Heroscapers

Heroscapers (https://www.heroscapers.com/community/index.php)
-   Other Games (https://www.heroscapers.com/community/forumdisplay.php?f=19)
-   -   Diplomacy (https://www.heroscapers.com/community/showthread.php?t=53767)

vegietarian18 November 1st, 2017 02:30 PM

Re: Diplomacy
 
kevindola told me about this a few weeks ago and I do want to try to get in the next game. I haven't played before but it seems like the best way to learn is to play.

Kinseth November 1st, 2017 02:31 PM

Re: Diplomacy
 
Interesting insights Kevindola.

The play with NTH - Hol succeeding was basically the same play as ION c APU - TUN. Anticipating a player must protect another position(Bel) and sliding in behind him and letting him take that position. At the time, only Bel was open as a logical place for NTH to go.

I am glad to see you had bigger aspirations, and glad to see my instincts were correct as we were jockeying for position in our diplomacy. Fighting you off about turning over another Turkish Dot made all the difference in the world(I mean Europe). And outmaneuvering England quicker than you anticipated.

I like how open everyone is being about this game, it had so much depth to it. One that I will remember for a long time!

Dad_Scaper November 1st, 2017 02:37 PM

Re: Diplomacy
 
You were in a tough spot, KD. And it's easy to second-guess yourself, and easy for others to second-guess you.

It sounds like you pressed Russia about the center disparity issue while there was still time to do something about it, and (essentially) he won those rounds of negotiations because you were persuaded not to take firm action at that time. In a way, your position was *quite* weak, in that - of the four major powers - you were the expendable one. EF had to hold down the western side of the map, and Russia was the dominant power in the East.

It's interesting to think that you were holding out for a 2WD. That's a pretty rare animal. Maybe a 3WD with one surviving western power? Russia was in a precipitously strong position for an endgame, though. With his northern fleets he was well across the stalemate line.

It was a well-played game, by the old veterans, the new veterans, and the brand newbies alike. As far as I could tell. I hope nobody confuses my comments with anything other than stray thoughts about the game and constructive criticism from someone who didn't read the press, so feel free to ignore it as you please. :)

Kinseth November 1st, 2017 02:40 PM

Re: Diplomacy
 
@dok - you going to join us next game?

Kinseth November 1st, 2017 02:45 PM

Re: Diplomacy
 
It would have been interesting to see what would have happened if France completely turned tide, and moved all his fleets vs England. If he felt the game was over, what was there to lose?

Often in these standoffs, neither side wants to make the first move.(France or Austria), even if you recognize that someone is in great position to solo and you must stop them.

wriggz November 1st, 2017 02:49 PM

Re: Diplomacy
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Ranior (Post 2167128)
I'm up for playing again of course, ready to start whenever.

--Italy, going for the spanish peninsula is a pretty big mistake. Especially if that was your plan in the opening--France has uncontested reign over that, such that they almost always capture it in 1901 and hold onto it throughout the game. France is actually one of those annoying nations where I suspect they rarely are the first to get eliminated since they have such a natural advantage for early growth.

-- What frustrated me the most about this game is that once it was clear to me that England and I were not going to be winning, I turned to the other powers on the board seeking options. Russia has long offered to turn on England, but that plan didn't appease me much as I just felt Russia would grow into an even more likely winner than I saw him at the time. So I looked towards Italy and Austria to work things out. And what annoyed me so was that it seemed neither of you were actually playing to win. Italy's movements I could not understand towards the end--Austria had done literally nothing all game for you besides let you lease TRI for a round, and then you promptly vacated it and turned your forces against me once more....yet there was literally no way your fleets/forces could break through mine. So you were slamming your head against a brick wall that wouldn't fall over. it stunned me because I just didn't get how you thought your moves were actually doing anything to assist yourself, and instead it seemed you were an obedient lap dog for Austria for most of the game serving as a buffer for him from French aggression.

--In response to Wriggz now, I can't say for sure what I would have done if you had joined England and I....but just know that I do turn on allies. Like I said before I'm not really a person to just blindly stab for the thrill of it. You can trust me as long as I think I'll do better with you than against you. But the moment that line is crossed, you can be pretty confident I'll be switching against you. So just make sure that when working with me that you're forcing enough concessions out of me that both of us are more or less equally positioned and both are gaining from being allied. All of which is to say that there are sequences of moves and negotiations where I ally with you and we turn against England.

My early plan was Turkey with drew me an Austria together. I had an exaggerated fear for Turkey and You seemed friendly so that only made sense. Also if Italy does not get into the East, it seems it is a really hard road for the win. When that door closed with Turkey moving to block me, and then Russia moving in, there was little I could do since my boarders were looking at your French fleet.

I understand it was annoying that we should dig in and ensure neither of us grow. However the way I looked at it, an EIA alliance was the likely outcome against Russia's strength. I never saw Austria/Russia as such a strong alliance since I assumed they would have to turn on each other. In my eyes You (France) were my biggest threat since your only real route to expansion was either in my centers or past my centers. Remember England did join with Austria and I, it was very close.

You final comment about holding an alliance as long as it suited you was clear in game. I realized as soon as your fleets were past me, I would be quickly swallowed up. More over to enter into a pact with you was to make war with Austria, thus I would be fighting a war with Austria instead of France, but with an ally who moved into a threating position, with whom I had built up no trust, and who I believed (rightly) would stab me as soon as it suited them. Austria needed my fleets in the interim so I could trust in that at least. My mistake was not demanding a 5th supply center when Austria reached 6 SC of their own. Also it really looked like you were just trying to get the upper hand. At that point EF were pretty strong on the board, and Germany had not clearly made their intentions to attack England. I felt you just wanted to get a foot in the door and would barge in with your 7 vs 3 SC and take me out (It's likely what I would have done).

If Austria had of come around at the 11th hour and entered into a alliance with England and I, then I think the game would have been different. I think in that case I could have expanded, and I had built up enough of a relationship with Russia (proven by their warning that Austria was going to stab me) that I could have flopped on the EIA alliance and worked with Russia towards the end. This was a much better gamble then being eaten up by France.

dok November 1st, 2017 02:52 PM

Re: Diplomacy
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Kinseth (Post 2167144)
@dok - you going to join us next game?

I am available to play if you don't have 7 others ready and willing.

Dad_Scaper November 1st, 2017 03:00 PM

Re: Diplomacy
 
Well then. Let's see who might be interested in a new game and go from there.

In order of how I remember people declaring interest:

1. Kinseth
2. Wriggz
3. Vegie
4. Dok
5. Kevindola

I'm not going to cut the list off at 7. I just want to get a sense of who might be interested, and then we'll figure out how to pare it down, if necessary. Just add your name to the list, if you have some interest in playing. Again, don't worry about the number of people on the list.

Ranior November 1st, 2017 03:12 PM

Re: Diplomacy
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by kevindola (Post 2167138)

I will be happy to hear criticism about how off base I was about that conclusion of victory chances, but as I said in an earlier post. I sent my opinions to France about why I didn't think I was in such dire straights through the course of the game, and I did not receive a rebuttal.

Here are the majority of the Austria/French talks regarding Russia throughout the game. As early as Fall 1903 I was harping about how Russia was in the better position and looked poised to solo.
Spoiler Alert!


Now as for your assertion that you sent me a rebuttal about why you ddin't think you were in dire straights, I can only assume you're talking about your message I labeled Austria 1906 above?

If so, c'mon. It was 1906 which was after about 2-3 seasons where I made concerted efforts to sway you and work with you and you constantly rebuffed me. You talked a big game about the moves we could make but always, and I mean always, stuck tight to Russia and served to cause issues for me. I felt I was getting strung along.

Then in that very same message you admit you mostly simply don't trust me. You think my talk about Russia beating you primarily is me trying to manipulate you. You'll have to forgive me for this next part, but GAHHHHHH. Coupled with your metagame talks a bit earlier, this is part of the reason I sometimes do hate playing CoN's--people think I'm constantly manipulating them to my own ends to the point where they seem to never want to trust me just because I have built up such a reputation as a great manipulator. Sure, I do think I'm pretty good at tricking people in CoN and playing as a puppet. But I'm also a skilled player who can really see what is going on as a warrior, yet often warriors allies in Con ignore me because of reputation It would seem that in this game, you essentially did the same thing where you were so afraid I was manipulating you that you essentially ignored my constant warnings as someone crying wolf rather than me actually pointing out the probable outcome of the game.

Ultimately, whatever. I'll admit in our first game we played I did wind up crying wolf over a juggernaut (although I was legitimately fearful of that myself, but whatever). You have limited experience and were working off of what you had. It's alright.

But please understand it's very rough for me to hear that I wasn't doing enough to warn you or explain to you that Russia was going to win. I repeatedly and consistently were warning you that Russia was in the better spot compared to you and that you would likely lose to him or draw. All of your press never made me feel like you actually thought you could win, you entirely were playing for the draw with Russia by the end and largely were just hoping he wouldn't stab you. Then you flat out admit you don't trust my words as you think I'm just manipulating you....

I mean what possible motive do I have at that point in the game to continue trying to work with you? I had accepted my loss and was ready and glad when it came.

Ranior November 1st, 2017 03:17 PM

Re: Diplomacy
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Kinseth (Post 2167146)
It would have been interesting to see what would have happened if France completely turned tide, and moved all his fleets vs England. If he felt the game was over, what was there to lose?

Often in these standoffs, neither side wants to make the first move.(France or Austria), even if you recognize that someone is in great position to solo and you must stop them.

The main reason I didn't do that is because I explicitly told Austria I was going to do everything in my power to make his life miserable towards the end and not let him have expansion opportunities in the southern seas. As I just shared with my correspondence I had longed warned him Russia was in a better position and he had longed ignored it. I really didn't intend to give him free centers at the end.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dad_Scaper (Post 2167152)
Well then. Let's see who might be interested in a new game and go from there.

In order of how I remember people declaring interest:

1. Kinseth
2. Wriggz
3. Vegie
4. Dok
5. Kevindola

I'm not going to cut the list off at 7. I just want to get a sense of who might be interested, and then we'll figure out how to pare it down, if necessary. Just add your name to the list, if you have some interest in playing. Again, don't worry about the number of people on the list.

I'm certainly in despite all my caterwauling.

Dad_Scaper November 1st, 2017 03:20 PM

Re: Diplomacy
 
Excellent. I expected you to add your name. As for your "caterwauling," that's what EoG's are for, partly. Go ahead and vent. There is an emotional investment in playing a game of Diplomacy, whether in person or online, and now you get to breathe.

What I was hoping was that people would just add their names to the list without me having to do it, as follows:

1. Kinseth
2. Wriggz
3. Vegie
4. Dok
5. Kevindola
6. Ranior

Kinseth November 1st, 2017 03:20 PM

Re: Diplomacy
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Ranior (Post 2167154)
I'm certainly in despite all my caterwauling.

That's the spirit!


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:09 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2022 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.