Diplomacy Debate

[ORBOTRON]

Yeah, way off, if anyone has a relevant comment to make, please do so.
BTW, PM's and the Private Forums are the right places for some of the conversation taking place, let's not air all our dirty laundry here, it smells.

 

[AAFitz]

Yeah, way off, if anyone has a relevant comment to make, please do so.
BTW, PM's and the Private Forums are the right places for some of the conversation taking place, let's not air all our dirty laundry here, it smells.

Honestly, I thought we were all joking around and you with us with the army hat and the stetson comments. In any case, I will enjoy my new avatar. But as far as diplomacy goes, I will never earn the "D" medal for real, because I dont even like diplomacy in games unless absolutely necessary, and would certainly never break any real truce under anything close to normal conditions.

I think the discussion has shown pretty conclusively that there are many different views on diplomacy and clearly a few options would be the best way to serve all.

 

[FLAGG]

"I think the discussion has shown pretty conclusively that there are many different views on diplomacy and clearly a few options would be the best way to serve all."

-----------------

BINGO! Well stated.........FLAGG

 

[StayPuft]

I think the discussion has shown pretty conclusively that there are many different views on diplomacy and clearly a few options would be the best way to serve all.

I think we pretty much all agree on that. The question is which options do we include, and which do we exclude.

Also it's kind of interesting to have a bit of a run around the block with the more conceptual ideas about what diplomacy brings to the game.

For example, I seem to be pretty much the only person here who likes diplomacy and tries to make use of it whenever advantageous.

 

[WidowMakers]

For example, I seem to be pretty much the only person here who likes diplomacy and tries to make use of it whenever advantageous.

I like it and use it . It is great to get into others minds by having them see we are communicating but not know the context. I also like the border agreements. Most of the time when I have made those, I pull all my troops off that border and use them elsewhere.
So I have trusted those players, but if a player did break the truce, then I would need to see in what context they did.
If it was just to be a jerk or if it was to win the game.
Depending on which one would determine my attitude towards another truce.

 

[FLAGG]

I like Diplomacy and use it all the time. It is often good / helpful to talk to specific players. I also often set up treaties. I just wish there was an option where I could decide if in the current game they were to be binding or not. So my opinion is that when setting up a game there could be a choice for treaties:

Treaties: BINDING / NOT BINDING

(not binding would be exactly how we play now)

When I am playing multiple games I often check the brief to make sure I remember how reinforcements work in the current game. We allow options there. They can vastly effect the strategy. It would be neat to be able to just check the brief to double check if a treaty is really binding or not.........and how that might effect the strategy.

FLAGG

 

[ORBOTRON]

I use diplo agreements like they are going out of style. Although for some reason, I have an aversion to the diplo chatter, maybe because I am wary of giving the impression that I'm cooperating with someone, especially if they just felt like saying howdy in private.

 

[FLAGG]

I assume this thread is closed with a lot of typing, but leaving things exactly as they are?

FLAGG

 

[ORBOTRON]

I would say probably, but you could always wait a bit and start a thread in the suggestions forum and see if you can rally more support. Old ideas can make a comeback

 

[FLAGG]

Orbotron,

I will probably just give up. I really don't see how posting this issue in another place will make any difference. I was not the one that started this tread......I am not sure why it is here vs. suggestions.........but it seems to me like the same thing would just be typed by the same people over and over on that forum. Perhaps you could just move this whole thread if you think that matters.........

I just really thought we might want to play test something while we are still in BETA mode. No loss. I know the rules as they are, and can certainly play that way!

FLAGG

 

[StayPuft]

I think FLAGG has a point about at least testing some of the different ideas out and seeing if people like them. I get it if it's a pain in the ass when we're not even through bug-fixing, but if there were no obstacles, it's at least a good idea in theory.

 

[mapguy]

Research and Development systems are at their best when they incorporate "out of the box" thinkers. Genius is born from these type individuals. To poo-poo ideas just because they differ from the norm, is shortsighted, and leads to stagnation. Do any of you remember the quip, Try it ...you might like it.

 

[ORBOTRON]

Orbotron,

I will probably just give up. I really don't see how posting this issue in another place will make any difference. I was not the one that started this tread......I am not sure why it is here vs. suggestions.........but it seems to me like the same thing would just be typed by the same people over and over on that forum. Perhaps you could just move this whole thread if you think that matters.........

I just really thought we might want to play test something while we are still in BETA mode. No loss. I know the rules as they are, and can certainly play that way!

FLAGG

Flagg,
read the whole thread and you'll see why it's here, this thread was broken off another that went off-topic, it was meant to simply discuss the idea of diplomacy, but veered off into this talk about binding treaties. I'm not too keen on sorting through 18 pages of discussion, picking out where you first suggested binding treaties, then every post related only to that, for a sugg thread. If you really want me to, I will, but I think it would bring new life to your idea if you started your own thread.

 

[ORBOTRON]

Research and Development systems are at their best when they incorporate "out of the box" thinkers. Genius is born from these type individuals. To poo-poo ideas just because they differ from the norm, is shortsighted, and leads to stagnation. Do any of you remember the quip, Try it ...you might like it.

This is both irrelevant and needlessly accusatory. Nobody "poo-poo'd" anything for differing from the "norm". This site is only about a year old, and is always evolving, there is no norm.

 

[mapguy]

This is both irrelevant and needlessly accusatory. Nobody "poo-poo'd" anything for differing from the "norm". This site is only about a year old, and is always evolving, there is no norm.

Orbo,
Not accusing anyone of anything. lol. Just trying to make it clear that I personally like this idea. And, I am aware that others do not. My point is, it does not matter if I personally like or dislike it, or if others personally like or dislike the idea. Others have indeed poo-pooed it, and went on to explain their reasons for liking the statuesque (norm).

I believe that more than just a few will really like this option, and I think that it would be smart to find out just HOW many. I also think that more than just a few would really like the "No Dip." option. So I am only adding my two cents here. Not at all trying to debate which Dip option is my favorite, or should be adopted. Just that I believe that a "Test Drive" is in order. Only then will we know the answers to the Diplo question.

 

[Incandenza]

Speaking very generally, I'd say it's more likely that we'd add a "no diplomacy" option to games, rather than a "binding diplomacy" option, since it seems over the various diplo threads over the months the major divide has been between people that like diplo and people that hate it.

One thing to bear in mind is that we're trying to be very cautious about option bloat, especially for a site like this that's still in beta with a small-ish community. Also, there's things coming that'll blow everyone's mind way more than a diplo option.

Thanks everyone for the comments.

 

[ORBOTRON]

ok then, this has run it's course. FLAGG, like I said, I encourage you to start a Sugg. thread, and I promise I'll keep it on topic for you, lol

 

[FLAGG]

Orbotron - OK - I will start a thread under the suggestions tab!!!!! Since you just suggested it twice.........it might be worth seeing where it goes.....

Flagg

 

[StayPuft]

One thing to bear in mind is that we're trying to be very cautious about option bloat, especially for a site like this that's still in beta with a small-ish community. Also, there's things coming that'll blow everyone's mind way more than a diplo option.

Sounds exciting! More mind-blowing than diplo? But ... how?!

Seriously, though, you have piqued my interest tremendously, and your point on option bloat is well-taken.

 

[mapguy]

Thanks for the new avatar.

Id respond in kind, but I have no idea what those bars are in your avatar.:dancing:

Here is something that you might like better.