Is it just me, or do the Ojibwe seem to be in a very good position? There's really only one country near them at three territories between their home centers (The Algonquin are about as near as the Kaskasia by pure territory, but owing to the optics of the board, the fact that they have many more countries near them, and there aren't as many attractive supply centers, I wouldn't count it)

Yeah, it looks pretty potent. Kakasia is their number one rival though, and they both get three centers to their name.
It depends though.

On the test, Kaskasia and Ojibwe formed a Juggernaught. It was brutally effective.

@Captainmeme- you have to remember though, in the test game, the other alliance was plagued by Canaduh's constant NMR's and other people attacking from the back...

True, but the alliance would be attacked from the back in any game, and Red's NMRs only strengthened Yellow, the main adversary to the Juggernaught.
I wish we could have played that to the end; it would have been very interesting.

Join http://www.vdiplomacy.com/board.php?gameID=7925

Yes but without his NMR's we would have destroyed Yellow and mounted an effective front against you. and yes the alliance would have been hit in the back, but added to the NMR's it was making a good front impossible... I'm glad we didn't. too many NMR's

True, but I still think the OK Jug is hugely overpowered. Because of the land chokepoints and the inability for anyone apart from Green to build on Lake Michigan, it's practically impossible to make any advances on the OK home SCs.

My one complaint is that the territories do not look real enough. They should be marked by arbitrary boundaries, not by straight lines! War does not work in such a fashion. Regardless, I look forward to my first games with it.

The borders look fine enough to me, but I wouldn't know what the territory is actually like on the ground...

cuz yer not from around these parts!!!

Three join fast: http://www.vdiplomacy.com/board.php?gameID=7925

There are 7 "Great Lakes" games starting, ATM, 4 full press and 3 gunboats. Since 3 games have just started, the few remaining people willing to try this new map are scattered around 7 games now.
I wonder why some people don't check what's already starting before they create duplicated games ...

They have all (but 2) different settings:
1x Normal
2x Anon
1x Anon + WTA
1x Anon + Gunboat
1x Anon + Gunboat + NMR 10 turns

Well Oli, even only one duplicated would be too much, because it decreases the chances of both games to start.
But you know, there are 50+ different Maps you can choose among. I'm ok if you say that Full Press and Gunboat on the same Map are 2 totally different games, even 2 different sports. I may be ok if you say that a WTA is rather different from a PPSC. But please don't tell me that
1x Anon + Gunboat
is so much different from
1x Anon + Gunboat + NMR 10 turns!
Plus, considering that other 3 games just started and other 5 games are starting on the same Map!
Btw, in your post I count 6 games... looks like you forgot one: was it another duplicated (the 3rd)? or maybe a triplicated? :)

The 2 games with the same settings have different phase-length. So it's no duplicate.

On second thought, Huron looks like perhaps the most underpowered tribe ever. Look at it! It's like Austria except with 5 countries immediately surrounding it, plus the fact that it has delectable SC's. I mean, how are you supposed to make an alliance with them?

Yes, of course Oli. I'm not saying there are 7 indentical starting games, I'm saying they are too similar. What's the use in creating a Anon + Gunboat 20 hrs, when there's already another Anon + Gunboat 24 hrs on the same Map (or viceversa)? And there are other 5 games starting on the same Map, one of which is another Anon + Gunboat ? (Yes you forgot a gunboat)
I'd like to ask to who made the 3rd gunboat (the "triplicated") if he really thinks that 3 gunboats on the same map would all start in a few days only because there's some light difference in some secondary setting. I'm sure he'd reply:
"Yea sorry I just didn't notice there were already 2 gunboats starting"

The same goes for the 2nd Anon FullPress. I'd ask him: "Three full press games have just started. Now, there are already other 3 full press games starting and the difference between the 4th you want to create and one of them is just the phase lenght. Do you think it'll start? Don't you think your new game could prevent to start the other 3? Or at least the other very similar? Couldn't you wait a few days?

7 games starting on the same Map at once. It'll be a miracle if 2 of them will actually start.

Get over it, this happens everytime a new variant comes out. All the excitement will die down and the variant will find its own equalibrium between games being started and those being played/finished.

Ok. But there are also 5 WWIVs starting right now. Is it excitement or the 4th and the 5th just didn't check what was already starting? Or do you (and them) think that 5 WWIVs can start all within 9 days?
There will be never an equilibrium until someone just creates the game he likes without checking first what's going on. More than 50 Maps, 24 games starting. Half of them are on the same 2 Maps. This is the current equilibrium.
However, nevermind. I guess there's not a lot we can do about it.

Come on, Guaroz...why dont you want to accept that some people might find some conditions, espessially the phase lenght inacceptable (one of my friends for example joins only games <2 because he simply has not so much time), or that they maybe, like in WWIV, want to choose their own country or maybe fight a a WWIV game out to a clear winner (like in the hell game i just joined) :)

Oh, I accept it.
I'm just saying that if you need to create a 2days/phase game because you don't have the time to play a faster one, choosing a Map having already 6 games starting is the worst choice you can do because players interested in that Map will be scattered around 7 games. Your new game won't start, and perhaps because of it some other game won't start as well.
If you want to play a WWIV with the preferences you like the most set, and there are already other 4 WWIVs starting, what makes you think that you'll find 34 more players willing to play a WWIV? Choose a different Map or wait a few days: you'll have much better chances to get the game you created started.
So yes you can create a WWIV if there are already 4 starting. But you're giving to it the worst chances ever to start. And this doesn't look very smart since solutions are so simple (choose another Map or wait a few days and retry)

This is probably the reason why almost every game I create actually starts: I don't make any duplicate (= a game similar to one or more already starting).
It's just a suggestion, you may follow it or not. If you don't, you'll have a clue why your games don't actually start as often as you'd like to.