Diplomacy where is the fun?

[Sombra]

I would like to start with a question I asked before.

If Italy , Germany and Gb invest each one chit on Spain. What are now the chances to influence Spain.

a. 5% or 3%? (Blashy as Betatester confirmed that a. is the correct answer)

B. 0% because GB chits cancels out one from each Italy and Germany?

In SC2 Spain is the BIG price for the axis. You get HQ , tank armies and lots of additional MP. I think after a few MP (As I see already in the MP I am playing currently) The AXIS will ALWAYS first try to get Spain investing 5 chits after the fall of Poland. They have very good chances that if the Brits do nothing that even before Summer Spain will join the axis (25% per turn!!!) even with consumable chits turned on in the end the Axis will get Spain for something of 350-400MP . If Great Britain decides to counter they have to invest 375MP (hard for GB especially in the beginning) but after Italy joins the axis put simply again 5 more chits in diplomacy (15% chance per turn, 25 turns a year) And again Spain will soon join the Axis.

For me at least this a kind of boring and I predict that the AXIS will always get Spain on board.

More interesting would be IMHO opinion if the answer is b. Why it is more interesting?

Some virtual game situations:

Lets assume that the axis does as before puts 5 chits on Spain has 2 advances in Spain puts again 2 more chits on Spain (Now has 350MP ) and puts even 5 chits for Italy on Spain to speed things up. The Allied player has kept enough money to buy 5 chits in one turn and spends it on Spain. Effectively killing the diplomatic efforts of the Axis (Germany and Italy). Resulting in a huge net loss of MP for the Axis because the Axisplayer made the mistake to put all its efforts only on Spain.

Another game the axis player has learned and only puts for example 3 chits on Spain. Still, after 6-8 turns you will see in most cases an advance for the Axis . Again the Allied player puts five chits in Spain but suddenly effectively GB has wasted its efforts because they have now a 10% chance to improve the diplomatic status of a country which is nearly Axis and in investing even more MPs there than the axis and leaving the axis open invest its efforts on other countries unopposed.

Because with the “answer b” you have to guess what your opponent does and both sides can make mistakes its much more interesting for me.

IMHO the diplomacy option should work in the fashion that a diplomatic chit cancels out the a diplomatic chit from each other nation who spend a chit. Its simple and elegant way to really make diplomacy a small game with guessing what your opponent is doing and should be easy to implement if Hubert wants to do it.

[Blashy]

So you`re saying 1 chit should cancel out 2 chits?

What, UK has better diplomats? Even if a country like Spain is ''hostile'' ?

I have blocked Spain from joining in MANY games. Hell I even managed to have USA join 1 year early and STILL blocked Spain from joining, I got the faster and luckier rolls. Stuff like that occured more than once in various ways.

[Sombra]

Originally posted by Blashy:

So you`re saying 1 chit should cancel out 2 chits?

What, UK has better diplomats? Even if a country like Spain is ''hostile'' ?

I have blocked Spain from joining in MANY games. Hell I even managed to have USA join 1 year early and STILL blocked Spain from joining, I got the faster and luckier rolls. Stuff like that occured more than once in various ways.

Blashy a year has 25 turns? Do the math. Its simply a no brainer that Spain will join the Axis. (luck can warp any game)

Still I tried to explain that the game the other way would be simply better (IMHO) because you would have to develop strategies and anticipate enemy diplomatic moves. I think this had been the original intent of Hubert design.

Realistic? Whats realistic right now in the SC2 modell? US send s 5 ambassadors to Iraq and Iran only two and Iraq will now join the US?

I think the idea has been do have a little diplomatic backstabbing in the game without assured benefit. The way the system works right now I can´t see how it can do that. But perhaps you can explain to me why the game is better the way it is right now?

[Blashy]

If it is a no brainer how come I've prevented it more than once? If as UK you invest in Spain ASAP, you will always be behind Germany by 1-2 chits, so Germany only has 5-10% chance and when you catch up, it has 0% of seeing Spain join.

I don't even understand your US example, you'll have to be more specific.

But yes, spend 5 chits into Iraq and you have a 15% chance of getting a hit.

All I see from your way is that 1 chit would cancel out 2 chits, so one chit from Italy could cancel out ALL chits from the 3 Allies combined on one country.

[Sombra]

Yes, GB is in the Beginning behind Germany for always for 1-2 chits and later on even worse if Italy although puts chits. Worse because GB in the beginning has already fewer chits , they are more expensive and especially Britain needs in teh Beginning build a defense against Sealion.

In my example if the allied player it so "stupid" to put chits from 3 nations on one country the Axis player could cancel out with only one chit three chits of the Allies. How you invest your diplomatic chits and not knowing how and what the other is player is doing , thats part of the fun yes? Play a little bit wiht the possibilities in your mind, I think when you get the idea you will see it opens up a "small game" of diplomacy within SC2 where not always the chits in Dipolacy will be spend the same way again and again

[Exel]

Sombra's suggestion might actually improve the gameplay and put more strategy into diplomacy instead of the "who invests more wins" diplo rushing. Realism is really a moot point in this regard since the diplo system isn't realistic to begin with.

An example to clarify the differences:

UK, Germany and Italy all attempt to influence Spain. Germany ivests 5 chits while UK and Italy both invest 3. Net results:

Current system

Spain influenced by 5 German chits. Italy and UK "lose" 3 chits.

Sombra's system

Spain influenced by 2 German chits. Italy, UK and Germany all "lose" 3 chits.

With the latter the Axis has to play more of a gamble instead of raw maths in trying to make Spain join the war. I like it better because diplomacy should never be just statistics and math.

[hellraiser]

basically with both germany and italy spending 5 chits each in diplo on the same target you have 2 rolls -> 25% each turn for germany and 15% for italy, they do not cummulate.

GB will counter with , say, 5 chits but exactly which Axis country does it counter??? Italy or germany? Or some chits from both 2 axis majors?

[Edwin P.]

I always thought that it was:

3 rolls - 25% for Germany, 15% for Italy and 25% for the United Kingdom; home of King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table.

[Desert Dave]

Good points.

Good suggestions.

Not avoiding yer pertinent questions, but,

In this instance, Hubert

Will have to clarify,

Since I don't know

The precise answers

WRT this particular area.

[... some of the Diplomatic aspects

were altered later in the game]

Rather than say something that would

Merely confound & confuse,

I'll let another who KNOWS

What is what

Respond - when they are able.

[hellraiser]

Eddie, as I understood, UK diplo chits would just negate Axis' ones. If this is true, exactly which of them? Italians or germans ones? If it is just 25% for UK and no cancelling out effect, it's more simple.

[Exel]

Simpler perhaps, but that's not the impression the manual gives. It clearly states that the chits will "cancel each other out" and the net effect will be in the favor of just one party. So it is not possible that one turn the Axis influence Spain by 10% and on the next the Allies influence it by 15% if the chit allocation remains the same.

It might be better if percentage odds were applied always without exception, but if we must have the chit-vs-chit system then I favor Sombra's suggestion.

[Sombra]

Thanks Exel to explain the idea with a much better example.

Note since the manual is pretty vague regarding diplomacy you could make the change to the "better "system even without changing it

[Blashy]

I see some potential here.

Tell me if I'm wong.

Spain: 5 chits Germany.

UK has 1 one chit in Spain... this would cancel ALL of Germany's chits?

[Sombra]

No Blashy, Germany would have still 4 chits acitve on Spain.

5-1 =4

The Situation would only change if Italy although invests on Spain (for aexample 5 chits)

As the system works now:

5 chits Germany -1 Chit GB + 5 Chits Italy = 9 active chits on Spain

My suggestion:

5 Chits Germany -1 chit GB + 5 chits Italy -1 chit GB = 8 active chits on Spain.

the diplomatic effort of GB reduces the effort of each participating nation)

[Blashy]

Hmmm. So 3 chits USA, 2 chits UK and 1 chit USSR vs. 5 chits Germany and 2 chits Italy, all in Spain.

How would this function?

********************************

Maybe just making it simple with no chits canceling each other out and see how that goes?

25% UK, 25% Germany and 15% Italy, each rolls everyturn.

[Sombra]

Originally posted by Blashy:

Hmmm. So 3 chits USA, 2 chits UK and 1 chit USSR vs. 5 chits Germany and 2 chits Italy, all in Spain.

How would this function?

********************************

Maybe just making it simple with no chits canceling each other out and see how that goes?

25% UK, 25% Germany and 15% Italy, each rolls everyturn.

Well it could be simple: 2 chits for Germany remain.

All the other influences cancel each other out.

[willgamer]

Blashy: Maybe just making it simple with no chits canceling each other out and see how that goes?

25% UK, 25% Germany and 15% Italy, each rolls everyturn.

This approach has the advantage (imho) that it puts all possible results on a bell curve of probabilities. That way, in the simple case of 2 countries with evenly competing votes, the most likely result is canceling out but it's not a certainty. More complex cases work out nicely as well, preserving a diversity of results with appropriate probability.

Canceling offsetting votes before "rolling" them eliminates this effect.

[hellraiser]

Yeah, 5 germany = 25%; 5 Italy = 15% ; 5 GB = 25% separate rolls each turn - this should be ok. The canceling out effect is not clear at all, because it is not the same thing if UK chits cancel out Germany's chits or Italy's ones

[Sombra]

% percentage system would improve the situation but in the end it would be only luck and no real strategy behind it.

[Edwin P.]

There is strategy, do you expend resources on diplomatic pressure; which may or may not be successful, or not.

[hellraiser]

Hmmm...it maybe that countering with 5 chits completely block diplomacy on that specific nation after all. So no matter how many other nations invest chits, that diplo option is blocked by the enemy. Blashy, is this true ?

[Night]

Why don't we add a script where Hitler meets with Franco and thing's don't go well, the result being Spain's Axis leaning falls 30%. Make it early so that the Axis player will have a smaller window to get Spain to join, and it will be earlier in the game when MPPs are more scarce and much has to be done to prepare for Russia.

A historical meeting did take place and Hitler left saying he would rather have teeth pulled then meet with Franco again, so we can easily say it did not got well. After all Spain didn't join the Axis.

[SeaMonkey]

How about we use a new formulation for diplomatic effects based on the mechanics we have now.

Depending on the diplomatic vitality of each major as was historical, a new multiplier is used unique to each major instead of the set 5%.

Let's say historically UK probably achieved the greatest diplomatic influence in WW2 = 6%. Germany next = 5%, USA = 4%, France, Italy, and USSR maybe 3%.

These are the base starting values subject to modification from which tech? How about Intel?

New formula % influence = base X chits + Intel level. So for UK with 4 chits and a level 3 Intel we have 6*4+3=27%. UK max=35%, Germany=30%, and so on.

To determine who(Axis or Allies) is wielding the most diplomatic influence against any nation, just sum the % influences, every nation contributes its effect.

[Blashy]

Well Sombra I really don't get your system, my example showed 6 chits for the Allies to Germany's 5 and Germany would end up with two.

A simple system where no chit is cancelled out is IMHO the best solutino, it really adds unknowns to diplomacy.

[Sombra]

@ Blashy : Point of this discussion is only to to talk about that there are things to improve in the diplomacy part of the game. I am sure Hubert and you guys will come up with something better along the way.

Regarding "my" system: Itis really simple:

The mayor nation with the most chits cancels the other out. As hellraiser pointed out with 5 chits from one nation you can effectivly block the diplomatic sucess on a minor nation. The advantages for the gameplay would be: Guessing what your opponent does, certain risk in investing diplomacy chits (in your example Blashy the efforts of Great Britain and Italy are utterly wasted without any effect on the game)

Y