C-Diplo Series: Casual, Play to 1907 (Recruiting)

Join Classicist games.

Moderators: JonS, Buachaille

Forum rules
Reminders to Creators of Classicist Games:
1. Please include all the information about the configuration of your game settings in your post advertising the game.
2. Specify whether your game is a STRICT game (for Bronze, Silver, Gold and Platinum Classicists only) or a CASUAL game (that is also open to Aspiring Classicists).
3. All games should be password-protected. Please do NOT publish the password to your game in the forum, but instead let interested players know who they should PM for the password.
4. It is the responsibility of game creators to check that all players to whom they issue the password are listed as current members of the Classicists in the appropriate membership lists.
5. Game creators should keep the thread title updated with the current status of the game (eg. 2/7, 6/7, Confirmation Phase, Started, Finished etc).

Re: C-Diplo Series: Casual, Play to 1907 (5/7 & 3/7)

Postby NoPunIn10Did » 26 Feb 2018, 20:47

Enriador wrote:
Would this Series include non-Classic maps in the future? In any case SoS runs well with 1900, Versailles and Milan. Not sure about Ancient Mediterranean though.


Right now we're just trying to get a few games off the ground, and I'm limiting it to the classic map since that doesn't require a paid subscription.

Sum-of-squares scaling would be perfectly fine for Milan (which isn't played much anyway), and would be reasonably fine for Ancient Med (since it also has 34 SCs and a victory condition of 18 SCs).

1900 would be a little different (with 39 centers on the map), but probably not in a noticeable way, as the victory condition is still 18 SCs. There will be only rare scenarios where a game ends in a draw with two players at 18 or 19.

Versailles, however, is where scaling differences would start to show up, though again to not any huge degree.

What I meant to refer to in the last post is the variety of variants that aren't currently supported on this site, but could hypothetically be available in the future. You end up with perverse scenarios in which the gain of a single SC, which represents a lower percentage of the overall map, represents a higher percentage of the SoS calculation.
NoPunIn10Did
Organizer for the Classicist C-Diplo Series

Variant GM, Designer & Collaborator
User avatar
NoPunIn10Did
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1642
Joined: 17 Aug 2011, 00:17
Location: North Carolina
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: 1000
All-game rating: 1358
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: C-Diplo Series: Casual, Play to 1907 (5/7 & 3/7)

Postby WHSeward » 26 Feb 2018, 22:18

I think you have it backward, Nopun. SoS will work well on any map because your score is normalized compared to the other competitors. It is C-Dip where the map makes a difference since raw SC count is part of the score.
"As a general truth, communities prosper and flourish, or droop and decline, in just the degree that they practice or neglect to practice the primary duties of justice and humanity." WHS

A member of the Classicists.

Ask me about mentor games. Send me a PM or post in the Mentoring forum.
User avatar
WHSeward
Premium Member
 
Posts: 2912
Joined: 29 Dec 2012, 22:16
Location: San Francisco, California, USA
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1633)
All-game rating: (1647)
Timezone: GMT-8

Re: C-Diplo Series: Casual, Play to 1907 (5/7 & 3/7)

Postby NoPunIn10Did » 26 Feb 2018, 22:58

WHSeward wrote:I think you have it backward, Nopun. SoS will work well on any map because your score is normalized compared to the other competitors. It is C-Dip where the map makes a difference since raw SC count is part of the score.


You are correct, and I should clarify a couple things.

C-Diplo would scale poorly too, but other rank-based systems that omit the raw SC component would work fine.

Where SoS breaks down is in comparing disparate maps. While in SoS you're "normalized" compared to your competitors, that starts to break down when comparing disparate maps. The X-squared function just starts to screw everything up. In my previous comment I mentioned that Versailles would present the greatest problem, but it's actually more likely to occur in variants where the percentage of total SCs on the map required for victory is vastly different.

For instance, let's look at three three-player draws where one player is just shy of victory, and the other two split the remaining map approximately equally.

Classic (34 SCs in total, 18 to win)
Player A has 17 SCs
Player B has 9 SCs
Player C has 8 SCs

Total SOS = 289 + 81 + 64 = 434

A = 66.59%
B = 18.66%
C = 14.75%


1900 (39 SCs in total, 18 to win)
Player A has 17 SCs
Player B has 11 SCs
Player C has 11 SCs

Total SOS = 289 + 121 + 121 = 531

A = 54.43%
B = 22.79%
C = 22.79%


Versailles (43 SCs in total, 22 to win)
Player A has 21 SCs
Player B has 11 SCs
Player C has 11 SCs

Total SOS = 441 + 121 + 121 = 683

A = 64.57%
B = 17.72%
C = 17.72%


It is certainly arguable that getting stopped at 17 SCs in 1900 should be worth less than in classic Diplomacy, but by how much? That's a judgement call for any multi-variant ranking system, but my preference would be to drop the SC component entirely.

We're hoping to run C-Diplo games here as a way to see how the community responds to a rank-based system in general, but I don't anticipate seeing C-Diplo as the eventual system of choice.
NoPunIn10Did
Organizer for the Classicist C-Diplo Series

Variant GM, Designer & Collaborator
User avatar
NoPunIn10Did
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1642
Joined: 17 Aug 2011, 00:17
Location: North Carolina
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: 1000
All-game rating: 1358
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: C-Diplo Series: Casual, Play to 1907 (5/7 & 3/7)

Postby Ceasars Geezers » 26 Feb 2018, 23:43

The big key here is enough people to start the game... ;)

It generally sounds like a fun, new style of play. It would be very interesting to see the different incentives and reward structures. Alliances mean more, solos are harder. The game becomes more about convincing people what to do. Right. Now. More immediate. More over reactions.

Did I mention I am excited about the game?

And do we actually have 5 for the 2/1/1? I think with Fuddin out, we are back to four.
Ceasars Geezers
Premium Bronze Classicist
2018 C-Diplomacy Series Member - Ongoing
User avatar
Ceasars Geezers
Premium Member
 
Posts: 82
Joined: 08 Oct 2014, 16:50
Location: Richmond VA
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: 934
All-game rating: 952
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: C-Diplo Series: Casual, Play to 1907 (5/7 & 3/7)

Postby NoPunIn10Did » 27 Feb 2018, 19:40

Ceasars Geezers wrote:
And do we actually have 5 for the 2/1/1? I think with Fuddin out, we are back to four.


We're back up to 5 now.
NoPunIn10Did
Organizer for the Classicist C-Diplo Series

Variant GM, Designer & Collaborator
User avatar
NoPunIn10Did
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1642
Joined: 17 Aug 2011, 00:17
Location: North Carolina
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: 1000
All-game rating: 1358
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: C-Diplo Series: Casual, Play to 1907 (5/7 & 3/7)

Postby dojhar » 27 Feb 2018, 21:35

I'm interested.
dojhar
Premium Member
 
Posts: 1
Joined: 26 Feb 2017, 18:29
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: 972
All-game rating: 897
Timezone: GMT-8

Re: C-Diplo Series: Casual, Play to 1907 (5/7 & 3/7)

Postby NoPunIn10Did » 27 Feb 2018, 21:46

dojhar wrote:I'm interested.


Let me know when you finish a current game. The minimum bar for joining the Classicists at the "Aspiring" level is one completed game. I'll send you the links for the application process at that point; it's pretty quick.
NoPunIn10Did
Organizer for the Classicist C-Diplo Series

Variant GM, Designer & Collaborator
User avatar
NoPunIn10Did
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1642
Joined: 17 Aug 2011, 00:17
Location: North Carolina
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: 1000
All-game rating: 1358
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: C-Diplo Series: Casual, Play to 1907 (5/7 & 3/7)

Postby Enriador » 28 Feb 2018, 05:24

NoPunIn10Did wrote:
WHSeward wrote:I think you have it backward, Nopun. SoS will work well on any map because your score is normalized compared to the other competitors. It is C-Dip where the map makes a difference since raw SC count is part of the score.


You are correct, and I should clarify a couple things.

C-Diplo would scale poorly too, but other rank-based systems that omit the raw SC component would work fine.

Where SoS breaks down is in comparing disparate maps. While in SoS you're "normalized" compared to your competitors, that starts to break down when comparing disparate maps. The X-squared function just starts to screw everything up. In my previous comment I mentioned that Versailles would present the greatest problem, but it's actually more likely to occur in variants where the percentage of total SCs on the map required for victory is vastly different.

For instance, let's look at three three-player draws where one player is just shy of victory, and the other two split the remaining map approximately equally.

Classic (34 SCs in total, 18 to win)
Player A has 17 SCs
Player B has 9 SCs
Player C has 8 SCs

Total SOS = 289 + 81 + 64 = 434

A = 66.59%
B = 18.66%
C = 14.75%


1900 (39 SCs in total, 18 to win)
Player A has 17 SCs
Player B has 11 SCs
Player C has 11 SCs

Total SOS = 289 + 121 + 121 = 531

A = 54.43%
B = 22.79%
C = 22.79%


Versailles (43 SCs in total, 22 to win)
Player A has 21 SCs
Player B has 11 SCs
Player C has 11 SCs

Total SOS = 441 + 121 + 121 = 683

A = 64.57%
B = 17.72%
C = 17.72%


It is certainly arguable that getting stopped at 17 SCs in 1900 should be worth less than in classic Diplomacy, but by how much? That's a judgement call for any multi-variant ranking system, but my preference would be to drop the SC component entirely.

We're hoping to run C-Diplo games here as a way to see how the community responds to a rank-based system in general, but I don't anticipate seeing C-Diplo as the eventual system of choice.


Thanks for the explanation! I am actually surprised 1900 only got a 12,16% decrease relative to Classic, especially since 1900 has 14,7% more SCs than Classic. Looks actually quite balanced.

Among all rank-based systems, C-Diplo is certainly my favorite by a wide margin. I won't join now but I'll be following the game!
Enriador
 
Posts: 31
Joined: 06 Jul 2016, 07:11
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: (974)
All-game rating: (975)
Timezone: GMT

Re: C-Diplo Series: Casual, Play to 1907 (5/7 & 3/7)

Postby Mr Aedron » 01 Mar 2018, 14:48

Hey!

I'm interested! Sounds like a great structure and more ... diplomacy I guess?
Mr Aedron
Premium Member
 
Posts: 3
Joined: 25 Feb 2018, 13:45
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: 1370
All-game rating: 1627
Timezone: GMT

Re: C-Diplo Series: Casual, Play to 1907 (5/7 & 3/7)

Postby NoPunIn10Did » 01 Mar 2018, 16:28

Mr Aedron wrote:Hey!

I'm interested! Sounds like a great structure and more ... diplomacy I guess?


As soon as you've finished a game, you can join the Classicists at the Aspiring level, and then we can sign you up.
NoPunIn10Did
Organizer for the Classicist C-Diplo Series

Variant GM, Designer & Collaborator
User avatar
NoPunIn10Did
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1642
Joined: 17 Aug 2011, 00:17
Location: North Carolina
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: 1000
All-game rating: 1358
Timezone: GMT-5

PreviousNext

Return to Games looking for players

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest