There continue to be calls for a smaller game. WHile i understand that those suggesting it are trying to help get a game started, the fact is that this is a terrible idea. The thing that makes bourse special is that the game has 15 players, all of whom may compete until the game is over regardless of eliminations on the board. The board play influences the bourse results, and the bourse results influence the action on the board. This allows eliminated players on the board something to play for since the real victory is in the bourse victory points. This dynamic is possible because there are 15 players, and a diverse set of perspectives, angles, and strategies in play. In bourse Diplomacy board alliance might be two or three nations, but economic alliances vary from two to seven or eight, and shift with each season. You're not going to get this with five or seven players.

Now if players are interested in a experimental/educational game, maybe a smaller map might be a good idea. From what e have seen in the past couple of bourse games is that the learning curve for new players is so steep that they loose interest quickly, and quit playing. However the real issue with players struggling to pick up bourse is that it require two or three times as much communication as a regular game. VDiplomacy is full of players who prefer one sentence messages, and that's just not good enough for a bourse game. It's a complex variant that requires significant board and spreadsheet analysis. It's not something that you can just belt out in 5 minutes each turn.

I was only suggesting a 10 player map as that still does regional conflicts and Bourse would still affect it.

But if you want to keep people involved, anon game and Bourse with 25 point buyin to each. The mods on webDip can take 25 from a player for special rules so I'm sure they can on vDip too. By going full on anon, the reporting and communication will be by country only the until the game ends.

Yes, and you could cut the NCAA tournament or the World Cup down to four teams and still have a enjoyable event. Are we so certain that we cannot find 15 players with a pulse, a brain, and a shred of integrity here?

It requires 15 players who are as you describe plus are interested and have the time to dedicate going forward.

Well, it doesn't have to be 15 - it could range from Crowded (11 players) to Haven (19 players), both of which could still be competitive.

Build anywhere is important I think.

ok, let's move on from the issue of what board to play bourse on for the time being and put it as for further discussion. I'd like for people to have a brief discussion as to what solution should be put into place for NMRs.

Now due to the nature of playing on the internet the occasional NMR is to be unfortunately expected. In SRGs such as bourse missing a turn can be disastrous both on the board and in the bourse. It also ruins the playing experience much more significantly than in a 'normal' game of Diplomacy.

Would a potential solution to this issue mean having a 'strict' NMR policy in the game creation, meaning the season would be extended indefinitely until a player returns to the game. Or is there another way around this problem?

-

On the table:

NMR policy

-

To be discussed later on:

What board to play on

I'm fine with strict for any nation size. But realize, once eliminated, the game knows nothing about the Bourse and what orders are in so a Bourse NMR I becomes possible.

Agreed with YCHTT; a missed order on the Bourse would not do anything to halt the game unless the game was pause and force processed only once Bourse orders were received from all players. Though I don't think that's a great option since it doesn't give players a cadence of turn length to count on.

The other potential issue with that is what happened with Arabia in this past game where they up and left. Would the solution there be to kick them? Find a replacement?

In general, I am fine with the strict NMR policy, just a couple knots to work out.

If my input is appreciated, maybe nations that quit the game can be barred from participating in the Bourse aspect of things?

Having the season extend for an NMR would be fine- but only if it comes about as a result of internet and Real Life. I'm fine with granting legitimately caring players some leniency. Life happens. Internet goes down. Stuff happens. But this would be a pain if some jerk decides he doesn't like the way things are going for him and stops checking in.

Of course, if we start the game with a full roster of responsible players, NMRing shouldn't be a huge problem. (We should probably figure out the roster before deciding on the board. But that's for kaner to decide.)

Strict for NMR's is probably a good idea, with consequences if abused. Once, maybe twice for a really hard season IRL is to be understood. Back to back, or third fourth fifth occurences should be highly frowned upon. We need to have a wait list of a few players ready to step in should someone need to be kicked.

Bourse NMRs are harder...

Kaner I have some questions for you on that. If we set a good cadence for turns, are you able to verify receipt of all bourse orders say 4 hrs before the phase ends and implement a pause/extend if players don't have bourse orders in? Again, once or maybe twice per player isn't a problem, but multiple neglected order sets will get you kicked.

I like that idea of kaner force pausing or extending if some one is about to NMR in Bourse.

Bump. I'm going through Bourse withdrawal. We really need to work the details and try again.

Personally, I think full anon (all reporting done by nation holdings) with 1/infinity and by invite only will cover 99% of the issues.

What about infinity/infinity?

I am ready to start back up too if we can get recruiting done.

I would like some clarification around how to establish the end-of-game conditions.

I mentioned earlier that the old PBEM might be a solution.

In this scenario, players can nominate any draw or win combination that they want players to vote on when they next submit orders, the GM then publishes the draw/win proposals at the next adjudication.

An example might be (in classic):

proposal that an equal win between Russia/Turkey
proposal that an equal win between Russia/Turkey/England
proposal for a win Turkey

and players vote accordingly.

The result would need to be unanimous. It would also prevent the game from becoming too protracted towards the end. And could open up another avenue for 'horse-trading' in stock.

Thoughts?

Simpler solution is anyone who feels they were beat votes to concede. Once a concede vote is in, the GM privately asks the non conceding players to declare their allies in private. If the non-conceding nations all list each other, the concede is complete. If someone isn't included, the GM can ask that player if they will concede or not. If yes, the game is over. If not, it continues.

If a player thinks they can solo, they list no allies and the game continues.

Or just set a game time limit. Have it end on a certain year.

Bump... seems this has died.

The game works just fine with reliable players, interested in playing the special rules for bourse. No complex set of parameters or new rules is going to fix a game with 6-8 donkeys.

I'm happy to try for a smaller cohort of players. Modern is a pity balanced variant.

Having said that, the sign up criteria will need to be changed a little in the light of the issues that occurred in the last round.

But I'd also be quite interested to see what would happen in a game of Renascimento....

I'll pass on Ren. Too unbalanced which would make the Bourse lean towards the obvious big nations from the start.

We could probably figure out some sort of convoluted algorithm that would restore balance to the stocks... at least at the start of the game.

Or, the nations could decide to whom they will allocate all of their beginning currency. (In standard bourse, there are 1000 of each currency for each player. This rule would apply, but each nation would, before the game starts, decide how much of each currency went to each player- essentially a bribe.) (Yes, this still has problems. You want perfect balance? Go play chromatic.)