Your 5 D claim is dubious at best. The lowest England ever had was 3 SCs, and the buyin on that game was at least 100 D initially. There is no way you bought in as England for 5 D. Try another one and see if we believe you.

You're banned.

Draugnar -1. I bought into that game for 5 (D)s

You probably mean 100 when you say 5. It is possible to back calculate the bets, although there is a rounding error. You did not buy in for 5 points.

I'm suprised anyone would ally with you. I guess the game comes first...

England and Italy went CD and were picked up in time to move in Fall 1904. Assuming England bought in first, then the original pot looks like it was about 525 (75 point buy in). with 5 SCs at that point Englands buy in would have been around 90 points.

The only way to have a 5 point buyin for 5 SCs would be in a 35 point game at the time of the buy in. So seriously, stop lying about it.

I thought It was a well played take over by the way.

why in not-gods name is this thread at the top?

stop posting on these ridiculous thread people

The Ghostmaker -1: I bought into that game for 5 (D)s. The pot grew because several large countries CDed.

airborne -1: France proposed the alliance, not me.

philcore -1:I bought into that game for 5 (D)s. The pot grew because several large countries CDed.

Sicarius -1
You just posted on it, stupid.

Kestas, forum ban time pl0x?

diplomat1824 +1

I hope you're this mercurial in real life.

isnt that dude like 40

I've heard anywhere from 12 to 40. Who knows?

Who cares, really?

guess it doesn't matter. but I would like him to be twelve rather than 40.

I'm trying to be optimistic about human intelligence but its not turning out so well

Age matters little. Plenty of under 18s are smarter than people twice their age and from what I have seen the main cause of the young being stupid is that the older generation stereotypes them as being stupid and stereotypes and argumentum ad populum arguments are tough to do away with it due to the fact that they appeal to people in an emotional way rather than a logical one and for many the emotional is more stimulating than the logical one and so with it being a stereotype that the young are stupid the young guess that they have little reason to become smarter and therefore no enthusiasm to become smarter, the means are present but the will is absent therefore the effort is unsuccesful.

@diplo1824: "philcore -1:I bought into that game for 5 (D)s. The pot grew because several large countries CDed."

I'm only responding because I enjoy working out the "what if" math. You should try it, you'd see how seriously flawed, your 5 point claim is. But let me walk you through a scenario just for kicks:

5 point buy in - 35 point pot.
England CDs with 5 SCs - you take over for 5 (pot = 40)
Germany CDs with 10 SCs - someone takes it over for 15 (pot = 55)
France CDs with 10 - take over for 20 (pot=75)
Austria CDs with 17 (almost made the win, damn!) - taken over for 38 by incredibly bad player who couldn't monopolize on the 17 SC (pot=113)
Turkey CDs with 12 - taken over for 40 (pot=153)
Russia CDs with 12 - taken over for 47 (pot=200)

Seriously? I'm still only to a 200 point pot. You really Really expect anyone to buy that all of these improbable high positions went into CD over and over again, new players not capitalizing, and then CDing themselves, not only to the extremes in my example but another 10 times or so to get up to 700 points?

really?

aside from that it is very easy to simply walk through the moves and see that only 2 countries could have gone CD in that particular game. I suppose you could claim that every CD was a fall retreat, followed by unit placement miss, but that even adds more unlikeliness to your story.

It was a well played take over, I think you did a good job. Why is it so important to stick to your 5 point take over lie? Personally, it doesn't matter to me if it cost you 1 point or the 90 that you really played, it doesn't make it any more or less of a win. It just makes you appear really realy stupid to stick to that story. When you've been caught, own up!

Sioraf:
"Words"

Commas, man! Commas! And periods!
Break your sentence! Aaaargh!

Sorry.

S'fine. Just saying for next time. :P
I got the idea well enough, at least.

philcore -2, for being wrong twice. I bought into that game for 5 (D)s.

diplomat. Your position is untenable, so why do you attempt to hold it?

Because he's not allowed to start inane threads anymore, so this is how he can get off.

ok - I was trying to get you to see that it is easily verified that you are lying, but go ahead and stick to your guns. You are truly an idiot.

Um, Sioraf... I'm guessing you took offense because you are of the younger crowd... I never think anyone is stupid based on age, but inexperienced can't be argued. And stereo-type or not, youthful exuberance and inexperience leads to an insitence that one is right even when they know they are lying. That is why the founding fathers set minimum gaes for roles such as President in the US. It allows the levelheadedness (is that a word) of the more experienced, and therfore pragmatic, individual to prevail over the exuberance and idealism of the inexperienced youth.

You are right, completely. I never mentioned experience, just intelligence though.

Agreed, nor did I mention intellect. And I've seen some condescension from people towards me (telling me to let THEM plan the strategy) that proved that sometimes, experience can make one arrogant. I'll be 43 in less than 3 weeks, and the arrogance came from a 50 something. What he failed to realize is it was my nation to do with as I pleased and being arrogant and condescending made me decide to give it to an ally who, while not exactly giving me anything, wasn't as stubborn. It was a CD in a bad position I took over just trying to survive and get a few D out of. I was trying to talk both into leaving me alone, but Mr. A&C wanted me to follow his exact moves as if it was his nation. I lost the pitance of points, but got to help the friendlier guy out.

I think playing experienced players is better because although there are so many things that can be done in Diplomacy most of them either fail miserably or are foiled by a better strategy (for example England has 15 or so possible openings but only 2 or 3 seem to be any good) so the experienced players to a degree are predictable. Playing newcomers I think is HARDER because you never know what they're going to do next and often I find they pull off a move that would have me stunned for an hour or so.

Everyone -1: I bought into that game for 5 (D)s, and will continue to insist on such.

Diplomat -infinity: Hey Diplomat, this is no longer about you. Let the adults and intellectually above avergae teens talk and you go back to playing in your sandbox where the 2 year olds actually believe your tall tales.