HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: an7840@anon.penet.fi
Subject:      Game Express!!!
Organization: Anonymous contact service
X-Anonymously-To: rec.games.diplomacy
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 12:53:28 GMT


To all involved in this game:

I have been an Observer for aproxx. 2 weeks and to be frank I am
disgusted with this game!!!!

This game should be called joke and not express. You guys should end
the game now with a draw. If anybody takes over England and other
soon to be abanoned countries, they will regret it, if the game is not
ended.

I believe that this experiment in superfast games is a failure.
Please get another group of players together and start again.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
From: kovar@world.std.com (David C Kovar)
Subject: Every wonder why the judge doesn't respond to you?
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 16:05:47 GMT


  Ever wonder why the judge doesn't seem to be talking to you? I'll
give you the two most common reasons:

1) Your mail address is "wrong" in some sense.

	a) It's got a really weird return path. The mailers at the
	   EFF and Washington judges know how to get to just about
	   everywhere (BITNET, UUCP, all around the world), but
	   if your return path doesn't follow the specifications,
	   it's likely to fail. MAKE SURE YOUR MAILER IS GENERATING
	   A "GOOD" HEADER. (And don't ask me how to do that, you've
	   got paid system administrators.)

	b) Some gateway along your path is down.

2) Your account doesn't have enough disk space.

	Come on, people. If you're using a student account with limited
	disk space, don't request something that might be really large!
	Check! "get flist" which will tell you the size of the files.
	Or, just think. The sources for the judge are liable to be
	really large!

  Ever wonder where all the mail that doesn't get to you goes?
The judge saves it for the administrator to wade through, trying to
figure out why it failed and if there is some way to get it to you.

  Guess what I just spent an hour doing.

I'm surprised Ken handled this for so long ....

-David
Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
From: js138@cus.cam.ac.uk (John Sloan)
Subject: Re: Diplomacy in Middle Earth
Keywords: Necromancer
Organization: U of Cambridge, England
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 03:32:30 GMT

An ommission on the ascii map produced is that DrF is a supply centre.  I blame
this ommission on the newness of the ascii map, and the fact that I didn't
produce it.
Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
From: positron@quip.eecs.umich.edu (Jonathan Haas)
Subject: Game 'roleplay' still forming on EFF
Organization: University of Michigan EECS Dept., Ann Arbor
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 20:00:33 GMT

We're still looking for a few good roleplayers for the
game 'roleplay'. Because this game has been forming so
slowly, I decided to drop the requirement that only people
involved in no other game could join. So if you've been
wanting to play but couldn't because of this, you're now
welcome to join. 



Game 'roleplay' is waiting for 5 more players to sign on.

The parameters for 'roleplay' are as follows:
  Move    clock 1410 min 12.00 next  72.00 grace 168.00 delay 0.50 days --TWTF-
  Retreat clock   -1 min  0.00 next  24.00 grace  72.00 delay 0.50 days --TWTF-
  Adjust  clock   -1 min  0.00 next  24.00 grace  72.00 delay 0.50 days --TWTF-
  Access:  Different-site, Level: Any, Moderated, Dedication: -10.
  Variant: Standard, Gunboat.
  Flags:   NoNMR, NoProxy.
  Press:   White/Grey, No Fake Broadcast.


This game is for roleplayers ONLY. People who want to play this game should
be prepared to roleplay their respective powers to the hilt. If you
don't like to roleplay, this game is not for you.

Grey press is allowed, but white press is the default. Observers can
send grey press also... but because white press is allowed, you should
not trust any grey press which comes your way.

The following players are signed up for game 'roleplay':
  Master                      positron@eecs.umich.edu
  Observer                    someone@somewhere
  Observer                    someone@somewhere
  Observer                    someone@somewhere
  a power                     someone@somewhere
  a power                     someone@somewhere


-- 
__/\__  Jonathan S. Haas         | Jake liked his women the way he liked
\    /  University of Michigan   | his kiwi fruit: sweet yet tart, firm-
/_  _\  positron@eecs.umich.edu  | fleshed yet yielding to the touch, and
  \/    Finger for PGP key       | covered with short brown fuzzy hair.
Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
From: positron@quip.eecs.umich.edu (Jonathan Haas)
Subject: Re: English and French Alliance
Organization: University of Michigan EECS Dept., Ann Arbor
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 17:10:44 GMT

In article <1993Jan21.074935.9414@midway.uchicago.edu> bitn@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>
>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?
>

You know something? I noticed the same thing. I'm currently involved
in my first game. I am France and have a close alliance with England.
Together, we have 16 centers (8 apiece) and are doing very well. Then
I got a document off the FTP site about playing France, and was shocked
to find it saying something like, "It is to your best interest to destroy
England as soon as possible... Franco-English alliances rarely work out."
Are we talking the same game here?

-- 
__/\__  Jonathan S. Haas         | Jake liked his women the way he liked
\    /  University of Michigan   | his kiwi fruit: sweet yet tart, firm-
/_  _\  positron@eecs.umich.edu  | fleshed yet yielding to the touch, and
  \/    Finger for PGP key       | covered with short brown fuzzy hair.
From: ac999266@umbc.edu (ac999266)
Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
Subject: Q: how much time to play judge
Date: 27 Jan 1993 11:27:56 -0500
Organization: University of Maryland, Baltimore County Campus
Distribution: na
NNTP-Posting-Host: umbc8.umbc.edu

As someone who has never played a judge game, I'm wondering
 how big a time commitment it is.  For standard 2-3 day turns,
 what's the typical amount of talking that occurs?  Is there
 more or less communication for different variants, esp chaos
 +/or gunboat?  Etc?

I'd like to play judge, but I can't spend hours a day writing
 mail.  

Bizarro Francis Uy
.
From: pmenard@cse.unl.edu (Patrick Menard)
Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
Subject: Re: Extra De Luxe armies and fleets.
Date: 22 Jan 1993 18:41:20 GMT
Organization: University of Nebraska--Lincoln	
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: cse.unl.edu

ericg@getafix.cs.uoregon.edu (eric leander gorr) writes:

>In article <1jfalhINN1f3@corax.udac.uu.se> magnus@solaris.astro.uu.se (Magnus Selhammar) writes:
>>  A friend of mine has bought De Luxe Diplomacy, only to find out
>>that Avalon Hill just wanted to make more money without any effort.

>Just to clarify...do you mean that there was no apparent reason for
>calling it Deluxe Diplomacy?

>Oh, and I believe you can get more pieces for the game...I don't know
>exactly how, but I expect that if you were to write or call AH, they
>would help you...

Oh, I'm sure they'd LOVE to help.....for a price, of course :)
(like that really needed to be said :)

Shadow
From: gregt@carson.u.washington.edu (Greg Tanner)
Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
Subject: EFF game "reward" for *Dedicated* players
Date: 28 Jan 1993 18:14:35 GMT
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: carson.u.washington.edu

New EFF game "reward", previously unlisted:
******************************************

To all of you who expressed interest in a game for dedicated players,
thanks!  We now have 7 players for game "reward," which I've opened up for
listing and public view.

The spots filled up so fast, and there was so much interest in such a
game, that I will probably do this again soon.  We already have about 4-5
players on the waiting list!

I will see how this one goes:  if we can get through quickly with minimal
interruption, I'll be creating more such games, and letting everyone know
how this works.  To moderators of new games, I second David Kovar's
suggestion of setting a dedication level; someone with a rating of -800 is
obviously trouble!
Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
From: magnus@brisk.ii.uib.no (Magnus Y Alvestad)
Subject: Shameful Confession
Reply-To: magnus@ii.uib.no
Organization: UVBS -> SFK/T-DSA / SOPS - HOS / RNoN
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 16:02:17 GMT

I just want to apologize to the players of the games lowe and italia.
I played Turkey on these, but dropped out because I was away for a
week. I work at a military installation and had to go to sea at very
short notice. I hope my replacements do well.

-Magnus
Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
From: jek@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (James E. Kittock)
Subject: Re: English and French Alliance
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 02:19:49 GMT

In article <1993Jan21.074935.9414@midway.uchicago.edu> bitn@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>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?


Well, the trivial answer is that OF COURSE a F-E
alliance can last, if both players want it to.

However, I have recently come to the conclusion that a
F-E alliance is much more favorable to E than F, for
the following reason:

Once F and E have beat up on G, there is little for F
left to do but either 1. Turn on E (so much for the
alliance) or 2. move down into the Med.

Now, for F to effectively operate in the Med, they will
almost certainly have to move fleets down there.  In
fact, to get anywhere, they will have to concentrate
most of their resources AWAY from their vulnerable
northern coast and territories (usu Bre, Bel, maybe
Hol).  Of course, E is always churning stuff out up
there, and when it comes time to backstab, E has a huge
advantage.

I have just seen (played in, whatever) too many games
where F and E went along happily until stab time, and F
was really screwed hard.

It was somewhat in reaction to this that when I was
assigned France in game speed (on the Eff judge) I
decided to stab England as hard as I could from the
beginning.  So I formed a super good alliance with
Germany (which is still holding) and invaded England as
soon as possible.  I finally wiped him out,
single-handedly, in the Fall of 1905. 

So that's my current view on such things, at least as
far as standard variant games go: France should ally
with Germany, have a mutual nonagression treaty with
Italy, and attack England hard and fast.  

Now, I have never played France in a variant such as
crowded or Loeb9.  Might be interesting though.

--james
-- 
 james kittock :: stanford cs grad student :: duke '92 :: go blue devils!!
 "Adaptation is a recursive process in living systems." -- Alex. M. Andrew
From: magnus@solaris.astro.uu.se (Magnus Selhammar)
Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
Subject: Re: Dropouts
Date: 26 Jan 1993 14:26:14 GMT
Organization: Uppsala University
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: solaris.astro.uu.se

  Sorry, forgot to sign, thus adding to the ENOURMOUS
waste of bandwidth for this group.

My name is Magnus Selhammar, and I moderate 1905, Halden
and Lutzen.

Magnus
From: vincent@cc.und.ac.za (Russell Vincent)
Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
Subject: Re: map
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 18:15:26 GMT
Organization: University of Natal (Durban)
NNTP-Posting-Host: pc56.cc.und.ac.za
Keywords: copyright

In article <1993Jan21.050742.7090@infodev.cam.ac.uk> js138@cus.cam.ac.uk (John Sloan) writes:

>What is the copyright status on the actual map?  I have an ascii map for personal
>use which would be useful to those without access to PS printers (and is a lot
>easier to scribble on, I find) but don't want to ruffle any feathers by posting
>it if that is illegal.

I would have thought that a map of Europe at the turn of the century would 
certainly not be copyright, especially if "home made". It just happens to be 
your interpretation of how Europe looked. Just keep the word diplomacy off 
it and you shouldn't have any problems.

That is just my opinion, though.

 -Russell

P.S: Would you like it available on any of the judges? :-)
     (If so, send it my way)

--
Russell Vincent,  Computer Services, Univ. of Natal, Durban, South Africa
Vincent@cc.und.ac.za
Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
From: del@hawk.adied.oz.au (D Elson)
Subject: Diplomacy in Middle Earth
Organization: Australian Defence Industries
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 07:34:17 GMT

I checked with my FGU copy of Diplomacy in Middle Earth (called
"War of the Ring"), and the rules are quite different to standard
Dippy, and more like the hardbop/coolbop/necromancer rules posted
on this thread recently.  There are also copyright messages on
the rules (how FGU managed to copyright a game that is an almost
blatant rip-off of Diplomacy is beyond me).  I won't post the
rules or the map, because I don't consider that the game is
significantly better than the ones just posted (it's for 2 or 4
players, and not as adaptable as the ones posted).

Thanks for the enquiries, but if the various judge programmers
want to modify their source to allow for Middle Earth diplomacy,
I'd go with either hardbop or necromancer (posted recently).
I'd be interested in a game, and I can pass on addresses of
other people who have contacted me and want to play in
Middle Earth.

IMHO, I'd say that SPI's game "War of the Ring" is a better
Middle Earth game for the Tolkien fans, and Avalon Hill's
"Diplomacy" is a better game for the people who want multi
player interaction and Diplomacy type rules.  I can't see
the point in a 2 player version of Diplomacy, the fun of the
game is in the interactions, the alliances, and the stabs!

It's a pity that with the SPI game long out of print there
are no commercially available, playable, and realistic
Middle Earth simulations (I don't count ICE's efforts here
either, I wasn't impressed by them).

Del
Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
From: c85perwe@IDA.LiU.SE (Per Westling)
Subject: Tegner
Reply-To: c85perwe@und.ida.liu.se
Organization: CIS Dept, University of Linkoping, Sweden
Distribution: rec.games.diplomacy
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 12:55:18 GMT

The game Tegner needs a replacement as Austria.  

Two things need to be noted:

  1.  This is a game reserved for those who understand Scandinavian
(Swedish, Danish, Norwegian)
  2.  The game is run at the Washington Judge (judge@u.washington.edu)


	Welcome / The moderator

--
Per Westling              |
Mardtoprsgatan 15         |  c85perwe@und.ida.liu.se
S-582 48 LINKOPING        |  In praise of Idleness -- Bertrand Russel
SWEDEN                    |
Stuff regarding DPP may be sent to x90perwe@ida.liu.se instead.
From: ee52fel@sdcc15.ucsd.edu (Gift Horse)
Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
Subject: Re: English and French Alliance
Date: 24 Jan 93 08:58:07 GMT
Organization: University of California, San Diego

In article <llutk5INN3l5@levelland.cs.utexas.edu> kbs@cs.utexas.edu (Kenneth Brian Samuel) writes:
>
>	I believe that the French-English alliance is arguably the
>strongest alliance next to the Russian-Turkish alliance. That brings
>up a good question that has crossed my mind lately. What do people
>thing is the strongest two-player alliance, meaning which pair of
>powers, from the start, has the best combination of the following
>three aspects:
>		1) Best combined attack
>		2) Best mutual defense
>		3) Best chances of avoiding backstabs for the longest time
>
>Ken

I've been reading this thread and wondering "why is a
Russian-Turkish alliance such a good one?"  Well, I guess I can see
that depending on the players.  Thinking back to the few games I've
played and the one I'm playing right now, I would say that it all
depends on whether the players want a strong alliance or not.  If
one player doesn't, then it won't happen, but if they both agree
that it's in their best interests then it will happen.  Now, having
been really vague, I'll be specific.  I like the Austrian-Turkish
alliance if it starts from the very beginning.  Right now I am
playing Austria and I have a solid alliance with Turkey.  Together,
we have killed Russia (St. Pete is left) and we are on our way to
Italy.  As far as I can tell, there is no way that the two of us can
lose as long as we stick together.

BTW, I have also noticed this natural alliance in a few other games
besides Diplomacy such as Empires in Arms and others whose names
escape me at the moment.

BCNU.

+----------------------+------------------------------------------+
|  --> Jon Schell <--  |  "Andre, you mean to tell me that you    |
|      The Master      |  have lost _another_ sub?"               |
|      tm@ucsd.edu     |             -- The Hunt for Red October  |
|   jonschell@aol.com  |  "REboot to the head."  --me             |
+----------------------+-------------------------------------+----+
| No one else would be crazy enough to claim these opinions. | 42 |
+------------------------------------------------------------+----+
From: ac999266@umbc.edu (ac999266)
Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
Subject: Re: English and French Alliance
Date: 22 Jan 1993 14:57:32 -0500
Organization: University of Maryland, Baltimore County Campus
NNTP-Posting-Host: umbc8.umbc.edu

bitn@midway.uchicago.edu writes:

>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

On the tactical side of this situation...

Last time I played France, I allied with England on
 the condition that building more than three fleets
 would be considered an act of war and treachery.  
 Of course, England eventually did build a 4th + 5th,
 and stabbed me at the same time.  

I found it quite easy to confine England to the north
 coast.  Is this common?  I've played the scenario
 out several different ways + it seems that the French
 defense has a moderate terrain advantage.  

The French advantage makes it all the more important
 that England stab first, since a French landing on
 the Isle can be deadly.  Comments?
From: thaco@Lise.Unit.NO (Eirik Milch Pedersen)
Subject: MAPIT output.
Reply-To: thaco@solan.unit.no
Organization: NTH -- Norwegian Institute of Technology
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 19:21:26 GMT

I have received several postscript maps from judge@morrolan.eff.org produced by MAPIT.
My problem is that the .PS-map is to big for my paper (A4) so I don't get the top of it.
From the <name> <forces>/<SC> list on the top I miss Austria and England (abouth 1
cm.?).
Have anyone else got this problem, or have I only got bad luck?


thaco@solan.unit.no
Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
From: limmej@aix.rpi.edu (Joel D. Limmer)
Subject: Re: Improper Behavior
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 17:18:27 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.
[stuff deleted]

Player X certainly seems not to be adhereing to the spirit of the game
(depending on your interpretation :) ), although he's not doing anything
actually illegal.  Bad form, X.

With so many games out there, it seems like it would be rare to have
two players in two of the same games (although I could be wrong).  If
appeals to X's sense of fair play don't work, Y may have to get a sub
for one of his positions (and join amnesia! =D- 3 spots still open :) ).

Y may even be able to make the same threat back at X (threaten to turn on X
in game A if X turns on him in game B).  Or broadcast the threatening
letter in both games and ask for help from the other powers.

=D-   is pronounced "plug", by the way.
-- 
 ><>	Joel Limmer			   | "Let the one who is without sin
	Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute   |  cast the first stone."
	limmej@rpi.edu			   | WHACK!!
					   | "Mom, cut it out!"
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: cmckeith%galsci.UUCP@mathcs.emory.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
Date:         Wed, 27 Jan 1993 08:12:05 EST
Reply-To:     Cliff McKeithan <cmckeith%galsci.uucp@MATHCS.EMORY.EDU>
From:         Cliff McKeithan <cmckeith%galsci.uucp@MATHCS.EMORY.EDU>
Subject:      Re: No Subject Given

>Mike Sluyter
>
>P.S.  Does anyone out there have a gif of the map for the basic game and a
>set of rules in electronic form?

Mike,
  I think the rules are kind of copywrited, so they can't legally be sent
around via e-mail.  This is not to say that it isn't done, but in general
it is best to order them from Avalon Hill (I think 2-3 dollars is the
going rate).
  As far as gifs go, I am working with David Kovar (the administrator of
the EFF judge) to scan in some maps for the judge archives.  We are just
determining how large the gif files need to be to be readable.  If you
can't wait for them, you can get postscript maps from the judge.  The
judge's help files will tell you all about that.
Cliff
Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
From: matheso@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Carl Allan Matheson)
Subject: more info
Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 22:31:29 GMT

Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
From: kovar@world.std.com (David C Kovar)
Subject: Re: EFF Judge down?
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 18:33:04 GMT

In article <1993Jan27.155725.9987@midway.uchicago.edu> bitn@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>Is the EFF judge down?  I haven't received a response from it for about
>an hour ...



  Opppps. I forgot to reset the lock!

>Just wondering,


  Glad you did!




Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Via:        UK.AC.LEEDS.GPS; 25 JAN 93 17:54:39 GMT
Newsgroups: rec.games.diplomacy
Date:         Mon, 25 Jan 1993 17:53:19 GMT
Reply-To:     amt5man@SUN.LEEDS.AC.UK
From:         amt5man@SUN.LEEDS.AC.UK
Subject:      Re: New Hall of Fame Scoring for Chaos Games

>
> In response to numerous negative comments I have received lately about
> Chaos scoring (some of which was mine!), I am considering changes to the
> scheme.  I looked at various modifications, which would leave the scores
> for the standard variant alone, but adjust the other, however they were
> very complicated, so after much thought, I came up with a simple solution:
>
My simple solution would just be not to rate Chaos games.

Mark.