Diplomacy - EP Chapter 2 - Issue 296 From: nick@sunburn.uwaterloo.ca (Nick Fitzpatrick) Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1992 03:45:29 +0000 Issue #296 of Chapter Two of the Electronic Protocol By Nicholas Fitzpatrick (nick@sunburn.uwaterloo.ca) October 6, 1992 (1992 10 06) Distributed via: rec.games.pbm rec.games.board bit.listserv.dipl-l ------------------------------------------------------------- Electronic Protocol Games played on the Diplomacy Adjudicator ------------------------------------------------------------- **** TABLE OF CONTENTS **** PART ONE - Opinions, Letters, and Editorials: The Value of a Kill New Hall of Fame Letter from Mark Nelson Letter from Dan H|rning CFV for rec.games.diplomacy PART TWO - Summary of all moderated games on the Judge: - See issue 295 PART THREE - Report from the Battle Front Furlong EOG Report Dppd EOG Report (First Standard Non-press Gunboat Draw ever on judge) ***** PART ONE ***** *** THE VALUE OF A KILL *** From: jjfink@skcla.monsanto.com (Joel Finkle) One of the guidelines often listed regarding attacks and stabs is never to stab for just one center. One exception to that can be if in making the stab, you destroy the unit. Destroying a unit has the following benefits: 1) One less unit to counter-attack. 2) Even if it's fall, and your victim gains new units, they'll be way behind the lines. 3) If a counter-attack succeeds, the center is occupied, and the new build can't be there. The last item is the one I want to emphasize: If you can destroy a fleet in a home center, odds are a fleet won't be built there for a loooooong time. An example: Turkey: Army Armenia -> Sevastopol Fleet Black Sea Supports Armenia -> Sevastopol Army Bulgaria -> Rumania (bounce) Russia: Army Rumania Supports Sevastopol (cut) Fleet Sevastopol Supports Rumania (cut, dislodged) There is no place for the Russian fleet to retreat, so it is destroyed. Let's say that happened in spring, and in fall, a russian counter-attack succeeds (say, Rumania and Ukraine support Moscow to Sevastopol, while the Turkish units are distracted). There is now an army in Sevastopol. With an ongoing war with Turkey, it's highly unlikely the Russians will manage to EVER get Sevastopol open when a build is available, and the Black Sea region will be lost to Russia forever. Sevastopol is one of a few very vulnerable points, where there are no other nearby coastal home centers to help retake it. Similar results can probably be gotten with St. Petersburg, Trieste, Marseilles (if the Italian is asleep at the wheel and lets the French build a fleet there to begin with), and Brest. England, Italy, Turkey and Germany do not have this problem so severely, as they each have multiple centers on the same seas. This allows eventual replacement of a lost fleet position in a more roundabout way. For example, while Kiel and Berlin have very different strategic values as ports, a fleet in Berlin can retake Kiel rather easily. *** NEW HALL OF FAME *** A new Hall of Fame was released this week, if you want a copy, E-mail me (nick@sunburn.uwaterloo.ca) The top players have been invited to play in the Hall of Fame game hall92, on the judge. The game is created, and all have signed on except Andre. (Scott declined, and Sandy could not play, as he was at the same site as Matt Ender). The game is presently unlisted, but all are invited to observe. Below are the top 60 players, and a list of completed game from the Hall of Fame, if you have any corrections or additional info, please tell me. Top 60 Player List From Hall of Fame # Name E-mail Address Points - ---- -------------- ------ 1 Dave Cebula cebulad@physics.orst.edu 26.11 2 Jamie Dreier PL436000@brownvm.brown.edu 14.99 3 Andre Verweij andre@duteinh.et.tudelft.nl 11.47 4 Matt Ender ender2@husc.harvard.edu 10.58 5 Sean Pfeiffer highlndr@cs.bu.edu 10.15 6 Sandy Kutin kutin@husc.harvard.edu 9.00 7 Scott Boland scottb@cs.utexas.edu 7.83 8 Dan H|rning d91-dho@nada.kth.se 7.50 9 Bill Dunlevy dunlevy@erim.org 7.38 10 Niklas Persson niklasp@minsk.docs.uu.se 7.33 11 Brian Sullivan brians@hpcljms.cup.hp.com 7.06 12 James Codik Jim.Codik@EBay.Sun.COM 6.67 13 J.J. Lehett JJL101@PSUVM.PSU.EDU 6.58 14 Richard Sullivan sullivan@erim.org 6.32 15 Anders Dessmark Anders.Dessmark@dna.lth.se 6.00 16 Ben Lotto lotto@math.berkeley.edu 6.00 17 Brian Bacher bacherb@physics.orst.edu 6.00 18 Chuck Shotton cshotton@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu 6.00 19 David Wiseman dwiseman@spsd4330a.erim.org 6.00 20 Donald Kerr DKERR@CC-VMS1.MASSEY.AC.NZ 6.00 21 Ethan Solomita es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu 6.00 22 Grant Kalinowski grant@leland.stanford.edu 6.00 23 Ingolf Markhof markhof@ls12x.informatik.uni-dortmund.de 6.00 24 John McCarthy mccarthy@jezebel.wustl.edu 6.00 25 Jonathan Amsterdam jba@ai.mit.edu 6.00 26 Jonathan Tan 6.00 27 Lorenzo Sadun sadun@math.utexas.edu 6.00 28 Matt McLeod mjmcleod@maria.wustl.edu 6.00 29 Steve J Fatula 76106.1640@CompuServe.COM 6.00 30 Thomas Anthony Bohman bohman@math.rutgers.edu 6.00 31 Yawar Ali YALI@BNR.CA 6.00 32 Eric Hunter hunter@oswego.Oswego.EDU 5.87 33 Tony Dugdale cxad@musica.mcgill.ca 5.69 34 Nicholas Fitzpatrick nick@sunburn.uwaterloo.ca 5.15 35 Eric Shafto shafto@ils.nwu.edu 4.66 36 Robert Jentz jentz@erim.org 4.61 37 Rick Desper desper@math.rutgers.edu 4.41 38 Brian R. Landwehr RENEGADE@VAX1.Mankato.MSUS.EDU 4.38 39 Kevin Quinlan quinlan@erim.org 4.33 40 MIKE MAGNUSON S9IK9@starburst.uscolo.edu 4.33 41 Al Petterson calsci!al%gvgpsa.gvg.tek.com@RELAY.CS. 4.19 42 Michael Rawdon rawdon@cs.wisc.edu 4.00 43 David Owens owens@b.cambridge.ibm.com 3.85 44 Bill Stamos stamos@suna0.cs.uiuc.edu 3.75 45 Geoff Kent gpk8571@dijkstra.UnivNorthCo.EDU 3.75 46 Pete Rauch pcrauch@Athena.MIT.EDU 3.49 47 Fred Scott pei!moody!fred_s@sgi.sgi.com 3.47 48 Paul Kidd WISEMAN@phvax.physics.uq.oz.au 3.41 49 Ken Lo lokendr@ecf.toronto.edu 3.20 50 Mauri Krouse mauri%psych@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU 2.86 51 John Aidan O'Regan J_ORegan@csvax1.UCC.IE 2.78 52 Larry Farkas LNF@PSUVM.PSU.EDU 2.72 53 Karl Dotzek karl@adler.philosophie.uni-stuttgart.de 2.66 54 Ben Kowing as610@cleveland.Freenet.Edu 2.57 55 Anand Sinha SINHAA@SSCvax.CIS.McMaster.CA 2.50 56 Gudmundur Bjarni Josepsson gummi@rhi.hi.is 2.50 57 Karen Litten KLL3@PSUVM.PSU.EDU 2.50 58 Patrick Plaisted pat@kcgl1.eng.ohio-state.edu 2.50 59 Paul Glenn PGLENN@loyola.edu 2.50 60 Scott C. Best nsc!gpo.nsc.com!sbest%clasic.dnet@sun.c 2.50 List of Completed Games Name EP# Result ---- --- ------ Standard Games 100andup G won in 1907 apple 87 EFI drew in F1913 aust 71 EFT drew in F1914 banditos 149 AFG drew in F1907 berezina 95 EI drew in F1916 blind G won in 1914 boadicea 147 AGIT survived F1913 cannon AET survived F1910 check 89 EG drew in F1906 cubit 158 E won in 1908 diamond EFGRT survived S1911 dove EFR drew in F1914 dragons 75 T won in 1908 dram 159 G won in 1912 emerald A won in 1905 evolt 160 ERT drew in F1912 flip AGIR survived F1908 gallon 162 R won in 1912 guadal 111 GIT drew in F1907 hector 165 F won in 1910 horse 51 ART drew in S1908 inch AI drew in F1913 jade FGT drew in F1914 jugful 184 G won in 1909 juteland F won in 1916 jutland 112 A won in 1908 koursk T won in 1909 land EFGIRT survived F1907 lot 186 R won in 1908 mercury A won in 1912 mod 97 EFT drew in F1911 munk I won in 1910 nifty AEFGR survived S1907 normandy 226 EFGIRT drew in S1908 orange G won in 1909 osijek 137 GR drew in F1910 ounce 189 R won in 1909 paris 134 AR drew in F1907 portnoy 125 AEGRT drew in S1917 purple R won in 1912 quartz EG drew in F1910 quebec 154 R won in 1908 radar AEGI drew in F1907 rose E won in 1913 snake EGIT survived F1908 spam R won in 1905 sparrow 133 E won in 1918 stockhol A won in 1910 sugar G won in 1914 swift R won in 1911 tiberius 83 AIR drew in F1915 topple EFIT drew in F1910 turbo T won in 1907 under A won in 1911 vittle FGIR drew in F1908 walouf A won in 1906 water A won in 1911 whip EFT drew in S1919 xenon EF drew in F1909 xray E won in 1910 yank AEI survived F1909 zounds F won in 1909 zulu 77 R won in 1907 Standard Gunboat Games ajax 115 A won in 1912 fast R won in 1912 leipzig 128 AEFR drew in S1909 mystery E won in 1913 snorri 126 ET drew in F1912 tuba EFT drew in F1908 warp 127 EFT drew in F1912 Standard No-press Gunboat Games bach I won in 1913 conan 163 T won in 1914 dppa 167 G won in 1908 dppb 168 A won in 1907 dppc T won in 1908 dppd 238 EFT drew in S1914 khafji 138 R won in 1911 mess G won in 1912 1898 Games agincour 120 F won in 1914 bataan 152 EG drew in F1907 lepanto EIT drew in S1909 1898 Gunboat Games hide AEFT drew in S1914 sinai EGT drew in S1909 Crowded Games 7senuf FINR drew in F1909 emu BLR drew in S1907 Loeb9 Games eylau 153 I won in 1915 Youngstown Games berlin CFJNT drew in F1915 Youngstown No-press Gunboat Games iowa T won in 1913 speed FIJ drew in S1922 *** LETTER FROM MARK NELSON *** MN The longest every postal game was a game run in a German zine which ended in 1936 in a win (can't remember who by). There is a currently a British game being run in Dolchstoss which has reached 1932, or so, and still has some life left in it. NF Per Westling also wrote me, to say: From: Per Westling <c85perwe@und.ida.liu.se> The longest known game according to the European BNC ended in the game year of 1936 with an Italian Win. After that 1930 is the next oldest. Both these are games by regular mail. /Per MN I Suspect that Jim's comments on the strength of email players is correct, you don't need to have as much commitment to sign up for an email game which I think would encourage more bunnies to play. MN One way in which we could get some evidence to examine Jim's claim is to look at how long games last. In what year does the average email game finish? How does this compare to the average postal game? NF I can provide this information easily, if anyone wants to make a correlation! MN Jim mentions that in the game in which he played he built up his 2 center Italy to 13 units. In a game played in the British zine Fall of Eagles, about ten years ago, the German player was reduced to two centers but fought his way back into the game. He ended up winning it! Anyone know which is the biggest come back in an email game? MN There are many, many, different rating systems. Furthermore it's very easy to supply the raw data on finished electronic games. I'd be happy to see Karl maintain his own rating system and distribute it to email fans. Calhamer based systems (such as the one Nick) uses don't reward players who survive to the end but who are not eliminated. There is some justification for this. Games should be DIAS, but frequently players agree a draw because they don't want to continue playing the game and eliminating the remaining non-draw players. The question is then, should players who survive only because the players in the draw don't want to carry on playing receive any credit? NF To me insisting on DIAS is like insisting that in the game of chess, that a game must be played to completion. I am not sure I have ever seen a listing of a high-calibre chess game that was not ended when someone resigned. MN In the rating system I devised for postal games in 1987/88 the answer was yes. I gave players who survived (but who weren't in the draw) some pts. Nowadays I have come to the conclusion that people who agree to draws without being included in the draw should receive no credit. So I would now rate these players as being eliminated in the year after the draw was agreed. NF I agree (surprise, surprise) MN Rating systems which use "average" sc count are pointless. It doesn't matter at the path you use to arrive at the final result, it's only the final result that counts. A win is a win, regardless how you achieved it. Ditto draw. Ditto elimination (although I would separate eliminatees based on the year of elimination). MN GMs who refuse to recognize draws agreed by the players are guilty of misconduct and (a) shouldn't be GMing and (b) certainly shouldn't GM games in the future. My question is this: since Ken feels that he has the right to decide the result of the game without consulting the players, what is the point of having players in his games? NF I have published an extensive conversation on this incident in this issue of EP. MN There have been two books written on diplomacy. Rod Walker's "Gamer's Guide To Diplomacy" is still (I believe) available from Avalon Hill. Richard Sharp's "The Game of Diplomacy" is long out of print (it was published in 1978/79). You may be able to get it through inter-library loan. Failing that you can order a photocopy of it from either Richard Sharp (in the UK) or Fred C. Davis Jnr (in the States). MN There are a couple of novice-packages produced by postal fans which are worth a look. Supernova is distributed by American Bruce Linsey, I'm not sure if the other American package (Masters of Deceit) is still available --- Ken Peel (who is on CompuServe) used to distribute it. MN In the UK there are two novice packages. One called "The Novice Package" has articles on many different games, the other is distributed by Danny Collman but I think Danny refuses to mail it outside the UK. MN Finally, there is the DIPLOMACY AZ which is available on all good judges. This doesn't give you advice on how to play diplomacy but contains a wealth of fascinating tidbits about the game of diplomacy. Recommended! *** LETTER FROM DAN H|RNING *** From: d91-dho@nada.kth.se Regarding the end game comment on game Lot, which I won. I read EP but I disagree with your opinion. There is such a thing as a strong second in Diplomacy. Not in the point system (by the way, you can quote this in EP if you like) used in the hall of fame, but in the game. Many other point systems give points for second place. Every system used here in Sweden does. Even Calhammer himself acknowledges this style of playing in an article I read in Lepanto 4ever recently. He does not like it very much, though. I believe that one of the charms of the game of diplomacy is the vast amount of playing styles possible (and the vast amount of diplomatic tricks). I do not think anybody should restrict that. Dan H|rning NF There has been extensive discussion of similar type play recently in the game ounce, and it appears the majority is on your side (although people may not like it!). Read the last issue of EP for more info! *** CFV FOR rec.games.diplomacy *** A call for votes for the creation of the Usenet Newsgroup rec.games.diplomacy had been issued, here is a copy of the CFV All votes should be sent to me AT nick@watfrost.uwaterloo.ca -------------------------- CALL FOR VOTES: rec.games.diplomacy PROPOSED CHARTER: ---------------- The newsgroup would be for the discussion and organization of the game Diplomacy. Both regular (ie face to face) and play by mail would be discussed. HOW TO VOTE ----------- To register a vote, send an email message to: nick@watfrost.uwaterloo.ca To vote against the group, send a message similar to: I vote NO for rec.games.diplomacy as proposed To vote for the group, send a message similar to: I vote YES for rec.games.diplomacy as proposed The voting will close at midnight (EDT), 31st Oct. 1992 (1992 11 01 04:00 GMT) Shortly after the CFV period ends, the vote will be summarized to all relevant newsgroups. If the group receives 100 more YES votes than NO votes, and there is a majority of at least 2/3 in favour of the group, the group will be created, in accordance with net guidelines. RATIONALE: --------- Diplomacy is a very popular board game, that has also been adapted to play by mail (snail and E). There are presently over 120 games ongoing over the Internet, being played by people across the world. There are five automated Diplomacy programs (in four continents) connected to the Internet processing games. There is much discussion of the game in the groups rec.games.pbm, rec.games.board and bit.listserv.dipl-l (DIPL-L@mitvma.mit.edu). The problem is that diplomacy is split between too many places, and its bitnet list does not get a wide enough distribution. rec.games.diplomacy would provide a focus for discussion which currently appears in a number of groups, often to the annoyance of readers. There are no plans at the present time to link rec.games.diplomacy to the DIPL-L discussion list, however this may be reconsidered at a later date. FOLLOW-UPS: ---------- Follow-ups are directed to news.groups ***** PART TWO ***** See issue 295 ***** PART THREE ***** *** FURLONG EOG REPORT *** Summary of game furlong through F1910R. Master: Ken Lowe jdr@u.washington.edu Austria: Kris Zierhut PLV@VAX5.CIT.CORNELL.EDU from S1903M: Daniel C. Tellez tellez_d@merlin.nmhu.edu from F1903M: King Jon S2BW7@starburst.uscolo.edu from S1905M: Sean Starkey starkey@netcom.com from F1908M: Keith T. Bowen kbowen@unp4861.cc.unp.ac.za England: Stephen Clancy CLANCY@ITHACA.BITNET France: Dan H|rning d91-dho@nada.kth.se Germany: John Carr JRCARR@grove.iup.edu Italy: Andrew S. Goldstein ac024@cleveland.Freenet.Edu from F1903R: John O'Regan J_ORegan@csvax1.ucc.IE from F1909R: Kendrick Lo lokendr@ecf.toronto.edu Russia: Eric Knight knight@gnu.ai.mit.edu from S1902M: Joakim Spangberg NDB026@nov.hb.se Turkey: Bill Dunlevy dunlevy@erim.org from S1906M: Benjamin Canning bcanning@reed.edu Game parameters are/were as follows: Move clock 1410 min 12.00 next 72.00 grace 168.00 delay 0.50 days --TWTF- Retreat clock -1 min 0.00 next 24.00 grace 72.00 delay 0.50 days --TWTF- Adjust clock -1 min 0.00 next 24.00 grace 72.00 delay 0.50 days --TWTF- Access: Different-site, Level: Any, Moderated. Variant: Standard. Flags: NoNMR, NoProxy. Press: White, No Fake Broadcast. Historical Supply Center Summary -------------------------------- Ven Nap Edi Lvp Par Por Bel Mun Ber Swe Stp Mos Con Smy Rum Ser Vie Year Rom Tun Lon Bre Mar Spa Hol Kie Den Nor War Sev Ank Bul Gre Bud Tri 1900 I I I . E E E F F F . . . . G G G . . . R R R R T T T . . . . A A A 1901 I I I I E E E F F F F F F G G G G G . E R R R R T T T T . A A A A I 1902 I I I I E E E F F F F F F G G G G G E E E R R R T T T T R T T A A I 1903 I I I I E E E F F F F F G G G G G G E E E R R R T T T T R T T A A A 1904 T I I I E E E F F F F F F G G G G E E E R R R R T T T T A T T A A T 1905 T G T I E E E F F F F F F G G E G E E E R R R R T T T T T T A T A A 1906 T T T I E E E F F F F F F F F E G E E E E R R T T T T A T T T A T A 1907 T T T I E E E F F F F F F F G E E E E E E R E T T T T T T T A A T T 1908 T T T I E E E F F F F F F F F E E E E E E E E T T T T T T T T T T T 1909 T T T T E E E E F F F F F E F E E E E E E E E T T T T T T T T T T T 1910 T T T T E E E E F T F T E E T E E E E E E E E T T T T T T T T T T T History of Supply Center Counts ------------------------------- Power 1900 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 Player Austria 3 4 2 \ Kris Zierhut 3 3 \ King Jon 3 3 2 \ Sean Starkey Keith T. Bowen England 3 4 6 6 6 7 8 10 11 13 Stephen Clancy France 3 6 6 5 6 6 8 7 8 6 Dan H|rning Germany 3 5 5 6 4 4 1 1 John Carr Italy 3 5 5 \ Andrew S. Goldstein 4 3 1 1 1 1 \ John O'Regan Kendrick Lo Russia 4 4 \ Eric Knight 4 4 4 4 2 1 Joakim Spangberg Turkey 3 4 6 6 8 9 \ Bill Dunlevy 11 12 14 15 Benjamin Canning Index: 10 21 25 24 26 29 37 42 54 61 Power 1910 Player England 14 Stephen Clancy France 2 Dan H|rning Turkey 18 Benjamin Canning Index: 74 Index is the sum of squares of the number of supply centers divided by the number of players. It is a measure of how far the game has progressed. Broadcast message from d91-dho@nada.kth.se as France in furlong: I wish to congratulate Turkey on a victory well-earned. His play and manipulation of England is a great example of how to play the game when you are cornered by a two-power alliance, especially when you are playing Turkey. You have to get them to stab each other! There is no other way!! And Turkey did in this game. When faced with the choice between slowly dying and perhaps letting the one who betrayed me (very foolishly) win or die quickly (better to burn out than to fade away) and let my honest enemy (who even tried to help me once) win, the choice was simple. Once again, my congratulations! Dan H|rning, France, Furlong Hope to see you all in some other game! Broadcast message from CLANCY@ITHACA.BITNET as England in furlong: I also wish to congratulate Turkey, although I disagree with France in at least one important respect. The alliance between France and England was torpedoed not by Turkish intervention (in fact, I had actually betrayed an agreement with Turkey when I moved into War), but instead by France's own distrust of England, which caused him, at one point, to demand that I give up a center so that we could be equal in numbers. To me, that distrust was not a good basis for further cooperation, so I gambled on a quick stab of France, and hoped that Turkey would have difficulty making headway while I swept up a few French centers to make it a real contest. Unfortunately, France chose to abandon centers to Turkey, and commit suicide against me, which made the Turkish victory easy. Again, congratulations to Turkey, and best of luck to both of you in the future. --Stephen Clancy, England in Furlong Broadcast message from bcanning@reed.edu as Turkey in furlong: Well, thank you both. It was an enjoyable game all around. Although I can't take full credit for the win, seeing as I came with 9 centers already, I must say I am quite pleased. It's my first victory with the judge (actually first completed game, none of my others have finished yet.) It was good playing with you both, and I wish you luck in the future. -Ben *** DPPD EOG REPORT *** Summary of game dppd through S1914M. Master: Danny Loeb loeb@geocub.greco-prog.fr Austria: David Maymudes microsoft!davidmay@cs.washington.edu England: Dave Cebula cebulad@physics.orst.edu France: Nicholas Fitzpatrick nick@sunburn.uwaterloo.ca Germany: Constantin Staykov staykov@geocub.greco-prog.fr from F1904M: Eiji Hirai hirai@cc.swarthmore.edu Italy: Andrew Brennan BRENNAAA@DUVM.OCS.DREXEL.EDU from S1905M: Eiji Hirai hirai@cc.swarthmore.edu Russia: Everett Boyer boyer@ready.eng.ready.com from S1906M: Justin Knoll U8155653@NMSUVM1.BITNET Turkey: Richard Bourgeois ringo@buengf.bu.edu from S1906M: Arkoff, Gary larryw@lclark.edu from F1909M: Eiji Hirai hirai@cc.swarthmore.edu Game parameters are/were as follows: Move clock 1410 min 12.00 next 72.00 grace 168.00 delay 0.50 days --TWTF- Retreat clock -1 min 0.00 next 24.00 grace 72.00 delay 0.50 days --TWTF- Adjust clock -1 min 0.00 next 24.00 grace 72.00 delay 0.50 days --TWTF- Access: Different-site, Level: Any, Moderated. Variant: Standard, Gunboat. Flags: NoNMR, NoProxy. Press: None, No Partial. EP 238, completed October 1992. EFT Draw. This was one of Danny Loeb's dpp games, to test the Boardeux Diplomat. Historical Supply Center Summary -------------------------------- Ven Nap Edi Lvp Par Por Bel Mun Ber Swe Stp Mos Con Smy Rum Ser Vie Year Rom Tun Lon Bre Mar Spa Hol Kie Den Nor War Sev Ank Bul Gre Bud Tri 1900 I I I . E E E F F F . . . . G G G . . . R R R R T T T . . . . A A A 1901 I I I I E E E F F F F . E G G G G . . E R R R R T T T T R . A A A A 1902 I I I I E E E F F F F F E G G G G E R E R R R T T T T T T A R A A A 1903 I I I I E E E F F F F F E E G E R E R E R R R T T T T T T A T A I I 1904 I I I F E E E F F F F F E E R E R E R E R R R T T T T T T T T T I A 1905 I I F F E E E F F F F F E E R E R E E E R R R T T T T T T T T T I T 1906 T F I F E E E F F F F F E E R E R E E E E R R T T T T T T T T T I T 1907 T F F F E E E F F F F F E E E E E E E E E R R T T T T T T T T T T T 1909 F F F F E E E F F F F F E E E E E E E E E E R T T T T T T T T T T T 1910 F F F F E E E E F F F F E E E E E E E E E E E T T T T T T T T T T T 1911 T F F F E E E E E F F F E E E E E E E E E E E T T T T T T T T T T T 1912 T F F F E E E E E F F F E E E E E E E E E E E E T T T T T T T T T T 1913 T F F F E E E E E F F F E E E E E E E E E E E T T T T T T T T T E T History of Supply Center Counts ------------------------------- Power 1900 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '09 '10 Player Austria 3 4 4 2 1 David Maymudes England 3 5 6 8 8 9 10 12 13 15 Dave Cebula France 3 4 5 5 6 7 7 8 9 8 Nicholas Fitzpatrick Germany 3 4 4 1 \ Constantin Staykov Eiji Hirai Italy 3 4 4 6 4 \ Andrew Brennan 3 2 Eiji Hirai Russia 4 5 5 5 6 5 \ Everett Boyer 4 2 1 Justin Knoll Turkey 3 4 6 7 9 10 \ Richard Bourgeois 11 12 \ Arkoff, Gary 11 11 Eiji Hirai Index: 10 18 24 29 33 37 41 50 53 58 Power 1911 '12 '13 Player England 16 17 17 Dave Cebula France 6 6 6 Nicholas Fitzpatrick Turkey 12 11 11 Eiji Hirai Index: 62 63 63 Index is the sum of squares of the number of supply centers divided by the number of players. It is a measure of how far the game has progressed. ------------- Turkey wrote: From: hirai@cc.swarthmore.edu (Eiji Hirai) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 14:23:42 -0400 > by the way I am in DPPD, (France), I think > that was a pretty nice block of England we pulled off! Oh my, you were France? Wow. When I came into the game, I didn't check the history of the game. I quickly realized that I was doomed from the start since I couldn't fend off the combined forces of Both England and France unless one person backstabbed the other. I may have played poorly in some of the turns but all my hopes were on a quick stab by you or England. However, it seems like I overestimated how much I could strike back. I couldn't break out of the Russian/German lands and taking over your supply centers would've meant a quicker victory for England. Oh well. I guess I should've realized that I could maintain a stalemate line on my end and gone for a stable configuration instead of trying to break through the English armies in Russia. I didn't realize that until the Spring turn. Oh well. I feel sort of sorry for England since he/she was soooo close to winning but I guess that's life. :-) Next time, I'll be on the lookout for possible stalemate lines. I learned something this game. France writes: I guess I probably should have stabbed England before he stabbed me, I knew it was coming, but I guess we still pulled it off in the end. My philosophy after the stab was to move all my units against England, and let Turkey walk through me, if necessary. Basically I would hand the game to Turkey, rather than let England win. However Turkey was wise, and did not move into my undefended centres, for fear it would weaken me in my battle against England. I knew if worse came to worse, I could end up with one unit in Portugal, and still insist on being part of the draw! (remember sinai?) Congratulations to all for a good game. Nick From: loeb@organon.greco-prog.fr (Daniel LOEB) Here is ENGLAND's summary >From cebulad@physics.orst.edu (David Cebula) [England] >Thanks for an excellent game. Its just too bad that I could not get an >outright win, oh well maybe next time. Nick, sorry about the stab but >I needed a few of your centers to try for the win. Perhaps I should have >waited another year to stab, but hindsight is 20/20. You and Turkey did >a fine job of stopping me. I had forgoten about the Tri-Bud-Rum-Sev line. >The timing was awfully close though. Its always good to actually >finish one of these. Here are the DIPLOMAT's comments to the game DPPD: Spring 1901 - Based on experience in DPPA,B,C, moves are computed using an algorithm taking into according Supply centers, and distance to unowned supply centers, and various other factors. However, moves are still computed without supports, and by assuming that the other players will play badly. ENGLAND discovers diplomat based on unusual opening The move to the Baltic Sea is quite unusual. (Only used in one other game so far on the JUDGE "King".) However, the algorithm described above was quite new at the time, and because this was a Spring phase not enough weight was given to new supply centers. The current algorithm (taking into account good play by opponents) finds classic openings for all countries, especially when joined to the diplomatic module (not in use for DPPD). Fall 1901 - Diplomat covers Munich not because he assumes it will be under attack. (He thinks opponents will play badly, but as a response to the Italian move to Tyrolia, and regain his "control of the south".) Similarly, the diplomat assumes he can get either Sweden or Denmark, and chooses to get Sweden which would also place him in good shape to take Denmark later. However, as it is, Russia is not as cooperative as the Diplomat would like, and the Diplomat gets nothing up North as a result of one mistake compounding on another. Winter 1901 - FRANCE discovers diplomat since no support used to date. Spring 1902 - Diplomat becomes abandonned and is taken over by a human. The diplomat was reinstated, and the human's moves were NOT used The bounce in Kiel is an unusual move. I'm surprised none of you noticed it. The current diplomat would have (when considering this move) replaced it with a supported move to Kiel, and then probably rejected it as a senseless retreat. Fall 1902 - TURKEY thinks that AUSTRIA is computer... weird support in RUM Autumn 1903 - We didn't have any retreats due, but I ran the program anyways to examine how well it retreats. Italy has 4 units and controls ITALY + Tunis. He forced his way into TRIESTE (5th center), while the Turk forced his way into IONIAN SEA and SERBIA. Austria must retreat to GRE Italy must retreat to TUN/TYS/APU/ADR/GRE (1) Does our program consider the consequences of the double retreat to Greece... (annhilation of both units)....[No.] If so, that would explain why the program doesn't suggest the retreat to Greece, which otherwise would be a good move. (2) In the end our program suggests a retreat to NAPLES. This leaves TUNIS in the total control of the Turks. A human would have retreated to TUNIS, and then built in NAPLES. However, for the moment our program doesn't think ahead, so it could not come up with such a strategy. Once it does, (and Chowjonowski's build module is installed), then we should recalculate this season to see if the suggested move improves. Spring 1904 - New algorithm used. Computes moves with supports, and assumes other players will play well. However, the position is too bad to recover from. The next turn in my absence the diplomat goes CD, and is replaced by a human who is eliminated. Broadcast message from France in dppd: As an aside, I was compiling the new Hall of Fame the other day, and I noticed an interesting statistic, dppd is the only non-press Standard gunboat to finish in a draw! So I guess Turkey and I can both pat ourselves on the back for being the first to pull of this feat (Though a draw was pulled off in the non-press Youngstown game speed, but it is a lot easier to get a draw in a Youngstown game . . . ) France, Nicholas Fitzpatrick nick@sunburn.uwaterloo.ca Up