Originally posted by buffalobillI may not know anything about military matters (rolls eyes), but I do know that in order to play a game called "Diplomacy", you must be diplomatic or forfeit your chances of winning. No1 has succeeded in this thread to alienate everyone, and so has thrown away his chances of winning long ago.
Jusr so typical - insulting and arrogant. These are my last words with you.
All the rest of it is just "noise" 🙂
Originally posted by SuzianneThe problem was not that you quoted something which might not have been public information, but that the quote contained an e-mail address. There are programs which search the internet for e-mail addresses and add them to address lists for spammers. Therefore it's a bad idea to post e-mail addresses on public forums, even if the addresses are not secret.
But what I posted was NOT email... it was originally from a Yahoo user group and what I posted was excerpted from the digest version they send out. Everyone in these groups understands that it's a public forum.
Originally posted by NordlysYou might as well try to explain Einstein's Theory of Relativity to a begonia.
The problem was not that you quoted something which might not have been public information, but that the quote contained an e-mail address. There are programs which search the internet for e-mail addresses and add them to address lists for spammers. Therefore it's a bad idea to post e-mail addresses on public forums, even if the addresses are not secret.
Originally posted by SuzianneYou have also. So have most realms on the map by allowing a few nations to get stronger than the rest with no challenge whatsoever. You don't have a clue about strategy and neither apparently do most of the players in this game. You're supposed to knock down the most powerful nations if you are to have any chance of winning, not continually save their ass everytime they get into any type of difficulty. You and others have not played the game to win at all and you won't.
I may not know anything about military matters (rolls eyes), but I do know that in order to play a game called "Diplomacy", you must be diplomatic or forfeit your chances of winning. No1 has succeeded in this thread to alienate everyone, and so has thrown away his chances of winning long ago.
All the rest of it is just "noise" 🙂
Originally posted by no1marauderAllying yourself as part of a strong coalition is just as viable a way of winning as attempting to put down the strongest nations to secure your own ascendency. Just because your strategy is one of attack, does not make it the best way of winning.
You have also. So have most realms on the map by allowing a few nations to get stronger than the rest with no challenge whatsoever. You don't have a clue about strategy and neither apparently do most of the players in this game. You're supposed to knock down the most powerful nations if you are to have any chance of winning, not continually save their as ...[text shortened]... any type of difficulty. You and others have not played the game to win at all and you won't.
1 edit
Originally posted by StarrmanHow many nations can be in a winning coalition?? Answer: 4. Look at the board right now and you can already tell who's going to win. Continuing to aid these countries is not in the other realms' best interest if they want to have any chance of victory.
Allying yourself as part of a strong coalition is just as viable a way of winning as attempting to put down the strongest nations to secure your own ascendency. Just because your strategy is one of attack, does not make it the best way of winning.
EDIT: And you ain't one of them.
Originally posted by no1marauderThere's a lot of the game left to play, alliances can change and coalitions can disperse, it's far from sewn up.
How many nations can be in a winning coalition?? Answer: 4. Look at the board right now and you can already tell who's going to win. Continuing to aid these countries is not in the other realms' best interest if they want to have any chance of victory.
EDIT: And you ain't one of them.
Originally posted by StarrmanThe game favors those who already are ahead; they're able to build more troops each turn so their advantage only grows with time. Cooperating with them in the short run under the assumption that later you'll be able to turn on them and defeat them is wishful thinking. The time is now to knock down the powerful countries before their advantage gets too overwhelming.
There's a lot of the game left to play, alliances can change and coalitions can disperse, it's far from sewn up.
Originally posted by no1marauderWhat is this? Whack-a-mole? Everyone who sticks their head up a little higher than the rest gets hit with a large wooden mallet? Somebody is going to win eventually, you can't keep everyone down forever. At some point it does become in your interest to attach yourself to a hypothetical winning coalition.
The game favors those who already are ahead; they're able to build more troops each turn so their advantage only grows with time. Cooperating with them in the short run under the assumption that later you'll be able to turn on them and defeat them is wishful thinking. The time is now to knock down the powerful countries before their advantage gets too overwhelming.
1 edit
Originally posted by rwingettOf course, IF you're one of the four. If you're one of the other 19 such a strategy only assures that you'll lose slower. Norway in this game is a perfect example; by stubbornly attaching himself to Saxony's teat in their war with Denmark, he's assured that he can never expand sufficiently to have any chance of winning. Rolling the dice and allying with Denmark against Saxony would give him some possibility of eventual victory. As it is, he's too weak to be part of an eventual winning coalition; dollars to doughnuts after Denmark is defeated Saxony will simply turn on Norway and quickly destroy them too.
What is this? Whack-a-mole? Everyone who sticks their head up a little higher than the rest gets hit with a large wooden mallet? Somebody is going to win eventually, you can't keep everyone down forever. At some point it does become in your interest to attach yourself to a hypothetical winning coalition.
EDIT: Yes it is somewhat like "Whack a Mole" or at least should be. Allowing a few countries to get far stronger than the rest gives you little leverage in your dealings with them; you come to them with a begging bowl rather than a position of strength.
Originally posted by AThousandYoungYou're in the wrong thread. If you want to act like a lunatic, you have to put on your King George persona and head over to the Napoleonic Empires thread.
More Rorschach!
Hungary is a flying mushroom with two red eyes gazing at her enemies in Italy.
Bavaria's some kind of goose.
Aquitaine's a penguin or something.