• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Cpt. Kiwi is very welcome to join Turkey or indeed any other nation if he wants to. I didn't ask you, because you had said several times that you didn't have time for the game.

I wouldn't have time for a full game, but glorious Turkey with it's two fleets hardly counts as a full game ;)

Pretty much all I'd have to do is choose to go down fighting Italy, or go down fighting Austria.
 
It certainly can be risky, but the idea would not be to cede all control of your armies, but just to allow your ally to choose the order for one army for one turn from two or three predetermined options. This is meant to make cooperation easier.
Example:
Italy and England are long-term allies and have been thinking about how to best capture Spain from France. Unfortunately they are in different time zones and time's running out.
England might then order:
F Mat S F Wes-Spa(sc) (allow Italy to change to F Mat S F GoL-Spa(sc))
and copy Italy on the order. Italy can then decide with which fleet to attack Spain and still get the support from England.

I'm still not decided on this and I welcome feedback, but it's not as stupid as you make it sound.

The solution to this problem is not a complicated sovreignty order process...but giving the diplomats more time.

With a 48 hour turn cycle, Austria and I could hammer out exactly what our moves were going to be in advance and execute them in the last Diplomacy game.

I was on record as saying that the 24 hour turn cycle was a bad idea from the start (hence why I asked for an extension EVERY TIME). I am still of the opinion that 48 hours is a MINIMUM required to conduct all the business that goes on in this game.

Again...you need to give the diplomats more time.
 
Many potential issues. An controlling ally override preliminary orders from the country itself? What aboutcontrolling ally changing orders in the eleventh our to open his trusting friend to a stab? What if one of the diplomats in the home country has a full inbox?

I would not support the proposal.

It is based on conditions which allow for each player to decide what exactly can be done with that force.
 
Just to be clear, if the players don't want this rule, I won't implement it. Period.
With that in mind - I asked for feedback, so thanks for all the replies - I still don't quite understand most of the objections. I'm going to continue with my England-Italy example for illustration.
The one controlling will always choose the outcome that's best for him, not exactly what the owner of the armies would do.
That's the whole point. England regards Italy as an ally, so it wants them to succeed in taking Spain and it just let's Italy decide, which way is more likely to be successful. If England doesn't want its fleet to do certain action, it just shouldn't offer Italy to choose that order.
I am opposed and if you implement it in this game I will resign.
Isn't that a bit overly dramatic? I can understand if you are reluctant to turn over even partial control of an army to an ally, but even if this rule were implemented you would never have to do it, if you don't want to.
So what's your problem with other people doing it? If you fear that some evil mastermind can then control the armies of several nations for his own nefarious purposes, well, he can already do that by convincing people to make moves that are in his interest. The new rule would change nothing.

Many potential issues. An controlling ally override preliminary orders from the country itself?
Italy can only choose between the orders predetermined by England. And of course England can take that power back, without even telling Italy, just by issuing new order for F Mat, that doesn't include that provision:
F Mat-Wes
It's exactly the same as asking Italy which course of action it would prefer and then acting on it. This happens all the time in the game.
What aboutcontrolling ally changing orders in the eleventh our to open his trusting friend to a stab?
England should of course never give Italy order options, that it wouldn't order itself, if Italy recommended them. If they follow that advice an Italian stab isn't easier or harder, than it would be without the rule.
What if one of the diplomats in the home country has a full inbox?
I fail to see a problem here. Please explain?

Btw, are you back now? :)
reis91 said:
It is based on conditions which allow for each player to decide what exactly can be done with that force.
Exactly.
The solution to this problem is not a complicated sovreignty order process...but giving the diplomats more time.

With a 48 hour turn cycle, Austria and I could hammer out exactly what our moves were going to be in advance and execute them in the last Diplomacy game.

I was on record as saying that the 24 hour turn cycle was a bad idea from the start (hence why I asked for an extension EVERY TIME). I am still of the opinion that 48 hours is a MINIMUM required to conduct all the business that goes on in this game.

Again...you need to give the diplomats more time.
As you might have noticed, we haven't had a single 24-hour turn yet. (Except build and retreat turns, but you don't want to extend those, do you?)
After the last game most people wanted to avoid another four month game, so the idea was to shorten the turns in order to speed up the game. Since I knew that 24 hours would often not be enough, I allowed for this extension rule. I was hoping that there would be at least a few turns, where there would not be a lot of diplomacy going on and we could save a day. We got very close a few times, but ultimately never managed that 24-hour turn.
As I mentioned earlier, the next game can experiment with longer turns, but I don't want to change the rules now, because maybe turns will be faster in the end game. And if they won't, players can always have the 48 hours if they need them.
Besides, it isn't like all people are clamoring for longer turns, I've had a few annoyed or impatient reactions, when I declared an extension of the deadline.

Your point that the rules might be overly complicated is the one objection, that convinces me most. I don't think they would be that much more complicated then the normal diplomacy rules though.
I wouldn't have time for a full game, but glorious Turkey with it's two fleets hardly counts as a full game ;)

Pretty much all I'd have to do is choose to go down fighting Italy, or go down fighting Austria.
Oh, but with your powers of logic and persuasion you could rise again and conquer all of Europe, muahaha. Ahem.
Do you want to join Turkey then, together with taii?
 
He'll do better than me, I don't think I could be bothered with diplomatic relations (with who, anyway? Italy? :I).
Okay then, Cpt. Kiwi will you take Turkey under your wings? ;)


In light of all this discussion and due to the fact that I have only received two orders so far, I'll extend the deadline.

New deadline is Thursday, March 29th at 17:00 GMT.
 
He'll do better than me, I don't think I could be bothered with diplomatic relations (with who, anyway? Italy? :I).
With me (Austria). Lay down your arms without resistance and I promise to keep the sanitary conditions in the POW camps up to a minimum standard. Also the Sultan won't be beheaded if you give up now. :)
 
Okay then, Cpt. Kiwi will you take Turkey under your wings? ;)


In light of all this discussion and due to the fact that I have only received two orders so far, I'll extend the deadline.

New deadline is Thursday, March 29th at 17:00 GMT.

Done.
 
You're Austria, syber? How many diplomats will serve Austria in this game, any bets?

Let's hope we see some old diplomats return. Also, enjoy Rome while it remains unburnt, you Italian dog.
 
Get a room you two!
 
I'll be back April 1st; however, I remain extremely pleased by the work Synergies has done in my steed and am glad to see Synergies and esemesas working well together.


A.E.I.O.U.
 
F. U.
 
I'll be back April 1st; however, I remain extremely pleased by the work Synergies has done in my steed and am glad to see Synergies and esemesas working well together.


A.E.I.O.U.

His name is Syber, y'know.
 
Spring 1910

British Orders
F Lon - Yor
F Nth - Edi

French Orders
F Eng - Nth
F Nrg S F Eng - Nth
F Mat - Eng
F Wal S F Mat - Eng
A Bre - Gas
A Mar - Pie

German Orders
F Den S F Eng - Nth
F Swe - Nwy
A Mun - Tyr
A Boh - Vie
A War - Gal
A Kie - Mun
A Ber - Sil
A Hol - Hold
A Mos - StP

Austrian Orders
A Budapest-Vienna
F Adriatic - Ionian Sea
F Tunis S F Adriatic- Ionian Sea
F Albania - Greece
A Bulgaria S F Albania-Greece
A Ankara-Smyrna
A Saint Petersburg - Livonia
A Rumania - Sevastopol
A Venezia S A Trieste - Tyrolia
A Trieste-Tyrolia

Italian Orders
F Rom - TyS
F Ion S F Rom - TyS
F Gre S F Ion Hold
A Tus - Rom

Russian Orders
A Nwy-StP
(This order was the result of a dice throw between A Nwy H, A Nwy-Swe and A Nwy-StP)

Ottoman Orders
F Black Sea Move Ankara
F Constantinople Support F Black Sea Move Ankara


Orders


Results



The Italian fleets in Ionian Sea and Greece are dislodged and have to retreat or be disbanded.


Retreats
Italy: F Ion
Italy: F Gre




Next deadline for the Summer 1910 retreat phase is in 24 hours, 17:00 GMT on Friday, March 30th.
No extension possible. I will end the phase as soon as I have the retreat orders.

 
Well done, britain. The one set of moves I didn't forsee.