Winter 1903 - Sultan Dark Replica of Turkey has be discovered to be in active rebellion against the king and his loyal subjects. The Sultan has suffered the ultimate penalty, and has been put to death. He is further attainted and his lands have been divided among the King's loyal subjects. Long live the King!

"When the Lamb opened the fourth seal, I heard the voice of the fourth living creature say, 'Come!' I looked, and there before me was a pale horse! Its rider was named Death, and Hades was following close behind him. They were given power over a fourth of the earth to kill by sword, famine and plague, and by the wild beasts of the earth." - Revelation 6:7-8

Winter 1904 - King Steephie22 of Italy has been found to be taking part in an open rebellion against the Kaiser and his loyal subjects. The King Steephie has been captured and his lands and property now under control of others. Through his brief rule, King Steephie was shown to be untrustworthy and attempted to be guised as a knight and traitor before being revealed as a rebel. Thus, the former king will be kept in a prison where everything changes. In each cell the temperature, the place the water drops fall, the cleanliness of the cots, and everything else will change. The King will be moved from cell to cell at random intervals for the rest of his life, never being able to take anything for granted.

Emperor Battalion of Germany has been found to be taking part in an active rebellion against the Kaiser and his loyal subjects. The Emperor has been captured and his lands distributed among the loyal subjects to the crown. The Kaiser was impressed with Emperor Battalion's military and diplomatic ability during the war, and has exiled him to a small farm to live out the eternity of his days. The farm is kept under guard. Any visitors to the farm, albeit very few are allowed to visit, are allowed to order the former emperor about. The orders cannot be questioned or debated. All of the books on the farm and any delivered to the farm have mislabeled bindings.

Long live the Kaiser!

Winter 1904 - Upon elimination Germany and Italy are confirmed to be rebels.

Winter 1906 - With Austria's pending elimination the Traitor is dead. The game is over. All remaining players should please vote DRAW after Winter 1906 processes and AUstria is officially eliminated. Congratulations to the King and this knights. Long live the King!

"I looked, and there before me was a white horse! Its rider held a bow, and he was given a crown, and he rode out as a conqueror bent on conquest." - Revelation 6:2

It was a pleasure, everyone.

Let's debrief. Where to start?

Tactics that worked and that didn't.

I suppose the first major thing to dicuss - did the rebels choose the best time to rebel?

Two rebels and a traitor next to the king. I can't say I think you did.

The first issue there is that we had no way of knowing who the rebel was, especially given that he continued to fight the rebels even after the balance between sides was destroyed. As a result we could only base our decisions upon the other rebels whom we knew. Don't forget, however, that the traitor would not have wanted your death even if we had been able to identify him. Even so, had we known we might have been able to play it differently.

We should use country or role names to be clear. For instance:

1. As the king, I liked to know what moves a person was going to do. I choose one (arbitrarily or with purpose) ask the player to change it. The reaction shows a great deal. Resistant players were identified as rebels. Similarly, with builds.
2. As king, claim SC's and see who argues with you.
3. Anyone who shares moves of opponents can generally be trusted. In my case, Austria shared some moves from Turkey and I was able to discern both Italy and Turkey as rebels from almost year one.

I am intrigued to know at what stage you knew the identities of Italy, England, and France. I obvioulsy know the stage at which you knew for sure my allegiances, but when were your suspicions about me aroused?

I'd like some feedback on my play as the traitor. It was incredibly dangerous, and the quick advances of France threw everything off for me.

Batallion/Germany/Rebel
I believed you were a knight until you started disregarding orders or explaining your way out of them. Boy, was there a lot of explaining! It was good logic, but the resistance irritated me. It was less about logic and more about loyalty. Multiple rounds of this led to me outing you in global.

Contrast this with England and France, both knights, who would do what I asked without much back and forth and had full disclosure of moves (France).

Chaqa/Austria/Traitor
You were amazing. From the beginning when you shared the Italian message egging you and Turkey on to all the other bits of information, it was marvelous. I was blindsided when your attack came. Of the remaining players I had the least doubts of your loyalty. My final plan was to ask the traitor to confess in global and go around eating up SC's until the traitor flinched. You flinched early and everyone jumped on you.

If I were to suggest a different tactic, going after me with the help of Turkey and Germany might have helped once their role was determined. For instance, the Livonia advance by Germany. When I expressed concern about a convoy attack, say you don't think it likely and compliment Germany on the position to set up a convoy.

Italy was pretty much the first year. Considering England and France as knights was not until the German attack, and confirmed with the Austrian attack.

Italy/Rebel was the first year as a result of a message Austria/Traitor shared with me. The attack of Turkey/rebel made things easier.

I also had a problem accepting the possibility that I could have two rebels and a traitor as a neighbor. Or three rebels.

Here's the notes I kept from the game: I've cleaned it up as best I can. If you see a (*text text text*) it's me explaining what some notes mean.
----------------
Spring, 1898: France and Italy directly and promptly said they were knights. Good?
Spring, 1898: Italy . . . oddly aggressive.
Spring, 1898: Italy is a stinking rebel, according to a shared chat from Austria that matches his diction.
England claims to be a knight, but so did Turkey.
Germany: Almost definite knight.
Austria: Knight?
So . . . Who's the traitor?

Autumn, 1898: Austria & Germany: Knight, but for how long?
Italy and Turkey: Rebels.
France and England: Claimed Knights. Which one is a rebel?

Autumn, 1899: England has followed all orders. France. . .the same. Both seem to honestly answer questions. England sacrificed a build rather than engage.

Autumn, 1899: (To: Austria, from Italy) - Spring, 1898: Hi. I think I have good news for you; I'm a rebel, and I'm pretty sure you and Turkey are too. Russia is pretty sure you and Turkey are rebels but he thinks I'm a knight. Because of that, I'm able to convince him to stand and fight instead of run away, because he thinks he has my support.

So all you and Turkey have to do is close in on him by moving to Rumania and Armenia, if Russia bounces in Rumania, which I expect, Budapest can move to Serbia in fall to get a build anyway while Russia probably still moves to Rumania, and Turkey takes Sevastopol. Then Russia can be killed the year after. Sounds good?

Autumn, 1900: Germany, Austria, England all readied up at my request.

France, Italy, Turkey did not. Connection?

Spring, 1901: Germany-> Traitor? Very resistant to delaying a build.
Spring, 1901: France is more rebel now.
Spring, 1901: Or is it England, for being online consistently with Italy and Germany?

Autumn, 1901: Italy claims being traitor. Fits with the psychology, but not with Germany. (*This was after a series of moves together.*)
Autumn, 1901: "The King: Survive and kill all Rebels AND the Traitor
The Knights: Kill all Rebels AND the Traitor. Keep the King alive.
Rebels: Kill the King (without the only survivor being a Traitor).
Traitor: Death of ALL other players. Even other Traitors.

The game ends when the King is killed, or when all of the Rebels and Traitors are killed."

Spring, 1902: Other King games:
gameID=16418
gameID=16438
gameID=16544

Spring, 1903: Germany, Italy, Turkey -> Rebels/Traitor
Austria -> Knight
France, England -> Knight/Traitor

Autumn, 1903: France--> messed up supports and moves in A 1903 (traitor?)

Spring, 1904: Turkey: Confirmed rebel.

Autumn, 1904: The rebels have been defeated. This means there is a traitor among us. We can do this the easy way or the hard way. Easy: Traitor fesses up or attacks. You'll last longer than with the hard way. Hard: I will send units out to take over your home SC's one by one. The first one to flinch gets killed. (*This was a drafted global message.*)
Autumn, 1904: Austria -> Traitor.
Autumn, 1904: Budapest, Bulgaria, Greece, Serbia. Home SC's for Austria.

Just wondering: is there no way for the traitors to survive under your "hard way"?

In all honesty, I think Austria/traitor messed up. He made everything way too clear way too early. I knew you were a traitor, for example because you said I could have Trieste and you bounced me...

I think you should have done anything BUT tell Russia that message Russia/king posted above.

I understand though. A traitor is in serious shit anyway.

Under the hard way, I keep getting stronger and take home SC's. If you rebel, I'm already behind your lines. So no, there's no way to survive. But if you fight early, you'll have more resources and a better defense.

Italy/Rebel your opinion is noted, but Austria/Traitor did a wonderful job getting my trust. Even if he hadn't told me, I'd still have known both the identity of you and Turkey that year, only I'd be in a far weaker position. The way he chose allowed us both to get stronger.

Global message for help, people pounce. Austria would probably be one of them.

Russia/King, I followed orders to the letter up until the tipping point in the game came - you were growing too quickly, and Italy and Turkey/rebel were shrinking faster than I could grow. Therefore, I had to strike fast and this required all the builds that I could get before the rebels' combined size became too small. I tried my best to play England/knight off against France/knight (thinking that he was the rebel), but this quite obviously failed (probably because I was already suspected by this point).

This leads me nicely onto the discussion about the traitor. My opinion is that Austria/traitor could not have asked for a better position - he needed to be between knights/the King and rebels where he would be able to manage the balance of power and that is exactly what he got. However, because he continued to pose as a knight for so long, I had discounted him as the rebel - the rebel would find no advantage in attacking the rebels while the King and knights grow strong, or he will find himself in the position where he is going to be hunted by everyone else on the map (as he did). I was so sure that, once I had established France as a knight (long before the King had), I was absolutely certain that it was England that was the rebel, and berrated him many times about his poor tactics (which I can only think he must have found amusing!).

What I believe Austria/traitor should have done is as is described on the original forum - as soon as the rebels have been identified and begin to attack, you should manage the balance of power between the two sides and slowly grow. The traitor remains safe because everyone else must focus resources on the opposition. You should definitely have attacked the King/Russia much sooner than you did once it became apparent that the knights were gaining control, and you may have been able to maintain the power balance whilst exploiting Russia's trust in you.

Germany/Rebel
You did follow orders to the letter, and my notes give you great credit for it. You even had Austria convinced.

How do people think I did as king?

Too good to be honest. You picked out the rebels real quick. Part of that is my fault.

I'd be interested in playing another, maybe with anonymous users!

I'd be interested in playing an anonymous game too, although I feel that people will be identifiable by their language. Regardless, it sounds like it would be fun.

As for the King, you got lucky...

That is why I talked about the penalty on the King for slaying his own knights. This will give the game a bit more balance and prevent the King from attempting to wipe out everyone else to win (although Hawkeye you were not exactly doing that).

Hey, one of the other games, the king lost.

I think we should try a different variant, with more players.

I propose Europe 1939 with the following rule changes:
- The King is still known
- 2 knights
- 3 rebels
- 2 traitors

Traitors are informed about all other players' status at the beginning of the game.

For king & knights to win: eliminate rebels, and both traitors, without the king dying
For rebels to win: eliminate the king and his knights, and both traitors, with at least one rebel surviving
For traitor to win: eliminate all other players (including the other traitor)

There is no "king must die before rebels" rule.

Europe 1939 would be a good map because it is fairly balanced and has an extra player.

Who likes this idea? Also, everything would be anonymous.

Yea I was among those who overthrew the tyrant - but we got England as King, with Germany, Russia and Italy as rebels, plus delayed action from the traitor Turkey lol

i am game for the revised version

I want to amend the rule of the knights to say "and protect the king." Otherwise, it's unfair. Yes, the king shouldn't die, but the rebels are going to try and kill them anyways. They should be able to put up a fight.

That's why the rebels should not be required to kill the knights as well.

I think they should, but as long as it is consistent.

Otherwise, just rush the king.

Clarifying. If I don't have to kill the knights, I'll just rush the king.

I maintain that the rebels should only have to kill the King - it makes sense logically, or the knights aren't really any different to the King. It also makes sense because, at least to begin with, the King has the huge advantage that the rebels do not know who everyone else is, and everyone will want to remain in good terms with the King. Rushing the King is rarely going to be an option because, as with our game, it would normally just leave you exposed to attack from the knights.

I quite like the idea that traitors are told everyone's identity, but only really as a variant - I am not sure that it would be best to make them the 'normal' rules. I'm happy to give it a go though (and then we would be in a much better position to decide!).

Right, you can't really rush the King successfully unless you are not alone and you got significantly more units than the King, and you still have to hope that the knight is not next doors.

So, we agree to try a revised variant for testing? I can set up the game, I just need someone (I guess Ruffhaus?) to moderate it and assign players.

I'm game for the revised variant as explained above.

To be clear though, what if the king, rebels and one traitor died? So only knights and a traitor? Traitor wins? I think he deserves it at that point, and no one else can win...

I'd like to take a break, so you'll need another player.

Yeah, with the game as england as the king I was screwed as a Knight, I had no way to help.

gameID=17263

PM me for password.

Why PM me the game but not the password? :P