| 1648 091010: Corrected Adjucation in the pipeline - hmtucaz (Mar 29, 2010, 4:36 pm) |
Charles -
So glad you are correcting this. I guess it means that my moves gave me the solo win. No need to do the maps. Instead you can just announce my victory.
I'll accept everyone's congratulations and I thank you all for a good game.
My End of Game Statement is simple - Hey Ma, it was a tough fight, but I won.
Now, on to the next game.
Harvey
2010/3/29 Charles Féaux de la Croix <charlesf(at)web.de ([email]charlesf(at)web.de[/email])>
Hi guys,
I'm afraid I missed a set of later orders and hence the adjucation I sent out earlier is invalid. Actually, I noticed my mistake as the message was being sent and stopped the message transfer. Or so I thought. I now see it made it out into cyberspace after all.
I'm currently working on the corrected adjucation and it should be going out to you shortly.
Sorry about this gaffe of mine.
Charles
[Reply] |
| 1648 091010: Corrected Adjucation in the pipeline - charlesf (Mar 29, 2010, 4:32 pm) |
Hi guys,
I'm afraid I missed a set of later orders and hence the adjucation I sent out earlier is invalid. Actually, I noticed my mistake as the message was being sent and stopped the message transfer. Or so I thought. I now see it made it out into cyberspace after all.
I'm currently working on the corrected adjucation and it should be going out to you shortly.
Sorry about this gaffe of mine.
Charles[Reply] |
| 1648 091010: Corrected Adjucation in the pipeline (dc279) hmtucaz Mar 29, 04:36 pm |
Charles -
So glad you are correcting this. I guess it means that my moves gave me the solo win. No need to do the maps. Instead you can just announce my victory.
I'll accept everyone's congratulations and I thank you all for a good game.
My End of Game Statement is simple - Hey Ma, it was a tough fight, but I won.
Now, on to the next game.
Harvey
2010/3/29 Charles Féaux de la Croix <charlesf(at)web.de ([email]charlesf(at)web.de[/email])>
Hi guys,
I'm afraid I missed a set of later orders and hence the adjucation I sent out earlier is invalid. Actually, I noticed my mistake as the message was being sent and stopped the message transfer. Or so I thought. I now see it made it out into cyberspace after all.
I'm currently working on the corrected adjucation and it should be going out to you shortly.
Sorry about this gaffe of mine.
Charles
|
| 1648 091010: Fall 1655 Moves - MattKelly (Mar 29, 2010, 4:10 pm) |
I sent in a changed set of orders this a.m. did you not recieve them?
----- Forwarded Message ----
From: Matthew Kelly <kelly058(at)verizon.net>
To: charlesf(at)web.de
Sent: Mon, March 29, 2010 10:57:09 AM
Subject: 1648 Sweden Orders
(A) Mec support (A) BRa
(F) Baltic support (A) Bra
(A) Bra support French (A)UPr to LSa
-Matt-
From: Charles Féaux de la Croix <charlesf(at)web.de>
To: Charles Féaux de la Croix <charlesf(at)web.de>; Matthew Kelly <kelly058(at)verizon.net>; Mike Hoffman <mrh(at)panix.com>; Marc Ellinger <mellinger(at)blitzbardgett.com>; Harvey Morris <hmtucaz(at)gmail.com>; Nigel Phillips <nephilli99(at)hotmail.com>; Jorge Saralegui <jmsaralegui(at)gmail.com>; Mikael Johansson <m_don_j(at)hotmail.com>; Dirk Knemeyer <dirk(at)knemeyer.com>; Aidan Slattery <AiSlattery(at)aol.com>; dc279(at)diplomaticcorp.com
Cc: Jeff Hall <hall.jeff(at)gmail.com>; RJ Jenulis <R.Jenulis(at)gmail.com>; Nick Higgins <congressofvienna1814(at)yahoo.com>; Jeffrey Kase <jeffreykase(at)yahoo.com>; jfburgess(at)gmail.com; Marc Ellinger <mellinger(at)blitzbardgett.com>; Tony Cheng <moskatoe(at)gmail.com>; Benjamin Hester <screwtape777(at)gmail.com>; Mario Huys <woelpad(at)yahoo.com>; Chris McInerney <c.p.mcinerney(at)gmail.com>; Wladimir Mysonski <wmysonski(at)gmail.com>
Sent: Mon, March 29, 2010 4:54:36 PM
Subject: 1648 091010: Fall 1655 Moves
Hi guys,
if you thought the English would hold on to Novgorod, well, you were mistaken. The Poles retook the ancient city as Cromwell's men focused on securing territory in the East (in doing so, routing the Turkish auxilliaries that had been assisting the Poles these past seasons).
Sweden's decline has continued unabated as the March of Brandenburg was seized by imperial troops that evacuated Lower Saxony, no doubt in view of the heavy odds there stacked against them. This gave Louis XIV another easy conquest, next to forcing the Polish Jutland army to surrender after its many exploits.
Now, there are no retreats pending, so it's just adjustments this winter (31 March). Thereafter, we may either move on to a Monday or Wednesday deadline, depending on what players' holiday schedules. I'm expecting some deadline extension request, so Spring 1656 probably will be on post-Easter Wednesday.
Cheers,
Charles
----------
PLAYERS:
AUSTRIA: Mike Hoffman <mrh(at)panix.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)
TURKEY: Aidan Slattery <AiSlattery(at)aol.com>
PROCLAMATIONS:
o IMPERIAL REGIMENTS SEEK WINTER QUARTERS IN BERLIN
o ROUNDHEADS ROUT JANISSARIES IN FAR-OFF LANDS
o LOUIS XIV CELEBRATES FRENCH VICTORIES NEAR COPENHAGEN AND BRUNSWICK
o POLES RECONQUER NOVGOROD
o SPANIARDS MAINTAIN THEIR TOEHOLD IN THE EMPIRE
o SWEDES LOSE GROUND ON GERMAN SOIL
o SULTAN TAKES A GREATER INTEREST IN POLISH AFFAIRS
PRESS: None. 
ORDERS:
Austria:
A Bavaria Supports A Tyrolia - Swabia
A Lower Saxony - Brandenburg
A Saxony Supports A Lower Saxony - Brandenburg
A Trieste - Venice (*Fails*)
A Tyrolia - Swabia (*Bounce*)
England:
A Abo - Ingria
F Arctic Ocean Supports A Karelia - Permia
F Gulf of Bothnia - Riga (*Fails*)
A Karelia - Permia
F Lake Ladoga Supports A Abo - Ingria
F Norwegian Sea Convoys A Karelia - Permia
A Novgorod - Siberia
A Stockholm - Scania
France:
F Helgoland Bight Supports F Skagerrak - Copenhagen
A Lombardy Supports A Venice
A Lorraine Supports A Switzerland - Swabia
A Rhineland-Westphalia Supports A United Provinces - Lower Saxony
A Savoy - Switzerland (*Fails*)
F Skagerrak - Copenhagen
A Swabia - Hesse
A Switzerland - Swabia (*Bounce*)
A United Provinces - Lower Saxony
A Venice Hold
Poland-Lithuania:
A Copenhagen - Holstein (*Disbanded*)
A Courland - Prussia (*Fails*)
A Ingria - Novgorod
A Moscow Supports A Ingria - Novgorod
A Prussia - Greater Poland (*Fails*)
A Pskov Supports A Ingria - Novgorod
A Riga - Courland (*Bounce*)
A Samogitia - Courland (*Bounce*)
A Smolensk Supports A Ingria - Novgorod
Spain:
A Algiers Supports F Tunis
A Holstein - Copenhagen (*Fails*)
F Naples Supports F Papal States(ec) (*Cut*)
F Papal States(ec) Supports F Naples
F Sardinia Supports F Tyrrhenian Sea
A Seville Hold
F Tunis Supports F Tyrrhenian Sea
A Tuscany Supports A Venice
F Tyrrhenian Sea Supports F Naples
Sweden:
F Baltic Sea Supports A Brandenburg - Greater Poland
A Brandenburg - Greater Poland
A Mecklenburg - Holstein (*Bounce*)
Turkey:
F Adriatic Sea Supports F Ionian Sea - Naples
F Aegean Sea Supports F Eastern Mediterranean - Ionian Sea (*Fails*)
A Croatia Supports A Trieste (*Ordered to Move*)
F Eastern Mediterranean - Ionian Sea (*Fails*)
F Egypt Supports F Eastern Mediterranean - Ionian Sea (*Fails*)
F Illyria Supports F Adriatic Sea
F Ionian Sea - Naples (*Fails*)
A Permia Supports A Ingria - Novgorod (*Disbanded*)
F Sicily Supports F Ionian Sea - Naples
A Silesia Supports A Lower Saxony - Brandenburg
A Volhynia - Podolia
PENDING RETREATS:
None.
ADJUSTMENTS:
Austria:
Build
France:
Build
Build
Poland-Lithuania:
Build
Spain:
Build
Sweden:
Remove
Turkey:
Build
SUPPLY CENTER OWNERSHIP (Winter 1655):
Austria(6): Bavaria, Brandenburg, Prague, Saxony, Trieste, Vienna.
England( : Abo, Bristol, Christiania, Ireland, London, Scotland, Stockholm, United Provinces.
France(12): Brest, Copenhagen, Flanders, Lorraine, Lower Saxony, Marseilles, Paris, Rhineland-Westphalia, Savoy, Swabia, Switzerland, Venice.
Poland-Lithuania(9): Courland, Cracow, Moscow, Novgorod, Prussia, Riga, Vilna, Voronezh, Warsaw.
Spain(10): Algiers, Madrid, Mecklenburg, Morocco, Naples, Papal States, Portugal, Seville, Tunis, Tuscany.
Sweden(2): Mecklenburg, Stettin.
Turkey(11): Belgrade, Candia, Constantinople, Crimea, Damascus, Moldavia, Persia, Transylvania, Turkestan, Ukraine, Wallachia.
DEADLINE SCHEDULE: (all orders are due NLT 6PM CET (i.e. GMT+1)...not local time)
o Winter 1655 Retreats/Adjustments: 31 March
ORDERS MAP:
RESULTS MAP:
nt in[Reply] |
| 1648 091010: Fall 1655 Moves - charlesf (Mar 29, 2010, 4:04 pm) |
Hi guys,
if you thought the English would hold on to Novgorod, well, you were mistaken. The Poles retook the ancient city as Cromwell's men focused on securing territory in the East (in doing so, routing the Turkish auxilliaries that had been assisting the Poles these past seasons).
Sweden's decline has continued unabated as the March of Brandenburg was seized by imperial troops that evacuated Lower Saxony, no doubt in view of the heavy odds there stacked against them. This gave Louis XIV another easy conquest, next to forcing the Polish Jutland army to surrender after its many exploits.
Now, there are no retreats pending, so it's just adjustments this winter (31 March). Thereafter, we may either move on to a Monday or Wednesday deadline, depending on what players' holiday schedules. I'm expecting some deadline extension request, so Spring 1656 probably will be on post-Easter Wednesday.
Cheers,
Charles
----------
PLAYERS:
AUSTRIA: Mike Hoffman <mrh(at)panix.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)
TURKEY: Aidan Slattery <AiSlattery(at)aol.com>
PROCLAMATIONS:
o IMPERIAL REGIMENTS SEEK WINTER QUARTERS IN BERLIN
o ROUNDHEADS ROUT JANISSARIES IN FAR-OFF LANDS
o LOUIS XIV CELEBRATES FRENCH VICTORIES NEAR COPENHAGEN AND BRUNSWICK
o POLES RECONQUER NOVGOROD
o SPANIARDS MAINTAIN THEIR TOEHOLD IN THE EMPIRE
o SWEDES LOSE GROUND ON GERMAN SOIL
o SULTAN TAKES A GREATER INTEREST IN POLISH AFFAIRS
PRESS: None.
ORDERS:
Austria:
A Bavaria Supports A Tyrolia - Swabia
A Lower Saxony - Brandenburg
A Saxony Supports A Lower Saxony - Brandenburg
A Trieste - Venice (*Fails*)
A Tyrolia - Swabia (*Bounce*)
England:
A Abo - Ingria
F Arctic Ocean Supports A Karelia - Permia
F Gulf of Bothnia - Riga (*Fails*)
A Karelia - Permia
F Lake Ladoga Supports A Abo - Ingria
F Norwegian Sea Convoys A Karelia - Permia
A Novgorod - Siberia
A Stockholm - Scania
France:
F Helgoland Bight Supports F Skagerrak - Copenhagen
A Lombardy Supports A Venice
A Lorraine Supports A Switzerland - Swabia
A Rhineland-Westphalia Supports A United Provinces - Lower Saxony
A Savoy - Switzerland (*Fails*)
F Skagerrak - Copenhagen
A Swabia - Hesse
A Switzerland - Swabia (*Bounce*)
A United Provinces - Lower Saxony
A Venice Hold
Poland-Lithuania:
A Copenhagen - Holstein (*Disbanded*)
A Courland - Prussia (*Fails*)
A Ingria - Novgorod
A Moscow Supports A Ingria - Novgorod
A Prussia - Greater Poland (*Fails*)
A Pskov Supports A Ingria - Novgorod
A Riga - Courland (*Bounce*)
A Samogitia - Courland (*Bounce*)
A Smolensk Supports A Ingria - Novgorod
Spain:
A Algiers Supports F Tunis
A Holstein - Copenhagen (*Fails*)
F Naples Supports F Papal States(ec) (*Cut*)
F Papal States(ec) Supports F Naples
F Sardinia Supports F Tyrrhenian Sea
A Seville Hold
F Tunis Supports F Tyrrhenian Sea
A Tuscany Supports A Venice
F Tyrrhenian Sea Supports F Naples
Sweden:
F Baltic Sea Supports A Brandenburg - Greater Poland
A Brandenburg - Greater Poland
A Mecklenburg - Holstein (*Bounce*)
Turkey:
F Adriatic Sea Supports F Ionian Sea - Naples
F Aegean Sea Supports F Eastern Mediterranean - Ionian Sea (*Fails*)
A Croatia Supports A Trieste (*Ordered to Move*)
F Eastern Mediterranean - Ionian Sea (*Fails*)
F Egypt Supports F Eastern Mediterranean - Ionian Sea (*Fails*)
F Illyria Supports F Adriatic Sea
F Ionian Sea - Naples (*Fails*)
A Permia Supports A Ingria - Novgorod (*Disbanded*)
F Sicily Supports F Ionian Sea - Naples
A Silesia Supports A Lower Saxony - Brandenburg
A Volhynia - Podolia
PENDING RETREATS:
None.
ADJUSTMENTS:
Austria:
Build
France:
Build
Build
Poland-Lithuania:
Build
Spain:
Build
Sweden:
Remove
Turkey:
Build
SUPPLY CENTER OWNERSHIP (Winter 1655):
Austria(6): Bavaria, Brandenburg, Prague, Saxony, Trieste, Vienna.
England(: Abo, Bristol, Christiania, Ireland, London, Scotland, Stockholm, United Provinces.
France(12): Brest, Copenhagen, Flanders, Lorraine, Lower Saxony, Marseilles, Paris, Rhineland-Westphalia, Savoy, Swabia, Switzerland, Venice.
Poland-Lithuania(9): Courland, Cracow, Moscow, Novgorod, Prussia, Riga, Vilna, Voronezh, Warsaw.
Spain(10): Algiers, Madrid, Mecklenburg, Morocco, Naples, Papal States, Portugal, Seville, Tunis, Tuscany.
Sweden(2): Mecklenburg, Stettin.
Turkey(11): Belgrade, Candia, Constantinople, Crimea, Damascus, Moldavia, Persia, Transylvania, Turkestan, Ukraine, Wallachia.
DEADLINE SCHEDULE: (all orders are due NLT 6PM CET (i.e. GMT+1)...not local time)
o Winter 1655 Retreats/Adjustments: 31 March
ORDERS MAP:
RESULTS MAP:[Reply] |
| 1648 091010: Fall 1655 Moves (dc279) MattKelly Mar 29, 04:10 pm |
I sent in a changed set of orders this a.m. did you not recieve them?
----- Forwarded Message ----
From: Matthew Kelly <kelly058(at)verizon.net>
To: charlesf(at)web.de
Sent: Mon, March 29, 2010 10:57:09 AM
Subject: 1648 Sweden Orders
(A) Mec support (A) BRa
(F) Baltic support (A) Bra
(A) Bra support French (A)UPr to LSa
-Matt-
From: Charles Féaux de la Croix <charlesf(at)web.de>
To: Charles Féaux de la Croix <charlesf(at)web.de>; Matthew Kelly <kelly058(at)verizon.net>; Mike Hoffman <mrh(at)panix.com>; Marc Ellinger <mellinger(at)blitzbardgett.com>; Harvey Morris <hmtucaz(at)gmail.com>; Nigel Phillips <nephilli99(at)hotmail.com>; Jorge Saralegui <jmsaralegui(at)gmail.com>; Mikael Johansson <m_don_j(at)hotmail.com>; Dirk Knemeyer <dirk(at)knemeyer.com>; Aidan Slattery <AiSlattery(at)aol.com>; dc279(at)diplomaticcorp.com
Cc: Jeff Hall <hall.jeff(at)gmail.com>; RJ Jenulis <R.Jenulis(at)gmail.com>; Nick Higgins <congressofvienna1814(at)yahoo.com>; Jeffrey Kase <jeffreykase(at)yahoo.com>; jfburgess(at)gmail.com; Marc Ellinger <mellinger(at)blitzbardgett.com>; Tony Cheng <moskatoe(at)gmail.com>; Benjamin Hester <screwtape777(at)gmail.com>; Mario Huys <woelpad(at)yahoo.com>; Chris McInerney <c.p.mcinerney(at)gmail.com>; Wladimir Mysonski <wmysonski(at)gmail.com>
Sent: Mon, March 29, 2010 4:54:36 PM
Subject: 1648 091010: Fall 1655 Moves
Hi guys,
if you thought the English would hold on to Novgorod, well, you were mistaken. The Poles retook the ancient city as Cromwell's men focused on securing territory in the East (in doing so, routing the Turkish auxilliaries that had been assisting the Poles these past seasons).
Sweden's decline has continued unabated as the March of Brandenburg was seized by imperial troops that evacuated Lower Saxony, no doubt in view of the heavy odds there stacked against them. This gave Louis XIV another easy conquest, next to forcing the Polish Jutland army to surrender after its many exploits.
Now, there are no retreats pending, so it's just adjustments this winter (31 March). Thereafter, we may either move on to a Monday or Wednesday deadline, depending on what players' holiday schedules. I'm expecting some deadline extension request, so Spring 1656 probably will be on post-Easter Wednesday.
Cheers,
Charles
----------
PLAYERS:
AUSTRIA: Mike Hoffman <mrh(at)panix.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)
TURKEY: Aidan Slattery <AiSlattery(at)aol.com>
PROCLAMATIONS:
o IMPERIAL REGIMENTS SEEK WINTER QUARTERS IN BERLIN
o ROUNDHEADS ROUT JANISSARIES IN FAR-OFF LANDS
o LOUIS XIV CELEBRATES FRENCH VICTORIES NEAR COPENHAGEN AND BRUNSWICK
o POLES RECONQUER NOVGOROD
o SPANIARDS MAINTAIN THEIR TOEHOLD IN THE EMPIRE
o SWEDES LOSE GROUND ON GERMAN SOIL
o SULTAN TAKES A GREATER INTEREST IN POLISH AFFAIRS
PRESS: None.
ORDERS:
Austria:
A Bavaria Supports A Tyrolia - Swabia
A Lower Saxony - Brandenburg
A Saxony Supports A Lower Saxony - Brandenburg
A Trieste - Venice (*Fails*)
A Tyrolia - Swabia (*Bounce*)
England:
A Abo - Ingria
F Arctic Ocean Supports A Karelia - Permia
F Gulf of Bothnia - Riga (*Fails*)
A Karelia - Permia
F Lake Ladoga Supports A Abo - Ingria
F Norwegian Sea Convoys A Karelia - Permia
A Novgorod - Siberia
A Stockholm - Scania
France:
F Helgoland Bight Supports F Skagerrak - Copenhagen
A Lombardy Supports A Venice
A Lorraine Supports A Switzerland - Swabia
A Rhineland-Westphalia Supports A United Provinces - Lower Saxony
A Savoy - Switzerland (*Fails*)
F Skagerrak - Copenhagen
A Swabia - Hesse
A Switzerland - Swabia (*Bounce*)
A United Provinces - Lower Saxony
A Venice Hold
Poland-Lithuania:
A Copenhagen - Holstein (*Disbanded*)
A Courland - Prussia (*Fails*)
A Ingria - Novgorod
A Moscow Supports A Ingria - Novgorod
A Prussia - Greater Poland (*Fails*)
A Pskov Supports A Ingria - Novgorod
A Riga - Courland (*Bounce*)
A Samogitia - Courland (*Bounce*)
A Smolensk Supports A Ingria - Novgorod
Spain:
A Algiers Supports F Tunis
A Holstein - Copenhagen (*Fails*)
F Naples Supports F Papal States(ec) (*Cut*)
F Papal States(ec) Supports F Naples
F Sardinia Supports F Tyrrhenian Sea
A Seville Hold
F Tunis Supports F Tyrrhenian Sea
A Tuscany Supports A Venice
F Tyrrhenian Sea Supports F Naples
Sweden:
F Baltic Sea Supports A Brandenburg - Greater Poland
A Brandenburg - Greater Poland
A Mecklenburg - Holstein (*Bounce*)
Turkey:
F Adriatic Sea Supports F Ionian Sea - Naples
F Aegean Sea Supports F Eastern Mediterranean - Ionian Sea (*Fails*)
A Croatia Supports A Trieste (*Ordered to Move*)
F Eastern Mediterranean - Ionian Sea (*Fails*)
F Egypt Supports F Eastern Mediterranean - Ionian Sea (*Fails*)
F Illyria Supports F Adriatic Sea
F Ionian Sea - Naples (*Fails*)
A Permia Supports A Ingria - Novgorod (*Disbanded*)
F Sicily Supports F Ionian Sea - Naples
A Silesia Supports A Lower Saxony - Brandenburg
A Volhynia - Podolia
PENDING RETREATS:
None.
ADJUSTMENTS:
Austria:
Build
France:
Build
Build
Poland-Lithuania:
Build
Spain:
Build
Sweden:
Remove
Turkey:
Build
SUPPLY CENTER OWNERSHIP (Winter 1655):
Austria(6): Bavaria, Brandenburg, Prague, Saxony, Trieste, Vienna.
England(: Abo, Bristol, Christiania, Ireland, London, Scotland, Stockholm, United Provinces.
France(12): Brest, Copenhagen, Flanders, Lorraine, Lower Saxony, Marseilles, Paris, Rhineland-Westphalia, Savoy, Swabia, Switzerland, Venice.
Poland-Lithuania(9): Courland, Cracow, Moscow, Novgorod, Prussia, Riga, Vilna, Voronezh, Warsaw.
Spain(10): Algiers, Madrid, Mecklenburg, Morocco, Naples, Papal States, Portugal, Seville, Tunis, Tuscany.
Sweden(2): Mecklenburg, Stettin.
Turkey(11): Belgrade, Candia, Constantinople, Crimea, Damascus, Moldavia, Persia, Transylvania, Turkestan, Ukraine, Wallachia.
DEADLINE SCHEDULE: (all orders are due NLT 6PM CET (i.e. GMT+1)...not local time)
o Winter 1655 Retreats/Adjustments: 31 March
ORDERS MAP:
RESULTS MAP:
nt in |
| 1648 v3.3 - charlesf (Mar 27, 2010, 8:37 am) |
Hi guys,
just a brief variant design heads-up: I've now finished implementing a couple of further changes to the variant. Eastern Europe has undergone considerable change since my reworking of other parts of the map (v3.2).
The Smolensk buffer space (basically the territory Poland ceded later in the 17th century to Russia) now shields Moscow from a first-year attack by the Poles. Yet as Moscow rather than Novgorod now stretches to the White Sea (ie. part of what's designated as the Norwegian Sea in the game), Moscow may be nonetheless targeted in 1649 (albeit only by a Danish descent on the Muscovite port of Archangel, so to speak).
A new province is located between Karelia and Moscow, Onega. This refashioning of the map allows for a new axis of attack in a Russo-Swedish war.
The sum of these changes in Eastern Europe very much alter Russia's opening play. Also, the dynamics in the North-Eastern triangle are somewhat changed by the extra Smolensk buffer edging Poland and Russia somewhat further apart.
Since I now realise that the unicoastal character of Abo was not in keeping with the intuitive reading of the map by most folks, I've decided to turn it into a bicoastal province. I had contemplated both approaches prior to the game and opted for the unicoastal option without it being a strong preference of mine, so better now to go with what I now understand is the more natural solution.
I hadn't added coastal labels to the past normal-sized maps since I thought that say the space round Holstein was simply too congested to fit them in. Fortunately a little rearranging of labels and the use of the smallest still legible font allowed this after all. So that ought to give players a "one stop" map reference.
All-in-all, I think both the lowered victory conditions and numerous map changes present a huge difference compared to v3.0, i.e. the one being used for the present playtest.
That being said, I'm tempted to yet:
a) Add a Magdeburg buffer space between Brandenburg, Saxony, Lower Saxony and Mecklenburg, while still having Lower Saxony and Brandenburg remain adjacent (arrows indicating this). I think gameplaywise this would be beneficial, but it might be cutting it close in terms of available space.
b) Also have Hesse and Franconia touch another, while Saxony and Swabia would remain adjacent. Another red-arrow-crossing. Arguably easier to fit in than the aforementioned Madgeburg idea, but I kinda fear it might look odd. I guess I'll just have to try that out one day and see whether such a change works for me aesthetically.
Other than perhaps those, I don't think I have any other possible changes on my radar. Though I guess one never knows what ideas might hit you next.
Cheers,
Charles[Reply] |
| 1648 091010: Polish monarch returns from exile - charlesf (Mar 25, 2010, 11:03 am) |
Hi guys,
Jorge has retracted his resignation and since that step was never of my own choosing, I've welcomed him back with immediate effect.
As such, we shall proceed on to the Fall 1655 Moves this coming Monday, 29 March. I trust that remaining on schedule allows for ample time. Please send me your preliminary orders no later than Saturday, should you not have already done so.
Cheers,
Charles[Reply] |
| 1648 091010: Summer 1655 Retreats - offdisc (Mar 24, 2010, 6:30 pm) |
I asked this question in a previous email and have not received an answer:
If Abo has no coasts, then it cannot force a break in Ing's coasts either
(ala Swe / Den in Standard). If Ing has no coasts, what the heck does it
need a Canal for???? I have never seen a Dip board produced with such a
flagrant redundancy built in. The existence of the canal obviously shows
that the designers made Ing with separate coasts.... and thus Abo must have
separate coasts as well.
Mike, Ingria has a canal (well, actually the river Neva) flowing through it.
Much as say the Kaiser-Wilhelm-Canal runs through Kiel in Standard, or the
Suez Canal runs through Suez in the 1900 variant. Neither space is bicoastal
in nature. So I don't understand your point in the least.
Charles
My point is this: If Ing is bi-coastal, what breaks it's coastline?
Abo, right? Therefore, Abo MUST be bi-coastal as well.
In the case of Kiel & Denmark, Denmark is not bi-coastal because of
its *other* connection, the one to Sweden. That connection is
considered 'fleet passable' and thus both Sweden and Denmark have
single coastlines. However, IF that connection was more solid and
Sweden became bi-coastal, then Denmark would also be bi-coastal,
because the canal runs inside of Kiel.
Thus, the Abo/Ing connection is the same thing. Ing contains the
canal to allow it to act as a single coast province, it's coast breaks
being Abo and whatever is south of it (map not open right now). But
that land connection with Abo **prevents Abo from being single
coastal**!!!
If you claim that Abo is single-coastal, then the border between Ing &
Abo becomes 'fleet passable' (like Den & Swe). So Ing becomes single
coastal ---- and thus no need for the canal.
It's just logic. 
Mike
---------
"Shared Pain is lessened, Shared Joy is increased" --- Spider Robinson
"Whenever some act of wondrous power must be performed, Michael is
sent" --- Pope Saint Gregory the Great[Reply] |
| 1648 091010: Summer 1655 Retreats - charlesf (Mar 24, 2010, 5:57 pm) |
Mike,
I recognise and wrote that Abo's character ought to be further explained in the variant rules. I rely on playtesters to point out what points need to be further specified/clarified. As a designer, one tends to be less aware of what isn't obvious since one's too close to the design. Catching these shortcomings is part of what one hopes to achieve with a playtest and I'm grateful to those who've contributed to the improvement of the variant in this manner.
As I mentioned in my previous email, I use the DC Variants page for descriptions. It includes a very detailed point about Ingria, never mentioning Denmark or Standard Dip:
"Ingria is a canal province (much as Copenhagen), thus allowing units to move from Abo, Lake Ladoga, the Gulf of Bothnia, Novgorod (South Coast) and Riga to Ingria (and vice versa). The River Neva is shown on the map to indicate this."
Basically, if an analogy to Standard is to be made, it should be to CON, not to DEN. Thus CON allows units to pass through, but BUL has coasts.
Yes, I got the nomenclature wrong. I meant Denmark. Thanks for pointing that out.
I asked this question in a previous email and have not received an answer: If Abo has no coasts, then it cannot force a break in Ing's coasts either (ala Swe / Den in Standard). If Ing has no coasts, what the heck does it need a Canal for???? I have never seen a Dip board produced with such a flagrant redundancy built in. The existence of the canal obviously shows that the designers made Ing with separate coasts.... and thus Abo must have separate coasts as well.
Mike, Ingria has a canal (well, actually the river Neva) flowing through it. Much as say the Kaiser-Wilhelm-Canal runs through Kiel in Standard, or the Suez Canal runs through Suez in the 1900 variant. Neither space is bicoastal in nature. So I don't understand your point in the least.
As a replacement player, I never received the large map or the pre-game description emails. So I can only go by what I find on the DC website.
My bad. I've now sent it to you.
Charles[Reply] |
| 1648 091010: Summer 1655 Retreats - offdisc (Mar 24, 2010, 5:17 pm) |
Charles,
As I mentioned in my previous email, I use the DC Variants page for descriptions. It includes a very detailed point about Ingria, never mentioning Denmark or Standard Dip:
"Ingria is a canal province (much as Copenhagen), thus allowing units to move from Abo, Lake Ladoga, the Gulf of Bothnia, Novgorod (South Coast) and Riga to Ingria (and vice versa). The River Neva is shown on the map to indicate this."
Basically, if an analogy to Standard is to be made, it should be to CON, not to DEN. Thus CON allows units to pass through, but BUL has coasts.
I asked this question in a previous email and have not received an answer: If Abo has no coasts, then it cannot force a break in Ing's coasts either (ala Swe / Den in Standard). If Ing has no coasts, what the heck does it need a Canal for???? I have never seen a Dip board produced with such a flagrant redundancy built in. The existence of the canal obviously shows that the designers made Ing with separate coasts.... and thus Abo must have separate coasts as well.
As a replacement player, I never received the large map or the pre-game description emails. So I can only go by what I find on the DC website.
Mike---------
"Shared Pain is lessened, Shared Joy is increased" --- Spider Robinson
"Whenever some act of wondrous power must be performed, Michael is sent" --- Pope Saint Gregory the Great
2010/3/24 Charles Féaux de la Croix <charlesf(at)web.de ([email]charlesf(at)web.de[/email])>
Hi guys,
from what I gather, Jorge has communicated to you players separately his resigning from the game. He cited in his correspondence with me his dissatisfaction over Abo/Lake Ladoga.
Now, the current variant rules do state that Ingria works much as Denmark in Standard Diplomacy. That logically also entails that Abo functions much the same as Sweden does in Standard.
Hence, there are no coastal specifications for Abo on the big map I sent to all players upon starting the game. Realpolitik's adjucation output equally expressly does not list any coasts for Abo as a careful reading of the fall adjucation shows.
I recognise that the variant rules would benefit from a more explicit statement beyond pointing to the Denmark analogy. For what is obvious to a designer may not be to playtesters (a frequent phenomenon in the rules-writing process). Actually, pointing out such room for improvement is indeed to a large extent what playtesting's about and my variants have benefited from such helpful playtester input. I regret Jorge plainly doesn't share that outlook.
Jorge has equally reproached me for not clarifying this situation to him beforehand. However, as it so happens I did actually note at least once in a mail to him prior to game-start that:
"Systematically, [the addition of Lake Ladoga as a space] means that Karelia will have two coasts, whereas Abo will still only have one (much as Standard's Sweden despite a canal space touching it in the middle)."
I'm sorry Jorge no longer remembered that. In light of the extensive variant design discussions Jorge has participated in in the past, I was not aware of his erroneous assumption/lapse of memory. Otherwise I would have of course again stressed that point in my communications to him, much as I notify any player whenever I notice such an issue. I don't spot all such issues, but I do try.
Suffice to say that I consider these illegitimate grounds for abandoning a game and am sorely disappointed.
Now, this means I shall seek a Polish replacement. Once I've sent out this summer adjucation, I shall immediately contact DC's replacement list and advertise the position more generally on the site. Lets hope we shall have a replacement before long. As soon as a replacement has materialised, I shall set a new deadline that affords the new Pole sufficient time to negotiate.
My hope is we'll be back on track before to long.
Cheers,
Charles
----------
PLAYERS:
AUSTRIA: Mike Hoffman <mrh(at)panix.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: TBA
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)
TURKEY: Aidan Slattery <AiSlattery(at)aol.com>
PROCLAMATIONS:
o POLISH MONARCH FORSAKES HIS PEOPLE
o ENGLISH REPAIR TO FINLAND
PRESS: None.
RETREATS:
England:
A Ingria - Abo
SUPPLY CENTER OWNERSHIP (Winter 1654):
Austria(5): Bavaria, Prague, Saxony, Trieste, Vienna.
England(: Abo, Bristol, Christiania, Ireland, London, Scotland, Stockholm, United Provinces.
France(11): Brest, Flanders, Lorraine, Lower Saxony, Marseilles, Paris, Rhineland-Westphalia, Savoy, Swabia, Switzerland, Venice.
Poland-Lithuania(10): Copenhagen, Courland, Cracow, Moscow, Novgorod, Prussia, Riga, Vilna, Voronezh, Warsaw.
Spain(10): Algiers, Madrid, Mecklenburg, Morocco, Naples, Papal States, Portugal, Seville, Tunis, Tuscany.
Sweden(3): Brandenburg, Mecklenburg, Stettin.
Turkey(11): Belgrade, Candia, Constantinople, Crimea, Damascus, Moldavia, Persia, Transylvania, Turkestan, Ukraine, Wallachia.
DEADLINE SCHEDULE: (all orders are due NLT 6PM CET (i.e. GMT+1)...not local time)
o Fall 1655 Moves: TBA
MAP:
[Reply] |
| 1648 091010: Summer 1655 Retreats - charlesf (Mar 24, 2010, 4:42 pm) |
Hi guys,
from what I gather, Jorge has communicated to you players separately his resigning from the game. He cited in his correspondence with me his dissatisfaction over Abo/Lake Ladoga.
Now, the current variant rules do state that Ingria works much as Denmark in Standard Diplomacy. That logically also entails that Abo functions much the same as Sweden does in Standard.
Hence, there are no coastal specifications for Abo on the big map I sent to all players upon starting the game. Realpolitik's adjucation output equally expressly does not list any coasts for Abo as a careful reading of the fall adjucation shows.
I recognise that the variant rules would benefit from a more explicit statement beyond pointing to the Denmark analogy. For what is obvious to a designer may not be to playtesters (a frequent phenomenon in the rules-writing process). Actually, pointing out such room for improvement is indeed to a large extent what playtesting's about and my variants have benefited from such helpful playtester input. I regret Jorge plainly doesn't share that outlook.
Jorge has equally reproached me for not clarifying this situation to him beforehand. However, as it so happens I did actually note at least once in a mail to him prior to game-start that:
"Systematically, [the addition of Lake Ladoga as a space] means that Karelia will have two coasts, whereas Abo will still only have one (much as Standard's Sweden despite a canal space touching it in the middle)."
I'm sorry Jorge no longer remembered that. In light of the extensive variant design discussions Jorge has participated in in the past, I was not aware of his erroneous assumption/lapse of memory. Otherwise I would have of course again stressed that point in my communications to him, much as I notify any player whenever I notice such an issue. I don't spot all such issues, but I do try.
Suffice to say that I consider these illegitimate grounds for abandoning a game and am sorely disappointed.
Now, this means I shall seek a Polish replacement. Once I've sent out this summer adjucation, I shall immediately contact DC's replacement list and advertise the position more generally on the site. Lets hope we shall have a replacement before long. As soon as a replacement has materialised, I shall set a new deadline that affords the new Pole sufficient time to negotiate.
My hope is we'll be back on track before to long.
Cheers,
Charles
----------
PLAYERS:
AUSTRIA: Mike Hoffman <mrh(at)panix.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: TBA
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)
TURKEY: Aidan Slattery <AiSlattery(at)aol.com>
PROCLAMATIONS:
o POLISH MONARCH FORSAKES HIS PEOPLE
o ENGLISH REPAIR TO FINLAND
PRESS: None.
RETREATS:
England:
A Ingria - Abo
SUPPLY CENTER OWNERSHIP (Winter 1654):
Austria(5): Bavaria, Prague, Saxony, Trieste, Vienna.
England(: Abo, Bristol, Christiania, Ireland, London, Scotland, Stockholm, United Provinces.
France(11): Brest, Flanders, Lorraine, Lower Saxony, Marseilles, Paris, Rhineland-Westphalia, Savoy, Swabia, Switzerland, Venice.
Poland-Lithuania(10): Copenhagen, Courland, Cracow, Moscow, Novgorod, Prussia, Riga, Vilna, Voronezh, Warsaw.
Spain(10): Algiers, Madrid, Mecklenburg, Morocco, Naples, Papal States, Portugal, Seville, Tunis, Tuscany.
Sweden(3): Brandenburg, Mecklenburg, Stettin.
Turkey(11): Belgrade, Candia, Constantinople, Crimea, Damascus, Moldavia, Persia, Transylvania, Turkestan, Ukraine, Wallachia.
DEADLINE SCHEDULE: (all orders are due NLT 6PM CET (i.e. GMT+1)...not local time)
o Fall 1655 Moves: TBA
MAP:[Reply] |
| 1648 091010: Summer 1655 Retreats (dc279) offdisc Mar 24, 05:17 pm |
Charles,
As I mentioned in my previous email, I use the DC Variants page for descriptions. It includes a very detailed point about Ingria, never mentioning Denmark or Standard Dip:
"Ingria is a canal province (much as Copenhagen), thus allowing units to move from Abo, Lake Ladoga, the Gulf of Bothnia, Novgorod (South Coast) and Riga to Ingria (and vice versa). The River Neva is shown on the map to indicate this."
Basically, if an analogy to Standard is to be made, it should be to CON, not to DEN. Thus CON allows units to pass through, but BUL has coasts.
I asked this question in a previous email and have not received an answer: If Abo has no coasts, then it cannot force a break in Ing's coasts either (ala Swe / Den in Standard). If Ing has no coasts, what the heck does it need a Canal for???? I have never seen a Dip board produced with such a flagrant redundancy built in. The existence of the canal obviously shows that the designers made Ing with separate coasts.... and thus Abo must have separate coasts as well.
As a replacement player, I never received the large map or the pre-game description emails. So I can only go by what I find on the DC website.
Mike---------
"Shared Pain is lessened, Shared Joy is increased" --- Spider Robinson
"Whenever some act of wondrous power must be performed, Michael is sent" --- Pope Saint Gregory the Great
2010/3/24 Charles Féaux de la Croix <charlesf(at)web.de ([email]charlesf(at)web.de[/email])>
Hi guys,
from what I gather, Jorge has communicated to you players separately his resigning from the game. He cited in his correspondence with me his dissatisfaction over Abo/Lake Ladoga.
Now, the current variant rules do state that Ingria works much as Denmark in Standard Diplomacy. That logically also entails that Abo functions much the same as Sweden does in Standard.
Hence, there are no coastal specifications for Abo on the big map I sent to all players upon starting the game. Realpolitik's adjucation output equally expressly does not list any coasts for Abo as a careful reading of the fall adjucation shows.
I recognise that the variant rules would benefit from a more explicit statement beyond pointing to the Denmark analogy. For what is obvious to a designer may not be to playtesters (a frequent phenomenon in the rules-writing process). Actually, pointing out such room for improvement is indeed to a large extent what playtesting's about and my variants have benefited from such helpful playtester input. I regret Jorge plainly doesn't share that outlook.
Jorge has equally reproached me for not clarifying this situation to him beforehand. However, as it so happens I did actually note at least once in a mail to him prior to game-start that:
"Systematically, [the addition of Lake Ladoga as a space] means that Karelia will have two coasts, whereas Abo will still only have one (much as Standard's Sweden despite a canal space touching it in the middle)."
I'm sorry Jorge no longer remembered that. In light of the extensive variant design discussions Jorge has participated in in the past, I was not aware of his erroneous assumption/lapse of memory. Otherwise I would have of course again stressed that point in my communications to him, much as I notify any player whenever I notice such an issue. I don't spot all such issues, but I do try.
Suffice to say that I consider these illegitimate grounds for abandoning a game and am sorely disappointed.
Now, this means I shall seek a Polish replacement. Once I've sent out this summer adjucation, I shall immediately contact DC's replacement list and advertise the position more generally on the site. Lets hope we shall have a replacement before long. As soon as a replacement has materialised, I shall set a new deadline that affords the new Pole sufficient time to negotiate.
My hope is we'll be back on track before to long.
Cheers,
Charles
----------
PLAYERS:
AUSTRIA: Mike Hoffman <mrh(at)panix.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: TBA
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)
TURKEY: Aidan Slattery <AiSlattery(at)aol.com>
PROCLAMATIONS:
o POLISH MONARCH FORSAKES HIS PEOPLE
o ENGLISH REPAIR TO FINLAND
PRESS: None.
RETREATS:
England:
A Ingria - Abo
SUPPLY CENTER OWNERSHIP (Winter 1654):
Austria(5): Bavaria, Prague, Saxony, Trieste, Vienna.
England(: Abo, Bristol, Christiania, Ireland, London, Scotland, Stockholm, United Provinces.
France(11): Brest, Flanders, Lorraine, Lower Saxony, Marseilles, Paris, Rhineland-Westphalia, Savoy, Swabia, Switzerland, Venice.
Poland-Lithuania(10): Copenhagen, Courland, Cracow, Moscow, Novgorod, Prussia, Riga, Vilna, Voronezh, Warsaw.
Spain(10): Algiers, Madrid, Mecklenburg, Morocco, Naples, Papal States, Portugal, Seville, Tunis, Tuscany.
Sweden(3): Brandenburg, Mecklenburg, Stettin.
Turkey(11): Belgrade, Candia, Constantinople, Crimea, Damascus, Moldavia, Persia, Transylvania, Turkestan, Ukraine, Wallachia.
DEADLINE SCHEDULE: (all orders are due NLT 6PM CET (i.e. GMT+1)...not local time)
o Fall 1655 Moves: TBA
MAP:
|
| 1648 091010: Summer 1655 Retreats (dc279) charlesf Mar 24, 05:57 pm |
Mike,
I recognise and wrote that Abo's character ought to be further explained in the variant rules. I rely on playtesters to point out what points need to be further specified/clarified. As a designer, one tends to be less aware of what isn't obvious since one's too close to the design. Catching these shortcomings is part of what one hopes to achieve with a playtest and I'm grateful to those who've contributed to the improvement of the variant in this manner.
As I mentioned in my previous email, I use the DC Variants page for descriptions. It includes a very detailed point about Ingria, never mentioning Denmark or Standard Dip:
"Ingria is a canal province (much as Copenhagen), thus allowing units to move from Abo, Lake Ladoga, the Gulf of Bothnia, Novgorod (South Coast) and Riga to Ingria (and vice versa). The River Neva is shown on the map to indicate this."
Basically, if an analogy to Standard is to be made, it should be to CON, not to DEN. Thus CON allows units to pass through, but BUL has coasts.
Yes, I got the nomenclature wrong. I meant Denmark. Thanks for pointing that out.
I asked this question in a previous email and have not received an answer: If Abo has no coasts, then it cannot force a break in Ing's coasts either (ala Swe / Den in Standard). If Ing has no coasts, what the heck does it need a Canal for???? I have never seen a Dip board produced with such a flagrant redundancy built in. The existence of the canal obviously shows that the designers made Ing with separate coasts.... and thus Abo must have separate coasts as well.
Mike, Ingria has a canal (well, actually the river Neva) flowing through it. Much as say the Kaiser-Wilhelm-Canal runs through Kiel in Standard, or the Suez Canal runs through Suez in the 1900 variant. Neither space is bicoastal in nature. So I don't understand your point in the least.
As a replacement player, I never received the large map or the pre-game description emails. So I can only go by what I find on the DC website.
My bad. I've now sent it to you.
Charles |
| 1648 091010: Summer 1655 Retreats (dc279) offdisc Mar 24, 06:30 pm |
I asked this question in a previous email and have not received an answer:
If Abo has no coasts, then it cannot force a break in Ing's coasts either
(ala Swe / Den in Standard). If Ing has no coasts, what the heck does it
need a Canal for???? I have never seen a Dip board produced with such a
flagrant redundancy built in. The existence of the canal obviously shows
that the designers made Ing with separate coasts.... and thus Abo must have
separate coasts as well.
Mike, Ingria has a canal (well, actually the river Neva) flowing through it.
Much as say the Kaiser-Wilhelm-Canal runs through Kiel in Standard, or the
Suez Canal runs through Suez in the 1900 variant. Neither space is bicoastal
in nature. So I don't understand your point in the least.
Charles
My point is this: If Ing is bi-coastal, what breaks it's coastline?
Abo, right? Therefore, Abo MUST be bi-coastal as well.
In the case of Kiel & Denmark, Denmark is not bi-coastal because of
its *other* connection, the one to Sweden. That connection is
considered 'fleet passable' and thus both Sweden and Denmark have
single coastlines. However, IF that connection was more solid and
Sweden became bi-coastal, then Denmark would also be bi-coastal,
because the canal runs inside of Kiel.
Thus, the Abo/Ing connection is the same thing. Ing contains the
canal to allow it to act as a single coast province, it's coast breaks
being Abo and whatever is south of it (map not open right now). But
that land connection with Abo **prevents Abo from being single
coastal**!!!
If you claim that Abo is single-coastal, then the border between Ing &
Abo becomes 'fleet passable' (like Den & Swe). So Ing becomes single
coastal ---- and thus no need for the canal.
It's just logic.
Mike
---------
"Shared Pain is lessened, Shared Joy is increased" --- Spider Robinson
"Whenever some act of wondrous power must be performed, Michael is
sent" --- Pope Saint Gregory the Great |
| 1648 091010: Spring 1655 Moves - charlesf (Mar 23, 2010, 6:38 pm) |
Hallo zusammen,
I'm afraid two issues prevented me from publishing results yesterday. Mike's only got back from his holiday after the deadline had run its course and he hadn't sent me a set of orders prior to leaving. Dirk and Harvey also missed the deadline yesterday. Perhaps I ought to have been more vigilant, yet being away over the weekend prevented me from doing so.
Now, in light of the deadline being set closely after Mike's EXPECTED return (the 20th), but as it turns out being in conflict with his ACTUAL return two days later, I've now decided to treat matters as though the deadline had been today, the 23rd. I recognise this is less than ideal, but hope that such "lenience before justice" serves everyone best. I'd rather not see this game's generally reliable crew being changed on account of these circumstances. Yet since this judgement call of mine somewhat departs from my stated house rules practice, I felt compelled to disclose these matters to all. Should anyone wish to appeal this decision of mine as you have every right to do, let me know and I shall happily refer the matter to the DC big-whigs for their final ruling.
Ah well... What happened on the board? Well, Novgorod fell into the hands of the Roundheads and the Austrians made it the the shores of the North Sea. Shall these gains be kept this fall...?
England's retreat is due 24 March, 6 PM CET.
Liebe Grüsse,
Charles
----------
PLAYERS:
AUSTRIA: Mike Hoffman <mrh(at)panix.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)
TURKEY: Aidan Slattery <AiSlattery(at)aol.com>
PROCLAMATIONS:
o NOVGOROD SACKED BY CROMWELL'S HARDY MEN AS ANOTHER GODLY ARMY IS DEFEATED ON THE NEVA
o IMPERIAL TROOPS MAKE IT TO THE NORTH SEA SHORE
PRESS: None.
ORDERS:
Austria:
A Bavaria Supports A Tyrolia - Swabia
A Hesse - Lower Saxony
A Saxony Supports A Hesse - Lower Saxony
A Trieste - Venice (*Fails*)
A Tyrolia - Swabia (*Fails*)
England:
F Abo - Lake Ladoga
F Arctic Ocean - Permia (*Fails*)
A Ingria Supports A Scotland - Novgorod (*Dislodged*)
A Karelia Supports A Scotland - Novgorod
A Lapland - Stockholm
F Norwegian Sea Convoys A Scotland - Novgorod
A Scotland - Novgorod
F Stockholm(ec) - Gulf of Bothnia
France:
A Flanders - United Provinces
A Lombardy Supports A Venice
A Lorraine Supports A Swabia
F Lower Saxony - Helgoland Bight
F North Sea - Skagerrak
A Rhineland-Westphalia Supports A Swabia
A Savoy Hold
A Swabia Hold
A Switzerland Supports A Swabia
A Venice Hold
Poland-Lithuania:
A Copenhagen - Holstein (*Fails*)
A Courland Supports A Samogitia - Prussia (*Fails*)
A Novgorod - Ingria
A Polotsk - Pskov
A Prussia - Greater Poland (*Bounce*)
A Riga Supports A Novgorod - Ingria
A Samogitia - Prussia (*Fails*)
A Smolensk - Moscow
A Vilna - Smolensk
Spain:
A Algiers Supports F Tunis
A Holstein Hold
F Naples Supports F Tyrrhenian Sea (*Cut*)
F Papal States(ec) Supports F Naples
F Sardinia Supports F Tyrrhenian Sea
A Seville Hold
F Tunis Supports F Tyrrhenian Sea
A Tuscany Supports A Lombardy - Venice (*Void*)
F Tyrrhenian Sea Supports F Naples
Sweden:
F Baltic Sea - Greater Poland (*Bounce*)
A Brandenburg Supports F Baltic Sea - Greater Poland
A Mecklenburg Supports A Brandenburg
Turkey:
F Adriatic Sea Supports F Ionian Sea - Naples
F Aegean Sea Supports F Eastern Mediterranean - Ionian Sea (*Fails*)
A Croatia Supports A Trieste (*Ordered to Move*)
F Eastern Mediterranean - Ionian Sea (*Fails*)
F Egypt Supports F Eastern Mediterranean - Ionian Sea (*Fails*)
F Illyria Supports F Adriatic Sea
F Ionian Sea - Naples (*Fails*)
A Permia - Novgorod (*Fails*)
F Sicily Supports F Ionian Sea - Naples
A Silesia Supports A Prussia - Greater Poland
A Ukraine - Volhynia
PENDING RETREATS:
English A Ingria can retreat to Abo or disband.
SUPPLY CENTER OWNERSHIP (Winter 1654):
Austria(5): Bavaria, Prague, Saxony, Trieste, Vienna.
England(: Abo, Bristol, Christiania, Ireland, London, Scotland, Stockholm, United Provinces.
France(11): Brest, Flanders, Lorraine, Lower Saxony, Marseilles, Paris, Rhineland-Westphalia, Savoy, Swabia, Switzerland, Venice.
Poland-Lithuania(10): Copenhagen, Courland, Cracow, Moscow, Novgorod, Prussia, Riga, Vilna, Voronezh, Warsaw.
Spain(10): Algiers, Madrid, Mecklenburg, Morocco, Naples, Papal States, Portugal, Seville, Tunis, Tuscany.
Sweden(3): Brandenburg, Mecklenburg, Stettin.
Turkey(11): Belgrade, Candia, Constantinople, Crimea, Damascus, Moldavia, Persia, Transylvania, Turkestan, Ukraine, Wallachia.
DEADLINE SCHEDULE: (all orders are due NLT 6PM CET (i.e. GMT+1)...not local time)
o Summer 1655 Retreats: 24 March
o Fall 1655 Moves: (27) 29 March
ORDERS MAP:
RESULTS MAP:[Reply] |
| 1648 091010: Update - charlesf (Mar 11, 2010, 5:08 pm) |
The overall trend with these changes and the ones you already made in the Med are to limit stalemates.
Well, I'd say the East-West confrontation we've seen in the present game presents something of an anomaly. Yet I indeed am aiming for more fluid play. The most important step here was to reduce the victory criterion to 15. The second-most important one the reworking of the Central Med.
It also slows thrusts to some degree, which is fine and in keeping with the game.
Well, my aim is to keep the map very integrated. I want to keep players even more on their toes.
Specifically, all of the ones that Nigs mentioned - Franconia and the Prussias - seem good to me. Making Turkey non-contiguous influences it to move east and west instead of to the Balkans - is this what you want?
Don't think that A Damascus was going to march straight into the Balkans in the old versions either. But it could provide backup to A Belgrade and hence that very possibility somewhat diminished the attractiveness of a South-Eastern thrust by Austria.
A Damascus can really turn into any direction:
- Karaman gives you a play for Candia and some protection against first-year attacks vs. Constantinople.
- Armenia also allows one to cover Constantinople, covers a "soft spot" and presents a possible play for the Crimea or Voronezh.
- Azerbaijan is somewhat similar to an Armenian opening, but probably not much of an opening move.
- Persia is obviously the "grow now" option.
- Egypt presents a play for Tunis. More attractive now that F Sevilla is somewhat less of an immediate factor.
I'm liking the added incentives for moves to Egypt and Armenia.
With regard to changes in Russia, I would consider splitting Novgorod to facilitate an attack on Sweden...
That one of the ideas I'm looking at. Carving out a norther buffer out of Novgorod, while also extending Moscow to the northern shore.
and I would also break up NRG. The possibility of NRG C Sco - Nov amounts to a sort of long-range blitzkrieg unseen anywhere else on the map. (My issue is more about consistency than historical accuracy.)
Ah, until I reached v2.5, NRG indeed didn't border Novgorod. Here's the 2.0 map (which is basically where I had left things off in 2004, the new work in 2009 began with v2.1 which was already an entirely different beast):
Yet this type of map arrangement created kinda a D-W-R string rather than a genuine "Arctic triangle". I wanted Denmark (and indeed England, then an "Arctic quadrangle" to be able to attack Russia (and vice versa). Makes for better gameplay and is also historically justified.
Indeed, only up there can one power "leapfrog" two basically closer powers to attack the another. I like that a lot!
But there's another reason why I'm showing you this mothballed old map version. It shows you an arrangement of Poland's buffer provinces in the East (save for Polotsk, which I introduced with v2.1) I'm now once again considering. Moscow is, as you can see, shielded by the Smolensk buffer (which corresponds to the territory Poland lost to Russia later in the 17th century)).
Cheers,
Charles[Reply] |
| 1648 091010: Update - txurce (Mar 11, 2010, 12:59 pm) |
Slow attacks are what it's all about! Which is why I'm advocating for splitting up the English Arctic passage!
Cheers,
Jorge
2010/3/11 Charles Féaux de la Croix <charlesf(at)web.de ([email]charlesf(at)web.de[/email])>
Ah, if you guys think the extra buffer has merit, I guess I'll draw a map for you to comment upon. Would move Poland and Russia further apart.
As for redrawing Moscow to touch NRG and add that buffer, yes, it'd broaden the front in the far north. Nov would be not the one province through which Russian units have to pass to get at Sweden. But it'd be a slow developing attack - as I consider appropriate for the Northern wilderness. And of course, the Danes could descend on Moscow rather than on Novgorod...
Charles
[quote:662e37b332] ----- Original Message -----
From: Jorge Saralegui ([email]jmsaralegui(at)gmail.com[/email])
To: Charles Féaux de la Croix ([email]charlesf(at)web.de[/email])
Cc: Nigel PHILLIPS ([email]nephilli99(at)hotmail.com[/email]) ; kelly058(at)verizon.net ([email]kelly058(at)verizon.net[/email]) ; Mike Leprecaun ([email]mrh(at)panix.com[/email]) ; Marc Ellinger ([email]mellinger(at)blitzbardgett.com[/email]) ; hmtucaz(at)gmail.com ([email]hmtucaz(at)gmail.com[/email]) ; Mikael Johansson ([email]m_don_j(at)hotmail.com[/email]) ; dirk(at)knemeyer.com ([email]dirk(at)knemeyer.com[/email]) ; aislattery(at)aol.com ([email]aislattery(at)aol.com[/email]) ; dc279(at)diplomaticcorp.com ([email]dc279(at)diplomaticcorp.com[/email])
Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2010 4:58 PM
Subject: Re: 1648 091010: Update
Charles,
I like the idea of giving Austria more incentive to move east instead of west. Another buffer on the Russo-Polish border is a good idea both ways, taking pressure off both and allowing both to consider moving elsewhere. Is the idea behind extending Moscow to the White Sea an opportunity to give Russia more space from which to invade Sweden?
Jorge
2010/3/11 Charles Féaux de la Croix <charlesf(at)web.de ([email]charlesf(at)web.de[/email])>
[quote:662e37b332] Nigs,
well, I'm not sure this change makes Swabia less of a bottleneck (which don't have a particular issue with). Had I chosen to have Franconia border Hesse, then yes. But I didn't want to make the HRE have the makings of a doughnut, with Hesse/Franconia being the hole. That's why I added the territory of the Würzburg bishopric to Swabia (i.e. that salient towards Saxony).
For Austria I'd say this change is a mixed blessing. It somewhat complicates Austria's opening game, which I welcome. Getting three SCs in 1649 struck me as being too easy in the past. Bavaria can't help Austria into Saxony (and vice versa). This in turn makes Austria more dependent on support from pretty one single source of minor power support in Germany, namely Swabia. And that makes the job of those interested in curbing Austrian growth quite a bit easier since successfully competing for DPs in Swabia will most likely slow down the Emperor.
So I understand this change to be about recalibrating Austria's influence in the Empire as compared to those of others.
Also, the change down in Turkey might also tempt Austria more into a Balkan direction. After all, now that Damascus and Constantinople are no longer adjacent, A Damascus can no longer more to Constantinople in an effort to back up A Belgrade if need be. In other words, Belgrade is more vulnerable. Next to the opportunity this gives rise to for Austria, it also might have Turkey move into Hungary more precisely in order to check that danger.
In this regard, Fraconia also complicates home defence since if A Prague moved to Saxony or Franconia, it'd be somewhat less useful in fending off a Turkish raid.
Much as the Sultan may worry more about Belgrade, so does a Russian move into Armenia present more of a headache now thanks to Damascus and Constantinople no longer covering another. More of a temptation for the Tsar to go south, but also for the Sultan to move into Armenia precisely because of this danger. All in all, this makes early Russo-Turkish conflict rather more likely, methinks.
And that in turn had me thinking whether I ought to somewhat ease the home defence burden on Russia. Say by adding a buffer province between Nov, Mos, Vor, WRu and Smo. Another idea would be to extend Moscow up to the White Sea (i.e. Russia's northern shore), while adding a buffer between Novgorod, Karelia and Moscow, so that a Swedish move into Karelia wouldn't border both Novgorod and Moscow at the same time.
Considering also a number of other approaches, but decided to hold off of them for now.
Cheers,
Charles
[quote:662e37b332] ----- Original Message -----
From: Nigel PHILLIPS ([email]nephilli99(at)hotmail.com[/email])
To: charlesf(at)web.de ([email]charlesf(at)web.de[/email]) ; kelly058(at)verizon.net ([email]kelly058(at)verizon.net[/email]) ; Mike Leprecaun ([email]mrh(at)panix.com[/email]) ; Marc Ellinger ([email]mellinger(at)blitzbardgett.com[/email]) ; hmtucaz(at)gmail.com ([email]hmtucaz(at)gmail.com[/email]) ; Jorge England 214 ([email]jmsaralegui(at)gmail.com[/email]) ; Mikael Johansson ([email]m_don_j(at)hotmail.com[/email]) ; dirk(at)knemeyer.com ([email]dirk(at)knemeyer.com[/email]) ; aislattery(at)aol.com ([email]aislattery(at)aol.com[/email]) ; dc279(at)diplomaticcorp.com ([email]dc279(at)diplomaticcorp.com[/email])
Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2010 10:46 PM
Subject: RE: 1648 091010: Update
Charles,
I like the effect of Franconia and the prussian changes. Franconia in particular should help to avoid blockades in middle germany. I don't know turkey's territories well enough to comment on those.
Nigs
Not got a Hotmail account? Sign-up now - Free
[/quote:662e37b332]
[/quote:662e37b332]
[/quote:662e37b332][Reply] |
| 1648 091010: Update - charlesf (Mar 11, 2010, 12:57 pm) |
Ah, if you guys think the extra buffer has merit, I guess I'll draw a map for you to comment upon. Would move Poland and Russia further apart.
As for redrawing Moscow to touch NRG and add that buffer, yes, it'd broaden the front in the far north. Nov would be not the one province through which Russian units have to pass to get at Sweden. But it'd be a slow developing attack - as I consider appropriate for the Northern wilderness. And of course, the Danes could descend on Moscow rather than on Novgorod...
Charles
----- Original Message -----
From: Jorge Saralegui ([email]jmsaralegui(at)gmail.com[/email])
To: Charles Féaux de la Croix ([email]charlesf(at)web.de[/email])
Cc: Nigel PHILLIPS ([email]nephilli99(at)hotmail.com[/email]) ; kelly058(at)verizon.net ([email]kelly058(at)verizon.net[/email]) ; Mike Leprecaun ([email]mrh(at)panix.com[/email]) ; Marc Ellinger ([email]mellinger(at)blitzbardgett.com[/email]) ; hmtucaz(at)gmail.com ([email]hmtucaz(at)gmail.com[/email]) ; Mikael Johansson ([email]m_don_j(at)hotmail.com[/email]) ; dirk(at)knemeyer.com ([email]dirk(at)knemeyer.com[/email]) ; aislattery(at)aol.com ([email]aislattery(at)aol.com[/email]) ; dc279(at)diplomaticcorp.com ([email]dc279(at)diplomaticcorp.com[/email])
Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2010 4:58 PM
Subject: Re: 1648 091010: Update
Charles,
I like the idea of giving Austria more incentive to move east instead of west. Another buffer on the Russo-Polish border is a good idea both ways, taking pressure off both and allowing both to consider moving elsewhere. Is the idea behind extending Moscow to the White Sea an opportunity to give Russia more space from which to invade Sweden?
Jorge
2010/3/11 Charles Féaux de la Croix <charlesf(at)web.de ([email]charlesf(at)web.de[/email])>
[quote:497e7fd61f] Nigs,
well, I'm not sure this change makes Swabia less of a bottleneck (which don't have a particular issue with). Had I chosen to have Franconia border Hesse, then yes. But I didn't want to make the HRE have the makings of a doughnut, with Hesse/Franconia being the hole. That's why I added the territory of the Würzburg bishopric to Swabia (i.e. that salient towards Saxony).
For Austria I'd say this change is a mixed blessing. It somewhat complicates Austria's opening game, which I welcome. Getting three SCs in 1649 struck me as being too easy in the past. Bavaria can't help Austria into Saxony (and vice versa). This in turn makes Austria more dependent on support from pretty one single source of minor power support in Germany, namely Swabia. And that makes the job of those interested in curbing Austrian growth quite a bit easier since successfully competing for DPs in Swabia will most likely slow down the Emperor.
So I understand this change to be about recalibrating Austria's influence in the Empire as compared to those of others.
Also, the change down in Turkey might also tempt Austria more into a Balkan direction. After all, now that Damascus and Constantinople are no longer adjacent, A Damascus can no longer more to Constantinople in an effort to back up A Belgrade if need be. In other words, Belgrade is more vulnerable. Next to the opportunity this gives rise to for Austria, it also might have Turkey move into Hungary more precisely in order to check that danger.
In this regard, Fraconia also complicates home defence since if A Prague moved to Saxony or Franconia, it'd be somewhat less useful in fending off a Turkish raid.
Much as the Sultan may worry more about Belgrade, so does a Russian move into Armenia present more of a headache now thanks to Damascus and Constantinople no longer covering another. More of a temptation for the Tsar to go south, but also for the Sultan to move into Armenia precisely because of this danger. All in all, this makes early Russo-Turkish conflict rather more likely, methinks.
And that in turn had me thinking whether I ought to somewhat ease the home defence burden on Russia. Say by adding a buffer province between Nov, Mos, Vor, WRu and Smo. Another idea would be to extend Moscow up to the White Sea (i.e. Russia's northern shore), while adding a buffer between Novgorod, Karelia and Moscow, so that a Swedish move into Karelia wouldn't border both Novgorod and Moscow at the same time.
Considering also a number of other approaches, but decided to hold off of them for now.
Cheers,
Charles
[quote:497e7fd61f] ----- Original Message -----
From: Nigel PHILLIPS ([email]nephilli99(at)hotmail.com[/email])
To: charlesf(at)web.de ([email]charlesf(at)web.de[/email]) ; kelly058(at)verizon.net ([email]kelly058(at)verizon.net[/email]) ; Mike Leprecaun ([email]mrh(at)panix.com[/email]) ; Marc Ellinger ([email]mellinger(at)blitzbardgett.com[/email]) ; hmtucaz(at)gmail.com ([email]hmtucaz(at)gmail.com[/email]) ; Jorge England 214 ([email]jmsaralegui(at)gmail.com[/email]) ; Mikael Johansson ([email]m_don_j(at)hotmail.com[/email]) ; dirk(at)knemeyer.com ([email]dirk(at)knemeyer.com[/email]) ; aislattery(at)aol.com ([email]aislattery(at)aol.com[/email]) ; dc279(at)diplomaticcorp.com ([email]dc279(at)diplomaticcorp.com[/email])
Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2010 10:46 PM
Subject: RE: 1648 091010: Update
Charles,
I like the effect of Franconia and the prussian changes. Franconia in particular should help to avoid blockades in middle germany. I don't know turkey's territories well enough to comment on those.
Nigs
Not got a Hotmail account? Sign-up now - Free
[/quote:497e7fd61f]
[/quote:497e7fd61f][Reply] |
| 1648 091010: Update - txurce (Mar 11, 2010, 9:58 am) |
Charles,
I like the idea of giving Austria more incentive to move east instead of west. Another buffer on the Russo-Polish border is a good idea both ways, taking pressure off both and allowing both to consider moving elsewhere. Is the idea behind extending Moscow to the White Sea an opportunity to give Russia more space from which to invade Sweden?
Jorge
2010/3/11 Charles Féaux de la Croix <charlesf(at)web.de ([email]charlesf(at)web.de[/email])>
Nigs,
well, I'm not sure this change makes Swabia less of a bottleneck (which don't have a particular issue with). Had I chosen to have Franconia border Hesse, then yes. But I didn't want to make the HRE have the makings of a doughnut, with Hesse/Franconia being the hole. That's why I added the territory of the Würzburg bishopric to Swabia (i.e. that salient towards Saxony).
For Austria I'd say this change is a mixed blessing. It somewhat complicates Austria's opening game, which I welcome. Getting three SCs in 1649 struck me as being too easy in the past. Bavaria can't help Austria into Saxony (and vice versa). This in turn makes Austria more dependent on support from pretty one single source of minor power support in Germany, namely Swabia. And that makes the job of those interested in curbing Austrian growth quite a bit easier since successfully competing for DPs in Swabia will most likely slow down the Emperor.
So I understand this change to be about recalibrating Austria's influence in the Empire as compared to those of others.
Also, the change down in Turkey might also tempt Austria more into a Balkan direction. After all, now that Damascus and Constantinople are no longer adjacent, A Damascus can no longer more to Constantinople in an effort to back up A Belgrade if need be. In other words, Belgrade is more vulnerable. Next to the opportunity this gives rise to for Austria, it also might have Turkey move into Hungary more precisely in order to check that danger.
In this regard, Fraconia also complicates home defence since if A Prague moved to Saxony or Franconia, it'd be somewhat less useful in fending off a Turkish raid.
Much as the Sultan may worry more about Belgrade, so does a Russian move into Armenia present more of a headache now thanks to Damascus and Constantinople no longer covering another. More of a temptation for the Tsar to go south, but also for the Sultan to move into Armenia precisely because of this danger. All in all, this makes early Russo-Turkish conflict rather more likely, methinks.
And that in turn had me thinking whether I ought to somewhat ease the home defence burden on Russia. Say by adding a buffer province between Nov, Mos, Vor, WRu and Smo. Another idea would be to extend Moscow up to the White Sea (i.e. Russia's northern shore), while adding a buffer between Novgorod, Karelia and Moscow, so that a Swedish move into Karelia wouldn't border both Novgorod and Moscow at the same time.
Considering also a number of other approaches, but decided to hold off of them for now.
Cheers,
Charles
[quote:e470fdddb4] ----- Original Message -----
From: Nigel PHILLIPS ([email]nephilli99(at)hotmail.com[/email])
To: charlesf(at)web.de ([email]charlesf(at)web.de[/email]) ; kelly058(at)verizon.net ([email]kelly058(at)verizon.net[/email]) ; Mike Leprecaun ([email]mrh(at)panix.com[/email]) ; Marc Ellinger ([email]mellinger(at)blitzbardgett.com[/email]) ; hmtucaz(at)gmail.com ([email]hmtucaz(at)gmail.com[/email]) ; Jorge England 214 ([email]jmsaralegui(at)gmail.com[/email]) ; Mikael Johansson ([email]m_don_j(at)hotmail.com[/email]) ; dirk(at)knemeyer.com ([email]dirk(at)knemeyer.com[/email]) ; aislattery(at)aol.com ([email]aislattery(at)aol.com[/email]) ; dc279(at)diplomaticcorp.com ([email]dc279(at)diplomaticcorp.com[/email])
Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2010 10:46 PM
Subject: RE: 1648 091010: Update
Charles,
I like the effect of Franconia and the prussian changes. Franconia in particular should help to avoid blockades in middle germany. I don't know turkey's territories well enough to comment on those.
Nigs
Not got a Hotmail account? Sign-up now - Free
[/quote:e470fdddb4][Reply] |
| 1648 091010: Update - charlesf (Mar 11, 2010, 9:50 am) |
Nigs,
well, I'm not sure this change makes Swabia less of a bottleneck (which don't have a particular issue with). Had I chosen to have Franconia border Hesse, then yes. But I didn't want to make the HRE have the makings of a doughnut, with Hesse/Franconia being the hole. That's why I added the territory of the Würzburg bishopric to Swabia (i.e. that salient towards Saxony).
For Austria I'd say this change is a mixed blessing. It somewhat complicates Austria's opening game, which I welcome. Getting three SCs in 1649 struck me as being too easy in the past. Bavaria can't help Austria into Saxony (and vice versa). This in turn makes Austria more dependent on support from pretty one single source of minor power support in Germany, namely Swabia. And that makes the job of those interested in curbing Austrian growth quite a bit easier since successfully competing for DPs in Swabia will most likely slow down the Emperor.
So I understand this change to be about recalibrating Austria's influence in the Empire as compared to those of others.
Also, the change down in Turkey might also tempt Austria more into a Balkan direction. After all, now that Damascus and Constantinople are no longer adjacent, A Damascus can no longer more to Constantinople in an effort to back up A Belgrade if need be. In other words, Belgrade is more vulnerable. Next to the opportunity this gives rise to for Austria, it also might have Turkey move into Hungary more precisely in order to check that danger.
In this regard, Fraconia also complicates home defence since if A Prague moved to Saxony or Franconia, it'd be somewhat less useful in fending off a Turkish raid.
Much as the Sultan may worry more about Belgrade, so does a Russian move into Armenia present more of a headache now thanks to Damascus and Constantinople no longer covering another. More of a temptation for the Tsar to go south, but also for the Sultan to move into Armenia precisely because of this danger. All in all, this makes early Russo-Turkish conflict rather more likely, methinks.
And that in turn had me thinking whether I ought to somewhat ease the home defence burden on Russia. Say by adding a buffer province between Nov, Mos, Vor, WRu and Smo. Another idea would be to extend Moscow up to the White Sea (i.e. Russia's northern shore), while adding a buffer between Novgorod, Karelia and Moscow, so that a Swedish move into Karelia wouldn't border both Novgorod and Moscow at the same time.
Considering also a number of other approaches, but decided to hold off of them for now.
Cheers,
Charles
----- Original Message -----
From: Nigel PHILLIPS ([email]nephilli99(at)hotmail.com[/email])
To: charlesf(at)web.de ([email]charlesf(at)web.de[/email]) ; kelly058(at)verizon.net ([email]kelly058(at)verizon.net[/email]) ; Mike Leprecaun ([email]mrh(at)panix.com[/email]) ; Marc Ellinger ([email]mellinger(at)blitzbardgett.com[/email]) ; hmtucaz(at)gmail.com ([email]hmtucaz(at)gmail.com[/email]) ; Jorge England 214 ([email]jmsaralegui(at)gmail.com[/email]) ; Mikael Johansson ([email]m_don_j(at)hotmail.com[/email]) ; dirk(at)knemeyer.com ([email]dirk(at)knemeyer.com[/email]) ; aislattery(at)aol.com ([email]aislattery(at)aol.com[/email]) ; dc279(at)diplomaticcorp.com ([email]dc279(at)diplomaticcorp.com[/email])
Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2010 10:46 PM
Subject: RE: 1648 091010: Update
Charles,
I like the effect of Franconia and the prussian changes. Franconia in particular should help to avoid blockades in middle germany. I don't know turkey's territories well enough to comment on those.
Nigs
Not got a Hotmail account? Sign-up now - Free [Reply] |
| 1648 091010: Update - txurce (Mar 10, 2010, 9:36 pm) |
Charles,
The overall trend with these changes and the ones you already made in the Med are to limit stalemates. It also slows thrusts to some degree, which is fine and in keeping with the game. Specifically, all of the ones that Nigs mentioned - Franconia and the Prussias - seem good to me. Making Turkey non-contiguous influences it to move east and west instead of to the Balkans - is this what you want? With regard to changes in Russia, I would consider splitting Novgorod to facilitate an attack on Sweden... and I would also break up NRG. The possibility of NRG C Sco - Nov amounts to a sort of long-range blitzkrieg unseen anywhere else on the map. (My issue is more about consistency than historical accuracy.)
Jorge
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Nigel PHILLIPS <nephilli99(at)hotmail.com ([email]nephilli99(at)hotmail.com[/email])> wrote:
Charles,
I like the effect of Franconia and the prussian changes. Franconia in particular should help to avoid blockades in middle germany. I don't know turkey's territories well enough to comment on those.
Nigs
Not got a Hotmail account? Sign-up now - Free
[Reply] |
| 1648 091010: Update - Nigs (Mar 10, 2010, 3:47 pm) |
Charles,
I like the effect of Franconia and the prussian changes. Franconia in particular should help to avoid blockades in middle germany. I don't know turkey's territories well enough to comment on those.
Nigs
Not got a Hotmail account? Sign-up now - Free[Reply] |
| 1648 091010: Update - charlesf (Mar 10, 2010, 2:36 pm) |
Hi guys,
of course I got my dates mixed up. The 22nd is a Monday, so we'll stick to Mondays for now.
Been working on the map lately and decided to imploment another three changes (though I have more ideas I'm pondering over):
1) FRANCONIA: I created this buffer province (named after the imperial circle of Franconia) between Bavaria, Saxony, Swabia and Prague. Complicates Austria's conquest of German SCs somewhat, makes Austria's position arguably less compact and generally provides more room for manoeuvre.
2) KARAMAN: Renamed the Tekke buffer province and had it border Armenia. Makes Turkey an non-contiguous power, which has considerable repercussions for Turkey's opening and home defence.
3) ROYAL PRUSSIA: Split Greater Poland into Royal Prussia and Greater Poland proper. So what was previously known simply as Prussia, also had to be renamed and now is listed as Ducal Prussia (more current a term for this age than "East Prussia". Anyway, creates a somewhat broader front to fight on in that area.
Closely looking at carving out another buffer province in Northern Germany (either called Altmark or Magdeburg). Similarly pondering over altering adjacencies in Russia.
Here's the map for v3.2, the latest version:
Becoming ever more different from our current game's 3.0 version...
Cheers,
Charles[Reply] |
| 1648 091010: Update (dc279) Nigs Mar 10, 03:47 pm |
Charles,
I like the effect of Franconia and the prussian changes. Franconia in particular should help to avoid blockades in middle germany. I don't know turkey's territories well enough to comment on those.
Nigs
Not got a Hotmail account? Sign-up now - Free |
| 1648 091010: Update (dc279) txurce Mar 10, 09:36 pm |
Charles,
The overall trend with these changes and the ones you already made in the Med are to limit stalemates. It also slows thrusts to some degree, which is fine and in keeping with the game. Specifically, all of the ones that Nigs mentioned - Franconia and the Prussias - seem good to me. Making Turkey non-contiguous influences it to move east and west instead of to the Balkans - is this what you want? With regard to changes in Russia, I would consider splitting Novgorod to facilitate an attack on Sweden... and I would also break up NRG. The possibility of NRG C Sco - Nov amounts to a sort of long-range blitzkrieg unseen anywhere else on the map. (My issue is more about consistency than historical accuracy.)
Jorge
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Nigel PHILLIPS <nephilli99(at)hotmail.com ([email]nephilli99(at)hotmail.com[/email])> wrote:
Charles,
I like the effect of Franconia and the prussian changes. Franconia in particular should help to avoid blockades in middle germany. I don't know turkey's territories well enough to comment on those.
Nigs
Not got a Hotmail account? Sign-up now - Free
|
| 1648 091010: Update (dc279) charlesf Mar 11, 09:50 am |
Nigs,
well, I'm not sure this change makes Swabia less of a bottleneck (which don't have a particular issue with). Had I chosen to have Franconia border Hesse, then yes. But I didn't want to make the HRE have the makings of a doughnut, with Hesse/Franconia being the hole. That's why I added the territory of the Würzburg bishopric to Swabia (i.e. that salient towards Saxony).
For Austria I'd say this change is a mixed blessing. It somewhat complicates Austria's opening game, which I welcome. Getting three SCs in 1649 struck me as being too easy in the past. Bavaria can't help Austria into Saxony (and vice versa). This in turn makes Austria more dependent on support from pretty one single source of minor power support in Germany, namely Swabia. And that makes the job of those interested in curbing Austrian growth quite a bit easier since successfully competing for DPs in Swabia will most likely slow down the Emperor.
So I understand this change to be about recalibrating Austria's influence in the Empire as compared to those of others.
Also, the change down in Turkey might also tempt Austria more into a Balkan direction. After all, now that Damascus and Constantinople are no longer adjacent, A Damascus can no longer more to Constantinople in an effort to back up A Belgrade if need be. In other words, Belgrade is more vulnerable. Next to the opportunity this gives rise to for Austria, it also might have Turkey move into Hungary more precisely in order to check that danger.
In this regard, Fraconia also complicates home defence since if A Prague moved to Saxony or Franconia, it'd be somewhat less useful in fending off a Turkish raid.
Much as the Sultan may worry more about Belgrade, so does a Russian move into Armenia present more of a headache now thanks to Damascus and Constantinople no longer covering another. More of a temptation for the Tsar to go south, but also for the Sultan to move into Armenia precisely because of this danger. All in all, this makes early Russo-Turkish conflict rather more likely, methinks.
And that in turn had me thinking whether I ought to somewhat ease the home defence burden on Russia. Say by adding a buffer province between Nov, Mos, Vor, WRu and Smo. Another idea would be to extend Moscow up to the White Sea (i.e. Russia's northern shore), while adding a buffer between Novgorod, Karelia and Moscow, so that a Swedish move into Karelia wouldn't border both Novgorod and Moscow at the same time.
Considering also a number of other approaches, but decided to hold off of them for now.
Cheers,
Charles
----- Original Message -----
From: Nigel PHILLIPS ([email]nephilli99(at)hotmail.com[/email])
To: charlesf(at)web.de ([email]charlesf(at)web.de[/email]) ; kelly058(at)verizon.net ([email]kelly058(at)verizon.net[/email]) ; Mike Leprecaun ([email]mrh(at)panix.com[/email]) ; Marc Ellinger ([email]mellinger(at)blitzbardgett.com[/email]) ; hmtucaz(at)gmail.com ([email]hmtucaz(at)gmail.com[/email]) ; Jorge England 214 ([email]jmsaralegui(at)gmail.com[/email]) ; Mikael Johansson ([email]m_don_j(at)hotmail.com[/email]) ; dirk(at)knemeyer.com ([email]dirk(at)knemeyer.com[/email]) ; aislattery(at)aol.com ([email]aislattery(at)aol.com[/email]) ; dc279(at)diplomaticcorp.com ([email]dc279(at)diplomaticcorp.com[/email])
Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2010 10:46 PM
Subject: RE: 1648 091010: Update
Charles,
I like the effect of Franconia and the prussian changes. Franconia in particular should help to avoid blockades in middle germany. I don't know turkey's territories well enough to comment on those.
Nigs
Not got a Hotmail account? Sign-up now - Free |
| 1648 091010: Update (dc279) txurce Mar 11, 09:58 am |
Charles,
I like the idea of giving Austria more incentive to move east instead of west. Another buffer on the Russo-Polish border is a good idea both ways, taking pressure off both and allowing both to consider moving elsewhere. Is the idea behind extending Moscow to the White Sea an opportunity to give Russia more space from which to invade Sweden?
Jorge
2010/3/11 Charles Féaux de la Croix <charlesf(at)web.de ([email]charlesf(at)web.de[/email])>
Nigs,
well, I'm not sure this change makes Swabia less of a bottleneck (which don't have a particular issue with). Had I chosen to have Franconia border Hesse, then yes. But I didn't want to make the HRE have the makings of a doughnut, with Hesse/Franconia being the hole. That's why I added the territory of the Würzburg bishopric to Swabia (i.e. that salient towards Saxony).
For Austria I'd say this change is a mixed blessing. It somewhat complicates Austria's opening game, which I welcome. Getting three SCs in 1649 struck me as being too easy in the past. Bavaria can't help Austria into Saxony (and vice versa). This in turn makes Austria more dependent on support from pretty one single source of minor power support in Germany, namely Swabia. And that makes the job of those interested in curbing Austrian growth quite a bit easier since successfully competing for DPs in Swabia will most likely slow down the Emperor.
So I understand this change to be about recalibrating Austria's influence in the Empire as compared to those of others.
Also, the change down in Turkey might also tempt Austria more into a Balkan direction. After all, now that Damascus and Constantinople are no longer adjacent, A Damascus can no longer more to Constantinople in an effort to back up A Belgrade if need be. In other words, Belgrade is more vulnerable. Next to the opportunity this gives rise to for Austria, it also might have Turkey move into Hungary more precisely in order to check that danger.
In this regard, Fraconia also complicates home defence since if A Prague moved to Saxony or Franconia, it'd be somewhat less useful in fending off a Turkish raid.
Much as the Sultan may worry more about Belgrade, so does a Russian move into Armenia present more of a headache now thanks to Damascus and Constantinople no longer covering another. More of a temptation for the Tsar to go south, but also for the Sultan to move into Armenia precisely because of this danger. All in all, this makes early Russo-Turkish conflict rather more likely, methinks.
And that in turn had me thinking whether I ought to somewhat ease the home defence burden on Russia. Say by adding a buffer province between Nov, Mos, Vor, WRu and Smo. Another idea would be to extend Moscow up to the White Sea (i.e. Russia's northern shore), while adding a buffer between Novgorod, Karelia and Moscow, so that a Swedish move into Karelia wouldn't border both Novgorod and Moscow at the same time.
Considering also a number of other approaches, but decided to hold off of them for now.
Cheers,
Charles
[quote:e470fdddb4] ----- Original Message -----
From: Nigel PHILLIPS ([email]nephilli99(at)hotmail.com[/email])
To: charlesf(at)web.de ([email]charlesf(at)web.de[/email]) ; kelly058(at)verizon.net ([email]kelly058(at)verizon.net[/email]) ; Mike Leprecaun ([email]mrh(at)panix.com[/email]) ; Marc Ellinger ([email]mellinger(at)blitzbardgett.com[/email]) ; hmtucaz(at)gmail.com ([email]hmtucaz(at)gmail.com[/email]) ; Jorge England 214 ([email]jmsaralegui(at)gmail.com[/email]) ; Mikael Johansson ([email]m_don_j(at)hotmail.com[/email]) ; dirk(at)knemeyer.com ([email]dirk(at)knemeyer.com[/email]) ; aislattery(at)aol.com ([email]aislattery(at)aol.com[/email]) ; dc279(at)diplomaticcorp.com ([email]dc279(at)diplomaticcorp.com[/email])
Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2010 10:46 PM
Subject: RE: 1648 091010: Update
Charles,
I like the effect of Franconia and the prussian changes. Franconia in particular should help to avoid blockades in middle germany. I don't know turkey's territories well enough to comment on those.
Nigs
Not got a Hotmail account? Sign-up now - Free
[/quote:e470fdddb4] |
| 1648 091010: Update (dc279) charlesf Mar 11, 12:57 pm |
Ah, if you guys think the extra buffer has merit, I guess I'll draw a map for you to comment upon. Would move Poland and Russia further apart.
As for redrawing Moscow to touch NRG and add that buffer, yes, it'd broaden the front in the far north. Nov would be not the one province through which Russian units have to pass to get at Sweden. But it'd be a slow developing attack - as I consider appropriate for the Northern wilderness. And of course, the Danes could descend on Moscow rather than on Novgorod...
Charles
----- Original Message -----
From: Jorge Saralegui ([email]jmsaralegui(at)gmail.com[/email])
To: Charles Féaux de la Croix ([email]charlesf(at)web.de[/email])
Cc: Nigel PHILLIPS ([email]nephilli99(at)hotmail.com[/email]) ; kelly058(at)verizon.net ([email]kelly058(at)verizon.net[/email]) ; Mike Leprecaun ([email]mrh(at)panix.com[/email]) ; Marc Ellinger ([email]mellinger(at)blitzbardgett.com[/email]) ; hmtucaz(at)gmail.com ([email]hmtucaz(at)gmail.com[/email]) ; Mikael Johansson ([email]m_don_j(at)hotmail.com[/email]) ; dirk(at)knemeyer.com ([email]dirk(at)knemeyer.com[/email]) ; aislattery(at)aol.com ([email]aislattery(at)aol.com[/email]) ; dc279(at)diplomaticcorp.com ([email]dc279(at)diplomaticcorp.com[/email])
Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2010 4:58 PM
Subject: Re: 1648 091010: Update
Charles,
I like the idea of giving Austria more incentive to move east instead of west. Another buffer on the Russo-Polish border is a good idea both ways, taking pressure off both and allowing both to consider moving elsewhere. Is the idea behind extending Moscow to the White Sea an opportunity to give Russia more space from which to invade Sweden?
Jorge
2010/3/11 Charles Féaux de la Croix <charlesf(at)web.de ([email]charlesf(at)web.de[/email])>
[quote:497e7fd61f] Nigs,
well, I'm not sure this change makes Swabia less of a bottleneck (which don't have a particular issue with). Had I chosen to have Franconia border Hesse, then yes. But I didn't want to make the HRE have the makings of a doughnut, with Hesse/Franconia being the hole. That's why I added the territory of the Würzburg bishopric to Swabia (i.e. that salient towards Saxony).
For Austria I'd say this change is a mixed blessing. It somewhat complicates Austria's opening game, which I welcome. Getting three SCs in 1649 struck me as being too easy in the past. Bavaria can't help Austria into Saxony (and vice versa). This in turn makes Austria more dependent on support from pretty one single source of minor power support in Germany, namely Swabia. And that makes the job of those interested in curbing Austrian growth quite a bit easier since successfully competing for DPs in Swabia will most likely slow down the Emperor.
So I understand this change to be about recalibrating Austria's influence in the Empire as compared to those of others.
Also, the change down in Turkey might also tempt Austria more into a Balkan direction. After all, now that Damascus and Constantinople are no longer adjacent, A Damascus can no longer more to Constantinople in an effort to back up A Belgrade if need be. In other words, Belgrade is more vulnerable. Next to the opportunity this gives rise to for Austria, it also might have Turkey move into Hungary more precisely in order to check that danger.
In this regard, Fraconia also complicates home defence since if A Prague moved to Saxony or Franconia, it'd be somewhat less useful in fending off a Turkish raid.
Much as the Sultan may worry more about Belgrade, so does a Russian move into Armenia present more of a headache now thanks to Damascus and Constantinople no longer covering another. More of a temptation for the Tsar to go south, but also for the Sultan to move into Armenia precisely because of this danger. All in all, this makes early Russo-Turkish conflict rather more likely, methinks.
And that in turn had me thinking whether I ought to somewhat ease the home defence burden on Russia. Say by adding a buffer province between Nov, Mos, Vor, WRu and Smo. Another idea would be to extend Moscow up to the White Sea (i.e. Russia's northern shore), while adding a buffer between Novgorod, Karelia and Moscow, so that a Swedish move into Karelia wouldn't border both Novgorod and Moscow at the same time.
Considering also a number of other approaches, but decided to hold off of them for now.
Cheers,
Charles
[quote:497e7fd61f] ----- Original Message -----
From: Nigel PHILLIPS ([email]nephilli99(at)hotmail.com[/email])
To: charlesf(at)web.de ([email]charlesf(at)web.de[/email]) ; kelly058(at)verizon.net ([email]kelly058(at)verizon.net[/email]) ; Mike Leprecaun ([email]mrh(at)panix.com[/email]) ; Marc Ellinger ([email]mellinger(at)blitzbardgett.com[/email]) ; hmtucaz(at)gmail.com ([email]hmtucaz(at)gmail.com[/email]) ; Jorge England 214 ([email]jmsaralegui(at)gmail.com[/email]) ; Mikael Johansson ([email]m_don_j(at)hotmail.com[/email]) ; dirk(at)knemeyer.com ([email]dirk(at)knemeyer.com[/email]) ; aislattery(at)aol.com ([email]aislattery(at)aol.com[/email]) ; dc279(at)diplomaticcorp.com ([email]dc279(at)diplomaticcorp.com[/email])
Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2010 10:46 PM
Subject: RE: 1648 091010: Update
Charles,
I like the effect of Franconia and the prussian changes. Franconia in particular should help to avoid blockades in middle germany. I don't know turkey's territories well enough to comment on those.
Nigs
Not got a Hotmail account? Sign-up now - Free
[/quote:497e7fd61f]
[/quote:497e7fd61f] |
| 1648 091010: Update (dc279) txurce Mar 11, 12:59 pm |
Slow attacks are what it's all about! Which is why I'm advocating for splitting up the English Arctic passage!
Cheers,
Jorge
2010/3/11 Charles Féaux de la Croix <charlesf(at)web.de ([email]charlesf(at)web.de[/email])>
Ah, if you guys think the extra buffer has merit, I guess I'll draw a map for you to comment upon. Would move Poland and Russia further apart.
As for redrawing Moscow to touch NRG and add that buffer, yes, it'd broaden the front in the far north. Nov would be not the one province through which Russian units have to pass to get at Sweden. But it'd be a slow developing attack - as I consider appropriate for the Northern wilderness. And of course, the Danes could descend on Moscow rather than on Novgorod...
Charles
[quote:662e37b332] ----- Original Message -----
From: Jorge Saralegui ([email]jmsaralegui(at)gmail.com[/email])
To: Charles Féaux de la Croix ([email]charlesf(at)web.de[/email])
Cc: Nigel PHILLIPS ([email]nephilli99(at)hotmail.com[/email]) ; kelly058(at)verizon.net ([email]kelly058(at)verizon.net[/email]) ; Mike Leprecaun ([email]mrh(at)panix.com[/email]) ; Marc Ellinger ([email]mellinger(at)blitzbardgett.com[/email]) ; hmtucaz(at)gmail.com ([email]hmtucaz(at)gmail.com[/email]) ; Mikael Johansson ([email]m_don_j(at)hotmail.com[/email]) ; dirk(at)knemeyer.com ([email]dirk(at)knemeyer.com[/email]) ; aislattery(at)aol.com ([email]aislattery(at)aol.com[/email]) ; dc279(at)diplomaticcorp.com ([email]dc279(at)diplomaticcorp.com[/email])
Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2010 4:58 PM
Subject: Re: 1648 091010: Update
Charles,
I like the idea of giving Austria more incentive to move east instead of west. Another buffer on the Russo-Polish border is a good idea both ways, taking pressure off both and allowing both to consider moving elsewhere. Is the idea behind extending Moscow to the White Sea an opportunity to give Russia more space from which to invade Sweden?
Jorge
2010/3/11 Charles Féaux de la Croix <charlesf(at)web.de ([email]charlesf(at)web.de[/email])>
[quote:662e37b332] Nigs,
well, I'm not sure this change makes Swabia less of a bottleneck (which don't have a particular issue with). Had I chosen to have Franconia border Hesse, then yes. But I didn't want to make the HRE have the makings of a doughnut, with Hesse/Franconia being the hole. That's why I added the territory of the Würzburg bishopric to Swabia (i.e. that salient towards Saxony).
For Austria I'd say this change is a mixed blessing. It somewhat complicates Austria's opening game, which I welcome. Getting three SCs in 1649 struck me as being too easy in the past. Bavaria can't help Austria into Saxony (and vice versa). This in turn makes Austria more dependent on support from pretty one single source of minor power support in Germany, namely Swabia. And that makes the job of those interested in curbing Austrian growth quite a bit easier since successfully competing for DPs in Swabia will most likely slow down the Emperor.
So I understand this change to be about recalibrating Austria's influence in the Empire as compared to those of others.
Also, the change down in Turkey might also tempt Austria more into a Balkan direction. After all, now that Damascus and Constantinople are no longer adjacent, A Damascus can no longer more to Constantinople in an effort to back up A Belgrade if need be. In other words, Belgrade is more vulnerable. Next to the opportunity this gives rise to for Austria, it also might have Turkey move into Hungary more precisely in order to check that danger.
In this regard, Fraconia also complicates home defence since if A Prague moved to Saxony or Franconia, it'd be somewhat less useful in fending off a Turkish raid.
Much as the Sultan may worry more about Belgrade, so does a Russian move into Armenia present more of a headache now thanks to Damascus and Constantinople no longer covering another. More of a temptation for the Tsar to go south, but also for the Sultan to move into Armenia precisely because of this danger. All in all, this makes early Russo-Turkish conflict rather more likely, methinks.
And that in turn had me thinking whether I ought to somewhat ease the home defence burden on Russia. Say by adding a buffer province between Nov, Mos, Vor, WRu and Smo. Another idea would be to extend Moscow up to the White Sea (i.e. Russia's northern shore), while adding a buffer between Novgorod, Karelia and Moscow, so that a Swedish move into Karelia wouldn't border both Novgorod and Moscow at the same time.
Considering also a number of other approaches, but decided to hold off of them for now.
Cheers,
Charles
[quote:662e37b332] ----- Original Message -----
From: Nigel PHILLIPS ([email]nephilli99(at)hotmail.com[/email])
To: charlesf(at)web.de ([email]charlesf(at)web.de[/email]) ; kelly058(at)verizon.net ([email]kelly058(at)verizon.net[/email]) ; Mike Leprecaun ([email]mrh(at)panix.com[/email]) ; Marc Ellinger ([email]mellinger(at)blitzbardgett.com[/email]) ; hmtucaz(at)gmail.com ([email]hmtucaz(at)gmail.com[/email]) ; Jorge England 214 ([email]jmsaralegui(at)gmail.com[/email]) ; Mikael Johansson ([email]m_don_j(at)hotmail.com[/email]) ; dirk(at)knemeyer.com ([email]dirk(at)knemeyer.com[/email]) ; aislattery(at)aol.com ([email]aislattery(at)aol.com[/email]) ; dc279(at)diplomaticcorp.com ([email]dc279(at)diplomaticcorp.com[/email])
Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2010 10:46 PM
Subject: RE: 1648 091010: Update
Charles,
I like the effect of Franconia and the prussian changes. Franconia in particular should help to avoid blockades in middle germany. I don't know turkey's territories well enough to comment on those.
Nigs
Not got a Hotmail account? Sign-up now - Free
[/quote:662e37b332]
[/quote:662e37b332]
[/quote:662e37b332] |
| 1648 091010: Update (dc279) charlesf Mar 11, 05:08 pm |
The overall trend with these changes and the ones you already made in the Med are to limit stalemates.
Well, I'd say the East-West confrontation we've seen in the present game presents something of an anomaly. Yet I indeed am aiming for more fluid play. The most important step here was to reduce the victory criterion to 15. The second-most important one the reworking of the Central Med.
It also slows thrusts to some degree, which is fine and in keeping with the game.
Well, my aim is to keep the map very integrated. I want to keep players even more on their toes.
Specifically, all of the ones that Nigs mentioned - Franconia and the Prussias - seem good to me. Making Turkey non-contiguous influences it to move east and west instead of to the Balkans - is this what you want?
Don't think that A Damascus was going to march straight into the Balkans in the old versions either. But it could provide backup to A Belgrade and hence that very possibility somewhat diminished the attractiveness of a South-Eastern thrust by Austria.
A Damascus can really turn into any direction:
- Karaman gives you a play for Candia and some protection against first-year attacks vs. Constantinople.
- Armenia also allows one to cover Constantinople, covers a "soft spot" and presents a possible play for the Crimea or Voronezh.
- Azerbaijan is somewhat similar to an Armenian opening, but probably not much of an opening move.
- Persia is obviously the "grow now" option.
- Egypt presents a play for Tunis. More attractive now that F Sevilla is somewhat less of an immediate factor.
I'm liking the added incentives for moves to Egypt and Armenia.
With regard to changes in Russia, I would consider splitting Novgorod to facilitate an attack on Sweden...
That one of the ideas I'm looking at. Carving out a norther buffer out of Novgorod, while also extending Moscow to the northern shore.
and I would also break up NRG. The possibility of NRG C Sco - Nov amounts to a sort of long-range blitzkrieg unseen anywhere else on the map. (My issue is more about consistency than historical accuracy.)
Ah, until I reached v2.5, NRG indeed didn't border Novgorod. Here's the 2.0 map (which is basically where I had left things off in 2004, the new work in 2009 began with v2.1 which was already an entirely different beast):
Yet this type of map arrangement created kinda a D-W-R string rather than a genuine "Arctic triangle". I wanted Denmark (and indeed England, then an "Arctic quadrangle" to be able to attack Russia (and vice versa). Makes for better gameplay and is also historically justified.
Indeed, only up there can one power "leapfrog" two basically closer powers to attack the another. I like that a lot!
But there's another reason why I'm showing you this mothballed old map version. It shows you an arrangement of Poland's buffer provinces in the East (save for Polotsk, which I introduced with v2.1) I'm now once again considering. Moscow is, as you can see, shielded by the Smolensk buffer (which corresponds to the territory Poland lost to Russia later in the 17th century)).
Cheers,
Charles |
| 1648 091010: Winter 1654 Retreats/Adjustments - charlesf (Mar 09, 2010, 12:32 pm) |
Hallo zusammen,
now that three of the four pillars of the Swedish realm have been knocked down (i.e. Finland, Livonia and Sweden proper), only the German pillar remains. Confined to North-Eastern Germany, Sweden arguably now bears more of a resemblance to Brandenburg-Prussia under the Great Elector than come across as a Scandinavian power. That being said, Brandenburg-Prussia never quite had enough of a naval arsenal as to amount to a single fleet in game-terms. Though the Great Elector did build up a sizable merchant navy to engage in the triangular trade (and to that end he had established a colony in Western Africa later in the 17th century. Kinda following the example of the Duke of Courland who had established colonies on Tobago and on the African coast). But I digress...
Looks like Europe's statesman are saving for a rainy day, given the number of builds that are being banked. Now, on whom will it pour?
Note that we shall have our next deadline on the 22nd. So we'll take the opportunity of Mike's travelling to shift again to a Wednesday/Friday routine.
Liebe Grüsse,
Charles
----------
PLAYERS:
AUSTRIA: Mike Hoffman <mrh(at)panix.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)
TURKEY: Aidan Slattery <AiSlattery(at)aol.com>
PROCLAMATIONS:
o EUROPE'S MONARCHS SAVE FOR A RAINY DAY
PRESS: None.
RETREATS:
Austria:
A Swabia - Hesse
ADJUSTMENTS:
France:
Build waived
Poland-Lithuania:
Build A Vilna
Build waived
Spain:
Build waived
Sweden:
Remove F Gulf of Bothnia
SUPPLY CENTER OWNERSHIP (Winter 1654):
Austria(5): Bavaria, Prague, Saxony, Trieste, Vienna.
England(: Abo, Bristol, Christiania, Ireland, London, Scotland, Stockholm, United Provinces.
France(11): Brest, Flanders, Lorraine, Lower Saxony, Marseilles, Paris, Rhineland-Westphalia, Savoy, Swabia, Switzerland, Venice.
Poland-Lithuania(10): Copenhagen, Courland, Cracow, Moscow, Novgorod, Prussia, Riga, Vilna, Voronezh, Warsaw.
Spain(10): Algiers, Madrid, Mecklenburg, Morocco, Naples, Papal States, Portugal, Seville, Tunis, Tuscany.
Sweden(3): Brandenburg, Mecklenburg, Stettin.
Turkey(11): Belgrade, Candia, Constantinople, Crimea, Damascus, Moldavia, Persia, Transylvania, Turkestan, Ukraine, Wallachia.
DEADLINE SCHEDULE: (all orders are due NLT 6PM CET (i.e. GMT+1)...not local time)
o Spring 1655 Moves: (20) 22 March
MAP:[Reply] |
| 1648 091010: Fall 1654 Moves - charlesf (Mar 08, 2010, 2:55 pm) |
Hallo zusammen,
as you know, I'm keeping track of the number of times Swabia flips. Well, here's our sixth flip! Not bad for the few years we've been playing, particularly considering the by design congested circumstances in the Holy Roman Empire.
It's quite a different picture in the Med, where the Spaniards and Turks aren't gaining a single inch on each other. Must confess that I'd love to see my changes I've implemented since starting this game loosening up matters down there. But perhaps a future diplomatic realignment will yet do the trick...?
But hey, what's Swabia and the Med when probably all eyes are on how things shall shake out round the Baltic? Spring left us wondering whether the rzeczpospolita might hold on to its conquests. And then there was the matter of the itinerant Polish army over in the Empire: Would it have to surrender to surrounding forces or yet proudly fly the White Eagle's banner in far distant lands?
Well, we have our answers! Courland and Riga shall be covered in pink before long. But so will Copenhagen as they marched into Jutland with Army of Flanders hotly in pursuit. No Polish winged-hussars vs. Castillian tercios showdown just yet! Sounds bad-ass doesn't it?
Oh, before I forget: If anyone wishes to amend his Keppler Award predictions, winter seasons are the time to do it.
As Mike shall be travelling and without any internet access from the 10th until the 20th, I've granted an extension of the spring deadline until the 22nd. Furthermore, to accomodate Mike's departure, I've scheduled the coming winter season for tomorrow, Tuesday, 6PM CET. I hope that works for everyone. Just want to make sure Mike gets to see and possibly react to the winter adjucation before leaving.
Liebe Grüsse,
Charles
----------
PLAYERS:
AUSTRIA: Mike Hoffman <mrh(at)panix.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)
TURKEY: Aidan Slattery <AiSlattery(at)aol.com>
PROCLAMATIONS:
o FOUR GERMAN ELECTORS OPENLY DECLARE FOR LOUIS XIV; IMPERIAL CROWN SOON IN BOURBON HANDS?
o ROUNDHEADS ISSUED WINTER GEAR SO AS TO BRAVE THE RUSSIAN WINTER
o THE SUN-KING PARADES THROUGH AUGSBURG; MANY A BURGHER'S DAUGHTER FAINTS IN EXCITEMENT
o WHITE EAGLE OVER THE ORESUND!
o ARMY OF FLANDERS FAILS TO CHASE DOWN WILY POLES
o JANISSARIES SET FOOT ON GERMAN SOIL
PRESS: None.
ORDERS:
Austria:
A Bavaria Supports A Swabia
A Saxony Supports A Swabia (*Cut*)
A Swabia Hold (*Dislodged*)
A Trieste Supports A Tyrolia
A Tyrolia Supports A Swabia (*Cut*)
England:
A Ingria - Novgorod (*Fails*)
A Karelia Supports A Ingria - Novgorod
F Lapland - Abo
A Northern Norway - Lapland
F North Sea - Norwegian Sea
F Norwegian Sea - Arctic Ocean
A Scotland Hold
F Stockholm(ec) Hold
France:
F English Channel - North Sea
A Flanders Supports A United Provinces - Rhineland-Westphalia
A Lombardy - Venice (*Fails*)
A Lorraine Supports A Rhineland-Westphalia - Swabia
F Lower Saxony Supports A Mecklenburg - Holstein
A Rhineland-Westphalia - Swabia
A Savoy Supports A Switzerland
A Switzerland Supports A Rhineland-Westphalia - Swabia
A United Provinces - Rhineland-Westphalia
A Venice - Tyrolia (*Fails*)
Poland-Lithuania:
A Courland - Prussia (*Bounce*)
A Holstein - Copenhagen
A Novgorod Hold
A Polotsk Supports A Riga
A Prussia - Greater Poland (*Bounce*)
A Riga Hold
A Samogitia - Prussia (*Bounce*)
A Smolensk Supports A Novgorod
Spain:
A Algiers Supports F Tunis
A Mecklenburg - Holstein
F Naples Supports F Tyrrhenian Sea (*Cut*)
F Papal States(ec) Supports F Naples
F Sardinia Supports F Tyrrhenian Sea
A Seville Hold
F Tunis Supports F Tyrrhenian Sea (*Cut*)
A Tuscany Supports A Lombardy - Venice
F Tyrrhenian Sea Supports F Naples
Sweden:
F Baltic Sea - Greater Poland (*Bounce*)
A Brandenburg - Saxony (*Fails*)
F Gulf of Bothnia - Riga (*Fails*)
A Stettin - Mecklenburg
Turkey:
F Adriatic Sea Supports F Sicily - Naples
F Aegean Sea Supports F Ionian Sea
A Croatia Supports A Trieste
F Eastern Mediterranean Supports F Ionian Sea
F Egypt - Tunis (*Fails*)
F Illyria Supports F Adriatic Sea
F Ionian Sea Supports F Sicily - Naples
A Permia Supports A Novgorod
F Sicily - Naples (*Fails*)
A Slovakia - Silesia
A Ukraine Hold
PENDING RETREATS:
Austrian A Swabia can retreat to Hesse or OTB.
ADJUSTMENTS:
Austria:
Build?
France:
Build
Poland-Lithuania:
Build
Build
Spain:
Build
Sweden:
Remove
SUPPLY CENTER OWNERSHIP (Winter 1653):
Austria(5): Bavaria, Prague, Saxony, Trieste, Vienna.
England(: Abo, Bristol, Christiania, Ireland, London, Scotland, Stockholm, United Provinces.
France(10): Brest, Flanders, Lorraine, Marseilles, Paris, Rhineland-Westphalia, Savoy, Swabia, Switzerland, Venice.
Poland-Lithuania(: Cracow, Lower Saxony, Moscow, Novgorod, Prussia, Vilna, Voronezh, Warsaw.
Spain(10): Algiers, Madrid, Mecklenburg, Morocco, Naples, Papal States, Portugal, Seville, Tunis, Tuscany.
Sweden(6): Brandenburg, Copenhagen, Courland, Holstein, Riga, Stettin.
Turkey(11): Belgrade, Candia, Constantinople, Crimea, Damascus, Moldavia, Persia, Transylvania, Turkestan, Ukraine, Wallachia.
DEADLINE SCHEDULE: (all orders are due NLT 6PM CET (i.e. GMT+1)...not local time)
o Winter 1964 Retreats/AdjustmentsMoves: 9 March
o Spring 1655 Moves: 22 March
ORDERS MAP:
RESULTS MAP:[Reply] |
| 1648 091010: Summer 1654 Retreats - charlesf (Mar 03, 2010, 9:59 am) |
Hallöle,
other than perhaps the Polish retreat, this summer season has been quite straightforward. Will this Polish outpost have to surrender come fall or manage to escape that fate? Stay tuned.
Preliminary Fall 1654 Moves are due on Saturday, 6 PM CET.
Tschau,
Charles
----------
PLAYERS:
AUSTRIA: Mike Hoffman <mrh(at)panix.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)
TURKEY: Aidan Slattery <AiSlattery(at)aol.com>
PROCLAMATIONS:
o HOMESICK POLES SEEK REFUGE IN THE "LAND BETWEEN THE SEAS"
PRESS: None.
RETREATS:
France:
A Swabia - Lorraine
Poland-Lithuania:
A Lower Saxony - Holstein
Sweden:
F Courland - Gulf of Bothnia
SUPPLY CENTER OWNERSHIP (Winter 1653):
Austria(5): Bavaria, Prague, Saxony, Trieste, Vienna.
England(: Abo, Bristol, Christiania, Ireland, London, Scotland, Stockholm, United Provinces.
France(10): Brest, Flanders, Lorraine, Marseilles, Paris, Rhineland-Westphalia, Savoy, Swabia, Switzerland, Venice.
Poland-Lithuania(: Cracow, Lower Saxony, Moscow, Novgorod, Prussia, Vilna, Voronezh, Warsaw.
Spain(10): Algiers, Madrid, Mecklenburg, Morocco, Naples, Papal States, Portugal, Seville, Tunis, Tuscany.
Sweden(6): Brandenburg, Copenhagen, Courland, Holstein, Riga, Stettin.
Turkey(11): Belgrade, Candia, Constantinople, Crimea, Damascus, Moldavia, Persia, Transylvania, Turkestan, Ukraine, Wallachia.
DEADLINE SCHEDULE: (all orders are due NLT 6PM CET (i.e. GMT+1)...not local time)
o Fall 1964 Moves: (6) 8 March
MAP:[Reply] |
| 1648 091010: Spring 1654 Moves - charlesf (Mar 01, 2010, 5:19 pm) |
Hi guys,
life in Swabia's peasants must be living hell. To date this strategically important province of the Holy Roman Empire has witnessed five invasions ever since Europe's monarchs once again embarked in war. Yet if the downtrodden locals happen to be the losers in all this, at least the Emperor will be relieved that for the time being Germany's eight electors still for the most part support him.
In the Baltic, Sweden's suffered a setback as the Poles have conquered Mitau and Riga, yet the arrival of Cromwell's men further to the north might yet alter the equation in that theatre.
Anyway, Summer 1654 retreats are due on Wednesday, 6 PM CET.
Liebe Grüsse,
Charles
----------
PLAYERS:
AUSTRIA: Mike Hoffman <mrh(at)panix.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)
TURKEY: Aidan Slattery <AiSlattery(at)aol.com>
PROCLAMATIONS:
o EMPEROER PARADES THROUGH AUGSBURG
o ROUNDHEADS WADE THROUGH GODFORSAKEN SWAMPS
o LOUIS XIV OVERSEES SUCCESSFUL FRENCH COMBINED OPERATIONS
o POLES CELEBRATE THEIR RECONQUEST OF LIVONIA
o SPANIARDS ASSIST IN FRENCH LANDING NEAR BREMEN
o TURKISH SPAHIS SKIRMISH WITH SWEDISH SCOUTS
PRESS: None.
ORDERS:
Austria:
A Bavaria Supports A Hesse - Swabia
A Hesse - Swabia
A Saxony Supports A Hesse - Swabia
A Trieste - Venice (*Fails*)
A Tyrolia - Switzerland (*Bounce*)
England:
A Abo - Ingria
A Christiania - Northern Norway
A Lapland - Karelia
F North Sea Supports A Brest - United Provinces
F Norwegian Sea Supports A Lapland - Karelia
F Scania - Stockholm(ec)
A Scotland Hold
F Stockholm(ec) - Lapland
France:
A Brest - United Provinces
F English Channel Convoys A Brest - United Provinces
A Flanders Supports A Lorraine - Rhineland-Westphalia
F Helgoland Bight - Lower Saxony
A Lombardy Supports A Venice
A Lorraine - Rhineland-Westphalia
A Savoy - Switzerland (*Bounce*)
A Swabia - Bavaria (*Dislodged*)
A Switzerland - Tyrolia (*Fails*)
A Venice Supports A Switzerland - Tyrolia (*Cut*)
Poland-Lithuania:
A Greater Poland - Prussia
A Ingria - Riga
A Lower Saxony - Rhineland-Westphalia (*Dislodged*)
A Novgorod - Pskov (*Bounce*)
A Polotsk Supports A Ingria - Riga
A Prussia - Courland
A Samogitia Supports A Prussia - Courland
A Vilna - Smolensk
Spain:
A Algiers Supports F Tunis
A Mecklenburg Supports F Helgoland Bight - Lower Saxony
F Naples Supports F Tyrrhenian Sea (*Cut*)
F Papal States(ec) Supports F Naples
F Sardinia Supports F Tyrrhenian Sea
A Seville Hold
F Tunis Supports F Tyrrhenian Sea
A Tuscany Supports A Venice
F Tyrrhenian Sea Supports F Naples
Sweden:
F Baltic Sea Supports A Stettin - Brandenburg (*Fails*)
A Brandenburg - Silesia (*Bounce*)
F Courland - Riga (*Dislodged*)
A Riga - Pskov (*Disbanded*)
A Stettin - Brandenburg (*Fails*)
Turkey:
F Adriatic Sea Supports F Sicily - Naples
F Constantinople - Aegean Sea
A Croatia Supports A Trieste (*Ordered to Move*)
F Damascus - Eastern Mediterranean
F Egypt Supports F Ionian Sea
F Illyria Supports F Adriatic Sea
F Ionian Sea Supports F Sicily - Naples
A Permia Hold
F Sicily - Naples (*Fails*)
A Slovakia - Silesia (*Bounce*)
A Ukraine Hold
PENDING RETREATS:
Swedish F Courland can retreat to Gulf of Bothnia or OTB.
Polish A Lower Saxony can retreat to HolsteinHesse or OTB.
French A Swabia can retreat to Lorraine or OTB.
SUPPLY CENTER OWNERSHIP (Winter 1653):
Austria(5): Bavaria, Prague, Saxony, Trieste, Vienna.
England(: Abo, Bristol, Christiania, Ireland, London, Scotland, Stockholm, United Provinces.
France(10): Brest, Flanders, Lorraine, Marseilles, Paris, Rhineland-Westphalia, Savoy, Swabia, Switzerland, Venice.
Poland-Lithuania(: Cracow, Lower Saxony, Moscow, Novgorod, Prussia, Vilna, Voronezh, Warsaw.
Spain(10): Algiers, Madrid, Mecklenburg, Morocco, Naples, Papal States, Portugal, Seville, Tunis, Tuscany.
Sweden(6): Brandenburg, Copenhagen, Courland, Holstein, Riga, Stettin.
Turkey(11): Belgrade, Candia, Constantinople, Crimea, Damascus, Moldavia, Persia, Transylvania, Turkestan, Ukraine, Wallachia.
DEADLINE SCHEDULE: (all orders are due NLT 6PM CET (i.e. GMT+1)...not local time)
o Summer 1964 Retreats: 3 March
ORDERS MAP:
RESULTS MAP:[Reply] |
| 1648 091010: Spring 1654 Moves - charlesf (Mar 01, 2010, 5:18 pm) |
Hi guys,
life in Swabia's peasants must be living hell. To date this strategically important province of the Holy Roman Empire has witnessed five invasions ever since Europe's monarchs once again embarked in war. Yet if the downtrodden locals happen to be the losers in all this, at least the Emperor will be relieved that for the time being Germany's eight electors still for the most part support him.
In the Baltic, Sweden's suffered a setback as the Poles have conquered Mitau and Riga, yet the arrival of Cromwell's men further to the north might yet alter the equation in that theatre.
Anyway, Summer 1654 retreats are due on Wednesday, 6 PM CET.
Liebe Grüsse,
Charles
----------
PLAYERS:
AUSTRIA: Mike Hoffman <mrh(at)panix.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)
TURKEY: Aidan Slattery <AiSlattery(at)aol.com>
PROCLAMATIONS:
o EMPEROER PARADES THROUGH AUGSBURG
o ROUNDHEADS WADE THROUGH GODFORSAKEN SWAMPS
o LOUIS XIV OVERSEES SUCCESSFUL FRENCH COMBINED OPERATIONS
o POLES CELEBRATE THEIR RECONQUEST OF LIVONIA
o SPANIARDS ASSIST IN FRENCH LANDING NEAR BREMEN
o TURKISH SPAHIS SKIRMISH WITH SWEDISH SCOUTS
PRESS: None.
ORDERS:
Austria:
A Bavaria Supports A Hesse - Swabia
A Hesse - Swabia
A Saxony Supports A Hesse - Swabia
A Trieste - Venice (*Fails*)
A Tyrolia - Switzerland (*Bounce*)
England:
A Abo - Ingria
A Christiania - Northern Norway
A Lapland - Karelia
F North Sea Supports A Brest - United Provinces
F Norwegian Sea Supports A Lapland - Karelia
F Scania - Stockholm(ec)
A Scotland Hold
F Stockholm(ec) - Lapland
France:
A Brest - United Provinces
F English Channel Convoys A Brest - United Provinces
A Flanders Supports A Lorraine - Rhineland-Westphalia
F Helgoland Bight - Lower Saxony
A Lombardy Supports A Venice
A Lorraine - Rhineland-Westphalia
A Savoy - Switzerland (*Bounce*)
A Swabia - Bavaria (*Dislodged*)
A Switzerland - Tyrolia (*Fails*)
A Venice Supports A Switzerland - Tyrolia (*Cut*)
Poland-Lithuania:
A Greater Poland - Prussia
A Ingria - Riga
A Lower Saxony - Rhineland-Westphalia (*Dislodged*)
A Novgorod - Pskov (*Bounce*)
A Polotsk Supports A Ingria - Riga
A Prussia - Courland
A Samogitia Supports A Prussia - Courland
A Vilna - Smolensk
Spain:
A Algiers Supports F Tunis
A Mecklenburg Supports F Helgoland Bight - Lower Saxony
F Naples Supports F Tyrrhenian Sea (*Cut*)
F Papal States(ec) Supports F Naples
F Sardinia Supports F Tyrrhenian Sea
A Seville Hold
F Tunis Supports F Tyrrhenian Sea
A Tuscany Supports A Venice
F Tyrrhenian Sea Supports F Naples
Sweden:
F Baltic Sea Supports A Stettin - Brandenburg (*Fails*)
A Brandenburg - Silesia (*Bounce*)
F Courland - Riga (*Dislodged*)
A Riga - Pskov (*Disbanded*)
A Stettin - Brandenburg (*Fails*)
Turkey:
F Adriatic Sea Supports F Sicily - Naples
F Constantinople - Aegean Sea
A Croatia Supports A Trieste (*Ordered to Move*)
F Damascus - Eastern Mediterranean
F Egypt Supports F Ionian Sea
F Illyria Supports F Adriatic Sea
F Ionian Sea Supports F Sicily - Naples
A Permia Hold
F Sicily - Naples (*Fails*)
A Slovakia - Silesia (*Bounce*)
A Ukraine Hold
PENDING RETREATS:
Swedish F Courland can retreat to Gulf of Bothnia or OTB.
Polish A Lower Saxony can retreat to HolsteinHesse or OTB.
French A Swabia can retreat to Lorraine or OTB.
SUPPLY CENTER OWNERSHIP (Winter 1653):
Austria(5): Bavaria, Prague, Saxony, Trieste, Vienna.
England(: Abo, Bristol, Christiania, Ireland, London, Scotland, Stockholm, United Provinces.
France(10): Brest, Flanders, Lorraine, Marseilles, Paris, Rhineland-Westphalia, Savoy, Swabia, Switzerland, Venice.
Poland-Lithuania(: Cracow, Lower Saxony, Moscow, Novgorod, Prussia, Vilna, Voronezh, Warsaw.
Spain(10): Algiers, Madrid, Mecklenburg, Morocco, Naples, Papal States, Portugal, Seville, Tunis, Tuscany.
Sweden(6): Brandenburg, Copenhagen, Courland, Holstein, Riga, Stettin.
Turkey(11): Belgrade, Candia, Constantinople, Crimea, Damascus, Moldavia, Persia, Transylvania, Turkestan, Ukraine, Wallachia.
DEADLINE SCHEDULE: (all orders are due NLT 6PM CET (i.e. GMT+1)...not local time)
o Summer 1964 Retreats: 3 March
ORDERS MAP:
RESULTS MAP:[Reply] |
| 1648 091010: Spring 1654 Moves (dc279) charlesf Mar 01, 05:19 pm |
Hi guys,
life in Swabia's peasants must be living hell. To date this strategically important province of the Holy Roman Empire has witnessed five invasions ever since Europe's monarchs once again embarked in war. Yet if the downtrodden locals happen to be the losers in all this, at least the Emperor will be relieved that for the time being Germany's eight electors still for the most part support him.
In the Baltic, Sweden's suffered a setback as the Poles have conquered Mitau and Riga, yet the arrival of Cromwell's men further to the north might yet alter the equation in that theatre.
Anyway, Summer 1654 retreats are due on Wednesday, 6 PM CET.
Liebe Grüsse,
Charles
----------
PLAYERS:
AUSTRIA: Mike Hoffman <mrh(at)panix.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)
TURKEY: Aidan Slattery <AiSlattery(at)aol.com>
PROCLAMATIONS:
o EMPEROER PARADES THROUGH AUGSBURG
o ROUNDHEADS WADE THROUGH GODFORSAKEN SWAMPS
o LOUIS XIV OVERSEES SUCCESSFUL FRENCH COMBINED OPERATIONS
o POLES CELEBRATE THEIR RECONQUEST OF LIVONIA
o SPANIARDS ASSIST IN FRENCH LANDING NEAR BREMEN
o TURKISH SPAHIS SKIRMISH WITH SWEDISH SCOUTS
PRESS: None.
ORDERS:
Austria:
A Bavaria Supports A Hesse - Swabia
A Hesse - Swabia
A Saxony Supports A Hesse - Swabia
A Trieste - Venice (*Fails*)
A Tyrolia - Switzerland (*Bounce*)
England:
A Abo - Ingria
A Christiania - Northern Norway
A Lapland - Karelia
F North Sea Supports A Brest - United Provinces
F Norwegian Sea Supports A Lapland - Karelia
F Scania - Stockholm(ec)
A Scotland Hold
F Stockholm(ec) - Lapland
France:
A Brest - United Provinces
F English Channel Convoys A Brest - United Provinces
A Flanders Supports A Lorraine - Rhineland-Westphalia
F Helgoland Bight - Lower Saxony
A Lombardy Supports A Venice
A Lorraine - Rhineland-Westphalia
A Savoy - Switzerland (*Bounce*)
A Swabia - Bavaria (*Dislodged*)
A Switzerland - Tyrolia (*Fails*)
A Venice Supports A Switzerland - Tyrolia (*Cut*)
Poland-Lithuania:
A Greater Poland - Prussia
A Ingria - Riga
A Lower Saxony - Rhineland-Westphalia (*Dislodged*)
A Novgorod - Pskov (*Bounce*)
A Polotsk Supports A Ingria - Riga
A Prussia - Courland
A Samogitia Supports A Prussia - Courland
A Vilna - Smolensk
Spain:
A Algiers Supports F Tunis
A Mecklenburg Supports F Helgoland Bight - Lower Saxony
F Naples Supports F Tyrrhenian Sea (*Cut*)
F Papal States(ec) Supports F Naples
F Sardinia Supports F Tyrrhenian Sea
A Seville Hold
F Tunis Supports F Tyrrhenian Sea
A Tuscany Supports A Venice
F Tyrrhenian Sea Supports F Naples
Sweden:
F Baltic Sea Supports A Stettin - Brandenburg (*Fails*)
A Brandenburg - Silesia (*Bounce*)
F Courland - Riga (*Dislodged*)
A Riga - Pskov (*Disbanded*)
A Stettin - Brandenburg (*Fails*)
Turkey:
F Adriatic Sea Supports F Sicily - Naples
F Constantinople - Aegean Sea
A Croatia Supports A Trieste (*Ordered to Move*)
F Damascus - Eastern Mediterranean
F Egypt Supports F Ionian Sea
F Illyria Supports F Adriatic Sea
F Ionian Sea Supports F Sicily - Naples
A Permia Hold
F Sicily - Naples (*Fails*)
A Slovakia - Silesia (*Bounce*)
A Ukraine Hold
PENDING RETREATS:
Swedish F Courland can retreat to Gulf of Bothnia or OTB.
Polish A Lower Saxony can retreat to HolsteinHesse or OTB.
French A Swabia can retreat to Lorraine or OTB.
SUPPLY CENTER OWNERSHIP (Winter 1653):
Austria(5): Bavaria, Prague, Saxony, Trieste, Vienna.
England(: Abo, Bristol, Christiania, Ireland, London, Scotland, Stockholm, United Provinces.
France(10): Brest, Flanders, Lorraine, Marseilles, Paris, Rhineland-Westphalia, Savoy, Swabia, Switzerland, Venice.
Poland-Lithuania(: Cracow, Lower Saxony, Moscow, Novgorod, Prussia, Vilna, Voronezh, Warsaw.
Spain(10): Algiers, Madrid, Mecklenburg, Morocco, Naples, Papal States, Portugal, Seville, Tunis, Tuscany.
Sweden(6): Brandenburg, Copenhagen, Courland, Holstein, Riga, Stettin.
Turkey(11): Belgrade, Candia, Constantinople, Crimea, Damascus, Moldavia, Persia, Transylvania, Turkestan, Ukraine, Wallachia.
DEADLINE SCHEDULE: (all orders are due NLT 6PM CET (i.e. GMT+1)...not local time)
o Summer 1964 Retreats: 3 March
ORDERS MAP:
RESULTS MAP: |
| 1648 091010: Winter 1653 Retreats/Adjustments - charlesf (Feb 25, 2010, 6:54 pm) |
You count a little, Ben.
BTW, what dya make of the v3.1 changes I've been working on?
----- Original Message -----
From: dc279 ([email]dc279(at)diplomaticcorp.com[/email])
To: dc279(at)diplomaticcorp.com ([email]dc279(at)diplomaticcorp.com[/email])
Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2010 5:53 PM
Subject: Re: 1648 091010: Winter 1653 Retreats/Adjustments
I use the RP files - but as I'm not a player, perhaps I don't count
B.
[Reply] |
