Finished: 07 PM Thu 14 May 15 UTC
MOdern Noobs
1 day /phase
Pot: 122 D - Autumn, 2004, Finished
Modern Diplomacy II, Anonymous players, Draw-Size Scoring
1 excused missed turn
Game won by Buzzle (1531 D)
08 May 15 UTC Spring, 2003: Like I said, the variant defines that "There are no home SCs." It stands to reason that any controlled SC then should be considered instead with respect to automatic disbanding rules. Keeping SCs occupied as long as possible seems most realistic and would encourage people to take over CD'd games.
08 May 15 UTC Spring, 2003: And like I said, that statement is made incorrectly due to the common misconception that home center and center you can build are the same thing. Also, one should remember that unless otherwise specified, any missing ruling will be covered by the original diplomacy rules.
08 May 15 UTC Spring, 2003: Which...again, define home center as a starting center. And disbands happen based on proximity to those centers
08 May 15 UTC Spring, 2003: And as I just read the rules of original diplomacy there is not specification as to any home centers "my error, I admit" there is no mention of any home center at all. Only home country. Disbands happen based on distance from home country.
08 May 15 UTC Spring, 2003: Yes. I was just reviewing them as well. The concept of "home SC" or "country" or even "home" is not well-defined in the rulebook. Or at least, there are too many half-definitions when fewer would do the job.
09 May 15 UTC Spring, 2003: I agree that having SCs occupied as long as possible makes the most sense.
10 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: France, you're so dead this turn it's not funny.
10 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: Congrats on helping Poland solo.
10 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: France won't even respond to us about helping Poland solo now.
10 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: I love how he moved from Picardy at just the wrong time after setting up Britain for a Polish invasion. Bye bye Belgium too. Sheesh.
10 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: England, you wanna help solo now?!? Awesome!
10 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: Should be "help me solo"
10 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: France, you are a fool.
10 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: He could have even taken Austria to even things up. So sad.
10 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: I couldn't keep up the pretense any longer. Sorry France. Points per supply center are the games for draws. I may have been premature with the stab, but so be it.
10 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: I have to say, I was surprised that I got Bulgaria. was the bounce a gamble to keep Greece open for a build?
10 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: Yep. I figured I needed two armies in the Balkans to be effective. I could have let Greece open, but I gambled you'd do something unconventional.
10 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: The thought crossed my mind, but I wanted to put pressure on you in case the thought of going to Sev crossed yours. Good gamble on your part though.
10 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: Only a good gamble when it pays off. :/
10 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: Yeah, I guess that's true.
10 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: France isn't even responding now. I guess he has seen his failure.
10 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: That sucks. I hope he doesn't just quit.
11 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: Looks like France is back and not quitting. Looks like Egypt gets that Greek build after all too.
Here's hoping that the couple of turns France spent not working against me were enough. I know I acted a bit prematurely and should have waited at least 1 more turn and probably 2. I think I am good for the solo, though it might get a little dicey.
11 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: Nah, I am not interested in continuing this game any longer. Seeing that Poland is a "Man of his word" and all.

Peace out gents.
11 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: France isn't a man at all apparently. Good riddance.
11 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: Sorry guys. I have chased out 3 players in this game. No one knows how to accept a stab anymore. Britain, and Germany, I give you my respect because you did not quit. Egypt, I would like to play you again.
11 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: I suspect we have already played before. ;)
11 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: It's always good to play good players, repeatedly
11 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: Waiting on a response from Britain before readying...soon.
11 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: No problem. Though if France is really quitting, then not much is realistic as for resistance to your Polish overlords
11 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: Survival of the honorable.
11 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: Fair enough. I respect that.
11 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: The cheese eating, wine swilling, surrender monkies on the other hand...
11 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: Given Poland's immense size, Britain's poor strategic decisions about 5 turns back (prior to Poland and my "agreement") as well as Egypt's lack of armies...the Polish Solo was inevitable.

There was nothing anyone could do to stop it, if Poland really wanted a solo. So, given that information I sided with Poland, because he gave me his word that he would draw with me. (An outcome that would at least be interesting and garner my attention away from other games and make this game more fun)

However, it seems that Poland always wanted a solo and in all honesty, I am not sure why he didn't just busy himself with that. He could have taken Belgium and broken through my lines long ago, so why wait and prolong the outcome of the game? Why wait until 2003 to 'stab' me? I don't get that move right there. I mean if you were going for the Solo...and always going for the Solo then you could have ended the game a while ago.

I am leaving because this game is going to end the way it was always going to end. Nothing I did ensured the Polish victory either. I did not tie up any Egyptian units that made the difference in the Poland's Balkan gains. Convoying to the British Isle and taking London did not give Poland the Norwegian Sea or Arctic Ocean. Britain was falling no matter what.

Now, the real thing that baffles me is Poland's statement about Draws. In a Points-Per-Supply-Center game versus a Winner-Take-All game, a WTA should have more draws than the PPSC. Why? Because a draw divides the Pot evenly between all remaining players. So, in a PPSC game, if you are in a good position (ahead of the average in SC count) then you won't want to draw because you will lose out on centers. It actually benefits you to help someone else win because you will still get more points than if a draw occurs. Versus a WTA game where if you are ahead of the avg. and someone else might solo before you. You will want to draw, because if you don't solo you get nothing. So it behooves you to draw.

So, I am not sure what you mean Poland when you say PPSC are for draws...
11 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: Worst rationalization ever.
11 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: You royally screwed up, so own it. There was a time when Poland only controlled about 35% of the SCs on the board. He could have easily been contained then by multiple opponents. WTA means a 1-vs-1 draw is impossible. One will stab the other to take the prize. PPSC means people may play for the "strong second" and get webDip points out of the game even though their opponent gets the win (which is really most important).

It is clear you don't pay WTA games at all because you don't understand what it means to win.
11 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: *play

And further, your resignation from this game proves that you aren't even worthy of respect. If you want fun, fight to the end. Don't puss out when the game goes against you.
11 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: Poland waited to stab you because *now* the outcome is inevitable. If he stabbed you when he had 25 SCs, you might have woken up to the reality that you were a patsy. But now because it's too late, you're twisting your own head to avoid admitting you made a mistake by trusting him in the first place.
11 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: really now? Poland was always going to Solo. That is an indisputable fact.

So, 5-6 turns ago I was presented with the choice of taking Poland at his word and make the game more enticing or fight a losing war. To me, this game was over when Italy went MIA. If Italy had remained then an argument could have been made for many different outcomes.

When Italy left, Britain didn't have enough units to defend against Poland's ever increasing navy, my fleets were out of position, and Egypt already had a stalemate line around the Caspian Sea/Black Sea region. So, Poland was poised to take a majority of Italy, unopposed. Egypt couldn't (and hasn't been able to) do anything about it. At the time I had 2 armies, but would have risked my line to go after Italy's centers in force.

So there was literally only 1 outcome. A Polish Solo. That is unless Poland just straight up decided to go for a draw of some kind. He approached me with the offer I looked at the board and said to myself, "If I stand with Britain and Egypt, the game is already over...Poland can take the victory easily. My only chance to make any points was to accept his offer and see what happens.

Egypt is angry because he is convinced that Britain, He, and I could have somehow stopped Poland. Which was never a possibility.

I will point out why. First off, look at the map right now. Count how many fleets Poland has in the North. There are 8. Britain never had more than 4. Even if my 2 were cooperating with Britain's, we would have 6. Poland's conquest of the British Isle would have lasted a long time but would have always ended with it being red.

Secondly, Egypt has been fighting Poland non-stop in the Balkans, Poland still gained Serbia and Bulgaria. Even if Italy had been allowed to claim Rome last Autumn, it still would have been only 1 army that had to take a turn to convoy to Greece. Poland has 3 armies in the Balkans and Egypt's fleets are powerless inland.

Lastly, A vast majority of my forces are useless. The fleets in the Mediterranean are useless, because they are both out of position and too far away to do anything. Had I been moving them straight to fight in the north, they would have been blocked up in the SAO/MAO corridor. The only reason my line of armies from Picardy to Milan are still there is because for 3 turns Poland ordered holds and supports on his line. Had he actively attacked me I would have been pushed back.

In no scenario, with any kind of collaboration between 2 or 3 of us could we have ever hoped to stop Poland. I knew this and I thought Poland knew this. Which is why when Poland made the draw offer to me I said to myself, "Well, he probably isn't lying about this mainly because he doesn't need to. He already has the game won if he wants"

How is that poor rationalization Egypt? Because honestly, look at the map. The only way a Polish solo could have been stopped is if solid, stalemate lines were set up. None of us had the forces to set them up 100% except for the line from W. Black Sea to Kazakhstan. (And even that one is only temporary)
11 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: At the end of 2001, you built a fleet at Monaco instead of Bordeaux. And because you are weak, you did not stab Poland then, which would have been sufficient to turn the tide against him. Instead, you foolishly went after me in Italy, despite my repeated attempts to set up a reasonable DMZ in the Mediterranean.

Don't make end-game deals with the largest power. Nothing good ever comes of it. I think you'd have learned that by now.
11 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: And I *told* you I needed that build from Rome SC to make a second army in the Balkans (after I admittedly screwed up by building a fleet in Alexandria).

But you were too busy fawning over your new Polish alliance to see reality.
11 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: Run to the arms of big daddy every time....
11 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: "And because you are weak, you did not stab Poland then," Where could I have stabbed Poland exactly? He was defending his entire front with me.

"Don't make end-game deals with the largest power. Nothing good ever comes of it. I think you'd have learned that by now." I explained my reasoning behind this decision.

"I needed that build from Rome SC to make a second army in the Balkans" I already pointed out that not only are you losing ground but a single army would have done zero. Poland has 2 armies on the front and 4 armies in the Balkan area. You will not convince me that a single army would have suddenly allowed you to push his multiple armies.

"Run to the arms of big daddy every time...." LOL, it is a game.
11 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: Yep. It's a game, one you played very poorly at the end.

You never even tried.
11 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: With French support, Britain could have blocked me in the north.
Egypt should have built a fleet in Iran nc, which I feared he would do the first few turns he joined.
France, at several points could have taken Austria and then Munich.
I also wondered if you all might band together and use staged retreats to get builds elsewhere on the map. A form of quick travel, if you will. Sitting on 25 SCS, I was no where close to a sure solo. The Polish solo was always going to be attempted, it was not assured though until recently.
11 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: And quitting at the end is pathetic
11 May 15 UTC Autumn, 2003: France no one agrees with your logic. You even said taking London didn't help Poland take Norwegian Sea or Arctic Ocean. That's so false. I pulled my units back from him in order to stop your invasion of me. If you had built your fleets in the north instead of the Med, we had a chance of stopping him up North. Plus you 4 units trying to take African SC's from me. Why didn't you better use those against Poland? And there were times you could have broken through Polands defensivea. Multiple times I offered to support you to Ruhr, which you would have taken since he never supported it, but you never responded to me. What I think is even more crazy is that if you thought there was no way of stopping Poland, why believe you could draw with him? That was foolish, and now you are being even more foolish by just giving up.
11 May 15 UTC Spring, 2004: Cognitive dissonance. That's you, France.
14 May 15 UTC Good game every one but France.
14 May 15 UTC Yes good game

Start Backward Open large map Forward End

Buzzle (1531 D)
Won. Bet: 10 D, won: 122 D
34 supply-centers, 30 units
Jeff Kuta (2066 D)
Survived. Bet: 12 D
15 supply-centers, 14 units
CrispyNinja (100 D)
Survived. Bet: 10 D
12 supply-centers, 13 units
rannjohnson (1361 D)
Survived. Bet: 7 D
3 supply-centers, 3 units
esb257 (100 D)
Defeated. Bet: 10 D
Tama in China (120 D)
Defeated. Bet: 10 D
Iñigo (0 D X)
Defeated. Bet: 3 D
Imperator Dux (603 D (B))
Defeated. Bet: 10 D
psychosis (100 D)
Defeated. Bet: 10 D
unterTboot (188 D)
Defeated. Bet: 10 D
Civil Disorders
Puddle (518 D)Britain (Spring, 1998) with 7 centres.
Glasgow Warrior (105 D)Russia (Spring, 1997) with 6 centres.
Tarsil (7 D X)Egypt (Autumn, 1999) with 11 centres.
Tama in China (120 D)Italy (Autumn, 2001) with 5 centres.
Iñigo (0 D X)Russia (Spring, 1999) with 1 centres.
Archive: Orders - Maps - Messages