Skip to main content

Back for Good..?

Image
By
Eventually, I was able to move into the modern world.  I got a PC.  Yep, a real computer.  And I got t'internet.

Even more eventually I wondered: What will I find if I search for Diplomacy on the web?  So I searched and the first return of note was Play Diplomacy Online.


So, I wasn't impressed with the map used back when I joined.  But, you know what, it was only the map.  The game system worked.  The game was easy to access.  It didn't have a long, long wait for things to happen.  And I could play live games against people.

I think PlayDip was about a year old back then.  Not everything ran smoothly.  But it improved - massively.  The map is now pretty looking, there are interesting variants available on the main site, the ranking system is much better than the old one, games are interesting and varied.

For me, though, it's always been the Forum that has interested me as much as playing Dip.  The discussion about Diplomacy there is amazing.

I did spread my wings a bit.  I joined webDiplomacy and tried that site.  I have to say that, way back then, I was put off by two things.

At that point webDip's forum was awful.  This was both in the way it was presented (which has changed today) but also in the posts there.  At that time (maybe not so much now) the 'loud' people were often pretty ascerbic (understatement).

There was also a problem on one of the variant games, where there was a bug on the map.  I reported it, like a good little player, and one of the Moderators came back with something along the lines of: This is a known bug.  If you want to get rid of it, go and reprogramme it.  Having come from a site where Mods actually did something about bugs to one where - then - they weren't interested was a bit of a shock.

If your site's Mods don't give a toss, I guess that's reflected by the site's membership, at least in part.  I can't stress enough, though, that was then.  It seems to be a better site now.

I've also been to other sites.  I've at least visited every site on my menu under Dip Links - Play.  The only other site I've really played for any time on is Stabbeurfou which is a French/English site.  Didn't particularly like the messaging systems there, have to say.

Occasionally I get Dip-fatigue and have to stop myself playing for a while.  There have also been times when ill health, or family issues, have got in the way and taken me away from this great hobby.  But, generally, with the ease of accessing Diplomacy at my fingertips, I'm here to stay.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

What do you think?

Popular posts from this blog

WHAT IS DIPLOMACY? - Part 5: Variants

By
A variant is a game of Diplomacy where the rules or context are different from the standard game as designed by Allan B Calhamer.  There are three types of variants: context variants, map variants and rules variants. Context Variants Context variants are those games that are played with a wider context.  They may be tournament games, other scored games, or remote format  games.  These aren't often recognised as variants as such, as variants tend to be within the other two types discussed below.  But the context the game is being played in will have an impact on how some players will play the game, and so they are certainly a variation of Dip. Maybe they should be called "variations" rather than variants but does it really matter? Map Variants Diplomacy has been adapted to different maps, or boards.  Not surprising as the general idea of the game, pitting competing powers against each other in a localised region and time in history, can be adapte...
Post a Comment
Read more

Tournament Scoring - Part 3: Draw Size Scoring (DSS)

By
If we're looking to score Diplomacy games based on the rules of the game, there are just three outcomes: a win, a draw, and a loss.  A scoring system based on these outcomes would therefore be based on whether the game was won, or whether it ended in a draw.  These systems are called Draw Size Scoring systems (DSS). The basic model for DSS systems is: The result is based on how the game ends only. If you win the game outright (solo), you take all the points in the game. If you are part of the draw at the end of the game, you receive the points avaialble in the game divided by the number of players in the draw. If you lose the game, you receive 0 (zero) points. The most basic version of this is the Calhamer Point system, designed by the great and good ABC himself.  If you soloed, you earned a point.  If you drew the game, you scored a number of points based on how many people you drew with.  So a 4-way draw would provide 0.25 points, a 5-way draw 0....
Post a Comment
Read more

Tournament Scoring - Part 2: What should a good scoring system do?

By
As I mentioned in the first post in this series , if you're playing in a tournament, you're playing a variant of Diplomacy.  This must be kept in mind when we're evaluating scoring systems.  The games are already variants so having them scored just means the variant aspect is increased. However, the scoring system should change the nature of the game as minimally as possible.  Ideally, even in the context of the variant you are playing - whether that variant is that the game is part of a tournament only, or whether it's being played online - the scoring system should try to meet the objectives of Diplomacy, not alter them. Objectives of Diplomacy The objective of the game is to win.  This means owning 18 SCs. If the game is unlikely to end in a solo victory, then the surviving players can end the game in a draw.  This means that players should be looking to survive in most cases, and certainly to be in a position to be part of the draw. Draws Inc...
Post a Comment
Read more