Warning: Wall of Text. Proceed with caution.
Sorry about missing the build phase. Besides being in the middle of a 60-hour work week, I've had my car totaled and my house flooded...fun times. However, this thread isn't about my woes.
There is a line that we are tiptoeing in regards to talking about the options players have, discussing the moves they have made, and influencing play. Of course, just talking about the game is going to have the potential to influence the moves of the players, but we should try and prevent that influence as much as possible.
Ideally, we would point out potential options in a way that does not suggest one may be better or worse than the other, let the students talk to their TA and then make their decision, and then comment about the decisions they made.
It's not always so easy, though. For instance, we can point out that a player has the option of attacking either Country A or Country B. They attack Country A, where attacking Country B was clearly the correct choice. On one hand, we want to tell them they made a mistake, but that would clearly influence play, because often times their correct decision moving forward would still be to change course and attack Country B. Essentially, I believe the instruction should be something like "You made this key decision, which was a mistake, and here's why. Because of that, you are in this position, and you could do this, this or, this. Now, what's the proper move?"
I've had most of this typed up yesterday (though I rewrote parts of it to reflect other commentary that was emerged), but I wanted to wait until after the retreat to comment, because I didn't want to influence England's retreat option, and the things Germany and Russia need to think about would be different based on England's decision.
Anyway, I'm going to start in the West because that theater is more interesting to talk about, and there were more mistakes made there.
Germany:
Let's start with the builds: why did you build a fleet Kiel? You had to build a fleet this year, but placement is important. What can a fleet in Kiel do that one in Berlin can't? It can move to Heligoland or Holland. Combined with the fact that you already have a fleet in Holland, this definitely sends a message of hostility towards England. I'm not saying the build was bad; in fact, I thought it was quite good.
I thought your moves this spring were poor, however. England built a fleet in Liverpool, signaling friendliness towards France, and had already declared war on Russia (and put a fleet out of position against both France and yourself) in the process, and he was was likely to move on you directly after he took St. Petersburg, if not immediately. Because you let him have Sweden, and because England declared war on him, he likely would have cooperated with you in pushing England out of Scandinavia (and perhaps help you assault his island), and France may have also joined in on the party.
Instead, what did you do? Not much, except antagonize the only guy who you could be reasonably sure would be willing to work with you. In regards to the England/France dynamic, you quite literally did nothing. You moved Munich to Ruhr, which means you now have to chose whether or not to defend it, with France moving to Burgundy, as expected. You issued holds (HOLDS!) to both Holland and Belgium. That's simply unacceptable. Now was the time to make your move, and I think that move should have been against England. You could have moved Kiel to Heligoland and Holland could have moved to the North Sea, which would either bounce the fleet moving in from Edi or cut the North Sea's support on Norway, depending on what he chose to do. If you wanted to attack France, you could have moved to Picardy, bounced Germany in Belgium as you moved up that Berlin army towards Ruhr, or even move Munich to Ruhr and Berlin to Munich. Instead, you issued holds.
Despite your poor Spring moves, you are still in pretty good shape. You are in Standing in Sweden, but you'll have to decide whether to use your fleet in Baltic to defend it. If things go right, you'll get a build this year. I seriously doubt your TA advised you of these moves. If he did, then I would certainly love to hear what he was thinking later. Be sure you are communicating with him as much as possible. After your successful 1901, you really messed up here. You can get past this bad turn, but a few more like it will surely send you on your way to being eliminated.
France:
Your fleets are an interesting move, indeed. Italy surely doesn't like to see those moves, and without press, you cannot explain to him your intentions, even if you legitimately has no intention on attacking him right now. You run the risk of Italy pulling back from the Lepanto and moving towards you.
In some situations, especially in press games where you can talk with Italy, moving Por to Spain SC and Brest to MAO can be an excellent precursor for a fall stab where you move MAO to Irish (with Lvp hopefully being undefended) and Spain back to MAO. This works great in situations where you are getting a build in 1902, like if you took Belgium and Portugal in 01, and take Spain with an army in 02. This allows you to build a fleet in Brest if you want to, while at the same time having a convoy path set up to England's island, if the situation is right to convoy over. In this situation, however, I think if you were intending on attacking England, it would have been better to go at him directly, since be built in Edi and the Channel was likely to be open. This is assuming you have any intentions of attacking England, which may or may not be the case. Only you (and probably your TA) know the intentions of your fleet moves.
This might be a good time to point out that you always need to be evaluating the board and making the best decision. It seems like an obvious statement, but it can be more difficult than it sounds. Sometimes, you choose to go down a path that ends up leading to a dead end. It's important to recognize the “Dead End” signs along that road, and turn back, rather than continuing down that road until you actually hit that dead end. This analogy might not really apply to you here (in fact, it might have been better placed in England's section), but it's always a good thing to keep in mind.
England:
First off, Split is right when he says that not finalizing, especially a retreat, is often bad manners. However, it's perfectly acceptable for this game. It's important that you have ample time for you to talk with your TA, whether it was about the decision whether to retreat to Finland or disband, or whether it was about these fall moves after the retreat. Additionally, it gives us commentators a larger window to post our input, which provided a better opportunity for students to get more feedback before putting in moves (and hey, it also reduces the time commitment, which is really useful for myself currently)
You've made it clear as day that you want to work with France, and it looks like France is responding favorably, but that's not a certainty. There is the option of him walking (sailing?) right into the Irish Sea, and with the way your units are currently positioned, you wouldn't be able to cover Liverpool. Disbanding would be tempting; France would have it in his mind that if he did move into Irish, you just may have that build coming, which would make it less likely for him to make the move. However, you made the right decision with the retreat. It's just too likely that you'll need that unit to reclaim a center, whether that be Norway, Sweden, Denmark, StP, or a bold attempt at two to try and actually get a build here.
Now, it comes down to the actual decision you make. If you want to, you can guarantee that you take back Norway, but you need to decide of that's the best option. Look at all of your available options, your opponents available (and decide which ones are likely), and think about how the board might play out with different combinations of orders put in by you and your opponents, and this will help you decide which option you should choose.
Russia:
Your builds were strong. The Army gives you more flexibility, allowing you to move to Finland if you wanted to. You are probably shocked by the German moves, and I am too. I would have expected him to cooperate with you against England, and for that reason I think your northern moves were strong. However, you are now likely to be disbanding this year because of the German's play.
In the south, you again made some more strong moves. It's really a shame that Turkey did almost nothing with his turn. It would have been terrific if he took Serbia with your support, and it would have been beneficial to you if he had bounced him in Greece, as well. With him doing neither, he's allowed Austria to freely advance his units into ideal position.
Now, you have some decisions to make. One of the more interesting ones is what to do with Moscow? Do you support StP again, in case England tries to take that instead of Norway, or do you move it south to Ukraine to join the fight against Austria?
You are in an uncomfortable situation, and there's a risk that this game won't end pleasantly for you. Sometimes, you are just going to lose, even if you don't make a mistake. The play of your neighbors (whether that be by skilled play or poor play) sometimes leaves you with no chance to succeed. I'm getting ahead of myself a bit, because you aren't in trouble yet, and there's many possibilities around the board that can lead to you having a successful game; there is just potential for trouble. The next year or so will probably be make or break, and unfortunately for you, I feel that your fate right now is left more in the hands of your opponents than in your own, but I guess that's not all that unusual.
Turkey:
I disagree with Split here, and I would love to hear his thoughts about why Turkey's moves were perfect. I agree with Barn3tt on the matter. Turkey blew it this turn, even without taking Russia's support into Serbia into account. Bulgaria was at almost no risk. Austria was unlikely to make a move on it, in my opinion, and even if he did, it would require Russia's very unlikely support.
Instead, you wasted the moves of three units: Bulgaria and Black Sea were both ordered to support Rumania (when neither were needed), and Con supported Bulgaria. It would have been MUCH more effective to move Con to Bul with Black Sea support, and move Bul to either Serbia or Greece. Often, when in a normal AI vs RT where Austria takes his two in 01, he'll move Greece to Aegean, Serbia to Greece, Trieste to Serbia. Your move to Greece or Serbia will force Austria to take longer to get into proper position, which gives you and Russia a larger chance to break through his defense before he has his line completely set up.
Smyrna moving to East Med was his only good move of the season. This is my preferred move with the fleet for a couple reasons. First, I want to keep Italy as far away from completing the Lepanto as possible, in hopes that he decides it isn't worth the effort and decides to either stab Austria or turn to attack France. With Austria's fleet in Greece in 01, Italy usually moves to East Med because the Austrian often moves to the Aegean, and a bounce would be horrible for their cause.
Moving forward, you are in a bit of an uncomfortable situation, but there's light at the end of the tunnel. With the French fleet moves, Italy can't be the most comfortable. Now, there's certainly no guarantee that those fleets are heading at Italy; they can just as easily stab England for what may be a guaranteed build next year, depending how the rest of the board plays out. However, what's going through Italy's mind? Does he try to continue with the Lepanto, or does he pull back and go hard at France?
Italy:
There's not a whole lot to say about your build and Spring moves. They were the proper moves to make, and the situation in the east is relatively standard. What you don't like to see is France's fleet movements to Spain SC and MAO. If he wants to, he can take GoL and West Med unopposed, immediately.
You have a decision to make: do you continue with the Lepanto, hoping that France is using his fleets either to stab England, or is planning on just holding them to deter any attack from you, or do you abandon the attack on Turkey and prepare to fight France? Read the board, talk to your TA, and then decide what course of action is best.
Austria:
There's even less to say about your actions. You made the correct army builds, and then you made solid spring moves. Luckily for you, Turkey played passive and didn't bounce you in Greece or Serbia (which he would have taken), allowing you to complete your formation. Every unit of yours is on the front line, which is exactly where you want them to be right now. You are in a very strong position.
One thing to keep in mind is the French movements. It may end up causing him to abandon the attack on Turkey, and you may end up having to fight them alone. That's not as scary as it sounds, especially with Russia currently facing northern pressure; once you get either Bul or Rumania (and getting one will likely lead to getting the other), you will have the units to fight both of them alone, should you have to.
Another potential positive, if Italy chooses to go for France, is that you may have the opportunity to build a second fleet. Normally, a fleet build by Austria leads to a conflict with Italy, because there's just not a whole lot Austria can do with it. If it's early in the game and Italy is doing the Lepanto, you are going to be in the Aegean and Italy is going to be in East Med, so there's simply no room for it to be used against Turkey. However, if Italy pulls back to attack France (or defend against a French attack), you just may have that opportunity. If you have not breached Turkey, and the Juggernaut is still intact, you will need that second fleet in the East Med to break him, and Italy should know that. He's still probably not going to like the build, but if he's engaged with France, he's probably going to grudgingly accept it and move on, as long as you give clear signs you are simply building it to attack Turkey because Italy's fleet isn't in the East Med to do so. Later, this fleet may be used to either deter/defend an Italian attack, or it can be useful for a later solo attempt if you are fortunate enough to end up in that position.
In the later stages of a game, if you build another fleet after growing big, it's almost certainly going to be a “stab build” where you are telling Italy that it's time for you to attack him and make your push for a solo, and it makes a difference if that fleet ends up being your second or third fleet on the board.
The Things Public School Doesn't Teach
left of my starting 100 so if anybody's up for a cheaper game, I'd be up for that. A little bit about myself: I'm a huge Tolkien geek, I absolutely love sports, and I'm currently in college so I'll be pretty busy for the next 4 weeks.
)
)
)
)
)