AAR: 79706. PD Versailles Tournament Game B2

Moderator: sinnybee

AAR: 79706. PD Versailles Tournament Game B2

Postby sinnybee » 22 May 2014, 11:35

Game 79706. PD Versailles Tournament Game B2 is the fourteenth of 22 PDVT Phase 1 games to finish.

ImageImageCrnaZemlja earned 65 points in game B2: 2way DRAW 50 Britain 12 Rumania 3
ImageImagealvin1912 earned 62 points in game B2: 2way DRAW 50 Italy 7 Egypt 5
ImageImageBuachaille earned 16 points in game B2: France 14 Spain 2
ImageImagejakofipa earned 0 points in game B2: Poland 0 Sweden 0
ImageImagekdwyer796 earned 0 points in game B2: Turkey 0 Greece 0
ImageImageNamelessNate earned 0 points in game B2: USSR 0 Czechoslov. 0
ImageImagetomspencer87 earned 0 points in game B2: Germany 0 Yugoslavia 0
Their scores are also here.

Congratulations to all 7 players for not surrendering!

Game created 1 Apr ( 2 Apr in GMT +1), started 4 April (5 Apr in GMT +1), and finished 21 May (22 May in GMT +1).
Gold Classicist since 1-11-11
FT Asst GM of 35 player WWIV Aug 2011-Feb 2012
#1 ranked player of playdip early 2013
4th highest forum karma count at Apr 2013 ending (behind Craw, Dipsy, and Rick)
Tournament Director of the 31 game PDVT Feb-Dec 2014, the first playdip tourney with over 100 sign-ups
User avatar
sinnybee
 
Posts: 5816
Joined: 03 Sep 2010, 07:01
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: (1332)
All-game rating: (1467)
Timezone: GMT-7

Re: AAR: 79706. PD Versailles Tournament Game B2

Postby simblanco » 22 May 2014, 17:07

Wow! A fabled 2-way draw... how did it happen?
Silver member of the Classicist
User avatar
simblanco
 
Posts: 651
Joined: 21 Jul 2013, 10:08
Location: Beyond the Wall
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1256)
All-game rating: (1353)
Timezone: GMT

Re: AAR: 79706. PD Versailles Tournament Game B2

Postby JonS » 22 May 2014, 17:46

simblanco wrote:Wow! A fabled 2-way draw... how did it happen?

Yeah very curious to hear AARs from this game, since it appears that Buachaille accepted a draw excluding him while holding 16 SCs? More than either of the victors. I assume there were some interesting negotiations, and gaming of tournament points....

EDIT: Reading the PP, that appears to be exactly what happened. The victors needed the extra points to advance, Buachaille allowed them to take it. Interesting outcome.
“Find an ally who will die for you, and see that he does just that.”
The immortal Richard Sharp

Platinum Member of the Classicists Club
House Tyrell in Diplomacy of Ice and Fire
User avatar
JonS
 
Posts: 1415
Joined: 26 Apr 2013, 21:39
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1557)
All-game rating: (1606)
Timezone: GMT-7

Re: AAR: 79706. PD Versailles Tournament Game B2

Postby Buachaille » 22 May 2014, 18:58

There are no flies on you lot ;) My post in the PP describes the situation best:

Right gents, time for transparency.

It is apparent that neither of you have done sufficiently well in your other game to accept a 3 way here. As a result the two of you move against me and I will not be able to resist for long.

I have this question for you both. Will the points from a 2 way (between the two of you) and your current number of centres suffice? I am willing to bank on the fact that my scoring from my other game and the points I'd get from my current number of SCs would be enough to get me through to the next round.

It's a pretty generous for to the two of you as I see it? It's also a fairly big sacrifice for me but I guess it's punishment for getting myself into this 'meat in the sandwich' situation.

Let me know as the offer won't stand for long.


Yes; you're entirely right Sisyphus. This was a really difficult decision for me and clashed heavily with my 'never give up' attitude. In the end I opted for what I'd say was the most pragmatic, lowest risk option that maximised my chances of progression even if I can't exactly walk away with my head held high.

Ultimately the difficult situation I found myself in was my own fault; I settled in to a comfortable 3 way pattern, not allowing for a change in circumstance in the other two's other games or change of heart in this and didn't pay proper attention to some avoidance of answering questions by my partners. With the wonders of hindsight I should have probably played more aggressively in the mid game.

When it came to the rub and Italy and Britain turned against me I tried extremely hard to coerce Italy to my side as I had little leverage on Britain. I trust Italy will testify to this but it was no avail; he wasn't for turning and I felt my options narrowing. I could only really attack one of them and effectively gift the other the solo. I did much threatening of kingmaking but it seemed to hit deaf ears. If I started down that road my position didn't seem retrievable in the fashion I eventually chose.

Because of the unusual circumstance here I'd very much appreciate other's opinion about this and obviously, particularly that of Italy and Britain and whether I could have done any more?

Edit: PS It was also my hope that in suggesting it I might be able to 'out' someone who's actual preference was for the solo but alas it wasn't to be; Italy proposed it, Britain accepted and I stole another couple of SCs and then grudgingly did the same.
Classicist.
User avatar
Buachaille
 
Posts: 854
Joined: 28 Aug 2013, 00:29
Location: Glen Coe
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1580)
All-game rating: (1635)
Timezone: GMT

Re: AAR: 79706. PD Versailles Tournament Game B2

Postby alvin1912 » 22 May 2014, 21:11

Buachaille wrote:There are no flies on you lot ;) My post in the PP describes the situation best:

Right gents, time for transparency.

It is apparent that neither of you have done sufficiently well in your other game to accept a 3 way here. As a result the two of you move against me and I will not be able to resist for long.

I have this question for you both. Will the points from a 2 way (between the two of you) and your current number of centres suffice? I am willing to bank on the fact that my scoring from my other game and the points I'd get from my current number of SCs would be enough to get me through to the next round.

It's a pretty generous for to the two of you as I see it? It's also a fairly big sacrifice for me but I guess it's punishment for getting myself into this 'meat in the sandwich' situation.

Let me know as the offer won't stand for long.


Yes; you're entirely right Sisyphus. This was a really difficult decision for me and clashed heavily with my 'never give up' attitude. In the end I opted for what I'd say was the most pragmatic, lowest risk option that maximised my chances of progression even if I can't exactly walk away with my head held high.

Ultimately the difficult situation I found myself in was my own fault; I settled in to a comfortable 3 way pattern, not allowing for a change in circumstance in the other two's other games or change of heart in this and didn't pay proper attention to some avoidance of answering questions by my partners. With the wonders of hindsight I should have probably played more aggressively in the mid game.

When it came to the rub and Italy and Britain turned against me I tried extremely hard to coerce Italy to my side as I had little leverage on Britain. I trust Italy will testify to this but it was no avail; he wasn't for turning and I felt my options narrowing. I could only really attack one of them and effectively gift the other the solo. I did much threatening of kingmaking but it seemed to hit deaf ears. If I started down that road my position didn't seem retrievable in the fashion I eventually chose.

Because of the unusual circumstance here I'd very much appreciate other's opinion about this and obviously, particularly that of Italy and Britain and whether I could have done any more?


For late game I believe both of us have a long discussion and talked several topic in depth, regretfully we couldn't reach an agreement in the end. ( I believe both of us may have some tired about that discussion). When I shown my concern about how to get some more point and how to reduce border friction, it seems to me that you are much prefer to threaten me instead of satisfying some of my request in order to turn me into your side. (Actually I think that you are just asking me to be neutral--stop supporting Britain instead of joining your side.)
And my objective is seeking for more points, it is not a good moment to threaten be when Britain is just 15SCs. Even if you ignore Britain and put most of your units on me, I believe there would still have sometime for me to get some more SCs before the situation get worst ( must have prevent Britain from 22SCs and sit on the table to discuss for a 3-ways.) (At least I don't think I would lose much SCs even if you focus on attacking me)
If you have taken my offer the story may have been different.
P.S. From the message you sent to me, I strongly feel that you have just emphasis too much on your plan C(threaten) and not really want to discuss about how could we execute the plan B(cooperate). While plan A(neutral) may be your urgent concern, but that's not my top priority at that moment.

After all, two-way is better than a three-way, and glad that we could reach a agreement that everyone of us could maximize the chance of progression.
alvin1912
 
Posts: 62
Joined: 04 May 2012, 15:59
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1355)
All-game rating: (1874)
Timezone: GMT+8


Return to Versailles Tournament AARs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron