Fall 1903
This page is part of a frameset, if you can't see the navigation bar to the left, go to the main index page.
From - Wed Oct 10 18:28:08 2001
Message from pre at dalliance.net as Russia to France in 'gutsy':
Ah, these delayed press things have been turning up for
a while. I think my SMTP server must have been queueing
my mail for a while for some reason. Oh well.
Adam..........
> Message sent to France:
>
> Message from pre at dalliance.net as Russia to France in 'gutsy':
>
> > Both E and G have sent me proposals for attacking the other. I think
> > I already know which way I'm going to go, but knowing your plans for F
> > Swe will help me evaluate the ramifications of my decision.
> >
> > If you really don't care whether you hit Nwy or Hold, perhaps I could
> > tell you which I might prefer. Of course, we should hold our
> > conversations in the strictest confidence regardless. We might
> > side with E or G for a time, but our long-term goal should
> > be to grow at their expense. I realize that you have other
> > priorities right now, but if you can help me grow in the north
> > now, it makes things easier for you when you're ready to make your
> > own push in the north.
>
> I'll promise to be quiet about it, but as a guess you'd
> rather I bounced Norway to give Germany a greater chance
> of holding Nth until next year. Correct?
>
> Adam............
>
> End of message.
From - Wed Oct 10 18:28:12 2001
Message from pre at dalliance.net as Russia to Turkey in 'gutsy':
> > The worry will be that we may face a united IA if that
> > goes too wrong.
>
> Do you really think Raine will be able to arrange a productive
> relationship with Keith?
Probably not, I'm going to send him press saying that
he should definately try to convoy into Alb if he
wants a build this year, we're going to dislodge
Con and let it retreat to Aeg. I'll cut what supports
I can from Ser and Gal etc.
> I did hear from Raine this morning. He asked if I'd let him leave in
> peace if he attacked Keith. I told him that as long as F Con moves
> to Gre and he doesn't move Ion east, we could work together.
He's written to me twice today, and in each press he has
tried to argue that it's better for us to eliminate you
ASAP. The last press I wrote, which I no longer expect
a reply to before the deadline in ten hours, said that
I thought eliminating powers when you don't need their
SC's immediately was counter-productive for at least
three reasons and that I hoped he would try to attack
Austria intead.
After I get home this evening, I'll write to him again
and tell him that he can take our way, or work out some
way to get his aims on his own because I'll be expecting
you to take Con from me in the fall, and I'll be taking
Con from him this spring.
> He also asked if I'd build an Army, rather than a Fleet, but I didn't
> address that issue.
Can't imagine why. Heh.
So as far as I'm concerned we're on for supporting Bla into
Con this spring, I hope that Raine will also convoy into
Alb but I'm not terribly optimistic on that. Our fight
could be a long one, but we should be able to beat them
given how little Raine will ever give on any idea.
Adam..........
From - Wed Oct 10 18:28:22 2001
Message from pre at dalliance.net as Russia to Italy in 'gutsy':
> I try to explain my priorities. The main point is position. Austria is
> between us and he is unable to beat us when we attack him together as long
> as he doesn't have Serbia, Rumania and Bulgaria.
Yet you think I should abandon Serbia (the one unit we have
which is behind Austria's lines) and move Sev - Arm which
leaves Rum less guarded than it is!
> He simply doesn't have
> the power to attack both of us. I understand your point of view. Your
> motivation is clear. You must be unsure of my help after Turkey is gone.
This isn't my motivation at all, I simply see a large threat
in Austria and want to knock it down. I don't share your
opinion that a player knocked out of the game alltogether
is neccasarily a bonus for me. Personally I'd sooner have
six squabbling players left into the end-game than have
three players lining up the draw.
> It makes sence for me to take Turkey out first
> and then we could take Keith out. If you could trust me 100%, would it be
> clever for you to first attack Eric and then Keith.
I disagree, if we trusted each other 100% then I think we
would be better off ensuring that neither Eric nor Keith
have the power to stop us as soon as possible. I think
that between us we can ensure than Eric and Keith are
both three (or less) centers big at the end of this
year while we are both around six or seven. I think
that all my units are facing Austria already and
see no reason why we can't leave the rest of Turkey until
we're satisfied that the Keith threat has been
removed.
> Eric is gone if we work together that is a fact.
Eric and Keith are both gone is we work together until
they're both dead. We outnumber them. I see no reason
to insist that one dies before the other, or that
either dies completely until we need the centers they
own.
> Then if you can count on my help shoudn't
> Keith fall between us?
Why wait?
> I have absolutely no grudge against Eric. It is just that I believe that
> we have a good oppotunity to get rid of one common neighbour and then
> concentrate on the one that is between us. This was our original plan,
> right?
Well, I think I said turn on Austria when Turkey is 'nearly dead'
to be honest. That gives you the surprise, which we have already
taken advantage of. Turkey looks 'nearly dead' to me and besides,
that was a spring 1901 plan, never supposed to be eternally valid.
> I assume that there is going to be a fight between them
> and that is good for you.
It looks that way, but they're all less willing to say than
usual which makes me quite suspicious.
> Another possiblity is that EG make alliance and co-operate against you
> _and_ Rod. That wouldn't be nice at all.
They might work together to get Swe, even to attack me
but if they do that Rod will be going into the Med and
the tripple we created hasn't desolved. Yes, that would
be trouble.
> I don't think Steve is helping Brent against you.
> You just gave up your chance to get Berlin for free.
> That is something. Steve won't forget it.
No, but I need to be aware of the posibility in case it's
true. A build this year should sort out any trouble.
> I won't move there 'cause Keith might bounce in there and that would
> destroy my fleet.
But if Keith did that then your convoy to Alb will have
worked and we have a real huge advantage over him, you
get Tri for sure for a start!
> Also if Keith is going to move there he most prbably
> wants a bounce 'cause why an earth he would move away from Greece.
I'm sure he would want a bounce, perhaps if we dislodge Con
and let it retreat to Alb it would be better. No bounce
then so if Gre - Alb then you can take Gre even more
easily.
> What do you think of my plan?
I think your plan requires that I move probably the most
valueable piece in our attack against Kieth from behind
his lines where it's useful to Rum where it's comparitively
useless. I think it needlessly allows Kieth to get an
extra center and therefore allows our strongest enemy
to grow even stronger. These are both not good things.
> Remember, that you can count on my help.
> Please think of this from my point of view. I think I am making the best
> moves for my country by attacking Turkey with you and then taking Austria
> out.
Personally if I were you I'd sooner have Tri and Gre than Con anyway,
I'd also sooner have two three center enemies nearby than one six
center enemy right on my border. I am trying to see it from your
point of view, but the only way I can understand is if I
assume you have some personal reason for making eliminating Eric
more important than the best interests of your own country.
> How could I get two?
Well, probably two. If you managed to convoy into Alb then
almost certainly Tri and Gre. If you don't then probably
Bul and Gre.
> The lion is between us. And he has two lions around him, right?
Sure, but at least one of those lions seems preoccupied with
the spider.
> I am not saying that I do not offer help to you. I think my plan is good
> for both of us.
The trouble is that it's not as good for both of us as
taking out Keith's vast bulk now would be. Last year you
were saying you'd attack France then backed out saying
that you needed Eric to die first. Then you agreed that
we should go after Keith and then said you need Eric
to be eliminated first. Now you're still going on about
eliminating Eric while vast opertunities for bigger
gains and better position are right there in Austria.
I still don't understand why eliminating Eric is good
for either you or me, let alone why it's better than
reducing Keith's size. An Eliminated power is one who
isn't going to be any help to me at all, an Eliminated
power can't put a hole in a stop-the-leader alliance,
and Eliminated power doesn't talk to me and let leaks
slip from other powers.
> Let's take the assumption of Sev-Arm.
I have to use Sev to protect Rum. I can't use Ser to do that
because it's going to be more important to use Ser to cut
some of Keith's support. Besides, that unit behind Keith's
lines is important, I went to some trouble to put it there
precicely for that purpose I don't want to retreat it
back to Rum where it came from!
> It means you should support yourself to Rumania.
With Bla? I thought Bla was cutting Ank support. Ser's
support will be useless to anybody, it'll be cut. With
Sev also going to Arm there's no units to even TAKE
Rum, let alone support into it.
> In both cases you would get one center from Turkey. You would lose Serbia
> but Turkey is also dead and we could concentrate on Austria with all our
> forces.
So I get no builds at all? I can see why you like this plan,
why should I like it again? Keith grows, you grow and I don't.
Not my idea of a good time.
> Even if Keith is not falling to this he is history if we follow my plan.
> I understand your desire to attack Austria first but is there a hole in my
> plan? The result should be that both Turkey and Austria will fall, right?
The result would be Austria gets Ser back, Austria GROWS which is
pretty far from falling if you ask me.
> If we attack Keith first there will be AT for sure and we lose momentum by
> first attacking Keith and then attacking Eric and then moving all the way
> to west. Western powers are for sure on our backdoors when they see what
> we are doing.
Lose momentum? I'm already in Ser and Gal, I've got all the
momentum I need and your proposal is to use Tunis to HOLD!
How much momentum does a holding unit have exactly? Much
faster to convoy it so Alb and get some work done with it.
> By attacking Eric first we head west from former Turkey and go against
> western powers by attacking Keith. Then it is much shorter way to attack
> the EFG.
How is going East, then back West faster than just killing the
centers we already surround?
> Would you please tell me what is wrong with my plan? Is there some
> misunderstanding? The result should be the same in both plans but my plan
> is better in tempo. Although it was the original plan, right?
As I said, the orignal plan, which was a S1901 plan and which
was never going to stand up, was to take on Austria when Turkey
was Nearly Dead. Nearly. Looks like we're there to me.
Adam.............
From - Wed Oct 10 18:28:31 2001
Message from rkarjala at mail.student.oulu.fi as Italy to Russia in 'gutsy':
Hi Adam,
Are you saying that the mail I just received from you was sent before
S1903M and came late due to judge problems?
If you just wrote it I can tell you that there is no need for us to talk
about S1903M moves anymore. I'd like to talk about F1903M instead.
Raine
From - Wed Oct 10 18:28:32 2001
Message from pre at dalliance.net as Russia to Italy in 'gutsy':
> Are you saying that the mail I just received from you was sent before
> S1903M and came late due to judge problems?
Yep, it seems my SMTP server was clogged up for some
time. No wonder hardly anybody replied to me!
I've got some stuff to get done today then I'll
come write some press later this afternoon, gotta
go book a flight to Hamburg.
Adam..........
From - Wed Oct 10 18:28:36 2001
Broadcast message from pre at dalliance.net as Russia in 'gutsy':
Seems my outgoing mail was very slow or something
earlier, it's still catching up on stuff from before
so a lot of press from me will make very little sense.
Oh well..
Adam...........
From - Wed Oct 10 18:28:37 2001
Message from bwarner34 at home.com as England to Germany in 'gutsy':
I'm going to try to respond to some of your latest comments in a rational
way, but I my occasionally slide into ranting, so you'll have to bear with
me.
First of all a little explanation. Even if you hadn't sent that little
message just before the deadline, your moves came as no surprise. It was
clear to me (with a bit of help from Rod), if not to everyone else on the
board, what your plan was. The only thing that surprised me a bit was that
instead of telling me outright that you felt North Sea was your right (as
was pretty obviously your feelings) or even pulling "I didn't hear from you,
so I panicked", you sent me a message filled with some of the most
insultingly silly statements I've received.
[In no way do I consider this a pro-French move,]
This statement shows that either you are clueless, or you think I am. I
really doubt the first one. Whether or not you wanted it to, the move
obviously benefits France in that it weakens his opponent, who he obviously
selected on the basis of your promise to make it. Or are you going to
continue the blantantly obvious lies and try to tell me that France didn't
know about it?
[ Hopefully, you will not see it as an anti-English move]
OK, now you're either trying to be funny and just not having it work, or
you think I'm a completely numbskull who's never seen a Diplomacy board
before.
What I don't understand is that you're an experienced player, and I can't
imagine that you'd underestimate an opponent to that degree. So what's the
point of the Diplomacy equivalent of talking to me like I'm a 2 year old?
You lied to me and attacked me, for your personal gain, and at my expense.
You know it and I know it. If you want to have any semblance of real
negotiation, have the guts to admit it for what it was, and not try to hide
behind such obvious niceties.
As for your second letter
[Does that make any sense to you or am I just talking to myself?]
Mostly the latter. My retreat was already in before I received it, and
the obviously biased "reasoning" in your letter didn't change anything.
Your plan seems quite suspect to me, as its basically a u-turn from
everything you did last turn. Speaking of last turn, Rod and I had a good
long talk. Lo and behold, he was able to quite accurately predict your
build, your negotiation strategy, and the moves that you'd eventually order.
It became clear to me early on that this was not just a factor of him being
able to predict based on the board. They were based on inside information
he had and that the plan you were feeding me meant nothing to you in the
long run, other than a way to keep me occupied and off balance.
Unfortunately for me, Rod saw the opportunity in this, and rather than
siding with me against you, he took advantage of knowing both our plans
ahead of time and made it so that he will gain the most from it. And then
you know what he did? He wrote me and said "Yes I stabbed you, and am now
trying to eliminate you. I did it for my own personal gain, and it was the
right move." My response? "You're right." I respect him for being up
front with me. I also respect him for letting me in on your treachery, even
if I wasn't able to use it to my advantage. And because of that respect,
I'd much rather see him in my centers than you or anyone else(other than
myself).
So here's where we stand now. You seem to communicate well in the concept
of "goals", so I'll tell you mine. Its to get you to stop attacking me. My
secondary goal is to make sure you don't benefit from attacking me. Minimal
forces will be used to defend against France, so either you'll stop
attacking me and will attack France to prevent him from gaining my centers,
or they will be lost to you. Either way I achieve one of my goals. Beyond
that, I'm not going to discuss my moves. I won't tell France about the
"minimal" defense, but I can't stop you from doing so. The ball is in your
court.
Brent
From - Wed Oct 10 18:28:48 2001
Message from keith at alumni.caltech.edu as Austria to Germany in 'gutsy':
> Yes, it certainly will be. None of my centers are threatened so I'm pretty
> much free to go whichever way I would like. If you were me, what would you
> do?
I don't know. On one hand, France is never again going to be in such a
vulnerable position, and Italy does not look like he is ever going to
attack France. You could move against France and get England to support
you to Sweden.
On the other hand, if you can get France to support your convoy to London,
you can get a foothold on the island and perhaps dominate it. This might
lead to a long war with France in a year or two unless you both trust each
other enough to turn around and attack Italy and Russia.
I would probably try to get France to help my into England and then stab
France (since France isn't going to get a build). This will make England
less dangerous, hopefully removing a Scandinavian fleet.
If you're asking what is best for Austria, probably a strong France,
which weakens Italy. I think Russia is going to crumble on his own.
Austria
From - Wed Oct 10 18:28:49 2001
Message from rodspade at acm.org,rodney.spade at philips.com as France to Germany in
'gutsy':
Steve,
I am actually surprised that Brent went to Ska. What is his purpose? Does he
with to foment a G/R conflict? Is Den at risk?
My goal for this turn is to guarantee myself a build. For some reason, I had
thought that Lvp was guaranteed, but now I realize that NAO S Edi-Lvp protects it.
I don't think Brent will do that, but since I haven't gotten a build since 1901,
I'm looking for a sure thing this year.
We can easily guarantee Lon. If I take it then you can keep Bel. Or we can convoy
Bel-Lon and I get Bel. Either way is fine with me. A possibility is to convoy
through Eng if you prefer Hel S Den over Hel S Nth.
What do you suggest?
Rod
From - Wed Oct 10 18:29:01 2001
Message from rodspade at acm.org,rodney.spade at philips.com as France to Turkey in
'gutsy':
Eric,
Did you make it to Tempest in a Teapot?
Rod
From - Wed Oct 10 18:29:02 2001
Message from dip_power at hotmail.com as Turkey to France in 'gutsy':
>Did you make it to Tempest in a Teapot?
No, my son had something scheduled Friday night,
and money was tight, so I had to pass on it.
E.
From - Wed Oct 10 18:29:04 2001
Message from pre at dalliance.net as Russia to Italy in 'gutsy':
> I think we should not argue anymore. We should talk constructively about
> the plans we propose. Feel free to give me your detailed plan of
> forthcoming moves and I'll think about it.
I need to know what exactly you want. I presume you'll be
taking Smy since you're so obsessed with eliminating Eric,
but the question is what else are you prepared to do? Are
you prepared to take Greece this year? Finally? Will
you try to get Tri? Eric may not be quite dead once
you have taken Smy but he'll have only one center left
and we have all agreed from the begining that Ank
is to be Russian anyway.
Will you convoy into Greece now, or try and get Tri?
I can't see any good reasons why you wouldn't but
I haven't understood what your moves are supposed
to achieve for some time so I thought I'd ask.
If you are prepared to make attempts on Tri and Gre
then I am probably prepared to leave Smy unsupported.
Did you have some other plan?
Adam.........
From - Wed Oct 10 18:29:29 2001
Message from pre at dalliance.net as Russia to Turkey in 'gutsy':
> Thanks for taking Con. Hopefully we can hold out.
You're welcome. How I'm going to convince Raine to not
take Smy is another question. Probably I'm not is my
guess I'm afraid.
> Even in terms of Centers, perhaps, but do you really
> think they can coordinate well enough to be effective?
No, center count was all I was talking about. I have
no doubt that they wouldn't communicate very effectively.
> Or convoy to Syr, though that risks being forced to
> disband.
Well, I guess I could try to get Con - Bul to work,
the problem being that it almost definately wouldn't.
The only unit which could support it is Aeg and even
if Raine is on our side he'd need that to support
into Gre. Things would have been so much more
convienient if he'd just done as I asked. Can't
get the staff these days.
> Yes, I'm not sure Keith can afford to ignore the
> possibility of Ven-Tri, and a supported attack on
> Gre, and risk losing Bul to save a Center for Raine.
He can ignore the attack on Tri becasue it's just
not going to happen unless Raine abandons and someone
with an ounce of sense takes over Italy. Same for
the attack on Gre I think. Risking loosing Bul is
a different thing. All he has to do is cut Rum
and Ser's support, and he can do that easily with
Gal and Bud.
My guess is we'll see Gal - Rum and Bud - Ser. This
means I can take Gal but it means all of Austria's
supply centers are safe from me and you. He may
arrange a bounce in Tri from Vie and Ven if he
does that. It leaves Bul safe to support one of
those moves too so unless Bul support is cut
I could loose Ser or Rum too.
I've asked Raine if he will attack Austria this year.
I don't even expect him to say yes and I may support
Smy if he does refuse. I still don't think that support
will be worth a great deal, and I'll need to cut any
Bul support somehow.
Adam.........
From - Wed Oct 10 18:29:31 2001
Message from rkarjala at mail.student.oulu.fi as Italy to Russia in 'gutsy':
Hi Adam,
While you had these problems to send messages did you receive mail
normally? If you did this could explain our misunderstandings.
> Will you convoy into Greece now, or try and get Tri?
> I can't see any good reasons why you wouldn't but
> I haven't understood what your moves are supposed
> to achieve for some time so I thought I'd ask.
I have been following my idea to eliminate Turkey. I have not attacked
Austria 'cause then I could not do well against Turkey. My main goal has
been to take Turkey out and then concentrate on Austria.
I have nothing against Eric. He has been polite and so on. I have followed
my plan nothing more. It went complicated when you demanded that I must
attack Austria. I understood that so far it has been so that you had
been happy if I attack Austria but now I hear demands or... I think it is
unnecesary to behave that way. It must have been your mail problems that
confused us to think something that ain't real. I mean, so far I have
thought that we agreed to work this way i.e. that I attack Turkey and come
to help you after Turkey is eliminated/almost dead. Now it went very
complicated when you moved to Con after the confusing mail thing. I am not
sure of your goodwill anymore. I already hear talks that you are goint to
support Smy hold. I think there's no reason for you to do that. It would
only get me against you. Also you have much better thins to do with it.
I admit that I talked to little before last moves. So feel free to blame
me. Still, I'd like to forget that and continue with better communications
and better plans.
You asked what I want to do. Well, at first I'd like to get my share of
Turkey back. You forced me out of there and make demands for me. That is
not very good way to get someone on your side. We did agree that Ankara is
yours but now we have different priority list. Youäd like to attack Austria
and I'd like to take back what was mine.
I'd like to continue working with you. I like the fact that we are able to
communicate more due to timezones. But you should not make it too hard for
me.
Raine
From - Wed Oct 10 18:29:34 2001
Message from scse at maine.rr.com as Germany to England in 'gutsy':
Hi Brent,
We just seem to get more and more tangled up. At least we're still talking,
though; that's good.
I'm sorry my last two letters (and my moves for that matter) have made you
angry. That really was not my intention. Also, I did not mean for any of
my press to be insulting. I'm sorry if it was.
A couple of thoughts. I tend to write more than the average dipper, plus I
quoted you a lot. :) Please forgive the length of this letter:
> The only thing that surprised me a bit was that instead of
> telling me outright that you felt North Sea was your right
> (as was pretty obviously your feelings)
I didn't think the North Sea was mine by right; it is usually English all
the way. I just saw the opportunity to take it and better my position; so I
did. Kind of like when Rod took London the first year and you took St Pete
the second.
> [In no way do I consider this a pro-French move,]
> This statement shows that either you are clueless, or you think I am. I
> really doubt the first one. Whether or not you wanted it to, the move
> obviously benefits France in that it weakens his opponent, who he
obviously
> selected on the basis of your promise to make it. Or are you going to
> continue the blantantly obvious lies and try to tell me that France didn't
> know about it?
> [Hopefully, you will not see it as an anti-English move]
> OK, now you're either trying to be funny and just not having it work, or
> you think I'm a completely numbskull who's never seen a Diplomacy
> board before.
> What I don't understand is that you're an experienced player, and I can't
> imagine that you'd underestimate an opponent to that degree. So what's
the
> point of the Diplomacy equivalent of talking to me like I'm a 2 year old?
I think you're missing the point of my statements; why I wrote them in the
first place. I definitely do not think you're clueless or a numbskull or a
2 year old for that matter and I certainly try my best not to underestimate
any opponent, particularly in a highly rated game.
I wrote what I wrote to see what your response would be; plain and simple.
I pretty much expected the rant I got, but I had hoped for something more
like: "Damnit Steve, that really pissed me off! But we both know an
unchecked France is the biggest threat to German success, so here's what I
propose..."
> Your plan seems quite suspect to me, as its basically a u-turn from
> everything you did last turn. ...(snip)... the plan you were feeding me
> meant nothing to you in the long run, other than a way to keep me
> occupied and off balance.
Yes, exactly! That's exactly what I was doing; it's important you
understand this about me. And, I'd do it to Rod if I thought I'd benefit
(*in a second*). I know you don't like this style, but I've found it
immensely successful. It does, however, require a certain thickness of
skin; that's the hard part.
When I look at the board as objectively as I can, I see six things:
1) The east is a mess; it probably won't resolve any time soon.
2) Italy is just about as far east as Italy could be. That gives France a
virtual blank check in the west.
3) France is vulnerable by land *and* by sea as long as he doesn't get a
build.
4) Germany and France can protect all of their centers this year.
5) England can keep his centers with German support
6) Russia can keep his center with English or German support.
Given that context, on a stricly objective basis, I see plenty of EG
opportunities. I was serious about "Operation Mid-Atlantic" BTW. If you
have any thoughts, I'd love to hear them.
The last thing I want to say is that your threat of giving the English
centers to Rod doesn't carry any weight. The basis of the FG agreement is
that of the "contested four" (lon, lvp, edi, and bel), Rod gets three and I
get one. Giving up on your home defense only furthers my agenda.
Thanks for writing.
- Steve
From - Wed Oct 10 18:29:39 2001
Message from scse at maine.rr.com as Germany to France in 'gutsy':
Hi Rod,
First off, great job with Wales. I know I said as much in my last letter,
but that really was an excellent move; caught Brent totally off guard and
sets FG up very well.
> I am actually surprised that Brent went to Ska.
Me too. If I were him, I would have covered my butt in York.
> What is his purpose? Does he with to foment
> a G/R conflict? Is Den at risk?
Shoot, one paragraph, three questions; you really squeeze them in don't you?
:)
I'll do my best to answer:
Re purpose: Brent's mighty pissed off right now and just about as desperate
as he can get. He's resorting to the old "I'll throw my centers to the
other guy" threat. I've always figured that you get 3 of the 4 "contested
centers" (English SCs plus Belgium) so as far as I'm concerned, his threat
doesn't hold water with me. They're yours for the taking.
Re G/R conflict: He might be thinking it, but it's immensely unlikely to
happen. As long as Adam is tangled up in the south, I'm keeping Sweden
hostage. I might even throw in Norway or St Pete. :)
Re Denmark: I will probably order Hel to support Denmark just to be sure.
I figure that it never sucks to be kicked out of the North Sea. I have
about a zillion retreats (in rough terms LOL); no matter where I go it's
good for me.
> My goal for this turn is to guarantee myself a build.
I support that completely. Whichever way you want to go about it is fine
with me.
> ...but since I haven't gotten a build since 1901, I'm looking.
Well...you did have London once upon a time, but gave it back. That's a
friendly jibe by the way. :)
As the board lays, you can support yourself into London, but can't guarantee
yourself Lvp. I know you want a build, but I'd like one too. What's the
best way to keep both of us happy?
Here's one thought: How about we work the press with Brent (not that he
trusts either one of us, but he can still be manipulated) and encourage
edi - lvp with support from nao? You can re-take London and I can slip into
Edi (I'll probably use North in some way in Scandanavia, but this way I get
a safe retreat). If you'd prefer me to attack Edi right off, let me know.
I'm still up for a Belgium convoy to London BTW, but that's a little
trickier trustwise. I would very much like an army on the isle, but I'd
hate to lose Beligum without recompense (LOL. I guess I'm still obsessing).
I'd also like to hear back from Brent and Adam before comitting; I hope
that's okay with you.
Thanks for the letters. Write when you can; I'll be here.
- Steve
From - Thu Oct 11 18:50:21 2001
Message from bwarner34 at home.com as England to Germany in 'gutsy':
[We just seem to get more and more tangled up.]
On the contrary, I feel like I understand you quite well.
[I just saw the opportunity to take it and better my position; so I did.]
And you want me to say what? Congratulations? Thank you? You have
absolutely no consideration for someone who offered you friendship, and then
you wonder why I feel like attacking you.
[I wrote what I wrote to see what your response would be; plain and simple.]
What the heck kind of reason is that? Do you actually say anything in
negotiations that you mean, or is it all just meaningless attempts to
provoke reactions?
[But we both know an unchecked France is the biggest threat to German
success, so here's what I
propose...]
Is it? Because thats what you've got on your hands. Sorry to disappoint
you with the lack of proposals, but I'm sick of being treated like a
doormat. If you really want to work with me, I'm sure you can figure out
how to do it.
[I know you don't like this style, but I've found it immensely successful.]
Well guess what, its not with me. I find it arrogant, and at times
downright sickening. So either you give up on working with me, or you learn
to adapt a new style of play, at least in your dealings with me.
[5) England can keep his centers with German support]
Not all of them, I thought we already established that.
[ I was serious about "Operation Mid-Atlantic" BTW.]
And there's the problem with your vaunted 6 on 1 strategy. You ever heard
of the boy that cried wolf? Well you're him. You've proposed several plans
to me , and every time you've abandoned the plan for something that
benefitted you at my expense. Now I'm supposed to believe you won't do the
same, just because you said "I was serious about 'Operation Mid-Atlantic'"?
[The basis of the FG agreement is that of the "contested four" (lon, lvp,
edi, and bel), Rod gets three and I get one. ]
And you agreed to that? When I was offering you a much more even
agreement? Why? I can only assume that you didn't plan to keep your
agreement with Rod (especially since you've never kept one with me).
So here's the deal. From my previous experince, it seems that nothing I
say will change your actions, as you always end up doing whats best for
yourself. So I'm not going to waste my breath. If you decide that you
don't want to keep your deal with France to give him all my centers, you'll
help me out. If you decide that, we'll have more to talk about next season.
I promise you that my moves will leave that possibility open, but they'll
also insure that if you don't attack France he'll get every center you
promised him. Sound fair?
Brent
From - Thu Oct 11 18:50:25 2001
Message from rodspade at acm.org,rodney.spade at philips.com as France to Germany in
'gutsy':
Steve,
> He's resorting to the old "I'll throw my centers to the
> other guy" threat.
That does seem like the most likely explanation.
> I've always figured that you get 3 of the 4 "contested
> centers" (English SCs plus Belgium) so as far as I'm concerned, his threat
> doesn't hold water with me. They're yours for the taking.
Maybe it would've worked better for him if he'd threatened to throw all
his centers to *you* - but don't you dare suggest that to him! ;-)
> Re G/R conflict: He might be thinking it, but it's immensely unlikely to
> happen. As long as Adam is tangled up in the south, I'm keeping Sweden
> hostage. I might even throw in Norway or St Pete. :)
I think Adam is willing to listen to us (and to Brent too), but he seems
hesitant to rock the boat in the north.
> Re Denmark: I will probably order Hel to support Denmark just to be sure.
> I figure that it never sucks to be kicked out of the North Sea. I have
> about a zillion retreats (in rough terms LOL); no matter where I go it's
> good for me.
I think you're right about that. Hel S Den is the safest plan.
> I know you want a build, but I'd like one too.
Not content to let me catch up with you, eh? ;-) Actually, that's
fine. One build for each of us (at England's expense) is an excellent
goal.
> I'm still up for a Belgium convoy to London BTW, but that's a little
> trickier trustwise.
Yes, we'd have to trust each other, but I don't think that would be a
problem. OTOH, if you feel safer sitting in Bel, that's fine too.
> I'd also like to hear back from Brent and Adam before comitting; I hope
> that's okay with you.
Certainly. We have plenty of time.
Rod
From - Thu Oct 11 18:50:27 2001
Message from bwarner34 at home.com as England to France in 'gutsy':
[But the first issue is that I generally
don't trust a lackey til after I've knocked him down to one or two
centers.]
Well, I'm not yet to the point where that sounds enticing yet. But maybe
it will in the future. I did have one point to add to the possible benefits
of keeping me around. While lackeys are useful, as you said, they're often
too small to be of much use. I was thinking more of a janissary type
position. Bascially, you let me live, and I become your extension on the
Northern front. You can cross into the Med while its still wide open, and
you get the benefit that you don't look as big, delaying the grand alliance
against you. Obviously you don't want me too big, and maybe minus a home
center here or there, but strong enough that I can still help you cross any
major stalemate lines should the need arise. Riskier of course, but you
don't win this game without taking risks. Anyways, something to think
about.
By the way, Steve is once again trying to sell out anyone he can. I
wouldn't let him get any bigger if you can avoid it, he'll certainly turn on
you as soon as he gets a chance. I'd love a chance to be able to return the
favor if you'd let me have it sometime...
Brent
From - Thu Oct 11 18:50:33 2001
Message from pre at dalliance.net as Russia to Italy in 'gutsy':
> You asked what I want to do. Well, at first I'd like to get my share of
> Turkey back. You forced me out of there and make demands for me. That is
> not very good way to get someone on your side. We did agree that Ankara is
> yours but now we have different priority list. Youäd like to attack Austria
> and I'd like to take back what was mine.
>
> I'd like to continue working with you. I like the fact that we are able to
> communicate more due to timezones. But you should not make it too hard for
> me.
You want Con back, I have no problem with that but only if you
are indeed my friend and ally. My problem for the last year or
so has been you complete inflexability - your refusal to
compromise in any way. I will willingly hand Con over to you
and offer what support I can to get you into Smy but first
I must see some evidence that you are also behind me in my
attacks on Austria. I need to see you in Greece, and ideally
at least an attempt on Tri. Are you prepared to do this?
Adam..........
From - Thu Oct 11 18:50:35 2001
Message from scse at maine.rr.com as Germany to France in 'gutsy':
Hi Rod,
> Maybe it would've worked better for him if he'd threatened to throw all
> his centers to *you* - but don't you dare suggest that to him! ;-)
Yea, I though of that too; at the least it would have made me think a bit.
While I didn't actually suggest Brent throw them to me, I did point out that
throwing away his centers is exactly what I want him to do.
Just so you know I also suggested a couple of other possible plans on how EG
could cooperate, but he just got angrier and angrier with me and nixed them
all. Some of them were pretty good. :)
If you have any insight into what makes him tick I'd love to hear it.
> I think Adam is willing to listen to us (and to Brent too), but he seems
> hesitant to rock the boat in the north.
I agree. At this point, I think Adam is happy with keeping Sweden. I'd
like to do something with him to divide up the last two Scandanavian
centers, but I don't think that will happen this year. Maybe.
Regarding our moves, I'm pretty badly torn. If I hold Bel, you get London,
but I would imagine me having three armies on the mainline would make you a
bit itchy. Once upon a time, you talked about needing a third fleet. Would
you still like to do that? Or would you prefer an army build?
On the other hand, if I do convoy, and you force Belgium, I lose a fleet and
get pushed back to hol, ruh, mun. I hope you understand my hesitancy here.
Would you consider something like this? :
France:
gas - bur
bur - bel
eng c bel - lon
wal s bel - lon
iri whatever
Germany:
bel - eng - lon
nth - eng
ruh - hol
mun - gas
hel s den
den whatever
Those orders would give you a build and me a foothold on the isle. We'd
both be at six. The nth and mun orders would cut your support in case you
didn't convoy. Plus, we would end up DMZing Burgundy and the Ruhr which was
one of our end-of-the-year goals.
Let me know if that sounds reasonable.
Also, somewhere along the line, we should start talking about what comes
next. In a couple of years we should be facing a 9/8 split and a bunch of
fleets between us. That might make for a stable line, or it might mean I go
after Russia while you go after Italy, or it might mean we start hacking
each other up. Any of the three could be entertaining, but the was the east
looks right now, I'd prefer to push our advantage which should only grow if
we do things right.
Write when you can.
- Steve
From - Thu Oct 11 18:50:36 2001
Message from dip_power at hotmail.com as Turkey to Italy in 'gutsy':
Raine,
I don't know why I'm bothering but, I am persistent.
What exactly did I do that made you decide that I HAD to
be eliminated first? Is there any way that I can make
you recognize the opportunity you have to stab Austria,
and take it now? Drop me a line.
Thanks,
Eric.
From - Thu Oct 11 18:50:37 2001
Message from rodspade at acm.org,rodney.spade at philips.com as France to Germany in
'gutsy':
Steve,
> If I hold Bel, you get London,
> but I would imagine me having three armies on the mainline would make you a
> bit itchy.
It's not ideal, but if you pull Ruh back to Kie and let me maintain a sentry in
Bur then I'd be comfortable - but would you be comfortable?
> Once upon a time, you talked about needing a third fleet. Would
> you still like to do that? Or would you prefer an army build?
A fleet might not be as crucial right now as I had thought, but I reckon I'll need
fleets when I move into the Med. Do *you* have a preference for my build?
> On the other hand, if I do convoy, and you force Belgium, I lose a fleet and
> get pushed back to hol, ruh, mun. I hope you understand my hesitancy here.
Is it hesitancy or paranoia?
> Would you consider something like this? :
>
> France:
> bur - bel
> eng c bel - lon
> wal s bel - lon
> iri whatever
>
> Germany:
> bel - eng - lon
> nth - eng
> ruh - hol
> hel s den
> den whatever
Those moves sound good to me.
Wait a minute - How do I know you won't take Lon and bounce me out of Bel?!
You see, I can be paranoid too. ;-)
> gas - bur
> mun - bur
Sorry, I can't agree to a bounce in Bur. I want to be able to choose between
Iri-MAO and Gas-Spa if I fear that Brent might go wandering.
Whatever we decide about Bel/Lon, I'd like you to DMZ Ruh. I hope that's not a
problem for you. I'd be willing to do Wal S Bel-Eng-Lon, Bur-Bel, with a DMZ in
Bur but no bounce. Or I'd be OK with Bur H, Mun-Bur, Bel H, Eng S Wal-Lon, but
then you can't do Nth-Eng.
Is either of those good for you? I'm happy to discuss it further if you have
additional concerns.
> Any of the three could be entertaining, but the way the east
> looks right now, I'd prefer to push our advantage which should only grow if
> we do things right.
I agree. I think we're both experienced enough to realize that a cooperative
push across the stalemate line has much better long-term benefits than greedy
squabbling between us. That's a lesson we could teach to the easterners quite
effectively. ;-)
Rod
From - Thu Oct 11 18:50:39 2001
Message from scse at maine.rr.com as Germany to Russia in 'gutsy':
Hi Adam,
Thanks for your last letter. Sorry that it's been a couple of days.
I ordered Kiel west because that's where I really need it. I pretty much
knew Brent was going to try that convoy to Belgium stunt so it didn't make
any sense for me to risk pissing you off. As it turned out, Rod suckered
Brent for the second time this game. This time with an offer of support
from Picardy. The funny thing is that Brent got really pissed at *me* for
the whole thing. I know you find Raine a bit obstinate, but I've found
Brent to be a bit volatile. Has he appeared that way to you or are my
perceptions whacked?
> I'm still not convinced he actually will, he's strange.
> How far can I push to make him compromise I'm not
> sure but you definately have to push hard to get him
> to do anything at all don't you?
Luckily, I haven't had to negotiate much with Raine. We have never been on
different sides of an issue, at least not an important one. Looking at his
position, he has two excellent targets, both of which he could take with
either a convoy or a fleet. That really is a pretty good position. The one
thing that I do find encouraging is that Keith ordered gre - alb last turn.
That means that there must be at least a little distrust between A and I.
> I like having almost powerless powers around to help
> me out and leak info to me and put wedges into large
> aliances. I'd sooner leave a power on the map if I can
> myself, it's handy to have someone who's greatful for
> just their continued survival, never mind a supply center.
I've heard arguments for both sides of this issue. Some folks say once you
stab, you have to finish them off, which makes a certain degree of sense if
the stabee was particulary angry about the situation. But most players at
this level tend to be a bit more distanced emotionally from the game which
allows them to be a bit more reasonable. Someone like Eric has the
experience and temperament to let a grudge drop so I think he would make an
excellent "small power partner".
>From what you've written, I know you think this way, but I'm not at all sure
of Raine. If I were in Raine's shoes, I'd be all over Greece in a second,
with a convoy. But...that's me.
> Two centers in Scandanavia, StP and Norway are easier to
> mutually protect from each other than Swe and StP. Norway
> is also less threatening to you. Would it be good or
> bad for you if the two centers which I took were Nwy and
> StP and you took Swe from me? If it were done properly I
> could even retreat into Norway which would leave Brent
> unable to complain too hard at me.
I'd much prefer Den and Swe to Den and Nwy for the reasons you just
described. When I wrote before, I just thought the other way would be
easier to make happen. Now, with Brent in Skag, I'm not sure how to proceed
at all. One thought is that I support you into Norway and support myself to
hold in Den. If you have any other ideas, let me know.
Thanks.
- Steve
From - Sat Oct 13 07:53:33 2001
Message from scse at maine.rr.com as Germany to Master in 'gutsy':
===***===***===***===
Gutsy - Germany - EOY 1902 (Addendum)
A day or two ago, after the S'03 moves but before the S'03 retreats, Eric
asked Rod and me to write addenda to our '02 EoY statements. Here is Eric's
letter:
> Gentlemen,
>
> If you haven't sent your EoYs to Roger, could you do me a favor
> and do so, and address the question of what you would have done,
> if Brent had listened to my advice, and taken Swe, convoyed to
> Nwy, and built A Edi last Fall.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Eric.
Eric had been the prime proponent of a Western Triple after the S'02 orders
in which Russia and Austria moved with frightening speed against me. Eric
proposed the triple through the following T to EFG press:
> All those in favor of a Western Triple, say, "Aye."
>
> Aye!
Some folks would have said something like "Excellent! Now my friends will
help me out" especially when Brent immediately supported the idea. I chimed
in with a very lame "Umm...I'll do it, like I have a choice? :)" But, by
the time Rod agreed, moves were already being proposed and I feared the
triple was in full swing.
When I saw what was happening, my heart just sank. It's bad enough for
Germany to have Austria and Russia on its doorstep, but now I faced another
German nightmare, the *forced* triple.
The triple is hard enough for Germany to play when Russia and Austria *are*
playing nice and Germany has no tension with either England or France. But
that was not the case here. Russia could simply take Berlin, the best I
could hope for was a bounce in Munich, and I had probably pissed off France
by wandering into Burgundy.
I figured that if Brent and Rod followed Eric's suggestions (and I fully
expected that they would), Brent would get Sweden in '02, St Pete in '03,
and then reclaim London in '04. Meanwhile, Rod would be everyone's hero by
vacating London yet he would keep the center for five(!) full seasons while
positioning himself in the Med (or against me). I also figured that I would
have to vacate both Belgium and Holland because I would be expected to bring
my units to the front line. That would have sucked.
Now, to answer Eric's original question: "What would you have done, if
Brent had taken Swe, convoyed to Nwy, and built A Edi last Fall?"
This is actually a two step process, moves then builds (plus whatever forks
result along the way). Please forgive my verbosity but it's important, for
me at least, to go over this in my mind.
Since, I did *not* want the triple to happen, I had to work two diplomatic
fronts, Russia and France. Russia, because Adam had the walk-in into Berlin
so I had to talk to him anyway, but also because I knew he didn't want to
lose Sweden. That aligned our needs pretty well as long as I could convince
him that he had better prospects in Austria than he did in Germany.
My press to France was important because Rod had already taken London. Our
needs were aligned pretty well as long as I could convince him that I had AR
under control and was still interested in an FG partnership. I've played
France a bunch of times and I don't think I've ever voluntarily left London
once it was conquered. The fact that Rod did in F'02 shows how bad the
triple is for Germany and how good a player Rod really is.
If I had found no support from either party (ie. Rod had said "Get stuffed,
the triple is your only hope" or Adam had said "No way, Berlin is mine!"), I
would have had to support Brent into Sweden and accept the convoy. Yecch!
As it turned out, I found support from both France and Russia so I was able
to move a little more aggressively in F'02 and still keep Berlin. As I
wrote to Rod in W'02, my only regret was that I didn't move *more*
aggressively by supporting myself into the North Sea.
To answer the second part of Eric's question, I'm very glad I did not attack
the North Sea in F'02. I fully expected Brent to build F Lvp and F Edi. I
saw absolutely no reason for him not to, but he surprised me with F Lvp and
A Edi. That gave me and Rod (I think) all the reason we need to continue
FG, me because I could take the North Sea, Rod because Lvp threatened him
and him alone.
This is where Eric followed up with one of the most brutally honest pieces
of press I've ever seen:
>>Adjustment orders for Winter of 1902. (gutsy.006)
>>
>>England: Builds a fleet in Liverpool.
>>England: Builds an army in Edinburgh.
>>Germany: Builds a fleet in Kiel.
>
>Paranoia and over-eagerness are an unfortunate
>combination, Brent. Had you taken my advice you
>would have been well positioned to stab Rod or
>Steve in a year or three, but by insisting on two
>builds this yeat, and building F Lvp, you've
>crippled the WT, and doomed me to an early exit.
>The odds are that you've also forced Steve and Rod
>into an alliance against you, and so you will not
>profit from your early growth. Ah well, I'll see
>you all in the next game, unless I manage to swing
>Adam to my side.
>
>Eric the Doomed.
Bottom line, I agree with Eric. I was in a crappy position, mostly of my
own making, and was the the #1 candidate for first player out. If I were
Brent, I would have *insisted* on Nwy - Swe and publicly said something
like: "You can keep London, Rod; I think it's the best thing for the triple
right now, but I fully expect to get it back in a year or two so, please if
you will, let's DMZ the channel." As I wrote to Rod (I think): "If I were
Brent, I would take my four centers and go home smiling."
Now, it's time for me to make a couple of confessions. First, I write this
having seen the S'03 moves and having read a couple rounds of the resulting
press. I also write this having had a nasty exchange with Brent over my
moves and the differences in our styles of play. So, I readily and freely
admit that this statement might be somewhat tainted. Probably more than
somewhat.
I still hope to make amends with Brent because that's what good dippers do,
but I'm afraid that won't happen. I will try though. :)
Also, I very much look forward to reading the EoY's and EoG's for this game.
I expect to learn a lot.
Thanks.
- Steve
From - Sat Oct 13 07:53:51 2001
Message from bwarner34 at home.com as England to Germany in 'gutsy':
You seem to have quieted down lately, so either you've just given up on
talking to me, or I'm starting to get through to you and you're thinking
about things before just sending me meaningless nonsense. If its the
former, its understandable but disappointing. If its the latter, I think
its a good sign. I hope that I will be pleasantly surprised this coming
season when I find that you really are interested in performing "Operation
Mid-Atlantic", rather than just using it as something to distract me. Write
when you can.
Brent
From - Sat Oct 13 07:53:54 2001
Message from bwarner34 at home.com as England to Russia in 'gutsy':
Sorry I haven't written you until now, its been quite the week at work for
me. I was wondering how you wanted to handle Scandanavia. Right now I'm in
grave danger of being overrun by France and Germany, which would of course
leave you as Germany's next target. While I was hoping to recover North Sea
this turn, its pretty clear that that isn't going to be possible. So I was
wondering if there was any possibility of you and I combining to take
Denmark off Germany. This should keep him from getting a build, maybe even
forcing a removal. It may also make him think twice about the arrangement
he's in where France is set to pick up everything while he stays the same
size. I would prefer your support in for me, but if that is not possible, I
would also be willing to support you in. Anything to take him down a notch.
Let me know what you think.
Brent
From - Sat Oct 13 07:53:56 2001
Message from bwarner34 at home.com as England to Italy in 'gutsy':
So, with the current situation, is there any chance I will be seeing your
fleets steaming towards the West? My guess is you will be seeing a fleet
build in Marseilles either this turn or next. So the only way you're going
to be able to defend yourself is to move soon, and the only way you'll
actually have an offensive advantage is if you go now. If you can keep
France from eliminating me before you attack, you'll also have the advantage
of continued pressure from the North. I know you wanted to get that center
in Turkey, but at this point it won't do you much good if by the time you
can hold it France is breathing down your neck in the Med. Please give it
some consideration.
Brent
From - Sat Oct 13 07:53:59 2001
Message from pre at dalliance.net as Russia to Germany in 'gutsy':
> Thanks for your last letter. Sorry that it's been a couple of days.
Been pretty busy here myself and this weekend is going to
be a frantic rush between various different parties and
pubs and things with a friend who's been in Canada for
a couple of years but is comming back to visit for a while.
Should be fun except for the hangover bits.
> As it turned out, Rod suckered Brent for the second time this game.
Yeah, he's not the brightest player in the game. Still, I guess
you have to take some people's word sometimes. He was too caught
up with trying to explain StP and ensure I wasn't too angry about
it to ask me what anybody else was saying. If you don't check
that the other players are giving the same story to everyone
else you can't have any idea at all if they're telling the
truth.
Mind you, France was pretty quiet too, all I could have really
said is that I don't know.
> This time with an offer of support
> from Picardy. The funny thing is that Brent got really pissed at *me* for
> the whole thing. I know you find Raine a bit obstinate, but I've found
> Brent to be a bit volatile. Has he appeared that way to you or are my
> perceptions whacked?
He's in a tricky situation really, believing anything Rod said
to him was pretty silly but then you're not exactly his best
friend either and his only other neighbour, me, lost a home
supply center to him last year. If I were him I'd have done
something closer to appologising to you and saying you
were right, let's go get France. If you think everyone is
against you though, there's very little you can do.
His explanations on why he took StP seem real, but it may
have been a mistake all the same. Harder for him to get
my sympathy now.
> Luckily, I haven't had to negotiate much with Raine. We have never been on
> different sides of an issue, at least not an important one. Looking at his
> position, he has two excellent targets, both of which he could take with
> either a convoy or a fleet. That really is a pretty good position. The one
> thing that I do find encouraging is that Keith ordered gre - alb last turn.
> That means that there must be at least a little distrust between A and I.
Yeah, I'm pretty sure that all three of them suspect I'm their
best bet for partnership which is (A) probably true and (B)
a nice situation to be in. Unfortunately Raine is the guy I'd
most like to team up with and he's the one that's being the
most difficult in that he's arguing against his own best
interests from what I can see. His excuses for not attacking
Austria are flimsy at best and I think he's going to continue
to use them. Keith would be a good bet if he wrote a little
more but it would mean backing off an attack I'm quite far
into now. Eric would be the best of the lot of them but
he's going to be down to like one SC pretty soon so that's
not too helpful.
Hummm. It's hard. I think that if Raine doesn't write to me
again this weekend I'll tell him I'm going to support Smy
and that he has to attack Gre if he wants a build. He's
said that if I do that he'll team up with Keith but I
don't really see how he can hurt me from his position
anyway and Keith already seems to have a lot of security
in that Raine won't attack.
> I've heard arguments for both sides of this issue. Some folks say once you
> stab, you have to finish them off, which makes a certain degree of sense if
> the stabee was particulary angry about the situation.
You have to make sure they're harmless to you, or at the very
least that their clear best cause of action is to help rather
than hinder you - that's true. For a newbie (attacker OR attackee)
that might mean the same thing.
> But most players at
> this level tend to be a bit more distanced emotionally from the game which
> allows them to be a bit more reasonable.
Exactly, Raine seems to be missing all kinds of oppertunies
because he's so unwilling to pick a second victim even when
his first is almost dead. I find it frustrating that he won't
persue what would be a very mutally advantageous idea.
> Someone like Eric has the
> experience and temperament to let a grudge drop so I think he would make an
> excellent "small power partner".
I agree, if he were but one or two centers bigger I'd just ditch
Raine right away. Oh well.
> From what you've written, I know you think this way, but I'm not at all sure
> of Raine. If I were in Raine's shoes, I'd be all over Greece in a second,
> with a convoy. But...that's me.
And me. And Eric. And, to judge by the attempted bounce, Kieth.
I think Raine is the only player on the map who WOULDN'T have
taken Greece yet. Lucky huh?
> I'd much prefer Den and Swe to Den and Nwy for the reasons you just
> described.
It's a much more sensible way for Germany and Russia to split
Scandanavia.
> Now, with Brent in Skag, I'm not sure how to proceed
> at all. One thought is that I support you into Norway and support myself to
> hold in Den. If you have any other ideas, let me know.
Well, not bad. I'd say there's a pretty good chance that the
Nth support would be cut though and it would tip our hand
to Brent if we tried to support me into Norway before we
actually took it.
On the other hand, I just recieved press from Brent asking
if I'd support him into Denmark. We could probably use
that to our advantage, knowing one of England's moves
would make the attack much easier. I'll let you know how
it goes on. We should be able to talk again before the
deadline.
Adam...........
From - Sat Oct 13 07:54:10 2001
Message from pre at dalliance.net as Russia to England in 'gutsy':
> Sorry I haven't written you until now, its been quite the week at work for
> me.
Me too, though the weekend promises to see me even more busy with
play than I have been with work during the week. I should be able
to reply to any press from you once or twice during the weekend
and then again just a few hours before the deadline though.
> I was wondering how you wanted to handle Scandanavia. Right now I'm in
> grave danger of being overrun by France and Germany, which would of course
> leave you as Germany's next target.
Quite possibly, though there's also a good chance Germany and
France would fight each other. While they are definately colluding
against you I don't think they're exactly best friends themselves.
I still don't want to see your country destroyed however, the
posibility that Germany would sail East is enough to keep my
attention.
> While I was hoping to recover North Sea
> this turn, its pretty clear that that isn't going to be possible. So I was
> wondering if there was any possibility of you and I combining to take
> Denmark off Germany. This should keep him from getting a build, maybe even
> forcing a removal. It may also make him think twice about the arrangement
> he's in where France is set to pick up everything while he stays the same
> size. I would prefer your support in for me, but if that is not possible, I
> would also be willing to support you in. Anything to take him down a notch.
> Let me know what you think.
Well, I don't mind the idea of taking Denmark from Germany so
much as I dislike the idea of TRYING to take Denmark off Germany
and failing. That would give away our cooperation while
achieving no actual result.
Denmark can be supported from Nth and Hel. While you can
(and I imagine will) cut the support from Nth the support
from Hel would stand. The consequences of a failed attack
on Denmark are heavy for me and not good for you either. Can
you think of anything less overt I could do, or perhaps
a way to make an attack which we could guarentee?
Meanwhile, is there any good explination for F Liv - NAO?
At first I assumed it was bribed to move contry to your
orders but then I remembered this isn't a payola game
so that's impossible.
Adam............
From - Sat Oct 13 07:54:44 2001
Message from rkarjala at mail.student.oulu.fi as Italy to Austria in 'gutsy':
Hi Keith,
I hope everything is ok. I have not got a message from you for awhile.
I propose the following:
Austria:
a vie-tri
a gal-rum
a bud s bul-ser
f alb-gre
a bul-ser
Italy:
ven h
(or ven-tri, if you dare to trust that Adam is not going to support
me to tri. I suppose he won't 'cause he might have some other things in
mind.)
a tun h
f ion s alb-gre (if you want)
f aeg-smy
f eas s aeg-smy
I hope we could talk more. At least I'd be happy of that.
Raine
From - Sat Oct 13 07:54:45 2001
Message from rkarjala at mail.student.oulu.fi as Italy to France in 'gutsy':
Hi Rod,
People are asking me to attack my best friend :-) Do not worry of it.
> Adam told me that he intends to support Smy in order to force you to
> attack Austria. I guess your choice is to either take Gre or get Keith
> to tap Con.
Could you clarify? Do you think Adam will really support Smy hold? Or did
Adam ask you to tell me this to get me to attack Austria?
Raine
From - Sat Oct 13 07:54:47 2001
Message from dip_power at hotmail.com as Turkey to Russia in 'gutsy':
Hi Adam,
>You're welcome. How I'm going to convince Raine to not
>take Smy is another question. Probably I'm not is my
>guess I'm afraid.
I'd say we have better chance to convince Keith not to
cut Con S Smy.
>I guess I could try to get Con - Bul to work,
>the problem being that it almost definitely wouldn't.
No, I can't see Con-Bul succeeding, either. Rum-Bul,
on the other hand, could work. (Ser-Bud, War-Gal,
Ukr-Rum, Con S Rum-Bul/EC)
>I've asked Raine if he will attack Austria this year.
>I don't even expect him to say yes and I may support
>Smy if he does refuse. I still don't think that support
>will be worth a great deal, and I'll need to cut any
>Bul support somehow.
I asked him too. He hasn't responded, yet.
Eric.
From - Sat Oct 13 07:54:49 2001
Message from rodspade at acm.org,rodney.spade at philips.com as France to Italy in
'gutsy':
Raine,
> People are asking me to attack my best friend :-) Do not worry of it.
I am not concerned. We both know that a F/I skirmish would be foolish.
> > Adam told me that he intends to support Smy in order to force you to
> > attack Austria.
>
> Could you clarify? Do you think Adam will really support Smy hold?
My impression was that he intends to support Smy, and that he will make sure that
you know he will do so. I suppose that if he just *convinces* you that he will
then he might not need to actually *do* it, but I believe that he was sincere.
Rod
From - Sat Oct 13 07:54:55 2001
Message from keith at alumni.caltech.edu as Austria to Italy in 'gutsy':
> I hope everything is ok. I have not got a message from you for awhile.
Yes, everything is okay. I haven't gotten any messages lately, either.
I thought we had everything worked out.
> I propose the following:
> Italy:
> ven h
> (or ven-tri, if you dare to trust that Adam is not going to support
> me to tri. I suppose he won't 'cause he might have some other things in
> mind.)
> a tun h
> f ion s alb-gre (if you want)
> f aeg-smy
> f eas s aeg-smy
Your moves sound fine with me. I'm not sure that my moves will be
exactly as you propose, though. I definitely think you should support
yourself to Smyrna. Your holding in Venice is fine. If you don't do
this, let me know.
Austria
From - Sat Oct 13 07:55:07 2001
Message from scse at maine.rr.com as Germany to Austria in 'gutsy':
I think your analysis is dead-on. I like to discuss more of these type of
issues if you're up for it.
You raised a couple of points that deserve a response:
> On the other hand, if you can get France to support your convoy to London,
> you can get a foothold on the island and perhaps dominate it.
This is my hope. It's a little risky, but probably worth it.
> If you're asking what is best for Austria, probably a strong France,
> which weakens Italy.
I agree...with one concern. When I play France, I like to delay my move
into the Med until I've eliminated the GR navies and GRs ability to generate
more. Obviously that would be bad for me, but it would also be bad for
everyone else because once Rod *does* turn the corner he will be unstoppable
if there are no opposing northern fleets.
If you're really interested in a weakened Italy, our needs are well aligned.
I'll start encouraging Rod to take the Med next year; is there some way we
can coordinate our press?
> I think Russia is going to crumble on his own.
Yes, I believe so too; this turn is "make or break" for him. The situation
he is in (and the whole of the east for that matter) is rather dynamic
though; Serbia, Greece, Smyrna, Bul, and Con could all change hands.
However, since Adam and Raine don't seem to be cooperating very well, I
think you have the upper hand.
Also, regarding Russia, I don't think I will work with England against
Sweden this turn, but the time might come when I want to take some Russian
centers. If you haven't wiped through Russia by then, there should be at
least a few ways we can cooperate. I'm not asking for any crazy-ass
commitments so soon, but I wanted you to know that I haven't forgotten your
suggestion last year. If you'd like to talk a little more long-term,
though, I'd welcome your ideas.
Thanks for writing. No rush to respond immediately, but I do appreciate our
exchanges. Thanks again.
- Steve
From - Sat Oct 13 07:55:25 2001
Message from scse at maine.rr.com as Germany to Turkey in 'gutsy':
Hi Eric,
It's been a couple of days since I last wrote, so I thought we should
re-connect. I haven't heard much from the east except that Adam still fears
Raine won't move against Keith and that Keith feels he has things well under
control. That's not a very good combination of news, is it? :)
The main reason I'm writing is because of your request for Rod and me to
address Brent's '02 moves in our EoY statements. After re-reading what I
wrote to Roger, I guess I didn't address your question as directly as I
might have, but I thought I would send a copy to you as well. Maybe it will
spurn some discussion between us. At the least, it lets you know what I was
thinking the last couple of seasons.
If you're up for it, I'd like to hear your thoughts. Thanks.
- Steve
=================
Message sent to Master:
Message from scse at maine.rr.com as Germany to Master in 'gutsy':
===***===***===***===
Gutsy - Germany - EOY 1902 (Addendum)
A day or two ago, after the S'03 moves but before the S'03 retreats, Eric
asked Rod and me to write addenda to our '02 EoY statements. Here is Eric's
letter:
> Gentlemen,
>
> If you haven't sent your EoYs to Roger, could you do me a favor
> and do so, and address the question of what you would have done,
> if Brent had listened to my advice, and taken Swe, convoyed to
> Nwy, and built A Edi last Fall.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Eric.
Eric had been the prime proponent of a Western Triple after the S'02 orders
in which Russia and Austria moved with frightening speed against me. Eric
proposed the triple through the following T to EFG press:
> All those in favor of a Western Triple, say, "Aye."
>
> Aye!
Some folks would have said something like "Excellent! Now my friends will
help me out" especially when Brent immediately supported the idea. I chimed
in with a very lame "Umm...I'll do it, like I have a choice? :)" But, by
the time Rod agreed, moves were already being proposed and I feared the
triple was in full swing.
When I saw what was happening, my heart just sank. It's bad enough for
Germany to have Austria and Russia on its doorstep, but now I faced another
German nightmare, the *forced* triple.
The triple is hard enough for Germany to play when Russia and Austria *are*
playing nice and Germany has no tension with either England or France. But
that was not the case here. Russia could simply take Berlin, the best I
could hope for was a bounce in Munich, and I had probably pissed off France
by wandering into Burgundy.
I figured that if Brent and Rod followed Eric's suggestions (and I fully
expected that they would), Brent would get Sweden in '02, St Pete in '03,
and then reclaim London in '04. Meanwhile, Rod would be everyone's hero by
vacating London yet he would keep the center for five(!) full seasons while
positioning himself in the Med (or against me). I also figured that I would
have to vacate both Belgium and Holland because I would be expected to bring
my units to the front line. That would have sucked.
Now, to answer Eric's original question: "What would you have done, if
Brent had taken Swe, convoyed to Nwy, and built A Edi last Fall?"
This is actually a two step process, moves then builds (plus whatever forks
result along the way). Please forgive my verbosity but it's important, for
me at least, to go over this in my mind.
Since, I did *not* want the triple to happen, I had to work two diplomatic
fronts, Russia and France. Russia, because Adam had the walk-in into Berlin
so I had to talk to him anyway, but also because I knew he didn't want to
lose Sweden. That aligned our needs pretty well as long as I could convince
him that he had better prospects in Austria than he did in Germany.
My press to France was important because Rod had already taken London. Our
needs were aligned pretty well as long as I could convince him that I had AR
under control and was still interested in an FG partnership. I've played
France a bunch of times and I don't think I've ever voluntarily left London
once it was conquered. The fact that Rod did in F'02 shows how bad the
triple is for Germany and how good a player Rod really is.
If I had found no support from either party (ie. Rod had said "Get stuffed,
the triple is your only hope" or Adam had said "No way, Berlin is mine!"), I
would have had to support Brent into Sweden and accept the convoy. Yecch!
As it turned out, I found support from both France and Russia so I was able
to move a little more aggressively in F'02 and still keep Berlin. As I
wrote to Rod in W'02, my only regret was that I didn't move *more*
aggressively by supporting myself into the North Sea.
To answer the second part of Eric's question, I'm very glad I did not attack
the North Sea in F'02. I fully expected Brent to build F Lvp and F Edi. I
saw absolutely no reason for him not to, but he surprised me with F Lvp and
A Edi. That gave me and Rod (I think) all the reason we need to continue
FG, me because I could take the North Sea, Rod because Lvp threatened him
and him alone.
This is where Eric followed up with one of the most brutally honest pieces
of press I've ever seen:
>>Adjustment orders for Winter of 1902. (gutsy.006)
>>
>>England: Builds a fleet in Liverpool.
>>England: Builds an army in Edinburgh.
>>Germany: Builds a fleet in Kiel.
>
>Paranoia and over-eagerness are an unfortunate
>combination, Brent. Had you taken my advice you
>would have been well positioned to stab Rod or
>Steve in a year or three, but by insisting on two
>builds this yeat, and building F Lvp, you've
>crippled the WT, and doomed me to an early exit.
>The odds are that you've also forced Steve and Rod
>into an alliance against you, and so you will not
>profit from your early growth. Ah well, I'll see
>you all in the next game, unless I manage to swing
>Adam to my side.
>
>Eric the Doomed.
Bottom line, I agree with Eric. I was in a crappy position, mostly of my
own making, and was the the #1 candidate for first player out. If I were
Brent, I would have *insisted* on Nwy - Swe and publicly said something
like: "You can keep London, Rod; I think it's the best thing for the triple
right now, but I fully expect to get it back in a year or two so, please if
you will, let's DMZ the channel." As I wrote to Rod (I think): "If I were
Brent, I would take my four centers and go home smiling."
Now, it's time for me to make a couple of confessions. First, I write this
having seen the S'03 moves and having read a couple rounds of the resulting
press. I also write this having had a nasty exchange with Brent over my
moves and the differences in our styles of play. So, I readily and freely
admit that this statement might be somewhat tainted. Probably more than
somewhat.
I still hope to make amends with Brent because that's what good dippers do,
but I'm afraid that won't happen. I will try though. :)
Also, I very much look forward to reading the EoY's and EoG's for this game.
I expect to learn a lot.
Thanks.
- Steve
From - Sat Oct 13 07:58:56 2001
Message from rkarjala at mail.student.oulu.fi as Italy to France in 'gutsy':
Hi Rod,
> My impression was that he intends to support Smy, and that he will make
> sure that you know he will do so. I suppose that if he just *convinces*
> you that he will then he might not need to actually *do* it, but I
> believe that he was sincere.
Rod I am not good at this :-) Still I try. So Adam did not ask you to
convince me, to give me the 'info', so that he can then do something else
than support Smyrna? You seriously think that Adam is supporting Smy h?
You would bet your money on Con S Smy after you diplomed with Adam?
I mean, I can see better moves by Adam than supporting Smyrna.
Raine
From - Sat Oct 13 07:58:59 2001
Message from rkarjala at mail.student.oulu.fi as Italy to Austria in 'gutsy':
Hi Keith,
Good to hear that you're ok.
> Yes, everything is okay. I haven't gotten any messages lately, either.
> I thought we had everything worked out.
There is a huge difference in our level of experience in Diplomacy :-)
I would like to know more how we could co-operate in future. I would like
to get AI work well. So I give my intentions of moves and you just say
everything is worked out :-) I feel like I'm stupid...
> Your moves sound fine with me. I'm not sure that my moves will be
> exactly as you propose, though. I definitely think you should support
> yourself to Smyrna. Your holding in Venice is fine. If you don't do
> this, let me know.
As default I won't move to Trieste. I will _only_ if you ask me to.
I would like to hear what you are going to do differently than I proposed.
That would give me confidence to our alliance. I hope you trust my
goodwill after the last moves.
I have the feeling that FR are talking much. They are spreading rumours
of each other and they both talk about how I should attack Austria now.
What do you think? It is obvious that Eric is asking me to attack you.
In fact Brent is the only one who is not asking me to attack
Greece+Trieste. He want's me to head west.
I did not get reply to my press to AG. Does it imply that you and Steve
are not interested in working together or what? In west it looks like a
quick fall of England. Should I be afraid of AGF?
When everything is worked out between us we could talk about what are the
others are going to do or what we believe they are going to do.
Raine
From - Sat Oct 13 07:59:19 2001
Message from Elladan915 at netzero.net as Turkey to Germany in 'gutsy':
(Roger, I'm not talking about 'titleist', but I am discussing my VGFP
semi-final
game in this letter, so if you're feeling scrupulous (or anal-retentive)
about
gunboat rules, don't read this until I've eliminated you from 'titleist'
*wink*)
Hi Steve,
> I haven't heard much from the east except that Adam still fears Raine
> won't move against Keith and that Keith feels he has things well under
> control. That's not a very good combination of news, is it? :)
I suppose I can hope that Keith is wrong... ;^}
> The main reason I'm writing is because of your request for Rod and me to
> address Brent's '02 moves in our EoY statements. After re-reading what I
> wrote to Roger, I guess I didn't address your question as directly as I
> might have, but I thought I would send a copy to you as well. Maybe it
will
> spurn some discussion between us. At the least, it lets you know what I
was
> thinking the last couple of seasons.
Ouch, I guess you think I am dead... 8-)
> Eric had been the prime proponent of a Western Triple after the S'02
orders
> in which Russia and Austria moved with frightening speed against me.
> Some folks would have said something like "Excellent! Now my friends will
> help me out" especially when Brent immediately supported the idea. I
chimed
> in with a very lame "Umm...I'll do it, like I have a choice? :)" But, by
> the time Rod agreed, moves were already being proposed and I feared the
> triple was in full swing.
> When I saw what was happening, my heart just sank. It's bad enough for
> Germany to have Austria and Russia on its doorstep, but now I faced
another
> German nightmare, the *forced* triple.
There are times when a Triple is the right thing to do, though, and I think
this
was one of them. Certainly the Press reaction to what looked like AIR was
a major factor in Adam's stabbing Keith, and Raine moving Pie-Ven. If you
had reservations, I wish that you had raised them to me privately. We could
have worked together to address them.
> I also figured that I would have to vacate both Belgium and Holland
> because I would be expected to bring my units to the front line. That
> would have sucked.
No, unless Brent had agreed to build only Armies, and had moved
Nth-Nwg, I would have reccommended that you leave a rear-guard
Army in Hol. I think you did need to move F Hol-Kiel to deal with the
Russian threat, though.
> Since, I did *not* want the triple to happen, I had to work two diplomatic
> fronts, Russia and France. Russia, because Adam had the walk-in into
Berlin
> so I had to talk to him anyway, but also because I knew he didn't want to
> lose Sweden. That aligned our needs pretty well as long as I could
convince
> him that he had better prospects in Austria than he did in Germany.
Did you consider three fronts? RF & T? I proposed the WT as much to
save you as to save me.
> I've played France a bunch of times and I don't think I've ever
voluntarily
> left London once it was conquered. The fact that Rod did in F'02 shows
> how bad the triple is for Germany and how good a player Rod really is.
I'm playing in the Vermont Group Full Press Final Round game, 'titleist',
because I led Germany to a 12-11-11 GEF 3-way, in my semi-final match.
The WT is risky for Germany, but with appropriate restrictions and
precautions, it CAN be very good for Germany. (I can send you the game
history, if you're interested.)
> I fully expected Brent to build F Lvp and F Edi. I saw absolutely no
reason
> for him not to, but he surprised me with F Lvp and A Edi. That gave me
and
> Rod (I think) all the reason we need to continue FG, me because I could
take
> the North Sea, Rod because Lvp threatened him and him alone.
And Brent still thinks F Lvp should have encouraged Rod to ally with him...
> This is where Eric followed up with one of the most brutally honest pieces
> of press I've ever seen:
>
> >>Adjustment orders for Winter of 1902. (gutsy.006)
> >>
> >>England: Builds a fleet in Liverpool.
> >>England: Builds an army in Edinburgh.
> >>Germany: Builds a fleet in Kiel.
> >
> >Paranoia and over-eagerness are an unfortunate
> >combination, Brent. Had you taken my advice you
> >would have been well positioned to stab Rod or
> >Steve in a year or three, but by insisting on two
> >builds this year, and building F Lvp, you've
> >crippled the WT, and doomed me to an early exit.
> >The odds are that you've also forced Steve and Rod
> >into an alliance against you, and so you will not
> >profit from your early growth.
*chuckle* Never assume that a Diplomacy player is completely honest!
I had my reasons for phrasing things the way I did, but if the three of you
had listened to my advice from 1902-05, Brent's chances to stab would
have been not very good, and about the same as yours. I felt Brent's
moves were too focused on this year, and not on the mid-term or
long-term prospects of the WT, so I over-emphasized his mid-term
potential to drive that point home.
> Bottom line, I agree with Eric. I was in a crappy position, mostly of my
> own making, and was the the #1 candidate for first player out.
Hmm, if AIR had pressed forward, it would have been interesting to see
which of us would have been eliminated first. Your fate would have
hinged on Rod's reaction to the Eastern threat, and your Army in Bur.
Eric.
From - Sat Oct 13 11:45:42 2001
Message from bwarner34 at home.com as England to Russia in 'gutsy':
[Quite possibly, though there's also a good chance Germany and
France would fight each other. While they are definately colluding
against you I don't think they're exactly best friends themselves.]
No, I don't think they are friends either. But if you think they will
immediately start fighting each other, you're missing the whole reason that
they are cooperating. The East is a mess, no one is gaining a clear
advantage. As long as thats the case, they willl have an incentive to stay
together and get across the stalemate lines before the East gets organized.
I would be VERY surprised to see them attack each other if their attack on
me is successful.
[Well, I don't mind the idea of taking Denmark from Germany so
much as I dislike the idea of TRYING to take Denmark off Germany
and failing. That would give away our cooperation while
achieving no actual result.]
Are we really concerned about "giving away" our cooperation at this point?
The fact that we are fighting makes us look weaker to our enemies, FG for
me, and Austria for you. If we were obviously united, they would know that
they are going to have a tougher time taking us down, and may look for
easier targets.
[Denmark can be supported from Nth and Hel.]
It can, but I can guarantee it won't. Which space is more important to
Germany, Denmark or North Sea? Denmark is just a single center, but North
Sea is possibly the most important space on the board. Which space is more
likely to be attacked in Germany's mind, North Sea or Denmark? One is
bordered by two English fleets that were just booted from that space. The
other is only bordered by one English flet and a "friendly" Russian fleet.
Plus, Germany will most likely be convoying through the North Sea this turn,
so he can't afford to have it get dislodged.
[Can you think of anything less overt I could do, or perhaps
a way to make an attack which we could guarentee?]
I can pretty much guarantee you that two units against Denmark would
successfully capture it.
[Meanwhile, is there any good explination for F Liv - NAO?
At first I assumed it was bribed to move contry to your
orders but then I remembered this isn't a payola game
so that's impossible.]
No, not payola, but the concept of a bribe is pretty accurate, only I was
doing the bribing. I knew that Germany was against me, and that my only
hope for really getting anywhere was to get Rod on board. Lvp-NAO was part
of a deal I made with him that was supposed to be enticing enough to get him
to move against Germany. Obviously unsuccessful, but given the
circumstances, I knew I was in trouble if he attacked me no matter what my
moves, so I decided to take the chance.
Brent
From - Sat Oct 13 18:32:46 2001
Message from rodspade at acm.org,rodney.spade at philips.com as France to Italy in
'gutsy':
Raine,
> Still I try. So Adam did not ask you to
> convince me, to give me the 'info', so that he can then do something else
> than support Smyrna?
He did not ask me to convince you. He told me that *he* would try to
convince you.
> You seriously think that Adam is supporting Smy h?
My impression was that he actually intends to support Smy.
> You would bet your money on Con S Smy after you diplomed with Adam?
I wouldn't bet money on *anything* in a diplomacy game. :-)
> I mean, I can see better moves by Adam than supporting Smyrna.
Could be. I'm not concerned about what moves are best for Adam or you.
I suggest you contact him and talk about it if there's something better
for you and him.
Rod
From - Sat Oct 13 18:32:47 2001
Message from keith at alumni.caltech.edu as Austria to Italy in 'gutsy':
> As default I won't move to Trieste. I will _only_ if you ask me to.
> I would like to hear what you are going to do differently than I proposed.
> That would give me confidence to our alliance. I hope you trust my
> goodwill after the last moves.
I have not yet decided exactly what to do yet, but don't worry, I think
you will like my moves.
> I have the feeling that FR are talking much. They are spreading rumours
> of each other and they both talk about how I should attack Austria now.
> What do you think? It is obvious that Eric is asking me to attack you.
> In fact Brent is the only one who is not asking me to attack
> Greece+Trieste. He want's me to head west.
> I did not get reply to my press to AG. Does it imply that you and Steve
> are not interested in working together or what? In west it looks like a
> quick fall of England. Should I be afraid of AGF?
As far as I can tell, Germany is not going to attack Russia any time
soon. I have asked him to. I think Russia and I will keep each other
busy. I think that France will pose a threat soon if he continues to be
allied with Germany. He won't have anywhere to go.
Germany is in the king position now. He has both France and England
trying to get him as an ally. I think that France will give London to
Germany this turn, and that Germany won't attack Sweden with England.
> When everything is worked out between us we could talk about what are the
> others are going to do or what we believe they are going to do.
I think everything is worked out between us. Our moves are independent
this turn, so we don't need to coordinate that. I think the best way for
you to prosper is to attack Turkey. If you attack me, you will be able
to take Greece, but if Russia and Turkey still work together, it is going
to be trouble for you, especially if France remains strong. Is there
something I can do to ease your fears?
Once I have my units in better position, I think that Russia wil start to
crumble. His units are in poor positions right now, and he can't rely on
German goodwill forever. Since this is the case, I expect to be able to
get Rumania soon, and we can get you Greece then (perhaps destroying my
fleet if you'd like). You will need a number of builds to protect you
against France.
I am thinking along the lines of AGI rather than AFG. I think Germany is
too. It gives him the best opportunity to win. We do have to be careful
about that.
Austria
From - Sat Oct 13 18:32:49 2001
Message from scse at maine.rr.com as Germany to Russia in 'gutsy':
Hi Adam,
Everything you wrote in your last letter makes sense to me. So much so that
I'm having a hard time figuring out what to respond to.
I think your assessment of Brent is dead-on as is your assessment of Raine
and the situation in the east as a whole (Eric included). Threatening a
support of Smyrna might be very effective with Raine.
For me, the big thing in your letter is:
> On the other hand, I just recieved press from Brent asking
> if I'd support him into Denmark. We could probably use
> that to our advantage, knowing one of England's moves
> would make the attack much easier. I'll let you know how
> it goes on. We should be able to talk again before the
> deadline.
Excellent. Just let me know how those negotiations proceed and I'm willing
to do whatever you want. I'll dive on Norway if you think that will work or
I'll support you in if you think that is better. In either case, I'll
probably support Den to hold so the risk on my end is pretty slim. Offhand,
I think Nth - Nwy is more likely to succeed, but I'll do whatever you want
here.
> It's a much more sensible way for Germany and Russia
> to split Scandanavia.
I agree. That's the way I see it too. If I do take Norway this fall, I'm
sure we can swap once Brent loses a center or two. My goal is to get you
another center in the north so you can be more effective in the south.
Have fun this weekend and respond when you can. Actually I'm a bit envious;
with two kids under three and a work project *way* behind schedule, my
social life is a bit curtailed. No scratch that; right now it's just about
zilch. Poor me. LOL
Write when you can. I'll have a chance to respond both Sunday and Monday
evening.
Thanks.
- Steve
From - Sat Oct 13 18:32:50 2001
Message from scse at maine.rr.com as Germany to France in 'gutsy':
Hi Rod,
> Is it hesitancy or paranoia?
LOL. Actually, it's not much of either really. Maybe a bit of paranoia,
but nothing serious. :)
I just like to talk these things out. I'd much rather work with someone who
has thought everything through than someone who tries to convince you
*their* solution is the right one. There's no way I want to see us waste
time and units haggling over our border, but it's important for me that we
exchange letters and discuss the tactical pitfalls of our situation. Let me
know if that really grates on you and I'll back off.
Back to the orders. Since my primary goal is to eliminate England, I'll
take the convoy. Thanks for being patient while I worked this out in my
head. :)
I'll order:
bel - eng - lon
ruh - hol
mun h
nth (I'm not sure yet)
den (I'm also not sure yet)
hel s den
If you convoy me in with support from Wales, you can take Belgium and get
the build you'd like (and deserve). Next year, we should have little
problem taking Edi and Lvp.
As you pointed out, this means I could still bounce you in Belgium, but I
won't. Also, I will definitely *not* order nth - eng or mun - bur. If
you'd like to order gas - bur, I'd understand (but I'd prefer not).
I believe my prospects in Scandanavia look pretty good, but I'm not yet
ready to commit orders for Nth and Den. I hope that's okay with you.
Also:
> I think we're both experienced enough to realize that a
> cooperative push across the stalemate line has much better
> long-term benefits than greedy squabbling between us. That's
> a lesson we could teach to the easterners quite effectively. ;-)
Yep, I think that could occur with surprising quickness. We can spin our
units pretty damn fast when the time comes. I look forward to seeing that
happen. :)
The only other thing we might want to talk about is our press with AIRT.
I've heard lots from Adam, a bit from Keith and Eric, but zilch from Raine.
If there's anything I should be saying, let me know.
Thanks.
- Steve
From - Sat Oct 13 18:32:53 2001
Message from rodspade at acm.org,rodney.spade at philips.com as France to Germany in
'gutsy':
Steve,
> I just like to talk these things out. I'd much rather work with someone who
> has thought everything through than someone who tries to convince you
> *their* solution is the right one.
I agree completely.
> it's important for me that we
> exchange letters and discuss the tactical pitfalls of our situation.
Sounds good. Two heads are better than one, and we'll both be more successful if
we coordinate closely. Also, if either of us has concerns, it's best to discuss
them out in the open and resolve them rather than let paranoia fester. :-)
> I'll order:
>
> bel - eng - lon
> ruh - hol
> mun h
> nth (I'm not sure yet)
> den (I'm also not sure yet)
> hel s den
OK. I'll do Eng C Bel-Lon, Wal S Bel-Lon, Bur-Bel.
> Also, I will definitely *not* order nth - eng or mun - bur.
Thank you. Also, thanks for agreeing to withdraw from Ruh. :-)
> If you'd like to order gas - bur, I'd understand (but I'd prefer not).
I will NOT order Gas-Bur. Let's DMZ both Bur and Ruh.
> I believe my prospects in Scandanavia look pretty good, but I'm not yet
> ready to commit orders for Nth and Den. I hope that's okay with you.
No problem. Whatever you think is best there is fine with me. I guess it depends
on what you hear from Adam.
> I've heard lots from Adam, a bit from Keith and Eric, but zilch from Raine.
Most of my recent correspondence has been with Raine. We've agreed to leave each
other alone.
> If there's anything I should be saying, let me know.
Feel free to say anything you like - as long as you're not bad-mouthing France,
of course. ;-)
Rod
From - Sat Oct 13 18:32:55 2001
Message from rodspade at acm.org,rodney.spade at philips.com as France to England in
'gutsy':
Brent,
I apologize for not replying sooner. I'm taking advantage of the leisurely deadline
to be lazy. :-)
> [But the first issue is that I generally
> don't trust a lackey til after I've knocked him down to one or two
> centers.]
> Well, I'm not yet to the point where that sounds enticing yet.
I understand. Your position is still rather viable, especially if the easterners
surprise us again. ;-)
> While lackeys are useful, as you said, they're often
> too small to be of much use. I was thinking more of a janissary type
> position. Bascially, you let me live, and I become your extension on the
> Northern front.
What's the difference between a lackey and a janissary?
> Riskier of course, but you
> don't win this game without taking risks.
That's true, but pushing everything into the Med while my victim (BTW, that's you
;-) is still strong is a bit more risk than I'm generally willing to take.
I prefer for my lackeys to essentially be on life support. Still, your suggestion
is intriguing.
> By the way, Steve is once again trying to sell out anyone he can. I
> wouldn't let him get any bigger if you can avoid it, he'll certainly turn on
> you as soon as he gets a chance.
I think you're right. I'm planning to cooperate with him (for now), but I suppose
it'd be prudent to stab him before he stabs me. That will be easier for me after
I've experienced some growth - which, unfortunately, will come at your expense.
And it helps if you oppose Germany more vigorously than me - but of course that's
entirely up to you. I can't promise to immediately turn on him if you just let me
waltz into a couple of your centers, but you know that I like to do what's best for
me - and the better my position is, the more attractive a stab becomes.
Does that mesh with what you've been thinking?
Rod
From - Sun Oct 14 15:39:36 2001
Message from bwarner34 at home.com as England to France in 'gutsy':
[I apologize for not replying sooner. I'm taking advantage of the leisurely
deadline to be lazy.]
As is everyone else it seems.
[What's the difference between a lackey and a janissary?]
Well, the difference may all be in my head, but here's what I was
thinking. Imagine yourself as a king. A lackey would be some servant of
yours. He does your bidding, but he has so little power that he really has
no effect on your kingdom's prosperity. I want to be more of a loyal
vassal, who conquers distant lands in your stead. I still do your bidding,
and depend on you for my survival, but because you allow me to have more
power, I am able to actually significantly improve the state of your
kingdom.
In Diplomacy terms, I see myself holding on to Edi, allowing me to build
units to pursue your Northern campaign. I also see myself being able to
grow above the two center mark that you seem to be imagining.
[I prefer for my lackeys to essentially be on life support.]
They really don't do you much good at that point though. It seems that
all they'd be trying to do would be to find some position where they can
join a stalemate line. Someone in a slightly more viable position still has
hopes for surviving in other ways, and is thus more willing to make moves to
stay in your favor, rather than just trying to hunker down on the other side
of the board.
[snip plans about atacking Germany later]
[Does that mesh with what you've been thinking?]
Yah, that sounds about like what I was figuring would happen. Stabbing
Germany right now wouldn't do you any good, but he's a very conservative
player, so don't underestimate his capability to stab you as soon as he ses
a possible threat.
Brent
From - Sun Oct 14 15:39:45 2001
Message from bwarner34 at home.com as England to Italy in 'gutsy':
I haven't heard from you in almost a week again. France is clearly
positioned to eliminate his naval rival in the West, and without your
interference I believe he would soon to do the same in the Med. I hope to
hear from you soon.
Brent
From - Sun Oct 14 15:40:04 2001
Message from bwarner34 at home.com as England to Austria in 'gutsy':
How go things in the East? It looks like a mess over there, I can't quite
figure out whose side everyone is on, and it seems to change with each
passing turn. As a result, there doesn't seem to be any clear winners,
though Russia looks to be the strongest at this point, especially when you
consider that he will easily be able to regain StP and probably Norway quite
soon.
Quite the ooposite is true in the West, where the FG alliance has pretty
much ruled since S1901, with a brief interruption in F1901 that was stopped
by the Eastern attack. They are now in position to have me kicked out
completely in the course of two years, which leaves all of you in the East
at a disadvantage. France and Germany have no love for each other, but they
are both opportunistic players, and given the chance to swoop down on an
ill-prepared East, I think they will do so.
I'm not sure what you can do to fix that unfortunately, you and Adam are
pretty hopelessly tangled up, and Raine has never been very useful for
anything. I'd be interested in hearing if you had any ideas though how we
could improve the current situation.
Brent
From - Sun Oct 14 15:40:06 2001
Message from keith at alumni.caltech.edu as Austria to England in 'gutsy':
Here is the situation as I see it. Germany is in the most powerful
position now. He has everyone--France, England and Russia--trying to be
his friend. Germany is going to have to attack someone. I think what he
will do is try to get France to help him against you. However, this will
only be a temporariy situation, and you can open wide your diplomatic
nozzle next turn. It is not to Germany's advantage to strengthen France,
especially since Italy shows no signs of turning West. I think once
Germany has gotten all the help he can from France, he'll attack France,
before France gets any of your centers. At least this is what I expect
will happen.
Russia is going to collapse soon. His units are poorly positioned. One
eastern unit from Germany, and Russia is dead. If Italy doesn't attack
me, I think I will be able to do pretty well. Germany is not going to
need to worry about his Eastern front for a while.
Austria
From - Sun Oct 14 15:40:24 2001
Message from keith at alumni.caltech.edu as Austria to Italy in 'gutsy':
Hello, how are things going? Is everything still okay? I know you are
probably getting a lot of pressure to attack me. Remember that attacking
me might well be in the interests of those people trying to convince you,
but I think it is probably not in your best interests. At least I hope
you see it that way too. If not, perhaps we can discuss it.
Austria
From - Mon Oct 15 17:09:17 2001
Message from rodspade at acm.org,rodney.spade at philips.com as France to England in
'gutsy':
Brent,
> In Diplomacy terms, I see myself holding on to Edi, allowing me to build
> units to pursue your Northern campaign. I also see myself being able to
> grow above the two center mark that you seem to be imagining.
So suppose you handle the northern campaign, and we grow to 18 centers
between the two of us. Then what? I win, or you play for a draw? What
would the long-term goal of the "loyal vassal" be?
Rod
From - Mon Oct 15 17:09:18 2001
Message from rodspade at acm.org,rodney.spade at philips.com as France to Russia in
'gutsy':
Adam,
Raine seems uncertain that you really will order Con S Smy, because he
believes you have "better" moves available. Regardless, I told him I
think you're sincere about your intent to support Smy.
I suppose E and G are both making you offers in Scandinavia. I think
you should do whatever's best for *you*.
Rod
From - Mon Oct 15 17:09:24 2001
Message from pre at dalliance.net as Russia to Italy in 'gutsy':
Well, just sixteen and a half hours or so until the deadline
and we've managed to not talk a great deal again this phase.
I don't really know what to do. I'll have to leave your
moves up to you and fight what I can of my own battles
I guess. I still think it's way past the time you should
have moved against Gre and Tri, attacking Austria right
now will improve our relationship considerably not to
mention it could get you supply center growth which
you can't get anywhere else this year now.
Good Luck,
Adam.........
From - Mon Oct 15 17:09:25 2001
Message from pre at dalliance.net as Russia to Austria in 'gutsy':
> Yes. I find it strange that, knowing this, you decided to attack me.
> You've given me no opportunity to attack Italy, so it seems like you're
> stuck with him for now.
Yeah, unfortunate geography is the phrase here I think. Even if
I'd given you chance to attack Italy there's no way that I
could have helped out so I'd have had to find something else
to do anyway. Raine's gone quiet as well as obstuctive and
unhelpful now, that's always a problem.
Adam..........
From - Mon Oct 15 17:09:44 2001
Message from pre at dalliance.net as Russia to Turkey in 'gutsy':
> No, I can't see Con-Bul succeeding, either. Rum-Bul,
> on the other hand, could work. (Ser-Bud, War-Gal,
> Ukr-Rum, Con S Rum-Bul/EC)
Rum-Bul could work but wouldn't help stop you from going
down to one center this year. I may do it anyway since
I can't really see anything much better to be going
on with, and if it goes wrong it'll just tend to leave
things how they are in the Balkans.
> I asked him too. He hasn't responded, yet.
Raine's hardly talked at all, but I think he's going
to attack Smy, I just can't see him doing anything else
at all. Frustrating.
In the north I have england and Germany both asking me
for support into Den and Norway respectively. Steve
even says he's support ME into norway then take Swe
later - I also get StP. That's probably the better
deal but I haven't really decided yet. The problem is
that it wouldn't work that way, I'd have to support
him into Norway in order for us to get it then swap
around later. Any advice on that which you can send in
the next couple of hours would probably help.
Adam..........
From - Mon Oct 15 17:09:46 2001
Message from pre at dalliance.net as Russia to France in 'gutsy':
Rod,
> Raine seems uncertain that you really will order Con S Smy, because he
> believes you have "better" moves available. Regardless, I told him I
> think you're sincere about your intent to support Smy.
Well I was, the more I look at it though the more I think
Bul will cut Con's support anyway so it's probably useless.
Probably better to find something else to do with a unit
if the order you want to give it won't work.
Raine's been so quiet lately I have to just asume he's
planning to continue doing what he's been doing: Attack
Eric again. I'll continue to point out how much more
meat there is on Austria than Eric's skiny bones but
I think Raine might be too dumb to understand his own
best interests.
> I suppose E and G are both making you offers in Scandinavia. I think
> you should do whatever's best for *you*.
They are indeed, and I can't decide which is better for me
still. Steve's full offer is better, but akward to get into
position for. Brent looks like he's in trouble but I don't
know if that's a good thing or a bad one so I don't know
whether I want to help there.
Maybe I'll just hold again and sit on the fence.
Adam...........
From - Mon Oct 15 17:09:49 2001
Message from pre at dalliance.net as Russia to England in 'gutsy':
> No, I don't think they are friends either. But if you think they will
> immediately start fighting each other, you're missing the whole reason that
> they are cooperating. The East is a mess, no one is gaining a clear
> advantage. As long as thats the case, they willl have an incentive to stay
> together and get across the stalemate lines before the East gets organized.
> I would be VERY surprised to see them attack each other if their attack on
> me is successful.
The West is pretty messy looking to me too of course. Rod wrote
to me saying that he's sure I'm getting offers from both you
and Steve and that I should take whichever offer is best for
ME since he doesn't much care if I help you or Germany. Doesn't
sound like they have any long term plan to me.
> Are we really concerned about "giving away" our cooperation at this point?
Well, I'm not too keen on making an enemy out of Steve, especially
while he's offering to do things like leave Sweeden alone,
he could cause trouble for me using relatively few units
which aren't really needed to work at reducing your size
if France helps.
> The fact that we are fighting makes us look weaker to our enemies, FG for
> me, and Austria for you. If we were obviously united, they would know that
> they are going to have a tougher time taking us down, and may look for
> easier targets.
If they think we're fighting, who do you think gave them
that idea by taking StP? I don't have a unit to spare in
the north so I don't want to take any position at all if
I can help it, at least until I have to do so, or until
it's obviously to my advantage.
> It can, but I can guarantee it won't. Which space is more important to
> Germany, Denmark or North Sea? Denmark is just a single center, but North
> Sea is possibly the most important space on the board. Which space is more
> likely to be attacked in Germany's mind, North Sea or Denmark? One is
> bordered by two English fleets that were just booted from that space. The
> other is only bordered by one English flet and a "friendly" Russian fleet.
> Plus, Germany will most likely be convoying through the North Sea this turn,
> so he can't afford to have it get dislodged.
Convoy? You must mean from Bel and I don't think Germany trusts
France enough to just leave Bel open. They may have arranged
deliberately to swap it I guess but probably not.
> I can pretty much guarantee you that two units against Denmark would
> successfully capture it.
It would probably capture it but how much long term good
would that do anyway? Germany would just retreat into Bal
or Kie then disband Munich and take Denmark straight
back next year. Quite possibly building another fleet
with it which would be a bad thing for you. He'd also
not trust me anymore so I couldn't get him to promise
Swe would be safe. You'd get an extra unit of course
to make up for the inevitable loss of Lon or Lvp, but
all that would stop you doing is disbanding one unit
for a year and A Edi isn't going to be doing anything
useful during that year anyway.
> No, not payola, but the concept of a bribe is pretty accurate, only I was
> doing the bribing. I knew that Germany was against me, and that my only
> hope for really getting anywhere was to get Rod on board. Lvp-NAO was part
> of a deal I made with him that was supposed to be enticing enough to get him
> to move against Germany. Obviously unsuccessful, but given the
> circumstances, I knew I was in trouble if he attacked me no matter what my
> moves, so I decided to take the chance.
Well, there's certainly trouble now but I'd have said less
trouble if you'd moved to Iri which would have been my choice.
I think you'll have to make a decision who you want to defend
against and hope that the other will take your centers
quickly enough to convince the one you're fighting to help
you out.
Tell me what exactly you would do AFTER Denmark was taken.
What would A Edi do next year which can't be done just as
well/badly without it? Or would loosing A Mun be particually
bad for Germany? I quite like the idea of helping you
survive for a few years, but stoping the disband one one
almost useless army doesn't sound like enough gain to
make it worthwhile.
Adam.............
From - Mon Oct 15 17:09:51 2001
Message from rkarjala at mail.student.oulu.fi as Italy to France in 'gutsy':
Hi Rod,
Thanks for your patience :-) I appreciate it.
Raine
From - Mon Oct 15 17:09:53 2001
Message from rkarjala at mail.student.oulu.fi as Italy to England in 'gutsy':
Hi Brent,
To be honest, I think I cannot send units to help you at the moment.
I have tried to convince Steve of the benefits of EG alliance from the
beginning. It seems that my talks have had no impact on Steve's play.
I will continue to speak for EG alliance. I think Eric has told to the same
to Steve at least at some point of the game. Adam must be against EG
'cause EG could easily kick Adam out of Scandinavia.
I advice you to talk to FG to help you out (if my advice is worth
something). Steve is in very strong position. That should make Rod scared.
On the other hand Steve might give you a good deal to work with 'cause
Steve's armies are in good position to attack France.
Raine
From - Mon Oct 15 17:09:55 2001
Message from rkarjala at mail.student.oulu.fi as Italy to Austria in 'gutsy':
Hi Keith,
I'm ok, thanks for asking.
I am still going to attack Smyrna. Don't worry about me. I would like to
agree a bounce in Trieste but as long as you don't ask me to move Ven-Tri
I won't move like that. I would benefit of Ven-Tri bounce 'cause that
would give Adam the picture that I am trying to attack you. But like I
said if you don't want me to move to Tri, I won't. At the moment I haven't
been able to get the idea what Adam is about to do. As long as I don't say
the words Adam wants me to say (i.e. that I attack Austria) he won't tell
me his intentions.
Your answer of my AGF question did not help. I am still paranoid. How
could you be more AGI than AGF when you don't reply to my opening press to
both of AG? I hope my fears are wrong. You asked if there's a way to ease
my fears. Yes there is, I would like you to be more open with your
intentions. I do understand _your_ fears, but still I hope you could tell
me what you are doing. I hope I have showed my goodwill towards you. I
hope my supported attack against Smyrna will proove that I am on your
side. I haven't decided if I'll convoy Tun-Smy or Aeg-Smy. What would you
prefer and why? Please do not take it personally if I attack with the
other unit that you would prefer.
Has Steve talked you of AIG?
I am worried of the fact that FG can beat E very fast. If FG will last I
am the one who'll face France. So I will rather try to work with you than
RT who are asking me to attack you. I would like to be able to show Adam
that I am 'working' with him via Ven-Tri to get him to share me his
intentions. So if there is any chance that you could spare a bounce in Tri
I'd like to hear of it. If you do not clearly say that you want me to move
to Trieste I won't move there.
Raine
From - Mon Oct 15 17:09:59 2001
Message from rkarjala at mail.student.oulu.fi as Italy to Russia in 'gutsy':
Hi Adam,
I do not have a solution to our problem :-( I know I have been a little
inflexible. I still think that I have not been unfriendly against you. I
have always said to you what I am going to do. I have played open game and
I would like to continue that way.
I want to be your friend and ally. I am thinking of RI as one. It means no
drawback for us if I try to get Smyrna and if you keep Con. I want to show
you that I can live with the dispand. So I attack Smyrna and you do what
you want to do. My point is that even when I am inflexible I still want
to be your ally. I hope you will appreciate the fact of knowing what
I am going to do. I hope you appreriate it enough to let me be your ally.
I know that I might need to dispand, it depends on you.
My fear at the moment is AFG alliance. I have no proof but somehow I read
it between the lines (I know I am not good at this). It is a fact that FG
will crush E fast. If FG continue their alliance after that it means
troubles for us RI. Feel free to say that I am coward if I do not attack
Austria now, I just feel that I don't want to fight Austria while there is
a fast growing France behind me.
I leave my destiny to your hands. I hope you think me as worth allying
with even when I am inflexible. I hope you appreciate the fack of knowing
what is going to happend in neighbourhood of Italy.
While I don't know your intentions I'll support myself to Smyrna and
keep it neutral otherwise.
Raine
From - Mon Oct 15 17:10:04 2001
Message from pre at dalliance.net as Russia to Italy in 'gutsy':
> I know that I might need to dispand, it depends on you.
I suspect that (A)Bul-Con will cut the support anyway and
(B)I can find better things to do with A Con that give
a useless support so I almost certainly won't be going
though with that threat.
I still think you should at least try to get into Tri
and convoy across to Gre while you try for Smy.
> My fear at the moment is AFG alliance.
Simply isn't one. Even FG itself isn't very strong, Steve
is talking to me about ways we can make England disapear
quickly so that he can get a good start on France. Germany
doesn't want to build all those fleets and then end up
just taking StP before he has to use an army, he wants
to attack a power with lots of costal provinces like France as
soon as he can.
> It is a fact that FG will crush E fast.
Probably this is true, but we wouldn't be far behind with
finishing off Keith if you'd just start NOW and Eric
going to be at nothing in no time at all.
> If FG continue their alliance after that it means
> troubles for us RI. Feel free to say that I am coward if I do not attack
> Austria now, I just feel that I don't want to fight Austria while there is
> a fast growing France behind me.
You must be the judge, but if France comes I'd have thought you'd
be better off with the extra supply centers that attacking Austria
will give. You are going to get at MOST, the ABSOLUTE LIMIT one
more supply center from Eric. Smy. Then possibly calim Con back.
Two two of them together are only one build from your current
unit position. You need a target and you need one now.
> While I don't know your intentions I'll support myself to Smyrna and
> keep it neutral otherwise.
I wish you'd try for Gre and Tri at the same time, at the
very least.
Adam.............
From - Mon Oct 15 17:10:05 2001
Message from rkarjala at mail.student.oulu.fi as Italy to Germany in 'gutsy':
Hi Steve,
Looking good for you. To my eyes your position is the strongest at the
moment. It seems like my hope for EG did not happen. Not that I have
something against FG. I only hope that you are willing to hold France
after you have finished England. I have a feeling that west will resolve
way before east and that means trouble to me if you don't turn against
France. You still have a good line from Belgium to Munich.
I feel a bit lonely at the moment in gutsy. Or should I say a little
unsure of people and thier intentions. I know I did not get response to my
GAI proposal. Would you like to comment that?
I'd like to ask your view of the benefits of GIA and GIR. I think those
two are the triples we could think of at the moment. Which one would you
prefer and why? I have a feeling that Germany and Italy are in a way
natural allies at the moment.
Raine
From - Mon Oct 15 17:10:14 2001
Message from rkarjala at mail.student.oulu.fi as Italy to Russia in 'gutsy':
Hi Adam,
> I suspect that (A)Bul-Con will cut the support anyway and
> (B)I can find better things to do with A Con that give
> a useless support so I almost certainly won't be going
> though with that threat.
I am sure you can find something better to do with it. Nevertheless I am
willing to believe you if you say that you will support Smyrna. I honestly
believe that RI will benefit from acting by my priorities. I admit I am
selfish, indeed BUT my plan is there for you too. In the end it helps you
also. It is my benefit to see strong Russia especially to go against quick
resolving west. I cannot find the words now but I know that I sound like
the world's most stubborn person to you. I know I am not flexible and I
keep saying the same things over and over again. Still, my goal has always
been to keep you informed and to make ground for our original plan.
> Simply isn't one. Even FG itself isn't very strong, Steve
> is talking to me about ways we can make England disapear
> quickly so that he can get a good start on France. Germany
> doesn't want to build all those fleets and then end up
> just taking StP before he has to use an army, he wants
> to attack a power with lots of costal provinces like France as
> soon as he can.
Three fleets ain't much for Germany. Building more will reveal his
intentions but at the moment I think Steve has doors open to do what he
wants.
You have been the one I have talked the most, so you must know that I have
had only limited time for gutsy. I do not know what are the alliances at
the moment or I don't have a clear view of it. So I would like to ask you
of the possible triples we could form together? By looking the map only I
think there are 2 possibilities: RIG and RIE (you might say RIF but I'd
hate to be in the middle). Do you have time to give me your comments on
the possibility of these triples?
Here is mine:
RIE
- England is in danger to fall quicly so this might not be a good idea.
- possible conflicts in north(?)
+ none of us is in the middle
+ each of us has a separate way of expansion
- if England survives the FG attack EI both have a desire to build fleets
RGI
- RG are usually thought as enemies.
+ Germany is in the middle :-)
+ We could create a buffer between us in Tyr,Boh,Sil,Pru easy to see if
one is violating it
+ From the start I have had the feeling that RG relations are good.
- Threat to take Berlin
+ The way you 'gave up' Berlin
+ each of us has a separate way of expansion
For your information, I have asked from Steve what he thinks of RIG triple
alliance. So far, no answer. I asked in the sidenote not as detailed as
from you. I have almost forgot that Steve is there... I try to say that I
haven't talked much to him. So, I mentioned the possibility of GIR to have
something to say to him.
Raine
From - Mon Oct 15 17:10:15 2001
Message from pre at dalliance.net as Russia to Italy in 'gutsy':
> It is my benefit to see strong Russia especially to go against quick
> resolving west. I cannot find the words now but I know that I sound like
> the world's most stubborn person to you. I know I am not flexible and I
> keep saying the same things over and over again. Still, my goal has always
> been to keep you informed and to make ground for our original plan.
You wanted Eric dead, seems to me you have that now even though
I personally would rather have all seven players alive right
up until someone hits eighteen. I'm a balance of power player
and I like to keep the power balanced, that's harder when
there are less players on the board. Anyway, you'll drive
Eric down to two centers this year, I have little doubt about
that even if I do doubt it's the best thing for you.
After you've taken Smy Eric will be on one center and you'll
want another build. You will want Con back, and I could
probably give that up but not until you were commited against
Austria anyway.
>From my point of view, I can't see any reason at all why
you wouldn't move Ven - Tri and Alb-Ion-Gre. They may well
both bounce but it limits Kieth's options and possibly
gets you a center. If I were you I'd have done it eighteen
months ago but you wanted to see Eric dead first. Surely
one SC is the same thing as dead - especially since that
one supply center was agreed to be ultimately Russian -
so with Eric dead you turn on Keith surely?
Still, whatever, I'm come to realize that you're not going to
do what's best for Italy, let alone what's best for
Russia and I'm bored of talking about it really. Let me
know when you finally do think it's time, I won't bother
to ask again.
> So I would like to ask you
> of the possible triples we could form together? By looking the map only I
> think there are 2 possibilities: RIG and RIE (you might say RIF but I'd
> hate to be in the middle). Do you have time to give me your comments on
> the possibility of these triples?
Last year I'd have said RIT without question. The year before I
did say AIR without any question. Right now I don't think we
either need nor can really work with any third player at all.
We take out Austria and then turn West. I mean sure, I'm happy
to work with Germany or England and I'd be happy to work with
France a little if I were Italy but ultimately we know we'd have to
fight 'em.
> For your information, I have asked from Steve what he thinks of RIG triple
> alliance. So far, no answer. I asked in the sidenote not as detailed as
> from you. I have almost forgot that Steve is there... I try to say that I
> haven't talked much to him. So, I mentioned the possibility of GIR to have
> something to say to him.
I was hoping Brent would have talked to me while I was at work
today. The deadline is very close now and I wanted his last word
on stuff up north before I decided what to do. Oh well, I'll
send orders from home in a few hours I guess.
Adam...........
From - Mon Oct 15 17:10:18 2001
Message from pre at dalliance.net as Russia to Germany in 'gutsy':
> Excellent. Just let me know how those negotiations proceed and I'm willing
> to do whatever you want. I'll dive on Norway if you think that will work or
> I'll support you in if you think that is better. In either case, I'll
> probably support Den to hold so the risk on my end is pretty slim. Offhand,
> I think Nth - Nwy is more likely to succeed, but I'll do whatever you want
> here.
Well, I felt that I had to understand exactly what Brent was
intending to do with the unit he didn't have to disband if
he caught Den so I wrote and asked him and he hasn't replied
even though the deadline is in just a few hours. Hopefully
he'll get a press to me and I can confirm the attack in
time for the deadline in which case you can support me
to Nwy this spring since I'll know that Ska is trying to
get into Denmark.
Or he might not, in which case I'll probably just A Swe H
and sit on the fence for a while.
You may need to change your orders at a fairly last minute
if he does write. The deadline is in just under ten hours
but I'll be heading for bed in closer to six.
> I agree. That's the way I see it too. If I do take Norway this fall, I'm
> sure we can swap once Brent loses a center or two. My goal is to get you
> another center in the north so you can be more effective in the south.
I like that goal. Wish Raine wanted to be effective in the
south too.
> Have fun this weekend and respond when you can. Actually I'm a bit envious;
> with two kids under three and a work project *way* behind schedule, my
> social life is a bit curtailed. No scratch that; right now it's just about
> zilch. Poor me. LOL
Ah, you want to get them to give realistic deadlines on
that work thing so you can work a four day week like I
do.
Adam.........
From - Mon Oct 15 17:10:22 2001
Message from brent at epicsystems.com as England to Germany in 'gutsy':
Still no word from you. I'm hoping that you're figuring your actions
will speak louder than your words, but realistically I'm figuring you
probably just ran out of ways to try to convince me that you weren't
attacking me. I hope the silence is not too prolonged though, and that
we will soon be working together more effectively than we have so far in
this game. I just received a message from Raine that he will not be
moving West. He still doesn't realize the threat that exists in an
unopposed France who is about to gain several builds. For both of our
sakes, I hope that you do.
Brent
From - Mon Oct 15 17:10:23 2001
Message from brent at epicsystems.com as England to Italy in 'gutsy':
[To be honest, I think I cannot send units to help you at the moment.]
It is clear from this line that I have failed in my attempt to get you
to see the seriousness of this situation. The units I urged you to send
were not to help me, though that may be a side effect. They were to
protect yourself. You WILL be overrun by French fleets in the Med if
you do not move to defend yourself, I guarantee it.
[I have tried to convince Steve of the benefits of EG alliance from the
beginning. It seems that my talks have had no impact on Steve's play.]
No, not really. Steve plays only for himself, and takes advantage of
any situation he can. The benefits of alliance play are non-existent to
him.
[I advice you to talk to FG to help you out (if my advice is worth
something).]
Um, what? I should talk to FG to help me? Who do you think I need
help against? No, FG are the problem, not the solution.
[Steve might give you a good deal to work with 'cause
Steve's armies are in good position to attack France.]
Correction, Steve's armies WERE in a good position to attack France.
Now he's got some work to do if he wants to go in that direction again.
Best of luck in the East, though without a miracle in the West I don't
see that it will help you much.
Brent
From - Mon Oct 15 17:10:24 2001
Message from brent at epicsystems.com as England to Russia in 'gutsy':
[Doesn't sound like they have any long term plan to me.]
Not really. I think their plan is "Eliminate England, then see where
to go from there."
Thats as long term as I need to worry about. =)
[Well, I'm not too keen on making an enemy out of Steve, especially
while he's offering to do things like leave Sweeden alone]
Steve absolutely will not leave Sweden alone once I am eliminated.
This is what you have to understand. As soon as he has an opening,
meaning I'm out of the way and you're under-defended, he will press
against you. If you think otherwise, you don't know Steve like I do.
[I don't have a unit to spare in
the north so I don't want to take any position at all if
I can help it, at least until I have to do so, or until
it's obviously to my advantage.]
Then I guess my offer is rejected. I don't know what kind of spell
Rod and Steve weave over everyone, but it seems that everybody thinks
that they are their best friends, and will continue to do so right up
until they get brutally stabbed. Raine still thinks hes in no danger
from France too. My hope behind taking Denmark was not necessarily to
hold it, but to swing France into attacking Germany instead. If I don't
remove, and Germany does, suddenly Rod has really got to decide who he's
better off attacking.
[ A Edi isn't going to be doing anything useful during that year anyway]
Huh? Edi is one of my more important units, as its the only thing
allowing me to hold on to Liverpool. If I were to remove it, I would be
dead meat.
[Tell me what exactly you would do AFTER Denmark was taken.]
Lobby like hell for Rod to start attacking Steve. I know he thinks
I'm a more trustworthy ally, he's only been working with Steve because
he made that opening that kind of forced him into doing so. I'd also
continue to pressure Germany with everything I've got, which would at
least keep him off your back for a while. He could retake Denmark next
year, but that would mean he'd most likely lose North Sea in the
process. And if I were to get Denmark, I'd feel a lot safer in letting
you retake St. Petersburg. Otherwise, doing so would cause me to have
to remove another unit that I just can't afford.
I really hope you'll reconsider. If you really think that Steve is
allied with you, perhaps seeing some of the "explanatory" messages I've
gotten from him would change your mind. Even now he's been trying to
get me to throw everything against France, with only a blind hope that
he will join me. Looks like thats the best offer I've got though...
Brent
From - Mon Oct 15 17:10:26 2001
Message from pre at dalliance.net as Russia to England in 'gutsy':
> Steve absolutely will not leave Sweden alone once I am eliminated.
> This is what you have to understand. As soon as he has an opening,
> meaning I'm out of the way and you're under-defended, he will press
> against you. If you think otherwise, you don't know Steve like I do.
Oh, I realise that I have to get some units north eventually,
it's a question of how long I can leave it.
> Raine still thinks hes in no danger from France too.
It's odd you should say that since I only minutes ago
wrote a note to Raine reassuring him that he should
attack Austria with me since France wasn't as big
a worry as Raine was making out.
Raine is a strange fellow indeed though, I have no idea why
it's been so long that I've been saying "Lets attack Asutria"
and he's been saying "No, let's finish off Eric" - even
now and if Eric isn't already finished now I don't know
what the word means.
> [ A Edi isn't going to be doing anything useful during that year anyway]
> Huh? Edi is one of my more important units, as its the only thing
> allowing me to hold on to Liverpool. If I were to remove it, I would be
> dead meat.
Oh, yes, you're right. Sorry, I wasn't thinking straight at all.
I was thinking you'd have just one unit on each of Lon and Liv
and that Rod had to choose which to support into from Wal.
Actually you have two units on Lvp so he'l have to choose Lon.
I still can't think of a better unit to disband than one
of the armies on the British Isles and both are pretty
useless for the fight against Germany (for obvious
reasons).
> Lobby like hell for Rod to start attacking Steve. I know he thinks
> I'm a more trustworthy ally, he's only been working with Steve because
> he made that opening that kind of forced him into doing so.
I'm also working with my least favoured out of a choice between
Raine and Keith. It's hard to attack Italy from here. It's
getting so I'm not so sure I'm working with either of them,
which is pretty scary.
> I'd also
> continue to pressure Germany with everything I've got, which would at
> least keep him off your back for a while. He could retake Denmark next
> year, but that would mean he'd most likely lose North Sea in the
> process. And if I were to get Denmark, I'd feel a lot safer in letting
> you retake St. Petersburg. Otherwise, doing so would cause me to have
> to remove another unit that I just can't afford.
> I really hope you'll reconsider. If you really think that Steve is
> allied with you, perhaps seeing some of the "explanatory" messages I've
> gotten from him would change your mind. Even now he's been trying to
> get me to throw everything against France, with only a blind hope that
> he will join me. Looks like thats the best offer I've got though...
If that's what Steve's saying he's definately lying to you to
get you to turn around. If I were in your position I'd be saying
precicely that to Steve too: That I had no intention of defending
against France at all and that by the time England was dead France
would be on eight or nine centers to Germany's five or six at
best. And I'd go through with it too if I had to.
However, you're right when you say that all I have as a mission
in the north is to delay and keep things fluid and fighting. That's
why I first moved against Germany afterall. And from what I can
tell the best way to make sure you aren't eliminated before I've
got some more force up there to defend myself with is to keep
you alive for a while and give you the use of Swe.
If you confirm recipt of this note before the deadline (I'll be
available for the next four or five hours before I hit bed
and wake up to the moves) I'll order F Swe S F Ska - Den for
you and we'll see if forcing Germany to disband A Mun makes
France decide Bur is in a nice place to attack him from I
guess.
Adam...........
From - Mon Oct 15 17:10:29 2001
Message from pre at dalliance.net as Russia to Germany in 'gutsy':
> Or he might not, in which case I'll probably just A Swe H
> and sit on the fence for a while.
Ah, he wrote to me and gave me a few poor reasons for
the support so I 'caved in' and offered it. Hopefully
you can confirm before I go to bed that you'll order
F Nth S F Swe - Nwy
F Ska will try for Denmark but without the support that
will fail.
You could take F swe this year if you're desperate about
it, but I could really use the power against Keith since
Raine is still being silly and refusing to do the best
for the Italian people, I'd prefer that you leave it
until next year if that's okay.
I won't send the move unless I get your confirmation that
the support will be there though, so that's pretty important.
Adam.......
From - Mon Oct 15 17:10:30 2001
Message from scse at maine.rr.com as Germany to Russia in 'gutsy':
> F Ska will try for Denmark but without the support
> that will fail.
Well done. I will order "nth s swe - nwy". That should give you the
reinforcements you need.
Good luck with Keith.
- Steve
From - Mon Oct 15 17:10:31 2001
Message from brent at epicsystems.com as England to Russia in 'gutsy':
Receipt confirmed, thanks a bunch! Now we just have to hope it has
the desired effect. Either way, I really appreciate the help, and will
certainly remember it when it comes time for St. Petersburg to change
hands.
Brent
From - Mon Oct 15 17:10:35 2001
Message from pre at dalliance.net as Russia to England in 'gutsy':
> Receipt confirmed, thanks a bunch! Now we just have to hope it has
> the desired effect. Either way, I really appreciate the help, and will
> certainly remember it when it comes time for St. Petersburg to change
> hands.
No problem, F Swe S S Ska - Den.
From - Mon Oct 15 17:10:36 2001
Message from pre at dalliance.net as Russia to Germany in 'gutsy':
> Well done. I will order "nth s swe - nwy". That should give you the
> reinforcements you need.
Yeah, the coordination here has been last minute but
surprisingly effective. If you two could take more from
me conbined than seperated then I'd suspect a conspiracy
it's gone so well.
> Good luck with Keith.
Thanks. Good luck yourself,
Adam..........
From - Mon Oct 15 21:23:17 2001
Message from scse at maine.rr.com as Germany to Turkey in 'gutsy':
Hi Eric,
> Ouch, I guess you think I am dead... 8-)
LOL. I didn't mean to imply you were out by sending you an EoY. Really, I
didn't. I just thought it would restart some talk between us.
> If you had reservations, I wish that you had raised them to
> me privately. We could have worked together to address them.
Excellent point; I appreciate the reminder that there are reasonable people
out there willing to talk these things through. Will do in the future.
> I proposed the WT as much to save you as to save me.
I recognize that and I thank you for your intention.
> The WT is risky for Germany, but with appropriate restrictions and
> precautions, it CAN be very good for Germany. (I can send you the game
> history, if you're interested.)
I would love to see it. I've had two email experiences with the triple,
once as an EFT three-way (me England) and once as a German elimination.
> *chuckle* Never assume that a Diplomacy player is completely honest!
I didn't, the key word was 'brutally'. :)
If there's anything I can do for you, please write. I'm willing to help as
best I can.
- Steve
From - Mon Oct 15 21:23:21 2001
Message from keith at alumni.caltech.edu as Austria to Italy in 'gutsy':
> I am still going to attack Smyrna. Don't worry about me. I would like to
> agree a bounce in Trieste but as long as you don't ask me to move Ven-Tri
> I won't move like that. I would benefit of Ven-Tri bounce 'cause that
> would give Adam the picture that I am trying to attack you. But like I
> said if you don't want me to move to Tri, I won't. At the moment I haven't
> been able to get the idea what Adam is about to do. As long as I don't say
> the words Adam wants me to say (i.e. that I attack Austria) he won't tell
> me his intentions.
Hi, if you really want to move to Trieste, that is fine with me. I don't
understand what benefit you'll get from it, though. Unless you tell
Russia that you rae attacking me, why would he think you are attacking me
just because you moved to Trieste and didn't attack me elsewhere?
> Your answer of my AGF question did not help. I am still paranoid. How
> could you be more AGI than AGF when you don't reply to my opening press to
> both of AG?
Germany has said he is not going to attack Russia right now, and in fact
I've had little conversation with Germany since then. He is
concentrating on the EFG problem. Like I said, as far as I know he is
allied with France, but I don't know how long this will last. Since he
is not attacking Russia, I have little in common with Germany. I've told
him that I wouldn't attack Munich last turn, and that has been about it.
> I hope my fears are wrong. You asked if there's a way to ease
> my fears. Yes there is, I would like you to be more open with your
> intentions. I do understand _your_ fears, but still I hope you could tell
> me what you are doing. I hope I have showed my goodwill towards you. I
> hope my supported attack against Smyrna will proove that I am on your
> side. I haven't decided if I'll convoy Tun-Smy or Aeg-Smy. What would you
> prefer and why? Please do not take it personally if I attack with the
> other unit that you would prefer.
I would prefer to keep my moves secret. I hope you don't mind. This
way, if Russia outguesses me, you won't have to worry about my blaming
you for leaking the information. Plus, our units can move independently
this turn, and there is no need to coordinate our moves. If you have
some need for the information about exactly which moves I will make, I
can certainly tell you, of course, but it doesn't seem to me like there
are any moves I could make that would cause you much concern. Am I wrong
about that, or why are you so curious?
As for how exactly you take Smyrna, I have no strong opinion. Convoying
the army looks like the stronger move to me, and it should allow you to
conquer Turkey with less outside assistance.
> Has Steve talked you of AIG?
No. Like I said, Germany has not mentioned any coordinated effort with
me about anything. I am guessing that he hopes that Russia and Austria
will keep each other occupied so that he doesn't have to worry about
either of us while he gains the upper hand against England and/or France.
> I am worried of the fact that FG can beat E very fast. If FG will last I
> am the one who'll face France. So I will rather try to work with you than
> RT who are asking me to attack you. I would like to be able to show Adam
> that I am 'working' with him via Ven-Tri to get him to share me his
> intentions. So if there is any chance that you could spare a bounce in Tri
> I'd like to hear of it. If you do not clearly say that you want me to move
> to Trieste I won't move there.
Yes, it is not clear to me what Germany will do if he and France remain
allied after England is gone. Perhaps you can convince him to attack
France if you are willing to join in, I don't know.
As far as I'm concerned, Russia's intentions do not matter to me. He has
clearly shown that he is hostile towards me, and I'll believe this until
I have evidence otherwise. I am sure he would like you to attack me.
That would make his job easier, for sure. But I think he is bluffing
when he says that he would support Smy in place. That would be foolhardy
on his part.
I am not concerned that you will attack me. First, there is nothing I
can really do about it if you decide to work with Russia. Second, I
think you realize that you are not in a safe position until it is clear
that Turkey is neutralized. Russia and Turkey seem to have worked
together, though I don't know if Russia plans to follow through. If you
support the players to the East of me rather than Austria, your neighbor,
th next scenario will involve the eastern players moving west towards you
rather than my moving east away from you. There is no worse position for
Italy to be in than to be crushed between France moving east and Russia
and/or Turkey moving west.
Let's keep in touch.
Austria
From - Mon Oct 15 21:41:05 2001
Message from bwarner34 at home.com as England to Turkey in 'gutsy':
Quite the interesting turn its been. Rod is already making offers to me
about what will happen when I'm down to two centers. Steve tried to
convince me to throw all my forces at France, then went completely silent
since last Wednesday after I told him that I wouldn't trust him until he
made a move against Rod. Adam had repetedly scolded me for taking St.
Petersburg, but at least he has realized that hes got more important things
to worry about than punishing me for it. Whether he'll actually let me hold
on to it for a while is another story. Keith has been his usual silent
self, his only advice to me being that Germany is in a very strong position
and will likely keep working with France (duh!) Raine as always is refusing
to act in his own best interest by attacking Rod. I don't know what you did
to that guy to make him want to eliminate you so much. And then there's
you, who has gotten noticably more quiet (at least with me) since falling to
two centers and predicting my demise. I was at least expecting some more
predictions (most likely correct) about how my end was going to come.
Anyways, hope things are going OK for you and that there is still hope that
the witches will rise again someday.
Brent
From - Mon Oct 15 23:33:30 2001
Message from scse at maine.rr.com as Germany to England in 'gutsy':
Hi Brent,
I hope you're doing well and I wish you the best of luck with your moves.
I hope to talk some more later. Thanks for writing.
- Steve
From - Mon Oct 15 23:33:32 2001
Message from bwarner34 at home.com as England to Germany in 'gutsy':
Hehe. Why Steve, I think that may be the first letter ever where you
haven't tried to convince me to do something for you! ;-) Just kidding.
Its good to hear that your silence has been self imposed and that you
haven't lost touch with the game. I've seldom heard of experienced players
using the "silent treatment" before so it will be interesting to hear your
reasoning behind it when you do decide to break the silence. As for talking
more later, I certainly hope your moves will give us something to talk
about!
Brent
From - Tue Oct 16 18:49:12 2001
:: Judge: NZMB Game: Gutsy Variant: Standard
:: Deadline: F1903M Tue Oct 16 2001 20:00:00 +1300
Movement results for Fall of 1903. (gutsy.009)
Austria: Army Bulgaria -> Serbia.
Austria: Army Galicia -> Rumania. (*bounce*)
Austria: Fleet Albania -> Greece.
Austria: Army Vienna -> Trieste.
Austria: Army Budapest SUPPORT Army Bulgaria -> Serbia.
England: Army London HOLD. (*dislodged*)
England: Fleet Norway -> North Sea. (*bounce, dislodged*)
England: Fleet Skagerrak -> Denmark. (*bounce*)
England: Fleet North Atlantic Ocean SUPPORT Army Edinburgh -> Liverpool.
England: Army Edinburgh -> Liverpool.
France: Army Gascony HOLD.
France: Army Wales SUPPORT German Army Belgium -> London.
France: Fleet English Channel CONVOY German Army Belgium -> London.
France: Army Burgundy -> Belgium.
France: Fleet Irish Sea -> Liverpool. (*bounce*)
Germany: Army Belgium -> English Channel -> London.
Germany: Army Ruhr -> Holland.
Germany: Fleet Denmark SUPPORT Russian Fleet Sweden. (*void*)
Germany: Army Munich HOLD.
Germany: Fleet North Sea SUPPORT Russian Fleet Sweden -> Norway.
Germany: Fleet Helgoland Bight SUPPORT Fleet Denmark.
Italy: Army Tunis -> Ionian Sea -> Aegean Sea -> Smyrna.
Italy: Army Venice HOLD.
Italy: Fleet Aegean Sea CONVOY Army Tunis -> Smyrna.
Italy: Fleet Eastern Mediterranean SUPPORT Army Tunis -> Smyrna.
Italy: Fleet Ionian Sea CONVOY Army Tunis -> Smyrna.
Russia: Army Serbia -> Budapest. (*bounce, dislodged*)
Russia: Army Ukraine -> Rumania. (*bounce*)
Russia: Fleet Constantinople SUPPORT Fleet Rumania -> Bulgaria (east coast).
Russia: Fleet Sweden -> Norway.
Russia: Fleet Rumania -> Bulgaria (east coast).
Russia: Army Warsaw -> Galicia. (*bounce*)
Turkey: Army Smyrna SUPPORT Russian Fleet Constantinople. (*cut, dislodged*)
Turkey: Fleet Ankara SUPPORT Russian Fleet Constantinople.
The following units were dislodged:
The English Army in London can retreat to Yorkshire.
The English Fleet in Norway can retreat to Norwegian Sea or Barents Sea or St
Petersburg (north coast).
The Russian Army in Serbia can retreat to Albania.
The Turkish Army in Smyrna can retreat to Syria or Armenia.
The next phase of 'gutsy' will be Retreats for Fall of 1903.
The deadline for orders will be Wed Oct 17 2001 19:00:59 +1300.
From - Tue Oct 16 18:49:17 2001
Message from Elladan915 at netzero.net as Turkey to England in 'gutsy':
Hi Brent,
> Raine as always is refusing to act in his own best interest by attacking
> Rod. I don't know what you did to that guy to make him want to
> eliminate you so much.
It's either fear of my JDPR, or the fact that I correct his English, as he
requested. I've worked damn hard to convince him that IT and EIT
would work, and even opened against Russia as he requested, but he's
been in Lepanto mode from Day One.
> And then there's you, who has gotten noticably more quiet (at least
> with me) since falling to two centers and predicting my demise.
There comes a point where repeating the same things over and over
becomes email harrassment, rather than negotiation. 8-) Raine isn't
listening, EFG aren't listening, Keith isn't talking OR listening, and it
only takes a letter or three to coordinate with Adam, so I've been
focussing on 'titleist'.
> I was at least expecting some more predictions (most likely correct)
> about how my end was going to come.
With a Russian Fleet in Nwy, a German Army in Lon, a French Army
in Wal, and French Fleets in Iri and ECh, I see no point in rubbing your
nose in it. I did get a note from Steve indicating that he never liked or
really worked toward the WT idea, though, so you may have been right
to take Lon. I still believe that building F Lvp destroyed any chance you
may have had for allying with France, though.
Eric.
From - Tue Oct 16 18:49:23 2001
Message from pre at dalliance.net as Russia to Master in 'gutsy':
END OF YEAR STATEMENT
----------------------
I spent the whole year trying to talk Italy into attacking
Austria and I still don't understand why he didn't. I tried
every trick I knew, even the classic Gunboat Diplomacy of
taking his center and trying to force him into attacking
Austria since he'd disband if he didn't get it. Nothing.
Not even a glimmer.
Why? He won't say. He keeps on about following the 'original
plan' - by which I assume he means my press in S1901. As
if I believed it would really work out like that. Besides,
it more or less HAS worked out like that: Turkey was
almost dead and we swtiched to Austria just before he
was dead and while Austria wasn't expecting it. Only
he didn't switch and shows no signs of doing so. Why
does he want to knock another player out so badly?
Is he playing for a draw? Knocking players out so that
you're left with nothing but three or four strong players
is a good way to chase a draw but I'd sooner grow and
then have to fight six three center powers than grow
and be confronted by one seventeen center power. Ouch.
Anyway, no real diplomatic progress down in the south,
the player I've been getting on best with has been knocked
down to one center in fact. Ouch. At least I'm going to
be actively fighting against Raine over Con now unless
he jumps into Austria. If he refuses to take Gre then
I refuse to hand over Con. Point blank. I'll probably
leave Ank around for a while too, no rush to take it -
I'll only look bigger if I do and Early Leader syndrome
could start to prove problematical as it is. Always
a danger for Russia.
In the north I got press from each of Steve and Brent at
a fairly last minute both asking for my support against
the other. I agreed to both, but with some argument for
the sake of looking realistic, then used the info I had
on Brent against him by getting Steve to support me to
Norway. Again I'm borrowing supply centers here - I'll
have to pay for Norway with Swe at some point. Still,
Steve has promised to try and help me get StP whereas
Brent's best offer was to help him get Denmark which
would keep him alive for a while. Better to take the
centers and work on my own defence I think. Norway and
StP are a more natural coupling than Swe and StP anyway,
especially if Germany has Den and the other one of the
group.
This leads us into the next year. GOALS: Take a supply center
from Austria and continue to try and get Raine to do so too.
In the south I'd kinda like to get a second unit up there
and claim StP but I'm in not rush there, we have a couple of
years. The important thing now is making sure Brent can't
take any revenge attacks on me, I think he's in enough trouble
that this shouldn't be an issue.
Adam............
From - Tue Oct 16 18:49:24 2001
Message from pre at dalliance.net as Russia to England in 'gutsy':
> Germany: Fleet North Sea SUPPORT Russian Fleet Sweden -> Norway.
> Russia: Fleet Sweden -> Norway.
Sorry about that, I decided it was all over for you basically
and that propping you up for a little longer probably wouldn't
give me the time I'd need to sure up the north - especially
without StP. Steve was offering to help me get StP plus
whichever of Nwy and Swe I wanted which was a better offer
than trying to get you into Denmark in the end.
Yes, I know it's dangerous, I have to have two or three
units in the north by the time you're completely wiped out
and get the diplomacy right so that Rod and Steve fight
each other. Hopefully I'm up to the task, though more
than I'd like still depends on Raine admitedly.
Adam..........
From - Tue Oct 16 18:49:27 2001
Message from bwarner34 at home.com as England to Russia in 'gutsy':
[Sorry about that, I decided it was all over for you basically]
The wonders of the self-fulfilling prophecy...
[Steve was offering to help me get StP plus
whichever of Nwy and Swe I wanted which was a better offer
than trying to get you into Denmark in the end.]
Of course, he won't follow through, but its nice to know that I'm not the
only one who occasionally fell for Steve's rhetoric.
[Yes, I know it's dangerous, I have to have two or three
units in the north by the time you're completely wiped out
and get the diplomacy right so that Rod and Steve fight
each other.]
Good luck, you've now got me to contend with as well. Those Northern
units are the only ones I can defend, and I intend to do so.
Brent
From - Tue Oct 16 18:49:28 2001
Message from bwarner34 at home.com as England to France in 'gutsy':
We should talk about removals, I have some ideas for where they should be
but want to clear them with you first.
Brent
From - Tue Oct 16 18:49:31 2001
:: Judge: NZMB Game: Gutsy Variant: Standard
:: Deadline: F1903R Wed Oct 17 2001 19:00:59 +1300
Retreat orders for Fall of 1903. (gutsy.010)
England: Army London -> Yorkshire.
England: Fleet Norway -> St Petersburg (north coast).
Russia: Army Serbia -> Albania.
Turkey: Army Smyrna -> Syria.
Ownership of supply centers:
Austria: Budapest, Greece, Serbia, Trieste, Vienna.
England: Edinburgh, Liverpool, St Petersburg.
France: Belgium, Brest, Marseilles, Paris, Portugal, Spain.
Germany: Berlin, Denmark, Holland, Kiel, London, Munich.
Italy: Naples, Rome, Smyrna, Tunis, Venice.
Russia: Bulgaria, Constantinople, Moscow, Norway, Rumania, Sevastopol,
Sweden, Warsaw.
Turkey: Ankara.
Austria: 5 Supply centers, 5 Units: Builds 0 units.
England: 3 Supply centers, 5 Units: Removes 2 units.
France: 6 Supply centers, 5 Units: Builds 1 unit.
Germany: 6 Supply centers, 6 Units: Builds 0 units.
Italy: 5 Supply centers, 5 Units: Builds 0 units.
Russia: 8 Supply centers, 6 Units: Builds 2 units.
Turkey: 1 Supply center, 2 Units: Removes 1 unit.
The next phase of 'gutsy' will be Adjustments for Winter of 1903.
The deadline for orders will be Thu Oct 18 2001 01:11:17 +1300.
From - Tue Oct 16 18:49:32 2001
Message from rodspade at acm.org,rodney.spade at philips.com as France to England in
'gutsy':
Brent,
> We should talk about removals, I have some ideas for where they should be
> but want to clear them with you first.
What do you have in mind?
Rod
From - Tue Oct 16 18:49:34 2001
Message from rodspade at acm.org,rodney.spade at philips.com as France to Germany in
'gutsy':
Steve,
Brent's disbands will have a big impact on our strategy for 1904, but if there's
something we can start discussing right away, that's fine with me.
I haven't really thought about my build yet. Do you have a preference?
Rod
From - Tue Oct 16 18:49:33 2001
Message from rodspade at acm.org,rodney.spade at philips.com as France to Russia in
'gutsy':
Adam,
Congratulations on your growth! Your hold on your new territories looks tenuous,
but your builds will be a big help.
Rod
From - Tue Oct 16 18:49:36 2001
Message from rodspade at acm.org,rodney.spade at philips.com as France to Italy in
'gutsy':
Raine,
Did you and Russia come to agreement, or was he just jerking us around when he said
he'd support Smy?
Rod
From - Tue Oct 16 18:49:37 2001
Message from rodspade at acm.org,rodney.spade at philips.com as France to Austria in
'gutsy':
Keith,
Russia's growth is worrisome, but I think as long as Italy stays on your side you'll
be OK.
Rod
From - Tue Oct 16 18:49:38 2001
Message from rodspade at acm.org,rodney.spade at philips.com as France to Turkey in
'gutsy':
Eric,
I think Adam had originally intended to support you in Smy, but then he waffled.
Regardless, you might be able to survive in Ank for a while, but a comeback seems
like a long shot.
Good luck!
Rod
From - Tue Oct 16 18:49:39 2001
Message from rkarjala at mail.student.oulu.fi as Italy to France in 'gutsy':
Hi Rod,
Congratulations for the build! FG seems to roll E in a second. Good work.
I wish I could tell you about my good work... At least I do not have to
dispand.
> Did you and Russia come to agreement, or was he just jerking us around when he
> said he'd support Smy?
He insisted to support Smyrna. It was only few hours (can't recall
excatly) before the deadline that Adam told me that he might not support
Smyrna to hold.
Raine
Ps. Could you build somewhere else than Mar, please?
From - Tue Oct 16 18:49:40 2001
Message from pre at dalliance.net as Russia to France in 'gutsy':
> Congratulations on your growth!
And you on yours, I wasn't expecting a convoy over to London
at all let alone a German army on the end of it but it shows
that you and Steve are starting to get into the stride of
it and are cooperating well. A frightening thought to me
who's having trouble even getting Raine to talk let alone
help me out.
> Your hold on your new territories looks tenuous, but your
> builds will be a big help.
Tenuous indeed, I'm still having to do most of my defense work
through the ancient art of diplomacy and blind hope. These
two mystical practices are helpful when done properly but
they'll only take you so far. An extra unit in the north
is going to be useful with any luck, if I can get it past
StP and Swe is destined to become German anyway so no big
deal trying to hold that one.
It's the south that still worries me. My favourite of the
three other players down here is now down to only one supply
center, looks like he'll be out before even Brent. Poor
Eric. Yet Raine was still insisting last fall that he
couldn't afford to attack Austria until Eric was dead.
Maybe NOW he'll realize that Eric is already dead and
finally come to my rescue to help me out a little
here. I'm not that optimistic but he has to give up
on Eric eventually doesn't he?
I could do with a year out to just improve my position
but I'd lose quite a bit of momentum if I did that. I
guess we'll have to see what everyone is thinking again.
And how about your plans for the future? There's only Lvp
and Edi left in the English Mainland and Liverpool is
pretty much guarenteed to you this spring so you'll be
looking elsewhere after that.
I could be more direct use to you if you decided to start
taking German supply centers, and giving Italy a little
more time to rescue me in Austria would be nice so
far as I'm concerned too. Italy does look fairly open
though, are we going to see a F Mar this winter? I
hope not, that would scare Raine and I'd never see
an Austrian attack from him then.
Adam.........
From - Tue Oct 16 18:49:43 2001
Message from rodspade at acm.org,rodney.spade at philips.com as France to Italy in
'gutsy':
Raine,
> Ps. Could you build somewhere else than Mar, please?
Of course! :-)
Rod
From - Tue Oct 16 18:49:50 2001
Message from rkarjala at mail.student.oulu.fi as Italy to France in 'gutsy':
Hi Rod,
> Of course! :-)
Thanks! :-)
Raine
From - Tue Oct 16 18:50:05 2001
Message from brent at epicsystems.com as England to Germany in 'gutsy':
So now that the turn is over, and I'm on my way out, you can confess,
right? You had no intention of attacking English Channel ever, nor
probably of letting me have Sweden. It was just another attempt to
"confuse and put off-balance". Unfortunately, I've been in a position
throughout this game of being good enough to know I was in trouble, but
not good enough to be able to do somehting about it. Oh well, got any
more amusing offers you'd like to make?
Brent
From - Tue Oct 16 18:50:16 2001
Message from brent at epicsystems.com as England to France in 'gutsy':
My thoughts were to remove NAO and Lvp. Yor can still be helpful in
defending Edi from Germany, as well as helping you to take London from
him (if you so desire...) . And the two Scandanavian units are
important if I'm going to setup my "home away from home" there.
Obviously, if you want to keep me alive to serve you, you're going to
need to help me out by waiting to capture my home centers until doing so
will not cause me to remove and have to slip away. With Russia already
at 8 and growing, I would think that it is definitely in your interest
to help me act as a speed-bump against him. What do you think?
Brent
From - Tue Oct 16 18:50:23 2001
Message from rodspade at acm.org,rodney.spade at philips.com as France to England in
'gutsy':
Brent,
> My thoughts were to remove NAO and Lvp.
Sounds good.
> Yor can still be helpful in
> defending Edi from Germany, as well as helping you to take London from
> him (if you so desire...) .
It can also convoy somewhere, if that becomes useful.
> And the two Scandanavian units are
> important if I'm going to setup my "home away from home" there.
Definitely. Those units can cause quite a bit of havoc over there. :-)
> Obviously, if you want to keep me alive to serve you, you're going to
> need to help me out by waiting to capture my home centers until doing so
> will not cause me to remove and have to slip away.
You're right. I don't want to give you *too* long of a leash, but we can accomplish
a lot more if you're healthy.
Rod
From - Tue Oct 16 18:50:28 2001
Message from rodspade at acm.org,rodney.spade at philips.com as France to Russia in
'gutsy':
Adam,
> I could be more direct use to you if you decided to start
> taking German supply centers
I think that when the time comes, we should attack Germany together. Neither of us
is in a great position to pummel him alone, but if we squeeze him between us then he
won't be able to defend all his fronts. However, a German compaign requires that you
first achieve either success or peace in Austria. Hopefully that will be resolved
quickly.
> and giving Italy a little
> more time to rescue me in Austria would be nice so
> far as I'm concerned too. Italy does look fairly open
> though, are we going to see a F Mar this winter?
I will not build in Mar. I intend to leave Italy alone.
Rod
From - Tue Oct 16 18:50:30 2001
Message from scse at maine.rr.com as Germany to Master in 'gutsy':
===***===***===***===
Gutsy - Germany - EOY 1903
The builds for 1902 are in and the press is really flying, but I thought I
would take the time to get centered and start my EoY statement. Putting my
thoughts to paper (or bits and bytes as it were) really helps. Here goes:
Not out of the woods yet, but F'02 went very well. My only regret is that I
think my hedges cancelled each other out; one set of English moves killed
the value of both hol - nth and den - swe. I would have been much better
off supporting Holland into the North Sea. Monday morning quarterback...
At first glance, I'm thrilled to have gotten a build and the east is a
chaotic mess; looks like grandma's patchwork. Problem is...with R deep into
A, the east might resolve more quickly than I think; A Ser kind of forces
the issue. The funny part about this situation is that I think Adam's
erratic '02 moves and Raine's inflexible negotiating style might force an
AT. Short-term, that's excellent; long-term, I'm not so sure.
If I were a betting man, I'd say Adam loses Serbia and Raine loses Con. On
the plus side, Raine has a free spring convoy into Albania so Greece might
become Italian territory. That's the next commit I think I need (RT fleet
builds was the first, Rum - Ser was the second).
My plan for '03 is FG all the way. I'm a little concerned about Belgium and
Denmark, but not that much. I will probably order a spring attack on the
North Sea, but I'm just as willing to hold off a season. Or if Brent comes
through with a good plan, I could turn on Rod; it's unlikely France will
quite this vulnerable for a while.
The big question I'm wrestling with is: "How important is it for me to get
another center this year?" A French center is only possible if I know
Brent's working with me, but I'm afraid that won't happen. That leaves
Norway or Sweden...or maybe I'll use Adam to whittle down Brent. That's the
most tempting option because it gives Adam a build which must be used in the
south and sort of takes Scandanavia hostage. Question 2 is: "Will Adam
turn around yet another time?"
That's what I'm thinking right now; more later I hope.
===***===***===***===
Spring and Fall results are in and builds/disbands are due soon.
After the spring turn, Brent and I just weren't seeing eye to eye. Rod's
deceived him three times now and Adam just snagged Norway. All I did was
take the North Sea, but for some reason it feels like *I've* gotten the
brunt of Brent's wrath. I'm not exactly sure why that is, but it makes it
very unlikely for us to cooperate at all the rest of the game and forces me
to eliminate him as quickly as possible.
Brent's disbands are the most important thing for me right now. Rod's build
is really irrelevant; it's what he does with it next year that really
matters to me.
From - Tue Oct 16 18:50:48 2001
Message from scse at maine.rr.com as Germany to France in 'gutsy':
Hi Rod,
I think that worked out very well for both of us; equal at six centers with
our neighbors committed in the other direction is a good position for FG.
I have no idea what I would disband if I were in Brent's shoes; he doesn't
have a lot of good choices. Since adjustments are due tomorrow morning,
it's probably not worth the "what if" effort.
Adam's builds should be pretty routine, A Sev and A Mos. But, I would love
to see F Sev; that would commit him even more to the south which would give
me an easier time in Scandanavia/StPet plus it would keep Raine tied up.
I'll try encouraging that unless I get a quick negative from you.
Regarding builds, the best thing for an FG is the semblance of tension, but
nothing too threatening. I think a build in Marseilles is way too
premature. I really don't want to see an army in Paris, but A Brest just
looks silly. So...I suggest F Brest; I bet you already decided that, right?
:)
In the spring, you can order Bre - Mao without angering Raine too much and
without threatening me too much. That seems like a good balanced position.
Write when you can.
- Steve
From - Tue Oct 16 22:46:53 2001
Message from keith at alumni.caltech.edu as Austria to Master in 'gutsy':
Austria's 1903 EOY Statement
I was surprised to see Turkey support Russia into Constantinople in the
Spring. Italy apparently stayed on my side this year, but I don't know
whether he has something cooking with Russia or not. I can't believe
that Russia would be dumb enough to attack Italy and me at the same
time. This makes me suspicious that Italy and Russia worked it out
against Turkey.
Italy convoyed an army to Turkey. This gives him some power in attacking
Turkey, but it also allows him to use his fleets against Greece if he
wants. I think if Italy is going to attack me, he will do it soon.
Turkey is all but gone now.
I have some hope. First, Russia's unit placement is not very effective
against me. I should be able to destroy his army in Albania. Second,
Italy might think twice about attacking me. True he could get Greece,
but this would make Russia all that much more powerful. With Germany not
attacking Russia, Russia would be likely to get most of my supply
centers. Third, Germany and France are cooperating against England for
now. This might cause some concern for Italy that France will start
coming south.
I am not sure what Germany is up to. He helped both Russia and France
this turn. He is going to have to attack someone soon. If he attacks
France, I am in trouble. Russia is not going to slow down any time soon
then. He should be able to get Stp back easily.
So, my mission for the coming year, should I choose to accept it, is to
convince Germany to attack Russia and to keep Italy onside. The third
objective is to get Russia to withdraw peacefully, but I don't think this
will happen unless objectives 1 and 2 are met first.
Austria
From - Wed Oct 17 18:28:53 2001
Message from rodspade at acm.org,rodney.spade at philips.com as France to England in
'gutsy':
Brent,
I wonder now if it might be better to retain NAO and disband StP
instead. It would cede StP to Russia, but with his builds he can
probably retake it anyway. The benefit of F NAO is that it can
immediately move to Nwg, which gives you leverage on Edi, Nth, and Nwy.
It's a much more versatile unit than F StP.
Rod
From - Wed Oct 17 18:28:55 2001
Message from rodspade at acm.org,rodney.spade at philips.com as France to Germany in
'gutsy':
Steve,
> I think that worked out very well for both of us; equal at six centers with
> our neighbors committed in the other direction is a good position for FG.
Definitely!
> I think a build in Marseilles is way too premature.
I agree. Raine would go ballistic, and England's not quite dead yet.
> I really don't want to see an army in Paris, but A Brest just
> looks silly. So...I suggest F Brest; I bet you already decided that, right?
Yes, I'm leaning toward F Bre.
Rod
From - Wed Oct 17 18:28:57 2001
Message from rkarjala at mail.student.oulu.fi as Italy to Austria in 'gutsy':
Hi Keith,
You were right, I liked your moves :-) I understand your will to keep your
moves secret but you can make me happy by telling more of your intentions.
Adam got 2 builds and that is a disappoinment for us. We can still keep
him from going ballistic but we need to be careful. His units are badly
placed to defend against you.
> Hi, if you really want to move to Trieste, that is fine with me. I don't
> understand what benefit you'll get from it, though. Unless you tell
> Russia that you rae attacking me, why would he think you are attacking me
> just because you moved to Trieste and didn't attack me elsewhere?
You are right once again. I was dreaming to keep Adam fooled of my
intentions. I did not move to Trieste 'cause you did not ask me to. I
thought that I could fool Adam by telling that my other units were tied up
on attacking Smyrna.
> I would prefer to keep my moves secret. I hope you don't mind. This
> way, if Russia outguesses me, you won't have to worry about my blaming
> you for leaking the information. Plus, our units can move independently
> this turn, and there is no need to coordinate our moves. If you have
> some need for the information about exactly which moves I will make, I
> can certainly tell you, of course, but it doesn't seem to me like there
> are any moves I could make that would cause you much concern. Am I wrong
> about that, or why are you so curious?
I am selfish :-) Honestly, I would like to have one person on board I
could trust completely. I see that Austria is the one I'd like to be that
trusted one. Had you told me that you are moving like you did and I would
be willing to move Ven-Apu and convoy to Syria in Fall. This is only my
4th partial press game so I cannot tell you if I am 'balance of power'
type of player,'alliance' type, carebear, or whatever . I know that I
would like to know what my ally is doing. That would give me more
confidense.
> As for how exactly you take Smyrna, I have no strong opinion. Convoying
> the army looks like the stronger move to me, and it should allow you to
> conquer Turkey with less outside assistance.
That was what I thought too.
spring moves:
-You (or we) should destroy Russian army in Albania. It means one less
unit for Russia in fall moves.
-Let me know if there is something you want me to do with my army in
Venice. French build may dictate the actions but I hope to see a build
somewhere else than Mar.
Raine
From - Wed Oct 17 18:29:00 2001
Message from rkarjala at mail.student.oulu.fi as Italy to Russia in 'gutsy':
Hi Adam,
Good work! Especially in the northern front.
> After you've taken Smy Eric will be on one center and you'll
> want another build. You will want Con back, and I could
> probably give that up but not until you were commited against
> Austria anyway.
I think it is fair. You are now at 8 centers and I have only 5. I don't
know if I am balance of power type of player or something else but it
really looks like a fair deal to give Con back to me.
> Still, whatever, I'm come to realize that you're not going to
> do what's best for Italy, let alone what's best for
> Russia and I'm bored of talking about it really. Let me
> know when you finally do think it's time, I won't bother
> to ask again.
To my eyes Russia is in very good shape. What is best for Russia? Would
you like to be even stronger? I think that is against balance of power
-idea. I am bored also to talk of priorities. I think the moves show that
you got the advantage and I did not. I would have if you would not taken
Con from me.
Let's just forget our disagreements in priorities. That is the way we
could get the best outcome.
You are getting Stp back for sure. So would you be willing to let me have
Con? That would be no dispand for you and a build for me. We would be more
balanced that way.
Raine
From - Wed Oct 17 18:29:08 2001
:: Judge: NZMB Game: Gutsy Variant: Standard
:: Deadline: F1903B Thu Oct 18 2001 01:11:17 +1300
Adjustment orders for Winter of 1903. (gutsy.011)
England: Removes the fleet in the North Atlantic Ocean.
England: Removes the army in Liverpool.
Turkey: Removes the fleet in Ankara.
Russia: Builds an army in Moscow.
Russia: Builds an army in Sevastopol.
France: Builds a fleet in Brest.
The next phase of 'gutsy' will be Movement for Spring of 1904.
The deadline for orders will be Tue Oct 23 2001 20:00:00 +1300.
