|
|
Austria: Removes 1 unit
France: Removes 1 unit
Russia: Builds 2 units
Turkey: Builds 1 unit
Message from Russia to all
I'd like to add my best wishes to those that others have sent around.
--- Eric
P.S. Sorry this is coming so late, but it was a busy day. I had to organize
all the animal entrails, clean out the sacrificial pit, get my horns buffed
-- it was just non-stop crazy.
Message from Russia to England
Ben,
First off: I love your press. By far the most enjoyable part of this game
for me.
>You write this as if we are now locked into our courses. I do not think
>/you/ think that way; I know *I* don't.
You are completely correct, I am not wedded to any path. But I didn't want
to be unreasonably optimistic either.
>Consider whether you want to dominate the North and the Austrian home
>centers simultaneously. You will be the early leader and there will be no
>solo for you - trust me, I've tried (zulu on ustx - just finished). I
>continue to be no threat to you, though as you commented yourself, beyond
>DEN there's just not much there for you. More profitable would be the
>German centers first, I would think. . .
Well, that was not what I was going for. My moves were based on an
optimistic (yet -- I thought -- not totally unrealistic) set of
expectations that did not come to pass. You'll be able to see some of the
details when you look at the press log, and you can ask me about it if you
still have questions from then.
>If you build in the north you will be facing - my guess - an EIT. If you
>do not threaten me with a northern build then you will be free to operate
>without the early leader albatross around your neck.
But the more meaty question is: where does it leave us? Is me not pushing
forward good enough to mend fences? That still sounds along the lines of
the unreasonably optimistic that I referred to above.
I should be around most of the week, so no rush to respond if you're
engrossed in the holidays (which you should be!)
--- Eric
P.S. I was going to say something in my broadcast about the fact that you
were not at all slanderous, just libelous, but I wasn't able to come up
with a funny enough line.
Message from England to Russia
Eric -
> First off: I love your press. By far the most enjoyable part of this game
> for me.
I'm going to cut you off if you build a northern fleet. I'll be boring but
belligerent - you'll see. No more twinkle toes from me!
> >If you build in the north you will be facing - my guess - an EIT. If you
> >do not threaten me with a northern build then you will be free to operate
> >without the early leader albatross around your neck.
>
> But the more meaty question is: where does it leave us? Is me not pushing
> forward good enough to mend fences? That still sounds along the lines of
> the unreasonably optimistic that I referred to above.
Tut tut. If you are worried about my fleets steaming northward, and you
nevertheless feel you would like to extend an olive branch to me, you have
but to build A STP. A powerful defensive unit, a friendly overture to
England.
> I should be around most of the week, so no rush to respond if you're
> engrossed in the holidays (which you should be!)
No, no, this is more important. The kids can wait.
Ben
Message from Russia to Turkey
>I let Andy into Greece because I didn't want him to get overrun by
>France. I wasn't planning on him putting a fleet there, though, and with
>France down two builds, I'll probably take it back this year.
That I understand, though I still want to see you beat France to Tun. Once
you get there, he'll never take it from you no matter what happens.
>I'll make sure to cover Bul, no problem, while we head west against
>Austria. I believe there was talk of my getting Tri before, and I'd like
>to continue with that. With A Rum, I can support Bud while you help me
>into Tri, and my fleets maneuver to retake Gre.
Only one problem: All of that was based on you taking Rum with a fleet. I
was very clear that I was expecting Bla-Rum as a way for us to DMZ our
border. By moving in A Rum, you are putting a TON of pressure on my border.
To me, A Rum is a CLEAR attack against me, which is why I said your moves
confused me. A Rum is an attack, but A Ser S A Bud is clear cooperation.
I'm just not sure where we stand.
I would really like to see you move A Rum back to Bul before helping you
get Tri. You are welcome to keep Rum, but I want it to be with your fleet.
Here's what I propose: A Ser S A Bud, A Rum-Bul, F Bla-Rum. I'll move an
army into Gal, and then in Spring I can support myself in Bud (Gal S Bud),
while supporting you into Tri (Bud S Ser-Tri).
Jason, I have helped you get four centers (Gre, Ser, Bul and Rum) in the
Balkans while I have taken only one (Bud). I have offered you an overall
Balkan split of 5 centers to 2 (you are still to get Tri and while I'll get
Vie), and I have offered to help you into Italy if you need it. I
voluntarily gave you Rum -- a center that 9 out of 10 Russian players
consider to be a home center -- in order to keep our growth even. I think I
have been an amazingly good ally to you.
But the only reason I can see that you have to put an army in Rum is to
give you the option to attack me. So I have to ask, if you do attack me,
what does it get you? Who is going to be your ally? Is either Austria or
Italy going to give you a better deal than I'm giving you? Is Andy going to
be willing to take just Gre and then turn away to fight France? And even if
he does, you still don't get any of the Italian centers I've promised you.
Is Philippe going to let you have two of his home centers and all of Italy?
I doubt it. The board is trying to line up in an anti-RT alliance, if we
fight we'll both lose while that comes together.
I just don't see how that's worth it for taking Sev, which is as far as you
will get if you come after me. But if you are not planning on attacking me,
then I don't see why you'd put A Rum in place. I find it hard to believe
that you would not expect me to react to that move. I just don't see the
point of undercutting all of the trust we've built up over the last several
seasons.
I *really* want to continue to work together. I think it's the best thing
for both of us, and I've worked really hard to come up with ways for us to
cooperate that help us both. As usual when I'm trying to make what I think
is an important point, I'm probably going on too long. But I hope it's
clear that I'm making such a big deal because I really am committed to RT
cooperation (and not Rt or rT cooperation). I hope you will seriously
consider my points and agree to pull out A Rum so we can both push forward
comfortably.
Hope you had/are having a great holiday, and get back to me when you have a
chance.
--- Eric
Message from England to Russia
Eric -
One other thing I want you to consider:
In DEN and NWY, you already have pretty much all you will *ever* get from
me. If you build STP/nc, I will have to come at Scandinavia full steam to
head off an attack.
If on the other hand you build an army in STP (or somewhere else) you will
give me more flexibility in my own planning. If you build a northern
fleet, you frankly won't be giving me much choice, and you I don't think
will be the one reaping the benefits.
Share what's on your mind, if you think I'm wrong.
Ben
Message from Master to all
Players,
I've extended the deadline per a player's request.
Greg, GM
C2
Message from Turkey to Russia
Sheesh, after your stab of England, I'm not sure why you're getting so
high and mighty on me.
You did offer me 5 Balklan centers, but three of those are Gre, Bul and
Ser! Those are mine unless you actually attack me; not exactly generous
on your part. For that matter, you're now at 9 centers, and with your
stab of England, clearly headed for more in the middle of Europe.
Right now, you're not offering me anything other than the chance to let
you win. You're sitting in Mun and Den pretty much assured that. If you
can offer me a real deal that does not simply involve keeping your
comfortable to your south while you roll west, I'm all for it.
jason
Message from Russia to Austria
Philippe,
Okay, I lied. (I said I wouldn't try to negotiate prior to leaving Bud).
I do want to still want to leave Bud. I've also got requests from Jason to
support him into Tri and from Andy to support him into Vie. So without
getting into lots of negotiating on the idea, would you be interested in
Ser? This is the same support I offered you last season, with the same
promise that after you are there, I will move to leave Bud. Again, you
would get one or two builds out of the deal (depending on whether Andy
swooped in on Vie if you try to take Bud with Vie-Bud).
All the background on why I think you should remains unchanged, so I won't
go into that again.
--- Eric
Message from Russia to Italy
>Im still not quite sure why he [Erik] attacked me...Im sure you had a hand in
>it..:-)
Well, this is not the case, but I won't bother trying to convince you, as I
understand the suspicion.
>Pointing out how well I did, while getting 2 builds, and the ability to
>take back the dot you gave away to appease the peasants, anytime you want
>is a good strategy.
I guess, but I meant it sincerely. I'm not expecting to deflect you with
false praise.
>But you accomplished what you needed to....keeping BUD
>and setting up on Vienna. Unless you are still offering it to me.
I have no immediate designs on Vienna. If I tried to take it, you'd
probably support it anyway, so that's not what I'm looking at. I'm still
trying to figure out what I'm going to do with Bud. I'd like to come up
with something that gets you Vie without getting me in too much (more) hot
water, but that's not a promise at this point.
>You have him smoking from the Tzar's bong.
In deference to him, it's a hoooka. :)
Gotta run. I'm not trying to stall you, even though it's coming across that
way. I'll try to get back to you later today.
--- Eric
Message from Russia to Turkey
Jason,
Again, I am completely confused by your message. Your basic message seems
to be that I am somehow taking advantage of you by following all of the
plans that you have agreed to.
1) You complain that I attacked England.
Well, I did attack England. You and I never had any agreement that said I
wouldn't. In fact YOU said I should get my builds from the north. I am, and
now you are complaining. I don't see what the problem is.
2) I haven't helped you all that much in the south.
You don't really believe this do you?
o I gave you Rum voluntarily.
o I suggested to Austria that he support you to Ser, and helped ensure the
move happened (you would not have Ser without that).
o I have not threatened you with a fleet build the multiple times I could
have. (You haven't done this to me either, but it is still cooperation on
my part.)
o I have gotten nothing from the south beyond the normal Russian F1901
position (one Balkan center total).
o I helped ensure that Italy was weakened so he couldn't put up a battle
against you (that's something that comes with England being distracted: if
England builds fleets, France dies and Andy can focus on keeping you out of
the Med. I don't know if you are paying attention to this point).
3) I can still make gains in the north.
Right. That's our agreement. I make gains in the north, you make them in
the south. You seem to be saying that I should be offering you all of the
Balkan and Italian centers and trying to do badly in the north.
4) I have nine centers to your six.
You had seven centers but gave up one without giving me any warning you
were going to. I have nine because I voluntarily gave you one to make up
for my lead. Russia starts with an extra center, so this means that overall
I've gained exactly one more center than you have to date. Turkey also has
a more secure position than Russia, and needs fewer centers to do well in
the early- to mid-game, so until you are setting up stalemate lines it's
traditional for Russia to have a few more units, due to the need to operate
on two fronts.
Are you really saying that you want to throw away our whole alliance
because I'm one center ahead of you? That's what it sounds like to me. That
seems silly, because the ONLY way you could be eliminated is if you and I
fight, but you seem to be saying we should.
5) I have no right to be upset with your press, because I attacked England.
I will try to make it clear again: I have been completely honest with you
in all of my press, and you are acting as if taking Rum with an army is a
setup for cooperating with me. As I've tried to explain above, I think it's
a bad move for you to attack me, but what really bothers me is you
pretending that you took Rum with an army to help me. If you want to attack
me and screw up both of our positions, that's one thing, but at least be
straight with me about it.
6) I'm not offering you anything useful.
I am still offering Tri and support into Italy while I focus north. That's
six centers total for you. If you want to fight, then you and I can both
spend a lot of time fighting over Bud/Rum/Sev. You'll have to pull units
back and let Italy come after you, I'll have to do the same. Neither of us
will grow and England and Italy will take out France and set up defenses we
can't break. That would be really bad for both of us, but that seems to be
the "better" option you are suggesting we follow.
You say that I'm not offering you a "real deal" despite everything noted
above, the fact that I've done everything we've agreed to and that I have
consistently asked if there is anything else we need to discuss and you
have never raised any of these concerns before. I think you are just trying
to bully me into a deal that gets me to help you (into Tri) while you set
up to attack me. I am totally serious when I say that I cannot imagine what
more I could do for you short of intentionally sabotaging my northern
position. So if you see some "real deal" that I should be offering that
isn't stupid for me to agree to and goes beyond what I've already offered,
tell me what it is.
You are the one that set up to attack me, and you are the one that will
either continue the attack or back off. I think it would be a shame to blow
both of our positions after we've worked so hard to build them up, but it's
clearly your call.
--- Eric
Message from France to Russia
Eric:
So. Any recommendations here? I thought I could buy English time by
supporting Kiel so I could make some gains against Andy, but clearly I
misjudged him. He claims to have been badly manipulated by you, so kudos
to you for your success in that arena.
I'm kind of torn right now -- I need to make gains down south, but all
external forces are making me be defensive and head back north. Since you
seem willing to take on England rather directly now, perhaps it's okay to
do that. Frankly, I was feeling a little isolated before.
Erik
Message from Russia to France
Erik,
I'm ages behind in press in this game. Very pleased with the extension.
The short note I'll send now is that Germany seems to be focused on revenge
against England (he's angry that England allowed me the freedom to attack
his (Germany's) home centers). I've broached the idea of having him help
you take Bel in exchange for you helping (or letting) him take Hol in the
Fall, and he seems willing. Now, working with Tony is dicey at best, but
the last two seasons he's actually gone through with moves that he promised
to me, so I think he'd be willing to do this. If you are interested, I
think that's the best way to go forward.
I have to say I was majorly disappointed to see Jason give Gre to Andy. It
was a COMPLETE surprise to me. I've been trying to convince him it was a
bad idea, but the damage is done for you for the short term. I hoped to see
England go down one, Andy go down one, and we could press for a three way
(FTR) or we could try to squeeze out Jason for a two way. Unfortunately,
Jason was worried about making sure that Andy could slow you down rather
than trying to set up a good position for himself.
If you like the Bel/Hol idea, it gets you the ability to pick up a build in
the north (which, admittedly might be lost if F MAO takes Por, Spa or Bre)
while still leaving you the ability to push at Andy, or at least trying to
hold a line. Jason tells me he is considering taking back Gre. If he does
that, then Andy will be less of a threat.
The overall difficulty is who to defend against. If Jason takes Gre, then
you might be able to focus north. But given that Jason misled me last
season, I don't know that you want to count on my info about him. I will
also look and see if I can't give some advice about disbands. But I haven't
looked at the map much since the moves, and I just got in from 4 hours of
driving in bad weather, so I need to get off the computer and let the blood
back into my rear.
More later,
--- Eric
Message from Italy to Russia
Eric,
Happy New Year.
> >Im still not quite sure why he [Erik] attacked me...Im sure you had a hand in
> >it..:-)
>
> Well, this is not the case, but I won't bother trying to convince you, as I
> understand the suspicion.
>
thats fair.
> >Pointing out how well I did, while getting 2 builds, and the ability to
> >take back the dot you gave away to appease the peasants, anytime you want
> >is a good strategy.
>
> I guess, but I meant it sincerely. I'm not expecting to deflect you with
> false praise.
I know. I just wanted to point out that it is a good strategy.
Didnt mean to sound defensive there.
> >But you accomplished what you needed to....keeping BUD
> >and setting up on Vienna. Unless you are still offering it to me.
>
> I have no immediate designs on Vienna. If I tried to take it, you'd
> probably support it anyway, so that's not what I'm looking at. I'm still
> trying to figure out what I'm going to do with Bud. I'd like to come up
> with something that gets you Vie without getting me in too much (more) hot
> water, but that's not a promise at this point.
No problem.
> >You have him smoking from the Tzar's bong.
>
> In deference to him, it's a hoooka. :)
Understandibly....:-)
> Gotta run. I'm not trying to stall you, even though it's coming across that
> way. I'll try to get back to you later today.
Not a problem.
Message from Turkey to Russia
Sorry for my delayed response over the holidays.
Eric, I appreciate the work that we've done together, and I'm glad that
we have both enhanced our positions because of it. However, I really
don't understand your surprise over my concern with your position. You
have a lot of room to run in the north, and if I support you
wholeheartedly, I'll just be handing you the game. I presume that's the
whole thrust of your game, to win.
Yes, you have abided by every agreement that we've made, and I've done
my best to help you, even supporting A Bud when that wasn't in my best
interests, as a show of support.
You seem fixated on A Rum, however, and while I understand why you might
be concerned, you seem to see it as your ultimate destroyer. Given
such an overreaction, it makes me wonder if we can work together in the
long term.
jason
Message from Russia to Turkey
Before going into a specific response, let me say that I appreciate the tone
of this message from you. I hope it's been clear that while I've gotten
pedantic and detailed, the point is to try to come to agreement and
coopearation between us, not to express anger or get you defensive.
> Sorry for my delayed response over the holidays.
Not a problem. I have not been online for several days myself. Oddly relaxing
to get away from the game for a while. :) Happy new year, by the way.
> Eric, I appreciate the work that we've done together, and I'm glad that
> we have both enhanced our positions because of it. However, I really
> don't understand your surprise over my concern with your position.
My surprise is more along the lines that you haven't talked to be about it.
Pretty much every turn I ask you "is there anything else we need to discuss?"
and you haven't said anything. I thought that any serious concerns would be
discussed rather than show up in the form of a broken agreement.
> You have a lot of room to run in the north, and if I support you
> wholeheartedly, I'll just be handing you the game.
How do you see this happening? This is a serious question. I'm going to
outline how I see the north:
I can get into Germany, but I have one fleet -- two if I build F StP, against
five English fleets. Even if France and Germany combine against England
(unlikely), he'll have three to four fleets left. So I'm not going to be
making progress against him. I'll only make progress on land past Germany if
France falls. That is not likely to happen if you are attacking Italy. So
again, us cooperating seemed to be a long term good thing for both of us to
me.
> I presume that's the whole thrust of your game, to win.
Anything I answer to this is suspect, because if I say "yes" then you'll say
"see, you are manipulating me" and if I say "no" then you won't believe me.
The answer is somewhere in between. The thrust of my game is to get a decent
position, try to keep it from falling apart, and see what opportunities arise
from that position to get it better. Very rarely that actually leads to a
win, which as with most players is the preferred result, but I am perfectly
happy with a draw.
> Yes, you have abided by every agreement that we've made, and I've done
> my best to help you, even supporting A Bud when that wasn't in my best
> interests, as a show of support.
As noted below, this was not lost on me.
> You seem fixated on A Rum, however, and while I understand why you might
> be concerned, you seem to see it as your ultimate destroyer. Given
> such an overreaction, it makes me wonder if we can work together in the
> long term.
Well, I'm glad you will at least acknowledge that I'm not completely insane
to be concerned. :)
If us being able to work together "in the long term" means that you that you
can break our agreements if you are worried about me, or that you need a
position that allows you to attack me whenever you decide to, then frankly,
no, we probably can't work together. Moving A Rum was a stab. And it isn't
just A Rum that's the problem, but A Rum combined with F Bla.
I have no problem with you being worried about me; I'm worried about you too.
I just expect that if you want to cooperate that you'll negotiate something
that addresses your concerns rather than breaking agreements to suit your
needs. You broke our agreement in a way that is very threatening to my
position because you are worried about me. When I express concerns about what
you might do after breaking our agreement, you accuse me of overreacting. And
you seem to expect me to continue to follow the agreement without worrying
about what you might do. That's quite a double standard.
I recognize that you supported me in Bud when it didn't directly help you.
That is why I haven't written off RT cooperation. I really want to see RT
continue, because without it, either of our positions could crumble. That's
why I gave you Rum, something that doesn't directly help me. And it's also
why I keep writing these long, possibly annoying, messages. But yeah, A Rum/F
Bla really *is* a big problem for me. We need to to work out something out
that we can both be happy with to keep RT going.
I've given you my offer (put a fleet in Rum, move the Army to Bul), and
you've said no. So what's your alternative? I've asked this a couple of times
and haven't seen an answer yet.
--- Eric
Message from Russia to Austria
Hey Philippe,
Are you around? It's fine if you don't want to negotiate, but I'd like to
know if you are just not getting any messages from me (I've sent only two or
so) or if you are ignoring them. Thanks.
Also, in addition to the offers to help in Ser etc, I'm also open to just
walking out of Bud. My guess is that me walking out of Bud would be dangerous
for you, but if you are focused on seeing it go back to you despite the cost,
it might be worth your while.
Let me know what's going on over there.
--- Eric
Message from Russia to France
Erik,
Not like I'm Mr. Communication this season, but I'm interested in your
response to my last message. What did you think of the cooperate-with-Tony
suggestion I sent before? Even if you disbanded A Ruh I think it would work,
right?
--- Eric
Message from Russia to England
Ben,
Sorry for your loss. Looked like a good game though. Unfortunately, poor TiVo
mojo caused me to miss the second half of the game. (The first time in years
of owning a TiVo I had a UI problem cause a glitch. Very sad.)
I was heartened though to see Denver fall so terribly to whoever they played
(that's true as a general rule for me). Maybe Indy will wipe out KC too,
though that's not nearly as important as seeing Denver crushed.
As to c2, I've been almost completely out of the loop this entire break. I've
sent and received a couple of messages, but not much thought or effort has
been here, especially since my last message to you. I'm leaning towards A StP
as a build, but I haven't actually made up my mind yet.
--- Eric
Message from Russia to Germany
Tony,
I thought I sent you a check in note a few days ago but I'm not sure. Story
is that I'm still very interested in seeing FRG cooperation, but I haven't
heard much from Erik. Just one note. I sugggested trying to take Bel with
your support, but he's been pretty silent since then.
--- Eric
Message from Russia to Italy
Andy,
Well, I think I promised you a message that never got delivered. That was
mostly my fault (I've been very detached from the game over the break) and
partly difficulties in communicating with other players, which makes deciding
what I might or might not do in Vie harder.
Right now I'm still not planning to molest Vie in the Spring one way or
another. I won't be surprised if Philippe moves to evict me again, so Tyl-Vie
could either help me by cutting support (something I doubt you want to do) or
help you by picking you up a center against someone that may be attacking me
and I'd therefore be motivated to help you against (something you may or may
not want to do).
I know I'm not giving you much, but I'd rather be straightforward about
things. I expect to be wanting to help you more directly in the near future,
so don't want to set false expectations in the present.
Happy new year, etc.
--- Eric
Message from England to Russia
Eric -
> Sorry for your loss. Looked like a good game though.
Thank you for your sympathy. We were outplayed - Tennessee presented the
biggest matchup problems of all the teams in the playoffs. They were good
enough to stop Jamal with 9 in the box - where other teams tried & failed -
and then just went 1 on 1 with our outside receivers. Really, I think they
could have put 10 in the box and left one cornerback to cover our lousy wide
receivers. Anyway we are now set up nicely for next year, when hopefully
everyone who thought Anthony Wright could start successfully at qb will have
shut up, and we will get going with Kyle Boller, our qb of the future. We
have cap room & hopefully will finally find a legitimate #1 wide receiver.
I hope Oakland does well with the cap, and finds a good head coach. Denny
Green, is my guess for Oakland, which would be a good fit.
Apologies to the members of the gallery who are sick of the (American)
football talk - you did have the holidays without it.
> I was heartened though to see Denver fall so terribly to
> whoever they played
> (that's true as a general rule for me). Maybe Indy will wipe
> out KC too,
> though that's not nearly as important as seeing Denver crushed.
I'd like to see Tennessee go on & win out.
> As to c2, I've been almost completely out of the loop this
> entire break. I've
> sent and received a couple of messages, but not much thought
> or effort has
> been here, especially since my last message to you. I'm
> leaning towards A StP
> as a build, but I haven't actually made up my mind yet.
A STP is fine with me & is consistent with a desire to protect yourself in
the North without the declaration of war you get with a northern fleet
build. I would completely understand A STP & I will take it as a peaceful
overture.
As my journal notes will show you after the game is finished - my good will
toward you has steered my hand a couple of times already. No need to push
me unnecessarily. . .
Ben
Message from Russia to Turkey
Jason,
A shorter message just to deal with the immediate pragmatics. From a
pragmatic point of view, how do you want to move forward?
Given that you have A Rum, an army build would concerning for me, especially
if it were not in Con. A fleet build in Smy would be my ideal, obviously.
With A Bul (assuming you moved Rum-Bul as I'm asking), you could then support
yourself to Gre, take Tri with my support and move a fleet to Aeg to get a
have a 3 vs. 2 attack on the Ion, which would get you moving into Tun and
Nap.
If you don't build a fleet, then you probably won't be able to make headway
against Andy on your own, even though you might be able to retake Gre in the
short term. And if that's the case, I'd like to know what kind of support you
would expect from me, and what assistance you would provide to me. Again, so
far the only thing you've offered is that I should support you to Tri in
Spring while you hold Rum and Bla and prepare to take Gre. Is that my only
option? F Rum isn't negotiable? Vacating Bla isn't even an option?
--- Eric
Message from Germany to Russia
Hi Eric, I havent heared from Erik either (probably due to the holidays).
I am also unable to call up floc.net it seems to be down. Speak to you soon.
Tony
Message from Russia to Russia
Well, this has been a pretty pathetic round of negotiating on my part.
Clearly I misread Jason to some extent, but it was a calculated gamble to
make an ally of a player who was clearly unreasonable (I want all of the
Balkans, and I want them unconditionally) but I thought that given that I was
meeting those demands that he wouldn't try to take further advantage of them
or that I could negotiate out of the situation if he did.
I'll be curious to see whether observers think I'm overreacting to his move.
There's a whole separate question of whether I should have seen it coming,
but I'm comfortable with my choice in guessing it wouldn't -- I'm more
interested in whether people think I should have "let it slide" and
negotiated with the assumption of Rum S Bud, Bud S Ser-Tri. This strikes me
as similar to the situation in C1 between Eric (Russia) and Andy (Turkey)
with Eric trying to solo in the north by giving Andy a lot of (and
ultimately, too much, given how it played out) room to manever. In any case,
if I *can* get Philippe to agree to anything then I'll probably go with it
against Jason now (and I guess in that sense, Jason is correct to be worried
about me).
I could survive for a while with A Rum if there isn't A Ser to back it up,
but I really don't like the position or the precedent it sets up that I'll
let him get away with it. I can almost believe that he'd be willing to sit
there and not go any further, but the key to me is that I want to be in a
safe position relative to him when he picks up Gre and Tri (if I help him
there).
Of course, with Philippe, I'm taking the same tone that Jason is taking with
me. "I know I just attacked you, but work with me anyway". Clearly a double
standard there, but I thought it might work with his concern about Andy and
Jason. I also expected that if Jason went along with our agreement, I
wouldn't really need Philippe's support, so I was more willing to take the
risk. That didn't work too well.
In the north, the silence of the Eri(ck)s reigns supreme. Again, being so
silent it's hard to complain about others, but I'd like to hear something
from my name-wise counterpart. I was being truthful with Ben when I said that
I'm leaning towards A StP. If Erik isn't going to keep up the pressure on
Ben, then I might have to cut my losses and just hope I can drive Tony
forward fast enough to make gains from the situation.
So all in all, my strategy looks to be imploding. I misread Erik and Jason,
which means that the attacks on Ben and Philippe are both extra bad for me,
because they both sabotaged what were very good working relationships. By
arguing as much as I have with Jason, I've definitely risked creating an IT
that will make it hard to get Andy's help before my position is significantly
degraded. He actually ticked me off with his casual rebuff of all of the
concessions I've made to him, and I let my frustration show through in press,
even though I knew it was unlikely to be successful with him.
And the frustrating thing is that it's all my fault. As much as I'd like to
complain about Erik for being too silent (he is) or Jason for being
unreasonable (he is), I knew that those were the personalities they had, and
I explicitly risked the consequenses in both cases. As someone (Jim-Bob) said
in another commentary game, "in Diplomacy you always make your bed and you
always have to sleep in it" or somesuch.
Happy new year to all y'all.
--- Eric
Message from Turkey to Russia
Ok, now that floc is back up, to your two missives:
First, I appreciate your understanding as well. And no, the question
about "do you play to win" wasn't a trick question, just rhetorical.
I see your point about EF holding on in the west. I'll go ahead and
build A Con to move into the Balkans, looking to build F Smy next turn.
I'll also plan to move A Rum out of harms way, as it were. Italy should
still be tied up with France and not going anywhere, so that will give
me ample opportunity.
jason
Message from Austria to Russia
> Are you around? It's fine if you don't want to negotiate, but I'd like to
> know if you are just not getting any messages from me (I've sent only two or
> so) or if you are ignoring them. Thanks.
>
> Also, in addition to the offers to help in Ser etc, I'm also open to just
> walking out of Bud. My guess is that me walking out of Bud would be dangerous
> for you, but if you are focused on seeing it go back to you despite the cost,
> it might be worth your while.
>
> Let me know what's going on over there.
Nothing special. I came back some time ago and didn't bother
replying to you, sorry. Given how things turned out last fall, I
thought I might as well wait for the adjustment before renewing
negociation with everyone.
Message from Russia to Austria
Philippe,
I can understand your silence, both in general and with me.
I would like to get a read on whether or not you would be interested in
cooperation, as it may affect my builds slightly. Again, that could be me
helping you into Ser, or it could be me walking out of Bud. I would generally
imagine that you'd be happy to see me walk out of Bud, but it seems that it
would also depend on what you are expecting from Andy and/or Jason.
--- Eric
Message from Austria to Russia
> I would like to get a read on whether or not you would be interested in
> cooperation, as it may affect my builds slightly. Again, that could be me
> helping you into Ser, or it could be me walking out of Bud. I would generally
> imagine that you'd be happy to see me walk out of Bud, but it seems that it
> would also depend on what you are expecting from Andy and/or Jason.
To tell you the truth, I don't feel like I can trust any of my neighbours;
but while you don't always have my interest at heart, I must recognize
that you're the easiest to work with.
Message from Russia to Austria
> To tell you the truth, I don't feel like I can trust any of my
> neighbours;
I can certainly understand that point of view. I know neither Jason nor I
helped that sentiment with our last few moves either.
> but while you don't always have my interest at heart,
As you'll see in my comments to the observers, I think it (not keeping your
best interests at heart) was probably a bad move on my part. Not that it's
any consolation whatsoever for you that I think that.
> I must recognize that you're the easiest to work with
Ugh. While that might be good for me, I'm sorry to hear that for your sake.
In any case, whether you choose to work with me or not, happy new year (don't
remember if I said that in my last message or not).
--- Eric
Message from France to Russia
Erik,
Not like I'm Mr. Communication this season, but I'm interested in your
response to my last message. What did you think of the
cooperate-with-Tony
suggestion I sent before? Even if you disbanded A Ruh I think it would
work,
right?
--- Eric
11th hour, but what does it matter at this point, eh? And I can't
disband Ruhr, so that's a non-issue.
I think the idea of working with Tony has a lot of merit, and I will
certainly be more active in my communication with him this coming phase.
For now, the disband is coming down to a coin toss ...
Talk to you tomorrow,
Erik
Austria: REMOVE Fleet Albania
France: REMOVE Army Piedmont
Russia: BUILD Army St Petersburg
Russia: BUILD Army Warsaw
Turkey: BUILD Army Constantinople
Centers
Austria: 2
England: 5
France: 5
Germany: 2
Italy: 5
Russia: 9
Turkey: 6
|