= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Spring 1912: A New Heaven And A New Earth
And so it came to pass that on Christmas Day 1911, the three Great Powers of Europe signed a treaty to divide the continent between them peacefully, ending what future historians would call the Great War.
The sun truly never sets on King Jack's British Empire, which stretches from Spain to Stockholm, from Casablanca to Copenhagen, from the fringes of the Sahara to the coast of the Arctic Ocean. They rule fourteen major world capitals, and innumerable smaller towns and cities, the greatest power of the age and the unquestioned master of Western Europe.
From the steppes of Siberia to the minarets of Istanbul, the Ottoman Empire is no longer the Sick Man of Europe but stands healthy and renewed, a colossus every bit the equal of the Christian powers to its west. Its Sultan calls himself the Caliph, for the entire Islamic world basks in his glory, and his Grand Vizier has been rewarded with a reputation as one of the most brilliant and devious politicians of the age. At his feet grovel representatives of twelve great cities, and even far-flung Tunis has not escaped his sway.
And in between, the Austro-Hungarian Empire straddles the Alps and ancient Italy. Its lack of natural borders presented no difficulty for its wily Emperor, who successfully staved off the surrounding powers and played his enemies off against one another while building alliances that stood the test of time. Eight great cities pay homage to his double-crown, and he is what his predecessors could only dream of being - a true Holy Roman Emperor.
And hidden beneath the tricolor map every student learns in grammar school are echoes of subtler hues. In Germany, people still talk of the mighty Kajser Sotala I, who conquered the ancient French enemy and extended German rule all the way to the Mediterranean, and they still seeth and curse at his dastardly betrayal by his English friends. In Russia, Princess Anastasia claims to be the daughter of Czar Perplexed, and recounts to everyone who will listen the story of her stoic father, who remained brave until the very end; at her side travels a strange bearded man who many say looks like Rasputin, the Czar's long-missing adviser. The French remember President Andreassen, who held off the combined armies of England and Germany for half a decade, and many still go on pilgrimage to Liverpool, the site of their last great victory. And in Italy, Duke Carinthium has gone down in history beside Tiberius and Cesare Borgia as one of their land's most colorful and fascinating leaders.
And the priests say that the same moment the peace treaty was signed, the blood changed back to water, and the famines ended, and rain fell in the lands parched by drought. Charles Taze Russell, who had been locked in his room awaiting the Apocalypse, suddenly ran forth into the midwinter sun, shouting "Our doom has been lifted! God has granted us a second chance!" And the mysterious rectangular wall of force separating Europe from the rest of the world blinked out of existence.
Pope Franz I, the new Austrian-supported Pontiff in Rome, declares a month of thanksgiving and celebration. For, he says, God has tested the Europeans for their warlike ways, isolating them from the rest of the earth lest their sprawling empires plunge the entire planet into a world war that might kill millions. Now, the nobility of Europe finally realizing the value of peace, the curse has been lifted, and the empires of Europe can once more interact upon the world stage.
Chastened by their brush with doom, yet humbled by the lesson they had been given, the powers of Europe send missionaries through the dimensional portal, to convince other worlds to abandon their warlike ways and seek universal brotherhood. And so history ends, with three great powers living together side by side and striving together for a better future and a positive singularity.
...
On to the more practical parts. If you think you've learned lessons this game worth telling the rest of Less Wrong, you should send them to either myself or Jack. I say either myself or Jack because Jack had the most supply centers and therefore deserves some karma which he could most easily get by posting the thread which the other two winners then comment on, or if you insist that three way tie means three way tie, I'll post the thread and the three winners can all comment and get up-voted. We'll talk about it in the comments.
Thanks to everyone who played in this game. I was very impressed - it's one of the rare games I have moderated that hasn't been ruined by people constantly forgetting to send orders, or people ragequitting when things don't go their way, or people being totally incompetent and throwing the game to the first person to declare war on them, or any of the other ways a Diplomacy game can go wrong. Everyone fought hard and well and honorably (for definitions of honor compatible with playing Diplomacy). It was a pleasure to serve as your General Secretary.
All previous posts and maps from this game are archived. See this comment for an explanation of how to access the archives.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
Comments (287)
People realize comments can be sorted by how recent they are, right?
They can, but it's sufficiently bothersome to switch to that and then switch back every time you want an update that in practice few people will do this often even if they know.
I always have the comments sorted by New except for occasional exceptions in open threads, quote threads and the like.
The League of Nations cares so much about world peace it gets bored when we stop fighting for a turn?
A series of flashing lights seen from the moon have been discovered to be Morse code and translated into the following telegram:
The situation in Southern and Central Europe leads Austria to make this public declaration.
If German moves do not literally violate our treaty, Austria will still feel obliged to respect its terms, which includes not invading Warsaw. As a further concession, we do not consider German support to Italian attack as a violation of the treaty, if the attack does not aim to seize an Austrian home centre. We also do not object to direct German attack against Austrian units if the Austrian unit is stationed in Italian territory (Rom, Nap, Apu, Ven, Pie, Tus) or Tyrolia. We will even not revoke the treaty if Germany attacks Austrian units elsewhere, or helps Italy to attack Trieste or Vienna, if we are informed about the attack (and extent of its support) in advance, which means at least 2 hours before the official end of turn. This is as far as Austria can go. If German moves cross the described lines, Austria will feel entirely justified to renounce the peace treaty with Germany.
I remind all European leaders that I have been very clear about my intention to move against Italy when the treaty with Germany was made, and I got no warning from Germany that an agreement between Germany and Italy exists, or is being prepared. Therefore, I do not feel bound by any agreement between Germany and Italy, and if Germany attacks Austria, it should be interpreted as German betrayal. The concessions I have made in the paragraph above are meant as a gesture of good will, motivated by the fact that Austria does acknowledge that Germany may have interpreted the terms of our mutual agreement differently.
Austria has always observed all treaties we have signed, and never intended to sign two or more agreements whose terms are in conflict, and if this happened by accident, we would abandon all strategical gains that would follow from such situation, in order to minimise the damages to our reputation. We hope that German approach to truth and honour is the same.
As the former Duchy of Venice is now ascending to Great Power status, it is my pleasure to announce it's abolition. We are hereby taking up the title abandoned by the Austrian Emperors and henceforth declare the Holy Roman Empire!
The Duchy of Venice will continue to exist in Venetia, but as a subordinate title. Also, it is worth pointing out that the Duchy of Italy covers the area commonly known as "Rome" and not the entire state.
-Emperor Carinthium
Germany is glad to announce that even though the conflicts of the recent times have led to some unfortunate bloodbaths, this has also been a great time for Science. Under the lead of our brilliant Minister of Internal Security, Herr Prof. Doktor Weltschmerz (Dr.phil, Dr.med, D.Sc, D.Occ Psych, Eng.D, etc.), we conducted a number of experiments in the former French territories, leading to breakthroughs in the field of Occupation Science. As an example, we ran a number of randomized, double-blinded experiments on e.g. the comparative effectiveness of treating regions leniently versus having mass executions on the smallest sign of trouble. The results were crucial in helping figure out the best ways to integrate the country's citizens on a mass scale.
We are pleased to note that the results have now been accepted for publication in the International Journal of Social Engineering, but an even more gratifying result is that the people in-the-regions-formerly-known-as-France have abandoned their old identity at a record pace. German sausages and beer have now been accepted as the main dish in every home, and the numbers of volunteers flocking to enlist to the defense of their new homeland are truly remarkable. Best of all, there have been generous donations of truthen silverware: even though our truth mines have been working at full gear for many years now, melting down these household implements has helped refill the German truth coffers once again.
"We are truly on das Path to der World Domination now", says our brilliant Minister of Internal Security, Herr Prof. Doktor Weltschmerz (Dr.phil, Dr.med, D.Sc, D.Occ Psych, Eng.D, etc.). "Let us all have das Drink für that, bitte schön!"
Yvain, it's a little difficult to see what's going on in the East side of the map, since it's behind the LW sidebar. Would you mind scaling down the image a little?
I usually right-click on the image, pick "copy address of the picture" (or whatever it's called in English, my Firefox is in Finnish) and then paste the address to a new browser tab to see the picture in full.
But this is a bit cumbersome.
Does your firefox not have "view image" as a right click option? My firefox and chrome both provide the option you are emulating by default...
Huh. You're right, it does. For some reason I've always only used that feature when a picture has refused to load at all: it didn't occur to me to use it for this.
England will be sending an expedition north to investigate rumors of Russian battle ships in Norwegian harbors. Lines of communication are unreliable and borders sometimes unclear. The Russian fleet may have mistaken Oslo for Gothenburg. As there has not been any serious damage to English interests we will not rush to war. But should we find any Russians when we arrive, the snows of St. Petersburg will be ash by 1905.
Mistaking Oslo for Gothenburg. Fog in the Skagerrak. Yeah, that's the ticket. It was an error in navigation.
I hope I don't mistake Copenhagen for Malmo on the way back. Or Shetland for Jutland.
OK, thanks Yvain for moderating the game and all the amusing comments after each turn. If somebody deserves karma, it is the moderator, who, in contrast to the players, had no chance of resigning after being fed up.
I have started writing a detailed description of my moves and motivation, to provide a complete account of the Austrian part of the game, but will finish it soonest on Wednesday (latest on Friday, I hope, if akrasia steps in).
Edit: I forgot to thank my opponents, enemies, allies and whatever the other players may have been, for a fair and challenging game.
Thank you for being an awesome host!
DIAS draws are unordered.
Yes, this is what I understood us to have agreed upon. A draw is a draw.
Agreed- a draw is a draw.
Now I don't understand anything, especially the English moves.
I predict an alliance between England and Turkey while they absorb their former mid-European partners; Austria will be the first to go.
Such prophecies fortunately rarely become true.
While the British Empire understands the the Treaty of Hler could not last indefinitely we have the following complaints.
A) Germany failed to notify England and Russia of their decision to terminate the treaty, if that is their intention.
B) Germany's move destabilizes Russia, we believe a capable Russia is essential to English security.
C) While the treaty recognizes Sweden as Russia's domain, our Norwegian citizens long for the days of the Union. As such we believe that if Sweden is not to be held by Russia its right and proper place is under English domain beside Norway.
While the treaty does demand that England go to war with Germany there is precedent for peaceful, negotiated withdrawal in Scandinavia. Germany can avert war by returning his fleet to Denmark or by allowing the placement of some currently held German territory under English control.
Beg pardon. Don't you mean Russian control?
Yes. That is what I mean.
Ah! What a relief! I had been beginning to worry that there might be Great Powers out to get me.
$@!%!#$%!#!@!
As Austria recently pointed out, the last turn should have had Apulia moving to Rome, which means that it bounced with Italy and Italy did not move into Rome. That means Italy is still in Venice, which means it needs to issue a retreat order.
EDIT: Italians can't retreat into Rome. Italy, please send retreat order and revised move orders. Austria, please send revised move orders.
I know this turn is late. I didn't get Italy's orders until several hours after the deadline. Sorry.
I hesitate to mention this now, but doesn't Italy also have the option of disbanding, rather than retreating? And if the army disbands, doesn't Italy get to build - perhaps in Rome?
@#$!$#@. By which I mean yes. Okay, I will just wait for Italy to do something and then figure out what happens from there.
Uhhhhh, I don't think Italy is allowed to issue that retreat order! Since he was already bounced from Rome his choices are Piedmont and Tuscany. Jdip won't accept other imputs.
Darnit, quick rule check says you're right.
Okay, I want an Italian retreat order, and new Italian and Austrian orders for this turn AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. If Austria wants to send me two new move orders (one contingent upon retreat to Tus, one on retreat to Pie) so I'm only waiting for Italy, that's fine too. Anyone else may also send me changed orders in the "conditional upon retreat to Piedmont/Tuscany" format if they think it's important.
Sorry for the inconvenience.
I am sorry for finding out so late. Even if I have planned my previous move carefully, I fell victim to my laziness combined with belief in the moderator's infallibility and wasn't even surprised that Italy succeeded into Rome. Thanks to Douglas Knight for pointing that out.
Yeah, eight units against three. It was never going to go well. Even with perfect information about enemy moves I would still have gone down. :(
Yup. Well played though. Sorry it went down that way. Someone has to lose first I guess.
C'est la vie, or c'est la mort, as it seems.
Your speculation regarding English acquiescence in the Russian occupation of Norway is interesting. Perhaps even prescient.
However, I think that you are misinterpreting the treaty. German obligations do not require me to lose Scandinavia, St. Pete, and one other SC. Just Norway, Sweden, and a single additional SC. Germany is not required to continue destroying Russia beyond that point. St. Pete is not part of Scandinavia.
However, it remains correct that it may take years for Germany to accomplish this, if it can be done at all.
Prince Kropotkin for the Tsar.
Updated.
Since you are doing this by updating the original, I hope you are also saving the earlier versions someplace so that a complete narrative history with maps, headlines, and orders can be reconstructed after the game is finished.
Seconded. I'm not much of a player myself, but would love to read about who deceived whom when.
I'm glad I hadn't upvoted this post yet. I just had to reward you for this brilliant paragraph somehow.
And updated.
Oh, and I know that this game is ahistorical enough that this really shouldn't bug me, but... the League of Nations? In 1901? Really? :)
I need something to be General Secretary of!
League of Nations is fine with me, but please do not meddle in the Russian line of succession. The Tsar's younger brother and heir to the throne, Duke Michael, threatened to have me shot for treason after you carelessly referred to me as the crown prince. I claim the hereditary title of prince, but am not in the line of succession as Tsar of the Russias, nor am I closely related to the Romanov royal family.
Prince Kropotkin
And updated.
And updated.
Updated.
I really like the newspaper headlines. I was planning on doing something similar, but similar payoff for no effort is rather welcome!
Updated.
And updated.
Ils ne passeront pas! With our backs to the wall, and believing in the justice of our cause, each man must fight to the last. You can always take one with you. Better the gun than the Hun!
The other game of diplomacy is seeking another player for Italy, since the first person signed up appears to have dropped out. If you want to play, please respond in that thread to let others know that the slot is taken; please have your orders in Wednesday, 2200 GMT, to nojustnoperson@gmail.com.
Edit: We've got the last player- thanks Alexandros!
Upon thought, I'd like to request the title Duke of Venice. This game is very ahistorical to begin with anyway, so I may as well choose titles for the hell of it.
Sorry I know this is wrong. But I simply had to up vote this for the Civilization reference :)
For the good and wellbeing of the peoples of Scandinavia the leaders of Russia, Germany and England met this month, at a secret retreat on the Isle of Hlér to negotiate a regional peace agreement for all of Scandinavia. These three great powers agreed to the following.
1. Domains
1a. Sweden and St. Petersburg are hereby the domain of Russia.
1b. Denmark is hereby the domain of Germany.
1c. Norway is hereby the domain of England.
2. Demilitarization
2a. No armies are permitted in Sweden, Norway, Finland or St. Petersburg
2ai. Exceptions: Russia may build armies in St. Petersburg if a) there is no more convenient build location, b) he submits written notification to England prior to the build.
2b. The Barents Sea, Skagerrak and the Baltic Sea are hereby declared demilitarized zones.
3. Enforcement
3a. Should one signatory nation attack the Scandinavian domain of another nation (clause 1) or violate a DMZ (clause 2), the violator's or invader's rights to any territory in Scandinavia is hereby forfeit."
3b. The third nation is obligated to attack the invader and support the invaded until such time as the aggressor nation loses all claims in Scandinavia and is deprived of one supply center in addition to her Scandinavian domain.
4. Withdrawal
4a. Any nation, may void the agreement by providing written notification to the other two signatories. One year following notification the agreement is void.
The peoples of Scandinavia rejoice; there will be peace in our time!
Note: This is actually the Fall season, not Winter. Winter is the build season.
Yvain is giving the thread the title of the season for which the players are currently considering their orders. At the moment we are considering what to build, therefore we are in the Winter season.
Quick note: since the diplomacy map is actually ~1912 instead of ~1900, I'm going to place my Turkey after the Young Turk Revolution in 1908, and so I will play Grand Vizier Vanaturk, in charge of Parliament and speaking for the powerless Sultan Mehmed V.
Because, who wouldn't want to play secular liberals when they've got the chance?
I have seen this post and am willing to participate. (Thanks for doing this, by the way!)
I prefer email at vaniver@gmail.com .
If you want to make it high-stakes, we could have the victory reward be a post on the main site by the victor, so the reward is ten times higher- ~20-100 karma points would only make a big difference for myself and Carinthium, but ~200-1000 karma would make a big difference for everyone playing. It should also contain a write-up so we're not diluting the value of the main site- but a karma point from 7 people plus spectators is on the scale of making an insightful joking comment, which doesn't seem any more significant than bragging rights.
The only concern there is what to do with shared victory- posting 2 posts to the main site on the same topic right after one another already starts to feel like spam, and I shuddder at the thought of 3 or 4, but it seems doable.
Speaking of write-ups, I strongly recommend that everyone keep a diary of game-related thoughts. Half of the fun of public games like this is the After-Action Report, and since we're interested in rationality and biases recording your impressions, predictions, and motivations seems like a really good idea.
Well, it would be easy enough to get players to upvote many of your past comments to produce a large karma gain. I'm just worried that people would consider getting a few hundred karma for winning a Diplomacy game an abuse of the karma system. The only reason I included a reward was to give people an incentive to win on their own instead of jointly.
I'm sceptical about this too. Can I set up an official LW coin-toss game, played every 30 minutes, in which the loser has to upvote the winner?
The coin-toss game could be made fair (ie fair to LWers who weren't participating) if the loser had to downvote themselves simultaneously, so that the karma effects of the game were zero-sum.
This objection seems misplaced- if we're treating this as an actual laboratory experiment that we plan to get data from, then that data seems like it's worth karma. (I can see an argument that it should be worth as much as a few clever comments in the rationality fanfic discussion rather than as much as a clever post on rationality concepts, but I'd disagree pretty strongly.) The coinflip doesn't contribute anything besides a Boltzmann distribution for parts of the karma scores of some members (assuming you use the fair variant).
The reason I suggested bumping up the reward is I think it'll increase the pressure and make things more interesting. I fear that at the moment it's like a wager for a dollar- the amount almost makes it seem less serious- than a wager for a hundred dollars- where people start to sit up and get tense. But it also seems like it'll be easy to make it worth it (as an after-action report / example of decision-making under uncertainty and pressure).
I also don't see that much of a distinction between rewarding someone 50 points and rewarding someone 500 points when it comes to use or abuse of the karma system: if you shouldn't be giving people points for playing games, then you shouldn't be giving people points for playing games. But I think there are plenty of games that you can and should give people points for playing/winning, and Diplomacy seems like one of those. We're probably talking a solid month or so of commitment here (10 turns at 3 days a turn), and if people actually keep diaries that'll be pretty valuable stuff.
Final info: looking up some diplomacy stats, it looks like roughly 3 out of every 5 games end with a solo winner, and roughly 9 out of 10 have 3 or less winners. So, it does not seem like worrying about spam is worth that much effort.
Good points. I agree that having a significant reward will make the game more interesting, and that the diaries will turn out to be valuable. Mind you, most economists would say that a karma reward for the winner incentivises the wrong thing, if the diaries are the desired outcome.
I don't have a real objection -- it's only karma after all! -- I just wanted to make the argument to see if people would agree.
As an outsider I would simply love if people would keep track of and eventually post their decision making process. The subsequent analysis (game theory and rationality wise) would be well worth giving all of the player a few hundred points of karma. :)
Particularly good and rational thinking would be more rewarded, bad thinking could be stripped to its bare components helping the player become less wrong.
It would also do away with the effect of confusing readers about the actual karma score of a particular post (up voting the last 100-1000 comments might change the perceptions about the arguments quite a bit especially unpopular or ignored ones) But if you guys are set on it, I recommend you rely on volunteer upvotes (I get to make this post for winning the Diplomacy game, X respected guy recommends you up vote this)
$20 to SIAI or Village Reach if a country other than Turkey or Austria drops out and lets me play.
Why don't you instead organize the people named in this post to play a game on www.playdiplomacy.com ?
As a lesson in game theory for the blog readers, I think it will be more interesting if the community just has one game to occasionally follow... I could picture myself following along with one game, but two games at the same time seems like an overwhelming amount of information.
Of course, as a lesson in game theory for the participants, the more the better. I'm still hesitant to start another game online.
This makes me a sad Grand Vizier. :'(
I have expected a separate discussion thread for this, but since there is none, here is my diary. Well, not exactly a diary, since it has been written after the game, but I have tried to put it in a diary format and to avoid hindsight bias as much as I could.
A very interesting read, this one as well. With two players having written game diaries, I'll now have to reciprocate with writing one of my own as well. (Well, not a diary technically since it'll be a recount of the game afterwards, but still.) Expect one relatively soon.
Thank you! But I think I mostly just got lucky. :D
I probably did.
At this point, I had made offers of support to both you and Italy, figuring I could keep the promise to the side who it turned out to be more advantageous to support. You breaking our treaty and invading Italy when you did ruined my plans, though: I had been hoping to keep you out for a turn or two more, enough that I'd get to establish a strong position in Italy. With your invasion, I pretty much lost out on all of Italy's spoils. And then I lost your support for an invasion of Warsaw, as well. I was probably being too greedy, and should've just moved against Russia instead of trying to grab pieces of both Italy and Russia.
Three. Russia was the first to publish his record, even if shorter.
Burgundy disbands.
Austria-Hungary unilaterally declares cessation of hostilities towards the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and expresses sincere desire to end the war in Europe as soon as possible. We should enjoy at least one year of peace before the world ends.
Swe disbands; also, Ruh disbands in the upkeep phase.
Please tell me I get some kind of force multiplier.
You get a force multiplier of one.
I didn't get e-mail notification for this turn or the previous one. Did you stop sending them?
No, I'm sending them as normal. Has anyone else had this problem?
I haven't been getting them either (this winter turn I did though).
It happened to me two or three times around 1906/1907. I have explained it as a malfunction of my spam filter, since few other times the notification ended in the spam folder. (The same happened to some e-mails send by Russia during 1901, which is the main reason I am now allied with Turkey.)
[Diplomacy diary - Only the first few years strike me as interesting. I append my lost messages to Austria - their failure to arrive pretty much determined what later happened in the East. If there is any interest in Russian archives regarding the origins of Russo-Turkish hostility or the preliminary negotiations leading to the Treaty of Hier, I would be happy to make those available as well]
*Pre-spring 1901
I haven't played more than a couple games of Diplomacy in my life, and they were thirty years ago. So I spend the first part of the negotiations completely confused about basic rules and tactics. My first confusion was that I was under the delusion that coastal fleets resided on a particular ordered pair of land-province and ocean-province. So that, for example, a British fleet on the North Sea coast of Norway would take several moves to get to the Barent Sea coast of St. Pete. Once that was cleared up, I still didn't understand that Sweden (unlike St. Pete) has only a single coast.
Once I had that finally cleared up, I was able to negotiate non-aggression agreements with England and Germany. They won't hold for long, but maybe long enough so that I have time to deal with the mess in the Balkans.
The first annoyance is that Turkey wants us to pretend hostility (by bouncing in the Black Sea, for example) but later turn together against Austria.
Austria doesn't respond to my emails suggesting that maybe we should ally against Turkey. My original intention was A Warsaw->Galatia, A Moscow->Ukraine and F Sevastapol->Rumania. In fact, I told Austria and Turkey that this was my intention. I also suggested ways (German verbal threats against Russia, basically) that Austria could be assured that my army in Galatia was not a threat to Vienna and Budapest. Alas, no response from Austria until too late.
Austria claims that he never got most of my emails. I'm not sure whether to believe this or not. In any case, it gets me thinking about how I am royally (imperially?) screwed if I continue with my original plans with both Austria and Turkey hostile. I begin to realize just how important it is for both Turkey and Russia to keep the other party's fleet out of the Black Sea.
So at the last minute, I switch my orders to bounce the Turkish fleet. And I also decide to make a Warsaw move that is less hostile-appearing to Austria. Of course, I realize that this probably means that Austria will be moving the Vienna army toward Warsaw. So I also send a note to Italy suggesting that a move into Tyrol may prove interesting.
Spring 1901
I am relieved and surprised that Turkey has not moved into Armenia. I am initially completely baffled by the French decision to hold his army in Marseilles. And the Austrian decision to hold in Trieste.
My Fall moves are obvious. The only question is whether to attack Rumania from Ukraine or Sevastapol. If the attack fails it doesn't matter which direction I choose. Both Ukr and Sev stay put. But if I do succeed, I will need to build twice, and for the sake of peace in the north, I don't want to build in St. Pete. So I will try to move my fleet to Rumania and then build in Sevastapol. Fleet or Army? Interesting choice. I hope I get the chance to make it.
And now I am informed that Italy hasn't been receiving my email either. Sheesh.
Winter builds 1901
Cool! I get to build twice. I had been nervous about a German bounce in Sweden or an Austrian invasion of Rumania.
I had been planning to build a fleet in Sevastapol this winter, but now I'm not sure. Scandinavia looks mighty tempting right now, since Britain moved to Belgium. And assuming I decide to continue with my southern strategy, building an army in Sevastapol keeps Turkey confused about my intentions for a little longer. I need to talk to Austria. I'll delay my decision about the build until the last moment.
9:30 PM. Well, Turkish intransigence eliminates the confusion. Turkey and Russia are now at war. I will build an Army in Moscow and a fleet in Sevastapol. And Austria must decide whose side to be on.
Spring 1902
Tues. I have proposed a treaty to Austria and Italy. I believe it is a good deal for both. Italy wanted better terms; I replied. Austria queried, I responded.
Fall 1902
Fri. Well, I am screwed. I can hold Sevastapol with support from Ukraine and Moscow, But when Austria eventually moves into Galicia, I'm in trouble. I need to stir things up somehow. So I am goint to take Norway, to gain a build. And I am going to move Warsaw to Silesia. Two purposes: I can build in Warsaw. It can next turn south to Galicia or Bohemia. Plus if Germany moves some of his forces east, it may distract Austria.
[End diary.]
I'm interested in everything- and am anxious to discuss what everyone has learned (I've learned a ton). Unfortunately, the other nations persist their bloody and pointless war against the British Empire.
Same here. (Though I'll only provide analysis of my own actions after the game is over, even of the early game ones.)
[Begin archives of correspondence]
Greetings to Austria from Russia,
You and I have a problem. I want Rumania. You probably don't want me to have it. Too bad. If you try to prevent it, you will have difficulties with Germany, Turkey, or Italy. If you move against Warsaw, you will earn my lasting enmity.
On the other hand, if you permit my occupation of Rumania, then we can be allies, working together against either the Turks or the Germans, with me doing much of the work and you grabbing most of the spoils. I may even be able to offer you diplomatic support against the Italians, since both the French and the Turks are presently friendly to me.
Perplexed
Greetings to Austria from Russia,
I believe it is wise to inform you of my intentions, so that my moves are not misinterpreted.
My strategic intention is to sieze Rumania and Sweden, and then to adopt a defensive stance for several turns, to see what happens elsewhere on the globe. If these rather peaceful intentions are resisted or thwarted, then I may respond with extreme hostility immediately.
Diplomatically, my doctrine is to avoid all entangling alliances and only to make simple agreements of non-aggression and demilitarization of certain strategic regions.
Tactically, for a variety of reasons related to establishing a Russian presence in Rumania, it is my intention to move my Warsaw army into Galicia this Spring. Please understand that my purpose is simply to limit the amount of force you can bring to bear against Rumania. It is my intention to move the Galicia army on to Rumania in the Fall, should the tactical situation permit this.
Once the Rumanian situation is stabilized, there is no reason we cannot be friends, and even allies - at least for a few years, until our common enemies are sufficiently weakened.
Prince Kropotkin for the Tsar.
Greetings to Austria from Russia.
Yes, I am interested in cooperation. My proclaimed intentions, from which I do not intend to waver unless I am threatened or attacked, are to seize Sweden and Rumania, and then remain passive and neutral for several turns. However, if Russia is threatened (by, say, Austrian moves against Warsaw or Turkish moves against Sevastopol) then I will ally myself with one of you to defeat the other. I believe that Turkey has been lying to me. You have been honest. Therefore, I prefer alliance with you. If you can suggest a sequence of early moves for me which leaves me secure in Sevastopol, Warsaw, and Rumania, and in position to support your own advance into Bulgaria, then I am quite willing to listen.
What is the diplomatic situation in the Adriatic? Is the Trieste fleet free to move toward Greece? If Italy does not intend to attack Turkey, who will she attack instead? If we do dismantle Turkey, what do you propose as a target distribution of the spoils?
Prince Kropotkin for the Tsar.
Greetings again to Austria from Russia
I realize that you have no reason to trust me, but if you could be convinced to do so, the following opening strategy would work well:
Spring Russia A Warsaw -> Galicia A Moscow -> Ukraine F Sevastopol -> Black Sea (bounces) F St. P -> Gulf Austria A Budapest -> Serbia A Vienna -> Trieste (bounces?) F Trieste -> Albania
Fall Russia A Galicia -> Rumania A Ukraine supports A Galicia -> Rumania F Sevastopol -> Black Sea or Armenia (bounces?) F Gulf -> Sweden Austria (Depends upon situation in Trieste, but in any case occupies both Serbia and Greece)
Winter - Both Austria and Russia build twice. Italy and Turkey regret the error of their ways.
I realize that my move A Warsaw -> Galicia puts you at risk, but I need to make it to protect myself from your potential treachery. You can bounce it, of course, but then you will not be able to both take Greece by Fall and remain secure in Trieste. Your suggestions are welcome regarding any alternative solution.
One possibility is that during the Summer diplomacy, we jointly request (you publicly, me privately) a declaration by Italy and Germany (and perhaps even Turkey) that Russian moves from Galicia against either Vienna or Budapest will considered hostile.
The Prince
As one of the Eastern players in the other game, I'll give some feedback. This feedback will be about stuff which may or may not have mattered considering that your emails were not received. And it also may be stuff that you've already figured out, but which could benefit others.
In 1901, Russia tends to be viewed as having a reasonable claim to Rumania, so it was correct for you to lay claim to it. Austria's feelings about you taking it will probably depend on whether he is thinking of working with you, and he may not have even decided yet in Spring 1901. He might like it for himself, but he would be ambitious to think it reasonable to actually get it, and he would need to feel confident that Turkey would back him up.
While there is a time and a place for brinksmanship, you really don't need it in 1901. Everyone knows that if Austria foils you from getting Rumania, and/or Austria moves to Galicia, it's starting a war.
Since diplomacy is a zero-sum game with limited territory, it's very hard to remain neutral. Russia especially is so big that it can't really remain neutral in the early game, especially not for a few turns (which is a massive amount of time). Everyone is asking who they are going to get centers from next, and who is going to help them do it.
Let's look at this from Austria's perspective. Who is he going to attack?
Germany or Italy? No, center powers attacking each other is a risky strategy. Positions in the center are harder to defend because of multiple fronts. Austria turning his back on the East will make him and the Balkan centers a very tasty target for a Juggernaught. Even if the East let him move West, taking over German or Italian territory will result in Austria being treated like a pinata mid-game.
So, Austria has to go after either Russia or Turkey. To go after Turkey, he needs either Russian or Italian help. Italy being unwilling to attack Turkey meant that the had to work with either you or Turkey against the other: a classic triangle. His initial email basically told you: work with me against Turkey, or I team up with Turkey and destroy you.
Typically Russia-Austria alliances work by keeping Galicia demilitarized. Since Galicia borders two Austrian home centers and only one Russian home center, it's more dangerous for Austria to let you in there than vice versa. No Austrian player will accept Russia in Galicia in Spring 1901 as anything other than a declaration of war. It crosses a Schelling point. (Similar logic applies to the Black Sea, which is why Turkey wanted to bounce you there.)
You don't need to go through Galicia to try to get Rumania. Remember, to keep you out, Austria has to weaken his claim to Greece (a neutral center that he badly wants), or work with Turkey. Yet if AT are working together, they can keep you out of Rumania no matter what. The way to get and keep Rumania is diplomacy. Autria's desire for Greece, or interest in working with you, are both reasons to let you have Rumania rather than jumping into an alliance with Turkey. (Austrian alliances with Turkey have drawbacks. Exhibit A: The current map.)
There are a lot of hidden norms and Schelling points in Diplomacy, and they must often be learned the hard way.
And here I thought it was my good looks and winning personality! cries in corner
Austria protests! The order was Vie-Bud, not Vie-Boh.
I'll check and if you're right I'll fix it over winter.
Fall?
Paparazzi managed to take a rare photograph of the Grand Vizier and Emperor resting in between an afternoon frolic and tea party during which plush animals were pushed around a map of Europe to better plan their domination of the continent.
Stp retreats to nwy
Edi Birsan prefers springtime betrayal.
Silesia retreats to Prussia.
Also, the set of orders I submitted (just rechecked) had the fleet in Sweden moving to Bal, that doesn't seem to have happened?
You're right. I've updated the second map to take account of both these points.
I hope the Spring deadline is not in the past; when did you mean for it to be?
Hm, I was going to let Kropotkin live (but still put the rest of the royal family to death), letting him try out his ideas in a Siberian commune. I guess I should have ordered that beforehand. (Also, it isn't called Istanbul yet.)
Fixed. Feel free to include role-playing points like that in your orders in the future if you want.
To promote better understanding of history, Austrian government has decided to declassify the documents describing the preparation of invasion to Italy (code name Operation Odoacer). The analysis of the situation can be accessed here.
The file compares several reasonable Italian and German strategies and it was used to select between seven variants of play. I have taken into account only the number of supply centres controlled after the last turn and have practically assigned the same probability to all possible Italian moves. Of course, any comments or criticisms of the strategy are welcome.
The move you actually made, with Apulia holding, isn't on the table, is it? Waste of a move, isn't it? It would be simply better to support the attack on Venice. Also, you don't seems to have considered that many options, like attacking Tyrollia to cut support.
Attacking Tyrolia was prohibited by the treaty with Germany.
Army in Apulia was ordered to move to Rome. I am not sure why the army held in Apulia. Maybe some mistake they made in League of Nations? I failed to notice that. Thanks.
From here on, Germany guarantees the Holy Roman Empire's safety, conditional on the Holy Roman Empire assisting the German/English alliance against France. Presuming that the Holy Roman Empire assists the GE Alliance in the taking of Marseilles, Germany will consider any hostile actions against the Holy Roman Empire as declarations of war against Germany and will retaliate accordingly. As a further repayment for their help, the Holy Roman Empire will also be allowed to claim Marseilles as its own.
These guarantees will last until France has been eradicated from the whole continent of Europe, after which further agreements may be negotiated.
It is a sad moment when neither Germany nor Austria are able to punish the outrage caused by Italian dictator's arrogance and pride. I mean, it's true that the Holy Roman Empire was neither holy, nor Roman, nor an empire, but at least it was of the German Nation. Damn, if Greece can block the accession of Macedonia to NATO because of the country's name, Austria considers it obligatory to protest against the Duce's new title.
Austria gave up the title of Holy Roman Emperor, and there is a good case the Germans never deserved it in the first place. By contrast, the Venetians have at least moved our capital to Rome and control the heartlands of the old Empire.
I must protest; clearly His Supreme Majesty Mehmed V hold the best claim for this title, as our capital is Nova Roma, which has been the capital of the empire for longer than the provincial city of Rome was.
From it's roots the Roman Empire was made for the Romans themselves- moving the capital from Rome was a betrayal of what the Empire stood for. The Empire began in Rome- it is fitting that it should be rooted there.
Hardly! The virtues of the Romans was not their ethnicity, but democracy, honor, and learning; one could hardly deny that a Spaniard such as Marcus Aurelius deserves mention as a Roman! Constantine's decision to move the capital from the place of the Empire's birth to its natural seat of government, from which all the empire could easily be accessed, was surely the pinnacle of wisdom. When Italy had reverted to barbarism, the Empire remained strong and centered in Constantinople. When the lights of learning had gone out in Italy, we kept the Greek and Latin works alive.
It is only in Constantinople where Roman rule can be said to continue unbroken.
Much as we pride ourselves on our ancestry, you flatter us too much- our ancestors did not have a democracy, although they came uniquely close to their age. The historical evidence suggests they would identify people as Romans based on ethnicity, not virtue.
Constantinople was a well-defended city, but it was too far east to be an efficient seat of government. In addition, it further seperated the Roman people from the Empire they had earned.
Finally, the true ancient Romans of the Republican era would not have considered Marcus Aurelius a Roman.
Yet it is the Russian and German empires which continue to style their emperors "Caesar".
A mistake we are now correcting.
The following treaty is made between Germany and Austria:
Facing the possible invasion from the East, the leaders of the German Reich and Austrio-Hungarian Empire recognise that the sacred fates of the German nation, as well as the Hungarian nation and other nations of the Dual Monarchy, are at stake. To protect the rightful interests of both countries, this treaty of friendship and cooperation is signed:
Signed by
Kaiser von Österreich
Deutscher Kaiser
it should be confirmed by Germany, of course
Germany has continued attacking Austria after French armies have been eliminated from the continent, and the German move to Marseille clearly shows that German motive for that was not protection of Italy in terms of the Italian-German pact. We thus observe that Germany has abused the treaty with us and our willingness to maintain peace to achieve goals which were not in accordance with the original spirit of our treaty. The subsequent negotiations with Germany showed that continued cooperation would need us to betray Turkey who proved to be a reliable ally. Therefore we do no more feel bound by any earlier commintments to Germany, and declare our Treaty, as given in the parent comment, null and void.
Germany confirms.
The Holy Roman Empire is outraged that the League of Nations would try to warn anybody? We declare war on them!
This is what I get for writing orders while sleep-deprived! But at least Russia didn't try to take back Sev.
Dooohhhhh!
Don't be too put out by it; it wouldn't have done all that much to help you / it's the wrong move to hope your opponent makes massive mistakes like that.
I am surprised they didn't mention lutefisk. And ammonium chloride.
Obligatory link: an American trying out the pleasures of ammonium chloride.
This makes me want to visit Finland. If it was not winter, I would be buying a ticket now.
For some reason I don't seem to be getting any emails- could people PM me anything they've sent lately?
Darn, I missed Spring 1902, and now the post is getting overwritten. Here's what I suggested in our other game thread:
Is there any way we can update the map without erasing what is here? That's what the other game is doing, and the problem is that there is no way for viewers to see the history; furthermore, the witty summaries by the GMs are getting destroyed. I missed Spring 1902's update in the other post, and I'm already confused. Even worse, when the players write their end-of-game summaries about what happened, readers won't have any record to refer to, which partially defeats the purpose of rationalist diplomacy in the first place. Here are my ideas:
Make one post per year, and have all the moves and maps for that year
Host the seasons somewhere else and link to them from here (or keep updating the LW post, and keep an archive somewhere else).
Put it on the wiki, or at least keep a record of the seasons on the wiki. Then we have no problems making a bunch of pages.
Something clever someone else thinks of
I haven't mentioned my online archiving system, but it does exist. You can get to any file for any turn by going to:
www.raikoth.net/Game/rdiplo[$TURN-NAME][$SINGLE-LETTER-MARKING].[$FILE-EXTENSION]
where $TURN-NAME is the year plus the letter "s", "f", or "w" for spring, fall, or winter and $SINGLE-LETTER-MARKING is "m", "f", "t", or "p" for movement map, final map, text of orders, or posted headlines, and $FILE-EXTENSION is .jpg for the maps, .html for the order lists, and .txt for the posts. Note that the posted .txts are probably hard to read on some browsers.
For example, the movement map for fall 1901 would be at http://www.raikoth.net/Game/rdiplo1901fm.jpg
After the game ends, I will publish all my correspondence, all orders and positions of all units turn by turn (together with commentaries about my thoughts and plans). The history of Austria in the game will be possible to reconstruct.
But I do not believe that the older versions are lost. Yvain is certainly keeping an archive. Well, I hope so.
If not, everything but the headlines can be reproduced from the turn orders (which hopefully he's keeping so we don't have to pull out all of our emails).
So, should we have a thread where we recount lessons and experiences? Should it be in Discussion or the main site? And should I post it, or should Jack?
So the draw is unordered. I don't deserve any more karma than prase or Vaniver. That said, you've done a ton of work and I would have no problem putting lessons together for a post. On the other hand, you totally deserve more karma for the work you put in moderating this- so if you want it, take it. If I posted in the discussion section it would be pretty easy to make sure all players got the same karma. If I post on the main page that gets a lot harder.
I also think losing players should be awarded with karma if they can recount important lessons. People shouldn't have to give away insight without getting karma in return. So maybe we should just have a discussion thread where players talk about what they learned (and where the three of us can get victory karma)? And then you could just quote the worthwhile/top voted insights and put them in a post for the main page.
ETA: The other thing is the second game is still going. Since they might have their own lessons, the top level post could include those too- as they'll probably have their own discussion thread for their winner/winners.
My preference is to not be the one who has to arrange this, but if no one else wants to I will take the responsibility. If everyone else agrees on you, I'd support that.
I'm opting for one comment instead of a host of small comments carrying on various parts of the conversation, so this may be a little difficult to read in the future.
I care about victory karma.
I maintain my original position, though, that the victory karma should come from providing valuable lessons and data. While I sympathize with the argument that players that provide insight shouldn't go uncompensated, my impression of the game was that everyone was collectively agreeing to put together notes and insights and then the winners of the game would get the karma from the group effort- i.e., the compensation was the chance to win.
I am busy today, but should have the time in the next few days to put together a thread. My preference is for main, but the karma issues there are somewhat problematic. I like the idea of you making the thread (with content supplied by the players) and players having comments voted up, but if this is worth putting on the main page it seems like the victory karma should be scaled to the main page. Given my fellow winner's opinions, though, that seems like a good all-around option.
If the focus is going to be about lessons, then here is one way to find those lessons: Let the victors point out mistakes - tactical or strategic - that they noticed had been made by other players in the game. Then let the accused mistake-makers analyze the lapse in rationality that led to the mistake being made. Or if they wish, they can provide an analysis showing that there was no mistake - only bad luck.
I know that my own mistakes arose from a variety of correctable causes - ranging from simple carelessness, through character flaws, to use of wrong decision-making algorithms.
This seems difficult because of imperfect information. I remember being flabbergasted when Germany didn't bounce you out of Sweden (the standard play), but was that a mistake? I can't tell without knowing what information he had at the time he made the decision. A core principle of decision analysis is that you don't judge by outcomes but by the decision made ignorant of the outcome.
For example, one decision I'm ambivalent about was not moving to Tys when England vacated Tun (the same turn I took StP after saying I wouldn't). I was >90% confident England would vacate both Tun and Tys, and taking both of them would have put me in a solid position. But, if I took Tys, I opened Austria and myself up to losing Rome, which would have been unrecoverable. I played the maximin strategy but suspected the expected utility strategy was to move to Tys. That's the place to say whether or not I made a mistake, before we know that England did tell the truth.
I'm actually confused about what you're endorsing.
I've finished my diary and uploaded it here- sorry about the delay! My emails will be collected and posted once I figure out a good way to do that from gmail. (There are a lot of them, so I'd like for it to be automated.)
It seems like we should try to have some sort of central repository for everyone's stuff that wouldn't fit into a post- like, the last page and a half of my 17 page diary is my summary of the game, and even then that might be a little long if everyone wrote that much.
Quite an interesting read. Also a bit surprising. From the way you played, I got the impression of you as this coldly detached Vulcan chessmaster veteran player who had no trouble always going for the move that was calculated to be the most effective. I didn't expect to find out that you were as nervous about things as you were. :D
Regarding the Swedish bump - basically what happened was that I went looking for Diplomacy articles online, and came across this one. It claimed that
and I figured that I might as well go along with the advice offered, since I didn't know the game well enough to contradict it.
Actually, I never thought anything about this. Because, well, at that point I was at such a position that talking about me in the third person was fully justified.
I have more comments as well, but I'd prefer for somebody to make a separate thread for the post-game discussion to make things more clear...
I missed this comment - it would be better to place it as a top-level comment rather than here, because it isn't apparent when checking for new comments here.
Here I link to my diary.
Edit: I have finished reading of your diary, and it is brilliant. I was afraid of your stab in 1907 and later on, but I haven't probably realised how close it was.
I think there should definitely be a separate thread, rather than this thread. I don't really care where.
Also, another idea I'll throw out for the future of LW diplomacy: create a winner's (or survivors) bracket from this game, and our other game ("Rationalist Diplomacy Game 2") once it concludes.
With game hosts/moderators granted status as honorary survivors?
First, I don't want any karma from that. Playing Diplomacy on LessWrong was fun, and I feel enough rewarded by my survival until the end. The karma system, despite its occasional non-standard uses (polls...) should remain what it was designed for: a tool for maintaining high quality of discussion.
The decision between Discussion or main should depend on the number of interested people, and the fact whether some more general rationality-related insights were gained. I don't have any particular preference.
I second not caring much about victory karma. The bragging rights are worth a lot more. If Van doesn't care we can just forget about it.
England agrees to a draw.
Austrian agreement to a draw persists.
Inshallah,
HIH Sultan Mehmed V consents to a draw.
-GVIV
My congratulations to the victors on their survival. (Or is that congratulations to the survivors on their victory?) My particular congrats to the Austrian emperor, for whom survival no doubt feels like victory.
Peace at last, just in time to stop the clock that had been ticking toward Armageddon or the Singularity, or whatever it was that was expected to happen in 1914.
ETA: And particular thanks to Yvain for his hard work as host and commentator.
Thanks for congratulations, although I doubt that the draw feels like victory. But I can't tell for sure, because I haven't experienced victory in Diplomacy yet.
It looks to me as though Turkey and Austria have a stalemate line running south of St Petersburg, which will keep England from the two centers it needs for victory. I don't think England can credibly commit to not taking those two centers if either of the eastern partners betrays the other. Consequently a DIAS or continued partnership is the optimal strategy for Austria and Turkey, and England cannot force a victory.
Yes, but they don't yet have all the units in place to defend it.
They don't have the units in place, but they can put them in place rather quickly. South of the Alps they can order:
F Ionian Sea S F Tunis H; F Tyrrhenian Sea H; F Tuscany S F Tyrrhenian Sea H; A Rome-Venice (which will then support A Piedmont); A Piedmont H;
They could stalemate North of the Alps fairly easily. It is impossible to hold St Petersburg. Munich and Berlin may be defensible, if the Eastern Powers guess correctly, but if they can at least hold Berlin they can form a stalemate similar to John Beshera's Position II north of the Alps. A Munich retreats to Bohemia and Warsaw moves up to Prussia, and St Petersburg holds out long enough to move A Budapest up to Warsaw to support A Livonia H.
To get the units in position:
A Tyrolia S A Munich H; A Munich H (retreat to Bohemia if dislodged); A Berlin H; A Silesia S A Berlin H; A Warsaw-Prussia; A Livonia S A Warsaw-Prussia; A Moscow S A St Petersburg; A Budapest-Galicia, followed by A Budapest-Warsaw;
After the units are in position:
A War & Mos S A Livonia H; A Pru & Sil S Berlin H
Would tie up the line
Austrian fall orders are specified in this subcomment.
lyo retreats to spa
Not that it matters but... when did this happen? You fixed mis-written orders in the past and I don't believe I ever agreed to anything.
In any case, the mis-communication was due to saboteurs loyal to King George.
Turkey and Austria... can we make this faster than that? I don't see why the game can't end tonight (or the next 12 hours if some of your are in a different hemisphere). England won't oppose the invasion of Berlin...
We can send movement orders before the retreats are processed?
But no problem. These are official Austrian orders:
Also, Austria officially accepts draw after the Fall turn.
Edit: I hope it is not illegal to send orders this way. If any objection occurs, I will resend them by e-mail.
I'm thinking of a time Germany mixed up Burgundy and Gascony and I auto-corrected it. I made a post asking if I should continue doing so, and of the people who responded, all were opposed.
The Glorious German Empire may occasionally be the victim of cowardly backstabbing or deceit, but we do not mix up things, nor have we ever done so.
Yeah, there was this. But... response bias. Oh well.
I don't have Turkey's build orders yet, so I am giving them a 24 hour grace period. If they don't have them in by the time I get home tomorrow, they waive the builds. Sorry for not being able to post the new turn tonight.
Sorry about the delay- just sent it in.
F tun retreats to naf
That is impossible, as England cannot retreat to the province it was attacked from. Tun retreats to Ion.
This is right. F tys retreats to lyo. A bur retreats to par.
Can we bump the deadline back to 1800 GMT? I get home at about 1650 GMT and would like to be able to go over things and send in my orders after that, rather than the night before.
(i.e. I plan to send them in late like last time but would feel better with a sanction :P )
Go ahead.
I am still waiting for Austria's orders.
Sent.
This still isn't the truth.
If it were, I would learn facts that I didn't know from it. Apparently, the League can't be discreet and veracious at once.
England feels really bad about this :-/
Are there any games where I just get to be nice to everyone? Betrayal makes my tummy hurt.
Although a four-player draw is probably considered a failure by Diplomacy enthusiasts, I am surprised that nobody has yet initiated a discussion about this option.
Looks like a contradiction.
I am missing Germany and England's orders :(
Sorry, I didn't notice that today's deadline was at 12, and I also got stuck waiting for a response from one of the players.
Could we have longer turn deadlines for a while, after this one has been processed? Christmas and all that.
Sure. I'm going to be away a bit around New Years too, so that will take a while.
I am awaiting Austria's build order.
Sent. (I got no notification that the turn has proceeded by e-mail, therefore I am sending the orders late.)
...except that I'd need three free home centers for that, and Munich is currently occupied?
Germany can also retreat Ven -> Apu.
Ah, thanks for the catch, I didn't notice that myself.
I'll retreat Ven -> Tus, though.
I'm screwed anyway, and the idea of checking on my rival's moves is not appealing. Resigning.
In the interests of reducing uncertainty for the other players: I officially accept Italy's resignation. Italy has not sent in any orders for Fall 1905, and any future orders sent in by Italy will be disregarded.
Italy is now under civil disorder rules. All Italian armies will hold position and not support one another. If Italy loses supply centers, it will disband armies furthest away from its capital first.
As you may have noticed, I have finished my travel for this weekend a bit early and will update the turn as soon as I get everyone's orders.
So, my understanding is the standard for resigned players is that their pieces all hold. It would be very useful to know whether or not you are planning to submit orders for the Fall of 1905, and ideally that would be a strong commitment.
(I haven't heard of it, but it strikes me as possible to declare that you resign and then still submit orders, where your enemies are all thrown off-balance by expecting that you would just hold everywhere).
Really? It's unlikely you're going to win outright, but I think you've got a good shot of making it to a draw. That last round went as well as could be expected for you.
I only meant by this that you should make sure I didn't make a mistake that hurts you and helps your rivals. You don't have to if you don't want to.
The second map reports the actions of the previously turn, not the positions for the new turn as it usually does.
Fixed.
I received an order from Italy to support the German advance from Burgundy to Spain. Seeing as the Italians probably meant the German advance from Burgundy to Gascony and I wasn't able to contact Carinthium to confirm, I changed the order on my own initiative.
If you would like me to not do this sort of thing in the future, let me know.
I have a moderate preference against fixing these screwups (even though I've made them), but not high enough to insist on it.
I would prefer you not doing this.
I have noticed that the icons for armies on the map are not all identical, and the same hold for fleets. Does it have some reason?
It's done automatically by jDip. I'm pretty sure it doesn't mean anything.
Austria hereby declares that the move to Apulia was motivated by our desire to protect the rights of the Albanian and Greek minorities in the province. It certainly is not a hostile action against the Holy Roman Empire, even if our enemies will certainly try to interpret it as such. Austria expresses strong wish of maintaining peace with Germany, according to our Treaty of friendship and cooperation, which we signed before we have known about the German guarantees.
An army in Apulia is highly worrying for the Empire due to it's potential (even if unintended) for hostile action. Therefore, I would strongly urge you to pull out.
I am willing to accept an Austrian-selected government of Apulia and a DMZ in the province in exchange for such a pullout, with Germany as enforcer.
In the interests of mutual security, I propose a DMZ with Austria in the Adriatic, Ionian, and Tyrolia.
What if this is only a trick which may lead me to leave Adriatic?
I am willing to leave the Ionian Sea first as long as I can move to Apulia. We can then use a system of both sides patrolling the Adriatic (OOC: We bounce every turn) to keep the peace.
Anything? I need to know if this agreement is accepted or not.
I am afraid that the agreement cannot be accepted. On reflection, it would not be wise for me to have too many peace treaties. You have not proposed limited duration, and signing such a treaty would mean we are forever friends, which would avoid any offensive in the south later (I am not breaking explicit treaties, as a matter of principle) and it would be looked at with suspicion by Turkey. Moreover, steady bouncing would block the fleet and it could not be used in the future. So, even if it is probably impossible for either of us to succeed in an offensive agianst each other now, I reject your proposal. That does not mean that I will not be willing to sign a similar proposal in the future, if it was given a limited duration.
Proposed amendment: Agreement limited to the end of 1905, fleets not required for bouncing purposes. Will you accept now?
In 1905 I am still bound by alliance with Turkey, and have a relatively secure position. I gain nothing from your proposal. I would be forced to leave the Adriatic in fall 1904, then there would be two turns when I would not have chance to do anything, and in spring 1906 you would occupy the Adriatic with your two fleets - that is a pure loss for me.
What I have meant is that similar treaty would be acceptable later, when either my alliance with Turkey breaks down, or I am in war with Germany, or there would be some interesting movement on the Russian front. I am quite confident that a Demilitarised Adriatic Agreement would be accepted for 1907-1910 or so, but not for 1904-1905. Now I can defend my borders relatively easily and do not need the fleet for other purposes.
(Also how would you prevent Turkey from moving into Ionian, if you were to leave it?)
Is anyone else having trouble accessing the site? It seems to take an inordinately long time to load something from google, presumably the search bar. I also can't access my email at the moment.
F MAO retreats NAO.
Also, I won't consider Italy in breach of our treaty if his army retreats to PIE.
Ambitious!
Early in the morn tomorrow, I go on vacation; inshallah, I will return on the 8th. I intend to check my email at least twice a day while on vacation, so I expect no slowdown in issuing orders, but I may be somewhat slower when it comes to returning emails.
I have returned, Allah be praised!