Join or create a team of excellent players and try your luck in the 2021 World Cup! Sign ups close at the end of November.

Registration for the virtual World Diplomacy Championship played on Backstabbr can be found here.

Finished: 11 PM Sun 09 Sep 18 UTC
Private G-Candles of the Wild
1 day, 12 hours /phase
Pot: 140 D - Spring, 1911, Finished
Classic, No messaging, Anonymous players, Draw-Size Scoring
1 excused missed turn
Game drawn
05 Aug 18 UTC Spring, 1905: Moderator: (swordsman3003): A player requested a Pause until Monday.
08 Aug 18 UTC Spring, 1905: Moderator: (swordsman3003): Unpaused now
15 Aug 18 UTC Autumn, 1906: Moderator: (swordsman3003): I am issuing an emergency pause. email if you object to this happening.
17 Aug 18 UTC Autumn, 1906: Moderator: (swordsman3003): all countries have entered orders so I am continuing the game
04 Sep 18 UTC Autumn, 1909: Moderator: (swordsman3003): Thanks all
08 Sep 18 UTC Barnaby, surprised you drew! I thought we'd have a tough time keeping you from getting to 18!
08 Sep 18 UTC Good job sneaking into the draw David. Well-played late defensive game as Russia.

Good try at the solo win Paul. It’s really hard to solo win as Turkey cuz you’re so far from the stalemate like but that was a very good effort.

Kaley I’m sorry I was such a shit at the end of the game but I decided had to get away from Germany and threaten to throw the game to Turkey if I kept getting attacked. Portugal is the best place to hide out in as I always say. You did a very good job blocking Turkey especially under those circumstances.

Everybody associated with the name “Sam” bit the dust lol, oh well. Tough for Austria and Italy when Turkey has a good game.

Sam, as Italy I really recommend against attacking Austria in 1901. Worst case scenario is exactly what happened, Turkey is super-powered and you just die too. Best case scenario is just a draw with Turkey anyways usually.

The a big reason it is bad to attack someone so hard in 1901 is that you don’t know who is who. Sweetwatersam is one of the best players on the whole website so he didn’t collapse easily, and he correctly prioritized his centers near you instead of centers near Turkey, to force you to give up attacking him. If you wait a year, you have more time to see where your strategic advantage lies or who seems to be playing poorly.

DaddyO I wanted to be your ally so bad, Idk why you weren’t having it. Russia opened partially northern, France took Belgium in 1901. France as so weak due to my juke in 1901. We could have eliminated France and Russia, easily, if we had worked together. My opening was so good, and I shut down Russia and France despite also being attacked by you. So because you helped France and Russia, instead NOBODY got eliminated, not even me. Why didn’t you HELP the weakest players in your area instead of eliminating them? Doesn’t make sense to me. My position was so strong after early game, it was going to be extmtely difficult to elimate me, and instead you helped Russia recover and let France come back. Drove me NUTS. No eliminations in the north stuck you with a 5-way draw despite your strong game, so you don’t really have anything to show for your efforts.
08 Sep 18 UTC I’m sure you have some logic behind it DaddyO I’m just explaining my perspective. I could have told you that you wouldn’t eliminate anyone by attacking a strong power instead of a weak one. And I really think England is the best ally for Germany....that’s why I opened to English Channel! So you’d work with me and bounce Russia out of Sweden, fight for Belgium, all much easier targets than English home centers. :((((
08 Sep 18 UTC Next game, all are welcome, let me know if you join:
08 Sep 18 UTC Joined
08 Sep 18 UTC (G)underball? Not a Candle? Joined.
08 Sep 18 UTC Yeah I’m trying to name them after Bond films now (before it was Zelda games) but I couldn’t think of anything better for “Thunderball”
09 Sep 18 UTC Sorry Swordsman, when you went to the Channel I bounced Russia to allow you to fight the Frenchman without the Russian spoiling the party, as you wrote in your biggest game document. By fall '01 though, it looked like the Russian was already in trouble with the Turk and the Austrian was not going to be able to help contain the turk due to the Italian attack on Austria. With an army in Norway and fleet in MAO, I saw it progressing to a strong Turk and strong England, with me in the middle. I thought better to help the Frenchman, who could eventually hold back the Turk, and not weaken the Russian any more than he (she?) was already. Right or wrong, that was my logic.
In your opinion (which is much more experienced than mine) should I have helped attack both France and Russia? Would you then have gone around to the Med, or would I be caught between two strong attackers?
09 Sep 18 UTC F me I wrote this huge message and lost it somehow

DaddyO, thanks for having this conversation with me I hope I can illuminate my thinking for you:
1) Nobody is going to solo win in autumn, least of all Turkey
2) have some guts and try to play for some eliminations before panicking about a solo win threat. Players who are half-dead actually make it harder to form a stalemate line than if there are just 3-4 left.
3) Russia can't be propped up and that doesn't weaken Turkey. Russia will just retreat to the north to get the best chance at being in the draw, which is what happened here of course. It's so trivially easy to protect StP from the north, you're better off eliminating Russia just to get the draw size down, becuase you won't get to do it in endgame most likely
4) I understand propping up France to prevent a turkish solo win but nothing of the sort was really threatened at the time you rejected alliance with England. you and I could have eliminated France long before any of that matter. LONG before, or given up and let France help form a stalemate line. France was so badly damaged and I was off to a good start, so there was no way you could REALLY prop up France, as evidence by how in this game, despite all your help, you only rolled me back out of 1 center and by the time you capture a single home center from me, despite your relentless attack, I was still kicking France in the shins to try to throw the game.
5) Many games end in a 3-way draw and E-G + one very strong southern power is a very common 3-way draw. AS Germany you sit in a stalemate line location naturally and can't be eliminated in the endgame without being able to throw the game.
6) I advise against your thinking of attacking the power who is strong (I had 4 the way...never more than 4...I was not a solo win threat...nobody with 4 centers ever is...). Instead, focus on eliminating powers who are weak. Get builds, power up, and reconsider your situation as the game unfolds. Attacking your allies, or another power, because they are strong is advsiable unless they're directly a threat to you (by attacking or by solo win). Otherwise, it'll happen exactly as here: a strong power can turtle up, defend, and you never get anyone eliminted. So in this game, by your play, you never eliminated even a single power. Turkey finished off Austria and Italy, that's it, and you had nothing to do with that or were even trying to prevent that from happening. Don't be so fearful of players getting eliminated...a huge draw size should be a disappointment (unless you were a player clinging to life, like me or Russia).
7) dang I'm just going to make point 6 again but France was off to such a terrible start...the point of my attacking France in 1901 is so that YOU, Germany, will JOIN me and smash france so that we can get builds together. By your logic, Germany should never, ever ally England, because England will get builds. Your allies are going to get builds, unless you just sit around and durdle the whole game. My defensive position was so strong and Russia's and France's was so terrible...the entire rest of the game you did not finish me off because it was so extremely difficult to eliminate England after getting a bad start from France and Russia. I was able to fight all 3 of you at one point!!! sheesh.
09 Sep 18 UTC Out of curiosity what do you think the odds of England getting a Solo win would have been if he had accepted the Alliance?
09 Sep 18 UTC Well more than the 1/1,000,000,000 chance England has when attacked by France, Germany, and Russia all at the start. But it’s not like France was crushed by Italy early on and England was at 5 points in 1901. All that ]%^}%ing happened was England took Norway (which England should always get and never scare anyone) and got a fleet in MAO. That’s it. NONE of that is a threat to Germany.

So what I’m saying is that if DaddyO wants to follow my strategic advice and ally England in 1901 if England opens to English Channel (advice I stand by and will follow when I play as Germany), he’s gotta accept that England will....attack France and Russia. What the heck is the point of an England germany alliance but to eliminate those two powers....???? That’s the REASON I made the moves I did, was to impress Germany with my intent to attack them together with him, and not to attack germany at all. I did not do anything to incur German wrath like blocking him from taking Holland in 1901. His way of playing Germany is NOT allying England and amounts to a “death to England” approach that I recommend for France but not Germany. I mean not everyone agrees with me that Germany should ally England, but I think it’s a really good idea if England opens to English Channel. AND what I’m saying is that allying England means Russia and France must be crushed. AND I’m saying that attacking England right away is an even WORSE idea when France and Russia are off to a bad start

If Turkey is off to a strong start, nobody is going to solo win except turkey unless turkey suddenly plays like crap later on. The strength of a dominant power in the opposite side of the board compels alliance between the other players.

Unless you yourself are trying to solo win, the best thing that can happen to you is someone in the other sphere attempts a solo win or at least takes over the whole sphere. Then you can play it out to a 3 or 4 way draw with that power.

So like really common draws are:
France, Germany + Turkey
England France + turkey
Austria Italy + germany
Austria Italy + England
Italy turkey Russia + France
England Germany + Italy
Russia turkey + France
Austria Russia + France
And so on. It’s really easy to pair two powers on one side (who eliminate 1-2 other powers and set up a stalemate line) vs a dominant power in the other (who eliminates 1-2 other powers and sets up a stalemate line)

So if we take it as true the idea that Turkey was explosively strong in 1901, the power of turkey is INSurance that Germany cannot be attacked; all of Germany’s neighbors were weak (France bad start, Russia bad start, England has 4 scs). No two powers were somehow going to assemble the power to elimate Germany faster than turkey could take over the south. And to whatever extent England’s chance of a solo win increases by a German alliance (considerably more than the 0% chance of a solo win that England has when attacked by France , Germany, and Russia at the same time), so is Germany’s. Alliance with England let’s germany get Warsaw Moscow and Marseilles, which are centers Germany usually cannot get once openly going for a solo win.
09 Sep 18 UTC By trying to elimate me, Germany gave me no choice but to all-out attack France towards the end in hopes that France would be crippled faster than Germany could elimate me, thus forcing Germany to back off to prevent a solo win, and/or to get myself into Portugal/Spain so that I sit on the stalemate line.

I think in past games in our league our group has learned to underestimate the defensive ability of England because English players keep not opening to English Channel like I recommend and England gets invaded by France and dies right away. England has an extremely strong defensive ability if England does not risk everything by all-out attacking east in 1901 (essentially gambling that Germany and/or Italy are going to attack France, but they usually won’t.

Speaking more generally, attacking powers that are strong and avoiding attacks on powers that are weak is reversing priorities. Small, weak powers are dangerous and can screw up a stalemate line, throw games, and sneak into draws. Strong powers can form stalemate lines, make the draw smaller, and are unlikely to be eliminated if you attack them (and have a GREATER ability to throw the game if you show intent to elimate then). Fighting a strong power who has not and cannot attack you is a waste of time. Go around, get more builds off of declining powers, lure that guy out of position, and then go for a solon win or play it out to a small draw
09 Sep 18 UTC I wasn't thinking in terms of eliminating other players to reduce that draw size, that was never a consideration to me. Maybe lack of experience, lack of the killer instinct, not sure. My intention, early in the game, was not to get stuck having to defend against a strong Turkey on one side and a strong England attacking from the rear. Just my preferences, right or wrong, but too often as Germany I'm in that position of getting stabbed by England. The third leg of the stool -- strategy -- weak in this game. Lesson learned.
09 Sep 18 UTC Baranby -- Considering the game as it was played, with the chaos in the northwest, why did you draw here? I thought you would be able to get Tunis, Rome, possible Marseilles and Spain.
09 Sep 18 UTC One last question -- in gunboat games, or is it draw size scoring, is the initial goal essentially to eliminate other players to shrink the draw size, and figure a way to stop a solo later? In press games I try not to eliminate the smaller players an rather have them around to keep other players in my sphere in check, not getting too big faster than I am. Is it reversed in gunboat? Or wrong in general?
09 Sep 18 UTC So yeah, DaddyO, it sounds like what you REALLY think is “England must die” when you are Germany, and that you needed only the slightest excuse to attack England. If that’s really your strategy, you should be trying to ally Russia and/or France in 1901. Bouncing Russia only to immediately distrust England for attacking Russia and would never have allied England. So don’t waste your time. If you had let Russia have Sweden in 1901 Russia would have been strong.

DaddyO, your allies can eventually stab you. If Germany goes for a solo win, Germany will eventually backstab each and every ally he had. Consider “the biggest game” where I backstabbed France, then Russia, and then eventually even Italy (because I needed 1 center from him to win).

So yeah, as Germany England is likely to eventually come after your home centers. But, by the way, France is way, way more likely to do that because France is inherently more powerful. Also, EVERY power would like too eventually take Munich so Germany is at risk of being attacked by virtually everyone on the map. The way to avoid this is to become strong and he tbuilds by finishing off other Powers one by one. Then you will be strong enough to avoid a stab and maybe go for a solo yourself.

The way you describe your attitude is not “playing to win” but rather “playing not to lose”. 1901, 1902 is not the time for such an attitude, especially when you had a front opening and eliminations are on the table.

England and Turkey crushing Germany in the endgame is something I’ve seen almost never.

DaddyO I think you are wrong in general. Keeping around smaller powers to create chaos is only good if you are trying to get a solo win by bypassing the centers of smaller powers who are too weak to be a threat.

For example, in this game turkeys greatest strategic achievement was to bypass the Italian center to get fleets very far west. If France has not battled turkey so well, and if I had not blocked turkey from getting into MAO in spring 1910, turkey would almost certainly had a solo win.

Furthermore, the fact that I was alive (and to some degree Russia) ALSO advantages turkey, because the stalemate line eventually depended on the two of us cooperating. You were at my Mercy at the end and if I decided to help turkey then you were going to lose. Half-dead powers are unpredictable, dangerous, and good for solo wins because nearly-dead powers will deliberately try to set up someone to solo win so that they can get into a draw. They don’t care how much their actions screw up the draw because they’re going to be eliminated anyways. This applies to press games as well, where I can assure you many, many solo wins are caused by a 1-3 center power throwing a game. As a half-dead power, I have made it into many press game draws by helping a playing at 15,16 centers and screaming that if I’m not given evening I want I will lose to a solo win and not to being edged out of a draw (and that is a sincere threat)

Furthermore, not only are there strategic advantages to eliminations, but that’s also how you “win” the game more outside of solo winning.

The results of a match depend on the size of the draw. The smaller the better. For example the gunboat tournament going on right now awards points exactly in proportion to the draw size. Solo wins ended less than 50% of the games, so even if you assume you solo win at the same rate as others, that means you’re only getting a solo win in 7% of your games, and in like 30% of your games you’re getting a draw - but the smaller, the better for you.

Going for a solo win is not automatically the best idea. If you go for a solo win too early, thebother powers will stop playing for elimiantions. You can win up in 5-7 way draws if you choose too early and inopprtune a time to try for a solo, which is barely different for your results/rankings than just losing outright.

By the way that’s why this game i took back my draw vote until Austria and Italy were eliminated. I didn’t want turkey to get bored or frustrated and vote draw with a 6 or 7 way draw, which is barely different than just getting eliminated anyways.
09 Sep 18 UTC Yeah, sorry everybody I had a missed suport order and then was with out service sooner than I thought and missed a turn.
09 Sep 18 UTC OK, apparently lots to learn. Unfortunately I think we'll be revisiting these lessons sooner rather than later.

Start Backward Open large map Forward End

BarnabyWilde (100 D)
Drawn. Bet: 20 D, won: 28 D
14 supply-centers, 14 units
DaddyO (350 D)
Drawn. Bet: 20 D, won: 28 D
9 supply-centers, 9 units
tennis (114 D)
Drawn. Bet: 20 D, won: 28 D
6 supply-centers, 6 units
swordsman3003 (13174 D (G))
Drawn. Bet: 20 D, won: 28 D
3 supply-centers, 3 units
Verseven (123 D)
Drawn. Bet: 20 D, won: 28 D
2 supply-centers, 2 units
CogZilla (218 D)
Defeated. Bet: 20 D
sweetwatersam (6256 D)
Defeated. Bet: 20 D
Archive: Orders - Maps - Messages