France is the strongest at the start of the game i think -- if you take into account the entire length of the game, each power has advantages and disadvantages that are pretty balanced. not all the powers are balanced at the start of the game (see: austria, italy) but not all the powers are set up perfect for endgames either (see turkey, italy. well screw it italy sucks for everything.) England and Turkey are best for survival, Russia and France are great for early game strength, Germany and Austria are best for mid-late game.

most important spot on the map = the munich/tyrolia/burgundy triangle.

Thats a great suggestion Jef. merge Tus and Rome, that'd be cool.

It also means france can sail a fleet into rome within two turns of baking one in Marseille though. Not sure such a change would be all that much in favour of Italy.

Any army in piedmont can then also attack both Venice and Rome.

I actually think that change would usually benefit either France or Turkey, not Italy

France has to defend both Piedmont and Burgundy in the beginning, making both Italy and Germany stronger. France has to defend against a 1902 fleet (or army) from Italy. Gulf of Lyon becomes even more important and Italy can control it immediately with a fleet as well.

That seems like a pretty clear nerf for France and Italy much to the benefit of turkey and England.

F Rom starting unit for italy

F Rome pits France and Italy against each other from the outset.

You all also realize that classic Dip isn't webDiplomacy, it's actually a board game, so it's not changing unless you go through Hasbro. If you want a variant like this, go make one. I'd play them.

Not in my experience, granted 2 games only.... But r won first and second was a draw with both f and i in it.

I think depending on the players and their mindset different powers have different power. If a German player is predisposed to believe France is the strongest power on the board that in itself greatly nerfs frances power as the German is more likely to ally with england against France. Folow this logic around the board and diplomacy becomes almost impossible to predict.

Statistics bear out that France is the strongest power. Individual games may vary.

The balance is dynamic, players knowing what positions and moves are stronger or weaker prefer to use the stronger ones more often, and thus become more predictable, and more easily countered.

This is in a sense self-balancing. The game is not 'perfectly balanced' and i think symmetric maps (like Chromatic: http://www.vdiplomacy.com/variants.php?variantID=93 Duo http://www.vdiplomacy.com/variants.php?variantID=22, or Migraine http://www.vdiplomacy.com/variants.php?variantID=21 ) are less interesting for their symmetry.

Take the most extreme example, Pure: http://www.vdiplomacy.com/variants.php?variantID=11 this is still technically diplomacy, but it does not have the same playability.

People can say it is balanced all they want, but the numbers are there that suggest otherwise. Turkey is strongest, and Austria is weakest.

http://vdiplomacy.net/stats.php?variantID=1

Giving Italy more incentive vs France also helps Austria which in turn weakens Turkey. The Lepanto is unaffected.

@ leon

I struggle to put much faith in a performance chart which hasn't quite nailed complex concepts such as counting to 5. Also, there's not a chance in hell that Turkey has a solo advantage over the others.

Vdip has a 50% solo rate for Classic.

These conversations always highly depend on what level of play one's assuming.

@Jeff ... Italy should be going after Turkey anyway, it's the optimal strategy. How does taking him away from battling with Turkey (and Russia) help Austria at all?

@valis, really? That's nuts.

Not sure I agree with that Bo Sox..naturally a lot depends on the individual players, and I have a very poor record with Italy...that said, I think a good strategy is for Italy to make an alliance with Austria and to let Austria fight Turkey with minimal assistance,and for Italy go go hard against France from the start. Italy can invest too much in say a Le Panto for pitiful returns.typically Smryna. Most of the games that I've seen Italy get a solo win are where Italy makes then breaks a series of alliances, waaaaay to many stabs for my liking. Like I say, I'm pretty hopeless with Italy, so I'm trying new variations with it. If anyone is interested in my attack France strategy, have a look at one of my current games...and that invitation probably puts a curse on my future performance in that game..ha-ha

Just follow the link leon posted.

Pottype:
Winner-takes-all: 64 games
Points-per-supply-center: 272 games
Results:
Solo: 176 games
Drawn:160 games
2-way draw: 17
3-way draw: 64
4-way draw: 44
5-way draw: 13
6-way draw: 14
7-way draw: 8

176/336 = 52% solo rate

I also think Italy should capture Tunis with a fleet not an army, I've seen lots of examples of the army getting isolated in Tunis or worse, North Africa, and Italy can never get it home easily

I agree that Italy is probably better off taking Tunis with a fleet unless Turkey attacks Russia S01.

The key for Italy is to either have Trieste or Greece, and unless you're recklessly impatient as Italy you should take the time to peacefully acquire it. That gives you some breathing room and also an extra fleet to go west. He should also move to Piedmont S01 and ensure that France can't afford to let his guard down like he would if Italy simply agreed to a total NAP. That's what makes France strong.

The best Italian game is to keep both Turkey and France leashed and Austria strong enough to handle the east on his own if it became necessary. It's a very fine line and even the best Italian players can't accomplish it 100% of the time.

I didn't know people played Classic much on vDip. I guess the whole "stop the solo" campaign we have in basically every game here is nonexistent, maybe since most variant maps don't have such clear, mathematical stalemates.

I don't think Diplomacy was ever intended to be balanced. I think it was intended to be a different game each time with the players' individual levels of experience varying, as each nations map position is different. The ability to use diplomacy is the equalizer. It's possible for anyone to win, if they play well. Gamers don't want balance, we want a challenge.

I think the key to diplomacy is that is inherently unbalanced. Odd numbers of powers, both in total, or by region.

individual powers may generally win more frequently or be eliminated less frequently, but that is also part of the imbalance. How often do hear things like "let's eliminate turkey/England while we can." Or "Don't let France/Russia get off to a good start theyre too dominant long term." Italy is not a frequent winner, but is frequently the pivotal player in a stalemate. Austria and Germany can wreck in the mid game if they survive the early period.

Regarding Italy, every success I've had with them, including my first win, involved hitting France early. Mid Atlantic Ocean is the most important portion of the map for Italy in a solo.

@fourofswords. Well said. Completely agree.

CommanderByron's remark about player's mindset is on point.

I think one reason so many Classic seven player games end in solos on vdip is that most of those games are PPSC. Also compared to other variants the Classic seven player games is not played very much over there.I love vdip but if I were going to play a classic seven player game I would more likely play here instead. So a lot of those games might be noob games.

Those imbalances can also be transitioned into strengths, right? Isn't that part of the diplomatic process? I suppose in gunboat, the results would be more telling. Put 7 equal players on that map, in gunboat, and what would the results be?