HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: kovar@world.std.com (David C Kovar)
Subject: Temporary ban on creating new games on the EFF judge
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 15:07:28 GMT

  As of today, I am temporarily prohibiting the creation of new games
on the EFF judge. Hopefully, this will convince people to take up
spots in existing games. The current resignation/CD levels are
running rather high.

  I will consider making an exception to this for games for new
players, since dropping them into an already running game might be
a disservice to everyone. If you want to run a game for new players,
contact me.

  Once the number of openings drops to some reasonable level, I'll
open the EFF judge up again.

-David
From: matt@krikkit1.apana.org.au (Matt McLeod)
Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
Subject: Re: Flags
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 93 09:25:41 GMT
Reply-To: matt@krikkit1.apana.org.au
Organization: APANA in Newcastle!

In <1993Jan17.121010.12212@zip.eecs.umich.edu> positron@quip.eecs.umich.edu (Jonathan Haas) writes:
>Can anyone tell me what the flags of the seven Great Powers
>looked like in 1900? Reason: I'm working on a computer
>Diplomacy and thought it might be cute to include those flags
>as marks of the nations. Descriptions of the flags would
>be nice; drawings of them in a Macintosh-readable format,
>BinHexed and sent to me would be better.

Ditto.  Only a PC readable format would be more useful to me. :-)

Matt

-- 
Matt McLeod
Bob-fearing Freelance Writer & Programmer
matt@krikkit1.apana.org.au
From: PL436000@brownvm.brown.edu (Jamie)
Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
Subject: Re: britain variant
Date: 27 Jan 93 18:23:44 GMT
Organization: Brown University - Providence, Rhode Island  USA
NNTP-Posting-Host: brownvm.brown.edu
X-News-Software: BNN via BNN_POST v1.0 beta

>Message-ID: <HIGHLNDR.93Jan27131405@csa.bu.edu>
>Date: 27 Jan 93 18:14:05 GMT
>References: <1993Jan27.034909.8151@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>
>Sender: news@bu.edu
>Organization: Boston University Computer Science Department
>
>Remember: Self-dislodgement is prohibited, so England couldn't forcibly
>disband one of his armies.  The only way for England to get anywhere is
>to persuade another power to convoy an army to the continent.

I am not familiar with the Britain variant.

But as described, there is obviously another way for England to
get a fleet. She can capture some OTHER supply center.

(Or are all six of England's original armies isolated? In that case,
she can arrange for another power to dislodge one of her armies,
and disband it instead of retreating. I guess I should get the
info file on the variant, huh?)

Jamie
Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
From: dmercer@oracle.com (David Mercer)
Subject: Dedication ratings
Organization: Oracle Corp., Belmont CA
Distribution: rec
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 21:55:38 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by an unauthenticated user
              at Oracle Corporation.  The opinions expressed are those
              of the user and not necessarily those of Oracle.


Looking throught the games running on the Washington judge, I was
surprised at how few require a minimum dedication rating.  I for one
get really irritated when someone is late.  Anyway, so I'm working on
my dedication rating so eventually I won't have to play with people
who are regularly late.

I decided to check the dedication ratings of people who are currently
late on that judge.  There were 43 players in games who are late.
(Gunboat games not included.)  Many of these players are the same
person in several games.  The average dedication rating was -23.7, and
the median was +12.

There were 9 powers in CD.  Average dedication rating was -302.8, and
the median was -244.

I don't know what the average dedication rating of powers currently
playing in games is, so I make no conclusions based on these
statistics.

But does anyone know why there are so few games with minimum
dedication requirements?  I would imagine there's quite a demand for
it.

---DBM
Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
From: an7844@anon.penet.fi
Subject: Re: English and French Alliance
Organization: Anonymous contact service
X-Anonymously-To: rec.games.diplomacy
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 21:41:59 GMT


fkschmid@cip.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Frank Schmidt) writes:

> France and Germany ally against England from the start, and leave their
> southern borders unguarded. One Italian army marches directly through
> Austria towards Turkey (Turkey, which was me, realized too late what
> happened). Russia, now without allies, was the next one to vanish from
> the map.
> This looked like a four-player alliance, but i doubt they have all known
> each other before. Is this variant famous or did they create it

Only a few alliances have names, the one you outlined doesn't.

One of my favourite games involved a wondering Austrian army.  It moved
into Mun in Autumn 1901, was thrown out by the Germans in Spring 1902,
retreated to Bur in Summer 1902 and then took Par in Autumn 1902!

Mark Nelson (there's no egoboo in being anon!)


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
To find out more about the anon service, send mail to help@anon.penet.fi.
Due to the double-blind system, any replies to this message will be anonymized,
and an anonymous id will be allocated automatically. You have been warned.
From: bitn@quads.uchicago.edu (nathan elery bitner)
Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
Subject: Re: English and French Alliance
Date: 26 Jan 93 13:51:32 GMT
Reply-To: bitn@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago

In article <1k2149INNf56@cayenne.csv.warwick.ac.uk> mauht@csv.warwick.ac.uk (Mr A Jones) writes:
>
>In article <1993Jan25.221013.16800@fuug.fi>, an7844@anon.penet.fi writes:
>
>|> 
>|> One of my favourite games involved a wondering Austrian army.  It moved
>|> into Mun in Autumn 1901, was thrown out by the Germans in Spring 1902,
>|> retreated to Bur in Summer 1902 and then took Par in Autumn 1902!
>
>That's nothing; in a six-player game I once played in (no Italy), a solitary
>French army wondered into central Europe - Bohemia or Silesia or so - where
>it got squashed by the combined efforts of five or six armies from three
>countries... 

Ha!  Not far enough!  In the recently completed "lightspeed", my nomad
French warriors managed to stumble all the way to Galicia, where they
quickly found that they couldn't speak the language and promptly retreated.
They have no culture over there. :)

*-Nathan-*
>
>*****************************************************************
>*Alexander Lewis "Second and Special" Jones - the terminal sloth*
>*****************************************************************


-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                         INTER ARMA SILENT LEGES                      |
| "Worship Ditka NOW."                email:  bitn@midway.uchicago.edu |
|______________________________________________________________________| 
Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy,bit.listserv.dipl-l
From: nick@sunburn.uwaterloo.ca (Nick Fitzpatrick)
Subject: Washington Judge down?
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 15:57:27 GMT


Is it me, or is the Washington Judge down?

I have not heard from it since the wee hours of this morning.

Nick
Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
From: gil@cc.gatech.edu (Gil Neiger)
Subject: Re: Deluxe Diplomacy
Reply-To: gil@cc.gatech.edu (Gil Neiger)
Organization: College of Computing, Georgia Institute of Technology
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 21:45:02 GMT

In article <1jjeijINNbma@corax.udac.uu.se> magnus@solaris.astro.uu.se
(Magnus Selhammar) writes:
>  I played with the Deluxe version yestarday. It is NOT
>worth the money, and the wooden pices are too big.

Does anyone know how the Deluxe Diplomacy map and pieces compare
with the original version as marketed by GRI (Games Research, Inc.).
Those pieces were larger than the plastic ones, but never seem too
big, except that maybe the fleets were a little to long for areas
like Helgoland Bight and Skaggerak.

					- Gil Neiger
Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
From: jroberts@sanjuan (John Roberts)
Subject: CD more common in gunboat games?
Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, CANADA
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 93 07:16:12 GMT

I've noticed that of the games I am playing, there seem to be more
disappearances in the gunboat versions.  The obvious implication is
that, because their name is not shown, people are less timid about
walking away.  Is this an anomaly, or have others noticed the same
trend?  If so, I will be avoiding gunboat games in future.

--
John M. Roberts   jroberts@sanjuan.uvic.ca
voice: (604) 384-4131   fax: (604) 384-1194
Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
From: lokendr@ecf.toronto.edu (LO KENDRICK)
Subject: Austria-Italy alliance
Organization: University of Toronto, Engineering Computing Facility
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 03:33:45 GMT

One of the best worked alliances that I have recently seen on the judge,
was one in game cheetah on the Washington Judge.  I was playing France,
and A/I were so intertangled in one another, on Austria's territories,
that I didn't even know they were allied until they swooped out on the
rest of us.  Although, R,G and I were constantly bickering throughout the
entire game, it didn't take much of A/I's strong advances to bring us
together and force a 5-way draw.  And almost too late.  Definitely I think
one of the most interesting games I've played, and one of the best worked
A/I alliances I've seen played on Judge games.  Anyone interested might
want to peek through the history.

Kendrick

Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
From: casmacin@atlas.cs.upei.ca (Sean MacIntosh)
Subject: Necromancer Rules??
Organization: University of Prince Edward Island
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 21:43:19 GMT



Greetings Fellow Diplomats,

	I have been off the net for a few weeks and unfortunately, I have
only just heard about this Necromancer game.  Have the rules for it been
posted?  I have the ASCII map that was posted a little while ago (I think 
it was for the same game - Middle Earth).  If the rules were posted, I 
missed them and would be FOREVER grateful to anyone out there in NetLand 
who could send me a copy.

Thanks in advance. . .

Sean 

+--------------------------------+---------------------------------------+
|                                |                                       |
|Sean D.  MacIntosh              |Yesterday I was insecure,              |
|casmacin@atlas.cs.upei.ca       |                                       |
|casmacin@upei.ca                |   Today, I'm not so sure. . .         |
|                                |                                       |  
|Colonel Gray Senior High School |                                       |
|Charlottetown, P.E.I.,  CANADA  |              Who said that??          |
|                                | 	                                 |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
From: shoham@ll.mit.edu (Daniel Shoham)
Subject: Re:      Game Express!!!
Organization: MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 01:09:51 GMT

In article <1993Jan25.142903.19811@fuug.fi> an7840@anon.penet.fi writes:
>
>I have been an Observer for aproxx. 2 weeks and to be frank I am
>disgusted with this game!!!!
>
>I believe that this experiment in superfast games is a failure.

Don't know much about the game Express, but it seems to me that observers
have no right to publicly critisize games. Whatever the actual rules are,
I consider observership as a courtesy by players to those who want to study
the art of diplomacy or hope to take provide a replacement. (Also, I think
that an observer who, in the opinion of at least one player, abused his
welcome should be booted off the game.)

As for superfast games, the recent experiment "lightsp" (1 hour deadline)
has proved quite a success. After taking about 1/2 a day to get started,
and despite several NMRs (player consensus is that the game wasn't much
changed by the NMRs), a high-caliber game was finished in 3 days.
The game proved so interesting that a lively discussion is still going on
on the "press to all" channel about the strategies employed.

A lesson from this superfast game, is that players must be truely dedicated
for the duration of the game.


Dan Shoham               shoham@ll.mit.edu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The view presented are not necessarily those of my employer, etc.

Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Lincoln Laboratory
244 Wood Street
Lexington Massachusetts, 02173-9108
Office B-373
617-981-3515
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
From: gl8f@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl)
Subject: Re: Washington Judge Down?
Organization: Department of Astronomy, University of Virginia
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 03:15:36 GMT

In article <C1JHGu.2nK@ecf.toronto.edu> lokendr@ecf.toronto.edu (LO KENDRICK) writes:

> Anybody know whether or not the problem is being looked into?

When the Washington Judge goes down, Ken is always quick to look into
it. Remain calm.  I just got some email from it, so it's up right now.
Sometimes it gets a bit backlogged, so be sure not to repeat your
requests.



Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
From: matheso@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Carl Allan Matheson)
Subject: Re: English and French Alliance
Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 19:24:52 GMT

Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
From: lokendr@ecf.toronto.edu (LO KENDRICK)
Subject: Washington Judge Down?
Organization: University of Toronto, Engineering Computing Facility
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 01:00:30 GMT

I get the same problem too.  I have been expecting some results yesterday
and I have also sent a couple of things recently in which I've got no
reply.  Anybody know whether or not the problem is being looked into?

Kendrick

Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
From: bitn@quads.uchicago.edu (nathan elery bitner)
Subject: English and French Alliance
Reply-To: bitn@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 07:49:35 GMT

I have recently noticed something while playing a few judge games that
seems to be very different from FTF diplomacy with regards to the English
and French.  In nearly every single game I've seen/played in FTF, the
French and English simply cannot maintain a peace.  They usually start
out in a fragile alliance that quickly degenerates to war.  This seems to
precipitate from the French defensive (almost) necessity of continuing to
build fleets at Brest due to the always large English navy.  However, in
several judge games, I've seen the French-English alliance last MUCH
longer and seem to be much stronger.  In an 1898 game I'm currently in
as France, England and I have 14 centers between us and are allied.


Can a French-English alliance really survive until the endgame?  It seems
much more likely that one would backstab the other and, namely, that
France is especially vulnerable because of needing more defense for her
other fronts.  Or is the French-English alliance inherently weak?

Nathan

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                         INTER ARMA SILENT LEGES                      |
| "Worship Ditka NOW."                email:  bitn@midway.uchicago.edu |
|______________________________________________________________________| 
Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
From: del@hawk.adied.oz.au (D Elson)
Subject: Re: Improper Behavior
Organization: Australian Defence Industries
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 03:38:46 GMT

an7347@anon.penet.fi (Cane Boy) writes:

>There is a certain player, X, who is involved in multiple games; this
>player threatens to turn on player Y in one game, B, if player Y
>doesn't do what player X wants in another game, A.

>Person X: you know who you are.

>I think this sort of behavior is absolutely improper and
>reprehensible.  I am especially disturbed since player X is now
>actually moderating a game.

>I had always thought that each game is a separate universe.  Now maybe
>you can learn from experience that so-and-so is untrustworthy or a
>chronically bad tactician or whatever, but I think it is totally
>unfair to use this "cross-game" diplomacy.

>Any thoughts from others?

I agree.  I wouldn't accept it in FTF, for example.

Del
Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
From: abick@sebastian.carleton.ca (Alan Bick)
Subject: Re: New EFF game for *Dedicated* players
Organization: Carleton University
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 19:58:59 GMT

In <abick.728077082@cunews> abick@sebastian.carleton.ca (Alan Bick) writes:

>In <1k41cdINNlub@shelley.u.washington.edu> gregt@carson.u.washington.edu (Greg Tanner) writes:

>>To All Dedicated Diplomacy Players:
>>***********************************

>>rating of over 100, anyone who is a moderator, or anyone who takes over
>>an abandoned position in any game on any judge.  You'll still need to meet
>>the -10 dedication level, though.

>The EFF Judge is pretty new, I'm on two games and one of them is even a
>warp game. I'm not near 100 and have never abandoned/resigned. I know of a
>lot of people who have higher dedication ratings then me, but I haven't
>seen anybody at 100+ yet. Maybe you should set the "preference" at 50 or
>something.

Forget what I just said, after doing a search of EFF, I've found 5 people
with 100+ points and 3-4 more who should reach that mark within the next
week or so.

Alan Bick

Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
From: matheso@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Carl Allan Matheson)
Subject: info wanted
Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 07:09:14 GMT


First, sorry about the empty messages of the past couple of days. My
editor and I have not been seeing eye to eye on its policy of a press
blackout.

Second, I'm interested in FTPing some theoretical material on
diplomacy. I've been following the French-English alliance thread with
some interest. I don't have the AH book. Is there material on the same
sorts of topics (i.e. best initial moves for certain alliances, the
long-term prospects of given alliances etc.) at any site? If so, I'd
love to know the directory and filename(s). Thanks a lot. Carl.
Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
From: cman044@chpc.utexas.edu (Eva Simmons)
Subject: Possible Replacement Needed for SWEDEN in AVALON
Organization: The University of Texas System - CHPC
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 93 19:16:06 GMT

  Hi, 
      I'm playing 4-SWEDEN in the chaos game AVALON on
  the Washington Judge.  Due to a heavy workload, I may
  have to resign from that game.  I'm looking for a
  possible replacement for myself in that game.  The game
  is only in the midst of the build phase of Winter 1901.
  I have recently gotten a build, so I now have 2 pieces
  which puts me in a great position.  Right now, I'm just
  making sure there is someone out there that can replace
  me, if I'm forced to go.  If you're interested, please
  reply by mail and let me know.  I'll get back to you and
  update you on the situation.  I've already sent a similar
  message to the Observers and Alternates of the game.  If
  interested, it would be a good idea to 'list' the game
  and to possibly start 'observing' the game also.
			Thanks,
			    Eva S Simmons
From: magnus@solaris.astro.uu.se (Magnus Selhammar)
Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
Subject: Nine centers as the victory condition.
Date: 21 Jan 1993 19:26:53 GMT
Organization: Uppsala University
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: solaris.astro.uu.se

  This game number two with nine centers as the victory condition.
The other one, Suppress is moderated by Irilyth. The reason for me 
to start another game is that I think that Irilyth has misinterpreted 
the goal, to be the first player to own nine centers. I am not
saying that he is wrong, one can hardly be so, and I will play his
game myself when it starts. 

  For more information on this, I refer to previous postings. If you
want to join, sign on to Halden (or Suppress) on the Eff-judge.

Magnus
From: dmercer@oracle.com (David Mercer)
Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
Subject: Dedication ratings
Date: 26 Jan 93 20:35:58 GMT
Distribution: rec
Organization: Oracle Corp., Belmont CA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by an unauthenticated user
              at Oracle Corporation.  The opinions expressed are those
              of the user and not necessarily those of Oracle.


Looking throught the games running on the Washington judge, I was
surprised at how few require a minimum dedication rating.  I for one
get really irritated when someone is late.  Anyway, so I'm working on
my dedication rating so eventually I won't have to play with people
who are regularly late.

I decided to check the dedication ratings of people who are currently
late on that judge.  There were 43 players in games who are late.
(Gunboat games not included.)  Many of these players are the same
person in several games.  The average dedication rating was -23.7, and
the median was +12.

There were 9 powers in CD.  Average dedication rating was -302.8, and
the median was -244.

I don't know what the average dedication rating of powers currently
playing in games is, so I make no conclusions based on these
statistics.

But does anyone know why there are so few games with minimum
dedication requirements?  I would imagine there's quite a demand for
it.

---David B. Mercer
Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
Subject: EFF judge: Sends two replys?
From: cvadrgct@vmsb.is.csupomona.edu
Date: 25 Jan 93 11:22:03 PST
Organization: California State Polytechnic University, Pomona
Nntp-Posting-User: cvadrgct

Howdy all..

I have an annoying problem. The EFF judge seems to SOMETIMES send me two
notifications of certain actions, while other times sends me only one. I
suppose this isn't horrible or life threatening, but it is annoying.

I get two notifications of:
moves accepted/rejected
press sent
errors in signon/syntax

everything else only gets one reply.

Anyone know what the problem may be?

-Kevin

Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
From: jfurr@nyx.cs.du.edu (Joel Furr)
Subject: Britain variant game "empire" forming
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 21:57:21 GMT

A new Britain variant game, "empire," is now forming on the EFF Judge. 
Britain variant games are like standard Diplomacy except that England
starts out with six armies, one for each English province, and each
English province is a supply center.  England starts out with no fleets so
needs convoy help from an ally or a debuild of an army and replacement
with a fleet in order to use its strength.  

This game will be fast-moving and will include weekend processing.  Don't
sign up if you can't handle that.
From: jfurr@nyx.cs.du.edu (Joel Furr)
Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
Subject: Re: britain variant
Date: 27 Jan 93 03:53:54 GMT
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
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.

Those of you who've ever played in a Britain variant game may have some
information to answer questions I have about the game.  Since England
starts out with all six provinces as supply centers and all six are
occupied by armies, the English player either has to arrange for a convoy
from a friendly power OR set up a situation where he can build a fleet.

I assume that what England would have to do in order to build a fleet
would be to attack himself, force a unit to retreat, and disband the unit,
replacing it with a fleet in the fall builds.  Is this the case, or am I
missing something?

Also, how DO things usually work out?  Does a French or German player
usually help out or does England stand by the first year waiting to get a
fleet built?