The old A to B, B to C, and C to A conundrum

New players can go here for helpful advice and to sign up for our mentor program, or if you're a veteran help answer questions.
Forum rules
This is an area for new members or members looking for help with the site or Diplomacy. Off topic threads and replies will be moved to the appropriate category.
Post Reply
Message
Author
Muscovy_Duck
Posts: 28
Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2019 9:35 pm
Karma: 10

The old A to B, B to C, and C to A conundrum

#1 Post by Muscovy_Duck » Fri Aug 16, 2019 1:19 pm

I'm new here but played often in past times.

I would like to know how the title situation is officially resolved.

We always used to resolve it as follows : In the absence of any external influences on this triangular entanglement, unless all 3 units were from the same Major Power, regardless of alleged alliances, then all 3 units blocked each other and stayed in place.

If, however, all 3 were of the same nationality then the switch around was permitted. This only made any difference if one of the units was a fleet.

However, I believe in a strict interpretation of the original rules, both instances would swap places as ordered.

So, how do we play here? And what experience or opinions do players have of this 'menage a trois'?

Chaqa
Bronze Donator
Bronze Donator
Posts: 7932
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:33 pm
Location: Allentown, PA, USA
Karma: 5030

Re: The old A to B, B to C, and C to A conundrum

#2 Post by Chaqa » Fri Aug 16, 2019 1:24 pm

Say there are three armies in Turkey. Turkish armies in Smyrna and Con, and a Russian one in Ankara. If they move Con->Ank, Ank->Smy, Smy->Con, all three will move. Same if these were all Turkish armies.

If another unit bounces any one of them, then the entire thing fails.

Muscovy_Duck
Posts: 28
Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2019 9:35 pm
Karma: 10

Re: The old A to B, B to C, and C to A conundrum

#3 Post by Muscovy_Duck » Fri Aug 16, 2019 1:50 pm

Thanks. Yes, I felt that was implied in the original rules; all move (providing no external unit interferes).

For some reason in our long distant face-to-face games this situation occurred far too often and hence our 'house rule'.

Of course, if just one of the 3 circling units is blocked either by a supported or unsupported attack from outside the triangle then all units stay in place.

Chaqa
Bronze Donator
Bronze Donator
Posts: 7932
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:33 pm
Location: Allentown, PA, USA
Karma: 5030

Re: The old A to B, B to C, and C to A conundrum

#4 Post by Chaqa » Fri Aug 16, 2019 4:06 pm

I'd recommend looking over the DATC stuff to learn some more. I think the rules are pretty simple all things considered, but there's some wacky stuff you can do (like supporting an enemy unit that is trying to bounce another enemy unit).

Muscovy_Duck
Posts: 28
Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2019 9:35 pm
Karma: 10

Re: The old A to B, B to C, and C to A conundrum

#5 Post by Muscovy_Duck » Fri Aug 16, 2019 4:25 pm

Indeed. Support is unconditional unless the supporting unit is attacked.

That, though, is the beauty of diplomacy; it mimics both the military and diplomatic principles (and everything else that occurs) not only by communication but also by onboard .movement.

Matticus13
Posts: 408
Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2019 2:21 am
Karma: 404

Re: The old A to B, B to C, and C to A conundrum

#6 Post by Matticus13 » Sun Aug 18, 2019 10:20 pm

You could always download jdip or use the Backstabber sandbox to figure out how different situations play out

Muscovy_Duck
Posts: 28
Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2019 9:35 pm
Karma: 10

Re: The old A to B, B to C, and C to A conundrum

#7 Post by Muscovy_Duck » Mon Aug 19, 2019 5:29 am

Back stabber sandbox !! ??

Claesar
Posts: 1935
Joined: Tue Oct 03, 2017 10:34 am
Karma: 1456

Re: The old A to B, B to C, and C to A conundrum

#8 Post by Claesar » Mon Aug 19, 2019 6:14 am

Muscovy_Duck wrote:
Mon Aug 19, 2019 5:29 am
Back stabber sandbox !! ??
http://jdip.sourceforge.net/

Muscovy_Duck
Posts: 28
Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2019 9:35 pm
Karma: 10

Re: The old A to B, B to C, and C to A conundrum

#9 Post by Muscovy_Duck » Mon Aug 19, 2019 8:04 am

Thanks again, Cleasar

Certainly looks interesting.

Would it be possible to build variants with that resource?

One variant we used to play when we couldn't get the required 7, or when someone (or two or three) reneged at the last minute was to distribute the countries by lottery, leaving the surplus neutral.

All neutral units were placed normally and assumed to have hold orders if attacked. They could be supported by an external power.

At the beginning of the Autumn turn, another draw was made giving one of the neutrals to an active player starting from the next Spring turn. This allowed players to respond to the changed circumstances.

This continued until all the neutrals were allocated to active players. There were two prohibitions to acquiring a neutral; if you had attacked that particular neutral (entered its territory or even been stood off when attacking one of its units) or if you already had been allocated a neutral (even if no longer in existence), then you could not take control of another neutral until all other players had done so (could only happen with 2 or 3 players).

We found this provided a very interesting game.

Claesar
Posts: 1935
Joined: Tue Oct 03, 2017 10:34 am
Karma: 1456

Re: The old A to B, B to C, and C to A conundrum

#10 Post by Claesar » Mon Aug 19, 2019 12:38 pm

Muscovy_Duck wrote:
Mon Aug 19, 2019 8:04 am
...
Would it be possible to build variants with that resource?

One variant we used to play when we couldn't get the required 7, or when someone (or two or three) reneged at the last minute was to distribute the countries by lottery, leaving the surplus neutral.
...
I believe our sister site vdiplomacy.net had variants for every number of players.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests