seeing as they explicitly went against your ruling last game I assume not. I didn't even bother watching this game or figuring out what spaghetti rules were decided on this one so who knows

Are you? I probably should have checked the original thread first :)

The rules we played with were the ones proposed by ckroberts after the last mountain. Top two players advance, or top 1 if there's a solo. Ties broken by RR, then GR. Luckily we didn't have any ties.

That's some shade, Valis.

I will post my EOG on Monday. I need to collect some sad emojis in the interim.

Uhhh, EOG, EOG...what was I thinking through this game again?

I suppose as a general of my play: Italy was pretty annoying, but I was willing to work with him at Austria's request. Didn't pay off.

The rules on the tourney page say top 3 advance, not top 2.

"The winner or, in the event of a draw, top three players by SC count (tiebreakers, in order: RR, GR)"

And I approve of this shade, Stack.

I don't deserve to go on, but I will if someone has to, although I don't think I should. We had a convo after the last game about changing the rules, though many people apparently still seems to think they're not perfect.

I will try to write an EoG tomorrow, and get started setting up the next game.

I'm just unclear as to which are the true set of rules to follow if there are rules that aren't on the tournament page. Was it ever updated after the last conversation?

Why did you draw when there was no stalemate?

In this game? There was a clear stalemate

OK went back and reviewed and you're right - my bad

I don't have the power to change the tournament page, I think because I assumed (foolishly, in retrospect) that we wouldn't be needing to change the rules at all. I'm not sure how the process should work.

For those interested, I will have my EoG up later. We will get participants for the next Mountain game next week. I am out of the game, but I will make it and get everyone in.

Just email the mod email what needs to be changed on the page and I could do it. It also needs updating with links to the past two

@Bas, you got me, i shall be ready next time

EoG for France:

In this game, I feel like I didn't play well, in the beginning in particular, and I probably deserved to have been eliminated.

1901: Italy sounded very friendly, as did Germany and Russia. I heard from them first, so I figured a Sealion-typed thing would be the best move. With England, we decided on a WT, which would also be fine with me - to hedge my bets, I decided not to go to the EC. But horribly, Russia did not move north at all, and Italy moved straight to Pie. Italy tricked me! England and Germany and I decided to bounce Belgium because we couldn't decide, and then I made my dumb move.

So, in spring 1901, I was in MAO, Spain, and Picardy. Italy was in Piedmont. I had to decide whether Italy would try to move to Mars or not. I decided that if I were Italy, I would let France move back to Mars to ensure he couldn't build a fleet there and wouldn't get Spain; plus, Italy seemed really to not want to attack me. So, Spain sat still, Pie moved to Mars.

The next few years sucked. England moved to EC in spring 1902. Germany thankfully was fine with me getting Belgium. Jamie, I am curious what you were thinking in, let's say 1902-04, about me. I kept feeling like you were just about to attack me, but never decided to; as it happened we were the only neighbors, I think, who didn't end up fighting each other.

I would talk a ton with Italy the rest of the way, who was not always honest. Also, in public press, Wusti guessed who was who and was wrong about everyone except that basvanopheusden was Austria.

1902-03 was me begging England and Germany to not attack me so I could deal with Italy. They played it pretty well - keeping me weak enough that Italy could make gains, but not so weak that I would just get rolled over (Jamie, was that why you kept the fleet in EC? If so, well done.). Italy ran tactical circles around me this whole game - partly I think I was guessing bad, partly just better than me. Very impressive, Stack.

Germany basically stopped talking, and in fall 1903 forced Ruhr, which I knew meant I was a goner. I am curious, TrPrado, if you were intending to attack me and England at the same time. Fortunately Italy had a weird plan to move to MAO or something with my aforeknowledge, I guess to stab me better in a tricky way, so he didn't eat me as quickly as he could have. Germany managed to get Burgundy, but at the cost of Holland - Germany had moved to Hel and was consistently trying to force North Sea. I think Germany made a big mistake here, because even with Italian help a 2v2 fight is not going to be an easy time. But, I don't know what the behind-the-scenes conversations between England and Germany were like. Also, Italian help was not to be counted on.

Curiously, Italy wanted support to Burgundy, to go fight Germany (??), which happened in fall 1904. I think this was Austria's diplomacy which made it happen. I still do not understand it all. If I were Italy, I would have finished off France. In a pleasant surprise, I had all my home centers plus Belgium by the end of 1905. Austria played a very nice diplomatic game, and I was a partial beneficiary. At some point it looked like he had gotten Italy to want to attack England, going around me, which is interesting. Also in spring 1905, England sent me this message which I will always treasure: "Yaya, deffage"

ssorenn was eliminated in 1905, and we didn't talk very much, which is sad because he's fun to play with.

In 1906, Italy wanted me to attack England I guess? and Austria wanted me to help Italy attack England. I know now, his thinking was to weaken Italy for the stab, and it was well done. All I wanted to do was finish off Germany and be in position to force a draw with me in it. Austria really wanted me to work with Germany against England, which I pretended I was interested in, but why would I? Germany had attacked me, England had been a friend, and attacking England would leave me very vulnerable to Italy.

When Austria stabbed Italy, he was almost too successful. He was at 14 centers, and it was stop the solo time. England and I moved into position to hold a stalemate line. The real debate was over whether or not to keep Italy in the draw. Austria really wanted to cut Italy out. I did not as I don't really believe in cutting draws, but not enough to fight England about it, and when England wanted to then it was fine with me. Italy wasn't a game-long ally or anything. After a pointless little thing at the end of the game that got Austria stabbing me and Italy curiously helping Austria move into position to finish off Italy, it was a draw.

Overall thoughts: basvanopheusden, impressive and enjoyable game - fancy presswork throughout. A solo would have been deserved; the only possible lesson you could draw would be get across the stalemate line faster, which I guess was your thinking in trying to keep Germany alive. Jamie and Stack, you both played well enough to make a draw, I think. Stack, you outplayed me so hard in the first couple of years of the game; you pressed hard against me when I thought it was a mistake, but it worked. Then you backed off when I thought you should have kept pressing. TrPrado, we both made a couple of crucial errors in the game, but I was on the edge and came back; you were in the middle. Wusti and ssorenn, we didn't get to talk much this game.

EOG for Austria: This EOG is primarily about 1901, because I believe very strongly that most of the game is decided in the first year. And yeah, I like to talk, so I hope you like to read ;)

Spring 1901: I spent most of the time talking to Turkey. He established himself early on as a very talkative player, which I like, and I also felt he genuinely wanted to try an A/T and wouldn't stab at the first opportunity. I had the feeling we'd be great partners; however, he insisted multiple times that he didn't like to move to Armenia – but I never really understood why not. I insisted even harder and eventually he did move to Armenia, but already then our fledgling alliance was tensing up.
Meanwhile, Russia kept silent until pretty late in the phase. When we started talking, we seemed to hit things off nicely. We bonded over our frustration with Turkey, and I started to discuss tactics. But suddenly, Russia got angry with me, saying that he didn't want me to suggest moves to him, and that had to prove myself trustworthy before he'd consider moving North or DMZ Gal or anything, really. I apologized profusely, but already at this point I decided that Russia and I could probably never be long-term allies.
Throughout all of this, I had a great interaction with Italy. He started out by suggesting a Key Lepanto, which I countered by suggesting a Blue Water Lepanto, which to my surprise he accepted. I then looked up what a Blue Water Lepanto actually is and realized it doesn't work when Russia is moving to Galicia! I encouraged a German-English-Italian assault on France, but Germany told us he was more interested in a Sealion. This happened to be the breakthrough, because I realized that if France was going to play a Sealion, Ven-Mar becomes very attractive for Italy. Italy agreed and did open Ven-Mar, the Sealion was somehow not happening, and Turkey moved Smy-Arm as promised.

Fall 1901: Essentially the natural continuation of the Spring. Turkey and I had some difficulties, because he really wanted to take Greece, give me Rumania and expand West while I went North. I had agreed to that plan in the spring, but didn't see how it would work tactically, so I once again pressured Turkey to follow my lead. Italy and I went over some options like Ion-Aeg or Ion-Gre and Alb-Ion, but in the end we decided that the standard moves to Tun & Gre were best. And I was kinda sweating it, because Italy could've moved Pie-Tyr and Ven-Tri to end the game for me on the spot. But he didn't :)

Builds 1901: In my opinion, the most important turn of the game. Turkey and I started to fall out completely, because it became clear to him that I was never planning to give him Greece. But he did agree to a fleet build, which I was pretty happy with. Russia had no builds, which I was even happier with, and Italy had two. Initially, I planned on building two armies and Italy wanted to build A Rom and F Nap so he could attack France while covering his rear with the army. Curiously, Italy ended up asking me to build a fleet instead of an army so that I couldn't stab him in Venice, and he could safely build two fleets. So in the end none of my neighbours built any armies!

Spring 1902: Russia and I arranged a stab on Turkey together. My idea was to bounce in Gal, move Ukr-Rum with support from Sev & Bud, bounce with Turkey in Bul and Aeg, and force disband the Rumanian army. Both Russia and Turkey played differently, but only to my benefit, because I ended up in Galiacia and Aegean Sea.

Fall 1902: This turn, I made what I consider the biggest mistake of my game. Russia was under attack from Germany and asked me to bounce with him in War. Germany meanwhile asked me to support him to War. I pointed out that getting Sweden and Warsaw in one year would give him 7 units to my 5, so then he offered to support me to War instead. If I had taken his support, I'd have had 6 units, alliances with Germany and Italy, Russia essentially eliminated, and plausible deniability to boot! Now comes the big mistake: instead of just accepting the gift that had somehow landed in my lap, I tried to be clever. I told Russia that I had German support, so I couldn't move Gal-War. I expected Russia to be eternally grateful, and become basically an unbreakable ally. I even proved my worth as an ally by convincing Germany to build F Kie instead of his planned army. Instead Russia repaid my “kindness” with – one year of radio silence! So that backfired, but I still had a great A/I going on so feeling happy ;)

1903: Italy and I did some pretty serious calculations in the fall, and came up with the optimal plan of attack against Turkey. We agreed on the eventual exchange of Trieste this turn. This year also started a lasting theme: Italy and I convincing each other to go after Germany, and me trying to convince Italy to keep France alive juuuust one more year. Essentially, that's all Italy and I talked about until the stab in 1906. Builds 1903 was interesting as well. I offered Turkey a final ultimatum: if he disbanded Con, I'd support his army to Sev and I would keep him alive as my puppet. Turkey rightfully told me to sod off, but for some reason did decide to disband Con. I'm curious to hear what went on behind the scenes there...

1904: I made more progress against Turkey, Italy took Trieste as agreed, Russia adopted a waiting approach (which I was very happy with), and we made our move North.

1905: At Italy suggestion, I started a campaign of trying to force disband Russia's units while taking equally many centers, so he never got to disband his Northern fleet. It didn't have the impact we were hoping it would, but it was fun times ;) I quite seriously considered stabbing Italy in Fall 1905. I was going move Bul-Gre, Con-Ank, Aeg-Ion and Ser-Tri with support from Vie. In the end, I decided not to, because Russia/Turkey could still outguess me pretty badly, and if Italy got Munich, he could've voluntarily disbanded Tri to build in Nap, and my stab would've fizzled.

1906: The crucial year. I tried to play an improved version of my 1905 stab, but it failed. I had two major misconceptions which led me to overestimate the effect of my stab. I thought Italy would move Wes-Gol and Ven-Pie in Spring 1906, and start the quest to eliminate France. I also expected Germany to move either Kie-Ber or Kie-Mun.
The idea of my stab was to take Trieste, Ionian and force disband Bohemia in the Spring. Then in the fall I'd convoy to Naples, and move Vie-Tyr with double support. Italy, having moved Ven-Pie in the spring, would likely have defended by moving Tyr-Ven in the fall. The end result of my stab would have Italy owning a disjointed empire of Mun/Ber, Spa/Por, Ven, Rom and Tun, and no units to defend either of his holdings from France, Germany and me.
The real hope was that Italy would realize this, and decide in Fall 1906 to just give up on the homeland entirely, and move Pie-Mar. That way he'd be able to hold Por, Spa, Mar and Tun for a long time and secure his spot on the stalemate line. And I would have had the pleasure of getting to 16 centers with the West held by England, Germany, France, 3 Italian units and 1 Russian fleet. This may have been wishful thinking, but I honestly think if I were Italy in that spot, that's how I'd have played.

1907: The plan clearly had failed. Italy did defend his homeland vigorously, with the build he gained from eliminating Germany, and France allowed him to keep Spa/Por.

1908: England and I convinced France to eliminate Italy from the draw. France didn't want to initially, but England and I pressured pretty hard and I suppose it's hard to say no to extra points at little risk. I should've ordered Boh S Mun in Fall 1908 to keep an Italian unit in Munich, but I was worried that England and France were just testing me out for a turn so I decided to play nice.

1909: Italy wants to throw the game to me, we work on getting towards the stalemate line.

1910: This was a weird year. England reaches out to me, saying he wants to eliminate France and play for a two-way. I try to be as encouraging as I can be, but I'm actually wondering whether he's gone mad. France would 100% throw the game to me if England stabbed. On the other hand, I cannot imagine what England would have to gain from deceiving me, so I decide to trust him. And I decide to let Italy into the plan as well, because I wouldn't be solo-ing without his help. In the end, it turns out that neither of them was serious and the game ends in a draw.

bas orchestrated the fake Sealion and Italian attack on me? Very impressive!

I'm not sure where the original rumor came from. I tried convincing Germany to attack you in Spring 1901, but he said he'd rather side with you against England. Then Italy told me that you told him you were planning a Sealion. Did you? Or could it have been Germany?

Oh Bas, I told Italy and Russia and Germany what was going to happen, and none listened. Kudos to you.

Germany: From the Heart of the Betrayed (because very few people on the board DIDN'T stab me)

It's Germany. So, talking would be my ally. My first message is from France. He asked how I felt about England, and, a carrying on of the conversation later, he practically proposed a Sealion. We also agreed to a DMZ in Burgundy. Austria comes to me with the biggest concern of getting Russia to move north. He also comes right off the bat saying he's trying to convince Italy to attack France. Well, that comes fast. Russia and England start talking to me, and, besides the CPA that Austria proposed long-term, I have the options of going Sealion or WT (which was England's proposal). With Russia convinced of a Sealion, I fulfilled Austria's request of getting Russia to turn north.
And it is now that Italy contacts me for the first time. Most of the leg-work is already laid. So I feel I may have trouble with him. I told him, for the most part, that I wanted to see how the year played out to see who I wanted to attack, and if France moved to Burgundy we'd kill France. He said he would assist if the DMZ were violated. Russia asked about how to do a Sealion and figured that he only had 1 unit to open north with.

So here I am with a guaranteed 2 Center pickup next to a Russia who doesn't know how to open north, a neutral France, and a wildcard England. Austria suggested I work with England against both France and Russia. But then my general direction played off one issue: Sweden. Turkey had begun to pressure me about bouncing it. From experience, if I chose to bounce it I'd have to pull forces to war with Russia. Russia asked me straight-up if I was going to bounce, to which I said I would PREFER to hold. Then came everyone else. England, Austria, and France, in that order, suggested that I bounce Sweden. With all of my neighbors begging me to do it, I felt I hardly had a choice. So I bounced Russia in Sweden. There was also the matter of Belgium. France and England both wanted it and wanted me to decide who got it. In the end, France suggested that we all bounce in Belgium. Really? Triple bounce? I didn't see the point, so I made sure to secure Holland.

Russia started falling over himself to get me to move on France. So was Italy, but he was desperate for a different reason. He suggested I build in Munich, but then moving west may not be the greatest plan, considering I had a Russian loose end to tie up. I told Italy I would like to (truth), but I would have to sit on it, considering I was now at war elsewhere. In the end, I'm not at all sure why I decided to build a fleet at all. That sounds dumb at second glance.

Should I help Italy? He was very persistent. France was worried about Munich. I could attack and was heavily considering it, but Munich was a flexible build that could also help in my war against Russia. England and France were under the assumption that I was aiding a WT, so I was safe in the west, but I was willing to feed France to Italy. England was the one I really wanted on my side. In the end, I told Italy outright I wanted to do Mun-Sil. And then Russia saw my builds and took offense and called them "fightin builds." I felt my dignity was challenged him by following up with "So are yours...wait a moment..." Haha, no builds. Hilarious. Sigh. If I took out Russia fast enough, I'd help kill France. It depended a bit on how well England and I could handle it. And Austria, but he was a bit quieter this turn. I also don't know why I supported France to Belgium. I'm not sure he even asked for the support. What was I even thinking through this game? That was guaranteed to only sour relations with Italy, and I didn't want that. It could mean a more hostile Austria.

England failed a convoy to Norway. Sigh. This meant St. Pete was safe another year. So Russia would die slowly. The board was a mess, and this might serve well for me and Austria. So now, Warsaw. I wanted it, obviously, but then Austria said he would prefer to have it. He also told me that Italy was considering pulling back from France. That could make France strong, and I couldn't have that. Austria asked for support for Warsaw, which I entered.

What? Why, Austria? You were supposed to go for Warsaw, not let Russia live. You're mostly just delaying my attack against France here! Ugggggghhhhhhhh. And now Italy is trying to get France to kill me. This board is not going well for me. Well, as long as I keep England from getting more of a chunk of France than Italy, maybe Italy will thank me? Gah. Austria's saying something about keeping Russia alive to help against Turkey and England. And in that, he wants me to make nice with Russia and redirect myself and build a fleet. The moment I build a fleet England will get mad, and I think Austria is a bit crazy, but he's the best ally I have for now.

Yeah, England is mad. Sigh. Austria and Russia and I (mostly Austria and I) started coordinating my attack on England. And, now that I was nicer with Russia, I could finally offer Italy that help against France.

And then, what I feared would happen now that I'm helping Italy as well as carrying out killing England. They came together to decide to kill me. And now Austria is fighting Russia? How did that happen? I thought we were supposed to reconcile.
France supports Italy to Burgundy? Well, I guess that means I'm dead. I've begun begging Austria to stab Italy, but he keeps making excuses as to why he won't.

Austria and I are both trying to convince France to back off of attacking me and help against Italy. He would take less than anyone in the event of my death, and Italy wouldn't stop attacking him, so we figured it would be in France's best interest.
Apparently not, because now I've lost and France was a big part of that. And Italy is strong. But at least now Austria has come and stabbed Italy, so ride, my stallion, and make sure Italy pays for my demise!

So the Sealion wasn't fake, it just wasn't carried out well on Russia's part.

This is why I love Spring 1901 :) Germany and France agree to attack England, Germany tells Italy about it, who then tells me, and I get Italy to attack France, but then Russia and Germany fall out, so Germany tells France to wait a year before attacking. Did I get that right?

I also like how, even though I never attacked any of Germany's centers, nor supported him in the whole game, his impression of me went from allies to to "Ugggggghhhhhhhh" to "a bit crazy, but the best ally I have" to "ride, my stallion!". By the way, one of the reasons for me to not attack Russia was exactly so you wouldn't go to France. I was pretty happy with the impromptu alliance you and France had, because it was slowing down Italy and England. So sorry for that. Like I said, I was trying to be too clever...

I don't think I told Italy, actually.

But you also didn't tell me, and from ckroberts' EOG it sounds like he didn't tell Italy either. Could it have been Russia?

Probably. Still trying to wrap my head around not understanding how to open north.

I mean knowing how to open North and knowing that a Sea Lion wants you to open North are two different things.

He thought he only had one unit in the north and that there was nothing else. He didn't understand what would have been his role in the Sealion.

I'm on vacation, so forgive my interjection before I write my eog and check my press but...surely you would write down the specific moves when discussing the opening?

To kind of answer TrPrado, something I figured out but really didn't articulate until just now: by the time I was deciding to not attack Germany or not, I knew at least Austria was playing to have multiple small powers on the board, to keep things tricky and messy. In part I kept up the attack because I decided if Austria wanted it, it probably wasn't in my best interests.

Here is my EOG, for everyone who still remembers what happened this game.

************************************************

This is going to be even longer than basva’s EOG - hope y’all like reading!

Pre-game/ Spring 1901:

I draw Italy, which I think by now I have made known to most everyone that is my least favourite country to play. I’m coming off two pretty bad defeats as Italy in the last six months or so, and one decent draw. Italy is also (now) something like 75% of my eliminations in FP games in the last 9 months or so. But I am an optimist, and I’m also feeling a little adventurous this game, so never mind any of that.

At the start of the game, my important conversations are with France, Austria, Turkey, and Russia. France puts forward a view that it makes sense for Italy and France to keep out each other’s hair early on, and I actually completely agree with this on the merits, so I quickly tell France that I share his desire for peace. I mean it when I say it, too. This happens before I really come to an agreement with Austria or Turkey on anything, so at the time, it isn't a lie, although I do break the agreement.

Next up, Turkey. I have never had much success with an IT alliance, but Turkey appears interested and I really believe him, so my fullest intention in 1901 is to shift into an IT alliance at the earliest opportunity. Suffice it to say, this opportunity never comes. I try to convince Austria to sign up for a key lepanto, but he’s smart enough not to agree. Maybe he could tell I was going to stab him in 1902 or 1903 if I agreed, who knows.

I’m also having a pretty good conversation with Russia about a midgame alliance, and it seems prudent to take this seriously. Wusti and I have literally never had a game where we could get on the same page when it mattered, and now we’re 0 for 3 (depending on how you count our 5WD in the last GR challenge), so I dunno. ssorenn and I also have a bad track record now. Anyway, Russia is a bit tight-lipped, but he seems to be very unhappy with the prospect of working with either Turkey or Austria, so I count as a plus.

Crucially, my desire not to play a typical AI means I agree not to open with a lepanto, and that’s really all Russia and Turkey are looking for from me. I’m prepared to say yes to any Austrian plan that is consistent with that, and the suggestion to move to Piedmont seems harmless enough. It doesn’t help that I’m still sore from a brutal mid-game attack by France when I was Italy in a recent ODC game, but maybe my problem is I’m always fighting the last war when I draw Italy. I’m happy with this opening, anyway, because it means I weaken a big mid-game threat (France) and keep open the option of allying with Austria, Turkey, and Russia after the spring moves.

Austria’s proposal is a blue water lepanto, which is almost immaterial. My conversation with him lead me to believe he really isn’t actually sure what that opening entails, but I don’t much care. I’m just happy to have an excuse not to open to Apulia or plan to convoy to Tunis for a change, so I deliberately put discussion of executing the blue water move off until next phase.

Fall 1901:

France is obviously unhappy I’ve moved to Piedmont, but he doesn’t take very harsh tone with me. He just gently reminds me that early wars between France and Italy are bad, which in my heart I know to be true. I am mostly thinking to myself, well, if I don’t get a build this turn, I will probably just let France have his peace. Apparently I do a really good job convincing France I’m not interested in fighting, because my move to Marseilles succeeds.

I’m not sure if I had some help from east here or not. I get a message from ssorenn (Turkey, but I’ve figured out it is ssorenn at this point, is press is unmistakable, not that it affects my play) presuming there’s no way I’d actually move Pied-Mar, and Austria is also assuming I will hold in Piedmont. I have a theory that sometimes certain moves are “in fashion,” and while this kind of second-level metagaming might not be advisable, I get this strong feeling that everyone thinks Piedmont Hold is the “better” move, and thus Pied-Mar is probably going to be unexpected. And I want builds. So that’s why I end up going for it. Austria, Russia, Turkey, and France are all quite surprised by my move to Marseilles.

I don’t usually play 24hr phase games because it’s tough to handle with my schedule, so I’m doing a good job of talking to Germany or England at this point. I would say I’ve tried but barely.

The last important element of stage-setting is builds. I get Austria to build a fleet, and the reason for that is that I am still planning on shifting into a mid-game alliance with Turkey or Russia, and I am fairly confident that a second fleet isn’t a game-ending threat to me, but it does marginally improve my security in the next year (by lowering the payoff from an Austrian stab) and it makes Austria easier to attack on land if we have him surrounded. The interesting part of the next couple years for me is the sequence of events that completely makes me abandon my plan to stab Austria shortly after this point.

1902:

My approach to my lucky campaign against France is basically unchanged from last year. I continue to say I’m only reluctantly attacking him because I couldn’t do a lepanto for diplomatic reasons, and it is hard to agree to make peace when I’ve nabbed Marseilles. I’m still ready to call a truce as soon as I stop making gains, and honestly, I’m looking for an excuse to do so because my earlier promise to R and T that I’d eventually attack Austria is looking harder and harder to uphold.

So I move defensively in the spring, ensuring that I don’t lose Marseilles, and then in the fall I go for the build in Spain. I am successful, again, I think, largely because I’ve managed to convince the others I’m not aggressively pursuing builds, when really that’s all I’m doing.

I have a dilemma in the east, meanwhile, which is that I have so many units in the west, I don’t really have a finger in the AR vs T fight that’s ongoing, and it looks like I won’t get any gains from that fight, either. The year ends with me still contributing nothing to the fight in the east, but picking up Spain.

Austria and I try, rather unsuccessfully, to convince Germany to play a traditional CPA with us. He seems really concerned about Russia, and looking at the board, I don’t understand that all. Russia’s got a lot to worry about and can’t afford Russia. Having seen TrPrado’s thougths on the game, I get where those concerns were coming from, and if I’d been working more closely with Russia, I would have asked him to talk to Germany a bit differently. Some German assistance against France would have made it possible for me to stab Austria fairly soon after this point.

The way this year plays out, it is greatly to Austria’s advantage and not to mine. Austria has had Russian help against Turkey, will have Italian help against Turkey, and has had some weird and pointless conflict between Russia and Germany weakening Russia and keeping Germany from getting stronger. It’s great for Austria and pretty mediocre for the rest of us, but I don’t have the influence I need with germany or England to get anything to change to improve things for me.

1903:

Austria and Russia have some sort of diplomatic falling out, and I guess Austria got too clever by half here. Germany comes back to the west, but he’s still unwilling to get builds and help me fight France. I am making boring moves against France and am pretty close to hitting a wall without help from anyone else in the west.

I have built a fleet in Naples, and I am awkwardly using it to cover Venice because it is pretty undefended and it seems sort of useless for me to send a fleet east or west at the moment.

I guess what does matter is that I do have one fleet in the East Med now, and I’m just using it to support Austria. Austria agrees to give me Trieste if I support him to Smyrna, instead of taking Smyrna. From my perspective, any gains I can make in the east are quite tenuous and hard to hold. Trieste is a fictitious gain, but owning and occupying it is better than anything else. I think, I’d used those two fleets to start working with Turkey or Russia right now, it would have gone better, but I had a hard time seeing a safe way to do that.

More importantly, Austria’s offer of Trieste convinced me that I had a long time before Austria would stab me, and Austria’s rush to eliminate Turkey is also nice. Keeping Turkey around would be a more typical strategy of making it harder for me to stop him from trying to solo later. I find it interesting that France later thought Austria was playing to have multiple small powers on the board because, from my perspective, Austria is quickly and methodically eliminating players, and hasn’t really made any big moves to cross the stalemate. He doesn’t seem to be setting up for a solo run at all, which is another factor in my decision to continue the alliance.

1904:

The seeds planted in 1903 continue to grow, unabated. I swap Portugal for Spain, get in the MAO, and Austria gives me Trieste. Austria wants me to work with France, and I have to give this a lot of thought. I know keeping France around is risky when I can probably push him to elimination, France and I are the de facto middle powers now that Russia and Turkey are both done for. But I’m over at least one part of the stalemate line, and the centers needed for a solo are unlikely but not impossible for me to own. I can see a very narrow path to a solo, which closes completely if I kill France. Probably getting too greedy here.

My other reason for keeping France alive is that I’m now genuinely very annoyed I’ve handed Germany a lot of builds on a silver platter, and he’s refused to make any move against France. So I figure I can at least entertain myself by killing off Germany. Probably playing too emotionally here.

1905:

I forget if this conversation happened in 1904 or 1905, but apparently England tells Austria he thinks I could be a solo threat. I don’t want anyone talking about this, and it is pretty far-fetched if we’re being realistic, so I play it down with Austria too. The only viable path for me to solo involves taking all of England’s home centers, as well as Belgium, Munich, Holland, and 1 or 2 more centers, which is quite unlikely but I’m still keeping hope alive.

No reason to make Austria suspicious, though, especially since my assessment is that his own solo would be most aided by maintaining our alliance for a while longer and trying to get really big (like 12+ centers) before stabbing me. Austria’s belief that I’m happy to play for the draw lets me get armies into Tyrolia and Bohemia, as well as Burgundy, which are valuable territories for gaining access to the centers I’ll need. My mistake is that I’m wrong about Austria’s thinking about his own solo chances.

I’ll add that, for probably 4 turns now, France and I have been working more amicably together, and I’m sort of hoping that I can wrap around France and continue to cooperate with France to make gains elsewhere before taking his centers. But in the meantime, I’m being honest with France, and I think he is starting to trust that I at least will not immediately attack him. Austria’s been an honest broker between the two of us, and I think if he had really been wanting to solo, he wouldn’t have worked up a situation where France and I trusted each other. An Austrian solo run right around now would have benefitted a lot from France massively distrusting me.

Austria’s press ends up getting a little fishy, and I decide a stab is imminent, so I start playing a bit more defensively around my home centers, but I still don’t have a lot of units there and there’s not much I can do when the time comes.

1906:

The stab comes this fall, and while I have a bit of luck in delaying Austria’s attack on Venice and Trieste, as well as carving out a fairly secure set of German home centers, my fleets are too far to save Naples. Austria suggested in his EOG that I should have taken Marseilles just hung out on that portion of the stalemate line - maybe that would have worked, but as I saw it, my ticket to the draw was that France seemed to trust me, and my read of France was the he didn’t believe in cutting draws just for the sake of cutting draws.

If I’m going to take an inventory of my mistakes, I think my biggest mistake right now is probably not that I left Kiel, or didn’t retreat to a more essential part of the stalemate line, or really anything tactical. It is that I didn’t make a big effort to convince Austria to resume our alliance. Perhaps I could have been successful in convincing Austria to play for a 2WD, or offering him Munich in exchange for keeping my home centers. A number of bargaining chips were in my hand, but I didn’t have the focus to really use them.

1907:

For the most part, this is an uninteresting year of setting up a stalemate line. We are about 1 turn away from having the stalemate line at the end, but Austria observes to me that the way I’ve moved makes me pretty vulnerable to being burned at both ends. I’m fully aware of this, and I’m hoping I haven’t read England wrong. It will turn out next year that I have. My backup plan is to offer England support in passing the stalemate line, but that’s a less valuable bargaining chip than the ones I didn’t use last year.

1908:

The second stab comes this fall, and it is pretty devastating, reducing me to 3 centers from 9. It could have been more devastating. I imagine, for reasons of benefitting France as much as possible, they choose to take 6 centers from me rather than the 7 that they could have. Doesn’t matter much.

Preemptively, there is probably marginally more I could have done to convince France not to go along with the inevitable proposal to cut me out, which Austria telegraphed to me last year. But I don’t know if anything could have been enough with England and Austria both having absolutely no reason not to want me out.

1909-1911:

With three centers left and no options, I offer to throw to both England and Austria. I hope that if there is enough chaos, distrust will be so great between Austria and England that a draw will be essential. England is initially interested, but ultimately doesn’t follow through on any of his vague promises or really say much to me at all. He even backs out before the first set of moves goes through where he could position to stab France and jump up for 15-16 centers in a single turn.

Austria has gone over his drama with England in 1910 already, so I’ll add that my guess is England was talking to Austria under the assumption that it would leak to me, and that the possibility of his run for a solo would get me to defect from Austria. I considered this possibility, and decide that, if it was true, England could bring about my elimination regardless, and if it was not true, then Austria was going to solo. My best outcome among those options was to defect from the throwing to Austria camp, a turn too late to have even an extremely tenuous spot in the draw.

************************************

I’ve probably forgotten some important details, especially re: my press with Germany and Russia, but those are the broad strokes. I would say I had a decent strategy for the start of this game, but I let important parts of the board get away, and I didn’t make the right calls in how to respond to France and Turkey’s early weakness which laid the groundwork for me to be vulnerable to Austria later. I will say that I think Austria’s stab was mistimed - he was basically, and very predictably, trading one 3WD for a different 3WD in making that stab, and as the loser in that trade, I am obviously not a fan.

In his position, I would have tried to bring about a longer war between me and Turkey earlier on, or tried to cross the stalemate line in Germany, rather than encouraging me to do it, before making a run. Perhaps in my position, I should have played more proactively after Austria’s first stab, or I should have put more effort into executing the attack on Austria that I’d promised T and R earlier on. Or I should have just killed France when I had the chance, or at least taken him down to 2 centers. C’est la vie. I’ll just have to try to pick up another solo in ODC Round Two to recover the hit to my GR (I can dream, right?).

"Probably playing too emotionally here."
I'll say.

Haha I didn't realise this thread had some posts in it now - which I just caught up with.

OK so for the record I know exactly what Russia does in a Sealion - I was playing dumb, as given the press from Turkey and Austria, and Italy's commitment West that I was going to cop a combined assault in the South and could simply not commit the unit - essentially going turtle and hoping to outlast the initial onslaught, and come back mid-game - pretty much baking on Austria and Italy to fall out - its just came way too late to save me.

I have to say I was surprised by Germany's bounce and that no one else seemed to see Austria trying to play puppet-master - my press with him was more about trying to convince him to be honest rather than playing me for the patsy - he seemed to be very full of himself and taken with his own intelligence in most matter - which was a red flag from the get go.

I thought Italy played a fine game but stuck with Austria that bit too long - and I never really was able to come to grips with Turkey.

I have a lot to learn about Full Press games - I do well in most Gunboat environments but still struggle with press - my sleeping patterns make everyone nervous - although it doesn't seem to affect ATC so it must be something Im doing wrong.

Anyway I equal parts enjoyed and was frustrated by this match, and these EOGs have certainly explained some of my mis-steps.

Thanks guys.

@TrPrado: would you have attacked France earlier if you knew Austria was going to attack Russia by then? With all my units in the west, I had to choose between you and France, and while not all of my reasons for letting France go were good, I think it was at least the more exciting choice.

Stack: If I were assured Austria could hold back Russia's attention from me, then yeah. I also remember trying to make sure you got a decent enough chunk of France, but you kept saying you only wanted Portugal and Marseilles.
Wusti: I can assure you you wouldn't have been bounced if you had opened north.

Yeah, I was sort of hoping to be able to push north instead of taking the rest of France. Get more units further afield and all that.

Hmm, so to answer some of the earlier mysteries, the news of a Sealion in Spring 1901 actually came to me from Russia first, and then Austria, not Germany. TrPrado did not tell me about an attack on England at all, so I was definitely considering the possibility that I was not actually interrupting a Sealion when I moved to Piedmont.