Diplomacy!

[Shakyamuni]

Diplomacy was originally a board game where seven people played as European countries prior to the first world war. The game made everyone equal so that you had to cooperate/negotiate with other people to win. Essentially it was all about manipulating people.

So, I'm curious, how many of you have played diplomacy before? If you have, did you have to "change your personality type" in order to win?

[Arcani]

I've never played it before, but I have heard of it. If the alliances in Diplomacy are anything like the alliances in Risk, then it would be difficult to win without changing you "personality".

[Monte314]

Yes, I've played diplomacy many times. I don't like the lying and backstabbing; that is not part of my nature, so I always try to make honest alliances.

Of course, since everyone *knows* that's what I'm doing, I always end up getting beheaded by someone, and going down in flames.

[Marcus]

I had been playing Diplomacy per email for about ten years. I've never won but was quite good in forming a coalition against a winning player and in detecting lies (and of course in strategy). I did not change my personality, but had to develop my weaker sides, especially friendliness and communication. I had no problem with lying when I knew that the other party was working against me. If the other party was honest then double crossing him gave me very bad feelings. The game is quite stressing emotionally.

[Phalanx]

I would play this with a group once a month in high school. I had a relatively developed tactical sense from years of practice with other strategy games, at least enough to handle the simplistic and unimaginative prods from the young whippersnappers who started the event primarily as a social opportunity and not as a serious competition. I did not have to change my personality at all, for talking to other players for me was more about revealing the logic and dictates of their position to them than trying to manipulate their feelings on an abstract level. I did not win people's support as well the group extraverts, who would always team up with their friends from school, but my relatively greater tactical intuition more than compensated (we are talking about opponents who took several turns to convoy an army because they wrote the orders wrong). The backstabbing/alliances part was fairly natural for me because the position dictated exactly when to do what. Granted, against strong opponents it would be a different story, since all struggles feel natural when you have an active offensive initiative against reactive opponents, especially if you are outnumbered.

For perspective this comes from a guy who would entertain himself by joining 7v1 comp matches in starcraft all day with the sole, misguided intention of backstabbing and defeating the other 6 allied humans by himself, so my compulsive machiavellianism may not be representative of all INTJs.

[PharaohOfNerds]

I play diplomacy every few weeks with a group of close friends. What's great about these friends is that they don't mind the ruthless backstabbing aspect of the game, and don't let their real-life emotions be influenced by the game. This is great for me, because I am the most ruthless backstabbing bastard of us all. As a result, I win more frequently than any other player. I am great at manipulating them to my ends, seeing the whole picture of the game, and making my back-stabs timed exactly right and executed with maximum damage before they can retaliate. This is a very fun game for anyone with the INTJ personality type, because it allows you to get out all your ruthless manipulation in a game and be nicer in real life.