@zultar: yes, we do think differently about this game. Here's what I see:

Russia, Austria and France are the three biggest powers with 19 units combined, they are all three allied with each other (the Russian-French relation is hard to judge without seeing their press, but I'm confident they're on very good terms), and all four of the other powers are fighting each other. So if they stick to their current alliances, they're guaranteed a three-way draw. So let's see if any of them have the opportunity to get more, i.e. a solo.

France: needs to get Tunis, stab England, build enough armies to hold Munich/Berlin and enough fleets to conquer Scandinavia while protecting Tunis. Possible, but both Russia and Austria have stronger navies already and will probably be building fleets too.

Russia: needs to get some builds from Germany/Turkey and a good opportunity to stab Austria. Needs France to stab England to be able to hold Scandinavia long-term. And Austria needs to fall quick enough for Russia to get to 18 before the whole board organises against him. Possible, but Austria will probably be too hard a nut to crack.

Austria: Needs maybe one more fleet to become the dominant naval power in the South. Needs to get build quicker than Russia and/or distract Russia to build Northern fleets. Most importantly, Austria needs to cross the stalemate line in either Munich or Marseilles. Possible, but as it stands, neither of those goals seem within range.

So, all three major powers have some solo potential, but small. But they all benefit from playing the triple alliance. In either case, none of them are soloing without an ARF alliance.

Take a look at the global press. Can't take it at face value, but it seems to imply some weakness in France's relationship with Russia and Austria.

Well, we'll just have to change that, won't we?

Oh snap, I just got dissed by France in global press.

No, France, stabbing England wouldn't have been an automatic solo. Of course not. In a game with 7 strong players solo'ing is nearly impossible. But you would have been in a good position for it. Now, not so much. It doesn't matter how many Italian centers you take, as long as England remains strong you can never come close to a solo.

Can you defeat England later? Perhaps. But it'll be slower. You won't manage it before Italy (and probably Germany) is dead.

And yes, England could have disbanded Norway to rebuild in Liverpool. But look at how out of position his units would be. You'd still roll over him.

England is notoriously difficult to defeat, especially when he has armies on his island but his attacker doesn't. France would have a long time trying, and unless he could devote 4+ units to the attack, it would not have worked eventually. So no rollover at all. There are even examples of england coming back from one or two centers to win the game.

I read that global press comment from France. He needs a slap in the face for misreading my suggestion. I didn't say he and Austria were in a good alliance, I said he should listen to me and forge an alliance with Austria. Just for that, I want the west to kill off France. Fear my power.

And don't worry, Balki, I definitely see a solo coming your way. Tis my power.

Dax and ATC aren't contributing near enough in the press. I have a short attention span, can we swap them out for some more entertaining characters?

The audience craves more rants and mud-slinging.

France, I think we can stop Austria from being a rabid dog. Slap him and give him a shot. And then sic him on the rest of the board.

I think France rising to the bait of the gallery and explaining his ideas is probably unwise. I similarly think that not doing exactly what uclabb says at all times is unwise. Listen to that rabid dog last be bite you, Yale. The bite is bad enough, but I hear the shots they give you afterwards are even worse.

Also, France:
http://media.giphy.com/media/tmehsCdMJQptC/giphy.gif

I can't see Austria's diplomacy of course, but France's contempt seems a bit strange, considering how well Austria is doing. Rabid dog or not, he is clearly doing something right. If Austria really comes across as a rabid dog in his private messages, my guess would be that it is a deliberate pretense.

And let's talk more about the potential Russian stab on Austria last season. Some people were surprised about that. But Russia probably couldn't have known that Austria wouldn't cover Budapest, so the direct gain would have been 1 uncertain center. And if Russia had failed to get Budapest then further progress would have been difficult, since Austria would have had a build.

The stab still could have been worth it. Everything depends on Turkey, what kind of player he is and what relation he has with Russia. So not really something we can judge on from the sidelines.

The most important difference I think between the Russia / Austria situation and the France / England situation is long term potential. Russia can grow towards a solo with Austria as an ally. I don't mean he can reach a solo without coming into conflict with Austria, but he can grow towards a position where a solo is clearly on the table. The same is true for Russia in an alliance with Turkey. So in that regard either is a good choice.

This is not true of the France / England alliance. Generally speaking France will not have solo potential in such an alliance. France can never fully commit in the Mediterranean with a large English fleet to his North, and he can rarely fully commit against England. If he does manage to take out England later in the game, it will be slow, while leaving him exposed in the east. If the rest of the nations are only semi-competent they will see the solo coming from miles way and block it.

Of course all of this still depends on diplomacy. If you can manipulate some of the other players well enough then you can gain a solo from almost any position. But in general France can't allow England to grow too strong if he wants to keep the possibility of a solo open.

That's not necessarily a reason not to ally with England. But it does mean that when you do find yourself in the perfect position to strike, there have to be some truly exceptional circumstances to justify not striking.

And I can't see the press in this game, so I always have to be careful with judgement. But France was in a perfect position to strike. He was completely safe from Italy, and Germany was in a bad position too. The diplomatic situation would have to have been exceptionally bad to not be able to get either Russian or German support against England (Give back Hol for German support!).

Let's look at the tactics. England if smart will break Norway and rebuild in Lvp. France builds a fleet in Bre and brings that to the Channel in 1903. Plus you take Belgium. England can block one of these moves, but not both, and can only bring an army home if he lets both happen. Then in the fall you can convoy, and you have a gamble there, but you can just try again if you fail. If you gamble wrong 2 or more seasons in a row things get ugly, but by that time the Russians or Germans should be moving in from the east. If you can disband Holland (or arrange a disband in some other way) so you can build a 3rd fleet things are even better.

Rebuild in Lvp?! Russia and Germany aren't enough battles he now needs to start a war with France too?

And some point you have to be willing to gamble somewhat on the relationships you've forged. You'll never win any fights if you keep one hand on your wallet the entire time.

oh, thank God, I checked the game. I thought he actually rebuilt in LVP. I was so scared VI. So scared. Hold me.

France, if you don't fix your attitude, I'll be cheering on your demise.

Go France!!

You would so have muted him by now, Valis.

I'm actually pretty surprised that the gunboater who isn't a fan of press in general doesn't appreciate uclabb's unique style. Guess it's just one of those things a lot of people can't stand.

As for Russia stabbing Austria last turn, I think that would be a terrible move. A good early alliance is a lot more valuable than a few centers, and that A/R has a lot of potential. I also imagine there'd be some eastern unification to counter it. These are good players who recognize when someone has the advantage over them, and they'd work together to negate that advantage pretty quickly.

I'll leave that judgement for myself and/or till I meet uclabb at The Boroughs.

Bump. Just because we're paused doesn't mean we can let this fall behind.

Note: All of Italy and Tunis are Austria's by right.

What? That's not right. Tunis is mine.

...

Why are y'all looking at me like that?

...

Oh, I'm not playing in the game? A minor detail! TUNIS IS MINE

Also, what? Disband F Nwy, Build F LvP?! Even if England was actually looking to start a fight with the only neighbour they're not currently fighting, in what world would F LvP be better than F Lon? Especially since "Disband F Nwy" would surely be replied with "Build F Bre".

I mean, the whole idea is silly in the first place, but Build LvP instead of Lon would be taking a bad idea and going for a worse idea.

During this intermission, anybody wish to add their speculation on the first elimination?

Hrm. If I was staring at a gunboat board, I would say "why is Italy not dead already?"

But this is about as far away from a gunboat board as one gets. :-)

If I *had* to bet, I think I'd still pick Italy to go first, but Germany is potentially close in the running, depending on how builds go. But all of those bets are very dicey - nobody is really in a situation that's impossible to recover from yet, IMO.

Okay, that pause helped me out commentary wise, since I haven't had the chance to take a proper look at the board before now.

Let's start with France. Congratulations, after thinking about this for a while, and thinking about the possibility of an English stab I think your current moves are about as good as possible. I will say that I still think the all army builds have limited you in a way you shouldn't be right now, but I also think that you just managed to ensure that Austria and Russia don't have a clear walk into the west. You completely changed the power dynamic with England and now that you threaten Belg you have significantly more power in that alliance.

Faced with a Germany who's masterplan seems to be holding his centers, I expect you to be able to make more gains shortly. So for the first time this game, have a cookie.

Russia, from a purely tactical standpoint your moves are awful. So on that note congratulations. You are not really under any significant threat from anyone on the board, you have a steady alliance with Austria. England isn't in a position to cause you many problems so you have room to cause diplomatic chaos, which I am growing more confident in thinking you and Austria are excelling with.

The last big point I want to make is on Turkey. This is a great learning example for everyone watching this game. Turkey was simply outclassed this past turn, and it shows in his failure to realize it. Let me explain this from how I would have thought about that turn. If I'm Turkey my thoughts last turn are as follows:

- Italy and Austria bounced in Ion with Austria moving into Adr, those two are clearly fighting and Austria is going to win that fight hands down. In fact he's going to win it too fast unless I do something.

- Russia took the Black Sea so we're either allying or he's going to stab me. I might want to consider hitting Sev and telling him I'll be doing it to force him into defending it at this point regardless of what I think is happening.

- There are no clearly defined alliances between myself, Russia, or Austria, so I have to make sure that I am one of the 2 players who gets into one. Right now I can be offering them both either Serbia or Rum as the main bargaining chip. I have to make sure I have an agreement for one of them on how to get my next center.

Now lets take into account what actually happened.

- Italy was bounced by Turkey, and Turkey admitted in Global Press that he picked his allies wrong. This means he intentionally bounced Italy. This is a terrible move because it ensures that Austria is going to demolish Italy which is not ideal for anyone besides him.

- Bulgaria was held. This means that Turkey knew he did not have a deal in place with either Russia or Austria. In the situation from the previous turn, where there are no clearly defined alliances, one can safely assume that any alliance will result in at least 1 center being attacked in the Balkins. Since Turkey *knew* that he wasn't involved in that alliance he should have refrained from allowing either Russia or Austria to convince him to bounce Italy.

- Armenia moved to Smyrna. Italy could not afford to do anything beside move to Ion. So why give up your bargaining chip against Russia? Now that Italy is desperate he might just try and attack you to gain a center or simply to mess with you so you now have to keep Smyrna in place. Which is unfortunate for you since you cannot afford to have Italy annoyed with you.

Overall it's a rather rough turn, and I think it demonstrates that while Turkey is a good player, he's a bit outclassed by the likes of ATC and uclabb who are 2 of the sites absolute best.


The final point I want to make is a comment about the Global Press. Calling out other players as having "delusional and illogical" press is stupid. You are burning bridges and screwing yourself over long term. The #1 rule of this game is NEVER stop talking to anyone, ever. I don't care how unreasonable you find them, how annoying they are, or how badly they just stabbed you. If you stop talking you're reducing yourself to playing a gunboat. At the very least you should be talking for the purpose of information gathering.

So I would strongly recommend everyone avoid making those type of comments and focus on improving diplomatic relations.

I'd like to point out to my follow commentators above that my remark "England if smart will break Norway and rebuild in Lvp" was of course talking about the hypothetical situation I had been discussing earlier in that post (A French stab on England) and not the actual situation.


Now back to the game. I was surprised by Germany retreating to the Baltic. I had really expected a break and rebuild in Kiel. The retreat to the Baltic only makes sense if Germany is 1) convinced he can break up the English / French alliance and 2) is very afraid of Russian aggression. I can't imagine either of those points being true at the moment.

The English retreat is probably wise, but I would have loved seeing the much more aggressive retreat to Ska. That would have been very interesting to see for us observers.

Eh? No. Ber-Kie is a very sensible option, and if Germany is going to do that then having a unit in Kiel is pointless. And retreating to Ska would be a poor choice because... England might retreat there. Which is also why England didn't retreat there.

Bump... Whatever happened to all the hype!

I blame France.