PDL 2. Round 2 Game 3. AAR

After game reports for PlaDip Diplomacy League games

Moderator: mjparrett

Re: PDL 2. Round 2 Game 3. AAR

Postby JoeHoya06 » 04 Apr 2018, 17:05

mjparrett wrote:You mention tactics are weaker, and it is your diplomacy that is stronger. Well then you had a few choices - you could have been up front with England with a "WTs always end badly for Germany, so no thanks", or "WTs usually end badly for Germany, so how can we avoid that. E.g. certain DMZs to make me feel safe".


Well, I don't have enough experience with them – I've been in literally one game before this one where the topic was even broached, and it was England and Germany who decided to go after me as France literally right out of the gate so it never even got off the ground – to know how they usually go, which was kind of my point. And I thought it was pretty clear from both Shyvve's post and mine that I was pretty up-front that I saw a stab coming a year earlier, so I sort of did that? I also wanted the army in Belgium off the continent from Spring '02 on, and said as much, and its lack of movement was a big factor in my discussions with France.
We're the builders of their destiny.

Gold Classicist, Mafia forum interloper
User avatar
JoeHoya06
Premium Member
 
Posts: 712
Joined: 22 Aug 2016, 23:02
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: 1084
All-game rating: 1140
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: PDL 2. Round 2 Game 3. AAR

Postby Damon Huntington » 04 Apr 2018, 18:58

All valid points, Joe. I'll be happy to address what you wrote on Items #2 and #3.

Point #2 - I indeed psychologically profile players based on their messages, overall tone and types of move, among other elements; however, I never use this analysis with the intent to attack the player externally. My objective is to propose plans and ideas that will have a greater chance of captivating the people I talk to, but this is restricted to an internal dimension only. I do not strive to flatter or aggravate the person that's beneath the screen, because that would be unethical.

All in all, the use of my profiles is limited exclusively by the scope of the game. This is the main difference between what I do, and what I perceived Austria to do.

Point #3 - I do apologise if that was the message you derived from my reply. At no point it was my intention to imply that you are stupid; rather, my desire with that message was to relay the statement that you had been accusatory without reason (even though it was with reason) and to deny the claim that I had talked with England.

Differently from the Order History - which is objective and 100% trustworthy - the reports of players are unreliable and subject to falsehoods. Denying a communication you received from England does not imply that you're stupid to the point of not seeing the facts; rather, it plays on that very nature of distrust that all messages are subject to. As I previously stated, underestimating you and making you feel like I perceive you were stupid was absolutely not my desire. I simply wanted to see if there was a way to undo the sharing of the information you received from England.
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 NJLonghorn » 04 Apr 2018, 19:16

Shyvve wrote:Surely metagaming is an aspect of the League format, no?


There was a thread about this in the forum. The TLDR is that meta-gaming with respect to the league standings is permitted.
Classicists, Aspiring Bronze Silver Gold Bronze Member
I have never surrendered and never NMR'd, and hope to keep that alive. Never mind, the perfect run has come to an end. Dammit, DAMMIT, DAMMIT.
User avatar
NJLonghorn
 
Posts: 288
Joined: 07 Sep 2017, 23:41
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1171)
All-game rating: (1439)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: PDL 2. Round 2 Game 3. AAR

Postby Iggy » 04 Apr 2018, 19:32

Damon Huntington wrote:I do not strive to flatter or aggravate the person that's beneath the screen, because that would be unethical.


"unethical"? Getting someone to make an impulsive move or to trust you more than they should are both valid and "ethical" tactics. Flattery can be very effective. As can trying to annoy someone to do something brash and ill-advised. There are people that can go 'too far' - a very relative term - but there are plenty of ways to try to flatter or aggravate an opponent that are well withing in the scope of the game. I'm not quite sure you can play the game without doing at least one of those on a regular basis. And that is said by a guy that typically tries very hard to not blatantly lie to anyone if it can be avoided.
Iggy
 
Posts: 1007
Joined: 20 Jan 2009, 03:05
Location: Indianapolis
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1187)
All-game rating: (1259)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: PDL 2. Round 2 Game 3. AAR

Postby Damon Huntington » 04 Apr 2018, 19:41

Iggy wrote:"unethical"? Getting someone to make an impulsive move or to trust you more than they should are both valid and "ethical" tactics. Flattery can be very effective. As can trying to annoy someone to do something brash and ill-advised. There are people that can go 'too far' - a very relative term - but there are plenty of ways to try to flatter or aggravate an opponent that are well withing in the scope of the game. I'm not quite sure you can play the game without doing at least one of those on a regular basis. And that is said by a guy that typically tries very hard to not blatantly lie to anyone if it can be avoided.


There is a large difference between getting someone to make an impulsive move/trust you more than they should and deliberately strive to reach the player rather than the persona. As I've stated time after time, this is my take on the game - no one is forced to agree with me, since my personal set of tenets are not part of Diplomacy's rules.

(Likewise, the interception of orders in Postal Diplomacy was also not forbidden, but most players were averse to doing it. This comes to show how the scopes of "are allowed to do" and "should do" might vary greatly from player to player. I've even read a case in which a player feigned being another country or the GM - I'm unsure which - over a phone call, and such behaviour was not considered to be against the rules.)

Impulsive moves can be caused by a plethora of factors, including hiding crucial information, using the game's deadlines to your advantage and pressuring your opponent for a quick response. There is absolutely no need to resort to personal attacks with harmful intent.

Besides, there's a great difference between "aggravating" and "striving to aggravate". I do agree it is quite impossible to play the game without doing the former, but playing without doing the latter is completely feasible.
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 AleBelly » 04 Apr 2018, 21:32

I don't have a whole lot to add from France's perspective, but there has been a lot of off-topic discussion in this thread so I'll maybe rehash some things that have already been said.

Initial goals were 1) to figure out which of E or G I could work with to eliminate the other. 2) establish a DMZ with Italy so I could concentrate on #1.

To make a long story short, I heard early and often from Germany, and got a good vibe from him. I was strongly in favor of an F/G and hadn't heard much from England. In limited France experience I prefer to work with Germany anyway. Italy also agreed to a DMZ. Good start! Germany was apprehensive about a slog needed to take out England, so he suggested a Sealion which I supported. But Russia didn't want to play ball and betrayed us to England. More on this in a sec.

The Sealion denial, plus a diplomatic push from England, got Germany on board with a Western Triple. I was reluctant and tried a little to keep Germany against England, but it got to the point that I thought I'd be the target of an E/G if I didn't go along. England, you speculated early that my silence was a bad sign. Although we had a couple of messages back and forth, you were right to be concerned! I did trust the two others on the WT, as evidenced by my slightly unorthodox opening. Fall 1901 moves:

Image

In 1902 I got messages from both E and G saying they were having difficulty agreeing to moves. I worry that this is a ruse to get me off balance and attack, so I position my armies to defend my home SCs. Germany isn't ready to go after England, so I decide to just hammer on Italy. This is basically what I did the whole game going forward. I reached out to Austria and Turkey for help, but I get nothing until Turkey's stab (which was pretty much his idea anyway...I just offered reassurances that he would have my support going forward). Italy, sorry about violating the DMZ so early. My plan was to honor it, but the WT made this impossible.

And Germany, I truly didn't know about the stab. I wouldn't have been in a position to do much about it anyway. You were my primary ally in this game and if England hadn't so skillfully waited to stab you I would have turned on him with you.

England and Turkey, those were a couple of beautiful stabs. Austria, we didn't have much of a chance to work together. You're right, I probably would have come after you next once Italy fell. And Russia, not an unreasonable gambit to share our Sealion plans, but once you did you were an enemy of France, and I put serious diplomatic effort towards denying you a build in 1901.

All in all, I played a bit part in this one and was lucky to escape with a draw.
User avatar
AleBelly
 
Posts: 52
Joined: 11 Dec 2016, 17:36
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: 1176
All-game rating: 1159
Timezone: GMT

Re: PDL 2. Round 2 Game 3. AAR

Postby Shyvve » 04 Apr 2018, 22:06

Based off the German and French AAR's, it sounds like I got very lucky before S'01 and narrowly averted a really bad start for England.

Not sure how much time there was left before the first turn's deadline after I'd decided to share with GF what I'd heard from Russia about the possibility of a SeaLion, but I'm sure glad now that I did. I almost just sat on Russia's warning to me and hoped for the best on the first turn. From what France and Germany have both said, I don't think that would have worked out well for me at all! I did think that there had to be at least some truth to what Russia was saying though. I just wasn't sure how much of his message was an attempt to sow discord and how much was a legitimate warning.

I have been a member of successful WT's which have swept the board. So, they can indeed work in the sense of sticking with them to the very end. But, I'd be much less prone to join one when playing as Germany than when playing as either France or England.
An Oldie and Gold Classicist. Moderator for the Classicist group.
User avatar
Shyvve
Premium Member
 
Posts: 478
Joined: 31 Dec 2016, 20:10
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: 1313
All-game rating: 1345
Timezone: GMT-6

Re: PDL 2. Round 2 Game 3. AAR

Postby lb1785 » 04 Apr 2018, 22:50

Shyvve wrote:.
I have been a member of successful WT's which have swept the board. So, they can indeed work in the sense of sticking with them to the very end. But, I'd be much less prone to join one when playing as Germany than when playing as either France or England.


Though you know this can end badly as France as well ;)
"Mon Dieu, gardez-moi de mes amis. Quant à mes ennemis, je m'en charge !" (Voltaire)
"Tact is the ability to tell someone to go to hell in such a way that they look forward to the trip." (Winston Churchill)
Silver Classicist
3-way draw as The Mondoshawans in Invasion Earth
User avatar
lb1785
 
Posts: 91
Joined: 17 Jul 2014, 16:34
Location: Gascony
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1444)
All-game rating: (1450)
Timezone: GMT

Re: PDL 2. Round 2 Game 3. AAR

Postby Shyvve » 04 Apr 2018, 22:52

Lol, yes lb1785 they can indeed! Especially should England like...stab Germany, and then almost immediately gain position against France. That could even end up with England soloing or something outlandish like that!
An Oldie and Gold Classicist. Moderator for the Classicist group.
User avatar
Shyvve
Premium Member
 
Posts: 478
Joined: 31 Dec 2016, 20:10
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: 1313
All-game rating: 1345
Timezone: GMT-6

Re: PDL 2. Round 2 Game 3. AAR

Postby mhsmith0 » 04 Apr 2018, 23:28

Shyvve wrote:Lol, yes lb1785 they can indeed! Especially should England like...stab Germany, and then almost immediately gain position against France. That could even end up with England soloing or something outlandish like that!


Hmm... I'm vaguely aware of a game where such an outcome came vaguely close to happening :P
Proud holder of the Superior Tophat of Solving, an item entrusted with the forum's most prominent smartass
User avatar
mhsmith0
 
Posts: 3616
Joined: 11 Dec 2015, 06:55
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1269)
All-game rating: (1439)
Timezone: GMT-7

PreviousNext

Return to PDL AARs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests