Finished: 06 PM Tue 16 Feb 16 UTC
Private ODC 2015: Round 2, Board 4
1 days, 12 hours /phase (slow)
Pot: 35 D - Spring, 1928, Finished
Anonymous players, Draw-Size Scoring
Game drawn
12 Feb 16 UTC Spring, 1927: Turkey's goal, both unsporting and unlikely to be successful in my opinion, appears to be playing for a NMR. Am I right about that?
12 Feb 16 UTC Spring, 1927: He could be playing for a misorder, too.
12 Feb 16 UTC Spring, 1927: Even one misorder wouldn't change things, would it? Taking Munich and Berlin wouldn't be enough to take Kiel, too. Not sure why England hasn't put a fleet in Baltic and Western Med, but doing so would ensure that it would take multiple NMRs/misorders to break the stalemate line.
12 Feb 16 UTC Spring, 1927: Well, you can probably guess why England hasn't put a fleet in Baltic.
12 Feb 16 UTC Spring, 1927: I assume at your request?
12 Feb 16 UTC Spring, 1927: Yep.
12 Feb 16 UTC Spring, 1927: Happy to put a fleet there if you want ...
13 Feb 16 UTC Spring, 1927: thank you all for your kind comments :)
I can assure you this game is set to become slightly less boring
15 Feb 16 UTC Moderator: (ghug): A stalemate had formed, centers had stopped changing hands, and the players involved had no interest in breaking the stalemate, so a draw has been forced.

Thanks to all of you for playing.
15 Feb 16 UTC I am less bored now! :D
15 Feb 16 UTC 'grats mscott
16 Feb 16 UTC thanks - good game all
16 Feb 16 UTC I have to say I'm rather disappointed that the moderator has forced a draw at this point.... you can see I'm halfway through a plan of putting England on brink of solo.

As for me being portrayed as the bogeyman for prolonging the game, I'd like to point out notable contributions of others:
1. England: If he had been willing to work with me, we'd have finished this game 10 years ago as a 2 way draw. But he prefers to drag this game out by 10 years and turn a 2 way draw into a 4 way draw. All just to keep me out the final because he's too chicken to face me.

2. Germany: he wasted about 7 years through leading me on.... promising to stab England if I do x. Then as soon as I do x, demanding y too. Now obviously this has worked out for you Stack, if all you wanted was a 4 way draw - so congrats. But the fact that the moderator has rewarded you for these tactics by artificially forcing a draw I think creates some very perverse incentives for people. It's just asking for people to adopt exactly the same tactics - which waste everybody's time.
16 Feb 16 UTC And ghug: think about point 2. and the incentives you're setting up for people in future games. If you had allowed me to follow through with my plan, then maybe it would have been 50% England solo, 50% 2 way draw. By artificially ending the game now, you're rewarding Germany for his earlier time-wasting in leading me on. You're sending out a clear message to anybody in Germany's position in future games that if you can time waste and prolong the game long enough by leading people on as Germany did here, then you will be rewarded by a draw.
Is that really the message you want to send out?
16 Feb 16 UTC TBC about point 2: honestly, I felt bad, but I realized I had negotiated a bad deal for myself. What was I to do at that point? Keep the deal, and accept a risk I thought was unacceptable, or try to make a new one? I tried to make a new one; you didn't like that; and that's the ballgame.
16 Feb 16 UTC Germany: I see - thanks for your honesty. I felt the deal we negotiated, was biased in my favour but should have been good enough for you. Here the tournament should have come to your aid as I was very unlikely to step out of line and go for a solo. Your constant renegotiation led me to question your motives. Anyway, your 3rd on my list of people I'm annoyed at.

1st place is an England who has turned down a 2 way draw in favour of a 4 way draw together with a 10+ year delay.... all just to keep me out of the final.

2nd place is ghug who ended this game prematurely despite my messages telling him I was doing stuff. Throughout, I kept ghug informed of my plans - and told him that if all else failed my final plan was to put England on brink of solo to incentivise him to stab.... I explicitly told him more than once that I would do that at the end as a "hail Mary" play if you will. For him to deny me that chance just as I had set up the position seems barmy - especially bearing in mind that I responded to all ghug's messages and was never given any specific notice of a planned end. I know being a moderator is a tough job, and I don't like to criticise since I'm sure he does a lot of good for this site. But sorry... I felt that decision was just plain wrong.
16 Feb 16 UTC Yeah, I probably should have just paid more attention from 1917 on and maybe the endgame would have been more exciting if I had pushed harder for a deal I could definitely take. I understand the renegotiation undermined my credibility so I don't blame you. Keep in mind I got burned on a bad deal for a 2-way in Board 2 (which ended around 1913 in this game I think), so I was in a pretty cautious mood going in and a bit de-motivated after that solo.
17 Feb 16 UTC Turkey - Do you honestly think I was playing specifically to keep you out of the final? That is ludicrous:

1. I had/ still have no idea who you are
2. I played to get ME in the final, as was unconcerned with whether any or all of you went there with me.
On strategy:
You went for a solo and failed, thanks to some quick thinking and action, and some difficult negotiations between Germany and me; once that bid failed, I was content to play to draw if you didn't give me a clear and low-risk opportunity to solo. At the end there, it was getting close. However, it took you ten years to get there and you employed Italy's survival as a pawn in a game where a) he was defeated and should have been eliminated (no offense, Italy, but it's true) and b) it made no difference to my primary goal of advancing. It did piss me off as a silly strategy, and made me Elsa willing to work with you though.
Once your solo attempt failed, if you truly wanted the 2-way draw, you should have retreated from the south and from Germany to give me a 1-year buffer; I think that's what I needed to make it happen. Anyway, Germany proved, despite early disagreements, to be the most durable and reasonable ally in the game.
I could have played more aggressively and stabbed Germany regardless, but it felt like I owed him more than I owed you.
17 Feb 16 UTC The Italy thing there is curious - I definitely asked jimbo to do it, not only because it seemed like a prerequisite to me making another crazy move, but because I thought it would increase the tension between you two. Wonder if he saw it the same way or would have done it if I hadn't asked.
17 Feb 16 UTC England you write:
"2. I played to get ME in the final, as was unconcerned with whether any or all of you went there with me."

I'm sorry but this is just obviously nonsense. If you worked with me, you'd have almost certainly got a 2 way draw. But even if you messed up and let me solo (and given the plan I presented, you would have had to mess up pretty bad), then you'd have been through to the final anyway as all you needed was >8 SCs.
The one path that didn't guarantee you passage to the final is the one thing you did. By holding out on me, I almost secured a deal with Germany that would have seen us work together to 2 way draw and eliminate you.

So yes, I do believe you were deliberately trying to keep me from the final because nothing else makes sense. By taking your actions you:
1. Introduced unnecessary risk for yourself.
2. Obtained a 4 way draw instead of 2 way draw.
3. Prolonged the game by 10 years.
I see no other explanation.

As for Italy, as part of the deal I struck with him, I told him that I wouldn't eliminate him just to whittle down a 4 way to a 3 way - since it made no difference to me. And I saw no reason to go back on my word here. Maybe you could argue that he's being kept alive artificially. But then to some extent, England kept Germany alive artificially too. Any normal England acting in his own self-interests would have eliminated Germany

Start Backward Open large map Forward End

jimbobicus (133 D)
Drawn. Bet: 5 D, won: 9 D
15 supply-centers, 14 units
mscott (384 D (G))
Drawn. Bet: 5 D, won: 9 D
13 supply-centers, 13 units
Drawn. Bet: 5 D, won: 9 D
5 supply-centers, 5 units
Draffin (160 D)
Drawn. Bet: 5 D, won: 9 D
1 supply-centers, 1 units
guak (3381 D)
Defeated. Bet: 5 D
ckroberts (3548 D)
Defeated. Bet: 5 D
superchunk (4890 D)
Defeated. Bet: 5 D
Archive: Orders - Maps - Messages