Our official commentators should be the main people posting their reactions to the game developments on this thread. Spectators are invited to post questions, but additional extensive commentary from anyone aside from our official commentators is discouraged. We want interaction and engagement from lots of people who want to learn, but are not in the game, but we don't want lots of arguments about interpretations of board movements, unless it's among the official commentators.

Best of luck to all. Don't believe any of the smack the commentators talk about me, I have your best interests at heart. Trust me!

I wrote a couple essays in the last SoW in the prelim phase and first turn phase of the game that would still be relevant. Would you like me to transfer them to this thread? Or are we just going to settle for sub-par advice from stratagos?

*snarf*

Seriously, I think they'd be useful - opening moves are pretty generic. But since I'm playing, that'd be up to the Peanut Gallery

Oh yes, sorry, I misread. Sub-par playing. My apologies.

I'll wait for djbent to chime in, she's in charge. I'd understand if maintaining certain voices of official commentators might be important.

let's get some commentary from the current commentators - but i'll leave it up to any of them to copy and paste your essays from Game V, Centurian, as they truly were informative. but i do think it's nice to get the unique perspective of people commenting, b/c we all do approach the game somewhat differently.

Righto.

If any students want to do some extracurricular. then its found in last years thread (again at threadID=474841 ). The *most* relevant parts that are not game specific are towards the bottom of page one of that thread. The opening long posts (by Dunecat and Jacob) are game specific, so the main ones would be mine (the really big one) and then the rest on that page.

I can summarise most of the commenting with "look at the whole board because they all affect you." But thats all from me guys, I need to write some serious papers. Good luck.

personally I think if we had a running set of 'first season advice' posts that would be great. new commentators might have new insights to add to the mix, but the old commentary is still VERY relevant... we probably have 9-10 solid pre-game commentary posts that we can re-post for every SoW game. the question is - who has the time to go dig them all up?

Good Luck to our students and faculty. This is a time of slight anxiety. Waiting for the assignment. This is the time I light a candle and say a prayer to St. Jude as I prepare for the game. The prayer usually goes something like this "Please not Austria...Please not Austria". Of course, when I get Austria...I usually Thank St. Jude for not having given me Italy. Personally, I have won more times as Italy than any other nation I have played...so ultimately the country I end up with is usually satisfactory.

I have general ideas about how each nation should approach his opening move, but I think I will delay that until we actually have our assignments. I will try to have an opening statement fairly soon after assignments are given. If previous posts are reposted, then I will just respond to the highlights of those.

It would be interesting to ask everyone at the start of the game what their time zone is to get a sense of when people may be most likely to respond. So I might suggest everyone make that their first post in global.

Other than that....we wait.

So, uh....waiting on Athena.

I apologize for the delay. And being myself such a goofy person, I am failing to find the password for joining the game. Could anyone please kindly send it to me?

Thanks . Already got it. Le Roi sent it to me.

Question that came up in the previous game: doesn't WTA increase the motivations for players to "play for the draw" rather than take the huge risk (1/7 players * ~1/2 chance of draw) to push for a win?

That is an arguable question that has taken up quite a bit of forum space. I believe that it does encourage the draw, out of fear of gaining nothing. Others will argue that it reduces the passivity of a weaker ally. If I constantly am helping my ally without outgaining my ally, I will get nothing. Course there are always those people who would never draw a game, but keep playing until someone misses a turn.

Now that we know what country each of us will be playing, I like to start by getting an idea who my opponents are. If I am playing a non-anonymous game, I will quickly check who my opponents are. I may not make immediate decisions about my opening move based on my opponent, but I certainly want awareness of who is in the game. A newer player may not know what a Key Lepanto or Sealion opening looks like, or worse, not tell you he doesn't know. A more experienced player may have preconceived notions and may tend to follow discernable patterns. Obviously, if you are playing an anonymous game, this is unknown information....but I will use whatever information is available to me to know my opponents.


You will want to talk to everyone of your opponents. I am looking for opponents (every other player is an opponent, whether you are allied or not) who have actionable plans. I want detail. I want to know where each of my neighbors will open to. Their exact movement, if possible. If my neighbor won't tell me where, then I have to wonder whether our armies will become entangled and cause an either intended or unintended war. It is also easy to spot the liar sooner rather than later. Now, this certainly doesn't apply in every case with every territory. I can't expect to play Italy and have Austria tell me on the open that he is moving out of Trieste. I don't expect my opponent to tell me about territories that don't have an immediate interest to both of us...such as Austria telling me as Italy whether he will open to Rumania or Serbia. That is not a need to know. But the more an opponent is willing to tell me of his movements, the more I am willing to work with him. I will talk with my neighbors and see if I can confirm what I am hearing. When responding to my opponent, I want to be as truthful and honest as I can be...even if that person is to become my enemy. The worst play is to make an immediate ally and then proceed to lie to everyone else. Every alliance potentially has a counter alliance to match or beat it. My enemy today may become my friend tomorrow and I may have my hat in hand when I approach my enemy for help. Lying definitely has its place, but I try to use it sparingly. If you get pinned down and are pressed to a point that you have to lie, make it something that you can come back next turn to explain it. I like to use DMZ's to create an alarm of a neighbor's intent to attack you, but you can't rely solely on that. Just because France said he wouldn't open to BUR isn't reason to move MUN to TYL. DMZ's shouldn't necessarily be left unattended, as a wide open door is often too tempting.

As far as the opening move, you obviously want to capture a fair number of SC's. At least one. I have played as Turkey before and received no SC's on the opening year. It was quite embarrassing and resulted in a quick defeat to A/R. But you probably don't want a glut of SC's on the open either, lest you become an early target of your neighbors. E/F are probably not going to be too happy if Germany gets DEN, HOL and BEL resulting in a E/F alliance to eliminate Germany several years later. Your open should be such that it makes sense to acheive your goals.

Also this game is alot about physical space. You can defend certain areas without actually having to be in them. I will try to point those out as the game goes on.

I was hoping when the game started that one veteran would be in the Western sphere and the other in the Eastern, but it didn't work out that way. Both veterans are in the West. This should be an opportunity for Wolf89 to have some intense negotiations with both E/F. I think the goal here is to work with both England and France regarding the issue of Belgium. This is usually where things become contentious. Germany can be instrumental in who gets that SC as well as you receives Sweden. Sweden can be used to gain concessions from Russia. "I will give you Sweden if you do "x"" X usually being send a unit from MOS to STP to help stop the English....or make an agreement with Austria re: Galicia. I once was in a game where Sweden was being used to force either Russia or Turkey into the Black Sea. Germany has his hands in alot of business here in the open. Many times it is in Germany's best interest to allow Russia into Sweden unopposed.

Russia has to balance his northern and his southern game. If he is drawn too heavily in either direction, he becomes off balance. As Russia, I try to secure diplomatically relative peace in either the north or the south, so that my military doesn't become too stretched. Often that peace is acheived with Turkey, though you can't discount a longer term alliance with Italy. Russia often can't get out of the Black Sea... and it doesn't hurt to have a long term ally who can control the Mediterranean.

Austria to me is the country where decisive action is most needed. Austria doesn't have the luxury to make mistakes or have a wait and see attitude. If an agreement with Russia is possible to take out Turkey...great. You can possible take his place in the corner. An alliance with Turkey is good for relatively short time. Turkey has to go around an increasingly larger Austria and places too many demands on both. Italy and Austria are a good fit for alliances, though if the West gets settled quickly, this alliance usually can't get out of the Mediterranean and ends in draw.

Turkey is very defensible. If you choose not to Juggernaut, you will want to work closely with England to pressure Russian units to go north. You probably won't get further than Moscow before you have to turn West. Ideally, you will want to see Austria and Italy going at each other. Beware the Italian setting up a Lepanto. If he hasn't sent an army north or west and he builds a fleet, you should have built a fleet as well to counter him. Turkey gets a large percentage of wins here, so that has to be encouraging.

Italy, you get to choose sides. Generally, an opening move against France has a high chance of failure. Austria and you should talk immensely. Italy can take a wait and see attitude and still finish reasonably well...or a quick strike to Austria can build you up quickly...course if you face a Juggernaut, you will go down as quickly. Your goal should be to control the Mediterranean, some of which you can do diplomatically with Turkey and France, as both generally want you to not bug them.

Remember...you are building alliances to eliminate your competition. The stab is what gives you the win.

Oo Sucks Le_Roi Russia!! (my bias opinion because of my hard time getting a grip last SoW)
anyway what do you guys think is the best way to pull of the I/R alliance? going for Vie in 1901? or going slow and developing an alliance that exposes austria or weakens him and then jumping for Turkey?

Sealion?

How often do vets stick to those long-term moves as the Sealion, Key Lepanto and so on? It is like "think of it every game" or "one time in 10 games playing this country"?

I have found that if there is sufficient discussion about the opening and the overall goals of the alliance that you can expect high probability that your ally will open with those preset moves. Remember, most vets aren't going to lie straight out of the starting gate. If they do, they have tipped there hand and you need to assess who their real ally is and start talking to his neighbors about how to help you defend against it.

While the spring move is fairly certain, the fall move maybe less certain. I once was foolish enough to play a Key Lepanto as Austria to Babak's Italy. He opened in the spring correctly but used the position to take 2 of my home centers in the fall for a 3 unit 3 build as Italy.

You should assess where the entire board moves though. You need the flexibility to change your plan, which is why you want to stay om good terms with everyone.

Oh, great that I didn't miss this with the latest connection problems :)

My first advice to the players would be:
- If you don't like the nation you got you'll probably die fast. Be positive, each country has its unique advantages
- Don't lie on first turn. It is never worth it. Better tell someone directly that you cannot agree to their ideas. You're laying the ground for the future. There's a saying that one needs two stabs to win a game. First turn is not one of those.
- It's always easier to gain enemies, don't rush in to be the first in line. Try to get your neighbours friendly and leave them with the freedom to go to war elsewhere.

Country-specific:

RUSSIA
RUS is probably the most difficult country to play, starts over-expanded, involved on two separate fronts and being the weakest on each of them, which usually leads to roller-coaster games.

Your goal in the North should aim to avoid any other nation gaining dominance in the North Atlantic/Baltic, otherwise all of Scandinavia, together with St.P. will be lost. RUS cannot win if there's a stronger naval power North of MAO. France is your natural ally, but you'll need to work with GER/ENG or you'll lose the North. Getting Sweden would be a good start,

In the South, the situation is not much better, but you can draw in more troops making you more valuable. If you can ensure RUM and keep AUS and TUR out of GAL and the BS by the end of 1901 you've done brilliant.

TURKEY
You have one center guaranteed and a solid back in the corner. All you need to worry about at this point is your neighbours allying against you. The only one you can really attack is RUS, but RUS is also your most likely (natural) ally. You have to take a decision what are you going to do about the BS in the autumn (when RUS will probably need to use SEV for RUM).

In general, a TUR attack on RUS has a good chance for success, but there's a good chance that an AUS-IT alliance will kill you both in the meantime. All your focus should be on talking with your neighbours a grinding out a plan that will leave AUS and IT fighting each-other (or involved elsewhere) and your fleet sitting pretty in the BS end of 1901.

AUS
Austria needs to make a solid start, as after 1901 things will only get worse. Usually the goal is to take SER and GRE, without losing anything in the process. GAL and TYR are key territories, make sure you have them covered either by agreements or movement.

The main fact here, for both IT and AUS, is that their chances of surviving are much better if they work together. In every game there're one or two people who die in the beginning, just because it's too crowded. Sometimes it's just a matter of luck (all your neighbours attack you for no apparent reason) - and IT/AUS are among the usual suspects to die first. Sticking together helps A-I survive the early game.

ITALY
Taking TUN and making sure VEN is safe is the minimum for first turn. AUS is the only other player you can launch a serious attack on. This will most likely take him out, but you might be next. Russia can be a good ally longer-term, Turkey might turn to be a huge problem if he grows too big.

Italy moves slow, but can be decisive factor both East and West. Take your time and sell your services well :)

GERMANY
GER is a great country to play, but having so many neighbours has it's requirements. The key is to always have options. Don't move in a way which will limit your alternatives and ability to change sides if needed. You should not let ENG and FRA ally at any cost, so use the pressure you can apply on SWE and BEL wisely. At any cost you should gain two new centers, usually HOL and DEN.

Keep in mind that RUS can be a powerful ally in the North, IT can do the same in the South, and AUS is in a similar situation to you. Remember history and avoid two-front wars :)

ENGLAND
ENG is my favorite country to play with. Very high survival rate early game and very solid defensively in mid/late game. It's hard to expand beyond 12-14 centers, so winning with ENG is rather rare but, similar to real-life, ENG is always a major force to reckon with. Maybe convince FRA and GER for a triple alliance? :)

FRANCE
FRA has a very good starting position and the main 'problem' is that the major decision "who's next" comes quite fast, with the first builds, and everyone else is looking and adjusting their game according to it. FRA usually becomes the most predictable nation, so it will be interesting to see how Stratagos will turn things around this time :)

Good luck to all.

Apologies for being the last to come to board. And thanks to the commentators for the advices on the openings provided so far.

I am more than happy that I was lucky to draw Italy. Woohoo! I imagine Austria must share the same feeling. If the main purpose of this game is to learn about Diplomacy, better having a batism of fire and get the hardest ones to play!

To speak with the mentors do we just send them PM'S?

This is pretty cool, I came upon the last SoW after it was well established and I didn't have a clue what was going on. I'm glad I'm watching this one from the start.
Good luck to all!

@C-K- As long as they aren't PMS-ing.
Sorry for the bad pun, had to be said. :p

Hmm, people kept talking about SoW. I was like 'what is that?' Now I know. Interesting idea. =)

Here's my question. How do you maintain a friendly, cooperative, and beneficial relationship with every opponent right from the get go without committing to an alliance with them? Of course you want to try and gain information from all other players, but generally it seems best to wait and reevaluate everyone's position after the first year before fully committing to something.

what is the problem to get more than one alliance?