The Post-Game Chat Phase

[BaronRichard]

Does anyone actually participate in these? Or does it all get shuffled off to the After Action Reports section of this Forum?

In my games, I seem to be the only one who bothers with them.

I'm currently in the end stage of a "gunboat" game here, and I'd LOVE to chat with the other players afterwards to find out what they were thinking.

[Gavrilo Princip]

My experience these many years now is that very few people engage in after game chat, but also that very few people are interested in reading/writing after-action reports. This seems to me to be a tradition that has come down from the history of the game, but which is something of a dying (or dead) art in this age of instant communication and rapid rush to delete the old and install the new. I feel like only the "old schoolers" and a handful of the modern ambassadors make use of the AAR.

[Malarky]

I agree. I personally don't usually take part in the after game chat because, if you know anything about my writing, I tend to go on a bit and prefer AARs.

I have, though, congratulated those that have beaten me (all too often!) and maybe mentioned people who seemed to be unlucky in AGC so I appreciate it being there. And it's a good place to mention if you're going to do an AAR.

I like AARs but I also think that people tend to just want to get on with the next game or take a break or whatever. That's a shame for me. You've played a game of Dip, the most unique of strategy games, and you're not wanting to give something back by writing a bit about it?

Signs of the times, I guess. With deadlines being short in a lot of games, and good communication somewhat sparse, the online community isn't as prepared, I think, to spend time on Dip like earlier iterations of the Hobby. Let's face it, if you're prepared to write letters to people, then you're probably more prepared to write AARs (EoG reports as they tended to be known).

[edmgrim]

I pay attention to the chat phase and will generally write a brief postscript. Like Malarky, I’ve seen a few AARs in the chat phase, but I prefer to use The Forum. I think AARs are valuable resources for not only the participants in the game but also for other students or followers of Diplomacy and that opportunity is lost in the post-game public press.

Also, the forum is much easier to use and allows you to preview what you write.

[Latanst1]

I wish more people would contribute to the Post-game Chats (PGCs) . They are good for quick overviews, for assessing the sometimes sudden conclusion to the conflict, and for complimenting or griping at others, especially if the game was anonymous and players' real identities are finally revealed. I find these Chats to be much more fresh and personal than are the After Action Reports (AARs).

The AARs are also good but tend to be longer reads as people are writing for history and usually after some thoughtful reflection. The audience tends to be much wider than the PGCs.

The two are very different beasts and properly done both have merit. Both should be encouraged, in my opinion.

Latanst1

Does anyone actually participate in these? Or does it all get shuffled off to the After Action Reports section of this Forum?

In my games, I seem to be the only one who bothers with them.

I'm currently in the end stage of a "gunboat" game here, and I'd LOVE to chat with the other players afterwards to find out what they were thinking.