Quote from Richard Sharp's "The Game of Diplomacy", Chapter 1 - Fundamentals
CONFLICT AND SUPPORT
Only one unit may occupy a province at any one time — from this simple rule springs all the mayhem and slaughter that make Diplomacy such good, clean fun. If two or more units attempt to enter or hold the same province unassisted the result is a ‘stand-off’ and no unit moves, thus:
ENGLAND F(Lon) - ENG or ENGLAND F(Lon) - ENG
FRANCE F(ENG) stands FRANCE F(Bre) - ENG
However, any unit capable of moving to a specific province may also give support to another unit, friendly or hostile, attempting to enter or stand in that province. Each unit moves or stands with strength of itself and all its valid supports, and in case of conflicts the better supported unit prevails. If one unit succeeds in entering the disputed province, any unit already in occupation is dislodged, and must retreat or disband. In Diagram 1, Russia and Germany are involved in a typical frontier clash: Russia must hold his home centre of Warsaw against the German attack, and does so easily with
And yes, before you post, I know what he writes is not the official rules. He just has a more accurate phrasing.
I issue my final challenge: Go through the 32 diagram examples in the rules and find me one valid support that was done the way you interpreted it.
BTW, I'm not so much concerned with the outcome anymore so much as we all understand how support works.
Relatively ancient and inactive
Whatever. I'm sure everyone understands it so far. I just want to not have my last six game months wasted because of unclear wording.
None.
Centreri sent me the following moves:
Fleet Trieste -> Albania
Fleet Greece -> Aegean Sea
Army Budapest support Army Serbia, Army Serbia attack Bulgaria
These are valid moves, right? I got the support thing down?
I never responded to his question, so I never told him he was right, nor did I tell him he was wrong. After rereading the rules, I shall reword it so that it is very clear in my interpretation:
AN ARMY SUPPORTING ANOTHER ARMY MUST BORDER THE COUNTRY TO WHICH SUPPORT WILL BE GIVEN. AS IN, IF ARMY-A INVADES COUNTRY XXX, THEN ARMY-B MUST BORDER COUNTRY XXX.
Since I never gave advice, nor told him his moves were right or wrong, and since I never influenced his PM and move decision, I, as Gamemaster, decree that his last move is invalid, and therefore, it is a standoff.
Now please continue the game.
Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Feb 20 2009, 10:16 pm by A_of-s_t.
Relatively ancient and inactive
Now, please set a date by which orders are due, and explain why you so easily changed the rules of how you understand the game based on what Moose said, while the only semiofficial rulebook (maybe official) is vague.
None.
Obviously you thought it was right as you updated the map as such.
None.
Now, please set a date by which orders are due, and explain why you so easily changed the rules of how you understand the game based on what Moose said, while the only semiofficial rulebook (maybe official) is vague.
1. Monday
2. Because I'm the Gamemaster. You've obviously never played D&D.
Here we go, clear and definite proof that your order is written incorrectly, and thus invalid:
Quote from RULEBOOK I LINKED IN THE FIRST PAGE
A unit not ordered to move can be supported by a support order that only mentions its province.
A unit ordered to move can only be supported by a support order that matches the move the unit is trying to make.
Army Budapest support Army Serbia, Army Serbia attack Bulgaria
Your orders are written incorrectly, and therefore, invalid. In order to be valid, the supporting unit should be able to make the order as a move and have it still be valid. If you had written it as a support to Bulgaria, then we would have a REAL problem on our hands because the version of the rulebook I uploaded does not contain anything on validity of support moves. However, MiniMoose's does contain a rule I think we should use: that a supporting unit should be able to move to where it supports without being an invalid move.
Yay. We all win and learn. Continue the game.
Post has been edited 2 time(s), last time on Feb 20 2009, 10:35 pm by A_of-s_t.
I did some research:
Interestingly enough, the
previous edition 1992 rules is actually more clear on this.
"This space must be one to which the supporting unit
could have moved if not opposed by other units."
This same exact wording is used in the
1982 second edition as well and the
1976 version,
1971 version,
1961 version and the
the original rules.
I don't know why they changed the phrasing. But I'm pretty sure they didn't intentionally mean to add ambiguity to the rules. On a side, I sometimes read that many people preferred the 3rd edition rules. Now I know why.
Post has been edited 2 time(s), last time on Feb 20 2009, 11:03 pm by Theodore Roosevelt.
Did you mean this monday... or next monday (or possibly the monday after that)?
That's horrible. I'm sorry. Just poking fun.
None.
Relatively ancient and inactive
2. Because I'm the Gamemaster. You've obviously never played D&D.
So, because I said so. GG.
Most gamemasters know the rules of the game and take less than a week to update the board.
None.
2. Because I'm the Gamemaster. You've obviously never played D&D.
So, because I said so. GG. How the hell does a gamemaster not know the rules...
It's hard making sure every single move is right when I get double PMs from people and people who obviously don't read the rules themselves.
Relatively ancient and inactive
That hurts. I'm sure two PM's saying the same thing and commands given in slightly off format are hard for you to follow
.
Whatever.
None.
That hurts. I'm sure two PM's saying the same thing and commands given in slightly off format are hard for you to follow
.
Whatever.
Who said that the PM's said the same thing?
Relatively ancient and inactive
Horrible. Just horrible. Orders sent.
None.
Just give me the damn orders
On Monday at the latest.
Time for orders has expired. All units without orders are now ordered to hold.
CLOSED.
