 |
| |
|
|
RUFFHAUS 8
|
 |
The Old Dominion
Jan 2000
time: 00:14
|
|
ADC Dip 51 South American Supremacy Fall 1839
PRESS:
A Cordoba and F Buenos Aires curse the fact that this map is so biased towards the Brazilian.
ORDERS:
ARGENTINA (Iain Lindley)
A Salta-Formosa
A Cordoba - hold
F Buenos Aires - hold (dislodged, may retreat to Rio de la Plata or OTB)
BOLIVIA (Berzerker)
A Minas > Pant (dislodged, may retreat to Rio de Janiero, Sao Paulo, Goias, or OTB)
A SCruz > LaPaz (bounce with Santa Cruz)
A Pot > LaPaz (bounce with Potosi)
A Rib > Cus
F Arequipa > Lima
F BdArica > S Arequipa > Lima
BRAZIL (Hogfather)
F Boca de Navios > Maranhao (bounce 1v1 with Mato Grosso)
A Angostura > Cumana (bounce 1v1 with Golfo de Paria, dislodged, may retreat to Orinoco, Barinas, or OTB)
A Salvador > Minas Gerais
F Rio de Janeiro > Bahia de Todos os Santos
A Pantanal SUPPORT A Salvador > Minas Gerais
A Formosa > Corrientes
A Asuncion SUPPORT A Formosa > Corrientes
A Sao Paulo > Parana
F Santa Fe > Buenos Aires
F Montevideo SUPPORT F Santa Fe > Buenos Aires
CHILE (Chazzy)
A-Mendoza S A-Bahia Blanca>Rosario
A-Bahia Blanca>Rosario
F-Golfo de San Jorge>Bahia Blanca
F-Islas Jaun Fern Holds
A-Valparaiso>Santiago
F-S.Pac. Ocean Holds
COLOMBIA (Sahib)
A Caracas - Angostura
A Rio Branco S A Caracas - Angostura
F Maracaibo - Caracas
F Golfo de Paria - Cumana (bounce 1v1 with Angostura)
A Manaus - Mato Grosso (bounce 1v1 with Mato Grosso)
A Popayan - Iquitos (move fails 1v1)
F Bahia Sechura S Peruvian A Iquitos - Trujillo (void, no such order)
F Golfo de Panama S F Bahia Sechura
PARAGUAY (Snowfire)
A Misiones-Rio Grande do Sul
PERU (Gerwald)
F LIMA - TRU
A IQU supports A CUSCO - AQU (support cut)
A CUSCO - AQU
A MATO - MAR (bounce with Boca de Navios)
VENEZUELA (Defiant)
No units remaing
MAP:
http://www.geocities.com/ruffhaus8/ADC51/F1839.gif
GM COMMENTS:
Fall retreats will be due Sunday, June 3, 23:59 EST. Winter 1839 adjustments will be due Monday, June 4, 23:59 EST. Spring 1840 orders will be due Thursday, June 7, 23:59 EST.
As always, please check for accuracy.
ADJUSTMENTS DUE:
ARGENTINA - Disband 1
BOLIVIA - Build 1 (pending retreats)
BRAZIL - No Change (pending retreats)
CHILE - No Change
COLOMBIA - Build 2
PARAGUAY - No Change
PERU - Disband 1
VENEZUELA - No Change
GM INFORMATION:
RUFFHAUS8
ICQ: 63418710
E-mail: RUFFHAUS8@aol.com
PLAYER INFORMATION:
ARGENTINA (Iain Lindley)
ICQ: 33689665
E-mail: iain@lindleys.f9.co.uk
BOLIVIA (Berzerker)
ICQ: 38356654
E-mail: berzerkr@cjnetworks.com
BRAZIL (Hogfather)
ICQ: 102139615
E-mail: m_carreras@hotmail.com
CHILE (Chazzy)
ICQ: 116124479
E-mail: chazzy@execpc.com
COLOMBIA (Sahib)
ICQ: 43251116
E-mail: sa.hi@mailcity.com
PARAGUAY (Snowfire)
ICQ: 35476699
E-mail: peter.ingraham@oberlin.edu
PERU (Gerwald)
ICQ: 63688157
E-mail: CaladbolgFT@aol.com
VENEZEULA (Defiant)
ICQ: 46172786
E-mail: defiant@charter.net or seanc@herrschners.com
|
|
| |
|
|
|
RUFFHAUS 8
|
|
The Old Dominion
Jan 2000
time: 00:14
|
|
ADC Dip 51 South American Supremacy, Game Standings/Supply Center Count - 1836 (Fall); 38 Supply Centers Total, Solo Victory Requires Ownership of 20 Supply Centers Legend: COUNTRY - Present Leader/Former Leader (number of centers held) * Home Supply Centers listed in CAPS.
BRAZIL (10)
SAO PAULO, RIO DE JANIERO, SALVADOR
Parana, Montevideo, Cumana, Asuncion (Pa), Concepcion (Pa), Buenos Aries (A), Corrienties
COLOMBIA (10)
BOGATA, CALI, CARTEGENA,
Islas Galapagos, Maricaibo (V), Panama, Manuas (Br), Quito, Caracas (V), Angostura
BOLIVIA (7)
LA PAZ, ANTOFAGASTA
Santa Cruz, Arica, Potosi, Maranhao, Lima (Pu)
CHILE (6)
SANTIAGO, VALPARISO
Patagonia, Punta Arenas, Islas Juan Fernandez, Islas Malvinas
PERU (3) Gerwald
TRUJILLO
Arquiris Indigenous Territory, Iquitos
ARGENTINA (2) Iain Lindley
CORDOBA, SALTA
PARAGUAY (1)
Rio Grande de Sul
VENEZUELA (0) Eliminated 1839
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Defiant
|
 |
WISCONSIN
Aug 1999
time: 05:14
|
|
Well, my EOG, I just want to say that Ven position SUCKS!
When I thought we could take our countries and I wanted the Columbian Drug Lord province but Ruffhaus, in his wisdom, said, "na, I think I will make this a random drawing". Gee, thanks.
If I would have gotton Columbia, I would have done nothing different than what Sahib did, BTW, did you know that Sahib is German for Stabber.
I really think in order to make Ven competitive you need to give her one more unit, I could have bounced Sahib in the first Spring but I don't think it would have changed the outcome, just a very weak position, like Mexico in the world maps.
Enough whining, I do want to thank Ruffhaus for Gm'ing this game, he did, as usual a great job and thanks for all the rest of the players for their participation.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Defiant
|
|
WISCONSIN
Aug 1999
time: 05:14
|
|
MDR,
As I have only played your maps in 20th and Imperial, the only time I have seen Mexico doing OK, is in Imperial3 with Gerwald, all the other times, in 20th, they are a quick victum, in Domination I gave Mexico an extra unit, but to no avail, I am curious on how you solve that problem, might be to just let it be a neutral state, but once you are done, I will be willing to play it.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
RUFFHAUS 8
|
|
The Old Dominion
Jan 2000
time: 00:14
|
|
Defiant, Mexico got slaughtered in Domination because Talon isn't playing Diplomacy. It's about all he can do to get his orders in. He certainly isn't negotiation with anyone. Add to that, the fact that he was allied with Boshko's Colombia, and then immediately stabbed when Iain took over. The bottom line is that there are tough draws in Diplomacy, but I too have seen Mexico on the verge of soloing on an imperial map.
It comes down to how you play, who your opponents are, and how you interact with them. If you try to play Mexico in Imperia,l or Venezuela or Paraguay in South American Supremacy without allies, you're gonna get whacked hard and fast. It's much the same as playing Austria or Germany on the standard map. If you have no allies, then you have 5-6 enemies. And no one can survive that. It's not really my place to criticize play as GM, and that's not my purpose here with respect to Venezuela or Paraguay. It did appear that neither nation had any allies though.
Of note the map designer is considering some adjustments in the vicinity of both nations to make them more viable. And I think it will help, but ultimately it boils down to diplomacy.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MDR
|
 |
Avatar of Sweetness & Light
Nov 1999
time: 23:14
|
|
Now, I have seen Mexico in Imperial do some good stuff. It can work by either blitzing the CSA or picking up enough SCs in south america to hold off a combined CSA\USA assault. The key to how the Americas will be decided rests on what the CSA and the USA do in the early game. They're either allied & go in opposite directions (until one stabs the other), or Mexico will end up picking off the West Indies and a chunk of the CSA. Now, how far the CSA gets is dependant on how well Mexico can defend himself. Then you get to have Mexico make deals with Brazil, England, or France...any one of which is a good choice.
Check out dip 622 (a dipknight game) or I'll email the final positions on the first Imp1 game I ran. Ruff will verify that one. He picked it up as a replacement for Turkey.
As for why it gets picked last...I think it's more of a desicion on size...a three dot power looks like nothing compared to the 8 and up group. Mexico's postion is possibly the best on that side of the map. It's got access to both North & South America, and it has SCs on both oceans. It's sort of like a smaller Turkey.
Unfortunately, some countries just manage to consistantly survive. You tend to have one European power (usually Prussia), One African Power (Usually Turkey), One American Power (CSA or Mexico)...possibly two (Brazil can hang on with a few SCs), One Asian Power (China), Possibly one Pacific Power (Holland). Sometimes the Pacific is split between China and whoever owns the Americas. No one leaves Britain and France alone long enough to let them make any lasting impression on the map. If the Asian players are smart, the British and French colonies are destroyed, and that leaves a Europe spanning Prussia to push them out of their traditional home SCs.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
SnowFire
|
 |
New York City, NY
Jan 1970
time: 00:14
|
|
MDR: Interesting new lineup for 20th. I'm not sure it solves the "central" problem since now Columbia will be in-between Argentina and the USA, and it will be in their interests most likely to team up and tear into it, as it what usually happens when countries are arrayed in a line. So Columbia has more access to SC's to make up for it, which ironically only seals her fate more, because while before, perhaps the USA might concentrate on Japan and hope that Argentina & Columbia stalemate, now the USA and Argentina will be forced to always go after Columbia, because if you are at peace with them, they will assuredly gobble up the other nation, and then be unstoppable when they turn on you. This is of course a gross generalization, but what I would see as normal.
Still, I think it works better than the current set-up. Another way you could work it is make South America a vast empty landscape of very large empty territories and maybe only 2 or 3 SC's total inside it (after all, most of SA was not nearly as powerful as, say, Germany at the time). If you want to add an extra layer of rules to the map, you can use the "neutral armies" trick like Sengoku did and have it so that each of these SC's in South America have a neutral army defending it. So somebody can go imperialist and fish for a few extra SC's in South America, but it won't be particularly rewarding.
RUFFHAUS: Perhaps a bit of an over-generalization to just say "there are tough draws." Different draws requiring different strategies and diplomacy perhaps, but still, a good map has mostly equal countries.
If you try to play Mexico in Imperia,l or Venezuela or Paraguay in South American Supremacy without allies
Hehe. Both Defiant and I made extremely trusting Spring moves in that we were expecting allies but didn't get 'em. Perhaps you should remove the word "try" since it sure seems we did. ;-)
Also, I'd say that should be a true statement (without the try part) about any but the most unbalanced Diplomacy map. Even a "good" draw like, say, Japan in the Colonial map (which from what I've seen is consistently ranked the best) requires allies if you want to survive.
MDR: That sounds about right for Imperial. The price for far-flung colonies (which gives you a dramatically better chance to solo) is that you're spread out, and any compotent one-continent player will quickly move to squash colonies, since it's easy to do at first, and prevents armies cropping up there from nowhere. So in most games, the colonial powers are in trouble without good diplomacy in the other continents.
While not quite a good parallel, when I played Holland in Apolyton's game of Colonial (23/Amatsu), priority A1 for me was the elimination of the British at Singapore, and the French aimed to take them out of Hong Kong. This made Britain a much less potent enemy later in the game. It also balances out Britain in Imperial, since it has such great potential and twice the starting SC's of most powers, but can lose its great advantages so easily.
Defiant: I would have to agree that Venezeula is in trouble and probably the worst position on the map- it desperately needs Peru to attack Columbia with it, and Peru has a lot more freedom. So they might help, they might not.
However, the solution isn't giving Ven a new SC- just take Bogota from the Columbians. Say there was a minor revolution or something, and stick an army in Cartagena. That would balance that sector of the map right there. Columbia would grow a bit slower and a blitzkrieg against the Venezeulans is much less likely.
And oh yes, I don't consider Paraguay an unbalanced position. I think it's in one of the best positions to solo on the map. If Argentina works with it, Paraguay would tend to get most of the spoils of war, and can quickly turn on Argentina I think, especially if Argentina has become the sea power and has too many fleets. Paraguay is also great for attacking Bolivia later and collecting the SC's in that area. Of course, in exchange for the comparative ease in soloing, you do need an Argentinian ally at the beginning (or a Brazilian one, but that is a very dangerous alliance). I didn't get it. Simple as that.
If you want to make a Brazilian alliance more possible, or make it more plausible for an Argentinain stab of Paraguay, then you can just make Salvador neutral, like Maranhao. Brazil has a ton of SC's in its sphere of influence, but can't quite move out immediately like it can now. That's why an Argentinian stab is so deadly for Argentina- if you don't conquer Paraguay REALLY QUICKLY, Brazil will have already gained the crucial few extra SC's it needs to outnumber Argentina by 2-3 armies, and after that all it has to do is overwhelm Argentina. If Argentina has Paraguay working with it, the Paraguayans can quickly deny those extra armies and make it a much fairer fight.
Last edited by SnowFire on 06-06-2001 at 00:47
|
|
| |
|
|
|
RUFFHAUS 8
|
|
The Old Dominion
Jan 2000
time: 00:14
|
|
SF: I don't think it's overgeneralized at all. I think it's exactly the point. Many people scream that Italy and Austria are terrible draws on the standard map. I disagree. I like playing both powers. It's all what you make of it. Many of these same people claim that Russia is a powerhouse, starting ewith 4 units. But what happens to Russia if they get attacked by Turkey and England? Bad news for the Tsar!
I want to reitterate that I'm not slamming you or definat in SAS here. Both of you refer to stabs that effectively wiped you out. The same can be said of paly on other maps. Clearly on one where you star with only 2 centers, it's a lot easier to get hit with a fatal stab. I think you both got hit with extremely bad luck in that you got hit from the side that you didn't protect or expect to be hit. In my book to blame the map is to discredit Sahib, Iain, and Hogfather for duping you guys. And hell, Iain started off with three builds and is down from 6 to 2 already. I'm probably getting too specific for this discussion, and as the GM I should refrain from that. But my point is that IF things had gone another way, it could just as easily be someone else sitting there hating life right now.
I think the Sengoku map will produce a few quick casulties as well, and cries of imbalance will sprout up in a hurry there too. My first choice in Hagakure Dip was Shimazu. But in Dip 750 on Cat 23 Shimazu was gang banged by Chosokabe and Mori, and dead in two years. It's really a matter of how you play it, who you play it with, and a little luck. Same thing as standard Dip. Look at what happened to Gibby in the championship game. Middle power with no allies - dead in 2-3 years. Hel,l I had England, a supposed powerhouse, and was starting at a 1904 elimination until I finally (after hours and hours of intensive diplomacy) was able to "whore myself" to Defiant to save my ass and turn things around, finishing with 6 SCs.
Maybe a tuck and a pull here and there is warranted, but I don't see either position in SAS (Venezuela, Paraguay) as not viable. Nor do I see Mexico on the global maps as such. Keep in mind that Mexico has home SCs on both coasts, whereas the CSA does not. I'm not going to attempt to argue the Mexico has a higher survival rate than some other powers, but in the examples being cited here, the play of Mexico has been extremely poor ,and stabs have been a huge factor. If Mexico and Britain hook up against the USA, then the US play is screwed, and both England and Mexico are sitting pretty. The fourth SC in Domination Dip would have made a difference with a capable (or shall I say attentive) player at the helm.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
SnowFire
|
|
New York City, NY
Jan 1970
time: 00:14
|
|
SF: I don't think it's overgeneralized at all. I think it's exactly the point. Many people scream that Italy and Austria are terrible draws on the standard map. I disagree. I like playing both powers.
Erm, I obviously misunderstood you here or soemthing, because that's exactly what I was saying. Italy and Austria aren't terrible draws; they just require different strategies.
My apologies, I interpreted your original statement as "these maps are unbalanced, tough, get used to it."
I think you both got hit with extremely bad luck in that you got hit from the side that you didn't protect or expect to be hit. In my book to blame the map is to discredit Sahib, Iain, and Hogfather for duping you guys.
Not quite. First of all, I'm not blaming the map; you were talking about my death long before my initial post so I felt somewhat obliged to post that I wasn't whining about the map. You'll note in my previous post I said "I don't consider Paraguay an unbalanced position." Trust me, I will blame Iain for my death, when it comes.
As for not expecting to be hit by Argentina, my logic was that if Argentina stabbed I was doomed anyway so why bother. I might as well go whole hog against Brazil.
it could just as easily be someone else sitting there hating life right now.
I don't know about you, but I was immensly amused by this game. My freedom fighters have been wandering around for how long now? Not to mention after I planted the suitcase nuke in San Miguel De Tucuman which will go off any year now. If those wires haven't rusted.
Sengoku
Sengoku's a great map. Also, Shimazu's an exception, since it's one of the rare powers to only have 2 neighbors on that map.
Maybe a tuck and a pull here and there is warranted, but I don't see either position in SAS (Venezuela, Paraguay) as not viable.
I should probably re-iterate again, I like Paraguay! Good position.
Anyway, RUFFHAUS, I agree with most of your post.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MDR
|
|
Avatar of Sweetness & Light
Nov 1999
time: 23:14
|
|
I could've sworn my last post went through. Oh well. Since it seems it didn't, I'll post it again...
Ruffhaus: The one problem I have with the Sengoku map is the fact that everyone starts out with only two units. It doesn't give you the flexibility to setup a good opening move, and it leaves you too weak to defend against another country if they go all out to kill you. Basically you don't start out with enough force to defend yourself and grab reinforcements from elsewhere. The only mitigating factors to this are the neutral armies and the fact that the countries all have manuever room.
And speaking of manuever room:
Snowfire: I'm already ahead of you concerning the "stacking" problem in the 20th Century map. I plan on redesigning the provinces and sea zones in Central America, South America, & the Caribbean to allow for at least five powers to fight for control & they're not one on top of the other like it seems in the original map. The only concern I have with it at the moment is how to deal with USA & Canada like they are. The three major powers in the region will be the USA, Columbia, & Argentina. However, they will have to put up with one and two dot territories controlled by Britain, France, and\or Belgium\Holland. Combine this with problems these powers may be facing outside of the Americas (such as Japan or Germany), and it should add some depth to that side of the map. It'll be more like North America in Imperial.
However, I do not intend on using neutral armies. It makes it too hard for the smaller nations to get enough SCs to compete with the larger powers. The only alteration I plan on making to the rules will be the Home SC occupation rule from Imp3.
Most of this is on top of a whole other mess of things I'm thinking about doing to the 20th Century map. A number of improvements that popped up in Imp3 might find their way into the new map, as well.
Anyway, this all depends on when I can find the time to do this. It's rather hard to make new maps of this size, even if you have templates laying around.
As for colonies in Imperial? They just have to either make strong deals or try to stick together. The tough part is not getting in each other's way. The one continent powers can be just as vulnerable as the colonial ones.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:14.
Apolyton Time is 00:14. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
04-06-2001 08:52
That gives me 2 builds I believe, yay.
|