Pouch Deposits

Hobby players must have been busy travelling the tournament circut or defending against the RT because the Pouch mailbag has been light. So, to add more seed to the soil, I decided to throw two new challenges to the Pouch audience.

Bill White's challenge will test your familiarity of the Pouch and knowledge of the DPJR. Is it like the JDPR? Here's a helpful hint:  Doug Massey's the keeper of the JDPR so be diplomatic with your responses.   [Don't worry, Doug won't bite but he just might whack you with his 9-iron.]

Everyone knows that Dip players like to talk. Larry Peery's task is more along the lines of an autobiography of your first HOT DIP experience. Here is your chance mates! Do it for the fun, do it for the prize, do it for the publicity and fame, or just do it because it's at World Dip Con!

More details can be found in the General mail section below.

Concerning the mail received the past few months, it seems that a number of people had something to say about Diplomacy Without A Board. You know, Manus might be on to something. The question begs to be asked, "When will we see a Dip reality show?" Then, when people ask, "What is this Diplomacy thing about anyway?" we can say, "It's like, Diplomacy!"

On occasion, a question or challenge will be posed to The Pouch audience illiciting thoughts, comments, and/or continued discussion. Don't hesitate to respond. Remember, this is your opportunity to be heard, to voice your opinion -- the reader's forum. Let The Pouch (dippouch@devel.diplom.org) know what you think. Here's what a few of you had to say:
 
 

Bill White (DiploBill@aol.com) writes about the DPJR:

Can someone write a plain text summary or journalism style article discussing how the Diplomacy Player Judge Rating system works? In my opinion, spreading the word that the JPDR rates all Judge players will encourage participation in the hobby just as naming an annual Grand Prix champion for major face to face tournaments should increase FTF attendance. I know I will be playing more Judge games because of DPJR.

I find the Grand Prix scoring system easy to understand - although irrelevant to me personally given my relative lack of Diplomacy skills - however the JDPR rating system eludes my understanding.

In my youth I was very active in the United States Chess Federation and I understood that rating system quite well. I could maintain a moderately accurate running total of my USCF rating as I played from game to game and I pretty much knew how much was "at stake" every time I sat down at the chess board. I would appreciate having a somewhat similiar sense every time I submit a JOIN command to the DPJudge.

Finally, as a bonus question, can someone comment on whether they believe having ratings points at stake will alter the style of future game play. I am thinking of articles such as The Soloist Manifesto which argue that anything except a solo is a loss. A rating system would seem to encourage a "meta game" approach as opposed to viewing each game as an end all to itself.

Editor's Comment: I'm going to put this challenge to our readers. Please send your responses to the editor. Thank you.  -Ed-

Larry Peery (peery@ix.netcom.com) writes:

Gabe's given me an idea, but it will only work if all of you cooperate!

I want each one of you coming to WDC to send me a one page (e.g. around 500-600 words) essay on your first Diplomacy experience! How did you discover the game? In a store? When a friend invited you to play? At a Con? On the Internet? Whatever.

Tell me (and us) all about it. Was it FTF, postal, computer, PBEM, or what? You know, this ranks right up there with your first communion, sex, or experience behind the wheel of a car! Make it good!

Try to make it presentable and do it as a Word (.rtf if possible) file attachment. And please scan for viruses before you send it. I will also accept faxed or hard copy. Email me for directions.

I'll go through the entries and select what I think are the best and ask Manus and Jim Bob to look at them. Together we'll pick the very best. Best gets a prize. The best of the best might get published in DW or the Zine. Humor, Originality, and Truth count a lot! Think HOT DIP!

There will be prizes and anybody who wants to donate one is welcome. The bigger and funnier, the better!

The deadline for entries is 31 December, 2002.

Good luck!

Chris Aanstoos (diplomacy3@aol.com) writes:

Hi Manus,

That was a great, funny and useful article for the recent issue of the DipPouch E-zine! You have such a wonderfully engaging way of thinking and expression. And (speaking now as a professor of psychology) you also have a truly insightful understanding of the subtle psychology of mundane conversation!

(Remarkable for someone who works with machines for a living!
Must be the result of your highly developed Diplomacy skills   )

Jeff Dwornicki (jsab@excite.com) writes:

Manus,

I saw your article and have been dealing with explaining what Dip is too people. I use to say it was "How To Host a Murder Mystery" merged with Risk, but over the last year I have been saying it is Survivor merged with Risk. Frankly it does not matter if one uses BigBrother or Survivor, although I would argue (not very vocally with you in the room) that Survivor has a much better image and more mass appeal especially to those that don't watch either- trsut me on this. But your article had me thinking that dropping Risk might be a better way to go. So now I am thinking of either

1. Survivor type board game or
2. Survivor-esque 7way chess match.

Anyway, great article.

It seems very unlikely that I would skip WDC in Denver, and be able to say that I participated in all the WDCs in the US in this Millenium.
 

Brendan McClure (bmcclure@ualberta.ca) writes:

"A lot of Diplomacy players have noticed and commented on how "Survivor" resembles our game. Some have even grafted Survivor-type voted banishment rules onto the board to make a Diplomacy variant (uh, isn't that simply what taking a player's last SC is?)."

I see you've never played Survive Dip. Now, I know you're good, but I don't think you have ever felt truly vulnerable at say 14 SCs like you would in Survive. Have you ever gone from 14 to 0 SCs in one phase? I only say this because given your comment, I don't think you understand just how different my Survive game is from normal. Join Survive7 on NZMB - you really should try it out. I'm sure you'll find the Survive rules change the aspects of the game dramatically.

I wanted to talk to you because I (like everyone else no doubt) have had the exact same problem explaining Diplomacy to other people. I myself use "It's kind of like Risk, but there are no dice, and so no randomness to it." I think this description is similar in it's accuracy as "it's like Big Brother on a board game." Both are the closest descriptions we have so far.

However, I would not use the Big Brother analogy. Why? Well, I hate Big Brother (I hate Survivor too, but I love to watch it just so I can hate it later. Big Brother I thoroughly hate). Reality shows come across as overly dramatic, appealing to the lowest common denominator, and full of "media whores". While I agree with you that your analogy using TV is "a better safer topic", I would hesitate to connect something I like to a show like Big Brother.

This is why I like the Risk analogy. Few people really hate Risk, and those who do, hate the complex dice throwing and randomness of it.

So let's meet in the middle:

"Diplomacy is like a 7 player game of Risk, but without dice. The main focus of the game however is not in the board pieces, but with interacting and dealing with the other players like in the TV show Big Brother, or Survivor."

I feel that is an accurate statement of Diplomacy, while presenting the other person with an adequate segue, should he need to find an avenue of escape.

I await the massive amounts of feedback you'll no doubt receive on this. And I really am serious about you joining Survive7. I really do think you'll like it.

Manus Hand's (manus@manushand.com) response:

You are right. I do not understand Survival Diplomacy, and I suppose I should have invested the few minutes it would have taken to learn before I wrote what I did. I pledge to do so, and I apologize for having been perceived as snooty toward you. That was not my intent at all, and I am now considering revising that parenthetical. I truly apologize.

The remainder of your e-mail is also very well-taken, and I thank you for it. I believe I will indeed happily agree to, as you say, "meet in the middle."  

Stab you soon, and yes, I will consider survive7....

Chris Martin (dance.teacher@verizon.net) writes:

Nicely done! And how true -- nevre watched BB or really survivor, but the concept is a valid one. I hereby commit myself to not answering "Like risk but no dice" when someone asks me about dip.

Frank Mayer (affaldssakt@hotmail.com) writes:

My first reaction was the Germany may have been made too strong, France too weak. But my experience is nil and I'd be the first to admit I could be wrong. I think 1900 must be a fun and exciting variant.

I should also tell you, I dropped out of the hobby (I was an enthusiastic Payola player) abruptly a couple of years ago and had been quiet until your article excited my interest.
 

Bruce A. Knight (baknight@aracnet.com) writes:

I had read about your variant (Gamer's Guide to 1900 at the Diplomatic Pouch), but hadn't played it before the March PiggyBack meet in Portland.... I enjoy trying new variants, though I find most pale next to standard Dip after a few games. I've played four games of Colonial since last summer, and still enjoy that one. But other than Migraine or Five Italies, I haven't found a variant with better play balance than 1900 ... and I've been playing Dip for 30 years now, and trying variants almost that long.

Your article is an excellent summary of the 1900 variant. I'll be referring players to it, and giving copies to others who aren't web-wise if you don't mind.

Thanks for all the thought and work you put into 1900. It's a variant that may well become popular. It could even see tournament play before long.

Baron Powell's (VonPowell@aol.com ) response:

Thank you for both the note and your kind words about the variant. I'm always pleased to get positive feedback from people who have played. I certainly appreciate any references.