Broadcast message from [email protected] as France in barney:
Bob-> Is that the definition of success? Even if your head hits the block next?
That was never a given, though I suppose it should've been more obvious to me after all my stabs. Again, I credit that to my tunnel-vision.
Bob-> If making yourself open to a stab is the price for a breakthrough,
is
Bob-> it not better not to have that breakthrough?
Well, as I mentioned previously, my goal was to win the game outright. Anything else was, at that point, a loss. Short-sighted? Tunnel- vision? Yes, but there you have it.
Besides, nothing ventured, nothing gained. I thought this was the sort of play you wanted from your Ally.
I gambled and lost. It happens sometimes. I'll do it again.
Bob-> >it really came down to putting more
Bob-> >fleets around the Ionian than Turkey and forcing my way through.
Bob-> >I don't see how I could have accomplished this without either
Bob-> >(a) English fleets (unacceptable)
Bob->
Bob-> One English fleet at the front would have been acceptable. It
might have
Bob-> even dissuaded England from stabbing if he had priority for
post-break-through
Bob-> supply center capture.
I see that now. I hope I won't fall victim to this sort of short-sightedness in my other games....
However, at the same time, King Terry might have balked at this because he didn't want centers so far away from his main defensive lines. (This was something we had discussed before I stabbed him that last time.)
> [From King Terry (Thierry) II of England]
> I am very impressed by Dan Shoham play on this game. He managed to
> manipulate us all with just one center, never giving a clue he was the
> strategic genius behind Carragher's successes...
Hey! Gimme a little credit!! B-)
> I had many surprises in this game. I considered Bob Carragher and Dan
> Shoham as "potentially dangerous" even reduced to a few centers. I wanted
> a two-way draw, and I thought one of them might devise a new technique to
> steal this draw from me. Therefore I "assured" a two-way draw, providing
> Turkey all security, never giving up something Dan might have used to turn
> him back against me. If I had been more aggressive, I think I would not
> have achieved this result, since France, Russia and Turkey would have
> formed a some kind of line to prevent me from getting my 18th center, and
> I would have been forced to accept a 3 or 4-way draw.
Indeed. Had you done *anything* offensive against the Sultan, I think the 4-way draw would have been a foregone conclusion. In fact, all that odd maneuvering on my part after your stab was to set up a stalemate line against you. The line would have succeeded regardless of your actions and would have been static. Only problem was, it needed the Sultan's blessings.
> PS : To prevent fake messages from being used against me, I always used
> the "King Terry II" signature with Russia and France, and the "-England"
> signature with Turkey... I don't know if it influenced the game, but I
> think it will explain what this "King" stuff is to Turkey :-)
Ah, interesting. If the Sultan is still listening, I'd like to ask him if he was taken in by the faked message from England I sent to him? The signature would've given it away, since "you" signed it "King Terry II."
Good work!
Retired-Presidente-in-Exile Carragher
Go Back to the Diplomacy Academy
Read the next article (GameMaster's End of Game Statement)