| dc331 needs a new egypt - MattTheLesser (Sep 21, 2010, 7:53 am) |
| Middle of the pack position (8 SC) in what is still very much a wide open game. Who can lead the African nation to greatness? [Reply] |
| DC332 Winter 1905 Adjudication - cfisher6 (Sep 21, 2010, 5:01 am) |
Deadline for Spring 1906 moves is next Sunday 26th, 23:59 GMT.
Austria:
Build A Budapest
England:
Remove F Baltic Sea
France:
Build A Brest
Build A Paris
Germany:
Build A Berlin
Italy:
Remove A Rome
[Reply] |
| DC327 - Autumn 08 adjudication - bielf11 (Sep 20, 2010, 11:52 pm) |
Autumn 08
----------------
Attica: disband F Caria
Laconia: A Ira - Megalopolis
Ownership:
----------------
Aetolia: Achaia, Arcania, Callium, Calydon, Corsea, Dafni,
Elis, Helicon, Ira, Locris, Megara, Opus, Phocis,
Pisatis, Thermium.
Boeotia: Byzantium.
Attica: Athenae, Delion, Euboea Occidental, Pylos.
Arcolia: Corinth, Epidaurus, Ionia, Iria, Maniana, Mycenae,
Pellea.
Laconia: Arcadia, Caria, Cyn., Koidaunas, Megalopolis,
Messena, Prastos, Sparta, Tegea.
Elia: Cumae, Rhegium, Sicily.
Adjustments:
-------------------
Aetolia: Supp 15 Unit 12 Build 3
Boeotia: Supp 1 Unit 1
Attica: Supp 4 Unit 3 Build 1
Arcolia: Supp 7 Unit 8 Remove 1
Laconia: Supp 9 Unit 9
Elia: Supp 3 Unit 3
Deadline for Winter 08 is Friday Sep 24 at 7pm GMT.
And don't forget to submit (or change) your votes for the EGPs.
Frank
[Reply] |
| DC327 - Fall 08 adjudication - sgttodd (Sep 20, 2010, 9:14 pm) |
I vote no. Aetolia wants a solo, let him grab 20 centers - it's been done twice before on Dipcorp, and DIAS is just lame.
On 9/20/2010 6:20 PM, DipCorp Master wrote:
Received two EGPs:
1) Aetolia Solo
2) DIAS
Please send your Oichi or Neh for each (with number or EGP) to me before the Winter adjustments.[Reply] |
| DC 335 Deadline reminder - fencertim (Sep 20, 2010, 7:40 pm) |
Less than 24 hours to the spring deadline….needing one set
of orders.
Thanks,
Tim[Reply] |
| DC327 - Fall 08 adjudication - bielf11 (Sep 20, 2010, 5:20 pm) |
Received two EGPs:
1) Aetolia Solo
2) DIAS
Please send your Oichi or Neh for each (with number or EGP) to me before the Winter adjustments.
Fall 08: Laconia and Attica units are dislodged. Despite plenty of movement very little excitement elsewhere.
with one EXCEPTION - Arcolia expects a major attack on Megara and pulls off a neat trick: its army in Megara has itself convoyed to Eleusis across Saronieus Sinus while the invading Aetolian army marches across land from Eleusis to Megara. Result is a swap. Admitted, Aetolia gains an SC while Arcolia looses one.
Fall 08 adjudication
----------------------------
Aetolia:
A Achaia Hold
A Eleusis - Megara
A Elis - Ilia
F Helicon Hold
A Locris - Elis
A Patcae Supports A Achaia
A Pisatis Supports A Protilae - Lycaion
F Prian Rhium Convoys A Locris - Elis
A Protilae - Lycaion
F Sinus Corinthiucus Supports A Eleusis - Megara
A Thebae Supports A Eleusis - Megara
F Triphylia - Ira
Boeotia:
A Byzantium Hold
Attica:
A Athenae - Marathon
F Caria - Ionia (*Dislodged*)
F Mare Mediterranea - Saronieus Sinus (*Fails*)
F Pylos Supports F Messeniacus Sinus - Messena
Arcolia:
F Argulicus Sinus - Mare Mediterranea (*Fails*)
A Corinth Supports A Pellea
F Ionia Supports F Rhodius Sinus - Caria
F Lesbos - Marmora Sinus
A Maniana - Protilae
A Megara - Eleusis
A Pellea Supports A Kaphyae - Achaia (*Void*)
F Saronieus Sinus Convoys A Megara - Eleusis
Laconia:
A Arcadia Supports A Maniana - Protilae
A Ira Supports A Lycaion - Triphylia (*Dislodged*)
A Kaphyae Supports A Pellea
F Koidaunas - Helos
F Laconicus Sinus - Laconia
A Lycaion - Triphylia
A Messena Supports A Ira (*Cut*)
F Rhodius Sinus - Caria
F Thuria Supports A Messena
Elia:
F Cypurissius Sinus Supports F Triphylia - Ira
F Italus Sinus Hold
F Messeniacus Sinus - Messena (*Fails*)
Autumn Retreats
------------------------
Attican F Caria can retreat to Rhodes. Or OTB.
Laconian A Ira can retreat to Megalopolis or Khora. Or OTB.
Deadline for retreats is Wednesday Sep 22 at 7pm GMT.
Deadline for Winter 08 is Friday Sep 24 at 7pm GMT.
Frank
[Reply] |
| DC327 - Fall 08 adjudication (dc327) sgttodd Sep 20, 09:14 pm |
I vote no. Aetolia wants a solo, let him grab 20 centers - it's been done twice before on Dipcorp, and DIAS is just lame.
On 9/20/2010 6:20 PM, DipCorp Master wrote:
Received two EGPs:
1) Aetolia Solo
2) DIAS
Please send your Oichi or Neh for each (with number or EGP) to me before the Winter adjustments. |
| Will someone run a priivate game? - dknemeyer (Sep 20, 2010, 12:22 pm) |
| While I didn't want to take on another full game I would actually be happy to adjudicate in Garry's absence so this game can continued uninterrupted, if it is OK with Garry... [Reply] |
| dc330: Fa41 Reminder! - dknemeyer (Sep 20, 2010, 10:55 am) |
Diplomats,
The deadline for fall 1941 is in a scant 29 hours. I've only received two sets of orders to date, so don't delay in, at least, getting prelims in!
FYI, I will be traveling this week and thru our main adjudication next as well. In each case I will be adjudicating before bed the same night as orders are due but it may be some hours after the deadline. Just FYI...
Dirk[Reply] |
| 1936 v1.5 - charlesf (Sep 20, 2010, 10:23 am) |
Hi guys,
just thought I'd send you the finalised version I shall be using in
my next playtest. As indicated in an earlier mail, I've gone back on
the Adriatic change as the below Realpolitik module map for Winter
1935 readily shows (the module is attached as a zip-file).
Having done my homework, I'm as of now looking for playtesters for a
new game (having decided to after all run a follow-up game). If
interested, send me a ranked power preference list. I'll aim for a
healthy mix of players so as not to have this turn into too
"incestuous" an affair.
As nobody objected to me doing so, I'm also releasing my DC319
spreadsheet which contains the seasonal DP allocations.
Cheers,
Charles
PS: Jimmy, no, I certainly do not want to heighten any bilateral
tensions to a fever pitch. So having East Prussia be anything other
than a simple buffer province was very much out of the question.
I've been musing though over turning Gdynia also into a German
potential build site as Danzig was a German city. But then that'd be
the type of exception I'd rather not implement without very good
cause.[Reply] |
| Will someone run a priivate game? - garry.bledsoe (Sep 20, 2010, 10:18 am) |
Hey...my time away will be from the 13th of Oct to approx. the 29th of Oct. So there would be nothing completed during that time. Other than that I am ready to run it.
g[Reply] |
| Will someone run a priivate game? (Community) dknemeyer Sep 20, 12:22 pm |
| While I didn't want to take on another full game I would actually be happy to adjudicate in Garry's absence so this game can continued uninterrupted, if it is OK with Garry... |
| DC 341: Deadline Reminder - AceRimmer (Sep 20, 2010, 8:10 am) |
The inaugural deadline for DC 341 is... tomorrow! Time to dust off the cobwebs and invade Belgium!
Remember: if I don't have your orders by adjudication time tomorrow, you will be out on your ear. And since y'all do have such lovely ears, I'd much rather not need to do that...
Adam[Reply] |
| DC 341: Deadline Reminder (dc341) AceRimmer Sep 27, 07:58 am |
Tick-tock-tick-tock... Five sets are in. Two are missing.
F1901 orders due on Tuesday at 10:00 a.m. CST! |
| DC 341: Deadline reminder (dc341) AceRimmer Feb 09, 02:44 pm |
I believe there is a deadline tomorrow.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Now that's room service! Choose from over 150,000 hotels
in 45,000 destinations on Yahoo! Travel to find your fit.
http://farechase.yahoo.com/promo-generic-14795097 |
| Winter Deadline Reminder - dreamsynergy (Sep 20, 2010, 5:18 am) |
Hi Folks,
Its less than 3 hours to the deadline, and I still lack a set of builds.
Regards,
Ben[Reply] |
| 1936 v1.4 - charlesf (Sep 19, 2010, 9:08 am) |
Karsten,
thanks for your input. As you shall see, I once thought not so
unlike you...
having
the chance to lead USSR to it's doom in the current game, I
thought I add my 2 cents considering the balance in the east:
I found it rather hard to find a position for my soviet armies in
the very early game, that did not leave another front totally
vulnerable (well, the two times I was daring enough to do it both
were followed by my neighbors jumping exactly on me exactly
there... but that could have to do with the diplomatic situation
as well).
Nigel managed to gain three SCs in his first year. All in different
regions: Up north Finland, further south Latvia and in the Near-East
Iran. Nor did he lose any of his home SCs while making those gains.
It can be done.
But is the USSR quite vulnerable at game-start? Yes. That's how I
want it to be. I want players to feel the same kind of paranoia as
Uncle Joe felt about a possible anti-Soviet capitalist crusade. The
communists hadn't yet forgotten that the great powers had intervened
on the Whites' side during the Russian Civil War...
In game-terms, this is the price the Soviet Union pays for enjoying
a board-edge position. Uncle Joe doesn't have to maintain a 360
degress defence as most other powers have to. That has long-term
advantages.
Heading south, you forfeit your options in Scandinavia and with
some bad luck, you lose the Baltic states and have Britain
knocking on your door with two tempi and neutral support in
Leningrad. Heading completely north, you forfeit Iraq and Iran,
having Turkey eying Stalingrad directly, able to support
themselves in easily. Sending one unit south, one north and on
west makes you completely depending on DP and other player's help
(where I managed to get screwed, say... three times?).
The USSR will have to decide where it wants to focus its energies.
There are basically five general directions towards which one can
make a play during the first year:
1. Scandinavia (Finland/Sweden)
2. Latvia
3. Rumania/Cracow
4. Near-East (Iran/Ankara)
Obviously the USSR cannot make a play for all of those. The question
then is whether it goes for two or three out of these four.
As for "Turkey eying Stalingrad directly", here's one idea how you
might neutralise that threat:
Offer France favours by Republican Spain (e.g. support into Madrid)
in exchange for her arranging a bounce with Turkey over Alexandretta
(or for her simply moving there). That'd tie down A Ankara very
nicely.
Incidentally on of the was how the Republicans can be used to
further Soviet interests...
There
are two major weak points that can be very easily addressed inmho:
1.) NRG borders LEN. This does give the British player a major
advantage in taking Scanfinavia, as he will almost for sure have a
fleet sitting in NRG, which is in fact necessary to take Norway
Britain could take Norway via NTH, provided it gets minor power
support.
In any case, Britain need not gun for Norway in the first year.
London might decide to make more of a play for any of
Den/Net/Bel/Bre instead.
Perhaps the USSR could get the Brits to not enter NRG in return for
Uncle Joe doing Britain a favour in Spain or the Near-East.
Considering how Britain is bound to fear Turkish expansion into the
Near-East and have a considerable interest in having Spanish affairs
working out in a way amenable to Britain, I dare say Moscow has got
a number of diplomatic cards to play.
-
but does put constant pressure on LEN. a USSR fleet build LEN(nc)
in case you have an early gain is not only the most direct
declaration of war to britain, but cannot be used for anything
else than northern Scandinavia, while Soviet armies are
desperately needed everywhere on the map. Removing Len(nc) is not
an option, but reacing it via ARO and Finland (not to forget it's
baltic borders) should suffice to balance the region. Thus, I
would relocate NRG to not border LEN.
We'll have to agree to disagree there. I love that the Western-most
and Eastern-most powers are quite close to another in the Far North.
As they might ultimately be in the Near-East.
Gives you added diplomatic complexity and does justice to the high
Anglo-Soviet tensions during the interwar period.
2.)
The second,? I even think grave problem is the "claim" the map
gives Poland on the Baltic states, which makes it difficult to dip
about their fate.
Poland's in a pole-position regarding these two SCs. Much as say
Germany is when it comes to Denmark and the Netherlands. To expect
say an equal division of those two SCs, is to expect quite much.
That's like say Britain expecting to get Belgium in Standard. It
ain't the norm.
They
are polish home SC right now, and that will always make Poland
want them badly. It does in the end give you more flexibility to
build. Yet as three of them is much too much - it does neither
reflect Poland's situation in the era, nor does it by any means
reflect the importance of the SC that are flagged "build SC" in
the Baltic.
Poland's diplomatic position is not set in stone in this game.
Historically Poland horribly bungled its interwar diplomacy, if you
ask me. The "Jagiellonian dream" of establishing a Polish-led
power-block on territory once belonging to the Polish-Lithuanian
Commonwealth wasn't a pipedream. In light of the precarious
independence many states gained on account of German and Russian
defeat, whilst those countries were bound to reemerge from a period
weakness, I think there indeed existed a quite compelling
pull-factor for these states to form a confederation led by the
region's most powerful state: Poland.
Of course, Poland made a royal mess of it by picking fights with
almost all her neighbours. That's what thwarted the Intermarum
project. I chose to not burden my Polish player with the same
unenlightened greed that kept such alliances and confederations
largely merely on the drawing-board.
Yet
simply removing one or two pink circles does not do the job for
me, as any expansion of both USSR and Poland will still result in
a clash there with units, that cannot be send elsewhere easily. So
what I would do redrawing the map is:
- Remove SC LAT completely. It didn't have that much importance
historically,
Riga's been a key city for centuries. Had Peter the Great taken
Riga, he'd have made that his capital, I understand. Saint
Petersburg was a poor substitute.
? and
for the sake of the game's balance in the region this serves as
well.
If one subscribes to the thesis that the balance is off in the first
place.
-
Create an SC EUK, not being a build SC for anyone.
- redraw WUK and STA so EUK does no longer touch Moscow.
- optional: redraw STA to not have an (wc) and make EUK a build SC
(home of the Black Sea fleet)
You might be interested to see how this part of the map looked like
in the variant's very first draft back in 2004. Sounds like it was a
mirror-image of what you propose (save for Latvia, that is):
As you can tell by the variant having evolved further, I didn't
particularly like this arrangement. I've long-since paired down both
the USSR and Germany to 3-SC powers. Works IMO much better and as I
read more about the times, the more comfortable I felt with me doing
so.
And
thus [a Sevastopol SC] serves to have another reason for Turkey
and USSR to fight over, as an IRAQ/IRAN agreement now can be done
too easily imho.
Easily done? I think the whole issue is very tricky for both Turkey
and the USSR.
Indeed, one reason why I scaled the USSR down to three SCs is that I
didn't like the then overly antagonistic Soviet-Turkish relations. I
wanted the Black Sea to be initially quiescent rather than a
battleground for F Sevastopol and F Ankara (the shift of the Turkish
fleet to Izmir is also one reason why I prefered a 3-SC Russia. Much
better there!).
As a
plus, it gives a strategic very important region the role it
deserves - just think of the battles of Sevastopol and Kharkov,
both EUk.
It's already pretty important a space. But if you look at the map,
you'll see that only the three major German objectives in the USSR
(Moscow, Leningrad and Stalingrad) have SC status. I happen to like
that.
Good discussion.
Cheers,
Charles[Reply] |
| 1936 v1.4 - Nitsch (Sep 19, 2010, 6:39 am) |
Gentlemen,
having the chance to lead USSR to it's doom in the current game, I thought
I add my 2 cents considering the balance in the east:
I found it rather hard to find a position for my soviet armies in the very
early game, that did not leave another front totally vulnerable (well, the
two times I was daring enough to do it both were followed by my neighbors
jumping exactly on me exactly there... but that could have to do with the
diplomatic situation as well). Heading south, you forfeit your options in
Scandinavia and with some bad luck, you lose the Baltic states and have
Britain knocking on your door with two tempi and neutral support in
Leningrad. Heading completely north, you forfeit Iraq and Iran, having
Turkey eying Stalingrad directly, able to support themselves in easily.
Sending one unit south, one north and on west makes you completely
depending on DP and other player's help (where I managed to get screwed,
say... three times?).
There are two major weak points that can be very easily addressed inmho:
1.) NRG borders LEN. This does give the British player a major advantage
in taking Scanfinavia, as he will almost for sure have a fleet sitting in
NRG, which is in fact necessary to take Norway - but does put constant
pressure on LEN. a USSR fleet build LEN(nc) in case you have an early gain
is not only the most direct declaration of war to britain, but cannot be
used for anything else than northern Scandinavia, while Soviet armies are
desperately needed everywhere on the map. Removing Len(nc) is not an
option, but reacing it via ARO and Finland (not to forget it's baltic
borders) should suffice to balance the region. Thus, I would relocate NRG
to not border LEN.
2.) The second, I even think grave problem is the "claim" the map gives
Poland on the Baltic states, which makes it difficult to dip about their
fate. They are polish home SC right now, and that will always make Poland
want them badly. It does in the end give you more flexibility to build.
Yet as three of them is much too much - it does neither reflect Poland's
situation in the era, nor does it by any means reflect the importance of
the SC that are flagged "build SC" in the Baltic. Yet simply removing one
or two pink circles does not do the job for me, as any expansion of both
USSR and Poland will still result in a clash there with units, that cannot
be send elsewhere easily. So what I would do redrawing the map is:
- Remove SC LAT completely. It didn't have that much importance
historically, and for the sake of the game's balance in the region this
serves as well.
- Create an SC EUK, not being a build SC for anyone.
- redraw WUK and STA so EUK does no longer touch Moscow.
- optional: redraw STA to not have an (wc) and make EUK a build SC (home
of the Black Sea fleet)
This does result, in terms of tempi, almost in the same location:
bordering a single Soviet home SC and a neutral (polish build option) SC,
which is another move away from a Polish home Sc. Moreover, this gives the
Russian player a single option to take an easy SC, but having to forfeit
concentrating his troops on the north or the Baltic in the first turn. It
will as well never be a completely safe SC, as it is not to far away from
Turkey. And thus it serves to have another reason for Turkey and USSR to
fight over, as an IRAQ/IRAN agreement now can be done too easily imho. As
a plus, it gives a strategic very important region the role it deserves -
just think of the battles of Sevastopol and Kharkov, both EUk.
Just my 2 cents, but happy to read some responses...
Best,
Karsten[Reply] |
| DC332 Autumn 1905 Retreats - cfisher6 (Sep 19, 2010, 12:16 am) |
Germany:
disband F Holland
Russia:
F Sevastopol - Armenia
We'll say goodbye to Bruce in England this year. Bruce, thanks for playing and submitting orders up to the end!
Deadline for Winter 1905 Builds/Disbands is Monday 23:59 GMT.
Ownership:
Austria: Budapest, Rumania, Sevastopol, Trieste, Vienna.
France: Belgium, Brest, Edinburgh, Holland, Liverpool, London, Marseilles, Paris, Portugal, Spain, Tunis.
Germany: Berlin, Denmark, Kiel, Munich, Venice.
Italy: Naples, Rome.
Russia: Moscow, Norway, St Petersburg, Sweden, Warsaw.
Turkey: Ankara, Bulgaria, Constantinople, Greece, Serbia, Smyrna.
Adjustments:
Austria: Supp 5 Unit 4 Build 1
England: Supp 0 Unit 1 Remove 1
France: Supp 11 Unit 9 Build 2
Germany: Supp 5 Unit 4 Build 1
Italy: Supp 2 Unit 3 Remove 1
Russia: Supp 5 Unit 5 Build 0
Turkey: Supp 6 Unit 6 Build 0[Reply] |
| 1936 v1.4 - Nigs (Sep 18, 2010, 4:18 pm) |
Charles,
for what it's worth, I think the SU is underpowered (surprise, surprise) and Poland unhistorically strong. The changes to France may indirectly help, but a weak SU so far from Spain with a Italy in arguably a better position and closer to Spain directly, makes the civil war a distraction for the SU, and maybe even a disadvantage.
I'm not sure how much the last game is useful for typical lessons as to how things would play out again.
Nigs
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2010 21:27:17 +0200
From: charlesf(at)web.de
To: dirk(at)knemeyer.com
CC: wesaq(at)list.ru; tomjnkns.IL(at)gmail.com; Jimmy.Ghostine(at)vtmednet.org; jlqueiros3(at)hotmail.com; dc319(at)diplomaticcorp.com; davidchegould(at)bigpond.com; c.p.mcinerney(at)gmail.com; dipping_chris(at)yahoo.com; ndeily(at)yahoo.com; congressofvienna1814(at)yahoo.com; VonPowell(at)aol.com; screwtape777(at)gmail.com; max.luckey(at)googlemail.com; mellinger(at)blitzbardgett.com; jamie_nordli(at)hotmail.com; nephilli99(at)hotmail.com; smileyrob68(at)gmail.com; sun.chung(at)gmail.com; nick.s.powell(at)gmail.com; wmysonski(at)gmail.com; karsten.nitsch(at)gmx.de; psychosis(at)sky.com; timothy.d.hayward(at)googlemail.com
Subject: Re: 1936 v1.4
Dirk and all,
thanks for your feedback. Always good to have many "second
opinions" when operating on a patient.
The map I sent you is more of a draft for v1.4 than being
definitive. Particularly since my conviction on the merits of the
changes vary on each one.
A key question here is whether the changes strike a good balance
between a westerly and an easterly orientation of Italy. In other
words: whether the respective Franco-Italian and Turkish-Italian
friction levels are within a desirable range.
And there's another question that follows on from this: Is Italy
(and I'm factoring Nat.Spain, of course) sufficiently strong?
FRENCH ALGERIA
- I think this makes the Italian position weaker. Italy
simply can't have France building fleets in Alg given access to
the STS.
Having Algiers present a far more substantial danger to Italy indeed
does. But I don't agree that Italy cannot afford a French fleet
being built there. First of all, only Naples can be reached by such
a fleet within two moves (leaving aside Algiers-Tunis-Tripoli). So
in this regard, such a fleet build is no different from an army in
Marseilles marching on Milan.
It is more a later movement by such a fleet into NTS or ION that is
dangerous. Fortunately, a fleet build in Algiers gives the Duce a
clear warning. And unless Italy's totally committed in other
directions, a bounce in STS ought to be not so difficult to
engineer.
I'd suggest that Italy would do well to any of the following:
- ensure a French unit keeps blocking the Algiers build site
- have France agree not to build fleets there
- attack Algiers in an effort to make sure it's blocked by a French
unit or have it fall to Italy.
A Tripoli can do much to keep France honest - and more.
THE ALPINE FRONT
And with Tuscany, A Rom is channeled - almost forced - to
either go to the Balkans or Swi only.
I'd say A Rome's viable openings include moves to Croatia, Slovenia,
Austria and South Tyrol (thus pivotting towards Switzerland).
Remaining in place and supporting Austria is another good option
(kinda historically Italy's standing order until 193 .
That's a pretty broad range of options. The unit just doesn't have
all that much of an anti-French use anymore (other than perhaps a
move to Naples in preparation for a convoy over to Algiers, though
I'd say that's probably not the best use of the unit early on.
One weighty reason why I've given A Rome a more easterly bent is
that in turn for greater friction over Algiers, I needed to reduce
Franco-Italian tensions in the Alps. Otherwise friction levels would
have gone through the roof.
So basically four sound opening move options remain for A Rome.
That's a healthy number. And two quite different directions:
striking out into the Balkans or up north into the alps
(Switzerland, Austria).
There is not an attack avenue on France.
Not for A Rome, no. But A Milan can gun for Marseilles immediately.
It's just that without Swiss help you cannot engineer a supported
move on Piedmont.
However, this somewhat diminished offensive potential in the Alps
also means that Piedmont's no longer an Italian soft-spot (i.e. a
locale adjacent to 2+ of her initial SCs).
I'd argue this somewhat decreased offensive potential is not much of
a loss for Italy (if you want to attack Marseilles, investing in
Switzerland may go a long way to defeating a French offensive in
Piedmont - and if France isn't doing that, you don't need a
supported attack anyway). But Italy gains CONSIDERABLY in terms of
security as Rome can't be taken by France in 1936.
Very much a net plus for Italy, methinks. And also for France,
because Italy won't be as paranoid about Piedmont with the redrawn
map.
So this map would seem to prevent Italy from channeling
force and instead to make a series of very defensive decisions:
to parry French or Turkish naval threats? Can't do both, and
whichever is ignored is in trouble.
Italy can mount exactly the same attack it was able to launch in
past versions. Just without A Rome and A Milan combining (hardly
much of a difference as A Switzerland is most likely to be decisive
in a clash over Piedmont).
TURKEY ETC.
Indeed, this makes France and Turkey - in my view - natural
allies. Good news for France, terrible for the USSR.
Oh, I've always considered those two well-suited to another. Their
relationship is characterised by second-degree proximity, which
tends to go hand-in-hand with good alliance potential. And no, A
Beirut, doesn't in my book transform that relationship into one of
first-degree proximity. If players nonetheless view Franco-Turkish
relations in that light, they're plainly misinterpreting what A
Beirut brings table.
Of course, much as France/Turkey enjoy good ally potential on
account of their second-degree proximity, so does the Italy/USSR
pairing (at least if players don't let Spanish affairs overly colour
their relationship).
Italy may also find in Britain now a more useful ally owing to its
more robust presence in the Near East. Perhaps also more of a rival,
but on the whole I'd rate this development as good news for Italy.
- Making Sue a build location is interesting, but I think is
a case where more strength on the board translates into
diplomatic weakness. If I'm Turkey I no longer want Sue out of
greed but out of self-preservation.
Aye, Anglo-Turkish relations are complicated by Britain's enhanced
role in Turkey's backyard. It's indeed something I was gunning for
and that also made me comfortable giving Britain this additional
capability.
That is a much sharper motive, and one that might railroad
more behaviour particularly in light of the fertile FT
possibilities and increased shared interest.
Conversely, that may in turn be met by an Anglo-Italian block.
All that being said, I do wonder if the redrawn Adriatic does overly
heighten IT friction. It's the one change I've been least certain
about. And indeed, I'm now thinking that I may well have turned
Greece into a space that pulls in Italy and Turkey into conflict
much in the way the old Ukraine space did with Poland and Turkey.
So, right now I'm leaning towards undoing the Adriatic change.
The one major motivation for it was that I wanted to further pull
Italy away from France. Perhaps that was overdoing it.
I suppose my biggest concern is that the USSR remains
underpowered, and the changes may further compromise their
position.
If anything, Turkey facing greater challenges HELPS Uncle Joe.
Surely if you can justify Turkey being a 3 SC power Russia
could be a 4.
Oh, an earlier version of 1936 had indeed 4 SCs. I cut it down to
three as you can see. Works better and also reprects the Soviet
weakness with all those purges going on.
SOVIET UNION
No special rules, create an SC for the Urals or something
and done. This seems the one gaping hole, despite your
bullishness over their 6 SC high water mark in 1937. In fact I
would challenge a truly top, expert player to take the current
position on a challenge and see what they could do with it. I
think it is terribly weak relative to the situation of the other
powers.
Piano, piano.  As you know, I'm not in the least worried. In this
I'm as firm as I am about England's much-derided viability and
strength in 1648.
Another small change to consider with USSR is to not have Len
and NRG touch. It only compounds the potential or deep misery
for the Soviets, the nice jumping off point to blitz the British
in the mid-game notwithstanding.
Ah, I love that tension in the Far North! It's historical and makes
for more interesting gaming.
Despite my sharing the concern of others that France was
underpowered, as you know Charles France is one of the powers I
most want to play in this variant. Well, I have to say, even
these subtle changes make me think that now France could be a
premier power.
I'm in the camp of those who considered v1.3's France not too weak.
And now that I've given Algiers build site status, I take solace in
France's poor performance to date. My hope (and belief) is that I
haven't overpowered France.
Not sure the impact that would have on poor little Italy,
but it may help justify having Italy control the Nationalists,
providing an interesting counterweight in the far western Med.
The Nationalist presence of course very much has to be factored into
the Italian power calculation. And having that small base out West
comes also with the hefty potential of a united Spain.
Perhaps 1636's Italy is a power that either does very well or gets
squashed by neighbouring powers. With fairly little middle-ground.
In any case, I've enjoyed this exchange as well as the wider variant
discussion (as I trust you can tell by my long and numerous posts).
I'd love to hear more views on these changes. Just note that the
operating assumption here ought be that the Adriatic will be
returned to its original shape since that's where I am right now on
that question.
Cheers,
Charles
Dirk
On Sep 17, 2010, at 1:06 PM, Charles Féaux de la Croix
wrote:
Hi guys,
I've now decided to run with the various changes I
discussed in my past mail and implemented those on the
below v1.4 map. Here a summary of the changes:
- Both Algiers and Suez are no longer marked
with a red circle as they're now regular HSCs.
- The Tyrrhenian Sea has been divided into Northern and
Southern Tyrrhenian Sea spaces.
- Tuscany makes a comeback.
- The Adriatic now adjoins Greece.
- I've removed the Abruzzi buffer province that was
geared to facilitate an amphibious landing in Italy.
Given the redrawn Adriatic adds to Italy's defense
worries in the East, I felt I might help out Italy be
removing that landing-site.
- I also cut out the now fairly redundant-seeming
Ligurian Sea space. As the SC-space ratio is already
pretty high at 1:2.56, I felt it wise to not further
increase the number of overall spaces. Standard has a
ratio of 1:2.2. Plainly 1936 is a whole lot more fluid
variant, though some of 1936's spaces (e.g. Iceland,
Kuweit, Caspian) are only of very marginal use. So the
"effective" ratio is arguably somewhat lower.
All-in-all, I'd say that Franco-Italian tension is
increased in Africa (owing to the threat potential of the
Algiers HSC), while round Piedmont it has been reduced by
a fair amount. To the East, Turkish-Italian rivalry over
Greece has been intensified.
I'd be interested to hear your take on these recalibration
measures in the wake of Algiers and Suez being promoted to
HSC status.
Charles
<1936_14.jpg>[Reply] |
| 1936 v1.4 - charlesf (Sep 18, 2010, 2:27 pm) |
Dirk and all,
thanks for your feedback. Always good to have many "second
opinions" when operating on a patient.
The map I sent you is more of a draft for v1.4 than being
definitive. Particularly since my conviction on the merits of the
changes vary on each one.
A key question here is whether the changes strike a good balance
between a westerly and an easterly orientation of Italy. In other
words: whether the respective Franco-Italian and Turkish-Italian
friction levels are within a desirable range.
And there's another question that follows on from this: Is Italy
(and I'm factoring Nat.Spain, of course) sufficiently strong?
FRENCH ALGERIA
- I think this makes the Italian position weaker. Italy
simply can't have France building fleets in Alg given access to
the STS.
Having Algiers present a far more substantial danger to Italy indeed
does. But I don't agree that Italy cannot afford a French fleet
being built there. First of all, only Naples can be reached by such
a fleet within two moves (leaving aside Algiers-Tunis-Tripoli). So
in this regard, such a fleet build is no different from an army in
Marseilles marching on Milan.
It is more a later movement by such a fleet into NTS or ION that is
dangerous. Fortunately, a fleet build in Algiers gives the Duce a
clear warning. And unless Italy's totally committed in other
directions, a bounce in STS ought to be not so difficult to
engineer.
I'd suggest that Italy would do well to any of the following:
- ensure a French unit keeps blocking the Algiers build site
- have France agree not to build fleets there
- attack Algiers in an effort to make sure it's blocked by a French
unit or have it fall to Italy.
A Tripoli can do much to keep France honest - and more.
THE ALPINE FRONT
And with Tuscany, A Rom is channeled - almost forced - to
either go to the Balkans or Swi only.
I'd say A Rome's viable openings include moves to Croatia, Slovenia,
Austria and South Tyrol (thus pivotting towards Switzerland).
Remaining in place and supporting Austria is another good option
(kinda historically Italy's standing order until 193.
That's a pretty broad range of options. The unit just doesn't have
all that much of an anti-French use anymore (other than perhaps a
move to Naples in preparation for a convoy over to Algiers, though
I'd say that's probably not the best use of the unit early on.
One weighty reason why I've given A Rome a more easterly bent is
that in turn for greater friction over Algiers, I needed to reduce
Franco-Italian tensions in the Alps. Otherwise friction levels would
have gone through the roof.
So basically four sound opening move options remain for A Rome.
That's a healthy number. And two quite different directions:
striking out into the Balkans or up north into the alps
(Switzerland, Austria).
There is not an attack avenue on France.
Not for A Rome, no. But A Milan can gun for Marseilles immediately.
It's just that without Swiss help you cannot engineer a supported
move on Piedmont.
However, this somewhat diminished offensive potential in the Alps
also means that Piedmont's no longer an Italian soft-spot (i.e. a
locale adjacent to 2+ of her initial SCs).
I'd argue this somewhat decreased offensive potential is not much of
a loss for Italy (if you want to attack Marseilles, investing in
Switzerland may go a long way to defeating a French offensive in
Piedmont - and if France isn't doing that, you don't need a
supported attack anyway). But Italy gains CONSIDERABLY in terms of
security as Rome can't be taken by France in 1936.
Very much a net plus for Italy, methinks. And also for France,
because Italy won't be as paranoid about Piedmont with the redrawn
map.
So this map would seem to prevent Italy from channeling
force and instead to make a series of very defensive decisions:
to parry French or Turkish naval threats? Can't do both, and
whichever is ignored is in trouble.
Italy can mount exactly the same attack it was able to launch in
past versions. Just without A Rome and A Milan combining (hardly
much of a difference as A Switzerland is most likely to be decisive
in a clash over Piedmont).
TURKEY ETC.
Indeed, this makes France and Turkey - in my view - natural
allies. Good news for France, terrible for the USSR.
Oh, I've always considered those two well-suited to another. Their
relationship is characterised by second-degree proximity, which
tends to go hand-in-hand with good alliance potential. And no, A
Beirut, doesn't in my book transform that relationship into one of
first-degree proximity. If players nonetheless view Franco-Turkish
relations in that light, they're plainly misinterpreting what A
Beirut brings table.
Of course, much as France/Turkey enjoy good ally potential on
account of their second-degree proximity, so does the Italy/USSR
pairing (at least if players don't let Spanish affairs overly colour
their relationship).
Italy may also find in Britain now a more useful ally owing to its
more robust presence in the Near East. Perhaps also more of a rival,
but on the whole I'd rate this development as good news for Italy.
- Making Sue a build location is interesting, but I think is
a case where more strength on the board translates into
diplomatic weakness. If I'm Turkey I no longer want Sue out of
greed but out of self-preservation.
Aye, Anglo-Turkish relations are complicated by Britain's enhanced
role in Turkey's backyard. It's indeed something I was gunning for
and that also made me comfortable giving Britain this additional
capability.
That is a much sharper motive, and one that might railroad
more behaviour particularly in light of the fertile FT
possibilities and increased shared interest.
Conversely, that may in turn be met by an Anglo-Italian block.
All that being said, I do wonder if the redrawn Adriatic does overly
heighten IT friction. It's the one change I've been least certain
about. And indeed, I'm now thinking that I may well have turned
Greece into a space that pulls in Italy and Turkey into conflict
much in the way the old Ukraine space did with Poland and Turkey.
So, right now I'm leaning towards undoing the Adriatic change.
The one major motivation for it was that I wanted to further pull
Italy away from France. Perhaps that was overdoing it.
I suppose my biggest concern is that the USSR remains
underpowered, and the changes may further compromise their
position.
If anything, Turkey facing greater challenges HELPS Uncle Joe.
Surely if you can justify Turkey being a 3 SC power Russia
could be a 4.
Oh, an earlier version of 1936 had indeed 4 SCs. I cut it down to
three as you can see. Works better and also reprects the Soviet
weakness with all those purges going on.
SOVIET UNION
No special rules, create an SC for the Urals or something
and done. This seems the one gaping hole, despite your
bullishness over their 6 SC high water mark in 1937. In fact I
would challenge a truly top, expert player to take the current
position on a challenge and see what they could do with it. I
think it is terribly weak relative to the situation of the other
powers.
Piano, piano. As you know, I'm not in the least worried. In this
I'm as firm as I am about England's much-derided viability and
strength in 1648.
Another small change to consider with USSR is to not have Len
and NRG touch. It only compounds the potential or deep misery
for the Soviets, the nice jumping off point to blitz the British
in the mid-game notwithstanding.
Ah, I love that tension in the Far North! It's historical and makes
for more interesting gaming.
Despite my sharing the concern of others that France was
underpowered, as you know Charles France is one of the powers I
most want to play in this variant. Well, I have to say, even
these subtle changes make me think that now France could be a
premier power.
I'm in the camp of those who considered v1.3's France not too weak.
And now that I've given Algiers build site status, I take solace in
France's poor performance to date. My hope (and belief) is that I
haven't overpowered France.
Not sure the impact that would have on poor little Italy,
but it may help justify having Italy control the Nationalists,
providing an interesting counterweight in the far western Med.
The Nationalist presence of course very much has to be factored into
the Italian power calculation. And having that small base out West
comes also with the hefty potential of a united Spain.
Perhaps 1636's Italy is a power that either does very well or gets
squashed by neighbouring powers. With fairly little middle-ground.
In any case, I've enjoyed this exchange as well as the wider variant
discussion (as I trust you can tell by my long and numerous posts).
I'd love to hear more views on these changes. Just note that the
operating assumption here ought be that the Adriatic will be
returned to its original shape since that's where I am right now on
that question.
Cheers,
Charles
Dirk
On Sep 17, 2010, at 1:06 PM, Charles Féaux de la Croix
wrote:
Hi guys,
I've now decided to run with the various changes I
discussed in my past mail and implemented those on the
below v1.4 map. Here a summary of the changes:
- Both Algiers and Suez are no longer marked
with a red circle as they're now regular HSCs.
- The Tyrrhenian Sea has been divided into Northern and
Southern Tyrrhenian Sea spaces.
- Tuscany makes a comeback.
- The Adriatic now adjoins Greece.
- I've removed the Abruzzi buffer province that was
geared to facilitate an amphibious landing in Italy.
Given the redrawn Adriatic adds to Italy's defense
worries in the East, I felt I might help out Italy be
removing that landing-site.
- I also cut out the now fairly redundant-seeming
Ligurian Sea space. As the SC-space ratio is already
pretty high at 1:2.56, I felt it wise to not further
increase the number of overall spaces. Standard has a
ratio of 1:2.2. Plainly 1936 is a whole lot more fluid
variant, though some of 1936's spaces (e.g. Iceland,
Kuweit, Caspian) are only of very marginal use. So the
"effective" ratio is arguably somewhat lower.
All-in-all, I'd say that Franco-Italian tension is
increased in Africa (owing to the threat potential of the
Algiers HSC), while round Piedmont it has been reduced by
a fair amount. To the East, Turkish-Italian rivalry over
Greece has been intensified.
I'd be interested to hear your take on these recalibration
measures in the wake of Algiers and Suez being promoted to
HSC status.
Charles
<1936_14.jpg>[Reply] |
| Next GM? - FuzzyLogic (Sep 18, 2010, 11:37 am) |
It is indeed! Either a Stonehenge or Dark Ages would probly fill fast.
We still need Standard game GMs! Our queue is down to 0 ready in the wings...
-mike[Reply] |
| Next GM? (Community) alwayshunted Sep 21, 06:09 pm |
| Put me on the list for another if you like Mike. |
| Next GM? (Community) FuzzyLogic Sep 23, 12:57 pm |
Woohoo!
Glad to have ya. Who's after Warren?
Any takers??
-mike |
| Next GM? (Community) Sean2010 Sep 24, 03:39 pm |
Michael,
I'm interested in taking a shot at GMing standard since this will be my first attempt at Gming. |
| Behold! dc339 s219bc results! - FuzzyLogic (Sep 18, 2010, 11:06 am) |
A Dac retreats to Kul!
-mike
From: Michael Sims
Sent: Saturday, September 18, 2010 10:55 AM
Cc: dc339
Subject: Behold! dc339 s219bc results!
Just one retreat!
Scythian A Dacia is dislodged by
the Macedonians, aided by the Germanic Hordes! That unit can go back to
Gel or Kul by Monday 3pm Central.
Then, Fall 219bc due
Friday! 3pm Central again.
Enjoy,
-mike
Carthage:
F Carthage Hold
F Cartenna - Strait of Gibraltar
A Saguntum - Pyrenaei
F Cyrenaica - Syrtis Major
A Hispania Supports A Saguntum -
Pyrenaei
Egypt:
F Lybian Sea - Creta
A Alexandria - Cyrenaica
A Memphis - Sinai (*Bounce*)
Gaul:
A Burdigala Hold
A Lugdunum - Helvetii
A Lutetia - Lugdunum
F Britannia - O.Britannicus
Germania:
A Aliso Supports A Bojohaemum -
Belgica
A Biskupin - Iazyges
A Bojohaemum - Belgica
F Scandia - O.Germanicus
Macedonia:
F Aegaeum Mare - Pontus Euxinus
A Pella - Moesia
F Athens - Aegaeum Mare
A Moesia - Dacia
A Byzantium Supports A Pella -
Moesia
Persia:
F Attaleia - Lycian Sea
A Antiochia - Cappadocia
A Nineveh - Armenia (*Bounce*)
A Judea - Sinai (*Bounce*)
F Cyprus - Gulf of Judea
Rome:
F Tyrhennian Sea - Sardinia
A Genua Supports A Narbonensis
A Aqueleia - Raetia
F Roma - Balearic Sea
A Narbonensis Hold
A Pannonia Supports A Moesia -
Dacia
A Sicilia Hold
Scythia:
F Pontus Euxinus - Maeotis Palus
A Maikop - Armenia (*Bounce*)
A Dacia Hold (*Dislodged*)
[Reply] |
| 1936 v1.4 - dknemeyer (Sep 18, 2010, 10:58 am) |
Hi Charles,
These are interesting changes. Some flash feedback:
- I think this makes the Italian position weaker. Italy simply can't have France building fleets in Alg given access to the STS. And with Tuscany, A Rom is channeled - almost forced - to either go to the Balkans or Swi only. There is not an attack avenue on France. So this map would seem to prevent Italy from channeling force and instead to make a series of very defensive decisions: to parry French or Turkish naval threats? Can't do both, and whichever is ignored is in trouble. Indeed, this makes France and Turkey - in my view - natural allies. Good news for France, terrible for the USSR.
- Making Sue a build location is interesting, but I think is a case where more strength on the board translates into diplomatic weakness. If I'm Turkey I no longer want Sue out of greed but out of self-preservation. That is a much sharper motive, and one that might railroad more behaviour particularly in light of the fertile FT possibilities and increased shared interest.
I suppose my biggest concern is that the USSR remains underpowered, and the changes may further compromise their position. Surely if you can justify Turkey being a 3 SC power Russia could be a 4. No special rules, create an SC for the Urals or something and done. This seems the one gaping hole, despite your bullishness over their 6 SC high water mark in 1937. In fact I would challenge a truly top, expert player to take the current position on a challenge and see what they could do with it. I think it is terribly weak relative to the situation of the other powers.
Another small change to consider with USSR is to not have Len and NRG touch. It only compounds the potential or deep misery for the Soviets, the nice jumping off point to blitz the British in the mid-game notwithstanding.
Despite my sharing the concern of others that France was underpowered, as you know Charles France is one of the powers I most want to play in this variant. Well, I have to say, even these subtle changes make me think that now France could be a premier power. Not sure the impact that would have on poor little Italy, but it may help justify having Italy control the Nationalists, providing an interesting counterweight in the far western Med.
Dirk
On Sep 17, 2010, at 1:06 PM, Charles Féaux de la Croix wrote:
Hi guys,
I've now decided to run with the various changes I discussed in my
past mail and implemented those on the below v1.4 map. Here a
summary of the changes:
- Both Algiers and Suez are no longer marked with a red
circle as they're now regular HSCs.
- The Tyrrhenian Sea has been divided into Northern and Southern
Tyrrhenian Sea spaces.
- Tuscany makes a comeback.
- The Adriatic now adjoins Greece.
- I've removed the Abruzzi buffer province that was geared to
facilitate an amphibious landing in Italy. Given the redrawn
Adriatic adds to Italy's defense worries in the East, I felt I
might help out Italy be removing that landing-site.
- I also cut out the now fairly redundant-seeming Ligurian Sea
space. As the SC-space ratio is already pretty high at 1:2.56, I
felt it wise to not further increase the number of overall spaces.
Standard has a ratio of 1:2.2. Plainly 1936 is a whole lot more
fluid variant, though some of 1936's spaces (e.g. Iceland, Kuweit,
Caspian) are only of very marginal use. So the "effective" ratio
is arguably somewhat lower.
All-in-all, I'd say that Franco-Italian tension is increased in
Africa (owing to the threat potential of the Algiers HSC), while
round Piedmont it has been reduced by a fair amount. To the East,
Turkish-Italian rivalry over Greece has been intensified.
I'd be interested to hear your take on these recalibration measures
in the wake of Algiers and Suez being promoted to HSC status.
Charles
<1936_14.jpg>[Reply] |
| 1936 v1.4 (dc319) buyz2men Oct 01, 03:41 am |
| hi am glad to be here good work keep it on |
| Behold! dc339 s219bc results! - FuzzyLogic (Sep 18, 2010, 10:55 am) |
Just one retreat!
Scythian A Dacia is dislodged by
the Macedonians, aided by the Germanic Hordes! That unit can go back to Gel or
Kul by Monday 3pm Central.
Then, Fall 219bc due Friday!
3pm Central again.
Enjoy,
-mike
Carthage:
F Carthage Hold
F Cartenna - Strait of Gibraltar
A Saguntum - Pyrenaei
F Cyrenaica - Syrtis Major
A Hispania Supports A Saguntum -
Pyrenaei
Egypt:
F Lybian Sea - Creta
A Alexandria - Cyrenaica
A Memphis - Sinai (*Bounce*)
Gaul:
A Burdigala Hold
A Lugdunum - Helvetii
A Lutetia - Lugdunum
F Britannia - O.Britannicus
Germania:
A Aliso Supports A Bojohaemum -
Belgica
A Biskupin - Iazyges
A Bojohaemum - Belgica
F Scandia - O.Germanicus
Macedonia:
F Aegaeum Mare - Pontus Euxinus
A Pella - Moesia
F Athens - Aegaeum Mare
A Moesia - Dacia
A Byzantium Supports A Pella -
Moesia
Persia:
F Attaleia - Lycian Sea
A Antiochia - Cappadocia
A Nineveh - Armenia (*Bounce*)
A Judea - Sinai (*Bounce*)
F Cyprus - Gulf of Judea
Rome:
F Tyrhennian Sea - Sardinia
A Genua Supports A Narbonensis
A Aqueleia - Raetia
F Roma - Balearic Sea
A Narbonensis Hold
A Pannonia Supports A Moesia -
Dacia
A Sicilia Hold
Scythia:
F Pontus Euxinus - Maeotis Palus
A Maikop - Armenia (*Bounce*)
A Dacia Hold (*Dislodged*)
[Reply] |
| Behold! dc339 s219bc results! (dc339) FuzzyLogic Sep 18, 11:06 am |
A Dac retreats to Kul!
-mike
From: Michael Sims
Sent: Saturday, September 18, 2010 10:55 AM
Cc: dc339
Subject: Behold! dc339 s219bc results!
Just one retreat!
Scythian A Dacia is dislodged by
the Macedonians, aided by the Germanic Hordes! That unit can go back to
Gel or Kul by Monday 3pm Central.
Then, Fall 219bc due
Friday! 3pm Central again.
Enjoy,
-mike
Carthage:
F Carthage Hold
F Cartenna - Strait of Gibraltar
A Saguntum - Pyrenaei
F Cyrenaica - Syrtis Major
A Hispania Supports A Saguntum -
Pyrenaei
Egypt:
F Lybian Sea - Creta
A Alexandria - Cyrenaica
A Memphis - Sinai (*Bounce*)
Gaul:
A Burdigala Hold
A Lugdunum - Helvetii
A Lutetia - Lugdunum
F Britannia - O.Britannicus
Germania:
A Aliso Supports A Bojohaemum -
Belgica
A Biskupin - Iazyges
A Bojohaemum - Belgica
F Scandia - O.Germanicus
Macedonia:
F Aegaeum Mare - Pontus Euxinus
A Pella - Moesia
F Athens - Aegaeum Mare
A Moesia - Dacia
A Byzantium Supports A Pella -
Moesia
Persia:
F Attaleia - Lycian Sea
A Antiochia - Cappadocia
A Nineveh - Armenia (*Bounce*)
A Judea - Sinai (*Bounce*)
F Cyprus - Gulf of Judea
Rome:
F Tyrhennian Sea - Sardinia
A Genua Supports A Narbonensis
A Aqueleia - Raetia
F Roma - Balearic Sea
A Narbonensis Hold
A Pannonia Supports A Moesia -
Dacia
A Sicilia Hold
Scythia:
F Pontus Euxinus - Maeotis Palus
A Maikop - Armenia (*Bounce*)
A Dacia Hold (*Dislodged*)
|
| dc334 f03 results! - FuzzyLogic (Sep 18, 2010, 10:45 am) |
Player list for dc334
Sorry for the delay folks!
Lots of action this round… Persians and Thessalians have a
great round, Ionians, well, not so great… Boeotia MIA? Poul if I
don’t hear from you by the winter deadline your units will go into Civil
Disorder, you’ll be out of the game. Then it’ll be tougher to
join any veteran-only games that don’t allow players who have CD’d
previously! (so get back to me)
Macedonia: Remove 1
Persia: Build 2
Thessalia: Build 2
Ionia: Retreat GOL and Lesbos, and Remove 2
**********
Athens:
F Aegina Supports F West Cyclades
F Athens - Euboea
A Megara - Athens
F West Cyclades Hold
Boeotia:
F Ambracia, no move received
A Chalcis, no move received
A Delphi, no move received
F Naupactus, no move received
A Thebes, no move received
Macedonia:
F Lemnos, no move received
A Olynthus, no move received (*Disbanded*)
A Thracia, no move received
Ionia:
F Delos - West Cyclades (*Fails*)
F East Cyclades Supports F Delos - West Cyclades
F Gulf of Laconia - Pylos (*Dislodged*)
F Lesbos Hold (*Dislodged*)
F North Sporades - Delos (*Fails*)
F South Ionian Sea Supports F Pylos - Olympia (*Void*)
Persia:
F Amphipolis Supports F Thermaic Gulf - Olynthus
F Carpathian Sea Supports F South Cretan Sea - Cnossos
F East Aegean Sea Supports F West Aegean Sea - Lesbos
A Halicarnassus - Caria
A Odrysae - Byzantium
F South Cretan Sea - Cnossos
A Troia - Cyzicus
F West Aegean Sea - Lesbos
Sparta:
A Achaia - Olympia
A Arcadia - Sparta
F Gulf of Patrae - South Ionian Sea (*Fails*)
F North Cretan Sea - Gulf of Laconia
F Pylos Supports F Olympia - South Ionian Sea (*Invalid*)
F Zarax Supports F North Cretan Sea - Gulf of Laconia
Thessalia:
A Dolopia - Aetolia
A Hestiaeotis - Dodona
A Pella Supports F Therma
A Phthiotis Hold
F Therma Supports F Thermaic Gulf - Olynthus
F Thermaic Gulf - Olynthus
[Reply] |
| dc337 - Fall 1902 Results - z93blom (Sep 18, 2010, 10:42 am) |
Diplomats,
I have received indications that my changed deadline did cause troubles, therefore I am doing the adjudication with the orders that were sent my way before the deadline. I have so far not received any changed orders. I am terribly sorry for this, and we will now go to a Monday/Wednesday schedule for the adjudications. This means that you will have to send in the Autumn Retreats along with the Winter Adjustments on Wednesdays. You can always order the adjustments conditional depending on what was ordered/how it was resolved for the Autumn. Hopefully we'll not run into this kind of trouble again.
To the changes:There was some movement from the central powers - Italy, Austria and Germany. Otherwise everyone safes it and noone moves. The movement was towards the west, and some of the pressure that was previously applied to the eastern powers have been lessened. We have a single retreat to take care of:
British F Egypt can retreat to Palestine, Hejaz or OTB.
Then on to the builds: We have some adjustments for the winter:Germany gains a center, and gets to build one.
Italy also gains a center and gets to build one.Russia loses two centers, but the Russian government scrambles, and gets an extra unit on the board. They therefore only have to remove one unit.
Britain gets to build one unit if the Egyptian Fleet retreats off the board.
Next turn: Autumn 1902 Adjustments and Winter 1902 BuildsNext Deadline: Wednesday, 22nd of September 2010, 18:00 GMT (6PM).
The orders:Austria: A Galicia - BohemiaA Vienna - TyroliaA Ukraine Supports A RumaniaA Serbia Supports A Rumania
A Rumania Supports A Ukraine (*Cut*)A Bulgaria Supports A Macedonia - Constantinople
Britain: F Egypt Hold (*Dislodged*)F Sweden Supports F Denmark
F Portugal Supports F Mid Atlantic OceanF Mid Atlantic Ocean HoldF North Sea Supports F Denmark (*Cut*)F English Channel Supports F Mid Atlantic Ocean (*Cut*)
France:
A Spain Supports A GasconyF Gibraltar Supports A SpainF Brest - English Channel (*Fails*)A Picardy - Brest (*Fails*)A Gascony Supports A Picardy - Brest (*Fails*)
A Morocco Supports F Gibraltar
Germany: A Kiel Supports F Baltic Sea - DenmarkA Silesia - BerlinA Warsaw Supports A UkraineA Belgium HoldF Baltic Sea - Denmark (*Fails*)
F Helgoland Bight - North Sea (*Fails*)
Italy: A Milan - SwitzerlandA Rome - MilanA Macedonia - Constantinople (*Fails*)A Cyrenaica - Egypt
F Ionian Sea - Aegean SeaF Eastern Mediterranean Supports A Cyrenaica - Egypt
Russia: F Denmark HoldA Prussia HoldF Livonia Supports A Prussia
A Moscow Supports A SevastopolA Sevastopol Supports A MoscowF Black Sea - Rumania (*Fails*)
Turkey: F Constantinople HoldA Konya Supports F Constantinople
A Damascus Hold
Next turn: Autumn 1902 Adjustments and Winter 1902 BuildsNext Deadline: Wednesday, 22nd of September 2010, 18:00 GMT (6PM).
/Fredrik[Reply] |
| dc337 - Spring 1902 Results - z93blom (Sep 18, 2010, 6:01 am) |
Diplomats,
I've had several people tell me that they'd prefer to have the major turns due on Mondays, as had been the case for a few turns. I myself had a hard time keeping the schedule this week as we were busy last night.
I currently have a full set of orders from everyone for the Fall. Despite that I've decided to extend the deadline until Monday. From now on the major turns will be due on Mondays, and the minor turns will be due on Wednesday, with both Autumn and Winter being due on the same day.
I want to thank you all for turning in orders on time continuously. So far noone has used their grace period, and we are progressing nicely.
Next turn: Fall 1902 MovementNext Deadline: Monday, 20th of September 2010, 18:00 GMT (6PM).
/Fredrik[Reply] |
| dc307 ~ Orient Express - sgttodd (Sep 17, 2010, 5:37 pm) |
Deadline for Spring 1913 orders is: Wednesday, September 22nd (at)
2359 UTC.
Retreats:
India: F Borneo - Thai Sea
Adjustment orders for Winter of 1912.
Siberia: Build F Kamchatka.
Siberia: Build A Irkutsk.
Unit locations:
India: F Bay of Bengal, F Bombay, A Delhi, A Kunlun, F South
Indian Ocean, F Sri Lanka, A Sumatra, F Thai Sea.
Indonesia: F Borneo, F East China Sea, F Jawan Sea, F Philippines.
Russia: A Afghanistan, F Arabian Sea, F Caspian Sea, F Eastern
African Sea, A Iran, A Kazakhstan, A Moscow, A Oman, A Pakistan, F
Red Sea, F Seychelles, F St. Petersburg, A Tien Shan, A Urals.
Siberia: F Celebes Sea, F Chucki Sea, A Ekaterinburg, F Hokkaido,
F Honshu, A Irkutsk, F Kamchatka, A Laos, A Mongolia, A Novosibirsk,
F Shanghai, A Tibet, A Vietnam, A West Siberia.
files: http://mainecav.org/diplomacy[Reply] |
