Obsidian Forums Diplomacy Game 1 (OBS-1)

[jaguars4ever]

Personally, I think declaring a draw would be rather contrary to the spirit of the game. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Nah - what is contrary to the spirit of the game is when people forfeit when the going gets tough, or when folks vote to deny people turns.

[Archmonarch]

I did not forfeit because "the going got tough," so remove that notion from your mind. If you remember, I agreed to continue playing, until others ( <_< ) posted my negotiations in the thread. I felt such unfairly disadvantaged an already vulnerable nation.

[jaguars4ever]

I did not forfeit because "the going got tough," so remove that notion from your mind. If you remember, I agreed to continue playing, until others ( <_< ) posted my negotiations in the thread. I felt such unfairly disadvantaged an already vulnerable nation.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well actually, given your history of personal issues/mental instabiliy I was specifically intending NOT to refer to you, but instead to the others (with the exception to Mets who was the epitomy of gallantry). Also, despite that crazy comedic Swede NMRing of late, his sparkling spirit to the game has been well appreciated.

 

And before you regress back to your pompous & arrogant self daring to "remove that notion from my mind", let me remind you -

 

Edit: Actually, it doesnt really concern me anymore. With the knowledge that I am utterly and irrevocably f***ed (My only option is to move into France with a 1/3 chance of success [less considering standoffs] and build a new unit this winter. However, Baley could easily block any move into France and even if I was successful, I wouldnt be able to regain London until next year, if at all.), I see no choice but to withdraw from the game. Good luck to you all.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yeah, so

 

1. You quit 'cause you couldn't hack it any more;

 

2. You have a personal complex about it and will use any excuse to disguise your instantiation of being a quitter;

 

 

)

[metadigital]

So, come on you two: Italy or Russia? Commies or Brown Shirts? :D

 

 

 

PS The spirit of the game is not to take it (or yourself) too seriously ... really it's all just as it is: you either cop it sweet, or you don't: the game goes on.

[jaguars4ever]

First of all, it was classic Kaftan Comedy Gold and he was right in sharing it with us. In fact tactically, it wouldn't have effected your Iberian Gambit whatsoever. I only reason Kaft & I decided to take it down was because you were bitching and whining like a 10 dollar whore who's only paid 5 bucks. But since you've requested I shall oblige my emotionally handicapped friend. :D

 

To make war like gentlemen -

 

Kaiser Kaftan Barlast,

 

Though we may have had differences in the past, I hope that we can now put such behind us, if for no other reason than that we have use for each other. I have recently learned of a French plot that may interest you. I will share the details if, and only if, you agree to support a move against French occupied London with your Fleet in the North Sea. This will benefit both of us: France will lost power and I will gain power. The first's advantage to us should be self evident, however, yhe latter may seem to profit only myself. Such is not the case. By allowing me to regain London, you will have gained an ally, perhaps not that powerful as of yet, but England will soon rise.

 

Arch Regis,

Prime Minister of the British Empire

 

 

 

 

Dear Prime Minister Archie,

 

 

I'm awfully sorry about this old chap, but you see, I had sort of set my mind on a rather ambitious invasion myself. We will be landing one army in Scotland so we can do some golfing at St. Andrews before the season ends. So I'm afraid I'll be using those fleets to land my own forces on your lovely island. We will of course behave in a gentlemanlike fashion when we invade. You wont notice a thing, I assure you.

 

 

Again, Im very sorry about this,

 

 

Kaiser Kaftan of Germany

 

----

 

So, yeah - you had QUIT before, and despite the so-called forced disadvantage that posting put on your "grand plans", you decided to kick yet another tantrum like you always do. Therefore you QUIT again - any excuse to deflect you problematic nature, eh Archie?

 

 

====

 

Secondly, I'm afraid you're mistaken. For you see, the majority opinion on this board is that I'm anything but the "bastard" you make me out to be. In fact you're the emotional retard here. It's actually quite sickening. You really ought to see a psychiatrist instead of playing games of competitive nature - you simply can't handle it:

 

 

Yet again, I have overreacted. I did not view this game as seriously as my last post may have implied. I tend towards the dramatic, in situations such as this. Though, now that I think about, it isnt all that unusual that I have a minor complex concerning perceived slights considering the relationship I have with my father.

 

Also, on a somewhat tangential note, I think I have discovered why I am agnostic. Ive been reading up on Freud and Jung lately for a research paper and I read something that made a great deal of sense to me. According to Freud, God is a totemic representation of the father's exaggerated worth in an attempt to detract from the guilt the son(s) have for killing their father to gain power in prehistoric times. Therefore, the relationship between a person and God often parallels that between themselves and their father. I have a terrible relationship with my father, i.e. I have a terrible relationship with God.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Sounds like you've got some problems there, matey.

[metadigital]

"Hey, that's my cat!"

Erwin Rudolf Josef Alexander Schr

[Archmonarch]

Im sorry to continue to disrupt this thread's intended purpose, but I will not accept jag's words without response:

 

I react badly to criticism, in some cases. I admit that. Is this so foreign to your own experience as to label me "sickening" and say I "should see a psychiatrist?" Perhaps I can be liable to overreact. In comparison to disregard for the feelings of others, I do not view it as so great a fault.

[metadigital]

Depends if you hold a grudge.

 

Some un-asked for advice?

 

Cop it sweet.

[Archmonarch]

Depends if you hold a grudge.

 

Some un-asked for advice?

 

Cop it sweet.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Exactly what does "Cop it sweet" mean?

 

Also, I tend not to hold grudges. Once the conflict passes, I usually stay angry for a short while, then let it go. But if the conflicts are later brought up for the express purpose of denigrating me, in addition to disparaging remarks and libel, I will not simply accept it.

[metadigital]

Take it on the chin.

 

Don't whine. Everyone get's a bad ball, or a bad call. Just carry on, regardless.

 

Whinging about it just makes you look like the little kid who doesn't want to be out in the backyard ball game.

 

I grew up in a big family. Holidays were when we all came together and systematically all attacked each of us in order, usually clockwise.

 

Capisce?

[Archmonarch]

I suppose you are right, Meta.

 

Jags, the argument is finished: we each had valid points and are entitled to our opinions. I will not speak of this again, or use it to in any way prove an opinion in the future. I expect the same of you.

[EnderAndrew]

I currently hold Germany's supply centers, and I don't see how Germany is getting any of them back.

 

Kaftan has been eliminated, and Baley officially conceeded.

 

The two remaining players have diplomatically agreed on a peace treaty.

 

I thought the name of the game was Diplomacy, and the game has been resolved in Diplomacy. If the name of the game were Global Conquest and Utter Devestation

[Reveilled]

I currently hold Germany's supply centers, and I don't see how Germany is getting any of them back.

 

Kaftan has been eliminated, and Baley officially conceeded.

 

The two remaining players have diplomatically agreed on a peace treaty.

 

I thought the name of the game was Diplomacy, and the game has been resolved in Diplomacy.  If the name of the game were Global Conquest and Utter Devestation

[Kaftan Barlast]

Yeah, noone could be said to have won unless you rack up 18 of em.

[EnderAndrew]

The rules clearly state you can declare a draw before one player reaches 18 supply centers.

 

However Reveiled insists on forcing players to continue a game the players declared reached an end. Very well, I will continue to submit moves but I think the whole thing in assanine.

[Reveilled]

The rules clearly state you can declare a draw before one player reaches 18 supply centers.

 

However Reveiled insists on forcing players to continue a game the players declared reached an end.  Very well, I will continue to submit moves but I think the whole thing in assanine.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I'm not forcing you, I'm asking you. You can declare a draw whenever you like. But if you declare one before Tuesday (or monday if Kaftan doesn't send in a move), then the draw will be three ways between Yourself, Jags, and Kaftan.

[EnderAndrew]

Given that Kaftan doesn't have a supply center that is silly.

 

You're just being obstinate for the purpose of being obstinate. I sincerely think that you fail to understand the purpose of a game is to have fun.

 

Whatever. Moves have been submitted.

 

Don't expect me to ever play in a Diplomacy game that you are involved in.

[Reveilled]

Given that Kaftan doesn't have a supply center that is silly.

 

You're just being obstinate for the purpose of being obstinate.  I sincerely think that you fail to understand the purpose of a game is to have fun.

 

Whatever.  Moves have been submitted.

 

Don't expect me to ever play in a Diplomacy game that you are involved in.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Oh gosh, I'm so sorry. <_<

 

You know, maybe instead of whining, you could ask Kaftan to capitulate. Just a thought.

[EnderAndrew]

Take chess for a common example.

 

One player might announced "checkmate in 3 moves". The other player can then conceed that checkmate is inevitable and honorably agree to end the game, or force moves at their discretion.

 

In that case, players decide to play as long as the game is enjoyable which may be to the full conclusion or not.

 

In two seperate instances I have seen you defend continuing a game that isn't fun for others. I could even push and possibly gain an 18th supply center as early as this Fall, though it would most likely happen in the Spring if I wished to.

 

However, as a celebration of a successful alliance, I am content declaring two winners in this game rather than claim glory for myself. I also made it a point to send a message to Baley thanking and congratulating him on a good game.

 

In addition to you twice pushing the game into a realm where it is no longer fun, I've seen you lie out of game. At first I considered it might have been miscommunication, but you insist that you had no prior experience with the game after making a big deal about how experienced you were. Then I notice a comment where you mention "I haven't seen a game before where this happened."

 

If you have seen games played out, or participated in them on any level, you are clearly more experienced than a person who entered with not having seen or played the game before.

 

You agreed yourself that lying out-of-game isn't cool.

 

I've tried to give you the benefit of the doubt, but these three examples make it clear to me that you are a player that I'd rather not play with.

[Reveilled]

Take chess for a common example.

 

One player might announced "checkmate in 3 moves".  The other player can then conceed that checkmate is inevitable and honorably agree to end the game, or force moves at their discretion.

 

In that case, players decide to play as long as the game is enjoyable which may be to the full conclusion or not.

 

In two seperate instances I have seen you defend continuing a game that isn't fun for others.  I could even push and possibly gain an 18th supply center as early as this Fall, though it would most likely happen in the Spring if I wished to.

 

However, as a celebration of a successful alliance, I am content declaring two winners in this game rather than claim glory for myself.  I also made it a point to send a message to Baley thanking and congratulating him on a good game.

 

Uh-huh. And once Kaftan is eliminated, you can feel free to do so. One player has not yet agreed to end the game.

 

In addition to you twice pushing the game into a realm where it is no longer fun, I've seen you lie out of game.  At first I considered it might have been miscommunication, but you insist that you had no prior experience with the game after making a big deal about how experienced you were.  Then I notice a comment where you mention "I haven't seen a game before where this happened."

 

If you have seen games played out, or participated in them on any level, you are clearly more experienced than a person who entered with not having seen or played the game before.

 

You agreed yourself that lying out-of-game isn't cool.

 

I've tried to give you the benefit of the doubt, but these three examples make it clear to me that you are a player that I'd rather not play with.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I haven't participated in games, or seen them played out. I've read game reports, and forum threads on which PBEM games have been played, which anyone on the entire planet can do if they have an internet connection and know how to use Google.

[EnderAndrew]

You claimed that you had no experience with the game what-so-ever, which you have repeatedly contradicted with other statements.

 

You outright said you had less experience than I.

 

Have I ever played or even seen the game? No. Had I ever read the rules? No.

 

Were you intimately familiar with seeing entire games play out? Yes.

 

Those statements don't reconcile. But you can continue to back-pedal.

[Reveilled]

You claimed that you had no experience with the game what-so-ever, which you have repeatedly contradicted with other statements.

 

You outright said you had less experience than I.

 

Have I ever played or even seen the game?  No.  Had I ever read the rules?  No.

 

Were you intimately familiar with seeing entire games play out?  Yes.

 

Those statements don't reconcile.  But you can continue to back-pedal.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I thought lying out of the game wasn't cool? I said:

 

You do realise that you've actually played in more games than I have, right? I may know the rules back to front, But you are arguably more experienced than I am at actually playing the game.

 

At actually playing the game. At actually playing the game. Not "no experience whatsoever". At actually playing the game.

 

Until OBS-2, I had never engaged in diplomatic correspondence. Discounting those given in strategy articles, until OBS-1 I had never even read any diplomatic correspondence. All I had seen is was the same thing that anyone reading this thread would see: the orders and their results.

[EnderAndrew]

And your statements that you're the only one here who probably understands shorthand?

 

You made several statements bragging up your knowledge and then turn around and try to downplay it.

 

You directly said as well that you had less experience than I which is a flat-out lie.

 

You also defending maintaining a game with players getting unfair advantages. Then you turn around and say you were for a reset, when every other player claims to have voted for a reset. One player didn't, and you were the only one defending continuing the game.

 

Hmmm....

[Reveilled]

And your statements that you're the only one here who probably understands shorthand?

 

You made several statements bragging up your knowledge and then turn around and try to downplay it.

 

You directly said as well that you had less experience than I which is a flat-out lie.

 

First, that statement was a joke. Second, you seem to be completely unable to distinguish my experience with the rules and strategy of this game from my experience with that actual diplomacy of the game. Where have I ever said that I'm an experienced diplomat? Never. Where have I said that I'm experienced with the rules? Lots of places, because it's true. I'm experienced with the rules, but before OBS-2 I had never played in a game. By OBS-2, you had played in a game. That makes you more experienced at actually playing the game, whether you like it or not.

 

You also defending maintaining a game with players getting unfair advantages.  Then you turn around and say you were for a reset, when every other player claims to have voted for a reset.  One player didn't, and you were the only one defending continuing the game.

 

Hmmm....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Ender, I really don't care whether or not you believe me when I say that I voted for the restart. But it's true. I didn't defend the descision because I wanted it, or because I voted for it, I defended it because I believe that every change to this game after it has begun has to be decided unanimously.

[EnderAndrew]

You bragged up your experience repeatedly, not just in one joke. Then you flip-flop and when called on it, you argue semantics. But there is no arguing that you were pushing one message, and then a completely contradictory one.

 

The very art of back-pedalling is to fight over semantics so that it might seem like the two contradictary statements might possibly both be true.