muon2's Diplomacy game

[NOVA Green]

Request to Play???

Is this the correct venue to get on the list, or do I need to PM muon2 as well?

[NOVA Green]

Seven have signed up, so the game is on. The countries have been assigned randomly:

Austria - TJ in Oregon
England - Pope Michael Bolton/jdb
France - NOVA Green
Germany - Cath
Italy - YPestis25
Russia - Baconomics/Bacon King
Turkey - GeorgiaModerate

Negotiations are open by pm or whatever means are agreed to. Feel free to post questions or general statements on this thread. The first move for Spring 1901 is due by pm to muon2 by 11:59 pm Friday Oct 12.

I'm using JDip to generate maps and orders. The abbreviations on the map are acceptable for orders. Here is the starting position.

Can you please specify the timezone by which the first move is due via pm to the GM, since we all live in different timezones within the United States, people might have travel to other time zones via the course of the game, including International Travel, etc....? 

[NOVA Green]

So apologies for asking an additional question regarding the rules, so all players have visibility...

Players can CHANGE their moves so long as they are received by the deadline specified?

As you likely well know, in traditional games of Diplomacy, especially in FTF settings, this allows the political realism that involves "11th Hour" decisions, Brinksmanship, etc... that creates a more potentially realistic atmosphere, and an extra element, especially as we march into the 20th Century.

It might well not be a factor in this particular game, but certainly a consideration for players debating between various options, send their initial moves, then receive communications from various other World Powers, and need to rapidly shift their movements, after they have already PM's their moves...

[NOVA Green]

This is an impropmtu poll of the players in light of BKs abdication from Russia. I can continue with the turn and all units will hold. Alternatively I can hold off the move for a week and try to find a replacement. Unless everyone agrees to the second choice moves go through as scheduled.

Of course there is another possibility: someone reads this or finds someone in the next few hours to take over Russia. If they post here by the deadline and pm me moves for Russia, I'll count it as an early Russian revolution.

I'm OK with waiting for a replacement.  An abandonment right off the bat would throw off the game IMO.

Motion seconded, additionally it allows a little longer for the diplomatic process to develop, since many of us likely didn't realize we were playing until we were PM'd by another player.

I was wondering why I hadn't received any response yet from Russia, and thought they just didn't like me.

Also, question to your statement: "I can continue with the turn and all units will hold".

1.) Does this mean that the units of all countries will hold or just Russia?

2.) It sounds like the default will be the statement above, unless all players agree.

3.) So, just to be safe, I guess it is best to submit moves in case all players do not agree prior to the imminent deadline in just a few short hours?

Please clarify--- and btw THANKS for agreeing to moderate and putting this all together muon2!!!!

[NOVA Green]

I have reached out to 3-4 individuals on Atlas that are generally stable and reliable posters, to assist in the cause of recruiting a 7th player to represent Russia, since essentially we had a player unexpectedly bow out, not realizing the game clock was ticking, combined with the reality that the game started a bit late, with most posters not realizing they were selected until they received PMs from other players....

I have one individual in particular, that if interested would be an amazing addition to the game, even if just in a caretaker role....

There a few potential options available here:

1.) Players agree to pause the game for a Week, in the event that we do not have either a permanent or temporary caretaker.

This will address issues of Game imbalance in the event the "Russia Holds" all Military Movements for one Game Cycle.

2.) We look at shifting the format from a weekly turn-based game to a bi-weekly cycle, since there are various individuals interested in playing, but have work-life commitments that creates a "time management situation", where it is easier to accommodate a longer-term game. (Obviously this creates a greater commitment on the part of the GM Muon2 (Who has volunteered to host this game--- THANK YOU!!!!)

Additionally, in many ways this is more the cycle time of the "Old Skool" Postal Games of Diplomacy, considering that the USPS doesn't generally commit to more than an average 3 day delivery time for 1st Class mail to most parts of the United States.

3.) We all can obviously role play about the impacts of an earlier element of political unrest in Russia, so a 2-Week Move Cycle will align with overall Political Instability within the Russian Empire at that time, or even potentially in the event that other players leave the game for various reasons, allowing time for replacement players from a "waiting list" to jump in.

4.) Hell--- it's been quite a few years since I have played Diplomacy, and would rather lengthen the "Move Cycle Times" if it gives us greater coverage....

Thoughts All???

[NOVA Green]

S'pose I could play as Russia. Anyone tell me what I should do because I have a reasonable idea of what moves I want to make.

I'll PM you a few strategy guides from the dude who created the game back in '54, that got published by Avalon Hill in '59 as a board game, then Avalon Hill becomes essentially the "Gold Standard" of Military Board Games by the time the '70s/'80s rolled around.

THANK YOU for stepping up the plate!!!!

Honestly Russia, likely isn't that hard to play as a "Newbie", mainly because most of your major "supply centers" are located further from potential hostile powers.

Next thing that is going to happen since you volunteered to represent Russia, is you will likely be bombarded from the other six players in the Game trying to negotiate with you (Myself Included), suggest strategic alliances, attempting moral suasion, potentially planning to backstab you, provide military advice, etc....

I suspect that most of us will go easy with you on your first turn, but point is you will need to sift the thistle through the sieve and attempt to discern who is a real potential friend, ally, hostile... you will need to discern their short, medium, and long-term political interests, tactical aspects of the game.

Bottom line on your first turn, will likely be to talk to every single player in the game, protect your supply centers, eyeball expansion opportunities, but not look at it like a "short term move"....

Every player in the Game will see a major betrayal against an Ally as a character flaw...

First moves in the game would likely be considered "safe moves"....

You currently have a strategic advantage in the game in the sense, that nobody has any idea of your playing style nor strategy based upon prior moves.

You will definitely want to review the official rules that Muon2 posted prior to sending ANY of your moves before the deadline FRIDAY 12 PM CST (?).

Since Muon2 is the official GM, I would suggest sending any requests to him regarding interpretations of the rules to him directly via PM when it comes to how to post Military Movements etc....

[NOVA Green]

I'm fine with pausing the game until a permanent Russia is found.

If others prefer a biweekly move schedule I'm OK with it, although the weekly schedule isn't a problem for me.  I suggest putting retreats and adjustments on a shorter schedule, though.  Even a week seems like a lot for those; two weeks is overkill.

So it sounds like there isn't any opposition posted publicly regarding continuing the original game rules as posted of continuing to play on a Weekly Basis.

Next question, would obviously be, how we would collectively handle a situation where a player:

1.) Does not post any movements by the required deadline.

2.) How do we adjust for an event where players either "abandon" their duties (Not posting their resignation from the Game on this thread), or in the event that players need to "quit" the game for personal reasons?

At this point do we start looking at moving to a larger extension of movement to replace existing players?

So if a player does not submit any movements by the deadline, are they effectively considered "on probation" as having abandoned their responsibilities, etc?

How should we handle such a situation collectively....

Thoughts???

[NOVA Green]

Sorry everyone, but I gotta drop out.  I've just not had time for this lately

#RIP

Now we have to recruit a new player....

Bummer, but get your Education takes first priority.

NoVA GREEN

[NOVA Green]

Awesome!!!

Would have voted for the 2 Week delay if needed, but glad to see we have a "Pinch Hitter" jumping in, since although I was able to recruit a player to represent Russia after the last drop-off (Thanks DEMS for KNUTE BUEHLER     ), it's most properly played as a 7 Power Game, until eventually Nations get gradually eliminated....

Let it roll....

[NOVA Green]

I'm sorry to lose England again. In Spring 1901 Germany submitted an illegal move and Ber had to hold. Same thing with England this turn. It's not normal play, but I can notify the player of any illegal moves so that the moves can be amended. Is that what players want?

I support that.  It's the same thing the email Diplomacy judges do if a player submits an invalid order.

I did not know that. In other online and face to face games I've played, illegal moves are covered by the rules as orders to hold.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Note that the rules cover illegal orders differently than poorly written moves that are unambiguous, which are interpreted in favor of the player. For example England wrote "F Nor supports F Swe holding", and Nor isn't technically the abbreviation of any province (it could be Norway, North Sea or North Atlantic Ocean). Since there was only one of those three (nwy) that could support swe, it was interpreted that way.

As with other suggestions, if all other players want a house rule change to notify players of an illegal order submitted, we can do that.

I'm actually sympathetic and in agreement with Muon2 on this:

1.) As an individual who started playing D&D 2nd Edition almost 30 Years ago in live sessions, the DM/GM sets down the rules, and players are expected to abide by the rules.

2.) It is not the responsibility of the DM/GM to micro-manage individual players, when it comes to their individual decisions....

Any questions? DM/GM should respond in a private manner regarding any interpretation of the rules.

3.) Muon2 has invested a significant amount of his free time to host the game, and honestly should he be responsible to check up on every player's moves that are illegal and get clarification, especially within fixed timelines for players to submit moves?

4.) The GM did clearly state the Rules at the very beginning of the thread, which I have conscientiously reviewed to ensure my actions are compliant with Game Rules, so in theory it should be on the player to review and ask questions to the GM prior to posting any Movements or Actions (As I have done).

5.) In Diplomacy Tournament Games, there are situations where players will deliberately write illegal orders to confuse their opponents.... honestly I suspected that Germany might have done that on the first turn of this game (Although that is obviously not the case based upon what I know now).

6.) Fundamentally, I guess the individual players should ask do they want a "slop diplomacy" like a "slop pool" game, and create a constant GM intervention to divine the intentions of individual players regarding any moves that might appear illogical, or do we want a game where players are more engaged, spend a bit more time looking at the rules of Diplomacy 5.0, and react accordingly, and accept the individual consequences of poor choices and lack of attention to fundamental details of the game.

7.) Germany took their hits from their mistakes of '01.... We had a stand in for England providing "strategic advice" who made mistakes regarding fundamentals of the game.

Meanwhile we have a Newbie to the Game Knute Buehler from Oregon, who is taking this all in stride as a reluctant player who thought the Game was too difficult, who took over Russia under difficult circumstances.

8.) I'll go along with whatever the rest of y'all want to do, since I would much rather actually have a chance to play Diplomacy again after a few Decades, but my fundamental question would be:

To what extent should Muon2 babysit us, when the rules are clearly posted, and we can all collectively consume  "Wine, Cheese, and Smoke", and just move forward....

[NOVA Green]

Just to be clear, I do not consider myself a Diplomacy expert. I don't regularly play and if I ever read any strategy guide I long ago forgot what it said. There are things to be said in favor of both a strict and a relaxed game, but given my level of interest it's clear where I stand. It's also why I made clear from the start my intention to only be a temporary , and why I took the soonest opportunity to engage in an excuse to depart.

Come back True Federalist, the rules aren't that complicated (You already know them for sure, but slightly foggy on the details like many of the rest of us) and if you have any questions regarding some of the slightly more nuanced items such as naming convention for movements, convoy orders, etc, I'm sure Muon2 would be more than willing if you PM him to clarify (based upon the modified 5.0 Internet rules), if there is any questions on your part.

We miss you already, and despite the confusion over the posting of movements, you already have the key elements of the game under your belt (Diplomatic discussions, broader strategic picture, etc)....

Honestly your intended movements in Spring '02 was a surprise to all players that created a massive *RESET* moment, in a game where every single action (or in this case intended action) impacts the entire game.

The "Caretaker Government role" was well played and quite frankly IMHO (Very Rusty player speaking here so insert massive doses of salt) the moves might well have succeed in creating a massive strategic advantage for England going into the Mid-Game (Depending upon the next 4-8 Moves of all players).

Stick it out for a little longer, and you'll remember why you enjoyed playing the game back in the days, as I have who has not played in over 20 Years in a "Beer and Pretzel Night" type of Board Gaming session.

Petition to Bring Back True Federalist

x NoVA GREEN

[NOVA Green]

I'm still up and the orders are all in ...

Spring 1902

Austria:
        A bud Supports A tri -> vie
        F gre -> alb
        A ser Holds
        A tri -> vie
     
England:
        No order for unit at London. Hold order assigned.
        F eng -> eng
            No unit in eng
        A edi -> yor
        A hol Supports A bel -> ruh
            Support failed. Supported unit's order does not match support given.
        F lon Holds
        F nth Supports F lon -> eng
            Support failed. Supported unit's order does not match support given.
        F nwy Supports F swe
     
France:
        A bel Holds
        F bre -> eng
        A mar -> bur
        A par -> pic
        F por Holds
        A spa -> mar

Germany:
        F bal Supports A den -> swe
        A den -> swe
            Bounced with swe (2 against 2).
        A kie Holds
        A sil Holds
     
Italy:
        F nap -> tys
        F tun -> wes
        A tus Supports A ven
        A ven Holds

Russia:
        A mos Supports F sev
        F sev Holds
        F swe Supports F nwy
            Support cut by Move from Denmark.
        A ukr Supports F sev
        A vie -> boh
        A war -> sil
            Bounced with sil (1 against 1).
       
Turkey:
        F bla Supports A smy -> arm
        A bul Supports A rum
        A con Supports A bul
        A rum Holds
        A smy -> arm
     


No retreats are needed. This is the position going into Fall 1902. I've added the place names with proper abbreviations so that there should be no confusion.



Fall 1902 moves are due by 11:59 pm CDT on Fri Nov 2.

If I were interested in causing chaos as England:

F Nwy move to Stp (North Coast)
A Hol move to Nwy by convoy via F Nth
F Nth convoy A Hol to Nwy
F Lon support F Nth hold
A Yor move to Wal

But since I'm no longer playing England, these aren't official orders.

Hmm... interesting, so English Naval Fleet could move directly from Norway to STP, and not have to move through BAR (*** Frantic searching through Diplomacy 5.0 Rulebook***)...

Been a few decades since I last played the game, but I can see where you were going with all that and deliberate movements, where you were thinking a few years ahead on the Chess Board....

Come on back.... come on home... you know you want to...

It likely would be negative to the interests of the Nation I currently represent, as well as many other Nations, but would happily welcome your return to the Game, even if you destroy France, Germany, and Russia on the path to Global Domination and achieving 18 supply centers, while you carefully destroy all hostile powers to achieve Pax Brittania.

The attempted diversion of French forces from Belgium to the Ruhr, combined with dominating the English Channel, and a wild card up the sleeve to invade Saint Pete, would have created a potential massive English influence in power heading into 1903....

Come on home.....

[NOVA Green]

We've now got two powers in CD and it's only 1903.  This is disappointing.

Is Russia actually out? Either way, it looks like the viable powers are narrowing with each campaign season.

Weird thing about Russia is that they PM'd me WEDS evening asking for advice on movements, and said they didn't have much time to invest in the game, so assumed the player was still interested in playing at that time....

It obviously caused some major impacts in the Game, just like the stuff that happened with England.

It's actually a bit of major bummer for me, since I first played this game 30 Years Ago, and haven't played it in decades, and was really hoping to have a proper "Old Skool" style game where negotiations and diplomacy played a major role, without players dropping out etc...

Still NoVA Green isn't going to drop out regardless, but my thought which I threw out there is that if a player resigns there should be an automatic 2-Week "recruitment drive", and if a player does not submit their movements in a given turn, their position will be suspended with a backup player available to take over their Country, hitting a "2 Week" period.

Going forward in future games, my humble suggestion would be keep to the 1-week turnout time frame, but not trigger the game until backups are available. If a player drops out, automatic 2 Week pause unless a player is found prior. If a player neglects to submit any military movements (abandonment), 2-3 day pause to allow for replacement moves from another player to step into the role before the default 5.0 rules kick in...

Thoughts from fellow enthusiasts of the game?

[NOVA Green]

Austria's essentially dead.  An army in Bohemia can't hope to survive, while a Free Austria Navy in Tunisia can't do anything while it might survive another year or two, if only because of the incompetence of the Ottoman Navy in getting out of its own way so that it could build that third unit in Constantinople.  (Note, the Admirals in this game have generally been incompetent on all sides, not just the Ottoman Admirals.)

Italy would have been better off doing a full retreat in the West, at least temporarily. Had it done Lyo->tys, Italy wouldn't be disbanding a unit and France would be building one less because France wouldn't have captured Spain.

If y'all are allowing joint victories, a Franco-Ottoman one is now available if the two don't want to see who wins.

The responsible admirals have been recalled to Constantinople for consultation.

11 novembre 1905
Paris, France

Your Excellency (Former English Ambassador) from 11 octobre 1901 au 2 juillet 1902,

The French Government appreciates your frank and quite honestly blunt critique of the general overall flawed military tactics and strategy employed by the Naval forces of most Nations at critical times over the course of the past Five Years.

Despite your abrupt resignation of your post as England's Ambassador to most of Europe, your works are still routinely published into the Political Science Journals at a global level.

In fact my Government was recently shocked to see of your extended speaking tour of America, including Boston, Philadelphia, New York, Chicago, Atlanta, and of course the US Capitol of Washington itself.

We understand that you are earning a significant amount of revenue from these activities, and haven't returned to London in over a Year, while political violence and dysfunction continues in England (Especially now that the Irish and Scottish Rebellions have essentially created two independent nations), while meanwhile English Military forces are occupying the Mines of the Northlands and the Mills of Sheffield and Birmingham, not to mention many neighborhoods of East and South London, to prevent a full blown revolution.

It is true that although various Naval Commanders and War Cabinet members have made mistakes, but still, I am not convinced that your generalization of these affairs shopped to the American market is truly representative of the overall situation:

Although I cannot speak to each individual Nation's Military Movements, it appears that the minor issue with Germany in Spring of '01 was the fault of the Army Commander in charge and not the Naval commander....

Since then the German Naval forces have successfully executed all strategic and tactical movements.

England, as you are well aware suffered a major flawed naval execution during your tenure as English Ambassador to Europe, and we don't need to go into all of the details of that.

The Russians and Austrians, haven't really had any major flawed execution of naval units that I can easily discern.

I will let your comments regarding Italian and Turkish Naval Movements speak for themselves.

France, as you well know recently achieved a change in Political leadership with the recent election of Aristide Briand as President of France, and also a solid gain in Radical-Socialist representation within our legislative branch.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristide_Briand

This change in Political Leadership was as a direct result of a multiplicity of factors:

1.) The loss of the glorious cradle of the French Revolution and Jacobin stronghold and ancient Roman Port City of Marseilles and subsequent Italian Military austerity occupation caused major anger among the French Citoyens from "des grandes villes à la campagne".

2.) When we opened the Paris World Fair of 1900, we promoted it as event that would bring Nations together, an end of war, mutual sharing of science and technology, and progressive cultural exchange of ideas as part of a "New Europe".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exposition_Universelle_(1900)

Even here we showcased the innovations of the motion picture to display the science and technological innovations to a global audience.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:1900_-_The_Paris_Exposition_Universelle.webm

3.) The collapse of the English Government during your tenure, after extremely aggressive Military Movements contrary to diplomatic correspondence that still exists in our official records, triggered a Government crisis within France.

4.) The French Nationalists that were yearning to reclaim the Franco-Prussian regions of the Rhine Valley area after the Wars of 1870-1871 achieved power within French Army Forces at a Senior Level.

5.) French Naval Forces that were sent to Occupy Liverpool as part of a Peacekeeping operation, mutinied against their Nationalist officers the first time they were ordered to bombard the working-class dockworker communities, while meanwhile their beloved City of Marseilles was under Foreign Occupation.

6.) Although I am not attempting to critique your overall generalization, if you want an understanding from the French perspective on such internal matters, before publishing this to a global audience with what passes for "faux analysis", as an individual with Socialist leanings under prior French Governments, would be more than happy to be attributed in your book sales in America, as well as getting credited in your "political science" publications on such matters.

Honest Regards,

European Ambassador,

NoVA GREEN

[NOVA Green]

German troops in Galicia, Warsaw, and Kiel cross the trenches with Christmas beverages and carols to greet the French, Russian, and Turkish lines.

French Army troops in the Netherlands cross over the trenches to greet their German adversaries with bottles of wine and champagne expedited to the front lines, and join together to sing traditional Holiday anthems in both languages and tell stories of their families and children that are awaiting their return from the War.

French forces in Tyrol, seasoned Veterans of the Franco-German War disobey direct Military orders and cross the trenches in the early Morning Hours of Christmas Day to join with their Italian Working Class rivals in Holiday Festivities.

Meanwhile, the French Officer Corps in Tyrol hosted the Turkish Officer Corp from the Army Occupying Vienna for a Week in Holiday Festivities and working sessions on how to prevent any mutual misunderstandings should Enlisted Men accidentally cause a major Diplomatic Incident.

The French Army forces that liberated Marseilles are reunited with their families after several years of Italian Military Occupation, while the Italian Army that formerly held the City dissolved and went back home and is now enjoying their Holiday season with their families.

The Admiral of the French Fleet in Spain approached the Italian Naval Fleet in the Gulf of Lyons with a White Flag, and boarded the Italian Admirals ship under the watchful eyes of the French and Italian Naval Warships nearby, to exchange Holiday Cheer and toasts, and hopes for an end to a war that has cost so many lives on both sides.

[NOVA Green]

Spring 1906

Turkey: Supply centers were gained. Units that may be built: 3 (only 2 unoccupied centers are available).

Sorry, our construction yards are on summer holiday.

*** French Dockworkers in Marseilles go on strike in solidarity with the Dockworkers in Istanbul being forced to work mandatory Overtime to build additional Fleets, which was the result of the impact of the English Dockworkers Strike in Liverpool that started in '03, which spreads like wildfire as a result of wartime Union Repression and war wariness within the Working Classes of Europe ***

[NOVA Green]

Spring 1906

Turkey: Supply centers were gained. Units that may be built: 3 (only 2 unoccupied centers are available).

Sorry, our construction yards are on summer holiday.

The international press corps was a bit concerned by the packet ship arriving long after it was expected. The ship claimed it was due to the intense naval traffic in the Mediterranean.  Nonetheless the intrepid reporters ran with the story, unaware that it was merely a transcription of the news from last fall.

The rumor doing the rounds in the Cities of France and England, is that this story first gained traction as a result of American Journalists from the Hearst Media Empire, intercepting the package in order to boost Newspaper Sales in America, as part of what most Europeans are now viewing as typical "Yellow Journalism".

This is obviously Fake News, whether by intent or sloppiness, but our Governments Intelligence Agencies firmly believe this was an attempt by the bellicose Southern States to create a War Fever in America in order to seize French and English Colonies in the New World, while at the present time American Military Forces have been deployed to the Western Canadian Border in Washington State, Maine and Update New York in Quebec Province, and even in Michigan, close to the Capital of Canada, in order to exploit the Civil Disorder in England and the collapse of the former Great British Empire.

[NOVA Green]

Having finally finished its buildup, the United States is ready to get involved in Diplomacy.

Fall 1906 orders:

F Salish Sea supports A Washington -> British Columbia
A Washington -> British Columbia
A Montana supports A Washington -> British Columbia
A Dakota supports A Minnesota -> Manitoba
A Minnesota -> Manitoba
A Michigan supports A New York -> Ontario
A New York -> Ontario
F Gulf of Maine supports A New England-> New Brunswick
A New England -> New Brunswick
F Delmarva -> West Atlantic
A Georgilina -> Delmarva
A Florida -> Cuba
F Sargasso convoys A Florida -> Cuba
F Caribbean supports A Florida -> Cuba
A Louisiana -> Nuevo Leon
F Gulf of Mexico convoys A Louisiana -> Nuevo Leon
A Texas supports A Louisiana -> Nuevo Leon
A New Mexico supports A Arizona -> Sonora
A Arizona -> Sonora
F California Coast supports F San Diego -> Baja California (wc)
A Hawaii holds
A Manila supports A Davao holding
A Davao supports A Manila holding

All of Europe was wondering what has been happening in the "New World"....

Although I'm not sure exactly which expansion of Diplomacy your movements represent, I'm assuming it is something like the following:

https://webdiplomacy.net/variants.php

[NOVA Green]

At this point, it's fairly clear that the Turks have won, the only question is if a Franco-German alliance can force the Porte to accept a draw.

The Germans have no ability to threaten Sevastapol and their prospects of advancing into the former Austrian territories look bleak.  The Porte might be able to take Moscow in 1908, but likely only if the Reich fails to reinforce Moscow because it gets too involved in the West.

The French also have a lack of ability to act against the Turks right now. It's doubtful that the Republic of France can hold on to Venice once the Turks get a fleet into the Adriatic with the only question being does that happen in 1907 or 1908? Too much effort in Britain, or even worse, fighting with Germany, makes reinforcing the Republic's forces in the western Mediterranean in time impossible, but Britain has supply centers a Franco-German alliance will need to be able to halt the Porte.

The biggest weakness a Franco-German alliance has are those two German navies. If they're needed in the Baltic for defense, the Porte will have taken at least Moscow. If the French were to build a second northern fleet that could then grind the German fleet to pieces to be replaced by armies before heading south themselves to the Mediterranean, that too would actually make the situation worse in the short term by tying up so much force away from the Turkish fronts, that they might win outright before the freed up resources could get south.

Oddly enough, what a Franco-German alliance needs most is either an active British or an active Austrian player, at least in the short run.  A British player could grind away the German fleets so they could be rebuilt as armies without tying up French navies and make it possible for the one French army already landed to take Britain without further reinforcements, tho it wouldn't be able to finish until Fall 1909. (Obviously France would need to let Germany get back Munich at minimum.)  An active Austrian player cooperating with the French would be able to hold Tunis and support French navies in the water. (In the turn just past, an Austria cooperating with the French would have been able to get a French fleet into WES and still seen the elimination of the Italians.)

Well, no.  One of the most important skills in Diplomacy is the ability to count to 18.  Unless F&G are completely brain-dead (which they have demonstrated not to be the case), the absolute max that Turkey can take in this position is Turkey (3) + Austria (3) + Balkans (4) + Italy (3) + Tunis (1) + Russia except StP (3) for a total of 17.   The 18th center just isn't there; France can block me from further gains in the Med, Stp can't be taken by land from the south as long as it has minimal support, and FG can easily defend the German centers.  The game will be an FGT draw, and I'll be happy to call it a day as soon as Austria is eliminated.  Or if Austria is now considered in CD, let's call it now and think about starting a new game with 7 active players this time. 

Muon2: Can we call a vote for an FGT draw now?  If so, I propose it and vote yes.

The first I heard Austria was in Civil Disorder was this Morning (Presumably because they didn't post military movements last turn???)

Still, the Austrian Player is interested in playing future games, and my assumption is that they didn't post military movements solely because a HOLD would be a HOLD regardless, and they likely didn't get my PM until shortly before movements were posted that I would be supporting their Fleet in Tunisia against the anticipated Italian / Turkish combined military movements....

Arguably GM's "absolute Max" scenario is factually correct, and with Germany and France both picking up an additional Supply Center from England by Fall '07 AND the concentration of Military Land Forces within Central Europe, make it extremely likely that not only will not achieve the maximum of 18/34, but additionally might well potentially lose in a protracted ground war....

I Second GM's motion, and if Germany agrees and if Austria's Agreement is required as well, I look forward to a New Game, a reshuffling of the Deck, since by my Count we have 5/7 current players (Including Italy) in Agreement to play a new game, and hopefully we can recruit at least one or two more reliable players, or start with (5) or (6) Player Diplomacy Rules in the event we can't get the full (7)....

NOVA

[NOVA Green]

Both France and Germany made tactical blunders earlier in this game, so I wouldn't assume everything's going to go by the optimum Diplomacy book. It probably is the case that they should be able to keep you from winning by yourself, but I don't consider that a guarantee just yet.  I'd at least wait and see what the builds are before accepting a draw.

True both France and Germany made blunders early in the Game based upon being a bit rusty with a few rule items....

Also, I believe that a Caretaker Government in England made a massive tactical and strategic blunder during the Spring of '02, where they attempted to make Military Movements against France and Germany at a time where there was a secret French-English Alliance to conquer Germany.

Shush.... top secret intelligence cables leaked now that the war is virtually over....

The fog of war and the unknowns, caused France to shift forces towards England at a time where Italy was starting to shift forces towards the Western MED, eyeballing the Iberian Peninsula and Marseilles....

France made aggressive movements towards Germany after England dropped out, and Turkey back-stabbed Austria-Hungary shortly after.

Still, France, Germany, and Turkey are all experienced players, so I would not anticipate any balls getting dropped again, as occurred early in the Game, and France and Germany might well prevail in a United Front against Turkey based upon what are likely the final map results.....

Again, True Federalist there will be a new Diplomacy Game shortly, and since it is obviously it is something totally up your ally, and you are likely to be a reliable player once you commit, I ask will you join us in a new game of Diplomacy?

If not, at least potentially offer to be a "pinch hitter" in the event that a player drops out unexpectedly for personal reasons for a few turns, so we can cover the game even if we start it using (5) or (6) player Diplomacy 5.0 rules....

[NOVA Green]

Looking ahead to a potential next game, one question is the degree to which written orders are strictly followed according the rules. This is what the 5th Ed rules state.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

As we saw a couple of times, players, especially if new or rusty, write "illegal" orders. Once a game starts I don't like changing the rules, but I can start with house rules within reason. For example, I could pre-judge any orders submitted sufficiently in advance of the deadline (3 or 6 hours?) and ask the player to review and revise any illegal orders as necessary. Perhaps that would make it easier for new players to begin.

Although certainly I can't speak for others, where it looks like we have 5/7 committed players for a future game, where all military movements were posted 100% on time (There might have been an exception for an Italian Military Build Order), I think this might well help newer and rusty players navigate the rule book without being worried that if "I don't post my orders exactly in Diplomacy 5.0 rules it might be considered invalid"....

The most important thing in an Atlas Diplomacy game is emphasizing commitment to play out the game and post orders on a regular basis....

I suspect that many of the 5/7 committed players would prefer that style of approach to reduce the intimidation that some players might feel jumping into a new game with what might be perceived as complex rules....

Another item to consider might be running a Six Player Diplomacy game using 5.0 rules, so if we don't have enough recruits, at least we can get a kick-off going while we have Five players that have already said they want a new game....

Thoughts from the rest of the Diplomacy Crew???

[NOVA Green]

My thoughts:

I really want to start with 7 players or not at all.

If Muon2 is willing to precheck the orders for validity, that's very helpful. 

So, the initial survey indicates that we have Five active and consistent players that want to reshuffle the deck of cards and start a new game, a Game Master willing to host...

Georgia Moderate would prefer to start with 7 players or not at all.... (Which I would certainly like to start with Seven Players, but not required on my part if we have consistent players and start the game with default "short-handed" Diplomacy rules.)

Now, key question is how to market, recruit, and Vet new or rusty players to the Game?

My thoughts are:

1.)  That we need to start with a new Game Invite thread (Since many potential players in the Atlas "Gaming Thread" probably don't even click anymore on this existing link, since they consider it the coverage of an ongoing and existing game.

2.) In the Introduction to the game as part of the marketing strategy basically briefly describe the game (and why it is so cool and history of Diplomacy etc...), provide links to the official rules (and GM proposed modifications to help recruit new players, etc...).

3.) In the Diplomacy 5.0 rules Muon2 posted as part of the game, there is an item that refers to the classic board-game involving giving new players a "dry run" of one movement turn to familiarize themselves with some of the Movement Orders, etc....

It might be interesting to incorporate this into part of the vetting process for new players....

4.) Recruitment--- honestly this is not my area of expertise, since I believe the only gaming thread I ever previously posted on was the President Forever thread....

Some of y'all that have more experience with posters in the History, Gaming, European Politics sections of the Forum might have better luck than myself....

5.) Thoughts about how to recruit an additional few players so we can have a full board, and hopefully minimizing drop-outs....

6.) Really looking forward to a new game and hopefully am not regretting going for a complete conquest option against Turkey.   

NOVA GREEN

[NOVA Green]

So is someone going to post a new thread for a new game with new recruits based upon the "Muon2" flex advisement Diplomacy 5.0 rules where a player has a window to modify illegal movements within the time-frame provided, or do I need to post it myself?

If we don't move forward with a proposal for a new Game now, most likely existing players will lose interest, get caught up in life events, etc....

Should I post the proposal for a new game on a new thread, or does one of the rest of y'all want to perform the honors???

[NOVA Green]

Bump....

Any interest in a new Diplomacy game?

Only reason not starting this as a new thread is so that those who are not familiar with an online version of the game, have a chance to see what the rules are, and how some of the diplomatic negotiations and role playing structure works....

If enough folks are interested we may be lucky enough to draft Muon2 to be a GM for a new game....

[NOVA Green]

GeorgiaModerate is right, you really need 7 committed players for the first few turns or the game becomes unbalanced. I would note that for this thread there were initially 10 players who professed interest but only 7 available to start the game and then some early drop outs. It helps to have a couple of spare players who didn't get in, but can take over when a player gets to busy IRL and has to abandon the position.

Sent some PMs to recruit players, but totally agree with GM that 7/7 is the way to start, plus a few reserve players on the wings....