HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jfurr@nyx.cs.du.edu (Joel Furr)
Subject: Re: The relative merits of NMR
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: Sat, 9 Jan 93 01:17:43 GMT

In article <C0JGnD.Mt6@watserv2.uwaterloo.ca> nick@sunburn.uwaterloo.ca (Nick Fitzpatrick) writes:
>In article <199301081330.AA26650@world.std.com> David C Kovar <kovar@WORLD.STD.COM> writes:
>>(and I believe Joel Furr wrote the >>   N. Fitz.)
>>
>>>Let me give another case: someone's down to one army.  In a supply center,
>>>true.  They give up and quit.  The other players wait 10 days for them to
>>>go CD, then ask people to take over.  People eye the army and decline.
>>>I'm playing an army in 'light' on the Washington judge and hey, there's
>>>NOT a lot I can do with it.  Which is more realistic?  People waiting 10
>>>days to two weeks for the army to go CD, or the army just holding?  Makes
>>>darn poor sense for 35 units to grind to a stop because that Russian army
>>>holed up in Berlin isn't issuing orders.
>>
>>  I think the solution is to encourage people to take over such positions.
>>I've taken on one or two because they're very low maintenance and it helps
>>other people out. I think we can convince a few other people to do the
>>same thing.
>>
>I think the solution is to restrict the creation of new games while
>there are plenty of openings (especially at Washington)!

Would that it were so simple.  The games being created on the EFF Judge
are largely games with 2-day grace and 1, 2, or 3-day deadlines... and
they all have moderators.  Most of the games on the Washington judge that
are spinning in circles have three-day deadlines and seven-day graces and
most do not have moderators.  Why tell people "you can't form a fast-moving
game on the EFF judge so long as there are slots open in those games on
the Washington judge that process one turn every two and a half weeks?" 
That's mindless.  It would be better if it were recognized that some of
those games on the Washington judge aren't ever going to finish in any
sort of coherent condition: you're going to have the replacement players
for two or three powers finally agree to a tie since everyone's sick of
waiting two weeks for each turn to process.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.dipl-l
Date:         Thu, 7 Jan 1993 15:48:05 EST
Reply-To:     Robert Holder <robert@WHIPLASH.ER.USGS.GOV>
From:         Robert Holder <robert@WHIPLASH.ER.USGS.GOV>
Subject:      Re: how do observers resign?

thank you all for your kind help.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.dipl-l,rec.games.diplomacy
From: nick@sunburn.uwaterloo.ca (Nick Fitzpatrick)
Subject: Re: Vote on: Future of DIPL-L
Reply-To: nick@watfrost.uwaterloo.ca
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 15:26:34 GMT

In article <9301050946.AA09917@tyr.diku.dk> Lars Henrik Mathiesen <thorinn@DIKU.DK> writes:
>   Date:         Mon, 4 Jan 1993 21:04:28 GMT
>   From: Nick Fitzpatrick <nick@WATFROST.UWATERLOO.CA>
>
>   So I am not declaring the vote open.
>This word  ^^^ should be ``now,'' right?
>   --------------------------------------------
>   Should the Usenet link for DIPL-L be moved from bit.listserv.dipl-l
>   to rec.games.diplomacy?
>
>   YES   or     NO
>   --------------------------------------------
>
Yes, It should be I am NOW declaring the vote open.  Please send
all votes to nick@watfrost.uwaterloo.ca

Nick
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Via:        UK.AC.LEEDS.GPS;  4 JAN 93 21:00:01 GMT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.dipl-l
Date:         Mon, 4 Jan 1993 20:58:44 GMT
Reply-To:     amt5man@SUN.LEEDS.AC.UK
From:         amt5man@SUN.LEEDS.AC.UK
Subject:      Re: Game aargh! not eligble for EP (was 24-Hour Warp With NMR)

> From: Nick Fitzpatrick <nick@CA.UWATERLOO.SUNBURN>

> For the record, I would like to point out that that game aargh! is
> not eligble for inclusion in EP.  There are three main rules for
> inclusion in EP.
>
> 1)	Must be noNMR
> 2)	Must be moderated
> 3)      Games must be different site
>
> Also, EP does not recognize Machiavelli games . . ..

Does (3) apply to the game at all stages or just the initial line-up?

What's wrong with Machiavelli?  It's a perfectly respectable dip variant.

Mark.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.dipl-l
Date:         Tue, 5 Jan 1993 12:08:24 CET
Reply-To:     Piotr Sulecki <PSULECKI@PLTUMK11.BITNET>
From:         Piotr Sulecki <PSULECKI@PLTUMK11.BITNET>
Subject:      Opening libraries

Hi !

Anyone knows if opening libraries for variants exist ( and, if yes, where ) ?
I am especially interested in Youngstown and Machiavelli openings.

Peter S.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
From: loeb@greco-prog.fr (Daniel LOEB)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.dipl-l,rec.games.diplomacy
Subject: Re: Historical Variant?
Date: 12 Jan 93 09:39:23 GMT
Reply-To: loeb@geocub.UUCP (Daniel LOEB)
Organization: Greco Programmation du CNRS

In article <C0npG9.3C3@comp.vuw.ac.nz> Michael.Norrish@comp.vuw.ac.nz (Michael Norrish) writes:
>Couldn't one at least try to simulate the
>diplomatic process a little more realistically? Diplomacy, (the game),
>so often leads to the elimination of players early on and the
>accompanying creation of quite enormous powers that it bears little
>relation to any realistic situation. Even during the cold war, with
>two enormous superpowers dominating the world, there were plenty of
>minor states around. (Of course, this is due to a lot of factors that
>I imagine would be pretty difficult to simulate in a mere board game,
>but I can dream can't I? :-)

I think the CHAOS variant might please you then. You start with 34
minor powers. After the many eliminations in the early years you end
up with a few super-powers, but these are held in check by huge
coallitions of minor powers. It is lots of fun negotiating with large
numbers of people at a time.



 
-- 

Yours, Daniel Loeb				loeb@geocub.greco-prog.fr
HOME 	150, cours Victor-Hugo; Appt D45; 33000 Bordeaux France
WORK	LABRI; Universite de Bordeaux I; 33405 Talence Cedex France
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Via:        UK.AC.LEEDS.GPS;  7 JAN 93 11:39:41 GMT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.dipl-l
Date:         Thu, 7 Jan 1993 11:38:22 GMT
Reply-To:     amt5man@SUN.LEEDS.AC.UK
From:         amt5man@SUN.LEEDS.AC.UK
Subject:      DIPLOMACY AZ Version <3.0>

This has now been installed on the new judge (thanx very much Dave!).

If you want to get mail judge@org.eff.morrolan (JANET STYLE ADDRESS)
with the msg

get diplomacy.a-z_1
get diplomacy.a-z_2

These files are BIG (about 150,000 bytes each so you might want to send two
seperate msgs).

Mark.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Subject: (no subject given)
Via:        UK.AC.LEEDS.GPS;  8 JAN 93 15:35:35 GMT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.dipl-l
Date:         Fri, 8 Jan 1993 15:34:09 GMT
Reply-To:     amt5man@SUN.LEEDS.AC.UK
From:         amt5man@SUN.LEEDS.AC.UK

> 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.

I think this could be one of two people: Paul Willey and/or Martin Hansen.
Both have since dropped out of the hobby.  I could probable dig out their
addresses but I don't rate your chances of getting hold of thie program...

Mark.


----- End Included Message -----
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Via:        UK.AC.LEEDS.GPS;  9 JAN 93 14:52:23 GMT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.dipl-l
Date:         Sat, 9 Jan 1993 14:50:56 GMT
Reply-To:     amt5man@SUN.LEEDS.AC.UK
From:         amt5man@SUN.LEEDS.AC.UK
Subject:      Re: The relative merits of NMR

> From: Joel Furr <jfurr@EDU.DU.CS.NYX>
>
> In article <7993.9301081547@sun059.leeds.ac.uk.sun.leeds.ac.uk>
> amt5man@SUN.LEEDS.AC.UK writes:
> >> From: Josh Smith <irilyth@EDU.CLAREMONT.FENRIS>
> >>
> >> Well, I hope I don't get classed as a "snob" for my opinion, but I prefer
> >> noNMR games to NMR, but not because I think they're more Pure or Blessed In
> >> The Eyes Of The Lord or whatever. I do think noNMR is truer to what I think
> >> Diplomacy is "about", to the reasons I play the game, though of course
 other
> >> people may play the game for different reasons.
> >
> >
> >I personally prefer NO NMR games to NMR games.  I've played in many NMR games
> >and have won several NMR variant games.  I'd rather win a NO NMR game
> >though, is it really a win if you win because someone NMRs at a vital
> >stage in the game or someone drops out leaving you able to take their
 centers?
> >NO NMR games are more difficult to win which is why I prefer them.
>
> Is it really a win because someone goes CD, stalls the game for two weeks,
> and gets replaced by someone who makes no effort to find out what was
> going on before issuing orders?
>

  Maybe not.  But I'd say that it's MORE of a WIN then if no-one was issuing
orders for that power.  I'm not saying that NMR games are bad, just that I
prefer NO NMR games because it's more of a challenge.

Mark
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Via:        UK.AC.LEEDS.GPS;  6 JAN 93 14:46:10 GMT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.dipl-l
Date:         Wed, 6 Jan 1993 14:44:47 GMT
Reply-To:     amt5man@SUN.LEEDS.AC.UK
From:         amt5man@SUN.LEEDS.AC.UK
Subject:      Re: Q: Diplomacy AZ

> From: Scott Robinson <robinson@GOV.NASA.GSFC.NEXT532-2>

> 1. I've noticed that various FAQs and discussions refer to something
> called "Diplomacy AZ", but have never seen any hint as to where it
> might be available via FTP.  If it is available, is it a single file,
> or a whole collection of files?

The Diplomacy AZ is a collection of diplomacy definitions: Opening names,
stategies, tactics, variants, fanzines, famous people... some of them obscure.
There are 811 definitions in Version <3.0>.

You won't become much of a better player by reading it, but you will learn
lots about the history of diplomacy!

At the moment I think the only place that you can can get <Version 3.0>
(asides from either Harold Reynolds or myself) is
at the new Judge site.  Dave Kovar told me that he had installed it there,
but I haven't looked.  At some stage in the future it should be
reprinted in Chapter Two.

> 2. Also, is there a source in the US for the files that the FAQs say
> are stored in Germany?  I can't see wasting all those expensive
> electrons to get stuff that might also be closer...


I don't think so.

Mark.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
From: matt@krikkit1.apana.org.au (Matt McLeod)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.dipl-l,rec.games.diplomacy
Subject: Re: Historical Variant?
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 93 11:48:13 GMT
Organization: APANA in Newcastle!

> In article <DIPL-L%93010512131700@MITVMA.BITNET> BLT@OSUCC.BITNET writes:
> 
> >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.

Some of these things that you want are in the 1914 variant.  Basically,
1914 introduces:

	* A currency system, making some countries more economically
	  powerful than others.

	* Unbalanced forces.  For example, England has an extra fleet,
	  and Germany has an extra army.

	* The smaller powers which did not actually do an awful lot
	  around that time are relegated to non-player positions
	  (ie Italy and Turkey)

	* The neutrals are called 'minors', and Powers can expend
	  political effort in trying to gain control of them.  Normal
	  conquest is also allowed, but a little more difficult as each
	  minor has it's own army.

Eric Klein sometimes runs 1914 games in EP.


Matt




--
Matt McLeod
Bob-fearing Freelance Writer & Programmer
matt@krikkit1.apana.org.au
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.dipl-l
Date:         Tue, 12 Jan 1993 11:00:41 +0100
Reply-To:     Robert Rehbold <rehbold@SMARAGD.ZFE.SIEMENS.DE>
From:         Robert Rehbold <rehbold@SMARAGD.ZFE.SIEMENS.DE>
Subject:      HoF points for replacement players

Since there seem to be as many rating schemes for Diplomacy games as there
are rating masters :-) and I don't want to invent another one I just want to
suggest something regarding the points (or whatever) a replacement player
(maybe the umpteenth!) gets for winning/participating in a draw.

The difficult question in my opinion is whether the success of the last player
of a nation based on his own diplomatic and strategic skills or on the situation
he took over. E.g. if you take over an abandoned nation with 16 SC making it
to the win might not be much of *your* work while taking over a 3 SC nation
currently under heavy attack and reviving it to survive to a draw is probably
*only your* work. In most cases the former will only happen if the ex-player
of the nation got in real trouble (time, network access etc.) while the latter
happens much too often when some coward resigns after having messed things up.
Therefore the ideal solution for deciding which of the several players of a
certain nation gets what share of the points the nation receives would be to
evaluate the board at each time a change occurred (of course we would need a
board evaluation board (BEB) to do that :-). The disadvantages are obvious:
Outside players don't know the actual *diplomatic* situation at that time,
volunteers for the BEB would be hard to find, the evaluation would always be
subject to endless discussions.

Alternatives already mentioned here were

1) last player gets full merit
2) evenly distribute points on all players
3) distribute points to players depending on how long they played the nation
   (e.g. game ends in 1912, then a player who played 6 years would get 1/2,
   another who played 2 years would get 1/6 etc.).

My idea is to enhance 3) by weightening the last player(s) more than the first
ones. Moreover I would not give points to players who played for less than
a whole year.
For those of you happy to read formulas here is an example of how this
could be achieved (n = number of players for the nation that played at least
one year, y[i] = number of years player i played the nation (y[i] >= 1;
i ranging from 0 to n-1), y = sum over y[i]):

points-for-player-i := (y[i] - 1 + 2*i)/(y - 2*n + n^2) * points-for-nation

As you can see this reduces to points-for-nation if n=1, i.e. one player only.
For a game that ended winter 1912 where nation X was played by two players, one
until summer 1906, the other for the rest, this would give

(5.5 - 1 + 0)/(12 - 2*2 + 2^2) = 4.5/12 = 3/8 for the first player and
(6.5 - 1 + 2)/12 = 7.5/12 = 5/8 for the second player.

Feel free to incorporate this idea into any scoring scheme or just argue why
you think it's too complicated / not fair / whatever reason you don't like it
for.

Robert
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.dipl-l
Date:         Wed, 6 Jan 1993 23:04:42 EST
Reply-To:     Rick Desper <desper@MATH.RUTGERS.EDU>
From:         Rick Desper <desper@MATH.RUTGERS.EDU>
Subject:      EP # 203

I am running a white press gunboat game which needs three more players
before I can start.  It is running at a private judge, so I cannot
tell you where it is.  The game will be run at normal speed (3-day
deadlines.)  The first three players who answer this ad will be
granted the last three spots.
					Rick Desper
					GM EP # 203
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Via:        UK.AC.LEEDS.GPS;  8 JAN 93 15:15:04 GMT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.dipl-l
Date:         Fri, 8 Jan 1993 15:13:37 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 H9009699@hk.hku.hkucc Fri Jan  8 07:11:04 1993


> Can you tell me what's the Maritime Strategy? How many stalemate lines
> are there in standard game? Are there any articles or books concentrate
> -ing on the named openings of various countries in standard dip?
>
> Sorry to ask you so many questions. :)
>
> Earnest


I've never heard of the Maritime Strategy before.  It could mean that a player
is concentrating on building Fleets and not armies; but that's only a guess.

There are many stalemate lines in the regular game.  Stalemate lines depends
not onlyon what centers you are tying to hold but also on what centers the
opponents hold (in particularly which centers they can build in).

The books by Richard Sharp (Game of Diplomacy) and Rod Walker (The Gamer's
Guide To Diplomacy) contain articles on named openings.  The DIPLOMACY AZ
contains the names of many openings but these are listed by name of the
opening so in order to find all the named Italian openings you need to read
the whole of the file.  For Versions <4.0> I'll try to add some new entries.

e.g AUSTRIAN OPENINGS: For different Austrian openings see.... then a list
    of the names.

I once wrote an article that listed all the different diplomacy openings
named by Richard Sharp, but do not have a copy on me.

NOTE TO PER WESTLING: Were you on my mailing list when I printed that article?

Mark.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Via:        UK.AC.LEEDS.GPS;  5 JAN 93 15:09:46 GMT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.dipl-l
Date:         Tue, 5 Jan 1993 15:08:26 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 15:03:47 1993

> Well, what is the size of this article ?
> And, maybe you didn't notice, and this may be important, I'm from Poland...

Only about a page or so, maybe two pages at most.  Not very long.

Poland!  No I didn't notice, but that's no problem.

Poland!! I don't have anyone from Poland on the mailing list of my snail
mail zine, want to be the *first*?

Mark.

PS If interested I can send you a stack of snail mail zines.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.dipl-l
Date:         Thu, 7 Jan 1993 15:32:26 EST
Reply-To:     Robert Holder <robert@WHIPLASH.ER.USGS.GOV>
From:         Robert Holder <robert@WHIPLASH.ER.USGS.GOV>
Subject:      how do observers resign?

greetings, sorry to send this here.  i'm an observer in several
games and need to remove myself from those games.  i'm having
difficulty getting out of the games.  i sent commands of the form:

RESIGN ant

...but the judge replies:

Signon command not encountered.  Use 'help' for info.

...i looked through the index file but RESIGN and WITHDRAW were the
only commands i could find that looked like they'd do what i need.

please help me somebody!  I am no longer on DIPL-L, so i must ask
you to reply to me personally, at:

robert@whiplash.er.usgs.gov

...thank you very much, and my apologies for bothering you all.

rob
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Via:        UK.AC.LEEDS.GPS;  5 JAN 93 14:13:52 GMT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.dipl-l
Date:         Tue, 5 Jan 1993 14:12:30 GMT
Reply-To:     amt5man@SUN.LEEDS.AC.UK
From:         amt5man@SUN.LEEDS.AC.UK
Subject:      Re: Game aargh! not eligble for EP (was 24-Hour Warp With NMR)

> From: Josh Smith <irilyth@EDU.CLAREMONT.FENRIS>

> ... EPC2-the-magazine would be quite interested in publishing such an
> article. Or at least, speaking as editor of same, I'd be interested in
> publishing an article commenting on the effects of NMR on an actual game; I
> can't promise anything for future editors, of course. Still, I think it's an
> interesting subject, and would be happy to hear comments from both
> proponents and opponents of the "EP should include NMR games" issue.

It is (I think) woth pointing out where the no-NMR rule comes from.  It
comes directly from Eric Klien who believes that NMR ruin diplomacy games.
So when Eric started his snail mail zine (Protocol) and later when he started
ELECTRONIC PROTOCOL he insisted that none of his games would allow NMRS.
This doesn't work too well via snai mail, but via email it works OK.
As I understand it Eric's original intention was that players who are always
late and delay the game are ejected by the GM.  So a situation where a player
always uses the grace period wouldn't occur if Eric was running the game.



But NMR games can't receive EP numbers because they are against Eic's original
wishes.

My view would be that the Ep Number Custodian (hello Nick!) should take a leaf
from the US Boardman Number Custodian's book.  I *would* give NMR games a
EP number *but* then make a comment in the records that the game is
"irregular because it uses the NMR rule".  Then rating masters, such as Nick
and myself, can decide if they want to include such games in their rating
systems.

If an EP number is is given then we have the option not to include it, if noEP
 number is given we don't have the option to include it.

Mark.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.dipl-l
Date:         Fri, 8 Jan 1993 00:11:08 -0500
Reply-To:     David C Kovar <kovar@WORLD.STD.COM>
From:         David C Kovar <kovar@WORLD.STD.COM>
Subject:      NMR vs noNMR

  I'd just like to politely request that we keep this discussion civil.
Refering to crazed agendas and hatred is only going to turn this into a
flamefest rather than a discussion. I don't think anyone is trying to
ban NMR games. I think their place in the greater scheme of things is
just slowly getting decided. So let's help it along, in a friendly manner.

-David