Depending on which nation I get I'll have preferences to suit strategic plans, but it depends on other players.. that's for full press games...I'm rather enjoying playing one against one over at VDiplomacy, no hassles with alliances etc, simple choose a strategic plan and go for it..Hoorah

I don't have a preconceived idea other than what I know has worked well or poorly for me in the past. It's not binding, but I know that odds are I'm not going to start off in an EGR triple. I know that as G or A, I'm not likely to immediately go after the other. I tend to like EF and RT alliances if I'm playing one of those powers, but everything is open at the start of a game.

In early press, I'm looking for allies who seem intelligent and have a plan. Not just the standard blah blah let's work together, but something more concrete that shows me they have really thought about working with me and why that is their best course.

I like early dogpiles -- on France, on Austria, on Turkey, wherever. I don't initially strive for them, but if that seems to be the mood, I will fan that flame. It may not be quite as good as a solid two-power alliance out the gate, but better to pile on than be piled on.

I like quantity and quality of press. If I have a strong ally, we're going to be exchanging lots of press at all hours. If someone only logs in once or twice per phase (especially in the early turns) and gives vanilla press, they probably will be a target rather than an ally.

I go into the game with the mindset that I'm the best ally in the game (hell, on the site!), and I'm looking for who is going to have that same mindset. So whoever has the most aggressive, compelling pitch, that's what I'm going to go with and we are going to take over the board and quickly.

But you know that ATC :-)

I *also* knew that you were going to rib me in your response to this thread :)

> I'm the best ally in the game (hell, on the site!)

Second best :P

Initially, I go in hoping for an alliance with a strategically strong partner. Like if I'm Russia, I'll try to organize a Jugg with the Turk.
Then, depending on the reception I get from each player, I will adjust my alliances accordingly. Perhaps the Turk seems difficult to work with, or something.
Primarily, what I look for is someone who is trustworthy enough not to stab immediately, and gullible enough to support my crazy ideas.

I don't go into games with preconceived alliance ideas, but if I can't decide from just the press, I'll go for whatever seems most fun - maybe something I haven't done as often.

"I like early dogpiles -- on France, on Austria, on Turkey, wherever. I don't initially strive for them, but if that seems to be the mood, I will fan that flame."

I sometimes promote early dogpiles myself. I usually look for people who agree to take part.
England to Germany: Wanna attack on France?
Germany: Sound interesting tell me more.
England to France: Wanna attack Germany?
France: I'd like to wait and see.Let's talk next turn.
England to Italy: Germany wants to attack France, what do you say?
Itay: Count me in. I'll move to Pie
England to Germany: Italy's moving to Pie.
Germany: Okay let's do this.

After that it all depends on how things play out in the first move or two. The main thing I look for at first is a willingness to communicate and make plans. Some players are a bit wishy-washy in that regard.

I often go in with a pre-chosen preference because I have many many many more ideas than I have chances to try them out, but as soon as an alarm triggers by press that I shouldn't try it I'll often drop it.

I tend to not pick my ally until about spring 1902. By then I've seen the direction everyone is going, have maintained good relations with most of them, and am ready to commit to burning other bridges. Say for example as Russia my S 01 moves are usually basic moves to Ukraine from warsaw, sev bounce Black Sea, StP to GoB and Moscow either going North or South. In this way I see if Austria wants peace by not going into Galicia, I put a pause on turkey, and I see how the north is forming. then by the end of 01 I can generally see direction and then I start targeting and working my press with one of the allies very strong.

my allies also have to be elaborate and clear about every wish, and they need to be as honest as can be expected in that first year. The Austrian who says "I really don;t feel comfortable leaving galicia open in S 01 can we bounce?" is better in my eyes than the one who says "Sure lets DMZ and moves there for the exact same reason."

I've been known to kill a man because he seemed too smart to manipulate later in the game. To each their own.

@CB- A little advice: you will be more successful if you start playing in 1901 rather than waiting until 1902.

<3 uclabb

I tend to gather as many as possible and worry about stabbing later.

@Valis ... does that mean the fact that you always attack me is a compliment?

I feel like this is speed-dating. "What do you look for in an ally?" *ding, ding* [move to next table]

1901 is a bit like speed dating as well.

Maybe, but dating isn't like 1901 press. "I'm looking for someone to open aggressively with" is not something I've ever said on a date. Well, not yet, anyway.

You never know, you might get better dates.

@ ATC
Maybe you need to start finding diplomacy players to date, then...

I definitely have certain countries I prefer to neutralize early, but my behavior is generally driven by who is cooperative.

I tend to look for a strong player to ally with in the beginning and prefer to switch to a less strong player towards the middle/end game that is easier to sway diplomatically.

I really like that two of my favourite diplomats replied first. In fact, I've modeled a lot of my opening press off of playing with THM.

Give me real and concrete plans in spring and you've got my ear. Think that you can beat around the bush with non-commital vanilla BS, and I'll look elsewhere. I'm pretty sure he said that to me once (in more eligent words than that) but it struck a chord with what I'm looking for too.

One of the things that I find funny is that I often think I'm not going ally with the strongest opponent on the board. It would, of course,be best to eliminate my hardest opponent rather than help them. However, I always end up working with them. I guess that's a natural effect of them being a good diplomat but I always think it's a funny dichotomy.

That isn't to say i don't play. just that i try to take a backseat in tactics and primarily focus on having good relations with press. I like to soak up as much information in 1901 before really committing. Generally works for me, I usually make it to the end game unless I am a country that has been the victim of a dogpile. If i have any allegiance as a neighbor I almost always make it to midgame.

To echo earlier commentary, the quality of one's press is far more likely to help me choose an ally. What's great about this is that it sometimes leads to less conventional alliances, which I enjoy.

The notion that waiting until 1902 to decide upon an alliance seems prevalent, but I don't consider that to be wisest in all situations. Sometimes an opening stab is necessary, tactically. But it can also force the diplomatic issue if a potential ally is fence-sitting. And it always gets people talking.

I'm very much of the same mindset as CommaderByron. 1901 is for feeling people out. That being said, I do so in a manner that doesn't come across as wishy-washy. My goal at the end of the year (most of the time) is to make sure that *everyone* believes I'm they're ally. I do this by doing a set of moves that is (or can be perceived as, with some help) friendly towards everyone. If I can get both France and Germany to support me into Belgium, then great. Usually that doesn't happen, and my enemies choose themselves before the year is out.

As for alliances though, I often have some slight preferences going into games. President Eden burned me bad once when I was Germany and he was England. Ever since, I've been very averse to a GE alliance when I'm Germany. But more than anything, press guides me. Those who are quietest and loudest are my favorite targets. If your press is as good as mine, my aim is to kill or cripple you as soon as possible, because you're a threat.

Man you must be paranoid every match then Goldie :P

My own nature is to be cautious in opening and see who stabs and let that determine my alliances. Howver, as time goes on, I've realised that the site is made up of many that follow THM's philosophy, and that this has led to many of the dogpiles I've ended up experiencing. You need to appear bold and decisive, but not overly so. Throwing in a plausible but pretty meh move suggestion helps stop the smart ones seeing you as a threat.

Paranoia very appropriately describes my gameplay, Wusti. I'm sure others will agree.

wow I just checked and we have never played together goldie