Diplomacy zine -- Chapter Three From: Eric_S_Klien@cup.portal.com Date: Thu, 21 Sep 1989 00:10:41 +0000 Issue #99 of ELECTRONIC PROTOCOL: ************************************************************* He lied; I knew he lied and he knew I knew he lied. That was Diplomacy. RADM W Kimball USN, C. 1909 ************************************************************* Chapter One contains: D-DAY, NAVARONE, BLITZKRIEG, OPERATION OVERLORD, GETTYSBURG, and HMS HOOD And is published by Daybell@aludra.usc.edu/Donald Daybell Chapter Two contains: DRAGONSLAYER, DOUGHBOY, BISMARK, COLD WAR, JACAL, and TRENCHFOOT And is published by Tedward@cs.cornell.edu/Ted Fischer ------------- Chapter Three ------------- Spring '03 of the game TANNENBURG (BNC number 1989HZ) (GM is ebrosius@lucy.wellesley.edu/Eric Brosius) Due Sept 24th Autumn and Winter '01 of the gunboat game VERDUN (MNC number 1989AZrb32) (GM is sccs6069@iruccibm.bitnet/Michael O'Regan) Not received yet, I'm checking into why I didn't get a report. (I have gotten no complaints so the players have probably been getting reports.) Spring '14 of the 1914 variant ENTENTE (MNC number not known) (GM is matt@oddjob.uchicago.edu/Matt Crawford) Due Sept 24th Spring '01 of the Blind variant Mulhouse (MNC number not known) (GM is barry@freezer.it.udel.edu/Barry T. Fausnaugh) Due date not set, country assignments not known. Spring '01 of the game DAWN PATROL (BNC number not known) (GM is sinhaa@mcmaster.ca/Anand Sinha) Due date not set, country assignments not known. Spring '01 of the game RATATOSK (BNC number not known) (GM is jall@diku.dk/Mogens Jallberg) Due Sept 24th GM comments: Quote was from Fiat Bellum! #69. It's pretty easy giving game reports for games that are just getting off the ground! By the way, if any players in any games are having problems with their GMs, please send me mail. We now have 19 guest GMs in this zine and I doubt if all of them are perfect. I would like to thank one more person for becoming a scribe! He is: THANK YOU -- THANK YOU -- THANK YOU as36156@yuorion.bitnet/Dean Hedman THANK YOU -- THANK YOU -- THANK YOU Not all of our scribes are players or even subscribers to this zine. People are even more generous than I thought. I am now up to date in reporting my latest gamestarts in chapter three. As you can see this chapter will soon start to overflow. Anyone want to be a guest publisher? If anyone would like to GM the remaining turns of a twenty player Diplomacy game, let me know. The game is now down to 7 players and you would start GMing September 27th. My rough draft for my ST:TNG script is completed. Would anyone like to read it and comment on it? Taken from Diplomacy World #39: VARITIES OF DIPLOMACY PLAYERS by Lewis Pulsipher In fifteen years of playing Diplomacy I've noticed certain patterns of behavior or attitude among my opponents and allies. Diplomacy players can be categorized according to the way they play; if you can identify which category a potential ally or enemy best fits, it will help you plan your strategy. If you think about how you play, you may discover that a change would increase your enjoyment of the game. First, players differ in the objectives they pursue. One group plays to win, while the second doesn't care about winning. The "win" group is split further according to their opinions about the most desirable result if a win is unattainable. One variety prefers to be the largest surviving power, other than the winner -- "draws are like kissing your sister". (This is a person who would "rather die than draw".) The other type believes that a draw is a partial win, while "second place is a loss", hardly better than elimination in 1903. These have sometimes been called the "win only" and "strong second" schools, but better terms might be "drawers" and "second placers". Among the "who cares" group there are those who want to see a tactically, strategically, and especially diplomatically interesting game, regardless of who wins, and those who intend to do exactly as they please, regardless of repercussions. The first type -- "let's have a good game" might be the key phrase -- will try unusual strategies or set up unique stabs and deceptions, playing for the sake of the brilliant move. The second type -- "I feel like doing it" -- will attack someone who's insulted him, or someone he doesn't like, or he'll try wild things like getting an Austrian army in Belgium in 1902, just for the sake of it. Second, players can be seperated into groups according to their playing styles -- the Classical or the Romantic. The Classical player depends on logic. He employs minimax strategy; that is, his moves are intended to maximize his minimum game. He pays attention to detail and takes few risks, preferring to let the other bloke lose the game by making mistakes. He tries to take control of the entire game, though subtly. He is often a good ally, and certainly a bad enemy; he keeps trying until his last unit is eliminated. The Classical playing style is more suited than the Romantic to a game in which overt chance factors play no part; only the unpredictability of the seven players throws off the Classical player's calculations. A Classical players usually refuses to risk a position which guarantees a draw or second place (depending on his preferences) rather than go for a win. The Romantic player is more flamboyant. He relies upon the unpredictable, upon surprises, or the Great Stab. His object is to defeat the enemy with a single move, which in Diplomacy means to destroy the other player's morale, to convince him of the inevitablity of his defeat. I have seen players give up well before their positions were hopeless--in common paralance they were "psyched out". The Romantic works to psych out the other players. He will take chances in order to seize victory rather than wait for others to err. Rather than maximize minimum gains, he prefers to predict exactly how his opponent will move and take advantage of those anticipated moves, sometimes with amazing results. The Romantic is an unreliable ally; as enemy he can be unpredictable, either frustrating the attack with excellent guesses or collapsing entirely because he isn't interested in a dull tactical defense. Aside from these basic varieties, there are some subtypes which apply to inferior players only. You'll surely encounter these types if you play often, for the average game includes several weak players. THE SUPPLY CENTER GRUBBER This player, frequently, sometimes with no good reason, captures an ally's supply centers. He sees a center he can capture this year -- if he starts a new war. He resists temptation, but the center looms larger in his mind as time passes. It'll be so easy, he feels. He doesn't worry about long term consequences -- the center becomes the ultimate goal. Nothing matters but the center. Finally the center- grubber can resist no longer. He grabs the center, but often this turns out to be a bad move. Center-grubbers are always deficient in strategic ability but may be good tacticians and glib negotiators. Some of them even make a career of stealing centers and then talking the victim out of plans for retribution. The key phrase for the center-grubber is "I couldn't resist". Most merely adequate Diplomacy players are center-grubbers. THE PIECE PUSHER This player is sloppy. He deals with impressions rather than details. His negotiation is vaguely generalized, and he seldom thinks beyond the next move or two. He pushes pieces up into the battle line, making obvious moves, toward whatever enemy he has selected. The key phrase here is "let's you and me kill him" -- a typical letter from a piece pusher in a postal game. THE LOST ONE This player's pieces mill around without accomplishing much, because he really doesn't know what to do. He might be better off as a natural puppet (see below). Perhaps he doesn't quite grasp the idea behind the game, of if he does, he's at a loss to see how he can attain a win. His key phrase is, "I can't decide whom to attack". There is no player so indecisive. THE NATURAL PUPPET (two types) This player either (1) is convinced by whomever last talks to him, or else (2) he picks his father figure when the game begins and does whatever father says. If the puppet is "naughty" he soon wants to rejoin the family. The type 2 puppet tends to survive longer than type 1, IF he chooses a smart father figure. The natural puppet can be a frusterating ally because he tends to foul up his moves, but the type 2 is worth the trouble, particularly if he is a "second placer". "Tell me what to do" is the key phrase. MACK THE KNIFE This player likes to stab -- period. He'll do it regardless of how it may hurt his overall position. Naturally, he is a bad ally. The key phrase is "tough luck, sucker". When you play, the sooner you find out what variety of player each opponent is, the better your chances of achieving your objectives, whatever they are. How do you figure this out? If I could describe a foolproof, or even fairly reliable way to figure out what or how your opponent thinks, merely by talking to him, I'd have solved the major problem of the game! Talking may help -- for example, you could describe what's happened in other games you've been in, and see what your opponent has to say about it. You may even talk "philosophy" directly. But the best guide to a player's propensities is his past actions. Talk to those who have played Diplomacy with him in the past, if you haven't. Read 'zines he plays in, especially end-of-game statements and press releases. While you can't trust anything completely in Dippydom, mostly-accurate information with some inaccuracies is better than no information at all, and no experienced player can hide his tendencies indefinitely. (By the way, anyone who tells you that you should ignore the past actions of a player in deciding how to deal with him is either (1) an idealist (and an especially naive one at that) or (2) someone who wants to hide something about how he plays. And 99 out of 100 will be of the second kind rather than the first.) (Lew Publisher has been involved in postal Diplomacy for a long time. He has conducted polls and has written numerous articles on the game in pro and semipro gaming publications. He is also well-known as an expert on variants, and is the author of two variant collections, one of them professionally published in England.) Taken from MAD #286: MORE YOU'D BE RICH IF YOU HAD A NICKEL... By Charlie Kadau For every vacation postcard you send to friends that arrives long after you've already come home. For every telephone receptionist who askis if you "hold" and then puts you on "hold" before you can answer. For every time you set off your smoke detector just by cooking. For every health club ad that says this is your last chance to join before the rates go up. For every message on your answering machine that turns out to be a recording of someone hanging up. For every take-out pizza you get where there's more cheese stuck to the box than on the pizza. For every minute you waste in a doctor's waiting room beyond your scheduled appointment time. For every politician who climas victory in a primary, even when he finishes second, third, or worse. For every great dream you never get to finish before somebody wakes you right at the best part. For every old packet of salt, ketchup, soy sauce and Sweet 'N Low stashed away in your desk drawer. For every time MAD runs a sequel to an article that they shouldn't have run in the first place! I am enjoying moderating this zine, keep that mail coming! Eric Klien Up