 |
|
The Joker
|
|
Copenhagen, Denmark
Aug 1999
time: 06:14
|
|
Hmm...
Thursday. That's today. I will log on to #GGS at undernet to see if anybody's there. Otherwise I am a bit buissy this weekend, but I will squeeze in some time for GGS and for Diplomacy where I can.
You are right about GGS, BTW. And that is truly sad. And it is even sader that I will propably not be home very often for the rest of my stay down here. So I wont be able to do some serious work untill july 1.
But still, how is everything going? Is the UI progressing?
------------------
"All that monsters fear is the day."
- Kashmir
GGS Website
|
|
| |
|
|
|
S. Kroeze
|
 |
the Hague, the Netherlands, Old Europe
Dec 1999
time: 05:14
|
|
In the interest of the game I have decided to accept VetLegions orders and to revoke this earlier decision 'to throw him out of the game'.
I am willing to admit my reaction was too emotional, but I was really very disappointed indeed!
And since I myself have always received a warning from my internet provider when some e-mail cannot be delivered, I didn't think of the possibility of some technical problem. I imagined he was again enjoying himself in the countryside. And while everyone is of course free to enjoy life as much as possible, participating in a game -however unimportant in real life- also creates some obligations to the other participants.
I sincerely hope that we will not have this sort of problems again in the future.
Dear GGS'ers playing Diplomacy,
I have a rather sad message:
Since VetLegion -assuming he is still alive- might be willing to send in orders in time, but is clearly unableto do so, he is by now irrevocably thrown out of this game!!
This result of not sending in orders in time twice, was announced in my message posted on this Forum on the 7th of May, 2001:
quote:
I am glad to observe you are still alive and willing -and hopefully able- to pursue our game. When you will henceforth respect the deadline you can play on as if nothing happened.
Yet since NMRs are truly a disaster and most damaging to this game for the other players, I will be compelled to take measures when the same player makes this slip repeatedly.
IMPORTANT: When a player does not send me his moves in time twice, within a period of five seasons, I will throw him out of this game and seek a substitute!
No GM rejoices enforcing such measures, yet sadly enough they have proven to be sometimes necessary to guard the interests of the serious players.
(I hope everyone will notice this warning...)
|
I do not enjoy this decision at all! On the contrary!
Yet Diplomacy should be played with seven actively participating players and not with countries constantly in civil disorder.
So I will not send you a game report of Spring 1902 until we have found a substitute. Having received orders from all other countries, those orders remain valid of course. I will inform you all about a new deadline. You could also send me new orders before this new deadline, replacing the old.
To make it somewhat more inviting to continue this game playing Italy, I will assume that Italy has conquered Tunis in Fall 1901.
So Italy has: A Ven, A Pie, F Tun, but no new unit for it yet, though Tunis has by now become Italian.
This is a most unusual decision, but it is also most unusual that a player manages to cause two NMRs in the first three seasons! Diplomacy addicts generally loathe such creatures.
I will actively seek for a substitute, but help on your part is positively encouraged. Please help us all! Diplomacy is truly worth the trouble.
I am extremely disappointed!
Sincere regards,
S.Kroeze
PS: One question for Vetlegion: When you obviously do not enjoy this game, nor care for the enjoyment of the more dedicated players, why couldn't you say so straightout?
EDITED
[This message has been edited by S. Kroeze (edited May 14, 2001).]
|
|
| |
|
|
|
S. Kroeze
|
|
the Hague, the Netherlands, Old Europe
Dec 1999
time: 05:14
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by VetLegion on 05-13-2001 07:32 AM
What? Well dear GM can you please re-check your incoming mail for last week? I ask because I have sent you an email with my moves the day I wrote the message above. And I sent them that day, way before the deadline, speciffically so I am sure they are played.
all that stuff about loathing, diplomacy addicts, blah, blah, not my style to comment that.
|
Obviously I have never received it and I dare say to be very meticulous in handling e-mail. I never have deleted any e-mail sent by anyone of the GGS team. Sometimes I throw an e-mail in my Recycle Bin, but I even inspect my Recycle Bin before emptying it irreversibly. I check my mailbox usually twice a day.
Since I want to believe you have indeed sent them, could you please send your moves immediately to me a second time, assuming you are still willing to continue the game after my harsh words. I can understand you when you wouldn't anymore because I haven't been too kind.
I repeat: I didn't like taking such a decision at all and I WAS allready disappointed about your first NMR.
Concerning the Diplomacy addicts: they are probably mentally disturbed, yet it is true they loath NMRs. As a rule they will not ally with someone they consider NMR prone.
Perhaps I should confirm in the future any orders I have received to reduce the risk of lost mail?
My sincere apologies for my harsh words!
S.Kroeze
|
|
| |
|
|
|
amjayee
|
 |
Jyväskylä, Finland
Oct 1999
time: 07:14
|
|
The game situation at Balkans is interesting, it took me a while to understand what happened last turn.  I'm looking forward with interest to see how the situation unfolds there.
Then a game move question: if a unit in B attacks a unit in A, and meanwhile a unit in C attacks the unit in B, does the attack of the unit in B fail? Let's assume the attack frim B is better supported than the defense in A. I assume, by the impression I got from rules, that the attack of the unit in C fails, but I think there was not a rule concerning this situation. What if the unit in A is giving support, unit in B tries to cut the support given by A by attacking A, and C attacks B to prevent the cutting of support, what happens? I know this is a complicated explanation, but this is a complex game in all its simplicity. 
Has anyone else noticed that the last message sent to the forum is not visible? At least on me, the message I just sent is not visible. Weird.
[This message has been edited by amjayee (edited May 14, 2001).]
|
|
| |
|
|
|
In the first situation you described, both B and C would succeed (if nothing else is going on, for instance someone else attacking B) and A would be dislodged. Also, I think that the support is cut even if the attack itself fails, and you cannot "cut" an attack, so there is really nothing that could stop B from cutting A from supporting another unit. (Wow.. a triple negative! ) Unless, of course, the support was given to an attack that was directed at B. In other words, if
A S C->B, B->A, C->B
Then B->A would fail and B would be dislodged (unless we are still assuming that B's attack is better supported than A's defense, in which case A would be dislodged). But however, if
A S X-Y, B->A, C->B
Then A's support would be cut regardless of whether B->A succeeds or not. Right?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
S. Kroeze
|
|
the Hague, the Netherlands, Old Europe
Dec 1999
time: 05:14
|
|
quote:
I have to say that also I was a little shocked and disturbed by the tone at which you S.Kroeze told VetLegion off. You make an impression that you are a truly cultivated person, so it was a little disappointment. Nevertheless, I'm happy the situation was cleared. I think taking this game a little less seriously and pondering the responses more carefully on your side (treating other people with respect regardless of their position or actions is the highest standard for a civilized human being) and a little more carefullness from our side should make this game more enjoyable for all of us. I think we all should aim to send draft orders already on Sunday or Monday. And when substitute orders are sent, we should remember to include all orders for that turn! That's what I will do at least. I hope we can all be in friendly conditions in the future.
|
Dear Amjayee,
I am also far more satisfied with the present solution.
I agree with you almost completely. It would have been far better not to show emotion. And though generally I consider myself rather cultivated, I am also quite difficult, demanding and short-tempered. It is no accident I am still single...
By the way, this remark of you, "pondering the responses more carefully on your side", do you want to imply that you do not like the way I answer questions here about the game in general? Or are you referring specifically to the far too emotional way I treated poor VetLegion? Because you should know that people will always be what they are: one can not deny one's true self. I am human after all, like it or not.
I am and probably will be more or less a perfectionist, highly critical, also of my own performance, irrespective whether it concerns a payed or a voluntary duty.
In the end, we are all here to suffer and to die..... so all distinguishing between important and unimportant is rather ephemeral.
Let's continue with some technical questions:
Then a game move question: if a unit in B attacks a unit in A, and meanwhile a unit in C attacks the unit in B, does the attack of the unit in B fail? Let's assume the attack frim B is better supported than the defense in A.
So we have A/F B-A with support, so it succeeds and the unit in A is dislodged
and A/F C-B which also succeeds since province B is empty (unless a stand-off occurs with an order A/F D-B)
What if the unit in A is giving support, unit in B tries to cut the support given by A by attacking A, and C attacks B to prevent the cutting of support, what happens? I know this is a complicated explanation, but this is a complex game in all its simplicity.
Now we have A/F A S some unit, A/F B-A and A/F C-B
Normally the support of the unit in A will be cut, unless this unit is not dislodged and giving support into province B, from where the attack originated. Normally when A/F B-A succeeds, A/F C-B would succeed too.
I think, TempLeland has answered your question perfectly:
'You cannot "cut" an attack'
I quite agree!
S.Kroeze
|
|
| |
|
|
|
amjayee
|
|
Jyväskylä, Finland
Oct 1999
time: 07:14
|
|
S.Kroeze,
Don't worry, we all make mistakes, and it's perfectly understandable to be a human. Though generally since acting on the net you have more time to consider your words, I think it's wise to do so. Also I have no objection against your character, we are all different and that's makes this world interesting.
When I talked about pondering the responses more carefully, I meant mainly the VetLegion case. Though, giving very emotional answers to questions may hurt other people. The above statement about considering the words, since there is more time for it, implies here also. But never mind this, we don't need to talk about this anymore.
quote:
Originally posted by S. Kroeze on 05-14-2001 06:45 PM
In the end, we are all here to suffer and to die..... so all distinguishing between important and unimportant is rather ephemeral.
|
Though it's true we are here to die, suffering is a relative matter. It is up to you and your attitude if you suffer from something or not. Also about important and unimportant, in my opinion there are mainly two kinds of things: those that are always important, and those that are never important; though, there can be also really good things in this category, they are just the kind that you can live without.
And thanks for the answers, now I understand this game once again a little better!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
What the heck just happened?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
I was referring to Diplomacy...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Well, I thought Diplomat and VetLegion finally got their acts together, but still there seemed to be some problems with their orders. NMRs for Diplomat, all units holding for Vet. Not that it bothers "The king of Austria-Hungary" though...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
One question: is it possible to retreat into a province with a supply center controlled by another country, but not currently being occupied by any unit (or being in a standoff)?
"Leland"
Last edited by on 25-05-2001 at 01:37
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:14.
Apolyton Time is 00:14. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
09-05-2001 03:21
) all will not be lost.
|