A place to discuss topics/games with other webDiplomacy players.
Start a new discussion in the public forum
Post a new thread
If your post relates to a particular game please include the URL or ID#
of the game.
We get a lot of feature requests. If your feature request isn't already on our issue tracker,
then the best place to ask is the forum. This will help us gauge support for your ideas, before we add it to the todo list.
If you are posting a question please check the FAQ before posting.
If your message is long you may need to write a summary message, and add the full message as a reply.
Interested in organising a game for folks interested in playing other big hitters. Not sure what the cut off should be, but would be good to get a mass of quality players interested and then we'll land on a general consensus if some aren't as big hitters as others.
For me the dynamics of a game are much more interesting and enjoyable in WTA. For example, I find it much more interesting to try to group together to prevent the solo than to turn on each other in an attempt to snatch another SC or two before the solo happens.
Yeah, both PPSC and WTA actually follow the rules and share draws equally (unlike SoS scoring). That's a a big plus in my book! The help pages used to explain that very clearly.
I don't remember the part of the rule book that says soloists don't get all the points for the win. I also think the "all players share equally in a draw" line has been vastly misconstrued to establish a basis for DSS systems. "A draw" is never defined by the rulebook, and frankly if we were trying to replicate the rulebook accurately we would all play systems where you get one point for a solo and zero for everything else.
A draw is defined very clearly on the very first page of the rulebook, with a slight difference between the new rulebook ("[a]ll players who still have supply centers") and the previous rulebook ("all players who still have pieces on the game board").
And points themselves aren't in the rulebook, so any system that gives more points to the winner would satisfy the requirement to recognize the winner.
Battalion: You're talking about blue's stab in the very last turn of the game?
GOD: It's actually not strictly points-per-supply-center in solos either. Assuming that the coding still works, PPSC was changed at some point so that the winner only wins the portion of the pot that they needed to win. That way games aren't drawn out by the winner trying to win, for example, by 20 supply centers in a classic game.
What I meant was the rulebook does not define how draws are to be awarded. If anything they aren't supposed to be. My point is that it doesn't make sense to use the rulebook to justify any scoring system, because as you said they all satisfy the requirement to recognize the winner. All arguments about what point system to use should not include reference to the rulebook beyond this basic question.
JECE, it's not necessarily obvious from the moves, but Jolof had long decided not to worry about the solo and instead concentrate on PPSC. Working with Benin to take Begho in Spring 1406 would be a good example - it undermined Bonoman who was essential if we were to have any change of preventing the solo. Attacking me at the end was just the final part of that.
Battalion: Under PPSC draws are shared equally, so Jolof would have done just as well if not better by collaborating to stop the solo. I don't see how you can blame PPSC here for your loss.
Beyond the points scoring system, It's hard to judge since I can't see the press, but I think that you had tactical and strategic options to stop the solo that you didn't exploit. Tactically, you and Bonoman still had a fighting chance in 1406 to stop the Benin-Jolof alliance. In fact, you could have counted on 11 armies when the other alliance had 12 armies, but it looks like you chose to maintain neutrality with Jolof, even though Jolof didn't have a single fleet with which to fight Benin. Alternatively, you could have maybe taken the strategic approach of convincing Jolof that it could still win the game, but it looks like you didn't support a Jolof solo push either.
Just to clarify, I wasn't blaming PPSC on the loss, just the style of play.
At the very least a misconception of PPSC rules was to blame, even if unfounded - Jolof stated that PPSC was the reason for their actions.
We may have had numbers, but we didn't have a chance in my opinion - in part because there was little trust between Bonoman and myself. Even if we were a cohesive unit, I think I'd have had a very hard time breaking down Jolof and I was of the opinion that if I could convince Jolof (who'd not yet worked with Benin) to lay off we had a better chance if my units were used to try to contain Benin.
I started this account so I could join in games set up by my school, but I didn't realize that I needed to model my username after specific formatting, so now I'm stuck with a username that doesn't fit the guidelines of the setup. does anyone know how one could go about changing their username on here?
Here is the map. They’re trying to fill a fourth match: https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/1201263855062487120/1208887389854892122/Imperial_Diplomacy_-_Version_1.png?ex=65ee259d&is=65dbb09d&hm=41f342eeff473278464101b30bc129465f5da9450ac5087d085421f7adaa354c&
[Speed Europa variant] moving from Burgundy to Ruhr should not be possible
Hello,
As noticed by Tyran (user ID 2518) in the game "Wolf Pack v3" (game ID 58137) armies may move from Burgundy to Ruhr and vice versa (see the Map info tab of the variant's page) while the map doesn't say that. Maps on the external variant homepage also, so I suppose it is an error in the code, not the map.
Newest Deadline show just released on DBN. This month we have an interview with North American Diplomacy Federation President Zachary Moore, a panel on what is Hot or Not in the hobby, and headlines from around the World of Diplomacy. https://youtu.be/UMbW_NWWmfo?si=cMiv9HGwzfN4mWFT
Hey everybody. It was about time someone organised another cross platform Cold War tournament.
The tournament will be played wherever the players agree to play. Which means vDip will be hosting games. I have made a rule set on discord: https://discord.gg/kKnAuHN6kM - if you do not like discord I will communicate via e-mail. I will post updates here.
IMHO a really great new variant with many options, constantly fluctuating balances of power, both fleets and armies with power, sensible offboard movement that makes stalemates hard.
I've got some very good positions in a Europa Renovatio and a Colonial 1885 that I'd like to unload. Excellent opportunity for some shiny V points with no risk. PM me for details....
Going through an unexpectedly busy period at the moment and can't really pay full attention to all of my games. I don't want to keep spamming extend or pause requests so I was hoping someone could take a couple of gunboat games off my hands. Only solid positions, including one board top. DM if interested!
A country has taken the accounts of two other powers in our game and is now controlling three countries. How can we report this player “Akim” for Multiaccounting?
)
)
Instant register 100% authentic Ielts, Toefl, Toeic without exam(+27 83 880 8170)