Actually, in that situation, there was a pretty good chance that they don't kill you. Munich and Berlin were absolutely essential to the lines and if they tried to kill you then they wouldn't have been able to replace the armies in time.

Eden +1. If you can't see that, Cdre, I don't know what to tell you.

From what I recall, Turkey was positioned to attack Munich and cut Berlin's support when I moved to Burgundy. I was bordered by German or British fleets on all the other sides. Turkey was going to take Munich and there was nothing I could do about it.

But that's when webdiplomacy stopped refreshing for me so I may be mistaken. You can go check the game if you'd like.

But anyway this ignores how helping England draw is not consistent with me trying to screw him over here. So your point is academic at most.

Someone that would screw over someone who attacked him at his own expense isn't someone I ever want to play with again.

☺ I at least tried to hold off Turkey, but I didn't realize that when England took Spain he meant for good, because he really screwed it up when he did. So I thought he was just coming down to grab free centers while I was busy with Italy.

Cdre, you realize that gunboat doesn't prevent people from supporting other armies' holds, right?

Now I grant you in this case it didn't happen because Germany was stupid (and deserves more blame for this than he's getting), but had you done your job and Germany done his, you would have held on. The game would have been over.

And the fact that you're not acknowledging this and CONTINUING to insist that being a petulant twelve-year-old and screwing someone trying to help you stay alive for the draw out of some childish principle of revenge is not completely inane and contrary to the victory criteria is rather telling.

This is a silly argument. Turkey has made it clear that he only kept me alive because I was useful and that I would not have been in a draw. With your attack on St. Petersburg, I could do nothing to Turkey but I could do everything to you. You made a miscalculation and you paid for it. Get over it.

It is a silly argument. Everyone else has made it clear that once you were in Berlin and Munich you weren't going to get killed. Turkey could not dictate whether or not Berlin and Munich fell. England could and happily would have supported your hold there and could not afford to kill you off. So what Turkey had to say on that means jack shit because he didn't have a say in it.

St.Petersburg is part of the draw line! If Turkey got it he would have won! Do you not know what the 17/17 Draw line is?

Who cares about the Germany tangent, Eden? He obviously wasn't helping. I'm not having a philosophical debate about hindsight here.

And when did England help me stay alive? Did you even look at the game? Show me what turn. Was it when he took St. Petersburg and took away my ability to hold off Turkey? What a big help he was.

Wait a minute wait a minute wait a minute

You're holding England taking St. Petersburg, a single center, back in 19-0-THREE...

...against him...

...so that, several years down the road, you could carry your primary adversary who took several times as many centers from you in the course of the game, to a solo.

That's not even revenge-based principle. That's completely incomprehensible.

That is PMSing.. Only explanation..

Yes, I looked at the game. Care to ask any other inane questions?

How about the turn when you let Turkey have Munich. See Baltic Sea? It ordered a support hold to Berlin, which would have kept Berlin around even after Munich fell when combined with his army in Kiel supporting the measure as well.

The record in unequivocal. England was trying to win like everyone else back in 1903 when he took St. Petersburg. It wasn't anything personal. You need to stop taking it that way, first of all. Secondly, when you put yourself in the invaluable position of holding Munich and Berlin, YOU DON'T GIVE IT AWAY TO LET SOMEONE WIN! The odds are NONEXISTENT that you'll be killed from there. It takes too many units to backfill the line.

*note: caps for emphasis, not emotion

"Wait a minute wait a minute wait a minute"
Does that mean wait 3 minutes?
(Sorry, I had to) :P

My "primary adversary"? Don't remember reading that term in the rule book.

Oh, and nice sexism there. "The most disgusting game I've ever played" is apparently the words of a level-headed sober man but my denying him the draw he wanted is apparently beyond the pale. I'm done with this thread, boys.

First, the obfuscation isn't cute. You had two people who attacked you all game: England, who took St. Petersburg, and Turkey, who took everything else. It's incredibly obvious that Turkey was your primary adversary. I don't think this needs to be explained at all.

Second, I have no idea where in the world the sexism allegation came from, but it's as ridiculous as they come because I have no clue what gender/sex you are.

How in any way, shape or form is that sexist? That is you finding some way and how to troll this thread even more because you raged after England took 1 SC from you and Turkey took them all from you, yet that was fine by you, because you just didn't want England to win because he took your Wine/Women/ and Song in St. Petersburg.

Yeah, there's a reason I added CdreChris to the list of players I'll avoid in the future. What he (or perhaps she?) has said in this thread only confirms that decision.

And I think the charge of sexism came from the PMSing comment.

@CdreChris - There is an order to how one should play Diplomacy

1. Win!
2. If you can't win, Draw!
3. If you can't do either of those, Survive!
4. If all else fails, Screw the asshole who hurt you most!

You violated all 4 of these, making you the kind of idiot most of the top players don't want to play with.

Draugnar +1

Well, this thread has become unnecessarily hostile.

I would like to point out that I am a friend of CdreChris and have played a number of games with him, so Draug could not be more wrong saying that top players don't want to play with him.

I would also like the thank everyone in this thread for alienating and insulting a new member of the community. A new member who most likely won't be coming back. Whether or not he played well in this game, I don't know; I didn't bother to look, but instead of gaining a member and improving his play, you've instead given us a reputation of being rude, insulting, and hostile to new players. And, you've made me personally look foolish for recommending this site to a friend.

So, thanks and +1 to everyone in this thread.

@abgemacht - Epic fail. I said *most*, not *all* of the top players. Just because you would play with him doesn't mean the other 99 of the top 100 or even 50 more of the top 100 would. Anecdotal evidence is not proof. I would not play with someone who doesn't understand the best approach to get the best result from the game and instead stabs himself in the foot out of stupidity. So my anecdotal evidence woudl agree wiht my opinion. But I bet (and I'll put real moeny on this), that if you surveyed the top 100 players on this site by GR, you would find more that agree with me than agree with you.

Oh, and he joined 3 Mar 2008. I call bullshit on your "new member" attempt to shame the community. That is a total crock of shit! By that standard, I'm a newer member than him. Want to try and lie some more to the community?

Hell, he joined just 5 days after you did. Jesus Christ, abgemacht, prevaricate much?

@Draug

Did you purposefully miss the point of what I was saying?

Uh, he's played 11 games and has 13 forum messages, most if not all in this thread.

I got the point, but you said he was a new member. The fact that he has played 13 games in more than 3 years makes him an inexperienced, but *not* new member. And the fact that you stated "And, you've made me personally look foolish for recommending this site to a friend." when you recommended it 3 years ago after being here for 5 days makes your statement disingenuous at best and was clearly intentional misleading to shame us.

@ agbe:

I don't think we really started the hostility. I really think he did. I was more than happy to explain things to him, as I've done in the past with people. But he didn't come here asking for help or even civilly explaining himself, but stubbornly insisting he was right.