So I wanted to take a moment to acknowledge a point made in the global press of this game:

"I feel pretty confident if this was a SoW game Italy would be receiving low marks for unilaterally attacking Austria. But it is pw, so maybe once you know the rules the smartest thing to do is break them. Teach me, HR"

I found this to be an interesting comment, because for the most part it is accurate. Attacking Austria right off the bat is normally a poor choice for Italy. A lot of Italy's power comes from possibilities and the diplomatic need other countries have for your help. Attacking early removes much of that power. That said in this case it was done perfectly.

I would prefer, like Hr to assume that Italy knew (and didn't get lucky) that Turkey and Russia would be committing themselves against each other. You can pretty safely assume that if he knew this he can be confident that both RU and Turkey are making Austria offers of alliances, all of which require eastern moving Austrian units.

Which means Italy is free to move as he did without risk of a Turkish attack, knowing that Austria is not going to get any aid, and that he'll probably be out of position to defend himself. This is double true if Italy managed to catch wind of Russia's intent to leave Galicia open.

So while I would normally agree with Austria, that we discourage new players in SoW from attacking AU right off the bat I think this situation was done perfectly and demonstrates why this is a game of Diplomacy, and not strategy. While the strategy is important, there is nothing more critical then understanding what everyone else on the board will be doing, and understanding the best way to take advantage of that knowledge. Which in this case has landed Italy the opportunity to play more aggressive then normal, with options against Austria, or even Germany (unlikely but awesome to see).

My only other thought right now is I agree with HR, I very strongly dislike the French move from Paris to Gas. France can take Spain and Por without moving Paris south, and a supported move into Bur, or a bounce with Paris are both far more ideal then the move we saw.

Overall thoughts, this is going to be a fun game to watch.

This isn't a gunboat so I think you need to judge the moves assuming there was some amount of knowledge or influence on how the other powers opened. I love Italy's position, even if it's just because not Lepantoing is a breath of fresh air.

Hellenic, you sort of assumed England is heading to Belgium now that it is open but why would you rule out a convoy to Norway and fleet in Barents? Considering the Turkish and German openings, I definitely would think that it's on the table.

Gold, your man is going down. You're going to have to watch him slowly burn as Locke reigns supreme.

You're going to really want to factor in the psychology of this match-up. While there will be some minimal grabbing rights in this one, it's mostly an exhibition game so we're probably going to see a little more "anything goes" and "think outside the box" play. Especially when you consider some of the players in the game are pretty good at selling ideas. You're should probably expect layers of sub-alliances going on in this one too.

I'd say there's probably some kind of superficial WT goin on (that probably won't last all that long). Burg was almost definitely an intentional bounce while Gasc i've got to assume was some kind of goodwill move to give England assurances of gaining Belgium. The reason why there wasn't overly aggressive moves (like setting up for Spain SC) is both so the three players can conservatively ease into the alliance and also to loosely hide the WT at least until next spring.

I like the aggressive Turkey opening, my guess is there was a plan set in motion to blank out Russia in the first year.

Italy's hiding his cards pretty well so far, i don't know if an attack on Austria is a sure thing or not but if he does he's still not giving away who he's buddied with. It's possible he's made arrangement with Turkey, but if so he's certainly got a side alliance elsewhere as that's not overly sustainable.

If there is a WT of some kind going on, it is terrible for France. Most plausible alternatives for Paris and Marseilles would have made a WT more advantageous for France than the moves he made. Par-Bur + Mar-Spa gets the friendliness to England across without hamstringing options for the MAO fleet, and Mar-Bur and Par-Pic also seems better. I wonder what press France received that led to this opening.

Is Marseilles going to bounce Munich in Burgundy again this turn? Could it move to Piedmont while Munich hits Tyrolia?

Of course, if there is no WT going on, it also kind of looks terrible for France to me, too. Belgium going to an English army, no threat to England or Germany from their other front, and Italy going strong one way or another (I agree with VI that it's not 100% obvious he's going after Austria yet) -- none of that is good for France.

I'm a big fan of the CPA, so it's a shame that Italy will probably be going after Austria or Germany. Since I'm rooting for Austria, guess that means encouraging a Germany attack!

Doing so would strengthen England a lot, though, especially with Russia focusing south, but attacking Austria will strengthen Turkey. Those Wicked Witches...

Lies and damn lies, Tasnica.
gameID=67295
A big fan of CPA indeed. You tried to get me out as soon as you can. It was due to blind luck that I survived. :)

A game where zultar actually played? If we look back far enough, miracles do happen.

Those were different times. Countries have risen and fallen since then.

gameID=80032
gameID=83367
I used to play, but like all good bureaucrats, I stopped.

In the times since Zultar played a game:

- Ukraine has overthrown a president and collapsed into civil war
- Israel has fought a war with Hamas
- Edward Snowden has revealed US and UK mass surveillance programs
- Croatia has joined the European Union
- China has landed a robot on the moon
- Nelson Mandela has died
- Lehmann Brothers has collapsed and triggered a financial crisis
- The Eurozone has been founded
- Germany has invaded the Sudetenland
- The Ottoman Empire has captured Constantinople
- Charlemagne has been crowned Holy Roman Emperor
- Hadrian's Wall has been built in Britannia
- The Greeks have won the Trojan War
- Hatshepsut has sent an expedition to the Punt
- Khufu has completed his Great Pyramid at Giza

@Zultar: Hey, that was my first game of Diplomacy ever. I'd hardly established preferences yet! :P

I am nearly positive that there is no western triple happening here. It just does not make sense for the players involved. More likely is 2 of the western players are proposing that idea to a 3rd in order to get him to make accommodating moves that are really just the setup for a stab. Since England has benefited the most with 2 builds available (and I'd bet most of my points England ends in Belgium) he has the choice of 2 willing allies.

As to the suggestion that England pass on Belgium, that is not a good idea. Belgium is a critical center. If England can take it he gains massive negotiating with both France and Germany and the ability to influence both of them for years. Leaving it to let one of them take it can have temporary benefits but long term is a massive loss. So no, I do not see that as a good idea or a likely one despite the opening in Russia.

A perfectly executed WT is also an obvious one. This (which i think most can agree on) is a bit more ambigious, it could be one or it couldn't be. It's not clear enough that everybody in the east is likely to drop what they're doing to spring into action but they're set up at least enough that they could finish off Fall with minimal questions and come Spring make a giant collective step east.

Or maybe they're stringing along one odd man out in the west into thinking they're part of a WT when really he's about to get his head chopped off.

jmo, I'll take that bet. I'll be a quarter of my points against a quarter of your points that he doesn't take Belgium this year.

p.s. England, I'll give you an 8th of jmo's points if you don't take Belgium.

Ohhh, is Italy going for a Bohemian Crusher? I would love to see an anti-German Italy here. That would make Austria working with Turkey more possible, and I see some brilliant opportunity for that. I would love to see it play out that way.

I hope Germany and France are doing my favorite opening. It's not named to my knowledge, but I think of it as the French Lepanto.

Both Germany and France push hard for an alliance with England against the other. They also arrange a Mar/Mun bounce in Burgundy as shown, faking a war between them and "forcing" France to take Portugal by convoy. France then builds a fleet in Brest and moves MAO-NAO, Bre-MAO. The following turn, France convoys an Iberian army to either Liverpool (if unprotected) or Clyde (otherwise).

I don't think this is what they are doing though. First of all, I have never heard anyone other than me mention this as a possible opening. I think I invented it, but I'm sure someone must have thought of it before me. Secondly, Germany should have opened to Holland if this were the plan. If Germany opens to Denmark (as he did in this game), England gets Belgium uncontested.

Still, it's possible that we are watching this unfold! Keep an eye out for it!

Isn't that called the Lisbon Leap? I don't remember details on whether the Mar/Bur bounce is a part of the opening, but the convoy of Gas-Por followed by MAO-NAO+BRE-MAO fits the bill.

Oh is it? I like that name better anyway. I've never heard of that before.

The Lisbon leap is a pretty anti-English opening usually. I've not seen it combined with a Burgundy bounce before - Germany is supposed to bounce Belgium to keep England out normally.

Also, are we convinced that ATC and and Chumbles are actually definitely fighting? I know ATC can be sneaky about that sort of thing sometimes. :-)

Guess we'll have a chance of seeing after this season.

http://www.diplomacy-archive.com/resources/strategy/articles/lisbon_leapfrog.htm

Looks like Mar-Bur, Mun-Bur is a standard feature of the Lisbon Leapfrog - MAO Convoy Gas-Por, Mar-Spa for F1901 gets two builds. Without the bounce, you just have to order A Mar Hold, or something else, which all seems dubious.

Berch? An authority? Pah!

Hehe. Well, authority or not, the bounce over Burgundy exists as an option within the Lisbon Leap(frog). :-) I make no comment as to whether that part is a good idea, or indeed whether the whole thing is a good idea.

It's a horrible idea. Giving England an extra build so you can attack him is dumb. And it's a very poor way of attacking Italy, too.

+1

England doesn't get an extra build if Germany opens to Holland. That didn't happen in this game, so I'm not sure a Lisbon Leapfrog is in the cards.

It is also better if Russia opens north. But then, I'd France and Germany are cooperating, they may as well Sealion.

Okay ladies and gentlemen. That was an interesting phase. I'm going to address a few specific things that I think are key, and ignore a few others that are easier to understand.

First off, and I cannot say this enough, Germany that bounce might be the dumbest move I've seen in a high class game. Let me explain why. This past turn Russia was in a bad situation and the whole board knew it. He had a 50/50 shot of losing Sev or Rum, and actually a small chance of losing BOTH of them. Had this happened, in addition to you bouncing him in Sweden, he wouldn't have had a build.

Why is that so bad? I'm glad you asked! Russia is in a bad position right now because he has to have all his units facing south. He's facing a brilliant Italy, an aggressive Turkey, and an Austria that is now free to ally with anyone. So if Russia did not have a build or was stuck at 4 centers he would be tied up in the south completely. Which means England would be able to walk right into StP. Now the other eastern powers cannot let that happen so they would have blitzed Russia, wiped him out faster then England could make gains and then turned west.

The opening years are all about balance. If any 1 country gets too weak or too strong the balance is thrown off and everyone else is forced to react to the balance shit even if this means abandoning plans for a solo setup, or for a great alliance. This is specifically true for the western vs eastern zone. If any country in the east gets too weak the others can destroy him quickly, allowing them to break out into the western zone while the west countries are still infighting, or figuring out alliances. The same applies for the west. If any country is destroyed too fast the other two expand quickly into the east with a massive advantage.

So it's absolutely essential to ensure that no country gets too weak too fast. And that bounce in Sweden gave the eastern countries a 50/50 shot of getting the chance to end Russia faster then Germany or any western power can afford to have them do. I know Germany didn't know that RU was going to keep Rum, because it was a coin flip between Sev and Rum, and in coin-flips you cannot trust what you hear because people lie about coin-flip moves to try and get the edge. So that bounce literally just gambled the game.

Now you're probably thinking since Russia kept Rum the bounce was okay, but you'd be wrong again.

Since Russia does not have a unit in Sweden he has no threatening influence against Norway to prevent an attack into StP. This means that Russia is going to be forced into a northern facing build or risk England getting StP for free. If England gets StP then he's stronger then Germany or France and has a massive advantage over them both. If he gets StP *and* Sweden then Germany and France are both in serious trouble.

This also means that Russia is stuck with a fleet in GoB. Putting the fleet back in StP would cripple its use the rest of the game so that isn't an option, which means the fleet either tries for Sweden again (seems unlikely since his bad position lowers his negotiating power), or attacks Germany with England. So Germany with this bounce just massive undercut his own power, the stability of the east, increased the chance he gets attacked by Russia and England together, and removed all chances of having Russia as an ally.

To conclude, one of the worst moves I've seen in a long time.

P.S. The writers on the Zine agree with me (http://diplom.org/Zine/F2000M/Goff/swedensituation.html)

Now that I'm done bashing that bounce, lets get into the other key set of moves this turn. Italy, I have watched and played hundreds of games over the last 6 years. I've never seen an Italian opening I liked better. Absolutely brilliant. The power in Italy comes in the ability to be patient. I've never seen a better example of that then this game. If you take a look carefully, Italy's moves are impossible to understand to an outsider. And that is deliberate. No one in or out of the game has any idea what Italy is going to do because he can (and this is the KEY folks) ally with ANYONE on the board this coming turn. He is in the stunningly rare position of being a possible ally for every single country on the map. This gives him miles more negotiating power then anyone on the board. Everyone on map knows this, and that is why it works.

His moves are not overly hostile to any one country, as the hostility toward Germany, Austria, and Turkey all offset each other. They all know he made the moves he did to gain the negotiating power, not because he actually plans to attack. They all know that he will probably only attack or help another country against 1 of them, so they are all forced to work with him and offer him the best deal for his aid/neutrality.

This is how Italy is supposed to be played in the opening years. Tactfully, avoiding making any enemies while enhancing your own position so that you can capitalize on whatever alliances start to emerge around you. Making sure that your moves don't force other people to ally, while ensuring that you can easily become a part of any alliance you want. This was completely accomplished by Italy here.

Forget the cookie that HR was offering last turn, I would give you the damn bakery for how well that was played.

There are other interesting elements to last turns moves, but I'll leave those for other people to address.