Nice job josemurc (Germany) for soloing over a big group of thousanders. Perhaps it was an advantage as egos or expectations got in the way of putting up a coherent defense? No big lucky guesses or brilliant ploys that I noticed (though maybe something of that happened early when I wasn't paying attention to his theater), but josemurc carefully took what was given up and completed an efficient and workmanlike solo to enter the ranks of the thousanders with a flourish.

Story from my view (Italy):
I opened very friendly to Austria (Zmaj), opening up Venice and doing everything I could to make him feel comfortable. Nevertheless, at times I would need to traverse within range of his centers and each time I did that Zmaj would reflexively cover his centers from me to the detriment of his campaign against Russia (A/I were battling a stout R/T in the early game). I decided to send my northern army up towards Russia and instead of helping us, this just caused Austria to cover his centers and give up territory to Russia. Everything I did was to signal good intentions to Austria, I just can't understand why he felt to need to crash his position versus Russia in excessive worry over me. Two times were particularly bad, in Autumn 1904 and Auturmn 1906. In the latter, I was clearly battling a combined F/G, very strong since conquering England, with my army in Tyrolia holding off both Germany in Munich, Silesia and Bohemia, and France making assaults on Piedmont, and Austria feels the need to waste his move by self-bouncing in Trieste. Inconceivable. At that point, I abandoned the fight on Turkey to pit all forces versus France as there was clearly no working with the hopelessly paranoid Austrian. Quite a shame, as I think things may have been different if he were to focus more on Russia.

After some little back and forth with France, I realized my only hope was to back off France and hope that he stabbed Germany or he realized Germany may come for him. He did very well and appeared to get the message from my one obscured support order, and just in time too, and Germany was coming through the gates.

France was obviously in trouble, Vienna held Germans, and Russia (Lando) was throwing to Germany. Times seemed dark indeed. But we did have a stalemate.

This is where I wonder if egos of thousanders got in the way, as I can't understand why they didn't all set in for the 17-center stalemate line that we had basically set up. In Autumn 1910 we had 17 centers that we could have held against all attacks (Turkey, Sev, Bul, Ser, Bud, Tri, Italy, Tunis, Spa, Por, France). All Turkey had to do was to support Serbia to hold instead of attacking Rum (!!??). Perhaps he saw the stalemate evaporate when France potentially didn't get it and retreated his fleet to Wales, when the stalemate line could have instead been secured by destroying his fleet and rebuilding as an army in Paris. With armies in Pic,Bur,Mar, Par and a fleet in Brest, with Italians and Turkey holding the MAO, the line in the West would have been secured.

But alas, somebody didn't see these things. Germany quite obviously grabbed Serbia and it was over from two fronts.

Once again, well done josemurc.

responding to Roka's post. I forgot about that failure of the Budapest move too. Maybe he was still worried that I would take Trieste? I have no idea what he was thinking.

That said, Roka, you sealed Germany's victory by failing to support Serbia. If you were paying attention to Austria's moves you could see that all he was doing was holding and supporting his own units, oblivious to working with anyone as a team. Thus, hope that he would support you to Rumania was pretty slim. Plus the German move to Serbia was quite obvious. Not sure why you attacked Rum like you did.

@cspieker: holding Serbia in 1910 would have been useless. I attacked Rumania to show austria I need a support there. It was obvious germany will take Budapest. Rum attack Ser, Tyr attacks Tri, support are taken away, germany walks into budapest. It couldn't be more obvious. It's "how to get an SC one-o-one". There was no way to hold budapest without being in rumania, that's why I had to go for Rumania.,

What I see is Austria was defending himself passivly, meaning instead of taking away supports he rather held himself, which was bad.

Later, when I got Sevastopol, and was able to hold it, I saw there's no way France will be able to hold off germany in england, so I knew we have to get rumania also, otherwise we are doomed. If I held serbia in the last turn Germany would have won later. It was just the matter of time. True, I could have held it, but on north seas there was no stalmate guaranteed, far from it. Sooner or later you would have lost against germany in France.

@cspieker: as I said, you are right about Serbia, it was my mistake. But I usually think rounds forward and I knew France can't hold, so we must get back Bud+Vie+Rum, otherwise we don't have a chance.

If you knew stalemate lines well, you know once the enemy crosses it it's just the matter of time until he succeeds. My thinking was, we need to get SCs back east faster then losing them at west. Sadly serbia was my mistake, I admit it, but I think I just brought forward Germany's win in time, not gave him the win.

You needed to support Serbia in Spring 1911. We didn't need Budapest, but losing Serbia is what ultimately killed us.

See my count of SC's above. We didn't need England.

If we had Rum+Ser (which we never had) then it can be held forever from BS+Bul+Ser.
Meaning Trieste can finally attack bud, tyr can take away support, so can rumania attack gal, so Austria succeeds and get Budapest.

Rumania was far more important then you think, it was the path towards getting back austria's home SCs. My plan was to have bulg+rum. Sadly I couldn't make it.

France could hold with armies in Bur,Pic,Par,Gas and fleet in Brest. With my two fleets and yours we could have held MAO, and the line would have been secure in the West.

Mar S Bur
Par S Bur
Bre S Pic

MAO hold <- Italian
NAf S MAO <- Italian fleet
WMed S MAO <- Turkish fleet

It is a bit complicated and I'm not surprised that it wasn't seen by everyone involved. Oh well.
WMed S MAO

We needed budapest in like the next 4 rounds!!!! What you don't see is germany would have beaten you northwest, and without getting back bud+vie we would have lost.

Again, we didn't need Rum

Sev H
Bla S Sev
Arm S Sev
Ser H
Bul S Ser
Tri H
Adr S Tri
Ven S Tri
Pie H

and the Western line is detailed above.

cspieker: NO! germany would have taken all from brest to paris, and probably portugal and spain as well. You wouldn't have been able to hold it. Brest is an easy take for France.

And you are right that it would have been so much simpler if Austria would have taken Rum in Autumn 1910

Are you not bothering to read my posts? What is wrong with this line in the West?

Bur H
Mar S Bur
Par S Bur
Pic H
Bre S Pic

MAO hold <- Italian
NAf S MAO <- Italian fleet
WMed S MAO <- Turkish fleet

Germany got into burgundy, which had nothing to do with me holding serbia or not!

And which year are you talking about. if germany gets into english channel, then picardy can't hold burgundy anymore.

Ohh you mean paris holds burgundy, my bad!

What you say is not good, it has the assumption france has 6 units (mars,bur,par, pic, bre, mao) with only 5 SCs (por,spa, mars,par, bre)

So it would have had to be your fleet on MAO. which you hadn't

Of I see turkish fleet, well. Yeah that way it's good, you are right. There's no chance to form succh a stalmate line with 3 countries. Usually impossible to have the cooperation, theoretically it works, practically, never.

Don't forget germany got into EC as early as 1911 spring, and burgundy right after. We were already late.

At any rate, France didn't see this either. He had a retreating fleet that he could have destroyed at rebuilt at the end of Autumn 1910 and rebuilt as an army in Paris. At that point the line would have been solid, but you would have had to race your fleet out West. But you could have gotten there before Germany had three set up on MAO.

Plus your ideas about taking back Austria are good, but very difficult in a gunboat game where three different countries would have needed to be on the same page.

Yes, once 1911 rolled around, it was too late. France's failure to rebuild an army in Paris at the end of 1910 doomed that theatre.

I think we lost this game when we lost vie+bud. Generally germany should NEVER get anything south from Warshaw. I know, I just won a game with germany yesterday, being in bud+vie+sev. It was easy, and getting the rest from france is a walk in the park.

Whoever lets germany into these SCs give him a big chance.

cspieker: that's why I was telling, I admit, losing serbia is my fault, but losing the game is not. France was doomed, I wanted to compensate it by getting back bud+vie.

My thinking was not to build a stalemate line (like you proposed) but to get back those which are behind the "natural" stalmate line which all of us know very well.

I never beleived we can stop germany otherwise. You did. As france handled the situation it seems I was right about that, the west would have fallen.

All in all, I say germany played far better than we did. He was fighting 4 countries, where it's always certain there will be misunderstanding. The more enemies you keep on the map, the bigger your chances are for a solo. My biggest wins were always with 5-6 countries still alive. It's impossibe to have a coordination among them without any glitch.

When I'm going for a solo in a game I always take care to keep as many countries alive as I can becuase they won't understand eachother. Germany was quick and we had different ideas about the answer to the threat. That's what misunderstanding is about. Your solution is good, my solution is good, maybe france has a 3rd one. But since we cannot communicate we will invitably lose. We don't lose because we don't do your solution or my solution, we lose because we can't agree on any solution due to lack of communication.

So blaming me on losing is not to kind, because you could blame france or austria as well.

A short comment from Austria: You're right, I blew it. Too much thinking for my tastes, I can't even be bothered to follow everything you say here. I'll stick to live games from now on.

@rokakoma - that's the truth. When there are 5 or so alive everyone is more worried about staying alive and not getting cut out of the draw than they are about ensuring there is a draw. Which you really can't blame them since that happens often and I'd rather see someone solo then try and play the team game and get picked off.

Zmaj: I'm not blaming you, there was only 1 move especially which I didn't understand, all the rest I don't care. 4 of us lost the game, not you, but what's more important one of us won it. As I said, each of us has his own interpretation how to stop the solo threat, if those ideas are not in line, then we lose. No matter each of them is good on its own.

Hey all, France here. I can't respond in detail right now, but briefly: I certainly take some responsibility for bungling the defense in the west. I almost did disband that fleet and build another army... But obviously didn't do it.

That said, there were plenty of mistakes made by several people, evident not just by my errors but by the German presence in Rumania and Serbia (of all places). Germany played very well.

gg to everyone.

I followed this game from the get go, and I was convinced Germany had the solo after Spring 09 when Russia handed him Sev before everyone else was ready for it. This was a great game to watch and congratulations to josemurc for a well played game. Solo's in pots that high are few and far between.

IT'S ALL RUSSIA'S FAULT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

JK

Agreed that it's everyone's and no one's faults, but in actuality it was Germany's fault. Very well played.

Then again jmo brings up a good point. But it was not just Russia handing Germany Sevastopol, Turkey also had his part. At that point it did seem fairly clear that Germany was the solo threat. I don't get why Turkey isn't supporting Sev at that point.