Movement

Message from Russia to Austria in 'pouchtoo':

Ah!

I've just *glanced* at the results, but they are obviously very, very good.

Talk to you tomorrow.

Happy happy happy tsar.

Message from Russia to Italy in 'pouchtoo':

Mea maxima culpa.

Pardoname, papa.


I shall try to explain tomorrow, though I will not attempt to excuse.

Shamefully,
Tsar J

Message from Russia to England in 'pouchtoo':

Happy?

Message from Russia to France in 'pouchtoo':

Here comes the cavalry. Too late?

Tsar J

Message from Russia to Germany in 'pouchtoo':

My humblest apologies for doing it to you just a *little* better than you
were attempting to do it to me.


I needed either a stick to beat Austria with, or a carrot to cajole him off
my neck. You wouldn't provide me with a stick, so you left me no alternative.

Not my favorite situation, but I do feel justified.

Tsar J

Message from England to Russia in 'pouchtoo':

>Message from [email protected] as Russia to England in 'pouchtoo':
>
>Happy?

Da!  ;)

King Kal

Message from Italy to Italy in 'pouchtoo':

> Mea maxima culpa.
>
I take it that once I look at the map, I'll understand.  Bad news for
me, is it?  Well damn.

> Pardoname, papa.
>
If there is, as you say, no excuse, then I cannot imagine how there can
be any pardon.  However, I will leave you to what you call your shame
and hope you can come up with an excuse for whatever it is that you wish
me to pardon you for, since I would very much like to be able to do so.

Manus

Message from Italy to Russia in 'pouchtoo':

> Mea maxima culpa.
>
I take it that once I look at the map, I'll understand.  Bad news for
me, is it?  Well damn.

> Pardoname, papa.
>
If there is, as you say, no excuse, then I cannot imagine how there can
be any pardon.  However, I will leave you to what you call your shame
and hope you can come up with an excuse for whatever it is that you wish
me to pardon you for, since I would very much like to be able to do so.

Manus

Message from Italy to Austria in 'pouchtoo':

Aw, Dave.  I thought we had a good thing going.  That'll teach me
to think, huh?  :-)  Looks from your moves that our three way alliance
has been whittled to two, and I was voted the odd man out.  I could
get on my knees to beg and pray that this vote be recounted or
something, but somehow I don't think I stand much chance of success
there, do I?  :-)

But I'm here and willing to listen.  Even if you only want to talk
about the weather with me.  But if you do see fit to have a change of
heart... well, there I go begging and praying after I said I wouldn't;
sorry.  Jamie is a player of the first order, and I guess it's becoming
clearer to me that the observers are dang right in consistently putting
him first, and in wanting to get their Russian dictionaries out, etc.,
etc.  I can only tell you stuff that you already know in the way of
warning against Mr. Dreier, so there's probably no light I can shed there
that will make the blood in my back look the less attractive to you.

I guess I don't really know exactly why this course of action was
chosen, and so if you don't mind, I would really hope to lure you
into explaining it to me.  I'm asking from a pure strategy and tactics
point of view, and not even really as your neighbor, Italy.  Maybe
by needing to ask I only show that my grasp of the game is not as
keen as yours and Jamie's, but it seems to me that stabbing me now
will have the effect of:
   pulling me off France right away, giving all those centers to E/G
   putting you and I at each other's throats in protracted battle
      (which I admit, I will lose)
   leaving Russia in the BACK line of all fighting fronts (if everyone
      runs west, guess who wins)
   splitting all the potential anti-Russian allies apart.  It'll be you
      and Cal when the time comes, and you won't be anywhere near each
	  other.
   leaving Jamie as the only one writing his End of Game Statement with
       a smile on his face.

A sufficient answer would be that you are fine with fighting me, and
that Jamie will take Germany by himself or with England.  I suppose that
is the plan, and maybe I just don't understand it because I'm on the
wrong side of it, :-), but if you don't mind (and I do hope you don't),
I would like to hear your honest long-term plan for the game, and how
it can possibly differ from what I laid out above.

Personally, I cannot, at this point, help but think that ANY answer
you give (or anyone else gives), no matter where it may differ in its
particulars from what I laid out above, must logically end with the line,
"...and then Jamie wins."

Jamie has managed, by turning you against me, to ensure that any possible
coalition against him must be formed by two powers FAR away from each
other.  If ever the alarm is raised in you as it is now in me, your only
possibly ally will be the faroff Englishman, who I have dutifully kept
>from growing.  You will have no chance at combined operations.

With me in Turkey and you in Austria, and with us together and at
complete peace in the middle, Russia's only choice was to split us
apart.  For my part I am proud that this never happened (though I imagine
I don't need to tell you how anti-Austria and pro-R/I Jamie has always
talked in private messages to me, and by always, I mean always).

Well, I've talked enough, but I do kind of hope for a response.  As I
say, I think Jamie's plan to separate his potential enemies is obvious,
and is bound to succeed unless I am unstabbed.  I don't realistically
expect this to happen (though I will freely admit that I am typing
this from a kneeling position), but your appraisal of the situation and
your hope for the future would be a welcome read.  I promise I won't
get into an argument about it with you.  One mail from you explaining
what's up, just so I know that you at least thought about the future
before stabbing me, and I promise I will shut up and bend over, without
taking issue with anything you say.

There are creative ways to unstab me, and if you consider any of them
worth exploring (sheesh, my knees are starting to hurt!), let me know.
We're still adjacent to each other, but if Jamie has his way, we will
soon be enemies for all time, and he will be quite happy that all he
will need to worry about in the end is you and England yelling at each
other from way across the board.

Luckily, I have managed to remain, through all the moves, friends with
all of the Western powers.  I know that our plan was that this turn I
would show my true colors and alienate forever the E/G team.  This did
not happen.  I'm not quite as far away as you hoped, though I imagine
Jamie is not losing any sleep over how quickly I can get back to engage
you.  Naturally I will be doing all in my power to turn England
and Germany east immediately.  I imagine they will see the wisdom of
this course of action before too long.  This means either (a) France
dies fast now, or (b) France lives.  Either way, I hope there will soon
be at least three powers against you and Jamie.  Would you like it to
be three on two or four on one.  You have the power to decide this turn.
By next turn, the decision will be out of your hands.

If you wanted to borrow Venice, we could have discussed it.  To be
completely honest, I would have said yes.  Honestly, I would have.
I believe in the A/I, and I believe without it both parties are dead.
I believe this is true not only about a 1901 A/I war, but an '02 A/I
war, an '03 A/I war, an '04 A/I war, an '05 A/I war, etc.  I believe
that we hang together or we hang separately.

And I believe that my neck is starting to get a rope burn, and I
believe that yours will start to itch a little as well before too long.

Please write back.
Manus

P.S.  The weather here in Denver is very nice today.  How's yours?

Message from Italy to England and Germany in 'pouchtoo':

Well, guys.  I am including below, complete and unabridged, a mail I
just sent to Dave.  As you will see from reading it (which I hope you
will do), it is my considered opinion that unless a concerted attack
is made by all powers against either Russia alone or the Austro-Russian
alliance, we can all pass our cafe latte orders to Steve.  And I believe
that this attack must come NOW (for one reason because if it doesn't,
I won't be around, and when I kiss it goodbye, you guys can just watch
your own downfall, as the whole south goes).

Perhaps from reading the message below, you can come to understand what
I did *not* say in it, and can understand the reasons for some of my
more un-understandable moves of late.  To wit, my pro-E/G leanings
(something A/R do not have at all) have luckily kept me straddling fences
long enough to still be in the Med rather than in the Atlantic on this, the
planned "A/I/R mass attack and reveal-ourselves move."  I should have seen
that A/R could do their part of the mass attack and still have enough left
to give me a healthy stab in the back, but well, I didn't.  Actually, I did,
and am just sad it happened (while being happy that my friendships with
you enable me to not only see myself where I do rather than where they
would like, but also able to write you a message like this, which, as
I imagine you have gathered by know, is a pleading message for a
devoted and immediate eastern push.

You may be sure that as of this moment, I consider myself in an E/G/I
alliance until the end of the game, just as we had been talking about.
You may be sure that my enmity is directed eastward, and my forces soon
will be as well.  If either of you do not agree that the course of action
I propose (anti-A/R) is the only possible course, I would be surprised.
The only possible reason I can see for either of you to think otherwise
might be if Cal is perhaps in an E/A/R, but this I doubt, and Cal, if
for any reason you are, the message below (the one from me to Austria)
puts forth some [IMHO] decent arguments against the long-term viability
of such an alliance, since it it, I believe, the very alliance that
Jamie wishes to ()because he can easiest) betray in the end.  As I write
in my message below, Jamie has architected for himself an excellent plan
of conquest, and we have but this one chance to stop it.

That's (way more than) enough by way of preamble.  I do ask that you read the
message below, and if (as I expect you will) you agree with my analysis,
perhaps you will add your voice to mine in attempting to knock some sense
into Dave so that the very real danger posed by Jamie can be addressed before
it is too late.  Which, in my opinion, means addressing it NOW.

Your comments, opinions, insults, etc., welcome.  Even jokes at my
expense (which at this point, I think I richly deserve) would be welcome
in my mailbox.

Manus

> Message sent to Austria:
>
> Message from [email protected] as Italy to Austria in 'pouchtoo':
>
> Aw, Dave.  I thought we had a good thing going.  That'll teach me
> to think, huh?  :-)  Looks from your moves that our three way alliance
> has been whittled to two, and I was voted the odd man out.  I could
> get on my knees to beg and pray that this vote be recounted or
> something, but somehow I don't think I stand much chance of success
> there, do I?  :-)
>
> But I'm here and willing to listen.  Even if you only want to talk
> about the weather with me.  But if you do see fit to have a change of
> heart... well, there I go begging and praying after I said I wouldn't;
> sorry.  Jamie is a player of the first order, and I guess it's becoming
> clearer to me that the observers are dang right in consistently putting
> him first, and in wanting to get their Russian dictionaries out, etc.,
> etc.  I can only tell you stuff that you already know in the way of
> warning against Mr. Dreier, so there's probably no light I can shed there
> that will make the blood in my back look the less attractive to you.
>
> I guess I don't really know exactly why this course of action was
> chosen, and so if you don't mind, I would really hope to lure you
> into explaining it to me.  I'm asking from a pure strategy and tactics
> point of view, and not even really as your neighbor, Italy.  Maybe
> by needing to ask I only show that my grasp of the game is not as
> keen as yours and Jamie's, but it seems to me that stabbing me now
> will have the effect of:
>    pulling me off France right away, giving all those centers to E/G
>    putting you and I at each other's throats in protracted battle
>       (which I admit, I will lose)
>    leaving Russia in the BACK line of all fighting fronts (if everyone
>       runs west, guess who wins)
>    splitting all the potential anti-Russian allies apart.  It'll be you
>       and Cal when the time comes, and you won't be anywhere near each
> 	  other.
>    leaving Jamie as the only one writing his End of Game Statement with
>        a smile on his face.
>
> A sufficient answer would be that you are fine with fighting me, and
> that Jamie will take Germany by himself or with England.  I suppose that
> is the plan, and maybe I just don't understand it because I'm on the
> wrong side of it, :-), but if you don't mind (and I do hope you don't),
> I would like to hear your honest long-term plan for the game, and how
> it can possibly differ from what I laid out above.
>
> Personally, I cannot, at this point, help but think that ANY answer
> you give (or anyone else gives), no matter where it may differ in its
> particulars from what I laid out above, must logically end with the line,
> "...and then Jamie wins."
>
> Jamie has managed, by turning you against me, to ensure that any possible
> coalition against him must be formed by two powers FAR away from each
> other.  If ever the alarm is raised in you as it is now in me, your only
> possibly ally will be the faroff Englishman, who I have dutifully kept
> from growing.  You will have no chance at combined operations.
>
> With me in Turkey and you in Austria, and with us together and at
> complete peace in the middle, Russia's only choice was to split us
> apart.  For my part I am proud that this never happened (though I imagine
> I don't need to tell you how anti-Austria and pro-R/I Jamie has always
> talked in private messages to me, and by always, I mean always).
>
> Well, I've talked enough, but I do kind of hope for a response.  As I
> say, I think Jamie's plan to separate his potential enemies is obvious,
> and is bound to succeed unless I am unstabbed.  I don't realistically
> expect this to happen (though I will freely admit that I am typing
> this from a kneeling position), but your appraisal of the situation and
> your hope for the future would be a welcome read.  I promise I won't
> get into an argument about it with you.  One mail from you explaining
> what's up, just so I know that you at least thought about the future
> before stabbing me, and I promise I will shut up and bend over, without
> taking issue with anything you say.
>
> There are creative ways to unstab me, and if you consider any of them
> worth exploring (sheesh, my knees are starting to hurt!), let me know.
> We're still adjacent to each other, but if Jamie has his way, we will
> soon be enemies for all time, and he will be quite happy that all he
> will need to worry about in the end is you and England yelling at each
> other from way across the board.
>
> Luckily, I have managed to remain, through all the moves, friends with
> all of the Western powers.  I know that our plan was that this turn I
> would show my true colors and alienate forever the E/G team.  This did
> not happen.  I'm not quite as far away as you hoped, though I imagine
> Jamie is not losing any sleep over how quickly I can get back to engage
> you.  Naturally I will be doing all in my power to turn England
> and Germany east immediately.  I imagine they will see the wisdom of
> this course of action before too long.  This means either (a) France
> dies fast now, or (b) France lives.  Either way, I hope there will soon
> be at least three powers against you and Jamie.  Would you like it to
> be three on two or four on one.  You have the power to decide this turn.
> By next turn, the decision will be out of your hands.
>
> If you wanted to borrow Venice, we could have discussed it.  To be
> completely honest, I would have said yes.  Honestly, I would have.
> I believe in the A/I, and I believe without it both parties are dead.
> I believe this is true not only about a 1901 A/I war, but an '02 A/I
> war, an '03 A/I war, an '04 A/I war, an '05 A/I war, etc.  I believe
> that we hang together or we hang separately.
>
> And I believe that my neck is starting to get a rope burn, and I
> believe that yours will start to itch a little as well before too long.
>
> Please write back.
> Manus
>
> P.S.  The weather here in Denver is very nice today.  How's yours?
>
>
> End of message.
>
> Movement orders for Fall of 1904.  (pouchtoo.015)
>
> Italy: Army Marseilles, No Order Processed.
> Italy: Army Smyrna, No Order Processed.
> Italy: Fleet Western Mediterranean, No Order Processed.
> Italy: Fleet Gulf of Lyon, No Order Processed.
> Italy: Fleet Tyrrhenian Sea, No Order Processed.
>
>
> Orders not received for all units.  If complete orders are not
> received by Fri May 22 1998 23:30:00 , you will be considered late.
> You will be considered abandoned if nothing is received by
> Fri May 29 1998 23:30:00 .
>

Message from Italy to France in 'pouchtoo':

To let you know, obviously conditions dictate I beat a retreat ASAP.
With the loss of Con and Ven, I will still get a build because of the
dislodge of Con and the take of Mar.  But if I fail in convincing Dave
that Smyrna should stay green, I will be buildless and essentially dead.
(Unless we get me into Spain, I suppose.  This would enable me to build
Rome and perhaps stem the tide a little.)

I am doing ALL in my power to get Cal and John to call it quits and
run east as fast as they can.  I want to leave you alive, and if I have
to run away, I will have to make this happen through them.

I have sent LONG messages to Austria and to the E/G team laying out what
I feel are obvious reasons why Jamie must be fought now.  If you have
severed your diplomatic ties to Cal and John, I would humbly suggest
that this is the time you might choose to mail them with an appraisal
of the board that says if they don't get the heck off you and BOTH hit
Russia hard, we can all talk about it in the afterlife.

I am sure Germany is beginning to feel this way, but knowing (or at
least being told) that you recognize the situation on the board and
will not hold any grudge against him while he turns to deal with it,
will hopefully make the eastward move that is necessary happen.

Ditto England.  I humbly ask that you join your voice to mine in mailing
England and Germany to convince them that they must hit Russia now
or live to regret it.

I also ask that you send a similar mail to Dave in Austria.  If Dave
reads mail from every single other power that says Jamie must be stopped,
I stand a better chance of living, and therefore you do too.

I hope that our vocal observers will not blindly feed Dave's egos by
rating things with "R-A" one-two.  Hopefully some of them are astute enough
to run the same analysis I have, which is that this is a Russian board
the way it sits.  Jamie is engineered it so that his potential
enemies who could coordinate with each other are now at war.  Any
alliance he betrays in the end will leave him against two powers who
are not and cannot become adjacent to each other.  Divide and conquer.
He has sent the whole board west.  Gee, guess who will win any game in
which that happens?

Your lifelong ally, now in need of a lot of diplomatic help from you
and military help from everywhere,
Manus

Message from Italy to Russia in 'pouchtoo':

That's a neat way to make sure I look at a map earlier rather than later!
Well done.  :-)

(short pause while I adjust this rather uncomfortable knife -- I simply
must buy myself a low-back chair now!)

Ahem.  Okay, I'm ready to talk.  You will, I hope, excuse the occasional
gurgle of blood while I do so.  :-)

First, no apology is necessary.  Such is the game.  However, rather than
an unnecessary apology, a polite retreat would be quite nice.  If you can
see it in your heart (and find reason in your head [I can help here!]) to
step out of Con the way I stepped out of Ank, making t a Springtime visit,
then I will be able to build back home, far away from you, and we can
resume our once-friendly discussions (sniff).

I don't realistically expect that this will happen.  As I look at the board,
I see only a Russian victory, to be completely honest.  If you have managed
to turn Dave on me, the worst you can do in the end is betray an E/A/R
alliance, leaving yourself fighting two allies who cannot possibly coordinate
in any theater while you grab SC's 16 thru 18.  So more than anything,
I guess I am writing to express my congratulations on your accomplishment.
Well played, Jamie.

Well, okay, I'm writing for TWO reasons; the first was to congratulate
you, but since I have you, I suppose I'll throw in some begging and pleading
for my life.  Just for good measure.  Like I say, I see some creative ways
we can unstab me.  I still see all the benefits that both of us can
realize from the I/R partnership.  And you can save me the cost of a
brand new low-back chair.

Your response is anxiously awaited, even if it simply be chock full of
laughter at my expense (which, at the moment, I feel I richly deserve),
Manus

P.S. If you go through with taking me down, then if you *really* feel like
    you need to do pennance, picking up your "Master Class" pen again would
    be fine.

Message from England to Italy and Germany in 'pouchtoo':

I think what you have written, Manus, pretty much goes without saying
(although you managed to use a lot of electrons to say it... grin).  If
the three of us don't turn and face the surging A/R duo, we will all end
up watching Russia pull off a solo when he stabs David.

Even though we will all be heading east (I assume), we have to make sure
we don't leave some unfinished business behind us.  Obviously, I'm talking
about France.  We can't afford to leave him alive and functional after
this year.  This means that he shouldn't have anything beyond Portugal
after this turn (although I don't have the board in front of me and so
can't see if we can take Paris off him for sure or not) whatever it takes.
I'll have more on this later today after I get home from work to my board.

Komments, komrades?

King Kal


> Message from [email protected] as Italy to England and Germany in
> 'pouchtoo':
>
> Well, guys.  I am including below, complete and unabridged, a mail I
> just sent to Dave.  As you will see from reading it (which I hope you
> will do), it is my considered opinion that unless a concerted attack
> is made by all powers against either Russia alone or the Austro-Russian
> alliance, we can all pass our cafe latte orders to Steve.  And I believe
> that this attack must come NOW (for one reason because if it doesn't,
> I won't be around, and when I kiss it goodbye, you guys can just watch
> your own downfall, as the whole south goes).
>
> Perhaps from reading the message below, you can come to understand what
> I did *not* say in it, and can understand the reasons for some of my
> more un-understandable moves of late.  To wit, my pro-E/G leanings
> (something A/R do not have at all) have luckily kept me straddling fences
> long enough to still be in the Med rather than in the Atlantic on this, the
> planned "A/I/R mass attack and reveal-ourselves move."  I should have seen
> that A/R could do their part of the mass attack and still have enough left
> to give me a healthy stab in the back, but well, I didn't.  Actually, I did,
> and am just sad it happened (while being happy that my friendships with
> you enable me to not only see myself where I do rather than where they
> would like, but also able to write you a message like this, which, as
> I imagine you have gathered by know, is a pleading message for a
> devoted and immediate eastern push.
>
> You may be sure that as of this moment, I consider myself in an E/G/I
> alliance until the end of the game, just as we had been talking about.
> You may be sure that my enmity is directed eastward, and my forces soon
> will be as well.  If either of you do not agree that the course of action
> I propose (anti-A/R) is the only possible course, I would be surprised.
> The only possible reason I can see for either of you to think otherwise
> might be if Cal is perhaps in an E/A/R, but this I doubt, and Cal, if
> for any reason you are, the message below (the one from me to Austria)
> puts forth some [IMHO] decent arguments against the long-term viability
> of such an alliance, since it it, I believe, the very alliance that
> Jamie wishes to ()because he can easiest) betray in the end.  As I write
> in my message below, Jamie has architected for himself an excellent plan
> of conquest, and we have but this one chance to stop it.
>
> That's (way more than) enough by way of preamble.  I do ask that you read the
> message below, and if (as I expect you will) you agree with my analysis,
> perhaps you will add your voice to mine in attempting to knock some sense
> into Dave so that the very real danger posed by Jamie can be addressed before
> it is too late.  Which, in my opinion, means addressing it NOW.
>
> Your comments, opinions, insults, etc., welcome.  Even jokes at my
> expense (which at this point, I think I richly deserve) would be welcome
> in my mailbox.
>
> Manus
>
> > Message sent to Austria:
> >
> > Message from [email protected] as Italy to Austria in 'pouchtoo':
> >
> > Aw, Dave.  I thought we had a good thing going.  That'll teach me
> > to think, huh?  :-)  Looks from your moves that our three way alliance
> > has been whittled to two, and I was voted the odd man out.  I could
> > get on my knees to beg and pray that this vote be recounted or
> > something, but somehow I don't think I stand much chance of success
> > there, do I?  :-)
> >
> > But I'm here and willing to listen.  Even if you only want to talk
> > about the weather with me.  But if you do see fit to have a change of
> > heart... well, there I go begging and praying after I said I wouldn't;
> > sorry.  Jamie is a player of the first order, and I guess it's becoming
> > clearer to me that the observers are dang right in consistently putting
> > him first, and in wanting to get their Russian dictionaries out, etc.,
> > etc.  I can only tell you stuff that you already know in the way of
> > warning against Mr. Dreier, so there's probably no light I can shed there
> > that will make the blood in my back look the less attractive to you.
> >
> > I guess I don't really know exactly why this course of action was
> > chosen, and so if you don't mind, I would really hope to lure you
> > into explaining it to me.  I'm asking from a pure strategy and tactics
> > point of view, and not even really as your neighbor, Italy.  Maybe
> > by needing to ask I only show that my grasp of the game is not as
> > keen as yours and Jamie's, but it seems to me that stabbing me now
> > will have the effect of:
> >    pulling me off France right away, giving all those centers to E/G
> >    putting you and I at each other's throats in protracted battle
> >       (which I admit, I will lose)
> >    leaving Russia in the BACK line of all fighting fronts (if everyone
> >       runs west, guess who wins)
> >    splitting all the potential anti-Russian allies apart.  It'll be you
> >       and Cal when the time comes, and you won't be anywhere near each
> > 	  other.
> >    leaving Jamie as the only one writing his End of Game Statement with
> >        a smile on his face.
> >
> > A sufficient answer would be that you are fine with fighting me, and
> > that Jamie will take Germany by himself or with England.  I suppose that
> > is the plan, and maybe I just don't understand it because I'm on the
> > wrong side of it, :-), but if you don't mind (and I do hope you don't),
> > I would like to hear your honest long-term plan for the game, and how
> > it can possibly differ from what I laid out above.
> >
> > Personally, I cannot, at this point, help but think that ANY answer
> > you give (or anyone else gives), no matter where it may differ in its
> > particulars from what I laid out above, must logically end with the line,
> > "...and then Jamie wins."
> >
> > Jamie has managed, by turning you against me, to ensure that any possible
> > coalition against him must be formed by two powers FAR away from each
> > other.  If ever the alarm is raised in you as it is now in me, your only
> > possibly ally will be the faroff Englishman, who I have dutifully kept
> > from growing.  You will have no chance at combined operations.
> >
> > With me in Turkey and you in Austria, and with us together and at
> > complete peace in the middle, Russia's only choice was to split us
> > apart.  For my part I am proud that this never happened (though I imagine
> > I don't need to tell you how anti-Austria and pro-R/I Jamie has always
> > talked in private messages to me, and by always, I mean always).
> >
> > Well, I've talked enough, but I do kind of hope for a response.  As I
> > say, I think Jamie's plan to separate his potential enemies is obvious,
> > and is bound to succeed unless I am unstabbed.  I don't realistically
> > expect this to happen (though I will freely admit that I am typing
> > this from a kneeling position), but your appraisal of the situation and
> > your hope for the future would be a welcome read.  I promise I won't
> > get into an argument about it with you.  One mail from you explaining
> > what's up, just so I know that you at least thought about the future
> > before stabbing me, and I promise I will shut up and bend over, without
> > taking issue with anything you say.
> >
> > There are creative ways to unstab me, and if you consider any of them
> > worth exploring (sheesh, my knees are starting to hurt!), let me know.
> > We're still adjacent to each other, but if Jamie has his way, we will
> > soon be enemies for all time, and he will be quite happy that all he
> > will need to worry about in the end is you and England yelling at each
> > other from way across the board.
> >
> > Luckily, I have managed to remain, through all the moves, friends with
> > all of the Western powers.  I know that our plan was that this turn I
> > would show my true colors and alienate forever the E/G team.  This did
> > not happen.  I'm not quite as far away as you hoped, though I imagine
> > Jamie is not losing any sleep over how quickly I can get back to engage
> > you.  Naturally I will be doing all in my power to turn England
> > and Germany east immediately.  I imagine they will see the wisdom of
> > this course of action before too long.  This means either (a) France
> > dies fast now, or (b) France lives.  Either way, I hope there will soon
> > be at least three powers against you and Jamie.  Would you like it to
> > be three on two or four on one.  You have the power to decide this turn.
> > By next turn, the decision will be out of your hands.
> >
> > If you wanted to borrow Venice, we could have discussed it.  To be
> > completely honest, I would have said yes.  Honestly, I would have.
> > I believe in the A/I, and I believe without it both parties are dead.
> > I believe this is true not only about a 1901 A/I war, but an '02 A/I
> > war, an '03 A/I war, an '04 A/I war, an '05 A/I war, etc.  I believe
> > that we hang together or we hang separately.
> >
> > And I believe that my neck is starting to get a rope burn, and I
> > believe that yours will start to itch a little as well before too long.
> >
> > Please write back.
> > Manus
> >
> > P.S.  The weather here in Denver is very nice today.  How's yours?
> >
> >
> > End of message.
> >
> > Movement orders for Fall of 1904.  (pouchtoo.015)
> >
> > Italy: Army Marseilles, No Order Processed.
> > Italy: Army Smyrna, No Order Processed.
> > Italy: Fleet Western Mediterranean, No Order Processed.
> > Italy: Fleet Gulf of Lyon, No Order Processed.
> > Italy: Fleet Tyrrhenian Sea, No Order Processed.
> >
> >
> > Orders not received for all units.  If complete orders are not
> > received by Fri May 22 1998 23:30:00 , you will be considered late.
> > You will be considered abandoned if nothing is received by
> > Fri May 29 1998 23:30:00 .
> >
>

Message from Italy to England and Germany in 'pouchtoo':

I have pull with France.  I can virtually guarantee that he will be fine
with living in Portugal for the foreseeable future.  I will pass to him
that this is the plan.  I will take Spain (thus hopefully I can engineer
two builds back home, despite my loss of Turkey).  With two new units in
Italy and my fleets still sailing the warm waters, I can put up a line while
you guys put up a fight.

I believe Hohn is gone until Tuesday, but I will fill his mailbox in
the meantime, and send him a Portuguese dictionary.

May the force be with us,
Manus

P.S.  Sorry about the electron waste.  Habit when stabbed, I suppose.  :-)

Message from England to Germany in 'pouchtoo':

Hmm, guess you'll believe my phony war hunches next time, eh?  :(

I'll be swinging as many of my forces east as I can manage while still
taking Hohn down.  Obviously, THAT job (taking Hohn down) will fall to
Manus and I as you'll be needing your units to defend the homeland.

Any suggestions?  Requests?

King Kal signoff

Message from Italy to France in 'pouchtoo':

Surprisingly (since it is 2 AM my time when I'm writing this, and only
about a half hour since I sent a panicked mail to E/G), I have already
heard back from Cal.

He agrees that the only course of action is to rush east, and sees us
doing so by leaving you alive but living only in Portugal.  (Gee, just what
we were after anyway!  Am I good or what?  If ever an ally needs help, I
can even arrange to have myself *stabbed* to further his cause!  :-)

So my plan (which I hope you agree with) is to get me into Spain this turn
and you into Portugal.  It'll be kind of a boring game for you for a while,
sitting there with (hopefully) little to do, but who knows what the future
will bring?  At least we got you a future.  Maybe someday I'll convoy you
to Brest.  (Oh wait -- your unit is a fleet.  Well, maybe you can convoy ME
to Brest someday.  :-)

Anyway, with me taking Mar and Spa, and losing both my Turkish SC's and
Venice, as well as two units, I will be able to get at least one build to
stem the tide a little while my fleets steam east with all the speed they
can muster.

Sensing a slow turn in the tide that just hit me,
Manus

Message from England to Italy in 'pouchtoo':

> Message from [email protected] as Italy to England and
Germany in
> 'pouchtoo':
>
> I have pull with France.  I can virtually guarantee that he will be fine
> with living in Portugal for the foreseeable future.  I will pass to him
> that this is the plan.  I will take Spain (thus hopefully I can engineer
> two builds back home, despite my loss of Turkey).  With two new units in
> Italy and my fleets still sailing the warm waters, I can put up a line while
> you guys put up a fight.

I have a problem with this scenario, especially with Hohn surviving in
Portugal.  Quite frankly, *I* want the centres mentioned, although I'll be
quite happy to a) let you have Spain this year and b) let you have it
permanently when I gain Paris.

My rationale for wanting centres is simple and probably similar to yours.
While you will be taking on the job of stopping Austria, I will have to
stop Russia who is likely to be a harder target (John probably won't be
able to put up much of a fight regardless of how many centres he has).
Leaving Hohn holding a virtually dead centre is useless for anything.


> I believe Hohn is gone until Tuesday, but I will fill his mailbox in
> the meantime, and send him a Portuguese dictionary.

Send him the recipe for latte instead... grin.

> P.S.  Sorry about the electron waste.  Habit when stabbed, I suppose.  :-)

I was kidding.  I love it when the letters are long.

King Kal


PS: I HAVE to be up because I'm at work Why are you awake?  :)

Message from Italy to England in 'pouchtoo':

> I have a problem with this scenario, especially with Hohn surviving in
> Portugal.
>
Oops.  I guess I thought that was what you were proposing.

> My rationale for wanting centres is simple and probably similar to yours.
>
I agree you and I will be discussing center the best way, turn-by-turn,
arrangement of center ownership for a good long time.  First thing we need
to do (since it seems that with Mar and Spa, I can withstand my losses and
in fact even build despite them) is see if we can get John some centers.
We can't guarantee him anything to offset Berlin other than Belgium (if you
think it's worth the price).  But that, in combination with Bur S Ber-Mun,
only puts a German unit further northwest.

I can talk to France and see if he'll allow Bur-Par to succeed, but once
again that just pulls a German unit out of the theatre for a full year.

> Send him the recipe for latte instead... grin.
>
:-)

> I was kidding.  I love it when the letters are long.
>
Okay, but you're asking for it, Mister.  :-)

> PS: I HAVE to be up because I'm at work Why are you awake?  :)
>
Some play, some work.  I'm on the pager tonight and they're doing
system maintenance so I need to see it come back up.  But I'm about
off to bed in the meantime.  (I just got pages saying the system
was taken down.)

Manus

Message from England to Russia in 'pouchtoo':

Okay, the "master plan" looks to be working fairly well, my incipient
paranoia notwithstanding... 

How does this sound for future extrapolation?

1) Manus has, as expected, come on bended knee (His phrasing ) to form
a E/G/I in order to take on the A/R juggernaut.  I have of course agreed
and will use the next turn or two to a) finish off France (that's my price
to Manus for joining in with him) and b) move my units around to the
north, ostensibly to help Germany but in reality to join the feast.

2) Manus & David get their forces fully engaged while you and I appear to
do the same.  What you and I will actually do is arrange some phony
tactics which will a) make it look like we're at war and b) finish off any
German remnants.

3) When Germany and France are gone and I/A are engaged, we attack them at
almost the same time (I suspect it may end up being better if you attack
Austria first to draw Manus further east; I'll probably need the time in
order to get into position for my attack).

4) The North Rules!  :)

5) End Game Statements.

Komments?

King Kal

Message from England to Austria in 'pouchtoo':

Well, the Observers have certainly been stirred up, eh?  ;)

Manus has already sent mail to Germany and myself trying to line up an
E/G/I "stop the juggernaut" alliance.  Of course I told him I was in
because it will let me maneuver my units into position against him and
Russia... ;)

That said, I do want to make sure that you still see us working
directly together fairly soon.

In the longer term, do you think you'll be able to make sure that Russia
does NOT get a toehold in the Med fleet-wise?  IMO, that will be the key
to you and I having any sort of success against him later on.  Knowing
Jamie, it's pretty likely that he IS planning on stabbing you eventually.
It's our job to make sure he never gets the position to do that while
making sure that Italy follows Turkey, France & Germany down the toilet.
Comments on just how to do that (or just your opinion on our being ABLE to
do that) are welcome.

Kordially,

King Kal

Message from Austria to Italy in 'pouchtoo':

Hi Manus,

I got your note, and will be replying, but it will take a little time due
to time pressures at the moment.

Regards,
Dave

Message from Russia to England in 'pouchtoo':

Well, something like that, yes!

Just how much of a show do you think we'll have to put up to make Austria
happy? I was thinking that he would be satisfied as long as it looked like
there was a little tension between us, he won't need to see outright
fighting.


Let's see, if you are going to maintain the appearance of helping G, I
assume you will move Nwg-Nwy and Eng-Nth. Then I'll build something in Stp.
(If you insist, I'll build F Stp[sc]) I think I pretty much have to do that
to keep Austria from drawing the obvious assumption that I'll be looking to
take him on next.

We could then do some kind of little show in Stp. But beyond that, I don't
think we have to fake any fight.


Anyway, I do agree with your main ideas.


Tsar J

Message from England to Russia in 'pouchtoo':

>Message from [email protected] as Russia to England in 'pouchtoo':
>
>Well, something like that, yes!
>
>Just how much of a show do you think we'll have to put up to make Austria
>happy? I was thinking that he would be satisfied as long as it looked like
>there was a little tension between us, he won't need to see outright
>fighting.


Well, you have been doing more talking with him than I have, so I'll take
your word for it that we don't have to fake any actual fighting.  We can
always keep it in the back of our collective minds.

>Let's see, if you are going to maintain the appearance of helping G, I
>assume you will move Nwg-Nwy and Eng-Nth. Then I'll build something in Stp.
>(If you insist, I'll build F Stp[sc]) I think I pretty much have to do that
>to keep Austria from drawing the obvious assumption that I'll be looking to
>take him on next.


Probably correct as to my moves although I haven't decided on anything just
yet.  Obviously, I'll have to work some tactics out with John & Manus, but
I'll get back to you.

I definitely DO prefer the south coast for any fleet builds in St Pete's
(althougn I agree you probably have to build at least one there for
appearance's sake), but wouldn't want to see any fleet builds there after
that, okay?

How long do you figure it will be before A/I are engaged enough to be
attacked by us?  My guess would be probably season after next (Spring 1905)
but not more than the one after that.

>We could then do some kind of little show in Stp. But beyond that, I don't
>think we have to fake any fight.


Okay. :)

>Anyway, I do agree with your main ideas.


That's always good to hear... :)

King Kal

Message from Russia to England in 'pouchtoo':

>How long do you figure it will be before A/I are engaged enough to be
>attacked by us?  My guess would be probably season after next (Spring 1905)
>but not more than the one after that.

I think that's about right, yes.
It's hard to say. But that's my prediction.
Part of it is that I might be *afraid* to wait any longer than that!
Austria may grow pretty fast.

I should add that I have not worked through the position carefully at all.
And at first blush it's very complicated, in that there are many ways it
could develop.

Just in abstract terms, not thinking about exact positions, it does seem to
me that I should stab Austria before you commit yourself (I mean, I am
assuming you'll commit yourself against *Germany* quite soon, but your next
commitment after that, the one that will reveal the Master Plan). Because I
*think* I am apt to be bigger than you. So we'll want Austria more
committed against me than anyone is against you. Otherwise I'm worried
about serious instability (I don't want to be getting so big that you
*have* to attack me; as you know, this has been in the back of my mind for
several gameyears). So if I stab first, presumably you'll have more
openings and an easier time, to compensate for my greater size.

But maybe the actual developments will be completely different. We'll see!
And I definitely do want you to tell me if/when you think I'm getting too
close to a dangerous point. Don't just keep quiet and let yourself be
forced into attacking me! Promise?

Tsar J

Message from Italy to Austria in 'pouchtoo':

> I got your note, and will be replying, but it will take a little time due
> to time pressures at the moment.
>
Understood.  With the current deadline right in the middle of World DipCon,
which I for one will be attending (I believe others are as well), I imagine
we'll have an extension.

Don't make me lose *too* much weight from all this perspiration, though.
Hope to hear from you as soon as time allows.

Manus

Message from Italy to Russia in 'pouchtoo':

Okay, it's tomorrow.  You said something about an explanation?  :-)

Manus (with his cappuccino order in at the Cooley Coffee Shop)

Message from Russia to Italy in 'pouchtoo':

Manus,

As I'm sure you noticed, I didn't apologize. :-)

Here's the thing.
While it would be perfectly reasonable, positionally, for me to let you up
and change my course, one always expects in such situations that if the
stabee gets his life back, he'll never be a good ally. For instance, I am
almost certain that you are right now attempting to patch together an
alliance that would save you and destroy me if it could hang together. If I
gave you some extra life, I am afraid I'd be kicking myself later. (That
sort of sounds like an insult, but you will see deeply enough to take it as
a compliment!)

I think you were buttering me up with your assessment of the total
situation, but even allowing for that :-) I think I'm doing very well now.
Should I really risk it? How could I be better off with you instead of Dave
as my main ally now?

Tsar J

>P.S. If you go through with taking me down, then if you *really* feel like
>    you need to do pennance, picking up your "Master Class" pen again would
>    be fine.

Ooh! Oooh! Tantamount to cross-gaming! Rick, look, Manus is cheating!

Actually, I have a draft of something. It's on a topic that has absolutely
no bearing at all on pouchtoo, so it should be fine if I show it to you.
I'll send it along sometime soon.

Message from Russia to Italy in 'pouchtoo':

Crossed messages.

But, you're right, I did say I'd explain, and I haven't.

Up until quite recently, I had a number of options. But then things started
to crystalize. You were not available to begin an anti-Austrian operation,
Kaiser John was not *willing* to start one, and I was loathe to try
anything like that myself, because I'd make myself extremely vulnerable to
being picked over by northerners while I committed all my units to the
south.

So I pretty much had to go along with whatever plan Ungarnkaiser Dave
suggested, and I could think of no good excuse to wait longer. This was the
move for me to commit myself, and I had to be sure I'd get a build, and
your Turkish possessions were the only sure way I could get one. Actually,
the one alternative, I guess, was to start against England. But that seemed
very unwise, and in any case it wasn't what Dave had in mind.

I'm sorry to say that your frequent absences had a little something to do
with my choice. (Uh oh, now I'm quas-apologizing.) I think maybe if you
were talking to me all the time I might have thought differently. But don't
fret, I might not have!

Let me add that I don't feel entirely comfortable explaining absolutely
everything, at this point. Draw your own conclusions.


Tsar J

Message from Italy to Austria in 'pouchtoo':

Hey, while I have a monopoly on the conversation, :-), I'll go ahead
and pass on to you the fact that, just as we thought would happen,
the whole board is indeed allied against the biggies in the east.
It's just that there are only two biggies now and I line up on the
other side.  I've already gotten late-night responses from the West,
and I was right that it's going to be a four (if you count Hohn, which,
to be honest, we can't, so let's call it three) on two battle.  You're
one of the two.  I hope you'll see the sense in hopping over and making
it a four on one.  If not, it'll be a fun war, but all bets are off
on where anyone will end up.  ...Well, except Jamie, who will end up in
the catbird seat if you stick with him.  He will easily be able to
fulfill his divide and conquer goal by separating all his potential
opposition either by elimination, all-out war, or by interposition of his
own pieces.  He's pushes all the powers west so that he can go west and
through the middle.  That's just my firm (but considered) opinion, but I
base it on a suddenly ally-less (and therefore a very objective) look at
the board.  You are, of course, entitled to your own opinion (and again,
>from a purely divorced-from-the-game interest point of view, I would like
to know what that opinion could be).  Just to let you know, though, I already
have confirmation that my opinion is shared and will be acted upon.

Manus

Message from Italy to Russia in 'pouchtoo':

I'll start at the back first.

> Let me add that I don't feel entirely comfortable explaining absolutely
> everything, at this point. Draw your own conclusions.
>
Oh, no problem at all keeping secrets from me.  After all, for the moment,
we are enemies and everything.  I don't expect you to open the vault or
anything.  I'm just glad you'll listen to my gurgling voice.

I do want to comment on your comment about my frequent absences.  I was
of course unaware that, first of all, I was being anything less than
fully available and communicative with you.  On the contrary, I thought
each message I got from you was answered in a timely manner (I have of
course kept everything, so I will go back and look to see if this was not
the case).  Once the long delay due to my father was over, I have been
faithful in my correspondence, if not with the first two deadlines
thereafter.  I am completely flabbergasted that you had any issue with
a lack of planning time or something that the two of us have had and
used.  But I could very well be wrong.

(Or it could be that you were throwing me an excuse as a bone, but I
that particular one seems to be caught in my throat a bit.)

As for there being no way you would consider unstabbing me because I
am obviously an aggrieved party and therefore can never be trusted again,
I hope you truly don't feel that this is true.  If you do, then I am
bound to be attacked by you until kingdom come and we may as well not
even talk at all.  And that would be sad.  But if it is indeed the case
that there is no point in talking, I will clam up and devote my resources
elsewhere.

I have learned a lot from face-to-face play on the international level,
especially from the Swedes.  I wrote about this in one of the Pouch issues.
The Swedes have no long-term allegiance to any other player.  It's just
the way they play.  Every single turn can find every single Swede allied
with someone completely different.  There is no grudge holding.  It is as
if seven brand new players come to the board to play each new turn.  Each
player sees where his best advantage lies and works with whomever can help
him achieve it.  The fact that this same player just stabbed the other
for -- let us just invent a hypothetical situation -- all of his Turkish
centers and his eastern fleet :-) -- doesn't matter a whit.

Perhaps you can't see playing this way.  Perhaps you can't imagine anyone,
specifically me, playing this way.  But I can tell you that I for one am
absolutely convinced, from seeing this mindset in action, that this is the
best way to play.  It is my hope that you are, in fact, playing this way,
whether you know it or not (or rather, that you realize you are at a
point where you can choose to do so).  It is obvious that you looked at
the board and saw that your best single turn this time was to stab me.
Maybe it's not just yet, but I do hold out hope that soon your best single
turn might be to re-ally with me.  I hope you do not rule out this possibility
because of any preconceived notion that I would now make a bad ally because
I have been betrayed.

I am not swearing gamelong vengeance against you, and that should (I hope)
say something to reinforce the fact that my viability as a Russian ally is
not compromised permanently.  Yes, I am an American, and we are not used
to playing like Swedes, so it may be difficult to grasp that I adhere to
this modus operandi, but there it is.  The fact is, that I adhere to a
middle ground, which believes in the American concept of long-term alliances
(the Swedes do not have this term in their dictionary), but in the more
continental concept of having NO long-term enemies.  I believe that this
middle ground does exist, and this defines my playing style.

If you do not believe me, then as I say, there is no use typing a further
word to you.

You are correct, of course, that I am doing what I can to form a coalition
against my former allies, but please know that I do so with a mind that is
open to a lot more possibilities than just a big push east.  Though I may
be the only one on the board open to this, I am open to my being unstabbed
and left Con, in a second straight Turkish Spring surprise, if for nothing
else than to give the observers a thrill.

As I say, I'm probably the only one thinking that there is even a scintilla
of a chance of that happening, but I'm out here talking my legs off (can
legs "talk off?") so explore all the options.  I am not locked in against
you, and my hope is you don't lock yourself in against me simply because
you think that I will be unfaithful to you because of the past.  The past
is the past.  I bet the Swedes have a nice saying for that.

Your friend, the crossgamer (but this game is named "POUCHtoo" so I thought
I could bring up the "Pouch, too" in it! :-)
Manus

Message from Italy to Russia in 'pouchtoo':

Now for the *front* of your messages.

> While it would be perfectly reasonable, positionally, for me to let you up
> and change my course, one always expects in such situations that if the
> stabee gets his life back, he'll never be a good ally.
>
Given, then, that you admit that it would be perfectly reasonable,
positionally, to alter your course, from the above it would seem that
all that remains for me to cause this to happen (here I presume to
preach logic to the philosopher) is to convince you of the fallacy of
your position that I would be untrustworthy.

I hope the stab (no pun intended) I took at that in my last long message
goes somewhat toward this goal you have set for me.  (If not, then perhaps
you are at least having a good laugh about it, and this will make you love
me, and you will give in to guilt for stabbing such an entertaining fellow.)

Heck, even if I *did* want to hold a grudge, I don't even consider myself
stabbed yet.  Other than the loss of my fleet, nothing is undoable.  I'm
not stabbed yet.  You've just got a knife at my back and my hands are tied.

Not to say that I don't feel a little prick back there, that's for darn
sure.... but if you take the knife away, there is no reason to believe that
you have to hand it over to me and turn around.  In this game, we all
have knives.  Sure, if you untie my hands, I'll reach for mine, but you
have no greater chance of my trying to plunge it into you than anyone else
does.  I'm in no position to do so, cannot be for quite a while, and to
bow to my "despite this Swedish view, I'm a long-term alliance kind of guy"
feelings, I frankly would be reluctant to stab you even if I could.  I felt
that we were working very well together (your comments about my unavailability
shocked me, and I apologize for letting you down in this area, but I did
so unwittingly) and I enjoyed our relationship very much.  It is to my
benefit, both short-term (Swedish) and long-term (American) to hold out hope
for restoration of a long-term alliance with you.

If I hold out hope where there is none, please let me know.  I know, I know,
you already did, but as you can see from my logician's analysis of the
opening statement in your response, I still see reason to envision a way out.
If my logic is poor (it's your field, not mine, after all), I am sure you
will do me the courtesy of letting me know, at which time I will politely
pack up my pen and pencil set.

Until then, I remain (for as long as possible :-),
Manus

Message from Russia to Italy in 'pouchtoo':

PRESS TO SWEDEN, CALIFORNIA


As to our past correspondence:
I agree that you did answer every note. I guess I felt that you rarely
initiated anything. By contrast, Dave initiates all the time, it was all I
could do to keep ahold of the reins!

Well, you're certainly making up the shortfall now, anyway.

As to our future:
I don't quite understand the Swedish approach. If you ignore the past,
you're throwing away information. There's a theorem that says that's a bad
idea :-).
On the other hand, I do agree that *grudges* are bad play (as the Turkish
demise bears witness?).


So let me put it this way. If I stay with my current obvious course, I have
(a) a strong Austrian ally, and (b) a fragmented west (you look western
>from my vantage point) with England beginning to emerge as the
front-runner. That looks like an awfully good endgame. And not much stands
between me and it. I wouldn't say I had odds-on winning chances, but I do
feel that I'd be among the better-off of maybe three finalists.

If I change tacks, what do I have by way of advantage? I *might* have a run
at a whole lot of Austrian centers. Then again I *might* have a fight
against Germany, Austria, and Italy, and maybe England trying to pick off
easy farnorth dots. Since you are trying to organize some Resistance, I
have to think you might be somewhat successful, and that you might very
well think that playing that hand was your best bet, even if I were to
prove friendly again.

Do you think I have mis-assessed things? Convince me.

I was a little surprised, by the way, at your threat to 'clam up'. How
could *that* be a good idea?

Tsar J

Message from Italy to Russia in 'pouchtoo':

> PRESS TO SWEDEN, CALIFORNIA
>
:-)

Quickly:

(1) sorry for not initiating.  I can do that but didn't see any chance.
    We had our plans, and as I understood them, there was to be no joint I/R
    activity until we could both turn on Dave.  Saw no opportunity to initiate.
    Should have looked harder.

(2) Oh, I don't at all disagree that your position is worth pursuing.
    There's probably no way I could convince you that you're better off
    letting me off the hook and turning elsewhere.  I may be a dead duck
    if you don't come to find a reason to let me live, and with you not
    seeing one, that is, unless you're just fishing for me to prove I can
    initiate, there's not much hope for li'l ol' me.

(3) The Swedish approach doesn't ignore the past (though I made it
    sound like it does).  It is *not* like seven new players come to
    the board with each turn -- it's like the SAME seven players
    change positions.  The key is that player personalities and traits
    are still known, hence the "not ignoring the past" aspect.  So
    from this point of view, your next argument would be an attempt
    to expose the fallacy with a, "well, this proves my point, because
    you will know from here on in that I am a dirty, lowdown, backstabber
    who has no qualms about giving it to his Italian ally."  Well, sure
    I will, but to be frank, I knew that going into Spring '01.  I mean,
    you're Jamie Dreier, after all.  The last move didn't change my opinion
    of you and my co-operability with you.

(4) As for my threat to clam up, I do think it would waste both of our
    time if once it has been established that the rift between us is
    irreparable, we talk about anything but the weather.  If you say there
    will permanently be no reason to consider friendship with me on the
    board, all that will be left is our friendship off the board, so
    restricting our conversations to those topics seems to make sense.

Gotta run.  Turns out it's a workday!  Who knew?
Manus

Message from Italy to England and Germany in 'pouchtoo':

I have been busy all morning with mail from Jamie.  Got a quick one
>from Dave just saying he got my long mail but can't respond until he
gets some time.

As for Jamie, he is of course very pleased with his position; sees
no reason to unstab me despite my pleas.  Not that I, in his position,
would see any, but I thought it was worth the old college try.  He is,
as a matter of fact, just as convinced as I am that this game is his,
and that he can win it from this position (as opposed to any pro-Italy
position), and has said as much.

Shall we endeavor to prove him wrong?

To do so, I am becoming more and more convinced, will *require* Austrian
help.  Have you two had a chance to send some long anti-Russian messages
Dave's way, yet?  If he knows he's on the wrong side of a three-on-two,
maybe he can be convinced to make it a four-on-one, until we all party
in the Kremlin (hmmm....had it been built by 1903?) and the Crimea.

Manus

Message from Germany to England and Italy in 'pouchtoo':

I won't be able to communicate much. I am paying Kinko's .20 per minute
to read mail, and their server is way slooow. Naturally, I am with you
to the end. Den-swe is already ordered, so Russia won't take Norway this
turn. I think we should take out as much of France as possible. Thus
bur-par. If you guys give me the appropriate cuts and supports, I'll
finally be in Paris. Spain will fall. If you risk it, you can even
destroy f spa, leaving Hohn with Portugal and no units on the board.

Seems to me the only hope is to turn Austria against Russia. It could
happen. They are not so entangled that Austria can't take all of us on
as junior partners to prevent a Russia win. Otherwise, Jamie wins.

Re the phony war, Cal. I think it was my bad luck to leave town as this
crucial turn transpired. I could not diplomacize either A or R. I think
they hatched this one just this turn. To their great advantage.

Here are my preliminary orders:

f den - swe
a ber - mun
a ruh s a ber - mun
a bur - par

May ghod have mercy on our souls!

The Kaiser



______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

Message from Italy to England and Germany in 'pouchtoo':

Good to hear from John.  It sounds like we have the beginnings of a
tactical plan, and the cementing of a diplomatic one.  We must hit
Dave hard with two-by-fours upside the head until he the light makes
it through all that wool.

On the assumption that John's Kinko's connectivity will make his
swing of the two-by-fours tough, I will swing all the harder, but
will use select excerpts from John's mail to buttress the argument
to Dave that he has no friends but Jamie, and everyone but him sees
that Jamie's on his way to victory if Dave reciprocates that friendship.

As for the phony war, it was planned a couple years ago.  I knew all
about it.  Should have warned you, but thought you could stop it while
and after we still got our French pie.  I misplayed, though, by not telling
you.  I guess we're all snakes, eh?  You can cut off my head later.  (If I
still have it.)

To echo The Kaiser, may ghod have mercy on our souls!

Manus

Message from Italy to England and Germany in 'pouchtoo':

On the up-side, we have a while for this move, since the deadline is
scheduled for right during World DipCon, and I leave town to attend it
two days earlier (so fair warning).  As a result, I expect the deadline
will be extended.  Giving us that much more time to fill Dave's mailbox
with common sense.

Manus

Message from Austria to Russia in 'pouchtoo':

DDDD    00000    N  N   ''   TTTTT
D   D   0   0    NN N   ''     T
D   D   0   0    N NN   '      T
DDDD    00000    N  N          T


DDDD    00000        TTTTT   H   H   AAAAA   TTTTT   !!   !!
D   D   0   0          T     H   H   A   A     T     !!   !!
D   D   0   0          T     HHHHH   AAAAA     T
DDDD    00000          T     H   H   A   A     T     !!   !!


The first note I read this morning, BEFORE seeing the results, was
yours as it arrived first.  My doctor will be sending you a bill
for what it did to my heart rate and blood pressure.  Send me another
note like that and I'll attack you for health reasons!  Sheeesh!!!!

(<:

And now it is time to talk about the future.  First of all, the major
concesses is that I'm just setting us all up for a Russian win and
that I'm the one in danger of a stab.  Let's look at the situation:

You have the better position in Turkey.  You are in a position to
stab from Rum.  If you stayed still in Turkey, got into Berlin
and stabbed from Rum you would go plus 3 while I would be even,
with Russian armies in Bud and probably Gal.   Hmmm, maybe they're right....

I'm still committed to this alliance as you can tell from my moves,
but I have to admit about being a bit uneasy right now.  I did not
push on Rum because I felt you were concerned about the stab and that
you might have taken a push there as an indication that I was planning
on it, but I certainly would have felt a lot better if you had taken
the option to vacate it.  Now I really am in a vulnerable position and
that is giving me some pause about the upcoming turn.

While I'm definitely not going to turn on you, I am having to give some
serious thought to doing something to protect myself just in case.
My first thought was that I could improve the position by doing a
triple attack on Mun rather than supporting you to Berlin.  However,
if I opt for that, there is actually a chance that Germany could keep
his centers and get a build (Ruh + Bur s Ber -> Mun) and I don't really
like that option.  That has left several options.  One is to provide
some protection for my home centers, using Tyr to take Ven and using
Tri to cover either Bud and Ser.  Italy has also offerred to lend any
support I want against you (surprise) so I could take his support to
Con and use Aegean to ensure it works.  That might slow my attack on
Italy a bit, but wouldn't change our position any.  Another option is
of course that you support me to Berlin, but that is obviously not the
best tactical move.

So, I'd like your thoughts on things.  Do you agree that that shoe is now
clearly on the other foot and that I am the one who has to be concerned about
a stab?   As you said, it may be a bad move diplomatically to bring up
my concerns to you, and if not for your note and your staying in Rum, I
wouldn't have, but by showing your concern about the alliance you have
increased mine.  I had put my doubts to rest, but you've resurrected
them to some degree.  I see no percentage in damaging the AR in any way
and I'd very much like to take it forward to the three-way end game
that we've discussed, from which we will hopefully be able to devise a
safe and secure path to a two way draw.  What caused your concerns
about my intentions?  How do we put them to bed and make sure that we
don't enter into a destructive spiral of paranoia here?

Please don't get the impression that I think things are in a bad state
and that we are heading for conflict.  Obviously I've got a lot of
faith in the alliance and am moving away from you, but you've raised
concerns and I want to clear them up immediately so we can move
forwards.

Regards,
Kaiser D

>Ok, here we go. I hope nobody's late.
>
>Listen, I *almost* wrote you a longish note explaining why you shouldn't
>stab me now. :)
>
>Positionally, it must be tempting. I am a little worried about it. I
>concluded, though, that diplomatically it would be a mistake, and I am
>assuming that (a) I am right about this, and (b) you can see why. So I
>won't explain.
>
>Things will be clearer all around if the move goes through as I expect/hope
>it will.
>
>Anyway, don't stab me. There, in case you were still undecided, that ought
>to do it!

Message from Russia to Austria in 'pouchtoo':

Hi Kaiser Dave.

Sorry about that. It crossed my mind that my little eleventh hour worries
note might alarm you. I tried to give it the spin, "I was sort of worried
but I'm gritting my teeth and staying the course."

Send me the medical bills.

I am a *little* surprised that you seem so concerned about the position,
just because it was a very predictable position!

Let me just assure you that the *only* reason I was a little worried before
the move, myself, was the position on the board. (I will repeat this
assurance below.) It just looked like a turning point to me, and only a
fool thinks he always knows which way things will turn.

Also, just off the top of my head, I did not look carefully at this
position to see whether you were in real danger, for one simple reason: to
stab you right now would be outright diplomatic suicide.

So I ask you now to do what I did last night. Think about it. Notice that,
yes, if you were completely trusting and I took full advantage of you, I
would probably get a lot of centers and builds and that good material
stuff. And then notice that everyone on the whole board would align against
me. (Ok, maybe I could talk Hohn into being on my side. Yeah, that's
something I always count on!:-)) And then pay me the compliment I paid you
and conclude that I am a good enough player not to commit diplomatic
suicide, even when the centers are available.


Now, comments on your particulars.



>First of all, the major
>concesses is that I'm just setting us all up for a Russian win and
>that I'm the one in danger of a stab.

Yeah, but the consensus until last move was that 'Austria has few
possibilities for expansion'. :-)

Oh! Did you mean the consensus among the *players*? Really?!?!? I don't
believe it. Oh, well, of course they'd *say* that!

No, as I said, I agree that positionally you are now the one in danger. Ok.


>You have the better position in Turkey.  You are in a position to
>stab from Rum.  If you stayed still in Turkey, got into Berlin
>and stabbed from Rum you would go plus 3 while I would be even,
>with Russian armies in Bud and probably Gal.   Hmmm, maybe they're right....

They *are* right, from the purely material perspective. But you know that's
not the right perspective on the game, and you know it's not mine. (That's
why those observers are watching and you're playing.) (You watch and see
what Jim Burgess says, it will be a different tune.) (It had better be, or
I've wasted that ten bucks I paid him;))

>I'm still committed to this alliance as you can tell from my moves,
>but I have to admit about being a bit uneasy right now.  I did not
>push on Rum because I felt you were concerned about the stab and that
>you might have taken a push there as an indication that I was planning
>on it, but I certainly would have felt a lot better if you had taken
>the option to vacate it.  Now I really am in a vulnerable position and
>that is giving me some pause about the upcoming turn.

Damn. Now I wish I'd played Rum-Sev. Oh well. (If you had pushed a *little*
harder, I would have insisted that I be allowed to keep it there, but then
in fact I would have moved it.)

>While I'm definitely not going to turn on you, I am having to give some
>serious thought to doing something to protect myself just in case.

That's fine. Just as a general rule, in fact, I will not be upset if you
sacrifice a little of our alliance's initiative/momentum for a little
security. Indeed, it might make England happier and more likely to stab
Germany if we go slow and guard things a little.


>My first thought was that I could improve the position by doing a
>triple attack on Mun rather than supporting you to Berlin.  However,
>if I opt for that, there is actually a chance that Germany could keep
>his centers and get a build (Ruh + Bur s Ber -> Mun) and I don't really
>like that option.

Right.
I mean, if you want to do that, it's ok with me. Sure, we lose about a
turn's worth of anti-German tempo if it fails, but I think we can afford
it. (Make sure Tri is open for a build, that's all.) And Germany would have
to guess right. The only thing I don't like about it is that you'd get
three builds and I'd get only one. That does bother me a bit. Remember that
I don't have much real estate left in Germany before I have to stab
England, whereas you have lots of Italian centers to gobble before you meet
King Kal. So it's not my favorite option.

> That has left several options.  One is to provide
>some protection for my home centers, using Tyr to take Ven and using
>Tri to cover either Bud and Ser.

That's my least favorite option. It takes pressure off Germany. And it
makes me less willing to move out of Rumania; or if I do, it makes *me* a
little nervous for next time. That's what we should be trying to avoid,
back-and-forth nerves. But if you insist on it, I could stand it.

>  Italy has also offerred to lend any
>support I want against you (surprise) so I could take his support to
>Con and use Aegean to ensure it works.  That might slow my attack on
>Italy a bit, but wouldn't change our position any.

That one's perfectly fine with me.
If you go with that, it will be interesting to see what Italy tells me. He
would presumably try to get me to do something other than Con-Smy!
I think that's my favorite option.

>  Another option is
>of course that you support me to Berlin, but that is obviously not the
>best tactical move.

No, it isn't, and also it would mean you'd get three builds to my one, and
I would lose access to the other German centers. What will the observers
say then??? :-)

>So, I'd like your thoughts on things.  Do you agree that that shoe is now
>clearly on the other foot and that I am the one who has to be concerned about
>a stab?

Materially, positionally, yes. Diplomatically, no.
I actually think that we are currently in a very stable diplomatic situation.
Remember, this is basically what I've been shooting for, this is why I
lobbied you to time things like this.

Briefly (I know you already understand my ideas on this aspect of the
game), in a game such as this one it's hubris (and probably delusional) to
expect to be able to go crashing into an endgame as the obviously dominant
power and then not have everybody mass up against you. I mean, me. Or you.
What I've always been shooting for instead is to go into the ending as one
of three finalists, and preferably as equal with you and a bit ahead of
England. The current situation strongly encourages each of the three of us
to stick with the course, and imposes intrinsic penalties for defection,
because it's unrealistic to expect to have a better entry to the endgame
than one-of-three-finalists.

I suppose you might think that I don't really believe that! But I've been
hoping that it was just so clearly TRUE that it would be no stretch for you
to believe I believe it. Have I miscalculated? Or do you underestimate me?
Or is it just nerves (which I understand very well!)?

> As you said, it may be a bad move diplomatically to bring up
>my concerns to you, and if not for your note and your staying in Rum, I
>wouldn't have, but by showing your concern about the alliance you have
>increased mine.

Ok, I see that.
No, it's not bad diplomatically for you to bring up your concerns. No problem.


>  What caused your concerns about my intentions?

Only the position, nothing more. (There, now I've repeated it.)


>  How do we put them to bed and make sure that we
>don't enter into a destructive spiral of paranoia here?

Well, I was actually thinking that after this set of results (the ones
we've just seen), the fears would be allayed. Partly because that was such
a turning-point move, and we'd each figure, "Gee, if he were going to stab
me, he would have done it then, it makes no sense to wait and then stab"
(which seems to me to be true). And partly because we've just headed the
game into that favorable ending, with no advantage I can see to any single
one of us (the three of us) to turn back. (Maybe there's an advantage to
England to shake up the whole package, but you and I have been careful not
to give him the information he'd need to realize that, right?) As I said
above, I do think we are now in a very stable diplomatic position.



Let me close by noting that Manus has also been lobbying away at me. Of
course. You know Manus, right? And I knew he must be lobbying you. And I
*know* he's been lobbying England (Kal told me), and I feel very confident
that he's lobbying Germany, though I haven't heard from John. (I suspect
that Manus's primary plan is to try to arrange an IEG, arguing that the AR
threat is about to become impossible to contain and they have to act now,
yada yada yada.)
I was entirely honest with him in my answer. I told him that as far as I
could tell, there was no advantage to me to move out of Con (he suggested
that I go Con-Bul, letting him keep the center so he could rebuild at home)
and siding with him instead of you. I laid my cards on the table,
explaining that I liked the way the endgame was going to be shaped and
couldn't imagine how any realistic alternative could be better for me. And
that's true, I can't.
If Manus concedes and offers to puppet for me and help me win, and gets
Hohn Cho to do the same, and I believe them, then I'll let you know. Uh,
no, wait, no I won't. :-)

So, have I convinced you?
I knew you'd have doubts at some point. And I knew just what I'd say, and
I've tried hard to set things up so what I'd say would be quite true, and
therefore really convincing. I'm only a little surprised that this turned
out to be the moment; I thought we'd both be relieved and pleased that
everything turned out exactly as planned. But that's ok, let's get this
problem under our belts and proceed to the foreseen endgame. You choose the
option you like best, in light of my preferences but by no means deferring
to them. Or we can discuss them some more.

Tsar J

Message from Russia to Italy in 'pouchtoo':

Manus,

>(3) The Swedish approach doesn't ignore the past (though I made it
>    sound like it does).  It is *not* like seven new players come to
>    the board with each turn -- it's like the SAME seven players
>    change positions.  The key is that player personalities and traits
>    are still known, hence the "not ignoring the past" aspect.  So
>    from this point of view, your next argument would be an attempt
>    to expose the fallacy with a, "well, this proves my point, because
>    you will know from here on in that I am a dirty, lowdown, backstabber
>    who has no qualms about giving it to his Italian ally."  Well, sure
>    I will, but to be frank, I knew that going into Spring '01.  I mean,
>    you're Jamie Dreier, after all.  The last move didn't change my opinion
>    of you and my co-operability with you.


Hm, good point.
Well, I still don't quite see it that way. Players play different ways in
different games. Am I more like Prince Bela (my persona in a DSI
invitational) or Gentle King Jamie (of GHODSTOO)?
But I do see the Swedish approach better now.

Hey, let's pretend you're Swedish from now on. And let's pretend that I'm a
police lieutenant, can we, please?

>(4) As for my threat to clam up, I do think it would waste both of our
>    time if once it has been established that the rift between us is
>    irreparable, we talk about anything but the weather.

Don't be silly. Nothing is irreparable. Even if, as it seems to me, my best
play is to continue with Dave, you know (at least) as well as I do that
things change. Maybe I'll be suddenly beset with strife, or maybe suddenly
you will appear to be much stronger, or much weaker, and the whole balance
of the game will change. Or maybe you'll convince me that my prospects are
better with a weak Austria and a strong Italy in the endgame than they are
with a weak Italy and a strong Austria. We'd want to have been talking all
along, right?
I'm just laying my cards on the table for you, that's all.


>Gotta run.  Turns out it's a workday!  Who knew?

Can we get Rick, or maybe the judgekeepers to do something about this? It's
really interfering with the game.

Tsar J

Message from Russia to Turkey in 'pouchtoo':

>For a guy who went out in record time, I did get one thing right:  giving
>Russia back the piece was a bad move.  Jamie is in a rather enviable
>position-no enemies that can hurt him and plenty of expansion possibilities.
>I would have thought his keen tactics in destroying me would have
>discouraged potential allies from trusting his Tsarness...


You know, I'm just dying to comment on your broadcast comments, but I
won't. Until the end of the game.

(Tsar) Jamie

Message from Italy to Russia in 'pouchtoo':

Okay, then, I'll try and stay as strong as I can so that you'll at least
have the option of rejoining me.  Now that I think about it, you know,
there are ways you could *help* me in this mission.  :-)

Good on ya,
Manus

Message from Observer to Russia in 'pouchtoo':

Jamie,

Nice move.  You basically told me what was going to happen this season
with your cryptic reply.  Especially since I know David so well (you
should join us for one of the Boston "Incidents" some time), it was
child's play to put two and two together.


I intentionally didn't follow up on the message, since I didn't want
to know TOO much as I wrote those broadcasts.  I hope you saw how
carefully I disguised what I knew.

Lots more Dip in this game to be played.  The Observers are now
underestimating Barkdull, but I think I'll hold my tongue for the
moment.

Jim

Message from Austria to Russia in 'pouchtoo':

Wheeee!  That was fun (<:

All right, I've just deleted my third pass at this note.  The problem with
each one was that I felt it would increase tension, not reduce it, which
is not what I'm trying to do.  Suffice it to say that I am no where near
as worried about it as your last note implies.  Strategically I know that
it would be a bad idea for you.  Every time I look at the map however, my
nasty little hindbrain says, "See that white dagger in Rum aimed at your
heart.  Look at what he could do."  From my perspective, your worries about
me stabbing last turn were equally baseless.  So, I may pull something
a little bit defensive, but I'm going forward.  I will definitely be
supporting you to Berlin.  I'm in AR for the long haul.  Just vacate Rum,
okay?

Speaking of the long haul, we do need to plan ahead.  We both want to be
sure that when the moment comes we each find England a more tempting
target than the other.  I in particular have this concern as I think
your moment is going to come sooner than mine.  It's going to take me
a while to head across the Med, you will be a lot quicker in taking out
Ber, Kie and Den.  I do want to be sure that you are committed to the
northern route at that point and that you are not tempted by the Austrian
centers that can be reached by land, and by the potential of that fleet
in the Med.


I'm also a little concerned that we may end up with you attacking
 England too soon.  It would perhaps be best to
have England continue to concentrate on France so that the attack on Germany
does not go to fast.  We don't want France to get back up to 6 centers and
link up with England when you launch your attack!  Optimally, you would
get the three centers above and England would have gotten a few French
centers, while I would have cleaned up the Italian peninsula and taken Mun.
Then you push out against England and along the lowlands while I move for
Bur and Mar, keeping the pressure on and both of us moving.  We need to
keep an eye on the timing.

Don't worry, be happy (<:.

Kaiser D

Message from England to Russia in 'pouchtoo':

>Message from [email protected] as Russia to England in 'pouchtoo':
>
>
>>How long do you figure it will be before A/I are engaged enough to be
>>attacked by us?  My guess would be probably season after next (Spring
1905)
>>but not more than the one after that.
>
>I think that's about right, yes.
>It's hard to say. But that's my prediction.
>Part of it is that I might be *afraid* to wait any longer than that!
>Austria may grow pretty fast.
>
>I should add that I have not worked through the position carefully at all.
>And at first blush it's very complicated, in that there are many ways it
>could develop.
>
>Just in abstract terms, not thinking about exact positions, it does seem to
>me that I should stab Austria before you commit yourself (I mean, I am
>assuming you'll commit yourself against *Germany* quite soon, but your next
>commitment after that, the one that will reveal the Master Plan). Because I
>*think* I am apt to be bigger than you. So we'll want Austria more
>committed against me than anyone is against you. Otherwise I'm worried
>about serious instability (I don't want to be getting so big that you
>*have* to attack me; as you know, this has been in the back of my mind for
>several gameyears). So if I stab first, presumably you'll have more
>openings and an easier time, to compensate for my greater size.
>
>But maybe the actual developments will be completely different. We'll see!
>And I definitely do want you to tell me if/when you think I'm getting too
>close to a dangerous point. Don't just keep quiet and let yourself be
>forced into attacking me! Promise?


That's a promise I can keep.  :)

I think the only thing that would seriously jeopardize our long-term
commitment would be for you to get too fleet happy on either coast.  As long
as you avoid that, we should be okay.

As for me showing my commitment against Germany, I've looked over the board
situation and I think it's a lock that I'll grab Holland next Fall.  I'll
probably try and pull a "better me than them" ploy on John just to keep him
off guard.

All for now.  I'll write more if I se anything interesting in the rest of my
mail...

Kordially

King Kal

Message from England to Germany and Italy in 'pouchtoo':

>Message from [email protected] as Germany to England and Italy in
>'pouchtoo':
>
>I won't be able to communicate much. I am paying Kinko's .20 per minute
>to read mail, and their server is way slooow. Naturally, I am with you
>to the end. Den-swe is already ordered, so Russia won't take Norway this
>turn. I think we should take out as much of France as possible. Thus
>bur-par. If you guys give me the appropriate cuts and supports, I'll
>finally be in Paris. Spain will fall. If you risk it, you can even
>destroy f spa, leaving Hohn with Portugal and no units on the board.


I think taking Hohn out is absolutely vital to our alliance and will make
the appropriate orders.  However, I don't see any combination of tactics
that will lead to the "no French units" scenario you describe, John.  In
fact, the only way to eliminate even the two armies is if A Bre is the unit
to take Paris (no, I'm not suggesting this, you need the centre more than I
do).  Could you enlighten me?  For now, I'm going to order A Bre s A
Bur-Par; F Eng s A Bre; F Mid-Por.

>Seems to me the only hope is to turn Austria against Russia. It could
>happen. They are not so entangled that Austria can't take all of us on
>as junior partners to prevent a Russia win. Otherwise, Jamie wins.


Austria approached me a couple of moves ago about forming an A/E alliance.
I think he was sincere and of course I responded positively (never know when
you need a friend, right guys? ).  This probably led to him feeling he
could work with Russia against and may be the lever we need to pry him away
>from Russia.  I've already written to him about this.  The gist of the
letter was, "hey, great stab!" When do we take on Russia and what's the best
way to do it?"
We'll see how he reacts.  BTW, if that DID lead to your being stabbed, John,
I apologize, but it's something that could come in handy now in terms of
recovery and stopping Jamie.

>Re the phony war, Cal. I think it was my bad luck to leave town as this
>crucial turn transpired. I could not diplomacize either A or R. I think
>they hatched this one just this turn. To their great advantage.
>
>Here are my preliminary orders:
>
>f den - swe
>a ber - mun
>a ruh s a ber - mun
>a bur - par


Sounds good to me, but I'd still like to get your feedback to the above
paragraph on tactics.

Kordially Komrades,

King Kal

Message from Russia to Austria in 'pouchtoo':

Quick, I have to put my kid to bed in three minutes.

>  So, I may pull something
>a little bit defensive, but I'm going forward.  I will definitely be
>supporting you to Berlin.  I'm in AR for the long haul.  Just vacate Rum,
>okay?

Ok.


>Speaking of the long haul, we do need to plan ahead.  We both want to be
>sure that when the moment comes we each find England a more tempting
>target than the other.  I in particular have this concern as I think
>your moment is going to come sooner than mine.

I agree.

>  It's going to take me
>a while to head across the Med, you will be a lot quicker in taking out
>Ber, Kie and Den.

And in any case, I will *have* to keep building fleets, and then the jig's
up, so I may as well attack him.


>I'm also a little concerned that we may end up with you attacking
> England too soon.  It would perhaps be best to
>have England continue to concentrate on France so that the attack on Germany
>does not go to fast.  We don't want France to get back up to 6 centers and
>link up with England when you launch your attack!  Optimally, you would
>get the three centers above and England would have gotten a few French
>centers, while I would have cleaned up the Italian peninsula and taken Mun.
>Then you push out against England and along the lowlands while I move for
>Bur and Mar, keeping the pressure on and both of us moving.  We need to
>keep an eye on the timing.

Yeah, that's ok with me, but I don't think you're going to get KK to go
along with it.

I'll have to think about this and get back to you tomorrow.

Tsar J

Message from Russia to Austria in 'pouchtoo':

Ok, let's see.

First of all:

>Strategically I know that
>it would be a bad idea for you.  Every time I look at the map however, my
>nasty little hindbrain says, "See that white dagger in Rum aimed at your
>heart.  Look at what he could do."  From my perspective, your worries about
>me stabbing last turn were equally baseless.

Let us agree that (a) we will not let our hindbrains do the driving, and
(b) we will not allow ourselves to believe that the other's hindbrain is
driving.


> I do want to be sure that you are committed to the
>northern route at that point and that you are not tempted by the Austrian
>centers that can be reached by land, and by the potential of that fleet
>in the Med.

I will build a fleet in the north this winter, for sure. I have already
semi-cleared this with King Kal.

I will not build any southern fleet.

By the same token, I would like to see you build fleets at *every*
opportunity. Assuming you get two builds this year, I don't really think
you should waive one, but at some point you might consider waiving to get
extra fleets. (And me too, for all intents and purposes I now think of
myself as having only one buildable coast.)


>I'm also a little concerned that we may end up with you attacking
> England too soon.  It would perhaps be best to
>have England continue to concentrate on France so that the attack on Germany
>does not go to fast.  We don't want France to get back up to 6 centers and
>link up with England when you launch your attack!

Well, let's just think about this carefully.

For one thing, I suspect there are two different ways of going about this.
If we follow the main path we've been considering all along, then you're
right. But the other way to go is to blitz into Germany, and England be
damned. Then the main thing will be to get a fleet (or two) of yours beyond
Italy, and to get a third northern fleet for me. My sense is that if we get
another year under our belts, and have enough fleets, they can't stop us.
(I mean, a six center France, a seven center England, and a couple of stray
centers belonging to Italy or Germany, I think we'd outgun them.) Remember
that there will be no stalemate line left for them. I'll have northern
fleets, and we'll have (probably you'll have) armies in Germany.

The main problem with this approach is that it is apt to make our alliance
somewhat unstable. So I still do prefer to have an English partner for a
while. So in the end I agree that it's better if I don't stab England
really soon, not until you're finishing off Italy, say.

King Kal says that he intends to stab into Holland *next* Fall. Then
possibly I could *ask* him to defend Germany a bit, maybe by moving into
Norway and then ordering Nwy-Swe to prevent me from taking Denmark?
Something like that. I think Cal would like that, since it insures that he
gets his share of Germany. Hm, but is that what I want?? I think I want to
net Ber, Den, and Kie, leaving only Hol (and France) for England. How
greedy will he be? How greedy can I afford to look?

> Optimally, you would
>get the three centers above and England would have gotten a few French
>centers, while I would have cleaned up the Italian peninsula and taken Mun.

Ummmmm.
So let's see. Assuming I get Berlin, we'll finish this year even. Then
you're expecting to get Mun plus the three remaining Italian centers, that
makes 13 for you. Maybe I'd get Den and Kie, for eleven, then I'd stab for
Norway for my twelfth. Hm. Not ideal, but maybe good enough. If necessary
we could turn over a center to me -- e.g., you could push forward through
Munich and I could take it? Or possibly you could set me up to take a
Lowland center.
In any case, if we get that far without dramatic incident, we'd have about
25 centers between us, and the only issue would be our own stability.
Resistance would be very weak at that point.

Yeah, it's looking pretty good now. :)

And don't think I'm going to quibble about every single center, I don't
intend to do that. I just want the main line of the plan to have us
reasonably equal as we move along.


Oh, and I will vacate Rumania!


Tsar J

Message from Austria to Russia in 'pouchtoo':

> Let us agree that (a) we will not let our hindbrains do the driving, and
> (b) we will not allow ourselves to believe that the other's hindbrain is
> driving.
>
Agreed.

> I will build a fleet in the north this winter, for sure. I have already
> semi-cleared this with King Kal.
>
> I will not build any southern fleet.
>
> By the same token, I would like to see you build fleets at *every*
> opportunity. Assuming you get two builds this year, I don't really think
> you should waive one, but at some point you might consider waiving to get
> extra fleets. (And me too, for all intents and purposes I now think of
> myself as having only one buildable coast.)
>
Agreed again.

> > Optimally, you would
> >get the three centers above and England would have gotten a few French
> >centers, while I would have cleaned up the Italian peninsula and taken Mun.
>
> Ummmmm.
> So let's see. Assuming I get Berlin, we'll finish this year even.

No, you will have 9, I will have 8.

> Then you're expecting to get Mun plus the three remaining Italian centers,
> that makes 13 for you.

no, 12.  Mun, Bud, Tri, Vie, Ser, Gre, Bul, Con, Ven, Rom, Nap, Tun
and it will take a few years to get all of the Italian centers.

>Maybe I'd get Den and Kie, for eleven, then I'd stab for
> Norway for my twelfth. Hm. Not ideal, but maybe good enough. If necessary
> we could turn over a center to me -- e.g., you could push forward through
> Munich and I could take it? Or possibly you could set me up to take a
> Lowland center.

We should be at 12 each.  I'll have to push to France, you'll have to
push to England.  Probably fairly even.  Obviously we will want to move
into the lowlands, so supporting you there makes sense.

> And don't think I'm going to quibble about every single center, I don't
> intend to do that. I just want the main line of the plan to have us
> reasonably equal as we move along.
>
Agreed yet again
>
> Oh, and I will vacate Rumania!
>
Thank you.

I think we are well on track.  We can decide on how quickly to blitz Germany
as the time comes.  I think we can control that fairly easy by just
moderating how much effort I lend.  If King Kal seems to be getting worried
I'm sure he'll let me know and then I can "accomodate"' him by slowing down
my support if you are not yet ready to make a move.

Paranoia has been put on the back burner.  Charge!

Kaiser D

Message from Austria to Italy in 'pouchtoo':

Hello Manus,

I'll be straight forward with you.  I'm not going to attack Russia this
turn.  Nothing has changed from when I made the decision last turn, so
it would be rather silly to do a sudden reversal.  Should Russia not do
as I expect this turn, then you can certainly count on me to join in the
attack on him, and I'll expect to provide compensation for you in the
form of extra centers as part of that.

Why did I make this decision?  Well, I can't really tell you all that has
gone on at this point, I'm far from counting you out of the game, so you'll
have to wait for the EOG for that.  Suffice it to say that I am not playing
for a Russian win, I fully plan to be in the winner's circle, be it shared
or alone.  My biggest problem was the lack of growth potential for me.  As
the AIR moved north, you were going to make good gains against France.
Russia would have gained in the north, and I would have gained only a little
>from Germany.  The game would probably have evolved into an AIR vs EG
slugfest, which I think AIR would have had the upper hand.  However, I
think Austria would have been the poor sister of that alliance and would
constantly have faced the threat of being crushed between RI.

I think my position is much more secure now.  If Russia does not stab in the
next year or so, then I will have the forces to make that stab a bad bet.
He could stab now, but it is too early for him and he knows it.  If he does
so, the combined effort will quickly crush him.  Somewhat of a gamble, yes,
but that's you have to take a few risks!

It's far from over though, so we'll see what happens after this turn.

Regards,
Dave

Message from Russia to Austria in 'pouchtoo':

Oh yeah.
I was thinking you had seven centers already.

So actually it's going to be more even than I thought. Good.


Tsar J

Message from Austria to England in 'pouchtoo':

> Well, the Observers have certainly been stirred up, eh?  ;)
>
I been chuckling all along anticipating their reactions.

> Manus has already sent mail to Germany and myself trying to line up an
> E/G/I "stop the juggernaut" alliance.  Of course I told him I was in
> because it will let me maneuver my units into position against him and
> Russia... ;)
>
Well, naturally.

> That said, I do want to make sure that you still see us working
> directly together fairly soon.
>
Yes I do.

> In the longer term, do you think you'll be able to make sure that Russia
> does NOT get a toehold in the Med fleet-wise?  IMO, that will be the key
> to you and I having any sort of success against him later on.  Knowing
> Jamie, it's pretty likely that he IS planning on stabbing you eventually.
> It's our job to make sure he never gets the position to do that while
> making sure that Italy follows Turkey, France & Germany down the toilet.
> Comments on just how to do that (or just your opinion on our being ABLE to
> do that) are welcome.
>

Well, there is the one southern fleet to worry about.  Frankly, I do need
it to help against Italy.  My lack of fleets at the moment is a problem.
My plan for it is to see it in EAS where it will help me move on Ion.
I will be building fleets rapidly, and will stay in AEG and ION to keep
it pinned.  I think I can keep it contained and have made some demands
on backing away from our border to make him have to telegraph a stab early.

I also expect he'll be going for the win at some point, but he knows he's
not ready to make a solo bid yet, so we have a year or two at least.  The
thing to do I think is to make sure we limit our support for him in the
German theatre.  For example, I am claiming Munich and if I do not use it
to actively support him forward, his attacks on Kie and Den will take a
while.  The same for you, while you can grab Hol, you do not need to support
him to Den or Kie.  That will give us time to grab a few centers for ourselves.
I will build fleets of course, but will also add an army or two for home
defense.  You've got a build from Brest and can then get one from Holland
and hopefully something quickly from Iberia.

I don't know which one of us Jamie will move on first.  I expect that it might
make more sense for us to wait for him to move rather than moving on him
ourselves.  We will both be gaining centers faster than he will I believe
so time will be on our side.  When he does move on one of us, then the other
takes him from the rear.

Because we both border on him, and we have a good seperation between us,
I think we can be reasonably confident in Russia, not one of us, being the
odd man out.  I'm certainly in a lot better position to attack him than
you, and he is a lot more threatening to me.

Here's to rapid campaigns in France and Italy, and a slow muddy crawl in
Germany (<:

-Kaiser D

Message from Italy to Austria in 'pouchtoo':

Well, darn.

Okay, I promised to bend over now.

Manus

Message from England to Austria in 'pouchtoo':

>Message from [email protected] as Austria to England in 'pouchtoo':


>> Manus has already sent mail to Germany and myself trying to line up an
>> E/G/I "stop the juggernaut" alliance.  Of course I told him I was in
>> because it will let me maneuver my units into position against him and
>> Russia... ;)
>>
>Well, naturally.


He's still writing reams of letters to Germany and I.

>> That said, I do want to make sure that you still see us working
>> directly together fairly soon.
>>
>Yes I do.


Excellent.

>> In the longer term, do you think you'll be able to make sure that Russia
>> does NOT get a toehold in the Med fleet-wise?  IMO, that will be the key
>> to you and I having any sort of success against him later on.  Knowing
>> Jamie, it's pretty likely that he IS planning on stabbing you eventually.
>> It's our job to make sure he never gets the position to do that while
>> making sure that Italy follows Turkey, France & Germany down the toilet.
>> Comments on just how to do that (or just your opinion on our being ABLE
to
>> do that) are welcome.
>>
>
>Well, there is the one southern fleet to worry about.  Frankly, I do need
>it to help against Italy.  My lack of fleets at the moment is a problem.
>My plan for it is to see it in EAS where it will help me move on Ion.
>I will be building fleets rapidly, and will stay in AEG and ION to keep
>it pinned.  I think I can keep it contained and have made some demands
>on backing away from our border to make him have to telegraph a stab early.


As long as it's a single fleet that can be popped at will, we should be
okay.

>I also expect he'll be going for the win at some point, but he knows he's
>not ready to make a solo bid yet, so we have a year or two at least.  The
>thing to do I think is to make sure we limit our support for him in the
>German theatre.  For example, I am claiming Munich and if I do not use it
>to actively support him forward, his attacks on Kie and Den will take a
>while.  The same for you, while you can grab Hol, you do not need to
support
>him to Den or Kie.  That will give us time to grab a few centers for
ourselves.


Exactly.  If Germany falls to Russia quickly, Jamie will be hard to stop.
With me essentially "working both sides" because of my good standing with
Germany, we should be able to accomplish this fairly efficiently.

>I will build fleets of course, but will also add an army or two for home
>defense.  You've got a build from Brest and can then get one from Holland
>and hopefully something quickly from Iberia.


Yes.  I am going to have to grow fairly quickly for our plan to work, both
for military flexibility and because it will mean the quick demise of France
and Italy.

>I don't know which one of us Jamie will move on first.  I expect that it
might
>make more sense for us to wait for him to move rather than moving on him
>ourselves.  We will both be gaining centers faster than he will I believe
>so time will be on our side.  When he does move on one of us, then the
other
>takes him from the rear.


I *think* he'll move on you first, mostly because you signify a larger and
(theoretically) more easily obtained source of supply centres.  That's
probably preferable in the long run because (aside from my obvious
self-interest ), it makes him more vulnerable to being squeezed between
us.

>Because we both border on him, and we have a good seperation between us,
>I think we can be reasonably confident in Russia, not one of us, being the
>odd man out.  I'm certainly in a lot better position to attack him than
>you, and he is a lot more threatening to me.


Agreed.

>Here's to rapid campaigns in France and Italy, and a slow muddy crawl in
>Germany (<:


Cheers! :)

King Kal

Message from Russia to Austria in 'pouchtoo':

Kaiser D.,

Did you notice this from Jim-Bob?

>		  I will say that
>I don't see any reason why ANY of the six players are a "lock" to
>be the next one out.  All have some VERY intriguing options.
>I assure the observers that many of those options are being
>discussed, again just from knowing the players.

He must have something in particular in mind. What do you think it is? My
guess is that he believes Germany could wiggle his way out with good
diplomacy.

He also said this:

>I have to admit to seeing the Austria/Russia alliance coming, but
>I have the benefit of knowing both players very well and having
>some personal communications with one of them, that admitted
>nothing directly, but said EVERYTHING implicitly.

That was me, he had some 'personal communications' with me. If he really
did see it coming, then I probably said too much! But I suspect he really
saw that it was one of a handful of things that I might have had in mind.
Since he was sort of teasing me in the broadcasts earlier, I thought I'd
try to drive him crazy with some extremely enigmatic hints about what I
thought was going to happen. I'm going to stop doing that now.

Tsar J

Message from Austria to Russia in 'pouchtoo':

Greetings Tsar!


> >		  I will say that
> >I don't see any reason why ANY of the six players are a "lock" to
> >be the next one out.  All have some VERY intriguing options.
> >I assure the observers that many of those options are being
> >discussed, again just from knowing the players.
>
> He must have something in particular in mind. What do you think it is? My
> guess is that he believes Germany could wiggle his way out with good
> diplomacy.
>
My guess would be that he thinks France is going to pull a resurrection.
I know you have said you don't really expect this before, but as I see
it, most of the pressure, with the exception of England, is going to come
off France.  All the observers have been writing him off.  I see him coming
back up, or at least holding his own for a bit.

> He also said this:
>
> >I have to admit to seeing the Austria/Russia alliance coming, but
> >I have the benefit of knowing both players very well and having
> >some personal communications with one of them, that admitted
> >nothing directly, but said EVERYTHING implicitly.
>
> That was me,
Well, I knew it wasn't me!   I do know Jim well, but I haven't been talking
to him about this game.

> he had some 'personal communications' with me. If he really
> did see it coming, then I probably said too much! But I suspect he really
> saw that it was one of a handful of things that I might have had in mind.
> Since he was sort of teasing me in the broadcasts earlier, I thought I'd
> try to drive him crazy with some extremely enigmatic hints about what I
> thought was going to happen. I'm going to stop doing that now.
>
I found his hints about what would be happening next more intriguing.  It
certainly does help to know the players. I wonder if I can get him to put
in writing (deposited with the GM perhaps?) his predictions?

Kaiser D

Message from Italy to Austria in 'pouchtoo':

On the off-chance you might see the light, I'm going to be supporting
AEG-CON while you dislodge me.  Just FYI, you're my choice for allies
when you guys bust up.  If I live that long.  Because you will bust
up.  Jamie will bust you up.  Ask anyone.  He's already busted US up.
Now he'll try to bust E/G up by killing G.  That leaves you, Cal, and
him.  Guess which one (and only one) can win.

Manus

Message from Italy to England and Germany in 'pouchtoo':

Okay, I have put my orders in with a SET WAIT.  They're not rocket science.
I'm taking Spain, telling Hohn to move Spa-Por.  If you, Cal, choose to
bounce him out, he can retreat to WES, and at that point I would argue that
we leave him Portugal while we all run eastward.  It will give me an extra
fleet to fight with in the Med, at no worries to you.  I'll take the risk that
Hohn, who owes me his life, will stab me for Rome when he owns no home center
to build in.  What do you say?  Can we agree to leave Portugal French so that
we get the benefit of another southern fleet?  Please?  I will send press
on this subject to EF.

Manus

Message from Italy to France in 'pouchtoo':

I'm moving Lyo-Spa with Mar support.  I know it takes another center from
you, but I need the build, so please let me have it.  E/G should move east
right away, so Portugal can be your home until we can afford to start putting
you back where you belong.

I'm also sending WES-TUN and trying keeping Dave out of ION with TYS.

Actually, I have an idea.  I'll send a mail to both you and Cal, and let
you discuss it.

Sigh,
Manus

Message from Italy to England and France in 'pouchtoo':

Wow.  PRESS TO EF.  Who would have thought such a thing possible, but crisis
makes strange bedfellows.

I'm writing to ask that France be left Portugal so that his fleet, now in
Spain, can be used against the A/R threat.

Cal, I am asking that you take MAO and run it, with the rest of your forces,
eastward with all your might.

Hohn, I am asking that you commit your fleet to the Med.  We can put it to
good use.  It's a couple of years from action, but it's something.  I know
you risk that I or Cal will take Portugal the next year, arguing that a build
in Edi or Nap is better than a fleet in TYS, but well, it gives you something
to do in the meantime.

An alternate plan is Spa/sc-Por, bounced by Cal's MAO, and with my supported
attack on Spain this turn (I need a build in the boot!), Hohn can RETREAT
to Wes.  That's why I'm writing you both, to ask that you guys (if you
agree to this plan) coordinate on which of these two plans to follow (bounce
in Por, or both start running east).  The latter makes more sense to me.

Cal, it may soon be the case, if it is not already, that you have too many
fleets and need some armies.  I believe we should start looking for ways to
creatively dislodge you.  I don't see any at the moment, but if we don't
all start playing as a single body, or we'll all hit the hay together.

Manus

Message from Italy to England and Germany in 'pouchtoo':

Another suggestion:  Cal won't get a build, of course, with the loss of
Norway, but it is offset by the gain of Brest.  However, tying up his only
army in such a rear position might not make sense, so maybe you might want
to convoy Bre-ENG-Bel and cover Bre with MAO.  I know this means not putting
a fleet into NTH this turn, and that's not good.  Jamie will certainly
double-attack Norway this turn, so if John wants to send Den-NTH, I imagine
Denmark is safe, and since Berlin is headed for Kiel anyway in retreat,
Den can be covered again next year.

Getting the English army jumped to Bel this turn means that in Spring
it can occupy Hol without risk to Germany (if this makes tactical sense).
Better, it means we can send Bel-Ruh to re-form a line against the infidels
and try to start hitting what will by then be an occupied Munich.

I just hope Dave plays it conservative and doesn't do Tyr-Pie while letting
me into ION.  That would probably kill me.  My fleets will be out of position
(in Spa, ION, and Tun) to prevent a take of Rome.  If you guys TYS-ION
is too risky, let me know.  I have a set wait, and will be around until
at least mid-day Wednesday.

Manus

Message from Austria to Italy in 'pouchtoo':

Hi Manus,

Why don't you support Bul to Con instead?  Just in case (<:

Yes, we may bust up.  Yes, if we do I will do everything I can to set
things right with you.  I'm aware of the dangers of Jamie, we'll just
have to see if I'm prepared enough!

>
> On the off-chance you might see the light, I'm going to be supporting
> AEG-CON while you dislodge me.  Just FYI, you're my choice for allies
> when you guys bust up.  If I live that long.  Because you will bust
> up.  Jamie will bust you up.  Ask anyone.  He's already busted US up.
> Now he'll try to bust E/G up by killing G.  That leaves you, Cal, and
> him.

>Guess which one (and only one) can win.
Well, I was kinda hoping it might be me (<:

-Dave

Message from Italy to Austria in 'pouchtoo':

> Why don't you support Bul to Con instead?  Just in case (<:
>
Done.  Just in case.....  (You're mean, dangling this crumb
of hope out there for me.  :-)

> Yes, we may bust up.  Yes, if we do I will do everything I can to set
> things right with you.  I'm aware of the dangers of Jamie, we'll just
> have to see if I'm prepared enough!
>
I doubt that Jamie would bust up with you this turn.  You busting up
with him before it gets too late is the only hope I have, and frankly,
much of the hope the whole rest of the board has.

> >Guess which one (and only one) can win.
> Well, I was kinda hoping it might be me (<:
>
If it is, more power to ya.  I just don't see it happening with Jamie's
position, splitting up everyone every which way from Sunday.

Manus

Message from Russia to Austria in 'pouchtoo':

>My guess would be that he thinks France is going to pull a resurrection.
>I know you have said you don't really expect this before, but as I see
>it, most of the pressure, with the exception of England, is going to come
>off France.  All the observers have been writing him off.  I see him coming
>back up, or at least holding his own for a bit.

Hm.
As I said, I would have agreed if France had that extra unit.
He's certainly down to three after this move, and quite possibly down to
two. I don't see him coming back from three, unless for some reason Italy
just abandons his French center; if Italy gives any cooperation to England,
then a 3-center France will be outgunned. And if Hohn goes to two he's
really had it. And I think that's what will happen. Here's my prediction:

GERMAN A Bur - Par
ITALIAN A Mar-Gas, GoL-Spa (and Wes-Tun)
ENGLISH A Bre-Gas, F MAO S ITAL GoL-Spa

So every French support that could gain or protect a center is cut; Spain
falls; and Italy will support England into Por next year, if necessary, for
his troubles.

I am hoping that Hohn will hold on to Paris for a while, that they won't
get another army in there to wrench Paris loose. That would be convenient,
to have a French army lurking about behind the lines. But I'm not betting
on it. Maybe you can ransack Italy so badly that he *has* to remove the
army that's currently in Mar, and then I could keep England busy enough so
that he can't convoy another army into France.




So, I've sent in my moves. You will support Pru-Ber, right?

And I am, as agreed, emptying Con for your army, of course.

Tsar J

Message from Germany to England and Italy in 'pouchtoo':

I am home again. Cal, you are correct that my suggested moves won't work
as I said. I spoke too soon, without looking closely at the situation.

Manus, re Norway, I don't think Russia will try to take Norway. My guess
is he moved to Finland to allow swe-bal. Norway is actually secure due
to my cut of support for fin-nwy. If he tried swe-nwy, I'd take Sweden.

I am open to suggestions on tactics. King Kal, what say you?

The Kaiser

Message from Germany to Austria in 'pouchtoo':

By now, I imagine everyone has said you are making a big mistake to help
Russia. I've heard, in fact, that Tsar J is openly saying he is in
position to win the game. It's too bad. I thought the GAI would have
been an equitable, workable arrangement, but so be it.

I don't expect you to break off the attack on my homeland. But when the
time comes that you need help to prevent Russia's win, don't assume I'd
be your enemy. Grudges are a waste of energy in this game.

No doubt, the deeper story here is ERA, so my good friend in London
could well be the one who threw me to the wolves. In that case, the two
of you might have the wherewithal to stop Russia and force a 3-way. If
so I'm doomed. But this game has already taken some unexpected turns.
Maybe another will ocurr.

The Kaiser of the North

Message from Austria to England in 'pouchtoo':

Greetings King Kal,

I've just been looking at the board trying to decide which power the Boob
thought might pull a ressurection and it led me to thinking about what
might be going on in France this year.  While I know you have to do what
you have to do, and it's good to play being on the "good" side for the
year, it would certainly be appreciated if you could get Italy to support
you into French centers rather than you supporting Italy into them.  Any
hints about what Italy is going to do would also be appreciated.  I want
to get some builds fast so that I can afford to leave some units available
on the Russian front.

Regards,
Kaiser D

Message from Austria to Russia in 'pouchtoo':

> GERMAN A Bur - Par
> ITALIAN A Mar-Gas, GoL-Spa (and Wes-Tun)
> ENGLISH A Bre-Gas, F MAO S ITAL GoL-Spa
>
Interesting.  I had sort of assumed that Germany would be using Bur to
hold onto Munich.  I was also assuming that Italy would be more interested
in returning home than in finishing off France.  I had even considered
that Italy might move Mar to Pie or convoy it to Tus.  Hmmmm.

>
>
> So, I've sent in my moves. You will support Pru-Ber, right?
>
Yes.

> And I am, as agreed, emptying Con for your army, of course.
>
Of course (<:, and Rum is heading EAST, right?

Kaiser D

Message from Austria to Germany in 'pouchtoo':

Dear Northern Kaiser,

Thank you for your note.  Yes, I've had many a mail telling me I have
thrown the game to Russia.  Obviously, I don't think so.  I am certainly
not playing to bring about a Russian win, and should I see any danger
of that arising I will most certainly contribute my all to stopping him.

I appreciate you making it clear that you do not hold grudges.  One of the
things that I have enjoyed about this game so far is knowing that the
caliber of the players is such that I can depend on them to act wisely.

This game has had many twists and I'm sure there are many left.  I'm not
counting anyone out until their last dot is gone!

Regards,
The Kaiser of the South

Message from Russia to Austria in 'pouchtoo':

>Interesting.  I had sort of assumed that Germany would be using Bur to
>hold onto Munich.  I was also assuming that Italy would be more interested
>in returning home than in finishing off France.  I had even considered
>that Italy might move Mar to Pie or convoy it to Tus.  Hmmmm.

Well, you could be right. But I suspect that Italy will feel his long term
chances are better if he maintains a French presence. And if he could
manage to get two French centers, he could disband the A Smy when we
dislodge it and build at home! The moves I mentioned give him a fleet in
Tun, which he would certainly need, and except for the A Mar there's
nothing else he could do. And if he does abandon France, he'll be left with
three units and his chances of surviving the game would be remote.

Similarly for Germany: I suspect he will gamble that you won't go crashing
into Mun full force (and even if you did, Ruh S Ber-Mun guarantees that he
will save one of those two centers, and he can't expect to save both). Then
he still has a chance to add a French center. Otherwise he goes down to
four with no prospect of growth, and he'd have to hope that somehow England
can save him. I don't know, though. All he can really do is try to stick us
with four of his units and wait for one of us to stab the other. (Even
assuming, as he pretty much has to assume, that England won't swoop down
for some carrion.) I guess I figured he would prefer to see France
eliminated, at least.

Well, I don't suppose any of this changes our strategy for now, so we'll
just wait and see.

By the way, I figure that England will now occupy Norway and move Eng-Nth.
Then he'll build an army, convoy it to Bel, and stab into Hol next Fall
with a fleet. This leaves him with two armies to finish off France, as well
as his fleets which will presumably head to the Med full speed (or else
surprise me!). I don't see that this will be problematic in the long run.
If it looks like you're about to be stopped up, I'll just build on the
north coast of Stp at the opportune moment and drag the Brits back home.
(But you should make the call, I think, when you think it's time.)


>Of course (<:, and Rum is heading EAST, right?

Of course.

Tsar J

Message from Italy to England and Germany in 'pouchtoo':

Yeah, it was a late night last night.

Gotta run,
Manus

Message from England to Italy and Germany in 'pouchtoo':

>Message from [email protected] as Italy to England and Germany in
>'pouchtoo':
>
>Okay, I have put my orders in with a SET WAIT.  They're not rocket science.
>I'm taking Spain, telling Hohn to move Spa-Por.  If you, Cal, choose to
>bounce him out, he can retreat to WES, and at that point I would argue that
>we leave him Portugal while we all run eastward.  It will give me an extra
>fleet to fight with in the Med, at no worries to you.  I'll take the risk
that
>Hohn, who owes me his life, will stab me for Rome when he owns no home
center
>to build in.  What do you say?  Can we agree to leave Portugal French so
that
>we get the benefit of another southern fleet?  Please?  I will send press
>on this subject to EF.


I'm not sure why Hohn's retreat to Wes depends on my attacking Portugal.  Is
it just that he will feel he HAS to move there in case I do?

As for leaving France alive to help you in the Mid, I'm amenable to him
keeping Portugal, but nothing else.  And for that matter, he only keeps
Portugal until either a) I need it; or b) you can get another fleet of your
own.

Sorry if this seems harsh, but I don't believe in letting guys I've stabbed
hang around for a shot at me later in the game.  Call it enlightened self-
interest.

Kordially komrade,

King Kal

Message from England to Italy and France in 'pouchtoo':

>Message from [email protected] as Italy to England and France in
>'pouchtoo':


>I'm writing to ask that France be left Portugal so that his fleet, now in
>Spain, can be used against the A/R threat.


I have no problem with this.  Our only real advantage over A/R is our naval
superiority in the Med.

>Cal, I am asking that you take MAO and run it, with the rest of your
forces,
>eastward with all your might.


I hope you won't mind if I keep it right where it is until I see proof of
Hohn's intentions... ;-)

>An alternate plan is Spa/sc-Por, bounced by Cal's MAO, and with my
supported
>attack on Spain this tur