|
|
Message from Russia to England and Italy
Ivy, and Idalia,
> Message from Italy to Russia and England in 'titleist':
>
> > France: Army Ruhr SUPPORT Russian Fleet Holland -> Belgium.
> > Russia: Army Kiel SUPPORT French Army Munich. (*cut*)
> > Russia: Fleet Holland -> Belgium.
> You shouldn't make a pact with the Devil and expect Ivy and myself to
> prevent the French solo. Join now or watch as Belgium, Holland, Kiel,
> and Berlin become property of the Dauphin.
I cannot now, and have never been in a position to stop the French solo.
I do, however, believe that, by following my plan, EIR stand a very good
chance of stopping the French solo. If you and Ivy choose to throw the
game to France, rather than forcing him to battle for it, however, you are
certainly free to do so. I've been on the verge of elimination since 1902,
so threatening me with it now will be ineffective, at best, and
counter-productive, at worst. Neither you, nor Ivy have made the
necessary moves to stop France, so I'll be damned if I'll sacrifice my
position and Centers to do so.
> ps: 'press to mo' gets put in the history file. Perhaps that's why Fredd
> referred to you as a 'moron'.
Fredd couldn't think his way past his next move, that's why he was stalled
at six Centers from 1902 - 1906, and was eliminated in 1907. Let's review
what I wrote in my 'Press to OM'
France will solo in 'titleist' if England continues his
planned attack on me. Now we'll have to see, if I
can make England understand that. If England stabs
France this Spring, we're likely to see either an EFR
or an EFI 3-way, depending on how France and Italy
react to the stab, but a stalemated 2-way is not out
of the question.
Followed by:
A build, a build, my kingdom for a build! There are
those who think this is the deal I've made by allying
with France. I grant that this is a high-risk move,
especially given Prince Boar's skill, but I felt that
hitching my wagon to England this year would have
likely resulted in my elimination, even if we managed
to stop the French solo run, and given England's failure
to move aggressively against France in S1908M, I felt
there was a real threat that he would try to gain builds
to attack France by taking further Centers from me.
------>My hope is that by encouraging France to think that I
------>will keep England occupied, I will gain the time and
------>the builds to hold the line from Bel/Ruh/Mun to
------>Rum/Bul/Aeg/EMed. Turkey's silence is making this
------>goal more difficult, but hopefully I can convince
------>Italy to mount a defense before he's completely overrun.
Granted, there is some risk that France might review the history, and
see that I'm not quite as interested in "second place" to his solo as I've
suggested, but even in my letters to France I have maintained the hope
that I could be part of a draw, so I don't see any real problem there.
There's nothing in my press to om that I haven't said to you or Ivy. I'm
"allied" with France to encourage him to move slowly so that I can gain
the Units I need to defend Germany and Russia, (he thinks I'm trying to
eliminate England). England needs only four Fleets to stalemate France,
so my taking Belguim does not harm our chances at all, or England in
any meaningful way. Indeed, since France's first plan called for him to
take it, it has helped our cause. Your moves have cost already cost us
Vienna and Greece, giving France two more builds that he can use
against us. As far as I can tell you're already throwing the game to
France, so threatening to eliminate me before that happens is hardly
significant in the grand scheme of things. I'll be ordering Ukr S Mos-Sev,
so that I can begin building needed Southern Fleets to try to keep France
out of Turkey. If you want to work with me to stop France, move
Sev-Arm or Rum, and War-Gal. If you'd like to eliminate me before
France solos, do what you will.
Czar Nicholas II.
Message from France to England
Ivy:
Sorry about the support for Belgium, but it was the best
plan given my position. I understand perfectly your
retreat to the Channel.
I did not see the Italian-Russian moves coming. Do you
know what it was all about?
--Prince Boar
Message from England to France
Prince Boar,
>Sorry about the support for Belgium,
It's probably friendlier not to apologize in these circumstances. I'm not
a beginner and you already have my personal respect. 8-)
>I did not see the Italian-Russian moves coming.
Neither did Russia! I hope his setback leads him to alter his strategy.
Ivy
Message from England to Italy and Russia
Nick and Idalia,
I believe that this very next turn will determine whether or not France
will get his solo.
There is no doubt that any impartial outsider could take the
English/Russian/Italian units and easily (EASILY!) stop France cold. That
means that we are capable of doing the same ourselves.
Are we good enough?
Nick said:
>I cannot now, and have never been in a position to stop the French solo.
Right! Nor I, nor Italy. Even any two of us, acting in concert, could not
do it. Only all three of us, acting together, can pull it off.
>I do, however, believe that, by following my plan, EIR stand a very good
>chance of stopping the French solo.
That's what I want. A plan that all three of us agree to. A very specific
plan with actual moves agreed to in advance. Then if one of us lies or
deviates, the other two can throw the game. Actually, I think we are at
the point where any one of us can unilaterally throw the game by
cooperating with England.
Let's set aside all criticism of past sins and work from the present position.
Let's set aside all of our own prior plans and try to proceed by cooperating.
Let's dispense with all threats, for we all know that the penalty for
cooperative failure is a certain loss.
Now I will timidly try a few principles for cooperation.
1) Each of us has to have hope for ultimate survival. That won't be the
case if we attempt a plan where one of us is asked to reduce our forces to
4 centers for the good of the cause. If one of us is weak, he will have no
incentive to continue.
2) At the end of last year our theoretical strength was Italy 7, England 7,
Russia 6. That didn't correspond to our field strength, because it is
currently impossible for Italy to build, and it is very difficult for
Russia to build. Russia should be permitted to build. We must take pains
not to permit Italy's forces to be reduced further, because he won't be
able to recover for a while.
3) We need each to imagine how united forces can best be sent against
France immediately.
4) We all need to have forces arrayed directly against France. That's easy
for me and Italy, but I suggest that Russia might wish to send current and
new forces toward Kiel, Berlin, Silesia, Bohemia.
5) This is important. We have to continue to cooperate until France
requests a draw or is reduced in strength. If we stop France at 12, 13, 14
centers and then try, once again, to ally with him for personal advantage,
we have gotten nowhere.
I could go on, but I want to hear from you.
I have the time to create and propose moves for all of our forces. I think
Nick also has the time. I'm not so sure about Idalia, because we have
corresponded so little. I promise not to insist on my own suggested moves,
but to negotiate in good faith.
We can do this. Gentlemen, what do you say?
Ivy Wingo
Message from Russia to England and Italy
Ivy and Idalia,
>Message from England to Russia and Italy in 'titleist':
>I believe that this very next turn will determine whether or not France
>will get his solo.
That seems likely.
>There is no doubt that any impartial outsider could take the
>English/Russian/Italian units and easily stop France cold. That means that
>we are capable of doing the same ourselves.
I'm not so sure about the Turkish corner, but it does
seem likely.
>Are we good enough?
Obviously we're good enough, or we wouldn't be here,
but the real question is, 'Do we have the will?'
>Nick said: > >
> > by following my plan, EIR stand a very good
> > chance of stopping the French solo.
>
>That's what I want. A plan that all three of us agree to.
Getting the agreement is the challenge, though.
>1) Each of us has to have hope for ultimate survival. That won't be >the
>case if we attempt a plan where one of us is asked to reduce our forces to
>4 centers for the good of the cause. If one of us is weak, >he will have
>no incentive to continue.
Strength is a function of center count AND position.
England's four Fleets, holding the stalemate line, are
stronger than eight Russian Armies strung from Kie-Sev.
>2) We must take pains not to permit Italy's forces to be reduced further,
>because he won't be able to recover
>for a while.
Italy must defend his Centers if he expects to maintain
his strength.
>3) We need each to imagine how united forces can best be sent against
>France immediately.
>4) We all need to have forces arrayed directly against France. That's easy
>for me and Italy, but I suggest that Russia might wish to send current and
>new forces toward Kiel, Berlin, Silesia, Bohemia.
I have a fundamental disagreement with this. If I move
against France now, he can take Bel and push toward Ber,
Hol, Kie, and War, and easily solo in Austria and
Germany or the Balkans and Turkey. If I remain "allied"
with him, he's unlikely to attack me while I'm taking
Centers from England (that England doesn't need to hold
his end of the stalemate line), and Italy and I can
eliminate the threat posed by Turkey, and THEN lock down
the middle of the line.
>5) This is important. We have to continue to cooperate until France
>requests a draw or is reduced in strength. If we stop France at 12, >13,
>14 centers and then try, once again, to ally with him for personal
>advantage, we have gotten nowhere.
We all know that once we have the stalemate line
established, France will pull back and tempt us to
reduce the size of the draw, hoping that a solo
chance will reappear. As the "middle" Power, I
would be most exposed to those "extra" English
Armies that Ivy is so determined to keep, so they
remain a concern for me.
>I have the time to create and propose moves for all of our forces. I think
>Nick also has the time. I promise not to insist on my own suggested moves,
>but to negotiate in good faith.
>We can do this. Gentlemen, what do you say?
I'll look at yours, if you look at mine. ;^}
Nick.
Message from England to Turkey
Ali,
I am making one last ditch effort to talk to Russia and Italy concerning
the French danger. This includes my begging them to leave you alone. I do
know that you need more than just two or three units in order to have a
stake in this game.
I ask a personal favor. Please do not cooperate with France on this next
turn in order to further reduce Italy. If it turns out that Italy is once
again uncooperative, then I will personally throw the game to
France. Together you and I can easily do that. I just want one more shot
at attempting something better.
Thanks for your consideration,
Ivy
Message from England to Italy and Russia
Idalia and Nick,
> >Are we good enough?
>
>Obviously we're good enough, or we wouldn't be here,
>but the real question is, 'Do we have the will?'
I don't know if we are good enough. This situation may be trickier than
anything I have seen (and survived). The test of our ability will be
whether or not we survive this time. If we don't, then we were not good
enough.
> >2) We must take pains not to permit Italy's forces to be reduced further,
> >because he won't be able to recover for a while.
>
>Italy must defend his Centers if he expects to maintain
>his strength.
I agree. Italy will have to defend against France.
> >4) We all need to have forces arrayed directly against France. That's easy
> >for me and Italy, but I suggest that Russia might wish to send current and
> >new forces toward Kiel, Berlin, Silesia, Bohemia.
>
>I have a fundamental disagreement with this.
Fundamental disagreements are permitted.
> If I move
>against France now, he can take Bel and push toward Ber,
>Hol, Kie, and War,
I had assumed that Belgium is a lost cause, and that France will get it,
but perhaps it can be saved. While he may push toward Berlin, Holland,
Kiel and Warsaw, he cannot get any of them against a coordinated
defense. We can easily put armies in Kiel and Berlin and Silesia. Some of
the moves that I would recommend include Den->Kiel, Kiel->Berlin,
Mos->StP. This trades Kiel for StP, permits Russia to build another unit
in Moscow, and strengthens the defense in northern Europe.
> If I remain "allied"
>with him, he's unlikely to attack me while I'm taking
>Centers from England (that England doesn't need to hold
>his end of the stalemate line), and Italy and I can
>eliminate the threat posed by Turkey, and THEN lock down
>the middle of the line.
Maybe. We need to see moves. Please offer some when you get a chance.
Actually, things look worse than I first thought. What if England strikes
against Russia immediately with a double attack on Belgium and Kiel? Or a
double attack on Belgium plus a strike at both Holland and Berlin?
>We all know that once we have the stalemate line
>established, France will pull back and tempt us to
>reduce the size of the draw, hoping that a solo
>chance will reappear. As the "middle" Power, I
>would be most exposed to those "extra" English
>Armies that Ivy is so determined to keep, so they
>remain a concern for me.
Here is a question for you. Do you believe that you have the power to throw
the game to France, if Italy and/or I try some funny business? Each of us
needs to retain enough units in order to answer "yes" to that question.
Ivy
Message from Russia to England and Italy
Idalia and Ivy,
> Message from England to Russia and Italy in 'titleist':
> >Obviously we're good enough, or we wouldn't be here,
> >but the real question is, 'Do we have the will?'
>
> I don't know if we are good enough. This situation may be
> trickier than anything I have seen (and survived). The test
> of our ability will be whether or not we survive this time. If
> we don't, then we were not good enough.
I think this is mainly a matter of perspective. The tactics involved
in stopping a Solo attempt are pretty straight-forward, it's the will
and the trust to coordinate the necessary moves that is tricky.
> I agree. Italy will have to defend against France.
Yes, and we need to cooperate against Turkey.
> > >We all need to have forces arrayed directly against France.
> >
> >I have a fundamental disagreement with this.
>
> Fundamental disagreements are permitted.
Glad to hear it. 8-)
> I had assumed that Belgium is a lost cause, and that France will get
> it, but perhaps it can be saved. While he may push toward Ber,
> Hol, Kie and War, he cannot get any of them against a coordinated
> defense.
I suppose France could be stringing me along, but I get the sense that
he is willing let me grow toward "2nd place" to his solo as a reward
for my determined struggle for survival and refusal to give up. He
doesn't have to stab me to win, he just has to take seven of the nine
remaining Italian and Turkish Centers. He agreed to support me into
Bel, and let me take the remaining English Centers, and we're
discussing his withdrawal from Ruhr and Munich to increase the
security of my German holdings.
> I would recommend Den->Kiel, Kiel->Berlin, Mos->StP.
> This trades Kiel for StP, permits Russia to build another
> unit in Moscow, and strengthens the defense in northern Europe.
I'd have to see War-Sil/Gal as well, and would be curious about your
plans for A Nwy. I also think that it's more important for me to take
Sev, than StP, so that IR can eliminate Turkey quickly, and I can build
southern Fleets to help defend the Turkish Centers from France.
> Actually, things look worse than I first thought. What if France strikes
> against Russia immediately with a double attack on Belgium and Kiel?
> Or a double attack on Belgium plus a strike at Holland and Berlin?
Why would he do that? That would still leave me at two to four
Centers, and him without an ally. Unless it gives him a forced win,
and I don't think it does, there's no motivation for him to stab me.
> Do you believe that you have the power to throw the game to
> France if Italy and/or I try some funny business? Each of us needs
> to retain enough units in order to answer "yes" to that question.
Since Italy will find it difficult to regain a Home Center, I would say
he's unlikely to stab, since it would require pulling Units away from
France's line. In the north, on the other hand, unless France gets a
Fleet in Pic, or you don't cover Iri, there's really nothing I can do to
England, if you stab before France gets to 16 or 17 Centers. Those
two Armies you built were aimed at me, and potentially, they still are.
Nick.
Message from England to Italy and Russia
Gentlemen,
I may have spoken too quickly when I said that an impartial outsider could
easily coordinate our moves to stop France. The situation around Turkey is
a mess. Also, France could attempt a stab of Russia now because Belgium,
Holland, Kiel and Berlin are all vulnerable this particular turn. The
purpose of the four westernmost French armies is to stab Russia. Let's
hope Nick can talk France into waiting one more turn. Then it should be
too late.
If Turkey helps France, there could be problems at Smyrna or Bulgaria. On
the other hand Italy can retake Greece.
Here is a first draft of suggested moves.
England:
Nao-> Iri
Nwg-Nao
Nth s Eng
Nwy hold
Den->Kiel
Yor hold
Eng supp Bel
Russia:
Mos->StP
Kie->Ber
Ukr-Gal
Bel hold
Italy:
War hold
Sev hold
Syr-> E Med
Smy->Aeg
Ser supp bul->Gre
Rum->Bul
Some of these Italian moves make me nervous, because we have to guess.
However, I think that War hold and Sev hold are necessary this particular
turn to compensate Italy for the expected loss of two other centers. We
should take pains to prevent Italy from having to destroy any unit.
We may fail, but if we do, I would like to exit the game with my head held
high. We should try our best.
Are we desperate enough to try to bring Turkey into the deal?
Does someone wish to suggest alternatives?
Ivy
Message from England to Italy and Russia
Nick,
Our messages crossed in electron land.
>I suppose France could be stringing me along, ... we're
>discussing his withdrawal from Ruhr and Munich to increase the
>security of my German holdings.
I think that France has to at least consider a double attack on Belgium
plus a stab at Holland and Berlin. Three quick additions.
>
>> I would recommend Den->Kiel, Kiel->Berlin, Mos->StP.
>> This trades Kiel for StP, permits Russia to build another
>> unit in Moscow, and strengthens the defense in northern Europe.
>
>I'd have to see War-Sil/Gal as well, and would be curious about your
>plans for A Nwy. I also think that it's more important for me to take
>Sev, than StP,
If you take Sevastopol instead of Italy and request War-Sil/Gal (on this
particular turn) then Italy has to destroy two units. Don't you think that
would finish us instantly?
Ivy
Message from France to England
Ivy:
> I hope his setback leads him to alter his strategy.
Or at least tell you that it has ;-)
Seriously, it is clear that you are still poised to
battle me so I will not assume anything else. You hedged
your bets nicely last move. I will definitely continue
to support Russia against you and wait for him to nibble
away at your backside. There is not much else I can do.
--Prince Boar
Message from Russia to England and Italy
Ivy, and Idalia,
> Message from England to Italy and Russia in 'titleist':
> The purpose of the four westernmost French armies is to stab Russia.
No, he moved to Ruhr to support me into Hol, and moved to Pic to
keep you from convoying or retreating there. Will he look at the
position we're in now, and decide that he should stab me? I don't
think so. Yes, it would give him 14 or 15 Centers, but only 13
Units, and no clear path to 18. He needs several Armies in Austria
before stabbing me makes sense, and even then it's not strictly
necessary, since it he can win in the Med.
> Here is a first draft of suggested moves.
>
> England:
>
> Nao-> Iri
> Nwg-Nao
> Nth s Eng
Agreed.
> Eng supp Bel
I'd vote for ECh S NAO-Iri. France is unlikely to try MAO-Iri,
but establishing the stalemate position is more important than
protecting Bel agains an attack that's not likely to happen,
especially since we want France to think we're at odds.
> Nwy hold
> Den->Kiel
> Yor hold
I'm not thrilled with Den-Kie, and Yor-Wal might be useful.
> Russia:
>
> Mos->StP
> Kie->Ber
> Ukr-Gal
> Bel hold
Since I don't see France stabbing me, I don't see the need for
Den-Kie, Kie-Ber. Den-Kie, Kie-Den, Bel-Hol, Ruh-Hol
makes it look like there's conflict between us.
> Italy:
>
> War hold
No. Absolutely not. If Italy moves War-Sil, or War-Gal and
I build A War, we're in much better shape, even though Italy
has to disband. Had he moved to Vie, this Spring as we had
agreed, he wouldn't be facing two disbands. I see no reason
for me to pay for his mistake.
> Sev hold
Followed by Disband Sev, since Turkey will most likely disband
F Bla, would make sense, I think. I could move to Sev in the
Spring, and Arm in the Fall.
> Syr-> E Med
> Smy->Aeg
> Ser supp bul->Gre
> Rum->Bul
Looks good, though France may well continue to support Italy's
attack on Con, since Italy has shown no inclination to defend
his Centers, yet.
> We should take pains to prevent Italy from having to destroy any unit.
If his Units aren't defending his Centers then I see no reason for him to
take Centers from me.
> Are we desperate enough to try to bring Turkey into the deal?
I don't see any point. As near as I can tell, he hasn't written to anyone
in several turns, and France was the last one he wrote to.
> Our messages crossed in electron land.
> I think that France has to at least consider a double attack on Belgium
> plus a stab at Holland and Berlin. Three quick additions.
But he can't build five, indeed he probably won't be able to build more
than two, why overextend his position and throw away his alliance
with me unless it gives him the game?
> If you take Sevastopol instead of Italy and request War-Sil/Gal (on
> this particular turn) then Italy has to destroy two units. Don't you
> think that would finish us instantly?
No. Position is more important than Center count, and Italy's Units
aren't positioned to defend his Austrian Centers, so I see no point in
giving him my Centers to make up for his losses to France. To stop
France, I need to build, and I can't do that if Italy takes War and Sev.
Additionally, if Italy moves War-Sil, that freezes the French Army in
Munich, and delays the French takeover of Austria much more than
an Italian Army in War would, anyway. Italy needs to hold Rum, Bul,
Aeg and EMed to stalemate France, and I need to build Fleets to
accomplish that. I am willing to consider, Sev Hold, Bul-Gre, War-Sil
to keep Italy even, though.
So, my first draft:
England:
Nao-> Iri
Nwg-Nao
Nth s Eng
Nwy hold
Den->Kiel
Yor-Wal
ECh S NAO-Iri
Russia:
Mos->StP
Kie->Den
Ukr-Gal
Bel hold
Italy:
War-Sil
Sev hold
Syr-> E Med
Smy->Aeg or Con
Ser supp Bul->Gre
Rum->Bul or Bud
Nick.
Message from Russia to England
Ivy,
If I'm taking Bel and StP from you, you should order Nwy-Swe, to
balance it, and make it look good for France. I was juggling moves
in my head, between Mos-StP and Mos-Sev, and "dropped"
Nwy-Swe. Sorry.
I wish Italy would write. I realize that not everyone can write as
much as we do, but especially in delicate negotiations like these,
comments from everyone are helpful, and perhaps even necessary.
Nick.
Message from Italy to England and Russia
I will have a response to he discussions probably sometime tomorrow. If not
tomorrow, then the weekend for sure.
I've been sick all week and I had to put my dog to sleep today so you'll
have to pardon me on my silence the last few days.
Idalia
Message from England to France
Prince Boar,
Belgium, Holland, Kiel, Berlin. All are vulnerable to you. How many do
you plan to take?
[Need any help?]
Ivy
Message from France to England
Ivy:
Even if I were to attack Russia's German holdings, I
cannot build with those centers. Your fleets have Brest
tied down and I should already get a build from the
south.
While your fleets are on my side of the Island, I must
assume that you will be putting up a good fight and
therefore cannot consider turning on Russia.
I certainly do not want to take on the world with 13
units on the board! :-) The Dauphin may think that he
is that good, but I have my doubts. :-)
--Prince Boar
Message from England to Italy and Russia
Comrades in desperation,
> > Eng supp Bel
>
>I'd vote for ECh S NAO-Iri.
Sure, why not.
>Since I don't see France stabbing me, I don't see the need for
>Den-Kie, Kie-Ber. Den-Kie, Kie-Den, Bel-Hol, Ruh-Hol
>makes it look like there's conflict between us.
One suggested set of moves gives us armies in Kiel and Berlin. The other
set of moves leaves Berlin empty and my army back in Denmark, but preserves
the appearance of Russian/French cooperation. Which is better? I lean
toward the former, because it defends against a French stab of Russia in
the fall and acknowledges the inevitable: EIR against F. Let's all three
think about this.
> > Italy:
> >
> > War hold
>
>No. Absolutely not.
I would rather not deal in absolutes early in the negotiations.
> If Italy moves War-Sil, or War-Gal and
>I build A War, we're in much better shape, even though Italy
>has to disband.
Yes, let's assess things like this.
> Had he moved to Vie, this Spring as we had
>agreed, he wouldn't be facing two disbands. I see no reason
>for me to pay for his mistake.
And I really want to avoid recriminations. Let's work from the present
position, no matter how we got here. Let's all agree that each of us has
played perfectly while the other two messed up. Each of us is paying for
other's mistakes. Each of us should have won by now. Seriously, each if
us has to grit our teeth and really, really try to find common ground.
> I am willing to consider, Sev Hold, Bul-Gre, War-Sil
>to keep Italy even, though.
I am assuming that Bul->Gre will be offset by the loss of Smyrna or
Bulgaria. So I assume that Warsaw->Silesia, which does have its plusses,
will result in the overall loss of an Italian unit. I'm willing to
consider it, but I am not sure the remaining Italian units will be strong
enough to hold whatever it is that Italy needs to hold. Maybe, maybe
not. I have to move the pieces on my board and think.
Also, Italy just might have something to say about this. 8-)
>So, my first draft:
I'll look at these and get back to the two of you.
Ivy Wingo
Message from England to Italy
Idalia,
I'm sorry about the difficulties that you had this week.
Only you can decide whether you can live with Warsaw->Silesia. This may be
the deal-breaker, one way or another.
If (IF) you can do it, perhaps we can get Russia to yield on Den->Kiel,
Kiel->Berlin in exchange. That would give us armies in Kiel, Berlin and
Silesia, and the resulting pressure on Munich will tie down French armies.
This does not alter my own situation. I will lose Berlin & StP to Russia,
while gaining either Sweden or Kiel. I think Kiel is strongly preferable,
because it puts our armies in a more useful position. Russia wants to
"pretend" that he and France are still cooperating, but I think it is more
than a pretense. He is trying to have it both ways for yet another turn,
and I think we ought to make him decide now, once and for all. It's clear,
isn't it that Den->Kiel, Kiel->Berlin is tactically superior to Den->Kiel,
Kiel->Den.
Ivy
Message from Russia to England and Italy
Ivy Wrote >
> One suggested set of moves gives us armies in Kiel and Berlin.
And it gives you another one on my Centers when you already
have more than enough Units to defend your end of the stalemate
line against France, and I don't. Additionally, if you occupy
Centers in the middle of my section of the line, it makes it that
much easier for France to pull back and for you to eliminate me.
> The other set of moves leaves Berlin, but preserves the
> appearance of Russian/French cooperation. Which is better?
> I lean toward the former, because it defends against a French
> stab of Russia in the fall and acknowledges the inevitable:
> EIR against F. Let's all three think about this.
What does France gain by stabbing me at this point? A couple
more Centers. Does it give him a forced win? No. Does it force
me to work with England to prevent the French Solo? Yes. Will
our chances of stopping him be inproved by announcing our
cooperation at this point? I don't think so. I lack the Units to
defend my line, and England has too many free Armies available
that can do little against France, but could easily work to eliminate
me given a little French and Italian cooperation. I would prefer to
shore up my line before announcing my intention to oppose the
French Solo.
> > > Italy:
> > > War hold
> >
> >No. Absolutely not.
>
> I would rather not deal in absolutes early in the negotiations.
Unfortunately, we are faced with absolutes. If France gains 18
Centers, the game is over. Italy cannot build. I need additional
Units to oppose France. IA War Hold does not help our cause
in any way. If Italy holds in Warsaw, or attacks Moscow, I
will attempt to throw the game to France. This is not a
negotiable item from Russia's perspective.
> I assume that Warsaw->Silesia, which does have its plusses, will
> result in the overall loss of an Italian unit. I'm willing to consider
> it, but I am not sure the remaining Italian units will be strong
> enough to hold whatever it is that Italy needs to hold.
>From my perspective, whether Italy holds in War, or advances to Sil,
and disbands A Sev has little net impact on Italy's ability to hold his
position against France, though the Army in Sil is more useful. His
holding in War, does however, cripple my ability to build, and hold
my position against France.
> Also, Italy just might have something to say about this. 8-)
One would hope. ;^}
Nick.
Message from England to Italy and Russia
Nick,
> > One suggested set of moves gives us armies in Kiel and Berlin.
>
>And it gives you another one on my Centers
I believe that this half of your response is not quite accurate. Remember,
you already offered me Sweden in exchange for StP and Belgium. My
suggestion substitutes Kiel for Sweden, so there is no difference in the
number of centers. I am agreeing to give you one of my centers (net) in
either scenario.
> Additionally, if you occupy
>Centers in the middle of my section of the line, it makes it that
>much easier for France to pull back and for you to eliminate me.
You are in far greater danger from France than you are from me. In fact,
after this move you will have more supply centers than me. My goal for
these admittedly very, difficult negotiations is to build a partnership
that eventually reduces France's size, eliminates Turkey, get's back
Italy's homeland, and creates rough parity between the three of us. We are
all going to have to take risks to do this. The penalty for failure will
be a quick French victory.
If France ever pulls back, we just march right after him. When he is
reduced to our size (still a dream) then we can start fearing each other again.
We must trust each other 100% now. Or give up.
You would have nothing to fear if my army were in Kiel. I have a proven
track record in these situations. A few years ago, I could have walked
into Brest and Paris, but didn't, because there was something more
important to accomplish -- stop Italy. The situation with France now is
even more urgent.
Still trying my best,
Ivy
Message from Russia to England
*********Note that this is a PRIVATE response*********
Ivy,
> You would have nothing to fear if my army were in Kiel. I have a proven
> track record in these situations. A few years ago, I could have walked
> into Brest and Paris, but didn't, because there was something more
> important to accomplish -- stop Italy. The situation with France now is
> even more urgent.
You, of course, choose to ignore the fact that you agreed not to attack
Den and Swe, and then did so, and built in an anti-Russian fashion. Your
history of cooperation with France does little to ease my mind, in this
regard. 8-) Of course, this entire discussion is moot unless we get some
idea of the Italian position in the matter. Do you really feel that we can
work with someone who writes so little?
A Concerned,
Nick.
Message from England to Russia
Nick,
>You, of course, choose to ignore the fact that you agreed not to attack
>Den and Swe, and then did so, and built in an anti-Russian fashion.
That's correct; I am ignoring it. I am asking you to do the same. I want
to see if three good players can cooperate, starting from the current
position, in order to achieve a common goal. [At this point I might ask if
you have ever broken an agreement in a Diplomacy game. Nah, I won't ask.]
> Of course, this entire discussion is moot unless we get some
>idea of the Italian position in the matter.
So true.
> Do you really feel that we can
>work with someone who writes so little?
I don't like it, but there is no other choice. France wins, if Italy
cannot pitch in and join the two of us in a frank discussion. I am taking
him at his word when he says he was ill last week, but that he will get
back to us this weekend.
Holding my breath,
Ivy
Message from Russia to England
Ivy,
> >You, of course, choose to ignore the fact that you agreed not to attack
> >Den and Swe, and then did so, and built in an anti-Russian fashion.
>
> That's correct; I am ignoring it. I am asking you to do the same.
But you're also asking me to accept Den-Kie because the fact that you
didn't take Bre or Par from France makes you trustworthy. Don't you
see the irony of your argument? I read it as:
1) England was loyal to France.
2) England broke a promise to Russia
Therefore, Russia should trust England because of England's proven
record of trustworthiness.
> I want to see if three good players can cooperate, starting from the
current
> position, in order to achieve a common goal.
I understand that, but I'm also looking down the road to the point where
we've stopped France. Unless we can get a Unit into Pic to cut Bre S MAO
we will never retake MAO, and unless we can get an Army into Ruhr, we'll
never take Pic. If we don't take MAO, you're only route for expansion will
be through my Centers, and France is certain to point that out to you. Can
I
trust you, Italy and France to settle for a four-way Draw? I don't think
so. I
am, therefore, most at risk, and I don't want to do something that increases
that risk, like letting you into Kiel, and declaring against France before I
have
the Units to defend myself. I feel France is more likely to send Armies
south
against Italy, than he is to attack me for a couple of Centers, since he can
win
in the Med against the silent Turk and Italian, so declaring myself against
France this Fall would be counter-productive.
> > Do you really feel that we can
> >work with someone who writes so little?
>
> I don't like it, but there is no other choice. France wins, if Italy
> cannot pitch in and join the two of us in a frank discussion.
Does France win if Italy is eliminated? He needs to take all of Austrian
and the Balkans, plus at least one Center in Turkey to solo. There are
stalemate lines available to Russia that include just Turkey, or Turkey
plus Rum and Bul. I'm not proposing that we sacrifice Italy to France,
but it is an option available to us.
Nick.
Message from France to England
Ivy:
We look pretty close to have a pseudo-stalemate line
between us. I should be able to hold my side of the line
for a long time, even if Russia turns on me. You have
done a nice job setting yours up and putting youself in
position to defend Scandinavia. Russia also gets some
credit in that he has been successful at nibbled at your
holdings but leaving you in place against me. He refuses
to support my advance against you, which his smart of
him. He wants all your centers for himself.
I suspect another interest turn.
--Prince Boar
Message from Master to all
Extension for Veteran's Day or Armistice Day, depending on where you
live.
Doug
masseyd@btv.ibm.com as Master set the deadline
for game 'titleist' to Tue Nov 13 2001 23:30:00 -0500.
Grace period deadline advanced to Fri Nov 16 2001 23:30:00 -0500.
Message from England to Russia
Nick,
From Italy: nothing, nada.
I'm sure he meant well when he said he had a rough week and would get back
to us, but he just hasn't remained fully involved in titleist. I am
willing to give him the benefit of the doubt,for perhaps he just has too
many real world responsibilities. That doesn't help us though.
>masseyd@btv.ibm.com as Master set the deadline
>for game 'titleist' to Tue Nov 13 2001 23:30:00 -0500.
So now we have one more day.
Ivy
Message from England to Russia
Nick,
With nothing fron Italy to respond to (yet), I have a brief reaction to
something you said a couple of days ago.
>But you're also asking me to accept Den-Kie because the fact that you
>didn't take Bre or Par from France makes you trustworthy. Don't you
>see the irony of your argument? I read it as:
>
>1) England was loyal to France.
>2) England broke a promise to Russia
>
>Therefore, Russia should trust England because of England's proven
>record of trustworthiness.
The distinction is that the outcome of the game was on the line when I
declined to take Paris and Brest. I can be counted on to be a team player
when the game is on the line.
>Does France win if Italy is eliminated?
I think so.
>He needs to take all of Austrian
>and the Balkans, plus at least one Center in Turkey to solo.
Not if he takes part of Belgium, Holland, Kiel and Berlin. How do you
propose to defend those? We once had 4 units on those provences. Now we
have two.
[I know, this message was unnecessary, but my doctor prescribes a daily
dose of debate.]
Ivy
Message from Russia to England
Ivy,
> With nothing fron Italy to respond to (yet), I have a brief reaction to
> something you said a couple of days ago.
Any word from Turkey, by chance? (Yes, I'm grasping at straws here.)
> The distinction is that the outcome of the game was on the line when
> I declined to take Paris and Brest. I can be counted on to be a team
> player when the game is on the line.
Fair enough, but the problem I see is that France's likely reaction to my
allowing Den-Kie would be to limit his threat to you, and offer you the
space and time to eliminate me. Just as I would expect you to throw your
Centers to France and attack me full-force if I were to support Bre-ECh,
as France requested.
> >Does France win if Italy is eliminated?
> I think so.
>
> >He needs to take all of Austrian
> >and the Balkans, plus at least one Center in Turkey to solo.
>
> Not if he takes part of Belgium, Holland, Kiel and Berlin. How do you
> propose to defend those? We once had 4 units on those provences.
> Now we have two.
If we can convince Italy to move War-Sil, and I move Mos-StP/Sev and
build two, next Spring we will have four Units to defend those Centers,
with the possibility of taking Mun and having five or six Armies to defend,
by the Fall. I just don't see that France has a reason to stab me this
Fall,
and defending against that stab slows my growth, and increases the
chances that France will attack before my defenses are in place. We can
think about convoying one of your Armies to Holland next Spring, hoping
to force it into Ruhr in the Fall, but revealing our alliance this Fall
seems
counter-productive.
Nick
Message from Russia to England
Ivy,
Given Italy's continued silence, can I ask you to make a clear
expression
of support for War-Sil to IR? Hopefully, Italy will at least read his mail
before entering his moves. I'm tempted to try to force my way into Sev, as
well, to leave ER as strong as possible. What do you think?
In Alliance,
Nick.
Message from England to France
>We look pretty close to have a pseudo-stalemate line
>between us.
Close, but it's not there.
You have maneuvered yourself into a wonderful situation. Italy and Turkey
don't communicate. Russia talks, but never listens. He all output and no
input.
Will you join the 2002 tournament if titleist is still ongoing?
Ivy
Message from France to England
Ivy:
>You have maneuvered yourself into a wonderful situation.
More luck than anything. Things can turn on a dime
in a diplomacy game so I expect some rocky roads
ahead. Who knows, we may get back to our alliance
again :-)
>Italy and Turkey don't communicate.
I would actually prefer to hear from them too.
>Will you join the 2002 tournament if titleist is still
>ongoing?
I don't know. Life has been very overloaded (and work
has been worse). Three games is a lot more than I would
want to pursue. Plus I have another one on going, so
that would be 4!
It would be nice to play, but I would have to think
about. I would probably sign up in a moment of weakness
and then regret it later :-)
--Prince Boar
Message from England to Russia
Nick,
> > Not if he takes part of Belgium, Holland, Kiel and Berlin. How do you
> > propose to defend those? We once had 4 units on those provences.
> > Now we have two.
>
>If we can convince Italy to move War-Sil, and I move Mos-StP/Sev and
>build two, next Spring we will have four Units to defend those Centers,
Three units. Just Holland, Kiel, and Silesia. We only have four if my
Denmark army is in Kiel. Your new armies in Moscow and Warsaw will be too
far away. France will attack in the spring (if not this fall) when he sees
that it is his last opportunity.
>Given Italy's continued silence, can I ask you to make a clear expression
>of support for War-Sil to IR? Hopefully, Italy will at least read his mail
>before entering his moves.
I've already done so privately, and I am willing to do it again in a joint
message. My only question is how to phrase it. Italy had previously
indicated disgust at your loyalty to France, and I fear that another
request to Italy to make a sacrifice when you are rigid on your position
will just harden him as well.
How would feel if I suggested a compromise? Italy move to Silesia and
Russia move to Berlin. I think he may respond favorably if he sees that
you too can make a selfless decision for the good of an alliance.
> I'm tempted to try to force my way into Sev, as
>well, to leave ER as strong as possible. What do you think?
You have to decide in advance if you want Italy to help stop France. In
fact you have to decide if you want my help. On this particular turn I do
not want you to make any move that hurts Italy. Leaving ER "as strong as
possible" is a laugh. We once had four units in Belgium, Holland, Kiel,
Berlin. Now we have two, because mine are gone. You are playing a
dangerous game.
I am submitting moves now. They will be the ones you want. Nwy->Swe as
partial compensation for Belgium and StP. Den->Kiel also, of course.
Ivy
Message from Russia to England
Ivy,
> >If we can convince Italy to move War-Sil
> >next Spring we will have four Units to defend
>Three units. Just Holland, Kiel, and Silesia.
I considered RA War-Pru in the Spring as defending
Berlin. Add in Den-Hol and that's five.
>France will attack in the spring (if not this fall)
>when he sees that it is his last opportunity.
If he thinks Italy is threatening Mun, and I have
taken Bel and StP from you this Fall as you take
Swe from me, what reason would France have for
attacking me? You've never addressed this issue.
France is too talented to just stab for a Center
or two, what strategic advantage does he gain by
stabbing me? None, that I can see.
> >can I ask you to make a clear expression
> >of support for War-Sil to IR?
>I am willing to do it again in a joint
>message. My only question is how to phrase it.
>I fear that another request to Italy to make a
>sacrifice when you are rigid on your position
>will just harden him as well.
I've compromised on leaving Sev in Italian hands,
though I think we would be better off restoring
our Southern Fleet production capacity as soon as
possible. You, on the other hand, continue to
insist that you should move to Kiel. Rigidity is
in the eye of the beholder.
>How would feel if I suggested a compromise? Italy
>moves to Silesia and Russia moves to Berlin. I think
>he may respond favorably if he sees that you too can
>make a selfless decision for the good of an alliance.
I haven't seen any indication that he'll respond at
all. Why should I risk War S Sev-Mos, and give Kiel
to you? How does this benefit the alliance?
> >I'm tempted to try to force my way into Sev, as
> >as well, to leave ER as strong as possible.
>You have to decide in advance if you want Italy to
>help stop France.
I'd love for Italy to help us stop France, but based
on his Spring moves, and his Fall silence, I have no
reason to believe that he intends to do so. Italy
has been handing France Centers for a lot longer
than I have been allied with France to stop you
from trying to eliminate me. (Yes, I know, you want
to focus on the future and ignore the past, but the
fact remains that Italy has given no indication that
he plans to cooperate with us.)
>In fact you have to decide if you want my help.
>On this particular turn I do not want you to make
>any move that hurts Italy. Leaving ER "as strong
>as possible" is a laugh. We once had four units
>in Belgium, Holland, Kiel, Berlin. Now we have
>two, because mine are gone. You are playing a
>dangerous game.
Yes, and they are gone because you attacked me, and
then built two Armies to continue to attack me. Had
you wanted to stop France at that point, we'd be in
a much different position, now. Don't blame me for
your mistakes, or for not trusting your good
intentions. You're very fond of pointing to the
past when it supports your point-of-view, and then
dismissing any opposing past incidents because you
want to focus on the present, but I'd rather take
a more balanced approach.
I have struggled to stay in this game since 1902; my
Home Centers have been occupied by every Power except
France, and owned by all except France and Italy; I
have never had more than four Units on the board, but
I am still here, and still in a position to influence
events. A solo is out of the question for me at this
point, but I still have some hope of sharing in a draw,
and to do that, I must survive, and be able to build.
That means Italy has to leave Warsaw, and it means that
I will not allow you to occupy a Center in the middle
of my line from which you can later stab me to reduce
the size of the draw. If those conditions are
unacceptable, then you are free to try to get Italy to
help you eliminate me, and hope that France doesn't
solo before you can do so.
Realistically, though, I am your only hope to stop
France. Italy's position and silence doom him to, at
most, a supporting role in our Stop The Leader Alliance,
and chances are that France will pull back far enough
to allow me to eliminate Italy, if we stalemate France
in the North. Obviously, a draw is better than mere
survival, so my "alliance" with France must be intended
to make a draw more likely. Yes, it is a dangerous
game, but unless you can offer a winning strategy for
France based on a stab this Fall, I will stick by my
belief that he will not stab, and I will not increase
the likelihood of a French stab by showing obvious
cooperation with you until I have Units positioned to
defend against that stab.
Sincerely,
Nick.
Message from England to Russia
Nick,
>I've compromised on leaving Sev in Italian hands,
So kind of you. It's like your previous compromises in taking Belgium and
Holland. [Couldn't resist. I am counting on your sense of humor.]
>though I think we would be better off restoring
>our Southern Fleet production capacity as soon as
>possible.
Oh man, this is so important. Italy has already destroyed one more fleet
than I would have in his position.
> You, on the other hand, continue to
>insist that you should move to Kiel.
Not exactly, my moves are the same in either situation and I have entered
my moves. I just think this is best and have said so.
>I haven't seen any indication that he'll respond at
>all. Why should I risk War S Sev-Mos
This would be suicidal on Italy's part. [Hmm, he does seem to exhibit
suicidal tendencies, though.] This would leave Sevastopol in Turkish
hands. I really don't think he would do this, unless he takes a dislike to
you.
> > >I'm tempted to try to force my way into Sev, as
> > >as well, to leave ER as strong as possible.
>
> >You have to decide in advance if you want Italy to
> >help stop France.
>
>I'd love for Italy to help us stop France, but based
>on his Spring moves, and his Fall silence, I have no
>reason to believe that he intends to do so.
I blame you for a lot, but I will not blame you if you alter your moves
based on Italian silence. [That's an important statement on my part, so
read it carefully.] Unfortunately, I do think the game is lost if Italy
doesn't help, though.
>Italy
>has been handing France Centers for a lot longer
>than I have been allied with France to stop you
>from trying to eliminate me.
I have never tried to eliminate you. I took myself to that doorstep and
then decided it was unwise.
>Yes, and they are gone because you attacked me, and
>then built two Armies to continue to attack me.
So tiresome. I did prepare to attack you. I took a unit of yours that
would have been Germany's had I not done so. The only harm was to your
ego. After examining the situation, I concluded that I should switch
strategy and attack France. The two armies were decided upon after I
switched. They were to be convoyed to the mainland to fight
France. Perhaps not the best tactics.
>I have struggled to stay in this game since 1902
(background violin music) [please laugh]
>I will not allow you to occupy a Center in the middle of my line
If we ever get out of this alive, we will eventually have to debate
this. Many years from now, when France has been stopped, and Italy has
been eliminated (possibly), just what do you see as "your line." I'd
rather not get into it now.
>Realistically, though, I am your only hope to stop
>France. Italy's position and silence doom him to, at
>most, a supporting role in our Stop The Leader Alliance,
>and chances are that France will pull back far enough
>to allow me to eliminate Italy, if we stalemate France
>in the North.
I think I agree with the above.
Pray for Italy to respond.
Ivy
Message from Russia to England and Italy
(Especially to Italy)
Are we in agreement for our moves? Sev Hold, War-Sil,
Mos-StP, Ukr-Gal, Nwy-Swe, Ser S Bul-Gre?
Roberto/Idalia, we'd appreciate your input.
Nick.
Message from Russia to England
Ivy,
> >I've compromised on leaving Sev in Italian hands,
>
>So kind of you. It's like your previous compromises in taking Belgium and
>Holland. [I am counting on your sense of humor.]
I'm afraid I don't get the joke. (Not that I take
offense, but...) The French Fleet in Aeg is
worrisome. I tried to convince Italy to keep F Gre,
and he refused, and I fear we will need a third
Fleet to secure Turkey, so I do see accepting
IA Sev Hold as a significant compromise. Also, if
I hadn't taken Bel this Spring, France would have
this Fall, in all likelihood, so my "attack" blunted
France's (hopefully 8-).
>Italy has already destroyed one more fleet
>than I would have in his position.
Yes, I tried to get him to keep F Gre, disband A Ukr,
and let me take Sev, but he refused. I haven't seen
much indication of increased commitment to stopping
France since then.
> > You, on the other hand, continue to
> >insist that you should move to Kiel.
>
>Not exactly, I just think this is best and have said so.
Can't you see the advantage of taking Hol, instead?
Our forces wouldn't be as intermingled that way, and
end-game stabs would be more difficult. Den-Kie makes
sense to me, ONLY if France is going to stab this turn,
and I don't see that happening, why do you?
>I will not blame you if you alter your moves
>based on Italian silence.
Noted. I will take that under consideration.
>I have never tried to eliminate you. I took myself to that doorstep and
>then decided it was unwise.
When is a stab not a stab? 8-) I felt your builds
threatened my elimination, and reacted accordingly.
>The only harm was to your ego.
No, the real damage was to my trust in your good will.
There was no NEED to eliminate Germany that turn, you
did so because it gave you the position and builds to
attack me.
> >I have struggled to stay in this game since 1902
>
>(background violin music) [please laugh]
Hey, my flair for the dramatic is certainly part of
the reason I'm still here and fighting. ;^}
>just what do you see as "your line." I'd
>rather not get into it now.
It's pretty simple from my perspective. My "line"
is the line of Centers I control to hold the
stalemate line against France. Our positions are
more secure if you control the western end, and I
the eastern. EA Kiel could find itself able to
attack Hol or Ber, so I'd prefer to avoid that.
>Pray for Italy to respond.
I do, but I also think we should address the
possibility that he won't, and look for ways
to stop France, if that happens.
In Alliance,
Nick.
Message from England to Italy and Russia
>Message from Russia to England and Italy in 'titleist':
>
>(Especially to Italy)
>
>Are we in agreement for our moves? Sev Hold, War-Sil,
>Mos-StP, Ukr-Gal, Nwy-Swe, Ser S Bul-Gre?
>Roberto/Idalia, we'd appreciate your input.
I can live with these moves, and would like to hear from Idalia on this
score, if at all possible.
Idalia, I vow that, if you join in this endeavor and if Russia ever tries
any funny stuff afterwards, I will personally do everything in my power to
aid you in a campaign of revenge. Please let me know what your are
thinking, publicly or privately.
Ivy Wingo
Message from Italy to England and Russia
>
> Are we in agreement for our moves? Sev Hold, War-Sil,
> Mos-StP, Ukr-Gal, Nwy-Swe, Ser S Bul-Gre?
>
Can't say that I am.
I have two concerns with the suggested moves for my units:
1) The assumption is, Turkey will stand idly by and watch. That he won't
try for Smyrna or Bulgaria. The moves suggested give me no defense against
an aggressive Turk.
2) If I make an overly aggressive move against France prior to the
elimination of Turkey, then France has the opportunity to support Turkish
forces into Smyrna and Bulgaria next year. My survival, already on thin
ice, gets even more complicated if France and Turkey have an excuse to work
together.
Do I have a solution? No, but I'm reluctant to agree to the above moves.
Idalia
Message from Italy to England and Russia
>
> Message from France to Italy in 'titleist':
>
> Roberto:
>
> Nick tells me that you have been sick and have had other
> issues. I am sorry to hear that. Take your time writing
> back to me. We have until Monday and life always comes
> before Diplomacy.
>
> Regards,
> Xavier Boar
>
I forgot to mention one little tidbit:
It is my assumption that all messages from Italy to Russia are being
forwarded to France.
Nick, for the record, it was not my intention for France to know the reason
for my silence; if it was, I would have simply included the letter 'f' in
the press command.
Idalia, by the good graces of the ArchDuke
Message from Russia to England and Italy
Idalia,
>Message from Italy to England and Russia in 'titleist':
>
> > Are we in agreement for our moves? Sev Hold, > War-Sil, Mos-StP,
>Ukr-Gal, Nwy-Swe, Ser S Bul-Gre?
>Can't say that I am.
>Do I have a solution? No, but I'm reluctant to agree to the above moves.
Feel free to propose a set of moves you are
comfortable with. If you don't want to attack France
before Turkey falls, I would think Ukr S Mos-Sev,
Sev-Arm, War-Sil, Rum S Bul, Syr S Smy would be a
safe alternative.
Nick.
Message from Italy to England
>
> Idalia, I vow that, if you join in this endeavor and if
> Russia ever tries any funny stuff afterwards, I will
> personally do everything in my power to aid you in a
> campaign of revenge.
>
Not necessary. I am perfectly capable of extracting my own revenge.
Message from Italy to England and Russia
> If you don't want to attack France
> before Turkey falls, I would think Ukr S Mos-Sev,
> Sev-Arm, War-Sil, Rum S Bul, Syr S Smy would be a
> safe alternative.
>
And your suggestion for my two disbands would be.......
Message from Russia to England and Italy
>Message from Italy to England and Russia in 'titleist':
> > Message from France to Italy in 'titleist':
> >
> > Nick tells me that you have been sick ...
>
>I forgot to mention one little tidbit:
>
>It is my assumption that all messages from Italy to Russia are being
>forwarded to France.
You are, of course, free to make whatever inaccurate
assumptions you need to justify throwing the game
to France through your sojourn in Russia. They
remain inaccurate, however.
>Nick, for the record, it was not my intention for France to know the reason
>for my silence; if it was, I would have simply included the letter 'f' in
>the press command.
I did not view your claim of illness as being a
"state secret". I write to everyone, even the
silent Turk. France writes to everyone, England
writes to everyone. It's the way we play the game.
Sometimes we share information, sometimes we ask
questions, sometimes we refuse to support a French
attack on the English Channel. If there is something
you don't want me telling France that is outside of
our plans to prevent his Solo, tell me beforehand.
Telling him you said you were sick and had not
written allowed me to deflect his questions about my
plans in the East, so it struck me as a useful thing
to do.
Sincerely,
Czar Nicholas II.
Message from Russia to England
Ivy,
The attack on Sev seems better all the time...
Nick.
Message from Russia to England and Italy
>Message from Italy to England and Russia in 'titleist':
>
> > I would think Ukr S Mos-Sev,Sev-Arm, War-Sil,
> > Rum S Bul, Syr S Smy would be a safe alternative.
>And your suggestion for my two disbands would be.......
Make an alternative suggestion that does not Italy
holding in Warsaw, or attacking Moscow, and I'll be
happy to agree to it.
Nick.
Message from England to Italy and Russia
Nick and Idalia,
I just got free and I see lots of messages.
>I have two concerns with the suggested moves for my units:
>
>1) The assumption is, Turkey will stand idly by and watch. That he won't
>try for Smyrna or Bulgaria. The moves suggested give me no defense against
>an aggressive Turk.
By all means make moves in the southeast that you feel most comfortable
with. It's a guessing game down there. I would gamble that there is no
communication between Turkey and England, though. Nothing that you do is
completely safe there.
>2) If I make an overly aggressive move against France prior to the
>elimination of Turkey, then France has the opportunity to support Turkish
>forces into Smyrna and Bulgaria next year. My survival, already on thin
>ice, gets even more complicated if France and Turkey have an excuse to work
>together.
I don't think that anything that Italy does will have an effect on France's
future moves. He is already trying to take maximum advantage of the
situation in the southeast and he will continue to do so.
>No, but I'm reluctant to agree to the above moves.
When I first proposed taking Greece, it was just a suggestion. I am
comfortable with you selecting any moves down there that you think gives
you a fighting chance.
> > If you don't want to attack France
> > before Turkey falls, I would think Ukr S Mos-Sev,
> > Sev-Arm, War-Sil, Rum S Bul, Syr S Smy would be a
> > safe alternative.
> >
>And your suggestion for my two disbands would be.......
I have to admit that this is a good point. I notice that Nick hasn't
answered. Any cooperation that involves three of us has to allow for hope
of survival.
One more comment -- then unfortunately, I am occupied all evening until
about 10:00 eastern -- I do hope that Italy can see his way clear to move
Warsaw->Silesia. I know its a tough call.
Ivy.
Message from England to Russia
Nick,
>The attack on Sev seems better all the time...
Oddly, if you go for Sevastopol, it is I who benefit. You would be trading
StP for Sevastopol.
Your choice, of course. I am not aware of a single instance when I have
been able to change your mind on anything. If you go for Sevastopol, Italy
will do nothing for the rest of the game but attack you. Can you handle
that and still stop France?
Ivy
Message from Italy to England and Russia
> Telling him you said you were sick and had not
> written allowed me to deflect his questions about my
> plans in the East, so it struck me as a useful thing
> to do.
>
But, telling him that I was sick meant that I HAD written - to you and not
to him. Do I need to explain the subtle difference there?
To deflect his questions, you could have simply said that I had not written
period or, better yet, told him that you are currently negotiating with
England and Italy for the return of your home centers to Russian control.
Idalia
Message from Italy to England and Russia
>
> Feel free to propose a set of moves you are
> comfortable with.
>
Okay, but you're probably not going to like them.
Italy
============
war - mos
sev s war - mos
rum s sev
I deal with Con/Bul with my other units
Russia
============
mos - stp
kie - ber
ukr - gal
bel hold
England
============
nao - iri
eng s nao - iri
nth s eng
nwg - nao
den - kie
yor - wal
nor hold
>From my count, unless France completely stabs Russia in BEL/HOL, England
will have a disband (Norway) and Russia will have a build (in Warsaw). The
following year, SEV-ARM, MOS-SEV, WAR-SIL, Galicia has options, STP has
options some of which will be determined by the Turkish disband and the
French build.
> Make an alternative suggestion that does not Italy
> holding in Warsaw, or attacking Moscow, and I'll be
> happy to agree to it.
Like I said, you wouldn't like 'em.
However, you can't expect me to give up whatever hope of friendship I have
with France unless you are willing to do the same. I see the Italian/Russian
"conflict" similar to the way you see the English/Russian "conflict" as a
way to maintain a perception of discontent. Until Turkey is eliminated, I
have no choice and that, to borrow a term, is non-negotiable from Italy's
perspective.
Your other alternative for Italian moves is war-mos, sev-mos, rum-ukr.
Respectively,
Idalia
Message from Russia to England and Italy
Gentlemen,
> Message from England to Italy and Russia in 'titleist':
> > > If you don't want to attack France
> > > before Turkey falls, I would think Ukr S Mos-Sev,
> > > Sev-Arm, War-Sil, Rum S Bul, Syr S Smy would be a
> > > safe alternative.
> > >
> >And your suggestion for my two disbands would be.......
>
> I have to admit that this is a good point. I notice that Nick hasn't
> answered. Any cooperation that involves three of us has to allow
> for hope of survival.
Italy chose to not defend his Centers against France, in spite of the
fact that I could have taken Sev from Turkey, and built a Fleet there
next year to shore up our line. What he disbands as a result of his
poor choices, is his decision to make.
And how pray tell does my handing my Home Centers over to Italy,
limiting my builds, increase anyone's chance of survival except perhaps
Italy's? Why should I pay for his mistakes when he's refusing to even
defend the Centers he currently controls? How does this benefit the
"Stop France" coalition in any way? I offered Italy Sev in return for
War-Sil, more than that is unreasonable.
Nick.
Message from Russia to England and Italy
> Message from Italy to England and Russia in 'titleist':
>
> Okay, but you're probably not going to like them.
>
> Italy
> ============
> war - mos
> sev s war - mos
> rum s sev
And this slows France how? It keeps you from having to disband,
but next year, France will take Bud, and probably Bul or Ser, will
you take War and StP to offset your losses then?
> Russia
> ============
> mos - stp
> kie - ber
> ukr - gal
> bel hold
Even if we add in Nwy-Swe, this leaves me with two builds, and only
one open Center. If we're going to stop France, I need to build two
this year.
> you can't expect me to give up whatever hope of friendship I have
> with France unless you are willing to do the same.
There's a significant difference, France isn't growing due to my friendship.
If I allow Den-Kie, France has no reason to not attack me in Germany
next year. If you defend your Centers, France will have to pull Units
from Germany to attack you in Austria, and we can take Mun and Ruhr,
and pressure Pic/Bur.
> I see the Italian/Russian "conflict" similar to the way you see the
> English/Russian "conflict" as a way to maintain a perception of
> discontent.
Again the difference is that my conflict with England isn't pulling English
Fleets away from the stalemate line, and assuming that you move to Sil,
rather than into one of my Home Centers, we can pressure France next
year.
> Your other alternative for Italian moves is war-mos, sev-mos, rum-ukr.
I'll be blunt. Either set of Italian moves means Russo-Italian war. The
choice is yours. Work with us to stop France, or see which one of us
is eliminated before France solos.
Nick.
Message from Russia to England
Ivy,
> >The attack on Sev seems better all the time...
>
> Oddly, if you go for Sevastopol, it is I who benefit. You would be
trading
> StP for Sevastopol.
>
> Your choice, of course. I am not aware of a single instance when I have
> been able to change your mind on anything. If you go for Sevastopol,
Italy
> will do nothing for the rest of the game but attack you. Can you handle
> that and still stop France?
Does it matter? If Italy's only concern in maintaining his Center count
while fleeing from the French Army, does it matter whether he's "allied"
with us, or not?
Nick.
Message from England to France
Prince Boar,
It may take years for us to read through all the correspondence in this
game once it becomes available. If you read nothing else, you ought to
read the Italian/Russian correspondence (with copies to me) that has
occurred today.
I tried, goodness knows I tried, to put together an ERI defense against
France. It never had a chance.
Ivy
Message from England to Italy and Russia
Good night, my allies. It's bedtime for Bonzo. Have fun; do some damage;
buy bonds.
Ivy Wingo
Message from Italy to England and Russia
> There's a significant difference, France isn't growing due to my
> friendship.
This is where you are dead wrong. Your 'friendship' with France is keeping
me on my suicidal course. I don't see where I have any other choice else
the game ends as an EFR 3-way. Following your plan, where is the incentive
not to eliminate Italy if France does not gain a solo?
My 'mistakes' that you keep alluding to were a direct result of your
deception last spring so, yes, I think that you should pay for my mistakes
since you caused them. Or, do you feel you did not blatantly lie to me
during our talks last spring?
For some reason, you feel we need Russian southern fleet(s) to defend
Turkey. Why? We really only need a single fleet stationed in the Black Sea
(see Turkey's current position for an example). That fleet could easily
come from one of my remaining two.
I guess we'll let the chips fall where they may.
Idalia
Message from France to England
Ivy:
Thanks for your note. I will definitely check out the
press from this season. For now I will have to live
vicariously through your note. Not only am I not privy
to these messages, I get almost none. The real problem
with being the front-runner: the game gets boring.
Maybe I will be able to handle another game or two since
I have very little press in this one :-) :-)
So, will you join the 2002 Tournament? Would it sway you
to say yes if I agreed to do so ;-)
I am beginning to suspect that you want me to play so you
get a chance at betraying me again in a future game;
since I promised the French people that it would not
happen again in this game ;-) :-)
--Prince Boar
Message from Russia to England and Italy
> Message from Italy to England and Russia in 'titleist':
>
> > There's a significant difference, France isn't growing due to my
> > friendship.
>
> This is where you are dead wrong. Your 'friendship' with France is
keeping
> me on my suicidal course. I don't see where I have any other choice else
> the game ends as an EFR 3-way. Following your plan, where is the
incentive
> not to eliminate Italy if France does not gain a solo?
Oh what a crock! You abandoned your Home Centers to France when
Germany was still a 5-Center Power! If you choose to throw the game
to France rather than risk being eliminated that is your prerogative, but
don't
blame your poor play on my allying with France to prevent England from
trying to eliminate me.
> My 'mistakes' that you keep alluding to were a direct result of your
> deception last spring so, yes, I think that you should pay for my mistakes
> since you caused them. Or, do you feel you did not blatantly lie to me
> during our talks last spring?
What deception last Spring? I can't recall having lied to you at all, even
a
little bit, let alone blatantly..
> For some reason, you feel we need Russian southern fleet(s) to defend
> Turkey. Why? We really only need a single fleet stationed in the Black
Sea
> (see Turkey's current position for an example). That fleet could easily
> come from one of my remaining two.
Well, the standard defense of Turkey calls for F Aeg, F EMed, and to get
that we'd need a third Fleet to dislodge FF Aeg.
> I guess we'll let the chips fall where they may.
Yup, I probably can't stop you from throwing the game.
Nick.
Message from Italy to England
>
> Good night, my allies.
>
I'm sure you use that term loosely. I appreciate your efforts. Who knows,
maybe France will stab Russia sooner rather than later.
Message from England to Italy
>> Good night, my allies.
>
>I'm sure you use that term loosely. I appreciate your efforts.
>Who knows,maybe France will stab Russia sooner rather than later.
I think if I were France that I would probably hit some combination of
Belgium, Holland, Kiel, Berlin this fall. Right now. Although, perhaps
France doesn't fully realize that unified resistence is not going to occur.
Ivy
Message from Russia to England and Italy
Idalia, and Ivy,
First off, I would like to apologize for my somewhat heated, and sometimes
insulting, tone yesterday. Yesterday was not a good day, and that bled over
into my press. I'm sorry.
> Message from Italy to England and Russia in 'titleist':
> My 'mistakes' that you keep alluding to were a direct result of your
> deception last spring so, yes, I think that you should pay for my mistakes
> since you caused them. Or, do you feel you did not blatantly lie to me
> during our talks last spring?
I've reviewed every letter we exchanged since the 1907 Builds came through,
and I cannot find any case of my not writing what I percieved to be the
truth,
or of my giving you any advice that would not advance your cause, and our
cause (stopping the French Solo). I made a tactical mistake in S1908M,
when I didn't support you into Ukr, but I don't see that I decieved you in
any way. Could you point me to what you consider to be my "deception"?
In the hope that we can still save this game before Turkey moves,
and the Russo-Italian War starts,
Nick.
Message from England to France
Prince Boar,
>So, will you join the 2002 Tournament?
I expect to.
> Would it sway you
>to say yes if I agreed to do so ;-)
Maybe that would sway me to say no. You're too good.
I wonder what this game would have been like if the top three players from
the preliminary rounds had made it through the semifinals. I do believe
that if two of them were playing Russia and Italy you would have a much
tougher time winning. As it is you are going to have a cakewalk.
>I am beginning to suspect that you want me to play so you
>get a chance at betraying me again in a future game;
>since I promised the French people that it would not
>happen again in this game ;-) :-)
Nah. I don't carry grudges from one game to another. Actually, I have
only met one old acquaintance in a non-gunboat game, and he was eliminated
before we really had a chance to interact much.
Ivy
Message from France to Master and England
Ivy:
>Maybe that would sway me to say no. You're too good.
Now, flattery will NOT make me cancel my invasion of
Edinburgh :-)
For me, your playing would make me want to play in the
next tournament. I prefer talkative challenging players.
It makes things more fun, which is the point of a game.
>I wonder what this game would have been like if the top
>three players from
>the preliminary rounds had made it through the
>semifinals.
I was thinking of suggesting to Doug that he tweak the
final round entry. (So I will copy him in order to do so
:-) If you win or draw in the Second round, then you
make it provided that there are enough spots
(tie-breakers remain as they are). If, like this time,
this does not fill the game, then rather just take the
losing players with the most units in the second round,
he instead take the losing players with the best first
round result (or combined 1st and 2nd round results). But
of course, it is Doug's tournament and I am happy to let
him run it as he sees fit. :-)
>>I am beginning to suspect that you want me to play
>>so you get a chance at betraying me again in a future
>>game; since I promised the French people that it would
>>not happen again in this game ;-) :-)
>Nah. I don't carry grudges from one game to another.
I know. I was teasing. :-) By now you must realize
that I do this. I have enough respect for you to know
that you would treat every game as a new one.
Time to wait for our late friend. tick tock tick tock
yawn. :-)
--Prince Boar
Message from England to Russia
Nick,
>First off, I would like to apologize for my somewhat heated, and sometimes
>insulting, tone yesterday. Yesterday was not a good day, and that bled over
>into my press. I'm sorry.
Thank you, but as far as I am concerned it wasn't necessary. Nothing that
you said has ever bothered me on a personal level. You are a tough man to
deal with, but I would be more than happy to have you as an ally or engage
you as an enemy in a future game. I also suspect that we have met before
this. 8-) I can't wait until identities are revealed. It's about all I
have left to look forward to.
Ivy Wingo
Message from Russia to England
Ivy,
> >I'm sorry.
>Thank you, but as far as I am concerned it wasn't necessary.
Making an unneeded apology is better than not
apologizing when you have caused offense, in my
opinion. I know there are some who believe that
insulting your opponents is just part of the
game, but I prefer to think that we are gentlemen,
scholars, and honorable warriors, deserving of
respect.
>You are a tough man to deal with,
Some would say I'm an opinionated son-of-a-... 8-)
>I also suspect that we have met before this. 8-)
It does seem likely. ;^}
>I can't wait until identities are revealed.
Yes, I would have preferred that this game be
non-gunboat.
>It's about all I have left to look forward to.
Things are grim, but do not give up hope. Do you
have any idea what this deception Italy accuses me
of, is? Do you think you could act as a mediator
in the RI conflict? (I ordered Kie-Ber, btw. 8-)
A Desperate,
Nick.
Message from England to Russia
Nick,
>Things are grim, but do not give up hope. Do you
>have any idea what this deception Italy accuses me
>of, is?
No.
Six days ago, immediately after the last turn, there was this brief
exchange between Italy and me.
>Message from Italy to England in 'titleist':
>
> > Can you tell me if you and Russia are cooperating in a weird way?
>
>Nope, and I have no regrets considering he actually lied to me this turn.
That is all I know.
> Do you think you could act as a mediator in the RI conflict?
Man, I tried, I really tried. I will try once again.
>(I ordered Kie-Ber, btw. 8-)
Are you putting me on? What does that smile mean?
Ivy
Message from England to Italy
Idalia.
One last attempt. Russia tells me that he is desperate. He says that he
changed his mind and is going to move Kiel->Berlin to permit my army in
Denmark to slip down to Kiel. He asks that I try to mediate between you
and him. I choose to address this only to you, because I don't want to
provoke Russia into debate again.
My request is that you move Warsaw->Silesia. It would put great pressure
on the French armies near Munich.
If you choose to do otherwise, I understand. That's fine with me also.
Ivy
Message from England to Russia
Nick,
I wrote Italy privately, bringing him up to date and requesting
Warsaw->Silesia. I thought a private message would be best given
yesterday's exchanges. I will let you know immediately if I get a
response. [ I may be away from my computer from 10:30 - 4:00 today.]
Ivy
Message from Russia to England
Ivy,
>immediately after the last turn, there was this brief
>exchange between Italy and me.
> > > [are] you and Russia cooperating?
> >
> >Nope, [...] he actually lied to me this turn.
>
>That is all I know.
Hmmm, he told me to take Sev, and I agreed. I
supported myself to Ukr so that I could support
myself to Sev in the Fall, and so Italy could
retreat to Gal if his move to Rum got bounced.
(He was supposed to order Gal-Vie, Rum-Bud,
Ukr-Rum.) Perhaps he considers the attack on
Ukr as a lie...
> >Do you think you could act as a mediator in the RI conflict?
>
>Man, I tried, I really tried. I will try once again.
I suspect it's pointless, but...
> >(I ordered Kie-Ber, btw. 8-)
>Are you putting me on? What does that smile mean?
No, I'm not putting you on. Yes, I did order Kie-Ber.
The smiley is because I figured the news would shock
and stun you, since you've never been able to convince
me to do anything. ;^} (I still think it's the
wrong move, but if I'm going to be in a war with Italy,
I don't want you attacking from the North.)
In Hopes of Alliance,
Nick.
Message from England to Russia
Nick,
Hey, I need more information. Are you still taking StP? Am I still
supposed to move Nwy->Nth? If so, you would be building one unit in Moscow
if Italy sits in Warsaw and two units if Italy moves to Silesia. I think.
It's probably all moot if Italy doesn't respond, but I hope the move
does not process before I can get a reply from you.
Ivy
Message from Russia to England
Ivy,
>Are you still taking StP?
As of this time, I might end up retreating there,
but I'm not actively taking it.
>Am I still supposed to move Nwy->Nth?
Your choice, but I'd prefer that you didn't. It
seems unlikely that Mos and War will both be open,
but taking Kie keeps you even, unless I retreat to
StP.
>It's probably all moot if Italy doesn't respond,
My sense is that he's given up any thought of
stopping France, and just wants to cripple me
before he's eliminated.
Nick.
Message from Italy to England
>
> My request is that you move Warsaw->Silesia. It would put
> great pressure on the French armies near Munich.
>
I agree and I asked Russia to do just this move last spring and he
hemmed-and-hawed and came up with a brilliant excuse why pressure on Munich
was not needed.
More importantly, what's the point of pressuring Munich if I have to turn
around and disband the army in the winter? So Russia can build another army
in Warsaw and come up with another excuse not to move to Silesia? Those
armies he built in WAR/MOS were not aimed at France or you but rather at me
and potentially still are. (Where have I heard that before?)
There is one move that will work (ukr s mos-war) but it requires BLA-SEV.
I'll take my chances that France will once again support me into CON so I
won't have to disband. I'll leave it up to you and Russia to convince
Turkey to make that move.
If I do have to disband, I can't promise what unit it will be though.
Idalia
Message from Master to all
So Beth, my girlfriend sees that I've been delivered a package yesterday,
from some name she's never heard of from some address in New York
that she doesn't recognize. Her first thought: anthrax.
Luckily, she didn't dial the police immediately and the package was
still in one piece when I got home and identified it. "Yonkoski" isn't
a terribly common name, and I knew Roger lived over near Rochester,
so I opened it up and found your thoughtful gift.
Thank you to all our potential titleists, for your gift of Titleists
and the sweatshirt that was still dripping with sarcasm. :-) I am
again the beneficiary of other folks' overestimation of the amount of
effort that I put into the Vermont Group and the Tournament in
particular. I am quite proud of my 37th place finish and will wear
the sweatshirt with pride -- and maybe even in public! ;-)
As for the golf balls, I will wait until I'm in mid-season form next
year before trying them out -- that way, they'll last for more than
a round or two.
I've only met one of the seven of you (eight, if I include David N.)
in person, so this serves to further enforce my belief that friends
you make through the Internet -- especially through environments and
organizations like this -- are just as valuable as friends you might
make any other way.
Thanks again,
Doug
PS: Next time, I'll name the championship game "$500 Ping TiSI Driver"
Message from England to England
>Stop the presses! Germany emailed me!!!!
Yes! Me too. He likes me!
Well, not really. He demanded that my army move to Picardy or
Marseilles. I think I need to keep him in doubt so that he really does
feel the need to cover Munich.
More tomorrow. Gotto go.
John
England: Army Denmark → Kiel
England: Fleet English Channel SUPPORT Fleet North Atlantic Ocean → Irish Sea
England: Fleet North Atlantic Ocean → Irish Sea
England: Fleet North Sea SUPPORT Fleet English Channel
England: Army Norway HOLD
England: Fleet Norwegian Sea → North Atlantic Ocean
England: Army Yorkshire HOLD
France: Fleet Adriatic Sea → Albania
France: Fleet Aegean Sea SUPPORT Italian Fleet Smyrna → Constantinople
France: Fleet Brest SUPPORT Army Picardy
France: Army Burgundy → Munich
France: Fleet Greece SUPPORT Italian Army Bulgaria
France: Fleet Mid-Atlantic Ocean SUPPORT English Fleet English Channel → Irish Sea (*void*)
France: Army Munich → Tyrolia
France: Army Picardy SUPPORT Russian Fleet Belgium
France: Army Ruhr → Holland
France: Fleet Spain (south coast) SUPPORT Fleet Mid-Atlantic Ocean
France: Army Trieste → Vienna
Italy: Army Bulgaria SUPPORT Fleet Smyrna → Constantinople
Italy: Army Rumania SUPPORT Army Sevastopol
Italy: Army Serbia SUPPORT Army Rumania
Italy: Army Sevastopol SUPPORT Army Warsaw → Moscow
Italy: Fleet Smyrna → Constantinople
Italy: Fleet Syria → Smyrna
Italy: Army Warsaw → Moscow (*bounce*)
Russia: Fleet Belgium HOLD
Russia: Army Kiel → Berlin
Russia: Army Moscow → Warsaw (*bounce*)
Russia: Army Ukraine SUPPORT Army Moscow → Warsaw
Turkey: Army Ankara SUPPORT Army Constantinople
Turkey: Fleet Black Sea SUPPORT Russian Army Moscow → Sevastopol (*void*)
Turkey: Army Constantinople HOLD (*destroyed*)
|