6 ms·

Playing Risk (ok-a-board-game-but-still) told me early on that everything happens on several levels (strategic, tactic, emotional ect) and you have to keep an e

Playing Risk (ok-a-board-game-but-still) told me early on that everything happens on several levels (strategic, tactic, emotional ect) and you have to keep an eye on all of them (if you want to win).

eru 17y ago
Try `Diplomacy' if you have enough time and people.
- LogicHoleFlaw 17y ago
  And don't mind losing a few friends. (Yes, I've won several games of Diplomacy. The bitterness can last a while sometimes.)
  - Periodic 17y ago
    I find it fascinating how much reputation and emotions carry over between games if you play with the same group regularly, and also at the house rules that develop. For example, with my brothers and a few of their friends it is entirely expected that you will get stabbed in the back in a game if it helps the other guy win. There is a lot of guarding-our-flanks with that crowd. It's totally normal and expected, however some people have more of a reputation for it than others, which can lead to some players being unable to make any pacts without excessive bribery. On the other hand, my current social peers are paragons of morality. If someone says something regarding the game, no matter how casually, they will be bound do that for a reasonable duration. Breaking this code creates a reputation which will carry over for the next few games and you'll find very few people willing to ally with you without stringent conditions. Another odd example is playing multiplayer Magic: the Gathering. Throughout our time there have been a few decks that may not win often or quickly, but when they get going they become unstoppable, kill everyone in a single turn, or create a global effect that makes the game "unfun" for the other players such as destroying all their creatures and lands. Some of them have gotten such a reputation that certain players have only to play a certain spell on their first turn and the rest of the table will immediately focus on killing that one person first.
    - eru 17y ago
      > For example, with my brothers and a few of their friends it is entirely expected that you will get stabbed in the back in a game if it helps the other guy win. My fiancée will always put the dagger in my back in games. That's love, I guess.
  - access_denied 17y ago
    If you really want to take down your socialising server... take Junta http://www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/242 http://www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/242
    - eru 17y ago
      Junta is good. Alas, I never played, only watched people play it on a Diplomacy convention. Too bad it takes nearly as long as Diplomacy. If you want to lose your friends more quickly, you should try Kuhhandel (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/1117 http://www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/1117). That's poor evil `attacking', bluffing and second-guessing. (Unfortunately alliance are not common, so you do not get to break your word and stab your friends. But still a good game. :)
- ido 17y ago
  You can play it online for free, not exactly the same as a face-to-face game, but close enough. The communities are generally pretty small. My experience in playdiplomacy.com is that it doesn't feel like a bunch of strangers after a couple of games, especially if you go to the forums - since playing diplomacy (with good players) normally involves quite a lot of talking, you can make somewhat more significant ties than in other online games.
  - eru 17y ago
    I play on the www.diplom.org, which has also a nice zine with a lot of interesting articles. (And gorgeous .ps-maps) Perhaps we should organize a Hacker game once? Even if we can't find seven diplomats (+ a GM), there are interesting variants for a smaller number of players. Like `Hundred' or `Sail Ho!'. Ido, what do you think of this article: [http://www.diplom.org/Zine/F1997R/Windsor/lawdip.html http://www.diplom.org/Zine/F1997R/Windsor/lawdip.html]?
    - ido 17y ago
      I think it's too long for me to read at the moment ;) For a lot of the web based ones (including the site I mentioned) you do not need a GM, it is arbitrated by the computer. It also works a lot quicker and is more user friendly than PBEM.
      - eru 17y ago
        I play in communities where computer arbitration is the norm. Still they require a GM (and I think rightly so) to guide the game, search for replacements and answer questions. (And it is still technically PBEM, because the server uses email as the primary interface.) However the typical workload for a GM is far lower than without computer arbitration, of course. And you can read all the negotiations, if you want to.

Playing Risk (ok-a-board-game-but-still) told me early on that everything happens on several levels (strategic, tactic, emotional ect) and you have to keep an eye on all of them (if you want to win).

eru 17y ago

Try `Diplomacy' if you have enough time and people.

LogicHoleFlaw 17y ago
And don't mind losing a few friends. (Yes, I've won several games of Diplomacy. The bitterness can last a while sometimes.)
- Periodic 17y ago
  I find it fascinating how much reputation and emotions carry over between games if you play with the same group regularly, and also at the house rules that develop. For example, with my brothers and a few of their friends it is entirely expected that you will get stabbed in the back in a game if it helps the other guy win. There is a lot of guarding-our-flanks with that crowd. It's totally normal and expected, however some people have more of a reputation for it than others, which can lead to some players being unable to make any pacts without excessive bribery. On the other hand, my current social peers are paragons of morality. If someone says something regarding the game, no matter how casually, they will be bound do that for a reasonable duration. Breaking this code creates a reputation which will carry over for the next few games and you'll find very few people willing to ally with you without stringent conditions. Another odd example is playing multiplayer Magic: the Gathering. Throughout our time there have been a few decks that may not win often or quickly, but when they get going they become unstoppable, kill everyone in a single turn, or create a global effect that makes the game "unfun" for the other players such as destroying all their creatures and lands. Some of them have gotten such a reputation that certain players have only to play a certain spell on their first turn and the rest of the table will immediately focus on killing that one person first.
  - eru 17y ago
    > For example, with my brothers and a few of their friends it is entirely expected that you will get stabbed in the back in a game if it helps the other guy win. My fiancée will always put the dagger in my back in games. That's love, I guess.
- access_denied 17y ago
  If you really want to take down your socialising server... take Junta http://www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/242 http://www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/242
  - eru 17y ago
    Junta is good. Alas, I never played, only watched people play it on a Diplomacy convention. Too bad it takes nearly as long as Diplomacy. If you want to lose your friends more quickly, you should try Kuhhandel (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/1117 http://www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/1117). That's poor evil `attacking', bluffing and second-guessing. (Unfortunately alliance are not common, so you do not get to break your word and stab your friends. But still a good game. :)
ido 17y ago
You can play it online for free, not exactly the same as a face-to-face game, but close enough. The communities are generally pretty small. My experience in playdiplomacy.com is that it doesn't feel like a bunch of strangers after a couple of games, especially if you go to the forums - since playing diplomacy (with good players) normally involves quite a lot of talking, you can make somewhat more significant ties than in other online games.
- eru 17y ago
  I play on the www.diplom.org, which has also a nice zine with a lot of interesting articles. (And gorgeous .ps-maps) Perhaps we should organize a Hacker game once? Even if we can't find seven diplomats (+ a GM), there are interesting variants for a smaller number of players. Like `Hundred' or `Sail Ho!'. Ido, what do you think of this article: [http://www.diplom.org/Zine/F1997R/Windsor/lawdip.html http://www.diplom.org/Zine/F1997R/Windsor/lawdip.html]?
  - ido 17y ago
    I think it's too long for me to read at the moment ;) For a lot of the web based ones (including the site I mentioned) you do not need a GM, it is arbitrated by the computer. It also works a lot quicker and is more user friendly than PBEM.
    - eru 17y ago
      I play in communities where computer arbitration is the norm. Still they require a GM (and I think rightly so) to guide the game, search for replacements and answer questions. (And it is still technically PBEM, because the server uses email as the primary interface.) However the typical workload for a GM is far lower than without computer arbitration, of course. And you can read all the negotiations, if you want to.