Although, like some of my orders a day late and dollar short, here is Mexico's EGS.

Mexico was fun to play particularly in the early stages of the game. I must say, however, that given its position, and once Peru is dealt with, it can get a little less than dynamic to play in the later stages of a game. Although you are almost always looking at a multi-front war situation, Mexico's positioning makes it easy to defend and difficult to attack. But it is also difficult to launch big attacks from as well. All-in-all a good country to seek a draw with, but a poor choice if your hoping for a shot at a solo.

At the start, my partner Felix, who was Cuba at the time, and I came up with a grand "southern" strategy that saw us taking out Peru early and then addressing our Northern neighbors. That went according to plan until we lost Felix to a family matter. Later, Jason, the new Cuba, and I got the job done, but it took us a while longer than expected.

At the same time. I worked a deal with Texas to see off California as soon as possible. My task was to gain a couple of south western territories and then move as far North up the Pacific as possible to keep BC (and California) bottled up. None of this worked according to plan and this stage saw ray and I in a protracted battle of wills over one or two territories.

It was pretty much at this point and until Ray's stab that things settled into a stalemate up North with BC taking Hawaii and, along with Ray's well positioned Pacific fleet, bottling me up!

The action was much more interesting and exciting on the Caribbean side of things where Florida, Cuba and Mexico had some significant back-a-forth. On the issue of convoying and fleet action, try this game from the southern perspective: plenty of opportunities.

What I find most intriguing about this game is essentially three players who pretty much had a contentious or at least wary relationship throughout most of the game came together in the end to pull off a draw. It was a pleasure to play together with both Andrew and Lee. Fine tacticians and great correspondents.

Finally, let me once again than Trout for his outstanding GMing and all of the rest of the players for a thoroughly enjoyable game.

Best regards.

Bruce


----- Original Message ----
From: Former Trout <former.trout(at)gmail.com>
To: Andrew Tanner <damienthryn(at)gmail.com>
Cc: Michael Sims <mike(at)southwall.com>; dc138 <DC138(at)diplomaticcorp.com>; Andrew Clarke <a_c_2bcool(at)hotmail.com>; Bruce Quinn <coebq(at)yahoo.com>; Bruce Ray <raybrucea(at)aol.com>; Jason K <Githraine(at)yahoo.com>; Nathan Deily <ndeily(at)yahoo.com>; Rob Ackerley <rob_ackerley(at)yahoo.ca>; Samuel Smith <agenbite.lee(at)gmail.com>; Steve Lytton <stevelytton(at)hotmail.com>
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 12:31:25 PM
Subject: Re: dc138 Quebecian EGS

GMs thoughts:

There was NO way that Sims should have survived in this one. Your humble GM was disgruntled the entire game about this...

=P

Trout

On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 10:29 PM, Andrew Tanner <damienthryn(at)gmail.com ([email]damienthryn(at)gmail.com[/email])> wrote:

MY EGP stands as written since nothing changed, however Mike reminded me of one thing. I have to thank Andy again for being such a good sport, and not taking the retreat to eliminate Mike after I begged, and begged, and pleaded that he leave Mike alive. It was to my dismay that I couldn't keep Andy alive to the end as I did Mike. Once again Andy, many thanks and my apologies.

Look forward to playing you all again! Perhaps on this map - I for one thoroughly enjoyed it, and actually considered a few convoys during the course of events, so I can't agree that the lack of interior seas is a terrible hindrance...maybe if the Caribbean was a bit larger or there were island chains with multiple centers accessible to armies...but I'd rather see BC have access to a second first year neutral on the Canadian plains.

All in all a great game with great players.

Thanks,
Andrew


On Sun, Aug 17, 2008 at 8:44 PM, Michael Sims <mike(at)southwall.com ([email]mike(at)southwall.com[/email])> wrote:
[quote:d5af2c7107]
Hiya folks,
Guess it's time to post an EGS.

This is a great variant… I really liked it, despite the fact that I think North America does not make for good Diplomacy because it's basically one big mass of land with oceans on either side. No seas like the Mediterranean or the Baltic makes for no convoy action, and very little fleet interaction, but the introduction of the canals leading into the great lakes made up for it… just a bit. I still think NA geography is lacking in terms of tactical strategizing, but this one is about as good as it can get.

The game started out great, which lasted for about 2 turns. Rob, Andy, and myself set out with a triple, and we sent our troops off in opposite directions. We each got 3 builds in 01! We had the jump on all our neighbors, and BC really over a barrel. That was outstanding, and we were far and away the trio to beat on the board. Of course that lasted all of about 2 turns, as right off the bat Rob got Andy to turn on me, and then began the slow downfall.

I heard later on that Rob was never interested in the triple from the start, as he considered it unworkable… I will ALWAYS consider any alliance workable in any game – and love making unlikely alliances work out, but it just wasn't meant to be this time. After the initial stab by Andy, I tried to make a 2nd go at it, for we talked it over, and a turn later, yet again… Rob and Andy moved on me.

I really guess this just wasn't my game.

In the end, I have to thank Andy for not eliminating me when he could have done so via a retreat. I take that as payback for my trust of him in the opening rounds. And of course toward the end, I was doing all I could to stay on Andrew's (BC) good side since he was my initial target, and later, my protector.

I'm sure if the draws kept getting voted down, the big 3 would have had to go pick off the remaining 1-dotters. I'm 99% sure it was Ray voting them down, as nothing else seems to make sense. This part of draw votes always sucks… it might be nice to allow public voting in some variant, but as Trout pointed out that is not standard rules, and it would have to be a posted variant of some sort to allow a public binding vote.

Congrats to the victorious three, Andrew, Lee and Bruce. Well earned. Was interesting (in a "glad it wasn't me" sort of way) to see California lose 8 sc in one turn, that's surely a record that I've witnessed.

One thing I learned from this… Rob asked me early on if I would stab Andy with him, and so I should have absolutely assumed that he was asking the same thing of Andy against me. I outright told him no, I wanted to see if the triple would work, but that is no reason to assume that the other player would see it the same. So that's what I consider my error, that I assumed that just cuz I turned down Rob's offer, that others would too. So if someone approaches you about stabbing their own alliance before it even gets off the ground, take heed! Something is probly awry in Pleasantville. Don't ignore the clues. That's what this game is all about.

Here's to seeing you all again in the next one,
-mike

[/quote:d5af2c7107]