Kaug, I am sorry that you've had 194 life emergencies since you've joined vdip. Must be tough.

Their is no problem with the limiting rule. If you have proven yourself unreliable with game after game disrupted by "life emergencies" then you should perhaps, play fewer games so you don't screw them up for other people.

@Mapu: I play multiple games at once. Most of my NMRs and CDs are simultaneous. Meaning, one life emergency may make me have 30NMRs. I have also played almost three times as many games as you. Most of which I played while I was living in Venezuela where internet connection would sometimes be gone for a whole week, causing several of my NMRs. I am sure you cannot comprehend life circumstances beyond your very own, but I assure you not everyone has the same life.
@YouCantHandletheTruth: There is a problem with the limiting rule because it doesn't take into consideration number of games played. You can continue to ignore this point while offering no relevant arguments.
@DrRecommended: the site already offers a solution to how CDs impact others by delaying the phase until a replacement is found. I think that effect is thus minimal. Same point I made to Mapu, 9CDs out of which most of them happened simultaneously or under conditions very different to your own. Also, the choice of playing games with shorter phases happens not by choice but because there are not enough games on the site, and sometimes the only option is to play those games. Bad choice? maybe, but when the alternative is not playing, risking it may be worth it.

@all: it's simple you are all complaining about the site not having enough players/games. Fixing the rule helps get more games going. Having more games being played makes the site more attractive to new players and increases retention rate. This helps increase numbers even more. There are network effects in play here. The website already allows RR filtering of games so you don't have to play with people you think are unreliable and it allows delaying games when there is an NMR or CD. These protections are more than enough to achieve all the benefits you guys are saying come with the rule that limits the number of games. Thus, the rule that limits number of games just makes this suck for players who have to join CD positions for no important reason. If 7 players with 10 CDs out of 25 games want to all play a game together, why do you want to stop them from playing?

kaug makes lame ass excuses. Typical kaug.

Dude, don't play 30 games at once. That's stupid. You can't possibly be giving the appropriate amount of attention to the game if you are playing that many. And, as such, it is disrespectful to the other players.

Don't play short turn around games if you know you have unreliable internet. It's a fucking game. You don't have to spend every minute on it. And an NMR is disruptive to the game.

In short, play longer seasons and fewer games and respect the other players in doing so.

This is too funny

Yes, we would like more players and more game. That doesn't mean we want to endorse irresponsible play, which is what chases away good players. You dug yourself the hole you are in. Yet rather than accept it and try to work your way to respectability you want to tell us how it's all someone else's fault. That's enough evidence for me that the present system is doing exactly what it was designed to do.

Well, kaug has taken over a whole heap of CDd positions and has given, what seems to me, a pretty reasonable explanation for his past behaviour. In this instance it seems like he is contrite and is seeking to rehabilitate his respectability on this site. Mapu I think is sour over a past experience, but such is life. I've crossed horns with kaug a number of times and found him to be a fun and canny diplomat. I think that some of his suggestions have merit. In particular the RR system as it stands is a little bit draconian, and could be lightened a little bit. But please refer to my last post in regards to this question, the RR system is doing its job imperfectly. There is room to improve it to encourage more players and at the same time discourage unreliability.

Okay, if' you've seen positive actions from him that's a good sign. I've not seen an ounce of contrition from him, which is the only reason I weighed in on this If kaug is attempting to rehabilitate his reputation here, then great. Let's not discourage it. At the same time, trotting out the narrative that it's the system paining him in a bad light is a slippery slope. Joining 30+ games at once is irresponsible, and that is where it starts and ends. It's fun as hell until something goes wrong It's like driving 120 miles per hour down the highway. It's great fun until Johnny Law lays a out tire spikes to stop you from killing yourself or someone else. It's not the community's fault that kaug was overcommitted and abandoned multiple games. It's his fault, and his alone.

I'm not opposed to trying to help players back to respectability, but let's not pretend that he's blameless in this, and it's all just a bad system that caused this. There a very good case to be made for the point that the lack of CD/replacement/takeover positions available to kaug now because of the reduced number of active games is directly correlated to the perceived quality of play at the site, specifically frequent NMRs and drop outs.

I cannot speak for Mapu on this, but my irritation with him now isn't the past game he destroyed. It's the unwillingness to own this behavior and apologize for it. Respect is not something that you're entitled to. You earn it, or you lose it. When you bail on games you lose it, and it's 10 times harder to win it back. That's, is life.

Webdip has sum of squares scoring. I like that.

Just to put in my $0.02 as someone who played here fora while and has since pretty much disappeared:

I think what needs to be figured out is just what type of site vdip wants to be. Because they seem slightly incompatible at the moment. There's the arguments for looser restrictions in order to get more people and more games going. Which is great, however, the more you let people come in and just do whatever, the more likely you are to have your dedicated players become disillusioned with the site and disappear. As Ruffhaus noted, there's already a perception that play on vdip is not exactly "high quality" and that people don't take their games seriously. Allowing people to play lots of games at once (especially with short phase lengths) does nothing to change this perception. You tend to get people who are interested in Diplomacy as a fad, who come in, enter lots of games, and quit when things either don't go their way or they get bored. This leads to a constant cycle where eventually, the top players don't want to play with new players for fear of the game being ruined mid-way through. I know that's been a discussion around these parts in the recent past as well.

On the other hand, there's the argument for restricting play (through RR) which punishes people who don't take the game seriously. While this undoubtedly will hinder the growth of the site, and the number of games played, it will probably keep the dedicated players happier. The people who end up sticking around will tend to be those who finish their games and see things through. This is without question, a good thing. The entire Diplomacy community would benefit from people sticking with things and not just walking away at the first sign of trouble. Is it worth the risk of alienating new players to get this though?

Again, it all boils down to what you think Diplomacy should be. If you think it should be about in-depth strategic decisions, learning from past games, and fighting to the bitter end, then you should support having more restrictions on people who flake out on games so that those who are willing to learn and stick through tough spots become the core of the community. If you feel Diplomacy should be about having a good time, and since it's just a game, it's no big deal if people walk away every now and then so let's just have some fun, then loosening the restrictions so more people can play is undoubtedly the answer for you.

For what it's worth, I'm obviously in the camp of more in-depth Diplomacy as the way to go. I understand you need new people in order to replenish the hobby, but even in my few years of playing, I've noticed that the vast majority of people play a surface game of Diplomacy. "Dot grabbers" as they're sometimes called, don't bother to look under the surface of the game, which is where the real fun is. Sure, it's great to see your empire grow, but the real joy of this game is seeing your plan come to fruition when noone even knows it's your plan, or crippling the enemy plan with words instead of fighting, and seeing their game crumble. Diplomacy is supposed to be about just that - Diplomacy. Unfortunately, it seems to have become more of a tactical game in many people's minds, and the diplomatic part is left out, or seen as an after-thought. I think it'd be wise to implement whatever policies are needed to get people to realize that Diplomacy is the key factory in this game.

Drano, too bad you had disappeared, sounds like you are someone I would like to meet up with in a game. The times the tactical game is fun is when you are going against someone you know is a challenge. But what I stay here for is the diplomacy part. Anyone who has teamed with me knows I will message them to death making sure we are on the same page, encouraging them, or asking what the heck they were thinking... Even those I am fighting will find I am ready to talk to them, even if it is to congratulate them on a good round against me or to playfully poke them when I made some good moves... What kills me are the ones who only give one word answers or don't respond until ten minutes before moves process. If you don't want to talk to us, join games with no messaging. I guess I've been here awhile, I can't remember exactly how long, maybe three years, but the ratings aren't what brought me here or what keeps me here. It is the game play and the camaraderie through messages. I also thought this was a site that was more into 'testing' games and that interested me. Its just funny how someone who couldn't care less about the ratings system has only missed 1 phase out of nearly 4000.. While working full time, umpiring on the side, church twice a week, and raising four kids, one getting married this weekend, one getting prepared for college (lots of scholarship research needed), and one little 9yr old girl that demands LOTS of daddy time... Yet I can manage to be responsible here. Real life happens to all of us. Don't overextend yourself is what I think people are saying. Be realistic. Instead of trying to change the system to suit you, work within the system you chose to join. To those of us on the outside of any problems you have had, it appears that you are just trying to make it easier for you and not trying to make the system itself better. Stepping off my soap box now.

Advertise your NON-live games here!
1785 replies

Advertise live games here
3478 replies


Isn’t it weird?

I think that the ratio of non-live / live games played is around 10:1.
… while the advertisements ratio is around 1:2


Why did live games never got off the floor in this site? Is it only a matter of the relatively small (compared to webdip) size of the community here?

Without a revision of the Vdip points permitting to high score players to play without the sword of Damocles of a big loss of points (in case of defeat and/or draw) in exchange of a little gain of points (in case of victory), the number of games played by the stronger players will diminuish and so the level of the games.

Variants are what draws me to this site. I think that live games with 1-3 players do get off the ground here.

Right bolt, live games with 2 3 players and different maps are the best thing on this site. Another good thing is the interactive map. I d like to try a lot of variants, such as south America or rinascimento, but there is a small comunity here. Why? Why webdip doesn't incorporate vdips maps, since I read somewhere that webdip owns vdip?

webDip doesn't own vDip. vDip is a separate entity owned and run by a different site owner (Oli) for the specific purpose of allowing variants to be played using the code developed by kestas who is the creator of the code used over @ webdip.

ok thanks for explanation. By the way I would prefer Vdip cause offers more settings, variants and the interactive map, but, since hasn t a big comunity - and that s the most important thing- webdip remains better.

Both communities have their benefits and drawbacks. Play on both and you'll probably find that you enjoy both.

Just don't neglect your games on one because you've been hanging out on the other. :-)

vDip just has the different variants, webDip just has the people. Would be nice if we could combine the two for once.

I just heard there was gonna be pizza. Thats why I'm here

Hey Brainbomb :)

Nice to erm... see you after I got banned from webDip?

So who were you, Icy.

I didn't multi on this site but apparently I did on webDip because I had to lend a computer to my friend, thus impregnating my computer with another account. Also, my friend happened to be my school friend and you know what that means: META-GAMING. Well I was accused of it.

I've been returning to them under different persona from different books I've read and it's been quite entertaining to see their reactions to be honest. I love the mods there, they're so funny but good at their jobs :)

My friend, if you couldn't tell, doesn't play on this site, or else I would've been banned here too.

Be open and honest and real life friends can play here. The key is up front honesty and full disclosure. Also, neither giving nor receiving preferential treatment. Treat your friend like any other player and there will be no issues here.

Icy-Is frostweaver you or your friend?

@YouCan'tHandleTheTruth
Yes I will keep that in mind once they un-ban me (give or take a year and even then, that's not guaranteed).
@LordNaiwenXII
Moi.