- Joined
- Mar 30, 2020
- Messages
- 7
I wish there was no diplomacy. It ruins the game.
1 - NEW PLAYERS - Players who created an account on or after Oct 15 2023 are not able to log into the forum
2 - AWOL - We do not have an AWOL button under the ACTIVE tab yet. Please check each game to see if you are AWOL.
3 - STUCK GAMES - Some games will not load properly. If you encounter this, please post stuck games
HERE
Thanks.
I wish there was no diplomacy. It ruins the game.
Really? :hmmmm2: If it is used correctly....it can be a good thing for both parties. Yes, eventually the allies/friendship will come to an end...since it's the nature of the game, but you totally get further with good diplos. I totally rely on it with fixed force and certain flat rate games.
Newsheriff...i really hope the diplo tab will be in the html5 site.
peri, that icon looks like me searching for a hair.
Well sure you figured out you had to engage in the diplomacy to have a better chance to win. Really so what? Would it not be better if it did not exist at all?You should check out the clan EOD ..Enemies Of Diplomacy. They set up great games each month. You are not alone in this regard. You could even start a game and put in the notes NO diplo's. I understand your feelings, but I'm like peri. I have learned to use them properly and never break them. In a 6 player game. If you and another player are both completing a command, but need to finish them. A diplo there is beneficial to both. Why not got a leg up on the other 4 players. The best diplo's are the ones that help both parties. Believe me I used to try and break other players commands and never won. All I was usually doing was just busting the one player next to me, rather then use it to my advantage. Just No diplo's in 3 player games.:captain: Be the Captain of your vessel and travel with class and pride, and you will start kicking A$$
What does real life have to do with anything? We're not playing the game of real life, we're playing Risk. And let me point out that Risk(TM) doesn't have diplos, and neither does (for instance) Dominating 12. Is it better or worse? I don't know, but don't present your opinion as fact, and real life has nothing to do with the rules of Risk. A game has rules, if you don't like the rules, play another game. Just like no added time in real games - is that good or bad? I agree it influences the gameplay, but it doesn't mean it's therefore a better gameplay.
Keep in mind, all the strategy that you cite regarding breakable diplos can be exceeded by the strategy required if diplos can't be broken. Imagine if diplos can't be broken, then you'd have to try to entice a 3rd player to break a diplo that you yourself can't break. That would be as interesting as anything you describe. All the mindgame stuff you cite can exist in an unbreakable diplo format.
I'm not complaining about anything. I thought this was a discussion. And I found holes in your argument.
OK - here's a thought experiment. It's not a complaint or a whine. I'm just asking people to think outside the box a bit, to what the corollary to this discussion would sound like. I'm just stating an argument here. No need to go tell me to to start my own site with my own rules.
Imagine a Risk-themed website: General Command.
GC is based on Risk, and entirely analogous to MC. Except, diplos are not breakable. One day, a forum thread comes up:
Title: Why can't I break diplos?
I keep getting into diplos that stop me from winning. I want to break diplos. It sux that on this site, I can't break diplos. Why should I be forced to abide by the diplos I agree to?
Yours truly, periwrinkle.
Q.E.D.
Edit: In such a scenario, there would be no need for a diplomacy score either.