Finished: 11 AM Tue 01 Jan 13 UTC
Diplomacy-87
12 hours /phase
Pot: 128 D - Spring, 1913, Finished
Classic, Anonymous players, Survivors-Win Scoring
1 excused missed turn
Game drawn
13 Dec 12 UTC Spring, 1901: The usual Black Sea bounce?
13 Dec 12 UTC Spring, 1901: um turkey i think you meant to send that in private chat.
13 Dec 12 UTC Spring, 1901: As much as I'd like to say: Aha! That's what you think I think! the fact is, yeah, I meant to send that in private chat. D'oh.
14 Dec 12 UTC Autumn, 1901: Sry about missing a round...
14 Dec 12 UTC Autumn, 1901: Turkey- Yeah its alright its not like bouncing black sea surprises anyone here.

Italy- No problem as long as it doesn't become a recurring thing.
14 Dec 12 UTC Autumn, 1901: Sure
14 Dec 12 UTC Autumn, 1901: Sure
18 Dec 12 UTC Autumn, 1903: Hi everyone. Italy is under new management. I look forward to pursuing partnerships, where possible. Drop me a line and say hello.
20 Dec 12 UTC Spring, 1905: An open letter to the players of this game. Although Diplomacy is a game of treachery, deceit and backstabbing, there is also an expectation that people will play fairly and without collusion external to the game. If 2 or more players join forces before an "anonymous" game even begins, they will have a huge advantage throughout the game, to the detriment of the other participants. Whatever perverse pleasure they derive from this relationship is as nothing against the damage they do to the website and this hobby generally.

I believe that the play of England and France demonstrates such a collusive "meta-game" relationship. England, though communicative, has played from turn 1 as though he has nothing to fear from France, ever. France, though uncommunicative, has played in a manner calculated to advance English interests at the expense of French interests. How else to explain a France who has persistently attacked Germany for four solid years, while gaining no centers, while England was wide open and Germany offered deal after deal? Heck, I didn't even get the courtesy of a response. That is not "Diplomacy," and only people uninterested in Diplomacy -- that is, people who had their mind made up before the game started --- would engage in such behavior.

I have played and lost many games of Diplomacy. I have often failed to persuade others to my point of view, and I have been stabbed many times. That is part of the game, and I accept losses with cheerful grace. What I am witnessing here is not. Accordingly, I will be requesting that the site administrators investigate the play of England and France, and take appropriate action, including but not limited to the banning of said players if the evidence confirms my suspicions.

Thanks for listening, and good game to the rest of you.
20 Dec 12 UTC Spring, 1905: Wow. Nothing like what you claim is occuring. I am working closely with england because the quicker you lose centers in the north, the quicker i gain some in the south. That involves acts of trust between players, such as not exploiting an opening in your ALLY's lines. I have also not bothered to reply to your messeges of encouraging to stab an ally because I have sent similar messeges in other games when i am desperate and close to death. Replying to those messeges is counter productive to my own alliance. Your going to lose. So please stop complaining when other nations isolate you.
20 Dec 12 UTC Spring, 1905: Thank you for your reply. Your style of rhetoric - blaming me for eveything - is identical to that of your meta-gaming partner England. Likely he wrote the response, or at least told you what to say.

And what of the substance of your reply? I have been seeking your input since 1901, and received nary a response. 1901 is not "close to death." You also claim that you seek to "grow in the south." Your map position doesn't exactly bear that out -- even when Italy was in civil disorder you took no action in the south, instead hurtling your entire force againt me every turn. Look at the multi-turn chain of bounces going all the way back to Spain! It's 1905 and you are no further than you were in 1901. So how exactly is "working closely with England" benefitting you?

We all know what is going on here, and I think the site administrators will concur.
20 Dec 12 UTC Spring, 1905: What ever germany. Good luck for the rest of the game.
20 Dec 12 UTC Spring, 1905: I just had some great news in real life, and am feeling in a charitable mood. Therefore, I'm going to drop my efforts to report this game to the admin, and trust in the bona fides of my fellow players. My position is hopelessly untenable, but what the heck. Game on.
20 Dec 12 UTC Spring, 1905: hey guys sorry I missed a phase. wont happen again. Germany please shut your mouth. I have been communicating with france ALOT and are you serious about players making alilances at the beginning of the game, are you kidding? please grow up. You are honestly considering reporting a game because two nations are working against you.....Please shut up.
20 Dec 12 UTC Autumn, 1905: I agree with Germany's perspective that meta-gaming (alliances across multiple games rather than within a single game) is not fair play. However, I don't think that accusing people of unfair collusion is the best solution. Fair, firm, game-long alliances without stabs, though rare, do sometimes happen. If you have concerns about an unfair method of cooperation, they should be addressed to moderators in the forums. Moderators have tools to investigate. If suspicions are substantiated, players will be warned or banned. If suspicions are unsubstantiated, no harm done. I'd recommend this as a course of action, if only because doing otherwise is a good way to put a big old target on your back within the game.
20 Dec 12 UTC Autumn, 1905: france and i have had to do alot of communicating and germany is seriously considering reporting this game just because we haven't attacked each other yet. so what.....if turkey and russia decided to hypothetically form a juggernaut and sweep through the west would that be illegal too? This as absolutely ridiculous, germany is just pissed because he hasn't convinced me and france to attack each other. I'm sorry but experienced diplomacy players wouldn't tolerate that kind of whining. Italy I understand your point, but just because two countries form a strong alliance doesn't mean that their is cheating going on. A five year alliance is not anything major and I have been in alliances that have gone longer than 9 or ten game years. Germany is just being childish.
20 Dec 12 UTC Autumn, 1905: I hope a moderator does look at this game to prevent those kind of comments from happening. Trying to report a game just because your losing.....wow just wow germany.
20 Dec 12 UTC Autumn, 1905: Well, reporting the game doesn't flag you guys or anything. If he were to request that a moderator look at the game and the mod found nothing unusual, then no harm no foul. If asked to look into two players, mods will look at the ip addresses from which the players log in and whether they participate in an unusual number of games together. If the mod finds nothing unusual, then the players are vindicated, and it's game on.
20 Dec 12 UTC Autumn, 1905: And again... I think that sort of thing is best handled quietly through the forums. A wordy accusation in game can sometimes come off looking like sour grapes.
20 Dec 12 UTC Autumn, 1905: italy i understand, i'm just pissed because based on the conversations i've had with germany i believe he wants to report the game not because he thinks we're cheating but because he is losing. he's been whiny and radical this entire time and we're just doing a simple E/F alliance and he wants mods in.....I mean seriously did you read germanies comments in this global chat? he's being ridiculous, I would want a mod in here just to ban germany from this site. France and I had many negotiations over how to handle the english channel as well as how to make sure we both do well. I'm sorry germany, I am speaking directly to you here, but just because two nations cooperate well against you doesn't mean that there is foul play going on. I can't speak on behalf of france but I can assume the reason he is so stuck on attacking you is because he chose me as an ally and I have proven to be a good ally through the game(everything I've told him I was going to do I have done) while you are clearly a 5 year old who isn't used to getting what he wants. I'm sorry but your comments are outlandish.
20 Dec 12 UTC Autumn, 1905: Now, now, boys. Let's all remember it's just a game. Also, if somebody could give me a hand up in here, that would be totally rad. I'm getting run over.
20 Dec 12 UTC Autumn, 1905: Well spoken, Italy. I shall be more discrete should the need again arise. For now, I am content to enjoy this game and go down fighting!
20 Dec 12 UTC Autumn, 1905: I think you want to be discreet. Being discrete would be challenging. http://public.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/discreet.html
20 Dec 12 UTC Autumn, 1905: I humbly stand corrected... unless by "discrete" I meant those who wanted German's head on a plate vs. those who don't! ;)
20 Dec 12 UTC Autumn, 1905: alright guys, I'm down to stop arguing and just continue to have fun playing the game.
21 Dec 12 UTC Autumn, 1906: Just a quick correction to what I said above. The forums are apparently *not* the place to handle multi-accounting suspicions. (Not that I was concerned about this game. It was a different game.) The proper process, spelled out at http://webdiplomacy.net/rules.php, involves emailing webdipmod@gmail.com with certain information. Just FYI.
21 Dec 12 UTC Spring, 1907: No retreats; no builds. No runs, no hits, no errors.
22 Dec 12 UTC Spring, 1907: ugh guys sorry im missing I just had a rough night last night. sorry, it will not happen again. i swear.
22 Dec 12 UTC Spring, 1907: Wait... did I miss too? Damn you, work schedule!
22 Dec 12 UTC Spring, 1907: I usually play 24-hour phases. Perhaps I should stick to that.
22 Dec 12 UTC Autumn, 1907: relax it looks as if most players missed it, damn 21st of december
26 Dec 12 UTC Spring, 1910: If I genuinely ordered F Tri->Alb, that was a hilarious fat finger error.
26 Dec 12 UTC Spring, 1910: Yeah, I thought you might try to sneak out to Adriatic or something. But hey, I'll take it.
28 Dec 12 UTC Autumn, 1911: Turkey can you draw?
28 Dec 12 UTC Autumn, 1911: Evening all, new England here, so what's the deal with this game then?
28 Dec 12 UTC Autumn, 1911: The game is essentially boned due to multiple missed turns and a major CD, so we're trying to get Turkey, and now you, to draw.
28 Dec 12 UTC Autumn, 1911: But the bad news is it doesn't look like Turkey's interested in a draw
28 Dec 12 UTC Autumn, 1911: Frankly, who would be, in a similar situation?
29 Dec 12 UTC Autumn, 1911: A united anti-Turkey front might get his attention...
29 Dec 12 UTC Autumn, 1911: Well, no dice. Good (broken) game everybody.
30 Dec 12 UTC Autumn, 1912: Looks like the Christmas Turkey has all gone, do we still want a draw or do you want a few more SC's for the extra cash first?
30 Dec 12 UTC Autumn, 1912: Good of you to ask. I would like to Draw the game as soon as possible. But I think Turkey has to miss one more phase before he is deemed to have left the game, and so continues to block our "draw" votes until then. Should Turkey return, then I propose we simply further block him and/or grind him down (which we now have the strength to do) until he agrees to the draw.

Start Backward Open large map Forward End

England
snorky (2078 D (B))
Drawn. Bet: 49 D, won: 26 D
15 supply-centers, 15 units
Turkey
Drawn. Bet: 10 D, won: 26 D
13 supply-centers, 13 units
France
mog262 (244 D)
Drawn. Bet: 10 D, won: 26 D
3 supply-centers, 3 units
Germany
BlackAdder65 (159 D)
Drawn. Bet: 10 D, won: 26 D
2 supply-centers, 2 units
Italy
hecks (164 D)
Drawn. Bet: 9 D, won: 26 D
1 supply-centers, 1 units
Austria
PKissinger (312 D)
Defeated. Bet: 10 D
Russia
jersberg (100 D)
Defeated. Bet: 10 D
Civil Disorders
zqazi2 (635 D)England (Spring, 1911) with 13 centres.
Pthingholm (100 D)Italy (Autumn, 1903) with 4 centres.
Archive: Orders - Maps - Messages