Ending a single victory game

[glasse]

I wonder how you end a game that is started as a single victory game. I suppose that there should be a way for all the remaining players to declare that the game ends as a draw, but how do you arrange that?

[revans]

Someone has to get 18 supply depots (1/2 the board + 1) to claim victory.

[glasse]

Do you mean that there is no way to declare a draw for all the remaining players in a single victory game? That just don't make any sense. Isn't it a rather common situation that there are three players left who will make sure that nobody reaches those 18 centres? Or that there is a standstill along a stalemate line? These games would drag on forever. The only way something could lead to a victory in situations like these, is that someone gets so bored that he drops out from the game and therefore throws the game to one lucky player. This seems way off the original intentions with the game, where you either win on your own or have a draw with all surviving players.

I hope I have misunderstood you. If not, I don't think I will be interested to play Diplomacy here any longer, which would be sad.

[mdmuff]

Keep in mind that the site is still developing and changes will be made. I suggest you make a suggestion topic about your concerns.

[glasse]

Yeah, you're right. I'll do that.

[Laurence]

What about going to the moderator and ask if he can change the game to double or triple victory, which he can do if everybody agrees. easy peasy.

[glasse]

Thanks for your suggestion! I didn't know you could do that. But how do you know if everybody agrees?

Anyhow, I suppose that you still would have the problems that are present in the implemenation of the double and triple victory variants here, i.e. that it is possible for several winning constellations at the same time, which I think degenerates the game. For example, a change of the victory conditions when there are three reamaining players, would result in that any pair of players at once could win and leave the third player with nothing, even if the winning pair never could have managed to get a real two way draw on their own (= 17 centres each). I think that the game loses very much of its intended feeling with such an ending, and I think that the problems with these victory conditions have been discussed elsewhere as well.

Now, if a moderator could change a game with three remaining players to a three way draw, without any risks for the two quickest players to announce a two-way draw, then it would be a completely different story. This would keep the spirit of the game alive.