GamesByEmail Judge Retreat in Question

You may retreat to a country that just left however it may not be involved in the action causing the disband.

Also if two countries retreat to the same location both must disband (hence why you have to write your disbands down)

Another note about the game: Brian, Jacob, and Myself played a quick game tonight and ran in to the usual bugs. The most common is the "Process Orders" loop. I think I figured out the trick... Do not press the "Process Orders" button or it will submit that as your "move" causing your moves to be undone. Simply wait until all others players have played the turn you last did and sit and pray that your orders went through as you wanted. So far its happened to me both with builds and moves and every time my actions were safe as long as I just refreshed the page or the "My Games" page and waited until it was my turn again. To be safe one time I waited until it was my turn and then I was able to re-enter my moves and they went through as expected.

Fall 1902, PhxDiplomacy

In the second year of PhxDiplomacy, the game has enjoyed some interesting twists.

An active French/German/Austro-Hungarian has emerged. Historically, this combination has been able to dominate Western and Central Europe (see the Franks) and easily roll into Russia (see Napoleon). A continuing problem for them will be England. To successfully counter this island foe, the F/G/A-H alliance needs many fleets in the water and convoyed armies (see the Nazi's failed Battle of Britian, or again see Napoleon).

Northern Italy has become an interesting battle field. AH and France have been able to tie-down the numerically superior Italian forces. With the correct support arrangement, however, Italy should be able to take either Piedmont or Trieste. The chance for the Italians to break-out of this position, though, is quickly fading.

Austria-Hungary, through its smart alliance, has been able to hang-onto its home stars. But, it faces the growing Turkish juggernaut. Turkey appears to be playing south-eastern Europe historically correct. It has captured Sevestopol and sent Russia into decline. If the game follows history, Turkey's advance should be able to continue unabated until it reaches the Gates of Vienna where it will face stiff French and German resistance. For the time being, the F/G/A-H alliance may want to temporarily bypass Venice and take Tyrolia so that they will be in a strong position against Turkey.

Russia has a tough decision. It can either try to keep what it has, which will probably fail. Or, it can go kamikaze and convoy an army into Berlin, which would be fun.

England should form an alliance with Italy if it hasn't already done so. One should support the other into the MAO and start raiding French ports. It might be their best chance to turn the corner on the Continental F/G/A-H alliance. An even more profitable strategy would be for England and Italy to ally themselves with Turkey, since the Ottomans seem focused on building land forces.

I have been analysing this game from a geographic and historical perspective, but there is another angle that I haven't touched. There is an undercurrent of inter-personal relations within our Diplomacy group. For example, Hart and Melanie have been frequent allies, as of late. Adam and Mong are also commonly allies. Adam and Hart, though, are often Diplomacy foes. Since this is a codename game, I have no idea who is who yet. But, I suspect that identity politics will soon be a factor in the game if it isn't already.

On a closing note, has anyone else wondered what Diplomacy on a world map would be like?

East vs. West

Allies from the start of the game, Adam (Russia) and Jacob (England) split the board and tie at 17 apiece in PhxDiplomacyUnlimited.

Fall 1901, PhxDiplomacy

Since I don't have a horse in this race, I have decided to be an announcer for it. So, here goes...

PhxDiplomacy looks to be another rousing game of Diplomacy with seasoned veterans and newbies alike seated at the table. Since there are no robot countries, all players will need to be on their toes. The chances of double-crossings are higher; and alliances will be necessary to avoid multi-front battles.

England:

With potentially the most aggressive opening of the game, England grabs the traditionally neutral English Channel. England has the problem of where does it expand next after splitting Scandinavia with Russia. It looks like "The Beard" has answered that question with France. But, does England try slipping into the strategic MAO or land an army in Brest. Both have risks. Watch for alliances or non-aggression pacts (NAP) with Russia and Germany.

France:

With a natural hegemony over the Iberian peninsula, France appears to be keeping it in reserve while handling English and German aggressors to the North. France has some important questions to answer for next season that could determine its outcome in this game. To prosper, France needs to not only keep its shipyards in Brest, but also to make a foothold in Flanders. Also, watch for a French-Italian NAP, as they seem to have partitioned-off the southwest corner of the board.

Germany:

Geographically and historically, Germany is the worst positioned country in Europe. Smack in the middle of the continent, it is surrounded by the other great powers. Already, Germany appears to have a NAP with its kinsman, Austria-Hungary, and an alliance with England. Blitzkrieg in the Low Countries is a smart move; it worked well for Hitler. But, it still needs to fend off an active Italy and Russia. Will Germany hold the territory it has, or make sacrifices in the name of capturing new lands?

Italy:

Italy has made a very smart, yet unique, opening. At first, holding Rome in reserve seems unusual. But, after noticing the position in Tyrolia, this announcer sees that Rome will bounce Trieste's fleet out of Venice while the army in Tyrolia has its choice of Munich and Vienna. Additionally, the fleet out of Naples has its pick of Greece or Tunis. We will have to wait and see just how much Italy will gain with this strategy. Watch for an NAP with France and a strong cross-board ally in Russia.

Austria-Hungary:

With an apparent NAP with Germany, Austria-Hungary has made a dash to the resource-rich south. It has effectively blocked Russia, but has a weak spot in an open Vienna. This maybe the game's first double-cross if Austria and Italy also have an NAP and AH has granted Italy safe-passage through Tyrolia. Also, once AH and Turkey split the Balkans, watch for an anti-Russia / anti-Italy alliance, a la WWI.

Russia:

Because it has such a large initial territory, Russia has a variety of openings. Because Russia opened along the Baltic instead of the Barents Sea, I suspect there is an agreement between England and Russia to split Scandinavia. Watch for Russia making its early land gains in the North and blocking to the South.

Turkey:

Turkey has often won in our Diplomacy group when it can neutralize Russia's predations and take the Black Sea. Since, as a spectator, I only see the results of the moves, I wonder if Russia and Turkey have an NAP or bounced each other from the Black Sea. Either way, Turkey is still in a dangerous situation. In real life, the Crimean War (Florence Nightengale) was fought over this piece of the world since it's control is vital to both Turkey and Russia.

Prediction for early game gainers: England, Russia, Italy.

On a closing, metaphorical note, I have started wondering why training ourselves to invade and conquer Europe is soo much fun.

Diplomat Bios

Nate

Mong met Nate through his fiancee Shannon who is a teacher like Nate and his wife

Mong

Has been playing since the begining. Adam and Mong met through UOP but both went to college in Erie and hail from the great state of PA

Hart

Suggested to Mong and Adam to play diploamcy. Hart met Adam and then Mong through UOP

Jacob

Adam and Jacob went to college together. Jacob also grew up in the great state of PA but now lives in an eskimo village in Alaska

Jason

Jason met Adam and then Mong through a Flex consulting shop where they kicked major ass for a year and then all went very different directions

Melanie

Melanie met Hart through his current employeer and brought her in. She has played with us once in RL.

Brian

Brian is Adam's neighbor and then worked with him and Mong at UOP. He has played many games online and in RL.

Nick

Nick is Hart's child-hood friend and has joined a few games online but is currently deployed and won't be able to jump back in until that wraps up.

Shannon

Shannon is Mong's fiancee and has secretly joined 2 of our online games and after her last stabbing probably hates us and will never join again.

Adam

Has been playing since the begining. He knows most everyone that is playing and currently has many short bits of online time throughout the day as he is a stay-at-home dad and obsessed with the game.


*Please update this post with more/less information, but I thought this would be nice since not everyone knows everyone and their backstory

Life isn't Diplomacy...

but it can contain Diplomacy.

After one of our two games complete I think we should start a game with out a deadline. This is a bit of a risk since stalling has become a new tactic. However I say if people don't want to play the game don't sign up for it. Take as long as you need to communicate with other diplomats or think about your moves. Don't worry about missing your turn because you've got a family/work/other obligation. The real catch will be either we'll have to accept the bugs of players resigning or we'll have to allow players to surrender their link to the game to the group or to an individual. At first that may sound like crap but it's already happening indirectly and it happens in real life.

If we all agree to do our best to put in a move per weekday than there won't be any problems. If for some reason someone decides to screw an entire game by not participating they need to ask themselves why they signed up in the first place and if it makes sense to join another game. We're not children here we should be able to exercise some level of maturity when it comes to the game. I think a game with out time limits would be easier to get people to commit to since they don't have to worry about life causing them to miss turns. Emergency runs to another city, vacation, and work deadlines are more important than some silly game, but they shouldn't stop people from playing a game or causing a game to be decided based on moves not being able to be submitted.

We should start a private game since public would allow for someone to wreck the game and remain anonymous as an experiment and see how everyone likes it, how long it takes, and if anyone is immature enough to wreck the game for the rest of us either through a game erroring resignation or through an indefinite stall.

Diplomact MeetUp Group

So I started to create a group at meetup.com to see if we can get more players for our RL and Online games, but I didn't realize there was a fee. We should see if there is interest and maybe we can split it.

I though the following topics would be good for helping people find the group:
- Diplomacy
- Online Diplomacy
- In Person Diplomacy
- Diplomacy Variants
- Settlers
- Board Games

and I used the zip code for the Pasty Co. in Tempe

thoughts?

Playing Diplomacy to Get Your Ally to Win

This is a conversation originally Mong sort of started with me, but I thought I'd share the concept and open it up to comments/discussion.

When you're playing diplomacy I find the greatest joy in the following (in order): manipulation, strategy, trust, commands, and general play. However these things are quickly fleeting if you're out of the game in the first few years and aren't able to see the board mature into a handful of countries.

When you play the game with an ally and have the full intention of helping them win unless an opening is presented to you chances are you'll at least be able to be in the game longer than if not. In the perfect scenario you're able to grow away from your ally until you're not or it's less feasible to turn on them the moment before they are able to turn on you. A great alliance will almost take over the entire board before in a blink of the eye one player cuts the other's throat and takes victory. In a good alliance there is an understanding of "I'm your ally until I'm not" and when your ally stabs you in the back and starts taking your stars you can feel proud that maybe you didn't win this game but at least your counterpart did. The best in my opinion is when the rest of the board didn't even know you were working together.

So instead of playing to win, play to play and if you or your ally comes out on top be happy you blocked a side, provided some stars, or go stabbed before you planned on stabbing them. There will always be other games and when you truly trust you are also vulnerable, but you increase the amount of time you get to enjoy the other aspects of the game.