03 Aug 2014, 2:27 pm
Well, that was not much fun!
I started off thinking I had a deal with Greece, some contact with Persia and a clunky friendship with Carthage.
Greece offered me Dal and Vind, with conditions on which I took first, and we agreed on a DMZ in Ion. I agreed. I did as agreed. What happened next? He attacks and tries to make out it's somehow my fault...
Egypt was the most frustrating player (the first one, not George), he hardly communicated, and even then with little substance. So when Carthage and Persia pushed into him I was not too bothered, but I would have preferred to have a strong Egypt around.
Carthage and I had a few misunderstandings at first, but we were forced to work together against Greece-Persia. When Greece attacked me, Carthage was very supportive, and while I was always expecting a stab, it did not come until later than I thought it would.
My NMRs were not deliberate - I had a busy June-July, and went on a road-trip holiday at the end which meant I was not keeping up with emails. I guess had my position been better I would have made more of an effort, but that is no real excuse either. I don't think it would have really made a lot of difference, but it's never good to have an AWOL player, so I apologise to all - especially our diligent and helpful GM.
At the end, Greece offered me a way to suicide out, supporting him into Rome, which at least meant I left the board quickly while he and Carthage divided my lands up.
On the variant - I think 5 is too small a game - it is pretty well balanced and a good idea, but with 5 we go straight into a 'mid-game' of Diplomacy without the buildup.
I started off thinking I had a deal with Greece, some contact with Persia and a clunky friendship with Carthage.
Greece offered me Dal and Vind, with conditions on which I took first, and we agreed on a DMZ in Ion. I agreed. I did as agreed. What happened next? He attacks and tries to make out it's somehow my fault...
Egypt was the most frustrating player (the first one, not George), he hardly communicated, and even then with little substance. So when Carthage and Persia pushed into him I was not too bothered, but I would have preferred to have a strong Egypt around.
Carthage and I had a few misunderstandings at first, but we were forced to work together against Greece-Persia. When Greece attacked me, Carthage was very supportive, and while I was always expecting a stab, it did not come until later than I thought it would.
My NMRs were not deliberate - I had a busy June-July, and went on a road-trip holiday at the end which meant I was not keeping up with emails. I guess had my position been better I would have made more of an effort, but that is no real excuse either. I don't think it would have really made a lot of difference, but it's never good to have an AWOL player, so I apologise to all - especially our diligent and helpful GM.
At the end, Greece offered me a way to suicide out, supporting him into Rome, which at least meant I left the board quickly while he and Carthage divided my lands up.
On the variant - I think 5 is too small a game - it is pretty well balanced and a good idea, but with 5 we go straight into a 'mid-game' of Diplomacy without the buildup.
