
What are the best powers to play in Diplomacy? - polm23
http://uk.diplom.org/pouch/Zine/F2006M/Burton/DP_F2006M_best_powers.htm
======
kyle_morris_
For those who haven't played but want an understanding of Diplomacy, here's
how it was described to me:

 _It 's like Risk without luck, but instead of taking an hour it'll take
seven, and instead of being mad at your opponent at the end for a few days
you'll hate them for the rest of your life_

The way it's played is that there are seven players who are effectively equal
in power. There is a timed period where you can discuss your intent freely
with others(as open or closed as you'd like).

During this time you strategize, plot against, make deals and offer support.

At the end of the timed period you write down your moves, they're put into an
envelope and opened all at once.

No single nation is more powerful than another, you almost always need
another's support to make any progress. That said, you don't have to stick to
your word, and neither does your opponent.

Did you promise Germany you'd help them into Warsaw, but also promise Russia
you wouldn't? It doesn't matter both were plotting against you the whole time
because they overheard you talking with England about how you were going to
stab both of them in the back.

It's a really fantastic game that has unlimited re-playability.

There's also an urban legend that it was JFK and Kissinger's favorite
game[0][1]

[0]: [https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/1529003/kissingers-
favorite...](https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/1529003/kissingers-favorite-
game) [1]:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/boardgames/comments/6je8nu/til_henr...](https://www.reddit.com/r/boardgames/comments/6je8nu/til_henry_kissinger_described_diplomacy_as_his/)

~~~
cheschire
I would imagine based on your description that the replayability is in fact
limited by the number of new friends you can generate. Or at least how good
your post game negotiations are.

~~~
jefftk
"hate them for the rest of your life" is hyperbolic. My friends and family
have a good gaming culture, and when I've played Diplomacy with them no hard
feelings last past the end of the game.

You can't really have fun playing this kind of game seriously with people
unless you're able to separate what happens in the game from the rest of your
friendship.

------
polm23
A lot of people in this thread seem to have experience playing Diplomacy in
person, which surprises me.

If you play in person it takes a very long time, but if you're inexperienced
it's not unlikely someone will get knocked out after just a few turns. So
you'd need to be prepared to set aside a day but also prepared to have nothing
to do for most of it.

While I'm sure the in-person experience offers something special, this seems
like a game that's much more accessible play-by-post. The internet makes this
easier than ever, but even in my limited understanding the history of play-by-
mail Diplomacy is basically as old as the game itself.

~~~
flomo
I've only played in person a handful of times (hard to organize even if you
really want to). But every game ended in a _story_ which we friends have
retold and mythologized over the years. I'll probably never play a real game
of Diplomacy again, but those games were way better than whatever else we were
doing.

I tried playing PBM, and IMO it misses the entire personal charismatic essence
of _diplomacy_.

~~~
tnecniv
> I tried playing PBM, and IMO it misses the entire personal charismatic
> essence of diplomacy.

It depends on the people you get. I've had great random games where everyone
ended up role playing as the period appropriate leader of their country. I've
also had games where nobody talked to each other leaving me wondering why we
were playing.

~~~
specialist
Two of my friends sometimes enjoyed role playing as me. Imagine Robin Williams
playing board games who _always_ tried to "shoot the moon" (Hearts card game
reference).

Another fun variant is "backseat driver". 14 participants. Each country has a
"mover" and a "talker". Movers cannot communicate, only observe. Talkers
cannot move.

------
cryptoz
I have played many games, but only won one- the first one I played. I was
Italy, I made deals with everyone, backstabbed with multiple written orders to
show different alliances to players, and won. But then nobody ever trusted me
in Diplomacy again, so I could never make any deals and was always eliminated.

~~~
lojack
Yeah, there's a huge meta that goes along with diplomacy. I've heard numerous
times that those that play competitively rarely ever backstab. They understand
that there needs to be a certain level of trust in order to succeed.

~~~
baking
They way I would describe it is that 3-way ties are very stable. Backstabbing
to get into a 3-way tie is certainly considered fair game and there should be
no hard feelings among experienced players.

But not respecting the 3-way is a whole other thing. 2-way ties are extremely
tricky, so eliminating the third player will usually result in a solo win,
often with the third player throwing in to punish the perceived aggressor.

So experienced players do tend to play for the 3-way and will only work with
others that they know will respect the 3-way draw. On the other hand, solo
wins are wicked fun and one solo win is worth ten 3-way ties (even though
tournament scoring and other rankings don't reflect that fact.)

EDIT: I should add that there is one other dynamic that comes into play, and
that is that 4-way draws are really frowned on by many players. A larger
player with a smaller ally that stays "loyal" to their small partner can force
the elimination of a medium size power that would otherwise have participated
in the draw and that can upset the apple cart, possibly in the larger player's
favor. But this strategy is pretty transparent and is usually unsuccessful
among better players.

------
DavidPeiffer
For anyone who hasn't played Diplomacy, it's a very interesting game but can
take a _very_ long time to complete. There's a round of negotiation where you
can meet with other players and coordinate moves, then all moves are executed
at the same time. Much of the length of the game is dependent on the
personalities involved and any rules you apply to limit round length.

I started a game at 7 PM and left at 4:30 AM. None of the players had been
eliminated, but we all had a great time backstabbing.

~~~
rch
I play an open strategy, and hold conversations at the table with anyone. Of
course I lie on occasion, and expect others to do the same. Overall I feel
like it adds a nice dynamic and helps move the game along. I'm not sure it
would be as fun if everyone took the same approach.

------
Natsu
The site appears to be down, here's a recent archive of it:

[https://web.archive.org/web/20200510060156/http://uk.diplom....](https://web.archive.org/web/20200510060156/http://uk.diplom.org/pouch/Zine/F2006M/Burton/DP_F2006M_best_powers.htm)

------
rafd
For anyone interested in a slightly lighter Diplomacy, I recommend checking
out Game of Thrones the board game. Like Diplomacy, it can be played with no
randomness, but the way orders work is much less tedious. It ties in nicely
with the themes from the books. It is still pretty intense, so more for the
Risk crowd than the Catan crowd.

~~~
alasdair_
I really like GoT but the main game is quite imbalanced. Here are the stats
for thronemaster (online version of the game) after tens of thousands of full
games:
[https://www.thronemaster.net/?goto=statistics&sub=games&type...](https://www.thronemaster.net/?goto=statistics&sub=games&type=6)

As you can see, some houses are 3X more likely to win than some others.

It IS a fantastic game however, it just needs a few house rules to balance it.

For another truly exceptional game with even more treachery than Diplomacy,
may I suggest Dune (1979 with a reprint last year)? It has my favorite power
of all time in a game: before the game starts, the Bene Gesserit write down
the name of a player and a turn. If that player wins on that turn, the Bene
Gesserit win instead.

------
Sniffnoy
Can anyone clarify what "white", "gray", "partial", and "fake" mean?
"Broadcast-only" seems pretty self-explanatory, but I can't figure out what
these other terms refer to in terms of allowed communication.

~~~
weavejester
There's a full explanation here:

[https://web.archive.org/web/20151123190951/http://diplom.org...](https://web.archive.org/web/20151123190951/http://diplom.org/Email/judge/press.html)

~~~
Sniffnoy
I see, thanks!

------
protomyth
For some weird reason, I've always had the most fun playing Turkey. I've never
played a game where you weren't allowed to discuss things with other players
so maybe that would change things, but it just seems, well, undiplomatic and
frankly I want the interaction if I'm going to play this type of game.

I am curious about the whole psychology of going for a draw, but I guess I've
just played with people who I or they will curse the sudden but inevitable
betrayal.

For those that think diplomacy is a bit slow but still like the idea, Colonial
Diplomacy is a bit faster and pretty fun.

~~~
engineer_22
My first game was as Turkey, got lucky with a ton of conscript armies and
rolled Europe. Was fun, would do again.

~~~
labster
My first game was as Turkey, got unlucky when Italy and Russia decided to
murder me, left the game in under 20 minutes. Wandered the hall until I found
an open game of Alhambra, and never had a chance to play Diplomacy again.

------
cycomanic
If you enjoy diplomacy but are after a more short/casual game, I highly
recommend junta. It's a great game where players are controlling the ruling
families in a banana Republic and are trying to funnel as much money as
possible to their Swiss bank accounts. Lots of backstabbing involved, but much
shorter games than diplomacy, so one can easily incorporate it into a short
game night.

~~~
amenghra
You might also enjoy Coup (
[https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/131357/coup](https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/131357/coup)).
There's a bunch of other board games which are short/casual and have elements
of back stabbing / bluffing.

------
blickentwapft
I heard a (probably apocryphal) story about a couple breaking up due to a
diplomacy game.

------
gweinberg
Bet to worst: Russia, Turkey, England, France, Italy, Germany, Austria-
Hungary.

~~~
sokoloff
Article makes a reasonably compelling argument that France is the best, rather
than middle.

~~~
engineer_22
They're in a tough position without a navy

~~~
jefftk
Huh? Fleet Brest.

------
georgeoliver
Funny coincidence, I was randomly thinking about Diplomacy the other day.
Where are the best places to play Diplomacy online these days?

~~~
ryanmarsh
Playing online kills the best aspect (IMO), that is, careful deception and ...
diplomacy.

~~~
dbmikus
I played a game of Diplomacy online where people started doctoring photos of
texts and sending them to each other to spread misinformation. I started only
collaborating with people over phone calls and told everyone I would not be
making any strategies over text, so I could have plausible deniability about
any fake photos.

~~~
emerongi
Wow.

Are the players aware of message signing?

------
etr71115
Personal preference: France, England, Russia, Austria, Germany, Turkey, Italy.

------
dmurray
(2006)

