Five Tribes Five Tribes

Forums

Search
Forums » Small World - Digital » End Diplomacy in Two Player Games
Show: Today's Posts 
  
AuthorTopic
jepmn
Member

User Pages
Posts: 81
Registered:
July 2013
End Diplomacy in Two Player Games Sun, 10 November 2013 17:43
I just had my most thoroughly unenjoyable game of Smallworld ever. It was due to Diplomatic (because of course it was). To start, it just does not belong in a 2p game. It's a fun power in multi-player games, but should be taken out of the box for 2p (as I've read most people including myself do). But yo don't get that option online.

This game started out with Diplomatic Skeletons as one of the first few races and my opponent picking them (who wouldn't?) Since no other amazing combination came up that could possibly counter them (say Were Amazons or Marauding Pixies), I withdrew after a few turns. And I NEVER quit games. But there was just no point to it because it was obvious how it was going to go.

I don't blame the other player, but I do blame DoW. This just does NOT belong in a 2p game, and if you can't give us the choice to handpick races then you should just take that one out. You can choose to play without various expansions even if you own them. Yet you can do nothing about this since it's part of the base game.

And then the very next game it came up AGAIN. But this time it was in just about the only combination that was just okay: Diplomatic Dwarves!
      
AngryMarine
Senior Member
Faster Than Mongolian Horse

User Pages
Posts: 275
Registered:
January 2012
Re:End Diplomacy in Two Player Games Sun, 10 November 2013 22:20
Quote:

I don't blame the other player, but I do blame DoW.


You might be surprised, but Days of Wonder did not invent the rules. I may be wrong, but I think that they don't even have the right to change them without the designer's approval.

Next time one of your opponents picks another combo that you won't be able to counter, say Marauding Elves, because no other amazing combo will come up, what will you suggest? To end Marauding or to end Elves?

You say Diplomat is fun in multi-player games, but Diplomat is also more powerful on multiplayer maps than on the two player map, provided you do not forget to declare peace like I did on the 7th turn of my last 4 player game:)

[Updated on: Sun, 10 November 2013 22:29]

      
jepmn
Member

User Pages
Posts: 81
Registered:
July 2013
Re:End Diplomacy in Two Player Games Mon, 11 November 2013 03:15
I think you're in the minority here. Everything I've read here and on BGG shows the consensus is that people just take Diplomatic out when playing 2p games offline. It's a widely recognized problem.

And game designing/publishing doesn't really work 100% the way you think it does.
      
AngryMarine
Senior Member
Faster Than Mongolian Horse

User Pages
Posts: 275
Registered:
January 2012
Re:End Diplomacy in Two Player Games Mon, 11 November 2013 07:00
Quote:

I think you're in the minority here. Everything I read here and on BGG shows the consensus is that people just take Diplomatic out when playing 2p games offline. It's a widely recognized problem.

Where? Can you provide links? I agree there is always enough whiners who blame the game for their failures, some even request the option to to play without the Reinforcement Die. Those whiners are sometimes the majority like the ones playing Ticket to Ride who complain about blocking. Fortunately Days of Wonder have enough common sense to understand that even a slight interfering into the rules can ruin the game.
Quote:

And game designing/publishing doesn't really work 100% the way you think it does.

How do you know? Could you throw some light on how it really works?

[Updated on: Mon, 11 November 2013 10:34]

      
nathaniel_z
Member

User Pages
Posts: 60
Registered:
April 2013
Re:End Diplomacy in Two Player Games Mon, 11 November 2013 16:34
Hello there

Just to add, we often play two player sessions, and we always cut out the diplomat power. It is actually the only house rule we play by, and as the OP wrote, it is often agreed on BGG that diplomat should be taken out in 2p games.

Here are some links

http://boardgamegeek.com/article/11298678

http://boardgamegeek.com/article/6496370

http://boardgamegeek.com/article/3427752

http://boardgamegeek.com/article/5103207

http://boardgamegeek.com/article/5304650

http://boardgamegeek.com/article/3323033

http://boardgamegeek.com/article/3699621

There are many more, but it seems that diplomat doesn't mix well with 2 players, according to quite a few players. It seemed that that was fixed for the ipad version, however it should be fixed again (at least as an option) for the new sw2 version.
      
AngryMarine
Senior Member
Faster Than Mongolian Horse

User Pages
Posts: 275
Registered:
January 2012
Re:End Diplomacy in Two Player Games Mon, 11 November 2013 17:10
Is that all? The major part of topics that you linked are started by new players who just haven't figured out how to play yet. One of them goes straight saying that he was playing with his wife for the first time. Another goes with naive statement that elves are overpowered with any power because they don't lose tokens (sometimes they do actually) and don't have to go into decline. The third let his wife first take Ghouls and then Diplomat Skeletons...The majority of them just need a bit more practice! I agree that sometimes the game is unfair when it allows one of the players to take Diplomat Amazons on the first turn but so is the life itself! There are other strong combos that cannot be countered depending on the situation on the board. Not so long ago I was playing against Diplomat Skeletons that were taken from the very bottom on the third turn. In the end I lost only by two coins and that game was tons of fun! I am proud of that defeat more than of any victory! Some week ago I played against Diplomat Elves taken on the first turn by a very experienced player and I won that game by 12! coins, and again the game was full of fun and strategy.
I heartily hope that Days of Wonder won't make the same mistake as in the first version of Small World for iPad. As for the whiners there have been enough of them in all times, and they will always be. If only I could ask Days of Wonder to end whiners like you are asking them to end "Diplomatic"!

[Updated on: Mon, 11 November 2013 17:24]

      
jepmn
Member

User Pages
Posts: 81
Registered:
July 2013
Re:End Diplomacy in Two Player Games Mon, 11 November 2013 18:22
Please, just go away.
      
AngryMarine
Senior Member
Faster Than Mongolian Horse

User Pages
Posts: 275
Registered:
January 2012
Re:End Diplomacy in Two Player Games Mon, 11 November 2013 18:56
Quote:

Please, just go away.

Not for toffees! I am not in your house.
      
MarkoPolo
-= Crew =-
Cadet

User Pages
Posts: 141
Registered:
October 2002
Re:End Diplomacy in Two Player Games Mon, 11 November 2013 22:47
Jepmn and AngryMarine,

I'll ask both of you to please tone down your responses. We are fine with lively debate about our games, rules, ways to play, etc..., but not mean-spirited comments or personal attacks on other members. It's quite okay to disagree about how either of you likes to play, but let's keep it friendly.

And as Richard Borg, designer of Memoir '44 says, "Once you buy a game, it is yours to play anyway you want to play it."

Thanks,
      
Proto Persona
Senior Member
KS Backer - Skeleton

User Pages
Posts: 118
Registered:
May 2013
Re:End Diplomacy in Two Player Games Tue, 12 November 2013 01:03
MarkoPolo wrote on Mon, 11 November 2013 15:47

And as Richard Borg, designer of Memoir '44 says, "Once you buy a game, it is yours to play anyway you want to play it."

Thanks,

Well, in this case we don't actually have that option, since we can't remove diplomatic. I gotta agree with jepmn. It doesn't matter that it's possible to beat diplomatic in a 2-player game, the power is too overwhelmingly controlling and generally sucks the fun out of the experience for a lot of players. I would have thought that it's omission from SW1 was a sign that the developers at least recognized the desire of many players to leave it out.

At the very least at some point in the future there should be an option to remove it for those that would prefer it. The programming for it should be very simple.
      
AngryMarine
Senior Member
Faster Than Mongolian Horse

User Pages
Posts: 275
Registered:
January 2012
Re:End Diplomacy in Two Player Games Tue, 12 November 2013 09:25
Quote:

the power is too overwhelmingly controlling

But it is also a part of the balance, Diplomat justifies the presence of many combos in the game. Nobody likes to be controlled or trapped and what about being slaughtered by Commando Skeletons?

I love Small World, every aspect of it. Some players might like Small World too, but not everything about it. They are certainly free to play the board game with any any house rule they like, but at their homes! I believe that coming here saying that any of the rule "stinks" is very rude and shows disrespect towards the designer, the publishers and the game itself. Some don't like Diplomat, some hate Berserk, if we start to cut the game what will be left of the original Small World? While providing options will divide the online community and no ranking system will be possible!

I would never ask to take anything out of Small World, but I would welcome any new expansion with Races and Powers that would help counter such combos as Diplomat Amazons, Commando Skeletons, Marauding Barbarians.

[Updated on: Tue, 12 November 2013 09:28]

      
Proto Persona
Senior Member
KS Backer - Skeleton

User Pages
Posts: 118
Registered:
May 2013
Re:End Diplomacy in Two Player Games Tue, 12 November 2013 16:19
AngryMarine wrote on Tue, 12 November 2013 02:25

Quote:

the power is too overwhelmingly controlling

But it is also a part of the balance, Diplomat justifies the presence of many combos in the game. Nobody likes to be controlled or trapped and what about being slaughtered by Commando Skeletons?

I love Small World, every aspect of it. Some players might like Small World too, but not everything about it. They are certainly free to play the board game with any any house rule they like, but at their homes! I believe that coming here saying that any of the rule "stinks" is very rude and shows disrespect towards the designer, the publishers and the game itself. Some don't like Diplomat, some hate Berserk, if we start to cut the game what will be left of the original Small World? While providing options will divide the online community and no ranking system will be possible!

I would never ask to take anything out of Small World, but I would welcome any new expansion with Races and Powers that would help counter such combos as Diplomat Amazons, Commando Skeletons, Marauding Barbarians.

Sir, you are a very antagonistic poster. From quoting things I didn't say, cherry picking a quote out of context, and your repeated hyperbolic slippery-slope argument you are not actually adding to the discussion.

I think everyone here understands that you feel everyone should be forced to play by the official rules. By the official rules in a 2 player game diplomatic makes for an extreme challenge to overcome. If you enjoy this kind of difficulty, good for you. But it's looking like you are a very vocal minority.

I want an optional choice, not a new default setting. I'm definitely not alone in this desire. If I had to guess I'd say you're worried that this proposed option would become the new de facto standard for 2 player games. If that is a real possibility, it would be in DoW's best interests to allow that way of playing, not stifle it. This isn't a professional activity, it's a leisure game. In this case the customer would be right.
      
AngryMarine
Senior Member
Faster Than Mongolian Horse

User Pages
Posts: 275
Registered:
January 2012
Re:End Diplomacy in Two Player Games Tue, 12 November 2013 18:20
Quote:

Sir, you are a very antagonistic poster. From quoting things I didn't say, cherry picking a quote out of context

Really sorry about that! I did not think that the phrase " the power is too overwhelmingly controlling" in the sentence "it doesn't matter that it's possible to beat diplomatic in a 2-player game, the power is too overwhelmingly controlling and generally sucks the fun out of the experience for a lot of players." means more or something different than "the power is too overwhelmingly controlling".
Quote:

and your repeated hyperbolic slippery-slope argument you are not actually adding to the discussion.

Here you are wrong. I don't remember anybody here including myself talking about the importance of Diplomat power for the balance of the game, the thing that you refuse to admit.
Quote:

By the official rules in a 2 player game diplomatic makes for an extreme challenge to overcome.

So do Skeletons in combo with many powers and Igors too, in fact there are many extreme challenges! Here I am repeating myself and not adding to the discussion, but it seems that I have to explain. It is not that I am enjoying this kind of difficulty. It is I want to be sometimes a success by overcoming this kind of difficulty, and Diplomat helps in many challenging situations.
Quote:

It looks like you are a very vocal minority.

It does not make my point of view less valuable, does it?

[Updated on: Tue, 12 November 2013 18:50]

      
AngryMarine
Senior Member
Faster Than Mongolian Horse

User Pages
Posts: 275
Registered:
January 2012
Re:End Diplomacy in Two Player Games Tue, 12 November 2013 18:45
Quote:

I want an optional choice, not a new default setting. I'm definitely not alone in this desire.

How should the rating table look like then, if different players play by different rules?
Quote:

If I had to guess I'd say you're worried that this proposed option would become the new de facto standard for 2 player games. If that is a real possibility, it would be in DoW's best interests to allow that way of playing, not stifle it. This isn't a professional activity, it's a leisure game. In this case the customer would be right.

I think the community's best interests are to keep Small World an exciting leisure game that unites thousands of players around the world. Changing the basics is a dangerous path. Playing at home by house rules is one thing. But if the publisher officially provides options under the pressure of masses he admits that the basement of the game is not stable. And ones it is not stable the game stops to be what it has been - if one thing can be optioned why not ask to option all the other? And then we see a mess not a game!

[Updated on: Tue, 12 November 2013 18:47]

      
Proto Persona
Senior Member
KS Backer - Skeleton

User Pages
Posts: 118
Registered:
May 2013
Re:End Diplomacy in Two Player Games Thu, 14 November 2013 05:13
Been busy, but wanted to input a bit more.
AngryMarine wrote on Tue, 12 November 2013 11:20

Quote:

and your repeated hyperbolic slippery-slope argument you are not actually adding to the discussion.

Here you are wrong. I don't remember anybody here including myself talking about the importance of Diplomat power for the balance of the game, the thing that you refuse to admit.


I'm confused here, but I think you are saying that you are talking about how Diplomatic is important to the balance of the game. I don't refuse to admit it, I flat out disagree. I feel it breaks the balance of the 2 player game, and does not help it.

AngryMarine wrote on Tue, 12 November 2013 11:20

Quote:

By the official rules in a 2 player game diplomatic makes for an extreme challenge to overcome.

So do Skeletons in combo with many powers and Igors too, in fact there are many extreme challenges! Here I am repeating myself and not adding to the discussion, but it seems that I have to explain. It is not that I am enjoying this kind of difficulty. It is I want to be sometimes a success by overcoming this kind of difficulty, and Diplomat helps in many challenging situations.


Difference of opinion I guess. I don't see it as a challenge, I see it as a uphill slog. It's like playing against a cheater in a fps, just because I might beat him doesn't make it any fun to do. Even if I do win, I don't end up feeling the experience was rewarding.

AngryMarine wrote on Tue, 12 November 2013 11:20

Quote:

It looks like you are a very vocal minority.

It does not make my point of view less valuable, does it?

No, and I'm not asking you to be quiet and leave. ^_^ However if the majority of the paying customer base (or more importantly possible future paying customer base) wants the option, I think their opinion should be listened to over yours.

AngryMarine wrote on Tue, 12 November 2013 11:45

Quote:

I want an optional choice, not a new default setting. I'm definitely not alone in this desire.

How should the rating table look like then, if different players play by different rules?


This is an issue I honestly couldn't care less about. Making games with custom or non-official rules not count towards leaderboards is the easiest way to deal with it. I don't care what my ranking is, but I do care if I'm forced to play with a power that makes the whole experience horrible for me.

AngryMarine wrote on Tue, 12 November 2013 11:45

Quote:

If I had to guess I'd say you're worried that this proposed option would become the new de facto standard for 2 player games. If that is a real possibility, it would be in DoW's best interests to allow that way of playing, not stifle it. This isn't a professional activity, it's a leisure game. In this case the customer would be right.

I think the community's best interests are to keep Small World an exciting leisure game that unites thousands of players around the world. Changing the basics is a dangerous path. Playing at home by house rules is one thing. But if the publisher officially provides options under the pressure of masses he admits that the basement of the game is not stable. And ones it is not stable the game stops to be what it has been - if one thing can be optioned why not ask to option all the other? And then we see a mess not a game!

This is what a slippery slope argument is, AKA "If you allow this, where will it stop?". The assumption you seem to be making is people will demand that if one power is optional, then every power will need to be.

I don't see half a dozen threads full of people asking for the removal of berserk, or skeletons, or flying, or any number of other powerful races or powers. Diplomatic in 2 player is strangely singled out. Isn't that weird to you?

Admitting that a single power is broken in a single game mode is not the same as admitting the foundation of the game is unstable.

You also keep referring to powerful combos. We are not talking about combos though. I'm not worried about the power level of Commando Skeletons here, I'm talking about Diplomatic (Insert absolutely any race in the game here). It's not about a synergy being to powerful, but that the power by itself is out of hand.
      
Proto Persona
Senior Member
KS Backer - Skeleton

User Pages
Posts: 118
Registered:
May 2013
Re:End Diplomacy in Two Player Games Thu, 14 November 2013 05:15
As interesting as all this discussion has been for me, I would really like to know what DoW or the game creator thinks of Diplomatic in 2 players. Why was it not included in the SW1 app? Was trying to exclude the power for only 2 player games in SW2 too difficult, thus making its inclusion in every game mode necessary? Is there any support at DoW for a possible option down the road, or are we wasting our time with the request?
      
AngryMarine
Senior Member
Faster Than Mongolian Horse

User Pages
Posts: 275
Registered:
January 2012
Re:End Diplomacy in Two Player Games Thu, 14 November 2013 09:33
Quote:

Admitting that a single power is broken in a single game mode is not the same as admitting the foundation of the game is unstable.

Allowing any other person than the designer to decide which power is broken is exactly admitting that the foundation of the game is shaky. Everybody can have their opinion, but the official release is the official release. If you don't get an idea it does not mean it is wrong. If you buy a book and you don't like its ending, it does not give you the right to insist on removing it or writing an alternative ending. Some things live in ages and people tend to die taking their opinion to the grave. Other generations might have other opinions. Classic things become classic not because the majority approve of them. The Parisians used to hate the Eiffel Tower, now it is a thing of attraction and admiration for people all over the world. And many examples can remembered.
I think that a special mode of the game where players could create artificial conditions like in case of the physical board game could be a compromise. But it really requires enormous time and effort.

[Updated on: Thu, 14 November 2013 14:25]

      
nathaniel_z
Member

User Pages
Posts: 60
Registered:
April 2013
Re:End Diplomacy in Two Player Games Thu, 14 November 2013 16:16
Shaky comparisons, arguments and hyperboles apart, there are two facts that no arguing will change.

1) there is a number of people that find Diplomatic un-enjoyable in 2 players games, greater than people who complain about any single race or power (even races and powers combined if I'm not mistaken)

and 2) DOW are the ones with the final word. Whether they decide to listen to the group who ask for any feature whatsoever (an option to ban diplomat in this case), or they decide not to, it will be done based on a- the will of the designer, b- the technical feasibility and c- the will of the majority of customers. No arguing from a single person will make them change their mind once it is done.

Now, there are people who put a feature request, and people who disagree. DOW are privy to those facts, and will make their choice regardless of anyone's argument. So can we settle this down? Obviously, Angry Marine feels against a feature request. And obviously, he won't be able to convince those who feel the feature request is right. Therefore, unless DOW wants to share their thoughts or choices, let's change subject, shall we?

[Updated on: Thu, 14 November 2013 16:17]

      
AngryMarine
Senior Member
Faster Than Mongolian Horse

User Pages
Posts: 275
Registered:
January 2012
Re:End Diplomacy in Two Player Games Thu, 14 November 2013 16:41
Thank you, nathaniel_z, for summing it all up! I have said the major part of what I have to say on the topic. I thank jepmn for starting this thread and I thank all of you who shared their opinion.
      
Bayani
Junior Member
KS Backer - Orc

Posts: 10
Registered:
January 2013
Re:End Diplomacy in Two Player Games Fri, 13 December 2013 17:12
Well, in 2 player games Diplomat is two-fold.. if they want to use the Diplomat power on you then they also cannot conquer any of your regions.
      
DAC cazaron
Senior Member
Aspirante

Posts: 223
Registered:
May 2012
Re:End Diplomacy in Two Player Games Fri, 13 December 2013 21:15
Bayani wrote on Fri, 13 December 2013 11:12

Well, in 2 player games Diplomat is two-fold.. if they want to use the Diplomat power on you then they also cannot conquer any of your regions.

Also means they can't go in decline. The highest score they can possibly get in a turn is the value of their Race+Power. When they have diplomat, they can't attack your active, you can't attack theirs, so hit their declined race with your active and their score really won't be enormous.
What beats diplomat in 2 player: smart declining.
      
Ichiban
Junior Member

Posts: 4
Registered:
March 2013
Re:End Diplomacy in Two Player Games Sat, 14 December 2013 06:09
I have found that, at least vs the AI, diplomatic skeletons seem like they should be omitted from 2 player games. I don't have enough experience to say much beyond that, but that particular combo seems very unbalanced in a 2P setting.
      
GregFox
Member
Cadet

User Pages
Posts: 30
Registered:
March 2014
Re:End Diplomacy in Two Player Games Fri, 18 July 2014 13:26
Fight against diplomat can be a very hard/good challenge.
But many combos are also strong.
I think it's very interesting to play against diplomats because you have to use different strategies.
I understand that sometimes it's impossible. But when you'll try a good one, you'll be a better player.

I think the problem is not the power diplomat but how to play against it, and with wich combo. Like the Zombies in fact.


The game is made with diplomats, it's interesting to deal with that. But every player plays like he wants and can adapt rules. Every player is free to squeeze the combo and to agree with the second player.
      
AngryMarine
Senior Member
Faster Than Mongolian Horse

User Pages
Posts: 275
Registered:
January 2012
Re:End Diplomacy in Two Player Games Fri, 18 July 2014 15:26
Quote:

Fight against diplomat can be a very hard/good challenge.
But many combos are also strong.

That is why Diplomat is a very important part of the balance on the 2 player map. The more strong combos the better, the less strong powers the more difficult to deal with them.
Quote:

I think it's very interesting to play against diplomats because you have to use different strategies.

I am very glad that you think so, I think so too, and so do many other players.

It's a shame that Days of Wonder killed Diplomat in the 2player mode of the digital game. They have made this mistake (can find no other word) twice. First time, when they released the very first digital version of Small World, it had only the 2 player map and no Diplomat (and it allowed some players to think that the rules in the official game can be changed to their liking). When they were working on version 2.0, they were told by the designer himself, that Diplomat was meant for the 2 player mode too. Then they included it in the game, which led to a huge wave of criticism from a bunch of whiners who like to call themselves "the majority", and DoW killed Diplomat in digital version 2,5. So now when we play the official digital game, in fact we play by the home rule of this bunch of whiners, not by the designer's rule. I strongly despise this act of populism by DoW and would like to quote the great Mark Twain: "Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect."

[Updated on: Fri, 18 July 2014 15:41]

      
GregFox
Member
Cadet

User Pages
Posts: 30
Registered:
March 2014
Re:End Diplomacy in Two Player Games Fri, 18 July 2014 15:51
I do not know the context in which he said that. Everything depends on the subject.

I have read many posts where few players (beginners or advanced) complained about diplomats in the 2 players mode, particulary with skelets of course. If few speak on the forum, i think there are many to share this opinion.

Maybe DoW made this according to the greatest number, to attract new players and not lose.

It does not bother me too much because it must be recognized that an experienced player with diplomats against most players will have a good result too advantage.
Without diplomats, good or bad, all players play on an equal footing.

But I agree that it is disappointing to just remove a special power for a only one combo which can be problematic. And yet it must be taken at the beginning of the game.

[Updated on: Fri, 18 July 2014 16:00]

      
    
Previous Topic:Barbarians
Next Topic:Android: Finished games with buddies don't stop
Goto Forum: