I would like to apologize to Walrein for making the following post as it is his game and ultimately what transpires next will be his decision, but I would like to share my two cents on this matter as an outside observer and formerly active diplomacy player.
Except in the case of a quasi-unbreakable stalemate, ties are a cheap cop-out and ruin the game for the following reasons:
(1) They allow undeserving players to "win"
This needs little explanation, the fact that Agape and I were nearly given a chance of joining the winners circle is evidence of that. And before anyone else mentions it, just look at the
second diplomacy game hosted on smogon, I fucking "won" that with 1 supply center because EARTHWORM and billymills were my friends. It is sort of akin to "collabing" in a mafia game, which is highly frowned upon.
(2) "Permanent" alliances without backstabs are imbalanced
Indeed, I think swfan did a good job at drawing the line in regards to (1) by only accepting a tie with Agape, but that doesn't scratch the surface as far as my issues with ties go. The thing is, having been the perpetrator and victim of many voracious backstabs in diplomacy, I see them as an integral component of the game. From an outsider's point of view, alliances can be viewed as "two powers acting as one", which essentially results in twice the number of units being used for a single cause. In certain scenarios, this is obviously imbalanced. The very existence of backstabs is one mechanism that keeps this in check, without it you basically have an unfair advantage over other players who aren't in another "permanent" alliance.
(3) They make the game less interesting in the end
In a nutshell, permanent alliances prevent the other players from having a fair chance from a diplomatic perspective. Imagine if Russia and Turkey were not allowed to win together, then DLE would still be capable of winning the game by convincing either swfan or more likely Agape that sticking with the Juggernaut for too long could favor one player's victory over the other. However, even if the game did end up being between swfan and Agape anyway, it could still be interesting. Timing the inevitable backstab and psychologically predicting your opponent's orders lead to a fun and anxiety-ridden set of final turns. In the end, the better player wins. For example, see
this diplomacy game.
I am not going to pretend that I or many other players were not guilty of the same thing in the past, but I do want to point out from experience that it does make the game less fun. As I have already said, ties should really only be used for unbreakable stalemates (which are possible), but look at this game, already over by the end of 1904! It is probably too late to change anyone's mind for this game, but I do think anyone who intends to play swfan's upcoming game should think about it.