great comments guys... and what a great start for Russia. I'll be following this one closely...

and once again - thanks to the commentators for their insightful and timely analysis.

In my SoW1 commentary, I've focused each post around a question. I think I like that pattern and will do it here. My question in this case is: What didn't happen in 1901, and why? I'll move roughly northwest to southeast.

Belgium: Now the only SC still neutral. Why wasn't it taken? Looks like tension between England and Germany. I've played a couple games where E/G or F/G (or all 3) deliberately bounce here just to throw off the scent of an alliance... but that really puts England at a disadvantage here, and with Russia opening north, he's really got nowhere else to go. This is troublesome for England.

Sweden: Germany didn't bounce Russia out. This is probably a reaction to Russia's northern anti-English opening, as G looks for some help in taking down England. G's westward drive, and R's northward and eastward drives, indicate that G and R are probably working closely together... at least for now.

Mid-Atlantic: France didn't move out. The convoy is a weird decision. France could have achieved the same result moving just the armies, and could have taken the fleet to the Channel, NAO, Iri, or WMS. This tells me that France either hasn't decided who to attack and didn't want to threaten either Italy or England, or that France wants to sneak a move to NAf (less likely). Given the tensions between E/G, this means that G should lobby hard to convince F to get onto the anti-English bandwagon - as poor as England's position is now, G's fleet weakness will mean that he will have difficulty breaking E alone.

Venice/Trieste: No standoff. Not even a potential threat after the spring turn. This indicates careful coordination and significant trust between Austria and Italy. As Italy and Turkey stare each other down in the eastern Mediterranean, Austria's fleet in Greece will be the deciding factor in which side advances. Right now, I think that A siding with Italy will be in Austria's short term interests, but in the long term might drive R to support T and solidify a juggernaut unless A is careful to bring R in against T.

Galicia: Not only was there no opening bounce (not necessarily worrying on its own - this happens more often, or with less sinister results, than most people realize), but R went on to convince both A and T to support the move to Rumania. This means that R has kept his options wide open (he can drop either A or T at his convenience and still have a strong alliance left), and A and T ought to take note.

The Balkans: No fighting. And yet, combined with the peaceful moves in Gal, Tri, and Bla, this means that Balkans are completely saturated with units. Unless everyone works carefully to move out, this could be the tension that ignites major fighting between A/T/R.

Black Sea: No bounce. This basically echoes the missing Galicia bounce above in terms of Russia's politicking, but I figured I'd include it separately just because it's the most significant non-bounce.


Bottom lines:
-Germany seems to be going full speed ahead against England, although the moves have been subtle enough so far that he can still change tack if needed. G will probably seek to recruit R and F to his side against E. E will be in trouble unless he can convince one (or possibly even both) to join up against G instead.
-Italy has solid relations with Austria and peaceful enough relations with France. This is important to Italy's survival in the early game, but he will need to carefully develop these relations into well-chosen alliances to keep from getting penned in during the midgame. The key to making sure the alliance is well-chosen is to figure out what Russia is doing and whether R will support him in an alliance against T (or possibly, though far less likely, A).
-Russia is in a very strong position: working with G can gain him 1 or 2 SCs in the north, and the option to work with either A or T in the south gives him more freedom than most of the other players. I would expect R to remain quite cordial with both A and T (that's how he got into this position, after all), but increasing distance from the other (A or T) should indicate that R has chosen a partner and a response is needed. Both A and T should be wary of this happening in the very near future because of the huge number of units in the Balkans.

bump.

i'd like to throw two cents in about WTA vs PPSC.

although in theory when a clear leader emerges, everyone else should organize to attack them, this does not always happen for many reasons. in particular, if one larger power is declining to attack the emerging leader, letting that leader get more SCs may goad the other player(s) into action. sometimes as a small power in the mid to late game, you don't have much other leverage than that, if folks are not presenting a united front. trying to remain open to shifting alliance is a good idea - if someone stabs, it may be very upsetting, but figuring out how to work with them again may make the difference in how you fair in the game, as others have already said. initial reactions to a stab can be crucial there.

similarly, babak said that in PPSC people are more likely to look for game long alliance – i’m not sure that my experience reflects that. alliances can be much more fluid in WTA, but not always, and sometimes people stick to an alliance b/c breaking with it increases their chance of getting nothing. still, being flexible is the key, i think. draws can, and do, happen in WTA, even with greater frequency than in PPSC games, and those draws can be the result of a game long alliance, or a set of them, or could be the final balance of power after the dust has settled.

I don't find much difference in most WTA games around here... as by mid game, the promises or draws fly around, which makes the game, essentially a PPSC game. I'd prefer to see a game where draws -only- happen on stalemates. It would at least force those wanting to draw to spend years setting them up if they wanted to organize a draw.

This is a discussion, though, for another thread, and one that's already been beaten to death, to be honest. And I'm not the saint, either. I've taken draws just to finish games that were very long, low points, and I've been overloaded with active games...

BTW - the convoy of france? Ever thought it was puzzling on purpose, just to throw people off? Sure the army move would have made sense... but why make sense when you can cause confusion??? ;)

One problem with needing a stalemate to draw is that invalidates "strategic" draws like 3-ways. If you have 3 dominant powers and no-one is prepared to support someone else because it would let them solo, then no-one can do anything but it is not technically stalemate.

Ah the Lisbon Leapfrog. In the case, it was no different than the army shuffle with a fleet hold would have been, but it's extra snazzy. England should have taken this convoy as a bad sign, because it is very often used as a good jumping off point for an attack on England. I can say this also with the full benefit of hindsight because coupled with the fleet build at Brest, Kiel, and StP suggests that England will be having a very, very, hard time soon.

Russia isn't taking his time in this at all. He'll soon be more than psychologically large, and I think Austria will soon make a critical decision. To stab, or not to stab, that is the question. I certainly think he could find support for such a stab once Russia's at 7 or more centers.

There must have been some interesting winter press as Turkey's build F-Ankara despite having supported Russia into Rumania just the turn before. Perhaps he couldn't stand being the other man as Austria had also supported Russia. I'm not sure how much practical use F-Ank is going to be, but I think it'll be interesting to find out who, if someone else, gave him this idea.

On the road, so just bumping for now

bump

bump

bump; I'll have comments later for now I'm just going to enjoy the sun of Martha's Vineyard

to some of our observers andlurkers interested in these games. SoW 4 is being started in the 'admissions building' thread.

so come join us there...

oy - some interesting (and painful) moves going on here =)

Bump again :) oy indeed!

Very interesting.

I think we can see that the diplomacy skills are really paying off for the experienced Russian.

I apologize; our road trip is taking longer than anticipated. I will give my analysis tomorrow afternoon

Bumpity-bump. Just in case. Too golden to lose!

Back. Sorry for the delay on this, my vacation was sans Internet for a big part of it.

Germany appears to have seen the writing on the wall - when Turkey and England fall, that doesn't leave a lot of room for Russia to grow except through him. Ceding Belgium to England allows him to put up more of a fight, and Russia has left Warsaw *wide* open - which might have been a crippling error if he wasn't on track to get at least two SCs this round.

I would have sent the fleet in Kiel to the Baltic - that allows two units to concentrate on Sweden, while England could have plinked Norway. This would have forced Russia to either concede Sweden or surrender control of Norway.

England apparently was unable to patch things up with France, but his diplomatic moves with Germany prevent outright disaster. It should be noted that Germany could still easily take Belgium, so the future is not as bright as he would hope. While he can support hold EC from North Sea (preventing a French dislodgement), he has to guess if France will convoy Spain to either Wales or Liverpool. His best bet in the short term may be WAL > LVP, EC > WAL, NS > EC

France apparently wants his piece of the English pie, and is moving to either convoy an army to Liverpool or Wales. He may try for the dislodgement of the Channel fleet, but that is unlikely to be effective unless he can convince Russia or Germany to plink the North Sea fleet. Since Russia is probably going to support Finland to Sweden from Norway and Germany appears to be propping up England for now, that doesn't seem to be in the cards - unless France can offer Germany a common alliance against Russia once England goes down.

Italy is in a less than ideal position. Serbia can easily move to TRI and cause Italy to lose VEN with no chance of a useful retreat. While Italy is set up for a Lepano, Turkish centers will do him no good if Austria is in his home. The army in Tunis should head for Albania or APU, unless Italy wants to take a stab at Greece. The other option is to plink ADR and hope the fleet supporting the army in.

Austria's alliance with Russia appears strong - but then again, his alliance with Italy seemed strong last turn. Something to keep in mind. While the fleet build in TRI was an obviously anti-Italian move, the move to TYR could be the beginning on an anti-German move as well.

Austria has opportunities, but also risks. Bulgaria can protect Greece - unless Russia decides to work with Italy and plink it. Russia can also head for Serbia or Budapest, and Austria cannot cover both of them. If Austria chooses to move on Italy, serbia must move to TRI, to prevent an Italian retreat. An Austria stab of Russia to get RUM wouldn’t seem to be in the cards, however, as RUM can retreat to BUD

Turkey is done. His fleet build in CON did him no good in the face of the Russian convoy. Russia must have done some pretty nice sweet talking to explain how an army in SEV instead of WAR would be useful against Austria. His choice to move AEG to EAM was presumably intended to bounce Italy, but simply leaves him in a position where he has no chance to recover.

Russia is going like gangbusters – the biggest problem he has now is having the rest of the board unite against him. This would mitigate against the chances of an Austrian stab, despite Austria being *wide* open for it. On the other hand, playing conservative will only get him a net of one build, so he may roll the dice in a bid to kick Germany out of Warsaw quickly. I’m going to guess he’s going to play it safe, and move RUM > UKR, but only time will tell.


One thing to keep in mind is that this is effectively a gunboat game from my point of view - I have no idea what dastardly plots are afoot. I can only judge based on what people *can* do, and what they *have* done...

What does a gunboat game mean? I've heard the term a lot.

No press whatsoever.

thx for the comments strat - wish we had some more people commenting on these moves. This was by far the most interesting set so far this game.

I'm going to put in a few comments just for the hell of it and see what others think:

I find the French moves interesting. If France is going after England, as it would seem with the move to the Irish Sea, then why the move to MAO? Shouldn't this fleet have moved to the Channel? Can't work France out. Need to go back and look at the other interesting French moves and see if there is a pattern...

Germany has made friends it seems with both France and England (but who knows with France), which I find also unorthodox. Normally Germany decides to ally with one and take on the other, but SoW shows us that there can also in rare cases be a triple alliance, although that is hard work! Germany is off after Russia which Russia, busy in the north and south obviously didn't count on. There will be a lot of talking going on there I imagine! Warsaw is vulnerable.

Austria and Russia seem to have decided to divide up Turkey, and I'm sure Turkey was hoping it would be them and Russia dividing up Austria by the looks of it. You can't trust anyone, can you?

Italy needs to sweet talk Austria, although Austria may want to concentrate on Turkey so it may not be that hard. Austria needs to move the fleet into Ven to guarantee the SC which isn't a good spot for that fleet. Besides, Austria may persuade Italy to go after France which could be good for them both.

Turkey is toast. Turkey needs to get friendly with Italy!

England is in an interesting position but has a lot of options. Probably wouldn't hurt to do a deal with France if possible. England could cover Lvp and Wal while France moves out of the Irish. If they don't do a deal it's a guessing game. France could be convinced to go to the Med with Italy committing fleets east.

No doubt there is much discussion going on with these moves!

Prediction:

Germany takes War, England covers Lvp and Wal and France covers Brest and moves out of the Irish (to the Channel?) Russia takes Con with Italian help. Austria leaves Ven and takes the Ionian. All just speculation of course since I have no idea what anyone is saying!

What would you do if you were:

England:

Sweet talk France, Germany and Russia and probably move Wal to Lvp, Channel to Wal and North Sea and Bel support hold each other?

France:

Irish to Wal, MAO to NAO, Gas and Pic bounce in Brest, Spain to Marseilles?

Germany:

Hol support Ruhr to Bel, Den support Hel to North Sea, Silesia take Warsaw?

Russia:

Norway support North Sea hold, St. P. to Barents, Finland to Sweden, Rumania to Ukraine, Black Sea to Rumania, Ankara hold?

Italy:

Ven hold, Ionian to Adr, Agean to Ionian?

Austria:

Tyrolia support Adr to Ven, Serbia to Trieste, Greece and Bulgaria support hold each other?

Turkey:

Can support Smyrna to Ankara and Eastern Med to Smyrna?

Just speculating.

more fun moves...I told England exactly what France was going to do and he didn't listen to me...guess he didn't trust me after the whole Norway thing. =)

Nothing against you Frenchy - I was really using reverse psychology on England in order to HELP you out mon ami =)

You're supposed to keep the chatter to a dull roar, Jacob, since you're playing this game ;)

I'll give my own commentary tomorrow - it's not going to matter how Italy retreats

my apologies strat =)

wow, what a turn!