Variants

[RuHurt]

Hey, just thought I'd put this out here for input.

I've been thinking of designing a Dip variant, taking place during WWII. So, I thought I'd put this question to all you Dip fans out there: What changes, if any, should be made to the rules, and/or the map? Obviously the map should be one of Europe during that period, but I'm looking for any ideas others may have for the game, just to start a discussion.

[Edi Birsan]

The design of a WW2 game requires some approach problems...
1. How many players?
Germany, France, Italy, UK, Russia, Japan, US
or do you combine some
2. The basic core of Diplomacy game mechanics is a
written set of orders and no dice or cards, therefore there has to be a reasonable limitation on the number of pieces around. In Standard Dip, the total pieces are 34 on the board or about 5 average for 7 players .

3. Features of WW2 are planes and subs and tanks..
so you might want to have:
an Armored Army, that could move say 2 and attack with a force of 2 but which would take 2 centers to support it.
an Air Army that could co=exist with another piece and give that force a +1, however it would be destroyed if the host force was dislodged. AGain the Air Army would take 1 center to support but it could not operate alone. It could move say 2 to get to a host.
a Sub Fleet should be able to move through a sea province without being blocked but could not take a coastal province. In short it could only act against other fleets.

These pieces would give a feel for WW2 while at the same time staying within the structure of Diplomacy.

Edi Birsan

wwww.DiplomaticCorps.org

[David E. Cohen]

Before you go too far with your design, you might want to check out the Variant Bank, which has hundreds of variants for review, and/or get involved in one of the variant discussion groups around. The two most active ones that I am aware of are the Diplomacy Variant Workshop yahoogroup, and the variant discussion forum in the Redscape community.

[RuHurt]

Ok, couple points:

1: I think the best way to handle tanks, planes, and subs will be to have muliple SCs in each territory, each one providing the ability to build a specific type of unit (namely, fleets, subs, armies, tanks, and planes). I think this will provide more simplicity than uniform SCs, used to build all unit types. (Oh, and as for Luftwaffe; I don't own that game, and in fact have never even played it smile.gif

2: The game will probably start in 1939, and for the little countries (i.e. Bulgaria, Poland, Belgium, etc.) they will likely have one unit that will automatically hold, and cannot attack. They can be supported by the "real" countries, but otherwise are considered to be in "civil disorder."

3: Terrain, and weather would be very hard to simulate in the game, without adding in another level of complexity. I will consider it, but that is a matter I think best left until the simpler components are decided.

4: Oh, better say this now; I only planned on placing the game (at any rate the first one, depending on how succesful it is) in Europe and north Africa.

5: Ok, number of players: I am considering having Germany and Italy played by the same player, since Italian strategy during the war was almost totally controlled by Germany. I also planned on leaving out the United States. Now, before any cries of outrage arise, let me give my reasons. In the first place, the U.S. didn't enter the officially until 1942, and may not have attacked Germany at all if Germany hadn't declared war first. The U.S. was, however, supplying Britain greatly before 1942, so I propose reprsenting the U.S. by adding SCs in certain ocean spaces, that will grant Britain more units, and can be destroyed by enemy powers. Therefore, the number of players would be 4; Germany and Italy, France, Britain, and Russia.

6: The basic game mechanics from original Diplomacy would stay the same (written, simultaneous orders, support (different units may grant more support), bounces, etc.

I appreciate everyone's ideas on this subject, and look forward to seeing more.

[RuHurt]

Well, I've almost finished the map, but before I put the final touches on, I wanted to get some player's opinions.

1: Should Switzerland be impassable, or not? I'm thinking yes, simply because any country that tried to attack it would probably fail, and in any case, the odds of anyone attacking Switzerland were low.

2: Which neutral countries should have defending (albeit, only holding) armies?

3: Should Turkey be a player power, or not? And, if not, should it be impassable?

That's all that come to mind at the moment, and I'll be sure to post any more that I think of.

[simply4est]

It's always been tricky for players wanting Dip variants to find the right era/environment for them. I think WWII is very difficult to fit the Dip mold. I remember the old AH tried it with Origins of WWII, and it didn't seem to hold well with gamers, although I've never tried it myself.

I think the best one that is closest to the original Dip so far is Colonial Diplomacy. It doesn't have great balance, but plays well and fits well with era. Machivelli was a great extension of the Dip adding on Garrisons, Bribes, and an extra season per year.

[RuHurt]

Quote:

2.Some Nations should be represented by a 'Hold' unit. Others should have a considerable unit for their 'effects' that they contributed to either side's War effort. The ones to maybe consider for a 'Hold' types are: Belgium; the Netherlands; Denmark; Norway; Portugal; Albania; Sweden; the Baltic States; Bulgaria. Some of the 'others' should have an 'Active' unit for use with their 'allies' such as: Finland; Rumania; Hungary; Spain; Turkey; Yugoslavia; Greece; Poland; Italy.

Mostly, I agree with those choices. A few, however, I think should not have any units defending, simply because they were defeated so fast that it would be inaccurate to give them much of any defense. The ones I have in mind when I say that are Denmark, Albania, Holland, and the Baltic states.

Also, your idea for the other powers (i.e. Turkey, Spain, Italy) would raise the problem of deciding which major power starts with that country as its ally. There's probably a way to solve that, but I'm not quite sure how.