...
24 Oct 13 UTC |
Spring, 1701: (taylor4): 16436 game ID |
24 Oct 13 UTC |
Spring, 1701: (Phil1986): ? |
25 Oct 13 UTC |
Spring, 1701: (taylor4): ! ! |
25 Oct 13 UTC |
Spring, 1701: (Phil1986): # |
29 Oct 13 UTC |
Spring, 1701: (taylor4): << |
29 Oct 13 UTC |
Spring, 1701: (Phil1986): $$$ |
29 Oct 13 UTC |
Spring, 1701: (caliburdeath): (%) |
30 Oct 13 UTC |
Spring, 1701: (Phil1986): ^ |
31 Oct 13 UTC |
Spring, 1701: (Joe1966): Indeed |
31 Oct 13 UTC |
Spring, 1701: (Phil1986): True dat |
31 Oct 13 UTC |
Spring, 1701: (taylor4): 3 2 go |
01 Nov 13 UTC |
Spring, 1701: Silesia baffles me. |
01 Nov 13 UTC |
Spring, 1701: How so? |
01 Nov 13 UTC |
Spring, 1701: In this as some other Dip Game Variants, some (or all) start with more forces than SCs, or -- more SCs than units & are thus compelled by the game designer to make an initial gain. |
01 Nov 13 UTC |
Spring, 1701: I am all for that kind of thing, but the juxtaposition of that and silesia's indefensible position strikes me as quite silly. |
01 Nov 13 UTC |
Spring, 1701: Seems historically accurate. |
03 Nov 13 UTC |
Autumn, 1701: Well if historic accuracy is aimed then I am screwed. |
03 Nov 13 UTC |
Autumn, 1701: But Poland didn't fall until late in the 18th century. |
04 Nov 13 UTC |
Autumn, 1701: Actually we would be just in time fot Great Northern War, which would mean my and Sweden's loss, and Russia and Prussia's rise if I remember correctly(?). |
04 Nov 13 UTC |
Autumn, 1701: Actually Prussia wasn't active in that war. But the rest is correct. |
...