| Unknown - FuzzyLogic (Aug 24, 2009, 5:40 pm) |
Short answer - YES!
We've certainly considered it.
But when? With the WB taking up winter / spring, and the DCI going summer / fall, when on Earth could we fit in a Class Champ?
Being a chessplayer myself, our rating system is based on the the same proven system as chess, modified for the variable number of players in a game, varying result options, and so on.
Also getting the help would be a challenge, as well as fitting in potentially two rounds of a tournament. At full length, a 2-round non-blitz tournament could easily go 1-2 years - one of the drawbacks to things like the WorldMasters.
Happy to discuss any ideas you have, or um... any offers to run a tournament.  [Reply] |
| Rating System and Tourney - Kenshi777 (Aug 24, 2009, 5:00 pm) |
Has any thought ever been given to having a rating bracket tourney? Our rating system is well and good, so perhaps we should make use of it in a tourney to match players of even skill competing for a title. (i.e. the below 1150 title, the 1150-1200 title, the 1200-1250 title, the 1250-1300 title, the 1300 and up title) Maybe even some names (rather than just ranges, as it is in chess) - i.e. B, A, expert, master, grandmaster.
And for pete's sake, if this does make it past the good idea fairy stage, let's please not make it a blitz.
Anyone else like this?
B.[Reply] |
| Unknown (Community) FuzzyLogic Aug 24, 05:40 pm |
Short answer - YES!
We've certainly considered it.
But when? With the WB taking up winter / spring, and the DCI going summer / fall, when on Earth could we fit in a Class Champ?
Being a chessplayer myself, our rating system is based on the the same proven system as chess, modified for the variable number of players in a game, varying result options, and so on.
Also getting the help would be a challenge, as well as fitting in potentially two rounds of a tournament. At full length, a 2-round non-blitz tournament could easily go 1-2 years - one of the drawbacks to things like the WorldMasters.
Happy to discuss any ideas you have, or um... any offers to run a tournament. |
| me personally... (Community) Kenshi777 Aug 24, 09:57 pm |
...I don't see long-running games and tourneys as a bad thing. Most of the PBEM games I've played in any community (Cat23, ACD, and now DC) have typically been at least 6 months, some lasting well beyond a year. Those are the best kind of games - plenty of time to ponder and really shine to the best of your ability.
Now granted, finding GMs willing to run such games can be difficult, and you almost have to allow for GM and player induced breaks (within reason and specified limits) for no-kidding-real-life-gets-in-the-way-reasons. But if such considerations were allowed (since I have two jobs, and my wife has two plus grad school), then yes, I would be willing to GM such a game, and there's no reason I can think of why two tourneys running concurrently would necessarily be a bad thing.
A lowly-yet-vocal DC newbie...
B. |
| Unknown - FuzzyLogic (Aug 20, 2009, 8:21 pm) |
| This is in the works! Your TD is a bit overcome by travels but a summary email will be out in the next few days... [Reply] |
| WINTER BLITZ AWARDS - jhack16 (Aug 18, 2009, 11:21 am) |
Congrats to the organisers and GM's for the Winter blitz series just ended, a great event, thank you!
Was just wondering any news of or nominations for the BEST STAB or BEST PRESS AWARD?
 : Jhack16[Reply] |
| Unknown (Community) FuzzyLogic Aug 20, 08:21 pm |
| This is in the works! Your TD is a bit overcome by travels but a summary email will be out in the next few days... |
| Knights of the Companions - New Promotions! - garry.bledsoe (Aug 15, 2009, 7:55 pm) |
[color=darkblue:14d73e0fd2]It is with great pleasure that I update you all on the advancement of several of our brethren. Join me in congratulating the following four on their advancement in the orders:
Mikael - advances to the Order of the Acorn
Trout - advances to the Order of the Garter
Kevin - advances to the Order of the Mammoth
Garry - advances to the Order of the Parchment
I would like to personally congratulate Trout on joining Mike in the Order of the Garter. It is an elite group who have attained that level. Only Mike S., Stephen L. and Trout have ever achieved that Order and it is to be commended.
All of the best to all of our other Knights. Carry on the good fight! Truly the 14 of us are a great crew.
Your humble servant and new Scribe,
Garry[/color:14d73e0fd2][Reply] |
| Unknown - alwayshunted (Aug 14, 2009, 1:26 pm) |
I must agree completely with Joe in this case. The player in question had far reaching effects on this game and the 'still to be determined' outcome. It shows a complete lack of respect for the players that are being affected, and personally I think there should be SOME sort of repercussions for this type of poor play. I know we all have times in our lives where nmrs happen, but starting a new game while continually nmring in another is inexcusable.
My $0.02.
Warren[Reply] |
| Unknown - FuzzyLogic (Aug 11, 2009, 8:30 pm) |
Joe, thank you for pointing this out. Yes, typically a player gets put on restricted status after abandoning a couple games, which requires that said player complete a game before the restriction can be lifted. What does restricted status do? It prevents someone from auto-joining more than one game at a time. The system will allow one active game, but not more than that. Not to say that person cant play more, but they would just have to vocalize such to a potential GM rather than use the auto-join feature silently.
How did it fall apart in this scenario? In this case the player was never put on restricted status. The WB games process NMR's without intervention, so nothing raised a red flag here. This is still a manual / human review process, whereby someone has to bring it to our attention for something to be done. Usually I'll notice if someone abandons since GMs come to open games up for a replacement, but a single abandon usually does not warrant a restricted status.
In any case, this account has been duly noted. Please all, dont hesitate to bring up any questionable play. We can be reached anonymously via the feedback form online, or just email me directly, or feedback-at-diplomaticcorp-dot-com with any concerns. It is always our goal to raise the level of play here. This means finding the right balance between tolerance and improvement, and NMRs and abandons. It is a gray line, that is defined from everyone's perspective a different way.
If anyone has suggestions on preventing situations like this (moreso than pointing out any one individual, improving standards in general), please bring them up like Joe has done here. The best thing we have going for us is that we are a community, and as such, an active roll by everyone is the best course.
Thank you,
-mike[Reply] |
| NMR'ing in one game, while playing in others! - jhack16 (Aug 11, 2009, 5:05 pm) |
I and 4 others are playing in DC 247WB.
The game started in March,with two turns a week.
One player, for reasons best known to himself, has after nearly 35 seasons, lately submitted 4 NMR's in a row.
This has as you can imagine altered the course of the game.
C'est la vie you might say, and I would be inclined to agree, apart from one thing.
The member, while too busy to submit moves in a game that has gone gone for over five months, and which is now in Fall 1920, has commenced playing in a new game, DC 268, and has submitted moves to this game while at the same time NMR'ing without any excuse or notification to anyone in the original game.
This type of behaviour is reprehensibile and I would ask the moderators to take action to stop this kind of action being repeated.
In the meantime, Benjy Aarons, aka Finchley Womble, take a bow.
Joe Hackett aka jhack16  [Reply] |
| Unknown (Community) FuzzyLogic Aug 11, 08:30 pm |
Joe, thank you for pointing this out. Yes, typically a player gets put on restricted status after abandoning a couple games, which requires that said player complete a game before the restriction can be lifted. What does restricted status do? It prevents someone from auto-joining more than one game at a time. The system will allow one active game, but not more than that. Not to say that person cant play more, but they would just have to vocalize such to a potential GM rather than use the auto-join feature silently.
How did it fall apart in this scenario? In this case the player was never put on restricted status. The WB games process NMR's without intervention, so nothing raised a red flag here. This is still a manual / human review process, whereby someone has to bring it to our attention for something to be done. Usually I'll notice if someone abandons since GMs come to open games up for a replacement, but a single abandon usually does not warrant a restricted status.
In any case, this account has been duly noted. Please all, dont hesitate to bring up any questionable play. We can be reached anonymously via the feedback form online, or just email me directly, or feedback-at-diplomaticcorp-dot-com with any concerns. It is always our goal to raise the level of play here. This means finding the right balance between tolerance and improvement, and NMRs and abandons. It is a gray line, that is defined from everyone's perspective a different way.
If anyone has suggestions on preventing situations like this (moreso than pointing out any one individual, improving standards in general), please bring them up like Joe has done here. The best thing we have going for us is that we are a community, and as such, an active roll by everyone is the best course.
Thank you,
-mike |
| Unknown (Community) alwayshunted Aug 14, 01:26 pm |
I must agree completely with Joe in this case. The player in question had far reaching effects on this game and the 'still to be determined' outcome. It shows a complete lack of respect for the players that are being affected, and personally I think there should be SOME sort of repercussions for this type of poor play. I know we all have times in our lives where nmrs happen, but starting a new game while continually nmring in another is inexcusable.
My $0.02.
Warren |
| Eternal Sunshine #31 Now Posted - August 2009 Issu... - diplomacyworld (Jul 28, 2009, 8:24 pm) |
The August 2009 issue of Eternal Sunshine, Issue #31, has just been released. Inside you'll find:
The usual crap
Halfway Home to the Halfway House - Part Seven
I'm No Edward Norton - Part One
Subzines from Jack McHugh, Paul Milewski, and W. Andrew York
Play Reviews by Larry Cronin
Football Prediction Contest
Plenty of Game Openings
Letters
Hypothetical of the Month
The latest game results
And maybe some other stuff, who can remember?
Check it out! You can find it in pdf format in the Eternal Sunshine Yahoo forum at:
http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/eternal_sunshine_diplomacy/
Or in both pdf and html format from the Diplomacy section of my personal website at:
http://www.whiningkentpigs.com/DW/
Enjoy![Reply] |
| Resignation. - deathblade_penguin (Jul 21, 2009, 8:56 am) |
Just to let those people who are still emailing me about day to day management matters for this site, that I tendered my resignation as moderator of DC nearly 2 months ago.
I'm sure Mike has his own reason why no announcement was made to the community but I am just letting those last few people know that i am not reponsible for any matters relating to the run and organising of games at DC.
Thanks
Steve
Deathblade_Penguin[Reply] |
| still playing? (Community) Kenshi777 Aug 24, 10:02 pm |
...but you're still playing occasionally here I hope? Never got a chance to tangle (or perhaps even cooperate) over a board with you in ACD or here...and Trout informed me it was an experience not to be missed...
B. |
| NMR's - jhack16 (Jul 18, 2009, 6:49 pm) |
Hi Guys,
Love the site as you know.
Think the NMR score for each player is great, but guys, lets get a bit closer to the truth..
I'm down as a 10% NMR...
I inadvertently missed one build in one game, over a total of TEN completed games.
Guys, this is NOT a 10% NMR.
Havent looked, but take an average of 10 years per game, so twenty turns, plus builds and retreats, maybe 40 "moves" per average game.
So, I missed one turn out of a potential 400. This is 0.04% not 10%.
So my score in reality is around 99.6%, but my record says no, 90%!
My record looks positively criminal, its not!
Love the concept guys, but if you can, lets get a closer reality to moves ordered/NMR'd
Hate to complain coz this is such a brill site, but guys, HELP!
Thanks,
Joe  [Reply] |
| Light Brigade inductee! - FuzzyLogic (Jul 13, 2009, 8:14 pm) |
With a good dousing in WWIV as the mega-power Sichuan (actually a major undertaking), welcome Max Victory to the ranks of the Light Brigade!
**************************************************
Hey all,
I know this came up last year sometime, but it’s time to revisit this again. A few things I was thinking of…
A new inductee can only enter the Light Brigade via a trial of taking on a replacement position. This way our newest entrants will always get the next game.
There is now an indicator on the My Profile page, which we can expand to where you can click the link and it’ll take you to a list of the LB members and how many games they’ve covered.
Then of course we need some kick-ass graphics to make such a page work.
Ideas anyone?
-mike[Reply] |
| Diplomacy World #106 Has Been Released - Summer 20... - diplomacyworld (Jul 07, 2009, 5:50 pm) |
The Summer 2009 issue of Diplomacy World, #106, has just been released, with a theme of Historical Variants! 141 pages of Diplomacy for your reading enjoyment. It would impossible to list all of the highlights, but a small sampling would include:
Multiple articles on World DipCon 2009, including one from champion Andrew Goff
Prussian strategy in the Ambition and Empire variant
Two new variants: Battleship and 1648 with detailed designer notes, plus many more variant articles, historical and otherwise
Lots of information and player statements on the Diplomacy World Cup
The second to last installment of the Diplomacy Demo Game “After the Rapture”
The first installment of our new variant Demo game of the “Known World” variant
A review of phpDiplomacy on Facebook
And SO MUCH MORE!
You can find the new issue of Diplomacy World for free download in pdf format in the diplomacyworld Yahoo group:
http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/diplomacyworld/
or directly from the official Diplomacy World website:
http://www.diplomacyworld.net
Read it, absorb it, and let us know what you think about it! The deadline for #107 is October 1st, 2009, with a theme of “Balance of Power.” Remember, theme material only takes up a portion of each issue, so don’t feel your submissions need to be theme-related![Reply] |
| Unknown - charlesf (Jul 03, 2009, 7:24 am) |
I think the default one-game-a-time rule for those new to the site (which includes me) is really sound.
Vetting the players before game start also helps diminish the grief that might arise. I shall be building up a list of those players I want to invite (back) into any games I GM. After all, I want the most responsive and most reliable players I can get in any of the games I GM.
GMs certainly have a role to play in fostering a culture of responsiveness and diminishing the risk of NMRs. I'm trying my best in this respect by bugging player to write more and emphasising the importance of sending in preliminary orders. Monitoring all player correspondence makes for an early warning system.
I like the idea of players taking over as replacements being able to opt out of the ratings system. Not sure whether that is technically feasible, but perhaps that might ease the issue of getting replacements for mercy position. Not that I know how easily these are filled here.
In any case, I'm really impressed with DC. That's why I chose to run my playtest here. Together with the German Diplmacy community flagship site, Ludomaniac, I dare say this must be the best non-judge site out there. And for my part, I think non-judge Diplomacy encourages a hands-on approach by GMs, which really can make a huge difference in everyone's enjoyment of the game.[Reply] |
| Eternal Sunshine #30 Now Posted - July 2009 Issue - diplomacyworld (Jul 01, 2009, 5:54 pm) |
Now released: The July 2009 issue of Eternal Sunshine, issue #30. Included in this issue:
* Diplomacy results
* By Popular Demand
* Movie Reviews
* Deviant Diplomacy II
* Bourse
* New Game Openings
* Subzines by Jack McHugh, Andy York, David Hood, and Paul Milewski
* Prison Stories
* and more!
You can find Eternal Sunshine #30 in pdf format in the ES Yahoo group at:
http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/eternal_sunshine_diplomacy/
or in both pdf and HTML format in the Diplomacy section of my personal website at:
http://www.whiningkentpigs.com/DW/
Check it out and let me know what you think!
PS - Diplomacy World #106 is about to go into final proofing...watch for it sometime after July 4th weekend![Reply] |
| ACQUIRE/EXECUTIVE DECISION - vegas_iwish (Jun 28, 2009, 5:01 pm) |
Have kept running Acquire games but never picked up anyone from here. An even more disciplined/simultaneous turn-based game is Executive Decision. also an old 3M game. could schedule 1 buying & 1 selling turn a wk. Have more often done this 1 live as better with fast decisions if not newbies. Both are good options & easy to pick up. Of course if you want to make my life worth living you can go to http://www.alanemrich.com/PGD/Week_03/PGD_NAW_rules.htm & print out a real (if basic) wargame  [Reply] |
| Unknown - txurce (Jun 27, 2009, 5:45 pm) |
I really like Garry's idea of an advisory board. It would not only improve play, but diminish NMRs. I would implement it by listing a series of advisors that any player is free to contact. I'd keep it private, or ruin the point of most advice. It's no more unfair than asking your roommate for advice, and anyone can do it.
I also think that newbies should complete one game before being allowed to sign up for another, with case-by-case exceptions made by the mods. (For example, in the case of a newbie who has a perfect record in a game in its fourth year.)[Reply] |
| Quality of games - Kenshi777 (Jun 22, 2009, 2:06 pm) |
4. Maybe a way to increase the quality of players is to offer a mentoring type of program? If a new player has questions about strategy or specific tactics/moves, there is a pot of people available to email with those questions. We obviously can't help with "should I attack so and so" or "do you think I can trust them" because those are opinion questions. BUT, we could answer a question like "I am considering a stab like X. What would be the implications?" or "I have to retreat or retreat OTB. Should I retreat OTB?". I am just thinking that there are still a lot of questions where an advisory panel [in confidence] could help a newbie evaluate their options [not make the decision] and give them pros/cons of certain actions.
This was something like what I had in mind for a panel game, but to be fair and keep the game at least somewhat fun for the other players, I think all such commentary would have to be public (i.e. sent to the message board, not an individual player). Otherwise, I think playing with a coach might not be very well received. It's one thing for a third party panel member to publicly post "the R/T juggernaut appears to be forming early in this game, Austria should be alarmed by the DMZs in the Black Sea and Armenia" or "Italy's S1901 move of A Rome-Apulia tipped his hand that A Venice-Trieste is a Key Lepanto rather than a genuine stab." It's quite another thing for a private q&a analysis - when the players get to ask direct questions of the panel and solicit advice on the topics of their choosing, I think we've gone too far.
Which brings up another point - the best thing that newbies can do to learn is *watch* - far too many come in to a PBEM community, sign up for 50 games at once (slight exaggeration), and then NMR in all of them when they start losing. I would be in favor of a 3 game-at-a-time cap for newbies (for that matter, wouldn't advise more than that for anybody, but hey, to each their own)
B.[Reply] |
| Quality of games - garry.bledsoe (Jun 22, 2009, 12:16 pm) |
All,
I don't feel too different than the thoughts below but I do have a few opinions:
1. I am in favor of burn-in games for newbies. A method I have seen work before is say that a newbie can only start with one game or two and must play in those "newbie-only" games until they become a "standard" player. My opinion is that we should have "standard" games where all players have proven themselves and thus have a lower likelihood of dropping out. Hey, NMR's happen BUT standard-only games may create more serious games with less disruption.
2. I agree that GM encouragement could help. I should know; I am probably the worst of us in that regard [sending reminders, etc.]. The hard thing to remember is that we are all also playing games simultaneously AND balancing real-life with our slave, er, volunteer duty as GM's. But we do it for the love of the game.
3. To me, the NMR's are the most concerning. A lack of communication, although bad, usually leads to that player being eliminated anyway and the good players take advantage of it. Plus, as seasoned players, we probably should go out of our way to do more communicating. As a side note, I had never played variants before coming to this site. While they are fun, I find that the prospect of soooo many players in some variants also hinders communication when compared to standard games.
4. Maybe a way to increase the quality of players is to offer a mentoring type of program? If a new player has questions about strategy or specific tactics/moves, there is a pot of people available to email with those questions. We obviously can't help with "should I attack so and so" or "do you think I can trust them" because those are opinion questions. BUT, we could answer a question like "I am considering a stab like X. What would be the implications?" or "I have to retreat or retreat OTB. Should I retreat OTB?". I am just thinking that there are still a lot of questions where an advisory panel [in confidence] could help a newbie evaluate their options [not make the decision] and give them pros/cons of certain actions.
Just some thoughts. I have long since shifted all of my play to this site and I want to make it succeed as well. I think we have a great core group and can only get better as we find a smooth on-boarding/grooming for more enthusiasts.
garry[Reply] |
| Quality of games - Kenshi777 (Jun 22, 2009, 10:45 am) |
comments inserted below...
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 10:12 PM, Michael Sims <mike(at)fuzzylogicllc.net ([email]mike(at)fuzzylogicllc.net[/email])> wrote:
Hi guys,
Anyone feel free to add anyone else to the email chain… but I’ve seen a few discussions fly thru various channels lately about quality of games. I suppose this would mean NMR’s, Abandons, and general lack of communication in games.
How can dc improve this?
A few things about the status quo…
- Right now… we recruit one standard game at all times, which has an invitation for newbies to join it, as it is after all, standard. Easiest to learn the game on.
- Newbies are – and always will be – welcome here, (we were all one at some point) however we need to be able to limit the disruption they can do to games, and the frustration they can cause to other players.
- Anyone can play here. There is no proving ground.
Is this appropriate? If a leader of a country isn’t very good – and doesn’t write, and misses turns – is it up to the “good” players to be the best to capitalize on this, or should that player not have played in the first place? How can we realistically prevent such a player from causing disruption, given that new players have to get a start, somewhere?
***Diplomacy is going to go the way of baseball cards unless we do all we can to not only make newbies welcome, but actively recruit them. PBEM play is all that has saved the game from this unfortunate technological revolution (the Playstation generation) anyway. So if the rest of us occasionally get stuck in a game with a bad seed that NMRs and abandons at *just* the wrong season to ruin the whole game - oh well. Not to be callous, but we need to suck it up and deal with it. The only control measure is for the GM to communicate emphatically up front to all the players that signing up for a game means a commitment to play it through to completion, regardless of the outcome.
Should we go to a system of newbie-only games? I’ve run, I think 2 of these over the years, and they were a big hit.
***GMs should be free to run a newbie-only game at any time, at their discretion of course. That said - it's only by playing against better competition that a newbie's game will improve. What exactly do you mean by a "system" of newbie-only games?
Can GM’s do more to avoid NMR’s? Pumping up the players, sending reminders, etc?
***Absolutely. While it's not their *responsibility* - the GMs are in the best position to prevent NMRs.
Should players get more limited on the number and type of games they can play, based on their propensity for NMR’s? We have the new NMR stat on the Profile pages, which gives us info, but currently there is no mechanic in the system to limit players in any way based on their frequency of missing turns.
***No. Let the GMs decide if they want to restrict a player based on NMRs. By the way, I thought we were removing the percentage next to the NMR statistic on player profiles?
Anyways just looking for insight into what might really breed good hi-caliber players, and provide a fun gaming environment that isn’t met w frustration when players drop out.
***In a word - tourneys. The tourneys really bring the lurkers out of the woodwork, and everybody plays their A-game. Also, promote more strategy and tactics discussions on the board, maybe in the context of some peanut gallery (panel) games. Those are great teaching points for newbies. Let them get on a panel and watch a few of their predictions disappear - great way to learn and broaden your horizons.
B.
-mike
Order of the Garter
www.diplomaticcorp.com
--
Diplomacy in Texas!
www.texasdiplomacy.com
http://nairenvorbeck.angelfire.com/
Realpolitik files available here for the Sengoku, Balkans1860, South American Supremacy, and DarkAges Diplomacy Variants[Reply] |
| Unknown - txurce (Jun 21, 2009, 11:29 am) |
My first thought is that there may be a limit as to how many dedicated and viable players and GMs are out there. Quality of games is bound to drop with an increase in quantity. There's nothing wrong with DC's explosive growth slowing down.
It never occurred to me that one reason for dropouts by newcomers is that they’re trying out the game, decide they don’t like it, and opt not to stick out a months-long commitment regardless. The negative impact of this could be minimized by having a rookies-only game available alongside the standard game, as Mike suggested.
Players who have proven their reliability deserve games with fewer NMRs and abandonments. Maybe there could be an open standard game limited to players with a few games’ experience and good response records.
GMs should take the time to vet who’s signed up for their games, and either get a firm commitment from applicants with unreliable histories, or rule them out, as the GM sees fit. I realize that some Variants take a long time to fill up and the GMs get antsy, but they would probably be happier in the long run. If game entry weren't wrapped up until each game was over-subscribed, and players were contacted not once, but twice, before a game, and their response times factored into their eventual admission, I'd guess that NMRs and abandonments would decrease.
The issue of how best to deal with NMRs is probably in the eye of the beholder. I would prefer no NMRs at all, instead pausing the game either to find a replacement or do some sort of auto ordering like Edi suggested. This could be a task for the Light Brigade*, if not the GM. Filling these slots could probably be done very quickly if replacements had an option not to have the game count as part of their record. (I'd take almost every mercy opening overnight.)
* for the unaware, a group of dedicated backups managed by Former Trout
There may also be a need for more GM management. Whatever happened to DC251 seems to be unprecedented, and shouldn't have happened. (This could be another case where replacing players who NMR would have resolved things.)
Jorge
(txurce)[Reply] |
| Quality of games - Montgomery (Jun 20, 2009, 11:56 pm) |
hi mike,
i thought i'd give you a reply as i am fairly new to diplomacy (ie never played with people who wanted to finish a game, so i have never finished a game), and first time diplomaticcorp (online) player... dont worry i wont be dropping out
i guess i must be lucky as the game i have entered is going great... really exiting and everyone is involved.. i'll admit i am enjoying it more as i am doing pretty well with italy which is cool... however this is early on and i really hope it does not loose its intensity...
ok on to my opinion's:
currently there is not a "newbie' game to join right? that was the first thing i looked for..
currently all games have adjusted details such as map etc.. but it would be good if a GM can make his game with player parameters such as under 5 games exp, or over 10 games exp etc.. this also helps to keep the games balanced experience wise.. and all people who are active and proven that they stick out a game will get to enjoy a good battle amongst each other... while newbies wont be blown out of the water early and quit.
i'd also recommend DCorp gets its most active and interested people to GM the newbie games, giving them a really great intro into dip.. my feeling is that anyone who plays a whole game and really gives it a go will love it and become a convert regardless of how they fare, and the GM is the glue that keeps them going till they get to that point.
please be mindful of making too many laws that restrict and turn off newbies... diplomacy is such a great game and should be widely available..
it could also help if a few keen DCorp players put their hand up to be "fill ins" who's job it is to enter games when someone quits.. some experience and new life into a falling nation could keep a game exiting for another 6 people...
it seems to me the GM is really really important. again i am lucky in my game as andrew the GM is very active/responsive and even throws in a bit of commentary during adjudications which gives a "media" like effect to the game which is good.
in regards to limiting players to games or based on their history of abandoned games; again i think this is a parameter that the GM should be able to choose rather than a strict inflexible rule.
the rule that states a player on his first game may not enter a second until he gets the OK from the GM is good i think. it allows flexibility for someone really interested in dip, but it keeps out other less interested players as they would have to make the effort of writing a persuasive and coherent email.. this type of system works i think..
one last point (sorry to go on and on)...
i imagine a large reason for people dropping out and games getting abandoned is because of a lack of communication, and people dont feel involved or connected to the other players.. i think the best way to fix this is:
allow players from one game to be able to chat (typing chat in real time). if i am making plans with eng and france id like to be able to type chat with them both at once to cement the relationships.. if each game had its own chat; players would get to speak to people they might not have emailed otherwise, it might be held on DCorp site or an external one (i am no computer wiz).
another possibility is a forum for each game.. basically some communal place where a nation leader can "play up" his profile, or write a weekly "Press Release" or make an international statement about his intentions, or submit a trivia question etc... this would make online diplomacy more like real life diplomacy; as it is not all about one on one interaction but also about public profiles which can effect other players decisions.
thanks for your time,
regards,
jake.[Reply] |
| Quality of games - EdiBirsan (Jun 20, 2009, 10:59 pm) |
Some suggestions on NMRs Drops and lack of communication:1. No game should be processed with an NMR in 1901
some alternatives are:
a. halt the game check on the NMR player and if appropriate drop him and restart a new game
b. Provide a standard opening for each country with an NMR, get a new player immediately
c. halt the game, eject the player and get a new player for that country
Which alternative is up to the game culture you want
2. Provide a player guide (PBeM version) to all new players including the most common errors of new players (I will send both to Mike)
This way there is a chance that they can jump up the learning curve
3. Have all players make a declaration that they will play out the game as part of the social contract with a reminder that the purpose of the game is to have fun and make it fun for others, (actual scoring results may vary)
4. Allow for non scoring game so that the rankings system does not deter people.
5. Build in a reminder system into the game that gives people a summary of messages sent and received via the system in the game so that it flashes when there is a -0- in messages sent to a position that has units in the game.
6. Have an on going Gunboat game as that is a good way for new players to get a gripe on things.
7. Have short games that run to 1907 with the most centers winning sort of thing, so players can churn some games and get a feel for what is out there.
8. Have a capacity to put a set of orders in advance for the next turn, this cuts down order NMR's as the orders are promoted automatically and sit there as a default orders.
9. Try an AI or Easy Does It (EDI) back up system for NMR's/ for example when I run a Gunboat tournament when the deadline comes and there is a NMR I will have the AI or do it my self issue a set of orders for the position (takes about 20 seconds) so the game goes uninterrupted (it is a Gunboat game after all) I then contact the player direct to find out what is going on.
10. Set up an automatic reminder system that sends a message 24 hours before the deadline that orders are due and have a check to see if they are on file or not. If not on file then notify the player automatically.
11. Allow the GM to make a call on whether to process or not if there is an NMR.
12. Suggest to some players that they try a few One on One scenario games or maybe a 3 or 4 player scenario game where there is an advanced set up and a player tries to win or to be stopped by a combined group in maybe 4-6 turns.
13. Screen players by intent: are they trying out the game to see if they like it, or are they already committed? If they are trying it out then maybe team the new players up to work together on one country this way if one drops the other can pick up the slack.
Edi Birsan
EdiBirsan at astound.net[Reply] |
| Quality of games - FuzzyLogic (Jun 20, 2009, 10:13 pm) |
Hi guys,
Anyone feel free to add anyone else to the email chain… but I’ve seen a few discussions fly thru various channels lately about quality of games. I suppose this would mean NMR’s, Abandons, and general lack of communication in games.
How can dc improve this?
A few things about the status quo…
- Right now… we recruit one standard game at all times, which has an invitation for newbies to join it, as it is after all, standard. Easiest to learn the game on.
- Newbies are – and always will be – welcome here, (we were all one at some point) however we need to be able to limit the disruption they can do to games, and the frustration they can cause to other players.
- Anyone can play here. There is no proving ground.
Is this appropriate? If a leader of a country isn’t very good – and doesn’t write, and misses turns – is it up to the “good” players to be the best to capitalize on this, or should that player not have played in the first place? How can we realistically prevent such a player from causing disruption, given that new players have to get a start, somewhere?
Should we go to a system of newbie-only games? I’ve run, I think 2 of these over the years, and they were a big hit.
Can GM’s do more to avoid NMR’s? Pumping up the players, sending reminders, etc?
Should players get more limited on the number and type of games they can play, based on their propensity for NMR’s? We have the new NMR stat on the Profile pages, which gives us info, but currently there is no mechanic in the system to limit players in any way based on their frequency of missing turns.
Anyways just looking for insight into what might really breed good hi-caliber players, and provide a fun gaming environment that isn’t met w frustration when players drop out.
-mike
Order of the Garter
www.diplomaticcorp.com[Reply] |
| Quality of games (Community) EdiBirsan Jun 20, 10:59 pm |
Some suggestions on NMRs Drops and lack of communication:1. No game should be processed with an NMR in 1901
some alternatives are:
a. halt the game check on the NMR player and if appropriate drop him and restart a new game
b. Provide a standard opening for each country with an NMR, get a new player immediately
c. halt the game, eject the player and get a new player for that country
Which alternative is up to the game culture you want
2. Provide a player guide (PBeM version) to all new players including the most common errors of new players (I will send both to Mike)
This way there is a chance that they can jump up the learning curve
3. Have all players make a declaration that they will play out the game as part of the social contract with a reminder that the purpose of the game is to have fun and make it fun for others, (actual scoring results may vary)
4. Allow for non scoring game so that the rankings system does not deter people.
5. Build in a reminder system into the game that gives people a summary of messages sent and received via the system in the game so that it flashes when there is a -0- in messages sent to a position that has units in the game.
6. Have an on going Gunboat game as that is a good way for new players to get a gripe on things.
7. Have short games that run to 1907 with the most centers winning sort of thing, so players can churn some games and get a feel for what is out there.
8. Have a capacity to put a set of orders in advance for the next turn, this cuts down order NMR's as the orders are promoted automatically and sit there as a default orders.
9. Try an AI or Easy Does It (EDI) back up system for NMR's/ for example when I run a Gunboat tournament when the deadline comes and there is a NMR I will have the AI or do it my self issue a set of orders for the position (takes about 20 seconds) so the game goes uninterrupted (it is a Gunboat game after all) I then contact the player direct to find out what is going on.
10. Set up an automatic reminder system that sends a message 24 hours before the deadline that orders are due and have a check to see if they are on file or not. If not on file then notify the player automatically.
11. Allow the GM to make a call on whether to process or not if there is an NMR.
12. Suggest to some players that they try a few One on One scenario games or maybe a 3 or 4 player scenario game where there is an advanced set up and a player tries to win or to be stopped by a combined group in maybe 4-6 turns.
13. Screen players by intent: are they trying out the game to see if they like it, or are they already committed? If they are trying it out then maybe team the new players up to work together on one country this way if one drops the other can pick up the slack.
Edi Birsan
EdiBirsan at astound.net |
| Quality of games (Community) Montgomery Jun 20, 11:56 pm |
hi mike,
i thought i'd give you a reply as i am fairly new to diplomacy (ie never played with people who wanted to finish a game, so i have never finished a game), and first time diplomaticcorp (online) player... dont worry i wont be dropping out
i guess i must be lucky as the game i have entered is going great... really exiting and everyone is involved.. i'll admit i am enjoying it more as i am doing pretty well with italy which is cool... however this is early on and i really hope it does not loose its intensity...
ok on to my opinion's:
currently there is not a "newbie' game to join right? that was the first thing i looked for..
currently all games have adjusted details such as map etc.. but it would be good if a GM can make his game with player parameters such as under 5 games exp, or over 10 games exp etc.. this also helps to keep the games balanced experience wise.. and all people who are active and proven that they stick out a game will get to enjoy a good battle amongst each other... while newbies wont be blown out of the water early and quit.
i'd also recommend DCorp gets its most active and interested people to GM the newbie games, giving them a really great intro into dip.. my feeling is that anyone who plays a whole game and really gives it a go will love it and become a convert regardless of how they fare, and the GM is the glue that keeps them going till they get to that point.
please be mindful of making too many laws that restrict and turn off newbies... diplomacy is such a great game and should be widely available..
it could also help if a few keen DCorp players put their hand up to be "fill ins" who's job it is to enter games when someone quits.. some experience and new life into a falling nation could keep a game exiting for another 6 people...
it seems to me the GM is really really important. again i am lucky in my game as andrew the GM is very active/responsive and even throws in a bit of commentary during adjudications which gives a "media" like effect to the game which is good.
in regards to limiting players to games or based on their history of abandoned games; again i think this is a parameter that the GM should be able to choose rather than a strict inflexible rule.
the rule that states a player on his first game may not enter a second until he gets the OK from the GM is good i think. it allows flexibility for someone really interested in dip, but it keeps out other less interested players as they would have to make the effort of writing a persuasive and coherent email.. this type of system works i think..
one last point (sorry to go on and on)...
i imagine a large reason for people dropping out and games getting abandoned is because of a lack of communication, and people dont feel involved or connected to the other players.. i think the best way to fix this is:
allow players from one game to be able to chat (typing chat in real time). if i am making plans with eng and france id like to be able to type chat with them both at once to cement the relationships.. if each game had its own chat; players would get to speak to people they might not have emailed otherwise, it might be held on DCorp site or an external one (i am no computer wiz).
another possibility is a forum for each game.. basically some communal place where a nation leader can "play up" his profile, or write a weekly "Press Release" or make an international statement about his intentions, or submit a trivia question etc... this would make online diplomacy more like real life diplomacy; as it is not all about one on one interaction but also about public profiles which can effect other players decisions.
thanks for your time,
regards,
jake. |
| Unknown (Community) txurce Jun 21, 11:29 am |
My first thought is that there may be a limit as to how many dedicated and viable players and GMs are out there. Quality of games is bound to drop with an increase in quantity. There's nothing wrong with DC's explosive growth slowing down.
It never occurred to me that one reason for dropouts by newcomers is that they’re trying out the game, decide they don’t like it, and opt not to stick out a months-long commitment regardless. The negative impact of this could be minimized by having a rookies-only game available alongside the standard game, as Mike suggested.
Players who have proven their reliability deserve games with fewer NMRs and abandonments. Maybe there could be an open standard game limited to players with a few games’ experience and good response records.
GMs should take the time to vet who’s signed up for their games, and either get a firm commitment from applicants with unreliable histories, or rule them out, as the GM sees fit. I realize that some Variants take a long time to fill up and the GMs get antsy, but they would probably be happier in the long run. If game entry weren't wrapped up until each game was over-subscribed, and players were contacted not once, but twice, before a game, and their response times factored into their eventual admission, I'd guess that NMRs and abandonments would decrease.
The issue of how best to deal with NMRs is probably in the eye of the beholder. I would prefer no NMRs at all, instead pausing the game either to find a replacement or do some sort of auto ordering like Edi suggested. This could be a task for the Light Brigade*, if not the GM. Filling these slots could probably be done very quickly if replacements had an option not to have the game count as part of their record. (I'd take almost every mercy opening overnight.)
* for the unaware, a group of dedicated backups managed by Former Trout
There may also be a need for more GM management. Whatever happened to DC251 seems to be unprecedented, and shouldn't have happened. (This could be another case where replacing players who NMR would have resolved things.)
Jorge
(txurce) |
| Quality of games (Community) Kenshi777 Jun 22, 10:45 am |
comments inserted below...
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 10:12 PM, Michael Sims <mike(at)fuzzylogicllc.net ([email]mike(at)fuzzylogicllc.net[/email])> wrote:
Hi guys,
Anyone feel free to add anyone else to the email chain… but I’ve seen a few discussions fly thru various channels lately about quality of games. I suppose this would mean NMR’s, Abandons, and general lack of communication in games.
How can dc improve this?
A few things about the status quo…
- Right now… we recruit one standard game at all times, which has an invitation for newbies to join it, as it is after all, standard. Easiest to learn the game on.
- Newbies are – and always will be – welcome here, (we were all one at some point) however we need to be able to limit the disruption they can do to games, and the frustration they can cause to other players.
- Anyone can play here. There is no proving ground.
Is this appropriate? If a leader of a country isn’t very good – and doesn’t write, and misses turns – is it up to the “good” players to be the best to capitalize on this, or should that player not have played in the first place? How can we realistically prevent such a player from causing disruption, given that new players have to get a start, somewhere?
***Diplomacy is going to go the way of baseball cards unless we do all we can to not only make newbies welcome, but actively recruit them. PBEM play is all that has saved the game from this unfortunate technological revolution (the Playstation generation) anyway. So if the rest of us occasionally get stuck in a game with a bad seed that NMRs and abandons at *just* the wrong season to ruin the whole game - oh well. Not to be callous, but we need to suck it up and deal with it. The only control measure is for the GM to communicate emphatically up front to all the players that signing up for a game means a commitment to play it through to completion, regardless of the outcome.
Should we go to a system of newbie-only games? I’ve run, I think 2 of these over the years, and they were a big hit.
***GMs should be free to run a newbie-only game at any time, at their discretion of course. That said - it's only by playing against better competition that a newbie's game will improve. What exactly do you mean by a "system" of newbie-only games?
Can GM’s do more to avoid NMR’s? Pumping up the players, sending reminders, etc?
***Absolutely. While it's not their *responsibility* - the GMs are in the best position to prevent NMRs.
Should players get more limited on the number and type of games they can play, based on their propensity for NMR’s? We have the new NMR stat on the Profile pages, which gives us info, but currently there is no mechanic in the system to limit players in any way based on their frequency of missing turns.
***No. Let the GMs decide if they want to restrict a player based on NMRs. By the way, I thought we were removing the percentage next to the NMR statistic on player profiles?
Anyways just looking for insight into what might really breed good hi-caliber players, and provide a fun gaming environment that isn’t met w frustration when players drop out.
***In a word - tourneys. The tourneys really bring the lurkers out of the woodwork, and everybody plays their A-game. Also, promote more strategy and tactics discussions on the board, maybe in the context of some peanut gallery (panel) games. Those are great teaching points for newbies. Let them get on a panel and watch a few of their predictions disappear - great way to learn and broaden your horizons.
B.
-mike
Order of the Garter
www.diplomaticcorp.com
--
Diplomacy in Texas!
www.texasdiplomacy.com
http://nairenvorbeck.angelfire.com/
Realpolitik files available here for the Sengoku, Balkans1860, South American Supremacy, and DarkAges Diplomacy Variants |
| Quality of games (Community) garry.bledsoe Jun 22, 12:16 pm |
All,
I don't feel too different than the thoughts below but I do have a few opinions:
1. I am in favor of burn-in games for newbies. A method I have seen work before is say that a newbie can only start with one game or two and must play in those "newbie-only" games until they become a "standard" player. My opinion is that we should have "standard" games where all players have proven themselves and thus have a lower likelihood of dropping out. Hey, NMR's happen BUT standard-only games may create more serious games with less disruption.
2. I agree that GM encouragement could help. I should know; I am probably the worst of us in that regard [sending reminders, etc.]. The hard thing to remember is that we are all also playing games simultaneously AND balancing real-life with our slave, er, volunteer duty as GM's. But we do it for the love of the game.
3. To me, the NMR's are the most concerning. A lack of communication, although bad, usually leads to that player being eliminated anyway and the good players take advantage of it. Plus, as seasoned players, we probably should go out of our way to do more communicating. As a side note, I had never played variants before coming to this site. While they are fun, I find that the prospect of soooo many players in some variants also hinders communication when compared to standard games.
4. Maybe a way to increase the quality of players is to offer a mentoring type of program? If a new player has questions about strategy or specific tactics/moves, there is a pot of people available to email with those questions. We obviously can't help with "should I attack so and so" or "do you think I can trust them" because those are opinion questions. BUT, we could answer a question like "I am considering a stab like X. What would be the implications?" or "I have to retreat or retreat OTB. Should I retreat OTB?". I am just thinking that there are still a lot of questions where an advisory panel [in confidence] could help a newbie evaluate their options [not make the decision] and give them pros/cons of certain actions.
Just some thoughts. I have long since shifted all of my play to this site and I want to make it succeed as well. I think we have a great core group and can only get better as we find a smooth on-boarding/grooming for more enthusiasts.
garry |
| Quality of games (Community) Kenshi777 Jun 22, 02:06 pm |
4. Maybe a way to increase the quality of players is to offer a mentoring type of program? If a new player has questions about strategy or specific tactics/moves, there is a pot of people available to email with those questions. We obviously can't help with "should I attack so and so" or "do you think I can trust them" because those are opinion questions. BUT, we could answer a question like "I am considering a stab like X. What would be the implications?" or "I have to retreat or retreat OTB. Should I retreat OTB?". I am just thinking that there are still a lot of questions where an advisory panel [in confidence] could help a newbie evaluate their options [not make the decision] and give them pros/cons of certain actions.
This was something like what I had in mind for a panel game, but to be fair and keep the game at least somewhat fun for the other players, I think all such commentary would have to be public (i.e. sent to the message board, not an individual player). Otherwise, I think playing with a coach might not be very well received. It's one thing for a third party panel member to publicly post "the R/T juggernaut appears to be forming early in this game, Austria should be alarmed by the DMZs in the Black Sea and Armenia" or "Italy's S1901 move of A Rome-Apulia tipped his hand that A Venice-Trieste is a Key Lepanto rather than a genuine stab." It's quite another thing for a private q&a analysis - when the players get to ask direct questions of the panel and solicit advice on the topics of their choosing, I think we've gone too far.
Which brings up another point - the best thing that newbies can do to learn is *watch* - far too many come in to a PBEM community, sign up for 50 games at once (slight exaggeration), and then NMR in all of them when they start losing. I would be in favor of a 3 game-at-a-time cap for newbies (for that matter, wouldn't advise more than that for anybody, but hey, to each their own)
B. |
| Unknown (Community) txurce Jun 27, 05:45 pm |
I really like Garry's idea of an advisory board. It would not only improve play, but diminish NMRs. I would implement it by listing a series of advisors that any player is free to contact. I'd keep it private, or ruin the point of most advice. It's no more unfair than asking your roommate for advice, and anyone can do it.
I also think that newbies should complete one game before being allowed to sign up for another, with case-by-case exceptions made by the mods. (For example, in the case of a newbie who has a perfect record in a game in its fourth year.) |
| Unknown (Community) charlesf Jul 03, 07:24 am |
I think the default one-game-a-time rule for those new to the site (which includes me) is really sound.
Vetting the players before game start also helps diminish the grief that might arise. I shall be building up a list of those players I want to invite (back) into any games I GM. After all, I want the most responsive and most reliable players I can get in any of the games I GM.
GMs certainly have a role to play in fostering a culture of responsiveness and diminishing the risk of NMRs. I'm trying my best in this respect by bugging player to write more and emphasising the importance of sending in preliminary orders. Monitoring all player correspondence makes for an early warning system.
I like the idea of players taking over as replacements being able to opt out of the ratings system. Not sure whether that is technically feasible, but perhaps that might ease the issue of getting replacements for mercy position. Not that I know how easily these are filled here.
In any case, I'm really impressed with DC. That's why I chose to run my playtest here. Together with the German Diplmacy community flagship site, Ludomaniac, I dare say this must be the best non-judge site out there. And for my part, I think non-judge Diplomacy encourages a hands-on approach by GMs, which really can make a huge difference in everyone's enjoyment of the game. |
| ...and... - Kenshi777 (Jun 04, 2009, 3:59 pm) |
...and...help us build the next great American Convention, in the Lone Star state. Enjoy all the PBEM joy and happiness you can handle here in Diplomatic Corp, and when you're ready to push wooden blocks and take home trophies, visit www.texasdiplomacy.com and sign up for the list!
Need not be Texan to apply Just willing to come here to play!
B.[Reply] |
