1. All units are designated ‘Amphibious Units’ (letter designation ‘A’, e.g. A Nth).

2. Amphibious Units can move in any way that an army can or a fleet can (including convoying)

3. There are no coastal designations.  Stp, Bul and Spa have only one coast each.

Power

Name

Duration

GM:

Stephen Worthy

Spring 1901-end

Players:

Austria

Geoff Crewe-Brown
Suzanne Castagne

Spring 1901-Fall 1904
Winter 1904-end

England

Simon Blay
Jim Burgess

Spring 1901-Winter 1906
Spring 1907-end

France

John Hughes

Spring 1901-end

Germany

Don McLenaghen

Spring 1901-end

Italy

Conor Kositch

Spring 1901-Winter 1905

Russia

Mark Hancock

Spring 1901-end

Turkey

Adam Silverman

Spring 1901-end

Observers:

Jim Burgess

Jack McHugh

Year

01

02

03

04

05

06

07

Austria

5

5

8

6

4

2

2

England

4

6

5

6

6

7

7

France

4

4

4

4

5

5

5

Germany

6

6

6

4

3

2

3

Italy

4

3

1

0

0

0

0

Russia

5

4

2

2

2

2

2

Turkey

5

6

8

12

14

16

16

1901

1902

1903

1904

1905

1906

1907

Jim’s EOG

I was not in the game very long (I'll come back to my experience before I entered the game at the end briefly as a sum up, but my statements there were made on the on-going basis that you all saw), so I can do this pretty quickly.  Adam was cruising to a win, and when I came in I thought he could be stopped pretty easily, but only if all the remaining players worked together pretty quickly to form a stalemate line.  It looked to me that the formation of the line itself would apply under classical lines, without any worry about where there were fleets and armies (which would make things easier with my English units coming into northern Russia, and for France in locking up the Gibraltar line).

Adam may say more about this, but I did have some exchanges with him BEFORE I took over but I didn't think they ethically changed the state of the game at all for me, he didn't divulge any specific strategy to me, only that he intended to win and thought he could win (and I already KNEW that, just from the board position).  So, I knew Suzanne a bit from  before (and we had met in Paris at World DipCon a few years ago) so I started there trying to find out what was going on to assemble a draw coalition.

It turned out that Don and Suzanne already were working together VERY closely, so I just joined that.  We were left with getting Mark and Fenris on the corners on board.  I mostly left that negotiation to Suzanne and Don, since they had the on-going relationships.  It was key though to communicate to Fenris that I was NOT going to attack him, and would support the formation of the line.  We did have a little dance before Fenris trusted me and as a key, he had ONE guess on which the game hinged last game year when he had only one unit that had to choose between protecting Marseilles and Spain.  Fenris took my advice from my knowledge of Adam and how he was playing and that was correct.

I'd be interested in knowing whether Adam actually flipped a coin, in which case my "analysis" was false and we just got lucky.  I prefer to think it was skill.... and then that was that.  Adam could annihilate Bohemia, but it wouldn't have gotten him any centers, and we were firmly all working together.  Adam should have gotten a unit trapped behind our lines earlier and THEN worried about locking up the 18 centers, but he didn't count on the solid defense.  Congrats to all for a pretty good game.

I could have tried "draw whittling" down to a three or even maybe a two way draw, but I don't find such things palatable, only useful if I thought I had a chance to win with England.  Knowing Adam's tactical skill well, I did NOT think I had a prayer even at the 0.001 % chance of winning, so I stuck with helping to assemble the group for the draw.

As for the variant, and watching the tactics and use of the amphibiousness from the new rule, I think it must be judged a failure.  Sorry, but that's my view.  Stephen will recall my skepticism as we were talking about designing it and it came to pass in spades.  It really was the little things, Turkey is just WAY too powerful with that 'fleet" to start in Smyrna.  Those with a historical bent will recall that Allan Calhamer worked this out as well in play testing back in the late 1950s.  You just HAD to put the Turkish fleet in Ankara, and then there were interesting balance issues with Russia over the Black Sea and Turkey couldn't outflank Austria too quickly.  Also Italy was harmed as well.  It was interesting around the Baltic Sea how units could go from land to sea to land to sea freely.  But as a whole I don't think it works.  Fun as a diversion once though.

And couldn't have a simpler variant definition!   I'm not sure if it could be tweaked at all to make sense, possibly with map changes.  I had fun commenting and it was interesting how LITTLE I understood what was really going on with that outside technocratic point of view.  I really didn't see what was going on (even with where the units were, as Stephen will note I was very confused about where my own units were!!!) until I was in the game.  I think Adam played a great game, very efficient and methodical, but at least we could stop him from TOO easy a win.

Addendum

One brief point on Italy's behavior..... I actually thought that he did the variant playtest a favor by playing as he did.... for one thing the  Turkish situation meant that any kind of Lepanto was out of the question, would be easily blocked, and for another there is a  school of thought that likes the "Fleet Rome" variant just so Italy can attack France early.  Italy went roughly in this direction. Elsewhere (in the Diplomatic Pouch in the "34 centers" issue in my article on Rome) I argue this is completely wrongheaded and that Italy in the standard game needs to thank Allan Calhamer for that Army Rome and to USE it as an army.  Some playtests don't show off the characteristics of a variant very well, I thought this one did.

Also, apologies for not thanking Stephen before on his excellent Gming and handling of the game!  Thanks, Stephen!

Adam’s EOG

First off, a big thanks for Stephen for a tremendous job GMing, dealing with replacements, and keeping things running smoothly.  Secondly, a thank you to Jim-Bob for stepping in and taking over the dropped English position.  As Jim mentioned in his EoG, we had had some private conversations during the game, but nothing that really would have effected him stepping in, which is why I made no objection when the time came.

The game....

In standard Diplomacy, I can’t stand Turkey, which is why in this variant it was at the top of my preference list.  I was excited to play Turkey given some more flexibility, but as Jim astutely pointed out, the amphibious units simply gave Turkey a huge advantage and unbalanced the game.  That being said, I was planned to take every bias and use it to my advantage as best as possible.

As the game began, I managed to get on decent terms with both Austria and Russia, while the two of them started fighting quickly.  I used this opportunity to make a fast push against Italy, who for some reason decided to ignore me as a threat and move toward France.  I pushed westward very quickly, and finally decided to work with Austria.  Things went really well as we pushed into Russia and Italy, and I managed to take down most of the spoils and direct Geoff into a position where I could easily stab him.  I think I timed the stab just right, immediately taking 2 centers off him, and in position to take off 2 more the following year.

Immediately after the stab Geoff dropped out of the game.  Convenient timing.  Meanwhile, the west was a total mess, with England trying to battle both France and Germany, most of the Austrian units in Germany, and no one getting anywhere.  Things were looking good.  I kept pushing forward, but got a bit over-confident and made a tactical blunder, again as Jim pointed out in his EoG.  I spent too much time focusing on taking War and Mos, assuming that StP, Mun, Mar, or Spa would be takable later on, instead of trying to push a unit or two behind them.  Had I done this, a solo probably would have been a lock.  I was also counting on the turmoil in the west preventing France from setting up a stalemate line for Mar/Spa/Por.

And I think, based on the diplomatic situation, that is what would have happened, had England not dropped out and been replaced by Jim, who I know pretty well from face-to-face diplomacy... once Jim entered the game, I knew the dynamic would change and I would have to rush the stalemate line much faster.  But I couldnt get there fast enough, and the ending position was one where I could not advance further, so I agreed to the draw.  I didnt have too much interest in cutting down the draw, even though I think that we could have gotten Germany and Austria and maybe Russia out, but I didnt think EF would go for it given my solo risk.  Better to end it and move on!

Thanks to everyone in the game, it was nice meeting some new faces and seeing some familiar ones, and I hope to see you all at a board again sometime.

Suzanne’s EOG

You know, I think that this is the first time I have ever been part of (or even seen) a 6-way draw. But with my two borrowed centers, I was glad to be in on it -- and very glad that the imminent solo was stopped, in extremis.

The variant is interesting, but what struck me most was the non-communication of most of the players. Only two of my five remaining co-players bothered to write to me, or to reply to my initial mails, when I joined the game. Adam wrote even before I knew that I was in as the replacement; and Don as Germany replied rapidly to my initial mail, with a basis for an agreement that we kept essentially until the end. John, as France, took a little more persuading, but he did start replying fairly soon, and was soon convinced that he would move to the southwest when he could.  It took several seasons before Simon as England replied. He agreed that it looked like Adam would win the game, but said that there was nothing that he could do about it, since he was too far from Turkey. I explain what I thought he could do, but I never did get much response afterwards. We were lucky that Jim could take over the position so enthusiastically and so effectively, even though nearly too late. And Mark in Russia was held firmly in hand by Turkey; he didn't join the Coalition until Turkey finally stabbed him.

So, all in all, I am not sure that I agree with Jim about the variant. It was not a fair test, as far as I'm concerned; you need a full roster of experienced and active diplomats to really test a variant. Jim is probably right in saying that Turkey has an unusual advantage, but perhaps the other powers do too, if they take full advantage of their ressources. As Jim pointed out when I joined, how often does Austria have a fleet in the Baltic?

Back to the game, it took me a couple of turns to see how close Adam was to a solo. But we were very lucky to be able to stop it when we did. There was the French guessing game, of course; but also the possibility of a Turkish retreat into Prussia, if he didn't take Moscow with the Warsaw unit. That retreat really would have been a disaster; I don't think that we would have managed to make a line that stuck.

So, while I distribute "thank you"s, I send a first thank you to Adam, whose single-mindedness in finishing up the solo quickly was an immense help to the anti-solo Coalition. ;)  Thanks to Don, for his cordial welcome and steady and generous alliance, thanks to John, who once convinced worked well with us, thanks to Jim, for his advice and enthusiasm, thanks to Mark for joining the Coalition, thanks to Simon, for dropping out opportunely, and many thanks to Stephen, who made it all possible.

My EOG

Thanks for the EOG statements so far – I hope we’ll get a few more, but I thought I’d add my thoughts while I have the leisure of the weekend.

The origins of this variant can be found in my involvement in the playtest of Randall Shane’s Setup Diplomacy (initial placements stage, then chaos builds allowed in any owned region).  I realised then how much fun can be had if you give the game some more flexibility and allow for some odd situations to arise.

As it happens, the amphibious unit was only part of the design for my next variant, TransEurope, which requires players to travel round Europe, racing each other to visit target centres.  I needed to make everyone’s travel easier, so came up with the amphibious idea.  I’d play-tested Geoff Bache’s Bretwalda variant a long while ago, but his idea of ‘boat bunches’ that could take a season to convert between army and fleet seemed a little cumbersome to me.  Why wait at all?  While hammering out the details, I realised that here was a variant in itself.

So, on to the question of whether it works.  Jim makes a very good point, that some countries had limitations for a reason.  But of course, England is also limited in Standard by the trickiness of penetrating the continent with fleets, so this should have favoured him too.  And look at Youngstown – Russia starts off with twice the number of units as any other, but the playing field is levelled by everyone else recognising the threat.  Perhaps Turkey’s potential will be clearer the next time Amphibious is played and the balance of power will be regained through diplomacy.

Perhaps the next appearance of the Amphibious unit will be in TransEurope, while I give some more thought to perfecting this variant.  There was a real pleasure in seeing Austria’s admittedly suicidal attack on everyone at once and eventual emergence in the Baltic.  It’s nice to change the shape of the game with a simple alteration, and that is my aim.  I must thank Geoff, who had to bow out as Austria with RL concerns, for making the most of the variant, although perhaps choosing just one opponent might have avoided Turkey dominating so easily!

A 6-way draw is hardly ideal as a first run, but I welcome all comments to make Amphibious a fully playable and fun variant.  Jim’s comments have been welcome throughout the game, as has his and Suzanne’s interventions when we lost players.  Thanks to everyone who played,  apart from Simon, of course, who is still out there advertising his dip 0 game without explaining why he disappeared from mine…

I’ve notified Dipknights for those of you who’re interested, and I’m promised that there will actually be an update of DK points in the near future after deafening silence.  See you in a game coming up, and do let me know if there’s a particular variant that you’d like me run next.

Mark’s EOG

Firstly thanks to Stephen for GMing, and our replacement players for letting the game continue.

So what was my game like?

My strategy was simple, if a little too simple since it left no margin for alternatives whn it went wrong. I decided that one of the factors halting Russia in the standard game was the way its fleets were divided on completly different sides of the board. With fleets now gone I believed that Russia might be able to use its forces through it's central front with Austria a lot more effectivly than the standard game.

One problem England had to leave me alone in the north. He didn't, perhaps not suprisingly. This weakened my whole position and with those RL issues I was even able to talk my way out of trouble into my position was terminally weakened. Thankfully I was offered a olive branch at the end by the 'alliance' as we tried to stop the Turkish solo.

Never the less the DIAS was a little out of the blue but I'm not complaining as that gets me a result from nothing.

I think the variant works well but as with most of these things it's too easy to ignore the diplomacy by over analysing strategy before the game starts. When this variant reappears I will heartely recommend it though.