Diplomacy...obsolete?

General discussion about Defcon

Moderator: Defcon moderators

Diplomacy is obsolete because players are too good.

Poll ended at Fri Dec 15, 2006 6:20 pm

Agree
5
12%
Disagree
38
88%
 
Total votes: 43
User avatar
ynbniar
level5
level5
Posts: 2028
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 10:36 pm
Location: Home again...

Diplomacy...obsolete?

Postby ynbniar » Tue Dec 12, 2006 6:20 pm

Changed my mind...Diplomacy's great...

http://www.putfile.com/pic.php?img=4254542

:twisted:

Domino

************************************************************************************
I'm not keen on Diplomacy and tend to avoid it if I can.

It seems to me that with players getting better and more tactically aware this mode is pointless.

In the last game I played Europe did nothing...for the whole game. Don't get me wrong they played a good game...their units were very well positioned...nothing could get through the north atlantic, Africa was hopeless and they were in bed with USSR.

But they just sat there and waited...mind bogglingly boring...they never moved a single ship.

What's the point?

:?:

p.s. I got bored so backstabbed SA, then the server shutdown...
Last edited by ynbniar on Fri Dec 15, 2006 12:33 am, edited 2 times in total.
samdude9
level1
level1
Posts: 23
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 4:20 pm

Postby samdude9 » Tue Dec 12, 2006 6:22 pm

I don't particularly like it...
User avatar
Gen. Ripper
level3
level3
Posts: 290
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 12:22 pm
Location: London

Postby Gen. Ripper » Tue Dec 12, 2006 7:38 pm

i would claim that as players become more "tactical aware" the game moves from a placement and tactical game (since we would basicly mirror our oppenents moves and countermoves untill defcon 1 resulting in tense, close games of % chances) to a game of emotion and Psychology...the ability to twist players (and thus their assests) to your own means........which I think diplomacy is built for.


my 2 pence :shock:
gerph
level1
level1
Posts: 41
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2006 1:10 am
Location: UK

Re: Diplomacy...obsolete?

Postby gerph » Tue Dec 12, 2006 7:43 pm

ynbniar wrote:I'm not keen on Diplomacy and tend to avoid it if I can.

It seems to me that with players getting better and more tactically aware this mode is pointless.

In the last game I played Europe did nothing...for the whole game. Don't get me wrong they played a good game...their units were very well positioned...nothing could get through the north atlantic, Africa was hopeless and they were in bed with USSR.

But they just sat there and waited...mind bogglingly boring...they never moved a single ship.


I'm not quite sure I understand what you mean here.

On the one hand you're saying in the poll (and comment) that diplomacy doesn't matter because players are too good.
On the other hand you say you don't /like/ diplomacy.
On the third hand (well, after all the wars you'd expect this) you're complaining that one player in a game did nothing.

Diplomacy is just another way to play - it's not just about knowing the initial positions of things, but about when to strike, who to strike and what bargains can be made in the meantime.

If you don't like it, then don't play - that has no particular effect on whether diplomacy is a useful mode of play or not.

And as if my confusion at those things wasn't enough, after saying that players are too good, you cite one player that did nothing. Now, I'm all for agreeing that it's as important to know when /not/ to strike as when to strike, but this seems incongruous. If they didn't move the entire game then that's not playing well. Unless, of course they happened to do better than you, in which case... ok. But if you can't beat a player who isn't even controlling their units, then you probably don't stand a chance against those that are. If this player actually didn't do anything then it wouldn't make the blindest bit of difference whether they were playing a diplomacy game or not.
User avatar
wwarnick
level5
level5
Posts: 1863
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 8:44 pm
Location: Rexburg, ID

Postby wwarnick » Tue Dec 12, 2006 8:15 pm

Even though a player can see everyone else's units, they can see his, too. The difference is that each player sacrifices their defense for offense. Recon is no longer as important. But defense is critical. It's a different way to play.

wwarnick
User avatar
GrandfatherBones
level1
level1
Posts: 28
Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2006 8:13 pm
Location: Lille, France

Postby GrandfatherBones » Tue Dec 12, 2006 8:21 pm

Turn the Radar sharing off. And try the paranoid diplomacy mod.
User avatar
ynbniar
level5
level5
Posts: 2028
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 10:36 pm
Location: Home again...

Re: Diplomacy...obsolete?

Postby ynbniar » Tue Dec 12, 2006 9:17 pm

gerph wrote:If they didn't move the entire game then that's not playing well. Unless, of course they happened to do better than you, in which case... ok. But if you can't beat a player who isn't even controlling their units, then you probably don't stand a chance against those that are. If this player actually didn't do anything then it wouldn't make the blindest bit of difference whether they were playing a diplomacy game or not.


Thanks for the comments Gerph...they got me thinking which is what I should have done before writing the original post
:?

You're spot on...I forgot an important point...it wasn't Diplomacy that was the problem...it was the fact the scoring was survivor...that's why Europe was just sitting there...

...apologies to all for the confusion...it's been a long day.

:wink:
User avatar
Splatterer
level1
level1
Posts: 33
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 8:14 pm
Location: NJ USA

Postby Splatterer » Tue Dec 12, 2006 9:17 pm

Diplomacy is my least favorite way to play.

That said, I don't think it's obsolete.

A lot of people seem to like playing it, just not me.

Diplomacy games are fun to spectate, though.
User avatar
Mighty Santa
level2
level2
Posts: 150
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2006 5:10 pm
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Postby Mighty Santa » Wed Dec 13, 2006 12:48 am

Its not obsolete.
----

Personally, I hate Diplomacy mode. I think it causes too much trouble between players. I love defcon, its a truly awesome game concept, but Diplomacy games often end up as a bitch fest with players whining about being betrayed.

This style of play does nothing for creating a happy community of players who will keep coming back for more entertainment. Neither does it help clans build their member base which would further improve the games longevity

Straight forward ffa's, 2v2s, or 3v3s. Those can be grand games, games where team work can lead to superb victories, and where players are not left feeling like crap after being backstabbed for the one hundreth god damn time.
--

The fact is that endless backstabbing games are NOT going to help this game endure in the years ahead. I can only hope that team games predominate in the game, otherwise people will just end up leaving.

Santa - might have a new computer by the weekend :D
4, 8, 15, 16, 23, 42
Slinken
level2
level2
Posts: 188
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Gävle, Sweden

Postby Slinken » Wed Dec 13, 2006 1:20 am

Diplomacy is not obsolete! Its the most fantstic thing in the game to chat with other players and convice them to attack each other. I love to do that myself and when their both destroyed I get into the fight and score those easy points beacuse they have taken out each others defences.
User avatar
shinygerbil
level5
level5
Posts: 4667
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 10:14 pm
Location: Out, finding my own food. Also, doing the shinyBonsai Manoeuvre(tm)
Contact:

Postby shinygerbil » Wed Dec 13, 2006 2:06 am

It seems MadSeven hasn't got here to plug his website yet... How strange!

I personally enjoy Diplomacy a lot, but it has to be played with players who will get into the spirit of things; constantly private messaging each player with a different lie, then saying something totally unconnected in public chat, then doing something totally contrary to all of that, it's just so thrilling :)

(Especially if you play with people who are on the website I mentioned at the beginning of this post. They all know what to expect, and don't bitch if you lie to them, because it Diplo and you're supposed to.)
Here is my signature. Make of it what you will.
Image
User avatar
MadSeven
level2
level2
Posts: 195
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 8:19 am

Postby MadSeven » Wed Dec 13, 2006 9:15 am

shinygerbil wrote:It seems MadSeven hasn't got here to plug his website yet... How strange!

I personally enjoy Diplomacy a lot, but it has to be played with players who will get into the spirit of things; constantly private messaging each player with a different lie, then saying something totally unconnected in public chat, then doing something totally contrary to all of that, it's just so thrilling :)

(Especially if you play with people who are on the website I mentioned at the beginning of this post. They all know what to expect, and don't bitch if you lie to them, because it Diplo and you're supposed to.)


Who me? Never!
It's just that....this seems to be an "I like" vs. "I don't like"...

MadSeven
Defconmatch.com
165 members and counting...
User avatar
Doc Tchitcherine
level1
level1
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 5:00 pm
Location: Farmington, ME
Contact:

Postby Doc Tchitcherine » Wed Dec 13, 2006 6:08 pm

I can understand how you (the original poster) feel about this, but such a thing is what I feel makes this mode intresting. I've found that when playing in this mode that people often blindly forge alliances without much thought to their own future survival. Without a doubt I've been on the bad end of such alliances occasionally, but that's the brakes of the game. It's a very intresting mode.
snafu
level1
level1
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 10:33 pm
Location: .ca

Postby snafu » Wed Dec 13, 2006 6:38 pm

Mighty Santa wrote:Its not obsolete.
----

Personally, I hate Diplomacy mode. I think it causes too much trouble between players. I love defcon, its a truly awesome game concept, but Diplomacy games often end up as a bitch fest with players whining about being betrayed.

This style of play does nothing for creating a happy community of players who will keep coming back for more entertainment. Neither does it help clans build their member base which would further improve the games longevity

Straight forward ffa's, 2v2s, or 3v3s. Those can be grand games, games where team work can lead to superb victories, and where players are not left feeling like crap after being backstabbed for the one hundreth god damn time.
--

The fact is that endless backstabbing games are NOT going to help this game endure in the years ahead. I can only hope that team games predominate in the game, otherwise people will just end up leaving.

Weird. Diplomacy is my favourite mode.

As for your hope that backstabbing disappears from the game - you must be playing Defcon with a bunch of 10 year olds.
Betrayals and the paranoia it adds to games is (for me) what makes Defcon so great (both gameplay and atmosphere). If Defcon became, as you hope, simple 2v2 or 3v3 team affairs, it would lose its soul and be just a simplistic mediocre tactical game.
Sure, some people whine when they get backstabbed. Same is true of other great games where betrayal is an essential element (Risk, Diplomacy, etc.). Rather than playing a certain way to make those people happy, we should suggest they play different games.
User avatar
Xocrates
level5
level5
Posts: 5262
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 11:34 pm

Postby Xocrates » Wed Dec 13, 2006 11:49 pm

diplomacy is probably the slowest mode (barring office mode) in defcon, it is also the most paranoid and tactical. Just because a lot of people don't have the mindset to play it (I like it, but in small doses) it doesn't make it obsolete.

And really, what kind of people go into a diplomacy game expecting NOT to be backstabbed?

Return to “General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests