| DC-322 Autumn 827 - TheWhiteWolf (Jun 07, 2010, 4:53 pm) |
Guys, All retreats are in, so we're ready to see who gets punished this winter, and who gets rewarded.
Players:
Anglos Steve "BD" Emmert <steve.emmert(at)cox.net>Bretons Darren McAdam-OConnell <dmcaoc(at)gmail.com>Scots Mike Morris <mikemorris101(at)yahoo.com>Danes Frank Bielschowsky <dipcorp.player(at)gmail.com>Gaels Scott "Packrat" Troemel
<brn2dip(at)yahoo.com>Norse Benjamin Hester <screwtape777(at)gmail.com>Swedes Chris "DQ" Martin <dance.scholar(at)gmail.com>
Orders:
Gaels: F Dyfed - Cardigan BayF Isle of Man - Manx SeaF Ulster - North Channel
Bretons: A Mercia - Hwicce
Norse: Norse: disband F
Jelling(ec)
Disposition (Units/SCs):
Gaels: (3/5) - Disband 2Armies - MerFleets - Ato, Cab, Mxs, Noc
Scots: (8/6) - Build 2Armies - Con, Iom, StrFleets - Dal, Uls, Zet
Bretons: (4/5) - Disband 1Armies - Gwy, Ham, HwiFleets - Dyf, Som(sc)
Norse: (5/4) - Build 1Fleets - Lhm, Nth, Skg, Wfc
AngloSaxons: (4/4)Armies - Cor, ManFleets - Ech, Dei
Danes: (4/4)Armies - AusFleets - Arh, Jel(ec), Vib
Swedes: (9/6) - Build 3Armies - Alv, RerFleets - Bal, Bor, Ros, Skn
Deadline:Winter 827 is due Wednesday, 9 June at 6pm EDT (10pm GMT).
Any questions or complaints, bring them to my attention as soon as possible.Maps and RealPolitik file are attached.
Cheers, Andy I'm a Firefly fan and proud! Read my fiction:
http://www.fanfiction.net/u/1369632/[Reply] |
| FLWC public service announcement - FuzzyLogic (Jun 07, 2010, 4:32 pm) |
PRESS STATEMENT FROM THE WIZARD OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Today the Supreme Wizard Council announced its intention to cease all acts
of hostile expansion and declared itself open to peaceful vassalization by
any neighboring nation willing to grant the Wizard nation permanent control
over Faerun and Waterdeep, or even one of the two. The Wizard Council
plans to redirect its energies toward the peaceful development of magical
energy production.
"It's quite clear that this whole idea of conquering the central island
was a huge mistake," stated Wizzie McWizzarton, chief spokesman for the
Council in a prepared statement. "The Council cannot fully account for the
events in the Spring of 01, at which moment the entire planet collectively
and simultaneously declared war on one another without any real
justification. The Council now regrets its decision to participate in this
global spasm of imperial violence.
"It is our intention to fully comply with the demands of the Magic
Non-Proliferation Treaty and utilize our enriched magic only for peaceful
energy purposes," the statement concluded.
The Wizard Council will consider any and all offers from foreign powers to
vassalize the Wizard nation, allowing a suitable partner full control over
Wizard foreign and military policies.
The Council also noted that it has officially abandoned its
previously-stated mission to "wreak fiery vengeance on any nation which has
violated the trust of the Wizard nation," having concluded it lacks
sufficient fiery vengeance to spread among the relevant trust-violators.
###
This is truly the year for epic battles as forces clash in huge numbers all across the world... The Pirates and Trolls trade volleys over the High Seas, Ogre warships bombard the Elven defenses as the Undead clamber up the shores at Terabithia, and the last Faerie home center falls to the Archers...
All this while yet more units pile into the Underworld, the Centaurs barely hold on to Mount Nimro, and our Wizards look... inward, to more practical uses for their skills.
PLEASE CHECK MY WORK! This was a pretty complex turn, w units ordering across the map, either via the underworld or the wrap around the edges. Makes for a spiderweb of criss-crossing orders...
Lots of retreats and builds!
RETREATS:
Faeries: A Vinyaya, A Oz
Nomads: F WEST MIRIANIC OCEAN
Trolls: F HIGH SEAS
Wizards: A Caer
BUILDS:
Archers: Build 2
Centaurs: Build 2
Elves: Remove 2
Faeries: Remove 1
Nomads: Build 1
Ogres: Build 2
Samurai: Build 2
Trolls: Build 1 (or 2, pending Troll retreat)
Undead: Build 2 (or 1, pending Troll retreat)
Wizards: Remove 3
RETREATS and BUILDS are due together! Wed 6/9, 3pm Central. Those ppl who have a pending build should be sure to consider both possibilities of retreats, and use conditional orders if need be.
Archers:
A Prydain Supports F Kingdom of Hearts
A Fantastica Hold
F Kingdom of Hearts Supports F Andarien Plain
A Spiral Castle - Dragons Teeth Mtns
F Land of Sweets - Vinyaya
F Myth Drannor Hold
A Elephant Graveyard Supports F Khemri - Newa River (*Void*)
A Strawberry Fields Supports F Land of Sweets - Vinyaya
F CHOCOLATE RIVER - Oz
F RUGGED COAST - Gumdrop Isle
F HORNED BAY - CHOCOLATE RIVER
Centaurs:
A Tumnus - Immoren
A Mount Nimro Supports A Diamond Mines - Carpantha (*Cut*)
A Cathal Supports A Immoren - Sleepy Hollow
A Owlwood Hold
A Immoren - Sleepy Hollow
A Cave of Ordeals Supports F Newa River (*Ordered to Move*)
A Eridu - Gwynir (*Fails*)
F CELESTIAL DELTA Hold
F BEAVERSDAM - TILVA STRAIT
Elves:
F The Old Gristmill Supports A Uhl Belk - Terabithia
A Uhl Belk - Terabithia (*Fails*)
A Thra - Zhentil Keep
F Dhunia Supports A Uhl Belk - Terabithia
Faeries:
A Vinyaya Supports A Oz (*Dislodged*)
A Oz Supports A Vinyaya (*Dislodged*)
A Gurgi - Land of Sweets
F Dimmsdale - NORTH MIRIANIC OCEAN
A Diamond Mines - Carpantha (*Fails*)
Gnomes:
A Hundred Acre Wood, no move received
F Khemri, no move received
A Gwynir, no move received
A Sleepy Hollow, no move received (*Disbanded*)
A Starkadh, no move received
F Andarien Plain, no move received
Knights:
A GuTanoth - Paras Derval (*Fails*)
A Paras Derval - Andarien Plain (*Fails*)
A Brennin Supports A Paras Derval - Andarien Plain
F Walk of Clouds Supports F TILVA STRAIT - WEST MIRIANIC OCEAN
F Heavens Well - River Saeren
A River Saeren - Fionavar
A Shady Vale Supports A Gurgi - Land of Sweets
F TILVA STRAIT - WEST MIRIANIC OCEAN
Nomads:
A Carpantha Supports F WEST MIRIANIC OCEAN - Mount Nimro (*Cut*)
F Ella Supports F CHOCOLATE RIVER - Oz
F Great Glacier Hold
F WEST MIRIANIC OCEAN - Mount Nimro (*Dislodged*)
Ogres:
A Gelfling Hold
A Knockshegowna Hold
A Myrtle Supports F SAVAGE SEA - Terabithia
A Florin - Caer
A Hoarluk - Twisted Tunnels (*Fails*)
A Hall of Echoes - Ancient Necropolis
A Twisted Tunnels - Undermountain (*Bounce*)
A Temple of Doom Supports A Carpantha (*Cut*)
F THUNDERHEAD Supports F SAVAGE SEA - Terabithia
F ROARING RAPIDS Supports A Florin - Caer
F NORTH RAINBOW LAKE Convoys A Florin - Caer
Pirates:
F Riku Supports F GRIEF REEF - HIGH SEAS
A Baldurs Gate Supports A Two Towers - Candlekeep
A Never Never Land Supports A The High Way - Far Far Away
A Travers Town Hold
A The High Way - Far Far Away
F GRIEF REEF - HIGH SEAS
F MERMAIDS LAGOON Supports F GRIEF REEF - HIGH SEAS
F RESTLESS WATERS Supports A Baldurs Gate
Samurai:
A City of Splendors - Valley of Lost Honor (*Fails*)
A Two Towers - Candlekeep
F Ithin'Carthia(wc) Supports F GRIEF REEF - HIGH SEAS
A France - Shining Stream
A Cormyr - Garthim
A Thirsty Desert Supports A Two Towers - Candlekeep (*Cut*)
A Hollow Earth Supports A Carpantha - Mount Nimro (*Void*)
A Venatori Umbrarum - Temple of Doom (*Fails*)
F WAY THE HECK Supports F GRIEF REEF - HIGH SEAS
F BIKINI BOTTOM Hold
F SEA OF FALLEN STARS Supports A Never Never Land
Trolls:
F Newa River - GRIEF REEF
F Kahvi Supports F HIGH SEAS
A Grendel Hold
F Abby Normal Supports F Newa River - GRIEF REEF
A Sables Swamp Hold
A Far Far Away Hold (*Disbanded*)
A Yggdrasil - Undermountain (*Bounce*)
F THON THALAS Supports F Newa River - GRIEF REEF
F HIGH SEAS Supports F Newa River - GRIEF REEF (*Dislodged*)
Undead:
A To-Gai-Ru Supports F Walk of Clouds
A Skullcap - Uhl Belk (*Fails*)
F Everglot - Skellington (*Bounce*)
A Corona Supports F Walk of Clouds
F THE MAW - Skellington (*Bounce*)
F SAVAGE SEA - Terabithia
F ZEBOIMS DEEP Supports F SAVAGE SEA - Terabithia
Wizards:
A Waterdeep - Faerun
A Caer Hold (*Dislodged*)
A Valley of Lost Honor - Thirsty Desert (*Fails*)
A Kara-Tur - Waterdeep
F RAZORS EDGE - RIVER OF THE DAWN
[Reply] |
| FLWC public service announcement (dc303) FuzzyLogic Jun 08, 06:29 pm |
The Gnomes CAN retreat Sleepy
Hollow too! My mistake. If they do this, then something else has to come off
instead.
-mike
From: Michael Sims
Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 4:33 PM
Subject: FLWC public service
announcement
PRESS
STATEMENT FROM THE WIZARD OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Today the Supreme Wizard Council announced its intention to cease all acts
of hostile expansion and declared itself open to peaceful vassalization by
any neighboring nation willing to grant the Wizard nation permanent control
over Faerun and Waterdeep, or even one of the two. The Wizard Council
plans to redirect its energies toward the peaceful development of magical
energy production.
"It's quite clear that this whole idea of conquering the central island
was a huge mistake," stated Wizzie McWizzarton, chief spokesman for the
Council in a prepared statement. "The Council cannot fully account
for the
events in the Spring of 01, at which moment the entire planet collectively
and simultaneously declared war on one another without any real
justification. The Council now regrets its decision to participate in
this
global spasm of imperial violence.
"It is our intention to fully comply with the demands of the Magic
Non-Proliferation Treaty and utilize our enriched magic only for peaceful
energy purposes," the statement concluded.
The Wizard Council will consider any and all offers from foreign powers to
vassalize the Wizard nation, allowing a suitable partner full control over
Wizard foreign and military policies.
The Council also noted that it has officially abandoned its
previously-stated mission to "wreak fiery vengeance on any nation which
has
violated the trust of the Wizard nation," having concluded it lacks
sufficient fiery vengeance to spread among the relevant trust-violators.
###
This is truly the year for epic battles as forces clash in huge
numbers all across the world... The Pirates and Trolls trade volleys over the
High Seas, Ogre warships bombard the Elven defenses as the Undead clamber up
the shores at Terabithia, and the last Faerie home center falls to the
Archers...
All this while yet more units pile into the
Underworld, the Centaurs barely hold on to Mount Nimro, and our Wizards
look... inward, to more practical uses for their skills.
PLEASE
CHECK MY WORK! This was a pretty complex turn, w units ordering across
the map, either via the underworld or the wrap around the edges. Makes
for a spiderweb of criss-crossing orders...
Lots
of retreats and builds!
RETREATS:
Faeries:
A Vinyaya, A Oz
Nomads:
F WEST MIRIANIC OCEAN
Trolls:
F HIGH SEAS
Wizards:
A Caer
BUILDS:
Archers:
Build 2
Centaurs: Build 2
Elves: Remove 2
Faeries: Remove 1
Nomads:
Build 1
Ogres:
Build 2
Samurai: Build 2
Trolls: Build 1 (or 2, pending Troll retreat)
Undead:
Build 2 (or 1, pending Troll retreat)
Wizards: Remove 3
RETREATS
and BUILDS are due together! Wed 6/9, 3pm Central. Those ppl
who have a pending build should be sure to consider both possibilities of
retreats, and use conditional orders if need be.
Archers:
A Prydain Supports F Kingdom of Hearts
A Fantastica Hold
F Kingdom of Hearts Supports F Andarien Plain
A Spiral Castle - Dragons Teeth Mtns
F Land of Sweets - Vinyaya
F Myth Drannor Hold
A Elephant Graveyard Supports F Khemri - Newa River (*Void*)
A Strawberry Fields Supports F Land of Sweets - Vinyaya
F CHOCOLATE RIVER - Oz
F RUGGED COAST - Gumdrop Isle
F HORNED BAY - CHOCOLATE RIVER
Centaurs:
A Tumnus - Immoren
A Mount Nimro Supports A Diamond Mines - Carpantha (*Cut*)
A Cathal Supports A Immoren - Sleepy Hollow
A Owlwood Hold
A Immoren - Sleepy Hollow
A Cave of Ordeals Supports F Newa River (*Ordered to Move*)
A Eridu - Gwynir (*Fails*)
F CELESTIAL DELTA Hold
F BEAVERSDAM - TILVA STRAIT
Elves:
F The Old Gristmill Supports A Uhl Belk - Terabithia
A Uhl Belk - Terabithia (*Fails*)
A Thra - Zhentil Keep
F Dhunia Supports A Uhl Belk - Terabithia
Faeries:
A Vinyaya Supports A Oz (*Dislodged*)
A Oz Supports A Vinyaya (*Dislodged*)
A Gurgi - Land of Sweets
F Dimmsdale - NORTH MIRIANIC OCEAN
A Diamond Mines - Carpantha (*Fails*)
Gnomes:
A Hundred Acre Wood, no move received
F Khemri, no move received
A Gwynir, no move received
A Sleepy Hollow, no move received (*Disbanded*)
A Starkadh, no move received
F Andarien Plain, no move received
Knights:
A GuTanoth - Paras Derval (*Fails*)
A Paras Derval - Andarien Plain (*Fails*)
A Brennin Supports A Paras Derval - Andarien Plain
F Walk of Clouds Supports F TILVA STRAIT - WEST MIRIANIC OCEAN
F Heavens Well - River Saeren
A River Saeren - Fionavar
A Shady Vale Supports A Gurgi - Land of Sweets
F TILVA STRAIT - WEST MIRIANIC OCEAN
Nomads:
A Carpantha Supports F WEST MIRIANIC OCEAN - Mount Nimro (*Cut*)
F Ella Supports F CHOCOLATE RIVER - Oz
F Great Glacier Hold
F WEST MIRIANIC OCEAN - Mount Nimro (*Dislodged*)
Ogres:
A Gelfling Hold
A Knockshegowna Hold
A Myrtle Supports F SAVAGE SEA - Terabithia
A Florin - Caer
A Hoarluk - Twisted Tunnels (*Fails*)
A Hall of Echoes - Ancient Necropolis
A Twisted Tunnels - Undermountain (*Bounce*)
A Temple of Doom Supports A Carpantha (*Cut*)
F THUNDERHEAD Supports F SAVAGE SEA - Terabithia
F ROARING RAPIDS Supports A Florin - Caer
F NORTH RAINBOW LAKE Convoys A Florin - Caer
Pirates:
F Riku Supports F GRIEF REEF - HIGH SEAS
A Baldurs Gate Supports A Two Towers - Candlekeep
A Never Never Land Supports A The High Way - Far Far Away
A Travers Town Hold
A The High Way - Far Far Away
F GRIEF REEF - HIGH SEAS
F MERMAIDS LAGOON Supports F GRIEF REEF - HIGH SEAS
F RESTLESS WATERS Supports A Baldurs Gate
Samurai:
A
City of Splendors - Valley of Lost Honor (*Fails*)
A Two Towers - Candlekeep
F Ithin'Carthia(wc) Supports F GRIEF REEF - HIGH SEAS
A France - Shining Stream
A Cormyr - Garthim
A Thirsty Desert Supports A Two Towers - Candlekeep (*Cut*)
A Hollow Earth Supports A Carpantha - Mount Nimro (*Void*)
A Venatori Umbrarum - Temple of Doom (*Fails*)
F WAY THE HECK Supports F GRIEF REEF - HIGH SEAS
F BIKINI BOTTOM Hold
F SEA OF FALLEN STARS Supports A Never Never Land
Trolls:
F Newa River - GRIEF REEF
F Kahvi Supports F HIGH SEAS
A Grendel Hold
F Abby Normal Supports F Newa River - GRIEF REEF
A Sables Swamp Hold
A Far Far Away Hold (*Disbanded*)
A Yggdrasil - Undermountain (*Bounce*)
F THON THALAS Supports F Newa River - GRIEF REEF
F HIGH SEAS Supports F Newa River - GRIEF REEF (*Dislodged*)
Undead:
A To-Gai-Ru Supports F Walk of Clouds
A Skullcap - Uhl Belk (*Fails*)
F Everglot - Skellington (*Bounce*)
A Corona Supports F Walk of Clouds
F THE MAW - Skellington (*Bounce*)
F SAVAGE SEA - Terabithia
F ZEBOIMS DEEP Supports F SAVAGE SEA - Terabithia
Wizards:
A Waterdeep - Faerun
A Caer Hold (*Dislodged*)
A Valley of Lost Honor - Thirsty Desert (*Fails*)
A Kara-Tur - Waterdeep
F RAZORS EDGE - RIVER OF THE DAWN
|
| DC330 Intro Russia - Nitsch (Jun 07, 2010, 4:05 pm) |
Hey guys,
this is Karsten Nitsch, 30 years, and I seem to be the sole player able to find his home on the map: I play from Paderborn, right in the middle of Germany - within the eastern edge of the Rhineland on the map (Now that's what will be explaining, if sometimes my vocubulary and grammar will be somewhat... strange :p ).
I am playing diplomacy by mail for roughly 10 years, with a small "sabbatical" last year due to job change and moving and lots of worries ion my mind. Besides standard Dip, I've most often played Ambition&Empire (in a certain sense the "father" of this variant) and NewWorldOrder (A huge variant covering the whole world as it is today, with a whole couple of extra rules ranging from Airborne Units, to UN intervention to nuclear warfare), along with some other not so popular diplomacy variations.
Some of us have met before, and I do at least remember three of you - as far as I can remember all of them being skilled players with words and tactics. As much as I am looking forward to talking to you again, I am looking forward to getting to know those players I never met - eager to hear your plans.
Regarding my style of play, I tend to always have a look at the big picture, meaning that there will be times where I forfeit a personal gain if it serves the overall balance on the board (well, that is if I am not by accident the leader, of course!).
For now, this shall suffice - there will be a flood of words rolling in on all of us the coming days.
Cheers
Karsten
--
GRATIS f??r alle GMX-Mitglieder: Die maxdome Movie-FLAT!
Jetzt freischalten unter http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/maxdome01[Reply] |
| Camel Spotting f07 results! - FuzzyLogic (Jun 07, 2010, 3:41 pm) |
This round we see Egypt and Persia press their advantage, Egypt finally completing their siege of Leptis, and Persia marching 3 strong into the lone Massilian army. There is one retreat, but Roman A Mass could only go to Tarra, so I just moved it there and we hunker down for a cold winter. Especially for those Persians in France. They're not used to that cold!
Rome: -2
Carthage: +2
Persia: +1
Egypt: +1
BUILDS, by Wed 6/9, 3pm Central!
-mike
Rome:
F Adriatic Sea, no move received
F Apulia, no move received
A Massilia Supports A Roma - Etruria (*Dislodged*)
A Ravenna Supports A Roma - Etruria (*Cut*)
A Roma - Etruria
Carthage:
A Cirta Supports A Mauretania (*Cut*)
F Gulf of Tacape - Ausonian Sea
A Leptis - Numidia (*Disbanded*)
F Ligurian Sea - Baleares
A Mauretania Supports A Cirta
F Numidia - Gulf of Tacape (*Bounce*)
F Punic Sea - Sicilia
Persia:
F Aegean Sea Supports F Sparta
A Armenia - Chersonesus
F Cilician Strait - Minoan Sea
F Cyprus - Cilician Strait
F Dalmatia - Adriatic Sea (*Fails*)
A Epirus - Dalmatia (*Fails*)
A Etruria - Massilia
A Gaul Supports A Etruria - Massilia
A Macedonia - Epirus (*Fails*)
A Miletus Hold
A Rhaetia Supports A Etruria - Massilia
F Sparta Supports F Athens - Ionian Sea
A Venetia - Ravenna (*Fails*)
Egypt:
F Athens - Ionian Sea
F Cyrene - Leptis
F Gulf of Syrtis Supports F Cyrene - Leptis
A Marmarica Supports F Cyrene - Leptis
A Memphis - Cyrene
F Messenian Sea - Gulf of Tacape (*Bounce*)
A Phazania - Numidia (*Bounce*)
A Sahara - Cirta (*Fails*)
[Reply] |
| DC 288: Balkans1860: Fall 1867 - All Your Base Are... - Kenshi777 (Jun 07, 2010, 3:38 pm) |
I was amused by this diplomatic faux pas, yes  I actually saved the thread
-B.
On 6/7/10, Ross Webb wrote:
Hi all,
Scraping for time to do a proper review just now, but I'll definitely have
one for you all. In the meantime, here's a fine example of what never to do
in Diplomacy, courtesy of yours truly! 
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 10:59:53 -0500
From: Allen.York(at)cchmc.org
To: rodtheworm(at)hotmail.com
CC: screwtape777(at)gmail.com
Subject: RE: RE005 - Balkans1860 Bulgarian broadcast
Ross,
3 builds for Rumania. I haven't heard much so far, do you think he's moving
south at you or west at me?
And what was ottoman doing? Over here we're interested in the demise of
Greece. It's starting to look like several powers are going to divide him.
Any news?
Allen
>>> Ross Webb 1/22/2010 12:00 PM >>>
Hi Allen,
Hopefully neither. I'm working on him to go for Austria's back, though who
knows what he'll do. If he goes for you I'll try to assist as much as I
can, but I think you're quite shielded by Austria and I to be a viable
target.
I think Greg the Ottoman is looking towards Greece too, which is good for
me. The fewer powers that look my way, the better.
I'll be waiting until the builds come out before I make any hard decisions
as to where I attack next, but I'm leaving options open by building a fleet
and an army
How about with you? You may want to beware, as I heard one rumour
suggesting Italy and Austria were going to team up on you, though I can't
remember the source or verify it in any way.
Ross
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 12:17:48 -0500
From: Allen.York(at)cchmc.org
To: rodtheworm(at)hotmail.com
CC: screwtape777(at)gmail.com
Subject: RE: RE005 - Balkans1860 Bulgarian broadcast
LOL...dude I AM Austria!
Allen
>>> Ross Webb 1/22/2010 12:25 PM >>>
Well, that's embarrassing, I thought you were Serbia for a minute there. 
Diplomatic rule #1 - make sure you know who you're talking to.
You'll be happy to note that I'm in fact not urging Rumania to go for you -
in fact, I'm hoping he'll attack the Ottomans with me, but since Serbia is
hoping to carve up Greece with him, it wouldn't have been particularly
diplomatic of me to say so. You were just the only other plausible target I
could put in there.
While you might not be so happy about the reported rumour - which I did make
clear was just a rumour - my passing it on shouldn't come as a surprise. If
Serbia falls, I start to look vulnerable to attacks from behind (unless I
was the one the make him fall!). Could I urge you to reconsider, if it is
true, and to attack Italy with Serbia?
Ross
(Bulgaria )
Ross,
In your position I'd be suggesting to Rumania that I'm vulnerable. No
offense taken. Just got a good laugh about it. you know, Garry's
suggesting a central alliance, what's your interest there?
Allen
_________________________________________________________________
http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/195013117/direct/01/
We want to hear all your funny, exciting and crazy Hotmail stories. Tell us
now
--
Diplomacy in Texas!
www.texasdiplomacy.com
http://www.dipwiki.com
Realpolitik files available here for the Sengoku, Balkans1860, South
American Supremacy, and DarkAges Diplomacy Variants[Reply] |
| Balkans 1860 Revisions - Stage 1 (Long Version) - Kenshi777 (Jun 07, 2010, 3:37 pm) |
Hi Mike - while in principle I agree (I actually like A/T in Standard,
think it's underutilized as part of the true Central Powers alliance
(G/A/T) - in this case I think the comparison is forced for two
reasons:
1 - In Standard, Turkey can pass peaceably south of Austria
indefinitely (and rapidly). A stable border where Austria has Rum-Ser
vs. Bul-Gre is easily obtained, and later on the entire region can be
DMZed. This works especially well when G/A engage and defeat Russia
early, perhaps with English or light Turkish help.
Austria-Hungary in Balkans1860 has no such clear route. An argument
can be made that a full on invasion of Italy works - much as A/T in
Standard can attack Italy with great effect. But in Standard Italy
can be easily divided between A/T, in Balkans 1860 not so much - and
Serbia is definitely leaving vulnerabilities open to focus much aside
from their fleet on Italian spoils. It *is* possible for A/S to
engage Italy, and then Romania in turn (or vice versa) but I do think
(and two playtests have shown now) that it is a very unnatural
alliance.
2 - Relative concerns. A/S *is* possible, but it is not at all
Austria's easiest path to a solo - not really comparable to a southern
attack at all in terms of rapid spoils. (though it is worth nothing
that Austrians that do attack Serbia often find themselves pinched
between the Serbian remnant plus Italy and/or Rumania later, so
perhaps that is a consideration Austrians should take into greater
consideration. It's not a dynamic that is readily apparent on the
map.
For this reason, I am inclined to make some revisions there. Do you
have any thoughts on the specific changes I proposed - are they all
bad? Or do you just think any revisions are premature?
B.
On 6/7/10, Michael Sims wrote:
I dont see this problem you're trying to fix regarding AS alliances.
I feared the AS in this game. For the first couple weeks of game-time, I
really did nothing but cower and tremble in the corner, hoping to not see an
AS come at me, as I took a gamble early on building a couple fleets.
I don't think a single game is enough to draw any proof that changes need be
made. Get three games of history, then look at a rev. If you change it
every time, you'll interrupt the natural progression of the players to adapt
their strategy to deal w what we learned from the last playing. Standard
has played out so many times, and each time I learn new things about it, so
I wouldn't say "Austria cooperated w Italy two games in a row, so that means
we need to make A/I war more certain." It really could just be that A/I
happened to get along or share common ideas or it just worked out that way.
Anyways I wouldn't pin too much of what happened in this game purely on the
map. As you see we all have our own stories, and interaction as much as the
map determines what happens. So I'd suggest no changes as of just this
game. It's a good variant, see how it plays out when you get a few games
and can look at a more statistical distribution of results.
In this game, sure, AS didn't work together. But that doesn't mean it's cuz
of the map. If I were Austria, I would have considered an AS a viable
option, and I would probly have looked toward Romania or Italy as preferred
targets. You could look at AS in this game like AT in standard. Here
Serbia blocks Austria in, and Austria either has to work hard to operate
around the fringes, or he eventually has to barrel thru S. Likewise in
Standard. TA's don't often work out, cuz Turkey eventually has to break out
of the corner, and dinking around the edges gets old. But that doesn't mean
AT (or AS in Balkans) is unworkable.
-mike
________________________________
From: Benjamin Hester [mailto:screwtape777(at)gmail.com]
Sent: Fri 6/4/2010 3:52 PM
To: Michael Sims
Subject: Balkans 1860 Revisions - Stage 1 (Long Version)
Okay, had a chance to read Allen and Mike's remarks, and wanted to
take a second to discuss some of their revision ideas - lots of good
material here to work with, and I had a few thoughts of my own on some
of these same topics that I wanted to run by you all.
Note - This email is huge. For those not interested in reading the
whole thing, I have extracted the specific proposed changes paragraph
and sent in a separate email.
***Mike*** - Allen, I guess this opening for me revolved largely
around our trio w Italy. We had a great team, we had Serbia on the
ropes, and I had a killer stab of Bulgaria waiting to be taken.
---Ben--- ...Now this is interesting. I hadn't considered an IAR
triple to really be a viable option for Austria-Hungary (or, to a
lesser extent, Romania) over the long term. In this plan,
Austria-Hungary and Romania will likely face stiff resistance in a
pure southerly drive, and a Serb/Bulgarian alliance is very likely (I
thought) to spawn in response. Meanwhile, Italy capitalizes on having
a free hand to gobble up her internal open SCs (2-3 virtually
guaranteed) and focus undistracted on Greece. So Italy strikes me as
the big winner here, whereas Austria-Hungary is just waiting to get
stabbed by Italy and Romania in the mid-game phase. Greece is the
wild card though - if they open up an (ill-advised) second front
against Serbia or Bulgaria in this scenario, then Austrian or Romanian
growth could be significant.
In fact - I had expected that the single greatest impulse *for* an
Austrian-Serb alliance would be the Austrian fear of getting pinched
by I/R. After all, Italy can only go so far as a pure naval power -
then either an invasion of Austria or Greece seems necessary.
So maybe I was wrong on multiple assumptions. If IAR really was the
natural impulse for all three of you (Allen, Mike, Adam) then I should
not be surprised that the A/S alliance didn't last. More on how to
fix that farther down...
***Mike*** - From there it was pretty straight forward. It was Ross'
and my goal to try the unthinkable in this game and become naval
superpowers. Unheard of given our corner land powers...
---Ben--- More faulty assumptions on my part here it seems. 8 of the
9 territories on the Black Sea area coastline are SCs. Moreover, both
Romania and the Ottomans have 2 of their 3 home SCs on the coast in a
variant that does *not* allow chaos builds. So I expected that region
to be a naval hotspot.
It blew my mind to see Gregory pass on opening F Istanbul to the Black
Sea, given the diplomatic leverage with R and B that position allows,
the option for Sevastopol, and of course, the security of two of their
three home SCs. However, I suppose I really have made it too
difficult for the Ottomans to at least guarantee one SC - usually
Salonika. Army Ankara and F Izmir don't seal the deal as they should
be able to. Perhaps I overcompensated in strengthening the Bulgarian
position, which was disastrous in the first playtest. Thoughts on how
to improve this? My knee-jerk reaction is actually to change Ankara
to a fleet, but that just seems too strange to have the Ottomans start
with all three units as fleets. I suppose Istanbul could be the army
- and that has other advantages for the Ottomans as well. So I will
probably switch those two starting units, but even more is probably
needed.
***Mike*** - but I think we pulled it off pretty well by finally
breaking into the Aegean in this last couple turns. We set this goal
really early on, upon seeing our initial placements, and it was
refreshing to find a player excited to try less conventional
strategies - something often lacking in Dip games. We each trusted
each other right by our centers, and
this built a lot of trust.
---Ben--- Indeed - a B/R alliance that features heavy naval builds
strikes me as unusual. Mike and Ross have both also suggested it was
an unorthodox strategy. I will proceed with the assumption that most
B/R alliances will have a heavy focus on building armies and driving
west, with a token Romanian contribution to a primarily Bulgarian
naval fight against Greece and/or the Ottomans. Accordingly, I
haven't identified a need for revisions based on this particular
dynamic, though it was a very impressive alliance to watch in action,
especially as Mike deftly weaved his armies through the Serb/Bulgarian
border. There was an extraordinary amount of trust in that alliance.
***Mike*** - This map certainly has its choke points around the
Aegean, (separating BS from GI, with Turkey on the fulcrum) but this
dynamic surely exists in standard too, with, say, MAO dividing TI from
EG with F on the fulcrum. So altho it seemed hard to break out, I
don't know that it needs fixing so
much, for it's just as hard for a TI duo in standard to break out into
the northern half of the map against an EG team.
---Ben--- I see T/I as the one truly unorthodox alliance pair between
neighbours on the Standard map. Meaning that pursuing such an
alliance usually requires that the players bypass the best
opportunities for their own growth to pursue other goals, i.e. setting
up long convoys or other shenanigans just for fun. For those
international relations scholars in the crowd - they do not behave as
rational actors in the realist sense .
But I digress - in Balkans1860, open water is not intended to be where
the majority of naval action takes place. There really isn't an
analogy on this map to critical sea zones in standard like North Sea
or MAO. (Maybe Gulf of Taranto, but that's about it, and even that's
a stretch). The naval action largely consists of coastal fights,
which must often be accompanied by support from inland armies to
advance. True, the Aegean region can bog down, but I think that is
more so due to the Greek tendency to heavily emphasize naval growth
than the actual borders. This is where Nigel got into trouble I think
- 1-2 too many fleets in his build mix (or at least sent the wrong
way), and when they reached northern Italy, their usefulness ran out.
That's questionable though, because it did take a lot to crack Italian
defenses.
Anyway, this *is* very different from Standard, where blue water
fights - especially around MAO - can very much determine the outcome
of the game. I don't expect too many games of Balkans1860 to follow
that path. Much more likely in this variant that fleets will be an
auxiliary force for advancing along the coastlines and breaking
support lines on land. The path to a solo victory lies in the heart
of the Balkans. I would be genuinely surprised to see someone solo in
this map without driving into the heart, all the coastal SCs
notwithstanding.
***Mike*** - Overall a very nice map. I think Dark Ages would have to
hold your "best creation" title, tho this comes in a close second.
Plenty of naval action, and the play around Greece and the Aegean is
great. I would definitely play it again. Good game all, and thanks
for GM'ing it Ben!
---Ben--- Thank you kindly for the praise, I'm sincerely glad you
enjoyed it, and do hope to see you take a seat by the Balkans1860 map
again. Good thoughts here, let's now talk about what Allen had to
say...
***Allen*** - Game over. First, thanks to B for doing another great
job as GM. Calm, cool, and collected is our B, large and in charge.
Seriously, he runs a fantastic game, generally on time, always
communicative, and very professional. Thanks bro.
---Ben--- ...you're quite welcome! It was truly my pleasure to run
it, had a great set of players for this one.
***Allen*** - The variant. This is my second time through. When B.
put out the notice for the second game and I volunteered, I told him
I'd take whatever noone else wanted. I was stunned to get
Austria-Hungary. Rumania and AH are to me the strongest 2 positions
in the first year.
---Ben--- ...that's what I thought! But it has been made clear to me
that the A/S dynamic needs work...
***Allen*** - They can negotiate a quick settlement between them and
both are grateful to do it (Kol is obviously Rumanian and sets up a
nice DMZ). Playing both sides of this, it's a no-brainer. AH then
negotiates a quick peace with Italy and both sit at stare at each
other (Ven and Tri).
---Ben--- ...gotta disagree here. Austria is heavily favored in that
uneasy balance by the ability to build in Trieste, whereas Italy (by
design, to increase tension) does *not* have the ability to build on
the Adriatic coast. Plus, the quick move of F Tri - GoV threatens
Venezia, Ancona, and convoys along the Italian coast with Serbia. In
fact, I consider this dynamic to be the primary check against Italy's
otherwise rampant growth prospects. As Italy, I would not agree to
anything less than a complete DMZ of the region, to include Austria's
pledge not to build in Trieste without prior Italian approval.
***Allen*** - Year 1 is over and both have solidified their flanks and
looking downhill (south). AND, to add things up, both powers have
southern neighbors that need to come to them with some settlement or
get pinched between them.
---Ben--- True. And here lies the biggest challenge I hope to
overcome in the next round of revisions. For this map to be balanced,
I *must* make an A/S alliance at least roughly as appealing to Austria
as a southerly drive through Serbia is. The latter option seems
virtually guaranteed on the current map. I like some of Allen's
suggestions, so we can go down the list of his ideas and my own
below...
***Allen*** - This is an advantage in negotiations. In this case,
Rumania is in a more solid position, Ottoman(enemies on 2 sides) is
safer than Greece(enemies on 3 sides), so Rumania can work with either
Bulgaria or Ottoman, whichever seems better.
---Ben--- ...glad to hear this. I personally think the BRO triangle
is mostly balanced, though I am considering some improvement to the
Ottoman position (while trying to give them equal incentive to attack
Bulgaria or Greece...aaaargh)
***Allen*** - So some suggestions...increase the tension between AH
and Rumania. Maybe take out the SC in Kol and add 2, one in Tis and
one in Tem. I still like Sev as a home center for Rumania, I think
that was suggested last time. Rumania starts with F Sev, A Ias, A
Con. Agm is a little too far-reaching, what if it doesn't touch Nov?
I like the tension between Italy and AH as it is, I think a strong
Italy and AH could either negotiate a solid alliance or be at each
other's throats. That seemed to play well. AH has a natural
inclination to move south, it's too hard for Serbia and AH to come to
a reasonable accord. Serbia naturally distrusts AH, if you play this
game long enough you realize that in general, those downhill on the
map distrust those uphill. For some reason, AH and Serbia seem to
have more tension between them than R-B.
---Ben--- Allen makes some valid points about the A/S relationship and
the uphill/downhill map dynamic in general...thoughts on the changes
proposed so far below. First, the ones I *don't* want to do.
x - Rumania gains Sev as a home SC. While this would help, I can't
swallow the historical inaccuracy of it. I already go too far
negating the influence of Russia and France in this scenario, I cannot
give the primary Russian port on the Black Sea to Rumania outright.
x - Add SC Temesvar. I feel that this would increase Austria/Serbia
tension, not decrease it.
Then, the ideas that I am considering (a mix of Allen's and my own)...
1 - Move either SC Agram or SC Sarajevo. This would likely be done in
conjunction with Allen's idea to add SCs in between Austria and
Romania. Downside - removing Agram makes F Ven a no-brainer opening
for F Trieste. Removing Sarajevo gives Serbia an undesirable
incentive to send A Kragujevac after Bulgaria, or send more than just
F Cetinje against Greece - also undesirable. So for this to work, we
need to give A Kragujevac a good option against Rumania. Which leads
to the next idea...
2 - Add SC Craiova. With a bit of negotiations with Bulgaria to
secure uncontested passage through Nis, Serbia could reasonably
guarantee Craiova. However, I'm still trading the only guaranteed dot
for Serbia (Sarajevo) for a definite maybe in Craiova.
3 - Change F Trieste to A Trieste. Contrary to my intentions, that
Fleet in Trieste seems to be a constant point of tension with the
Serbs. If it were only a build option rather than a starting unit,
this could improve Austrian/Serbian relations...?
4 - Split Beograd? Increasing the buffer between Austria and Serbia
would help perhaps...though the main Austria/Serbia flash point seems
to be along the Adriatic coast. (alternate idea - disconnect Temesvar
from Beograd somehow with a border redraw?)
...and moving into the twilight zone of major revisions (which may
nonetheless be necessary)...
! - Leave Kolosvar as it is and make it an Austrian Home SC. To
understand the idea here, take the map and rotate it 90 degrees
clockwise. Now try to picture Austria in Balkans1860 like Russia in
Standard. I'm not proposing to give Austria a Black Sea port
(completely ahistorical) but this could give Austria a good option to
move against the Serbs, or with them against Romania. Here I would
need to add Allen's idea of SC Tiraspol to balance out Romanian
options. I would also pull another SC off the map to retain balance
(perhaps Bitola, and redraw that to be a single territory with
Skopje?)
!! - Add another Ottoman SC in Sevastopol? Strange and irrelevant as
this may sound - if Serbia had a stronger partner in the SE corner,
one that also had options to engage Romania directly (rather than just
Bulgaria) - then perhaps Austria/Serbia could join the Ottomans and/or
Bulgarians in a dogpile heading east. Sevastopol could not be made
Rumanian with any semblance of historical accuracy. It *could*
however be made Turkish, if I were willing to make this a "what if?"
or to use the academic term, counterfactual scenario.
Here we assume a different settlement after the Crimean War -
historically, the Ottomans did not much real receive territorial
compensation following Russia's defeat in the Crimean war. In this
case, I would suggest that the British, French, and Ottomans could
have achieved their objective of removing the Russian naval presence
from the Black Sea by restoring the old Ottoman claim to the Crimea
(it had only been lost in 1783) and allowing their retention of
territory gained in the Caucasus.
What the hell...I've already really made it a counterfactual scenario
by removing Russia from the Crimea and cutting French influence out of
Italian unification. Most Diplomacy variants also permit some degree
of historical inaccuracy, Standard included...lest anyone believes
Italy or Turkey was truly a major player in WW1?
Anyway, if I give the Ottomans Sevastopol or the Austrians Kolosvar -
Allen's idea of adding SC Tiraspol would be needed, as Romania would
then have *no* reasonably guaranteed opening SC. The Ottomans would
also have F Istanbul changed to A Istanbul if they gained F
Sevastopol. And we would have to very closely examine the new
Romanian situation to ensure they aren't forced into conflict with
Austria or the Ottomans - I think not, and could work with either one
still, but I don't want to see them always ignore the Bulgarians.
Ultimately though, I keep coming back to what I said above...the path
to a solo victory lies in the heart of the Balkans. Austria has to
have a working long-term plan to get to 19 SCs without hitting Serbia
until their solo bid in the endgame. It's *possible* to do so by
joining Serbia to hit Italy and then Romania on the current map - but
I think that's even more unlikely than the B/R naval alliance we saw
here. Serbia would have to tolerate a *large* Austrian navy pushing
down the Adriatic. So what I *really* need is a southeast option for
Austria, one that bypasses Serbia altogether to hit Romania and
Bulgaria, *while* A/S presumably contain Italy or aid Greece in
attacking them. Because Italy simply cannot be ignored - and it is
very difficult to divide between Austria and Serbia as well.
Please let me know your thoughts on all this. Nothing is decided at all
yet.
B.
--
Diplomacy in Texas!
www.texasdiplomacy.com
http://www.dipwiki.com
Realpolitik files available here for the Sengoku, Balkans1860, South
American Supremacy, and DarkAges Diplomacy Variants
--
Diplomacy in Texas!
www.texasdiplomacy.com
http://www.dipwiki.com
Realpolitik files available here for the Sengoku, Balkans1860, South
American Supremacy, and DarkAges Diplomacy Variants[Reply] |
| dc311 Spring '11 Results - notasb (Jun 07, 2010, 3:09 pm) |
Austria - Bruce Ray
England - Daniel Dzikowicz
France - Nick Powell
Germany - Dirk Knemeyer
Italy - Jason K
Russia - Paul Russell
Turkey - Hamish Williams
GM Notes:
Christine will be back later to finish things up
Map:
attached
Deadline:
Retreats are due Tuesday June 8th 2 PM CDST (GMT -5) 1900 GMT
Orders and Results:
Austria:
A Apulia - Venice
A Bulgaria Supports A Rumania (*Cut*)
F Greece - Aegean Sea
F Ionian Sea Supports F Greece - Aegean Sea
A Piedmont Supports F Spain(sc) - Marseilles
A Rumania Supports F Armenia - Sevastopol (*Void*)
A Serbia Supports A Bulgaria
A Tyrolia Supports A Vienna - Bohemia
A Vienna - Bohemia
F Western Mediterranean - Gulf of Lyon
England:
F Edinburgh - Yorkshire (*Bounce*)
F English Channel Supports F Helgoland Bight - North Sea
F Helgoland Bight - North Sea
F London - Yorkshire (*Bounce*)
A Norway Hold (*Dislodged*)
F Norwegian Sea Supports A Norway (*Cut*)
F Spain(sc) - Marseilles
Germany:
F Belgium - North Sea (*Fails*)
A Brest Hold
A Burgundy - Munich
F Holland - Helgoland Bight
A Marseilles Hold (*Dislodged*)
A Munich - Silesia
F North Sea - Norwegian Sea (*Dislodged*)
A Picardy - Belgium (*Fails*)
A Ruhr Supports A Burgundy - Munich
A Sevastopol - Rumania (*Fails*)
F Skagerrak - Norway
A St Petersburg Supports F Skagerrak - Norway
F Sweden Supports F Skagerrak - Norway
A Ukraine - Galicia
Turkey:
F Aegean Sea - Greece (*Dislodged*)
F Armenia - Black Sea
A Constantinople - Bulgaria (*Fails*)
Retreats:
Turkish F Aegean Sea can retreat to Smyrna or Eastern Mediterranean or OTB
German A Marseilles can retreat to Gascony or Burgundy or OTB
German F North Sea can retreat to Skagerrak or Denmark or Holland or OTB
English A Norway can retreat to Finland or OTB
------------
Experience is a wonderful thing. It
enables you to recognize a mistake when you make it again.
Hotmail has tools for the New Busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox. Learn more.
Hotmail is redefining busy with tools for the New Busy. Get more from your inbox. See how.[Reply] |
| 1648 091010: A new Archduke! - DrSwordopolis (Jun 07, 2010, 2:44 pm) |
Oh my, that was fast. I just joined the page a few minutes ago!
I do know a few of you from previous games, the Spaniard and the Turk. I'll do my best to study up on the game's history and get involved in it as soon as possible. In the meantime, Austria has had a change of crown and the new leader will not be holding over any previous grudges or arrangements to the other powers. Assuming the game continues for longer than this season, you're free to try and make new ones with me. Or convince me why I should vote for any of the draw proposals.
Best,
-Nick
On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 12:37 PM, Charles Féaux de la Croix <charlesf(at)web.de> wrote:
Hi guys,
Nick Powell has kindly volunteered as the new
Archduke and that surely is appreciated by all of us.
Now there are a number of draw proposals on
the table:
- a Polish-Turkish two-way draw
- a French-Polish-Turkish three-way
draw
- an English-French-Polish-Turkish four-way draw
- a six-way draw including all survivors
I must confess that I've been rather confused by the various public
statements regarding draws. So I'd appreciate renewed votes on the draw
proposals listed above.
The deadline will coincide with the new Winter 1659 deadline, Wednesday 6
PM CET. The fall adjucation is attached further below, amended as necessary for
Nick's contact info and the new deadline.
Happy dipping!
Charles
----
Hallo zusammen,
Emperor Louis V managed to defend his beleaguered throne for another year
and indeed has managed to wrest the Electorate of Saxony from the Habsburg
pretender to the imperial crown. Yet the Bourbons have suffered defeats
elsewhere, for Switzerland was conquered by an Austrian army while the remnants
of Cromwell's Scandinavian expeditionary forces descended upon wealthy and
papist Flanders. Considering how Cromwell's army has treated the equally
Catholic Irish, this is probably not such a good time to be Flemish... This also
incidentally mean that the Protestants in the Empire have a new champion for
their cause after having had no greater power to turn to after the demise of
Sweden.
In the Mediterranean the Sultan lurched forwards into Tunis and the Western
Mediterranean after having lately focused only on Italian conquests.
The Polish republic has equally sought to expand her influence westwards
and have pushed the Turks out of Greater Poland, liquidated England's erstwhile
Scandinavian empire but for a defenceless Finnish enclave and have sailed
through the Oresund.
All in all, quite a dynamic picture!
The Winter 1659 Retreats/Adjustments are due Friday, 4 June
[now 9 June!], 6 PM CET. Note that the number of adjustments for a number
of powers depends on how the two pending retreats play out. Remember that
adjustments may be made conditional on the preceding retreats.
Liebe Grüsse,
Charles
----------
PLAYERS:
AUSTRIA: Nick Powell <nick.s.powell(at)gmail.com>
DENMARK-NORWAY: Marc
Ellinger <mellinger(at)blitzbardgett.com> (eliminated Winter
1653)
ENGLAND: Harvey Morris <hmtucaz(at)gmail.com>
FRANCE: Nigel Phillips <nephilli99(at)hotmail.com>
POLAND-LITHUANIA: Jorge
Saralegui <jmsaralegui(at)gmail.com>
RUSSIA: Mikael Johansson <m_don_j(at)hotmail.com> (eliminated Winter 1650)
SPAIN: Dirk Knemeyer <dirk(at)knemeyer.com>
SWEDEN: Matthew Kelly
<kelly058(at)verizon.net> (joined Winter 1652, eliminated Fall
165
TURKEY: Aidan
Slattery <AiSlattery(at)aol.com>
PROCLAMATIONS:
o HOFBURG CELEBRATES SUCCESSFUL HELVETIAN
CAMPAIGN
o REMNANTS OF CROMWELL'S SCANDINAVIAN EXPEDITIONARY
FORCES MAKE FOR FLANDERS
o EMPEROR SEIZES SAXONY
o POLAND IS THE NEW MASTER OF SCANDINAVIA
o SPANIARDS RE-ASSERT THEIR CONTROL OVER
MARSEILLES
o TUNISIAN EMIRATE ONCE AGAIN FIRMLY UNDER OTTOMAN
SUZERAINITY
PRESS: None. 
ORDERS:
Austria:
A Bavaria Supports A Saxony - Swabia
A Brandenburg Supports
F Stettin - Mecklenburg (*Void*)
A Prague - Saxony (*Fails*)
A Saxony -
Swabia (*Dislodged*)
A Trieste - Venice
A Tyrolia Supports A Venice -
Switzerland
A Venice - Switzerland
England:
A Christiania - Flanders
F Ireland - Scotland
(*Fails*)
A London Hold
F North Sea Convoys A Christiania - Flanders
A
Yorkshire Supports F Ireland - Scotland
France:
A Brest - Paris (*Bounce*)
F Bristol Supports F
Scotland
A Dauphiné Supports A Switzerland - Savoy
F English Channel -
London (*Fails*)
A Hesse - Saxony
F Holstein(ec) - Copenhagen
A
Lorraine Supports A Swabia
A Lower Saxony Supports A Mecklenburg -
Brandenburg
A Marseilles - Paris (*Disbanded*)
A Mecklenburg - Brandenburg
(*Fails*)
F Scotland Supports F Bristol (*Cut*)
A Swabia Supports A Hesse
- Saxony
A Switzerland - Savoy (*Disbanded*)
Poland-Lithuania:
F Baltic Sea - Scania
A Cracow Supports A Warsaw -
Greater Poland
A Lapland Supports A Northern Norway - Christiania
A
Northern Norway - Christiania
A Novgorod - Karelia
A Riga - Courland
F
Scania - Skagerrak
F Stettin Supports A Brandenburg
F Stockholm(ec)
Hold
A Turkestan Hold
A Warsaw - Greater Poland
Spain:
A Aragon Supports A Gascony - Marseilles
F Cantabrian Sea -
Brest (*Fails*)
A Gascony - Marseilles
F Gulf of Lion Supports A
Savoy
F Morocco Supports F Seville - Cantabrian Sea (*Fails*)
A Savoy
Supports A Gascony - Marseilles (*Cut*)
F Seville - Cantabrian Sea
(*Fails*)
Turkey:
F Adriatic Sea Hold
F Aegean Sea - Constantinople
A
Constantinople - Bulgaria
A Greater Poland Supports A Brandenburg
(*Dislodged*)
F Ionian Sea - Tunis
A Lombardy - Switzerland (*Fails*)
F
Papal States(wc) Supports A Tuscany
A Persia Hold
F Sardinia Supports F
Tyrrhenian Sea - Western Mediterranean
F Sicily - Tyrrhenian Sea
A Silesia
- Slovakia
A Tuscany Supports A Lombardy (*Ordered to Move*)
F Tyrrhenian
Sea - Western Mediterranean
PENDING RETREATS:
Turkish A Greater Poland can retreat to Prussia, Silesia or
OTB.
Austrian A Saxony can retreat to Silesia or OTB.
PENDING ADJUSTMENTS:
Austria:
Build?
England:
Remove
France:
Build
Build
Poland-Lithuania:
Build
Build?
Turkey:
Build
Build?
SUPPLY CENTER OWNERSHIP
(Winter 165:
Austria(7): Bavaria, Brandenburg, Prague, Saxony, Trieste, Venice,
Vienna.
England(5): Abo, Christiania, Ireland, London,
Stockholm.
France(15): Brest, Bristol, Copenhagen, Flanders, Holstein,
Lorraine, Lower Saxony, Mecklenburg, Paris, Rhineland-Westphalia, Savoy,
Scotland, Swabia, Switzerland, United Provinces.
Poland-Lithuania(11):
Courland, Cracow, Moscow, Novgorod, Prussia, Riga, Stettin, Turkestan, Vilna,
Voronezh, Warsaw.
Spain(7): Algiers, Madrid, Marseilles, Morocco,
Portugal, Seville, Tunis.
Turkey(13): Belgrade, Candia, Constantinople,
Crimea, Damascus, Moldavia, Naples, Papal States, Persia, Transylvania,
Tuscany, Ukraine, Wallachia.
DEADLINE SCHEDULE: (all orders are due NLT
6PM CET (i.e. GMT+1)...not local
time)
o Winter 1659 Retreats/Adjustments: 9
June
ORDERS MAP:
RESULTS MAP:[Reply] |
| 1648 091010: A new Archduke! - DrSwordopolis (Jun 07, 2010, 2:44 pm) |
Oh my, that was fast. I just joined the page a few minutes ago!
I do know a few of you from previous games, the Spaniard and the Turk. I'll do my best to study up on the game's history and get involved in it as soon as possible. In the meantime, Austria has had a change of crown and the new leader will not be holding over any previous grudges or arrangements to the other powers. Assuming the game continues for longer than this season, you're free to try and make new ones with me. Or convince me why I should vote for any of the draw proposals.
Best,
-Nick
On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 12:37 PM, Charles Féaux de la Croix <charlesf(at)web.de> wrote:
Hi guys,
Nick Powell has kindly volunteered as the new
Archduke and that surely is appreciated by all of us.
Now there are a number of draw proposals on
the table:
- a Polish-Turkish two-way draw
- a French-Polish-Turkish three-way
draw
- an English-French-Polish-Turkish four-way draw
- a six-way draw including all survivors
I must confess that I've been rather confused by the various public
statements regarding draws. So I'd appreciate renewed votes on the draw
proposals listed above.
The deadline will coincide with the new Winter 1659 deadline, Wednesday 6
PM CET. The fall adjucation is attached further below, amended as necessary for
Nick's contact info and the new deadline.
Happy dipping!
Charles
----
Hallo zusammen,
Emperor Louis V managed to defend his beleaguered throne for another year
and indeed has managed to wrest the Electorate of Saxony from the Habsburg
pretender to the imperial crown. Yet the Bourbons have suffered defeats
elsewhere, for Switzerland was conquered by an Austrian army while the remnants
of Cromwell's Scandinavian expeditionary forces descended upon wealthy and
papist Flanders. Considering how Cromwell's army has treated the equally
Catholic Irish, this is probably not such a good time to be Flemish... This also
incidentally mean that the Protestants in the Empire have a new champion for
their cause after having had no greater power to turn to after the demise of
Sweden.
In the Mediterranean the Sultan lurched forwards into Tunis and the Western
Mediterranean after having lately focused only on Italian conquests.
The Polish republic has equally sought to expand her influence westwards
and have pushed the Turks out of Greater Poland, liquidated England's erstwhile
Scandinavian empire but for a defenceless Finnish enclave and have sailed
through the Oresund.
All in all, quite a dynamic picture!
The Winter 1659 Retreats/Adjustments are due Friday, 4 June
[now 9 June!], 6 PM CET. Note that the number of adjustments for a number
of powers depends on how the two pending retreats play out. Remember that
adjustments may be made conditional on the preceding retreats.
Liebe Grüsse,
Charles
----------
PLAYERS:
AUSTRIA: Nick Powell <nick.s.powell(at)gmail.com>
DENMARK-NORWAY: Marc
Ellinger <mellinger(at)blitzbardgett.com> (eliminated Winter
1653)
ENGLAND: Harvey Morris <hmtucaz(at)gmail.com>
FRANCE: Nigel Phillips <nephilli99(at)hotmail.com>
POLAND-LITHUANIA: Jorge
Saralegui <jmsaralegui(at)gmail.com>
RUSSIA: Mikael Johansson <m_don_j(at)hotmail.com> (eliminated Winter 1650)
SPAIN: Dirk Knemeyer <dirk(at)knemeyer.com>
SWEDEN: Matthew Kelly
<kelly058(at)verizon.net> (joined Winter 1652, eliminated Fall
165
TURKEY: Aidan
Slattery <AiSlattery(at)aol.com>
PROCLAMATIONS:
o HOFBURG CELEBRATES SUCCESSFUL HELVETIAN
CAMPAIGN
o REMNANTS OF CROMWELL'S SCANDINAVIAN EXPEDITIONARY
FORCES MAKE FOR FLANDERS
o EMPEROR SEIZES SAXONY
o POLAND IS THE NEW MASTER OF SCANDINAVIA
o SPANIARDS RE-ASSERT THEIR CONTROL OVER
MARSEILLES
o TUNISIAN EMIRATE ONCE AGAIN FIRMLY UNDER OTTOMAN
SUZERAINITY
PRESS: None.
ORDERS:
Austria:
A Bavaria Supports A Saxony - Swabia
A Brandenburg Supports
F Stettin - Mecklenburg (*Void*)
A Prague - Saxony (*Fails*)
A Saxony -
Swabia (*Dislodged*)
A Trieste - Venice
A Tyrolia Supports A Venice -
Switzerland
A Venice - Switzerland
England:
A Christiania - Flanders
F Ireland - Scotland
(*Fails*)
A London Hold
F North Sea Convoys A Christiania - Flanders
A
Yorkshire Supports F Ireland - Scotland
France:
A Brest - Paris (*Bounce*)
F Bristol Supports F
Scotland
A Dauphiné Supports A Switzerland - Savoy
F English Channel -
London (*Fails*)
A Hesse - Saxony
F Holstein(ec) - Copenhagen
A
Lorraine Supports A Swabia
A Lower Saxony Supports A Mecklenburg -
Brandenburg
A Marseilles - Paris (*Disbanded*)
A Mecklenburg - Brandenburg
(*Fails*)
F Scotland Supports F Bristol (*Cut*)
A Swabia Supports A Hesse
- Saxony
A Switzerland - Savoy (*Disbanded*)
Poland-Lithuania:
F Baltic Sea - Scania
A Cracow Supports A Warsaw -
Greater Poland
A Lapland Supports A Northern Norway - Christiania
A
Northern Norway - Christiania
A Novgorod - Karelia
A Riga - Courland
F
Scania - Skagerrak
F Stettin Supports A Brandenburg
F Stockholm(ec)
Hold
A Turkestan Hold
A Warsaw - Greater Poland
Spain:
A Aragon Supports A Gascony - Marseilles
F Cantabrian Sea -
Brest (*Fails*)
A Gascony - Marseilles
F Gulf of Lion Supports A
Savoy
F Morocco Supports F Seville - Cantabrian Sea (*Fails*)
A Savoy
Supports A Gascony - Marseilles (*Cut*)
F Seville - Cantabrian Sea
(*Fails*)
Turkey:
F Adriatic Sea Hold
F Aegean Sea - Constantinople
A
Constantinople - Bulgaria
A Greater Poland Supports A Brandenburg
(*Dislodged*)
F Ionian Sea - Tunis
A Lombardy - Switzerland (*Fails*)
F
Papal States(wc) Supports A Tuscany
A Persia Hold
F Sardinia Supports F
Tyrrhenian Sea - Western Mediterranean
F Sicily - Tyrrhenian Sea
A Silesia
- Slovakia
A Tuscany Supports A Lombardy (*Ordered to Move*)
F Tyrrhenian
Sea - Western Mediterranean
PENDING RETREATS:
Turkish A Greater Poland can retreat to Prussia, Silesia or
OTB.
Austrian A Saxony can retreat to Silesia or OTB.
PENDING ADJUSTMENTS:
Austria:
Build?
England:
Remove
France:
Build
Build
Poland-Lithuania:
Build
Build?
Turkey:
Build
Build?
SUPPLY CENTER OWNERSHIP
(Winter 165:
Austria(7): Bavaria, Brandenburg, Prague, Saxony, Trieste, Venice,
Vienna.
England(5): Abo, Christiania, Ireland, London,
Stockholm.
France(15): Brest, Bristol, Copenhagen, Flanders, Holstein,
Lorraine, Lower Saxony, Mecklenburg, Paris, Rhineland-Westphalia, Savoy,
Scotland, Swabia, Switzerland, United Provinces.
Poland-Lithuania(11):
Courland, Cracow, Moscow, Novgorod, Prussia, Riga, Stettin, Turkestan, Vilna,
Voronezh, Warsaw.
Spain(7): Algiers, Madrid, Marseilles, Morocco,
Portugal, Seville, Tunis.
Turkey(13): Belgrade, Candia, Constantinople,
Crimea, Damascus, Moldavia, Naples, Papal States, Persia, Transylvania,
Tuscany, Ukraine, Wallachia.
DEADLINE SCHEDULE: (all orders are due NLT
6PM CET (i.e. GMT+1)...not local
time)
o Winter 1659 Retreats/Adjustments: 9
June
ORDERS MAP:
RESULTS MAP:[Reply] |
| 1648 091010: A new Archduke! - charlesf (Jun 07, 2010, 2:37 pm) |
Hi guys,
Nick Powell has kindly volunteered as the new
Archduke and that surely is appreciated by all of us.
Now there are a number of draw proposals on
the table:
- a Polish-Turkish two-way draw
- a French-Polish-Turkish three-way
draw
- an English-French-Polish-Turkish four-way draw
- a six-way draw including all survivors
I must confess that I've been rather confused by the various public
statements regarding draws. So I'd appreciate renewed votes on the draw
proposals listed above.
The deadline will coincide with the new Winter 1659 deadline, Wednesday 6
PM CET. The fall adjucation is attached further below, amended as necessary for
Nick's contact info and the new deadline.
Happy dipping!
Charles
----
Hallo zusammen,
Emperor Louis V managed to defend his beleaguered throne for another year
and indeed has managed to wrest the Electorate of Saxony from the Habsburg
pretender to the imperial crown. Yet the Bourbons have suffered defeats
elsewhere, for Switzerland was conquered by an Austrian army while the remnants
of Cromwell's Scandinavian expeditionary forces descended upon wealthy and
papist Flanders. Considering how Cromwell's army has treated the equally
Catholic Irish, this is probably not such a good time to be Flemish... This also
incidentally mean that the Protestants in the Empire have a new champion for
their cause after having had no greater power to turn to after the demise of
Sweden.
In the Mediterranean the Sultan lurched forwards into Tunis and the Western
Mediterranean after having lately focused only on Italian conquests.
The Polish republic has equally sought to expand her influence westwards
and have pushed the Turks out of Greater Poland, liquidated England's erstwhile
Scandinavian empire but for a defenceless Finnish enclave and have sailed
through the Oresund.
All in all, quite a dynamic picture!
The Winter 1659 Retreats/Adjustments are due Friday, 4 June
[now 9 June!], 6 PM CET. Note that the number of adjustments for a number
of powers depends on how the two pending retreats play out. Remember that
adjustments may be made conditional on the preceding retreats.
Liebe Grüsse,
Charles
----------
PLAYERS:
AUSTRIA: Nick Powell <nick.s.powell(at)gmail.com>
DENMARK-NORWAY: Marc
Ellinger <mellinger(at)blitzbardgett.com> (eliminated Winter
1653)
ENGLAND: Harvey Morris <hmtucaz(at)gmail.com>
FRANCE: Nigel Phillips <nephilli99(at)hotmail.com>
POLAND-LITHUANIA: Jorge
Saralegui <jmsaralegui(at)gmail.com>
RUSSIA: Mikael Johansson <m_don_j(at)hotmail.com> (eliminated Winter 1650)
SPAIN: Dirk Knemeyer <dirk(at)knemeyer.com>
SWEDEN: Matthew Kelly
<kelly058(at)verizon.net> (joined Winter 1652, eliminated Fall
165
TURKEY: Aidan
Slattery <AiSlattery(at)aol.com>
PROCLAMATIONS:
o HOFBURG CELEBRATES SUCCESSFUL HELVETIAN
CAMPAIGN
o REMNANTS OF CROMWELL'S SCANDINAVIAN EXPEDITIONARY
FORCES MAKE FOR FLANDERS
o EMPEROR SEIZES SAXONY
o POLAND IS THE NEW MASTER OF SCANDINAVIA
o SPANIARDS RE-ASSERT THEIR CONTROL OVER
MARSEILLES
o TUNISIAN EMIRATE ONCE AGAIN FIRMLY UNDER OTTOMAN
SUZERAINITY
PRESS: None.
ORDERS:
Austria:
A Bavaria Supports A Saxony - Swabia
A Brandenburg Supports
F Stettin - Mecklenburg (*Void*)
A Prague - Saxony (*Fails*)
A Saxony -
Swabia (*Dislodged*)
A Trieste - Venice
A Tyrolia Supports A Venice -
Switzerland
A Venice - Switzerland
England:
A Christiania - Flanders
F Ireland - Scotland
(*Fails*)
A London Hold
F North Sea Convoys A Christiania - Flanders
A
Yorkshire Supports F Ireland - Scotland
France:
A Brest - Paris (*Bounce*)
F Bristol Supports F
Scotland
A Dauphiné Supports A Switzerland - Savoy
F English Channel -
London (*Fails*)
A Hesse - Saxony
F Holstein(ec) - Copenhagen
A
Lorraine Supports A Swabia
A Lower Saxony Supports A Mecklenburg -
Brandenburg
A Marseilles - Paris (*Disbanded*)
A Mecklenburg - Brandenburg
(*Fails*)
F Scotland Supports F Bristol (*Cut*)
A Swabia Supports A Hesse
- Saxony
A Switzerland - Savoy (*Disbanded*)
Poland-Lithuania:
F Baltic Sea - Scania
A Cracow Supports A Warsaw -
Greater Poland
A Lapland Supports A Northern Norway - Christiania
A
Northern Norway - Christiania
A Novgorod - Karelia
A Riga - Courland
F
Scania - Skagerrak
F Stettin Supports A Brandenburg
F Stockholm(ec)
Hold
A Turkestan Hold
A Warsaw - Greater Poland
Spain:
A Aragon Supports A Gascony - Marseilles
F Cantabrian Sea -
Brest (*Fails*)
A Gascony - Marseilles
F Gulf of Lion Supports A
Savoy
F Morocco Supports F Seville - Cantabrian Sea (*Fails*)
A Savoy
Supports A Gascony - Marseilles (*Cut*)
F Seville - Cantabrian Sea
(*Fails*)
Turkey:
F Adriatic Sea Hold
F Aegean Sea - Constantinople
A
Constantinople - Bulgaria
A Greater Poland Supports A Brandenburg
(*Dislodged*)
F Ionian Sea - Tunis
A Lombardy - Switzerland (*Fails*)
F
Papal States(wc) Supports A Tuscany
A Persia Hold
F Sardinia Supports F
Tyrrhenian Sea - Western Mediterranean
F Sicily - Tyrrhenian Sea
A Silesia
- Slovakia
A Tuscany Supports A Lombardy (*Ordered to Move*)
F Tyrrhenian
Sea - Western Mediterranean
PENDING RETREATS:
Turkish A Greater Poland can retreat to Prussia, Silesia or
OTB.
Austrian A Saxony can retreat to Silesia or OTB.
PENDING ADJUSTMENTS:
Austria:
Build?
England:
Remove
France:
Build
Build
Poland-Lithuania:
Build
Build?
Turkey:
Build
Build?
SUPPLY CENTER OWNERSHIP
(Winter 165:
Austria(7): Bavaria, Brandenburg, Prague, Saxony, Trieste, Venice,
Vienna.
England(5): Abo, Christiania, Ireland, London,
Stockholm.
France(15): Brest, Bristol, Copenhagen, Flanders, Holstein,
Lorraine, Lower Saxony, Mecklenburg, Paris, Rhineland-Westphalia, Savoy,
Scotland, Swabia, Switzerland, United Provinces.
Poland-Lithuania(11):
Courland, Cracow, Moscow, Novgorod, Prussia, Riga, Stettin, Turkestan, Vilna,
Voronezh, Warsaw.
Spain(7): Algiers, Madrid, Marseilles, Morocco,
Portugal, Seville, Tunis.
Turkey(13): Belgrade, Candia, Constantinople,
Crimea, Damascus, Moldavia, Naples, Papal States, Persia, Transylvania,
Tuscany, Ukraine, Wallachia.
DEADLINE SCHEDULE: (all orders are due NLT
6PM CET (i.e. GMT+1)...not local
time)
o Winter 1659 Retreats/Adjustments: 9
June
ORDERS MAP:
RESULTS MAP:[Reply] |
| 1648 091010: A new Archduke! (dc279) DrSwordopolis Jun 07, 02:44 pm |
Oh my, that was fast. I just joined the page a few minutes ago!
I do know a few of you from previous games, the Spaniard and the Turk. I'll do my best to study up on the game's history and get involved in it as soon as possible. In the meantime, Austria has had a change of crown and the new leader will not be holding over any previous grudges or arrangements to the other powers. Assuming the game continues for longer than this season, you're free to try and make new ones with me. Or convince me why I should vote for any of the draw proposals.
Best,
-Nick
On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 12:37 PM, Charles Féaux de la Croix <charlesf(at)web.de> wrote:
Hi guys,
Nick Powell has kindly volunteered as the new
Archduke and that surely is appreciated by all of us.
Now there are a number of draw proposals on
the table:
- a Polish-Turkish two-way draw
- a French-Polish-Turkish three-way
draw
- an English-French-Polish-Turkish four-way draw
- a six-way draw including all survivors
I must confess that I've been rather confused by the various public
statements regarding draws. So I'd appreciate renewed votes on the draw
proposals listed above.
The deadline will coincide with the new Winter 1659 deadline, Wednesday 6
PM CET. The fall adjucation is attached further below, amended as necessary for
Nick's contact info and the new deadline.
Happy dipping!
Charles
----
Hallo zusammen,
Emperor Louis V managed to defend his beleaguered throne for another year
and indeed has managed to wrest the Electorate of Saxony from the Habsburg
pretender to the imperial crown. Yet the Bourbons have suffered defeats
elsewhere, for Switzerland was conquered by an Austrian army while the remnants
of Cromwell's Scandinavian expeditionary forces descended upon wealthy and
papist Flanders. Considering how Cromwell's army has treated the equally
Catholic Irish, this is probably not such a good time to be Flemish... This also
incidentally mean that the Protestants in the Empire have a new champion for
their cause after having had no greater power to turn to after the demise of
Sweden.
In the Mediterranean the Sultan lurched forwards into Tunis and the Western
Mediterranean after having lately focused only on Italian conquests.
The Polish republic has equally sought to expand her influence westwards
and have pushed the Turks out of Greater Poland, liquidated England's erstwhile
Scandinavian empire but for a defenceless Finnish enclave and have sailed
through the Oresund.
All in all, quite a dynamic picture!
The Winter 1659 Retreats/Adjustments are due Friday, 4 June
[now 9 June!], 6 PM CET. Note that the number of adjustments for a number
of powers depends on how the two pending retreats play out. Remember that
adjustments may be made conditional on the preceding retreats.
Liebe Grüsse,
Charles
----------
PLAYERS:
AUSTRIA: Nick Powell <nick.s.powell(at)gmail.com>
DENMARK-NORWAY: Marc
Ellinger <mellinger(at)blitzbardgett.com> (eliminated Winter
1653)
ENGLAND: Harvey Morris <hmtucaz(at)gmail.com>
FRANCE: Nigel Phillips <nephilli99(at)hotmail.com>
POLAND-LITHUANIA: Jorge
Saralegui <jmsaralegui(at)gmail.com>
RUSSIA: Mikael Johansson <m_don_j(at)hotmail.com> (eliminated Winter 1650)
SPAIN: Dirk Knemeyer <dirk(at)knemeyer.com>
SWEDEN: Matthew Kelly
<kelly058(at)verizon.net> (joined Winter 1652, eliminated Fall
165
TURKEY: Aidan
Slattery <AiSlattery(at)aol.com>
PROCLAMATIONS:
o HOFBURG CELEBRATES SUCCESSFUL HELVETIAN
CAMPAIGN
o REMNANTS OF CROMWELL'S SCANDINAVIAN EXPEDITIONARY
FORCES MAKE FOR FLANDERS
o EMPEROR SEIZES SAXONY
o POLAND IS THE NEW MASTER OF SCANDINAVIA
o SPANIARDS RE-ASSERT THEIR CONTROL OVER
MARSEILLES
o TUNISIAN EMIRATE ONCE AGAIN FIRMLY UNDER OTTOMAN
SUZERAINITY
PRESS: None.
ORDERS:
Austria:
A Bavaria Supports A Saxony - Swabia
A Brandenburg Supports
F Stettin - Mecklenburg (*Void*)
A Prague - Saxony (*Fails*)
A Saxony -
Swabia (*Dislodged*)
A Trieste - Venice
A Tyrolia Supports A Venice -
Switzerland
A Venice - Switzerland
England:
A Christiania - Flanders
F Ireland - Scotland
(*Fails*)
A London Hold
F North Sea Convoys A Christiania - Flanders
A
Yorkshire Supports F Ireland - Scotland
France:
A Brest - Paris (*Bounce*)
F Bristol Supports F
Scotland
A Dauphiné Supports A Switzerland - Savoy
F English Channel -
London (*Fails*)
A Hesse - Saxony
F Holstein(ec) - Copenhagen
A
Lorraine Supports A Swabia
A Lower Saxony Supports A Mecklenburg -
Brandenburg
A Marseilles - Paris (*Disbanded*)
A Mecklenburg - Brandenburg
(*Fails*)
F Scotland Supports F Bristol (*Cut*)
A Swabia Supports A Hesse
- Saxony
A Switzerland - Savoy (*Disbanded*)
Poland-Lithuania:
F Baltic Sea - Scania
A Cracow Supports A Warsaw -
Greater Poland
A Lapland Supports A Northern Norway - Christiania
A
Northern Norway - Christiania
A Novgorod - Karelia
A Riga - Courland
F
Scania - Skagerrak
F Stettin Supports A Brandenburg
F Stockholm(ec)
Hold
A Turkestan Hold
A Warsaw - Greater Poland
Spain:
A Aragon Supports A Gascony - Marseilles
F Cantabrian Sea -
Brest (*Fails*)
A Gascony - Marseilles
F Gulf of Lion Supports A
Savoy
F Morocco Supports F Seville - Cantabrian Sea (*Fails*)
A Savoy
Supports A Gascony - Marseilles (*Cut*)
F Seville - Cantabrian Sea
(*Fails*)
Turkey:
F Adriatic Sea Hold
F Aegean Sea - Constantinople
A
Constantinople - Bulgaria
A Greater Poland Supports A Brandenburg
(*Dislodged*)
F Ionian Sea - Tunis
A Lombardy - Switzerland (*Fails*)
F
Papal States(wc) Supports A Tuscany
A Persia Hold
F Sardinia Supports F
Tyrrhenian Sea - Western Mediterranean
F Sicily - Tyrrhenian Sea
A Silesia
- Slovakia
A Tuscany Supports A Lombardy (*Ordered to Move*)
F Tyrrhenian
Sea - Western Mediterranean
PENDING RETREATS:
Turkish A Greater Poland can retreat to Prussia, Silesia or
OTB.
Austrian A Saxony can retreat to Silesia or OTB.
PENDING ADJUSTMENTS:
Austria:
Build?
England:
Remove
France:
Build
Build
Poland-Lithuania:
Build
Build?
Turkey:
Build
Build?
SUPPLY CENTER OWNERSHIP
(Winter 165:
Austria(7): Bavaria, Brandenburg, Prague, Saxony, Trieste, Venice,
Vienna.
England(5): Abo, Christiania, Ireland, London,
Stockholm.
France(15): Brest, Bristol, Copenhagen, Flanders, Holstein,
Lorraine, Lower Saxony, Mecklenburg, Paris, Rhineland-Westphalia, Savoy,
Scotland, Swabia, Switzerland, United Provinces.
Poland-Lithuania(11):
Courland, Cracow, Moscow, Novgorod, Prussia, Riga, Stettin, Turkestan, Vilna,
Voronezh, Warsaw.
Spain(7): Algiers, Madrid, Marseilles, Morocco,
Portugal, Seville, Tunis.
Turkey(13): Belgrade, Candia, Constantinople,
Crimea, Damascus, Moldavia, Naples, Papal States, Persia, Transylvania,
Tuscany, Ukraine, Wallachia.
DEADLINE SCHEDULE: (all orders are due NLT
6PM CET (i.e. GMT+1)...not local
time)
o Winter 1659 Retreats/Adjustments: 9
June
ORDERS MAP:
RESULTS MAP: |
| 1648 091010: A new Archduke! (dc279) DrSwordopolis Jun 07, 02:44 pm |
Oh my, that was fast. I just joined the page a few minutes ago!
I do know a few of you from previous games, the Spaniard and the Turk. I'll do my best to study up on the game's history and get involved in it as soon as possible. In the meantime, Austria has had a change of crown and the new leader will not be holding over any previous grudges or arrangements to the other powers. Assuming the game continues for longer than this season, you're free to try and make new ones with me. Or convince me why I should vote for any of the draw proposals.
Best,
-Nick
On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 12:37 PM, Charles Féaux de la Croix <charlesf(at)web.de> wrote:
Hi guys,
Nick Powell has kindly volunteered as the new
Archduke and that surely is appreciated by all of us.
Now there are a number of draw proposals on
the table:
- a Polish-Turkish two-way draw
- a French-Polish-Turkish three-way
draw
- an English-French-Polish-Turkish four-way draw
- a six-way draw including all survivors
I must confess that I've been rather confused by the various public
statements regarding draws. So I'd appreciate renewed votes on the draw
proposals listed above.
The deadline will coincide with the new Winter 1659 deadline, Wednesday 6
PM CET. The fall adjucation is attached further below, amended as necessary for
Nick's contact info and the new deadline.
Happy dipping!
Charles
----
Hallo zusammen,
Emperor Louis V managed to defend his beleaguered throne for another year
and indeed has managed to wrest the Electorate of Saxony from the Habsburg
pretender to the imperial crown. Yet the Bourbons have suffered defeats
elsewhere, for Switzerland was conquered by an Austrian army while the remnants
of Cromwell's Scandinavian expeditionary forces descended upon wealthy and
papist Flanders. Considering how Cromwell's army has treated the equally
Catholic Irish, this is probably not such a good time to be Flemish... This also
incidentally mean that the Protestants in the Empire have a new champion for
their cause after having had no greater power to turn to after the demise of
Sweden.
In the Mediterranean the Sultan lurched forwards into Tunis and the Western
Mediterranean after having lately focused only on Italian conquests.
The Polish republic has equally sought to expand her influence westwards
and have pushed the Turks out of Greater Poland, liquidated England's erstwhile
Scandinavian empire but for a defenceless Finnish enclave and have sailed
through the Oresund.
All in all, quite a dynamic picture!
The Winter 1659 Retreats/Adjustments are due Friday, 4 June
[now 9 June!], 6 PM CET. Note that the number of adjustments for a number
of powers depends on how the two pending retreats play out. Remember that
adjustments may be made conditional on the preceding retreats.
Liebe Grüsse,
Charles
----------
PLAYERS:
AUSTRIA: Nick Powell <nick.s.powell(at)gmail.com>
DENMARK-NORWAY: Marc
Ellinger <mellinger(at)blitzbardgett.com> (eliminated Winter
1653)
ENGLAND: Harvey Morris <hmtucaz(at)gmail.com>
FRANCE: Nigel Phillips <nephilli99(at)hotmail.com>
POLAND-LITHUANIA: Jorge
Saralegui <jmsaralegui(at)gmail.com>
RUSSIA: Mikael Johansson <m_don_j(at)hotmail.com> (eliminated Winter 1650)
SPAIN: Dirk Knemeyer <dirk(at)knemeyer.com>
SWEDEN: Matthew Kelly
<kelly058(at)verizon.net> (joined Winter 1652, eliminated Fall
165
TURKEY: Aidan
Slattery <AiSlattery(at)aol.com>
PROCLAMATIONS:
o HOFBURG CELEBRATES SUCCESSFUL HELVETIAN
CAMPAIGN
o REMNANTS OF CROMWELL'S SCANDINAVIAN EXPEDITIONARY
FORCES MAKE FOR FLANDERS
o EMPEROR SEIZES SAXONY
o POLAND IS THE NEW MASTER OF SCANDINAVIA
o SPANIARDS RE-ASSERT THEIR CONTROL OVER
MARSEILLES
o TUNISIAN EMIRATE ONCE AGAIN FIRMLY UNDER OTTOMAN
SUZERAINITY
PRESS: None.
ORDERS:
Austria:
A Bavaria Supports A Saxony - Swabia
A Brandenburg Supports
F Stettin - Mecklenburg (*Void*)
A Prague - Saxony (*Fails*)
A Saxony -
Swabia (*Dislodged*)
A Trieste - Venice
A Tyrolia Supports A Venice -
Switzerland
A Venice - Switzerland
England:
A Christiania - Flanders
F Ireland - Scotland
(*Fails*)
A London Hold
F North Sea Convoys A Christiania - Flanders
A
Yorkshire Supports F Ireland - Scotland
France:
A Brest - Paris (*Bounce*)
F Bristol Supports F
Scotland
A Dauphiné Supports A Switzerland - Savoy
F English Channel -
London (*Fails*)
A Hesse - Saxony
F Holstein(ec) - Copenhagen
A
Lorraine Supports A Swabia
A Lower Saxony Supports A Mecklenburg -
Brandenburg
A Marseilles - Paris (*Disbanded*)
A Mecklenburg - Brandenburg
(*Fails*)
F Scotland Supports F Bristol (*Cut*)
A Swabia Supports A Hesse
- Saxony
A Switzerland - Savoy (*Disbanded*)
Poland-Lithuania:
F Baltic Sea - Scania
A Cracow Supports A Warsaw -
Greater Poland
A Lapland Supports A Northern Norway - Christiania
A
Northern Norway - Christiania
A Novgorod - Karelia
A Riga - Courland
F
Scania - Skagerrak
F Stettin Supports A Brandenburg
F Stockholm(ec)
Hold
A Turkestan Hold
A Warsaw - Greater Poland
Spain:
A Aragon Supports A Gascony - Marseilles
F Cantabrian Sea -
Brest (*Fails*)
A Gascony - Marseilles
F Gulf of Lion Supports A
Savoy
F Morocco Supports F Seville - Cantabrian Sea (*Fails*)
A Savoy
Supports A Gascony - Marseilles (*Cut*)
F Seville - Cantabrian Sea
(*Fails*)
Turkey:
F Adriatic Sea Hold
F Aegean Sea - Constantinople
A
Constantinople - Bulgaria
A Greater Poland Supports A Brandenburg
(*Dislodged*)
F Ionian Sea - Tunis
A Lombardy - Switzerland (*Fails*)
F
Papal States(wc) Supports A Tuscany
A Persia Hold
F Sardinia Supports F
Tyrrhenian Sea - Western Mediterranean
F Sicily - Tyrrhenian Sea
A Silesia
- Slovakia
A Tuscany Supports A Lombardy (*Ordered to Move*)
F Tyrrhenian
Sea - Western Mediterranean
PENDING RETREATS:
Turkish A Greater Poland can retreat to Prussia, Silesia or
OTB.
Austrian A Saxony can retreat to Silesia or OTB.
PENDING ADJUSTMENTS:
Austria:
Build?
England:
Remove
France:
Build
Build
Poland-Lithuania:
Build
Build?
Turkey:
Build
Build?
SUPPLY CENTER OWNERSHIP
(Winter 165:
Austria(7): Bavaria, Brandenburg, Prague, Saxony, Trieste, Venice,
Vienna.
England(5): Abo, Christiania, Ireland, London,
Stockholm.
France(15): Brest, Bristol, Copenhagen, Flanders, Holstein,
Lorraine, Lower Saxony, Mecklenburg, Paris, Rhineland-Westphalia, Savoy,
Scotland, Swabia, Switzerland, United Provinces.
Poland-Lithuania(11):
Courland, Cracow, Moscow, Novgorod, Prussia, Riga, Stettin, Turkestan, Vilna,
Voronezh, Warsaw.
Spain(7): Algiers, Madrid, Marseilles, Morocco,
Portugal, Seville, Tunis.
Turkey(13): Belgrade, Candia, Constantinople,
Crimea, Damascus, Moldavia, Naples, Papal States, Persia, Transylvania,
Tuscany, Ukraine, Wallachia.
DEADLINE SCHEDULE: (all orders are due NLT
6PM CET (i.e. GMT+1)...not local
time)
o Winter 1659 Retreats/Adjustments: 9
June
ORDERS MAP:
RESULTS MAP: |
| DC 288: Balkans1860: Fall 1867 - All Your Base Are... - rodtheworm (Jun 07, 2010, 12:44 pm) |
Hi all,
Scraping for time to do a proper review just now, but I'll definitely have one for you all. In the meantime, here's a fine example of what never to do in Diplomacy, courtesy of yours truly!
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 10:59:53 -0500
From: Allen.York(at)cchmc.org
To: rodtheworm(at)hotmail.com
CC: screwtape777(at)gmail.com
Subject: RE: RE005 - Balkans1860 Bulgarian broadcast
.ExternalClass .ecxhmmessage P
{padding:0px;}
.ExternalClass body.ecxhmmessage
{font-size:10pt;font-family:Verdana;}
Ross,
3 builds for Rumania. I haven't heard much so far, do you think he's moving south at you or west at me?
And what was ottoman doing? Over here we're interested in the demise of Greece. It's starting to look like several powers are going to divide him.
Any news?
Allen
>>> Ross Webb <rodtheworm(at)hotmail.com> 1/22/2010 12:00 PM >>>
Hi Allen,
Hopefully neither. I'm working on him to go for Austria's back, though who knows what he'll do. If he goes for you I'll try to assist as much as I can, but I think you're quite shielded by Austria and I to be a viable target.
I think Greg the Ottoman is looking towards Greece too, which is good for me. The fewer powers that look my way, the better.
I'll be waiting until the builds come out before I make any hard decisions as to where I attack next, but I'm leaving options open by building a fleet and an army
How about with you? You may want to beware, as I heard one rumour suggesting Italy and Austria were going to team up on you, though I can't remember the source or verify it in any way.
Ross
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 12:17:48 -0500
From: Allen.York(at)cchmc.org
To: rodtheworm(at)hotmail.com
CC: screwtape777(at)gmail.com
Subject: RE: RE005 - Balkans1860 Bulgarian broadcast
.ExternalClass .ecxhmmessage P
{padding:0px;}
.ExternalClass body.ecxhmmessage
{font-size:10pt;font-family:Verdana;}
LOL...dude I AM Austria!
Allen
>>> Ross Webb <rodtheworm(at)hotmail.com> 1/22/2010 12:25 PM >>>
Well, that's embarrassing, I thought you were Serbia for a minute there.
Diplomatic rule #1 - make sure you know who you're talking to.
You'll be happy to note that I'm in fact not urging Rumania to go for you - in fact, I'm hoping he'll attack the Ottomans with me, but since Serbia is hoping to carve up Greece with him, it wouldn't have been particularly diplomatic of me to say so. You were just the only other plausible target I could put in there.
While you might not be so happy about the reported rumour - which I did make clear was just a rumour - my passing it on shouldn't come as a surprise. If Serbia falls, I start to look vulnerable to attacks from behind (unless I was the one the make him fall!). Could I urge you to reconsider, if it is true, and to attack Italy with Serbia?
Ross
(Bulgaria )
Ross,
In your position I'd be suggesting to Rumania that I'm vulnerable. No offense taken. Just got a good laugh about it. you know, Garry's suggesting a central alliance, what's your interest there?
Allen
Get a new e-mail account with Hotmail - Free. Sign-up now.[Reply] |
| Balkans 1860 Revisions - Stage 1 (Long Version) - FuzzyLogic (Jun 07, 2010, 10:25 am) |
Balkans 1860 Revisions - Stage 1 (Long Version)
I dont see this problem you're trying to fix regarding AS alliances.
I feared the AS in this game. For the first couple weeks of game-time, I really did nothing but cower and tremble in the corner, hoping to not see an AS come at me, as I took a gamble early on building a couple fleets.
I don't think a single game is enough to draw any proof that changes need be made. Get three games of history, then look at a rev. If you change it every time, you'll interrupt the natural progression of the players to adapt their strategy to deal w what we learned from the last playing. Standard has played out so many times, and each time I learn new things about it, so I wouldn't say "Austria cooperated w Italy two games in a row, so that means we need to make A/I war more certain." It really could just be that A/I happened to get along or share common ideas or it just worked out that way.
Anyways I wouldn't pin too much of what happened in this game purely on the map. As you see we all have our own stories, and interaction as much as the map determines what happens. So I'd suggest no changes as of just this game. It's a good variant, see how it plays out when you get a few games and can look at a more statistical distribution of results.
In this game, sure, AS didn't work together. But that doesn't mean it's cuz of the map. If I were Austria, I would have considered an AS a viable option, and I would probly have looked toward Romania or Italy as preferred targets. You could look at AS in this game like AT in standard. Here Serbia blocks Austria in, and Austria either has to work hard to operate around the fringes, or he eventually has to barrel thru S. Likewise in Standard. TA's don't often work out, cuz Turkey eventually has to break out of the corner, and dinking around the edges gets old. But that doesn't mean AT (or AS in Balkans) is unworkable.
-mike
From: Benjamin Hester [mailto:screwtape777(at)gmail.com]
Sent: Fri 6/4/2010 3:52 PM
To: Michael Sims
Subject: Balkans 1860 Revisions - Stage 1 (Long Version)
Okay, had a chance to read Allen and Mike's remarks, and wanted to
take a second to discuss some of their revision ideas - lots of good
material here to work with, and I had a few thoughts of my own on some
of these same topics that I wanted to run by you all.
Note - This email is huge. For those not interested in reading the
whole thing, I have extracted the specific proposed changes paragraph
and sent in a separate email.
***Mike*** - Allen, I guess this opening for me revolved largely
around our trio w Italy. We had a great team, we had Serbia on the
ropes, and I had a killer stab of Bulgaria waiting to be taken.
---Ben--- ...Now this is interesting. I hadn't considered an IAR
triple to really be a viable option for Austria-Hungary (or, to a
lesser extent, Romania) over the long term. In this plan,
Austria-Hungary and Romania will likely face stiff resistance in a
pure southerly drive, and a Serb/Bulgarian alliance is very likely (I
thought) to spawn in response. Meanwhile, Italy capitalizes on having
a free hand to gobble up her internal open SCs (2-3 virtually
guaranteed) and focus undistracted on Greece. So Italy strikes me as
the big winner here, whereas Austria-Hungary is just waiting to get
stabbed by Italy and Romania in the mid-game phase. Greece is the
wild card though - if they open up an (ill-advised) second front
against Serbia or Bulgaria in this scenario, then Austrian or Romanian
growth could be significant.
In fact - I had expected that the single greatest impulse *for* an
Austrian-Serb alliance would be the Austrian fear of getting pinched
by I/R. After all, Italy can only go so far as a pure naval power -
then either an invasion of Austria or Greece seems necessary.
So maybe I was wrong on multiple assumptions. If IAR really was the
natural impulse for all three of you (Allen, Mike, Adam) then I should
not be surprised that the A/S alliance didn't last. More on how to
fix that farther down...
***Mike*** - From there it was pretty straight forward. It was Ross'
and my goal to try the unthinkable in this game and become naval
superpowers. Unheard of given our corner land powers...
---Ben--- More faulty assumptions on my part here it seems. 8 of the
9 territories on the Black Sea area coastline are SCs. Moreover, both
Romania and the Ottomans have 2 of their 3 home SCs on the coast in a
variant that does *not* allow chaos builds. So I expected that region
to be a naval hotspot.
It blew my mind to see Gregory pass on opening F Istanbul to the Black
Sea, given the diplomatic leverage with R and B that position allows,
the option for Sevastopol, and of course, the security of two of their
three home SCs. However, I suppose I really have made it too
difficult for the Ottomans to at least guarantee one SC - usually
Salonika. Army Ankara and F Izmir don't seal the deal as they should
be able to. Perhaps I overcompensated in strengthening the Bulgarian
position, which was disastrous in the first playtest. Thoughts on how
to improve this? My knee-jerk reaction is actually to change Ankara
to a fleet, but that just seems too strange to have the Ottomans start
with all three units as fleets. I suppose Istanbul could be the army
- and that has other advantages for the Ottomans as well. So I will
probably switch those two starting units, but even more is probably
needed.
***Mike*** - but I think we pulled it off pretty well by finally
breaking into the Aegean in this last couple turns. We set this goal
really early on, upon seeing our initial placements, and it was
refreshing to find a player excited to try less conventional
strategies - something often lacking in Dip games. We each trusted
each other right by our centers, and
this built a lot of trust.
---Ben--- Indeed - a B/R alliance that features heavy naval builds
strikes me as unusual. Mike and Ross have both also suggested it was
an unorthodox strategy. I will proceed with the assumption that most
B/R alliances will have a heavy focus on building armies and driving
west, with a token Romanian contribution to a primarily Bulgarian
naval fight against Greece and/or the Ottomans. Accordingly, I
haven't identified a need for revisions based on this particular
dynamic, though it was a very impressive alliance to watch in action,
especially as Mike deftly weaved his armies through the Serb/Bulgarian
border. There was an extraordinary amount of trust in that alliance.
***Mike*** - This map certainly has its choke points around the
Aegean, (separating BS from GI, with Turkey on the fulcrum) but this
dynamic surely exists in standard too, with, say, MAO dividing TI from
EG with F on the fulcrum. So altho it seemed hard to break out, I
don't know that it needs fixing so
much, for it's just as hard for a TI duo in standard to break out into
the northern half of the map against an EG team.
---Ben--- I see T/I as the one truly unorthodox alliance pair between
neighbours on the Standard map. Meaning that pursuing such an
alliance usually requires that the players bypass the best
opportunities for their own growth to pursue other goals, i.e. setting
up long convoys or other shenanigans just for fun. For those
international relations scholars in the crowd - they do not behave as
rational actors in the realist sense .
But I digress - in Balkans1860, open water is not intended to be where
the majority of naval action takes place. There really isn't an
analogy on this map to critical sea zones in standard like North Sea
or MAO. (Maybe Gulf of Taranto, but that's about it, and even that's
a stretch). The naval action largely consists of coastal fights,
which must often be accompanied by support from inland armies to
advance. True, the Aegean region can bog down, but I think that is
more so due to the Greek tendency to heavily emphasize naval growth
than the actual borders. This is where Nigel got into trouble I think
- 1-2 too many fleets in his build mix (or at least sent the wrong
way), and when they reached northern Italy, their usefulness ran out.
That's questionable though, because it did take a lot to crack Italian
defenses.
Anyway, this *is* very different from Standard, where blue water
fights - especially around MAO - can very much determine the outcome
of the game. I don't expect too many games of Balkans1860 to follow
that path. Much more likely in this variant that fleets will be an
auxiliary force for advancing along the coastlines and breaking
support lines on land. The path to a solo victory lies in the heart
of the Balkans. I would be genuinely surprised to see someone solo in
this map without driving into the heart, all the coastal SCs
notwithstanding.
***Mike*** - Overall a very nice map. I think Dark Ages would have to
hold your "best creation" title, tho this comes in a close second.
Plenty of naval action, and the play around Greece and the Aegean is
great. I would definitely play it again. Good game all, and thanks
for GM'ing it Ben!
---Ben--- Thank you kindly for the praise, I'm sincerely glad you
enjoyed it, and do hope to see you take a seat by the Balkans1860 map
again. Good thoughts here, let's now talk about what Allen had to
say...
***Allen*** - Game over. First, thanks to B for doing another great
job as GM. Calm, cool, and collected is our B, large and in charge.
Seriously, he runs a fantastic game, generally on time, always
communicative, and very professional. Thanks bro.
---Ben--- ...you're quite welcome! It was truly my pleasure to run
it, had a great set of players for this one.
***Allen*** - The variant. This is my second time through. When B.
put out the notice for the second game and I volunteered, I told him
I'd take whatever noone else wanted. I was stunned to get
Austria-Hungary. Rumania and AH are to me the strongest 2 positions
in the first year.
---Ben--- ...that's what I thought! But it has been made clear to me
that the A/S dynamic needs work...
***Allen*** - They can negotiate a quick settlement between them and
both are grateful to do it (Kol is obviously Rumanian and sets up a
nice DMZ). Playing both sides of this, it's a no-brainer. AH then
negotiates a quick peace with Italy and both sit at stare at each
other (Ven and Tri).
---Ben--- ...gotta disagree here. Austria is heavily favored in that
uneasy balance by the ability to build in Trieste, whereas Italy (by
design, to increase tension) does *not* have the ability to build on
the Adriatic coast. Plus, the quick move of F Tri - GoV threatens
Venezia, Ancona, and convoys along the Italian coast with Serbia. In
fact, I consider this dynamic to be the primary check against Italy's
otherwise rampant growth prospects. As Italy, I would not agree to
anything less than a complete DMZ of the region, to include Austria's
pledge not to build in Trieste without prior Italian approval.
***Allen*** - Year 1 is over and both have solidified their flanks and
looking downhill (south). AND, to add things up, both powers have
southern neighbors that need to come to them with some settlement or
get pinched between them.
---Ben--- True. And here lies the biggest challenge I hope to
overcome in the next round of revisions. For this map to be balanced,
I *must* make an A/S alliance at least roughly as appealing to Austria
as a southerly drive through Serbia is. The latter option seems
virtually guaranteed on the current map. I like some of Allen's
suggestions, so we can go down the list of his ideas and my own
below...
***Allen*** - This is an advantage in negotiations. In this case,
Rumania is in a more solid position, Ottoman(enemies on 2 sides) is
safer than Greece(enemies on 3 sides), so Rumania can work with either
Bulgaria or Ottoman, whichever seems better.
---Ben--- ...glad to hear this. I personally think the BRO triangle
is mostly balanced, though I am considering some improvement to the
Ottoman position (while trying to give them equal incentive to attack
Bulgaria or Greece...aaaargh)
***Allen*** - So some suggestions...increase the tension between AH
and Rumania. Maybe take out the SC in Kol and add 2, one in Tis and
one in Tem. I still like Sev as a home center for Rumania, I think
that was suggested last time. Rumania starts with F Sev, A Ias, A
Con. Agm is a little too far-reaching, what if it doesn't touch Nov?
I like the tension between Italy and AH as it is, I think a strong
Italy and AH could either negotiate a solid alliance or be at each
other's throats. That seemed to play well. AH has a natural
inclination to move south, it's too hard for Serbia and AH to come to
a reasonable accord. Serbia naturally distrusts AH, if you play this
game long enough you realize that in general, those downhill on the
map distrust those uphill. For some reason, AH and Serbia seem to
have more tension between them than R-B.
---Ben--- Allen makes some valid points about the A/S relationship and
the uphill/downhill map dynamic in general...thoughts on the changes
proposed so far below. First, the ones I *don't* want to do.
x - Rumania gains Sev as a home SC. While this would help, I can't
swallow the historical inaccuracy of it. I already go too far
negating the influence of Russia and France in this scenario, I cannot
give the primary Russian port on the Black Sea to Rumania outright.
x - Add SC Temesvar. I feel that this would increase Austria/Serbia
tension, not decrease it.
Then, the ideas that I am considering (a mix of Allen's and my own)...
1 - Move either SC Agram or SC Sarajevo. This would likely be done in
conjunction with Allen's idea to add SCs in between Austria and
Romania. Downside - removing Agram makes F Ven a no-brainer opening
for F Trieste. Removing Sarajevo gives Serbia an undesirable
incentive to send A Kragujevac after Bulgaria, or send more than just
F Cetinje against Greece - also undesirable. So for this to work, we
need to give A Kragujevac a good option against Rumania. Which leads
to the next idea...
2 - Add SC Craiova. With a bit of negotiations with Bulgaria to
secure uncontested passage through Nis, Serbia could reasonably
guarantee Craiova. However, I'm still trading the only guaranteed dot
for Serbia (Sarajevo) for a definite maybe in Craiova.
3 - Change F Trieste to A Trieste. Contrary to my intentions, that
Fleet in Trieste seems to be a constant point of tension with the
Serbs. If it were only a build option rather than a starting unit,
this could improve Austrian/Serbian relations...?
4 - Split Beograd? Increasing the buffer between Austria and Serbia
would help perhaps...though the main Austria/Serbia flash point seems
to be along the Adriatic coast. (alternate idea - disconnect Temesvar
from Beograd somehow with a border redraw?)
...and moving into the twilight zone of major revisions (which may
nonetheless be necessary)...
! - Leave Kolosvar as it is and make it an Austrian Home SC. To
understand the idea here, take the map and rotate it 90 degrees
clockwise. Now try to picture Austria in Balkans1860 like Russia in
Standard. I'm not proposing to give Austria a Black Sea port
(completely ahistorical) but this could give Austria a good option to
move against the Serbs, or with them against Romania. Here I would
need to add Allen's idea of SC Tiraspol to balance out Romanian
options. I would also pull another SC off the map to retain balance
(perhaps Bitola, and redraw that to be a single territory with
Skopje?)
!! - Add another Ottoman SC in Sevastopol? Strange and irrelevant as
this may sound - if Serbia had a stronger partner in the SE corner,
one that also had options to engage Romania directly (rather than just
Bulgaria) - then perhaps Austria/Serbia could join the Ottomans and/or
Bulgarians in a dogpile heading east. Sevastopol could not be made
Rumanian with any semblance of historical accuracy. It *could*
however be made Turkish, if I were willing to make this a "what if?"
or to use the academic term, counterfactual scenario.
Here we assume a different settlement after the Crimean War -
historically, the Ottomans did not much real receive territorial
compensation following Russia's defeat in the Crimean war. In this
case, I would suggest that the British, French, and Ottomans could
have achieved their objective of removing the Russian naval presence
from the Black Sea by restoring the old Ottoman claim to the Crimea
(it had only been lost in 1783) and allowing their retention of
territory gained in the Caucasus.
What the hell...I've already really made it a counterfactual scenario
by removing Russia from the Crimea and cutting French influence out of
Italian unification. Most Diplomacy variants also permit some degree
of historical inaccuracy, Standard included...lest anyone believes
Italy or Turkey was truly a major player in WW1?
Anyway, if I give the Ottomans Sevastopol or the Austrians Kolosvar -
Allen's idea of adding SC Tiraspol would be needed, as Romania would
then have *no* reasonably guaranteed opening SC. The Ottomans would
also have F Istanbul changed to A Istanbul if they gained F
Sevastopol. And we would have to very closely examine the new
Romanian situation to ensure they aren't forced into conflict with
Austria or the Ottomans - I think not, and could work with either one
still, but I don't want to see them always ignore the Bulgarians.
Ultimately though, I keep coming back to what I said above...the path
to a solo victory lies in the heart of the Balkans. Austria has to
have a working long-term plan to get to 19 SCs without hitting Serbia
until their solo bid in the endgame. It's *possible* to do so by
joining Serbia to hit Italy and then Romania on the current map - but
I think that's even more unlikely than the B/R naval alliance we saw
here. Serbia would have to tolerate a *large* Austrian navy pushing
down the Adriatic. So what I *really* need is a southeast option for
Austria, one that bypasses Serbia altogether to hit Romania and
Bulgaria, *while* A/S presumably contain Italy or aid Greece in
attacking them. Because Italy simply cannot be ignored - and it is
very difficult to divide between Austria and Serbia as well.
Please let me know your thoughts on all this. Nothing is decided at all yet.
B.
--
Diplomacy in Texas!
www.texasdiplomacy.com
http://www.dipwiki.com
Realpolitik files available here for the Sengoku, Balkans1860, South
American Supremacy, and DarkAges Diplomacy Variants[Reply] |
| DC298 Spring 1922 Adjucation - untitled36 (Jun 07, 2010, 8:15 am) |
Hey all,
Well, that might about do it for the game. Russia actually nabs two centers this turn, and barring any major catastrophe he can hold at least one of them through the fall. Still, if this game proves anything, it shows that even unlikely turns of fortune can occur.
Move-wise, Italy attempted a nice little reorganization of his forces in turkey, but Russia managed to block the moves with his own attack. France gains the norwegian sea which potentially threatens Russia's northern holdings if the game lasts move than another season.
We do have two retreats. French A Par can retreat to Pic or Bre (or OTB). Italian A Trl can only retreat to Pie or OTB
France:
F Clyde - Norwegian Sea
F Edinburgh - North Sea (*Fails*)
F London - English Channel
A Marseilles - Spain
A Paris - Burgundy (*Dislodged*)
Italy:
F Adriatic Sea Supports A Trieste
F Aegean Sea Convoys A Bulgaria - Smyrna
A Albania - Serbia (*Fails*)
A Bulgaria - Smyrna (*Fails*)
F Constantinople - Bulgaria(ec) (*Disbanded*)
F Greece, no move received
F Smyrna - Constantinople (*Fails*)
A Trieste Supports A Albania - Serbia
A Tyrolia Supports A Trieste (*Dislodged*)
A Venice Supports A Tyrolia
Russia:
A Ankara Supports F Black Sea - Constantinople
F Belgium Supports F Norwegian Sea - North Sea
F Black Sea - Constantinople
A Bohemia Supports A Munich - Tyrolia
A Budapest Supports A Serbia
A Burgundy Supports A Gascony - Paris
A Denmark - Kiel
A Gascony - Paris
A Holland - Ruhr
A Munich - Tyrolia
F Norway - Skagerrak
F Norwegian Sea - North Sea
A Rumania Supports A Serbia
A Serbia Hold
F St Petersburg(nc) - Norway
A Sweden - Denmark
A Vienna Supports A Munich - Tyrolia
Hotmail has tools for the New Busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox. Learn more.[Reply] |
| dc303 today - FuzzyLogic (Jun 07, 2010, 8:14 am) |
A little birdie once told me that moves were due today...
But he didn't have orders in.
So all his units held.
[Reply] |
| DC317; Enough already - packrat (Jun 07, 2010, 6:32 am) |
Doug, et al,
I'm sure you would do well as a GM and I know DC could use another good GM on the roster. As
for my diplomatic communication - well - I've been considering my experiences here on DC and am
actually giving serious consideration to the fault being, in large part, mine. My gaming has been more
than a bit off for some time now and to the extent that the problem, whatever it is, lies (no pun intended)
with ME and not with some of the others.
Whatever the problem is I don't think it is the DC group either but it sure was easy to point the blame
there. Mike and others have worked long, hard, hours to bring this club up to what it is now and it can
only get better. I miss the public banter that was part of Cat23 but that is more
because I was too lazy
to go looking for it. I know I've mentioned it to Mike and there has always been a solution offered for
me to try.
With all that being said I have to figure out what my next move is going to be - in the big picture sense, not
in the 317 sense. There have been a lot of changes in RL that need my attention so I need to tend to those
as well.
Scott
From: Douglas Fresh <douglasefresh(at)googlemail.com>
To: Packrat <brn2dip(at)yahoo.com>
Cc: Nigel PHILLIPS <nephilli99(at)hotmail.com>; olson.gregoryscott(at)gmail.com;
dipknight(at)gmail.com; douglasefresh(at)gmail.com; dadidea(at)gmail.com; mdemagogue(at)gmail.com; phantomas13(at)orange.fr; blitz(at)diplomaticcorp.com; dc317(at)diplomaticcorp.com; Michael Sims <mike(at)fuzzylogicllc.net>
Sent: Mon, June 7, 2010 4:49:05 AM
Subject: Re: DC317; Enough already
Thanks for sharing your thoughts Packrat; yet another example of your considered, amiable and of course "Diplomatic" communication.
I am unsurprised that you consider yourself a higher level player when you can turn in such sweet prose every time.
For the record, Please feel free to add me to your blacklist, I am fairly certain it will not be required, as this game has also led me to the conclusion that I shall not be playing much Dip. I think I'll be sticking to GMing from now on
Best
D
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 12:20 AM, Packrat <brn2dip(at)yahoo.com> wrote:
Okay gents, I've had about enough of this nonsense and I'm reasonably sure Italy has as well.
Since Germany hasn't the balls to stand up to Russia nor has he the integrity to follow through
on agreements with others the outcome of this game is more or less a forgone conclusion; a
Russian solo.
I'm okay with a strong alliance, but Germany has all but given up here and the game is suffering
as a result.
Nigel - you have played this game in a manner keeping with how I see you as a diplomacy player,
and you have certainly earned the solo. However, if you are even half the player I believe you to
be I implore you to end this and end it now. You can take Denmark easily enough and I will even
support you by hitting YOR so it cannot support EDI in
place.
Each game I have played in recently has led me to question the caliber of the players here at DC. Sorry,
but that's how I see it. Sure, the group is intended to self regulate, but higher level players won't put up with
the nonsense that goes on here. I am unsure as to whether I will play another game here as time goes on.
As for our intrepid Germany, well, his name will go on a list that DC necessitated me putting together.
For all the time I player on Cat23 I never had to create a list of players to stay away from. DC gave
me that need.
Nigel - PLEASE - end this.[Reply] |
| DC330: Introduction from Berlin - charlesf (Jun 07, 2010, 6:17 am) |
Hi guys,
I'm grateful Dirk has made the transition from a
1936 player to a 1936 GM! Not only does this advance playtesting, but it also
allows me to have a first go at playing one of my own variants! Though I dare
say I'll once again prove that game designers usually aren't particularly good
at playing their own games...
Until about a year ago, I took something like a
five-year holiday from all things Diplomacy. Before that, I played quite a bit
since first getting a game together in High School, though obviously had to
take a break during my military service. American friends of ours gave my
father a copy of Avalon Hill at some point, no doubt because he's a diplomat
himself. As kids, we used the board to play our Risk-style games on what we
thought was a better map than Risk's original one. At some point though I got
curious about the game's actual rules, read them and that got the ball
rolling...
Round 2000/2001, I came across Baron Powell's
excellent 1900 variant and became an immediate convert what I believe happens to
be a scenario superior to Standard Diplomacy. Brilliant stuff! As Baron and I
began a long-running correspondence about variant design, the Ambition &
Empire variant soon came to my attention and I was immediately intrigued by the
well-modeled historical scenario and the ever so fascinating DP mechanism Baron
and Jeff had come up with. The bulk of my pbem Diplomacy playing 2001-04 was
limited to Baron's variants as I felt that Standard and other variants simply
couldn't match Baron's and Jeff's work.
Being such a fan of the DP mechanism, I started to
wonder what other historical settings might mesh well with Baron's and Jeff's
innovation. I soon homed in on the mid-17th century and the interwar period,
then setting about to designing my own DP variants: 1648 and
1926/36.
After my five-year Diplomacy "sabbatical", what
drew me back into the hobby was that a fresh look at the 1648 variant gave me
the idea how to fix a number of issues I hadn't solved to my satisfaction in the
past. Following those tweaks, I felt like running a playtest and that got me
back into the hobby.
So, over the past year I've GMed one 1648 (DC264),
one 1926 (DC283) and one 1900 game (on DPJudge) to conclusion, while I'm
currently running the second 1648 (DC279) and the first 1936 contest
(DC319).
As a player, I've played Germany in a Standard game
(DC266) and Denmark-Norway in an Ambition & Empire game. As you already
know, Wladimir played Russia in (DC266 - not DC270!) and Robert championed
Britain in that Ambition & Empire game. Currently I'm involved in a 1900
game, though none of you guys are involved in that one.
So that's the extent of my hobby involvement over
the past year. I don't believe I encountered anyone else in our group in earlier
years. Of course, none of this matters since I trust we all approach a new game
with a clean slate as regards to players we've previously
encountered.
As for my power preferences, I put Germany on top
of my list because:
- I'm particularly fond of playing centrally
located players.
- Germany didn't do well in the previous 1926
contest.
- Some of the newly implemented changes worsen
Germany's odds and I'd like to see whether I'm up to those additional
challenges.
- I myself am German and championing your own
country always has a special draw.
That being said, my preferences was only a slight
one as I'm also eager to try my hand at the others as well. But a slight
preference is still a preference, so I spent the max bidding points on
Germany.
As a designer, I obviously am interested in what
positions players particularly want to play. In the 1936 contest I am running
myself, France, the Soviet Union, Britain and Italy proved the more popular
powers. My guess is that was in part on account of players wanting to have a
stake in Spanish affairs. But much as in this game, preferences were quite
reasonably spread out, so these stats aren't that meaningful. And I certainly
don't take them as an indication of which powers players consider stronger than
others. After all, players pick their preferences for all sorts of
reasons.
Okay, I've gone on quite enough. I hope this gaming
experience shall be a blast for everyone involved!
Cheers,
Charles
[Reply] |
| DC317; Enough already - Douglas_E_Fresh (Jun 07, 2010, 3:49 am) |
Thanks for sharing your thoughts Packrat; yet another example of your considered, amiable and of course "Diplomatic" communication.
I am unsurprised that you consider yourself a higher level player when you can turn in such sweet prose every time.
For the record, Please feel free to add me to your blacklist, I am fairly certain it will not be required, as this game has also led me to the conclusion that I shall not be playing much Dip. I think I'll be sticking to GMing from now on
Best
D
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 12:20 AM, Packrat <brn2dip(at)yahoo.com> wrote:
Okay gents, I've had about enough of this nonsense and I'm reasonably sure Italy has as well.
Since Germany hasn't the balls to stand up to Russia nor has he the integrity to follow through
on agreements with others the outcome of this game is more or less a forgone conclusion; a
Russian solo.
I'm okay with a strong alliance, but Germany has all but given up here and the game is suffering
as a result.
Nigel - you have played this game in a manner keeping with how I see you as a diplomacy player,
and you have certainly earned the solo. However, if you are even half the player I believe you to
be I implore you to end this and end it now. You can take Denmark easily enough and I will even
support you by hitting YOR so it cannot support EDI in
place.
Each game I have played in recently has led me to question the caliber of the players here at DC. Sorry,
but that's how I see it. Sure, the group is intended to self regulate, but higher level players won't put up with
the nonsense that goes on here. I am unsure as to whether I will play another game here as time goes on.
As for our intrepid Germany, well, his name will go on a list that DC necessitated me putting together.
For all the time I player on Cat23 I never had to create a list of players to stay away from. DC gave
me that need.
Nigel - PLEASE - end this.[Reply] |
| Greets from Californian Britian - sunchung (Jun 06, 2010, 10:39 pm) |
Hello,
Greetings - I look forward to playing with everyone in this game. A bit about my Diplomacy history. I just started playing Diplomacy again after about a +7 year hiatus. Back when I did play in my first go around, it was off of the email newsgroup called Cat23. It's since morphed, I believe, into www.diplomaticcorp.com. A friend of mine who used to also play on Cat23 forwarded an invite for the Winterblitz 2010 and that's how I got re-acquainted with Diplomacy and the DC site. I played my first game earlier this year, and was fortunate enough to play in a game with our GM Dirk. It was this connection that has brought me to this game. I've never played a variant of Diplomacy other than Colonial Diplomacy and Gunboat, so I look forward to this game. I love the idea of the connected map plus the balanced nature of the powers and struggles. And I look forward to having a very dynamic map where each player needs to contact every other player - not just be focused on a particular theater. To be frank, the complexity of this variant both excite me and worry me - I hope I have the intellectual horsepower to keep up with all of the moving parts!
A bit about me. I'm in the San Francisco bay area with two young kids, so hopefully they won't tire me out too much (and allow me to think straight!). I don't know any of the other players other than our GM. Just one last note of thanks to Charles for creating this variant and Dirk for hosting the game. I've shied away from other Diplomacy sites that use judges as I think they tend to attract more casual players that are less committed to the game. Thanks you for the volunteer work and service to the DC community/players.
Sun[Reply] |
| dc330 Intro Turkey - Wladimir7 (Jun 06, 2010, 5:22 pm) |
Greetings Leaders of Europe,
This is Wladimir Mysonski and I playing from San Francisco, CA, USA. I began playing face-to-face Diplomacy back in high school and last year I picked it back up again.
My first game back (dc270), I played with Charles and he taught me quite a bit about how to play Germany and about German elections. Our topics would occasionally stray off of the game.
The second game (dc283) included Dirk in the 1926 variant that Charles play-tested. I was lucky to pull a draw out of that one.
Nick (France) accurately pointed out our playing history wherein I am barely surviving in dc307. For what it is worth, the Asia variant is grossly uneven in power distribution but this could just be sour grapes talking.
I believe that is the entirety of my connections in this game.
Just a comment about the bidding. I like it. I am very surprised though in how the bidding went. I think Poland is potentially very powerful and frankly am a little disappointed that it didn't get more votes. Turkey was also not very popular but perhaps you all know something that I don't. We shall see.
I enjoy chatting about anything geo-political, historical, or game-related.
Thanks,
Wladimir[Reply] |
| DC310: Fall 1903 Adjudication - Samnuva (Jun 06, 2010, 4:18 pm) |
Delay to Thursday, 23:59 GMT
On Jun 6, 2010, at 5:17 PM, Steven Hu wrote:
Can the adjudications be delayed until Thursday, June 10th?
From: sam_buck_productions(at)mac.com
Subject: Re: DC310: Fall 1903 Adjudication
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 21:39:08 -0400
To: feanorsfirstborn(at)gmail.com; leeaclark(at)btinternet.com; DC310(at)diplomaticcorp.com; steven.by.hu(at)hotmail.com;stuhobbs(at)gmail.com; kolinloconti(at)gmail.com; alliancedata(at)yahoo.com; Robert.choi(at)invescotrimark.com
Anyone have a problem with Tuesday? Winter due Tuesday the 8th, 23:59 GMT.
On Jun 3, 2010, at 9:35 PM, Adam Janis wrote:
When's everything due next? From: Sam Buck [mailto:sam_buck_productions(at)mac.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2010 2:09 PM
To: Doegred Winsterhand; Steven Hu; Lee Clark; DC310 Forum; Stu Hobbs; Kolin Loconti; Adam Janis; Robert Choi
Subject: DC310: Fall 1903 Adjudication Interesting. It looks like every person in the game either got stabbed or formed a new alliance this turn. As Turkey expands its reach, a Russian fleet invades its capital, while in the East, Italy suffers another withering NMR. Germany finally falls, after a valiant struggle by Doegred. Thanks for Playing. Since this is Italy's third consecutive turn NMRing, he is in CD, unless Kolin emails me immediately. Austria: Supply centers were gained. Units that may be built: 1. France: Supply centers were gained. Units that may be built: 1. Germany: Supply centers were lost. Units that must be removed: 1. Italy: Supply centers were lost. Units that must be removed: 2. Russia: Supply centers were gained. Units that may be built: 2. Turkey: Supply centers were gained. Units that may be built: 1. Austria: A vie -> triAustria: A tyr Supports F tri -> venAustria: F tri -> venAustria: A ser -> budAustria: A mun Supports A ber -> kieEngland: F nwy HoldsEngland: F nth -> holEngland: F lvp -> iriEngland: F eng Supports F lvp -> iriEngland: A den Supports A ber -> kieFrance: A ruh -> holFrance: F pic -> belFrance: F mao -> iriFrance: A mar HoldsFrance: A kie -> holFrance: A bur Supports F pic -> belFrance: A bre -> gasItaly: F wes HoldsItaly: A ven HoldsItaly: A pie HoldsItaly: F adr HoldsRussia: F swe Supports A denRussia: A stp HoldsRussia: A sil -> berRussia: A rum HoldsRussia: A lvn -> warRussia: F bla -> conRussia: A ber -> kieTurkey: F nap Supports F gre -> ionTurkey: F ion -> tunTurkey: F gre -> ionTurkey: A bul HoldsTurkey: A alb Holds
Look 'em in the eye: FREE Messenger video chat Chat Now![Reply] |
| 1648 091010: - charlesf (Jun 06, 2010, 4:04 pm) |
Hi guys,
I've only just got back from the countryside
and am inundated with emails. I'll sort through these DC279 matters on
Monday.
Charles
[Reply] |
| dc311 Sprng reminder - notasb (Jun 06, 2010, 2:28 pm) |
Spring '11 and votes on the Austrian solo proposal are due Monday June
7th 2 pm cdst (GMT -5) 1900 GMT
If I haven't acknowledged your orders I haven't received them.
Christine
------------
Experience is a wonderful thing. It
enables you to recognize a mistake when you make it again.
Hotmail is redefining busy with tools for the New Busy. Get more from your inbox. See how.[Reply] |
| DC 330: Salut - DrSwordopolis (Jun 06, 2010, 1:51 pm) |
Hi,
My name is Nick and I will be playing La Troisième République. I will do my utmost to ensure that it survives (and thrives?) long past its historical counterpart. This variant is interesting to me because of the way the date and power distribution make it seem very 'realistic' (by Diplomacy standards) allowing one to rewrite history - or not, in Germany's case.  Does France ally with England and try to prop up Poland and the minor powers against Germany while maintaining good relations with Italy and the USSR or do I throw history to the wind and ally with the great rival across the Rhine? Anyways...
I have played with Wladimir before, pretty recently actually, in DC 309, which is still running. I was eliminated early, and a few game years later he's not looking much better. We got reasonably well (even though he contributed greatly to my early downfall), but I think as France and Turkey our relations will be a little different in this game. I've also recently played a game with Dirk, our GM, in DC 311. We similarly got along very well in that game until he screwed me over really hard, and now he has a shot at a solo or at least a strong 2-way draw while I've been long eliminated, so good for him. Note to self: Diplomacy is not about making friends. I'm definitely looking for a result more to my liking in this game.
As for me, I'm a linguistics student living in Canada, in an unremarkable small town about 100 km outside Vancouver. I've been into Diplomacy for just under a year, but in that time I've played quite a few games and have at times been extremely invested in the hobby. I find I either do extremely well or extremely terribly in my games. Hopefully this doesn't reveal too much useful information to you all.
Best of luck dominating Europe and the Near East,
-Nick[Reply] |
| dc330: Player introduction: Poland - smileyrob (Jun 06, 2010, 1:10 pm) |
According to Dirk's House Rules, "
??Prior to
the start of the game each player is required to send an email to all players
in the game as well as the GM introducing themselves and declaring which other
players in the game they have played Diplomacy with before." I am going to do my best to do that.
My name is Robert Stein. I live in Eugene, Oregon. I currently teach social studies and mathematics at Thurston High School in neighboring Springfield. When school is over (June 18th), I'll be taking a few courses during the University's summer session to get the "Professional Growth" credits I'll need to renew my teaching license.
During my undergraduate years I had a group that regularly played Thursday night face-to-face standard diplomacy. After moving I found myself missing the game and discovered the world of PBEM and judges around 2000. I soon found myself playing a lot of the 1900 variant, and eventually A&E as well. I did take about a a three year hiatus from 2005-2008, and since returning to the hobby have not played as many games, or been as successful as I once was. Hopefully that second part will change with this game.
I have definitely played with Charles (Germany in this game) and David (Italy) before, both in A&E games. Most recently I have played with Charles in A&E 090802 in which he was Denmark and I Britain. He pretty much beat me handily managing to form an alliance with Prussia and France against me. Alas Charles and I are again neighboring powers. I hope, at least for me, things work out differently this time. Charles also was the temporary GM in a 1900 game I was playing just before the start of that A&E game. I think we may also have played once before, but I cannot remember whether it was a 1900 or an A&E game. I just recall that when he started to GM that 1900 game his name was not unfamiliar to me. It was Charles who informed me of this variant, his creation, and invited me to play in this game.
I played with David in A&E 090205/DC240 in which I was Turkey and he Denmark. With both survived to the finish, but lost nonetheless as the game ended in a solo for Britain.
I do not recall having played with any of the other players. If I have, and I don't remember, please accept my apology. This games played prior to my hiatus were from a different computer and a different email address, so it is hard for me to really carefully search all of your names. I do see Karsten was an observer of each of those A&E games, but I don't think we have ever played against one another.
I am looking forward to trying this new variant. Thank you Charles for creating it and inviting me to play. Thank you Dirk for mastering. Unlike the rest of you, I honestly had no idea which power I wanted to play. As most of you did have clear preferences, and received your choice, I hope I am not at too much of a disadvantage.
I eagerly await individual correspondence with each of you.
Robert[Reply] |
| DC309 Winter 1904 delay - TheWhiteWolf (Jun 06, 2010, 11:56 am) |
In my experience, both things always do...
From: mike Tombu <mtombu(at)gmail.com>
Sorry for the delays. Marrying/moving took more energy than expected.
[Reply] |
