4 ms·

So the only good games of diplomacy I’ve had were with other strategy gamers, where there was no pity or misunderstanding - we all wanted to win. The game is na

by ddek 5y ago

So the only good games of diplomacy I’ve had were with other strategy gamers, where there was no pity or misunderstanding - we all wanted to win. The game is naturally self balancing in a sense, weaker players have some utility so they tend to get strung along as puppet states. By the end of the game, we just respect what likely crazy shenanigans the winner pulled, then go eat together and dissect. That said, I’ve been roped into diplomacy games with RPG groups, which tend to go south long before any real double-crossing occurs. After about two turns, someone is already dead, people are realising there’s another 7 hours of doing the same thing over and over, and the game gets abandoned. If you want to strengthen friendships with games it’s important to pick the right games. Playing diplomacy at work would… not be a great idea. It would be like suggesting murder-and-incest-sim CK3 over a family zoom call.

johtso 5y ago
Makes me think of Magic the Gathering. People will tend to target the biggest threat at the table, so things end up balancing themselves out a bit.
pawelmurias 5y ago
> If you want to strengthen friendships with games it’s important to pick the right games. A lot of the new school border games have very little interaction with players just calculating the optimal way to increase their score.
- fho 5y ago
  That's basically the whole genre of Eurogames where there is very little actual player interaction for most of the session, isn't it?
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - pawelmurias 5y ago
    Yes. Those tend to be either an excuse to meet your friends or a bunch of introverted rejects calculating things in their little kingdoms. It's super hard to design games for more than 2 players with real interaction in a way that avoid ganging up on the winner so in most of the games for more than 2+ players the designers take the easy way out.
musicale 5y ago
Ironically enough I find "social" games (or perhaps "social dilemma" games) to be anti-social as they often hinge on deception, lies, betrayal, and ganging up on people. I would agree that they aren't a good match for people who aren't merciless strategy gamers. I have also found kingmaking/vote who wins to be a largely unpleasant feature/flaw of most multiplayer games that aren't races or competitive solitaire, so I'm unenthusiastic about a game where kingmaking is the core mechanic.

by ddek 5y ago

johtso 5y ago

Makes me think of Magic the Gathering. People will tend to target the biggest threat at the table, so things end up balancing themselves out a bit.

pawelmurias 5y ago

> If you want to strengthen friendships with games it’s important to pick the right games. A lot of the new school border games have very little interaction with players just calculating the optimal way to increase their score.

fho 5y ago
That's basically the whole genre of Eurogames where there is very little actual player interaction for most of the session, isn't it?
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- pawelmurias 5y ago
  Yes. Those tend to be either an excuse to meet your friends or a bunch of introverted rejects calculating things in their little kingdoms. It's super hard to design games for more than 2 players with real interaction in a way that avoid ganging up on the winner so in most of the games for more than 2+ players the designers take the easy way out.

musicale 5y ago

Ironically enough I find "social" games (or perhaps "social dilemma" games) to be anti-social as they often hinge on deception, lies, betrayal, and ganging up on people. I would agree that they aren't a good match for people who aren't merciless strategy gamers. I have also found kingmaking/vote who wins to be a largely unpleasant feature/flaw of most multiplayer games that aren't races or competitive solitaire, so I'm unenthusiastic about a game where kingmaking is the core mechanic.