Maybe 7 people who are playing the game for the very first time? I don't know.

Even then, they wouldn't be exactly equal. You would almost have to have computer simulations to judge this on a completely level playing field.

Those vDip stats suck. I haven't found a better statistical summary than this article (and would be happy if anyone pointed out another):

http://www.diplom.org/Zine/F2007R/Burton/statistician3.htm

I have an old "Avalon Hill Guide to Diplomacy" from 1978 with statistics. I doubt it's available online, though.

I think France is the strongest because it has both strong growth potential with an easily defensible position. These advantages are magnified in gunboat games, where I have held out comfortably as France in the face of two and even three-nation assaults for years because the attackers can't get their moves right.

Compare France with countries like Germany or England, who can be undone easily by a single errant army or fleet slipping in the wrong place. Munich for Germany and Liverpool for England seem particularly vulnerable, Mun because so many nations can reach it, Lvp because it's so out of the way that losing it will force England to bring at least two units back from the front lines to retake it. As long as France keeps Iberia safe, which is relatively easy, France cannot easily be cracked.

Several times over the years, people have posted statistics based on Webdip stats for the classic map. They've always been pretty consistent - Russia has a slight (+/- 5%) advantage, Italy has a slight disadvantage, but beyond that, things are pretty fairly equal.

Again, it doesn't matter how strong a nation is given the right players the game balances fairly well and is exceptionally unpredictable. Look at Russia, as soon as Russia sees scary growth Turkey and Austria end their squables to assault Russia. Usually Germany allows England to focus on Russia. Russia is suddenly weakened by diplomacy.

I recently finished a 50-game gunboat series, and kept track of SC for each power for each year. Here are some of the number if you're interested, given in SC's per game:
1901: A - 4.42 1903: A - 4.06 1905: A - 3.98 1910: A - 4.16 1920: A - 4.48
E - 4.16 E - 4.52 E - 4.10 E - 3.76 E - 4.02
F - 4.94 F - 5.46 F - 5.56 F - 6.52 F - 7.02
G - 4.64 G - 5.58 G - 5.90 G - 5.16 G - 4.94
I - 4.22 I - 4.56 I - 4.58 I - 4.04 I - 3.80
R - 4.98 R - 4.94 R - 4.80 R - 5.10 R - 3.70
T - 4.08 T - 4.86 T - 5.08 T - 5.26 T - 6.04
U - 2.56 U - 0.02 (U = Unowned)
Keep in mind that this is a small sample size, and that these were gunboat games. There was also an issue with NMR's coming into play. I don't think we had any before 1905-6, they started creeping in around then, and by 1910 started becoming fairly frequent, which skewed the results for some of these games.
As far as solos go, there were 11 in the series. France had 5, England and Austria 2, Turkey and Italy 1, and none for Germany or Russia. Hope this helps.

Ugh, that looks offset on my screen. Hope it shows up better for everyone else. I'll try that again:
1901 1903 1905 1910 1920
A - 4.42 4.06 3.98 4.16 4.48
E - 4.16 4.52 4.10 3.76 4.02
F - 4.94 5.46 5.56 6.52 7.02
G - 4.64 5.58 5.90 5.16 4.94
I - 4.22 4.56 4.58 4.04 3.80
R - 4.98 4.94 4.80 5.10 3.70
T - 4.08 4.86 5.08 5.26 6.04
U - 2.56 0.02

Any numbers on how mqny elimimations each had!

at any point after all the neutral centers are occupied, 4.857 is the average number of builds you would expect for a power to have. (which you might expect with an average of many games like this)

So Italy and Russia performed well below average in this set of games. Germany, and Austria around average, and Turkey and France well above average.

This however was gunboat, and has no bearing on how balanced diplomacy actually is.

It was also only 7 players. The abilities of those seven players in each country would have a big effect on the outcome.

For all we know the guy who organized it came in dead last by a large margin and heavily skewed the results. Hypothetically.

To answer SunRa, here's the number of times each country was included in a draw/solo:
France -- 35
Turkey -- 27
England and Germany -- 25
Italy and Russia -- 20
Austria -- 18
There were a lot of 4- and 5-way draws in this series, probably due (at least in my case) to be willing to wrap up some of these games just to lighten the load a little bit.

Just to add:
The games were not redistributed among players such that each player played an equal amount of each country either. For those interested they can see all the games here: threadID=1275355

It's worth mentioning that it's not the case that game theory says that with 7 rational players the game should be balanced. Having said that, I do mainly agree that all the powers are pretty well balanced, with the one exception that France is clearly the strongest power.

Beyond that, I think it varies. I tend to think that in high press volume games with unlimited time, Italy and Austria are the next strongest. However, as press decreases and certainly with fixed end times like in F2F, they get increasingly fucked.

I've always wondered if the classic board would become more balanced by making Switzerland a occupiable territory. Perhaps even an SC? Would this do anything to correct the early France/Italy imbalances?

I mostly agree with uclabb - but last year in particular I think we saw very few italian players attacking France early on, which was a contributor to the solid performance of France. Remember, friends don't let friends order Ven H.

I think the Diplomacy cast guys said something like "although there isn't a lot in it, if you had to win a game of Diplomacy to save your life, you'd pick France".

Lanium: I don't think so. Switzerland being impassable is an important part of the design of diplomacy - which means that movements towards other players are kind of rotational, with Switzerland being the hub.

I like this map for visualising the board:

http://diplom.org/Online/maps/stdmap.gif

It shows that the "corner powers" are mostly a myth, with the possible exception of Turkey.

@Lanium- I think it may screw over germany more. as he either goes for switzerland and possibly fights italy while giving up belgium or he goes for belgium but possibly allows france/italy into a center that borders munich.

I think it depends on what kind of players you were playing with.
Top players tend to play balance against all the others while seeking every opportunity to grow.

I've seen players submit terrible orders and then go "yeah, but I'm Austria, so it wouldn't have mattered".

They did not do well.

@ ATC- Fascinating! Thanks for sharing. Right in the middle of that circular visualization would be Switzerland. Probably wouldn't have any positive effect.

http://diplom.org/Online/maps/stdmap.gif

ATC, that is a fantastic way of picturing the map. Really puts things into perspective.

I've wondered about whether playing on it would change people's feeling about their position. My impression is that Italy would seem more like a threat, and Russia would seem less.

There's also a "variant" which is the same map, but with inverted shape (switzerland is around the edge of the board, and the edge of the board is now in the middle):

http://vdiplomacy.com/variants.php?variantID=31

Another thing that's nice about the polar map is that it illustrates the natural split for an R/T - ie, Rum/Bud/Vie for Russia and Bul/Ser/Tri/Gre for Turkey.

My pet hate in gunboat is Russia ordering Rum->Ser in 1902 when I am Turkey. That's Turkish, and I don't understand why so many Russian players don't think so.

Preach ATC. preach. I feel that way when Austria wants greece in a A/T. It just doesn't make sense.

The interesting thing about the Alcavre variant is that (in the small sample) France and Russia actually performed worst out of all of the powers.