[Classic] The Mountain Opening

[ssorenn]

It’s ok. I disagree with the whole premise.

[Enriador]

Umm no. Italy becomes hostile to France and the German is sure going to be hostile(France just aupported Italy to Munich) and England will become opportunistic.

Your reasoning here ("German is sure going to be hostile(France just aupported Italy to Munich") is interesting. Why is Germany "sure going to be hostile" against France but will suddenly trust Italy, the very power who took Munich itself?

Italy will have a hard time pitching innocence to Germany just after closely following "France's plan" in taking MUN. And just like Italy may promise the world to Germany, France can do the very same thing you propose and offer Germany support into both Munich and Belgium if they wish to make amends - how can poor Italy beat these odds?

England may become opportunistic... but the question is, against who? This question is quite complex, and is underlined by many other questions.

Is England in a good position to close Gibraltar before the Italian fleets arrive? Has England's claim to Belgium been respected by Germany (and if France did its work right, it was not)? Has Russia moved A MOS-STP in Spring 1901? Does Russia have F SWE/F BAL? Does Austria have A TRI & F GRE? Does Turkey have F AEG & F SMY?

In other words, there are plenty of contexts where England will probably decide to face its weakened neighbor - Germany - rather than the 5-center France who so far was friendly and demilitarized the English Channel.

Come on, you know Diplomacy is a much more complex game than "Country X is sure going" or "Country Y will do that". :)

[Enriador]

It’s ok. I disagree with the whole premise.

This is your God-given right, no one is angry at you for having your own opinion. I merely wish to understand your critic a bit more. I agreed with some of your points, and found some of your arguments flawed.

Nothing wrong, such is life.

[ssorenn]

I’d love to see some other high GR rated player weigh in here. I think I’ve been as high as 4th inGR non-live classic. I’m terrible at gunboat which is most of what i play now.
I appreciate your dedication to a new opening but TBH, maybe try to be a part of the games you actually play. @36% RR in 3 games on site- that’s not so good

But your opinion is yours like mine is mine. Best of luck, and i hope one day we find ourselves locked in this exact position and you support me to Munich. Then let’s see what happens then

[noumenal]

As Italy I never even look at Munich until very, very late in the game when I am looking for opportunities to solo. Even as France I am suspicious about offers to support me into Munich as that is the hardest supply center on the board to secure (often have a 4-way fight over it).

The general idea of an I/F alliance isn't bad, IMO. But it has to be a longer term alliance that can't really manifest itself till about 1903 or so. The ideal diplomatic setup for me is: France joins England to attack Germany (possibly with Russian help), Italy does the Lepanto on Turkey with Austria but then stabs Austria. An immediate move on Munich? A little too obvious, and not stable/secure enough.

[Enriador]

I think I’ve been as high as 4th inGR non-live classic

With all due respect, the correlation between success in online ELO-based rankings and expertise regarding Diplomacy opening theory is somewhat weak. I am sure you are a good player, but good players are not necessarily the best scholars (and vice-versa) so let's be careful here.

maybe try to be a part of the games you actually play.

I don't know why you mention personal accomplishments in a theoretical discussion about openings between two complete strangers, but if it's relevant for you:

My profile page on webDip (which serves only to see the forums) directly points to my vDiplomacy.com's profile with 98% RR in 37 games (https://vdiplomacy.com/profile.php?userID=7881). You are also free to check my profile on Conspiracy (99% RR in 58 games), my nickname is also "Enriador". (Oh, and you gotta improve that 90% RR of yours my friend! )

I also happen to be an established author of Diplomacy opening theory, having articles published in my name by the world's largest Diplomacy zines (Diplomacy World & the Diplomatic Pouch Zine). Besides, I have recently been invited to be the DPouch's Head of the Openings Library while also being an active developer on vDiplomacy.com. Oh, I am also a moderator at the Discord Diplomacy Tournament and variant-maker (some already released and playable right now). :)

None of this makes me superior to you, though (and vice-versa). The important thing is discussing with respect and good arguments - speaking of which, I left some questions for you in my last post, so far still unanswered.

i hope one day we find ourselves locked in this exact position and you support me to Munich

That wouldn't be fair to poor you, you already revealed your master plan.

as France I am suspicious about offers to support me into Munich

So am I. Italy has little to gain from it, so it's likely a ruse to bring France into conflict with Germany.

An immediate move on Munich? A little too obvious, and not stable/secure enough.

1) Obvious, but hardly avoidable. A French army in Burgundy and an Italian army in Tyrolia are very common sights, right? But how often do you see Germany wasting both armies with a supported attack on Munich? There is not much in their openings that telegraph their dark intentions to the Kaiser.

2) Munich is not supposed to be a stable center for Italy, under my perspective, and should actually be evacuated as soon as feasible - the center naturally belongs to France. As I said before:

Holding Munich, in any case, is not of essence. It's a quick grab against a very busy power that can hardly afford to launch a punitive expedition against Italy for a good while, as they wrestle with invaders from both west and east.

And here as well:

This is the key thing: **Italy cannot hold on Munich for very long**. It's actually most commonly taken as the **18th Italian cente**r or somewhere along the endgame. **Seeing A BUR S A TYR-MUN as a quick SC grab is for the best** - France will want it anyway, **sooner or later**.

[ssorenn]

“That wouldn't be fair to poor you, you already revealed your master plan. “


That’s the best part, i don’t need to keep it a secret, you’d be done as France before 04. Just saying.

[noumenal]

I think I’ve been as high as 4th inGR non-live classic

1) Obvious, but hardly avoidable. A French army in Burgundy and an Italian army in Tyrolia are very common sights, right? But how often do you see Germany wasting both armies with a supported attack on Munich? There is not much in their openings that telegraph their dark intentions to the Kaiser.

I mean, seeing just one of those moves, as Germany, would get my attention a bit and get to talking - "What's the plan with Bur/Tyr"? Seeing both?! Perhaps I am paranoid, or stick to conservative predictable openings (probably one of my main weaknesses) but that would seem to telegraph something to me, as Germany. If it doesn't to most players, then that's probably because we're so used to I/F going their separate ways in 1901 that we don't even imagine the quick Munich punch as a possibility.

I actually did get caught in a similar pickle as Germany, except it was Russia supporting France into Mun in 1901 from Silesia (!) -- I could never have seen that coming. Extremely effective, though. As I recall, I ended up getting no builds and got eliminated in 1903. One of those games where the diplomatic winds just don't go your way.

[Enriador]

That’s the best part, i don’t need to keep it a secret

Come on, you know you'd just abandon your 17th game after things get tough.

Perhaps I am paranoid, or stick to conservative predictable openings

Hmm, if you stop and think about A BUR *and* A TYR then you are actually a very attentive player - a good Kaiser is always a little bit paranoid. The real trick is getting the truth out of "Hey, A BUR is not agressive, I just want to play with Belgium" or "Tyrolia is a trick my fella, I will slip to Trieste/Piedmont/Bohemia next season" and similar chit-chat.

we're so used to I/F going their separate ways in 1901 that we don't even imagine the quick Munich punch as a possibility.

I didn't say it before, but now that you mention it I think that's one of the opening's most important pillars: novelty. No one realistically expects it, and leaving your hyper-confident fellow players utterly astonished is a diplomat's joy!

I actually did get caught in a similar pickle as Germany, except it was Russia supporting France into Mun in 1901 from Silesia

Whoosh, that's tough. Did you bounce them in Baltic Sea at least?

"Diplomatic winds" are harsh at times. I recall a specific game in deceased Droidippy (I was Germany) where Italy moved to TYR (and VEN, so I thought a Tyrolian Attack was afoot), France moved to BUR, England to NTH and Russia did its own thing. Fantastically, France and Italy bounced each other in Munich but damn England bounced me in Holland (I got Belgium). I was out by 1906, but at least got a good laugh!

[ssorenn]

‘I also happen to be an established author of Diplomacy opening theory, having articles published in my name by the world's largest Diplomacy zines (Diplomacy World & the Diplomatic Pouch Zine). Besides, I have recently been invited to be the DPouch's Head of the Openings Library while also being an active developer on vDiplomacy.com. Oh, I am also a moderator at the Discord Diplomacy Tournament and variant-maker (some already released and playable right now). :) “

I’d read some of your stuff. I just don’t buy into F/I alliance in 01

[Enriador]

I just don’t buy into F/I alliance in 01

I cannot blame you at all - it's pure theory. I lack the statistical data to properly corroborate whether the opening is useful or harmful to either side. Just food for thought.

[ziran]

at some point, with more games under my belt, i plan to compile a list of games that meet various criteria. here is one of an early f/i*: https://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?game ... #gamePanel

*includes at least two new players and a cd in 1901.

[Enriador]

at some point, with more games under my belt, i plan to compile a list of games that meet various criteria. here is one of an early f/i*: https://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?game ... #gamePanel

*includes at least two new players and a cd in 1901.

Hmm, isn't that an interesting game? Italy/France had quite the potential - by 1903 France had six centers (BEL, SPA, POR), and so had Italy (TRI, VIE, TUN). Denmark was in Russian hands while Scandinavia became an English playground. France had fleets at ENG and IRI ready to take the English mainland, while Italy held an iron grip on the Balkans and Austria itself.

Russia's weakness and England's power eventually harmed to both Germany and France. France made questionable decisions regarding their defense of Burgundy, and once a German raider gets behind the French lines, well, good luck holding onto it.

@ziran, I sent you a private message.