Ferdack wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 10, 2023 3:47 pm

dargorygel wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 10, 2023 3:33 pm

DO NOT DISCUSS THIS any more.

Silences will ensue.

Ahh, didn't see this post in time when I wrote my long response. My apologies.

dargorygel wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 10, 2023 3:33 pm

DO NOT DISCUSS THIS any more.

Silences will ensue.

Ginge86 wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 10, 2023 2:17 pm

This is my guess at the worm that played Italy and could not stick to the rules. I believe this is who you should all thank for a ruined game. NEVER, EVER, invite this player to one of your games, they have 0 honour.

JECE wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 10, 2023 1:41 pm

Ginge86 wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 10, 2023 1:30 pm

JECE wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 10, 2023 1:23 pm

Yes, that's why you wanted the game cancelled, because you desperately wanted to know who Italy was. That's totally logical. Everyone believes your motivations.

No. I do not want to go on a date with you. I am a happily married man. You really should move on now JECowardE. I know that I am one of a kind but I am sure there is someone out there for you.

Don't get caught!

Ginge86 wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 10, 2023 1:30 pm

JECE wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 10, 2023 1:23 pm

Yes, that's why you wanted the game cancelled, because you desperately wanted to know who Italy was. That's totally logical. Everyone believes your motivations.

No. I do not want to go on a date with you. I am a happily married man. You really should move on now JECowardE. I know that I am one of a kind but I am sure there is someone out there for you.

Gandalfthegrey wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 10, 2023 4:06 am

Did anybody really think that Ginge86 was a top-notch player who needed to be feared, though?

I have no clue how good Ginge86 is and don't particularly care. Fear is not the only motivator for targeting someone in Diplomacy though.

Simply trying to understand who your opponents are and what their playstyle is like doesn't harm the integrity of the game, in my opinion.

This is pretty clearly not what happened, and I'm not sure why you're trying to suggest that it did.

Figuring out Ginge86's identity and using it as a means of predicting his moves going forward is one thing, using his identity as a means of rallying players against him in negotiations (whether or not the information played a role in their decision to accept the proposals in question) is quite another.

JECE wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 10, 2023 1:23 pm

Yes, that's why you wanted the game cancelled, because you desperately wanted to know who Italy was. That's totally logical. Everyone believes your motivations.

Theodoric wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 10, 2023 6:23 am

Do other players think that I had an obligation here to tell another player not to talk about player identities? I feel like managing relationships is a big part of press diplomacy, and agreeing with other players' gripes, grudges, and impressions of each other is part of that. I certainly didn't discourage Italy from attacking Austria but also didn't try to rally other players into a "get the goat" alliance.

I guess I wouldn't have thought there was anything wrong, in another game, with capitalizing if another player told me that they thought a third player was someone they knew and disliked from a previous game, and that they wanted to attack them as a result. I'd feel like it was totally fine to encourage them to do so if I thought it would help me. In terms of the special "rules" in this game, I also wouldn't feel like I needed to correct another player who talked about arranging for a draw.

Additionally, you cannot make deals based on any factors outside of the game.

Did anybody really think that Ginge86 was a top-notch player who needed to be feared, though?

Simply trying to understand who your opponents are and what their playstyle is like doesn't harm the integrity of the game, in my opinion.

Gandalfthegrey wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 10, 2023 2:28 am

My understanding when joining the game was that there would be a strict prohibition on discussions of player identity in order to preserve its integrity.

Theodoric wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 10, 2023 1:11 am

I'll just take a second to spell out my reasoning for what I did this game as well. As is likely clear to anyone watching this ridiculous situation unfold, I played as Turkey.

Imo, the basic problem with Turkey is that any path to a solo hits Italy and Austria pretty quickly, and allying with Russia is extremely vulnerable. My general approach is to make shifting, short-term alliances in order to gain early ground and then try to work with the more distant powers to keep expanding. I wanted to avoid getting stuck in on a specific conflict that wouldn't yield centers, because once another Southern power gains more momentum than Turkey I'm likely to be stuck in my corner for the whole game.

I had two acceptable visions for how the first year would play out. The first was getting Russia and Italy to gang up on Austria, while I sent friendly press to everyone and made non-commital moves. I could then either team up with a weakened Austria to attack Russia and secure the Black Sea or team up with Russia and Italy to take out Austria, hopefully getting more than my fair share of the loot because Austria didn't expect an attack from me. This is what actually played out.

The second would be engaging in some early derring-do that had the potential to either yield me two builds or leave Greece open. You can see from the public press that Austria published that I tried to suggest two such schemes to Austria and was rejected both times.

I went into the second year genuinely usure if I would go after Austria or go after Russia. I ultimately decided to attack Austria because, despite me saying a few times that it was important to me that we both attack Russia at the same time, Austria only proposed plans where I would attack Russia first and he would follow up afterward. In addition, Russia looked to be in a weak position with a low chance of getting a build, so I wasn't too nervous about getting stabbed by Russia. I was, up until Austria rage-quit, considering whether there was a way to pivot back up against Russia while preserving a build--preferably from Greece.

Had Austria agreed to any of my proposed strategies I likely would have worked short-term with Austria (while of course looking for a chance to stab and grab).

It's true that Italy sent a message early on indicating that they thought Austria was Ginge, and saying that they wanted to attack. I encouraged this because I wanted Italy and Austria fighting each other. I don't think there's anything unethical about this, and in fact think it would have been silly not to try to capitalize on it. I still think--based on Italy's early non-committal moves and unwillingness to engage in kamikaze tactics (like bouncing Austria out of Greece on turn 1) that this was all a tactic on Italy's part to convince Russia and I that they would go after Austria, rather than a genuine motivation.

Ginge: you're of course welcome to feel however you want about all of this, but ultimately the reason I stabbed you was because you gave me an opening and didn't give me good alternatives. The reason the stab worked was because you didn't see it coming and didn't defend against it. That's life.