Resolutions Fall Moves 2379 public Edition

[je...@alum.swarthmore.edu]

Resolutions attached as text and images

[Todd Nelling]

Ber has nowhere to retreat and should just be disbanded, not dislodged.

On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 14:55, <je...@alum.swarthmore.edu> wrote:

Resolutions attached as text and images

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to startrek-diplomacy+unsubscribegooglegroups.com or reply to this email with the words "REMOVE ME" as the subject.

[Jeff Kaufman]

je...@alum.swarthmore.edu wrote:
> Resolutions attached as text and images
>

Because I'm late with resolutions, retreats are due tomorrow morning
at 9am. Unless someone needs more time, of course.

If all the orders are in tonight and not marked non-final, I can
probably resolve sooner.

Jeff

[Jeff Kaufman]

Todd Nelling wrote:
> Ber has nowhere to retreat and should just be disbanded, not dislodged.
>

You're right. BER pops.

This means only chris has retreats.

Jeff

[Chris Segal]

BEL is also destroyed.

No retreats.

On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 3:55 PM, <je...@alum.swarthmore.edu> wrote:
> Resolutions attached as text and images
>

[Todd Nelling]

I don't think it makes sense to do this before retreats, just from a counting perspective, but I'd like to submit a DIAS proposal to be voted on before the winter adjudication (so center count would reflect changes from this year). And I vote yes on it.

I'd also like to propose to the list that we start discussing possibilities for the next game. I personally would like to play something, as I don't currently have any other active games in which I'm playing. I wouldn't mind doing this variant again, but I'm open to other ideas as well.

[Tom Emmons]

So to clarify, the center counts are Chris 15, Todd 8, Joe and Tom 5?

I vote yes.

[Tom Emmons]

Sorry, Todd has 9

[Joe Grimm]

Yes, game over.

[Todd Nelling]

Yeah, though I hadn't considered how an infiltration would affect the final standings (if it would). I think it could be argued that you have 6 and Joe has 4, as even though that's clearly only temporary, it's not really any more temporary, then, say, your hold on Venice if Joe or I wanted to take it, or other similar situations.

[Tom Emmons]

Ultimately, it's a draw, anyway.

[Chris Segal]

So, as soon as Jeff pushes out the next map we each just write the list?

On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 4:42 PM, Todd Nelling <tnel...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Todd Nelling]

Voting is private if you want it to be, and in fact any of us could be submitting overwriting private votes, but if you want to vote on it now, go for it. The only difference the retreats would really make if we accept it is whether or not Joe owns Munich.

As for it ultimately being a draw... yes, but clearly you've done a bit better for yourself if you're drawing with 15 centers then 1. I think it worth establishing what the procedure for this is*. And I have another argument supporting my thesis: I think a Borg country could solo by counting their infiltration centers. It still contributes to their end of the year status, even if it's going to go away. So I'd say you have 6.

*I may or may not have a spreadsheet that wants to know, also. But! Before you judge me, know that I put it together mostly so I could keep track of who I'd played games with on Redscape, so that I'd be better prepared if I played them again.

[Chris Segal]

Oh huh, I missed that we were back onlist.

I saw game over, too.

And Todd, Real Men Keep Spreadsheets (tm) so don't be ashamed!

[Chris Segal]

SAY, I SAY

[Todd Nelling]

Do they keep spreadsheets of their dip games?

And also, what does "SAY, I SAY" mean?

[Chris Segal]

I was correcting the typo "I saw"

[Jeff Kaufman]

Chris Segal wrote:
> BEL is also destroyed.
>
> No retreats.
>

There are only no retreats if chris decides not to retreat his held
units.

If that's the case, chris needs to email me an empty set of retreat orders.

Jeff

[Chris Segal]

OK. Those were intended to be two separate statements.

[Jeff Kaufman]

Todd Nelling wrote:
>
> I have another argument supporting my thesis: I think a Borg country
> could solo by counting their infiltration centers. It still
> contributes to their end of the year status, even if it's going to
> go away.
>

I don't think that's what the rules say. The rules say:

8. During the year in which a Borg has assimilated a unit, the
Borg player does not have to capture an additional supply center
in the usual way to support his newly assimilated new unit.
Instead, for the build phase of that year, the Borg player's
supply centers can support an extra unit for each unit
assimilated. ...

9. The player losing a unit to Borg assimilation loses the ability
to support one unit in the same way the Borg player gains it. A
power which has lost 1 unit assimilated to the Borg and normally
could support 6 units can now only support 5 during the build
phase of the year he lost the unit to assimilation. He regains
his normal supply capacity the following year. No territory or
supply centers physically change ownership, the game master
merely makes the necessary adjustments during the build phase.

Unless there's an exception I'm missing somewhere else in the
document, for winning you need half the scs, and no "supply centers
physically change ownership" when the borg assimilate.

Also, please stop calling it "infiltration". That's the dominion.

Jeff

[Todd Nelling]

Whoops. Sorry about the misnomer.

Anyway, yeah, you're right. Probably should have consulted the rules.