|
|
England: Builds 1 unit
France: Builds 3 units
Italy: Removes 2 units
Russia: Removes 1 unit
Message from Italy to England
>
> I think you will be candid with me as I ask:
>
As always.
> Were your moves intended to help France win?
No. They were intended to keep Italy at 5 centers without disbanding and to
become a key cog in the stalemate line. France at 16 or 17 centers means
nothing to me. For what it's worth, Nick had agreed to take Rumania with
Budapest which would have eliminated the French army in Rumania. Once again
though, he lied and it may end up costing him and you a chance at a draw.
> Were they simply anti-Russia no matter what the consequences?
No, although they were intended to make Russia disband his northern units
thus freeing you from having to worry about his attacks.
> Were you fearful that Russia actually had winning chances?
A little bit. I don't trust Nick as far as I can spit.
I do wish you had been more upfront with me regarding Berlin/Kiel. I'm sure
you will agree that an Italian fleet in the Black Sea is a bit more critical
than a Russian fleet in Sweden in stopping France. Oh well, two more
Italian disbands.
Roberto
Message from England to Italy
Roberto,
>I do wish you had been more upfront with me regarding Berlin/Kiel.
Ouch. I added Berlin->Kiel at the last minute last night, because I
thought Russia was getting too much out of the move. I never dreamt that
he could actually lose material. I also included Belgium->Ruhr, because I
knew that Belgium was safe, but I was not so sure about Ruhr.
You may have gotten your wish about becoming a key cog in a stalemate line.
Had the French army in Rumania been destroyed, the French danger would not
have been so great, and you probably would have been expendable.
Everything now depends on Nick's attitude.
Ivy/Allen
p.s. "upfront" works both ways, although this may have been one occasion in
which you and I would not have been able to agree on best moves.
Message from England to Russia
Nick,
>>I knew I was safe from France this turn, but I had absolutely no idea what
>>you were going to do.
>
>You knew what Roger was going to do, but not me???
Yes.
**************
>It's not my fault he waited until 12 hours before the
>deadline to start negotiating.
That's a very big problem with Roberto. I agree.
>>I will build a fleet in Liverpool
>
>Great. I'll ponder my disband.
I suggest disbanding the fleet. It can never help with any stalemate line.
I will be vacating Norway to give you as much space as possible. The
Finnish army might be of considerable use in the south.
**************
>>I don't see the solo yet.
>
>Con-Ank, Bla & Arm S Rum-Sev, ...
Yeah, but this assumes that Italy will be helping France. As hard as it
may be to believe, Italy will likely help us. I have had an interesting
exchange with Roberto already.
[digression: I didn't bother to tell Roberto that I was upset with him for
his moves that were never discussed with me and caught me by surprise. He
even tried to take advantage of my moves. I had told him that Berlin was
holding and that Kiel was going to Holland. So Roberto tried to sneak into
Kiel. However, on Friday evening I decided to move Berlin to Kiel, because
I thought you were gaining too much from the moves (yup, too much!) and
were leaving me behind. Italy's moves surprised me more than any moves
this game. From where I am sitting, it is hard to blame Roberto too much,
though, because after the fall moves I intended to ask you and France to
eliminate Roberto.]
As I was saying, I have had an interesting exchange with Roberto. He says
his goal was to try to stay at five units and become an indispensable part
of a stalemate line. I think that was an unreasonable goal, because you
and I were not sufficiently desperate. Ironically, he may now get his
chance to be part of a stalemate line.
There is a major principle of Diplomacy that has come into play. It is
impossible to rely on anyone who does not believe he has a stake in the
outcome. Roberto must be made to believe he will be an indispensable part
of a stalemate line. It may even be true.
I am holding back my build until I have had a chance to look at what Italy
should destroy. Let me know if you have thoughts on this.
For the record -- note the official seal on this document -- I must now
believe everything that you say. Every word. There's no choice anymore.
Ivy/Allen
Message from England to France
King Roger,
This is wonderful; my fondest wishes have come true. Now I get to try my
hand at diplomacy again. I feel useful.
Ivy/Allen
Message from France to England
Ivy:
>This is wonderful; my fondest wishes have come true. Now I get to try
my
>hand at diplomacy again. I feel useful.
If I did anything to help you become useful, I am very pleased. I guess
that now means that I will go back to being ignored? We can't all be
happy at the same time eh? :-)
Will I hear what that proposal is or was if it is not viable?
Any chance that I will not see a fleet in Liverpool?
--King Roger XIII
Message from England to France
>I guess that now means that I will go back to being ignored?
I sure hope so.
>Will I hear what that proposal is or was if it is not viable?
It's not viable, and is best forgotten. Russia did what I hoped he would
do, but Italy's moves stunned me.
>Any chance that I will not see a fleet in Liverpool?
I don't think so. I will have to try to reform that line again.
Ivy/Allen
Message from Italy to England
Can I have one favor? Allow Mun-Kie to succeed. You can support Nick to
Munich or take it yourself that is up to you. In Munich, I will eventually
be at the mercy of French/Russian units as to my inclusion in the draw. I'd
much prefer the safety of being behind the lines. While you may decide in
the end to have me removed from the draw, I'd much rather take that chance
than the given of being removed by FR forces. Certainly, the threat of
Russian retaliation against you has been diminished if you do indeed decide
to harbor the fugitive.
Roberto
ps: I thought you knew I wanted to be in Kie/Hol/some far off land.....
Message from Russia to England
Ivy,
> >You knew what Roger was going to do, but not me???
>Yes.
In my, not so humble opinion, your faith in Roger and
Ken is as inappropriate as is you lack of trust in me.
Would you care to explain how I failed to make what
seemed blatantly obvious to me, clear to you?
> >Great. I'll ponder my disband.
>I suggest disbanding the fleet. The Finnish army might be of use in the
>south.
Right, and if through some lucky break, Roger doesn't
solo next year, and we push him back a bit, you take
Swe, StP and War in an attempt to win the tournament.
(Yes, I know, you just want a four-way draw, just as
Roger has no interest in the solo, anymore.)
>this assumes that Italy will be helping France.
He lied to me. He moved to Arm to block Sev-Arm, he
tapped Sev and Bud to cut my support of attacks on
two French positions, and he left Tri completely open
to French attack. How much more does he have to help
France before you see it?
>Roberto tried to sneak into Kiel.
Leaving Munich open if it succeeds. This helps us
stop France how? Both of you have clearly decided
that Roger is a nice guy, and you'd rather see him
win than me, and you moved to make sure that
happened, even though my solo was theoretical, at
best, and if Roger were any closer, he'd have a
forced win.
>I thought you were gaining too much from the moves and were leaving me
>behind.
If a draw is your goal, or if stopping France is your
goal, what difference does our Center count make?
>I have had an interesting exchange with Roberto.
Gee, isn't that grand. If he expects me to do any
more than make sure he's eliminated before Roger
solos, he'd better start talking to me.
>Ironically, he may now get his
>chance to be part of a stalemate line.
No, that won't happen unless I'm eliminated first.
I will see him eliminated before I set draw. Had he
cooperated this turn, then yes, I would have rewarded
his sacrifice, but not now, he's double-crossed me too
many times.
>Roberto must be made to believe he will be an indispensable part of a
>stalemate line.
You're welcome to try. He's going to throw the game
whether you do, or not, in my opinion.
>I am holding back my build until I have had a chance
>to look at what Italy should destroy. Let me know if
>you have thoughts on this.
Obviously, the Fleets, he has two Units defending one
Center there. It would also eliminate his ability to
aid France against me, and give me some motivation to
help him defend Mun and Vie.
>I must now believe everything that you say.
That's wonderful, but you were in that position last
turn as well. Had you ordered Ber Hold, and France
had ordered Bur-Mun, Pic-Bel, the game would be over
now. If Italy views maintaining his Center count as
being more important than stopping France, and you
view remaining even with me as more important than
stopping France, then guess what? France is going
to Solo! If you want me to work with you, you're
going to have to explain how you "knew" what France
would do, and why you had no idea what I was going
to do.
Czar Nicholas II.
Message from England to Italy
Roberto,
>Can I have one favor? Allow Mun-Kie to succeed.
Uh, do you mind if I try to save the world first? Can you begin to imagine
what Nick is saying? Sure you can.
>I thought you knew I wanted to be in Kie/Hol/some far off land...
There is nothing in the whole wide world that I would like better than to
get you miles away from Russia. The Russian moves to Norway and Denmark
complicated the fall moves, and getting Munich to Kiel or Holland was not
high on my agenda. Thank goodness we accidentally bounced. Had Russia lost
two units he would have thrown the game then and there. As it is, he is
having a level 10 conniption fit.
Please consider the following. Set aside the personalities for a moment and
just look at tactics. Suppose you retain the fleets plus the army in
Munich. Russia enters Rumania in the spring and you enters the Black Sea.
In the fall Rumania taps Bulgaria and you take Constantinople. It can't be
stoppped. France loses two units on that battle front. Would destroying
Venice and Bohemia make the center too weak? No. Galicia and Budapest can
bounce each other in Vienna in the spring to keep France out, while
bringing up Silesia to Bohemia. Russia should then get Vienna in the fall.
I think these tactics are quite good, but you will tell me if I missed
something. The downside comes when considering the personalities. I tend
to assume that all is lost if either you or Russia deviate from any set of
agreed upon tactics. Really lost, this time.
As for Munich->Kiel, I would be happy to do that anytime it doesn't risk
the loss of Munich or cause Russia additional grief.
Ivy/Allen
Message from England to Russia
Nick,
I decided that you deserved a fuller explanation, and just sat down to
write you, when I discovered that you had sent me a message -- as did
Roberto.
>If you want me to work with you, you're
>going to have to explain how you "knew" what France
>would do, and why you had no idea what I was going
>to do.
OK, I'll try. I fully expected that Rumania would be obliterated. I was
shocked when it wasn't. Since it was so obvious that France would lose
that army, and reasonable to conclude that he would only break even with
Trieste, it seemed clear to me that the French threat wasn't particularly
great. Under those circumstances, I thought that you had considerable
latitude to be, shall we say, adventurous. I also knew that you had
explored, even advocated, a 2-way with France. That added to my
uncertainty.
I knew that France was not going to attack me, because he told me so.
***********
>>this assumes that Italy will be helping France.
>
>He lied to me.
That's quite clear. He claims that you lied to him as well, that you said
you were going to take Rumania from Budapest. How does it come to this?
What an amazing game Diplomacy is.
We can debate Roberto's intentions, but I don't think he was trying to hand
France a victory then and there. My own moves were not an attempt to help
France. [France would be in Belgium and Munich now, if I wanted to throw
the game. But I know you are not accusing me of that.] Not knowing what
you would actually do, I tried to find moves that would enable me to build
a fleet in Liverpool if you retreated (which is what happened) or would
enable me to put up a bit of defense if you went for Norway, Denmark, and
Berlin. My moves have not helped France in the least. Holland will be in
Belgium in the spring, and Liverpool most likely will make it to NAO.
>>I have had an interesting exchange with Roberto.
>
>Gee, isn't that grand.
Well, yes, it gives me some hope.
>he'd better start talking to me.
Roberto's great weakness. He doesn't communicate much. As you said
earlier (or was it David Norman or someone else?) the challenge is to work
with the actual persons in the game.
>>Roberto must be made to believe he will be an indispensable part of a
>>stalemate line.
>
>You're welcome to try.
That I will.
>He's going to throw the game whether you do, or not, in my opinion.
Then I have lost nothing, but retained my self-esteem.
>>I am holding back my build until I have had a chance
>>to look at what Italy should destroy. Let me know if
>>you have thoughts on this.
>
>Obviously, the Fleets, he has two Units defending one
>Center there. It would also eliminate his ability to
>aid France against me, and give me some motivation to
>help him defend Mun and Vie.
Please consider the following. Set aside the personalities for a moment and
just look at tactics. Suppose Italy retains the fleets plus the army in
Munich. You enter Rumania in the spring and Italy enters the Black Sea.
In the fall Rumania taps Bulgaria and Italy takes Constantinople. It can't
be stoppped. France loses two units on that battle front. Would
destroying Venice and Bohemia make the center too weak? No. Galicia and
Budapest can bounce each other in Vienna in the spring to keep France out,
while bringing up Silesia to Bohemia. You should then get Vienna in the
fall. I think these tactics are quite good, but you will tell me if I
missed something. The downside comes when considering the personalities. I
tend to assume that all is lost if either you or Italy deviate from any set
of agreed upon tactics. Really lost, this time.
>That's wonderful, but you were in that position last
>turn as well. Had you ordered Ber Hold, and France
>had ordered Bur-Mun, Pic-Bel, the game would be over
>now.
Yup, but France said he wasn't going to do that. [I know, statements like
that must infuriate you, but you can handle it.] Had either France or I
imagined that Italy was going to do what he did, circumstances would have
been very different. I would not have trusted Roger to have been honest if
the game was within his grasp. However, neither he nor I thought he was
particularly close to victory.
It seems to me that an outsider might credit Roberto with reasonable
strategy. His life was worthless if the French threat diminished any
further. Now he still has a chance.
Ivy/Allen
Message from England to Italy
Roberto,
In my last response, I was concerned almost wholly with stopping France,
and I essentially ignored your request.
What you ask is simple to grant *provided you, I, and Nick can get
together*. Munich->Kiel in the spring can be accompanied by Ruhr supp
Berlin->Munich. From Kiel you can then go to Holland, or Denmark if
Holland is not available. This works smoothly even if Bohemia and Vienna
have been destroyed as I suggested in my last message. This strategy would
have you occupying Ankara, Constantinople, and Holland at year's end.
The big problem, though, is Russia. He doesn't handle these setbacks
particularly well. I am just hoping that his urge to see you eliminated is
weaker than his urge to stop France.
Ivy/Allen
Message from Russia to England
Ivy,
>I fully expected that Rumania would be obliterated. it was so obvious that
>France would lose
>that army, and that he would only break even with
>Trieste, it seemed clear to me that the French threat
>wasn't particularly great.
Well, give that he was gaining Bul, and gaining Tri,
and Bul-Rum, Tri-Ser, Rum-Ser protects his Center in
Serbia, I read that as plus two Centers, and down
one Army, to build three. Seems like a significant
threat to me.
>I thought that you [could be] adventurous.
I stab you, you disband Iri and/or ECh, France solos.
I told you that. The best I could do was 13-13, with
you and Italy favoring France. I may be adventurous,
but I'm no fool.
>I knew that France was not going to attack me, because he told me so.
Allen? This is Diplomacy, people lie. You lied
about not attacking Swe and Den to eliminate
Germany, Roger lied about supporting me into Ser
and Sev, I lied to Ken when I supported Roger into
Rum, and Ken lied to me this turn.
>He claims that you lied to him as well, that you said
>you were going to take Rumania from Budapest.
I did tell him that, and I did change the orders to
Bud-Rum, but then I started looking at what happened
if Roger ordered Rum-Ser. Tri-Ser would bounce, I'd
gain Sev and Rum, and I'd lose Kie, Vie, and likely
Tri as well, and be forced to disband one, while
Italy lost two, and France gained two. Given your
expressed concern, I concluded that Italy had some
motivation other than stopping France, so I changed
back to the moves which I tought would give me a build,
and destroy Rum.
>My moves have not helped France in the least.
Only because Roger chose to move south, instead of
North. Yes, he didn't lie to you this time, but you
should not trust someone at thirteen Centers.
>Set aside the personalities for a moment and
>just look at tactics. Suppose Italy retains the
>fleets plus the army in Munich. You enter Rumania
>in the spring and Italy enters the Black Sea.
>In the fall Rumania taps Bulgaria and Italy takes Constantinople. It can't
>be stoppped
Yes, but this was the plan I laid out for him and you
this Fall. Italy wasn't interested in stopping France,
he wants to maintain his Center count and he'd rather
see France take his Centers than me. If he keeps the
Fleets, I have to defend Sev.
> >That's wonderful, but you were in that position last
> >turn as well. Had you ordered Ber Hold, and France
> >had ordered Bur-Mun, Pic-Bel, the game would be over
> >now.
>but France said he wasn't going to do that.
And if he offered to sell you the Brooklyn Bridge,
would you buy that to? 8-)
>neither he nor I thought he was
>particularly close to victory.
You were wrong, and he was lying.
>It seems to me that an outsider might credit Roberto with reasonable
>strategy. His life was worthless if the French threat diminished any
>further. Now he still has a chance.
Sorry, I'm a Romantic. Work with me, be a loyal ally,
and I'll protect you. Screw me often enough, and I won't
trust you enough to work with you even if that's the only
way to stop the Solo. If he wants to stay in the game,
he has to disband the Fleets, and give me freedom to
manuver in the southeast.
Czar Nicholas II.
Message from France to all
>Congratulations, Roger, you've talked your way into
>another Solo. *Eric shakes his head...*
I have my doubts that your prediction is correct. I have not studied
the map.
Glancing at the results I noticed that I could have ended the game this
last turn. But even if I had guessed all the moves that were made, I
made two promises that were important to keep.
Can someone explain to me why the bounce in Kiel occurred? I know that
it kept the Russian fleet out, but it seemed quite a risk to the units
in Munich and Berlin, with little benefit?
My adjustments are in. While the debate occurs on the others, I can
focus on some home things. If anyone needs French input let me know. I
would be happen to help you choose adjustments :-)
--King Roger XIII
Message from England to France
King Roger,
>Can someone explain to me why the bounce in Kiel occurred?
It was a fortunate accident. Italy knew my moves, and I thought I knew
his. Berlin was supposed to hold, but at the last minute I decided that
Russia was going to grow too much (!) and I threw in Berlin->Kiel. It never
occurred to me that Italy might care one way or another. However, Roberto
took advantage of the knowledge of my moves and went for Kiel himself.
None of Italy's moves were what Nick and I expected.
I say it was a fortunate accident, because if either of us would have
succeeded in taking Kiel Nick would have had to disband two units instead
of one. As it is he having one of his patented fits. It's a bad one.
Ivy/Allen
Message from England to Russia
Nick,
>>I knew that France was not going to attack me, because he told me so.
>
>Allen? This is Diplomacy, people lie. You lied
>about not attacking Swe and Den to eliminate
>Germany, Roger lied about supporting me into Ser
>and Sev, I lied to Ken when I supported Roger into
>Rum, and Ken lied to me this turn.
My gosh! You are right. I just checked the rules. "The rules do not bind a
player to anything he says; deciding whom to trust as situations arise is
part of the game." I will be more careful after this.
Your paragraph brought a great smile to my face. Thank you. However, I
was completely confident that Roger was not misleading me on this
particular turn. He will only lie in rare situations.
>And if he offered to sell you the Brooklyn Bridge,
>would you buy that to? 8-)
Depends on the price. I am not a fool and I wouldn't pay too much for it.
*********
>>Set aside the personalities for a moment and
>>just look at tactics. etc.
>Yes, but this was the plan I laid out for him and you
>this Fall.
> If he wants to stay in the game,
>he has to disband the Fleets, and give me freedom to
>manuver in the southeast.
I'm sorry to hear that, but I am not surprised. I will see what I can do,
but I am not confident right now.
Ivy/Allen
Message from England to Italy
Roberto,
As of now, Nick's terms are that you must disband the two fleets. I am not
crazy about that. I don't know what you think of it either. He could
change his mind.
I am not going to enter my build until Monday to give him a chance to cool down.
Ivy/Allen
Message from England to France, Italy, and Russia
I will be unavailable most of Sunday. I will be taking part in a Christmas
bird count.
Allen/Ivy
Message from Italy to England
>
> As of now, Nick's terms are that you must disband the two fleets.
>
Has he explained his rationale?
I could be convinced if you would agree to the following:
mun-kie
ber s boh - mun
and
Nick agrees to remove the fleet in Sweden.
I would cede Vienna to Russia and, along with adding Rumania, Nick would
gain a build. Ankara would go to whomever got there first (strange as it
may seem, I'm not sure it would be France).
At that point, I would no longer have any eastern forces and it would be all
up to Russia to hold the line.
Roberto
Message from Russia to England
Ivy,
> >Allen? This is Diplomacy, people lie. You lied
> >about not attacking Swe and Den to eliminate
> >Germany, Roger lied about supporting me into Ser
> >and Sev, I lied to Ken when I supported Roger into
> >Rum, and Ken lied to me this turn.
>My gosh! You are right. I just checked the rules. I will be more careful
>after this.
Thank you. ;^}
>Your paragraph brought a great smile to my face. Thank you. However, I was
>completely confident that Roger was not misleading me on this particular
>turn. He will only lie in rare situations.
I'm glad you understood the subtle irony of my comments,
but there was an underlying message as well. Roger is
an absolute master of making people believe they have
nothing to fear from him, but his record shows that
those confident people were often wrong.
> > If he wants to stay in the game,
> >he has to disband the Fleets, and give me freedom to
> >maneuver in the southeast.
>I'm sorry to hear that, but I am not surprised. I will see what I can do,
I understand that you will do what is necessary to
stop Roger's solo, and that is certainly the rational
thing to do, but I am not at all sure that Roberto/Idalia
is rational at this point. If you were me, would you
trust Italy with two Fleets adjacent to one of your
Home Centers? I thought that I made a significant
offer after the Spring, when I gave Roberto control
of EIR tactics for the Fall turn. Frankly, I don't
know what more I could have done. I realize it was
Christmas, and he got sick, and called to Jury Duty,
but if he didn't have time, he should have asked for
an extension, and negotiated with us. If he wants to
be a vital link in our stalemate line, then Mun & Ber,
or Vie & Tri are probably his only realistic options.
He lacks the Units to defend Turkey, and he doesn't
communicate well enough to coordinate the actions
necessary to push France back. Even if he and I did
not have the "trust" issues involved, I don't see how
we could do it.
Nick.
Message from England to Italy and Russia
Gentlemen,
I am tired, having spent a full day in field and forest in stiff, cold
wind, but I think I should send off an e-mail this evening.
Here is where we stand.
I suggested that Italy destroy Vienna and Bohemia, because with the two
fleets it is easy to see how to take Rumania and Constantinople from France
next year.
That suggestion proved unacceptable to Russia, presumably because those
same two fleets could attack Sevastopol. After the last turn there isn't
much trust in either direction down there.
Russia suggested instead that Italy destroy the fleets. Italy said "OK,"
but with a side conditions, namely that I agree to mun->kie & ber s
boh->mun and that Russia agree to destroy the fleet in Sweden. Italy would
then cede Vienna to Russia.
We are making progress, but I hope that these last conditions can be
altered somewhat. First of all, I suggest that Munich->Kiel be followed by
Kiel->Holland. I would lose a unit and would destroy the fleet in Norway.
That fleet is useless for defense against France, and its destruction would
parallel the destruction of the Russian fleet in Finland.
What happens to Vienna in the short term may best be decided on tactical
grounds. Moves that implement the transfer of Vienna may permit France to
advance unimpeded. I would hate to lose Tyrolia just because all our units
were being shuffled in place.
With the above suggestions Russia still grows by a unit with the
acquisition of Rumania.
Comments please.
[Before we all jump for joy at our wonderful cooperation, does anyone know
if, even under ideal circumstances, we can stalemate France in roughly his
current position. It's a technical question. Are there stalemate lines
that run from Sevastopol to Munich that hold France to at most one of
Rumania, Budapest, Vienna? I will try to check.]
Ivy/Allen
Message from Russia to England and Italy
> Message from England to Russia and Italy in 'titleist':
>
> Russia suggested instead that Italy destroy the fleets. Italy said "OK,"
> but with a side conditions, namely that I agree to mun->kie & ber s
> boh->mun and that Russia agree to destroy the fleet in Sweden. Italy
> would then cede Vienna to Russia.
I was going to suggest that Italy would be best off holding Mun and Ber
or Kie, so this seems reasonable, though I am unclear why Italy would
want me to disband my Fleet.
> We are making progress, but I hope that these last conditions can be
> altered somewhat. First of all, I suggest that Munich->Kiel be followed
by
> Kiel->Holland. I would lose a unit and would destroy the fleet in Norway.
> That fleet is useless for defense against France, and its destruction
would
> parallel the destruction of the Russian fleet in Finland.
I would think that Ken would want to hold adjacent Centers that are needed
to hold the stalemate line against France, so Kie-Hol doesn't make much
sense to me, but if Ken is willing to do it, I have no objection.
> What happens to Vienna in the short term may best be decided on tactical
> grounds. Moves that implement the transfer of Vienna may permit France to
> advance unimpeded. I would hate to lose Tyrolia just because all our
units
> were being shuffled in place.
I'm more concerned about taking Rum and Bul, than I am about Vienna at
this point.
> Are there stalemate lines that run from Sevastopol to Munich that hold
> France to at most one of Rumania, Budapest, Vienna? I will try to check.]
There are eastern lines that hold Rum and Bul, and lines that hold Vie, Bud,
Rum and Bul, but I know of none that split them.
Eric.
Message from England to Italy and Russia
We seem to have sufficient agreement to proceed with builds. Afterwards we
can tinker with the precise moves. I am building a fleet in Liverpool.
Ivy/Allen
Message from Master to all
FYI, a picture of me wearing your gift (the sweatshirt, not the
golf balls) is on display at http://www.furrs.org/diplomacy/masseycon.htm .
Thanks again!
Doug
Message from England to all
>FYI, a picture of me wearing your gift (the sweatshirt, not the
>golf balls) is on display at http://www.furrs.org/diplomacy/masseycon.htm .
That's a nice looking gang you had there, Doug. I haven't played
face-to-face myself in over 15 years, but we have a game lined up at my
house on January 12. Karlis Povisils, who has never played face-to-face is
dropping by! I'm rather nervous about the event.
Allen
Message from Master to all
usin@thekleimans.com said:
>That's a nice looking gang you had there, Doug. I haven't played
>face-to-face myself in over 15 years, but we have a game lined up at
>my house on January 12. Karlis Povisils, who has never played
>face-to-face is dropping by! I'm rather nervous about the event.
First, a fair warning: Karlis is reading these broadcasts
as an observer to this game.
FTF is a strange animal. The killer for me is actually writing my
orders correctly. The first time I played FTF, I misordered in each
of the first four years. How embarassing. As Jim Burgess pointed
out, you get used to the Judge mechanism pointing out mistakes and
it becomes a crutch. Then when you actually have to write out each
move, convoy and support, it's so easy to make a mistake.
Just before handing in orders, I ask myself, out loud: "Are these orders
legal?" I check each one letter for letter, then hand them in. I
catch *so many* mistakes that way.
Secondly, FTF moves so much faster. You barely have time to discuss
tactics -- hell, you barely have time to think about them! I'm so
used to poring over a board and coming up with the perfect moves. In
FTF, I just try to make *legal* moves. :-)
So I think FTF experience is far more important than tactical skill.
Which means you're right to be nervous. :-)
Who else is playing?
Doug
Message from Italy to England and Russia
I think the Black Sea fleet has value. Consider the following:
bla-bul
sev supp ukr-rum
bud supp alb-ser
vie supp bud
The only way for Rumania not to be annihilated is for France to order:
con supp rum-bul
Bulgaria would also have to be ordered to Greece or the Aegean. That bit of
tempo would allow Russia the opportunity to slide SEV-ARM in the fall and
build a fleet if so desired.
If I remove both fleets, that gives France the freedom to order con-bla and
bul-con which would make it very difficult for Russia to order sev-arm in
the fall.
I've ordered both fleets to disband but am curious to hear comments on the
above tactics.
Roberto
Message from England to all
Doug asked, "Who else is playing?"
The others are locals. Our mathematics department hired four new Ph.D.s
this past fall. Two of them, and the husband of a third, have played
before. Only Karlis and I have played e-Diplomacy.
Allen
Message from England to Italy and Russia
Roberto (& Nick)
I have no problem with these tactics, or other tactics, as well. There were
good things we could have done if you kept both fleets. There are good
things to be done if you destroy both fleets. What is needed, though, is
a Russian-Italian agreement that sticks.
please?
I think it best -- by far -- that you destroy the fleets, unless you hear
from Nick this evening.
Ivy/Allen
>Message from Italy to England and Russia in 'titleist':
>
>I think the Black Sea fleet has value. Consider the following:
>
>bla-bul
>sev supp ukr-rum
>bud supp alb-ser
>vie supp bud
>
>The only way for Rumania not to be annihilated is for France to order:
>
>con supp rum-bul
>
>Bulgaria would also have to be ordered to Greece or the Aegean. That bit of
>tempo would allow Russia the opportunity to slide SEV-ARM in the fall and
>build a fleet if so desired.
>
>If I remove both fleets, that gives France the freedom to order con-bla and
>bul-con which would make it very difficult for Russia to order sev-arm in
>the fall.
>
>I've ordered both fleets to disband but am curious to hear comments on the
>above tactics.
>
>Roberto
England: BUILD Fleet Liverpool
France: BUILD Fleet Brest
France: BUILD Army Marseilles
France: WAIVE
Italy: REMOVE Fleet Armenia
Italy: REMOVE Fleet Black Sea
Russia: REMOVE Army Silesia
Centers
England: 8
France: 16
Italy: 3
Russia: 7
|