SDMB#3
ewd_dragon60
Toiletduck
I’d love to play, naturally. We’ll see how many people sign up for the third one and take it from there.
MR
Well, I chickened out before, but now that we’re on game three, maybe I can sink my teeth in…
I’m a newbie minus one kick ass game…
Thanks for organizing Maeg!
SN
Maeglin:
Greetings. Definitely interested. Haven’t played since high school, but know enough to be dangerous. I do like the Austro-Hungarian Empire with the two-faced, I mean, double-headed eagle and all.
email is mtn72@yahoo.com
SDMB#3
red_dragon60
Toiletduck
MerrySquirrels 
Ambrose
Three more and we’re good to go!
MR
I’m not a big tournament winner, or anything like that, but I’ve played more than my share of games.
As of right now, I don’t want to make the time commitment necessary to play, but I would be more than happy to collect the moves and press and adjudicate the moves, if you needed a GM or if Maeglin wanted to play in one of the games.
In any event, I’ll be watching the games with interest.
I would, however, like to strongly, strongly, strongly recommend that as many of the new or less experienced players be placed in the same game as possible. (By “less experienced”, I’m thinking three or less games played)
While a newbie isn’t automatically going to get stomped on, I would opine that it’s a distinct disadvantage to be one of two new players with the rest being experienced. On the other hand, if five players are new and two players are veteran, I don’t believe the relative advantage for the veterans are all that great.
Just my opinion, which I can’t recommend enough.
Oh, and as a semi hijack, my two favorite Diplomacy quotes:
“You can’t fool all of the people all of the time, but if you do it just once, it lasts four years.” --The Gamer’s Guide to Diplomacy, 1974
“Find an ally who is willing to die for you. And see that he does just that.” – Richard Sharp, The Game of Diplomacy
OK, I haven’t checked out the links yet, and I have no idea how the game works, but I’m extremely intrigued.
I definately want to be included in the third game as a hopefully fast learning newbie.
Having never played a long idstance, long duration game online before I am not sure if these suggestions will warrant any merit, but I’ll share them anyways.
It looks like we have a very good mix of veterans, and newbies, and not alot of middle ground. Because of this I fear that a game loaded with newbies (who may or may not maintain interest) might not give all the players the best impression of the game. Also, with people on a variety of timezones and daily schedules, it might be wise to coordinate things a bit based on peoples chances to play.
For example, a group which has 4 people playing from work only, and 3 people playing late at night and on weekends might end up being very frustrating for both, with the unneeded waiting and lack of access of all opponents.
Might it be wise to consider reorganizing things so that players with similar online schedules are playing in the same game?
That said, I have access round the clock, and as I’m not employed at the precise momnet I’m generally online for the bulk of the day and night with the exception of weekend nights and before noon everyday. When I’m working, which will hopefully be in mid-January, my online time will likely increase to include mornings. I’ll be bored for mst of the holidays, so I’d be game to start as soon as a group is willing.
Now, I’m off to try and learn this game. Direction to the best learning resources would be appreciated, as well as some pointers on how to keep a game of this nature, played online, organized here at home.
I’m sure it’s not like you don’t have anything better to do, but… I have a little idea.
I think it would be kind of neat if we had a web page up for each of the games. The page could be updated at the end of every turn and we spectators could view the results and make fun of the suckers… er, I mean ‘less successful’ diplomats.
I’d join a game after the holidaze… er, I mean, ‘days’.
I get the impression that there are online adjudicators which essentially do just this. I’m not sure how they are organized for lurking and such, but I’m sure we’ll need to find a way to trash talk in the SDMB.
You do raise a good point here. I suspect that a game loaded with newbies wouldn’t suffer from waning interest, though it’s always possible.
I guess what I’d visualized is that there’d be a pair of games (or more), with at least one filled with experienced players. This would allow the newer players to check out the moves of the more experienced players, and learn from them without watching a more experienced player take them apart. (Not that it’s unavoidable that an experienced player would win–it’s just that being the only new person in a game with experienced players COULD be very difficult. In my humble opinion.)
**
Actually, I think you’ll find that being online at the same time (or not) ISN’T a huge deal. The game isn’t played like, say, hearts or spades, where everyone has to be online at once. Players will submit moves every few days, and a gamemaster will adjudicate these moves (which are considered to happen simultaneously.
Most of the game consists of negotiating and planning with the other players (deciding which of the others to ally with, and which to attack). These negotiations can just as easily take place over e-mail or ICQ as over the phone or in person. It might help somewhat if people who had similar schedules were put in the same game, but even if not, it shouldn’t cause disruption. I think you’ll see what I mean once the game starts.
Others are welcome to chime in with their opinions, of course. Other experienced players may very well disagree with what I’ve posted above.
**
I’m sure that someone will post some good links to this thread in the next couple days. If no one else does, I suppose I could check my old Diplomacy game files (not with me at the moment) for some links. There are definitely some good links available.
I’m reading the Pouch as we speak, and its been a good start, it seems very interesting.
DRY, I see what you mean about it not needing everyone to be on at the same time, but I’m thinking it could become very annoying to try and form an alliance with a player who is completely isolated over the course of a weekend from his e-mail, and the SDMB. It doesn’t seem to be a fun situation if I and another player are in a geographic position to work together, but are seperated by one’s limited online time when the turn deadline is due. And from a competitive aspect, if me and a strategic alliance are out of touch while two opponents are constantly in #straightdope together, the game seems to lack fairness.
I undertsand these things are a factor no matter what with one players desire for invovlement versus another, but if a players only access is via a work machine it could be a problem. Similarly with oldscratch’s example, if a player is online only from work on the east coast, there is going to be a 24hr lag between all of their communications.
Now, a game isn’t exactly a disaster with these circumstances, but I’m just thinking that since we have a large pool of players, we might as well think ahead when we organize the players into games.
If there’s any kind of game, labeled #2 or Newbie or whatever, I wanna play! (g-hrafn@visir.is)
Oh, and the Champ Man things sounds great too, I’ve been playin’ it for hours a week almost solidly since the first release. It must be… eight years or something… I LOVE THAT GAME!
Anyway, Dopers should play more games with each other…
— G. Raven
Absolutely legitimate points.
There are obviously many possible considerations in setting up a series of games.
I definitely suggest that if you participate in a game where schedules don’t work well in terms of overlap, or if there’s limited e-mail/internet access on the part of several players, that the turn deadlines be made longer. The game will take a little longer to play, but it will be a better game (in my opinion).
Good luck!
Everyone has raised some excellent points, to be sure. I certainly will try to reorganize the games based on schedules and levels of skill. Perhaps the single most important reason why I am tanking in the World Masters tournament is the fact that I cannot email when I am out of the office.
DRY, thank you kindly for your offer to moderate. I will be on vacation from 1/11-1/23, and I would hate to pause the game in its infancy for such a long time. Since you aren’t playing, I just might pass the moderating responsibilities to you.
There certainly will be a webpage for all of the games, for players and lurkers alilke.
As it stands now, we will probably begin after 1/1. This will give me enough time to reorganize the existing games. We also finally have enough for three full games, so the odds of being in a game with people of a similar level is quite high.
MR
Takk fyrir, Morrison’s Lament! 
Dewt, your email address is not in your profile. Please send it to me!
MR
OK, I gotta play! I’ve played before a couple of times, but that was a couple of years ago. And I’m very, very gullible!
Please sign me up for game #3!
Oh, hell, sure.
Put me down as semi-experienced. I’ve read a lot on the game, and played it four or five times. Generally, I’ve gotten my ass handed to me, but I attribute that to a combination of my then-youth and my overwhelming desire to play Italy.
Eh, sorry, but could you guys take me off the Diplomacy list? Something came up…
Sorry 'bout that, maybe some other time.
Oh, and Happy Holidays!
— G. Raven
I might be convinced to join, but I don’t have a board 
Sign me up for whatever game is currently being put together. I’m pretty much a beginner. I’ve read a lot on the game. I know all the rules, so I’m quite capable of planning moves and making negotiations, but I’ve only actually played one game, so I won’t categorize myself as an intermediate. This should be sweet.
Go to the Diplomatic Pouch (www.diplom.org). Somewhere on that page, probably on Diplomacy resources, or something, you should see a list of game planning programs. These will allow you to place units on a standard board, or in many cases, also on variant maps as well. I use Diplomatik.