WDC 2017: AAR and General Impressions

Looking for a Diplomacy game in your neighbourhood? Meet members from your area!

Re: WDC 2017: AAR and General Impressions

Postby Captainmeme » 18 Jul 2017, 13:00

This is turning out to be quite a lot longer than I intended it to be. I'll probably go and create another thread over in Diplomacy Lore for it, don't want to derail this one.
I've now lost so many tournaments I can no longer fit them in my signature.
User avatar
Captainmeme
 
Posts: 103
Joined: 15 Jan 2012, 18:02
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: (1004)
All-game rating: (1005)
Timezone: GMT

Re: WDC 2017: AAR and General Impressions

Postby Jack007 » 18 Jul 2017, 13:02

Captainmeme wrote:Plea for a center count based ranking system


I beg to completely differ. What you describe is not Diplomacy, or maximally one of the numerous variants.

In Diplomacy there is one win, which might be catched by one player (also known as a "solo") or shared equally between a number of players included in a draw. That's something very essential of this game. There was even no bonus for soloing foreseen in the original rules. I love this approach, because it has parallels to the "big" diplomacy in politics. Any center count based ranking will make draws impossible. Just voting for a game stop is in no way a draw.

I also beg to differ, that a full game of FtF diplomacy is tiring. Nobody says that there must be two games per day. One is probably enough, and there can be sort of a finalizing mechanism, if you feel turns are too long in the later game stages. Also I dislike the idea, that the game shall be ended by any mechanism from outside the board, be it by a fixed limit, be it by randomly determining such a limit. It would just change the game and the idea behind. Would you play chess, then stop after 20 turns and count the tokens? (And then claim it be the World Chess Championships.)

I understand your position, after you have played - with a certain success - quite a lot with the system you describe. I wouldn't expect you to devaluate your success. Btw, it doesn't matter at all whether you calculate a square function or not, the bad point is center counting, as well as shortening the game.
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
 
Posts: 1012
Joined: 08 Mar 2014, 17:34
Location: Switzerland (Interlaken) ⛵ Instagram @jack060856
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: 1531
All-game rating: 1703
Timezone: GMT+1

Re: WDC 2017: AAR and General Impressions

Postby DQ » 18 Jul 2017, 14:01

I'd just like to make a plea that this not degenerate into the religious war over scoring systems? I say "the" religious war because tis the same war, fought over and over again, with the same arguments, convincing no one. Nearly 30 years in the hobby and this is one area I've never seen any movement towards a "Yeah, as a community, we agree on that."

THAT being said, I wanted to chime in and say our alliance, BG, was one of the most fun games of Diplomacy I've played in years. Germany was SO confident he was rolling the table, leading the triple, and SO crushed when he got stabbed. The Turk played SUCH amazing defense, and the French player was SUCH a toady - it made the brutal 1904-07 grind of defense so worthwhile.

Those kinds of games are why F2F is awesome. :D
Stab you soon!
User avatar
DQ
 
Posts: 349
Joined: 11 Sep 2008, 14:29
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: (1062)
All-game rating: (1063)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: WDC 2017: AAR and General Impressions

Postby Carebear » 18 Jul 2017, 14:06

Really not the right thread for it anyhow.
You can have my last supply center, when you pry it from my cold dead hands.

Spam Ambassador Wannabe

Officially Sanctioned Site Gadfly (meaning the negative kind of sanction)
User avatar
Carebear
 
Posts: 2389
Joined: 12 Nov 2013, 04:26
Location: In the fingerhold
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1573)
All-game rating: (1589)
Timezone: GMT+8

Re: WDC 2017: AAR and General Impressions

Postby Shyvve » 18 Jul 2017, 14:39

I have some questions as to how retreats/build phases were conducted in a FtF tourney setting, and turn timing in general.

So, it's my understanding that the clock for the next season must start running as soon as the written orders for the current season are revealed, yes? Or does it not start until the moves are adjudicated?

Let's say a spring turn has just been adjudicated and there are retreat(s). Is there a very brief time interval allocated to write your retreats (which is subtracted from the following fall season's negotiation time)? Or, could a player just delay writing his retreat in an attempt to limit the board's negotiation time for the coming fall turn?

Same thing for adjustment phases following a fall turn (builds/removals), are these phases allocated a brief time interval to be conducted, with this interval subtracted from the ensuing spring turn's negotiation time?

Also, as far as the actual map/game edition used. From some of the pictures I noticed what I think is the "UK-version" of the map board (purple Russia, bullets? and boats, lol). I didn't notice any of the mid-1970's US-version of the game (white Russia, long and stubby wooden blocks). Were any games played on the newer version of the map board circa 2000? I not too long ago bought that version and I find it almost impossible to distinguish the pieces unless they are flipped over to their solid-colored sides.
An Oldie and Gold Classicist. Moderator for the Classicist group.
User avatar
Shyvve
Premium Member
 
Posts: 465
Joined: 31 Dec 2016, 20:10
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: 1351
All-game rating: 1381
Timezone: GMT-6

Re: WDC 2017: AAR and General Impressions

Postby Jack007 » 18 Jul 2017, 14:48

No, there was no interval given for adjudication, retreats and builds. These were entirely at the cost of the new turn. The clock, after reached zero was immediately reset to the next turn's countdown.
Last edited by Jack007 on 18 Jul 2017, 15:52, edited 1 time in total.
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
 
Posts: 1012
Joined: 08 Mar 2014, 17:34
Location: Switzerland (Interlaken) ⛵ Instagram @jack060856
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: 1531
All-game rating: 1703
Timezone: GMT+1

Re: WDC 2017: AAR and General Impressions

Postby Carebear » 18 Jul 2017, 15:29

To be clear, there is no tournament standard. The way it was at WDC is the same as some tournaments, but not all.

Some tournaments put timer responsibility on the players at each table. Often, clock is stopped for retreats and builds. The clock is then restarted only at the beginning of the next negotiation phase.
You can have my last supply center, when you pry it from my cold dead hands.

Spam Ambassador Wannabe

Officially Sanctioned Site Gadfly (meaning the negative kind of sanction)
User avatar
Carebear
 
Posts: 2389
Joined: 12 Nov 2013, 04:26
Location: In the fingerhold
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1573)
All-game rating: (1589)
Timezone: GMT+8

Re: WDC 2017: AAR and General Impressions

Postby DQ » 19 Jul 2017, 02:05

I'm the current president of the North American Diplomacy Federation, and one of the things we struggle with is the lack of standards in tournament diplomacy. Enough people see this as a feature, not a bug, that getting things to change is hard.

And that's just North America!
Stab you soon!
User avatar
DQ
 
Posts: 349
Joined: 11 Sep 2008, 14:29
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: (1062)
All-game rating: (1063)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: WDC 2017: AAR and General Impressions

Postby Carebear » 19 Jul 2017, 02:17

DQ wrote:I'm the current president of the North American Diplomacy Federation, and one of the things we struggle with is the lack of standards in tournament diplomacy. Enough people see this as a feature, not a bug, that getting things to change is hard.

And that's just North America!

Yeah. Personally, I like not having builds and retreats on the clock and each table setting their own pace. So, not having a central clock as the "standard" is just fine by me.
You can have my last supply center, when you pry it from my cold dead hands.

Spam Ambassador Wannabe

Officially Sanctioned Site Gadfly (meaning the negative kind of sanction)
User avatar
Carebear
 
Posts: 2389
Joined: 12 Nov 2013, 04:26
Location: In the fingerhold
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1573)
All-game rating: (1589)
Timezone: GMT+8

Re: WDC 2017: AAR and General Impressions

Postby Carebear » 23 Jul 2017, 07:18

Round 5 Board 9
Austria: Steve Cooley
England: Julian Joost
France: Nathan Barnes
Germany: Robin Walters
Italy: Peter Lund
Russia: Carebear
Turkey: Shane Cubis

Opening Thoughts
Another good power. I think Russia may be my third favorite power in the game. After the fatigue debacle in my last game and the misplay in my second game I was determined that this would be a better game for me. While this board clearly did not have the strength and depth of my second and third boards, it still had some solid players on it in Cooley, Barnes, and Cubis.

Summary of Play
Wanting to get out quickly, I tried to arrange a DMZ of the Black. Turkey agreed, but then broke it immediately in S'01. A lot of people thought this was subterfuge, Italy asked about it for several turns. However, I moved Mos - Sev just in case. So, I was protected and still got my two builds. The North seemed reasonable as England landed a fleet Nwy IIRC -- at least I didn't build fleet StP which is my usual retaliation for army in Nwy.

Since Turkey lied out of the gate, I lied back and moved to BLA and Arm. Worked with Austria and Italy to kill him. Had another set of solid tactical moves in the South. In the North, it was clear that England was out of his depth. I tried to help him a bit, but with the effort in the South and concern about Austria stabbing me I really didn't help as much as I should have against Germany.

Italy said he was going to do something and didn't, which ticked off Austria. So, he stabbed Italy. It quickly became Austria and me against Germany and France. With Italy being the French vassal and England being mine. Though I lost StP for a while, I retook it and was tied for board leader near the end and was always one or two centers away from being the leader throughout the game. Then, I got stabbed by Austria on the second to last year (1909 - though we didn't play the last) as he became sole board top. Instead of tied for first or even second, I fell all the way to third for my worst placement finish of the tournament (even though I had my second best score of the event).

Post Game Analysis
Frankly, I did another misplay in two ways. Most importantly, there were a couple of opportunities where I could have protected myself. But for various reasons, I did not make the plays when the opportunities occurred. This left me vulnerable. Being vulnerable, I had no bargaining power. When Austria came to me and asked for a center so he could board top, I should have said "yes, absolutely". Then, I could have possibly finished with another strong second. Instead I tried to negotiate and he just decided to make a big stab. :S


Tournament Review
At my last WDC, I finished in the top 20 with other really solid players on the boards. In my other tournament between the two WDCs, I finished second with a reasonable field - including two of this year's WDC Top 15 finishers and Top board player. So, I came in with an expectation of finishing in the top 20 again. Having only one good result, I ended up in the top half only. :(

In reviewing each board, I think the one good result on my first board was about what I could expect. I am not sure anything could have been done to improve the position. Probably the most disappointing was my third game. It had the strongest board, I played well, and I while I finished tied for second, if not for the vote flub, I would have finished solely in second and probably closed the distance between myself and the board leader. Between my second and fourth games, it is a close call for my performance. At the end of the day, even though the second game had a much stronger board, I still felt I made bad decisions causing my result more so than the other players.

The woulda, coulda, shoulda finish would have been a much better second place on board three and four. Still, I would have probably finished just outside of the top 20. So, about the same as last year. But, I really need to board top to have a chance at the top board and I really didn't get close. My last board was perhaps my best chance for it. So, I perhaps need to re-evaluate some of my play.
You can have my last supply center, when you pry it from my cold dead hands.

Spam Ambassador Wannabe

Officially Sanctioned Site Gadfly (meaning the negative kind of sanction)
User avatar
Carebear
 
Posts: 2389
Joined: 12 Nov 2013, 04:26
Location: In the fingerhold
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1573)
All-game rating: (1589)
Timezone: GMT+8

PreviousNext

Return to Face-to-Face

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests