Finished: 08 PM Sun 07 Mar 21 UTC
7empest 2
1 day /phase
Pot: 350 D - Autumn, 1913, Finished
Classic, Rulebook press, Anonymous players, Sum-of-Squares Scoring
1 excused missed turn
Game drawn
12 Feb 21 UTC Spring, 1906: It's going to be an interesting morning to read all that! (I'm on Taipei time - GMT +8).
22 Feb 21 UTC Spring, 1909: Can I just say that, given that one of the key strategic items for Italy in the whole game is taking MAO, positioning so I had three on it and my opponents only had two, that I made a stupid mis-click order and Spain supports NAO - MAO instead of NA - MAO is the worst thing imaginable. They're right there next to each other. Both start with "North." And it doesn't even drop to 2:2. That's where France attacks from, so I made it 3:2 for not-Italy.

And it's the MAO.

22 Feb 21 UTC Spring, 1909: Your conscience got the better of you, I think! Subconsciously, you know it's time to smash that draw button ;)
04 Mar 21 UTC Autumn, 1912: HOLY SHIT
04 Mar 21 UTC Autumn, 1912: I'm horrified, but also really impressed lol
04 Mar 21 UTC Autumn, 1912: Isn't that the exact same move I offered you against England back in 1902 XD
04 Mar 21 UTC Autumn, 1912: I could only be impressed by a SMY -> EDI convoy.
04 Mar 21 UTC Autumn, 1912: @France, yeah, I just took a small delay in actually doing it.

Come ON you guys. You have to roll over now. Don't make me tell my kid that as Italy I convoyed Piedmont to Clyde and didn't win! ;-)
04 Mar 21 UTC Autumn, 1912: The highlands are a cold, harsh and unforgiving land, Italy. There's a reason the Romans didn't stick around. Their descendants won't be, either. Prepare to die!!!
04 Mar 21 UTC Autumn, 1912: you realize that you are also a descendant of the Romans France
04 Mar 21 UTC Autumn, 1912: No, the French are descendants of the Franks, which were a German tribe, don'tchaknow
04 Mar 21 UTC Autumn, 1912: Speaking of descents, I'm originally from the Clyde area, Glasgow that is ;-)
04 Mar 21 UTC Autumn, 1912: Glasgow - Taipei isn't a legal move. How the heck did that happen?
04 Mar 21 UTC Autumn, 1912: Must've been a hell of a convoy.
04 Mar 21 UTC Autumn, 1912: I can see why you'd only be impressed by Smyrna to Edi.
04 Mar 21 UTC Autumn, 1912: I'm originally from the Clyde area as well, from Ayr, specifically
04 Mar 21 UTC Autumn, 1912: although Ayr might actually be in Liverpool on this map, since Liverpool is up where it has no business being
04 Mar 21 UTC Autumn, 1912: I’ve been to Ayr, and got a good friend from there. Beautiful part of the world.
05 Mar 21 UTC Autumn, 1912: @France My aunt lives in Ayr. Funny if she's your good friend lol

@Turkey Not many of us here! We should establish an association here - Scots stabbing on webDip.

@Italy How on earth do you know about Taipei???
05 Mar 21 UTC Spring, 1913: @Germany, the Italian intelligence apparatus is extremely efficient and far-reaching. They guessed after you told us you were in the Taipei timezone.
06 Mar 21 UTC Spring, 1913: I definitely need to begin taking notes as to what I tell whom what...
06 Mar 21 UTC Spring, 1913: You said that to me privately first, but you also said that in public press on 2/12.
06 Mar 21 UTC Spring, 1913: Indeed! too many games at the same time!
06 Mar 21 UTC Spring, 1913: But in all seriousness, it isn't a bad idea. As some of you in this game can attest, I do my best thinking when I'm typing at someone. I can't tell you how *often* I have to delete 6-8 paragraphs of text because I've been working out some line or something and I realize that it is now information that I don't actually want to pass along. And it can be hard to remember what you've said to whom.

Another thing that is fascinating when I remember to do it (which doesn't include this game) is to write a bunch of press to myself - essentially journaling. I think I'm pretty good about being honest with myself about what I thought at various points, when I get lucky, etc., but it is genuinely hard to remember. For instance, in this game, I *really* didn't want to have an early conflict with France, and I kinda believe that he didn't really want to have one with me. Yet we were way-above average engaged in the first three years until it finally blew up. This was so dramatic, and at times frustrating, that it is clear in my mind. But I have no real memory of Austria in this game. It was over a month ago. Why did I choose to attack Austria early? I don't typically do this as Italy. What was my reason? I know what part of it must have been - an early planned alliance with Russia. But in what ways did Turkey and Germany influence it? I couldn't tell you. The interface isn't amazing for reconstructing those events (though it is a little easier now that they put the seasons in), but if you have your notes broken up by season, you can review and step through the game and learn more from it - at least that's what happened to me when I've done this.

I should write a scraper and see if I gush less text at other players when I'm writing to myself a lot. I wouldn't be surprised if that's so. I seem to have a congenital need to babble.
06 Mar 21 UTC Spring, 1913: The 'Notes' table is there for a reason. It's only a matter of developing such a habit.
06 Mar 21 UTC Spring, 1913: Yep. I'm at the level of seeing it is a good idea, but not yet in the habit of always doing it. :-/
06 Mar 21 UTC Spring, 1913: I’ve never seen someone write so much in this game. It’s wild
06 Mar 21 UTC Spring, 1913: You're far away. Russia's is a substantial multiplier of yours. :-)
06 Mar 21 UTC Good game all. I'm willing to assume that you're not going to allow me into the Channel or London and then on to Nth to start wreaking havoc. :-) I'm also pretty sure that my position is unbreakable.
06 Mar 21 UTC Thanks Italy. One of the most satisfying games of Diolomacy I’ve ever played. Nice work
06 Mar 21 UTC Thanks, France! For me as well. I don't think I've ever solo'ed as Italy on webdip. Still haven't. :-) But it will be interesting to talk about it once we wrap.
06 Mar 21 UTC Pass on my apologies to your son.
06 Mar 21 UTC LOL!
07 Mar 21 UTC I wanted to write 'I'm not drawing until the green stains are removed from the board', and then I realised that I'm incredibly lucky to have survived in the first place.
I truly enjoyed the game, its initial chapter, the sudden arrival of the thick, black clouds, and the flawless co-operation afterwards of three of us denying Italy the solo. I think all this was only possible due to the fact that the game was played by experienced players, and I can't wait to press the draw button to learn your names!
07 Mar 21 UTC And I'm feeling a bit awkward (I'm delaying the moment of the mask removal to heat up the temperature of the moment even more, lol). Feeling awkward that it is I, who almost got eliminated in the early phase of the game, to be the last to vote draw.

Ok, without further ado, I'm pressing the button.
07 Mar 21 UTC And I was right - strong, strong names all around!
07 Mar 21 UTC You flatter me - I generally suck
07 Mar 21 UTC A note to England - you were DOOMED from the moment you showed me a map of your previous game! Beware of doing that in future! Bwa-ha-ha-ha-haaaaa!!!
07 Mar 21 UTC Good to see some familiar faces in this game!

Italy, I suspected I had encountered you before in another game, but truth be told, I was convinced you were someone else entirely!
07 Mar 21 UTC Frankie, Szpoti--it was great working with both of you to make this draw work. At one point I thought I might be able to sneak in a solo. Glad you guys were there to make sure I didn't get totally steamrolled when I left myself open to Italy's stab.
07 Mar 21 UTC @France - can you elaborate this point about the board from another game?
07 Mar 21 UTC I had shown a strategy I played in a previous game. Is this not allowed?
07 Mar 21 UTC I'm asking just as a curious player, not as a mod investigating, although we could.... no no, we're not going down this road! I'm just curious.
07 Mar 21 UTC Do you mind my sharing the details of this, England?
07 Mar 21 UTC @England, if that game is either non-anonymous or over (and thus names are revealed) it is against the rules because it constitutes revealing your identity in an anonymous game. From your comments here, and the reaction that you apparently got, it was clearly both not intended as against the spirit of that rule and had no negative effect, if it happened. I doubt a mod would do more than explain what I've just explained unless this is the 12th time it is has happened, but this might be a good place to stop talking about it. :-)

FWIW, Russia and I both thought we knew who the other was, and did mention that generally, but without saying *who* we thought the other was, or what made us think so, and we were both wrong. Neither of us said anything that would have allowed either of us to investigate the question. Anonymous games should stay anonymous.

Also, in case you don't happen to know, except for perhaps being disqualified because of being in the game, Szpoti is one of the people most likely to be investigating the matter if it were raised as a complaint. :-)
07 Mar 21 UTC (The suspicion on my part with Russia was based only on style of communication and a strong tendency toward long alliance play. I suspect Russia's suspicion was similar, and probably even more based on press, as the sheer volume of press that I tend to say is something of a fingerprint. I tend to write *a lot* in Diplomacy. I don't know that I've ever encountered anyone that writes more than I tend to.)
07 Mar 21 UTC I had shown a previous board I had the played on to success. That was the extent of it. Then got gobbled up lol
07 Mar 21 UTC On to the post-mortem! My biggest question here is to France. What was your real intent toward Italy in the opening? I deeply didn't want an early conflict with France. I believed then, and never really shook the feeling, that France also didn't want an early conflict with me. Nonetheless, we had a start with way above-average engagement with each other. I thought that my moves were clearly defensive in orientation. And in press, through the first two major rounds of conflict, I did exactly what I said that I was going to do. In the second, I even laid out the exact best line of attack for you against me and pointed out that if you did that, how I would reply in all details and why it wouldn't work. And in that case, you did every move that I wrote, I responded exactly as I said I would, and it didn't work. It was only on the third pass that I stated a reconciliation path, you took it and I violated my part of it. I had finally decided that if so many of my units were going to be stuck in the area, it was time for me to dominate it.

Please understand, I consider the answer that you were just trying to get my guard down enough to hit from go to be totally fine. That's the game. And you did it reasonably well, as even at the game ending, I'm not really sure that you had ill-intent. I'd just love to hear whether it was that and I just managed sound enough defensive tactics, or if it really was a breakdown in communication where we both might have flourished better if such a miscommunication could have been corrected. If you were trying to avoid attacking France, I need to figure out what I should have done in press to make you realize that you didn't need to do those things -- or else see why my plan was more alarming to you than I believe that it should have been. (All players are encouraged to comment on this latter part.)

Russia, it was wonderful playing with you. I thought you were the Turk from Modern 2-7. The long-alliance style added to the nature of the press was very familiar. (In that game, I as France and Arminius10 as Turkey decided in the first year or so on very far-reaching plans and carried that alliance through the end, only running into one minor bump in that I wanted Egypt removed from the draw and he didn't, so I built up England to sufficient power to threaten Turkey and when Turkey finally stabbed Egypt, I stabbed England and brought us to the three-way draw with Germany which was generally the objective in that game:

That's an interesting game from the perspective of the technique of using a third party to force an ally to do something he doesn't want to do without blowing up the alliance.

Anyway... our styles are very compatible. I tend to look for players like you and ally with them. Our conversations were a joy and I never mistrusted you. Then I proved gloriously unworthy of the trust, granted. :-) The stab of Russia was barely planned before it happened. I rarely assume that I'm headed for a solo as Italy, particularly if I haven't achieved an Adventurer cum Raider unit above the stalemate line. I was very sincere in my thoughts about an alliance lasting until a draw up until almost the moment I stabbed.

My first thought of, "Maybe-Italy-Solo - .gif of Animal from The Muppets going crazy" was when it was a certain lock that I could gain MAO, with relatively thin presence of non-Italian fleets around, and several fleets that I could push straight through behind me. Then I did what I think is my most astounding mis-order ever. West Med (I think) supported NAO to MAO instead of North Africa-MAO. Not only did my 3:2 not work, but by wild "luck" I had issued the support from where France actually moved, giving him 3:2 and the region. It would be fun to go back and play from there without that mis-order. Even with everyone knowing clearly that I was making a solo run (which I don't think Russia would have concluded that early), it might have been forcible at that point. By several years later, though I did break through, and made a wild convoy that by then I more thought was cool than that it was going to cinch my victory, it was just too late. You all were in so much better a position as to be able to defend anyway. I knew that I might get lucky and grab a French center, but grabbing less than 3 French centers wasn't helpful. I needed to grab Russia centers, as his disbands might break the stalemate line. France wasn't similarly vulnerable, and it was clear that you were never going to let me circle England. If I had ever gotten a crack at Scandinavia, Russia is disbanding and can't retake himself, which means that even if someone is mopping up behind me, I have a real chance at Warsaw or Moscow in addition to whatever damage I'm doing locally.

Probably my second biggest question is what the Russian thinking was in supporting so much of my growth in the Balkans and Turkey. Things progressed largely along lines that we had discussed, but in the interim, France had tied me up for nearly a half a decade. You were in position to grab more of that yourself. I would have expected something more like leaving the Balkans mostly alone (so I slowly have to punch through, even if you support a little) while you break through the Black and gain access to southern fleets. Since I really couldn't get there by then, and you'd have been helping me with the Balkans, it really would have been hard for me to complain too loudly about this. Was your thinking about this more along the lines seeing enough skill that you felt sure that this would unite the board against you, or is more because of strong fidelity to established alliances? I do have to admit that this was the ultimate issue that caused me to run for the solo. With all respect to the player I mistook you for, who really is quite good, I thought I might be whiffing a tendency toward a bit of carebear-ing, and if that was true, not only was I going to get the numerous SCs of the area that I wasn't really in time to claim except by your generosity, but there was a good chance that you'd also not be in an excellent defensive position and I might quickly end up somewhere like Sev in a defensible position. Combine that with actually having taken Marseilles (I gave it up to break MAO, which was tactically necessary to win.) and my mis-order not happening, and I have Iberia (or one of them and something like Liverpool), and that's a solo. What was your thinking on that line?

Ask me anything. Please feel free to criticize or analyze my play. I'm always interested and am not too sensitive about such things. I'd say more about other powers, but as I mentioned, I didn't really take notes during the game, and it hard to remember this as more than a France-Russia-Italy game, with a small German who annoying was going to act tactically perfect in maintaining a stalemate line against me. :-) (Germany, I even recall an incident or two where I tried to convince you to do something like taking Holland, pointing out that France had units not needed to stalemate me, and your saying "Good point, I'll take it in the fall.", which would have created a situation where my western raider actually could do some good, but somehow I felt, even as I was typing my request and reading your response, that we both knew that we both knew you weren't doing that. Good on you.)

I think everyone played well. I enjoyed it immensely. Congrats on having the three-power ability to coordinate as well as was required to stop me.
07 Mar 21 UTC Oh, P.S.:

Spzoti, this might give you a chuckle, as you probably know the guy: Late in the game, for reasons outside the game, I thought you might be A_Tin_Can. :-) I'm in the Diplomacy Mentoring program, as a mentee to Tim. We hadn't talked for a while, and when I started to think there might be an Italian solo, I wrote to him to see if he wanted to talk about a game in progress. That's not our usual pattern, usually discussing general principles and games after the fact, but Italian solos aren't a "usual" thing. He replied instantly - "Talk about Diplomacy? Sure! Great. Busy now, but soon." or words to that effect. Then he wrote back after I was asleep saying, "Are you awake for a call? If not, I'll write something up." Obviously, he got no response with me asleep. But he didn't write anything up. I then wrote again, and no reply - very unusual for him. I stopped because there was a chance, however slim, that I had collided with him in an anonymous game. You floated the Taipei timezone, which is not where he lives, but only three zones away, so close enough to explain the rough pattern of when you're up. I started to wonder if you were he, and he was just black holing my email until the game was over and hoping I didn't text, as if I were to run into the reverse situation, that's what I would have done. (Press style and other factors made me sure he wasn't Russia or France.) Now I can just poke him harder. ;-)
08 Mar 21 UTC Hey Italy,

Wheels within wheels within wheels is the name of the game, but to be honest with you in the early part of the game things were indeed pretty much exactly as I presented them to you in press - that I had made up my mind to attack England (the reasons for which I shall share details of if England is comfortable with it), and wanted to line up my naval units in such a way that I looked committed to an attack on Italy but in fact could reverse within a turn right into England's backyard. It worked even better than I had hoped, as England still proceeded for a further turn before accepting that I had definitely turned against him.

For later on, I think my game suffered from my usual pitfalls, which is that I tend to stab too early, or without sufficient foresight. My conversations with both you and Russia when I launched an invasion into Northern Italy in Autumn 1905, and pushed further into Scandinavia were, as I'm sure you figured, half-truths to both of you. Yes, Russia, I wanted to ensure my dominance over Germany if we did indeed need to eliminate him (though Germany I had been pressing for you to have a better deal, I enjoyed working wth you more than anyone in the game and my later stab of you was very reluctant - small comfort I know!), and yes, Italy, I felt my defences might be somewhat stronger if I had potential land-threats in the North of Italy (I didn't pay much attention to your warnings about it, though they were completely correct in hindsight). But it cannot be denied that both Scandinavia and Northern Italy also had elements of exploratory reconnaissance, and had I caused either of you to reel back a bit more than you did, I would have taken the chance to push on. By my attacks were poorly timed. I've been wondering for a while if I should, in fact, not have launched my Italian attack the turn before (as I was very, very tempted to do - I even messaged you about having changed my orders a mere half hour beforehand. I didn't say what I'd changed them from, but essentially I'd postponed my invasion), whether that would have been much more successful, as you hadn't got your builds to counter me with.

Yes, as usual, I did fairly well up until the late mid-game, and then squandered my advantages. 'Tis often the way with I. But I repeat that this was the most enjoyable game I have played in a fair old while, fantastic press from everyone. Thanks again.

Start Backward Open large map Forward End

yoak (1765 D)
Drawn. Bet: 50 D, won: 220 D
15 supply-centers, 14 units
Drawn. Bet: 50 D, won: 80 D
9 supply-centers, 9 units
Drawn. Bet: 50 D, won: 36 D
6 supply-centers, 6 units
Szpoti (1766 D Mod)
Drawn. Bet: 50 D, won: 16 D
4 supply-centers, 4 units
Succotash (117 D)
Defeated. Bet: 50 D
JamesFranco (100 D)
Defeated. Bet: 50 D
Fianwa (100 D)
Defeated. Bet: 50 D
Archive: Orders - Maps - Messages