PDL 2. Round 2 Game 3. AAR

After game reports for PlaDip Diplomacy League games

Moderator: mjparrett

PDL 2. Round 2 Game 3. AAR

Postby mjparrett » 03 Apr 2018, 14:17

Corporation t-shirt, stupid bloody Tuesday...

Our first finished game of round 2! Oooft, that was quick. Looks like 3 powers hit it off and just went for it. Shame there was no breaking it up for someone wanting a solo, but well played all those involved.

England (Shyvve) 3 WAY DRAW
France (AleBelly) 3 WAY DRAW
Italy (NJLonghorn)
Germany (JoeHoya06)
Austria (Don Juan of Austria)
Turkey (quarryman) 3 WAY DRAW
Russia (MildWombat)

Thanks to MildWombat who took over a surrendered position. Damon Huntington didn't like being lied to, and quit the game/league. It would good for him to post here as well to get his side of the story. But the Wombat saved the day if not the position and now is in the League full time.

Please post your AARs here....
mjparrett
 
Posts: 381
Joined: 01 Mar 2017, 20:05
Location: Scotland
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: 1436
All-game rating: 1474
Timezone: GMT

Re: PDL 2. Round 2 Game 3. AAR

Postby mjparrett » 03 Apr 2018, 14:46

League table updated. 2 players with draws in both games and look to be good for promotion. No-one played the same country twice (a little nod there to a suggestion recently).

Well played all
mjparrett
 
Posts: 381
Joined: 01 Mar 2017, 20:05
Location: Scotland
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: 1436
All-game rating: 1474
Timezone: GMT

Re: PDL 2. Round 2 Game 3. AAR

Postby Damon Huntington » 03 Apr 2018, 16:40

Very well, I shall start by telling my recounting of the facts.

My issue was not with being lied, which is an integral part of the game. In fact, I'd like to give Turkey my kudos for a well-played game: he mentioned in the Public Press that my comment was probably with relation to him, which could not be further from the truth. In my opinion, Turkey played the best game from all players at the time I was on the board.

The problem was with Austria. Lying is one thing, and a necessary tool for Diplomacy to be conducted, but being overt in a lie that can be easily disproven by the Order History is a disrespect with the very player that resides outside the game. Austria stating that he was helping me (past tense, not future tense), not Turkey, when the moves inputted over the span of a whole year showed otherwise, was too preposterous to be taken without hitch.

For me, this could imply either two things:

1 - Austria had the intention to use the direct attack at the player as a strategy tool, in order to promote aggression via an external resource. Although the rules of Diplomacy are rather lenient and do not forbid this from happening, I have nothing but despise for those that use external implements to the game with the intention to obtain internal results. In the same way that other skills and external resources (such as hacking one's account and the use of previous rivalries in order to prod players) are unethical and sometimes even illegal, I also consider that the targeting of the external player, rather than his/her "plays", is a low blow in extreme ill-taste.

2 - Austria was too short-sighted to see how obvious his lie was, and too short-sighted in general. I recall that early on, I told Austria that Turkey would invade his territory and that he was painting himself into a corner. This was rather obvious to me, and a direct consequence of how the Turkish dynamic was playing at the time. This, by itself, would not be an issue (no one is forced to take a determined strategy, and we all make oversights from time to time); rather, the problem was the conjunction with this shortsightedness and the arrogance that Austria displayed while painting himself into a corner. Perhaps I shouldn't have been aggravated by the mistakes of others, but I was - potentially because the Possibility #1 was also grating on my nerves.

As such, the behaviours displayed in the game (coupled with Germany's incitatory posts in the Public Press, despite his attempt to do so anonymously) caused me to get gradually annoyed with it in a personal fashion, and for that reason I decided to withhold.

Please note that this doesn't imply, in any form, that I believe mjparrett has done anything short of a stellar job with the PDL; rather, this tournament is probably not for me at the present time - especially so because I'd be playing against the same individuals that I got this despise from over and over again. I foresaw that if I remained in the contest, then I'd not be fair when playing and that I'd constantly seek out to identify that player among all countries, which would have the ultimate consequence of causing me to act based on past rivalries (a phenomenon that could be easily construed as cross-game interaction, in disagreement to topic 4, item 5 of the Game Rules).

I hope to be proven wrong in the future, and that my bad impression about Austria is eventually dispelled - however, as it stands, my overview about the player and his methods is very negative. Perhaps this AAR will be the opportunity to see him in a new light - I surely hope so.
User avatar
Damon Huntington
 
Posts: 423
Joined: 31 Oct 2017, 17:17
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: (1332)
All-game rating: (1341)
Timezone: GMT-3

Re: PDL 2. Round 2 Game 3. AAR

Postby boldblade » 03 Apr 2018, 17:05

Damon Huntington wrote:1 - Austria had the intention to use the direct attack at the player as a strategy tool, in order to promote aggression via an external resource. Although the rules of Diplomacy are rather lenient and do not forbid this from happening, I have nothing but despise for those that use external implements to the game with the intention to obtain internal results. In the same way that other skills and external resources (such as hacking one's account and the use of previous rivalries in order to prod players) are unethical and sometimes even illegal, I also consider that the targeting of the external player, rather than his/her "plays", is a low blow in extreme ill-taste.


What exactly are you saying here? Are you accusing Austria of letting a rivalry with you from a previous game enter this game? Because it kind of sounds like that but also kind of does not sound like that.
boldblade
 
Posts: 338
Joined: 05 Feb 2014, 17:33
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1474)
All-game rating: (1488)
Timezone: GMT

Re: PDL 2. Round 2 Game 3. AAR

Postby Damon Huntington » 03 Apr 2018, 17:11

No, no, not at all. I only mentioned the examples of hacking and external game rivalries as two examples of external tools that can be used for internal benefit in a round of Diplomacy.

This was done in order to illustrate why I have an aversion to tools that target the player personally, rather than his plays/current disposition in a target game, by comparing it to other tools that are seen as unethical by the majority of players. In no way it is my intention to state that Austria let his judgement be guided by a previous game interaction (otherwise, I'd have brought this to the attention of the Cheater Hunters, since cross-game interaction is a forbidden behaviour).
User avatar
Damon Huntington
 
Posts: 423
Joined: 31 Oct 2017, 17:17
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: (1332)
All-game rating: (1341)
Timezone: GMT-3

Re: PDL 2. Round 2 Game 3. AAR

Postby WarSmith » 03 Apr 2018, 18:27

Anonymous game though...
"A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth even has a chance to put its pants on”
User avatar
WarSmith
Premium Member
 
Posts: 2178
Joined: 01 Mar 2009, 22:12
Location: Scandinavia
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1754)
All-game rating: (1664)
Timezone: GMT+2

Re: PDL 2. Round 2 Game 3. AAR

Postby Damon Huntington » 03 Apr 2018, 18:39

WarSmith wrote:Anonymous game though...


I'm afraid I don't follow. Anonymous games can still be reported, as long as the following formalities are observed:

"Finally, anonymous games.
Any game which is anonymous (including Gunboat and PPO games) should be reported anonymously. This can be by:
- Sending a PM to the cheater-hunter team, or
- Post in the Forum, Clearly indicating it is an Anonymous Game. We will take note of the report and Anonymize it before making it visible. (All Cheater posts are moderated before public posting)"

Nonetheless, there was no breach to the rules at all perpetrated by Austria, so I'd say this is besides the point.
User avatar
Damon Huntington
 
Posts: 423
Joined: 31 Oct 2017, 17:17
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: (1332)
All-game rating: (1341)
Timezone: GMT-3

Re: PDL 2. Round 2 Game 3. AAR

Postby quarryman » 03 Apr 2018, 18:45

A little about the game.

The early conflict between Russia and Austria really surprises me as I felt had to do a lot of talking over a lengthy period of time to persuade Austria to side with me (Turkey) instead of Russia. It took even longer for Italy to come on board with us. By that time we were facing a strong WT while our AIT alliance seemed to be formed based on self preservation and not much trust was apparent among us.

After a couple of years I could see that the WT was going to make inroads into our territories and I was just spinning my wheels. I then decide to contact Germany and France to see how they felt about adding me to their threesome if I were to stab Austria and provide valuable intel on Italy. They both stated they would support my inclusion but that England was reluctant to consider a 4way draw. I went ahead and stabbed Austria which pretty much crippled him and France was able to move on Italy based on info I had provided.

I then decided to contact England to see if I could persuade him to accept a 4way draw. At this point I never considered trying to break up the WT. It just seemed to strong. I stressed that it would take a long time to take me out as they would have to take my last SC. I told him I was not interested in final SC counts. England seemed to agree with my argument but still wouldn't commit to a 4way. It was finally agreed upon that the best and easiest way to achieve a 3way was for England to stab Germany. We both felt that France would be on board with us so England proceeded to take 4 SCs from Germany and that sealed the deal.

As far as any thoughts on a solo, I never felt I was in any position to try. I figured any attempt would only result in France and England destroying me and possibly even letting Germany back in the game. I was concerned with England possibly trying for the solo based on his position on the board and his probability of scooping up the rest of the German SCs. Fortunately he opted to accept the 3way draw.
There's no right or wrong. There's only what is and what will be.
quarryman
Premium Member
 
Posts: 53
Joined: 07 Jan 2012, 20:44
Location: Somewhere on the path to knowledge and enlightenment
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: 1237
All-game rating: 1397
Timezone: GMT-8

Re: PDL 2. Round 2 Game 3. AAR

Postby WarSmith » 03 Apr 2018, 19:14

Damon Huntington wrote:
WarSmith wrote:Anonymous game though...


I'm afraid I don't follow. Anonymous games can still be reported, as long as the following formalities are observed:

"Finally, anonymous games.
Any game which is anonymous (including Gunboat and PPO games) should be reported anonymously. This can be by:
- Sending a PM to the cheater-hunter team, or
- Post in the Forum, Clearly indicating it is an Anonymous Game. We will take note of the report and Anonymize it before making it visible. (All Cheater posts are moderated before public posting)"

Nonetheless, there was no breach to the rules at all perpetrated by Austria, so I'd say this is besides the point.


Agreed it’s besides the point, but you were referring to previous game grudges being brought in. Hence my point... it was an anonymous game so how did that come up? Anyway it was rather a vague assertion in the original post... don’t worry it’s not being investigated.
"A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth even has a chance to put its pants on”
User avatar
WarSmith
Premium Member
 
Posts: 2178
Joined: 01 Mar 2009, 22:12
Location: Scandinavia
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1754)
All-game rating: (1664)
Timezone: GMT+2

Re: PDL 2. Round 2 Game 3. AAR

Postby Damon Huntington » 03 Apr 2018, 19:32

Ah, now I understand. No, my mentions were not about Austria - at the first moment, I mentioned cross-game interactions just to reinforce the point that it's my belief that external factors should have no bearing inside the game (in an analogy to why I perceive attacks aimed at the external player's psyche as a low-blow).

At the second moment, I stated that I felt like I would be the one bearing a grudge if I kept playing the tournament - which is incidentally one of the motives for my withdrawal, in order to avoid that event from happening.

Sorry for the confusion.
User avatar
Damon Huntington
 
Posts: 423
Joined: 31 Oct 2017, 17:17
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: (1332)
All-game rating: (1341)
Timezone: GMT-3

Next

Return to PDL AARs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests