Oh, I wasn't going to comment on builds separately, but I can if you'd like. I'll write down my thoughts in a bit.

I meant maybe adding some thoughts to the question about England stalling and fleet-to-army balance.

There honestly wasn't anything amazing or horrible about the builds to warrant addressing.

It seems worth noting to me that:

a) I was right about Russia building a northern fleet, and so what I said about England's choice to move the fleet to Norway rather than convoy was correct and that was a big mistake. I think what I wrote there is pretty good and worth reading if anyone missed it.
b) France deferred to England and built a fleet in Marseilles instead of Brest. This suggests that F/E (and R/A on the other side of the board) are essentially moving forward as we predicted.

As far as the fleets and armies question, I think people overstate the power of fleets most likely because the ocean territories look so big. This is because of the way the map is drawn, not because of the actual strategic importance of the territories, with the possible exception of North Sea. I also don't agree that convoys are inherently weaker- they are actually stronger in a lot of ways. Further, an army is actually really strong defensively for England as well as offensively. A single army on the island is great deterrence (and actual defense) of a French attack. Finally, every power, not just England, wants to try to have 2 of each type of unit as soon as is feasible, as units are much more powerful in sets of two than in sets of one. England should build an army pretty much every 1901- the only times when it is even reasonable to consider not to is when they failed to convoy their first army off the island, as in this game.

I like England's fleet build. Ignoring Russia for a minute, it allows England to either push against France or, even better, set up a blockade against Germany. He could move to SKA and NTH and then easily take DEN. Yes, I suppose it is a bit slower, but it allows him to be much more independent, which is nice.

Of course, that all goes out the window looking at Russia's build. There is exactly one reason to build F STP NC and that is to take NWY. Why he chose this build given England's peaceful moves and his commitment in the South is unclear. Worse still, if he really wanted to attack England, then he should have moved WAR-LIV and built in MOS.

I'm assuming Turkey initially planned on heading West with his fleet build, but BS must be looking awfully tempting...

I think France made the right set of builds. I don't think it's likely England will move against France and he now wastes no time moving against both Germany and Italy.

Italy was obligated to build a fleet; I'm glad to see he did.

I note the game is paused and France has apparently left?

Yes. France wasn't able to continue, so I believe we are looking for a substitute. Poor guy had a terrifying TA apparently... :)

I have a replacement already set aside. He/she should be on and can log into the game at that point. Can someone PM me the password?

I believe the password was sow2014. I may be wrong.

Oh shit. I did not mean to post that on the forum...

Don't worry, I've changed the password

Note to those playing: based on my conversations with the new French player, it may be Wednesday before the game unpauses. Keep that press up in the mean time and thank you for your patience.

So, anyone have any questions?

With no questions forthcoming, I'll pose one. Abge, you stated that Italy leaving his army in Apu was a mistake. Do you still feel this way given the 3 Austrian armies surrounding Venice? What was the basis for your statement? I will state that I agree with your assessment, but I'm curious as to how you would answer this.

I'll ask a question: With a new France coming in, what should his concerns be? What on the board is pushing England/ Germany/ Italy toward and against working him?

I think France is coming into a very golden opportunity. Anytime I am playing France and I have 5 centers going into 1902, I have a pretty solid opportunity. There are two worries that need to be addressed diplomatically. The first is the English fleet in Lon. This is never a good sign no matter how nice England talks. Sweet words can hide true intentions but builds and moves never lie. With veteran players, a move or a build that declares an attack could be something different in the hands of a newer player. For example, if Russia builds F StP south coast, it's a clear attack o Germany, however, newer players may build that way when they think "I will build there so I can support a hold on Swe". In such a case, the newer player isn't thinking about what a build or move implies because they can think about only what they want--single-minded thought.
The second thing France has to think about is the German army build. There are a limited number of uses for an army in a FG alliance, especially when that army build is in Mun.
His best bet is to review the press and unit movements and discuss his thoughts with the TA.

France has one internal issue to take care of as well: his F Mar build. Again, the uses for F Mar in a FG or EF alliance are severely limited. His TA will have more insights for this unit based on what Ogion knows about the board and other players.

The final note I would make is the fear associated with unintentional meta game. New players introduced into a game that has been going on for several years alters the game itself (newer as in time spent in the game, not skill level). New players create a sort of chaos that shapes the game. Sometimes the introduction of a new face causes others around the map to distrust the new guy because they fear a stab or they haven't laid a foundation with them. This can cause others to band together and target the new guy. Similarly, (and more often) it can cause others to trust the new player in hopes of an alliance. The new player then has the opportunity to stab an "old ally" or continue where the old France left off. This can dramatically reshape the board.

Therefore as the New France takes over, he will have to address each of these concerns in turn.

"Abge, you stated that Italy leaving his army in Apu was a mistake. Do you still feel this way given the 3 Austrian armies surrounding Venice? What was the basis for your statement?"

If Italy was concerned about Austria, there were several things he could have done, none of which involve keeping his army in APU. Moving APU-VEN could have worked, as it would have allowed him to sh TYR. Probably not a move I would recommend, but it would have some merit. What I would have preferred to see is APU-TUN. While it does lose an army, it would have kept his fleet in ION. This would have done a much better job of keeping Austria in line because if Austria moved against him, he could have either supported Turkey to GRE or moved ADR to threaten TRI.

The only real way I would have been happy seeing the army stay in Apu is if he built an army in Ven. The way I see it, the problem I see with not convoying the army and then building a fleet as a follow-up is that the purpose of the convoy is to prevent your fleets from bumping heads. A fleet in Tun with F Nap means one goes to the ION while the other does nothing. If the convoy took place, the fleet in the ION could move to the AEG or EAS while F Nap flows into the ION. This usually sets up a convoy when Austria is allied with Austria.

I did notice your disagreement with Italian moves and I don't think I adequately highlighted this small error. Nicely answered.

Do you mean Italy is allied with Austria? I hope that Austria is normally allied with Austria..

Lol yes

Are we ready to start this game back up?

russia has been banned.

Paused the game while resolving a case. Sorry for delay, will be handled urgently.

New Russia is in. Please give me a little while to confer with my new student.

Take whatever time you need. I sent him a message about getting with you.

to the top!

Bump, any news?

Game is unpaused and will phase shift in 12 hours.

@true
You said: "I think France is coming into a very golden opportunity. Anytime I am playing France and I have 5 centers going into 1902, I have a pretty solid opportunity."

Two questions:
1. You mentioned the golden opportunity, but then you talked about the problems. Could you go into a bit more detail on the opportunities here? Or would that be giving too much away?

2. Doesn't France usually have 5 centers after 1901, meaning that France usually has a golden opportunity going into 1902?