HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.dipl-l
Date:         Fri, 8 Jan 1993 08:23:16 -0500
Reply-To:     David C Kovar <kovar@WORLD.STD.COM>
From:         David C Kovar <kovar@WORLD.STD.COM>
Subject:      Re: The relative merits of NMR
              08 Jan 93 07:48:56 GMT." <199301080921.AA19378@world.std.com>

  On other nice thing about noNMR - there have been a few cases in my short
time playing Diplomacy that the country who went CD managed to return and
keep the game going, with the same people, and without having his country
overrun.

-David
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.dipl-l
Date:         Wed, 6 Jan 1993 12:01:28 EST
Reply-To:     Rick Desper <desper@MATH.RUTGERS.EDU>
From:         Rick Desper <desper@MATH.RUTGERS.EDU>
Subject:      EFF false alarm

Sorry about that - EFF has just answered me, about a half an hour
later.  I am so accustomed to a speedy response from this machine,
that the slightest delay caused me to overreact.
				Rick
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Via:        UK.AC.LEEDS.GPS;  8 JAN 93 15:39:29 GMT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.dipl-l
Date:         Fri, 8 Jan 1993 15:38:03 GMT
Reply-To:     amt5man@SUN.LEEDS.AC.UK
From:         amt5man@SUN.LEEDS.AC.UK
Subject:      Re: NMR, games with many replacement players, and Hall of Fame

> From: Joel Furr <jfurr@EDU.DU.CS.NYX>

> In article <1ii2v5INNiki@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> PL436000@brownvm.brown.edu (Jamie)
> writes:
> >I am very strongly in favor of the NoNMR rule.
> >
> >Not every NMR affects a game that way. But unless we want to have
> >post hoc judges deciding how disastrous a given NMR turned out to
> >be, we need to maintain the rule that only NoNMR games can be
> >counted in Hall of Fame. Whereas I think there is no problem at
> >all counting multiple replacement games toward HoF points.
>
> ... There are games going now
> where people have come in and taken over positions where they have, say,
> seven or eight units, and they roll over some weaker powers.  Should these
> people get credit in the hall of fame for superior play?  I don't think
> so.

Surely it's up to the person producing the ratings to decide hoe to
treay no NMR games/standby players?  Let's play the games and let the
ratingmasters decide how to rate them.

When I produce my own rating lists (something I hope to do REAL SOON now that
I have most of the completed games) I intend to have two seperate tables.
One for ORIGINAL PLAYERS and one for STANBYS.  People who drop out recieve
zero credit whilst people who STANDBY receive FULL CREDIT just as if they had
played in the game from the very beginning.

Mark.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Via:        UK.AC.LEEDS.GPS;  7 JAN 93 11:31:26 GMT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.dipl-l
Date:         Thu, 7 Jan 1993 11:30:01 GMT
Reply-To:     amt5man@SUN.LEEDS.AC.UK
From:         amt5man@SUN.LEEDS.AC.UK
Subject:      Re: New Hall of Fame available

> From: Rick Desper <desper@EDU.RUTGERS.MATH>

> I have looked at the new hall of fame, and it is full of information.
> One comment I would like to make:  the current #1 player is a person
> who is in that position largely because of a Chaos victory, in a game
> where he did not even finish with the position.
> Assuredly, this person played a good game, but I am still more
> impressed by the records of Dave Cebula and Jamie Dreier, who each
> have multiple victories to their credit.  I think that the amount of
> points awarded for a chaos game is excessive.  It does not seem right
> that a single chaos victory counts more than five regular victories.
> Winning a chaos game seems like more akin to the feat of winning a
> lottery than winning a real diplomacy game.


I don't think Chaos games should be rated alongside Regular games, for the
reasons given above.  When [...] I've finished producing my own ratings
I won't be including Chaos games.

Mark.
Xref: sparky bit.listserv.dipl-l:472 rec.games.diplomacy:783
From: PL436000@brownvm.brown.edu (Jamie)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.dipl-l,rec.games.diplomacy
Subject: NMR, games with many replacement players, and Hall of Fame
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 15:14:51 EST
Organization: Brown University - Providence, Rhode Island  USA
NNTP-Posting-Host: brownvm.brown.edu
News-Software: BNN via BNN_POST v1.0 beta

I am very strongly in favor of the NoNMR rule.

I understand the objections. The rule slows down games, no question
about it. And there are many particular circumstances in which I would
prefer to see the rule violated. But I think we need to keep the general
rule, that is, the EP rule, the Hall of Fame rule, the one that counts
as "official" only game that use NoNMR.

It has been complained that a game in which there are half a dozen
substitutions of players is as much a spoiled game as one in which there
has been a processed CD. I doubt this very much. In fact, I see
virtually nothing problematic about a game with many substitutions. It
may drag on longer, it may be more challenging, but it is in no sense
defective. I have participated in a few games like this. "Masters of
Deceit" was a splendid game (it dragged on, but I consider that an
extrinisic problem). New blood kept the alliances shifting. I would not
want EVERY game I played in to be like that, but I don't think they are
inferior in any substantial way. I would like to hear exactly what the
problems are alleged to be with scoring multi-replacement games in Hall
of Fame.

By contrast, a game can easily be spoiled by a processed NMR. One of the
very first e-mail dip games I played was ruined because Austria NMR'd in
the Fall of '01. The player returned, but his position was pathetic;
Russia and Turkey filled the vacuum, and the game was tossed into an
endgame in about '03. In my opinion, this game should have been
considered a variant rather than a standard Diplomacy game.

Not every NMR affects a game that way. But unless we want to have
post hoc judges deciding how disastrous a given NMR turned out to
be, we need to maintain the rule that only NoNMR games can be
counted in Hall of Fame. Whereas I think there is no problem at
all counting multiple replacement games toward HoF points.

I admit I have a vested interest. I would like my share of the
three-way draw in "Masters of Deceit" to one day count in my
Hall of Fame rating (it doesn't count now because it wasn't
a JUDGE game, but Nick is working on including nonJUDGE EP
games for the future. Eh Nick?).

Jamie
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail v2.2 (R4).
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.dipl-l
Date:         Mon, 11 Jan 1993 13:21:48 TZONE
Reply-To:     Steven Heath <STEVENH@ACI_1.ACI.NS.CA>
From:         Steven Heath <STEVENH@ACI_1.ACI.NS.CA>
Subject:      RE: Historical Varient

 The Game Pax Brit. has an interesting feature in the game. That is a
 country cannot be "destroyed", as all fighting is outside Europe,
 except for possible Austrian expansion into the Balkans.

 The whole idea of this game is to divide up the world and then have
 limited wars with each other to gain already occupied territory.

 One of the endings is a war with 5 or more players.

 The game is very different having formal types of treaties ie
defensive, offensive and both.



 Steven Heath
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.dipl-l
Date:         Fri, 8 Jan 1993 08:59:23 GMT
Reply-To:     Chris Robey <CJR1@IBM-B.RUTHERFORD.AC.UK>
From:         Chris Robey <CJR1@IBM-B.RUTHERFORD.AC.UK>
Subject:      BBC dippy adjudicator

A few years back at ManorCon a bloke was advertising a BBC computer
version of a diplomacy adjudicator.

That was before I had a BBC, and now that I have one I am trying to track
the guy/program down so I can give it a whirl on by machine.

So far I have not managed to find any clue that the program exists.  My last
resort is you lot.

If anyone can throw some light on this question I would be v.gratefull.

Cheers !

Chris
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Via:        UK.AC.LEEDS.GPS;  8 JAN 93 17:24:41 GMT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.dipl-l
Date:         Fri, 8 Jan 1993 17:23:16 GMT
Reply-To:     amt5man@SUN.LEEDS.AC.UK
From:         amt5man@SUN.LEEDS.AC.UK
Subject:      Re: NMR, Replacements, and spleen

I'm not going to include Jamie's long (and well argued) posting as I
only intend commenting about the rating of standby players.

There are three different approaches:

(1) Ignore Standby Players.
(2) Rate the final Standby player as if he were the player of record.
(3) Rate the country and then split that rating up between those that played
     it pro rata the number of seasons they played.

(1) and (2) are easier than (3).

   I personally prefer to use either (1) or (2) because they are easy.
(3) is more accurate, but more work...

The first system I intend to use is tha Calhamer system (which wasn't invented
by Calhamer, but that's another post...).  I am producing a rating list
for ORIGINAL PLAYERS and one for STANDBY PLAYERS.  This gives credit to
those who standby, but the main table is the ORIGINAL PLAYERS listing.
If you want to see who the best players are you look at the ORIGINAL PLAYERS
table.  But I think giving rewards for standby players is nice.

Mark.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Via:        UK.AC.LEEDS.GPS;  6 JAN 93 15:19:38 GMT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.dipl-l
Date:         Wed, 6 Jan 1993 15:18:20 GMT
Reply-To:     amt5man@SUN.LEEDS.AC.UK
From:         amt5man@SUN.LEEDS.AC.UK
Subject:      DIPLOMACY AZ <3.0>

In a recent nsg I stated that Version <3.0> had been installed at the
new Judge...

...A quick look shows that it hasn't been installed yet (but Version 2.0
is there).

If anyone want to see Version <3.0> then I can drop it an anon ftp site.

Mark.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.dipl-l,rec.games.diplomacy
From: jfurr@nyx.cs.du.edu (Joel Furr)
Subject: qhorse needs someone to play Russia with seven units
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 93 21:58:49 GMT


The game 'qhorse' on the Washington judge needs someone to come in and
play Russia in the Fall 1902 Build turn.  Russia needs to build a unit to
go from six to seven.  Russia's in a pretty good position, IMHO.  Come in
and take over.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: cmckeith%galsci.UUCP@mathcs.emory.edu
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.dipl-l
Date:         Thu, 7 Jan 1993 11:47:14 EST
Reply-To:     Cliff <cmckeith%galsci.uucp@MATHCS.EMORY.EDU>
From:         Cliff <cmckeith%galsci.uucp@MATHCS.EMORY.EDU>
Subject:      Re: No Subject Given

>I have looked at the new hall of fame, and it is full of information.
>One comment I would like to make:  the current #1 player is a person
>who is in that position largely because of a Chaos victory, in a game
>where he did not even finish with the position.
>Assuredly, this person played a good game, but I am still more
>impressed by the records of Dave Cebula and Jamie Dreier, who each
>have multiple victories to their credit.  I think that the amount of
>points awarded for a chaos game is excessive.  It does not seem right
>that a single chaos victory counts more than five regular victories.
>Winning a chaos game seems like more akin to the feat of winning a
>lottery than winning a real diplomacy game.
>Rick

I have to agree with this.  While the "lottery effect" softens quite a bit
after the first few years, surviving 1901 is easily as much chance as it
is diplomacy.  Unless, of course, you have a smooth enough tounge to convince
a player that it is better to be eliminated than to retreat onto your only
supply center..... :-)

Cliff
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: cmckeith%galsci.UUCP@mathcs.emory.edu
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.dipl-l
Date:         Mon, 4 Jan 1993 20:36:37 EST
Reply-To:     Cliff <cmckeith%galsci.uucp@MATHCS.EMORY.EDU>
From:         Cliff <cmckeith%galsci.uucp@MATHCS.EMORY.EDU>
Subject:      Machiavelli Game on EFF Judge

The Machiavelli game GENOA on the EFF Judge has had a resignation of
Venice.  The game has not yet processed the first season, as it was
started just in time for the Holidays.  We are still discussing the
use of loans/famine, so if you join up ASAP you will get to provide
input.  The first move's deadline is Jan 15, plenty of time to get
diplomacy going.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Via:        UK.AC.LEEDS.GPS;  8 JAN 93 15:43:23 GMT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.dipl-l
Date:         Fri, 8 Jan 1993 15:41:53 GMT
Reply-To:     amt5man@SUN.LEEDS.AC.UK
From:         amt5man@SUN.LEEDS.AC.UK
Subject:      Re: NMR, games with many replacement players, and Hall of Fame

> From: Josh Smith <irilyth@EDU.CLAREMONT.FENRIS>
>
> Joel Furr (jfurr@nyx.cs.du.edu) writes:
>
> > Speaking as one of the advocates of NMR, I couldn't care less if NMR games
> > don't get EP numbers. [snip]
>
> That's really the issue here, not whether NMR games are worthwhile or not. I
> think that Youngstown is a severely broken variant, but that doesn't mean I
> want to ban it. (I might support making it non-EP, though! Not that I'm
> proposing this now, mind you, but I could see a case for it... :^)


I think that NMR games SHOULD receive EP numbers BUT the EP Number Custodian
should make a comment to the effect that these are NMR games.  Then if
rating masters want to ignore these games they can do so and if they want to
include them then they can do so.

Incidentally I assume that the NMR games would use standbys just as the
NO-NMR games use standbys, yes? And if NMR games are moderated they should
be little problem finding replacement players for most positions that merit
them.


Mark
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Via:        UK.AC.LEEDS.GPS;  5 JAN 93 17:21:59 GMT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.dipl-l
Date:         Tue, 5 Jan 1993 17:20:41 GMT
Reply-To:     amt5man@SUN.LEEDS.AC.UK
From:         amt5man@SUN.LEEDS.AC.UK
Subject:      Re: Historical Variant?

> From: BLT@EARN.OSUCC

>     Are there any variants out there that attempt to make Diplomacy
> more historically accurate. Diplomacy is an excellent, well-balanced,
> fun game that recreates well the diplomatic negotiations of the time,
> but it's somewhat lacking as a historical simulator. There are two
> areas for improvement that I see:
>
> 1) Make the starting forces roughly equivalent to their historical
>    strengths... It would also be necessary to adjust the victory
>    conditions for each country to compensate. And while we're on it,
>    what's the historical basis for having to conquer half of Europe
>    anyway? Only a few megalomanics like Hitler and Nappy (and dippers)
>    have attempted it.


If you have to conquer less than half the board then you don't have to
diplome with all the other players on the board.  So instead of one
7 player game you have two smaller games, typically a 3-player and a
4-player game.

> 2) Separate the diplomatic struggle for control over small countries
>    and colonies from the military struggle. It was mainly a non-
>    military struggle from 1901 until WWI began in 1914. Some provision
>    would have to be made for the off-map colonies that were negotiated
>    over (e.g. France and Germany over Morocco, France and England over
>    Egypt, England and Russia over Persia). Maybe there should be non-
>    military units that can establish control over minor countries and
>    colonies while that military units wait for war to break out. Or
>    maybe the game shouldn't even try to simulate the military part and
>    should end when war breaks out.


>                            Brent Tweeten
>                            Oklahoma State University
>                            blt@mvs.ucc.okstate.edu
>

There are many variants that cover #2 and some that cover #1 (although I see
little point in producing variants that are historical accurate) but I
don't think the rules for any of these games have been distributed via
dipl-l.

I sugest you write to the NAVB and ask for their current catalogue. (details
in the rec.games.diplomacy.faq)

Mark
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.dipl-l,rec.games.diplomacy
From: jfurr@nyx.cs.du.edu (Joel Furr)
Subject: Re: NMR, games with many replacement players, and Hall of Fame
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 93 03:51:07 GMT

In article <1ii2v5INNiki@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> PL436000@brownvm.brown.edu (Jamie) writes:
>I am very strongly in favor of the NoNMR rule.
>
>I understand the objections. The rule slows down games, no question
>about it. And there are many particular circumstances in which I would
>prefer to see the rule violated. But I think we need to keep the general
>rule, that is, the EP rule, the Hall of Fame rule, the one that counts
>as "official" only game that use NoNMR.

Speaking as one of the advocates of NMR, I couldn't care less if NMR games
don't get EP numbers.  If *you* want to play games that 
     a) drag on forever while 6 of 7 players wait for the grace period
        to elapse so they can replace a vanished player,
     b) involve in some cases the replacement of every single original
        player (one game I'm in is on its way to the replacement of 
        all of the original REPLACEMENT players),
     c) have less to do with diplomacy than with exasperation and boredom,

then you play them.  Have fun.  But don't expect me and SOME of the
rec.games.diplomacy players to agree when you claim that these games are
the ONLY acceptable version.  


>By contrast, a game can easily be spoiled by a processed NMR. One of the
>very first e-mail dip games I played was ruined because Austria NMR'd in
>the Fall of '01. The player returned, but his position was pathetic;
>Russia and Turkey filled the vacuum, and the game was tossed into an
>endgame in about '03. In my opinion, this game should have been
>considered a variant rather than a standard Diplomacy game.

Again, you're entitled to your opinion.  But don't you think that if we
look long and hard enough, we can find examples under ANY set of rules
where everything fell apart and the game turned into a joke?  Hmm?  Or are
you saying that because one NMR game didn't work out well, all NMR should
be denied any recognition as a valid way to play Diplomacy?

I don't quite understand the source of your utter hatred for NMR, but I
think I can safely say that you're not going to get your way in getting
NMR banned from the judges or whatever crazed agenda you seem to have. 
Let people play the way they care to play.  

Xref: sparky bit.listserv.dipl-l:494 rec.games.diplomacy:799
From: js138@cus.cam.ac.uk (John Sloan)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.dipl-l,rec.games.diplomacy
Subject: Re: NMR, games with many replacement players, and Hall of Fame
Date: 8 Jan 93 14:53:38 GMT
Organization: U of Cambridge, England


I have to say that I really dislike games in which people NMR, especially early. 
The effect on the delicate balance of the game (and it is always a delicate
balance - especially with good and experienced players) is radically broken.  A
replacement is less of a problem as you have a chance to work out what the new
player will do, and while the balance may shift, you still have your finger on
the pan.

I've played in too many games where an NMR has wrecked my 3/4 years of careful
forward planning.  I'm prepared to wait a few days from time to time to get
replacements.

Also, I'm happy to take over 1-centre positions.  Unlike a 3/4 centre position
they don't pose a great deal of investment in time, as a comeback from 1/2
centres is an order of magnitude harder than a comeback from 3/4.

I could appeal to people not to play 2 years, decide that you aren't going to win
and then quit.  I don't suppose it would help though.  Personally I learned much
of what I know about the middle and end game stages by trying to survive as long
as possible with poor positions, on the grounds that you never know.

I've rambled enough.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
X-Envelope-to: dipl-l@MITVMA.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"dipl-l@mitvma.bitnet"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.dipl-l
Date:         Tue, 5 Jan 1993 23:58:49 +0800
Reply-To:     H9009699@HKUCC.BITNET
From:         H9009699@HKUCC.BITNET
Subject:      Maritime Strategy

Hello,

     Could anyone tell me what's Maritime Strategy? Please tell me the
strategy in details, if possible.

Earnest
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Via:        UK.AC.LEEDS.GPS;  4 JAN 93 12:59:42 GMT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.dipl-l
Date:         Mon, 4 Jan 1993 12:58:21 GMT
Reply-To:     amt5man@SUN.LEEDS.AC.UK
From:         amt5man@SUN.LEEDS.AC.UK
Subject:      Re: Has anyone analyzed unpenatrable positions on Diplomacy
              boards

> From: David John Marotta <djm5g%Virginia.EDU@EDU.VIRGINIA.MCC.DMT03>

> Everyone recongines that there are areas of the board which can be held
> with fewer units than it encompasses supply centers.  Has anyone produced
> a list of such positions and moves to hold them?  I am interested in
> both the standard board and the Youngstown boards.


There are *many* articles on stalemate lines, some of them have been
reprinted in ELECTRONIC PROTOCOL.  I have about 20-30 different articles
in my archives.  There are different types of STALEMATE LINES e.g
Dynamic Stalemate Lines, Progressive Stalemate lines etc.  Details in the
DIPLOMACY AZ.


Mark.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Via:        UK.AC.LEEDS.GPS;  5 JAN 93 14:49:58 GMT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.dipl-l
Date:         Tue, 5 Jan 1993 14:48:39 GMT
Reply-To:     amt5man@SUN.LEEDS.AC.UK
From:         amt5man@SUN.LEEDS.AC.UK
Subject:      Re: Opening libraries

> From PSULECKI@EARN.PLTUMK11 Tue Jan  5 14:42:05 1993

>   You wrote you had an article on Russian openings in Youngstown. Is this in
> electronic form ? If yes, could you send it ? I'm Russia ;-) in one of the
> games in Durban.

If it was in Electronic fmt I would have posted it...  I have at least *1500*
articles in my archives on diplomacy/variants, of which less than 100 are in
electronic fmt.  I suppose I should look into using one of the University
scanners to scan them, but I really don't have the time for that.

If you are *really* interested then I could try and track the article down
and then *snail* it to you provided you *promise* to retype it so everyone
can read it (of course this won't help you in your current game, it could
take me weeks to find where it is).

Note, this article was written for a different Youngstown game than the one
played over Judge.  I think it was written for Youngstown IV.  I don't know
what the differences are between Youngstown IV/Judge but there should be enough
common ground for the artile to be of some merit.

Mark.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU