Is this game of Diplomacy going too far?
"U.S.A." is one variant I always wanted to try. It changes the dynamics for the corner powers heavily with just a few small changes.
"Zeus 5" should also be interesting as there are no corner powers at all.
["U.S.A."](http://www.variantbank.org/results/rules/u/usa.htm) is one variant I always wanted to try. It changes the dynamics for the corner powers heavily with just a few small changes.
["Zeus 5"](http://www.variantbank.org/results/rules/z/zeus5.htm) should also be interesting as there are no corner powers at all.
Maybe we'll houserule in terrorist attacks at some point.
There are some fun Diplomacy variants; there's a LotR one where there's a ring you have to keep hidden (requires GM as a result), and there are some "combined" armies that have 2 or 3 strength compared to a normal unit.
"Pure" Diplomacy has everyone with one SC and one army, 7 spaces on the board total, and everyone borders each other. That one has never interested me, personally.
"Fleet Rome" is a common variant meant to combat the perceived weakness of Italy by replacing their starting army in Rome with a fleet instead, allowing them (in the simplest strategic situation) to get involved in the Balkans while also taking Tunis, or even trying for a quick push one way or the other (likely France's direction).
"Gunboat" is a common one where there's no secret press - all press is publicly published, out in the open, where all players can see what's been said. For the face-to-face version of this, Diplomacy great Edi Birson dubs it "Woodrow Wilson".
"Ancient Mediterranean" is basically the same game, but for 5 players playing ancient Mediterranean powers - Rome, Carthage, Greece, Egypt, and Persia. There are some changes to the map (more north Africa, less northern Europe), but the basic idea is the same.
There are some others as well, that are worth looking through and can be fun to play as well.