Diplomacy Zine -- Chapter Seven EP #234 From: Eric_S_Klien@cup.portal.com Date: Sun, 17 Mar 1991 20:05:42 +0000 Issue #234 of ELECTRONIC PROTOCOL: ************************************************************************* He grabbed me by the face ... forced my mouth open and said 'Yehudi, Yehudi,' which means 'Jewish,' and then spit at me and slapped me. This sixth instinct that every anti-Semite has ever had -- 'Jew, dirty Jew.' I didn't think he would shoot me. I could have killed him. I would have killed him if I could have. I would have killed him and I would have had no more remorse than I had every morning when I got up and killed a cockroach in my room. ************************************************************************* Chapter One contains: BAGHDAD, AUSTERLITZ, BLITZKRIEG II, KING'S GAMBIT, PASSCHENDAELE, GET SOME, DRAGONS, BLACK OCTOBER, DEF CON 4, OPERATION DESERT STORM And is published by uunet!cti1!rlister or rlister@cti.com/Russ Lister Chapter Two contains: REPUBLIC, BORODINO, KHAN, SUTHERLAND And is published by sinhaa@mcmaster.ca/Anand Sinha Chapter Three contains: DAWN PATROL, BERLIN, EL ALAMEIN, SQUALANE, UNGAWE, BRUSILOV OFFENSIVE, CULLODEN, GANDALF'S REVENGE, GOODBYE BLUE SKY And is published by mad-2@kub.nl/Constantijn Wekx Chapter Four contains: DEADLY DAGGERS, MONTREUIL-SUR-MER, FIRE WHEN READY, THUNDERDOME, BEREZINA, FONTENOY And is published by daguru@ucscb.ucsc.edu/Nicholas Jodar Chapter Five contains: BORDEL, ERIS, YALTA And is published by ddetlef@csd4.csd.uwm.edu/David Aaron Detlef Chapter Six contains: BERLIN WALL, HIROSHIMA, GENGHIS KHAN, SEA LION, VIOLENT PEACE, GIBRALTAR And is published by mike@suna.computation.umist.ac.uk/Mike Reddy Chapter Seven contains: HELM'S DEEP, GROUND ZERO, TIBERIUS, BETELGEUSE, IRON CROSS, THE SOMME, GUERNICA, NOW AND ZEN, MASTERS OF DECEIT, TEUNISGEK, WOLF BLITZER ------------- Chapter Seven ------------- Table of Contents: WOLF BLITZER Letter from Michael Norrish Letter from Chad Foor Taking the Lepanto's Logical Conclusion How to Play Germany Kibitzing Super Diplomacy Stabs ---- Spring '01 of the game WOLF BLITZER (EP #105) (GM is frank@iastate.edu/Frank Poduska) German invasion of Burgundy fails! All other moves succeed! ***** Austria ***** A BUD - SER A VIE - BUD F TRI - ALB ***** England ***** Fleet Edinburgh to Norwegian Sea. Army Liverpool to Yorkshire. Fleet London to the North Sea. ***** France ***** F Brest ---> Mid-Atlantic A Paris ---> Burgundy A Marseilles support A Paris ---> Burgundy ***** Germany ***** A Mun-Bur (FAILS) F Kie-Hol A Ber-Kie ***** Italy ***** A Venice - Piedmont A Rome - Apulia F Naples - Ionian Sea ***** Russia ***** F St. Petersburg - Gulf of Bothnia A Warsaw - Ukraine A Moscow - St. Petersburg F Sevastopol - Rumania ***** Turkey ***** Army Constantinople moves to Bulgaria Army Smyrna HOLDS Fleet Ankara moves to Constantinople ***** Press ***** God today declared that, in order to eliminate all this press foolishness and get on with the serious business of wargaming, the U.N. would be created immediately. God went on to veto all future U.N. actions, and the U.N. disappeared in a poof of uselessness. From England - The Prime Minister today denied that the Italians ever had an Ambassador to the U.N., and said that "If I have my way they never will". He went on to say that Scotland Yard had conclusively determined that this was all a hoax concocted by someone in America playing with his computer. From France - I hearby declare my alliance with England and decry Italian aggresion in all of its hideous forms!!! From Germany - Although the Russian Czar has done everything in his power to negotiate for control of Scandanavia, I remain unswayed. If he wants the northern Kindoms he will have to come and take them himself. Or try. (See you in Warsaw, Ivan.) From Italy - The Italian Ambassador to the U.N. today announced that Tunis is, was, and always shall be the 7th Province of Italy, and the Italian 1st fleet has been dispatched to bring the good news to the Tunesian People. The ambassador also condemned all annexation of foreign lands by the Great Powers, calling on the Great Powers to throw down their arms and live in peace. When ask how he explained the contradiction between his two statements, he challenged the interviewer to explain why the Italians had an Ambassador to the U.N. in 1901 and promptly disappeared in a poof of improbability. Here is a letter from my chapter one checker, norrish@st.vuw.ac.nz/ Michael Norrish (who is my first competant checker): Dear Eric, As promised, I have read that latest issue. All seems well, and I have only one comment. It seems to me that the issues are longer than is really necessary because orders for 34 units are written like this: A Tyrolia supports A Bohemia -> Munich, A Bohemia -> Munich. Instead of A Tyr S A Boh-Mun, A Boh-Mun. For countries with up to about eight or nine units, the whole set of orders should fit onto just one line. With supports for foreign units this might increase but the point is that the whole set of orders for all 34 units should fit onto one screen. As it is, there is an awful lot of scrolling to do. Perhaps you could recommend to your GMs that they attempt to compress the results a little more. This would also save space in overcrowded directories. Otherwise, all is well, Michael Here is a letter from foor@freezer.it.udel.edu/Chad Foor: I have a comment to append to the French opening of your post to me of Chapter Seven of Electronic Protocol... In the game that I am in, Get Some, I am playing the now-just-about-dead Austrian player. In the beginning of the game, in an effort to get a little help p for an EARLY seizure of the Italian player, I got the French to open and place his forces to go for a Southern campaign. That was fine up until the point when I realized too late that the French presence there was simply too overwhelming to try to stop. My hats are off to good old France. The move for 1901 was this: (This is the Fall turn)... A Pic --> Bel A Gas --> Mar F MAO --> Spa(sc) This, initially, was an effort to cover a possible Italian invasion of the South region of France. The French then built the Fleet in Brest and an Army in Paris and was then able to conduct a 2-front war with minimal security resting on Germany and an English alliance w/England going FULL THROTTLE after Germany. The wonderful thing for France was that he backstabbed ME out of Italy, while at the e same time positioning his fleets around the Italian region while my armies were too busy to care about the ever-increasing French presence. The point that I am trying to make here is that the French player has an easier time of conducting a 2-front war (majority riding on the Italian booty) if England is not only Gung HO on Germany and is at least a YEAR out of position to attack him. Right now, I am in a BAD spot with the positioning and I have had to give up a LOT of g precious commodities simply to keep myself IN the fight. So note if you are France, these things are what you need to win the game, starting from 1901: England must be ambitious for Germany England must be your ally Austria and Italy MUST be fighting amongst themselves <<-- MOST IMPORTANT... Chad The following was scribed by loeb@geocub.greco-prog.fr/Daniel Loeb and first published in EP #173: From Rats #6 (an English zine) Taking the Lepanto's Logical Conclusion by Pete Swanson If you don't know what the Lepanto is, you haven't lived! but for those embryonic readers/players among you, it is basically this: a suggestion from Edi Birsan that Italy can make a suprise direct attack on Turkey by the following moves: Spring 1901: A(Rome)-Apu, F(Nap)-Ion, A(Ven)h Autumn 1901: F(Ion)CA(Apu)-Tun, A(Ven)h. Builds F(Nap) Spring 1902: F(Ion)-EMS, F(Nap)-Ion, A(Tun)&(Ven)h Autumn 1902: F(Ion)&F(EMS)CA(Tun)-Syr, A(Ven)h Turkey is now up the creek without a paddle, provided a) he doesn't move F(Con)-Ank in Spring 1901, and b) Austria attacks Aegean from Greece in Spring 1902. The Lepanto Opening virtually metamorphosed Italy from being a boring, predictable country, to an exciting, unpredictable one. Now, instead of walking virtually suicidally into Trieste or just hanging around for a few years, watching the other countries have all the fun, bouncing your armies in Piedmont and Venice around for kicks, and jumping in on the side of the player with the most units in 1904 or thereabouts, you can play an active part straight from Spring 1901. "Avanti, Luigi--let's swim to Turkey!" and pretty soon, most Italian players were! Lepantos cropped up like dandelions; this became pretty boring, since any Turk who had seen the Lepanto before was going to make fairly good efforts at stopping the initial convoy to (Syr) or (Smy) and then neither Italy or Turkey gets anywhere. Well, it wasn't long before some ex-Turk player invented a stab-Austria variant. Simply fake a Lepanto in Spring 1901, then Turkey tries for Greece, and the Italian convoys to Albania and attempts to slip in the back door into Trieste. With a Russian army floating in/around Galicia, the only real fighting is between Italy, Russia and Turkey over who gets Serbia, the last Austrian haven in Spring 1903. The Austrians are sometimes a shrewd people. Stung by the change of direction, they soon were showing the Italians how to switch the switch. "Hey Luigi, you know you probably won't get a build if you stab me from the Lepanto--I'm just going to be A(Tri)-Alb, keeping you out of both." "Oh..." "Why don't WE get Turkey?" "But me 'an da Sultan, we got dis plan..." "I know all that," interupted the Austrian, "but you want a build don't you?" "Uh, yep." "So I have a better plan in which you're bound to get a build." "Yeah?" "Sure, you move A(Ven)-Tri, A(Rom)-Apu, F(Nap)-Ion and I'll move F(Tri)-Alb, A(Bud)-Ser, A(Vie)-Bud." "Ok, then what?" "Well then, you move A(Tri)-Ser, and convoy A(Apu)-Tun, and I get Greece. You can build your second fleet and move to EMS & ION in Spring 1902, and we'll have Bulgaria beseiged and Turkey scared face-less." "Oh, yeah!" This was the Key Variant, invented by Jeff Key. Basically, Austria and Itlay bluff everyone else on the board into believing that they are at loggerheads, and then suddenly, like magic, they are at Turkey's doorstep. I have recently completed a game where we put together an excellant example of a deviant of the Key variant. This was 1974BZ, started in DER KRIEG in June 1974. I just so happened that Italy (Pete Cousins) and Austria (me) were at a small game con when the gamestart was announced, and of course we got to talking, planning, scheming, plotting, etc---the normal things two dippy freaks do when they get together. After having agreed that we were the two secret masters of British diplomacy, we also agreed that we should try a new, fun, but devastating Austro-Italian opening; this is what we came up with. The initial aims of Diplomacy were clear--we had to get Turkey and Russia at each other's throats. I made strong "alliances" with each of them against the other, claiming a non-aggression pact with Italy. We also cultivated something healthy up north in the other corner of the board--like England stabbing France stabbing Germany stabbing England. Since this Russo-Turkish conflict was essential to the plan, as it is in any Lepanto, the wait for the first season's results was nail-biting. The Spring 1901 moves were: A: A(Vie)-Gal, A(Bud)-Ser, A(Tri)-Adr! I: A(Ven)-Tri!, A(Rom)-Ven, F(Nap)-Ion R: F(Stp)-GOB, F(Sev)-Bla(BOUNCED), A(Mos)-Sev(BOUNCED), A(War)-Ukr T: A(Con)-Bul, F(Ank)-Bla(BOUNCED), A(Smy)-Arm E,F,G: Amusing themselves and leaving us alone. Which moved the GM to comment: "Pet Balloon Burst!" (Pet Balloon was an unearned nickname I had acquired from John Piggott.) I use Lakofkaesque notation in the moves. ! means a move of either certain crassness or sheer brilliance. God knows what Greg Hawes (R) and Mick Bullock (T) thought--hopefully they believed I had stabbed Russia and Italy simultaneously, and VERY badly, and that Italy had stabbed me, and Russia and Turkey had stabbed each other. At least, that's what I told them had happened! The diploming became furious now. I managed to throw myself at the mercy of Greg Hawes. "We're in the same boat now, mate. We both have stabbed and have got stabbed (by the way, heh, sorry about that, ahem). Let's get it together against Italy and Turkey, ok?" Needless to say, I said roughly the same thing to Mick Bullock, but with greater credulity, it seems, especially since he was the one I had NOT plunged by dagger into--"I can hold off Italy while we take care of Russia, but I need another center--how about supporting me into Rumania?" Now came the crunch. Autumn 1901: A: A(Ser)SA(Gal)-Rum, F(Adr)CA(Tri)-Gre!, Builds A(Vie),A(Bud) I: F(Ion)CA(Tri)-Gre!, A(Ven)-Apu, Builds F(Nap) R: A(Ukr)SF(Sev)-Rum(FAILS), F(GOB)-Swe, A(Mos)-Sev(BOUNCE), builds F(StPnc) T: A(Bul)SA(Gal)-Rum, F(Ank)-Bla, A(Arm)-Sev(BOUNCE), builds F(Con) Suddenly, out of the mess that was Austria, arises Phoenix-like from the ashes, a less-mess. However, Turkey looks decidedly more pale than anyone else, since Italy carries out the usual Lepanto convoy moves, but this time Bulgaria get immediate bad flak, and Russia shouldn't like what's going on either. Of course, it helps if you can still keep Russia and Turkey on unfriendly terms, though if they're smart, they'll kiss and make up pretty quick. These moves also show the usefulness of stabbing in the Autumn season of a two-season game [with English rules]. Greg build F(StPnc), which in this case was the most useless unit he could possibly want--however, assuming his plans had gone as expected, he probably would have been able to start an anti-English campaign whilst beating up Turkey with Austria and Italy. As it was, Greg carried on with his somewhat tenuous Austrian agreement (I suppose as an alternative to a non-existant Turkish one) and Mick tried very hard to pull over Greg to his side. But to no avail. Spring 1902 A: A(Vie)-Gal, F(Adr)-Ion, A(Rum)SA(Ser)-Bul, A(Bud)SA(Rum) I: A(Gre)SA(Ser)-Bul, F(Ion)-EMS, A(Apu)-Rom, F(Nap)-TyS R: F(Sev)-Bla(BOUNCE), A(Ukr)SA(Mos)-Sev(BOUNCE), ... T: F(Bla)&A(Bul)SA(Ukr)-Rum(NO SUCH ORDER), A(Arm)-Smy, F(Con)-Aeg By Autumn 1905, Turkey was out, and Russia was left with two supply centers, Liverpool and Edinburgh! (An interesting point: Russia kept these two centers for the rest of the game, and kept F(Bla) supplied from England until Autumn 1911 when the game ended. Until then, I needed four units to keep in penned up and out of my supply centers! Some more funny things about this game: Pete Birks dropped out (not his fault) as England, and then GMed the game from one gameyear later. Austria eventually won; however, I was held to a 16-unit stalemate line for a while, and voted "yes" to a four-way draw with Germany, France, and Russia. But Germany voted "no" hoping to break me down with French help. He then changed his plan, decided he would like a two-way draw with me, suddenly switched direction just as I was having what I thought was a last-ditch effort to sneak in the other two centers I needed!) Now, I'm certainly not recommending that you all go out and try exactly this opening in your next game. Firstly, anyone who has read this article [or the gamer's guide] will know what's going on. Secondly, I'm not certain that the opening is tactically ideal. (Why not just convoy, A(Apu)-Gre from the standard Lepanto for example?) However, I hope this opening will show a different attitude to the game than most people subscribe to, ie: the standard opening CAN get just a teensy-bit tedious, and make the game stereotyped. A far out play like this can give more fun and interest, and above, can work! ((The opening has been correctly summarized as generally being a load of rubbish BUT it equally shows that given the right situation anything can work, and work well. I don't imagine that you'd be so fortunate as to find such a pair of players playing R&T as occured in this game. Although to be fair it was Russia who misplayed.)) ((A good diplomay player is a player who is willing to change any ideas he has at the start of the game due to who the other players are and what they say. Nothing is sacred, but some openings are tactically sounder than others.)) ((The main problem facing Austro-Italian alliances is the Russo-Turkish alliance, it slows down the advance to what may be a mere trickle or even complete stalemate. Still, this is much better than the alternative which is a three-way attack on Austria. I have no stats, but it would be interesting to learn how these three-way alliances split up in latter years. Are there more Russo-Turkish alliances or Italian-Russian alliances? As I was saying Lepanto openings at least enable A/I to mobilize their forces as quickly as possible against a R/T alliance.)) The following was scribed by loeb@geocub.greco-prog.fr/Daniel Loeb and first published in EP #186: Saint George and the Dragon, No. 35, December 10, 1978, pp. 7,8,11. Dragonfire, "How to Play Germany," by Dipple O. Massey Does it thake an article to tell you how to play Germany? How stupid! Anybody can play Germany. All you have to do is write down your orders and send them in. Just be sure you write legibly so the GM can understand what you want. In fact, anybody can play any country by follwowing the above procedure. See what a knack I have for turning something appearing so co;plicated into downright simplicity? Oh, you want to WIN? Well, why didn't you say so. That's a different matter altogether. It's still very simple, actually. Just make sure your mother plays England and Peggy gemignani [DL: ???] play France. If you can't meet this basic requirement, the situation becomes somewhat more delicate. Ok, you find yourself in a game as Germany with six other guys you can't even pronounce their names. Let's assume these other guys are just as anxious to slit a throat as you are (although in some circles it is argued that this is established fact, and therefore, no assumption is necessary.) The first requirement is to get England and France to go at it. If they are even neutral towards one another, you chances diminish. You can rule out a 3-way alliance also because after you've mopped up everybody else, there YOU are in the middle of two 11 power countries. If you are going for a draw, that's fine. But western triple alliances are not favorable for a German win. How do you get France and England slashing each other right off the bat? Well, that's YOUR problem, but I will offer one suggestion. Tell Italy that France is going into the Channel, he will tell England. Tell Russia that England is going into the Channel; he will tell France. Tell Austrai and Turkey the same thing, just to cover everything. You also write E/F and tell them the same thing. Now they may think you are just blowing air, but if they receive the same reports from other corners of the board, chances are you will see a war in the channel. Phase II of your pre-game negotiations consists of forming an Austro-Turkish alliance in the east. You write A/T subtly hiniting what an honest, forthright, babykissing fellow the T/A player is. And of course what a weasel is the Russian rogue. You then proceed to cite "overwhelming" proof that your opinions are well-founded. A strong Russia in the early game will kill most chances for a German win. In Phase III, you persuade Italy to go east. You have successfully maneuvered A/T into keeping Russia pinned down, but you don't want them to grow to strong in the process. You want Italy there to keep them both honest. The game begins. The F/E standoff in the channel virtually assures you Beligium, Holland, and Denmark in 1901 and therefore, 3 builds. You have attacked no one, made no threatening moves, and all your neighbors are engaged in bloody conflicts. [DL: Better to give up the 3rd build in 1901, since otherwise someone is sure to point out that Germany is the leader, and then the shit will really hit the fan. Better to build 2 in 1901 and save Belgium for 1902. The free supply center to one of your "allies" will certainly make him happy, and in reality costs you nothing.] E/R/F are all coming to you with hat in hand, each desperately needing your help. You build two armies and a fleet and all your neighbors are happy. To Russia, you are in good position to help him against Austria. England now has visions of your sweeping in on France. France realizes that you are about to help you good buddy Russia against Austria and that you have built an additional fleet for an English assault. But here you must be careful. You don't want to throw most of your strength against England because he can hold you off with just a few forces of his own, while France can breeze into the English backdoor. Yet you cannot deny aid to France because then he might just decide not only that it is useless to tackle England alone but that YOU are the bigger threat, which could very well lead to a F/E reconciliation. So you move your fleets into SKA and DEN, two armies you send into SIL and PRU. England may be wary of this and cover himself in Norway, but he will not move against you and deliberately provoke a two front war, since it is obvious you are merely going after Russia. France sees two German fleets in good position to hit England. [DL: Appearantly, the other two armies move into France to help or attack as the case may be.] 1902 is a good year for Germany. You take Sweden and maybe Warsaw. France is just beginning to make headway and England positions his forces to meet the immediate threat. In 1903, you take Norway and convoy another army to Livonia. France may or may noit have taken London or Liverpool, but, if not, you give him BEL as a generous tidbit just so he will not feel that he is stagnating. Always remember to keep France happy. In 1904, you march into STP and take control of NTH. At this point, you make heartwarming overtures to Italy or Turkey (with whome you have maintained friendly relations and communications all along) whichever is the strongest and has the better position. If Turkey is in good shape, you convince him how cool and suave it would be to his Austria from two opposing sides. You would also send "scouting parties" to the Italian peninsula where Turkish and French fleets will soon be beating each other up. Soon it will be only you, France, and Turkey remaining. At this point, it should be fairly easy for you to see which of the other two is most vulnerable and forthwith stab the dimwit in the back for the win and congratulations from all parties involved (stabee excluded). If Italy is in the best shape, however, you generously grant him the privilege of being the beneficiary of your military genius and the two of you proceed to munch on Austria and Turkey. Of course, you convince France it is time he dealt with the Italian upstart, if he hasn't begun to move in that direction already. You also perform your moral duty and inform Italy that France is coming. This innocent maneuvering on your part insures that you will get most of the eastern spoils, provides France with someone other than you to hassle, and positions much of the French strength in the south. [DL: However, taking Turkey and the Balkans without the full force of Italian fleet will be quite a trick.] When the forces begin to reposition, you execute as brilliant stab of France to the applause of Italy and the GM. A quick strike into Burgundy and the English holdings prove to one and all that you are indeed Patton's seventh incarnate. You and Italy now proceed to demolish the lower class. But you must remember to keep Italy happy. Give him no cause to suspect your bloodlust. Otherwise, he might think you are only playing him for a sucker and may well join with the opposition. When he does realize that you have indeed played him for a sucker, it will be too late for him or anyone else to do anything about it. Now all this may sound great in theory, but putting it into practice WILL require some diplomatic effort on your part. Sure there are other ways to win with Germany, but I believe that this one gives you the best chance. An initial alliance with England is fine, IF you are willing to play for a draw. But it is too confining to permit many German wins, England would probably insist that you possess no more than two fleets, and he always has some units at your back. And an England knife can be very sharp indeed. That's the way I see it, and I'm Dipple O. Massy. ((Note [editor of G. & the D.]: There is good advice in this article, coming as it does from a multiple winner. I didn't win that way as Germany, but the important thing that shows up in the article [...] is that you must be THE active diplomat in the g ame. If your ally is the one constantly coming up with suggestions instead of you, you may share in a draw, but you are almost certainly not going to win.)) The following was written by loeb@geocub.greco-prog.fr/Daniel Loeb and first published in EP #189: KIBITZING by Danny Loeb In case you don't know, Kibitzing is a great Yiddish word introduced into the English language via bridge which means being a spectator who talks too much, as in "Stop Kibitzing. We're trying to play here!" (This is of course, as opposed to the "post-mortum" which is only done by the players, and sometime before the hand "dies".) The game "Cosmic Encounters" contains a variant for when you have one player too many. The extra player is called the Kibitzer, and he is allowed to look at any game materials whenever he wants. He can look at the cards about to be picked up from the deck, at the players hands, at the secret location of the bomb chosen by the Terrorist, etc. But not only that, he is allowed to divulge any information he wants. Of course, not all of it may be true. But what is the point of all this you ask? Well, the Kibitzer secretly choses a player before the game who he thinks is going to win, or a group of players he thinks will draw. If the Kibitzer is EXACTLY correct at the end of the game, then ALL of the players LOSE, and the Kibitzer is the one who wins. In fact, if the Kibitzer choses you to win, then the only way for you really to win is if you draw with someone. The game become rather psychological, since if the Kibitzer is seen to be helping someone, then people will think that person was chosen, or maybe the Kibitzer is using reverse psychology! My suggestion is that Kibitzing would be even more fun in a Diplomacy game. The Diplomacy game would be played as an ordinary (or a variant) gunboat diplomacy game with no regular press. However, the Kibitzer would be given the names and addresses of the players, and visa versa. Therefore, all communication between players would have to pass through the Kibitzer. The Kibitzer secretly sends the GM the name of the country he expects to win (or the winning coalition). If this actually comes about, then it is rather the Kibitzer who has won. If the country (or any of the countries) picked by the Kibitzer is eliminated, the Kibitzer can longer win. Optional rules: (1) When the Kibitzer arrives in the above mentioned no-win situation, then he is eliminated, and the game continues as a normal diplomacy game, or as a normal gunboat diplomacy game (with press). (2) The Kibitzer is required to forward the messages unaltered to the recipient(s). A copy of the message is sent to the GM by the player and the Kibitzer in order to confirm compliance with this rule. (3) All correspondence with the GM (including orders sent in) must be sent to the Kibitzer as well. However, last moment changes in orders can be used to prevent the Kibitzer from revealing your moves to everyone. (4) Generally speaking the GM shouldn't play in his own game, but you might consider allowing the GM to be the Kibitzer if there is not enough players. I am proposing this game for play in the Electronic Protocol, and I prepared to play as a country, GM, or play Kibitzer. Optional rules and any other rule changes will be decided before game start. Please write to me with your comments. Yours, Daniel Loeb ------------------ TOULOUSE BORDEAUX EMAIL loeb@rita.laas.fr loeb@geocub.greco-prog.fr (or else try loeb@frbdx11.bitnet) MAIL (H)13, boulevard des Fontanelles 150, cours Victor-Hugo; Appt B21 31240 L'Union France 33000 Bordeaux France MAIL (W)Group O. L. C. Departement des Maths et d'Info L. A. A. S. Universite de Bordeaux I 7, avenue du Colonel Roche 351 cours de la Liberation 31077 Toulouse Cedex France 33405 Talence Cedex France PHONE(H)xnational+33 61 09 68 15 xnational+33 56 31 48 26 (W)xnational+33 61 33 63 17 xnational+33 56 84 60 88 FAX xnational+33 61 55 35 77 xnational+33 56 80 08 37 The following was written by loeb@geocub.greco-prog.fr/Daniel Loeb and first published in EP #189: SUPER DIPLOMACY by Danny Loeb In DMing role playing games, I tend not to tell the players what system I am using. This uncertainty gives me more flexibility and it adds to the realism. After all, in the real world, you don't know what the rules are. With that in mind, I am proposing a diplomacy game without specifying all of the rules. All the players should know is that the game starts out similar to 10-player diplomacy (I can send you the rules if wish) except that each captial is worth 2 supply centers. Thus, each country begins with its ordinary collection of units, and may use its additional build as it wishes. One possible use of builds is to conduct research. You tell me where you want to do the research and toward what end (or in "general"), and I will tell you the results if any. A new discovery sometimes will usually involve new rules which you'll be informed of as necessary. There may be other possible uses of builds, but they are for the players to discover. You will be told if you try something which is inherently impossible. In addition, there may be random events that will occur occasionally some of which might require new players to join the game in progress. Please tell me if you are interested in playing, and also give me more ideas for events that could happen. Please write to me with your comments. Yours, Daniel Loeb The following was scribed by loeb@geocub.greco-prog.fr/Daniel Loeb and first published in EP #180: Taken from Fol Si Fie #93, p. 12-13 STABS By Randolph Smyth This text has been expanded from a tentative outline I'd jotted down to be presented at TorontoCon last May, when the topic was high on the list of subjects for a panel discussion. Since this even never got off the ground (er... the discussion, not the Con!), you'll have to bear with me holding forth on my own. Far be it from me to let something die on the drawing boards, even if it hibernates for 6 months. All other things being equal (they never are), I ally with the players that seem to be the most competant. This is not, I hope, to make up for any gross deficiancy on my part, but largely because I put more faith in such an ally not to stab me foolishly. Players who switch sides to pick up a nonessential center or two are a worse plague than any inexperienced novice. I cannot fault an attack which is ULTIMATELY successful (the ends justify the means), but so few are. This minority is normally forseeable since it's solidly based on the previous trends of the game. A grasp of the elements of a nascant stab will not only make your own attacks click more often, but will help you avoid the role of the sucker on the other end of the knife. Predicting the future permits you to change it---but nothing will warn you of a "chaotic" stabber. Your only consolation is that a poorly-founded attack usually gives you the opportunity to drag your new enemy down with you. The objectives of a good stab vary with its timing in the game. An opening "stab" is really just an unexpected attack, since you're reaching if you consider an initial agreement as an "alliance" until it's put into practice on the board. A German player, if successful, will conclude pre-Spring 1901 agreements with both England and France, usually mutually exclusive, one will get a nasty suprise before the year is out. Unless all your neighbors are attacking you at once, it's rare of an opponent to "declare war" at this stage---to much could still go wrong at HIS end to give you the advantage of a clear warning on a silver platter! The most exciting stabs take place in the middle game, designed to improve position, clear an obstacle, or just to take full advantage of a temporary weakness in your ally's position. This is usually done with the direct or indirect cooperation of a third power (unless you're already superior to your ally) but there are some important warnings to note. First, never let someone persuade you to stab before you yourself feel ready for it---without good tactical foundations most stabs become bloody disasters. You may depended on your new ally to help out, but this has obvious dangers of its own. Second, do your best to deflect the death struggles in some other direction. Make it clear to your old ally why you stabbed and apologize. Make him a puppet if possible (Cecil's article). If he ends up hating you worse than anyone else on the board, you must rely on an unusual tactical advantage to prevent an embarrassing suicidal counterattack. Third, and most important in the long run, judge whether your new allies will become WORSE obstacles once your old one has been dismembered. Here's where an experienced player usually has it over the novice. He can look three years ahead and see two centers coming his way... and four to the guys that are wooing him, and have been allied for the last eight game years to the exclusion of everyone else. (They both live in New York or Los Angeles, hmmm....) In the course of a game, there are several opportunities to surprise a couple of centers out of an ally---but will you still have them in five game years? In a sense, players often depend (quite rightly!) on their enemies' potential to discourage a stab by their ally! Successful middlegame stabs arise only after extensive diplomacy if all players are tactically competent. "Godd" players win their games on the strength of these operations since this is where their negotiating superiority shows to best advatage. If you can't keep up the pace, you'll be skewered behind the scenes before your moves are even adjudicated. If you wait for an attack on the board, it's usually already too late. An endgame stab is the "purest" form, but like a bathroom wall without graffiti, it's often less interesting for the observers. The object is a win, can you take on the board if the single season of the stab goes the way you expect? (If soemthing goes wrong, you've missed something in the preparation---often a lack of diplomatic groundwork leading to a lack of trust in the stabee. If he was about to attack you anyhow, at least there's no "loss" since the win was never in the hand in the frist place. See CK comments, p. 2) Such stabs are a real joy when you're on the blunt end of the knife, particularly if you prepare by sending your ally's units off on wild goose chases. If you're worried about deflecting the SHARP end in such situations, it's good policy to make up your own set of suggestions for your two way alliance as soon as you get the zine with the results of the previous season. Even if your ally normally takes the initiative in this area, you'll be able to compare your private set with his, and note any bias. Don't wait for his letters to arrive, or his proposals will usually sound logical. The more thought he's giving to a stab, the more plausible the sucker moves will seem without an independant check. Sadly, (or happily, depending on how good you are), better players usually get their openings sooner or later. At least make them work for it. Publisher comments: Quote is from CBS reporter Bob Simon, describing how an Iraqi army captain assaulted him in captivity. By the way, I could use some non war related quotes, does anyone have any Stooge quotes? Also, I need some more guest publishers ASAP! Note that issues 229, 230, 231, 232, and 233 were just game report issues. I posted them to Portal and to Usenet, but not to my mailing list. Issues available directly from me by request. ****************************************************************************** To join in the fun, send your name, home address, home and work phone numbers, and country preferences to Eric_S_Klien@cup.portal.com. ****************************************************************************** Up