Wow, I helped Germany more than I thought....

And I only stabbed Byzantium because he decided to go and stab me.

Spain EoG

Well, my game has been the most static game I’ve ever played. Not that this was my intention!
Wagadu felt threatened after my initial convoy in Mauretania and decided to stop me.
My fault is that I hoped Wagadu wasn't actually going to engage me and I've lost precious time and positions in 902-903. I was hoping that I could move on France during the early game (it's non-Anon, you can have a rough idea about your neighbourhood before the spring01 move). As long as the game moved on, I've been forced to abandon this idea. France and Germany stayed together, Wagadu closed my path, Axum downfall was incredibly fast and Egypt eventually decided to move towards the center of the map instead of Africa.
No one has ever been a serious threat for Wagadu, thus my game was decided.
Unless there's some revolutionary event... I am a stone.
I am quite sure that I shouldn't have been included in the draw if I took some initiatives in the east.

I've been asked about France taking part of the draw.
Preliminary remark: all of this is because he NMRed in the end-game, not because of poor play.
Firstly, there's not a rule stating "attack whoever does not respect the Contract".
I am displeased with anyone who didn't respect the previously-accepted rules, France above all, but this does not darken my brains during the entering orders process.
Of course, as well as Germany, I've evaluated the hypothesis to stab France but:
- this is a gunboat, I can't assume that the other 5-8 players makes a point of honour about people being included or not into a draw without hearing their opinion/intentions on the matter.
- Egypt didn't stab Wagadu, so I had to deal with the latter's breath on my neck.
- France outnumbered me almost 2:1 , not really a good initial position to stab by myself.
- my stab on France could get only 2 SCs out of 15, putting under risk the Mediterranean and the Atlantic line vs Wagadu on my point of view, and something worse (next point)
- the reaction of both France & Germany were unpredictable, a solo could arise among Germany or China.
- the reaction of Wagadu was unpredictable too. Probably he should've left me doing this dirty job without screwing my back... who knows?

So, definitely, we may argue whether France was worth to be a part of the draw or not but...I couldn't nuke France in a couple of years.
I tried to estimate the possible consequences of a stab and I thought: "No, thanks, I'm just sitting here".
The number of complaints directed towards France after the endgame is enough.
Nevertheless, I'd like to hear Scuba's opinion too.

China EOG:

As with many games when I actually do well, there was a heck of a lot of luck involved so I should probably be grateful that I was even around towards the end. I didn't get a lot of love from any of my neighbors the first year (Turan even supported the only neutral I tried to take) so I ended up with a grand total of zero builds during that first winter and I thought I was not long for the game...

Lucky break #1: Arabia seemed to be going after every neighbor at once, especially Turan during the early years while India and Svirijaya decided to go mano a mano as well. Suddenly I had no enemies on my borders and I was able to grab a few neutrals and even take one from Turan to exact a little revenge. India and I quickly became friendly as I joined the fight against Arabia and I suppose I exacted more than my fair share of flesh from Turan while he dutifully was helping to take down the aforementioned Arabia. At about this point Khazaria and I developed a nice working relationship as well (though we botched supporting each other's attacks more often than not).

Lucky break #2: As mentioned India and Svirijaya were definitely keeping each other busy so when I finally got around to building a second fleet to take the neutral island in the China Sea, the latter actually supported my attack. I understand that he was attempting to create an alliance, but with working relationships already established with all my land-neighbors, the natural next area of growth was through the thinly guarded sea lanes to my southwest so he may have assisted in his own demise here. As I kept building fleets and continued to advance, Svirijaya seemed to keep changing his mind whether he was going to put everything against me or India and that only helped me make further advances and eventually overwhelm him.

Lucky break #3: the war against Arabia seemed to drag on just long enough for me to vanquish Svirijaya and then turn my attention back to the land front. For some reason, Khaz was keeping Turan on life support (which was noble I suppose) but since Turan was basically in the way of further expansion, he had to go. Of course now I am starting to smell a solo...but for that to happen I needed Khaz to hold the western front (which he was) and hope that that situation stayed unresolved long enough for me to work my way there as now I had India firmly in the crosshairs.

Bad break #1: Khaz clearly figured out what I was up to (I suppose it wasn't that hard to tell) and sent a rogue unit east to stall my extermination of Turan, probably thinking that he (Khaz) was next on the menu. Actually he wasn't (well at least not immediately next) so I was bummed that our alliance fell apart. It is possible that he slowed me down enough to effectively stop the solo but I wasn't going to give up.

Luck break #4: Just when Khaz was starting to shift forces to the east, Egypt went for the stab and effectively stopped his campaign in my direction, with him out of the picture I was able to take Turan (finally) and race to the SCs between Germany/France and me.

Lucky break #4: in retrospect I probably waited one year too long to stab India, and he might well have handled my incursion much better if not for the sudden appearance of Wagadu on his west coast. Now I was absolutely sure that my solo was "meant to be". With Wagadu causing issues on one side, I was able to fairly easily roll through the India from both the east and north and even kick out Wagadu once I got to him too.

But here's where the luck ran out. Wagadu had a rock solid alliance with the rest of his neighbors and easily set up a naval stalemate line off the east coast of Africa. France and Germany also had a frienship set in stone (and about a million armies between them on our front) so my only real avenue left was to try to sneak up through the Arab peninsula against Egypt. I kept hoping Germany would stab him from behind while I kept him occupied from the front, but it was not meant to be. The writing was on the wall and (once we finally finished off Khaz) the draw was the only viable conclusion.

I have said it already, but it is worth repeating - I truly did enjoy the game and its level of play. Some great players with whom I would love to knock heads again if the opportunity arises. I love games that give me tips for future play and this one certainly brought more than a few. Thanks again to all.

Wagadu EoG.

Well, all there's need to know about my play has been said already, no mistery, so I'll just try to recap main points.
Opening. Rather standard for Wagadu. My thoughts at the end of 901 were for Spain landing in Mauretania and for Axum preventing Egypt to take a neutral SC. If there will be a war between 2 neighbours, I must choose carefully whose side to be on. So in 902 I just took care of a couple of neutrals and setting up defense in the North. In 903 both Egypt's signals and Axum's positioning (he even transformed into a Fleet) made me decide that Axum was an easier target. Also, if there will be a war for Med against Spain & France, then it's better having Egypt as ally. Sorry iLLuM.
Well nothing much happened in the middle of the game. Spain and I found a "dynamic balance" expecially after the fleet I managed to put in Ifriqiya was destroyed because yellow army in Fazzan was committed in making Barca a target for the French and it was too busy to support hold my fleet.
Well what happened in the middle of the game was that I was unable to understand what my ally wanted to do. He builded armies instead of fleets in Barca, so he didn't want to fight for Med (maybe for Sahara?) nor for Balkans. My only consolation is to read on his EoG that he DIDN'T know what to do, that could explain why I did never undersatnd it.
However, as he started his war in Middle-East, I felt safe enough to head towards Indian, since there were nothing to do in the North. And here's my biggest mistake: fighting for some useless Indian SC rather than facing China, who was already one of the biggest on the map and about to grab Srivijaya. When I noticed my mistake it was already too late. Perhaps this game could have been somewhat different.

@ Spain. Sorry mate, but I took your army in Mauretania not good. An Army means you aim to get into my desert. And when I saw you were peaceful with France, I attacked you the best I could because in a Gunboat there's no reason for Spain to have both France & Wagadu as ally. What would be left for you? Sail the Atlantic and grab America? It was either me or France.
@ Egypt. Nice alliance, thank you. Maybe if you were more determined, the game would have been different for us. But yeah, this is very easy to say now.
@ Axum. Sorry friend, c'est la guerre.
@ India. Sorry, ugly mistake by me.
@ China. Good game. Your play is very effective.
@ Drawers: Congrats everybody. :)

@ All. Thanks for the game, it has been a nice gunboat. But it was just a regular gunboat, not a Contract. A Contract is a completely different thing. Those of you who played CG-1 probably noticed the difference. This was not even a "Please finalize quick" gunboat, considering that players were asked to be online AT LEAST twice a day.
I hope we'll have better luck next times.

Ender, thanks for your very insightful EOG comments. You are correct in your thinking that I (Khazaria) was concerned about a solo. And while the rest of the board was apparently too naive to recognize it then (or even now) that is exactly why I sent an unit towards you when I needed it desperately against Germany. That is also why I was propping Turan up. I was hoping (against hope) that someone west and/or south of me could read my actions, and see that I very probably prevented you from soloing, and reward that with a reprived from opportunistic poaching. But dot grabbing was the name of the day, and doing the right thing was punished. But these things happen frequently in gunboat games. Most players don't analyze the entire board in standard games, so without the opportunity to alert people about a solo push, it's a hopeless situation in a gunboat game. The only one who came close to recognizing it was Wagadu, and as I mentioned in my earlier comments he's to be credited for not dot grabbing along the Persian Gulf.

The game was enjoyable regardless, but the 'Contract' concept is nothing more an absurd power mad ego boost for someone who chooses to abitrarily dictate the facts. The concept would function much more effectively if it had 14 less rules and the one left simply asked everyone on their honor to make the game their priority and to sunmit as ready their orders asap. Anyone exploiting the game could be easily reconized and either voted out or banned for future such games. But this mass purging based on one person's (another player in the game) alleged facts and personal gripes is for the birds. Nothing like a little objectivity.

My comments about the Contract.

Some days have passed and all of us can look at it with a cold-minded approach.

First of all thanks to the host because of the time he puts at our disposal.

Second I may say that 10 or 12+ players maps don't fit well the CG idea.
I think we can agree to this statement.

The goal is to have a fast gunboat, so I must say that the set of rules is good.
Once you accept them, you commit yourself to give priority to this game.
All the guys who joined the game are used to log in the website often, almost twice a day.
How much time does it take to enter orders in a gunboat-known-world-901?
10, maybe 15mins if you have 30 units. Be honest guys, not more. Out of 37 hours.
All the rest looks to me like excuses.
During those 38 days, each time I logged in
- I didn't read new PMs
- I didn't check the other game's progressed status
- I didnt read new in-game-messages
- I didn't check the forum
all of this before I spent those few minutes in finalizing the CG_II orders.
That is the meaning of priority.
I'm sure that some other mates behaved like that.

"some other mates" is not enough, though. We need "all mates" in order to let this stuff work.

"I didn't respect the rules completely, my apologies".
Captainmeme said it, I appreciate his fairness. I don't understand why should it be so difficult to behave like that, even in front of the evidence.

The line was drawn by the rules. We all accepted them and promised to observe them. Some of you did not, thus it was you to cross the line, not the host.
As you know, 1 single player delaying is a delay for the whole game, harming the point of the Special-Rule-Game. That's the weak point behind any fast-diplo-game system.
Actually the first years (IIRC the first 4 or 5) of play ran fast. Then some individual violations started a chain-reaction of violations that turned the CG in a standard-non-anon-gunboat.
For this reason, I think that the idea of the single rule "please ready your orders asap" simply can't work.
We need people committed to give priority to the game.

Nevertheless, I may agree with some of you that the "punishment" looks too harsh and actually was the cause that made the discussion unpleasant.
There's no need for those personal conflicts, we're all here for the same goal.
I appeal with the host for a review of the "punishment": please, Guaroz, allow the participation to CG_III to every player of CG_II.
Make CG_III the 2nd (and the last if failed again) chance for those 7 players.

well, I think most of the banned people gave up about the Contract Gunboat

and it sometimes took me longer than that because I go on throughout the day, and often RL makes me have to get off suddenly.

Thanks everybody for your comments on the Contract.
Ender correctly pointed out what "This is an invitational private game" means.
Decima Legio correctly pointed out how a player is asked to behave in this SRG.

Last Fortress Doerr's post is giving me the chance to make a clarification:
"often RL makes me have to get off suddenly."
This happened once to me as well. I sat on my PC thinking I had several minutes for myself, logged in the site, noticed CG was progressed, logged in the game and after 40 seconds that I was looking at the new map and thinking on what to do, they called me and I had to get up and go away so hurry. So I FINALIZED "all hold" (except 1 move). Nothing else I could do. :(
Luckily, when I got back a few hours later, the game wasn't progressed yet and I could put all my orders in. Nowhere in the Contract is said that you can't do this, because it's supposed it takes only a few minutes to you. It's said that you can't log out the game without finalizing, but you can re-log in and make changes: it should be a matter of seconds.

I don't think it happened that "often" to FD. Yes he broke the Contract sometimes, but it was BELOW the limit. Except for DL and Spartan22, everybody broke the Contract at least once in CG-II, just with rather different degrees.

But yes, if someone's RL makes him have to OFTEN get off suddenly, then this is simply not the game for him.
This is not a SRG that can meet everyone's RL. This is not a game for all. The sense of the few lines posted right above the Contract is that anyone interested in this SRG has to judge HIMSELF, his own vDip-use style and how his own RL can affect it, before anyone else does it.

This (judging oneself) may not be simple to do and that's why noone got banned forever after only 1 bad game. Everybody's got a second chance (even who completely ignored the Contract) either to improve his compliance to the Contract (I'm always avaliable to help and advise), or to realize that this is not the right SRG for him.
There would be nothing wrong with not getting it at first attempt: RL is complex and someone may need more time than others to get it.

But DL is right: the Contract works only if ALL players, with no exceptions, comply it. That's why the penalties may look "harsh".
Nine players played CG-I with just 8 not-big infractions and everybody kept himself far enough below the limit. So this is not an impossible Contract.
That's why the penalty-system: "First time, out 1 turn - Second time, out forever" STAYS ON for the next games.

At last, for the game that has just finished, and ONLY FOR THIS TIME :


.................... - - - GENERAL AMNESTY ACT - - - .................

- This CG-II gives no penalties to anyone.
- Plus, all players re-start from zero. No "forever-banning" for any of the seven, in case. Hence, all vDip users who meet RR requirements are invited for the next CG-III and everybody will still have 2 chances, as if that was their first CG.
.........................................................................................................

See you soon!
G.

wise decision, I appreciate that.
"see you soon" when? Is CG-III scheduled some day?

Whenever it is, I'm interested :)

Yes, within a couple of days. Maybe tomorrow.