3 Way Draws are for Sissies

Games with the intention to fight 'till the bitter end!

Moderators: sjg11, DOI

Re: 3 Way Draws are for Sissies

Postby JonS » 16 Aug 2016, 19:06

The game GPD and ThomM hint at is 119550, for those interested. But agree that we don't need to do a full AAR here, as that isn't what GPD was looking for.

My approach - I always play for the best outcome I can achieve for myself. That means looking for ways to build my alliances and partnerships and relationships to make a solo possible. And when the solo appears impossible without a huge change in the game, that means doing everything in my power to prevent others from solo, and including myself in the resultant draw.

That latter case is exactly what I saw play out in that Classicist game...so to touch it not as an AAR but as an illustration: EGI formed a start of the game cooperation to ambush France. Both E and G almost certainly planned to move against the other once France folded. But the clever resilience of France, and the way the western war played out, brought us to a mid game where neither E nor G had the ability to destroy the other, nor did they have alliances elsewhere on the board that would allow them to expand. They had spent the game talking and working with pretty much just with each other, and neither seemed advantaged to win out in a war between themselves. And for me, as a relatively lousy Italy, I had no clear path to expand towards a solo once the French war bogged down and Turkey gained the better of A/T. So for me, philosophically, I was completely invested in ensuring no other country could break away for a solo either - something I think E and G both at least implicitly understood

The EGI draw proposal submitted by Turkey seemed like a bluff to force either E or G to acknowledge they were harboring solo aspirations. I think it misjudged their view of the game - neither had the relationships across the board to make a solo possible, and so no compelling reason to vilify themselves by rejecting the draw. the cost/benefit analysis didn't make sense. (I think a secret ballot would've kept the game alive - Turkey could have rejected, and instilled doubt between the allies).

Anyway, all of that aside. I think that it's obviously important to aspire towards a solo, but I think that solos need to be earned. We have players on this site that solo with astonishing regularity, even when playing truly outstanding players, as our tournaments over the last few years have shown. As Nanook said, the best soloists are generally the best allies - they're friends with everyone on the board, they're always helpful, they're always essential, and in the end they have positioned themselves both tactically (but far more important - diplomatically) to seize the board. I think aspiring towards solos is great. But I think that expecting other players to bow down and allow a solo to happen out of some sort of artistic appreciation for the solo, rather than fight tooth and nail to prevent it, is unrealistic.

For those that desire it, there is a solo only variant option available I believe.
“Find an ally who will die for you, and see that he does just that.”
The immortal Richard Sharp

Platinum Member of the Classicists Club
House Tyrell in Diplomacy of Ice and Fire
User avatar
JonS
 
Posts: 1415
Joined: 26 Apr 2013, 21:39
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1557)
All-game rating: (1606)
Timezone: GMT-7

Re: 3 Way Draws are for Sissies

Postby JonS » 16 Aug 2016, 19:33

Other thought here - if anyone hasn't read it yet, I strongly recommend gsmx's "Art of the Consigliere" article. It encapsulates very well the approach I've seen our community's best players use when soloing consistently. It's a role model of the type of player I wish I could be. Required reading.

viewtopic.php?f=16&t=53250
“Find an ally who will die for you, and see that he does just that.”
The immortal Richard Sharp

Platinum Member of the Classicists Club
House Tyrell in Diplomacy of Ice and Fire
User avatar
JonS
 
Posts: 1415
Joined: 26 Apr 2013, 21:39
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1557)
All-game rating: (1606)
Timezone: GMT-7

Re: 3 Way Draws are for Sissies

Postby Strategus » 17 Aug 2016, 12:47

JonS wrote:Other thought here - if anyone hasn't read it yet, I strongly recommend gsmx's "Art of the Consigliere" article. It encapsulates very well the approach I've seen our community's best players use when soloing consistently. It's a role model of the type of player I wish I could be. Required reading.

viewtopic.php?f=16&t=53250

I think I read this before, but I just did so again. All good advice. For those who are interested, and if you haven't already seen these:

http://www.diplomacy-archive.com/resources/strategy.htm

A really good resource for all sorts of stuff, and

http://clocki.tripod.com/dip/laws.htm

A bit of fun, but with some real truths mixed in. Please note "Goloth's First Law" :shock:
The Devil makes work for idle forces

Better to have fought and lost, than never to have fought at all
Actual Platinum Classicist
I did WDC 2017

Just say "NO!" To carebears and kittens
User avatar
Strategus
 
Posts: 1764
Joined: 30 May 2015, 14:30
Location: England
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: 1583
All-game rating: 1730
Timezone: GMT

Re: 3 Way Draws are for Sissies

Postby ThomM » 21 Aug 2016, 18:47

JonS wrote:The EGI draw proposal submitted by Turkey seemed like a bluff to force either E or G to acknowledge they were harboring solo aspirations. I think it misjudged their view of the game - neither had the relationships across the board to make a solo possible, and so no compelling reason to vilify themselves by rejecting the draw. the cost/benefit analysis didn't make sense. (I think a secret ballot would've kept the game alive - Turkey could have rejected, and instilled doubt between the allies).



I think that, if it had been a secret ballot, I would have been inclined to reject the draw proposal. I would have been much more tempted.
But I have a rules question arising out of this. I realize this is the wrong forum, but I trust no one will be offended and I expect one of the two distinguished players contributing to this forum will be able to answer:

On a secret ballot game, can a player both propose a draw and rejected it? That is the move that you are suggesting for Turkey, and I'm just surprised to hear that is a possibility, so I thought I'd check.

Oh, and that stuff about a poor Italy is pure self efacing BS.

ThomM
ThomM
 
Posts: 114
Joined: 20 Sep 2014, 06:20
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: (1231)
All-game rating: (1253)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: 3 Way Draws are for Sissies

Postby nanooktheeskimo » 22 Aug 2016, 00:22

ThomM wrote:On a secret ballot game, can a player both propose a draw and rejected it? That is the move that you are suggesting for Turkey, and I'm just surprised to hear that is a possibility, so I thought I'd check.

Not to interject, but--yes, you can absolutely do that.
Platinum Classicist
(h/t lordelindel)

I am your (co-) Leader.

GM of WitA 7, WitA 8.

Come play face to face!

Need a forum game GM'ed? PM me!

Mod (but I'm normally not talking as one)
User avatar
nanooktheeskimo
Premium Member
 
Posts: 9454
Joined: 19 Jun 2014, 19:52
Location: East TN
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1209)
All-game rating: (1389)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: 3 Way Draws are for Sissies

Postby ThomM » 22 Aug 2016, 02:10

Thank you, Nanook, for interjecting.

Oh, and I meant to say to Graham that I did not suffer any profound personal distress at being called a sissy, and I do understand that it was intended in a lighthearted manner.

ThomM
ThomM
 
Posts: 114
Joined: 20 Sep 2014, 06:20
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: (1231)
All-game rating: (1253)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: 3 Way Draws are for Sissies

Postby Strategus » 22 Aug 2016, 10:43

Thom!
ThomM wrote:Oh, and that stuff about a poor Italy is pure self efacing BS.

Either
a) You have a mean streak I didn't know was there :o , or
b) My British sense of humour is rubbing off :D
Either way - I like it!

ThomM wrote:I did not suffer any profound personal distress at being called a sissy,

Definitely option b) :mrgreen:

nanooktheeskimo wrote:
Not to interject, but--yes, you can absolutely do that


I have learned something new. I was surprised at this so I looked up the rule. Here from Guides/Game Options/Draws:
Draws

Voting for draws can be conducted by “open ballot”, each voter and their vote is identified in public press when cast, or “secret ballot”, where only pass/fail for a draw proposal is indicated in the “Status” drop-down box. In an open ballot game, the proposer automatically votes for the draw proposed, while in a secret ballot game he need not. Secret ballots tend to provide for more competitive games, especially in a non-DIAS setting. Draw proposals expire at the end of the first full orders phase after they are proposed.

Draws include all survivors (“DIAS”) requires that all powers still controlling an SC be included in any draw proposal. If this option is not selected (a “non-DIAS” game), then draws may be called that exclude powers still in play, however, the draw vote must still be unanimous among all the players still in the game. Note: surrendered powers never stop a draw from passing and are never included in any draw, even if they hold SCs and even if they were included in the draw proposal.

Solo-only games have no draw functionality at all. Ranked games may never be played solo-only.


Anyway, with modest interest in this thread, and definitely some previous threads have indicated the same, I have created a "Handshake" Solos Only game to try to test out if it will work, and whether it is worth pursuing the revival of this forum. Game 120999, created a couple of days ago with no responses yet. PM me for the password. I will post another thread to try to advertise it a bit better.
The Devil makes work for idle forces

Better to have fought and lost, than never to have fought at all
Actual Platinum Classicist
I did WDC 2017

Just say "NO!" To carebears and kittens
User avatar
Strategus
 
Posts: 1764
Joined: 30 May 2015, 14:30
Location: England
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: 1583
All-game rating: 1730
Timezone: GMT

Re: 3 Way Draws are for Sissies

Postby Jack007 » 22 Aug 2016, 14:54

You know Diplomacy is a ugly game. Players committing to the "handshake" can easily break their promise later, when the day of truth comes.
Jack007 (xxxx.) unbanned for dubious reasons
Member of the Honorables
There is no greater solitude than the samurai's,
unless it be that of the tiger in the jungle… perhaps…
-bushido
User avatar
Jack007
Premium Member
 
Posts: 967
Joined: 08 Mar 2014, 17:34
Location: Naples (Amalfi/Atrani)
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: 1272
All-game rating: 1578
Timezone: GMT+1

Re: 3 Way Draws are for Sissies

Postby Strategus » 22 Aug 2016, 15:28

Jack007 wrote:You know Diplomacy is a ugly game. Players committing to the "handshake" can easily break their promise later, when the day of truth comes.

Not sure I agree Dip is an ugly game. It can be very elegant. However, with respect to your comment on people being free to choose - I agree. But I believe that if we create games where all the people agree to handshake at the start, then they would be less likely to WANT to agree to a draw, even though I agree they may be left with no alternative at some stage. So I contend that a solo would be more likely. One could draw a comparison in some respects to the Classicist forum. There is nothing stopping anyone from NMR or surrender, but the fact that we agree to abide by certain principles makes them less likely (although they do happen from time to time). There is one way to find out, and that is to give it a try.
The Devil makes work for idle forces

Better to have fought and lost, than never to have fought at all
Actual Platinum Classicist
I did WDC 2017

Just say "NO!" To carebears and kittens
User avatar
Strategus
 
Posts: 1764
Joined: 30 May 2015, 14:30
Location: England
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: 1583
All-game rating: 1730
Timezone: GMT

Re: 3 Way Draws are for Sissies

Postby ThomM » 23 Aug 2016, 02:11

GPD wrote:
Jack007 wrote:You know Diplomacy is a ugly game. Players committing to the "handshake" can easily break their promise later, when the day of truth comes.

Not sure I agree Dip is an ugly game. It can be very elegant. However, with respect to your comment on people being free to choose - I agree. But I believe that if we create games where all the people agree to handshake at the start, then they would be less likely to WANT to agree to a draw, even though I agree they may be left with no alternative at some stage. So I contend that a solo would be more likely. One could draw a comparison in some respects to the Classicist forum. There is nothing stopping anyone from NMR or surrender, but the fact that we agree to abide by certain principles makes them less likely (although they do happen from time to time). There is one way to find out, and that is to give it a try.


Ah, but what if I cross my fingers behind my back when we shake hands?
(I believe this is called 12-year-old humor)

In any event, this thread has sold me on the idea of the secret ballot draw option. Next time I create a game, I will definitely go with that option. I tend to like anything that allows for deception without hurting one's reputation.

And don't believe anything Jon says about being a poor player.

ThomM
ThomM
 
Posts: 114
Joined: 20 Sep 2014, 06:20
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: (1231)
All-game rating: (1253)
Timezone: GMT-5

PreviousNext

Return to Solo Victories Only

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest