It happened to me two or three times around 1906/1907. I have explained it as a malfunction of my spam filter, since few other times the notification ended in the spam folder. (The same happened to some e-mails send by Russia during 1901, which is the main reason I am now allied with Turkey.)
[Diplomacy diary—Only the first few years strike me as interesting. I append my lost messages to Austria—their failure to arrive pretty much determined what later happened in the East. If there is any interest in Russian archives regarding the origins of Russo-Turkish hostility or the preliminary negotiations leading to the Treaty of Hier, I would be happy to make those available as well]
*Pre-spring 1901
I haven’t played more than a couple games of Diplomacy in my life, and they were thirty years ago. So I spend the first part of the negotiations completely confused about basic rules and tactics. My first confusion was that I was under the delusion that coastal fleets resided on a particular ordered pair of land-province and ocean-province. So that, for example, a British fleet on the North Sea coast of Norway would take several moves to get to the Barent Sea coast of St. Pete. Once that was cleared up, I still didn’t understand that Sweden (unlike St. Pete) has only a single coast.
Once I had that finally cleared up, I was able to negotiate non-aggression agreements with England and Germany. They won’t hold for long, but maybe long enough so that I have time to deal with the mess in the Balkans.
The first annoyance is that Turkey wants us to pretend hostility (by bouncing in the Black Sea, for example) but later turn together against Austria.
Austria doesn’t respond to my emails suggesting that maybe we should ally against Turkey. My original intention was A Warsaw->Galatia, A Moscow->Ukraine and F Sevastapol->Rumania. In fact, I told Austria and Turkey that this was my intention. I also suggested ways (German verbal threats against Russia, basically) that Austria could be assured that my army in Galatia was not a threat to Vienna and Budapest. Alas, no response from Austria until too late.
Austria claims that he never got most of my emails. I’m not sure whether to believe this or not. In any case, it gets me thinking about how I am royally (imperially?) screwed if I continue with my original plans with both Austria and Turkey hostile. I begin to realize just how important it is for both Turkey and Russia to keep the other party’s fleet out of the Black Sea.
So at the last minute, I switch my orders to bounce the Turkish fleet. And I also decide to make a Warsaw move that is less hostile-appearing to Austria. Of course, I realize that this probably means that Austria will be moving the Vienna army toward Warsaw. So I also send a note to Italy suggesting that a move into Tyrol may prove interesting.
Spring 1901
I am relieved and surprised that Turkey has not moved into Armenia. I am initially completely baffled by the French decision to hold his army in Marseilles. And the Austrian decision to hold in Trieste.
My Fall moves are obvious. The only question is whether to attack Rumania from Ukraine or Sevastapol. If the attack fails it doesn’t matter which
direction I choose. Both Ukr and Sev stay put. But if I do succeed, I will need to build twice, and for the sake of peace in the north, I don’t want to build in St. Pete. So I will try to move my fleet to Rumania and then build in Sevastapol. Fleet or Army? Interesting choice. I hope I get the chance to make it.
And now I am informed that Italy hasn’t been receiving my email either. Sheesh.
Winter builds 1901
Cool! I get to build twice. I had been nervous about a German bounce in Sweden or an Austrian invasion of Rumania.
I had been planning to build a fleet in Sevastapol this winter, but now I’m not sure. Scandinavia looks mighty tempting right now, since Britain moved to Belgium. And assuming I decide to continue with my southern strategy, building an army in Sevastapol keeps Turkey confused about my intentions for a little longer. I need to talk to Austria. I’ll delay my decision about the build until the last moment.
9:30 PM. Well, Turkish intransigence eliminates the confusion. Turkey and Russia are now at war. I will build an Army in Moscow and a fleet in Sevastapol. And Austria must decide whose side to be on.
Spring 1902
Tues. I have proposed a treaty to Austria and Italy. I believe it is a good deal for both. Italy wanted better terms; I replied. Austria queried, I responded.
Fall 1902
Fri. Well, I am screwed. I can hold Sevastapol with support from Ukraine and Moscow, But when Austria eventually moves into Galicia, I’m in trouble.
I need to stir things up somehow. So I am goint to take Norway, to gain a build. And I am going to move Warsaw to Silesia. Two purposes: I can build in Warsaw. It can next turn south to Galicia or Bohemia. Plus if Germany moves some of his forces east, it may distract Austria.
I’m interested in everything- and am anxious to discuss what everyone has learned (I’ve learned a ton). Unfortunately, the other nations persist their bloody and pointless war against the British Empire.
You and I have a problem. I want Rumania. You probably don’t want me to have it.
Too bad. If you try to prevent it, you will have difficulties with Germany, Turkey, or
Italy. If you move against Warsaw, you will earn my lasting enmity.
On the other hand, if you permit my occupation of Rumania, then we can be allies,
working together against either the Turks or the Germans, with me doing much of
the work and you grabbing most of the spoils. I may even be able to offer you
diplomatic support against the Italians, since both the French and the Turks are
presently friendly to me.
Perplexed
Greetings to Austria from Russia,
I believe it is wise to inform you of my intentions, so that my moves are not
misinterpreted.
My strategic intention is to sieze Rumania and Sweden, and then to adopt
a defensive stance for several turns, to see what happens elsewhere on the
globe. If these rather peaceful intentions are resisted or
thwarted, then I may respond with extreme hostility immediately.
Diplomatically, my doctrine is to avoid all entangling alliances and only to
make simple agreements of non-aggression and demilitarization of
certain strategic regions.
Tactically, for a variety of reasons related to establishing a Russian
presence in Rumania, it is my intention to move my Warsaw army
into Galicia this Spring. Please understand that my purpose is simply
to limit the amount of force you can bring to bear against Rumania.
It is my intention to move the Galicia army on to Rumania in the Fall,
should the tactical situation permit this.
Once the Rumanian situation is stabilized, there is no reason we cannot
be friends, and even allies—at least for a few years, until our common
enemies are sufficiently weakened.
Prince Kropotkin for the Tsar.
On Nov 16, 2010, at 7:20 AM, Hynek Bíla wrote:
Greetings from Austria.
You are the last player with whom I have not yet established any contact. It is partly because my initial plan was a fairly standard Austrian opening: alliance with Italy, non-aggression treaty with Germany, and war against Turkey and Russia. But it seems that Italy doesn’t plan to attack Turkey, and this means that such plan is not feasible. So, I have to make an alliance with either you or Turkey. If, hypothetically, the Alliance with Turkey succeeded in the East, Austria probably gets Warsaw and Serbia, while Turkey gets Bulgaria and Sevastopol, the possession of Greece, Rumania and Moscow is not clear. In any case, it would leave Austria in a vulnerable position, because practically Turkey wouldn’t border any country except Austria, and a his natural course of play then is to break the alliance. On the other hand, I have seen a very successful Russo-Austrian alliance in a game which I lost (as Italy—see http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=38862#gamePanel ). In that game, Russia was the winner, while Austria took a second place. I wouldn’t mind that outcome. As Austria, my main motivation is to survive.
I would like to know if you are potentially interested in cooperation. If so, we can make any sort of agreement, whether secret or public, as you wish.
Greetings to Austria from Russia.
Yes, I am interested in cooperation. My proclaimed intentions, from which I do not intend to waver unless I am threatened or attacked, are to seize Sweden and Rumania, and then remain passive and neutral for several turns. However, if Russia is threatened (by, say, Austrian moves against Warsaw or Turkish moves against Sevastopol) then I will ally myself with one of you to defeat the other. I believe that Turkey has been lying to me. You have been honest. Therefore, I prefer alliance with you. If you can suggest a sequence of early moves for me which leaves me secure in Sevastopol, Warsaw, and Rumania, and in position to support your own advance into Bulgaria, then I am quite willing to listen.
What is the diplomatic situation in the Adriatic? Is the Trieste fleet free to move toward Greece? If Italy does not intend to attack Turkey, who will she attack instead? If we do dismantle Turkey, what do you propose as a target distribution of the spoils?
Prince Kropotkin for the Tsar.
Greetings again to Austria from Russia
I realize that you have no reason to trust me, but if you could be convinced to do so, the following opening strategy would work well:
Spring
Russia
A Warsaw → Galicia
A Moscow → Ukraine
F Sevastopol → Black Sea (bounces)
F St. P → Gulf
Austria
A Budapest → Serbia
A Vienna → Trieste (bounces?)
F Trieste → Albania
Fall
Russia
A Galicia → Rumania
A Ukraine supports A Galicia → Rumania
F Sevastopol → Black Sea or Armenia (bounces?)
F Gulf → Sweden
Austria
(Depends upon situation in Trieste, but in any case occupies both Serbia and Greece)
Winter—Both Austria and Russia build twice. Italy and Turkey regret the error of their ways.
I realize that my move A Warsaw → Galicia puts you at risk, but I need to make it to protect myself from your potential treachery. You can bounce it, of course, but then you will not be able to both take Greece by Fall and remain secure in Trieste. Your suggestions are welcome regarding any alternative solution.
One possibility is that during the Summer diplomacy, we jointly request (you publicly, me privately) a declaration by Italy and Germany (and perhaps even Turkey) that Russian moves from Galicia against either Vienna or Budapest will considered hostile.
As one of the Eastern players in the other game, I’ll give some feedback. This feedback will be about stuff which may or may not have mattered considering that your emails were not received. And it also may be stuff that you’ve already figured out, but which could benefit others.
You and I have a problem. I want Rumania. You probably don’t want me to have it. Too bad. If you try to prevent it, you will have difficulties with Germany, Turkey, or Italy. If you move against Warsaw, you will earn my lasting enmity.
In 1901, Russia tends to be viewed as having a reasonable claim to Rumania, so it was correct for you to lay claim to it. Austria’s feelings about you taking it will probably depend on whether he is thinking of working with you, and he may not have even decided yet in Spring 1901. He might like it for himself, but he would be ambitious to think it reasonable to actually get it, and he would need to feel confident that Turkey would back him up.
While there is a time and a place for brinksmanship, you really don’t need it in 1901. Everyone knows that if Austria foils you from getting Rumania, and/or Austria moves to Galicia, it’s starting a war.
My proclaimed intentions, from which I do not intend to waver unless I am threatened or attacked, are to seize Sweden and Rumania, and then remain passive and neutral for several turns.
Since diplomacy is a zero-sum game with limited territory, it’s very hard to remain neutral. Russia especially is so big that it can’t really remain neutral in the early game, especially not for a few turns (which is a massive amount of time). Everyone is asking who they are going to get centers from next, and who is going to help them do it.
Let’s look at this from Austria’s perspective. Who is he going to attack?
Germany or Italy? No, center powers attacking each other is a risky strategy. Positions in the center are harder to defend because of multiple fronts. Austria turning his back on the East will make him and the Balkan centers a very tasty target for a Juggernaught. Even if the East let him move West, taking over German or Italian territory will result in Austria being treated like a pinata mid-game.
So, Austria has to go after either Russia or Turkey. To go after Turkey, he needs either Russian or Italian help. Italy being unwilling to attack Turkey meant that the had to work with either you or Turkey against the other: a classic triangle. His initial email basically told you: work with me against Turkey, or I team up with Turkey and destroy you.
I realize that my move A Warsaw → Galicia puts you at risk, but I need to make it to protect myself from your potential treachery
Typically Russia-Austria alliances work by keeping Galicia demilitarized. Since Galicia borders two Austrian home centers and only one Russian home center, it’s more dangerous for Austria to let you in there than vice versa. No Austrian player will accept Russia in Galicia in Spring 1901 as anything other than a declaration of war. It crosses a Schelling point. (Similar logic applies to the Black Sea, which is why Turkey wanted to bounce you there.)
You don’t need to go through Galicia to try to get Rumania. Remember, to keep you out, Austria has to weaken his claim to Greece (a neutral center that he badly wants), or work with Turkey. Yet if AT are working together, they can keep you out of Rumania no matter what. The way to get and keep Rumania is diplomacy. Autria’s desire for Greece, or interest in working with you, are both reasons to let you have Rumania rather than jumping into an alliance with Turkey. (Austrian alliances with Turkey have drawbacks. Exhibit A: The current map.)
There are a lot of hidden norms and Schelling points in Diplomacy, and they must often be learned the hard way.
No, I’m sending them as normal. Has anyone else had this problem?
I haven’t been getting them either (this winter turn I did though).
It happened to me two or three times around 1906/1907. I have explained it as a malfunction of my spam filter, since few other times the notification ended in the spam folder. (The same happened to some e-mails send by Russia during 1901, which is the main reason I am now allied with Turkey.)
[Diplomacy diary—Only the first few years strike me as interesting. I append my lost messages to Austria—their failure to arrive pretty much determined what later happened in the East. If there is any interest in Russian archives regarding the origins of Russo-Turkish hostility or the preliminary negotiations leading to the Treaty of Hier, I would be happy to make those available as well]
*Pre-spring 1901
I haven’t played more than a couple games of Diplomacy in my life, and they were thirty years ago. So I spend the first part of the negotiations completely confused about basic rules and tactics. My first confusion was that I was under the delusion that coastal fleets resided on a particular ordered pair of land-province and ocean-province. So that, for example, a British fleet on the North Sea coast of Norway would take several moves to get to the Barent Sea coast of St. Pete. Once that was cleared up, I still didn’t understand that Sweden (unlike St. Pete) has only a single coast.
Once I had that finally cleared up, I was able to negotiate non-aggression agreements with England and Germany. They won’t hold for long, but maybe long enough so that I have time to deal with the mess in the Balkans.
The first annoyance is that Turkey wants us to pretend hostility (by bouncing in the Black Sea, for example) but later turn together against Austria.
Austria doesn’t respond to my emails suggesting that maybe we should ally against Turkey. My original intention was A Warsaw->Galatia, A Moscow->Ukraine and F Sevastapol->Rumania. In fact, I told Austria and Turkey that this was my intention. I also suggested ways (German verbal threats against Russia, basically) that Austria could be assured that my army in Galatia was not a threat to Vienna and Budapest. Alas, no response from Austria until too late.
Austria claims that he never got most of my emails. I’m not sure whether to believe this or not. In any case, it gets me thinking about how I am royally (imperially?) screwed if I continue with my original plans with both Austria and Turkey hostile. I begin to realize just how important it is for both Turkey and Russia to keep the other party’s fleet out of the Black Sea.
So at the last minute, I switch my orders to bounce the Turkish fleet. And I also decide to make a Warsaw move that is less hostile-appearing to Austria. Of course, I realize that this probably means that Austria will be moving the Vienna army toward Warsaw. So I also send a note to Italy suggesting that a move into Tyrol may prove interesting.
Spring 1901
I am relieved and surprised that Turkey has not moved into Armenia. I am initially completely baffled by the French decision to hold his army in Marseilles. And the Austrian decision to hold in Trieste.
My Fall moves are obvious. The only question is whether to attack Rumania from Ukraine or Sevastapol. If the attack fails it doesn’t matter which direction I choose. Both Ukr and Sev stay put. But if I do succeed, I will need to build twice, and for the sake of peace in the north, I don’t want to build in St. Pete. So I will try to move my fleet to Rumania and then build in Sevastapol. Fleet or Army? Interesting choice. I hope I get the chance to make it.
And now I am informed that Italy hasn’t been receiving my email either. Sheesh.
Winter builds 1901
Cool! I get to build twice. I had been nervous about a German bounce in Sweden or an Austrian invasion of Rumania.
I had been planning to build a fleet in Sevastapol this winter, but now I’m not sure. Scandinavia looks mighty tempting right now, since Britain moved to Belgium. And assuming I decide to continue with my southern strategy, building an army in Sevastapol keeps Turkey confused about my intentions for a little longer. I need to talk to Austria. I’ll delay my decision about the build until the last moment.
9:30 PM. Well, Turkish intransigence eliminates the confusion. Turkey and Russia are now at war. I will build an Army in Moscow and a fleet in Sevastapol. And Austria must decide whose side to be on.
Spring 1902
Tues. I have proposed a treaty to Austria and Italy. I believe it is a good deal for both. Italy wanted better terms; I replied. Austria queried, I responded.
Fall 1902
Fri. Well, I am screwed. I can hold Sevastapol with support from Ukraine and Moscow, But when Austria eventually moves into Galicia, I’m in trouble. I need to stir things up somehow. So I am goint to take Norway, to gain a build. And I am going to move Warsaw to Silesia. Two purposes: I can build in Warsaw. It can next turn south to Galicia or Bohemia. Plus if Germany moves some of his forces east, it may distract Austria.
[End diary.]
I’m interested in everything- and am anxious to discuss what everyone has learned (I’ve learned a ton). Unfortunately, the other nations persist their bloody and pointless war against the British Empire.
Same here. (Though I’ll only provide analysis of my own actions after the game is over, even of the early game ones.)
[Begin archives of correspondence]
Greetings to Austria from Russia,
You and I have a problem. I want Rumania. You probably don’t want me to have it. Too bad. If you try to prevent it, you will have difficulties with Germany, Turkey, or Italy. If you move against Warsaw, you will earn my lasting enmity.
On the other hand, if you permit my occupation of Rumania, then we can be allies, working together against either the Turks or the Germans, with me doing much of the work and you grabbing most of the spoils. I may even be able to offer you diplomatic support against the Italians, since both the French and the Turks are presently friendly to me.
Perplexed
Greetings to Austria from Russia,
I believe it is wise to inform you of my intentions, so that my moves are not misinterpreted.
My strategic intention is to sieze Rumania and Sweden, and then to adopt a defensive stance for several turns, to see what happens elsewhere on the globe. If these rather peaceful intentions are resisted or thwarted, then I may respond with extreme hostility immediately.
Diplomatically, my doctrine is to avoid all entangling alliances and only to make simple agreements of non-aggression and demilitarization of certain strategic regions.
Tactically, for a variety of reasons related to establishing a Russian presence in Rumania, it is my intention to move my Warsaw army into Galicia this Spring. Please understand that my purpose is simply to limit the amount of force you can bring to bear against Rumania. It is my intention to move the Galicia army on to Rumania in the Fall, should the tactical situation permit this.
Once the Rumanian situation is stabilized, there is no reason we cannot be friends, and even allies—at least for a few years, until our common enemies are sufficiently weakened.
Prince Kropotkin for the Tsar.
Greetings to Austria from Russia.
Yes, I am interested in cooperation. My proclaimed intentions, from which I do not intend to waver unless I am threatened or attacked, are to seize Sweden and Rumania, and then remain passive and neutral for several turns. However, if Russia is threatened (by, say, Austrian moves against Warsaw or Turkish moves against Sevastopol) then I will ally myself with one of you to defeat the other. I believe that Turkey has been lying to me. You have been honest. Therefore, I prefer alliance with you. If you can suggest a sequence of early moves for me which leaves me secure in Sevastopol, Warsaw, and Rumania, and in position to support your own advance into Bulgaria, then I am quite willing to listen.
What is the diplomatic situation in the Adriatic? Is the Trieste fleet free to move toward Greece? If Italy does not intend to attack Turkey, who will she attack instead? If we do dismantle Turkey, what do you propose as a target distribution of the spoils?
Prince Kropotkin for the Tsar.
Greetings again to Austria from Russia
I realize that you have no reason to trust me, but if you could be convinced to do so, the following opening strategy would work well:
Spring Russia A Warsaw → Galicia A Moscow → Ukraine F Sevastopol → Black Sea (bounces) F St. P → Gulf Austria A Budapest → Serbia A Vienna → Trieste (bounces?) F Trieste → Albania
Fall Russia A Galicia → Rumania A Ukraine supports A Galicia → Rumania F Sevastopol → Black Sea or Armenia (bounces?) F Gulf → Sweden Austria (Depends upon situation in Trieste, but in any case occupies both Serbia and Greece)
Winter—Both Austria and Russia build twice. Italy and Turkey regret the error of their ways.
I realize that my move A Warsaw → Galicia puts you at risk, but I need to make it to protect myself from your potential treachery. You can bounce it, of course, but then you will not be able to both take Greece by Fall and remain secure in Trieste. Your suggestions are welcome regarding any alternative solution.
One possibility is that during the Summer diplomacy, we jointly request (you publicly, me privately) a declaration by Italy and Germany (and perhaps even Turkey) that Russian moves from Galicia against either Vienna or Budapest will considered hostile.
The Prince
As one of the Eastern players in the other game, I’ll give some feedback. This feedback will be about stuff which may or may not have mattered considering that your emails were not received. And it also may be stuff that you’ve already figured out, but which could benefit others.
In 1901, Russia tends to be viewed as having a reasonable claim to Rumania, so it was correct for you to lay claim to it. Austria’s feelings about you taking it will probably depend on whether he is thinking of working with you, and he may not have even decided yet in Spring 1901. He might like it for himself, but he would be ambitious to think it reasonable to actually get it, and he would need to feel confident that Turkey would back him up.
While there is a time and a place for brinksmanship, you really don’t need it in 1901. Everyone knows that if Austria foils you from getting Rumania, and/or Austria moves to Galicia, it’s starting a war.
Since diplomacy is a zero-sum game with limited territory, it’s very hard to remain neutral. Russia especially is so big that it can’t really remain neutral in the early game, especially not for a few turns (which is a massive amount of time). Everyone is asking who they are going to get centers from next, and who is going to help them do it.
Let’s look at this from Austria’s perspective. Who is he going to attack?
Germany or Italy? No, center powers attacking each other is a risky strategy. Positions in the center are harder to defend because of multiple fronts. Austria turning his back on the East will make him and the Balkan centers a very tasty target for a Juggernaught. Even if the East let him move West, taking over German or Italian territory will result in Austria being treated like a pinata mid-game.
So, Austria has to go after either Russia or Turkey. To go after Turkey, he needs either Russian or Italian help. Italy being unwilling to attack Turkey meant that the had to work with either you or Turkey against the other: a classic triangle. His initial email basically told you: work with me against Turkey, or I team up with Turkey and destroy you.
Typically Russia-Austria alliances work by keeping Galicia demilitarized. Since Galicia borders two Austrian home centers and only one Russian home center, it’s more dangerous for Austria to let you in there than vice versa. No Austrian player will accept Russia in Galicia in Spring 1901 as anything other than a declaration of war. It crosses a Schelling point. (Similar logic applies to the Black Sea, which is why Turkey wanted to bounce you there.)
You don’t need to go through Galicia to try to get Rumania. Remember, to keep you out, Austria has to weaken his claim to Greece (a neutral center that he badly wants), or work with Turkey. Yet if AT are working together, they can keep you out of Rumania no matter what. The way to get and keep Rumania is diplomacy. Autria’s desire for Greece, or interest in working with you, are both reasons to let you have Rumania rather than jumping into an alliance with Turkey. (Austrian alliances with Turkey have drawbacks. Exhibit A: The current map.)
There are a lot of hidden norms and Schelling points in Diplomacy, and they must often be learned the hard way.
And here I thought it was my good looks and winning personality! cries in corner