Game new

I generally have no life so I will play again.

new game

I'd be interested in a new game whenever.  I could be the processor this round.  Tom and Bill have each taken a turn.  That way the chore of keeping things moving doesn't have to fall on them again.  Would everyone else be interested in starting sooner rather than later?  Also, is Craig still in, or should we look for a replacement?

New Game?

Will we be playing another game?  I'm up for it.

An asshole until the end

I guess he wouldn't be Bill if he didn't throw another jab.  At least he spared humiliation via photoshop.  But let me also be an asshole and try to get in the last word, which I sure Mr. Gerrard will not allow.  You died this round, I didn't.  So in that way, we are even.  I was overjoyed to hear of your birthday surprise from Tom.  I'm sure it was what you were wishing for when you blew out the candles on your cake.

Yes, let the rivalry continue.  Can you ever trust me?  Could I ever trust you?  The answer of course is no.  Is it my fault, probably.  I'm just an opportunist that likes to stab Columbia grads in the back.  So look out next game Bill.  I give you my pledge and to all those who will join us in a follow up game, that I'm coming for you, even at the peril of my own country.  Oh, won't you be my neighbor?  

Bill Gerrard, I'll see you in hell yet.  

It's a draw!

So the game ends, not with a bang, but a whimper.

Bill: 1

Tony: .25

Let the rivalry continue!

R.I.P.

Spring 1908 - Results

No retreats this round.  Moves for Fall 1908 will be due by midnight Friday -- unless the surviving players agree to a draw, in which case each player should submit some kind of "I agree to end this game in a draw" email to diplomacy@superteacher.us

MOVES:

AUSTRIA-HUNGARY

Vienna S Tyrolia (unit destroyed)

ENGLAND

Livonia S Warsaw

St. Petersburg S Moscow

Finland Holds

Sweden -> Skagerrak

North Sea Holds

Irish Sea Holds

Portugal S Spain SC

Spain SC S Western Med.

Western Med. Holds

GERMANY

MAO S Western Med.

Marseilles Holds

Gascony S Marseilles

Munich S Bohemia

Bohemia S Munich

Silesia -> Galicia

Warsaw S Silesia -> Galicia

Moscow Holds

Holland Holds

Kiel -> Denmark

ITALY

Budapest -> S Tyrolia -> Vienna

Tyrolia -> Vienna

Piedmont -> Tyrolia (bounce)

Trieste -> Tyrolia (bounce)

Tunisia S North Africa

Tyrhennian Sea S Gulf of Lyon

Gulf of Lyon Holds

Aegean Sea -> Constantinople

Bulgaria EC S Aegean Sea -> Constantinople

RUSSIA

Stevastopol Holds

Romania Holds

Black Sea Holds

1907 - Winter Adjustment

ENGLAND destroys A-Norway

GERMANY builds F-Kiel

Wanted Dead or Alive

Gentleman of Europe,

Yes, I have balls. Big gigantic squirrel nuts. But that is not the issue here. The issue is that we have a terrorist among us. And because we have become divided by our arguments over who should control Europe, we have left this terrorist hang around for far too long. This devious man is hiding out in a cave somewhere in Vienna, training new recruits to undermine the stability of our great continent. I think it is time to take decisive action. We must find him, and capture or kill him. The national security of our continent is at stake here. So whether you bleed English, Italian, Russian, or German blood, it is for the safety of all our peoples, that I ask you all to come together and eliminate this great threat. With his demise, there will be peace and unity, and the end of a hard fought game. And so with that, I grant all of you your terrorist hunting permits. The person to bag Osama Bill Laden, gets a beer and brat on me.

Tom brings us love ... LET'S GET HIM!!!

ABOVE:  The Austrian delegation to the Reasoned and Civil Debating Society, clearing their throats.  Center-left: Bill Gerrard with his trusty "logic stick":  "What do you mean "rancorous discourse," you slimy, scum-sucking bastard?!"

In all seriousness, Tom is right, of course.  In my previous post, I attempted to strike a defiant tone of "no surrender" in the face of Tony's provocative "Do I really have to waste time defeating you people?" post; I thought this would be a valid response to his proposal and in keeping with the spirit of this game.  I certainly never intended to do anything more than irk our resident English fop, but it looks like my tone was more vicious than what I honestly intended.  Leo has already received my apologies.

The truth is, this was an eventful and interesting game, and I enjoyed (almost) every minute of it.  I think it deserves to be played out to its natural conclusion.

Spawforth:  The option is still yours.  Take it, if you dare.

A little dose of reality

I've become a little bothered by the excessively rancorous nature of the discourse in this forum. Let's remember why we play this game, for fun. I hope no one has been personally insulted by any of the dumb or insulting, slanderous things I post here, they're all in jest. I'm all for a speedy end to the game which has evolved to a dead and stale chess game, but let's not let the inaction and seeming inevitability to the ending of the script lead us to snipe too much at each other. We all get frustrated at the outcomes now and then, but it's no reason to get angry with each other for real.

Can't the three men in the above historic summit at Yalta just get along? (In real life though, not in the game, in the game you weasels are all dead.)

We're missing an option...

Last time I checked this game revolved around a pretty simple goal: TAKE OVER EUROPE.

When I look at the current map, I see one country with a decided disadvantage in attempting to complete that goal.  The country I'm referring to is, of course GERMANY.  He's sandwhiched right between two countries with huge naval advantages and no backsides to defend.  His mutilation would bring giggling joy to the masses so I would make this appeal:

Leo, get off your high horse/ass and invade continental Europe.  This winter, you basically avoided your chance to land a few armies in the soft underbelly of the German empire and win this game; don't make the same mistake again.  His vulnerability to you cannot be overstated and,  frankly, I believe the game morally requires you to make an attempt to murder your once ally: he's blocking your progress.

From the grave,

Sultan Barnard

Options, options, options

I'll just through this out there but if everyone wants to let me win I can be ok with that so that's my say in this matter.

Oh, Please

Gentlemen,

I have just had the pleasure of reading Bill's open letter to me, and I thought a response was in order.

First, a few explanatory statements are needed. As Bill has rightly realized, Tony shedding centers to me was never an option - Tony put the question on the table, and let me 'decide' which of us should win, and it was my 'decision' to yield, since the possibility of a breakthrough the other way around was certain. Was this 'choice' that Tony gave me a false choice? Certainly. Has Bill told me anything I did not already know? Not at all. (Think about that for a second).

I made the decision not to betray Tony - the real decision - anyway, in no small part because it seemed the best way to end this game to my satisfaction so another could start, in which I shall surely get what's coming to me, if I am included.

Secondly, Tony posted his note "Must we do this... really?" of his own volition and without prior consultation with me. You have no proof but my word on this, but I aspire to no dual-kingship. If things continue as they are going now, I shall be just as much a loser - if a voluntary one - as Bill, a point to which I shall return.

Third, I have no problem going through with the mechanical destruction of my forces. The prospect is neither appealing nor unappealing, but it is a choice that I have made.

This is my question: why should I help you all, when the only man sticking his neck out to extend a rather insulting olive branch is the same man who did exactly what I'm doing now only a few months ago? In essence, I am just following his precedent. As I am giving up all hope for victory, so too did he. Maybe I should be reprimanded for my choice, but not by Bill.

But Bill's selective memory is worthy of Rovian praise. Why should I allow that I should "start playing the game like a human being" when the man accusing me of irrationality depicted himself as the Giving Tree heroically shedding Greece and Trieste when he made the same sacrifice? Bill was a font of all things good and sunny, and now I'm a "supine body" hardly blocking the end zone. I could still opt to humiliate myself by going through with this, just as you, Bill, have already humiliated yourself. Or is the scorn dripping from your prose the sound of your own regret? Maybe the same is true with me.

If Bill wants to respond that circumstances were different (citing France) when he gave over all his centers, I do not admit that it was a "stroke of luck" by which France fell, since there was nothing Craig could do when Tom, Tony and I systematically betrayed him. I talked about this with Tom, back before the Phillies game, and he and I both agreed that Bill had come to the wrong conclusion.

With an open mind, I see no reason to entertain betraying Tony, given Bill's hypocrisy on this very issue. The insults, graphic or otherwise, do not bother me, but to be called out of keeping with the game's spirit by a man guilty of the same theoretical crime does not entice me. To call Bill's idea of persuasive rhetoric patronizing and hypocritical hardly does it justice. I understand that part of his motivation was to respond to some of the more ludicrous ideas in Tony's post, and he (incorrectly, but reasonably) inferred that I was of the same opinion.  Tony was trying to be a good friend to me, and I don't fault him for trying. Still, I'll be a loser, but in losing I'll have actually handed over a victory trophy, an achievement Bill's self-sacrifice was unable to pull off. I hope you all enjoy watching the Leo Show unfold over the coming weeks. Feel free to send me your emails and phone calls, I'm happy to see how the show fares in ratings and reviews.

Leo

A final, open plea to the humanity of my good friend Leo; Plus, Tony wins this game's "Balls Award"

Dear Leo,

Well, here we are.  And where is that, you ask?   Exactly where Tony knew we would be all along.

I have to admit, it was a brilliant strategy on Tony's part -- always and only for his solo victory.  You once might have thought that you were Tony's co-equal partner in this game, but I hope by now you can see that this was never the case.  By now we all know the story:  Early on, Tony and you conceived an incorruptible alliance, an alliance which would at the very least ensure your shared domination of the map, and which would also very likely lead to a clean solo victory for one of you (a victory which the winner would magnanimously share in spirit with the less fortunate partner).  But is that the whole truth, and nothing but?  I think not.

For, you see, from the beginning, the possibility of a clean English victory was slim to nil.  (What do I mean by a "clean" victory?  I mean a victory that wouldn't require a player with 9 or 10 units -- i.e., a player who has as good a chance of winning this game as anyone else, a chance which should mean something to him -- to retreat, mechanically and voluntarily, from his supply centers; in other words, a victory that is truly in the spirit of this game.)  By agreeing only to build fleets for the first few years, you all but forfeited any chance you had of winning cleanly.  With France out of the way quickly -- a stroke of luck, you must admit -- and no enemy in the north, Tony was free to push all of his forces into the south and east.  It was always much, much more likely that Tony rather than you would win this game outright.  But there was also always the possibility that the other players would gang up in time to stop the juggernaut, and, after some unfortunate stops and starts, gang up we did.  Now we are in a classic stalemate.  But Tony has -- has always had, I suspect -- a Plan B.

The notion that "one" of you might eventually have to sacrifice himself for the technical victory of the "other" was a sham from the very beginning.  Given the current distribution of forces --the only possible distribution, as it happens, given your agreement only to build fleets and only to convoy armies to Russia -- there is only one safe play for victory, and that is Tony's.  For, you see, Tony's units, unlike yours, are almost all directly on the front lines.  Tony stands between us and you.  If Tony had to start shedding units, it wouldn't take too long before an opening would occur for us to advance.  The two of you might still be able to pull it off, but there would be a huge risk involved, and zero room for error.  You, on the other hand, can shed almost all of your units before it would have any effect on the Anglo-German wall.  (Think about that for a second.)  You were, from the very beginning, the one who was going to take the fall.

But there's more.  Tony has to know that there is no chance in hell that all of the players left in this game would agree to a draw -- and agree we all must.  (Hence the "Balls Award.")  Furthermore, no winner is declared in that instance.  (And there is no such thing as a "dual-kingship" in this game; this is merely the chimerical idea which Tony used to convince you to go along with his strategy.)  From the rulebook:  "OBJECT OF THE GAME:  As soon as one Great Power controls 18 supply centers, it's considered to have gained control of Europe.  The player representing that Great Power is the winner.  However, players can end the game by agreement before a winner is determined.  In this case, all players who still have pieces on the game board share equally in a draw" (emphasis mine).  Tony's gentlemanly call for a premature end of this game is a ruse.

Perhaps you're thinking at this point, why not call Tony's bluff and agree to a draw, thus ending the game without a winner?  (After all, Tom controls just as many supply centers as Tony, and more supply centers than you do, so why would you, but not Tom, have a share in victory?)  Why, in other words, give Tony what he wants?  The answer is simple: I will have no difficulty in accepting a solo victory from Tony, as Tony will have earned it: first by conceiving a brilliant strategy to secure half of the necessary supply centers, then by convincing you to renounce your opportunity to win the game for nothing in return -- to allow him to walk right over your supine body to the end-zone.  What I will not accept is being forced to call someone a winner, even a co-winner, who has not proven that he has any interest in winning.

So there will be no recognition of a "combined victory."  And there will be no premature halt to this game.  If you truly have opted to humiliate yourself by pointlessly handing Tony a solo victory, then I'm afraid you're actually going to have to go through with it.  We're going to watch you do it, and you're going to have to watch yourself do it.  But if that prospect sounds unappealing to you, then you still have the chance to win.  Tom, Damian and I will support you.  You have our email addresses.  For once in this game, talk to us with an open mind.  We will respect that you have finally decided to play this game like a human being.

If not:  You've got nine supply centers; Tony needs eight more.  Tony's victory would leave you with one unit; and with one unit, you will have no more reason to call yourself a winner than I currently have.

Your friend (in victory and in self-inflicted defeat),

Bill

Must we do this...really?

Gentleman,

The game is drawing to its exciting (not really) conclusion.  As you can all clearly see, Leo and I control 18 center between us, the required number to win the game.  Since we have reached a stalemate line, attempting to push further south is a fruitless endeavor.  Instead, we are beginning a slow transfer of power.  Now all that remains is for one of us to occupy all 18 centers.  So I ask you, Bill, Damian, and Tom, must we really waste the next 5 - 10 weeks with our slow movements and your frivolous attempts to break through a stalemate line?  Or would you rather declare this game over, and give Leo and myself a combined victory?  The choice is yours.  I only ask that if you do decide to waste all of our time and continue this game until the end, then we have our moves due twice weekly.  That way, we can get this game over with, and we can begin the next one that much sooner.  Shall we put it to the vote? 

I'm in favor of ending things now and giving myself and Leo the combined victory.

If everyone votes to continue, I'm in favor of increasing the frequency of move submission.

1907 - An Illustrated History (Plus a Vision of Things to Come)

THE ANGLO-GERMAN INVASION HITS A SECOND BRICK WALL...

... FORCING LEO TO SACRIFICE HIS SUPPLY CENTERS TO TONY ...

... THUS ALLOWING THE DYNAMIC DUO TO PLAY OUT THE SICK MARTYRDOM FANTASY THEY CONCOCTED AT THE BEGINNING OF THE GAME.

All that hard work for nothing, eh, Leo? No "aristeia?" No "time?" Is this really how you're going to go out? Like a Trojan dog?

Dinner is served

Happy Early Thanksgiving Tony...eat quickly, I'd hate to see your meal spoiled by rowdy Italians barging in.

Fall 1907 - Results

No retreats this round.  Winter adjustments will be due by midnight Sunday.   Moves for Spring 1908 will be due by midnight Friday.

MOVES:

AUSTRIA-HUNGARY

Vienna S Venice -> Tyrolia

ENGLAND

St. Petersburg -> Finland

Moscow -> St. Petersburg

Livonia S Warsaw -> Moscow

Norway Holds

Gulf of Bothnia -> Sweden

North Sea Holds

English Channel -> Irish Sea

Portugal S Spain SC

Spain SC S Western Med.

Western Med. Holds

GERMANY

MAO S Western Med.

Gascony S Marseilles

Marseilles Holds

Kiel -> Holland

Munich S Bohemia -> Tyrolia

Bohemia -> Tyrolia (bounce)

Silesia -> Bohemia (bounce)

Galicia -> Warsaw

Warsaw -> Moscow

ITALY

Gulf of Lyon Holds

Piedmont S Venice -> Tyrolia

Venice -> Tyrolia

Trieste S Venice -> Tyrolia

Budapest S Vienna

Tyrhennian Sea S Gulf of Lyon

Tunisia S North Africa

North Africa Holds

Constantinople -> Bulgaria EC

Bulgaria SC -> Aegean Sea

RUSSIA

Stevastopol Holds

Black Sea S Stevastopol

Romania Holds

WINTER ADJUSTMENTS:

AUSTRIA-HUNGARY controls the following supply centers:  Constantinople, Vienna (2 total).  Austria-Hungary may build 1 unit, but cannot since all of his home supply centers are either under foreign occupation or occupied by one of his own units.

ENGLAND controls the following supply centers:  Liverpool, Edinburgh, London, Norway, Belgium, Portugal, Sweden, Spain, St. Petersburg (9 total).  England must destroy 1 unit.

GERMANY controls the following supply centers:  Berlin, Munich, Kiel, Holland, Denmark, Paris, Brest, Warsaw, Marseilles, Moscow (10 total).  Germany may build 1 unit.

ITALY controls the following supply centers:  Rome, Venice, Naples, Tunisia, Smyrna, Trieste, Greece, Bulgaria, Serbia, Budapest (10 total).  Italy neither builds nor destroys units.

RUSSIA controls the following supply centers:  Stevastopol, Romania, Ankara (3 total).  Russia neither builds nor destroys units.

Fall 1907 - Countdown

All countries have submitted moves.  Stay tuned for the results.