Nowadays I always see the same thing:

1. Italy always runs a Lepanto.
2. Austria always allies with Italy against Turkey.
3. Russia either jumps on the kill-Turkey bandwagon, or is sympathetic to the Turk but gets stuck because Austria manages to get Rumania, Bulgaria and Galicia firmly in hand and Russia doesn't get enough up north to muster any strength to launch an offensive against the south.
4. France never attacks Italy early, same with Germany attacking Austria, so no one can help break the AI alliance.

EVERY SINGLE TIME. Regardless of what I say. It's to the point where I'm honestly finding Turkey more vulnerable than Austria in the early game. Which is absurd, ludicrous and completely opposite of its board position, not to mention relegating it to inferiority because its supposed strength doesn't matter in the face of determined anti-Turkish sentiment and this sentiment ALWAYS SEEMS TO SHOW UP.

Honestly, the meta-play goes something like this.

1. OH MAI GAWD A JUGGERNAUT ALL FIVE OF US MUST ALLY TO STOP IT!!!!1111!!! (read: Turkey can't ally with Russia)
2. Austria and Turkey? That can never work. I won't even consider it. (read: Turkey can't ally with Austria)
3. Italy and Turkey? Oh sure, let's carve up Austria SO YOU CAN JUST JUGGERNAUT!!!111!!1! (read: Turkey can't ally with Italy)
4. Italy? lol. Yeah, we need to deal with him, but England and Germany are kinda bothering me and I figure it's best for me if he kills you but takes forever to do it, so... have fun! (read: Turkey can't ask France for assistance)
5. You want me to come bail you out against Austria-Italy? Are you fucking crazy? (read: Turkey can't ask Germany for assistance)
6. DO YOU SEE WHERE I *AM*?! (read: Turkey can't really get England to help much -- not against the main threat, AI, at all)

I have had more sucess with Austria than i have with Turkey, with turkey as you just pointed out your diplomatic relations are so limited it isn't even funny. They are basicly either teaming with russia, in which case teh whole board teams against you. Or going all out against russia to prove to italy or austria there isn't a juggernaut to get any support form them. The only stratigy i have with turkey is sitting in the black sea, bulgria and support holding your 4 units hoping that austria and russia forget about you and go fight someone else and then stabing both of them mid game.

You know, as Italy/France, I usually start out looking at the other side of that equation simply because everyone suspects that Italy's going hunting for Turkey. In either case, if there truly is a Russia/Turkey alliance, you're doing well enough to work against it by the time it crystallizes. Hopefully.

Turkey is actually one of my best countries. On this site with five games, I've had 2 wins (40%) and 1 draw (20%); one of my losses as Turkey was the result of a personal vendetta for someone because I gave him his fifth loss ever and he did everything as France with a CD Italy to convince Germany and England to team up against me. They drew as soon as I was dead. :)
That being said, I haven't played many high end games as Turkey. I have found an early agreement with Austria to be useful, then depending on if Italy is going Lepanto or if Russia is doing well up north, then I work with Austria in the first case and Russia in the second.

I looked at that game. That French player... I've faced him before. He's one of the most infuriating people I've dealt with on this site.

?@Eden. LOL. When did you look at that game?

When you mentioned it just now. I figured I'd have a look in case I recognized the name. Boy, do I.

Ah.
You've played with him twice where he lost in both cases. I can imagine that he was pissed. He has a very holier than thou disposition when he's winning and he begs for survival when things don't go his way. Anyhow, back to Turkey.
Don't you think that as long as he can convince Austria to work with him in 01 then he's in good shape? I mean the Jugger is nice IF England and Germany don't come calling.

What would be extremely fun for Turkey is to convince England to go convoy to Norway and/or move to Barents, France to fight Italy, Germany to fight France, Austria to go to Gal and Rum, and Turkey takes black sea and Armenia. That would be hard to pull off, but boy, enjoyable.

Well, yeah, but like I said, the vast majority of Austrian players never seriously consider an alliance with Turkey. Save for a few shining beacons of openness to new ideas, the only time where I've ever seen Austria ally with my Turkey is out of absolute necessity (there is a known and very open Russia-Italy alliance with no real hope of a Western Triple to pressure Russia and/or Italy). And it doesn't matter what I offer, Austria just doesn't listen to me and goes through with it.

I think the people who insist that Austria should throw all her centers to Russia and Turkey the instant Italy attacks -- and there are many who have written widely-circulated articles on the subject -- are to blame, as are the "OH MY GOD JUGGERNAUT" crowd. Italy has effectively three options for an opening: France, Austria, or Turkey. Given the aforementioned attitude Austria takes toward Italy, Italy is almost doomed to fail at any attack on Austria unless his diplomatic work is extremely thorough and impressive and backed by very strong tactical play. Russia tends to ally with whichever of Italy or Turkey comes out stronger in a carveup of Austria, because if Italy is the odd man out then Russia can leave his strong neighbor alone for a while to get the builds from England/Germany/etc. to get ready to fight Turkey, and if Turkey is the odd man out, Russia can delay the northern campaign until he and Italy KO Turkey and get builds with which to push west. So unless Italy has done an extremely good job in attacking Austria, an attack on Austria doesn't work long-term.

That leaves France or Turkey. And the only way France works is if England and Germany are on board. This can work, but it takes as much effort to succeed as with Austria -- not because Italy will get steamrolled by EG afterward, necessarily (though it could), but rather because in all of this Italy has to keep Austria and/or Turkey from chipping away at its back side. Plus, EG don't always go after France, and if you only have the help of one then it's likely that the other is on France's side instead, and your attack isn't going to work. France isn't suicidal, but the stats Tru Ninja compiled are pretty clear -- the anti-French openings are statistically much weaker than Italy's other options.

Which leaves Turkey. Italy is as stuck as Turkey is.

And why? Because Austria swears mutually assured destruction if Italy doesn't ally with him. And enough people have done it over the course of however many years this game has been played that Italy knows it's coming.

My question now is again why, but a step back -- why should Austria be so quick to push the red button? In no other neighbor dynamic do you see this on such a consistent basis. Putting aside the rabid vendetta players who do this to everyone all the time as a strategy, you never see, for example, France swear mutually assured destruction to an England who enters the Channel, Germany swear it to a Russian in Silesia, etc. If England attacks France, then sure, France rallies Russia and Germany to its cause (or tries), but France doesn't go "Okay, giving Germany all my stuff, have fun." Germany will try to ally with England/Austria/Turkey, but only as a last resort would Germany give all its centers to England and France.

As a strategy, it's stupid. Austria dies first, Italy second, when Austria could simply behave like everyone else and try to stay afloat and actually make friends with Russia and/or Turkey to beat back Italy. When Austria DOES do that, it actually manages to survive more often than one might think. (And of course when Austria does that, I'm Italy attacking Austria, and I get my ass kicked. Go figure.) But as a meta-strategy, it's great, because now Italy is stuck, forcing Turkey to be at Austria's mercy. (I'm rather surprised the Austria-Russia alliance isn't more popular here; it's ridiculously successful whenever I see it played, and it's not like Turkey and Italy ever seriously consider anything but beating each other into oblivion anyway.)

I realize I'm going on for a while at this point, but I think Italy's and Turkey's issues are rather closely related.

I'm too tired to write up a decent answer, but here are two examples. Not sure if you consider these high class play, but I do, lol.
http://www.webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=22518#gamePanel
http://www.webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=14794#gamePanel

Those are really high-class, yeah.

The first game saw a lot more shifting of alliances than one typically sees in the east -- it's not luck, of course, but that could very well have gone badly for Turkey as it almost ended up doing. Not exactly a rock-solid strategy for succeeding as Turkey. Especially considering that, from the looks of it, the alliance ended up becoming one of necessity, with England about to solo; I'd imagine in absence of that that there would have been a fun Turkish-Italian war.

And the second one is much the same, only even stranger because Italy willingly passed on a build for two years to help a Juggernaut. I would hope Turkey could succeed in an environment like that. The only threat was the predictable Russian stab, which got dealt with rather interestingly (the dance IRT did post-Austria was very interesting). On the whole, though, the amount of shifting of alliances there doesn't allow for a blueprint on how to work, and Italy's very strange opening play -- something I've never seen before and something I don't expect to see again -- makes it difficult to draw up an opening strategy.

That said, if either Turkish player (or Turkey's neighbors) wants to elaborate, go ahead, I'm all ears. At least you guys did well. ;)

Yeah, Russia/Austria is CRAZY good.

gameID=59999

I consider myself a really good Austria, it's by far my strongest country. Maybe because I pull it a lot. As Austria, Russia and Turkey are the two countries I try to sidle up to, and there's some good examples in my history of allying with either. I think people get stuck in their little cycles, that Russia MUST ally with Turkey, Italy MUST Lepanto, and really, the reality doesn't reflect that. As Austria, you can very effectively say, "Hey Italy, please stay out of Tyrol and Trieste while I make sure there's not a Jugg," and Italy will listen.through 1902 or so.

Or, if Russia's on your nuts, a traditional Jugger gives most of Austria to the Turks, so you can sell that to Turkey pretty well. "Hey, I'm not telling you what to do, but check it out, Russia's taking the SC's that you should get if you're allied. Let me interest you in Rumania, Sevastopol, and Moscow."

That's more Austria than Turkey strategy, but I have to say: a good Turkey goes with Austria over Russia I think and a good Russia does the same with Austria over Turkey..

Well, I'm not so certain about Russia MUST ally with Turkey. I think there's been enough Juggernaut scare to break that. But yeah, Italian players tend to get stuck in the MUST LEPANTO cycle, for certain. Which means Turkey's options are pretty scant. It's tough when one of your three neighbors is an automatic enemy and a second neighbor is an automatic ally of that automatic enemy; you either have to convince Austria to break alliance with Italy or hang on to the hope of Russian goodwill for a stalemate in the East *and* wait for the West to arrive (with the very real chance that, seeing the 2v1, Russia decides to hop on board and make it 3v1).

So the question is... how do you fix that? Changing the meta play to break the de facto automatic alliances/enemies is something that just happens over time as attitudes about the game change, so that's not terribly practical to influence directly. You have to do something ingame, but what? Is there anything Turkey can do to sweeten the deal for Austria?

Well, what I look for as Austria in a Turkish ally.

1) Don't bounce Greece, especially if Italy or Russia is on my nuts. I might even give you Greece under those circumstances provided it looks like Russia or Italy is going to threaten the homeland. But don't bounce it.

2) Have some stance against Russia, or at the very least, convince Russia to look north and/or west. I can't help you much if I'm defending Galicia.

3) Have a clear target and stick to it. If you say it's Russia, get your ass in Armenia. If you say it's Italy, build a F Smy.

Anti-Russian opening with a strong ally in Austria that you will stab the first chance you have of scoring at least 2 of his SCs.
I've had 2 solos with Turkey, and both have depended on some version of this strategy.

I've come to believe that the best possible strategy for Turkey is to set a diplomatic fire in the whole area. If you can get the three nations around you to have but a shred of doubt where the others are concerned, you can do really well. But patience and hard diplomacy are necessary.

That's an interesting read, and an interesting question, Eden. I must admit Turkey is not my favorite country, but I think you give it too little credit.

First of all, I believe your evaluation that "Italian players tend to get stuck in the MUST LEPANTO cycle" is exaggerated. I did a search for high pot games. Out of the top 10 games, exactly half started with a Lepanto. And 3 of those broke up in 1902 already. So it simply not true that Turkey always faces an AI.

Second, Turkey's opening play is not where it's strong side lies. Whenever Turkey succeeds in finding an ally, it's incredibly strong. An Austria-Turkey is really badass, a Turkey-Italy can effortlessly carve up Austria, and Russia-Turkey is the all-feared juggernaut. Plus, Turkey has a phenomenal endgame (especially in WTA).

I think I have some strong ideas how to exploit these advantages. At this time, it's only theory, so I don't know how well it would do in an actual game. If you're interested, I can share my thoughts with you (in PM). Then you can playtest one or two things.

@ Basvan: If you don't mind sharing, I surely would love to hear your ideas as well!

I think the biggest thing with Turkey is the meta game, it is the strongest defensive country and has a lot going for it. The juggernaut is the most feared alliance and attracts the most attention of any alliance. I don’t think the turkey haters hate it due to its available moves or even its strategic positioning but the Meta game going into playing turkey we have issue over.

Turkey's defensibility works against it too. If you're Russia or Austria, it's pretty easy to cordon Turkey off once you've conquered it. No matter who has those three SC's, they have a good chance to defend them.

I personally think that Turkey offers something akin to a mix between playing England and Germany in that, on the one hand, you share England's corner position and what that entails in terms of tactics and, on the other hand, you share Germany's need for a great many diplomatic efforts. You can't win playing Turkey, or even do well, if you're not constantly in touch with Russia, England, Italy and Austria.
Diplomacy with England is actually key to Turkey's progress, as it will make a huge difference on how you will handle the big purple bear up north. As for Germany, you always gain from staying in touch with every one, but I believe that you can easily read what's going on from only looking at the moves during the opening 2 years.

I'm sure you would.

No, I don't think it's a good idea to post it on the forum. I mean, I have no idea whether it's at all a good plan. It really needs playtesting. Moreover, even if the plan is good, it might not be suited for my diplomatic style. So I should do the playtesting myself.

However, I know Eden's style is quite similar to my own. And he's a very strong player as well. So I really want him to try it out.

Also, the name's "bas".

is fleet-rome an appropriate solution for this? that would give italy a legitimate chance to attack france. That would make it much easier for turkey to convince italy to move west

Turkey has a pretty high success rating if he can get through 1904 or so. There doesn't need to be a game balance fix to it, in my mind.

Apologies for using the wrong nick, Bas.

I've been reading some of your posts and already had a fair amount of respect for you before coming across your intervention in this particular thread. That's what prompted me to ask you to share your thoughts on a Turkish strategy.

That being said, I understand your desire to keep such plans to yourself or trusted eyes until properly tested. I was actually suggesting that you PM it to me, and not post it here. I've done well with Turkey in the past and it actually is one of the powers I love to play. So I was curious to see how you would go about it. But let me assure you that there is absolutely no offence taken at your refusal to disclose it. Actually, the conversation provides me with the opportunity to ask you to join me in a game before too long. Tru Ninja would maybe join us too, and I'm sure we would find other worthy players in no time.

"1) Don't bounce Greece, especially if Italy or Russia is on my nuts. I might even give you Greece under those circumstances provided it looks like Russia or Italy is going to threaten the homeland. But don't bounce it."

Yeah, that's pretty fair. I typically ask for Greece as Turkey, but it's not a dealbreaker by any means. I am, however, a little concerned about Austria having a supported move on Bulgaria in S02... still, that part can't really be helped.

"2) Have some stance against Russia, or at the very least, convince Russia to look north and/or west. I can't help you much if I'm defending Galicia."

The bounce in Galicia is pretty standard issue, and most Turkish players make their move in S02 anyway. Convincing Russia to look more north/west is somewhat difficult simply because Turkey has no reason to want Russia looking north/west unless Turkey is looking Russia's way. Austria has a better case (as a pro-Austrian Russia only needs one army to fight Turkey, in Armenia, since the main aspect of Russia's attack on Turkey is naval; that frees up one army to go north). Turkey should definitely aid and abet Austria's efforts, but I think Austria has to spearhead that one because Turkey doesn't have a good case for it.

"3) Have a clear target and stick to it. If you say it's Russia, get your ass in Armenia. If you say it's Italy, build a F Smy."

Got to disagree there. Armenia is ridiculously weak if not accompanied with the Black Sea; better for the alliance not to telegraph intention and move Smy > Con > Bul to set up Con > Bul > Rum in A01 to deny Russia a center. Same effect as taking Sevastopol, but Russia won't see it coming as easily. (If, on the other hand, Turkey is sure of a DMZ in Black Sea and sure that Russia will abide by it... then by all means, go!)

"I've come to believe that the best possible strategy for Turkey is to set a diplomatic fire in the whole area. If you can get the three nations around you to have but a shred of doubt where the others are concerned, you can do really well. But patience and hard diplomacy are necessary."

This is definitely key. My question is how to set those fires. Even if (as bas argued later in the thread) Italy isn't as pro-Austrian as I made it out to be, then as long as Italy isn't anti-Austrian itself I can't see why Italy wouldn't forward Austria any Turkish solicitations for an attack on Austria. The best route (to me) looks to be Turkey hinting at an anti-Austrian Russia to Austria and Italy and coordinating something with both of them. If Turkey sends a pretty clear message that he wants to coordinate with Austria against Russia, that might give Italy the opening he needs to go west. Then Turkey has its pick of alliances because Austria is ready to fight Russia and Italy won't meddle. Best of all, it's probably not even a lie, considering how anti-Austrian a lot of Russian players are by default.

"Out of the top 10 games, exactly half started with a Lepanto. And 3 of those broke up in 1902 already. So it simply not true that Turkey always faces an AI."

Even if it breaks up in 1902, though, that's bad enough. Turkey has to commit pro-Russian because the threat of a Lepanto after A01 requires F Smyrna build, which makes any subsequent anti-Russian intentions difficult as you have a unit which is not only hostile to your ally against Russia (Austria) and someone you don't want to provoke unnecessarily while fighting Russia (Italy) but also useless against the actual target (Russia). And if AI stick with it, Turkey is stuck. It won't die for a really long time, but it is stuck, because of how difficult it is for anyone to intervene. (And I suppose my own personal experience is different from the norm. It seems to me that I'm the only Italian player I'll ever find who will do something aside from Lepanto in a high-class game...)

"Second, Turkey's opening play is not where it's strong side lies. Whenever Turkey succeeds in finding an ally, it's incredibly strong. An Austria-Turkey is really badass, a Turkey-Italy can effortlessly carve up Austria, and Russia-Turkey is the all-feared juggernaut. Plus, Turkey has a phenomenal endgame (especially in WTA)."

Well, yes, much in the same vein that if I were to get a law degree and land a job as a lawyer, I'd have an incredibly profitable career. That doesn't change the fact that getting to that point is a royal pain in the ass, nor does it change the fact that if I try that and I fail then I'm really screwed. Its weak point is trying to convince someone to ally with it, yes, which is the point of the discussion -- trying to figure out how to move past that vulnerable stage. You and others seem to know how, I'm stuck.

As for the PM, I'd be very interested.

Other comments:

Please-not-turkey nailed my opinion. I'm running into a meta wall here. I've been Turkey several times before and, by admission of my enemy, been better alliance material than my enemy's ally, but passed over simply because "X allying with Turkey is not a good idea" (whether X be Italy, Austria or even Russia). I don't know if it's my particular brand of play or what; I'm willing to take a risk and lead the charge against an enemy power if necessary, but I don't jump out the gate against any one power and I try to establish some modicum of trust in 1901 with smaller steps and maneuvers before committing to a total war with another power in 1902 (sometimes 1903). And yet as Turkey I've only found people willing to ally with me if I DMZ Black Sea, open to Armenia or agree not to build a fleet in Smyrna even after Italy convoys to Tunisia. No one sends a reasonable offer.

Fleet Rome... I'm with those who said that an actual gameplay adjustment like that is unnecessary. For one, it makes France an easier target, sure, but it also absolutely eliminates Austria as a reasonable target for Italy, which has to be far worse from Turkey's standpoint. For another, Italy can always just use those fleets against Turkey. If AI ally and keep Ven/Tri clear, then in Fleet Rome you can see Italy with fleets in Ionian, Eastern Med and Aegean by A02, with the army still ready for convoying. That's even worse than before. And, as noted before, the issue here can no doubt be solved under the current layout, without going to a variation.