I'm quite familiar with him; the art being used for this vDip adaptation was done with his input and approval. I also co-designed with him the latest version of Ambition & Empire and GM'd the first session of that edition of the variant.

I have no intention of changing 1900, though; the rules are locked now. I hope to implement a faithful recreation of it here.

So I didn't notice/remember, but those rules and maps capture version 2.6.1 of 1900. Version 2.6.2 is captured in the PDF at the bottom of the Variant Bank page:
https://web.archive.org/web/20090424045702/http://devel.diplom.org/Online/variants/1900-GG.pdf

nopunin10did: Were you able to add the Russian Steamroller Rule that was added in 2.6.2 yet? It sounds like it may be easier to code than the Suez Canal Rules.

nopunin10did: Speaking of the art, are you just going to ignore the Ottoman suzerainty/sovereignty over Bosnia, Bulgaria and Libya (also Egypt, though that doesn't seem to appear on the original map)? At least in the 2.6.1 map (the 2.6.2 map I found is black and white), those territories have an Ottoman yellow outline around them:
http://www.variantbank.org/results/rules/1/1900-large.gif

The borders between Kiel/Berlin/Silesia/Prussia were also changed, but I don't think that that affects gameplay. Not sure if anything else was changed.

The last paragraph on page 58 seems to suggest that the Suez Canal Rules were changed as well, but from what I can tell, this change actually is reflected in the rules as they appear on The Variant Bank page.

JECE, don't you remember? :p
> Project Tracking URL:
> https://tinyurl.com/1900-vdip-dev
>
> Base resolution sample map (no units):
> http://imgur.com/PcGEjzf

Russia can build in Siberia? Is there yet another version of the rules?

@JECE

You're getting the versions a bit confused. The earlier drafts of 1900 went through a couple iterations of trying to get Russia right. The Steamroller rule was used for several playthroughs, but it turned out to make Russia far too powerful.

These two links are up-to-date, and they reflect the rules of the game as it has been implemented on other sites. They've also been the static, unchanging rules since 2006. Baron has decided not to change the variant further (outside of purely aesthetic updates).

http://www.diplomatic-pouch.org/Online/variants/1900.html
http://www.diplomatic-pouch.org/Online/variants/1900-061119.pdf

The Russian Steamroller Rule was changed into the Russian Emergency Measures Rule (EMR) more than 10 years ago. Russia is able to build in Siberia when the EMR is active.

The Suez Canal Rules are present in all versions and aren't related to the Russia changes.

I did work with Baron this year to update the visual internal borders in France & Germany, but none of the adjacency was changed. This was an aesthetic update only.

nopunin10did: Great! Thanks for getting me up to speed. I'm pretty sure that I discovered all this years ago and simply forgot. The REM Rule sounds very familiar.

To be honest, the numbering is confusing, though. The numbering seems to refer to just the map changes. As I noted, there were at least two versions of 2.6.1, one with SCR applying to Hejaz and an older one where SCR do not apply to Hejaz. Likewise, there have been at least two versions of 2.6.2, one with the Steamroller and one with the REM Rule.

With regards to the art/aesthetics, what did you decide to do with the Ottoman suzerainty/sovereignty over Bosnia, Bulgaria and Libya (also Egypt, though it doesn't seem to appear on the map). Those territories do in fact have an Ottoman yellow outline around them in Baron's latest map on page 1 of the PDF you provided. I imagine that it would be difficult to capture those outlines with the webDip engine, but I was just curious. You could probably place an international border between Trieste and Bosnia, though, I guess.

There's Cyprus to consider as well. The island was under nominal Ottoman power according to the Cyprus Convention.

If a more subtle way of making those borders isn't available, better to leave those regions as neutrals (and Cyprus under British dark blue and Bosnia under Austrian red).

I think Cyprus is considered part of Egypt for gameplay purposes.

@JECE

So, for the official map (for Play By Email and similar games), Baron requested that the affected areas receive a red outline:

https://i.imgur.com/O8Wbpcx.png

Here's the most recent low-resolution map for vDip, as generated by the platform:

https://i.imgur.com/iKLCYyz.png

The outlines were left out, as that's just really not practical in the vDip implementation. It's not something Baron worries over too much; he just likes to see it when it's possible.

@Enriador

Cyprus is part of Egypt, as JECE says. Like many of the smaller islands on the map, it has no impact on gameplay. Crete, for instance, is marked as part of Greece, but there is no adjacency between Greece and Eastern Med. Likewise for Sardinia, Corsica, etc.

@nopunin10did

I know Cyprus has no gameplay purpose - leaving Bosnia half-red, half-yellow also has no purpose since it's neutral. My concern is purely cosmetics.

I believe that if Bosnia will receive that (meaningless) special treatment, Cyprus could as well. It's just a humble suggestion, to better represent Cyprus' dual overlordship!

Got it. The reason Bosnia got the special treatment was that it's a playable region, while Cyprus isn't.

If I end up fiddling with the original map any more, I'll ask about Cyprus.

I don't think that it would make sense to give Cyprus special cosmetic treatment if Egypt isn't given special treatment too. They were in a similar boat (de jure Ottoman, de facto British), and Cyprus can be considered part of Egypt for gameplay/adjacency purposes. Certainly ask Baron about Cyprus/Egypt, though. I'd be curious to know why the other territories got an Ottoman outline but these didn't.

I do not think that Crete or Sardinia should be colored at all. Kestas was right to leave islands with adjacencies that don't match their 'parent' province a neutral color. To do otherwise could be confusing. If that is unacceptable to Baron then the sea borders should be redrawn, much like the English Channel was expanded to touch Wales proper.

It's interesting that the map doesn't display international borders at all, with no bold line borders like you see on the original Diplomacy and original 1900 maps. Was that a conscious decision?

I agree that Ottoman outlines are not practical in a vDip implementation. But what if they were coded in as skins for additional 'neutral' players (one for Libya-Bulgaria and another for Bosnia)? As soon as a player moved into Bosnia/Cyrenaica, the color would change as any non-SC land space changes color. For Bulgaria/Tripolitania, the color would change as soon as a player occupies the SC at the end of a year, just like any SC would. If Baron decided to give Egypt an Ottoman outline (he hasn't so far), that would be more complicated, but maybe it could be considered a second British skin, if that's possible.

@JECE

>> It's interesting that the map doesn't display international borders at all, with no bold line borders like you see on the original Diplomacy and original 1900 maps. Was that a conscious decision? <<

Yes. It's mostly my personal preference, but there's a game-design reason behind it too.

While those hard borders are great for a map prior to Turn #1, I think they distract from the new evolving borders that develop as players move from place to place. If there was a trivial way to dynamically relocate those borders cleanly as players conquer one another, that'd be interesting, but that's not a priority for me. So instead, the colors create the new borders of the Russian, Austrian, British, etc. empires. It's up to the players to create those borders.

Those are interesting suggestions regarding the extended Ottoman borders, but I'd prefer to leave the map as-is for now, both for technical ease and to avoid inadvertent confusion.

nopunin10did: Regarding international borders, I think they actually do serve a gameplay purpose: delineating home supply centers. While you and I may be geography buffs, other players may forget what their and their opponents' home supply centers are, limiting their strategic potential. 1900 isn't a 'build anywhere' variant.

A fair point, but I still prefer maps without them.

The presence of Algeria and Egypt kinda cuts that purpose (of highlighting home supply centers).

Enriador: Algeria and Egypt aren't home supply centers. Hence why they aren't named Algiers and Cairo. No one can build in them. So yes, international borders would still circle the home supply centers in a clear manner.

Sure enough I did remember the REM even relatively recently:
threadID=62959

So let's try this again. For anyone unfamiliar with the variant, take a look at the rules here:
https://web.archive.org/web/20160903111637/http://www.diplom.org/Online/variants1.html#numbers

@JECE

But that's exactly what I said. If the purpose of "national borders" is highlighting home supply centers, it's useless for 1900 because Algeria and Egypt aren't home centers but would be included inside national borders.

So, what's the purpose of including those borders? To make home centers stand out, like you suggested? If so, it's a very weak point since Algeria and Egypt would be "delineated" alongside Marseilles or Liverpool, which is misleading.

Enriador: I thought that that's what you might have meant, but I still don't see your point. International borders are just a thick black line. They also delineate the borders between neutrals (e. g., between NAf and Tun in standard Diplomacy). If you find using international borders between SC's that aren't home supply centers to be potentially confusing, then that's a problem regular Diplomacy has too.

@JECE

The official Diplomacy board does not delineate "bordes between neutrals". Indeed, most boards I know - including the one used at the World Diplomacy Con - does not have such a border.

As a rule, I dislike national borders of any kind, in both 1900 and Classic. I think national colors are enough.

P.S.: Board of the WDC - https://i0.wp.com/flockofnerds.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/URozVSW.gif

This hasn't been forgotten, and I was able to make some progress over the weekend. Debugging PHP code is a pain, for what it's worth.

I'm having trouble getting my testcases for the DATC to play nicely with the game engine, but I expect this to be a temporary setback.

Good news then! Can't wait for it.

Haha, earlier today I found a screenshot of a variant map on my system, that I could not refer to an existing variant here on vdip. But I remembered that I spend some time on an elaborate coding problem of that variant. After some research I finally found some old messages and a link to a forum thread exactly 2 years ago. From there on I remembered that I worked with Oli on this variant and that it was nearly completed, especially the coding issue was solved. I decided to ask Oli about this variant and the chances that it will finally find the way on vdip. And just after I hit the send button, I realized that this 1900 variant you are working on here is the same variant we worked on in the past.

I was a bit off the radar during the last year so I forgot about the variant, did not ever read this thread and did not drew the connection. Unfortunately, there seem to be done much work twice.

I just scanned this thread and do not know how far the coding progress of your variant is. I still have a complete solution of the Suez rule to offer. If you are still struggling with the implementation that rule, I would love to combine our works so my past efforts were not completely useless.
I have other variant files from an early version from Oli, too. However, map files etc seem to be already done by you, as well.

Huh, I am still a bit stunned, that I didn't remembered by work on this variant during the last months!

Here's the summary of development progress so far:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1limXASopaSiS5Cr27Vs6B9gh_LcT8pxk7912Dr95Z-s/edit?usp=sharing

I've got a solution in progress for the Suez Canal Rule. The remaining issue that I'm having trouble wrapping my head around is handling all the wonky details with convoys.

There are additional frustration spots, but they aren't really related to the SCR.

I'll PM you with my email address, and we can collaborate from there.

tobi’s Code is going to be exceedingly helpful moving forward. We might just get this off the ground after all!