From: nick@sunburn.uwaterloo.ca (Nick Fitzpatrick)
Subject: Diplomacy - EP Chapter 2 - Issue 299
Originator: nick@sunburn.uwaterloo.ca
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 13:57:27 GMT

Issue #299 of Chapter Two of the Electronic Protocol
By Nicholas Fitzpatrick (nick@sunburn.uwaterloo.ca)
November 6, 1992                      (1992 11 06)
Distributed via: rec.games.pbm rec.games.board bit.listserv.dip-l
                 AND rec.games.diplomacy!!!!!!!!!! (if it exists anywhere yet)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Electronic Protocol Games played on the Diplomacy Adjudicator
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This issue is approximately 85-90 kB.  If anyone does not get the whole thing,
or it propogates incorrectly in Usenet, please tell me.

**** TABLE OF CONTENTS ****
PART ONE - Opinions, Letters, and Editorials:   
    An advanced player rating system
    WIN92 gamestart
    rec.game.diplomacy vote results
PART TWO - Summary of all moderated games on the Judge:
    List of game openings
    List of EP games on the judges
    For more info about the Washington judge
    For more info about the Electronic Protocol
    For archives
    List of diplomacy adjudicators
    List of gamemasters
PART THREE - Report from the Battle Front
    Cheetah EOG report
    DPPE EOG report
    Hall92 press and results
PART FOUR - Danny Loeb's Openings Library 
    Austria

***** PART ONE *****

***  AN ADVANCED PLAYER RATING SYSTEM ***

Jamie Dreir and I were discussing how to rate Diplomacy player, in
relation to the strength of competition in each game.  Here is some 
pieces he wrote.  The idea is to look at the rating system used in the
game of Chess.  The problem is, that in Chess, when one player consistenly
beats another player, he must be a better player.  But when you have seven
players, there is too much left to chance. 


From: Jamie <PL436000@BROWNVM.brown.edu>
Date:         Thu, 22 Oct 92 17:43:22 EDT

I found out a bit of info on how FIDE determines chess ratings.

I'm looking for more.

For the first 20 games a player plays, the rating is determined as
follows. (Actually, no, the FIRST game I think works some other way,
I don't know exactly how you get your initial rating, but that should
be easy--just assign someone an initial rating.)

Multiply number of games already played (not including the current
one) by your current rating.
Call this result your Total Score.

Add to Total Score your opponent's rating.

If you win the game, add another 50 points. If you lose, subtract 50.
If you draw, add nothing.

Now divide this figure by the total number of games you've played,
INCLUDING the current one.

In effect, you average your initial assigned rating with the
ratings of all the players you've played so far adjusted for
your result in those games.

I see some drawbacks to this system, and I'm sure they are why
FIDE uses another system after you've played 20 games. (It is
alleged to be very complicated.)

Roughly, applied to Dip it might go like this.

Take the total of the ratings of all players in the game and
divide by seven. Add 50 (or something). Call this the
Game Sum.
Suppose player X shares in a N-way draw. Then subtract X's
rating from the Game Sum: call this the player's Game Surplus.
Then divide by N, call the result the Available Surplus.

Add to the player's old score the Available Surplus divided
by the total number of games the player has played.

So much for winners.

For losers, subtract points as a function of the average
rating of the players in the game.
 ====

As I said, this has drawbacks. If you play in a game in which
the average player is 50 points worse than you, you're gonna
lose rating points even if you win! I guess I can see this
for chess, almost, or at least not letting someone gain any
points for beating someone much worse than he is. But not
in Dip. In Dip, a really good player should still get points
for whipping a bunch of intermediates, because they are that
much more likely to beat up on him.

I dunno.

This doesn't look too good for our purposes.

Maybe I'll try to come up with some variant.
Or I'll try to get the more complicated FIDE formula.

Jamie

From: Jamie <PL436000@BROWNVM.brown.edu>
Date:         Thu, 22 Oct 92 18:00:12 EDT

This just in.

.04(Opponents rating - your rating) + or - 16 for win or draw.

Add this to your current rating.

Apparently that's an approximate formula for the UCSF chess ratings.
But to get the exact formula, you supposedly need a set of tables
that UCSF uses. Drat.

Again, this has limited application for Dip. If your opponents
are good enough, you get points for losing. Yuck.

We might try this:

For losing, being eliminated, you ALWAYS lose n points.

For sharing a draw, you get
[k*(avg. opponent rating - your rating)/# sharing draw] + m

For surviving, you get
k*(avg. opponent rating - your rating)

So surviving among players better than you nets you points.

Looks like a reasonable start.

Jamie



From: Jamie <PL436000@BROWNVM.brown.edu>
Date:         Fri, 23 Oct 92 10:31:41 EDT

Picked this off the CHESS-L list.

Jamie
============

From:         "William R. Shauck" <shauck@MV.US.ADOBE.COM>

[7] How Ratings are Calculated: USCF Rating, Simplified
-------------------------------------------------------

**For first 20 games (provisional rating), use the following system:**

Take the rating of the opponent +400 if the player wins.
Take the rating of the opponent -400 if the player loses.
Take the rating of the opponent if the game is a draw.

Average these numbers.  (If unrateds play other unrateds, this requires
several iterations of the above.)

**After 20 games (established rating), use the following system:**

Players rated under 2100 can win/lose a maximum of 32 points per game
Players rated 2100-2399 can win/lose a maximum of 24 points per game
Players rated 2400 and up can win/lose a maximum of 16 points per game

(This maximum is called the K factor.  In a 1/4 K tournament, divide the
above numbers by 4.)

If players of equal rating play, the loser loses half of the maximum, the
winner gains the same amount.  No change for a draw.

If players of unequal rating play, the higher-rated player gains fewer points
for a win, but loses more points for a loss.  (The lower-rated player does
the opposite, of course.)  A higher-rated player loses points for a draw, a
lower-rated player gains points.  For players rated 400 or so points apart,
the maximum rating change is used for an upset, and the minimum gain/loss is
1 point if the much higher-rated player wins.

The true formula for the number of points won/lost versus the ratings
difference is a curve, but a straight line approximation for players with a K
factor of 32 points can be used, where every 25 points of ratings difference
is one additional rating point gained/lost starting from a beginning of 16
points for a win/loss, and from zero for a draw.  (I.e., for a 100 point
difference, the higher-rated player gains 16 - 4 = 12 points for a win, but
loses 16 + 4 = 20 points for a loss.  If a draw, the higher-rated player
loses 4 points, the lower-rated player gains 4.)

The actual formula is as follows:

K = K_Factor
delta_R = Opponents_Rating - Players_Rating
Expected_Wins = 1/(10^(delta_R / 400) + 1)
New_Rating = Current_Rating + K (Actual_Wins - Expected_Wins)

An established player's rating cannot drop below (his rating - 100) truncated
to the next lowest hundred (i.e., a 1571 player cannot drop below 1400).
This is called the rating's floor.
--
William R. Shauck                   Internet: shauck@mv.us.adobe.com
Adobe Systems Incorporated       uucp: ...!{decwrl|sun}!adobe!shauck


*** WIN92 GAMESTART ***

Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 12:53:52 +0100
From: loeb@zephyr.greco-prog.fr (Daniel LOEB)

Could you please tell the readers of EPC2 and the participants of
HALL92, that I'm starting an unlisted WIN92 game on the JUDGE.  
Eric Klien wants to have it run, so I've agreed to run it. 

Players are:
xll0pfg@luccpua.bitnet/Paul Glenn (2.50)
bohman@math.rutgers.edu/Tom Bohman (6.00)
patp@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov/Patrick Plaisted (2.50)
sullivan@erim.org/Richard Sullivan (2.08)
wkm@mti.sgi.com/Keith Mortensen (0.00 in 1 JUDGE game)
cebulad@physics.orst.edu/Dave Cebula (9.06)
sbest@clasic.nsc.com/Scott C. Best (2.50)

The ratings are not quite as high as in WIN92, but perhaps some of
these players also have non-JUDGE wins to their credit.
In case, I need replacement players, I will take the first people
meeting the following criteria.
(1) Registered ADVANCED player on the JUDGE.
(2) At least 2.08 points on the JUDGE HALL of FAME.
(3) No recorded draws in any game with a player in WIN92 according to
HALL of FAME.
(4) Not the same-site as someone in WIN92.
(5) Nonnegative dedication.

I recommend that anybody who meets these criteria sign up immediately
as an alternate.

Thanks.

Yours, Daniel Loeb                              loeb@geocub.greco-prog.fr


*** rec.games.diplomacy VOTE RESULTS ***

The Usenet vote for rec.games.diplomacy has been completed.  The vote 
was 237 yes to 25 no.  Sites should start creating the group around 
November 9.



***** PART TWO *****
**** LIST OF GAME OPENINGS ****
3 Crowded (11 player) and 1 Loeb9 (9 players) game now forming!!!!
Games forming on South African and Australian judges

Moderated Replacement Openings include:
junebug, locust, pillbug, wasp, leopard and diablos

Unmoderated games openings include:
zoom, gord, elguapo, sultan 

Unmoderated Australian judge openings:
twinkles and cable

Signups available for the following moderated games in formation:
senlac, boyne, fog, amnesia, nun and ix
(tegner for Swedish speakers only)

baldric and silly at Australian judge.

float at South African judge

**** LIST OF EP GAMES ON THE DA ****
--- EXPLANATION ---
Here is the monthly update on games played on Judge. Each game is
represented by a line of data (followed possibly by a line of comments

--- please send me comments I can use if you are a GM!). The games are
sorted according the variant rules which are used.   Also if you
have an EP number, and I don't, please send it to me.

Column  Explanation
------  -----------
(1)     Name of game including a "#" if game is "private" or "unlisted"
(2)     Electronic Protocol number (and Chapter) if available.
(3)     Name of the GM (see list of GMs below).
(4-10)  Updates on game in chronological order (most recent on the right)

The updates for a game in formation indicate the number of players
needed to start. For example, -5.

The updates for a game in progress indicate the season (F for Fall or
S for Spring), the last 2 digits of the year, and the phase (M for
movement, B for builds, and R for retreats). All this is possibly
followed by the indication of the number of replacement players (-1),
temporary replacements (T1) needed, or needed later on (*1).

I welcome short one or two line statements from ANY of the the players of
the following games, especially those managed by Ken Lowe.

--- LIST ---
Name      EP# GM      Apr03   Jun30   Aug26   Sep15   Sep29   Oct20   Nov05
-------   --- --      -----   -----   -----   -----   -----   -----   -----
STANDARD RULES
baldrick      Bob                                     -7      -5      -5
              This game is on the Australian judge, players are asked to
              list the game before joining.  (ie has grey press, etc)
cheetah   225 desper          S01M    F05M    F06B    F08M    F10M    Over
              See EOG summary in part 3.
croatia   148 Nick    F06M    F10M    F12M    F13R    F14B    S16M    F17M
              Most advanced standard game on judge.  E and F crush T. 17-17? 
diablos       j_oregan        -5      S01M    F01M    F02M    F02B-1  S03M-1
fall          Gummi                   ?       S02M    S03M    F04M    S05M
float         Vincent                                                 -6
              This game is on the South African judge (judge@shrike.und.ac.za)
              Vincent tells me he has now upgraded to judge version 10.0
grass     248 Karl    S01M    S04M    S06M-2  S07M    F07B    F08M    F09M
              German language game.  
hall92    200 Nick                                            F01M    S03M
              Hall of Fame game.  Will Turkey be first out?
              Observer press can be obtained with HISTORY command. 
kaiser    249 Karl    -3      F05M    F07B    S08M    S09M    S10M    F11M
              T in Pru while R in Bul! I vanishing.  EG fight.
lion      253 Desper                                                  F01M
              High dedication game, featuring Mark Nelson's judge debut!
marengo   129 Scottb  F11B    S14M    S14M    S14M-2  F14R    F15M    S16M
              Oldest standard EP # in Chapter 2.
peregrin  236 Casmacin                        -6      S01M    F01B    F02M
tegner        Per                                             -3      -3
              Swedish language game.  Endast svensktalande.
ulm       235 Marty                           -6      S01M    F01M    S03M
wren      223 Casmacin                F01B    S03M    S04M    S05M    F06M
infinite  166 Ken     F02M    ?       F08M    F09M    F10M    F11M    S12M
karat     185 Ken     S01M    ?       S05M    F06M    F07M    F08M    F09M
newton    188 Ken     S01M    ?       S07M    S08M    F08B    F09M    F10B
pint      190 Ken             ?       S06M-1  S07M    S08M    F09M    F10B
quart     191 Ken             ?       F06M-2  S07M    F07M    S08M    F09M
rad       205 Ken             ?       F04B-1  F05R    F06M    S07M    F08M
second    206 Ken             ?       S06M    F06M    S07M    S08M    S09M
ton       207 Ken             ?       S03M-2  F04M    S05M    S08M    S07M
unit      208 Ken             ?       S05M    F05M    F06M    S06M    F08M
volt      209 Ken             ?       S04M    F04M    S05M    F05R-1  F06M
watt      210 Ken             ?       F02M-3  F02B    S03M    F04M    S05M
ant       211 Ken             ?       S04R    S05M    F05M    F06B    S08M
beetle    212 Ken             ?       F04M    F04B    S05R    F05B    F06M
cicada    213 Ken             -3      F03M    S04M    F04R    F06M    F06M
dragnfly  214 Ken                     S03M    S03R-1  F03B    S05M    S05M
earwig    215 Ken                     F02M    F03M    F04M    F05M    S06M
fly       216 Ken                     S02M    F02B    S03M    F03B    F04M
gnat      217 Ken                     F02M    S03M    F03B    S04M-1  F04R
hornet    218 Ken                     S01M    S02M    S02R    S03M    S04M
inchworm  219 Ken                     S01M    F01M    F02M    F03B    F04M
junebug   220 Ken                     S01M    S01M    S02M    S03M    F03M-1
locust    221 Ken                     -1      F01M    F02B    S04M    F04M-1
moth      224 Ken                             S01M    S02M    F03M    S04M
pillbug   227 Ken                             S01M    F01M    F02B    S03M-1
spider    228 Ken                             S01M-1  F01M-1  F02M    S03M
tick      229 Ken                             S01M    S01M    S01M-1  S02M
wasp      230 Ken                             S01M    S01M    F01B    S02M-1
antelope  232 Ken                             -5      S01M    S03M    F04M
beaver    233 Ken                                     F01M    S03M    F03B
cow       234 Ken                                     S01M    S02M-1  F03M
dog       237 Ken                                     S01M    S02M    S03M
elk       240 Ken                                     -7      F01M    F02M
ferret    241 Ken                                             F01M    S02M
gorrilla  246 Ken                                             S01M    F02M
hedgehog  247 Ken                                             S01M    F01M
iguana    251 Ken                                             -3      S01M
jackel    254 Ken                                                     S02M
kudu      255 Ken                                                     F01M
leopard   257 Ken                                                     F01M-2
monkey    258 Ken                                                     S01M
narwhal   260 Ken                                                     S01M 
otter     261 Ken                                                     S01M
pinto         Ken                                                     -7

STANDARD GUNBOAT - Identities of players unknown. 
dppe      239 Loeb    S01M    F05B    S08M    S09M    S10M    F11M    Over
              The last game with non-human players.  See EOG report in part 3.
eldritch      j_oregan        S02M    S04M    S05M    F05B    F06M    S08M
fog           Josh                                                    -5
              Shadows - the sequel
pressure  256 Josh                                            -4      S01M-1
              White PARTIAL press - like standard, but anonymous
sarajevo  195 Desper                  F03B    F04M    S06M    F07M    S09M
              Liverpuddlians taking Russian lessons
shadows   259 Josh                                                    S01M
              Partial-press, can be faked!
sinister  244 Starkey                         -7      -7      S01M-1  F02M
              An Evil game for Evil Players  *Please* read press help!
trafalga  243 Marty                           -7      -5      S02M    F03M

STANDARD GUNBOAT ROUND-ROBIN - Each player plays all 7 powers in 7 games.
game 2    174 Jamie                   F05M    F06M    F07M    F09M    Over
game 3    175 Jamie                   F07R    F08R    F09M    F10R    Over
game 4    176 Jamie                   F02B    S03R    S04R    F06M    F07M
game 5    177 Jamie                           F01M    F02M    F04B    F05M
game 6    178 Jamie                                                   S02M

YOUNGSTOWN RULES (10 players) Extended map including Asia and Africa.
dien      124 jdr     F11M    F15M    F18M    S19R    S19R    F20M    S21M
giggles       dwisemanS10M    S12M    F13M    S14M    S14M    S14M    Over
              Local ERIM game
timor     160 nick    F01M    S05M    F07M    F08M    F09M    S10M-1  S11M
              
YOUNGSTOWN GUNBOAT GAMES
celebes   197 nick            -8      F03M    S04M    F05M    F06R    F07R
              Super warp  36h deadline, 72h grace, 7 days a week.
luzon     192 Marty           F04M-2  S05M    F05M    F06M    F07R    S09M
              Warp speed. 24h deadline, 72h grace.
mindanao  231 Marty           -6      -4      S01M    S01M    S02M    F02M
shuppan   245 Josh                            -8      -5      S01M    F02M
              A White Press Gunboat!!
sumatra   182 nick            F05B    F07M    F08M    F09M    F09B-1  S11M
              Warp speed. 24h deadline, 72h grace.
sunda     171 nick            F05M    S07M-1  S08M-2  F09M    F10B    F12M
              Warp speed. 24h deadline, 72h grace.

YOUNGSTOWN DUPLEX RULES (5 players) Same as Youngstown, but 2 powers each.
burmese       Desper                                                  -0
siamese       Desper                                                  -0
zen2      252 Nick                                                    F01B
              Pairs are FI, ET, AC, GJ and IR

CHAOS RULES (34 players) Regular map. Each SC is owned by a different player.
avalon        NONE                                            -20    -9
              Any-site.
fontenoy  114 jdr     F10M    F15M    F17B    F18R    F19M    F20M    Over
              Munich (Danny Loeb) take sudden solo win.  Report in later EPC2.
iona      169 jdr     F02M    S06M    F08M    S09M    S10M    S11M    F11M
zenith    250 NONE            -11     F00B*2  F01M    F01B    F02M    S03M
              Any-site.

CROWDED RULES (11 players) 
amnesia       Matt                                                    -10


CROWDED GUNBOAT RULES (11 players)
nun           Matt                                                    -9
sardines      Josh                                                    -7
              White Press

GREAT BRITAIN RULES (7 players) Britain starts with 6 SC's but all armies!
hastings  139 loeb    F07B    S16M    F19M    F20M    F21B    F23B    F24M
              E stabs F, F stabs E and T.  This game could go on for years!
senlac        Matt                            -7      -6      -7      -7

LOEB9 GUNBOAT RULES (9 players)
ix            Josh                                                    -4

1898 RULES / GUNBOAT GAME
corsica   222 dmb             S00M    F00M-1  S01M    F01M    S03M    F03B
boyne         Marty                           -6      -6      -3      -3
silly         Matt                                            -7      -7
              This game is at the Australian judge  
solo      242 Josh                                            F00M    S02M
              England in Brest, Germany in Paris.

MACHIAVELLI RULES - An economic variant of Diplomacy marketed by Avalon Hill.
sober         andre           F54M    F55M    S56M    U56M-1  F56B    U57M
              A gunboat Machiavelli Variant without Loans and special units.

**** FOR MORE INFO ABOUT THE JUDGE****
For X:                                  Send Y to JUDGE@U.WASHINGTON.EDU:
------                                  ---------------------------------
        (*QUESTIONS ABOUT A CERTAIN GAME*)
More detailed information about a game: LIST <name-of-game>
History of a game:                      SUMMARY <name-of-game>
Detailed Recent History of a game:      HISTORY <name-of-game> 
Regular updates for a certain game:     OBSERVE <name-of-game> <password>
Copy of variant rules:                  GET INFO.<name-of-variant>
                        or              GET PRESS
                        or              GET GUNBOAT
        (*GENERAL QUESTIONS*)
General information                     HELP
Update of the list of games above       LIST
More detailed list                      LIST FULL
To be informed of all game changes      OBSERVE CONTROL <password>
Default house rules                     GET EP.HOUSE.RULES

Other information: Contact me (nick@sunburn.uwaterloo.ca) or
Ken Lowe (jdr@u.washington.edu) or your game master (see list below)

**** FOR MORE INFO ABOUT THE ELECTRONIC PROTOCOL ****
To solve Email problems, contact one of the email wizards:
        swb@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu, andre@hern.stonemarche.org
        eisen@cs.jhu.edu, eisen@jhuigf.BITNET, or wcw27974@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu
Other information: Contact Eric Klien (eric_s_klien@cup.portal.com)

**** FOR ARCHIVES ****
1) Use the HISTORY command for recent game result.  (see above)
Use the GET command (especially GET FLIST) to receive JUDGE related
files.
2) Contact the archivists, jlitvin@hfglobe.intel.com/Jo|n Li|<4AppDBOno[_zq<F
Machine:                Directory:                Contents:
Milton.U.Washington.Edu /public/misc              judge source, postscript maps
FTP.FU-Berlin.DE        /pub/misc/diplomacy       variants, hall of fame,
                                                  postscript maps, articles,
                                                  judge source (slow!)
137.248.151.12          /pub/incoming/Ep-Chapter  Old issues of EP.

**** LIST OF DIPLOMACY ADJUDICATORS ****
COUNTRY       ADDRESS                     KEEPER
USA           judge@u.washington.edu      jdr@u.washington.edu
Australia     judge@gu.uwa.edu.au         ddt@gu.uwa.edu.au
South Africa  judge@shrike.und.ac.za      vincent@cc.und.ac.za

**** LIST OF GAME MASTERS ****
Bob Blanchett               s1029708@giaec.cc.monash.edu.au
David M Bowen               dmb@bigd.cray.com dmb@sequoia.cray.com
Marty Brumm                 marty@pc1504.Chemie-Uni.Marburg.de
Dave Cebula                 cebulad@physics.orst.edu
Rick Desper                 desper@math.rutgers.edu
Karl Dotzek                 karl@adler.ims.uni-stuttgart.de
Jamie Dreier                pl436000@brownvm.brown.edu
Nicholas Fitzpatrick        nick@sunburn.uwaterloo.ca
Gudmundur Bjarni Josepsson  gummi@rhi.hi.is
Danny Loeb                  loeb@geocub.greco-prog.fr
Ken Lowe                    jdr@u.washington.edu
Michael Luft                scottb@cs.utexas.edu
Sean MacIntosh              casmacin@atlas.cs.upei.ca
Matt McLeod                 C9106225@cc.newcastle.edu.au
John Aidan O'Regan          J_Oregan%csvax1@iruccvax.UCC.IE
Josh Smith                  irilyth@fenris.claremont.edu
Sean Starkey                starkey@netcom.com
Andre Verweij               andre@duteina.tudelft.nl andre@hlniob.uucp.
Per Westling                c85perwe@ida.liu.se
Vincent                     vincent@cc.und.ac.za


***** PART THREE *****

*** CHEETAH EOG REPORT ***

Endgame comments and summary of Cheetah:

The game Cheetah was recently completed, in a 5-way draw congratulations to 
Rick Desper for keeping ALL the original players, and for a fast game.  
Cheetah only started at the end of June!

Summary of game cheetah through S1910M. (EP 225)

  Master:        Rick Desper    desper@math.rutgers.edu
  Austria:       John Godfrey   godfrey@wdc.sri.com
  England:       Sean Starkey   starkey@netcom.com
  France:        Ken Lo         lokendr@ecf.toronto.edu
  Germany:       Roy Y.K. Li    h8902948@hkucc.hku.hk
  Italy:         Ken Ross       kar@swift.cs.columbia.edu
  Russia:        Steven Stuart  stuart_s@ocf.Berkeley.EDU
  Turkey:        Dave Marshall  dmarshal@Stars.Reston.Unisys.COM

Game parameters are/were as follows:
  Move    clock  720 min  3.00 next  48.00 grace  48.00 delay 0.25 days -mTWTF-
  Retreat clock   -1 min  0.00 next  24.00 grace  48.00 delay 0.25 days -mTWTF-
  Adjust  clock   -1 min  0.00 next  24.00 grace  48.00 delay 0.25 days -mTWTF-
  Access:  Different-site, Level: Any, Moderated, Dedication: -10.
  Variant: Standard.
  Flags:   NoNMR, NoProxy.
  Press:   White, No Fake Broadcast.


Historical Supply Center Summary
--------------------------------
    Ven Nap Edi Lvp Par Por Bel Mun Ber Swe Stp Mos Con Smy Rum Ser Vie
Year  Rom Tun Lon Bre Mar Spa Hol Kie Den Nor War Sev Ank Bul Gre Bud Tri
1900 I I I . E E E F F F . . . . G G G . . . R R R R T T T . . . . A A A
1901 I I I I E E E F F F F F F G G G G G R E R R R R T T T T R A I A A A
1902 I I I I E E E F F F F F F G G G G G R E R R R R T T T A R A I A A A
1903 I I I I E F E F F F F F F G G G G G R R R R R R T T I A R A I A A A
1904 I I I I G F F F F F F F F G G G G G R R R R R R I T I A A A I A A A
1905 I I I I G F F F F F F F F G G G G G R R R R R R I T I A I A I A A A
1906 I I I I G F F F F I F F F G G G G G R R R A R R I T A I I A I A A A
1907 I I I I G F F F F I F F F G G G G G R R R R A I A I A I I A I A A A
1908 I I I I G F F F F I F F F G G G G G R R R R A I I I I A I A I A A I
1909 I I I I G F F F F F F F F G G G G G R R R R R A I I I I A A I A G I


History of Supply Center Counts
-------------------------------
Power    1900 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09   Player
Austria     3   4   5   5   6   5   6   7   5   4   John Godfrey
England     3   4   4   2                           Sean Starkey
France      3   6   6   7   8   8   7   7   7   8   Ken Lo
Germany     3   5   5   5   6   6   6   6   6   7   Roy Y.K. Li
Italy       3   5   5   6   7   8   9  10  12  10   Ken Ross
Russia      4   6   6   7   6   6   5   4   4   5   Steven Stuart
Turkey      3   4   3   2   1   1   1               Dave Marshall
Index:     10  24  24  27  31  32  32  35  38  36


Index is the sum of squares of the number of supply centers divided by the
number of players.  It is a measure of how far the game has progressed.


Broadcast message from desper@math.rutgers.edu as Master in cheetah:

I have five "yeas" so the five-way draw goes through.  I will probably 
GM another game in the near future:  either a high-dedication game or a 
double-player Youngstown game (or both).  All of you would be welcome 
there (if I set the dedication rating too high, and you want to play, 
drop me a line.  I'll make exceptions for veterans.)

One nice thing about Cheetah was the fact that all of the
players stuck with it all the way through, and submission of late
orders was hardly  a problem at all.  I credit this partially to my
exclusion of players with negative dedication rating.  I'll look to
continue this trend in the future.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            Rick

Broadcast message from lokendr@ecf.toronto.edu as France in cheetah:

I would like to thank all my fellow players for an _interesting_ game.
True, a 5-way draw is not the most exciting, but I think it was inevitable
since none of us really, were willing to lose. 

Thanks to Rick Desper, for one of the most efficient moderated games I have
played to date on the Judge. The game ran so smoothly and quickly, I was
very impressed indeed.  His constant pushes to late players kept things
rolling and I for one, do not enjoy everlasting lagging games. Thanks Rick :)

As for the game, I think things would have turned out much differently if
Italy had not stabbed me so early on in the game.  At a time where I was
tempted to continue my assault against Russian and German fleets, I predicted
(with the help of my German and Russian colleagues) of a possible Italian
advance. And sure enough....  I think if Italy and Austria had helped me 
out from the other end,  we would have been left with 3 powers of which I
would be the weakest and the next target leading to a 2-way draw or perhaps
a win. 

Interesting moments:  I was completely awe-stricken with Germany's defense.
  I distinctly remember one point where I went for the gusto and tried for
  Munich, Belgium, London, Edinburgh and the North Sea (I think) -- well,
  anyways _I was going for it all_  and because of one miswritten order
  and void support from Russia, everything bounced and I didn't get a
  single thing. It was actually quite funny AND humiliating at the time.

Thanks to everyone again for playing and I hope I have the honor to play
with you all again some time, some place.  Good luck in your future conquests
and don't drink and drive.

Kendrick Lo 
France in Cheetah
University of Toronto


Message from godfrey@wdc.sri.com as Austria to Master in cheetah:

Cheetah end-of-game notes from Austria-Hungary:

      This was a good, well-run game, with dedicated players and GM.
It's unfortunate we couldn't produce a more fluid game.  Both France
and Germany wrote me that they felt from early on that Italy and I
were irrecovably united.  It's ironic, because I suspect that Ken
(Italy) and I are both the kind of player who would prefer a more
fluid, diplomacy-oriented game to a military slugfest.  However, our
initial success at eliminating Turkey through the Key Lepanto formed
a strong alliance between us, and it also left our forces so
intertwined that it was hard to entertain other options that were
offered to each of us until it was too late.

      If I learned one thing about the Lepanto, it's that Austria and
Italy have to break into France and/or out of the Med quickly, or
else a stalemate can easily result.  (Italy tried, but France
anticipated him; perhaps if we'd tried sooner.)  Alternatively,
either Italy or Austria should ally with France and stab his partner
-- but then, part of the rationale for any Lepanto is that if Italy
and Austria don't help each other, they both stand a good chance of
being eliminated.  In this game, Italy had plenty of opportunities to
do me in, and I appreciate his restraint.  When he finally did stab
me it was legitimate, but it was too late to shake things up in the
game, so after a few turns he agreed to call the attack off.  If he
had stabbed me earlier, I'm sure we wouldn't have ended up with a
five-way draw; however, he probably wouldn't have emerged as the
winner, given the strong French-German alliance.

John Godfrey


Broadcast message from kar@swift.cs.columbia.edu as Italy in cheetah:

Let me say thanks to all for the game.  I also appreciate everybody's
dedication in not leaving the game.  I enjoyed playing this game very
much.  I look forward to playing with any of you again.

In this game I was probably the player with the most choices and
decisions to make.  My first decision was to play a Key Lepanto with
Austria.  I also signed a peace agreement with France.  We modified
the Key Lepanto slightly on the second move so that Austria did not
support me into Serbia.  A consequence of this was that both Russia
and Turkey believed I was still attacking Austria.  I got good
information from them that helped protect both myself and Austria, and
gave Turkey little idea of the impending attack on Bulgaria.  The only
one to recognize the Lepanto was Germany, who either didn't share the
information or wasn't believed when he did.

The next opportunity I had was one proposed by Russia in which the two
of us attack Austria, and then divide the remainder of Turkey.  I was
not sure he was genuine (it turned out he was; had I known he was
genuine Austria and I could have taken Rumania then, and advanced much
more quickly against Russia).  The attack would have been impressive,
reducing Austria from 5 units to 0 in one move.  However I assessed
that Russia would gain more from such an arrangement than Italy, and
could break the game open.

At this point Turkey almost succeeded in breaking up the Austria/Italy
alliance by telling each of us about fictional agreements against the
other.

Now France and I joined in a short-lived attack on Germany, a one-move
unsuccessful attack on Munich.  I suggested to Germany that I was more
interested in attacking France with his cooperation.  I judged from
the position that it was in Germany's interest to attack France, but
he did not seem to agree as his moves indicate.  As a result, France
was now aware that Italy may be planning an attack.

Because of a probable warning from Germany, France was able to
relocate forces just in time to defend solidly.  My build of another
fleet against France's wishes must have been a certain tip-off, but I
couldn't attack France without it.  I did manage to get Marseilles,
but the Mediterranean was blocked.  And Austria was blocked in the
east.

I should mention that at two points up to now I strongly considered
stabbing Austria.  However I judged that doing so would strengthen
Germany and Russia, who would continue to attack Italy once Austria
was out of the way.  I also considered a three-way alliance between
Austria, France and Italy, but judged that I would be sandwiched in
such an alliance, and unable to adequately support my units in central
Europe.  If such an alliance were to succeed, Austria and France would
have only me to attack.

So the game seemed stalemated, with a France/Germany/Russia alliance,
and an Italy/Austria alliance.  Germany called for a draw vote.  I
figured it was worth trying for a win, even if that was an unlikely
prospect, by stabbing Austria and seeing if the northern alliance
would be rearranged.  It became clear that there was no perceptible
rearrangement of alliances, and so, at the last minute Austria and I
re-aligned to preserve a stalemate.

While a 5-way draw may seem a bit cowardly, I do not think that
anything I could do would give me a chance of winning.  I believe that
the other players also hold this view about their positions.

Ken Ross
Italy in Cheetah


Broadcast message from H8902948@hkucc.hku.hk as Germany in cheetah:

I want to thank all of you in the game Cheetah. Especially to our master, Rick.
His effort in pressing late players (me included) made the game smooth and
efficient.

Early in the game, negotiation was active and surprisingly honest at the
beginning. Probably because that not much promises or agreements had been made.
Uncertainty and suspisious jammed the communication channels between EFG. Any
one could be the victim of the other two. Eventually it turned out that England
was the poor guy, iwth Russia intervention from the northern seas.

With England gone , the AI alliance menacing and according to my ultimate goal
of survival, the FRG triple alliance was formed. I got many chances to raid the
Scandinavia holdings of Russia. But doing so required the retreat of my
garrison fleet in English seas, which would likely encourage a French stab. If
France had commited heavily in the med eariler, things may be different.

Fortunately, this defensive effort stopped a french stab and discouraged the
upcoming attack. I think it was the most critical point for my survival inthe
game. Thereafter, I proceeded with extreme caution. A bit coward, yes. But what
can a poor lamb do inside a wolfpack?  :-)

Kaiser Roy Li
Cheetah


Broadcast message from stuart_s@ocf.Berkeley.EDU as Russia in cheetah:

         I also enjoyed this game very much, because it was kept up with the
same players and it continued to be fast.  I am sorry that near the end
I got a little slow in responding,  but I got a job about a month ago and
did not have as much spare time and I also had to cut back on my saved mail
so at one point I lost my units, but I of course found them again :)
         I think that I and Italy would have made a very deadly combo
especially after we could have taken all of Austria in one move back
in the third or second year and we could have taken him from 5 centers
to 0 centers in one turn.  It would have been one for the record books.
Turkey also knew the plan.  I saw this and told Italy and he said 'yes',
but I guess he thought I would have the upper hand.  All and all
I thought this was a great game and I would love to play with all of you
again.

                 Steven Stuart
                 Russia
                 Cheetah


*** DPPE EOG REPORT ***

Summary of game dppe. (EP 239) (Standard no-press non-humans-allowed gunboat
diplomacy game). This game was part of the Diplomacy Programming
Project. For more information, contact loeb@geocub.greco-prog.fr 

  Master:        Danny Loeb          loeb@geocub.greco-prog.fr
  Austria:       Charles Arsenault   charlesa@pike.ee.mcgill.ca
   from S1905M:  Sean Starkey        starkey@netcom.com
   from S1908M:  Dan H|rning         d91-dho@nada.kth.se
   from S1909M:  Erik Ljungberg      t86_erik_l@maja.teknikum.uu.se
  England:       Andre Verweij       andre@duteinh.et.tudelft.nl
   from F1905M:  Andrew Percey       mhs!allied!andy_percey@attmail.com
   from F1907M:  Eiji Hirai          hirai@cc.swarthmore.edu
  France:        Stephen Clancy      CLANCY@ITHACA.BITNET
  Germany:       Michael Baswell     EWN@CORNELLA.cit.cornell.edu
   from F1903B:  John Godfrey        godfrey@wdc.sri.com
   from S1908M:  Greg Dilworth       rgd3729@tamsun.tamu.edu
  Italy:         Diplomacy Diplomat (at turns except F1904M, F1907M)
   F1904M:       Eiji Hirai          hirai@cc.swarthmore.edu
   F1907M:       Barrie Treloar      bjtreloa@teaching.cs.adelaide.edu.au
  Russia:        Yawar Ali           YALI@BNR.CA
  Turkey:        Jamie Dreier        PL436000@brownvm.brown.edu

Historical Supply Center Summary
--------------------------------
    Ven Nap Edi Lvp Par Por Bel Mun Ber Swe Stp Mos Con Smy Rum Ser Vie
Year  Rom Tun Lon Bre Mar Spa Hol Kie Den Nor War Sev Ank Bul Gre Bud Tri
1900 I I I . E E E F F F . . . . G G G . . . R R R R T T T . . . . A A A
1901 I I I I E E E F F F . F . G G G G G . R R R R R T T T T A T . A A A
1902 I I I I E E E F F F F F G G G G R G R E R A R R T T T T A T A A A A
1903 I I I I E E E F F F F F G G G G G R E E A R R T T T T T A T A A A A
1904 A I I I E E E F F F F E G G G G G E R A A A A T T T T T A T T T G I
1905 I I I I E E E F F I F E G G G G G E R A A A A T T T T T T T T T G T
1906 I T I I E E E F F F F F G G G G G E E A A G A T T T T T T T T T G T
1907 T I I I E E E F F F F F E G G G G E E E A G A T T T T T T T T T G T
1908 T I I F E E E F F F F F E E G E G E E E A G A T T T T T T T T T T T
1909 T I I F E E E F F F F F E E G E E E E E E T A T T T T T T T T T T T
1910 T T T F E E E E F F F F E E E E E E E E E T T T T T T T T T T T T T
1911 T T T T E E E F F T F F E E E E E E E E E T T T T T T T T T T T T T

History of Supply Center Counts
-------------------------------
Power    1900 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11  Player
Austria     3   4   6   6   6*\                            Charles Arsenault
                                4*  3   2 \                Sean Starkey
                                            2 \            Dan H|rning
                                                1          Erik Ljungberg
England     3   3   4   5   5 \                            Andre Verweij
                                5   5 \                    Andrew Percey
                                        7   9  11  13  12  Eiji Hirai
France      3   4   5   5   4   3   5*  5   6   6   5   4  Stephen Clancy
Germany     3   5   5   5 \                                Michael Baswell
                            6   6   7   6 \                John Godfrey
                                            3   1          Greg Dilworth
Italy       3   4   4   4   4   5   3   3   2   2          Diplomacy Diplomat
Russia      4   5   5   3   1   1                          Yawar Ali
Turkey      3   5   5   6   8  10  11  11  12  13  16  18  Jamie Dreier
Index:     10  18  24  24  27  30  34  34  39  47  64  69
* = 1 unused build.

----

Broadcast message from England in dppe:
--------------------------------------
My biggest flub was in incorrectly thinking that France was about to attack
when when France ordered a fleet into the Mid Atlantic.  I couldn't figure
out what France was doing until too late.  By that time, I had decided that
I needed to get French supply centers before Turkey could get them if France
really was attacking me.
However, I was stupid.  I should've risked it, trusted France and assumed
that France was doing the intelligent thing.
Oh well.  I apologize.  I truly am sorry.  I was hoping that France and I
could at build a stalemate line against Turkey but I really screwed it up.
Eiji Hirai
hirai@cc.swarthmore.edu

----

Broadcast message from France in dppe:
-------------------------------------
I had not anticipated a stab by England so soon. I figured (incorrectly) that
England would see my continued resistance against Turkey as being in his
best interests, and would therefore let me alone.  But then I never had a great
level of trust towards England, based on some earlier battles we had in and
around Spain.  My move into Mao from Naf was therefore probably overly
cautious,    and served only to provoke an aggressive English
response--not wise on my part!
Congratulations to Turkey on a game well played.
--Stephen Clancy, France in dppe
clancy@ithaca.bitnet

----

Broadcast message from Turkey in dppe:
-------------------------------------
DPPE was the most interesting game of Gunboat that I have
ever played, and possibly the most interesting game
of Diplomacy. I'm sure it was not QUITE as interesting
for the rest of you, but several of you played beautifully,
I was extremely impressed. I have to say that I won largely
by circumstance, and by exploiting bad strategies of
two of the powers (at least *I* think they were bad
strategies). For excellence of play, I think it was
a very even match among three or four of us. I will
say just a bit about my own strategies as they developed,
and then a few words about each of yours. I hope you
won't find this presumptuous--I have all this "discussion"
bottled up after a long, intense game of Diplomacy which
I couldn't discuss with anyone during the game.

The opening went about as I planned. I opened friendly toward
Russia, he opened aggressively toward me, and I got the upper
hand. I think my best play of the game, tactically speaking,
was the manouvering of my fleets in the first few years. I
snatched Sev, put my fleets out into open water, and prepared
to sail out against Italy. That was my plan; I figured if
I was successful, I would have Austria scissored and would
also have a good jump toward the stalemate line.
The only problem was, Austria was growing too fast. So I stabbed,
and I'd have to say that was my best *strategic* decision of
the game, and of course I was very lucky that Germany chose the
same time to stab at Austria.
>From then on, my strategy was pretty simple. I would try
to keep my opposition fragmented; thus, for example, rather
than playing for the elimination of Austria, I would leave him
be while I pushed against Germany and Italy, trying to keep
those three balanced. I never would have done that in a standard
Diplomacy game. The strategy was tailor-made for Gunboat: make
sure that as few of the pieces arrayed against me could coordinate
their moves as possible. Of course, it didn't hurt that one of
those powers was played by the Diplomat.
So, that was my game plan. It would have been interesting
to see how it faired if England had played differently.
So here are my comments about each of my foes.

Italy
I guessed early that Italy was Diplomat, but I was keeping an
open mind about it. I hadn't been watching France or England
closely enough to rule them out (though it became VERY obvious
later that France was human), and it could even have been
Russia, though I was inclined to think not. My guess was
based mostly on the fact that Italy's moves had no focus,
he was just pushing the pieces around. But sometimes that
can actually be a strategy for Italy, so I couldn't be sure.
There were two more specific cues, though: Italy almost
never supported himself (but he did on one key move, that
actually threw me for a short while), and he twice put a
fleet in Piedmont, which is certainly the silliest place
on the board for a fleet (has anyone ever seen a fleet
in Piedmont before?).
Obviously, I benefited a great deal from the fact that Italy
was played by an automaton. I benefited in a strange way, one
I would not have expected: it wasn't that I could roll over
him, easy prey, but rather that I didn't HAVE to roll over
him to get where I wanted to go. I could play around instead.
In 1907, Fall, I didn't take Naples even though it was
indefensible (I could have sailed in unopposed from TyS),
because it was clear to me that France was threatening, and
I knew I could defeat Italy later with no problem, and that
he would make no trouble for me in the interrim.
Nice try, Diplomat. You still have a long way to go.

Russia
I didn't get much of a sense of your play, because you were
so consistently unlucky, right from the opening when you
guessed but failed to take one of my home centers from Black.
If you had, it would have been a VERY different game. But
that was the story of your whole, brief presence in the game,
I think. I was a bit surprised that you abandoned Mother Russia
and headed for Scandinavia. I guess it looked safer at the time.

Austria
And talk about bad luck....
You grew too fast, even for a Gunboat game. That's hindsight,
and I admit I probably would have done the same thing. Your rise
was impressive, your fall was nothing short of spectacular. In case
the Northerners weren't watching, Austria went from the dominant
position in the game, the favorite to win the whole thing,
owning Vie, Bud, Tri, Ser, Rum, and StP, with a strong play
for Ven, War, and Mos, straight to ruin on the next
move, an almost hopeless position, fragmented and with no home
centers at all. I was especially struck by the fact that you
had units in Norway and Venice, and owned them both, but
owned none of your own centers. I'll bet that's a first!
I kept wondering whether the other players were noticing
the small but significant little skirmishes over Ukraine,
which you won for about 4 successive moves, driving me
nearly crazy; or the interesting point that when I trapped
one of your pieces and destroyed it, you were permanently
weakened since you could never rebuild. I bet Germany noticed.

I won't say that I left you sitting there in Russia just out
of respect--obviously, it was because I knew I could come get you
whenever I wanted to, and I was after Germany. But I was
glad to see you survive those extra years. You deserved that
much, at least.

Germany
You consistently surprised and impressed me. First, there was
your move into Vienna. I saw the logic, but the execution and
timing was perfect. I was practically taking notes.
Then, there was your decision to withdraw the knife from
France and return to face me. Again, it made perfect sense,
but it took a lot of courage and I wasn't expecting it.
My advantages were pretty daunting from the start. I had numbers,
I had time on my side, I had perfect coordination while you
had to guess at what Austria and Italy were going to do. And yet
you slowed my progress to a crawl. But I knew it would continue.
I imagined you beating your head against the nearest wall as
the English sailed into your ports. Actually, at first I thought
it was a clever plan--England would take a city from you, you
would disband a fleet, England would give it back, you would
build an army. But, er, no, that wasn't the plan. I think I would
have thrown in the towel before you did, vacating the south and
pitching everything against the Brits. You have the patience of
Job. It was a pleasure.

England
I don't get it. You disengaged from France, that made sense. I expected
to see you try to pop armies into Scandinavia and then into Russia
from the top. I hope you're going to explain your plan. Did you
think I wasn't a real threat?? Or did you figure I was sure to
win, so you may as well try to come in second?
I didn't really watch your tactics, we were never anywhere near
each other, so I really have nothing else to say.

Then again, in the end, you ALMOST pulled it off, the whole thing.
If France had moved from Spain to Marseilles on the very last move,
I think there was a good chance you could have forced a draw with
me.

France
Ah, France. The truly wonderful thing about this game
was, every time I gained the upper hand against one enemy,
thinking that NOW I had conquered my really formidable
foe, another one, equally formidable, would pop into place.
I had counted you out practically right away. You were squeezed,
attacked by ALL THREE neighbors, you were in tatters.... And
the suddenly you weren't. When I saw you chasing the Brits
back up north, I was quite pleased--I thought you would
follow them and go teach them a lesson, or something. When
you swung back, I smiled to myself--I obviously had you
seriously outgunned, and I had beaten you to the key
positions. Right? Hmph.
I was quite proud of my move in Fall '07, though I kicked
myself for letting you set up in Naf, Wes, and GoL the
season before. It wasn't 'til that point that I began
to realize how critical positioning was going to be. If you
had taken Tun and TyS at once, I might never have gotten
you out. I was starting to calculate whether I could win
by overrunning Germany, and I was figuring I would have to
march through Munich and Ruhr and bother you in Burgundy
if I wanted to make progress in the Mediterranean.....

Notes on the Endgame:
I thought Germany's debuilds in  winter before 1909 were
a bit churlish. He gave up any chance of winning, in fact,
he assured his own elimination, by ceding his remaining
centers to England. And he did this despite the fact that
England stabbed him in the back when Germany was making a
valiant effort to stave off the aggressor, namely me. So
my estimation of the Germans declined a bit.

Once England had completely replaced Germany without
allowing me to grab any German centers, I was more
impressed, and more worried. Now the entire game
depended on whether I could take Tunis and Marseilles.
I wasn't sure that England realized this. There was
a fairly obvious stalemate line through the middle
of Eastern Europe, and there was really never any
serious question of either of us taking the other's
centers once that line was set up.

I guessed that England would now come to help France
against me, and was ready to accept a 3-way draw
(stalemate lines in the relevant part of the Mediterranean
would also be easy to set up). But no. England stabbed
France in Fall of 1910.

I could hardly believe it. I thought at that point I would
win easily.

But AGAIN, I had underestimated the resources of my foes.
It looked like there was a chance that England could set
up a stalemate line that included the French forces, then
pick them off without leaving an opening for me. The result
would have been a 17-17 split.

The final year gave me a nervous breakdown. In the first
place, I obviously never expected to take Marseilles with
that move. Clearly France was expecting English Bur-Mar,
Turkish Pie-Mar. Good thought. But it didn't happen.
Now, if I had played, say Tyrolia-Piedmont on that move,
I would have had a forced win. But I didn't, I didn't put
ANYTHING in Piedmont. I was kicking myself.

I thought it was almost a sure thing that England would
order Bur S Spa-Mar, and that France would order Spa-Mar,
Por-Spa, Wes-GoL. That would kick me from Mar for sure.
And if France added Bre-Gas, I would have to destroy the
army in Mar. If France and England then pulled together,
I would be shut down; they could set up a stalemate line
and hold me to exactly 17 centers.

The Fall was almost anticlimactic. France, apparently hoping
to save Tunis, let me keep Marseilles. I thought that was
the first mistake I had seen France make. And of course it
was the last.

Thank you, all of you, for a great game.
Jamie, Turkey

----

Comments by Daniel Loeb (GM and DPP Director):
---------------------------------------------
Spring 1901 - The Diplomat chose a only moderately popular opening.
(Rom-Ven, Ven-Tri, Nap-Ion) used only in 7 other games. Since we were
testing only the strategic module, the computer could be expected to
have no mercy to Italy's usual ally: Austria. Moreover, at this point,
each countries moves are predicted indendantly, so Italy didn't
consider very long the possibility that Austria might defend himself
as in fact he did. Thus, our program continues to uselessly attack
Trieste continuously for the next several years. Finally, our program
is not designed to search for convoys, so no consideration was given
to any Lepanto-like strategy. 

Fall 1901 - At this point, we introduced code to give special
consideration to supply centers especially during Fall turns. Moves
were generated two times. The first time, fleet Ionian Sea held in
place. We then increased the weight of all supply centers, and on the
second run we had (Rom H, Ven->Tri, Ion->Tun).

Spring 1902 - Italy moves to ION and TYS in order to maximize its
control of the Mediterranean. The army moves to NAP not for a convoy
as you may have supposed, but merely because our program seeks to
control enemy territory with all of its units, and maintain control of
threatened units. For units to which neither concept applies, the
result is pretty much random.

Spring 1904 - Our program now calculates possible supports. This turn
was limitted to a 1700 iteration search due to a bug. Later searches
were much deeper. Turkey suspects Italy and Turkey of being the
diplomat. "Russia, on the grounds that (1) he drove Austria
out of Warsaw and into Livonia, whence the Austrian army wreacked havoc;
and (2) he abandoned his home centers, more or less, on the following
move, concentrating instead on attacking Germany.... Italy, on the
grounds that (1) he tried a foolhardy attack against France even
though A and T weren't fighting, and (2) he did not guard Tunis last
move, even though I was in Ion and he thought I was hostile, and (3)
he moved a fleet into Pied for no earthly reason."

Winter 1905 - My student accidentally let the Diplomat go unplayed
during my absnece. Mr. Hirai took control, but I corrected the
situation as soon as I noticed it. I set the quiet flag at that point,
but in so doing may have revealed the identity of the diplomat to
Turkey and the eventual England.

Winter 1906 - Russia is eliminated, and Turkey asks if my silence
means that Russia was not the diplomat. "If it wasn't Russia, then I
still guess it is Italy, but if so then it has improved considerably
over its performance in the games published in EP. 
(I still think I'm going to win, though.)"

Fall 1907 - Again we let Italy go CD, and it is played for a turn by a
human player. This explains why Trieste is not attacked!?       

Spring 1908 - Turkey writes: Ok, that does it. The Diplomat must be Italy.
It threw me a few moves ago by supporting itself. But look, it has
just left Naples indefensible for a Fall move!!!!
On the other hand, England must be crazy. Either that, or he
doesn't think I'm a genuine threat to win...."
As mentioned above, Support is a relatively new feature of our
diplomat. However, the program is unable to look more than 1 move
ahead, and uses a number of heuristics to compare positions. For this
reason, it couldn't see the threat to Naples.
Our program is now using an improved search algorithm which takes into
accounts the best possible enemy moves. This turn only 1000
iterations. Afterwards, a gain in speed allowed us 4000+ iterations
within the time limit; however, our position has already deteriorated
so far that it is difficult to estimate how much better our program is
now playing. In fact, starting now, our program's survival depends
more on the whims of Turkey than on its on ability.

Winter 1908 - Turkey asks about the procedures to follow in the case
of a draw as Germany hands SC's over to England.

Spring 1909 - A series of moves start in which our program
consistantly moves Pie-Mar, and Rom H. Neither move succeeds and the
computer continues to make these moves since its algorithm keeps on
finding the same moves.

Fall 1910 - Italy is eliminated. Turkey writes: "Oh well. I tried to
keep him around, really I did. And, for a while there, it really
looked like France had bottled me up. I was getting depressed. Count
on the English to screw everything up. Ya know, you MIGHT throw him
out for goofy play. But I guess dumb isn't the same as goofy, huh?
... Better luck next time, Diplomat."
 
I believe the Diplomat had a hard time at playing Italy. He couldn't
recognize that attacking his neighbors was not in his self-interest.
Moreover, he was unable to convoy, nor move his armies neatly down the
Italian pennisula. As a result, he never got any further than Tunis,
and had no chances to survive this game.

To do better, a diplomatic package is needed along with better long
range heuristics. (Some of which remain to be implemented, two years
after my article with Mike Hall....) Per Westling is now working on
the diplomatic part of our program, and expect renewed testing
sometime soon.

Thanks again for all your help and encouragement. I hope you enjoyed
the game.


Broadcast message from Observer in dppe:

Greetings, Jamie (Turkey in dppe),

I played Germany in dppe from F1903B to F1907B.  I enjoyed reading
your detailed comments on a game that I dropped out of a couple of
months ago, and I congratulate you on your eventual win.

> Germany
> You consistently surprised and impressed me. First, there was
> your move into Vienna. I saw the logic, but the execution and
> timing was perfect. I was practically taking notes.
> Then, there was your decision to withdraw the knife from
> France and return to face me. Again, it made perfect sense,
> but it took a lot of courage and I wasn't expecting it.
> My advantages were pretty daunting from the start. I had numbers,
> I had time on my side, I had perfect coordination while you
> had to guess at what Austria and Italy were going to do. And yet
> you slowed my progress to a crawl. But I knew it would continue.
> I imagined you beating your head against the nearest wall as
> the English sailed into your ports. Actually, at first I thought
> it was a clever plan--England would take a city from you, you
> would disband a fleet, England would give it back, you would
> build an army. But, er, no, that wasn't the plan. I think I would
> have thrown in the towel before you did, vacating the south and
> pitching everything against the Brits. You have the patience of
> Job. It was a pleasure.

Wow!  Thanks for the compliments.  When I took over the German
position, I thought I had a good chance to expand quickly.  No one
was threatening my borders, and I had made good inroads into France.  I
decided to strike out both east and west.  Austria was clearly the
leader in the game, so I thought it was worth taking a chance at
sneaking into Vienna; I figured I would at least tie him up awhile.
I was actually rather stunned that it worked; Austria made no effort
to cover his home centers.  His collapse was indeed spectacular.

It was then immediately obvious that you were in the fast lane to win
the game.  That's why I reversed course out of France (if I remember
right, I had made it all the way to Gascony ?) and headed east.  I
was hoping the other players would see the obvious as well; but
England, at least, did not.  You're right, I was extremely annoyed at
him for attacking me instead of going through Scandinavia.  But I
distinctly remember deciding that I couldn't spare the units to
garrison my rear and face your attack at the same time.

It would have been nice to have received help from Italy against you,
but obviously this didn't happen.  I thought Italy might be the
Diplomat, but I didn't feel I had enough evidence to lodge a guess with
Daniel Loeb.

> Notes on the Endgame:
> I thought Germany's debuilds in  winter before 1909 were
> a bit churlish. He gave up any chance of winning, in fact,
> he assured his own elimination, by ceding his remaining
> centers to England. And he did this despite the fact that
> England stabbed him in the back when Germany was making a
> valiant effort to stave off the aggressor, namely me. So
> my estimation of the Germans declined a bit.

> Once England had completely replaced Germany without
> allowing me to grab any German centers, I was more
> impressed, and more worried. Now the entire game
> depended on whether I could take Tunis and Marseilles.

I plead not guilty; overload at work had forced me to resign the
game by that point.  However, I'm not sure I would be as critical of
my successor as you are.  I spent a lot of time before I left the
game pondering this question, and I had more or less decided that it
was better to continue trying to hold back the power that was
threatening to win--Turkey--than to resist the stab from the rear.
Turning on England would have meant destruction by Turkey.
By giving over his centers to England, the new Germany was able to
hold you back, forcing you to make some successful moves in the Med
in order to win.

In a standard game, I might have done differently; when you know who
it is who's stabbing you, it makes it easier to be angry with them
and choose revenge as a goal.  (However, it turns out it would have
been misplaced, as England changed hands around the same time I left
the game.)  If we could have communicated, I (or my successor)
might have worked out a deal with you to remain in the game as your
subordinate and gone after England, for revenge.  But in a gunboat
game, none of this was possible.  It was especially frustrating to
me, in the mid-game, not to be able to write England and tell him
"Lay off, I'm busy holding off Turkey!"  Oh well, that's gunboat
Diplomacy.

Again, congratulations!  I look forward to meeting you in a game with
communications sometime.

Best regards,

John Godfrey


*** HALL92 PRESS AND RESULTS ***

Due to limits to the numbers of observers allowed by the judge, I have
published some recent press, and results from the game hall92 (EP 200).

Here is another comment Danny Loeb made about the openings.  In honour
of Dave Cebula's success in playing Austria, Danny Loeb's opening library
for Austria has been published in this issue.

Broadcast message from loeb@geocub.greco-prog.fr as Observer in hall92:

I making this public, since as Nick pointed out players can read
Observer press whenever they want anyway....

I wrote last turn:
>A:15.7% E:23.9% F:19%  G:14.1% I:9.1%  R:34.8% T:21.3%
>...
>Austria: Army Budapest -> Serbia.
>Austria: Army Vienna -> Galicia.  (*bounce*)
>Austria: Fleet Trieste -> Albania.
>TOTAL: 33       Win:2(Emerald,Ajax), Draw2:1(Inch), Draw3:1(Horse),
>Rank 3rd        Loss:14, Ongoing:13, Abandoned:1, Unknown:1
>(1a from player's guide, Balkan Gambit, Gal Variation)

I should have added that Dave Cebula (the current Austria) played
Austria to a win with this opening in the games Emerald and Ajax.
However, as we see below:

        Game            Russia                  Turkey
        Emerald         Ukr-Gal-Bla-Bot         Bul-HOLD-Con
        Ajax            MISSING                 Bul-Arm-Bla

In the games, Emerald and Ajax, Dave was not confronted with the
Russo-Turk Juggernaut... 
 
>I would have to agree that this has been an interesting fall to a somewhat
>conservative spring move.  I am most interested in the two 'void' support
>moves. (France's support of a Italy moving to Munich and Russia's support of
>Turkey moving his Fleet to Con.)
>In the first case, it seems that there may have been some misguiding or 
>promises not kept.  Did Italy say he would move to Munich, or did France 
>fabricate this move.

It may very well be neither deception on the part of Italy nor
invention on the part of France. France may very well have seen little
use in moving his army so pledged an open offer of support for Italy
to take as he sees fit. This may be a sign of desperation on the sign
of France, seeing as how Germany and England are communicating so
well. England would not have wasted a convoy to Denmark had he not
prearranged a North/South division of spoils.

>  If Italy knew about this possible support, why did he
>give up the extra build?  Did he not want to risk upsetting Germany or is he
>still a little worried about Austria?  Why did France order this move?  It is
>clear that France has taken a hostile stance toward Germany.  Did Italy offer
>support and then back out or was this just a French ruse?
>I am more puzzled by the Russian support of the Turkish non-move.  It would
>seem that a R/T alliance is in the works and in the process of moving on
>Austria.  Why then did Russia order a support of a move which Turkey did not 
>make?  Was there an error in communication, foul play by the Turk or a Russian
>ruse to make Austria think that all is not quite in order?

Italy is in the classic balancing role. He sees the Juggernaut and
offers a Lepanto to Austria's defense. However, Turkey is not naive
and moves to the Aegean to short circuit the Lepanto before it starts.

The army in Tyrolia had no interest in moving to Munich which he might
have gotten but would never have held on to. Instead it will be used
to support or hinder Germany in the future so as to better continue a
stalemate along German/French lines.

In the future, I see England engaging the Juggernaut up North while
Austria and Italy do so down south. France and Germany will continue
in a world of their own fighting each other. Of course, who really
knows what surprises our players have in store for us.

Yours, Daniel Loeb, Humble Observer, Hall92     loeb@geocub.greco-prog.fr


Fall 1901-Winter 1902 results for hall92.

Movement results for Fall of 1901.  (hall92.002)

Austria: Army Serbia SUPPORT Fleet Albania -> Greece.
Austria: Army Vienna -> Galicia.  (*bounce*)
Austria: Fleet Albania -> Greece.

England: Army Yorkshire -> North Sea -> Denmark.
England: Fleet Norwegian Sea -> Norway.
England: Fleet North Sea CONVOY Army Yorkshire -> Denmark.

France: Army Marseilles -> Spain.
France: Army Burgundy SUPPORT Italian Army Tyrolia -> Munich.  (*void*)
France: Fleet Mid-Atlantic Ocean -> Portugal.

Germany: Army Kiel -> Munich.
Germany: Army Ruhr -> Belgium.
Germany: Fleet Holland SUPPORT Army Ruhr -> Belgium.

Italy: Army Apulia -> Ionian Sea -> Tunis.
Italy: Army Tyrolia HOLD.
Italy: Fleet Ionian Sea CONVOY Army Apulia -> Tunis.

Russia: Army Ukraine SUPPORT Army Warsaw -> Galicia.
Russia: Army Warsaw -> Galicia.
Russia: Fleet Rumania SUPPORT Turkish Fleet Constantinople -> Bulgaria (south coast).  (*void*)
Russia: Fleet Gulf of Bothnia -> Sweden.

Turkey: Army Bulgaria -> Greece.  (*bounce*)
Turkey: Army Smyrna -> Constantinople.
Turkey: Fleet Constantinople -> Aegean Sea.

Ownership of supply centers:

Austria:   Budapest, Greece, Serbia, Trieste, Vienna.
England:   Denmark, Edinburgh, Liverpool, London, Norway.
France:    Brest, Marseilles, Paris, Portugal, Spain.
Germany:   Belgium, Berlin, Holland, Kiel, Munich.
Italy:     Naples, Rome, Tunis, Venice.
Russia:    Moscow, Rumania, Sevastopol, St Petersburg, Sweden, Warsaw.
Turkey:    Ankara, Bulgaria, Constantinople, Smyrna.

Austria:   5 Supply centers,  3 Units:  Builds   2 units.
England:   5 Supply centers,  3 Units:  Builds   2 units.
France:    5 Supply centers,  3 Units:  Builds   2 units.
Germany:   5 Supply centers,  3 Units:  Builds   2 units.
Italy:     4 Supply centers,  3 Units:  Builds   1 unit.
Russia:    6 Supply centers,  4 Units:  Builds   2 units.
Turkey:    4 Supply centers,  3 Units:  Builds   1 unit.


Adjustment orders for Winter of 1901.  (hall92.003)

Austria: Builds an army in Budapest.
Austria: Builds an army in Trieste.
Italy:   Builds a fleet in Naples.
England: Builds a fleet in Edinburgh.
England: Builds a fleet in London.
Turkey:  Builds a fleet in Smyrna.
Russia:  Builds an army in St Petersburg.
Russia:  Builds an army in Sevastopol.
Germany: Builds an army in Kiel.
Germany: Builds an army in Berlin.
France:  Builds a fleet in Brest.
France:  Builds an army in Paris.


Movement results for Spring of 1902.  (hall92.004)

Austria: Army Serbia -> Bulgaria.  (*bounce*)
Austria: Army Vienna -> Galicia.  (*bounce*)
Austria: Fleet Greece -> Aegean Sea.
Austria: Army Budapest SUPPORT Army Vienna -> Galicia.
Austria: Army Trieste -> Serbia.  (*bounce*)

England: Army Denmark -> Sweden.
England: Fleet Norway -> Sweden.  (*bounce, dislodged*)
England: Fleet North Sea SUPPORT Fleet London -> English Channel.
England: Fleet Edinburgh -> Norwegian Sea.
England: Fleet London -> English Channel.

France: Army Spain -> Gascony.
France: Army Burgundy HOLD.
France: Fleet Portugal -> Mid-Atlantic Ocean.
France: Fleet Brest HOLD.
France: Army Paris SUPPORT Army Burgundy.

Germany: Army Munich -> Ruhr.  (*bounce*)
Germany: Army Belgium -> Ruhr.  (*bounce*)
Germany: Fleet Holland -> Helgoland Bight.
Germany: Army Kiel -> Denmark.
Germany: Army Berlin -> Kiel.

Italy: Army Tunis HOLD.
Italy: Army Tyrolia -> Bohemia.
Italy: Fleet Ionian Sea SUPPORT Austrian Fleet Greece -> Aegean Sea.
Italy: Fleet Naples -> Apulia.

Russia: Army Ukraine SUPPORT Army Galicia.
Russia: Army Galicia SUPPORT Army Sevastopol -> Rumania.  (*cut*)
Russia: Fleet Rumania -> Black Sea.
Russia: Fleet Sweden -> Norway.
Russia: Army St Petersburg SUPPORT Fleet Sweden -> Norway.
Russia: Army Sevastopol -> Rumania.

Turkey: Army Bulgaria -> Greece.
Turkey: Army Constantinople -> Bulgaria.  (*bounce*)
Turkey: Fleet Aegean Sea SUPPORT Army Bulgaria -> Greece.  (*dislodged*)
Turkey: Fleet Smyrna -> Eastern Mediterranean.


Retreat orders for Spring of 1902.  (hall92.005)

England: Fleet Norway -> Skagerrak.
Turkey:  Fleet Aegean Sea -> Smyrna.


Movement results for Fall of 1902.  (hall92.006)

Austria: Army Serbia SUPPORT Fleet Aegean Sea -> Greece.
Austria: Army Vienna SUPPORT Army Budapest.
Austria: Fleet Aegean Sea -> Greece.
Austria: Army Budapest SUPPORT Army Vienna.
Austria: Army Trieste SUPPORT Army Serbia.

England: Army Sweden SUPPORT Fleet Skagerrak -> Norway.
England: Fleet Skagerrak -> Norway.
England: Fleet North Sea SUPPORT Fleet Skagerrak -> Norway.
England: Fleet Norwegian Sea SUPPORT Fleet Skagerrak -> Norway.
England: Fleet English Channel -> Irish Sea.

France: Army Gascony SUPPORT Army Burgundy.
France: Army Burgundy SUPPORT Italian Army Bohemia -> Munich.
France: Fleet Mid-Atlantic Ocean -> North Atlantic Ocean.
France: Fleet Brest -> Mid-Atlantic Ocean.
France: Army Paris -> Picardy.

Germany: Army Munich -> Burgundy.  (*bounce, dislodged*)
Germany: Army Belgium SUPPORT Army Munich -> Burgundy.
Germany: Fleet Helgoland Bight SUPPORT Army Denmark.
Germany: Army Denmark HOLD.
Germany: Army Kiel -> Ruhr.

Italy: Army Tunis HOLD.
Italy: Army Bohemia -> Munich.
Italy: Fleet Ionian Sea -> Eastern Mediterranean.  (*bounce*)
Italy: Fleet Apulia -> Ionian Sea.  (*bounce*)

Russia: Army Ukraine -> Rumania.
Russia: Army Galicia SUPPORT Army Ukraine -> Rumania.
Russia: Fleet Black Sea CONVOY Army Rumania -> Ankara.
Russia: Fleet Norway -> Barents Sea.
Russia: Army St Petersburg -> Finland.
Russia: Army Rumania -> Black Sea -> Ankara.

Turkey: Army Greece -> Bulgaria.  (*bounce, dislodged*)
Turkey: Army Constantinople -> Bulgaria.  (*bounce*)
Turkey: Fleet Smyrna -> Aegean Sea.
Turkey: Fleet Eastern Mediterranean -> Ionian Sea.  (*bounce*)


The following units were dislodged:

The German Army in Munich can retreat to Kiel or Berlin or Silesia or Tyrolia.
The Turkish Army in Greece can retreat to Albania.


Retreat orders for Fall of 1902.  (hall92.007)

Germany: Army  Munich -> Berlin.
Turkey:  Army  Greece -> Albania.

Ownership of supply centers:

Austria:   Budapest, Greece, Serbia, Trieste, Vienna.
England:   Edinburgh, Liverpool, London, Norway, Sweden.
France:    Brest, Marseilles, Paris, Portugal, Spain.
Germany:   Belgium, Berlin, Denmark, Holland, Kiel.
Italy:     Munich, Naples, Rome, Tunis, Venice.
Russia:    Ankara, Moscow, Rumania, Sevastopol, St Petersburg, Warsaw.
Turkey:    Bulgaria, Constantinople, Smyrna.

Austria:   5 Supply centers,  5 Units:  Builds   0 units.
England:   5 Supply centers,  5 Units:  Builds   0 units.
France:    5 Supply centers,  5 Units:  Builds   0 units.
Germany:   5 Supply centers,  5 Units:  Builds   0 units.
Italy:     5 Supply centers,  4 Units:  Builds   1 unit.
Russia:    6 Supply centers,  6 Units:  Builds   0 units.
Turkey:    3 Supply centers,  4 Units:  Removes  1 unit.


Adjustment orders for Winter of 1902.  (hall92.008)

Turkey:  Removes the army in Albania.
Italy:   Builds an army in Venice.

The next phase of hall92 will be Movement for Spring of 1903.
The deadline for orders will be Mon Nov  9 23:30:00 PST.


***** PART FOUR - DANNY LOEB'S OPENING LIBRARY *****

***  AUSTRIA ***
This is the first of a seven part series that examines the opening for 
each of the 7 powers.  Alphabetically, the first is Austria.  This series
was last published about 9 months ago, and I thought that considering all
the new data, it was time to look again.

It's interesting to note that the two wins (Ajax and Emerald) in one of
the openings below were won by Dave Cebula.  He is presently playing 
Austria in the Hall of Fame game (hall92) and has used the same opening!

Codes for the following tables:
W  - Solo win
Dn - n way draw
L  - Loss
O  - Game is still going on, no result available.
?  - Result is unknown, if anybody knows info about these games, please
     contact Danny Loeb (loeb@geocub.greco-prog.fr) or Nick Fitzpatrick
     (nick@sunburn.uwaterloo.ca)

SUMMARY OF OPENINGS FOR AUSTRIA (late October 1992)
-------------------------------
A Bud   A Vie   F Tri   #Games Used
-----   -----   -----   -----------
Ser     Bud     Alb     49
(Balkan Gambit, Bud Variation)  
2       W: Jutland, Mercury
2       D3: Banditos, Tiberius
1       D4: Radar
1       D5: Portnoy
18      L: Quartz, Berezina, Purple, Land, Guadal, Munk, Koursk,
           Osijek, Blind, Quebec, Xenon, Dday, Somme, Apple, Hector
22      O: Cheetah, Yellow, Ton, Hitler, Kaiser, Karat, Wren, 1889, Ulm, Tick,
           Inchworm, Soton, Spider, Amsterda, Beaver, Pompey, Dublin,
           Gorrilla, Sinister, Caps
           (Gunboat) Eldritch, Sarajevo
5       ?: Cannon, Nifty, 14epg8, 14epg13, Snake

Ser     Tri     Alb     47
(1b from players guide, Balkan Gambit, Tri Varaition)   
2       W: Water, Stockhol
1       D2: Paris
1       D4: (Gunboat) Leipzig
13      L: Vittle, Rose, Manhattan, Whip, Gallon, Ludwig
           (Gunboat) Mystery, Snorri, Warp, Tuba, Karlxii
           (NPGun) Bach, Khafji
23      O: Grossc, Slow, Maregno, Earwig, Volt, Lightspe, Twinkles, Pride,
           Msft, Fly, Gnat, Math, Diablos, Locust, Junebug, Dog, Elk,
           (Gunboat) Week, Zip, Silence, Lust,  Peregrin
           (NPGun) Dppf, Dppg
4       A: Drewids, Hyperwar, Squid, Gardens
3       ?: 14epg7, Diamond, Flip

Ser     Gal     Alb     35
(1a from player's guide, Balkan Gambit, Gal Variation)
2       W: Emerald, (Gunboat) Ajax
1       D2: Inch
1       D3: Horse
14      L: Juteland, 100andup, Turbo, Swift, Orange, Sparrow, Check,
           Cubit, Lot, Dram, Furlong, Mach5, Meter
           (Gunboat) Fast, (NPGun) Dppc, Mess
13      O: Unit, Watt, Ant, Ant, Zoom, Bosnia, Hall92
           Cicada, Infinite, Quart, Second, Fall
           (Gunboat) Banzai
1       A: Muddle
1       ?: 14epg5 

Ser     Bud     HOLD    4
        W: Walouf
        L: Sugar, Dragons, Jugful


Ser     HOLD    Alb     4       
(1c from player's guide, Balkan Gambit)
        O: Pint, Hornet, Ferret
        A: Lobo
        ?: Yank

Ser     Gal     HOLD    4       
        L: Zounds
        O: Grass, Mars, (Gunboat) Warsaw
   
Ser     Trl     Alb     4       
(Balkan Gambit)
        L: Bolt
        O: Comphall, Cow
           (Gunboat) Gluttony

Ser     Boh     Alb     4
(1-variant from player's guide, Balkan Gambit)
        L: Boadicea, Acre
        O: Womble, Surgeon

Ser     Gal     Ven     4
(The Southern Hedgehog)
        W: (NPGun) Dppb
        L: Mod, (NPGun) Dppd
        O: Trafalga

Tri     Trl     Adr     3
(2 from player's guide, Italian Attack, Von Metzke Opening)
        L: Spam, (NPGun) Conan
        O: (Gunboat) Avarice

Tri*    Gal*    Alb     3
        W: Under 
        ?: croatia, 14epg3

Ser     Trl     Adr     2 
        W: King
        ?: Dragnfly 

Rum     Tri     Adr     2       
        L: austerlitz, Ounce

Ser     Bud     Ven     2
        O: Beetle, (Gunboat) Hush

Rum     Bud     HOLD    2
        L: Xray, (NPGun) Dppa

Ser     HOLD    HOLD*   2
        O: newton, (NPGun) Dpph

Rum     Bud     Alb     2
        L: jade
        O: Antelope

SVieGal Gal     Alb     1       O: Pillbug
Gal     Tri     Alb     1       O: Tue
Rum     Gal     HOLD    1       O: Rad
Ser     Trl     HOLD    1       O: Moth
Rum     Bud     Adr     1       D6: Normandy
Ser     Bud     Adr     1       L: Zulu
Ser     HOLD    Ven     1       L: Evolt
Ser   SVen-Trl  Alb     1       O: gold 
HOLD    HOLD    HOLD    1       L: topple
Gal     Boh     Ven     1       L: (NPGun) Dppe
Rum     Trl     Adr     1       O: Wasp

Notes
-----
In 14epg3, Bud-Gal and Vie-Tri
In Newton, the actual order which judge ACCEPTED was F Tri C A Vie-Gre (!)

Excepts from Diplomacy A-Z
--------------------------

BALKAN GAMBIT (1.0) <MB:Jun80> The family of openings F(Tri)-Alb, 
A(Bud)-Ser. This is a true gambit, since the player is giving up much
of his ability to defend his home centres against Italy (and, to a lesser
extent, giving up some Austrian influence in Rum) in exchange
for the virtual assurance of gaining both Gre and Ser.

(2.0) <RE:89-90>
A name given, like most, by Richard Sharp, to a particular group of
Austrian opening moves in Spring 1901, all of which share in common
the order A(Bud)-Ser (and usually F(Tri)-Alb).  The name explains
it all: a `Gambit' is a move that risks loss in one area for a
hopefully better chance of gain elsewhere, in this case the Balkans.
It is a commitment by Austria to taking up two centres in the south
(Serbia and Greece) and is thus generally regarded as anti-Turkish.
There are several variations, mostly involving A(Vie), of which the
Trieste, Budapest and Galicia versions traditionally account for a
significant proportion of Austrian opening moves - indeed, Balkan
Gambits are widely regarded as the only `sensible' alternative
to the 'Southern Hedgehog' (qv).  Notice should also be taken of the
so called "Houseboat" variation of the Balkan Gambit, in which
F(Tri) Holds instead of moving to Albania.

(3) <MN:Jan92> The Balkan Gambit is most commonly defined as *any*
Austrian opening which includes the moves A(Bud)-Ser & F(Tri)-Alb.
In the 1960's it was common to see the Budapest variation
(A(Vie)-Bud), an attempt to take three centres.  In the early
1970's Italy often opened A(Ven)-Tri and accordingly the Budapest
variation lost favour with the Trieste variation gaining in popularity
(A(Vie)-Tri).  The Balkan Gambit is a risky opening:
if both Italy and Russia attack Austria in Spring 1901 it is unlikely
that Austria will live to tell the tale. A commonly seen variation
is the Galician (A(Vie)-Gal) which offers Austria some defense
against most hostile openings.  In the 1980's Italy has moved
towards opening A(Ven)-Tyr, A(Rom)-Ven.  Accordingly some Austrian
players have used the rarely-seen Tyrolian variant A(Vie)-Tyr
which, if Russia is friendly, gives Austria a strong position
provided Italy has opened to Tyr and not Tri... Postal play has, on
occasion, seen the Bohemian variant but this has nothing to commend
it to Austrian players; even if England/France/Italy & Russia have
all agreed to attack Germany... Finally in the early 1970's the
A(Vie)H option attracted support from Don Turnbull, I presume as
a result of FTF experience as this opening has not (to my knowledge)
been played in a British postal game.

BALKAN GAMBIT, BUDAPEST VARIATION (1.0) <MB:Jun80> The Balkan 
Gambit with A(Vie)-Bud.  Austria thus takes no defensive measures 
against Italy or Russia.  In return, he has two pieces adjacent to 
Rum.  He can also accept Russian support into Bul and still have 
A(Bud)-Ser. See Ionian Gauntlet and Key Opening.

BALKAN GAMBIT, GALICIAN VARIATION (1.0) <MB:Jun80>  The Balkan
Gambit with A(Vie)-Gal.  When it succeeds, you have two units on Rum, 
plus the threat to War which may well distract A(Ukr) away from Rum
---but risks Tri.  If it fails, you have shielded two home centres 
from attack, and are in a decent position to limit further 
mischief from any Italian A(Tri).

BALKAN GAMBIT, TRIESTE VARIATION (1.0) <MB:Jun80> The Balkan Gambit 
with A(Vie)-Tri, designed to defend against Italy.  The paradox is 
that an Italian attack is more likely to begin with A(Ven)-Tyr rather
than A(Ven)-Tri.  If there is a A(Tyr), A(Ven) you can still force 
Italy to guess (Vie or supported attack on Tri), being able to 
divert A(Ser) to defend Tri.  This is the single most popular Austrian
opening. 

HEDGEHOG (1) <MB:Jun80> A(Vie)-Gal, F(Tri)-Ven & A (Bud)-Ser/Rum.  This is
designed to deal with the I-R attack, and generally bespeaks an alliance with
Turkey.  With the Serbia option, barring German intervention, Austria is
certain of a build, although he has a greatly reduced chance of two.  As such
it is the reverse of the all-or-nothing approach of the Balkan Gambit.

(2) <RE:89-90> Named coined in 1975 by Richard Sharp for the Austrian opening,
F(Tri)-Ven; A(Vie)-Gal; A(Bud)-Rum - perhaps the most famous of all Diplomacy
openings.  Through his subsequent book, "The Game Of Diplomacy", Sharp
popularized the now classic A(Bud)-Ser variation, dubbed "The Southern
Hedgehog", which has since become one of the two most common openings for
Austria.  The aim is to afford Austria, so often the first player eliminated
from the game, complete protection against early attacks by Italy and Russia,
whilst the Southern version also ensures a fourth supply centre, in Serbia,
with the possibility of supporting A(Gal)-Rum in Autumn.  The moves to Gal and
Ven, through superficially speculative, are of largely defensive intent,
standing off the likes of A(War)-Gal and A(Ven)-Tri (or, still worse,
A(Rom)-Ven, following up A(Ven)-Tyr) - like the Hedgehog, says Sharp, this
opening is "ferocious in appearance but cowardly at heart, hence the name".

IONIAN GAUNTLET (1) <MB:Jun80> Edi Birsan's take-charge opening for Austria:
F01 A(Ser)-Gre, A(Tri/Bud)-Ser, F(Alb)-ION.  This gives Austria a more forward
position for S02, at the risk of losing Gre.

ITALIAN ATTACK (1) <RE:89-90> One example of the many fully committal attacks
that can be launched in Spring 1901, in this case by Austria on Italy.  As
such it is a suitable contrast with the Hedgehog opening, involving
F(Tri)-ADR, A(Bud)-Tri and A(Vie)-Tyr.  If Italy opens with A(Rom)-Nap, he's
lost Venice - though the Balkans are for Russia and Turkey to carve up. This
opening is invariably popular with Turkey, Italy's perennial rival in the Med,
but is usually regarded as one of the more "bizarre" openings.  Still more
"bizarre" are the likes of the "Beaujolais Nouveau" mentioned in a very early
Vienna but never used (it's a French opening: all three units are ordered to
Gascony in Spring 1901), and Denis Jones' "Yorkshire Pudding" (qv) opening for
England along similar lines (F(Lon)-Yor, A(Lpl)-Yor, F(Edi)-Yor).  I believe
that Denis has excelled by actually using this opening once or twice.

VON METZKE OPENING (1) <MB:Jun80> Conrad's favourite: A(Vie)-Tyr, F(Tri)-ADR,
A(Bud)-Tri.  Some claim that the poor statistics for Austria in the early days
of the hobby are due in part for Conrad's penchant for both Austria and this
opening.

Excerpts from the Player's Guide.
---------------------------------
1. A Bud-Ser, A Vie-Bud, F Tri-Alb 
unlisted

2. A Bud-Ser, A Vie-Tri, F Tri-Alb 
OPENING 1: "This is virtually _the_ opening for Austria. It is
followed by F Alb-Gre, A Ser S F Alb-Gre gaining two centers. Austria
should make no other opening without sound and sufficient reason. Here
the burden of defense is left mostly to A Vie. What the Austrian
player does with that unit depends on whom he distrusts most....."
        "1b: Here the object of distrust is Italy. (A Tri) can still
defend against Russia if she moves to Galicia. As in (1a) however, the
defense is primarily a guessing game."

3. A Bud-Ser, A Vie-Gal, F Tri-Alb 
OPENING 1: see above
        "1a: Here the object of distrust is Russia. The moves defends
against (A War-Gal) which would threaten Vienna and Budapest. If (A
Vie-Gal) succeeds, it may still defend Vienna or Budapest (if Italy
slips into Trieste). More importantly, it offer the anti-Russian
option of (A Gal-Rum, A Ser S A Gal-Rum). If Turkey is friendly (F
Alb-Gre) may still succeed. Austria thus has the possibility of 3
builds! The Fall 1901 moves (A Gal-Ukr) is also possible. It's
devastating for 1902."

4. A Bud-Tri, A Vie-Trl, F Tri-Adr
OPENING 2" "This seemingly suicidal set of orders has on rare
occasions given good results. If it succeeds, Venice falls and Italy
is crippled. (Italy's (A Ven-Trl, A Rom-Ven) would save Venice
however.) These orders might be used in the special circumstance that
Austria is allied with Russia AND Turkey. The alliance strategy would
call for the rapid destruction of Italy in order to hit France and
break into the Atlantic. Even so, Austria is usually foolish to give
up Serbia.

5.  A Bud-Ser, A Vie-Boh, F Tri-Alb 
OPENING 1: see above
Variant: "A Vie-Boh is marginal: if Russia is absolutely friendly, and
if there is definitely an Anglo-German alliance against France, it
provides good options. It will help preserve the Balance of power in
the west."

7. A Bud-Ser, A Vie H, F Tri-Alb 
OPENING 1: see above
        "1c: This non-move may keep everybody happy, but it is very
passive and not recommended. It allows the defense of (A Vie-Bud, A
Ser-Bud) if Russia has ordered (A War-Gal). (However if Russia then
orders (A Gal S AUSTRIAN A Ser-Bud) the result could be only 1 build
or none in 1901!) 
Newsgroups: rec.games.board