I'll play if you change it to PPSC. There are some nations cannot win in Rin. PPSC is the only fair way to play that variant.

me too, but agreed on PPSC for that variant ... I like it though, but I cant start until Mon March 30

PPSC has nothing to do with playing that game. When you accept PPSC you are suggesting that you're going to allow someone to solo, and you're okay with it as long as you get points. That's not Diplomacy. The fun of the Rinascimento variant is that it is a huge challenge to survive as the smaller nations or the nations that start with no supply centers. And perhaps very unlikely to win with these powers, but it's not impossible. Playing the game PPSC just takes a difficult situation and make the game into a mess. PPSC makes the game about points rather than the challenge. To say you like this map, but only a PPSC is to admit that you're nothing more than a point whore.

Oh, come on Ruffhaus, not here and not again please.
You are definitely victim of an obsession.
This is my thread where I am trying to gather 12 players for some Rinascimento fun.
I don't want this to become another "Ruffhaus has the greater Diplo-dick" thread.
Can you realize that you're off-topic sometimes, can't you?

As well as most of the people here, I am elastic enough to adapt my gameplay accordingly to the settings.
For what it's worth I'll let the majority decide for that, so I would encourage the interested players to cast their vote for PPSC or WTA.

I may also encourage you to enlist, Ruffhaus.
I'll be sincerely honoured to have you in as a player, instead of having to quarrel with you on the forum.

Updated list

1 – Decima Legio, WTA
2 – YCHTT, PPSC
3 – Rancher, PPSC
4 –
5 –
6 –
7 –
8 –
9 –
10 –
11 –
12 –

Rancher, I'm fine to start in a few weeks.
Let's say the game will begin on sat 04 April

My "real" diplomacy skills are both rusty and almost non-existent.. I never played a non-gunboat game on this site. But I might give it a try. Count me in.
Btw, no opinion on the PPSC/WTA debate

Saturday the 4th is my wife's birthday and the middle of holy week (the Saturday between Good Friday and Easter Sunday). If we push it to Monday the 6th (just two extra days) it would probably be better for some (well, me at least).

And the only reason I say PPSC is because of the specific scenario. It even scores differently and isn't included in the stats for just that reason. But it is a fun scenario.

Nice to have you in diatarn.

YCHTT, agreed, Monday 06 April is fine.

1 – Decima Legio, WTA
2 – YCHTT, PPSC
3 – Rancher, PPSC
4 – diatarn_iv, indifferent
5 –
6 –
7 –
8 –
9 –
10 –
11 –
12 –

I'm with Youcanthandlethetruth: PPSC is not only needed for making sense of most starting positions, which have about zero possibilities of winning, but I recently discovered that it's also good medicine against drawers, because (lo!) you can sometimes get better score "losing in survival" than "losing in a mass draw of mad losers". For a real soloist drawing or surviving or being eliminated is just losing and PPSC ironically offers negotiation avenues for alternative options to the draw/win-lose dichotomy, allowing for extended play and possible victories instead of the unavoidable 3 or 4 way draw that happens when Venice grows too large and everybody else rallies against him.

In brief: PPSC harms drawers rather than soloists, so it's not worse than WTA. And in the case of Rinascimento, if you want some other formula, you need to redesign that variant, so there is not a 0-4 initial imbalance in favor of Venice but something more in the 2-4 range or 3-4 or something like that. I have some drafts if someone is interested btw.

Hence: get me in if PPSC, else I pass.

Yes, again, and yes here. I was tempted to play, and that's why I posted in objections to the latest nitwittery espoused by YouCantHandleTheTruth on this variant needing the PPSC setting. This myth continues to be spun about concerning
Rinascimento because people cannot wrap their heads around the concept of playing the game the way it is meant to be played. I'm talking about both Rinascimento specifically, and Diplomacy in general.

The notion that some nations cannot win is simply a lie. The idea that Napoli and Venice are the only nations that can win is likewise untrue. Yes, these nations begin the game with more supply centers. And so what? If people could get beyond the overly simplistic concept of dot counting, and dot-grabbing, and focus on trying to play the game (again both variant and basic rules set) this would be a blast to play, and players just *might* actually learn something about how to stop a solo even when you are down to one or two units. Instead the majority of these games fall prey to the warped logic of dot-grabbing jealousy and points-whoring, and players simply accept that Napoli or Venice will will, and look to score as many points as they can in *losing*. All this behavior does is reinforce bad Diplomacy habits.

Rinascimento begins with two nations making solo runs, and contrary to popular opinion, it is Napoli and Venice who are in poor starting positions because everyone *should* be focuse on denying them growth as opposed to grabbing up supply centers and accepting defeat from the first turn. Playing this under a PPSC assures that there will be no grand alliance, and only plays into the hands of Naploi and Venice.

If PPSC reduces the number of scripted draws, which I agree with Luis Aldamiz is a viral plague, then it only serves to deliver scripted solos. Draws should be the common result because solos should be rare. The root cause if this is the points in the first place. We have a community full of players additcted to points and unwilling to risk going for a solo, which leads to premature draws, scripted draws, and games where no one actually tries to win. Most games are played to the point where all the rookies, NMR addicts, and multi-accounters bail out and then a draw is called so that all remaining players make a points profit.

Anyway, I am not truing to derail your recruiting. I want to play, but only WTA games. PPSC is a plague, and its even worse with Rinascimento. IF the popular vote is for PPSC, that's fine, but I'm not going to allow the myth/lie to go unchallenged.

Well since you ask it, I vote for PPSC, but I also think I can adapt my gameplay accordingly to the settings, so I don't mind if it will be different.
What I love here are the wisely-chosen high-quality RR & NMR settings, which are uncommon on a 12-players map. Those are the settings that make the fun, please count me in!

1 – Decima Legio, WTA
2 – YCHTT, PPSC
3 – Rancher, PPSC
4 – diatarn_iv, indifferent
5 – Guaroz, PPSC
6 –
7 –
8 –
9 –
10 –
11 –
12 –

Starting April 6 is good, but frankly because of a college visit I have for my son that day, starting Tuesday April 7 would be a touch better for me ...

wow, first off, I am not playing but I had to say wow when I agreed 100% with Ruffhaus. PPSC is a bit of a sham and really does warp how the game is played in a bad way. And if I read this right... full press means no one to one communication?

I do not personally like this type of game but I can certainly see how it could be fun to play around with! I know everyone has different likes and I can understand the fun to be had with this if played right. That being said however, I don't know if a game that is so hard to be won by any but two top powers is a good one to play in this manner? Talk about playing for points, where is the fun in the press for such a game?

I would say this particular variant should be played as meant to be played or you simply do it a terrible injustice and reward the larger more favorable nations in a tremendous way. If you want to play full press, then a better balanced game is certainly a better idea without a doubt.

and Rancher...what college are you visiting?

Visiting Carnegie Mellon in Pittsburgh (we're in Columbus so not a bad trip). He's great in math and computer science with excellent test scores, so he's got a fighting chance there and some other places.

I'll play this game WTA or PPSC, doesn't matter ... this is currently the only variant that I prefer PPSC , though as I always point out, the real board game is neither WTA or PPSC, no points are involved at all

@Ruffhaus8: "The idea that Napoli and Venice are the only nations that can win is likewise untrue".

Actually I think that Naples is relatively balanced: Turkey can carve it nicely with some ease if he plays properly (I've done it and then was forced to accept a draw when I was just getting started). IMO the main issue is Venice and how some other players do not understand the Venetian threat. Milan would be playable... but typically ends up being eaten by Savoy-Venice or (more rarely) France-Venice. Genoa, Firenze and the Pope, as well as Savoy are clearly playable. Even Ferrara has some hopes (but almost never Siena, nor Pisa, nor France). But even those "lesser powers" doing well initially, they eventually face a reality in which Venice has gone wild and there's little to do but force a draw.

I think that the concept is nice but that the game would greatly benefit from a rebalancing, including some historical issues like borders and the location of Trento, and the non-existence of Pisa as independent state by that time (Siena could be an armed neutral for all I care), the non-presence of Turks in the area (not yet) and instead emphasizing the French-Aragonese conflict around Naples. In any case I would not make any power starting with less than 2 centers, much less in a horrible position like those of Siena or France, keep the ratio of initial inequality at 2-4 (at most: 3-4 or 3-5 is surely better) and making sure that Venice has some sort of rival, for example by enhancing Milano and Ferrara (would actually be Ferrara-Modena).

My two cents.

fyi, Diplomacy (I assume Rinascimento is only a simple variant) is most certainly WTA.
The game is designed to have one winner and a bunch of losers (no second place and it spells out if a draw is achieved all survivors share equally in that draw further emphasizing one winner and all others being losers it also points out the goal is to win or to at least stop a win). While no "points" are awarded in the game, the "win" goes to only one, therefore it follows that all points (if given) would go to the winner.
Simply pointing out how no points exist in the standard game is more than a bit misleading to say the least, winner take all is absolutely the way the game was designed to be played and anything else is a bastardization of the design, PPSC is in fact just that, a bastardization of the game itself! (points or not)

oh, and it further points out how a draw is strived for since all players share equal in that draw. A one center survivor is the same as a 15 center survivor. PPSC does not do this! Points shmoints, the game was never designed to be played PPSC! (ok, enough hijacking the game thread, sorry about that)

Tom, the problem is in your assumption. Rinascimento is not like other variants. There are independent nations the size of a small island nation going up against nations big enough to swallow then in a year. These little nations' only saving grace is that they usually have 2 or 3 of this supernations surrounding them so they can negotiate for their survival or even partake in a draw, but they will never ever win. As such, the scoring of the game has been specially modified to take into account a given nation's starting size and position and reward them based on performance. Right now, I'm playing in a game where my small 8 SC nation pays nearly equally for a 5 way draw as it does for a survive if the four of us concede to the big nation. The interesting thing is there are two very large nations that outsize the other three combined and my nation is second smallest on the board. Even more interesting is the largerlst of the three small nations gets less from a survive than I do.

So you can see how your assumption in this instance is incorrect. Generally, I agree and only play WTA, but this variant would mean some nations have two choices, draw or no points because they simply cannot win.

And no, full press means full press. You'really thinking public press only. Full press is public and private. I thought you had played on the judges? The same terminology is used there with the addition of white, grey, and black for individual press types (like faking press from other nations).

if you can still write individual notes, then what I said would not apply. Public press only would be just horrible for such an unbalanced game and would benefit the larger powers too much. and no, I never played on any judges, the (now two) games i played here are the only games that have been automated ever. All of my games have been human moderated (so forgive me for not understanding)

Starts on 07 April.

1 – Decima Legio, WTA
2 – YCHTT, PPSC
3 – Rancher, PPSC
4 – diatarn_iv, indifferent
5 – Guaroz, PPSC
6 – Luis Aldamiz, PPSC
7 –
8 –
9 –
10 –
11 –
12 –

Tom, Ruff, you guys are going to play or not?

Per my initial reply:
"first off, I am not playing..."
sorry, I am taking an extended break once the current sealanes game is over

No problem, Tom. I didn't realize you had previously been a pure F2F player.

I'd love to play a game along side you sometime. I started in Dip back in the late 70s when I was roughly 12. Learned early that you can't trust your own dad not to lie in a game of Dip. :-)

YCHTT knows this per our Cincy discussions over many years, but I am also a FTF player since about 1980 ... most of my Dip playing has been FTF except for the last 5 years when I found these sites ... I do thin Rinasc is kind of an exception on the variants as far as PPSC, but I'll play either way

Yeah, we need to get a Cincy F2F going some day at YottaQuest (the owners fiance is family to a close friend and we've gotten to know each other at graduation parties and funerals and such).

Decima Legio, I am only playing WTA games from here forward. That's what drew my interest to this thread. Thank you for asking (again) If you cannot get a WTA game going, I will pass.

PPSC destroys the dynamic of the game, standard 7 player or variant play. Rinascimento is a variant with atypical starting positions, but the 'imbalance' is not necessarily as commonly portrayed. The game was designed by the creator to begin with these so called favorites, and to explore how players would react to the scenario. If you convert this variant to PPSC, you almost assure that there will be a solo because point chasing players have an incentive to see it that way.

Those who do not want the challenges of Rinascimento would probably prefer a variant on this map with reconfigured (and equivalent) starting positions. And that would be fun to play too if someone was able to create a derivative variant.

Ok thanks for the clarification. I'll keep you on the list just in case WTA becomes majority

Starts on 07 April.

1 – Decima Legio, WTA
2 – YCHTT, PPSC
3 – Rancher, PPSC
4 – diatarn_iv, indifferent
5 – Guaroz, PPSC
6 – Luis Aldamiz, PPSC
7 – Ruffhaus8, WTA
8 –
9 –
10 –
11 –
12 –