Diplomacy is not a logic game.

That said, I also did not threaten any players and never made moves to expand outside of my natural borders of Italy (I was playing as Rome).

Diplomacy is not a logic game.

Warlight, however, is.

I'd argue Diplomacy is a logic-based game. Not entirely, but has large elements of it. I agree with Zephyrum's toxicity scale, and basically all of what he said.

WarLight is a psychology - mathematics game.

i was fascinated with the idea of diplos when i first learned about them.

on a meta level (and considering the essence of diplos, not the reality) it is entirely in the subject of logic. it closely resembles an iterated prisoners dilemma, where turn after turn you make the decision to cooperate or defect from the group. sometimes it pays to betray an ally, or declare war on a smaller country solely for expansion. but if you do it too much then it sows discord and you become more likely to be attacked.

of course you are playing against fallible humans, who usually don't respond to logic with logic, are usually gullible, emotional, and paranoid, and are likely to follow impulses, even if they are harmed by them.

the reality is very far from the idea.

so it turns out diplos are just politics, the person that is good at convincing people and is likable is usually better at diplomacy. being smart or logical almost doesn't factor in at all.

i suck at it cause i naively appeal to logic and then quit caring when it becomes obvious that only one or two players in the game have even a tiny grasp of logic.

or i go all the way to the emotional side and base my actions entirely on my real life conception of right and wrong, always a sure loser in diplomacy.

i would still enjoy diplos if i could play against people that actually knew how to debate logically and used critical thinking to assess the game. and didn't roleplay. i think that shit is silly.

If I made an open game Diplo I would make sure of these things:

All starting incomes are within 20 of each other
I invite mostly people I know and trust and are decently good at the game.
Open seat prerequisites:
12% > boot rate
250 Multi-Day games completed
If I want it to move fast:
Average Multi-Day Speed 12 Hours

I have a very simple solution to your problem. What I do is create a diplomacy game, and find out what people don't follow the rules. The people that do and are very interested in diplomacy games I write them down on a word document. Then, I create a game with just those people. I have become good friends with most of them, and now almost every player in my diplomacy games follow the rules, and when one person doesn't, we all gangbang him. Send me a private message if you want to join one of my games, and you can see what it's like. I've created a my own community on warlight, and all of us know each other pretty well (on Warlight, I mean. We don't actually give out personal information). By the way, I create Game of Thrones Diplomacy games and scenarios, so if you don't like Game of Thrones, you won't want me to invite you to one of my games.

Edited 7/31/2015 03:39:39

Really, shyb? I think Roleplaying really makes the genre elevated.

But yes, I agree all the way.

Diplomacy runs a lot more fine-tuned the more rules and mechanics you add.

One system I personally like and use a lot is "Culture groups". Each nation starts out in a culture group. Each culture has a leader, and the rest are his vassals. Cultures can only align within each other. However, there can be cultural infighting.

It is really an easy patch or assimilation into a lot of systems. I.e. Medieval : Religion groups.

@ garrett
no offense, but your 49% boot rate makes me inclined not to believe you. go ahead and invite me to a game if you want, im happy to give you a chance anyway :)

@genghis, it's just my opinion, and my opinion should not be valued highly by anyone.

Edited 7/31/2015 03:44:41

@shyb No doubt, there's no sense in arguing about something trivial like that. It's just opinion.

I make diplomacy only and it feels hurtful when your players say your template suck . If hurts so much to me because I try to make it good and the only positive felling I get is that I assured I did the right thing. If diplos were given more respect.

Don't worry - it's not your templates' fault. All diplo games suck and always have. Make a good strategic template instead.

No hate. Just facts.

I said it, I meant it, I'm here to represent it.

How do diplos suck

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner%27s_dilemma

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_war_game

interesting ways to think about diplos.

im not a fan of diplos. but when i see "elites" get on the forum and state opinion like it's unequivocal truth it's just pathetic. get real. as far as im concerned [wm] you are just some shmoe on the internet playing a game. i don't care whatsoever about your warlight achievements. i don't care about your supposed wisdom on the subject. i don't care about you. grow up.

+1 shyb, pretty much summed up everything I was going to say.

Do not insult players in [20] if you expect us to take you seriously.

+1 shyb, all of these "strategic" clan league templates are 90% alike each other. Diplomacy games are highly customizable. It takes massive intelligence to take #1 in the 1v1 ladder. It takes a different type of intelligence to win a fair diplomacy game.

@FK Just because people in that clan are very good players, doesn't mean shyb can not go against his "facts". Sure he could have went about it less insultingly, but he should not have to act different to different people depending on how good they are.

For the record I do not enjoy diplos, just they are another way for players to play warlight. And if it attracts more people to play warlight, who loses?

i don't care if anyone takes me seriously or not. i have a real life to live. sorry if i came off as harsh...

@buns +1, I agree with this. What matters about what clan you are in? You say do not insult [20] if he expects "us" (whoever that may be) to take him seriously. What difference would it make if he insulted someone from Falcons? Yes, [20] do have several good strategic players, but what makes them deserve any more respect in the fora, than someone from a clan without as many good strategic players? Their achievements, skill, and wisdom in strategic games do not matter when discussing something where none are relevant, case in point - diplomacy games, and general respect.

It's annoying when people expect more respect just because they are in an elite clan, and that there are a bunch of people, (remember "us"?) that decide to not take people seriously, when insulting someone from an elite clan. People need to learn to stop treating these ranks like the fucking stock market and treat all people from across the game with equal respect.

Was shyb being as respectful as he could have been? No. But you reply to him, as if he said the same response to, say, [WOLF]Andrew, it wouldn't have mattered.