PE -

Thank you for your wonderful post. I concur with your post and almost everything you said. However, I challenge the notion that we should simply give up and just use our "airplane" (as you put it) to create competitive games more to our liking. I still assert that it would benefit everyone (and the site as a whole) if there was found to be a way to encourage a more competitive atmosphere as the "default" mindset on the site. Anyone who has played games in which there were a few tense turns during which one mistake would cost you the game will tell you that those are possibly the most exciting turns you can get in Diplomacy.

And so I say to you Ruffhaus: I am not giving up the fight. I will do as you suggest and bring my concerns to Oli directly. After all, if Oli disagrees, it does not matter what the rest of the community thinks anyways.

I will say though that you have a very good point. There does seem to be a culture of close-mindedness on this site where people repeatedly put down any idea that they don't agree with. There seem to be few people willing to have a serious discussion about things. Responses tend to be dismissive and have a distinct "talking down to you" feeling.

Nice personal attack Ruffhaus, way to make a point

drano, you're the close minded one who is not open to changes, or dare I say improvements to the game. You are the anti-federalist of Diplomacy, look how far that got them. They tried to get the constitution to fail, and looked for a strict interpretation to keep the US a freedom loving country. Countries (and games) morph, and later, a strict interpretation of the rules would result in failure on a world level. Let's call it adaptation. Games and governments both have to adapt based on a dynamic world and player base. The old rules will not always be prevalent. We have adapted on this site, and I do believe it has worked well. People can choose to play for the win, like you, or choose from a variety of ways to play. Everyone can be happy.

As for your other comment, you and RUFFHAUS are the ones who are talking down to us like we are peons not worthy to play such an elitist game with player such as yourselves. I like to play this game for fun, and if winning is the only thing that makes the game fun for you, it is a distorted view of what should be fun in a game.

Is that response thoughtful enough for you?

^ Proving my point. Thank you General Cool.

Does anyone else think he didn't even read PE's post? lol

Oops, I didn't read those posts, almost every other post though. I see that I just kind of said what he did. Also, what did I do to prove your point?

You proved my point by showing how close minded you are to differing viewpoints . Instead of giving me a calm and collected response , you immediatly attacked me with an aggressive post. That's not very open minded.

Yes, I did that after reading this whole topic and all of your posts. You keep saying the same thing about playing Diplomacy the way it was meant, I needed to vent. As a new(ish) player of diplomacy and a person with a still half-developed brain, I like options that allow me to thrive on this site. A strictly competitive format wouldn't allow that. Who knows, I might grow to be a better player and have a style like you. Do you remember you beginnings as a n00b? I'm sure you didn't have the same mindset about diplomacy that you do now. Well, your posts weren't open mined, you mocked my statistics openly, pretty aggressive.

Anyway, you have your way, I'll have mine, and we leave it at that.

I only mocked your statistics in retaliation for your aggressive posts against me. I didn't start it, but I sure wasn't going to back out either

As for when I started...I learned to play the same way I'm proposing we do it here. There's definitely something to be said for being thrown into the deep end. I learned fast and it shows. When we coddle new players, they rarely make that learning leap. Why? Because there's no need to. They tend to be comfortable where they're at. and then they teach new players then same thing. And the cycle continues.

As an aside, what does the half developed brain line mean? J was playing risk and axis and allies and chess when I was 9 or 10 and no one ever felt they needed to adjust the game for me. If yourebtaught properly, you can thrive even when younger.

Nope, I was never taught properly, I found this game about three years ago on Facebook, but quickly transitioned to webDip then here. All I've learned about the game has come from the internet. I think I can learn to play "properly" as you say, if I play as many games as I can on this site, which is what I've been going for!

And that General Cool, is exactly what Drano and I and others are trying to do, teach you and the rest of the community how to play. I think it's amusing how you take such umbrage at the suggestions that you do not know what you're talking about as you admit that you do not know what you are talking about.

I also think it's amusing how you've entirely missed the boat on your Anti-Federalist comparison. It was in fact the arguments of the Anti-Federalist that gave us the freedoms that we enjoy today. That's entirely another debate, but it clearly demonstrates that you've only been exposed to one viewpoint, just as you have only been exposed to one viewpoint (a very narrow minded one) about Diplomacy. You're just a kid, and at least you have the wherewithal to acknowledge that, and that you have a lot to learn yet. That's a good sign. Now stop and read, and ask questions before you just spit out attacks when you do not even understand what is being discussed.

Regardless of what you and the old guard of apologists think of me or ideas like Drano has presented, we are not here to burn down VDiplomacy and usurp it from Oliver. However, there are a great many odd things going on here just because that's the way they always have, and no one has bothered to ask why. Many of these problems could be resolved with simple revisions, and better explanations of the rules and settings. Yet when suggestions are made there's the old guard, the Knights of Mediocrity there to shout them down, and plenty of noobs and lemmings to chirp in their support.

I'd call you a noob still based on your own admissions, and that's fine. But some of us have been playing the game longer than you've been alive, and we have a wealth of experience and insight to offer. Don't reject those ideas just because you do not understand them. Consider for a moment that no one is trying to make the game less fun. We're trying to make sure the game stays fun, and that players actually improve. Believe it or not, the better noobs like you get, the better games are for everyone. It's really not fun kicking the crap out of noobs over and over again, even thought there are those noble champions of the mundane ready to ride out and award you some points for losing, just to keep you around as fodder.

Many of you think I'm arrogant. Maybe so. But let me ask you what is more arrogant? Is it the guy who is abrasive in pressing for overall improvement and player development, or is it the guy who likes it the way it is because he can stomp you every time you play because you never get better? It's a very evil and selfish concept embraced by the old guard players here. Keep all the masses of noobs and cannon fodder happy with a few VDip points whether they actually earn they or not. And why? Well, that lets them be big fish in a small pond.

To get better you have to understand the game you are playing. That's never going to happen if you're not playing to win. That's never going to happen if you're playing PPSC games. That's never going to happen if you favor lowering the requirements for solo victory. You're going to go off to college one day and a friend will whip out a Diplomacy game and you'll be thinking, "Cool, I'm great at this game" and then you'll have your ass handed to you because everyone else knows how to play, and understands that there are no points for second place. Face it. You'll never get better following the Knights of Mediocrity. They are selfishly cultivating a steady crop of victims to exploit just as politicians do with handouts. Playing as many games as you can is worthless if you're not analyzing, researching, evaluating, experimenting, and testing yourself. Find a mentor, someone who actually knows the game, encourages success, and is willing to observe and critique your game. If you want, I'll do it.

+1 Ruffhaus. Very nice post sir. I hope everyone reads it and actually takes in the meaning of the words instead of attacking it simply because it's not agreeing with their view point.

General Cool -

Going off what Ruffhaus said. We all have something to learn still. Even those of us who have been playing for awhile and have good records. Myself? I'd like to learn to translate my good board positioning into victories more often. I find myself making the move too late, or too early, and while I still pull off draws 3/4 of the time, I'd like to get more victories. The key is that we need to keep pushing ourselves to make ourselves better. And quite frankly, playing for draws, or playing for strong seconds doesn't do that. Does that mean you are going to get beat up quite a bit at the beginning? Most likely. But that's not a bad thing. As long as you learn from the experience, losing can be better than drawing or even winning sometimes! And as Ruffhaus said, the better new people get at the game, the bigger our group of quality players becomes, and the more fun EVERYONE has.

This also goes to show that Ruffhaus isn't ALWAYS an arrogant prick. Just most of the time : p

+1 to you as well. You may have just changed the way I look at Diplomacy.