- 1829 [PB:1980]
- Hartland Trefoil's game about railways.
- 1885 (1) [MB:Jun80]
- Fred C. Davis' popular 9 man game, having Sweden
and Spain as the new great powers, and additional SCs in Iceland, Ireland,
Morocco, and Switzerland. Russia is somewhat weakened, even in 1885-II. See
- 1914 O Jogo da Diplomacia (1) [MN:Dec92]
- The Brazilian version of
Diplomacy. See also Brazilian Variant and
Grow. See Variant (KW).
- 1958 DIPLOMACY (1) [MN:Apr92]
- The first version of Diplomacy to be commercially distributed.
Allan Calhamer paid for 500 sets to be made and
sold them through small ads. None of the people who were involved with the
setting up of Diplomacy fandom in the early 1960's were aware of the existence
of this game -- they had all found Diplomacy through the 1959 and 1962 releases
which were a significant revision to the 1958 game. (There is no distinction
between the 1959 and 1962 games). Diplomacy fans were not aware of their
favourite game's older relative until Rod Walker reprinted the rules in an
one-off publication, _Quarmill_, in 1971.
There are a number of differences between 1958 Diplomacy and the Diplomacy
game of today. The main differences are in (1) Build Rules, (2) Convoy Rules
and (3) the map. In addition minor differences are that the
was allowed and the rules for games with less than 7 players are different.
A player may only build armies in his "capital" and fleets in his "naval
base". Players may have more than one unit in these provinces, although
multiple units does not increase your defensive strength - they have a total
defensive value of one. These stacked units may not support each other nor
support the same unit outside the stacked province. If a player loses his
capital he may designate one of his other home supply centres as a new Capital,
where he may build armies. However if you lose your naval base then you can
only build new fleets if you recapture it.
There are no convoy rules. Instead an army and fleet may combine to form
a stacked A/F under certain circumstances. This A/F unit then moves as a
normal fleet unit. If the A/F fleet unit is in a coastal province then the
Army may attempt to disembark.
Tunis is not a supply centre, but Switzerland and Albania are. Home
supply centres in Germany and Turkey are different and there are more provinces
on the board.
The 1958 game is inferior to the 1959 revision as it is neither as dynamic
nor as flexible as the modern game. It takes longer to play to completion
because there are no quick convoys and there are more provinces. However, this
hasn't prevented a number of enthusiastic variant fans from playing in several
There are actually two different forms of the 1958 game, because the
released version had an error on the map -- one of the provinces was omitted.
There is also an earlier version, the 1953 game which has several differences
in the map; but this was never distributed.
1958 Diplomacy is sometimes called Classic Diplomacy.
See Variant (KW).
[SS:Dec02]I happened to notice that the description of 1958 Diplomacy
in A-Z is incorrect. The 1958 version was only a prototype. It is true that the
1958 edition had different rules and map. But the first set that Calhammer
published on his own in a batch of 500 sets was the 1959 edition, which used the
same map still used today. You can find more details on the 1958 and 1959
editions (and much more) in the
Diplomacy Boardgame Compendium.
- 1958 DIPLOMACY (2) [RW:Jun07]
- The one-shot giving the rules/map for Calhamer's prototype was Quarmal, not
Quarmill. The place in question was a city in Nehwon (I also produced a
Lankhmar, another city, same world). Now, Nehwon was originally the setting of
a board game designed by Fritz Leiber and a friend of his. This was played by
a number of his circle, including Jerry Pournelle and Dan Alderson (about whom
more later). Leiber then wrote a number of stories and at least 1 novel set in
Nehwon, relating the fantastic and also hilarious the adventures of Fafhrd and
the Grey Mouser (2 halves of a complete hero). Some of the best reading I've
ever come across. Anyway, now Nehwon is the setting of a role-playing game --
having thus come full circle.
Speaking of going in circles ... the aforementioned Jerry Pournelle and Dan
Alderson played Diplomacy in the early years. Neither published. Jerry, whose
drug of choice was peppermint schnapps, is better known as a SF writer of
moderate note and a rightwinger of the most determined disposition. Not of
course the usual religious nut we get nowadays but a genuine Goldwater man.
Dan, whose home town rejoices in the name of Tujunga, waw an engineer at JPL --
which (if you knew Dan) rather explained some things about that place. Dan was
a Collector (note capital "C"; imagine it's in red). He collected SF/fantasy
'zines and various games (also Dipzines). He got 2 of everything -- one for him
to look at, play with, and so on -- the other sealed (SEALED, not just wrapped)
in plastic and stored. In addition to his own house and garage, which were
stuffed to the gills, Dan rented 3 other garages in his neighborhood. He was a
great host and a great conversationalist ... knew all sorts of interesting
people. Conrad and I used to go up to visit to play Diplomacy and go on Toad's
Wild Rides with Pournelle and his schnapps.
My point here the early Diplomacy crowd was very different from the people
who came to dominate the hobby during the 1970s. We weren't gamers. Most were
SF/fantasy fans, well educated (graduate degrees and all that), and more than
usually literate. Not to mention more than usually eccentric. Way more. This
made the first decade of postal diplomacy unique and fascinating. Of course
even after that there were some members of the old guard around, and some new
people like them (including some really fun Brits), so that there were still
some flashes of what the early years were like. From your description of the
"Great Feud" (I'm going to have to get Conrad to tell me
about it), I would guess it represents a terminus a quo for Postal Diplomacy As
It Had Been.
- 1962-A (1) [MB:Jun80+Mar82]
- The most famous of all phoney games, this hoax was
perpetrated by Conrad von Metzke and
Rod Walker for the principal purpose of getting
John Boardman's goat, since JB was proud of running the first postal game,
1963A. Walker now claims (1982) this was not a hoax, but a real game which did
not get beyond 1902; and has produced photocopies of the supposed original zine
in which the game was run, _Mongo_.
- 1962-A (2) [RW:Jun07]
- "Mongo". That was a bit of fun. I inveigled Conrad von Metzke into the
plot, and we produced several phony issues of the zine, making sure that there
were things about it that differed from normal Dipzine practice. I can't
recall if we did carbon copies or what. I have a set of copies in a file box
somewhere. Boardman was of course furious, and just to needle him more I
maintained that Mongo was an actual game and 'zine for a long time -- until
now, in fact.
- 1963-A (1) [MN:Dec93]
- The first game of Diplomacy run postally, started in
_Graustark_ 2. The players were Dave McDaniel,
Derek Nelson, James Goldmain, Stuart Kershner and Fred Lerner. A five player
variant! (Turkey, Russian and the provinces of Bulgaria and Rumania were
closed.) Highlights include: first ever postal NMR! (Fred Lerner, France
_Graustak_ 5), first ever postal elimination (Austria, issue 8) and first ever
postal win (Derek Nelson, Italy) in _Graustark_ 15.
- 1963-B (1) [MN:Dec93]
- The first game of Diplomacy, ran in the second-ever
diplomacy zine _Ruritania_. Players: Dian Pelz, Fred Lerner, Jack Root, Allan
Calhmer, Tom Bulmer, Bruce Pelz and John Boardman. However Dian and Bruce were
married, which means that by current standards theh game is 'irregular'! Bruce
forced an 18 center win as Russia in 1918, his wife coming a strong second with
16. Another 'irregularity' was that Boardman resigned his position and then
picked up the first ever orphan when _Ruritania_ was transferred to Boardman
with issue 27. Playing and GMing in the same game is not considered acceptable!
- 1964-A (1) [MN:Dec93]
- The first ever game of diplomacy ran postally! Certainly the first
'regular' postal game. Ran by John Boardman, it started in _Graustark_ 15 (11th December 1963). The players
were: James Goldman, Derek Nelson, Stuart Kershner, William E. Christian, Fred
Lerner, Richard Schultz and James MacKensie. The game ended in a Turkish win
for James MacKenzie in Fall 1911 in _Graustark_ 48 on March 14, 1965.
- 1993-EP (1) [MN:Mar94]
- A game ran by Richard Sharp in _Dolchstoss_ noteworthy for being the only postal
game in UK Hobby history that Tyrolia has seen the only Spring 1901 standoff.
- # (1) [MN:Oct95]
- Symbol used by early BNC's to denote an
irregular game eg. #1963A and #1963B. Conrad von
Metzke stated in _Everything_ 7 (March 1973) that he would use the symbol
to denote (1) Five- and six-man games, if played under the rulebook and (2)
Local games, including games in which moves were made
in-person provided they were made one season per in-person session and were
published thereafter. Conrad announced his intention to move from #1963A to
(1963A) to denote irregularity, as the # symbol did not appear on overseas
APPENDIX ONE: Summary of Rating Systems used at DipCon
DIPCON XXI RATING SYSTEM (1) [MN:Jun93]
Scoring system used at DipCon XXI.
To qualify for the awards, players had to play two, or more, games. Any player
playing in three, or more, games had their worst result dropped. Games ended
in either a concession to a single player or as DIAS. The winner was
determined by highest average score of games counted.
(1) Points awarded for type of finish.
WIN 75 pts. 5-way Draw 20 pts.
2-way Draw 50 pts. 6-way Draw 15 pts.
3-way Draw 35 pts. 7-way Draw 10 pts.
4-way Draw 25 pts. Surv or Elim 0 pts.
(2) Add 1 point per center owned at the end of the game.
(3) Add points according to rank by centers within the game.
Eliminated players receive 0 pts.
1st 7 points 5th 3 points
2nd 6 points 6th 2 points
3rd 5 points 7th 1 point
4th 4 points
Ties split points (ie a two way tie for 2nd splits 11 points).
DIPCON XXVI RATING SYSTEM (1) [MN:Aug93] Don del Grande's rating system for
DipCon XXVI. Concession and draw votes could include modifications to the
final SC counts for the players in that game (rather than making them go
through the motions to get everyone a SC count that they agree to beforehand).
WIN: 125 points regardless of number of SCs (no SC points)
2-WAY DRAW: 45 + SC points
3-WAY DRAW: 30 + SC points
4-WAY DRAW: 22.5 + SC points
5-WAY DRAW: 18 + SC points
6-WAY DRAW: 15 + SC points
7-WAY DRAW: 12.8 + SC points
(if the 7-way draw was voted rather than forced, SC points only)
17 SCs - 23 points 16 SCs - 21 points 15 SCs - 19 points
14 SCs - 17 points 13 SCs - 15 points 12 SCs - 13 points
11 SCs - 11 points 10 SCs - 9 points 9 SCs - 7 points
8 SCs - 6 points 7 SCs - 5 points 6 SCs - 4 points
5 SCs - 3 points 4 SCs - 2 points 3 SCs - 1 point
0-2 SCs - no points
A player's tournament score is the sum of his/her top two game scores
- Playing in 2 or more games beats playing in 1 game
- High single game
- W/D score of two high-score games
- W/D score of single high score game
- Average opponent's total score
- Tournament GM's discretion
APPENDIX TWO: Solutions to THE TWISTER.
THE 1993 TWISTER. Solution appeared in _Dolchstoss
182, Febuary 1994.
Suggested reasoning, in brief.
- Note distinct positions, so winner must have 7 at least, so Russia
won. All active in the subsequent winter means nobody finished with
3 centres, so 654210 centres for the others.
- Examine England's position. To satisfy conditisions EA(Lpl)-Edi and
convoyed next turn. This leads to England did not swap capitals, and
a little later to the fact that the capital swap must be between Germany
and Italy. They are 5th and 6th. This requires a convoy round
Spain for a G army, which helps to fix the moves of IF, FF and 1x EF.
- This determines that neither France nor England can be eliminated, nor can
they get to 6 centres, placing Turkey and Austria 2nd and last --- we
do not yet know which way round.
- Point (2) and the fact that 3 countries lost all their home centres
means Germany and Italy lose all their home centres. Consideration of
who took Naples leads to Austria being identified (I used the wine
information of he 2nd place taking a centre from the last place, but
I suspect that information is not necessary if you're thorough). So
Austria got to 6 centres, and Turkey finished with 0.
- The unwanted convoy can now be placed as RF(Swe) and EF(NTH)
combining against GF(SKA). The GF retreat will be to a supply centre, so
Germany finishes on 2, Italy on 1. Further England can get to 4 at best,
so that's it and France finishes on 5 --- both her armies must gain a
- Then construct a matrix of what centres had to be captured and what
was available to capture them, and it falls out.
- So the ANSWER then: Russia took 1 from Germany and 2 from Turkey.
Austria took 2 from Italy and 1 from Turkey. France took 1 from Germany.
Germany took 1 from Italy. Italy took 1 from Germany.
The whole A-Z, in pdf format, is HERE