互联网与文化grantland.com
Alpha Nerds 的桌游
The Board Game of the Alpha Nerds
2014 — 2021，它一次次回到首页
黑点是上首页（≥ 50 分）的那次投稿，空心点是没冲上去的投稿，点越大分数越高。
导读
这篇 Grantland 特稿介绍经典桌游《外交》（Diplomacy）：玩家扮演一战前的欧洲列强，通过私下谈判、结盟和背叛来争夺补给中心。文章围绕它为何被称为“alpha nerds”的游戏，展现它如何把办公室政治、欺骗与长期谋划浓缩进棋盘。
为什么经久不衰：它把信任、谈判和背刺变成可玩的机制，几十年来持续制造令人难忘的社交戏剧，因此既是策略游戏经典，也是观察人性与办公室政治的镜子。
HN 评论精选
办公室对局会滋生敌意并拖累生产力；游戏很平衡，但激进或轻信都容易失败。
我之前工作时，我们有一个非常活跃的桌游社群，后来有人拿出了《外交》。我在职期间我们玩过两次，它制造了难以置信的敌意和纷争，但也特别好玩。第一次玩时大多数人没玩过。我们每周推进一个“年份”，春季和秋季的部队调动分别要在周二和周四结束前提交，然后结算冲突、提交建造或撤退命令，再继续密谋。真的很好玩，但我觉得好玩过头了——办公室生产力严重受损，尤其考虑到我们花在思考、谋划、谈话上的时间，和晚上真正“玩”游戏的几分钟相比。理解微妙之处后，这仍是一款平衡得惊人的游戏。我第一次把它当《风险》玩，太激进，结果很惨；第二次我变得温和合作，却因为太信任别人被彻底背刺。
jboggan查看英文原文
When I was at my last gig we had a very active board game community and Diplomacy was eventually brought out. We played twice while I was there and it sowed an unbelievable amount of enmity and discord. It was incredibly fun. The first time we played a majority of the players had never played before. We got through one "year" a week, with Spring and Autumn troop movements due by the end of the day on Tuesday and Thursday respectively. Then we'd resolve conflicts and submit build or retreat orders. Then we'd plot. It was really fun but I think it was too fun - I think office productivity seriously suffered for it. Especially considering the amount of time we spent thinking/scheming/talking versus the scarce minutes in the evening actually "playing" the game. Still an amazingly well balanced game once you understand the subtleties. I fared extremely poorly by treating it like Risk and being far too aggressive. On my second playthrough I became much more docile and cooperative, and was thoroughly stabbed in the back for being so trusting.
游戏核心技能是令人信服地撒谎和表演，面对面与线上所需能力不同。
我认为《外交》只在一种很特别的意义上算是“书呆子”的游戏。真正擅长它的人，是那些能令人信服地撒谎、表演的人。面对面时这很难，也超出经典书呆子的技能范围。线上对局另当别论：在那里，我认为长期分析加上良好写作能力更重要，尽管社交因素仍在起作用。
msluyter查看英文原文
I'd argue that Diplomacy is only a game for "nerds" in a rather peculiar sense. The people who are really good at it are those that are capable of lying/acting convincingly. Face to face, that's quite difficult and falls outside of the skill set of the classic nerd. Online games are another matter. Here, I think long range analysis combined with good writing skills matter more, although the social elements are still in play.
线下长时间对局极度紧张刺激，谈判与假动作让人精疲力尽；线上版节奏更慢。
这游戏要玩8到12小时，但如果是线下进行，时间会飞快过去。我甚至不敢停下来吃饭或上厕所，因为不想离开所有人的听力范围，免得他们背着我搞阴谋。每回合我们只有15分钟规划，永远不够。你想和每个人谈，有时先和某人谈，等他离开后再和另一个人谈，然后第三个人告诉你：“其实我跟他说的话不是真心的。别管那家伙，我们这么做吧。”结果那个人反而背刺了你，你才发现他们之间的争吵只是做给别人看的幌子，他们其实一直在假装交换补给中心，并没有真打。那种压倒性的感觉让我从不知道能信任谁，每回合都紧张地看实际结果。但这也是我一生中最刺激、也最累的游戏体验之一。也有网站可以在线玩，发消息来回，可以设置每回合耗时，比如一两天。那样也能玩，但体验没那么令人窒息。对一款62年的游戏来说不错了。
cableshaft查看英文原文
This game takes like 8-12 hours, but if you do it in person, it just FLIES by. I was too afraid to take a food break or even a bathroom break because I didn't want to be out of earshot of everyone else so they could scheme against me. We had 15 minutes for planning each turn, and that never seemed like enough. You want to talk to everyone, sometimes including one person, then again after that person leaves to talk to someone else and the third person tells you 'Actually I didn't mean what I told him. Screw that guy, let's do this instead.' And then that guy backstabs YOU instead, and you find out their quarrel was all a ruse for everyone else and they were actually just pretend trading supply centers back and forth, not actually fighting. It was overwhelming and I never knew who I could trust, with each turn just nailbiting seeing how it actually played out. But it was also one of the most exhilarating (yet exhausting) gaming experiences in my life. There's also websites for doing it online, and you send messages back and forth, and can set how long each turn takes (like a day or two maybe). It still works that way, but the experience isn't quite as overwhelming. Not bad for a 62 year old game.
办公室多人对局可能演变成真实贿赂和冲突，但也因此令人难忘。
我们曾在工作中开过一局这个。就一次。我们两人一组玩，这样至少每队有一个搭档有时间和其他玩家谈判。行动在周五最后一刻结算，所以你有整整一周去搞阴谋。然后我们大家拿瓶啤酒围在棋盘边看这些鬼把戏。进行到大约三分之二时，事情曝光：有一队在第一步还没走之前就用现金贿赂了另一队。这个消息让大家很不快，不过我倒是松了一口气，因为我们正被打得很惨，已经诉诸尼克松的“疯子理论”来争取喘息空间。我们决定最好在打起来之前放弃这局。10/10，再怎么推荐也不为过。
BucketsMcG查看英文原文
We got a game of this going in work once. Once. We played in teams of two, so that at least one partner would have time to meet with the other players for negotiations. The moves took place last thing on a Friday, so you had all week to do your scheming. Then we'd all grab a beer and gather round the board to watch the skulduggery. About two thirds of the way through it came out that one team had bribed another with actual cash money before the first turn had even been played. This news didn't go down at all well (although I was quite relieved as we were taking a pounding and had resorted to employing Nixon's "madman theory" in an attempt to buy ourselves some breathing space). We decided we'd best abandon the game before we came to blows. 10/10 can't recommend enough.
历次讨论
同类还值得读
如今电脑上几乎所有操作在感知上都比 1983 年更慢（2017）
Almost everything on computers is perceptually slower than it was in 1983 (2017)
2017 年的推文串认为，尽管计算机硬件比 1983 年快得多，日常操作的感知速度却常常更慢：启动、界面响应和网络应用被层层抽象、动画、后台检查与网络依赖拖累。
互联网与文化上首页 5 次 · 2017–2020twitter.com网站肥胖危机
The Website Obesity Crisis
Maciej Cegłowski（idlewords）的经典演讲文稿《网站肥胖症危机》，批评现代网页越来越臃肿：动辄数 MB 的 JavaScript、追踪脚本和广告，把本可以轻…
互联网与文化上首页 5 次 · 2016–2021idlewords.com编辑精选亚马逊那本标价 23,698,655.93 美元的苍蝇书
Amazon’s $23,698,655.93 book about flies
博文讲的是亚马逊上一本关于果蝇的二手书被标到 23,698,655.93 美元。
互联网与文化上首页 5 次 · 2011–2022michaeleisen.org浏览器 User-Agent 字符串的历史
History of the browser user-agent string (2008)
2008 年的经典文章用戏谑的“创世纪”口吻，讲述浏览器 User-Agent 字符串如何从简单的标识演变成层层叠加的伪装：浏览器为了绕过按 UA 分发的网站检测，纷纷把自己伪装…
互联网与文化上首页 5 次 · 2012–2022webaim.org编辑精选最后的问题——艾萨克·阿西莫夫
The Last Question - Isaac Asimov
阿西莫夫最著名的短篇科幻小说《最后的问题》的在线全文。
互联网与文化上首页 5 次 · 2009–2019multivax.com编辑精选