There's only one reason why I would put that army in Kiel and not Mun, barring some *intense* concerted diplomatic pressure from A/I/R

And what's that, gold?

An upcoming German long-distance venture into previously unexplored territories north of other exploits

?

Well, I didn't want to say, but it would be to move to Denmark and try to take the north

Right, I agree with you.

This is another reason I didn't like the English fleet build- its not enough power to ensure victory over the Russian in Scandinavia- any dislodgement of Sweden becomes guessy with a retreat to Baltic or Skagerrak. The maximum England can expect to gain is two centres, while if that build was an army, it can be spent to spent to either better crack France or to move to Scandinavia with a potential for more than two centres.

This comes back to the "only if I get something good out of it" spoken about with the Italian DMZ discussion. In this game, England chose to give up all claim on Norway in 1901. I hope Russia got something good out of "sure you can have it back".

bump

Great phase for spectators. I'll write up a longer post later, but generally:

* I don't believe that Russia is attacking Germany
* I really think Kiel should have been built in Munich
* I like Austria's moves
* The English fleet threatening Tunis, plus Vienna being surrounded by Germany/Russia is a great illustration of why an A/I is not a good response to an EG (or why an EG is a good response to an A/I)

(by "later" I mean "after the fall turn")

Sorry for the delay. I had some condo issues that required my full attention. Will get caught up with commentary soon!

A little help please. To me it looks like Eng is weakening but they are pretty steady and even captured Paris (at the cost of Picardy) but are mostly surrounded by Germany & France. Additionally their home country is buffered by a lot of open ocean (no fleets within 1 move) but their fleets are no closer either until they get a build (which I don't see as guaranteed). I am assuming Germany is friendly with England but I still feel they are weakening.

What am I not seeing if I am wrong?

If I am right, what can England do besides get a build or 2?

If anyone would like to sub in for Turkey, let me know. I'm trying to escape/finish any games shorter than 7 day phases (that are full press). My new career is taking up most of my time to associate with you all, unfortunately.

You're right in that the English position is much weaker than it was a turn ago. This is because they've become more reliant on Germany for their next centre- if Germany wanted to deny England Paris, they could.

This is another reason I didn't like the extra fleet build- an army gives more flexibility and self sufficience, whereas the current composition means that England has to rely on the behaviour of others to stay in their current comfortable position.

I don't think it's actually a big risk - I think it would be poor strategy for Germany to stab England here. If they stick together, they stand to both get centres over the stalemate line- which is important as that's how you get 18 centres. Additionally, the alliance structure on the other side of the board is not set up to defeat an England/Germany alliance.

So, I think England's position is strategically strong (unlikely to be stabbed, likely to have a good position in a few turns) but tactically they are out of position. I think this is different from weakening- they're out of positions but I expect them to continue to do well.

(I imagine they are also diplomatically strong, but it's hard to say without seeing the press).

This is important, as it depends what kind of player Germany is. If Germany is only counting centres ("I can get TWO if I take Paris and England helps me in to Sweden") then a stab is more likely. If Germany takes a longer term view of the bord, then it's less likely.

I don't think counting centres is a good long term strategy, because 18 is not 17+1. There exist many stalemates that lock a country down at 17 centres- so you can't always just improve your position by improving the number of centres you have. It's better to take your 18th centre when you're at 8 or 9, and then fill in the others.

An interesting question here is who gets Sweden (assuming they do take it off the Russian). I haven't worked this through, but I think I like the English position if they're getting Sweden, and I don't if Germany is getting it.

Wrong thread, I'll jump in.

Oh man, I thought it was the other Turkish position. As long as we all agree this doesn't count against my record I'm still in.

I'm happy with that, if everyone in the game is.

Also, I think England should have gone to English Channel instead of Brest. The position would have been better, I think.

I take that back. England almost certainly expects Eng-Mao to bounce with France's Portugal. Thanks to Captainmeme for pointing that out.

Alright, let's see what we have here...

Spring 1902-Spring 1903

England:

I must admit, when I saw Germany entering RUH, I was quite worried your alliance had fallen out of sorts. I, of course, can't say if you had this arranged the whole time or if you did some fast negotiating, but either way, well done. Many times, England will hold on to BEL while trying to work with Germany and it can serve as a real point of contention. Of course, if you are able to convince Germany to let you keep it while still working together, that is the best. But, handing BEL over to a friendly Germany and working together against France is much better than risking an FG alliance over one center.

Your fleet moves were also quite good. Getting around Iberia this early in the game puts you in an extremely strong position.

Germany:

Taking BEL from England without it causing a war is quite well done indeed. I am, however, a little concerned by your interest in poking Austria. In general, Germany and Austria do not fight, because that mitigates the advantage the other countries have by being in corners. It is usually in Germany's best interest for Austria to do well, at least for a while. By forcing Austria to focus on you, you are helping out Russia an enormous deal. Maybe that's what you want, but long term, you need to ask if you really want to be in between a strong England and a strong Russia. Germany usually doesn't ultimately do well if he helps both England and Russia.

France:

I realize you are in a tough spot and I don't want to be overly critical, but it seems like you are still making some serious tactical and diplomatic mistakes. Moving against Brest in Spring 1902 I believe was a mistake both because it was almost impossible to succeed, but also because I think you'd be better off stalling Germany's growth to encourage him to move against England with you. I think I would have prioritized taking Burgundy back do you could have centralized your defenses in the South. The goal is, even if you can't defend all your centers, to make sure one country gains more than the other so their alliance gets put under stress.

The good news, at least, is that you seem to have a decent relationship with Italy. The two of you have shared interests, so be sure to keep that relationship strong.

Russia:

Your ability to recover from a bad start is impressive. Your ability to keep England and Germany away from you while you deal with the south is a sign of strong diplomatic skill, especially having Germany move to BOH instead of taking a swipe at War. You are still not getting along well with Austria, which is a shame, but that has not resulted in an alliance with Turkey against you, which is very good. As long as Turkey and Austria keep fighting amongst themselves, you should be in good shape. Just try not to leave yourself too open to EG.

Italy:

This lepanto is working out very well for you; it's very nice to watch. Not gutting France is also good, as you don't gain by having England grow that quickly. Your next few centers are going to be harder to capture, though. This is the point where you'll need to decide what your new course of action will be for the mid game.

Austria:

Perhaps the diplomacy would reveal more, but Germany moving south is very bad for you. As Austria, you are surrounded by so many countries, you need to have at least one safe border. Luckily, your relationship with Italy is good, but that really isn't the same as having a secure northern border. Perhaps you haven't been talking with Germany? Impossible to say without the press, but I hope you're doing everything you can to get him to back away from you.

I'm also not quite sure why you made it so hard for Russia to get into GAL. The press may have indicated otherwise, but the board certainly made it seem like he was going after Turkey. If you had let him into GAL, you could have supported GAL to RUM, leaving it vacant again. In the meantime, Russia could have used SEV to go to ARM. This would have continued the RT fight, but also would have allowed you to move into GAL any time you wanted and surround RUM. At least you shouldn't disband this year, but it's going to be very hard to grow at this point.

Turkey:

I think I would have recommended supporting your fleet back to SMY instead of trying to take BUL. It's much more important to keep your three home centers secure. Now that you've lost SMY, there honestly isn't too much you can do, unless you can convince AI to stab each other.

Hey, guys. I'm not trying to be clever or anything, but isn't there a rule on the forums that prevents you from discussing games that are currently taking place? Is this event an exception, or have I misunderstood something? I'm just curious to know, since I have seen threads banned by moderators regarding such topics. (I know this is an organized event, by the way.)

Hi Mario,

The School of War (SoW) is a special series we run on the site to teach players to improve there game. Part of that is running commentary of the game. Everyone knew and agreed to this before the game started.

@abgemacht
Interesting. That makes sense. By the way, I love your Diplomacy commentaries on YouTube. Good stuff!

bump

Hey can we get a check against mod abuse for the integrity of our study group game thanks

What the heck just happened? And wasn't there some sort of a committment to play in this game, to offer commentary, etc?

Mod abuse has hopefully been checked.

Professors, I'm getting bored. Can we have some commentary while we wait?

My commentary is I really hope Germany isn't supposed to get both Brest and Sweden. Because that is terrible for England, and Brest is 100% English in an E/G.

I also hope that Germany isn't stabbing England. The south might be messed up enough for them not to punish you, but stabbing now means that they can probably get together and stop you from soloing.

It's an inefficient time to stab, and so you're giving the south tempo if that's what you did.

A lot of English players build a fleet once they've been stabbed- but armies are far more versatile for defence of the UK. And, they have the advantage that they're less aggressive, so it's easier for the stabber to be bought back on side.

Some commentary for the East too, maybe? :)

Professors, we have two successful alliance on the board now that are nearing completion of their objective - for E/G the elimination of France, and for A/I the elimination of Turkey. What do you advise doing at a time like this? How do you keep the alliance together? Is it in your best interests to keep the alliance together?

I don't think you've been reading my posts, gold :)

I don't think the objective of an EG alliance is "kill France". I think it's "take Moscow and Tunis", and killing France is a stepping stone on the way to that.