Cant we just open the floor to anybody giving commentary? We've just had the crucial F01 and Build 01 phases without any word. At this point I'm dying for *anyone* to share an analysis.

i would share an analysis if i was not a complete noob if you want the noob perspective and no one minds i can post my thoughts

I'm a TA. Have to keep my mouth shut. But I want feedback also.

I do want feedback as well. I want to say stuff but then again that wouldn't be productive. I'm fine with hearing Atundal out as long as nothing dumb is said like "Why didn't England build an army?"

I'll post something in a sec.

By that I mean like an hour.

I'll toss in my two cents briefly, if you guys don't mind.

This board is shaping up quite a bit differently than the other SOW. The east is shaping up to be just as interesting, though. Italy pulled a fast one on Austria with the Obriani, and I'm a big fan of the opening. Given the possible fight between Turkey and Russia, the A/I fight will be interesting, especially if A can get R on its side. Russia has also thrown its hat into the ring in the west with the second fleet in St. Pete. Germany has some big decisions to make this coming turn. F Kiel is a flexible build and allows for an attack on either NTH or Swe, but he has to consider the consequences of either action. Hitting the North likely gives Sweden to Russia, which puts A Ber in an awkward position if it's eventual destination is Warsaw. On the other hand, Swe is ripe of the taking, but likely at the cost of not immediately helping France. There's also the question of Belgium - take it, or cede it to France? A seven center Germany is a blessing and a curse, but dangerous in the hands of a capable player.

Lots of possibilities. 1902 is always the most interesting turn.

I will copy CS's style because I think it is a good one.

Fall 1901:

Pic -> Belgium
France choosing to bounce England in Belgium is a pretty clear choice of sides by France. My read from that if I were playing as England would be that France not only would prefer to work with Germany than with me, but further that he feels confident that he has Germany on his side. This second part is the part that is alarming.

Pied -> Tyr
I love the opening to Piedmont by Italy, and I also loved CS's commentary about it all of those turns ago. I really don't think it happens enough. I don't love this move, though. First, what was the chance that Marseilles would be open? I would argue it was something like 90 percent. If France moved Gascony to Marseilles, he would guarantee himself 1 build total. If he moved to Spain, he gets either 1 or 2 builds. Most players would move to Spain. Further, even if you did bounce, he would only have one build and wouldn't have the power to attack you.

So the question, then, is whether being in Marseilles would be a good thing. This is where strategy/diplomacy should come in. You should have known what was going on with Belgium, at the very least that England was convoying in. With this knowledge, you would have known that Engalnd would either have an army on the continent or would have been pissed off by France. Thus, the move would have manufactured an ally by giving England a clear path of expansion.

But what about strategy? The reason why moving west is less common I think is that Italy needs time to get itself set before the east resolves itself and comes knocking at his back door. ITaly is my favorite country for this exact reason- perhaps uniquely, Italy has to influence the speed of both the eastern and western spheres to make sure the timing is right for its growth. So was the east going to be slow? Russia's bounce heavy 1901 was a good sign that this would be the case. All signs pointed to a slow slog by Austria and Russia to try to take out Turkey, which meant that you likely would have time to lock up Iberia before Austria could turn your way.

It's also worth noting that you forfeited your chance to Lepanto in Spring by moving Rome to Venice. A much stronger move would have been to negotiate with Austria to ensure that Trieste was going to Albania, then moved Rome to Apulia. This would have left all three options open- French attack, Lepanto, and the weak Austrian attack you have going now.

Tri -> Ven

Real quick I wanted to point out that this is a good strong move that is much superior to holding. It nicely kept Italy from being able to build in Venice in most likely move sets, which is about the best that unit could do this turn.

Con -> Smy

This was an incredibly informative move that should have sent Austria a message that he needed keep his communication up. The only reason to make this move is so that Constantinople is open for a fleet build, which meant that Turkey at least thought he and Russia were making progress after what I have to assume was a first turn stab by Russia. Especially paired with Russia taking Rumania with and army rather than a fleet and thus forfeiting Black Sea for a long time, Austria should have been (and should be) worried.

It is worth noting, though, that Turkey forfeited tactical strength in return for that flexibility. It will be interesting to see how the east develops.

Stock rising: F, T, G
Stock falling: A, E, I

Builds:

F Edi - If noting else, this is a strange build. It seemed obvious that France was coming, so a more obvious build would have been in London or Liverpool. This build makes me think you knew (or at least had a sense) that the hostile German and Russian builds were coming. If that's the case, I love love love the build. The way to defend is almost always to create an imbalance, ie to shut attacker out one by one. This build sends a message to Germany that you are going to make it hard for him to get into North Sea. This could buy you some diplomatic capital and maybe push him away from you.

F St. Petes (nc) - Although I honestly think that the builds phase was a near formality, Russia has made clear (in my opinion) his intention to work with Turkey. I like this decision, especially if he knew that Italy was going to pull back toward Austria last turn.

I basically covered the Turkish build above.

Stock Rising: T, F, R
Stock Falling: E, A, G

This is supposed to be for the professors to comment, others to ask questions *only* and the professors are the *only* ones allowed to answer them. Quit breaking the school of war rules!

Thanks all for the comments. Very interesting. I would like to neutrally suggest that commenters look through the full moves and the global press too.

@Draug: the professors have been quiet, and these people are reacting to popular demand for comment. It feels like rain on a desert to me.

Yes, Draug is correct, and it should be kept so. I also appreciate the comments by others as well. However, just to keep it purely SoW, I do agree with Draug that it should be professors and only questions from outside.

Sorry - as I mentioned, I'm doing a lot of flying (I feel like I'm commuting between Tokyo and New York this week and next), so I'm sometimes going to be slow to reply.

With that in mind, I was planning on doing a bit of a review of the questions I raised last turn (there's some good stuff in there), but instead I'll focus on the new moves. One of the key lessons at this level is that while people lie, their moves and units don't. So, with that in mind, let's look at some of the units that seem to be speaking the loudest about the intentions of each player, and what they're saying. I mentioned last time that Germany and Italy seemed to be the least committed, and thus the most in position to influence events...

Germany: F Den H [Russia: Build F StP]

Given the choice between bouncing Russia and picking up an ally, Germany chose the ally. Well played.

Germany: A Ruh S Yor - Hol

Oops. Clearly a misorder, right? Don't ya hate when that happens? I don't like this though, and here's why. Let's look at how England and France will read it. As England, you might be inclined to consider it accidental under other circumstances, but along with F Den H and a Russia F StP (nc), the idea that Germany is a true friend of yours seems like a tough sell. As France, Germany might well convince you that this was intentional, and he didn't really intend to support England into Belgium. But, then why didn't he support Picardy there? Misorders, whether accidental or "accidental", occasionally do work out well. But, it's important to make sure there's a plausible story to tell that goes along with it. Still, Germany made a very good set of decisions this turn.



Italy: A Pie - Tyrolia, France Build F Bre

I'll say more about this unit next turn, but for now I will merely note that Italy has two armies on the board and Austria has four. As a result, if Tyrolia is intended as anti-Austrian, Italy is going to need some allies in order to make any gains. I also mentioned last turn that Ven - Pie would annoy France, but wouldn't necessarily provoke retaliation, especially if there was no lasting damage.

And, it seems, France agrees with me. I would like to think that France and Italy negotiated the combination of Pie - Tyr and F Bre. Although, as a tactician, I do note that Bre and Mar are equidistant from WES. :)

Still, from where the game stands right now, Italy seems to have opted for a difficult war against Austria rather than a potentially winning war against France or Turkey.


Russia: F Sev S A Ukr - Rum, build A War.

This could just as easily have been A Ukr S F Sev - Rum, build F Sev, which would have painted a rather...different picture of Russian intentions. As I mentioned last turn, the Russian chain of bounces looked silly, but wasn't really harmful.


Turkey: A Con - Smy, A Bul -Rum

A Bul - Rum ensures that Turkey gets BLA (or, Russia doesn't get Rum). However, Con - Smy is strange-looking move; it gives up the chance to quickly get a second army into Europe proper, and in return, Turkey can build F Con instead of F Smy. But, is that worth it? F Con can go to BLA and Bul(nc), while F Smy can go to Syr and EAS. But, the most likely plan for F Con would have worked with Smy, too. And further, as long as Con bounces, that army isn't getting back from Smy - Con, which means that Bulgaria has more neighbors than supports. Finally, Smy is the wrong place to put the army -- it should at least be Ank, which can also move to Armenia but which can be convoyed someplace by BLA (which otherwise is a cuttable support). I'm going to be Smy isn't headed for Syria.

So, how do I read this move? I think I have to read it as Turkey being concerned about Sev - BLA, Ser S Ukr - Rum, and being so concerned that the ability to respond with F Con and support himself into BLA was necessary. But, let's think a bit more about what that would mean. If this happens, Turkey faces an A/R alliance, and at best it's I/T vs. A/R. In that scenario, as I just described, Turkey is going to lose Bulgaria immediately anyway, while it waits for Italian help. And then what exactly does Turkey intend to do with A Smy/Arm/wherever and two fleets to cover AEG, BLA, and Con? The solution to a grand A/R conspiracy against you has to be diplomatic, not Con - Smy. I suspect at some point in the next year you'll really wish this army were in Con.


Austria: A Tri - Ven.

Доверяй, но проверяй. Seriously, a prudent use of the unit, all things considered. You still might not like the outcome of this turn so much, but your tactics have been sound, and I think you've got some leverage to work with here.


England: Build F Edi

OK, so, this looks bad for you. Russia basically was let into Sweden in return for menacing Norway. Germany presumably offered that deal. France bounce you in Belgium. So, you're sitting here staring down the barrel of a FGR that are out for British blood, and if you're playing in the intermediate game, you know that means you die. Thus, your options here are diplomatic more than anything else -- you must break that potential alliance to survive, and must do so quickly. What's a strong player to do under those circumstances?

Let me mention a couple of possible games you can play in a situation like this.

1) The "What happens next?" game. Start talking to your neighbors about what happens when you die. Three-way alliances, when the have finished eating their prey, often become two-way alliances with some fresh meat. Your job, then, is to convince at least one of these three that they're going to be the main course to your appetizer, and that they're better off being the dominant partner in an alliance with England. Of course, your allies usually think that somebody else is on the menu instead of them, and it's your job to convince them otherwise. There's going to be a ring of truth to this, of course, if you can sell it just right, since one of them has to be wrong...

2) The uneven split game.

You have four centers. Four does not divide evenly into three. Perhaps Belgium is on the table as well. Five also does not divide evenly into three. If you can figure out who's going to get the short end of the stick, they might just be open to a better deal. Especially if you can get them arguing about exactly who that should be (see the "what happens next" game).

Can you make a credible threat to shut one of your three neighbors out completely? As a last resort, I'll pick one of my neighbors and make it clear that I know I'm dead, but I'm going to use all of my units to defend against them and let everybody else pick at my bones, so that they can rest assured it's them who gets the short end of the stick. As before, you have to pick your target wisely -- ideally you do this with the power who's most scared of what happens next. Just remember, at the battle of Sekigahara, the turning point was when Ieyasu fired on a vacillating ally/enemy, and turned him into an ally.


Powers who improved the most in F/W01: G, R
Powers who declined the most in F/W01: E; each of A/I/T to some extent and for various reasons.

@TMoW - If commenting on a particular ongoing gunboat were suddenly in demand, would it be OK to break the rules? This is a variant with rules to be followed. The mods should be silencing those willfully breakign the rules.

For the record, I am authorized to comment.

Thanks CS. Food for thought.

Yes, that was just a cross-posting, uclabb. I was talking about some of the others.

Alright, I'm going to style my comments a bit differently then CS. Apoligies for taking so long to get to this, just started working full time after graduation so working to find time to properly comment on this game.

First I'm going to talk about a few things that are important in the opening year. The first is talk talk talk. You should be talking to everyone on the board. At this level you need to readjust the countries you are concerned with. Diplomacy is amazing. In the opening year or two of the game anyone can affect any other players moves. Turkey should be talking to England, whether it's just to establish a relationship for later in the game, or to help him against Russia it doesn't matter. Talk!

At this level I expect that you all know how to talk to your neighbors and how to look at their moves and understand what they mean. What I'm going to focus on this game is the entire board and different things you all should be focusing on in addition to your regular diplomacy with neighbors. CS is a tactical genius so I don't expect I'll have much to add on his analysis of moves.

What a lot of people tend to do is break the map up into two sections, east and west. This helps new players, but it's harmful if you don't break this preconception. So for this turn I'm going to write my thoughts looking at the map as a whole and what I'd be thinking in every countries position. This is something I do when looking at Open positions in games to decide if I want to take over a CD. I'll give every country a yes/no answer here. A lot of players understand how to read a board and are pretty decent at press. What most people are slow to learn is how to take advantage of specific situations in your press. You should be sending drastically different messages when you are in Russia's position then if you're in Englands. So I'm going to point these situations out and it will be up to you to talk to your TA and figure out how and when to send messages. I spend up to half an hour writing a good message in a high class press game, and I'll be talking to everyone literally every turn. You have to create your own style obviously, but you need to learn to adjust your style to different situations, which is what I'm going to try and help everyone do in this game.

England: At this point I'm thinking my initial diplomacy failed. Germany was probably faking the misorder on my support and France's builds didn't work well. Obviously the diplomacy may say otherwise and there might be a skillfully hidden alliance in these unfriendly moves. I will be talking to Germany and pointing out that Russia and France will be in better positions to make gains against me. Italy might be open to attacking France, so that is something I'll have to put some pressure into. Italy will be reconsidering attacking Austria because of how powerful Russia will be in the south and north after this turn, so he's looking for possible builds. I have an army on the mainland so I can effectively keep any one opponent from making any gains. I can use this to threaten either France or Germany into working with me by making it clear with my next set of moves that they won't be getting any of my centers while their ally will profit. At this point I would not take over your position if you were CD

France: I'm pretty worried about Italy, since he seems to be anti-Italian, but he made a fleet which clearly shows he's considering either me or Turkey as a target. England will help him if he moves against me, so I'm going to have to be more reserved in my moves and make sure my diplomacy is effective. I'm really going to be putting pressure on Turkey to get him to move against Italy. Russia is my ally if I move against England and I have plenty of diplomatic options left available to me. At this point there isn't a lot to say because there are so many choices and I have so much diplomatic influence in several spheres of the map. I'd take this position over pretty quickly.

Germany: You've clearly been the powerhouse when it comes to diplomacy this game. That is something every will be recognizing at this point. It makes you dangerous, but it also makes you an extremely effective ally for anyone to have. Everyone is your friend right now, but no one is completely sure if they can trust you. Germany is my favorite country to play after the opening year because you have so much diplomatic influence. Everyone is your neighbor and a lot of people are going to be wanting to talk to you right now. Your next few years will completely depend on if you're able to take advantage of the press you are receiving this turn. I'd take this position over in a heartbeat. Right now diplomacy is everything for you. I know this sounds repetitive, but talk to your TA about different strategies you have open to you and specifically work on the types of offers you should be making in your press.

Russia: I love the build. An extra army in Moscow would have been fairly worthless next year, and this build gives you so much diplomatic power. You have Germany, France, and England talking to you right now, which is something that wouldn't be happening without that build. In the south both Austria and Turkey are going to be looking for an alliance as will Italy. Literally everyone would benefit by being your ally right now. You should talk to your TA about how to take advantage of that. I would take over your position in a heartbeat as well. Tactically everything is fine, diplomatically you have more influence then anyone else on the board, now you just have to take advantage of it.

Turkey: Part of what makes Turkey so great is how defensible it is. Right now the lack of an army in con to support Bulgaria reduces that significantly. So tactically your position isn't the best. In your position I would be talking to Russia and Austria obviously, but don't get so caught up in your corner that you forget about talking to everyone else. You can and should be talking with England and France right now as their moves will significantly impact the choices Italy and Russia make. At the moment I wouldn't take over your position because of the limits the fleet positions put on you. Right now talk over with your TA the kind of offers you can make to your neighbors and how to convince them that you are the appropriate choice as an ally.

Austria: Italy's moves were initially threatening, but the build makes it clear that he's willing to talk and is considering other options. Right now no one is your friend, but neither is anyone your enemy. Everyone should be talking to you as an ally and you should be sending your TA the press you get to figure out what is the best for you. You have short term and long term possibilities so there will be trade off's no matter what you decide to do. Your units are bordering Rumania and Bulgaria. Russia and Turkey both want more centers and you are in a position to deliver, consider how to use that. What should you ask in return, what's the most a neighbor is going to be willing to let you get before you become too much of a threat, etc. There are a million things to be considering right now. The more you talk the more you are going to find out what your neighbors are thinking. I would take over your position just because the diplomacy would be so interesting this turn

Italy: Germany, France, Turkey, Austria. They are all afraid of you right now. The terrifying power of Italy is that you get to be patient. You get to choose when to move which is a choice no one else gets. Sometimes Italy will move units around till an opening appears in 05. You get to consider all the offers given to you and wait till someone is desperate enough to offer you something you want. Of course, none of this helps you at all if you aren't talking to all the people who should be worried about you. Force them to make concessions to get your neutrality or help, convince your neighbors to ally in ways that will give you the best openings.

So there is a good chance that you know some or all of what I said about your country right? Well what you need to consider is what I said about everyone! You should know who everyone is talking to and why they are talking to them. If you understand what your neighbor wants from talking to someone on the other side of the map you have information. There are two almost separate elements of a game. The Diplomacy and the Tactics. Most players base their diplomacy off their tactics. Players like MadMarx and Babak though base their tactics off their diplomacy. What you want to strive towards is knowing what your ally is going to suggest before they suggest it, and you should know if it's a lie or not from your press with everyone else and whether it makes sense based on the press flying around.

For example. When I play in a game with other high class players I am not the diplomatic powerhouse. I'm not going to be more persuasive then players like MadMarx or Cachimbo. So what I do is mess up everyone's press. I spread misinformation around the board specifically designed to make people question the other press they hear. Part of what I do is identify who the dangerous talkers are, who is likely to convince someone to attack me. Who is the quiet person who's going to watch and wait while sneakily plotting in the background? What style of press does everyone else use, and how does that affect me.

That is what's going to make the difference, when you start learning how to understand press and how to style your press to fit with other people's press style.

Hope this is a decent opening intro, please send me a pm if you are a TA and you or your student have any questions. I'd love to hear Uclabb or CS's thoughts on press styles and how it impacts the game when they have some time.

I'd like some thoughts on press too.

We've moved! waiting for comments & analysis.

On press style: I think everybody tends to have their own press style, and since it's very important for your press to feel genuine, I wouldn't recommend trying to write like somebody else. I'll throw in a few notes here, but haven't really had the time to polish them, so if I say something that sounds silly, feel free to call me on it and I'll amend it. :)

The main thing I'm trying to do with my press is to influence your worldview, so that eventually I will be able to let you get what I want.

To give you a somewhat clumsy/contrived example, let's say that in the E/F/G triangle, I'm trying as E to convince F to work with me against G. I might make sure to spend some time talking about the East, something that France is more likely to be willing to discuss openly and less likely to have a lot of solid information about. So, I'll spin what's going on as being indicative of a strong A/T, perhaps something I've been hearing hints of in my discussions in the East as well. And then worry about the power vacuum that a weak Russia creates and future Germany expansion.

Ideally, what I'm trying to do is to give France the impression that if he works with Germany, he'll take me out and be the weaker partner in the alliance, while if he works with me, he'll take Germany out and be the stronger partner. I won't come right out and say that, of course, but I'll be trying to drop the hints to let France figure it out.

The key thing here is that players are very strong on operational security and don't like to tell you what they're going to do this turn, but much more eager to discuss plans for a few years down the road. So, this bears the most fruit in the midgame, where if I've done things correctly, I've both been able to get a good sense of what each player would prefer to do and then been able to drop hints and influence the things I don't want to see happen.

As part of this style, by the way, it means I very, very rarely will lie. I'll spin like crazy, but I very rarely will simply say that I'll do A and then do B. In fact, I'll often bluntly explain to people why I can't work with them, and how that might change. For example, let's say that later in the game, I have a solid alliance with France and Germany is reeling. There's a temptation each turn to let Germany make an offer, accept it, and then stab him for short-term gain, perhaps gaining a center a year earlier than I otherwise would have. What I prefer is to simply explain to Germany the truth: I have a winning war, I'd be crazy to abandon a winning war for an uncertain war (which is usually what Germany is offering), but that if Germany can create a situation which is better for me than my current war, I'd be equally crazy not to accept it and just as I'm being honest with him and rejecting the offers I shouldn't accept, he'll be able to trust me to be honest when I do accept one as well. And then I'll give him some examples of ways that he could create a better situation for me and one where I'd be correct to stab France. Maybe all I really want is Denmark, Holland, and disbanding all of Germany's fleets, for example.

I'll say a little bit more about this in my reaction to the moves that just happened.

Spring 1902 Analysis:

As before, I'll highlight a handful of moves that look the most interesting. Since I can't read the press, there will be a bit more of an emphasis on tactics, and since the players have more information than I do, they should feel free to disregard what I'm saying. I'm basically reacting only to what the board is telling me. Then again, the board doesn't lie as much as the players do...

F Nwy - SKA, F Swe S Nwy - SKA, A War - Sil

Last time, I mentioned the two ways to break up an alliance - what happens next, and the unequal split. If you include Belgium and Sweden, there were basically six centers up for grabs, and it looked like Russia, Germany, and France could each get two. However, Russia now has his two, so *what happens next?* The answer, of course, is that Russia does whatever's in his own self-interest, and that might not necessarily mean letting France and Germany take their shares. This was well done on the part of both England (you might get a disband anyway, but that's better than getting four!) and Russia (you look like getting your two centers anyway, and now have the option of more). War - Sil is interesting tactically. I have a strong preference for what this unit should ideally do next turn, and we'll see whether it does.

F Den S F Kie - HEL

I should quickly mention this as well. There's a strong temptation to order something like Den - NTH, in case you catch England shifting fleets or otherwise trying to be clever (or, alternatively, to help Russia force Norway a little earlier). Germany is now in a much, much better position for having resisted that temptation, and has enough tactical options to have leverage with both E and R to try and pry those newly-found friends apart. If Kie - HEL had bounced, Germany would really have only one viable set of orders, and thus little leverage. You won't be happy with the results this turn, but your tactics give you a good chance to come out of this with at least one solid ally and a viable war. Not bad for a turn in which something unexpected happened.

A Smy - Con

Serbia has a retreat, which will clarify the tactics a bit. If this were in Bul right now, you'd be much, much happier, wouldn't you? Given that Con - AEG was a near-certainty, you could just have kept Con and built that fleet in Smy last year. And, had Austria ordered Gre - AEG, you would have been even further stuck and Serbia would have been even further hanging in the wind. I mentioned last year why Con - Smy was unnecessary; now there's a good chance that it will be a one-build difference this year.

A Spa - Mar

Just as Germany played in a way that maximized options and leverage, this move really decreases them. In all honesty, I think I would rather this army be in Spain than Marseilles, although ideally it should really be in Gascony. Why? Well, let me try asking the question this way: where would you ideally like this army to be? If the answer is Piedmont, then okay. But if the answer is Piedmont, then you probably wanted Bre - MAO, Por - Spa(sc) as well. So, I'm guessing the answer is either Wales/London or Ruhr [which really means Burgundy or Belgium, when one of those moves to Ruhr]. Ideally, you would like to have the tactical flexibility to move to both places. Meaning, you would like to be someplace that borders at least one of Bur/Bel and also is coastal to allow a convoy. So, this army should be in either Gas or Pic, and Gas was available. Further, if Italy did move to Pie/WES/TYS, you could have defended adequately with Gas - Mar, ENG - MAO, MAO - Spa(sc) or, self-bounce in Mar and build F Mar (you have a guaranteed build, because if Bel does get dislodged, it can disband and rebuild).

I don't want to be overly negative here, and if you get Bel this year and nothing bad happens, this is still a good year. But, this is exactly the sort of thing we're trying to help with in the intermediate game, because being inaccurate with a unit can turn a great year into merely a good year. Basically, you have just five units, so each one is precious. As we saw with Turkey, one inaccurate move of Con - Smy has created a cascade that's still being felt a full year later, and if it does cost Turkey a build, far beyond that. This has similar potential.

A Tyr S Ven

Things are happening around you, other powers are growing, and you're not putting yourself in a position to do the same. Swallowing Austria is fine, but you need a seat at the table. If the plan is for you to wait and eat leftovers, then there might not be any (this turn in the north should be a cautionary tale in that regard). The very worst thing you can do would be to tie up Austrian units in a way that helps other players take Austrian centers while you get none.

There are several ways you could get a build this year, and if you do, that's a reasonable result. My read is that there were better tactical options, but I don't know what the negotiations looked like. So, I'll reserve judgment on this one until the Fall. I have a strong opinion about what I'd like to see you do this turn, and we'll see whether you do so.

F Gre - Alb

Worth a quick mention here: on these results, Austria had the choice between A Gre/F Alb and A Alb/F Gre and chose the former. Either way, it's going to be nearly impossible to swap these units after this turn, so it was a permanent choice. These kinds of small moves that end up making a big difference. The fact that Austria picked this combination should be a strong indication to the rest of the board as to their current mindset and intentions.

Improved the most this turn: E, F
Declined the most this turn: A, I

Hi all, I knew jmo and CS were tied up a bit so I asked 2WL and uclabb to post some thoughts I the game so players could get some feedback. I should have mentioned it. Sorry for the miscue, thanks to our guests and I hope everyone is getting something from this.

free bump

bump

Another fascinating turn - eager for nuggets of wisdom from our profs.

Fall 1902 Analysis:

Each turn, you make two kinda of decisions: you set a goal for the turn, and then you execute orders designed to achieve it. Since this is an intermediate game, the bar for tactics, the second part, is, rightly, a bit higher here. With that in mind, let's take a look at some tactics this turn. I'm going to highlight one move that I'd have made differently this turn as each power, without changing what appear to be your objectives. We'll go alphabetically this time...

Austria: A Tri S Bud ==> A Tri -> Tyr/Ser, depending upon priority.

Obviously, there's a diplomatic failure here to get somebody to turn around. I'm actually not convinced this is Austria's fault; he's made sure that the powers attacking him are gaining unequally, given them an incentive to worry about the future, and they're not biting. In any event, there are really only two options here: (1) You successfully got one of R/T to turn around or (2) you didn't. If you did, great. If you didn't, then you face hostile armies in Gal, Rum, Ser, Ven, and Tyr. You clearly believed that Italy, at least, was not turning around, and preventing an Italian center was your clear goal. So, let's try and accomplish that as best we can with Tri, Vie, and Bud, while keeping Alb S Gre in place.

The obvious enemy tactics here are to hit all of Tri, Vie, and Bud, with a power-2 attack on two of them. You will not be able to support yourself to hold, because everything will be cut. So, your orders were just as good as holds. A better plan is to try and outguess the enemy supports. At the very least, the "all holds" set will lose two of Tri/Vie/Bud, while you might instead be able to lose only one. So, let's cut some supports!

Ideally, you might get one of your opponents to leak some plans, since they want to gain their centers but have you stop their allies from gaining so quickly. If not, from here it's a bit of guesswork and trying to map out some possible moves for the opponents. I see two sets of orders that look best to me:


1) [Best overall, I think]: Tri - Ser, Bud - Ser, Vie - Tri (or Tyr)
2) [Best specifically to foil Italian plans, perhaps at the cost of a center]: Tri - Tyr, Vie - Tyr, Bud - Gal

No matter what, you were going to be in trouble this turn. When three of your neighbors want a piece of the empire, you lose. But, I'd like to see you lose actively, and as a general rule, cutting somebody else's support has more of a chance to let something good happen than issuing a support of your own does. See if you can take advantage of the rest of this game to get a little creative with your defense, and maybe frustrate your enemies for a turn or two longer than they were hoping.

England: F NTH -> Den ==> F NTH -> HEL

Taking Denmark is great, and well done this turn to avoid a build. But, would you rather be in SKA or NTH right now? Clearly NTH. So SKA should be the one moving. Next question: Would you rather have F SKA or A Lvp right now? As I suspect you'll discover next year, A Lvp. So, taking the risk of HEL S Den - NTH is fine; you take Den, change the fleet to A Lvp, and Germany has NTH but no obvious followup and it might well end up disbanding anyway.

You're worried about France ordering ENG - NTH or ENG S Den - NTH. If the latter, it's a 3v3 bounce with your current orders, and you'd prefer to lose NTH and gain Den as above. If it's the former, then you were taking that risk with the current set of orders anyway, so no change. Thus, cutting HEL is better. You should give a small amount of attention to what happens if you get into HEL, and the answer is that it would be inconvenient, but also means Germany either repositioned to Kie/BAL or attacked France, and either one, combined with the gain of Den, is a quite acceptable result for the turn.

France: A Mar -> Bur ==> A Mar -> Gas

You got outguessed on Wales, but it was 50/50 so that'll happen half the time. This is the same problem as last turn, though. Gas also borders Bur, but also can be pulled to Bre and then the British Isles, or through MAO to the Isles. And, what was the advantage of Mar - Bur, anyway? It's useful if Germany tries Mun - Bur, of course, but that only matters if Bel - Wal and Bur - Bel both succeed, and if they do, you get a build, so being in Gas and building A Mar is a fine position.

Further, you ran the risk of Italy ordering Tyr - Pie, Nap - TYS, ION - Tun and having to respond with F Bre instead of F Mar. It's a risk you often have to take, but you chose to take it when you didn't need to. You got away with this one in the end, but it's an unnecessary risk, and this is the sort of thing that if it becomes inconvenient, will become direly inconvenient.

Germany: A Kie -> Ber ==> A Kie S Den

For the most part, your choices have been really good, but when you think through this one, you'll want to have it back. Your moves assume that E and R are enemies and F is an ally. I'll assume (though I wouldn't have) that Tyrolia is neutral here, so you are facing a power-3 attack on Denmark and Sil will try for either Mun or Ber (50/50). Your orders meant that you definitely lose Den and definitely do not lose Mun/Ber [again, assuming Italy doesn't interfere]. But, supporting Den would have meant instead of losing a center, you have a 50/50 shot of losing a center (let Mun guess between Ber and Mun). And, if you were really certain that Russia would pick between Ber and Mun and not get clever, you could even have tried asking for Bur - Mun, Mun - Ber, and then the only power who can get a center off you this turn is France.

Incidentally, if you told me you were certain to guess wrong, and it was a choice between losing Den to England and Ber/Mun to Russia, you should prefer to lose the center to Russia. Having Russia grow quickly might be good when you run screaming for allies, and you evict him from Mun/Ber immediately in the spring, while now you never get Denmark back.

[cont.]

Italy: A Tyr S Gal -> Vie => Many better options; let's discuss Tyr -> Tri.

Unfortunately, you're getting the lowest grades in the class right now. You're not in the worst position; indeed, not a single player on the board is attacking you. But, you're helping others to get centers while getting nothing for yourself, and that's pretty much the worst thing you can do in this game. As I said last turn, you needed to make sure you got a build this year.

Tyr - Mun with support would have made a lot of sense for several reasons, particularly if it came with Ven - Pie and Nap - TYS, plus ION - Gre with support. But, let's simplify here and ask the following question: Given that you know Russia is ordering Gal - Vie and asking for support, while Turkey is ordering Ser - Bud with Rum support, should you give Russia the promised support to Vie? Or, should you "stab" and take Trieste for yourself right now?

And the answer is a clear no. If you take Tri, it will retreat to Ser (no other options). You get a build. Austria is left with A Vie, A Ser, A Gre, A Gal, and F Alb, losing two. That's not a lineup which can threaten Trieste (and if you really were worried, take the risk of Tyr S Ven - Tri). Tactically, it's much better. Diplomatically, is it bad? Russia still needs your help to take Vienna, and with a war brewing with Germany, it's easy damage to repair. You haven't made Turkey upset in the slightest; you haven't denied him anything, and by being in Tri, you're in a better position to influence the next turn. And if Russia whines, pointing out to Turkey that Russia wanted a 8/5/4 R/T/I ratio rather than 7/5/5 may be enough to make Turkey worried about his neighbor the north...

Let me now pose a question you'd better be asking yourself: Now that you've helped Russia into Vienna, are you still useful to Russia and are you still useful to Turkey? If not, what does that imply? And, what does BLA - Con mean and what is Turkey going to build?

Russia: A Rum S Ser -> Bud => Rum -> Bud [Or, Rum -> Gal]

You've played this really, really well so far, as the board shows. But, this move seems like it's a bit of an overreach because it creates tension for only short-term gain. In the long run, you want Bud - it's presumably part of your expected share of Austria. So, you have to take it from Turkey and Turkey needs compensation, which is an extra negotiation you could have avoided. Or, if Turkey keeps Bud and Ser, you've created a flashpoint that needs to be militarized with a ton of units and is never stable. And if you take Ser while Turkey keeps Bud, that's even more unstable. A war with Turkey is a viable option, but if it happens, you want it to be something you trigger because it's in your best interest, not something that ends up inevitable because of a move that, in the end, was never going to cost Austria a center this year with no followup to Serbia.

Rum - Bud was the better play, and whether you asked Ser to support you depends upon whether you are happy to deal with the possibility being on 9 centers this early. Rum - Ser, Sev - Rum would have been an interesting idea as well, knowing that you'd have builds in hand, but is probably a similar overreach. If you were determined to do something like that, Rum - Gal, Sev - Rum would have been better on several fronts, and preventing the possibility of Austria keeping A Gal is a good idea. Turkey didn't need a support to Bud, so at the very least, Sev S Rum H is probably a little better than this result.

Ultimately, this is probably a minor point, and will be even more minor if A Gal is disbanded, but worth considering for situations where it's more relevant. But, when you start counting to 18 [and you should always be, especially at this stage when you have long-term strategic decisions to make], you'll see that Bud is a headache you could have avoided.

Turkey: F BLA -> Con ==> F BLA S Con -> Bul

Yes, I understand why you'd want to do something like this, both for tactical and for diplomatic reasons. You're still paying for Con - Smy, after all, and in many ways. It cost you a build this year, but it also forced this to be a Fall move. And that means you can't build in Con. Ser - Bud is bad for you for many of the same reasons it's bad for Russia -- you can't defend it, and it only has one natural way out. You desperately need a third army right now sitting in Serbia, but you can't build it in Con now. And building it in Smyrna is going to leave the same tactical nightmare you had before.

Turkey at this stage in the game is one of two countries that are always worried about getting new units in the board because of geography. [The other is Germany in the endgame, which is often in the position of trying to reach for 18 while being unable to build because Mun, Ber, and sometimes even Kie are on the stalemate line. I've had games where I waived six builds as Germany, and they weren't pretty.]

Anyway, I hope you'll all take this tactical advice in the right frame of mind. There might be reasons in the press that I haven't seen for some of these moves, too. But, it's worth a bit of focus, and in Diplomacy, better tactics has a tendency to win over better numbers.

Most improved positions: R, F
Biggest declines: I, E

I should probably say a little bit about why France comes out well this turn and England doesn't. Tactics. The largest beneficiary of the tactical errors this turn, by a wide margin, is France. Despite staying on four centers this year, the English outlook is now grim because of the four units on the board and where they're located, while France now borders three weak nations and has nobody in a position to threaten them. Having said that, even if England had ordered NTH - HEL, it would have had similar tactical issues. I suppose the dream scenario for England to have negotiated tactically would have been HEL S Den - NTH while Germany agreed to let SKA into Den, to let England rebuild A Lvp and then in return use F Den to help Germany against Russia (or give it right back). Barring something like that, England had a lot of new leverage, but was always going to be banking on turning around one of France and Germany as well using that leverage, and this turn England seems to have been unable to do so.

Basically, England did a great job last turn of turning elimination into something more interesting, but these tactical problems were still part of the cost, and so this was a high-stakes turn diplomatically. It could have gone much worse, too, but ultimately England didn't get enough out of a critical turn, and I think it's unlikely England will have four centers at the end of 1903.

Is it ok to PM for a proffesor with a question about his post? I don't quite understand what CS was talking about my moves ('Russia A Rum S Ser -> Bud' part)