Just to start off: I noticed a lot of people mentioning that Italy had the power to choose alliances on the board. In other words, he can decide who pairs with whom. If Italy goes for France, then the East gets strong. If Italy goes for Austria-Hungary, then the Great Powers at the edge of board get strong. And if Italy goes for Turkey, then the Axis Powers get strong. Italy has the power to choose where fighting occurs.

YES they're my second favorite country.. France won't usually attack them, and Austria isn't offensive inclined against them either

My moves:
Venice support hold Trieste
Rome to Apulia
Naples to Ionian

Venice to Tyrolia
Ionian Sea convoy Apulia to Tunis

Then build an army in Venice, and get ready to convoy to Albania.

These are some games where i did the same opening, (or should have for one)

gameID=182748
gameID=172256
gameID=162978

it makes Austria feel secure, then you set up a knockout. As long as France is docile, you only need to outrace Turkey in defeating Austria. A strong Russia actually is profitable early on.

A good strategy is to take both Munich and Trieste in 1901 and cripple both of the other central powers. As the only central power left, you gain untold influence!

@Hellenic Riot
I don't think it's a good idea to piss off Germany as well as Austria-Hungary. Don't give France or anyone else a reason to go after you. You're definitely going to face resistence from Austria-Hungary, so there's no need to get Germany involved as well. I like the opening that JamesYanik mentioned. I might try it myself.

@JamesYanik
I really like the opening you mentioned. What kind of negotiations do you need to make to achieve a good start with that opening? Do you ally with Turkey? Do you convince Russia to go south? Do you lull Austria-Hungary into a Balkan Gambit? I might try this opening myself.

I played a game with peterwiggin where he took Marseilles and Trieste and got three builds in 1901.

@Zybodia
That's all nice and romantic . . . Did he get to keep them? I don't think so.

He was only on eight centers when the board drew, but he did still have both of them, yes.

Seems like if Italy grabs three SCs in the fall, he's just made himself a target, as well as enemies with at least two of France, Germany, and Austria. Don't know if that really is the best thing.

Super Mario, I think you're looking at it the wrong way. You don't actually need to keep Munich and Trieste. Obviously it's nice if you can convince Austria and Germany of the merits of letting you stay in their centres, but that's not always the goal of taking them in 01. What taking Munich or Trieste is designed to do is to get you the builds to springboard you off of the 4 centres Italy is normally stuck with. Once you have the builds in 01, all you need to do is continue expanding in one direction, and you'll generally be fine to lose Munich or Trieste.
No one wants to deal with Italy early on. As such, it has the unique ability to stab whoever it likes for quick gains.

@SuperMario

it depends, you definitely make a NAP with France, and then you try to play with Turkey and Russia. it really depends on the personalities of the players, but it's all about personal preference. I really like it when Russia is helping out in the balkans but has England on his ass. However, if England is moving south, it's important to ally with Turkey more.

In the case of the Mar/Tri grab, Italy worked with Germany against France, and a weak Juggernaut against Austria.

This thread comes up pretty regularly. In general, I think Italy's advantages are:

1) No one can meaningfully attack you until 1903
2) You control the pace of the game
3) You can attack everyone
4) Because Italy has an (undeserved) weak reputation you can get pretty threatening without anyone taking you too seriously.

I think the two most common Italian mistakes are:

1) Playing "wait and see". If you're really waiting and seeing, you're throwing away advantage #2 above. It's fine to be patient, but have a plan, and know when to stop waiting.
2) Not accepting that your 5th centre has to come from someone else.

I think italy rewards a strategic play style. If you're thinking about dot count instead of what alliances you want to form on the other side of the board, I don't think you'll do well with Italy.

"Italy is the slowest nation to develop"

Only if you're counting dots. Italian positions can become dominant very quickly.

"also the hardest to win with"

I disagree. Italy has several different paths to solos, and the position close to many stalemate lines means that you don't really need to commit to one particular 18 like you do with say Turkey or England.

When Italy has 10-12 supply centres it has lots of options and is very hard to stop

Italy is so much fun to play. I don't think there's another country I'd rather be, possibly excepting Austria.

What a player like myself is capable of doing with Italy and what Peterwiggin is capable of doing with Italy are vastly different, implying that I can play that brilliantly with Italy is not supported by the facts. But I do enjoy reading these discussions.

Maybe Italy is an easy country to win with, but it's also an easy country to be defeated with as well...player ability and how the "alliance dance" goes are the keys to that ?

Italy is by far the most fun to play. You can play passively or aggressive and it's all about your diplomacy skills.

Which country is most fun to play depends a lot on your style.