Rules originally published in The Pouch Volume II: XXII.
(1) REVIEW: Robert Sacks in Lord of Hosts 4, March 1975.
This variant is identical to regular Diplomacy except that only
the GM knows the orders; the players are only told the positions.
Now while this is supposed to heighten the intrigue, it also makes
GM errors undetectable. Fortunately, each turn each player can
ask for complete information about a particular space and receive
all moves (including retreats) from, to, or through that space.
This variant is supposed to simulate myopic commanders using space-age
technology; actually it simulates a lazy GM.
TENFOLD DIPLOMACY (Josh Smith, 1992)
(1) MARK NELSON (26/1/93)
An expanded map variant adding China, India and Japan which is
an `anti-Youngstown' game. There are no Off Board Boxes, the European
map is the same as in regular diplomacy, there are no island provinces
and the map is completely planar. Seventeen supply centres are
added. Probably slightly inferior to Youngstown in terms of playability
because there are *no* Off Board Boxes. (This means that convoy
routes will be longer, it will be slower to move fleets across
the map etc.)
(2) JOSH SMITH (31/1/93)
This last criticism may actually be invalid. I wish I had a decent
copy of that map to show you, since this would be a lot easier
to explain if you could look at it. The board is a _lot_ "smaller",
in spaces, than the Youngstown map, though. Some statistics:
Number of players: D: 7 Y: 10 T: 10 Number of supply centers:
D: 34 Y: 72 T: 51 Number of land spaces: D: 56 Y: 130 T: 92 Number
of sea spaces: D: 19 Y: 50 T: 29 Total number of spaces: D: 75
Y: 180 T: 121
Centers per player: D: 4.9 Y: 7.2 T: 5.1 Spaces per player: D:
10.7 Y: 18.0 T: 12.1 Sea percentage of map: D: 25% Y: 28% T: 24%
In my experience, I've found that fleet mobility is significantly
lowered on the Youngstown map, especially in Asia, and these numbers
bear this out: the Youngstown map adds 4 water spaces in Europe,
17 in Asia, and 9 between Asia and Europe, while the Tenfold map
adds no water spaces to Europe, puts 2 between Europe and Asia,
and adds only 8 in Asia itself. Moving from Canton to Smyrna via
boat takes 11 moves in Youngstown (by off-board or not); the same
move takes 7 moves in Tenfold (as many as Smyrna to St. Pete,
as it turns out). Convoying from Japan to England takes more fleets
in Tenfold than in Youngstown, but the bottleneck of the Off Board
Boxes make convoys to England nearly impossible in any event.
I have yet to see a player force his way into another section
of the map through the Off Board--it takes too long, is too slow
to develop, and gives the defender plenty of time to prepare his
lines.
Another big flaw of the Youngstown map is its set of trivial stalemate
lines between Asia and Europe. Rick Desper and I have both commented
on this in the past, and in our opinions, it makes Youngstown
literally unwinnable for an Asian power except in the face of
sheer idiocy on the part of Turkey or England. The problem seems
to be centered in the fact that Asia contains many small spaces,
which are time consuming to move through, but is bordered by several
large spaces, which serve as a bottleneck to an invading force.
This makes it very difficult for an Asian power to invade a European
one by surprise. India's home centers are three moves away from
the closest Turkish home center, and four from the second; in
standard Diplomacy, every power but England and Turkey has at
least one home center within two moves of every one of their neighbors,
and every power has two centers within three moves of _all_ of
their neighbors. Everyone is nearby in standard Diplomacy; in
the Asian corner of Youngstown, the map is huge.
Tenfold's map is much smaller, and not by accident: the map was
modeled on a graph of the E/F/G triangle, casting Japan as England,
China as Germany, and India as France. As a result, the three
are in close proximity to each other, and like Austria/Germany
and France/Italy, the border between China/Russia and India/Turkey
can be quickly crossed. Playtesting is still essential, and I
have no doubt that the map will change as a result of it-- looking
at it now, it seems that the border between East and Asia is still
too wide. However, the intention is to drastically improve the
mobility of both fleets and armies, a factor that Youngstown destroyed
entirely in Asia.
I'm wondering if Tenfold should even be included in the variant
list at this point, since it has never been played, not even once.
It seems somewhat difficult to review it under such circumstances;
its goals certainly sound good (make a 10-player game that has
the same feel as the standard 7-player Diplomacy), but a review
should discuss whether it achieves those goals, and this isn't
really clear in the absence of any testing.
THIEF (Toby Harris)
Smodnoc 34, October 1991
(1) MARK NELSON in The Mouth of Sauron Volume VII: #6 (February
1991).
This is a minor change variant using the regular board. It illustrates
why a rule which works well in one game may not work well in another
and why variant designers should give some thought to the implications
of rule changes before publication of their brand new game.
The rule change comes from the VAIN RATS series of games. Each
Spring season, except for Spring 1901, any power with at least
one unit on the board may order any unit to be removed from the
board; this removal occurs before adjudication. This rule works
well amidst the anarchy of the typical Vain Rats game (when it
is only used by one power and restrictions prevent repeated use
of this power on a particular enemy), but I have doubts about
the playability of a variant based on this idea.
This rule change increases the power of large alliances, and as
a consequence it will be very hard to win a game--as soon as one
player is in a position to mount a winning attack, the remaining
players co-ordinate removals.
THIRD AGE II (Brian Libby, Duncan Morris & Richard
Sharp) ??/06
(1) STEVE AGAR in V&U 2 (July 1980)
This was a step forward in Tolkien designs in that it attempted
to cover the same ground as the book. The six powers are: Eriador,
Rhovanion, Gondor, Rohan, Umbar and Mordor. Multiple units were
introduced, all powers receive a 2A whilst Mordor receives a 3A,
four 2A's and four single armies! Neutral armies act as garrisons
for some neutral SCs and The Ring was created.
The Ring is hidden randomly in one of the provinces (but away
from Mordor), if worn it turns a player's 2A into a 3A (and a
4A against Mordor); but if left on that player's unit becomes
a 3A permanently and he can only win by controlling all the SCs
(in effect he becomes a second Mordor).
Mordor wins by capturing all the SCs or if his 3A wears the Ring,
other powers win by either being the largest power on the board
when Mordor's 3A is destroyed or by taking the ring to Barad-dur
and destroying it.
The fleet problem was overcome by giving Umbar two fleets, Eriador
one fleet and allowing any power to build fleets in the City of
the Corsairs. A simple form of A/F rules were introduced.
This has proved a popular postal variant, despite the superiority
of Mordor, probably owing to the "realistic" effect
that the game tries to create.
TRADER (Matt Diller)
Rules originally published in The Pocket Armenian 23.
(1) Robert Sacks in Lord of Hosts 8, March 1976.
A purposeless joke: five players; one island supply center each
and one sea space.
TREATY DIPLOMACY (Rod Walker)
(1) STEVE AGAR in V&U 4 (September 1980)
I've always liked the idea behind this one, that various powers
are not allowed to support or convoy each other unless a written
treaty is drawn up between the powers concerned allowing such
action. Such a treaty can include clauses concerning other aspects
of the game, it can be kept secret or made public. Apart from
this, the game is as regular.
TRIUMVERATE See Diadochi V
TUNNEL (Jeremy Maiden)
Rules originally published in He's Dead, Jim! Volume III:
17.
(1) REVIEW: Robert Sacks in Lord of Hosts 10, July 1976.
An economic variant, where money has to moved to the supported
unit; money can also be used to build and maintain shafts and
tunnels, through which money and armies can be moved, the latter
at double speed. Shows prospects of being highly amusing.
UNITED STATES III (Fred C. Davis Jnr)
Rules originally published in Bushwacker Volume V: III.
(1) Robert Sacks in Lord of Hosts 9, March 1976.
A revision of United States II, allowing for fleets and convoys:
the map from US II is modified, mainly by the addition of sea
and river spaces; optional starting positions are allowed for
three of the seven powers which, unlike US II, have fixed starting
boundaries. Rivers run between certain provinces without hindering
armies crossing them; at the same time armies may be convoyed
by fleets on rivers. Fleets may move between land spaces adjacent
or opposite by river; there are many special rules relating to
fleet and army movement in the presence of water. While it is
not one of his best variants, it is highly developed and worth
studying; of course I am probably prejudiced against any variant
or wargame played on a map of the US.
UPPSALA VARIANT (Unknown) ????/07
(1) MARK NELSON (26/1/93)
Designed in Sweden or quick FtF games and used in at least one
Swedish Diplomacy Tournament. The rules are as regular except:
1) Votes on draws are not allowed. 2) The game stops when a player
after Fall owns nine centers. 3) The player who owns most centers
is the winner. 4) If one or more players reach nine centers the
same year, and they own the same number of centers, there is a
draw between those players.
UTRECHT III (unknown) hc08/05
(1) FRED C. DAVIS JNR in Bushwacker 207 (April 1989)
This scenario begins in 1739, and parallels the War of the Austrian
Succession. There are several Neutral Powers, which are controlled
by the placing of Influence Points. However, the game involves
quite a bit of paperwork for all parties.
UTTER CHAOS (Scott Rosenburg)
(1) Robert Sacks in Lord of Hosts 7, September 1975.
Without doubt, the frontrunner for the 1976 Gemignani Award for
Worst Variant Design. Technically it combines Twin-Earth, Anarchy,
two varieties of Black-Hole, Schizo, Diluvian, Dilatory and Dud
Diplomacy. It can be best described by stating that every turn
the GM randomly redraws the (double) board and reshuffles the
units, and the GM has a unit of his own! Sigh!! The first postal
game was abandoned as unplayable, and a revision, Near Utter Chaos
(Rosenburg, Urf Durfal 3) has been started which combines two
varieties of Black-Hole, Schizo, Diluvian, Dilatory, Aquash, Blob
and Mobile Center Diplomacy.
VAIN RATS (Richard Sharp and others)
(1) Pete Sullivan in C'Est Magnifique 55, July 1988.
So called because it's a mixture of variants. Each player has
one (or, in most versions, two) special powers chosen from a list
at the start. These vary from version to version, but normally
include things like Petrol Rationing (allows multiple moves),
Evil Eye (may re-order another player's unit), Leper (can give
`leprosy' to units it meets, killing them), Double Armies and
so on. Usually won by the player who chooses the best special
powers at the start and makes the best use of them.
(1) JAMES NELSON in SPRINGY 45 (February 1991)
This variant has many different versions which are all very similar.
There is a collection of `special powers' and each country receives
one or two of these. Examples of Special Powers are Double-Strength
units (attack and support as a 2A or 2F), Leaper (can leap over
one space), Evil Eye (may order one unit of any other power),
etc.
The difference between versions is in which powers are available,
how they're allocated and how many are given. In some versions,
each player has one power for the whole game which many be used
once per season. In other versions each power has a stockpile
of powers and may use them whenever desired (although no more
than one power per season), once used the power is lost for ever.
VAIN RATS II (Richard Sharp)
(1) STEVE AGAR and JON LOVIBOND in ??? (circa 1979)
This is one of the `silly' variants that are played for fun. It
is played on the regular board with all the regular rules. The
amendments consist of a list of 12 or so special powers --- the
players send in a preference list saying which of these powers
they would like to have. An example of a Special Power is the
`Spring Raid': This player establishes ownership of a supply centre
by occupation in any season; he may build after the Spring moves
for any centers gained. Also, every power has a `hyperspace' joker
--- this enables him to connect any two provinces on the Diplomacy
board for one season, although the GM must be informed the season
before the link is made. A `different' game.
VOTE (Steve Doubleday)
Gallimaufry ??? (29/4/78)
(1) STEVE AGAR in ??? circa September 1980
The principle behind Vote is that everyone receiving the zine
is assigned to a team which plays one of the seven powers in a
Diplomacy game. All members of the various teams are invited to
vote on which moves their units will take, points being awarded
to the team members depending on how accurate their votes/prediction
were --- pure democracy between team members being used to determine
the real moves.
Alternatively, players can subvert (vote for) a foreign unit;
gaining points if their vote/prediction takes place and giving
them an opportunity to switch to a more successful team.
The game works quite well if some of the players can muster up
a bit of enthusiasm. A revised edition appeared in Gallimaufry
??? (3/11/78).
Back to the Introduction
Back to the previous file variants Q-S
On to the next file variants W-Z
or jump to a specific letter
[ A | B | C |
D | E | F |
G | H | I |
J | K | L | M |
N | O | P | Q |
R | S | T |
U | V | W |
X | Y | Z | 1]