Skip to main content

Who you'll meet across a Diplomacy board: Part 5: Mad as a Hatter

I thought it might be fun to have a look at some types of player you're likely to come across when playing Diplomacy.  Well, OK, it's not all fun in this series... but I'll do my best.



Yes, stubborn players are frustrating.  Equally frustrating are those players who seem to be insane.  These tend to be the players who play erratically.  They do make for an interesting game, though.

The Hippo

I didn't know this until comparatively recently, but the hippopotamus is one of the most aggressive animals on the planet - certainly one of the most unpredictable and probably the most dangerous.  You - maybe it's just me - think of them as being gentle giants, wallowing peacefully in African rivers.  Nope; when roused you'd better be about half a mile away.

In Diplomacy a Hippo is a player who is aggressively acquisitive and opportunistic.  "See a centre, grab a centre," is her motto.  It doesn't matter who the SC is stolen from, and it often doesn't matter what position she leaves herself in, the SC was there and so she took it.

She isn't the most unpredictable of players, however.  If you know she's a Hippo, you know not to give her the chance.  Point her in another direction.  Tell her an opponent was less than complimentary about her dental plan.

And if you do leave an opening for a Hippo to get to your SC, then more fool you.  Unless you didn't know she was a Hippo, in which case, less fool you.  But that's not a thing.

The Trimmer

Trimmers are also opportunists but in a different way to a Hippo.  While the ultimate aim is to get SCs, of course, a Trimmer see opportunity in having no fixed stance towards play or towards allies.  If she thinks she can get more from switching allegiances, she will do.

If you like, Trimmers sit somewhere between Hippos and Baggers (see an earlier post in this series).  She's not a player who will grab an SC just because it's there, but neither is she a player who will plan to stick with an alliance until it's had its day.

A Trimmer will throw an alliance away on a whim if she thinks she's going to get something more from an alternative ally.  She may be even be lead down this path by a careful Bagger.  She isn't about randomly collecting SCs, she's an inconsistent ally.

The Pussycat

You may have seen the film Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill!  Don't worry, you've not missed a cinematic masterpiece if you haven't.  I reference it because I have taken the name for this player from the title.

A Pussycat isn't a doormat; she's not a player that is kind and gentle and easily manipulated.  Actually, I've not met a feline that fits that description!  A Pussycat is a player who is constantly trying to move the game along.

Pussycats tend to demand games move on quickly.  They'll typically play to the shortest deadline possible when playing online.  On Playdiplomacy this will mean a 12 hour deadline.  This means that there really isn't the time for proper diplomacy in the game (and is, therefore, a bit of a waste of time to me - although not wasting very much time).  You need to sleep, you need to eat, you need to work/study, you need to defecate.  How much communication are you going to be able to do in 12 hours (whether or not you're communicating while defecating)?

Pussycats are also typically those players in your online community who are looking for ways to shorten games.  They're constantly frustrated if a game is delayed while a replacement is found.  They're arguing that phases should move on more quickly, no matter what.

The most annoying thing about Pussycats, however, is the way they constantly push for other players to complete the phase as quickly as possible, if not NOW!!!  They think that because they've finalised, you should too.  Public Press, the communication system in a game where players can send messages to all other players, is littered with demands to finalise.  Pussy-littered, in fact.

They're also bad players, in general.  So there's an upside.

The Somnambulist

Speaking of bad players, here stumbles the Somnambulist.

Somnambulism is the scientific name for sleep-walking.  I used to sleep-walk when I was a kid.  Once I found myself in the kitchen.  I'd walked downstairs, got the milk out of the fridge, and then settled down in the kitchen floor.  On another occasion I'd sleep-walked into my parents' room, while they were downstairs, and thrown talcum powder all over.  I was popular.

In Diplomacy you'll occasionally come across a player like this, someone who goes through a game - or as far through as their bad play will let them - without really knowing what they're doing.  They usually don't bother with communicating to any extent.  And this is Diplomacy - if you're not communicating you really don't know what you're doing.

I was once in a tournament final playing France.  England, in spite of my consistently reaching out to him, didn't send me a single message.  Didn't leave me a lot of choice, really.  Germany, Russia and I built an alliance that had England gone by 1904.

WHO YOU'LL MEET ACROSS A DIPLOMACY BOARD series:

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Tournament Scoring - Part 5: Other Scoring Systems

There are, perhaps, three other types of scoring system: Placement or Rank scoring, hybrid systems that seek to combine DSS and SCS, and Tier scoring systems.  I want to have a look at each system. Placement or Rank systems Essentially, these are Supply Centre Scoring systems with the addition of bonus points.  I'm going to have a look at some more regularly used systems.  Again, here is the map I will use as an example: England  - 12 SCs Russia  - 9 SCs Turkey  - 8 SCs Italy  - 5 SCs France ,  Germany   and  Austria-Hungary   were eliminated, with 0 SCs each. C-Diplo In a drawn game points are awarded for: Participating in the game: 1 (for an online tournament, I'd only award this for participating and not surrendering). Each SC held at the end of the game: 1 . The player that 'tops the board' (has the most SCs): 38 pts. The second placed player (second highest number of SCs): 14 pts. The third placed player: 7 pts. If players are

Tournament Scoring - Part 7: The Mystery Scoring System

Introducing the Mystery Scoring System.  This is a name that reflects that the actual points scored isn't known until the tournament is over. OK, enough.  Let's get to it.  Here's a breakdown of what the system looks like. The Mystery scoring system The Mystery scoring system is based on DIAS games, where all survivors share in the draw.  (I have modified it to work with non-DIAS games.) In a draw , all players involved in the draw score 100  points. For games which are non-DIAS, players that survive but who are not part of the draw receive 10 points. Eliminated players receive 0 points. If a game ends in a solo, all other players receive 0 points. Solos are scored using the following process: Find the sum of all points scored in games which end in a draw. Divide this total by the number of games that ended in the draw - the average number of points awarded. Divide the average number of points above by the number of games that ended in a solo. Each

The Ethics of Diplomacy - Part 9: Mind Games

I've separated this from gamesmanship because it is something different.  However, mind games have the same impact on the Dip community as gamesmanship, for very similar reasons. Mind games are anything that you can do to get under the skin of another player.  They can be irritants, impoliteness or meant to simply build paranoia. Silence Sending messages and getting no response is frustrating.  I know - I send a lot of messages and find it annoying if I'm getting nothing back from someone with whom I'm supposed to be working. Now, what happens when that silence is  deliberate ?  When someone decides that they're not going to answer messages, or keep their answers to a minimum?  Why would they do  that ? Well, it is usually to cause some disruption in your thinking.  If you're concerned that she isn't messaging back, you're going to be concerned about what your plans were going to be. I know at least one player who hates this, not becaus