Finished: 04 PM Fri 29 Nov 19 UTC
Private ODC 2019 - R2 G1
2 days /phase
Pot: 35 D - Autumn, 1913, Finished
Classic, Anonymous players, Sum-of-Squares Scoring, Hidden draw votes, Wait for orders
2 excused missed turn
Game drawn
30 Oct 19 UTC Autumn, 1909: Everyone else: sorry you have to put up with this.
30 Oct 19 UTC Autumn, 1909: Funny. I am enjoying the banter. Please do not suffer over it. It is not worth it. Just a game.

Guess what. In the end, I win. I keep forgetting to warn people, but they figure it out in time..
31 Oct 19 UTC Autumn, 1909: France wins? I'm ok with that. How about we all support France to a solo victory?
31 Oct 19 UTC Autumn, 1909: no. I eat what I kill.
05 Nov 19 UTC Autumn, 1910: This was exciting... Orders for next turn are ready! ;)
05 Nov 19 UTC Autumn, 1910: Everyone at peace except bloodthirsty Italy
05 Nov 19 UTC Autumn, 1910: Always thirsting for more. The Frenchman is not that stupid you know
05 Nov 19 UTC Autumn, 1910: True! Attacking his own people in Con turn after turn.
05 Nov 19 UTC Autumn, 1910: Yah. Why would he do that?
05 Nov 19 UTC Autumn, 1910: He doesnt like Turks. They are not his people. Plus, I heard England has a plan to take Con next fall.
05 Nov 19 UTC Autumn, 1910: Oh. Shouldn't have said that.
08 Nov 19 UTC Autumn, 1910: Well played you all, best of luck to you in the next round!
08 Nov 19 UTC Autumn, 1910: What? Don't go anywhere.
14 Nov 19 UTC Autumn, 1911: Shall we draw this game now? Russia has asked explicitly, and I don't see any other solution either.

If we don't draw because someone withholds a vote while, after 1913, we are still in the same position, I will submit a request to the mods and ask them to decide on the matter of a forced draw. I think we all agree it can't continue until 1925 like this.
14 Nov 19 UTC Autumn, 1911: It can only be you or France who hasn't voted - so I'm not sure why you are asking on public.
14 Nov 19 UTC Autumn, 1911: But I appreciate that it is classic you to keep plotting for a solo in private while claiming you are voting for a draw in public. Good luck with that - you have lost all credibility at this point.
14 Nov 19 UTC Autumn, 1911: If you want to actually stab France then get on with it - if you don't then you and France can vote draw. I genuinely don't know why we need to be lectured by the high and almighty, thinks they are god's gift to diplomacy england about this.
14 Nov 19 UTC Autumn, 1911: Pff :-(
14 Nov 19 UTC Autumn, 1911: Let's agree to put it to the mods then in 1914.
14 Nov 19 UTC Autumn, 1911: As I say, if you have voted, talk to your blue friend. I strongly believe the rest of us have voted. If France wants to claim they have voted on public - so we can identify England as once again telling lies - let's hear it.
14 Nov 19 UTC Autumn, 1911: My draw vote is still in.
14 Nov 19 UTC Autumn, 1911: Same here.
14 Nov 19 UTC Autumn, 1911: Bunch of losers
14 Nov 19 UTC Autumn, 1911: Let's play and crush some heads and let the best win
15 Nov 19 UTC Autumn, 1911: I predict Austria loses this game.
15 Nov 19 UTC Autumn, 1911: I have a plan.
15 Nov 19 UTC Autumn, 1911: It will be very ugly
16 Nov 19 UTC Spring, 1912: I've got a dream, I've got a dream
They can change their minds but they can't change me
I've got a dream, I've got a dream
16 Nov 19 UTC Spring, 1912: But my dream is just to draw. Sad.
16 Nov 19 UTC Spring, 1912: And Italy loses too. Forgot that.

But Russia wins
16 Nov 19 UTC Spring, 1912: After she wakes up
17 Nov 19 UTC Spring, 1912: For the record - my draw vote is in and I have no intention of attacking Italy or Russia.
26 Nov 19 UTC My draw vote is in
27 Nov 19 UTC I have now also re-entered my draw vote.
27 Nov 19 UTC Nothing happened though. Russia, Italy and Austria still ready to draw?
28 Nov 19 UTC Mine is still in.
28 Nov 19 UTC To Italy and Russia well played. To Italy in particular, I'm sorry that an untimely stab from you early and then me in the mid-game late resulted in neither of us dominating this one.
To Turkey - I have to admit you were closer to right about how this game was going to end, and maybe I made the wrong call all those years ago. I think if I had understood what England and France were like earlier I would have played that very differently.
To Germany - I'm sorry you got caught in the eastern rush to deal with the early signs of an unbreakable England/France alliance
To France - I think the petulant throw at the end to England, completely against your self-interest and with nothing to gain from doing so, was nothing short of disgraceful. You played parts of this game way better than your ultimate score indicates, but allowing yourself to be completely dominated by England doomed you and completely distorted this game and the tournament result.
To England - This score flatters you a lot. You won't get a puppet for a neighbour in the final, and this would have played very differently if you didn't have one here.
28 Nov 19 UTC I enjoyed fooling Austria and Italy twice. Austria, you could have won this game and chose not to.
28 Nov 19 UTC No - winning was never on the cards because Italy and Russia would (to their credit) not throw the game to me as you did to England.
03 Jan 20 UTC Dear all,

Sorry for my absence the past month. I was busy traveling and also preferred not to discuss the present game before my other R2 game was concluded.

I now first of all want to thank you all for playing a challenging and hard fought game. It was an honor to have played with the high caliber players many of you are.

Here is a little breakdown of the game, as well as a word to each of you for those of you that are interested. Feel free to (dis)agree.

The first year in this game was actually a very cautious one with two exceptions: AT opened against R and F had opened against G. Both had a direct impact on my game:

1. Firstly, France's opening to Bur put me in a great spot to take Bel without being hostile to Germany. After G secured Hol and cleverly left Mun open, they both had two builds directly opposing one another and both agreed to build two armies. For me, that was the best possible start as England.

2. I myself built two fleets given that they could be used both against G or against RF. The AT attack on Russia was one of the key reasons to choose G as an ally over F. F is more of a navy threat to England than G is, and taking out StP and Bre could put me in a defensively solid seat. It felt like the perfect timing.

That choice did not work out great, again for two reasons. Austria suddenly changed course to attack Turkey (not for the last time in the game), as a result of which Russia could focus on me again. And Germany seemed to leek my moves to France, surprised me with a fleet build in Ber (contrary to what was agreed on) and asked me to get 8-4 ahead of me in the alliance.

This required me to change course, also the only time in the game I actually changed course. At that point in time, I got back on track with France focusing on Germany first and securing the North next. France's willingness to forgive my stab made me consider him as an ally that I would not easily stab.

While attacking Germany, Turkey warned France and me for an IA endgame deal which included killing France and me both. Given Turkey's position and asking for help, I considered the message steered by a certain self-interest, although also sincere based on some moves. Given Austria's message to Turkey above, it seems that Turkey tried the exact same thing on IA by warning them for an EF endgame deal (which was only based on guessing from Turkey as far as I know).

I think this was a very strong idea of Turkey, although this is in my opinion actually also what caused / reinforced the endgame where two blocks did not want to blink against the other.

I think that the key factors for the five way draw eventually were:
1. Italy and Russia keeping their calmth when Austria attacked Italy. How I tried to convince Russia of pushing Austria out of Mun, and Italy of attacking Austria, must have been annoying at various times, to say the least. But they never even blinked (except once, but not enough:-)).
2. The fact that France and I stuck together in the west and stage some play and moves to ensure we could set up a stalemate line. The reason why France and I stuck together was caused by the strong IRA block - as announced by Turkey - and the mutual gratitude for earlier joint moves.

I would never attack and cause France's demise for only one or two additional SCs, and vice versa. France considered that not attacking me was his best chance to survive and not get squeezed by IA, and the same applies for me.

France in the two last years yielded some territory to me for the exact same reasons (and me asking politely), but importantly also one further reason. Austria by that time had grown an unmeasurable aversion against me for whatever reason. France's and my ultimate attempt was to make the difference between Austria and me so big that Austria would become angry/annoyed/desparate (which is what makes players make most of their mistakes) and move against Russia or Italy.

We knew that chances were limited, but one error at that time would be sufficient. Nothing immediately happened. France at that point got tired of the game (and new insults received), as did I. So we stuck with the final division of SCs and voted draw. Austria finally voted draw as well (not sure whether he just wanted to test whether all votes were up), and so the game ended.

Finally, some words to each of you:

- Russia, sorry for having attacked you twice. I did so the first time for the strategic reasons discussed above but also because you were perhaps least communicative of the western countries. I did so the second time because IRA had formed and I needed to lock StP to assure a solid defensive line.
You did perhaps not deserve this for the strategically very strong player with solid tactics you are. I also see you have become a specialist in beating the bots here, and am not surprised as it confirms your strategic skills.
I do think you can improve your press, particularly for full press games. Full press players tend to like a good conversation and will have a preference for players which are pleasant to talk to. It is often just as important as the pure tactics, at least that is what I think. The fact that you got attacked from the start by Austria and Turkey may have had something to do with that, although they will of course know better and perhaps I am mistaken?

- Germany, I enjoyed our press and think we would have been in a good position to push this game to the final stage. The idea of getting 8-4 by midgame, your Ber fleet build and the fact that my moves were blocked time after time by France - as if he had been informed what we planned - is what caused me to attack you.
Your strategic positioning is outstanding and your press is strong. The only advice I would have for you is to try to assure a balance with your ally if your ally repeatedly asks to do so, and particularly in early and midgame. Repeatedly ignoring such request will make your ally feel being used and move against you.

- Austria, you also know the strategy of the game and your press is very good under good circumstances, but there is a lot of improvement possible in terms of your press under bad circumstances.
Firstly, offending people hardly ever does any good. Only if you think that other player will make a mistake out of a grudge it can work (which is what I ultimately tried on you as a measure of last resort and after all hope for reconciliation was gone). Even though I saw mutually aligned interests at given times and even tried to reconcile with you again (despite loathing to do that), it can never work if you continue to insult. Read swordman’s posts on annoyance.
Secondly, players act in certain ways for different reasons. France wanted to enjoy the game and mislead, and so he did. He also wanted to be part of the draw and so he is. If France would have followed a different path it was likely to end in his demise. The result of the game shows that France made the right decisions, so it is not very sportman's like to start attacking him even when the game is done.
Finally, please take the game for what it is: the most lovely game there is, but still a game. And enjoy playing. Don’t get angry for no reason.

- Italy, I would have loved to work with you at a given time and regretted we never got to that point in this game. I actually thought you would become the dominant power in this game (and so did Germany). The other R2 game we shared confirms the strong player you are and the good press you can share with others. I really have nothing bad to say on your game. I would have loved if you would have moved against Austria, but you made the right call not to do so.

- Turkey. I regret that we could not get to the center of the map and meet in Ber or something like that. The distant press we exchanged showed that you are a strong tactician and have strong press. I definitely learned some things here from you. Apologies I was unable to help you out from a distance.
If Austria would have stuck with you after Y01 (which I always would have thought / done in his place), one or two further SCs after Y02 and you would have been the power to beat in this game. I hope we can play again some time.

- France. Only a lot of gratitude to you for a fantastic game and one of the best alliances I have ever shared. An alliance that was strong enough to overcome an early stab, and to surprise IRA twice. It is a pleasure to play with a partner who sees the longterm goal and who never ceases to be funny. Your R1 finish also confirms the strong player you are and that there is no ground in certain insults received.
I also think that, if we would have been able to break the IRA line, it would have been a difficult choice between going for a two way draw (with perhaps some minor countries) or going for a solo. It is hard to tell, but I think I would have stuck with a draw with you in such case. Thank you very much again!

To all: I see that some of you are still playing their second game and wish you the best of luck. Perhaps - and hopefully - we meet again at the final table!

Best regards and thank you very much again,
03 Jan 20 UTC To England - that is an impressively self-centred and arrogant. You were ridiculously lucky in this game - but if you think you are great and everyone else has lots to learn even though you succeeded because of a French puppet power to you.
03 Jan 20 UTC Thank you Austria, for the kind message.

I only provided you with a breakdown of the game from my perspective, and you are free to disagree.

The one word of advice to Russia and Germany to compliment their already strong gameplay is well meant, as was my advice to you. I added that this is only how I experience some things and I am not claiming to hold the truth.

I am happy to receive input from any of you on how I can improve my game as well.

Thanks again.
03 Jan 20 UTC I feel it is important to leave as the final message on this game that France threw it to England thereby destroying its worth as a game (and any review of the turn history will show that to be true).
03 Jan 20 UTC I did what was in my best interest. I didn't trust you.
03 Jan 20 UTC Precisely Austria! You are relying on an ex post facto “review of the turn history” - and thus necessarily biased with hindsight.

France did not have this information how you would react and how this would end when he made decisions. Being part of the draw with three, five or six units was of little relevance to him and he decided to try to do everything he could to break the East up and get to more than just 6 or 7.

It is not because a game ends with a result that you regret that it no longer has any worth. That is a logic that prevents you from properly reflecting on the game on what you could have done differently to achieve a better outcome.
03 Jan 20 UTC It is not the result I regret - I made mistakes here - but the result is not reflective of how people played. I’m happy for those looking at this game in the future to draw their own conclusions - France clearly suicided against their own interest out of spite (and admitted as much previously) and you clearly got the result you did because of that rather than superior tactics.
04 Jan 20 UTC Or you can say that England played France. Why not admit it, England
04 Jan 20 UTC I am not a solo player. I wanted a partner. England led me to believe he was on my team, and he was...and then he wasn't. So, yah, Austria, you perhaps were right about England, but I don't think he was any more heinous than you or Italy would have been. I was weak and had to choose a partner, he seemed to demonstrate more mastery than you guys did, so I wanted to be on the master's team. Maybe you are a better player than England is, but through his messages, he demonstrated that he was a master at tactics.

I think his drawback is that he not very convincing to you, Italy or Russia. You guys didn't trust him, which means, he perhaps was not a very good diplomat.

I think for England to be more successful, perhaps he has to hide his mastery and act dumber than he is. And perhaps that is what you, Austria, were doing.
04 Jan 20 UTC It is modest and kind from you to say that France but truth is I did not play you, at least not after 1901-02.

If the game eventually had been stuck at the positions of 1911 and I was still at 9 SCs, you seriously risked being attacked by me. Definitely because I did not know my result in the other game yet.

If I had done that, it would almost certainly cause your elimination and me ending at 11 or 12.

Instead you even took Tun after 1911, and you were part of the draw, whereas I ended at 13. I think it is a win-win for us both and I see no argument to say you threw to me for no reason.

Vice versa, one can say I threw you to be part of the draw. When we drew, I could still easily have taken Mar and Par, and put a stalemate line:
- Spring : Bre-Gas, Wes-Gol s by Spa, Mao-Por, Bre-Mao
- Autumn : Gol-Mar s by Bur, Gas and Spa.

That would have been a certainty, cause your elimination and lock the game again. I could then pick up Par after that.

But neither of us threw anything. We just assured an endgame deal that was mutually beneficial, and that could only be reached by relying on each other, which we apparently rightfully did.

The game is more than solely tactics, let alone from an isolated perspective. It is also politics and long term strategy. It is the combination of all those elements that always leads to the outcome, also in this case.

Diplomacy doesn’t lie and the eventual board is always right. Players all the time make decisions that are in the interest of some players, and not of others, and sometimes not even in their own interest. I don’t even think that is the case here but that is the game and that is what causes the result.
04 Jan 20 UTC No worries- when I’m back at work I’ll spell it out in clear enough terms that even you too can understand- but for now as a signpost to others - this game was ridiculously thrown to England- who deserves no credit for the result. The turn history doesn’t lie.

Start Backward Open large map Forward End

Drawn. Bet: 5 D, won: 21 D
13 supply-centers, 11 units
Napoleon of Oz (2709 D)
Drawn. Bet: 5 D, won: 8 D
8 supply-centers, 8 units
DarthWader (107 D)
Drawn. Bet: 5 D, won: 5 D
6 supply-centers, 7 units
bozotheclown (2495 D)
Drawn. Bet: 5 D, won: 2 D
4 supply-centers, 4 units
Drawn. Bet: 5 D, won: 2 D
3 supply-centers, 3 units
woland (134 D)
Defeated. Bet: 5 D
Defeated. Bet: 5 D
Archive: Orders - Maps - Messages