Diplomacy | BoardGameGeek

Reply: Diplomacy:: General:: Re: Diplomacy for the PC at Five Below for $5

claudio212 — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 19:41:38 +0000

Alas, if this is the Paradox(?) version, it is really awful. Not worth $5. Or even the time to install. The AI is terrible, the interface is buggy. Overall worthless implementation.

New Image for Diplomacy

pijll — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 17:42:00 +0000

by pijll

]]>

Inside the box. Philmar edition, ~1976 (UK).

New Image for Diplomacy

pijll — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 17:37:20 +0000

by pijll

]]>

Box cover, Philmar edition, ~1976 (UK).

New Image for Diplomacy

pijll — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 17:35:44 +0000

by pijll

]]>

Tray with playing pieces. Philmar edition, ~1976 (UK).

New Image for Diplomacy

Alliterato — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 15:52:51 +0000

by Alliterato

]]>

Self made version of the fleet

New Image for Diplomacy

Alliterato — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 15:52:37 +0000

by Alliterato

]]>

Self made version of the army

Reply: Diplomacy:: General:: Re: Now in BGG dB for your comments: Gamer's Guide to Diplomacy (Avalon Hill)

Original_CorPse — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 21:53:31 +0000

by Original_CorPse

mikemerten wrote:
I don't think it was such a good idea to add this book to BGG. I own an older edition. Published 1978 by AH. The author was Rod Walker.
Do we now need a second entry just because the author changed? Has somebody a better idea?

Sounds like you should create an entry for that version as well... or perhaps add info to the existing listing...

Reply: Diplomacy:: General:: Re: Now in BGG dB for your comments: Gamer's Guide to Diplomacy (Avalon Hill)

mikemerten — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 21:46:33 +0000

by mikemerten

I don't think it was such a good idea to add this book to BGG. I own an older edition. Published 1978 by AH. The author was Rod Walker.
Do we now need a second entry just because the author changed? Has somebody a better idea?

Thread: Diplomacy:: General:: Diplomacy for the PC at Five Below for $5

BugLaden — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 19:24:58 +0000

by BugLaden

Subject says it all.

Diplomacy
for the PC
at Five Below
for $5.

Five Below Store Locator

New Image for Diplomacy

Wolfenstad Manuel — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 19:02:33 +0000

by Wolfenstad Manuel

]]>

back of the box come to life!

Reply: Diplomacy:: General:: Re: Now in BGG dB for your comments: Gamer's Guide to Diplomacy (Avalon Hill)

Original_CorPse — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 22:15:45 +0000

by Original_CorPse

LurkingMeeple wrote:
Barticus88 wrote:
there is no category for board game book

Isn't the [property=1117]"Book" category[/property] appropriate? This entry strikes me as the Diplomacy equivalent of [thing=10904][/thing]. Anyway, I've submitted it as an additional category.

Adding the book category to the listing makes sense.

I think the OP means that there's no separate Book listing vs. a Game listing in the BGG hierarchy.

cP

Reply: Diplomacy:: General:: Re: Now in BGG dB for your comments: Gamer's Guide to Diplomacy (Avalon Hill)

LurkingMeeple — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 20:11:45 +0000

by LurkingMeeple

Barticus88 wrote:
there is no category for board game book

Isn't the [property=1117]"Book" category[/property] appropriate? This entry strikes me as the Diplomacy equivalent of [thing=10904][/thing]. Anyway, I've submitted it as an additional category.

Reply: Diplomacy:: General:: Re: Now in BGG dB for your comments: Gamer's Guide to Diplomacy (Avalon Hill)

MScrivner — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 03:38:28 +0000

by MScrivner

Robrob wrote:
MScrivner wrote:
It's not the only book listed in the database, and it's not rpg material. There is no gaming-related book category. It DOES contain legitimate listing of variant maps which count in this case as expansions. Where else should it go?

Why wouldn't it go in the files section of the Diplomacy entry?

'Cause it's not a file?

Reply: Diplomacy:: General:: Re: Now in BGG dB for your comments: Gamer's Guide to Diplomacy (Avalon Hill)

Robrob — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 02:11:37 +0000

by Robrob

MScrivner wrote:
It's not the only book listed in the database, and it's not rpg material. There is no gaming-related book category. It DOES contain legitimate listing of variant maps which count in this case as expansions. Where else should it go?

Why wouldn't it go in the files section of the Diplomacy entry?

Reply: Diplomacy:: General:: Re: Now in BGG dB for your comments: Gamer's Guide to Diplomacy (Avalon Hill)

Original_CorPse — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 01:23:18 +0000

by Original_CorPse

pjmcnamara wrote:
There is a copy for sale on eBay and I am trying to decide if I should buy it or not.

Wow, that was fast.

Reply: Diplomacy:: General:: Re: Now in BGG dB for your comments: Gamer's Guide to Diplomacy (Avalon Hill)

Barticus88 — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 01:19:27 +0000

by Barticus88

jrodgersh wrote:
This looks like a very interesting book, but why is this listed in the BGG database as a game?

Because there is no category for board game book. I am told there is no category for board game book, because this is not BoardGameBookGeek. I assume the designer and publisher pages will soon be deleted because this is not BoardGameDesignerGeek or BoardGamePublisherGeek.

Reply: Diplomacy:: General:: Re: Now in BGG dB for your comments: Gamer's Guide to Diplomacy (Avalon Hill)

MScrivner — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 00:52:34 +0000

by MScrivner

It's not the only book listed in the database, and it's not rpg material. There is no gaming-related book category. It DOES contain legitimate listing of variant maps which count in this case as expansions. Where else should it go?

Reply: Diplomacy:: General:: Re: Now in BGG dB for your comments: Gamer's Guide to Diplomacy (Avalon Hill)

jrodgersh — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 20:39:45 +0000

by jrodgersh

This looks like a very interesting book, but why is this listed in the BGG database as a game?

Reply: Diplomacy:: General:: Re: Now in BGG dB for your comments: Gamer's Guide to Diplomacy (Avalon Hill)

pjmcnamara — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 20:14:50 +0000

by pjmcnamara

There is a copy for sale on eBay and I am trying to decide if I should buy it or not.

Reply: Diplomacy:: General:: Re: Now in BGG dB for your comments: Gamer's Guide to Diplomacy (Avalon Hill)

MScrivner — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 19:53:08 +0000

by MScrivner

Awesome! Now if someone will only list a copy for trade...

Thread: Diplomacy:: General:: Now in BGG dB for your comments: Gamer's Guide to Diplomacy (Avalon Hill)

Original_CorPse — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 18:18:41 +0000

by Original_CorPse

Hey Guys,

Just wanted to let you know that I was able to get [thing=60595][/thing] posted to the database (thank you moderators!).

Considering how many Diplomacy fans there are, I'm guessing a number of you have this item and can give, comments, ratings, etc.

Enjoy!

New Image for Diplomacy

rober — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 09:42:03 +0000

by rober

]]>

overview

Reply: Diplomacy:: General:: Re: Which online service is the best one?

Arvidos — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 13:29:13 +0000

by Arvidos

I should add that I already have a bunch of friends in mind to play it, so the playerbase is not a problem, and all of them are registered on Facebook, so communication shouldn't be a problem either. :)

With that in mind, what would you guys recommend?

I very much like the option to customize the time limit of the turns. Is there any site that lets you end the turn automatically once all orders have been submitted? I know that's a feature on Playdiplomacy, but only for premium members...

Reply: Diplomacy:: Rules:: Re: Rule clarification on the Helgoland Bight

Barticus88 — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 08:11:43 +0000

by Barticus88

No. Helgoland Bight borders Kiel. The Kiel canal is part of Kiel.

Reply: Diplomacy:: Rules:: Re: Rule clarification on the Helgoland Bight

michinyon — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 08:07:44 +0000

by michinyon

Is the small piece of water adjacent to the east end of the Kiel Canal part of the Helgoland Bight water region ?

This small piece of water has a short boundary to the Baltic Sea water region.

If a fleet unit is present in the Helgoland Bight, and this piece of water is also part of the Helgoland bight, then can the fleet unit proceed in one move to the Baltic Sea water unit ?

Reply: Diplomacy:: General:: Re: Is there any reason to play this 2-player?

Eldard — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 00:29:42 +0000

by Eldard

malloc wrote:
Absolutely not.

-M

Agreed. The heart of the game is cooperation and betrayals; it requires more than two players, preferably at least 5.

Reply: Diplomacy:: General:: Re: Is there any reason to play this 2-player?

Hungadunga — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 00:00:57 +0000

by Hungadunga

Go 2-player to learn the mechanics, and use the WWI scenario where you control all the traditional allies. There is, of course, minimal diplomacy.

However, getting well-versed in the mechanics is a good investment. I've played a few games where someone who does diplomacy well will write erroneous orders and have all his "brilliant" moves not only rejected, but even worse....EXPOSED!

:D

Reply: Diplomacy:: General:: Re: Diplomacy on a LCD projector sceen?

MScrivner — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 17:04:34 +0000

by MScrivner

When I run Dip in my classroom, I use an MS Powerpoint file that I downloaded form Dipbounced.

Here's an image of it in action:

]]>

This allows you do do a couple of things:

1) Run simultaneous games, depending on the size of the area you are projecting onto - I usually have two, three, or even four maps up at a time.
2) The editable nature of the slides allows you to actually copy and paste new slides as you update the game and thus have a record of the game state before each season and year that you can scroll through.

My only complaint about the .ppt file is that it uses squares and rectangles instead of .gifs of armies and ships. I suppose you could edit it, but it just never seemed like it was worth it.

If you can't find the file on Dipbounced and would like a copy geekmail me your email address and I'd be happy to send you what I use.

Thread: Diplomacy:: General:: Diplomacy on a LCD projector sceen?

Merudo — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 23:46:39 +0000

by Merudo

Hello all,

What do you think would be the best way to play diplomacy on a LCD projection screen? Ideally, it would be possible to update the map as the game goes on.

Reply: Diplomacy:: General:: Re: Which online service is the best one?

DrSwordopolis — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 18:44:34 +0000

by DrSwordopolis

I don't know how much my opinion is worth because I've only tried the one, but I use www.playdiplomacy.com and I've found it to be pretty good, overall. Good interface, good features. Lots of opponents. You do run into noobies and AFKers, but I imagine that's prevalent in online dip in general. I have also heard that facebook diplomacy is not so great, to the extent that I don't even want to try it.

Reply: Diplomacy:: General:: Re: Which online service is the best one?

claudio212 — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 15:57:54 +0000

by claudio212

I used to play on the judges ( http://www.diplom.org/Online/judge.html is a good resource to learn them. The interface is very easy once you get up and running - just email your moves. While not the easiest setup, I liked the judges better than other options because the competition was much better and more dedicated. While I won't say anything negative about most other options, I will say: STAY AWAY FROM FACEBOOK! Communication is poor. Players are not very good. And no one seems to stick with losing positions. Without dedication by its players, this game loses a lot (well, everything, actually).

Reply: Diplomacy:: General:: Re: Which online service is the best one?

The Unbeliever — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 14:24:34 +0000

by The Unbeliever

[poll=34293]

Reply: Diplomacy:: General:: Re: Which online service is the best one?

Raid1280 — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 13:59:07 +0000

by Raid1280

I'm actually going to suggest this site:
http://www.webdiplomacy.net/

The communication aspect is excellent, its' very user friendly, and there is a large variety in time limits so you can customize which game will be easiest for you to play. It's also free.

Thread: Diplomacy:: General:: Which online service is the best one?

Arvidos — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 13:55:10 +0000

by Arvidos

Play Diplomacy:
http://www.playdiplomacy.com

DipBounced:
http://www.dipbounced.com/

Stabberfou:
http://stabbeurfou.org/

Facebook Diplomacy:
http://apps.facebook.com/phpdiplomacy/

?

New Image for Diplomacy

Bixby — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 20:22:16 +0000

by Bixby

]]>

Diplomacy Play By Email Game #01 - Fall 1901 News Bulletin. (Published on our group's website). PS. I am France.

Reply: Diplomacy:: General:: Re: Is there any reason to play this 2-player?

Anjohl — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 09:36:05 +0000

by Anjohl

Ok, I get the feeling now that playing the game 2-player is pretty much worse than playing Risk two-player. I might still grab a copy of the newer edition if I can get it cheap. I would rather get the 1999 edition for the better components, but I might just wishlist it.

With the simplicity of the rules, I bet I can get the family onboard.

Reply: Diplomacy:: General:: Re: Is there any reason to play this 2-player?

whac3 — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 11:29:45 +0000

by whac3

MurrayL wrote:
There is a 2-player official variant based on WW1.
One player controls the central powers and the other the allies, amongst other tweaks, but I don't know how well that plays.

I tried it and wasn't impressed. It might be better if Italy were simply left out rather than entering the game arbitrarily at a certain point.

Reply: Diplomacy:: General:: Re: Is there any reason to play this 2-player?

MurrayL — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 10:08:42 +0000

by MurrayL

There is a 2-player official variant based on WW1.
One player controls the central powers and the other the allies, amongst other tweaks, but I don't know how well that plays.

Reply: Diplomacy:: General:: Re: Is there any reason to play this 2-player?

paulidale — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 09:50:34 +0000

by paulidale

Playing two players is okay once you accept the premise that the game is about boring your opponents into letting you win....

:D

- Pauli

Reply: Diplomacy:: General:: Re: Is there any reason to play this 2-player?

medievalbanquet — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 09:32:56 +0000

by medievalbanquet

No reason at all on any level.

Reply: Diplomacy:: General:: Re: Is there any reason to play this 2-player?

MScrivner — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 04:43:06 +0000

by MScrivner

I would like to say that there are some strategic and tactical things to be learned from a 2-player game - especially how to break past the stalemate line - but I think without at least a third player, it's simply a race - the person who writes the most efficient orders would win, and even then, there may be a tactical advantage to starting out in, say France in a two-player game than starting out in England.

Reply: Diplomacy:: General:: Re: Is there any reason to play this 2-player?

Muzza — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 04:08:20 +0000

by Muzza

2 player to get the hang of the rules only. When it comes to proper play though I'd go so far as to say do not play this unless you have the full 7 player complement. It gets rather unbalanced as you reduce the player numbers.

Reply: Diplomacy:: Sessions:: Re: Facebook Diplomacy: Dormitory Style

geniuslegume — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 03:54:29 +0000

by geniuslegume

Fall 1903
I didn't know the retreat orders because they are not saved in phpDip and it has been too long for me to remember them.

Germany had two armies fairly close to Munich and I was ready to give up my claim to it in the coming year and told him so. I asked him to bounce with me there so that I could protect it this turn and be in position against Austria for 1904.

Outside of my influence, Austria agreed to support Russia back into Sevastopol (!) She expressed concern about my fleets in the Mediterranean near Greece, which I had not considered at all. I was worried about holding Constantinople and what to do if she and Turkey were working together. Eventually I decided that if they wanted to take Con back, they were going to, and I abandoned all hope of supporting it. Instead I opted to attack Ankara from Smyrna in order to cut what was surely a support order, which I would bounce back from and bounce the army that would have to be coming from Armenia.

I took Austria's idea and set my fleets for Greece. The army in Constantinople was changed at the last minute to attack Bulgaria to cut support that may be given to Greece from there.

The last problem was the top of my boot bordering Austria. What to do with the Venice fleet? Either leave it in Venice to counter an attack that may come from Trieste or spring it to the Adriatic and bounce her out of there to protect my claim to the Mediterranean.

With most likely one, and possibly two, builds on the way, I decided that holding Venice was more important, allowing me to put a fleet in Naples in the coming turn.

The moves
Autumn 1903 Large map:

England:
The fleet at Mid-Atlantic Ocean move to Portugal.
The army at Wales move to Liverpool.
The fleet at North Sea move to London.
France:
The fleet at English Channel convoy to Wales from Picardy.
The army at Belgium hold.
The army at Spain hold.
The army at Brest move to Gascony.
The army at Picardy move to Wales via convoy.
The fleet at Clyde move to Liverpool.
Italy:
The fleet at Venice hold.
The army at Smyrna move to Ankara.
The fleet at Ionian Sea move to Greece.
The army at Tyrolia move to Munich.
The army at Constantinople move to Bulgaria.
The fleet at Aegean Sea support move to Greece from Ionian Sea.
Germany:
The fleet at Norway hold.
The army at Holland hold.
The fleet at Kiel move to Denmark.
The army at Prussia move to Warsaw.
The army at Silesia support move to Warsaw from Prussia.
Austria:
The fleet at Trieste move to Venice.
The army at Serbia move to Trieste.
The army at Bulgaria support hold to Greece.
The fleet at Greece support hold to Bulgaria.
The army at Rumania support move to Sevastopol from Moscow.
The army at Vienna support move to Trieste from Serbia.
Turkey:
The army at Armenia move to Smyrna.
The fleet at Black Sea move to Constantinople.
The fleet at Ankara support move to Constantinople from Black Sea.
Russia:
The army at Warsaw hold.
The army at Moscow move to Sevastopol.
The army at Finland move to Norway.
The fleet at Sweden move to Denmark.

Again, my run of guesses continued (almost made more remarkable by the fact that these were new players and apt to make some very wild moves). I took Greece and held Constantinople; Austria and Turkey were not working together. The stab on Austria was probably a little too early, but it kept her from getting a build. England guessed right in Iberia, meaning the French would have to disband. Turkey was down to one center. Russia got greedy in the north and remained at four instead of grabbing a fifth while Germany made a land grab in Poland.

Reply: Diplomacy:: Sessions:: Re: Facebook Diplomacy: Dormitory Style

geniuslegume — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 03:43:32 +0000

by geniuslegume

Agh! The update took forever because my computer crashed. A Windows update caused XP to malfunction and I had to update to Windows 7 to get things to work. So here's the new:

Spring 1903
My plan was coming to fruition. Turkey was reeling from my surprise attack (turns out he didn't know that multiple fleets could be used for a convoy) and Austria was out of position to take advantage of my stretched military. France was wrapped up with England and Germany was driving eastward into Russia.

I had decided to finish Turkey off before turning to Austria, who was by now the bigger threat. Turkey was the kind of player who would hold a grudge and do all in his power to cripple me if I left him alive, so I continued to talk to Austria about driving further into Asia Minor.

I had two options for Turkey: either convoy my army from Naples into Constantinople and get support from my army in Smyrna or move to Ankara from Smyrna and convoy the army into now-vacant Smyrna. Initially I suspected Turkey wouldn't see the first move, but I couldn't be sure. After much self-deliberation I decided that the second move would be best, as bouncing out wouldn't be the end of the world and I could still hold Smyrna against Turkey and the army in Naples could be at hand to move up the peninsula and defend against Austria.

We were around the board that I had set up in my room (mirroring the current state of affairs) when Austria asked me "Which one is Ankara?"

I changed my orders.

Otherwise I was worried about the Austrian turning westward, as she had made mention of me growing too strong, at which point I had to constantly remind her that we were both at 6 and looking to gain one apiece before the end of the year.

Regardless I thought she would be going to the Adriatic, so I made the same play from Venice. I brought my army from Munich to Tyrolia to prepare for a full on assault.

The moves
England:
The fleet at North Sea hold.
The army at Wales move to London.
The fleet at Brest move to Mid-Atlantic Ocean.
France:
The army at Belgium hold.
The fleet at Liverpool move to Clyde.
The army at Portugal move to Spain.
The army at Paris move to Brest.
The fleet at English Channel move to London.
The army at Picardy support move to Brest from Paris.
Italy:
The fleet at Ionian Sea convoy to Constantinople from Naples.
The fleet at Aegean Sea convoy to Constantinople from Naples.
The army at Naples move to Constantinople via convoy.
The fleet at Venice move to Adriatic Sea.
The army at Munich move to Tyrolia.
The army at Smyrna support move to Constantinople from Naples.
Germany:
The army at Holland hold.
The army at Livonia move to Prussia.
The fleet at Norway move to Sweden.
The fleet at Kiel move to Denmark.
The army at Prussia move to Silesia.
Austria:
The army at Vienna move to Trieste.
The fleet at Albania move to Greece.
The fleet at Trieste move to Adriatic Sea.
The army at Bulgaria support hold to Rumania.
The army at Rumania support hold to Bulgaria.
The army at Serbia support move to Greece from Albania.
Turkey:
The army at Greece hold.
The fleet at Constantinople hold.
The army at Sevastopol move to Armenia.
The fleet at Black Sea move to Ankara.
Russia:
The army at Warsaw hold.
The fleet at Sweden move to Denmark.
The army at St. Petersburg move to Finland.
The army at Moscow support hold to Warsaw.

I had correctly predicted both Turkey's moves and Austria's moves. She surprised me by stabbing Turkey and taking Greece, destroying the Turkish army. Russia seemed to waste a turn going to Finland rather than driving into Norway directly from St. Pete. France's army from Portugal began moving eastward, which could be disastrous if I could not finish Austria in time.

Reply: Diplomacy:: General:: Re: Is there any reason to play this 2-player?

quozl — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 03:34:58 +0000

by quozl

There's a two-player variant called Intimate Diplomacy that I've heard good things about.

Reply: Diplomacy:: General:: Re: Is there any reason to play this 2-player?

Robrob — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 03:21:34 +0000

by Robrob

Anjohl wrote:
But in all liklihood I am going to be learning the game in a 2-player setting. Is that going to gum up the works completely? Is it better to wait until I have a larger group?

Given that it's a game of conspiracy, yeah - a two player isn't going to work too well. You certainly could play a couple "test" games two player (each of you running two or more powers), just to see how the move/fight/support mechanics work.

Also, is there any way to get those amazing metal pieces from the 1999 edition seperately? I absolutley HATE non-wood/metal pieces in board games, and won't generally buy anything with poor components.

You might be able to use bits from a thrift store Risk game or even repurpose some meeples.

Reply: Diplomacy:: General:: Re: Is there any reason to play this 2-player?

malloc — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 03:18:49 +0000

by malloc

Absolutely not.

-M

Reply: Diplomacy:: General:: Re: Is there any reason to play this 2-player?

MisterG — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 03:13:00 +0000

by MisterG

A 2-player game might be worthwhile in terms of learning the (very simple) mechanics of the game.

Otherwise, no, you'd be wasting your time.

Thread: Diplomacy:: General:: Is there any reason to play this 2-player?

Anjohl — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 02:44:37 +0000

by Anjohl

Might sound like a very stupid question (There most definitely *are* stupid questions), but here is the scenario:

Current group is 2-players, a friend and I. We are hoping to expand our group, and I think Dip. is a game that several of my family members would enjoy as well. But in all liklihood I am going to be learning the game in a 2-player setting. Is that going to gum up the works completely? Is it better to wait until I have a larger group?

Also, is there any way to get those amazing metal pieces from the 1999 edition seperately? I absolutley HATE non-wood/metal pieces in board games, and won't generally buy anything with poor components.

Reply: Diplomacy:: Reviews:: Re: [Video Review] Diplomacy

Anjohl — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 06:53:37 +0000

by Anjohl

The impression I get of the game from your review is that this is the logical evolution of the game Risk.

Reply: Diplomacy:: Reviews:: Re: [Video Review] Diplomacy

Anjohl — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 06:45:40 +0000

by Anjohl

Constantinople....fantastic.

It's *so* not Istanbul. *$&# you Four Lads.

Reply: Diplomacy:: Sessions:: Re: Facebook Diplomacy: Dormitory Style

DrSwordopolis — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 22:34:10 +0000

by DrSwordopolis

I really enjoy these sessions reports, and yours is well-detailed and entertaining. As a relative newcomver to Diplomacy yourself who has also been playing online (though at www.playdiplomacy.com with strangers), I can definitely relate to the sort of situations you've got yourself in. In my second game ever, I'm playing as England, I made an agreement with France that he would allow me the Channel AND support me into Belgium(!) into fall 1901, so I just moved my fleet into Brest instead. I didn't manage to hold it, and my relations with the rest of the players soured when they saw that I was so untrustworthy. but it was worth it for the fun of making such an early stab and giving a proper welcome to the French player to the ways of Diplomacy. It's really unfortunate when people make so many newb mistakes in the game, though. Really takes away the challenge (and the fun with it).

Reply: Diplomacy:: Sessions:: Re: Facebook Diplomacy: Dormitory Style

geniuslegume — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 20:08:02 +0000

by geniuslegume

Winter 1902
Austria: A Vienna, F Trieste
France: A Paris
Germany: F Kiel
Italy: F Venice, A Naples
Russia: A St. Petersburg

I had spoken to France and she was quite willing to continue her advances in the north and leave me be in the Mediterranean, which pleased me. Russia made the obvious, but solid, move of building an army in St. Pete. Germany asked me what it would take to convince me to move out of Munich, at which point I politely explained that it wasn't going to happen anytime soon as he had no way of forcing me out any time soon and he acquiesced and built a fleet in Kiel. I put an army in Naples to continue my move towards Turkey, but my trust in Austria had started to wane, so I placed a fleet in Venice as I couldn't risk losing Mediterranean dominance. As it turns out, my fears were warranted as the Austrians built a fleet in Trieste and an army in Vienna.

And so 1903 opened...

Reply: Diplomacy:: Sessions:: Re: Facebook Diplomacy: Dormitory Style

geniuslegume — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 19:57:46 +0000

by geniuslegume

I was playing with fairly new players, who understand the rules of the game but don't quite understand the tactical maneuvers that can be made, so I figured I could get away with it. So far it's still paying off :devil: but I might pay for it sometime down the road.

Reply: Diplomacy:: Sessions:: Re: Facebook Diplomacy: Dormitory Style

MScrivner — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 18:07:44 +0000

by MScrivner

Wow! A bit early for a stab, but it sounds to me like you had solid reasons. Hope it pays off. This point in the game where everyone starts fighting over the Balkans is both my favorite and least favorite part of Diplomacy. It's like a knife fight between three people in a narrow alleyway, and there really is no way to win it without getting cut oneself. I continue to look forward to the next report!!!

Reply: Diplomacy:: Sessions:: Re: Facebook Diplomacy: Dormitory Style

geniuslegume — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 17:36:52 +0000

by geniuslegume

Fall 1902

Turkey was immensely angry with my move into the Aegean Sea (rightly so, of course). In a face to face meeting with Germany and him, in Germany's room, I explained that I wanted an extra SC and moved there in order to force him to assist me into Bulgaria, which was currently occupied by Austria. I sent Austria a message via phpDip and told her exactly what I had told Turkey, saying that "So if he tells you, great; if he doesn't, then you can live knowing he would have sold you out."

My negotiations with Austria centered around what I was going to do in Turkey. I couldn't be sure how closely she was working with Turkey as they still have a truce going through 1903 and she is the kind of player to take that agreement very seriously. I told her I was going into Greece with my fleet from the Aegean. In a conversation on FB chat she suggested I move with my fleet in the Ionian Sea rather than the Aegean. With her fleet sitting in Albania, I didn't trust this suggestion one bit, but I agreed. My plan was to have Turkey support a move that didn't happen into Bulgaria and have Austria support a move that didn't happen into Greece, thus planting the seeds of doubt between both countries.

In phpDip, when a player finalizes their orders, there is a check mark by their name. When their orders are not finalized there is a red X. I try to finalize my orders at the beginning of the turn so I have a decisive plan going into negotiations (of course, you can always unfinalize and change the orders up until the deadline).

Unfortunately for me, a very astute Austria noticed during our conversation that I never unfinalized my orders. I had a very lame excuse for why and she caught me in my lie. I had a chance to stab her from Tyrolia, though admittedly it would be a very tame one with no guarantee of success; but we had been working closely for some time now and I preferred to have her on my side until Turkey was eliminated.

My other target, Germany, was wrapped up in a battle with Russia with a strong France on his doorstep ready to knock out England. I figured Munich would be an easy grab and would ingratiate me to Russia, who I would need to sandwich Austria once Turkey was eliminated.

I sent a text message to Russia, who had left a few hours earlier to spend the Fall Break at Turkey's house (a very risky message indeed), telling him to support Sevastopol from Moscow and slip his army in Prussia into Silesia with the promise that I would help him into Berlin next turn. I had hinted to him before that he could move into Denmark since Germany was headed to Norway via the Skaggerak [sic].

On Friday night with almost everyone else gone, Aaron (a non-player) and I built a fort in our lobby out of the furniture in order to watch "Teeth" and "Drag Me to Hell." I brought in my computer and, for lack of anything better to do, I was running RealPolitik through some situations that may happen in the next turn. And I discovered a grievous error made by France: in her lust for the Channel, she had left Brest wide open. I immediately sent a phpDip message to England informing him; he was incredulous, as he had expressed during many group lunches that he thought I was selling him out to England (I wasn't there for these lunches, but word made it's way to me).

The moves

England:
The fleet at North Sea move to Denmark.
The army at London move to Wales.
The fleet at English Channel move to Brest.
France:
The army at Belgium hold.
The fleet at Irish Sea move to Liverpool.
The fleet at Mid-Atlantic Ocean move to English Channel.
The army at Spain move to Portugal.
The army at Picardy support hold to Belgium.
Italy:
The fleet at Ionian Sea convoy to Smyrna from Tunis.
The fleet at Aegean Sea convoy to Smyrna from Tunis.
The army at Tyrolia move to Munich.
The army at Tunis move to Smyrna via convoy.
Germany:
The army at Holland hold.
The fleet at Skagerrack move to Norway.
The army at Berlin move to Prussia.
The army at Warsaw support hold to Prussia.
Austria:
The army at Budapest move to Serbia.
The army at Galicia move to Rumania.
The fleet at Albania support move to Greece from Ionian Sea.
The army at Bulgaria support move to Rumania from Galicia.
Turkey:
The army at Greece hold.
The fleet at Constantinople move to Aegean Sea.
The army at Armenia move to Sevastopol.
The fleet at Black Sea support move to Sevastopol from Armenia.
Russia:
The fleet at Sevastopol hold.
The army at Prussia move to Warsaw.
The fleet at Sweden move to Denmark.
The army at Moscow support move to Warsaw from Prussia.

The first, and most important, revelation is that my Lepanto worked. I expected nothing less, but there was a bit of doubt in my mind. The second was that neither my deal with Austria or Turkey was upheld by the other players, meaning that my plan to cause a split between them had failed. My thrust into Germany had been successful and neither Austria nor France had moved in my direction. Even Austria's Albanian fleet did not bother to move to the Ionian. I'm not sure what Turkey was trying to accomplish by going to the Aegean; even if I had upheld my end of the bargain and gone to Bulgaria, he wouldn't have gained the Sea he's after. Russia apparently didn't care to act on my message that would have limited Turkey to three pieces (against any other player, I would have preferred to leave him with four pieces and keep that army in Sev where it couldn't immediately bother me, but Cody is so keen on Greece that I thought he would remove on of the units by his home centers), nor did Russia move towards Germany, instead opting to take Warsaw back. England made the rather brilliant move to Brest, which France never saw coming, and bounced with the Russians in Denmark to my chagrin. The German was in a better position than I expected him to be; my stab to Munich may come back to haunt me.

Stay tuned.

Reply: Diplomacy:: Strategy:: Re: How To Win At Diplomacy

Zavia — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 16:02:58 +0000

by Zavia

cosine wrote:
Marriage counselor? No... :)

I feel that Diplomacy frequently gets a bad rap around here as the game where everyone is a backstabbing liar who'd sell their own grandmother for another center. I wanted to highlight with this article that I've never seen someone like that do well - if you can't be trusted and can't make friends, you often don't make it through Fall '02.

Yea, I have that rep a bit... from games like Bang! and Risk.
I blame a friend who tends to loudly announce how untrustworthy I am(tho i always give good reasons!) and tries to win games that way, or atleast ensure I don't. (irritating, I know.)
My 1st 3 games of Blood Feud in New York was such that he was "proven correct" as I pretty much always had a significant upper hand by the 6th round. (Non of those games lasted longer than that)

Hence, I won't be introducing Diplomacy to the group. Pity.
Thank God for online games, like the facebook app. Playing my 1st game with it, and I may have found my "chess".

Reply: Diplomacy:: Sessions:: Re: Facebook Diplomacy: Dormitory Style

MScrivner — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 02:11:17 +0000

by MScrivner

Great session report so far! I look forward to reading the continued narrative.

I've tried Facebook Dip but found that it limited negotiations a bit too much. I like that your negotiations included many other mediums, including face-to-face.

Session: Diplomacy:: Facebook Diplomacy: Dormitory Style

geniuslegume — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 19:43:27 +0000

by geniuslegume

Last semester I gathered a few of my friends here at the University of Nebraska on February 16th and introduced them to a little game called Diplomacy. We only played about five game years (which amounted to about six hours), but since no one else had even heard of the game, I counted it as a good session.

After the game, the room was split: half were so psychologically damaged that they were shaking and in a cold sweat; half were hooked, thirsty for another opportunity to make that glorious surprise of a well-timed stab.

We tried to put another game or two together before the summer came, but no avail. With all of us being full time students it was hard to find a weekend where someone didn't have some obligation already.

Then, about a week ago, I ran into the Facebook Diplomacy app (directed from a topic here on BGG, of course). I had offered the online play via the adjudicators before, but no one seemed interested--probably because of all the hassle that came with yet another website membership--but I knew they were all already members of Facebook anyway, so I joined the app and invited about ten people.

After having to give a verbal pitch to several people, I had a game lined up: three complete newbies and three who had played with me last semester (for my part, I only have about three games under my belt, none of them full).

The cast for the rest of the drama:
Italy - yours truly
Austria-Hungary - Christine (New)
Turkey - Cody (2nd game)
Russia - Carl (New)
Germany - Logan (New)
England - Jake (2nd game)
France - Mary (2nd game)

Spring 1901

Before I start, I would like to note that most of us live within the same dormitory and we see each other almost daily, so this provided us with a multitude of ways to communicate: e-mail, instant messaging, face to face, text messages, Facebook messages, or the default provided messaging system of phpDiplomacy.

The first turn was understandably filled with a lot of requests for rules verifications from the other players and I explained the rules the best I could and then sent them to www.diplomacy-archive.com/god.htm for opening strategies and other things to consider.

I was immediately worried about a Juggernaut because Cody and Carl were good buddies in Turkey and Russia, respectively. Cody had expressed an intent to attack Jake before we knew what countries we were getting, but he realized that the task would be impossible with the luck of the draw. Cody also has a special interest in Greece (he's a history major specializing in the study of ancient Greece) which I planned on exploiting. My opening negotiations with him basically said as such: "I'm afraid you're working with Russia, so unless you move the army Smy-Arm, I'm not letting you into Greece." He was quick to reply and tell me that he was not an ally of Russia and that he would make the move I requested.

Of course, I was bluffing. I needed that certain fourth build more than anyone else on the board and I was not going to waste my time bouncing out of Greece. I was setting up for the Lepanto anyway because I was worried about a Juggernaut.

My next conversation was with Austria. I told her that I wanted to bounce Trieste and Venice. She asked about the intelligence of such a move, to which I said that it was just to guarantee that neither of those pieces made a move detrimental to the other party. She questioned me again and I simply said "I'm moving Ven-Tri. Do what you will with it."

I had little to say to Germany other than some clarifications that he requested.

To Russia, I gave him several warnings that if there was an alliance between Turkey and him that I had already talked to the rest of the board and we had all agreed to fight back against them (none of that happened, although whenever I talked to Germany, England, or France, I told them that everyone else had already agreed and that they were the last). I also told him to not let Turkey have the Black Sea. He did not reply before the next season.

England and France both came to me for advice on the opening. I decided to take advantage of this and blathered about the importance of the Channel to both of them.

The moves

England:
The fleet at Edinburgh move to North Sea.
The army at Liverpool move to Wales.
The fleet at London move to English Channel.
France:
The army at Marseilles hold.
The fleet at Brest move to English Channel.
The army at Paris move to Picardy.
Italy:
The army at Venice move to Trieste.
The fleet at Naples move to Ionian Sea.
The army at Rome move to Apulia.
Germany:
The army at Munich hold.
The army at Berlin move to Silesia.
The fleet at Kiel move to Denmark.
Austria:
The fleet at Trieste hold.
The army at Budapest move to Serbia.
The army at Vienna support hold to Trieste.
Turkey:
The army at Smyrna move to Armenia.
The fleet at Ankara move to Black Sea.
The army at Constantinople move to Bulgaria.
Russia:
The army at Moscow move to Ukraine.
The army at Warsaw move to Ukraine.
The fleet at St. Petersburg (South Coast) move to Livonia.
The fleet at Sevastopol move to Black Sea.

A few things had worked in my favor: France and England bounced in the Channel; Turkey and Russia bounced in the Black Sea and Turkey had moved to Armenia, meaning that if they WERE working together, then at least the steamroller would take a turn or two longer to develop. Austria misunderstood the rule about the power of units and supported her fleet in Trieste from Vienna. Russia embarrassingly bounced himself out of Ukraine. But what was Germany doing moving EAST?

Fall 1901
Turkey, Russia, Austria, Germany, and myself were all in the same room when the first orders were revealed. I overheard Turkey asking Austria about some sort of agreement and I watched Turkey talking in a hushed tone to Russia over his computer screen.

I got Austria alone a little later and asked what Turkey had said. He had asked her to join a three year alliance with her and Germany. I jumped on Facebook and sent him a message, asking him what his agreement with Germany was. I got a reply in record time telling me that it was an agreement to destroy Russia. I was taken aback, but was skeptical still.

I began a series of messages with Russia trying to find out what went on with Turkey. He was actually receptive to my attempts at communication this season and said that Turkey offered to let him have the Black Sea this turn. I scanned the board for a few minutes before it became apparent: Turkey was trying to be sneaky and pull his army from Armenia into Sevastopol. I wasted no time in telling Russia about this and we developed a plan.

France asked what to do with England and rules about building; I told her to let him have the Channel and move her fleet Bre-MAO so that she could build a second fleet in Brest and attack him in the Channel next turn if she wanted it.

I told England that she wouldn't be challenging him for the Channel this turn and that he could use his fleet to move to Norway or Belgium.

I was worried about Germany coming down on top of Austria and I to squish us between Turkey and himself, so I asked what he was doing; he replied vaguely, "Don't worry, I'm not gunning for you."

The moves

England:
The fleet at London move to English Channel.
The fleet at North Sea support move to English Channel from London.
The army at Wales support move to London from North Sea.
France:
The army at Marseilles move to Spain.
The fleet at Brest move to Mid-Atlantic Ocean.
The army at Picardy move to Belgium.
Italy:
The fleet at Ionian Sea convoy to Tunis from Apulia.
The army at Apulia move to Tunis via convoy.
The army at Venice move to Tyrolia.
Germany:
The fleet at Denmark hold.
The army at Silesia hold.
The army at Munich move to Kiel.
Austria:
The army at Vienna move to Galicia.
The army at Serbia move to Rumania.
The fleet at Trieste move to Adriatic Sea.
Turkey:
The army at Bulgaria hold.
The army at Armenia move to Sevastopol.
The fleet at Ankara move to Constantinople.
Russia:
The army at Warsaw hold.
The army at Moscow move to Sevastopol.
The fleet at Sevastopol move to Rumania.
The fleet at Livonia move to Baltic Sea.

Germany went north and eastward towards Germany, alleviating my fears that he and Turkey would become a pincer. Russia countered Turkey's sneak attack much to Cody's dismay. The Austrians remained loyal to me and our agreement seemed to be solid for the moment. England ignored what I had said and supported his move into the Channel, giving up a supply center in the process. But France was deeply mired with him and that worked to my advantage.

So the end of the first year and quite a few surprises: Russia had made some terrible opening moves, though they are easily chalked up to a rookie mistake, but he made some strides towards recovery. Germany had made a startling move east to attack the Great Bear at the request of Turkey (!), opening himself up to France and England, who were too busy fighting with each other to take advantage of Germany's insane maneuvers. And down in the low center of the board, Italy and Austria were working together, though Tyrolia and the Adriatic were both occupied.

Winter 1901

In phpDiplomacy, you are given time to negotiate before the builds, as well, so I set off. To my surprise most people had already decided their builds without talking to anyone. My primary concerns were Germany and Turkey. I told Germany that an army in Munich would be a direct threat to me; he said that he needed to build there in order to counter France in the west. I knew that if Turkey was building a fleet that I would never bother putting an army in Venice anyway. Of course, he was building a fleet in Ankara, so I built mine in Naples and continued my plan for the Lepanto.

Builds
England: No builds
France: F Brest
Germany: A Munich
Italy: F Naples
Russia: No builds
Austria: A Budapest
Turkey: F Ankara

Spring 1902

I began talking with Austria; we had a good mutual cooperation and I did not want to ruin it until Turkey was out of the way. I convinced her to move Adr-Alb so that she could threaten Greece if she needed to. She said that Turkey told her she could have Bulgaria as long as he could have Greece. I said she should take him up on this offer.

I went into work setting up the Lepanto and making sure that Turkey was not moving to the Aegean. He came to me asking me to leave the Ionian before I had the chance; I explained to him how ridiculous this idea was for Italy and instead arranged to hold Naples and the Ionian while he held Greece and the Aegean, creating a 2 v. 2 standoff position. He bought it.

I worked with Russia on how to outfox the three enemies he had around him. We worked out that he was almost certainly going to lose one center this turn--two if he didn't play it right. We decided he should take his fleet to Sweden to be sure of at least one center. I also wanted him to keep Austria out of Rumania this turn because I needed Christine to be desperate for my help in the fall, so I advised him to move to Rumania. We tried to be sneaky in Germany by having him move out of Warsaw (which he didn't have much hope of keeping through the year) to Prussia in the hopes that Germany would send his armies west to combat France and that Carl could move into Berlin uncontested.

Germany remained fairly quiet towards me and I had no significant contact with France or England this turn.

The moves

England:
The fleet at English Channel hold.
The army at Wales move to London.
The fleet at North Sea support hold to English Channel.
France:
The army at Spain hold.
The army at Belgium hold.
The army at Paris move to Picardy.
The fleet at Mid-Atlantic Ocean move to Irish Sea.
The fleet at Brest move to Mid-Atlantic Ocean.
Italy:
The army at Tunis hold.
The army at Tyrolia hold.
The fleet at Ionian Sea move to Aegean Sea.
The fleet at Naples move to Ionian Sea.
Germany:
The army at Silesia move to Warsaw.
The army at Kiel move to Holland.
The fleet at Denmark move to Skagerrack.
The army at Munich move to Berlin.
Austria:
The army at Serbia move to Bulgaria.
The fleet at Adriatic Sea move to Albania.
The army at Budapest move to Rumania.
The army at Galicia support move to Warsaw from Silesia.
Turkey:
The fleet at Ankara move to Black Sea.
The army at Bulgaria move to Greece.
The army at Armenia move to Sevastopol.
The fleet at Constantinople support move to Black Sea from Ankara.
Russia:
The fleet at Baltic Sea move to Sweden.
The army at Moscow move to Warsaw.
The army at Warsaw move to Prussia.
The fleet at Sevastopol move to Rumania.

Russia's gambit to Prussia had not exactly paid off as the German army from Munich moved to Berlin. I was perfectly set up for the Lepanto and had no immediate threat from Austria or France. England was stagnating and Fall 1902 looked to be the first turning point in the game.

The next season to come later today after the moves are finalized.

Reply: Diplomacy:: Variants:: Re: 1900 Variant found at The Diplomatic Pouch ( http://www.diplom.org/Zine/)

r0gershrubber — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 19:44:59 +0000

by r0gershrubber

It's been nearly a year since Togu asked, but the simplest way to make a board from the image is to save it on a flash drive or cd and take it to a printing shop like Kinkos. If you tell the employees what you'd like to do, they'll pretty much do it for you.

Reply: Diplomacy:: Variants:: Re: 1900 variant

r0gershrubber — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 19:41:24 +0000

by r0gershrubber

This is my favorite variant: I went so far as to make a custom board.

Besides being more historically accurate, this variant improves game balance and interaction at the mere expense of a couple slight complications (Suez Canal rule and Russian Extreme Measures rule).

I highly recommend this variant over classic Diplomacy.