I’ve been playing Diplomacy since 1965, although not much recently. If you want to know the whole sorted story you can do a Google search on my name and the word Diplomacy. And then get out of the way because it’s quite a list, so make sure your printer is full of paper. Let me let you in on a little secret. As Edi Birsan, Walt Buchanan, and other real hobby Old Farts will confirm, I am the worst Diplomacy player of all time, certainly among the old timers. In all those years of playing all over the FTF, postal, and tournament hobbies I’ve managed: Two FTF wins: one against such hobby legends and top players as von Metzke, Rod Walker, Hal Naus, etc. That was in the mid-1960s; and one against the members of the LTA, a San Francisco bay area Diplomacy group, that included players like Charles Turner, James Justin Dygert, and Brian Bailey. What was memorable about that game was who was there but wasn’t playing: Issac Asimov and Ray Bradbury, among others. How decisive was my win? Well, Brian was so upset he said he’d never play again and took off for Papua New Guinea’s highlands were he devoted himself to converting the headhunters to Christianity; and then taught them how to play Diplomacy. Perhaps a few PBM wins (Most of the early ones got tossed by Conrad von Metzke when he was BNC), but nothing memorable comes to mind. Tournament games? I remember two wins that I was proud of. The first was at a DipCon played in Toronto, Canada where I actually managed to beat Jerry Falkiner, then one of the best Canadian players. For once my strategy, tactics, and diplomacy were first-rate. The second was being part of a three man team that won the World DipCon Team Championship in Sweden. If my memory serves, I tried to play in one of the first PBEM games and was gone in a micro-second. It just wasn’t my format. What I do know from all this playing over the last 45 years or so is that I spent a huge amount of time, energy, and money on the game and hobby. In fact, I calculate that for each supply center in one of those victories I spent a good part of a professional lifetime and about four thousand dollars. And what do I have to show for it? A garage full of junk and a lot of memories. Strategy and tactics were never my fortes in Diplomacy. For that matter, neither was diplomacy, and I wasn’t a terribly good smoozer either, but when it came to Peeriblah, nobody could sling it as well as me. And here’s a sample. Most players make diplomacy and Diplomacy too complicated. It really isn’t; which is why the game has lasted, remains popular with a certain kind of person, proves addictive, and drives people nuts. Let me share this with you. Strategy is about what you want to do. First, and most obviously, you want to win. Second, you want to get past that stalemate line. Once you’ve done that, victory is yours. Tactics is about how you achieve your strategic goals. How do you win and how do you get past that stalemate line? But wanting to win isn’t enough. You also have to want to keep the other six players from winning. A two-way or a three-way draw isn’t acceptable. Getting past those stalemate lines isn’t easy, but it isn’t as difficult as some people think. But first you have to know what they are. Do you? If you know each of them, and how to set one up or break one down, especially if you’re opponents don’t, puts you way ahead of the game. So, learn the basics, study the maps, and figure out how to do those two things: how do I set up a stalemate line and how do I break through one? And no, I’m not going to tell you either. It’s something you need to learn for yourself. And by the time you do, you’ll be good enough to achieve that first goal, winning. Tactics is how you achieve your goals. Most newbies think that tactics means how you move pieces around the board. That’s true, but there’s more to it. A sound knowledge of tactics is what will help you over-come your opponent(s) strategies and diplomacy. Remember, you’re playing a game that not only involves moving pieces around a board, but also involves manipulating other players (solely and in combinations). Tactics, especially when it comes to getting past stalemate lines, is a matter of mechanics. Diplomacy, if there are other players involved, is also important, but the key factor is mechanics. More players fail to prevent the establishment of a stalemate line or fail to break through one because of mechanical errors than any other single cause. And what do I mean by mechanical errors? Not reading the map correctly is one. Mis-writing orders is another. Not seizing the key space(s) in the stalemate line is yet a third. Stalemate lines are all about real estate, and as any real estate salesman will tell you, the secret in real estate is “location, location and location.” This is something you can’t learn from reading articles (like this one). It’s something you learn by playing or at least reading game reports (moves, analysis, and press). It’s impossible to write about S&T without mentioning diplomacy. Good diplomacy can off-set weaknesses in S&T, but it alone won’t get you to those first two strategic goals. Good diplomacy may not win you the game, but bad diplomacy will surely keep you from winning it. When you’re playing a game you need to push on all three fronts: strategy, tactics, and diplomacy; and push hardest where you’re being successful. If one player doesn’t have a solid concept of what a victory entails, push there. If another doesn’t seem to have a good grasp of game tactics, push there; and if a third doesn’t seem to be talking much, push (hard) there. I can’t guarantee that following these precepts will win you a game, but I can and do guarantee that following them will help you be a better player than I am. Trust me. Larry Peery (peery@ix.netcom.com) If you wish to e-mail feedback on this article to the author, and clicking on the envelope above does not work for you, feel free to use the "Dear DP..." mail interface.