Bump

I'm glad to see the board finally working together against France. Not sure if it will be enough at this point, though.

I liked that France tried something sneaky with Sil. It didn't work, but if it had, it would have been huge.

I'm concerned about England moving his army north through Russia. That was something he should have done a year ago. Now, he needs to get that army to the front and prevent France from getting behind the line in central Europe.

I'm also concerned by Turkey's fleet position. Those fleets in the north are completely useless. If they could be brought south, he could push through Ion.

The other big concern is the island, which is severally lacking fleets. Not much can be done about that other than trying to out play France.

Spring 1909

I'm going to echo a lot of what abge said in his brief commentary for this season. I will also not have a whole lot more to say because at this stage, all of the players are really playing like pros and you don't see a lot of the moves that are typically seen in the School of War, especially early on.

The biggest turn about for this phase was definitely the unity of the board moving to stop a solo. I don't try to come right out and say that one country is going to solo unless everyone else stops it because that's the job of the TA. However, after I see moves that show the board is doing just that, I will then step in and post my thoughts on the positive change.

In a vast majority of games, there come points where one or more countries can break out for a solo run. One thing I look for are times when a country first crosses the stalemate line. As long as countries stick to their side, a solo threat is not nearly so threatening. Take France, for example. France is a classic example because the country has multiple opportunities to cross the line and hit at various points (more frequently along Italy and northern Austria). The moment France crosses that line and engages Italy is when I take notice as a player. No matter which country I'm playing, I begin sending out those messages to others simply planting a bug in people's ears that a solo France is a possibility that everyone needs to pay attention to. The threat may never emerge, but having people prepared to change course is always positive when you're not the guy trying to solo.

It's best not to hint at a solo threat unless there is genuinely the possibility of it occurring. There's no sense in warning the board of a French solo threat when he has 12 centers and is fighting against a remnant Germany or England and there are powers in the east of equal size and no one has crossed the 17-17 line. It's like crying wolf.

With the current France, it was really about time the board stepped in, stopped their bickering and worked as a unit to end the game in a draw. This doesn't always happen because people are emotional creatures. We get mad, hold grudges, lose hope, grow weary and all manner of other things that can cause a player to not care whether someone solos. People also grow attachments, and when one player genuinely believes the tales that are being whispered into another player's ear, they can be hard to turn away, especially when history has proven the whisperings to be true and beneficial for said player.

I can recall one very specific game in the first ever Master's Tournament. I was Italy in game 1 and allied with Russia in the late game. England was a fragment of a country, and the game was coming down to me, Germany and Russia. I had been telling Russia that I was allied with him and Germany was trying to get him to stab me to stop a solo run. I had units from France to Turkey and Russia, who had been my game-long ally, was unwilling to trust Germany because he genuinely bought into the alliance that was being sold. All that was needed was to bump England out of the game and it would be a draw. I stabbed, Russia fell down a few centers, Germany lost one or two more, and the game ended up with me as the victor. It's rare when it happens and I have far more stories of where I stabbed and it cost me the game as a defeat or ended up being a 16 center draw rather than a solo, but there are times that people fail to listen to reason (and by reason, I mean unobjective reason--after all, Russia was operating off of objective reasoning because he had no real reason to distrust me--we had a solid foundation that lasted for years).

It's games like these in the SoW that really come down to the wire. Sometimes diplomacy isn't enough. Sometimes cunning strategy isn't enough, but in the end, if you're ever in a position to even TRY for a solo run, for goodness-sake, at least TRY. That's what France did well. He took advantage of opportunities that came his way, took risks, even when they may not have paid off, and continued to push forward.

My guess is that if I looked at the press behind the scene, I'd see a French player that is always trying to talk to people about next season's moves, next season's opportunities, both for himself and for others (emphasis on others).

At this point, the board will have to weigh in on several topics including:

--Is it reasonable to knock out Austria or Germany to reduce the draw size or are they too valuable to lose
--Is there a way that France can still move and keep the solo threat alive
--Is there a way that England or Turkey can turn the game around and set themselves up for a better position

Finally, I totally agree with abge's assessment of England's and Turkey's positions. The fleet issue with Turkey is something I've been talking about for years. Granted, France is locked out of most southern areas, but having a fleet in Gre about now would have been instrumental. Part of keeping France at bay is having the ability to take from him to help offset possible gains in the north. By taking from him in the south, you (a) have the ability to possibly force his hand into a premature draw if he continues to get out of control and (b) it can set you up to eventually have the possibility to turn this game around in your favor. There's no rule that says the game can't continue while one or two players refuse to draw in an attempt to gain solo leverage of their own. It might take 6-7 years, but if it can happen, ya gotta try.

Where England is concerned, the Island is protected, but the lack of a fleet in the NRG is going to be a difficulty. That's not to say that England is in any real danger because you have enough units around to do the job---it's just a matter of jockeying them around to get everyone where you need them. The bigger concern is, as abge stated, central Europe--more specifically western Russia/eastern Germany. This is the hot zone. The war will be won or lost here.

^It's been about time for three years or so. France's solo is now virtually guaranteed (and this has been true for a while). I really only see one move that can salvage it. So get brainstorming y'all

I agree with uclabb that the board needed to start working together 1-2 years ago in order to effectively stop the French solo. France has consistently outplayed the board both in diplomacy and in moves. Given the current position, I think it would be tough for even veteran players to stop France at this point.

Also, while the island is currently safe, it's only because he's using 5 units to defend 3 centers, which is why central Europe is at such risk. As Tru says, there's also a serious change of France getting behind English lines in the north.

To be clear, though, the board can absolutely stop the French solo. The game isn't over by any means. There's just no more room for mistakes.

Bump, moves

Fall 1909

OUCH! There were *several* less-than-stellar moves this year. Two of them were made by France and two were made by Turkey. With that said, let's look at everyone's order sets:

Austria and Germany: you two did exactly as you had to do. At this point, holding on is really all you can do. You're both in a spot that leaving your center to move to a non-center zone is hazardous to your health, so nothing went wrong for you two.

England: Your moves were predictable. Very predictable. The only one I didn't see coming was the convoy and it was a nice touch. I will say that the fact France didn't try to read the obvious choices for you was great for you and unfortunate for him. That put him a season back. You have really 2 choices for builds. The unit type is clear, but where to put it is not as cut-and-dry, so take time and mull it over.

Let's start with France. When I looked at the last season, I took a long look at England--well, more of an initial short one to think about where he needed to be in the north. The long look was around central Europe. After thinking through a few things, I put together my commentary with the following thoughts in mind:
1) England needs to keep France out of the NRG because if he can get there, there's nothing back in Scandinavia or northern Russia to prevent him from taking a center. The obvious move? Cly-NRG in case France tries to go there.
2) England needs to protect Lvp. My assumption was Yorkshire supports the hold while Wales heads to London.
3) England needs to protect the ENG or make a move for Holland. This ties down the NTH to one of those two options.

This thought process made it pretty clear that supporting yourself into the ENG was a great choice because England may not be able to afford to move Lvp to cut support. He could have ordered the cut support and issued Cly-Lvp with Yor support because there would have been no loss. London was safe that round anyhow. That was an unlikely event.

Knowing this, I thought "hmm, if I'm France, I'm going to let England into the NRG and instead use the NAO to move to Cly. This would put pressure on Edi AND Lvp" Imagine the power of having 2 units on the NTH and 2 units on Lvp with another fleet coming in behind. Talk about convoy possibilities and strategic options. Now, England's got a build coming in and I'm sure you can guess what it will be and it doesn't rhyme with schmarmy. If it does, then he's practically giving you the game on a silver platter.

The other really bad drop was along the German southern border. Again, it came down to simply knowing what your opponent would do in a time of duress. A double support hold on Kiel in the Fall was the obvious choice. He couldn't afford to lose a center and give you a build. What did that mean for you? Silesia would be WIDE open. I would have *definitely* ordered Mun-Sil and Bur-Mun. This puts 2 units on Berlin and 2 units on Kiel in S10 which nets you Kiel (and you already know where England would retreat to) and would allow you to take Berlin in the fall. Sure you might lose Kie as a result, but after England reduces a unit (which would have to painfully come from the Island), you could come back for Kiel. At this point, there's only one destination for the English army in Lvn, and you're not going to like it.

The fact that you failed to really consider your opponent's only real choice of moves means that the draw chance increased dramatically.


Now to Turkey. Your two moves were related in that they shared the same goal: GET A FLEET IN THE IONIAN. If you have a fleet that could have hit the ION by the Fall of next year, all of a sudden, you've got a unit that threatens Tunis, Naples, the Eastern Med--and if it can get into the EAS, it can threaten Spain, Marseilles and Portugal. France WASN'T going to get a build this year. This was a very prime opportunity for you to move the BLA fleet to Con. Then, it's in the AEG by the Spring, and you have one in the ION by the fall. Bada-bing, bada-boom. Draw.

The other related move was to get a unit in Albania. I mean, come on. Army in Alb and Ser puts pressure on Tri which means France has to dedicate a unit supporting a hold there. That either means Vienna has to do it, and give up on fighting toward Berlin and Warsaw, or the ADR fleet has to do it which means losing the ION, which we both know isn't going to happen.

Abge and I both agreed that France leaving Alb empty was a big mistake. We also both agreed that your fleets locked in the BLA and Rum were a waste of resources--still are. You're the guy that has the ability to force France's hand into a draw. The moment someone threatens the leader's back side, the game grinds to a halt because if France starts losing centers, he gives others the opportunity to move toward a solo. Therefore, I'd have moved Gre-Alb and AEG-Gre along with BLA-Con.

France- When you are trying to solo, you need to use all of your units. In particular, you need to realize what parts of the board you have sealed and thus don't need defensive units any more. For example, Turkey and Austria are completely neutralized in the Blakans. They are defending forever. You don't need a unit in Vienna. It should have been a high priority this turn to get that unit useful. Making a guess that England would move out of Warsaw was a horrible decision. Not only was it unlikely to work, but it put off actually getting your units into an effective position. It's the same with Burgundy. Germany has a fleet in Berlin. Munich is so so safe. That unit in Burgundy is useless. Good moves this turn that involved no guessing would have been something like Galicia supports Munich to Silesia, Burgundy to Munich, Vienna supports Budapest's hold, Trieste to Albania. Notice that literally none of those moves are "guessing right" (in fact, they are all in some sense guessing wrong), but they still are much superior to the moves that were made because all of your units would now be active.

Similarly, it is friggin ridiculous that that fleet that was in Spain and is now in MAO is moving further and further away from the Ionian Sea. Not sure what else to say about that.

Turkey! You should have clinched the loss this turn with your continued failure to go take Ionian Sea. Luckily for you France doesn't seem to care. Go take Ionian Sea or else France solos guaranteed.

Moves

Spring 2010

Wow...wow. I'm thoroughly disappointed in two moves.

Enland, you did just fine building a fleet. That fleet needed to go toward supporting a hold on the NTH, not in moving to the NRG. You had plenty of units to keep France locked out for the remainder of the game had you simply put Cly to the NRG without support, NTH holding with Edi supporting. That would leave your armies to issuing support holds. This would have bought you another year to work some deals out with Turkey. Now, you'll have to retreat to Den (or remotely Lon) to prevent loss.
Also, you needed to cover Silesia. You didn't and now France will take Kie. This will put you down 1 more unit leading to further losses in the north.

Turkey: why are you not moving to the ION? You seriously needed to be there wit the BLA. Getting into te ION is the only way to force France's hand by getting behind his lines. Now, it's doubtful you'll e able to do it before he solos.

Congrats France.

This game has been paused until Monday because a player will be unavailable.

I apologize for not addressing this until now.

The pause is in effect because a player will be out throughout the weekend and will return on Monday.

For the record, if anyone knows they will be out, please try to get the board to pause first by posting in the global chat. That way, we can cut out the middle man and everyone is prepared.

And the middle middle man : )

Lol sooooo true

With the current pause, this seems like a good time to take questions from our audience. If you have a question concerning anything that has been said or viewed here since the start of the game, we'd love to address it.

I feel like a broken record, which is why I haven't been saying much, but let me condense the advice I've given down to a few bullets:

1) Always talk to everyone. Even if you're in a brutal war or if they have only 1 center left. The map can change in the blink of an eye and you'll regret not having maintained a working relationship with someone.

2) Always give your units something to do. This sounds trivial, but there were many turns where several people had their unit hold when there were many useful things they could be doing. Diplomacy is important, but so is tactics. You only have half a dozen units most of the game. You can't afford to be wasting them.

3) Consider the Board the 8th player. By this I mean every turn look at the entire board and see what it tells you. The board is the only player that will not lie to you. Does England claim he wants peace with Russia but lands an army in NWY? That's a red flag. New Russian players will quickly learn this and understand how it impacts them. What is harder is for Italy to understand how an English army in NWY impacts *him*. Everyone is affected by everyone else. Look at the whole board and understand what your neighbors are doing.

Hopefully this will be starting again soon

Hopefully.

Has anyone talked about the three phases of the game (beginning, mid game, end game) and the changes to strategy required at each phase?
Also, what are the road markers that the game is about to move, or has moved, into the next phase?

Not a professor . . . but . . .
While there are many ways to divide games into opening, mid-game, and end-game, I prefer to think of the opening as the phase where diplomacy has the most effect on the game. At the beginning of the game, each power has many viable strategies to pursue, and it is often diplomacy that determines which ones will be chosen.

As alliances emerge and nations rise or fall, the game moves into the mid-game. Typically, in the mid-game, one or more of the initial alliances has finished its first target and is either breaking up or seeking a new target. In the mid-game, players must make strategic decisions – stabbing an ally, which centers and areas of the board to prioritize, or what builds to make, for example. The strategic decisions in the mid-game are often what separates great players from good players, as they allow great players to turn bad positions into draws and good positions into wins.

Finally, in the end-game, players have generally settled into a strategy, and as stalemate lines emerge, tactical decisions become ascendant. Of course, this does not mean that any of the skills can be ignored at any stage of the game, only that certain stages of the game tend to emphasize certain skills. After all, even the earliest moves must be made with a strategy, however fluid, in mind, and mediocre or poor tactics in the mid-game will get you eliminated so that you never make it to the end-game!

@RAZ: I pretty much agree with peterwiggin. The early game is where alliances are first being formed and targets develop. The game stays in this early stage until, as pw said, one or more countries are eliminated or very near elimination and alliances begin to look at either (a) new targets or (b) restructuring. The midgame goes on until a player becomes a solo threat, moves toward branching out of an alliance for a solo run or one alliance begins to trump another.

The things to think about in each phase are generally characterized as follows:

Early game: in the early game, a player needs to talk, talk, talk. Everything you say is an advertisement to other players that you want to be their ally. Those that talk more most frequently are the ones with alliances. Quantity is generally more important than quality. Quality matters, but you need to advertise yourself more than the other guy. Once you establish an alliance, it's time to formulate a strategy. Nothing advances an alliance like cohesiveness. This is the bulk of the work in the early game: be the guy with an ally and form a plan that nets you gains. Without growth, you die.

Midgame: the goal if the midgame is to, first, continue growth, and second, find the best way for you to cross the line. At some point, you will come to the crossroad of either maintaining your current alliance or breaking it up. The primary factor that goes into this is based on where you see YOUR best opportunity to cross the stalemate line is found. This is dependent on either (a) the press you gather from other players or (b) the press you establish with others that opens the opportunity for you to move the way you want. Aggressive players are the type that direct press and direct others in a way that opens opportunities for you to move into a solo position the way you envision things should go. It requires skillful manipulation and attention to detail. Reactive players are those that read the board and listen to the press of others to decide where the best means of accomplishing their goal can be carried out.

For example: let's look at France. In the midgame, he is often allied with either England or Germany and one of the two is dead or near dead. France has the option of either pushing into Italy or hitting their current ally on the way toward Russia. The proactive player will decide on the best path forward. They may see the board and notice Germany is out of balance and could be manipulated into exposing a soft spot that allows for a great stab and he would then manipulate Germany to expose himself or the knife while silently preparing others (like Russia) into joining in on the stab as France switches alles. The reactive player would talk to the eastern powers and might hear that Russia wants to work with you to hit Germany. You agree and Russia attacks and you take the opportunity to come in from Germany's back side while Germany is throwing himself at Russia.

In the midgame, you have to know your play style and make or keep your eye out for opportunities that put you in the solo position. If the endgame starts when a player makes a solo run, then you want to be that guy. This is the primary goal in the midgame. There is no timeframe for this part to end because players may jockey for a position for years seeking or trying to make an opportunity to cross the line and establish himself as a solo threat.

The goal of the endgame is to simply keep your solo threat alive. It is just as strategic as it is diplomatic. You need to get others to believe you're not a threat and that they need your help as muc as you need theirs.


If you're not the guy in the driver's seat, your role is to break up alliances that are against you and to continuously read the board and convince others that they need to target someone else to either prevent a solo, prevent a personal threat by getting others to personalize that threat as well, and to find your footing and growth to change the course of events that are not unfolding in your favor.

When's this game starting back up.

As soon as I hear back from the player that requested the pause.