10 minutes! Excitement!

Very Interesting first move. Turkey's going anti-Russia, Russia and Italy are going anti-Austria-Hungary. England and Germany have gone with the boring moves, but France has gone pro-Belgium.

It'll be interesting to see how the east plays out. Will they all stay on their starting courses, or will alliances shift? Particularly, it'll be interesting to see if Turkey joins in on the dog-pile of Austria-Hungary, or if he allies with A-H against the R/I. Getting into Black and Arm certainly puts him in a strong position against Russia. If I was Turkey, personally, I'd convince A-H to let me save him from the wintergreen. That could be a strong way to get out into the med and up into Russia, gaining a spot in any draw, and perhaps having solo chances.

This seems like a good opportunity for a professor to talk about the questions of Belgium and Sweden, as well as the issues with a Sev-Rum opening. And, of course, the steaming pile that Austria's neighbors have just thrown at him.

Yes, there's lots of interesting stuff to go over. I'll get to it sometime tonight. Once I'm clear of finals, I'll be more active here.

Spring 1901 Commentary:

This turned out to be a really exciting phase with a number of interesting developments. Generally speaking, I am really happy to see that a lot of players are thinking outside the box. It makes for an exciting game, which means that Valis and I don't have to give the same commentary that every other professor in every other game has given.

England - Your standard opening was met by a standard opening from your neighbors. This bodes well for you - Norway is guaranteed, and if you and France hit it off early on, you might be able to negotiate your way into Belgium. Consider where you stand with your partners in the west and consider the potential for an alliance with Russia as well because it looks to me that you're going to be able to choose your first target if you choose to.

France - Great opening phase and I love the move set. A lot of players will take a chance on six units after 1901, but the fact of the matter is that nobody is going to take Iberia before you do. Moreover, spacing out your builds between 1901 and 1902 ensures that someone like England or Italy can't get too much of an edge if they decide to attack you. You have the option here of taking Belgium for yourself or offering it to England (or even Germany if you choose to). Both have their pros and cons. I encourage you to discuss this with your TA because Belgium is often a point of contention in the early stages.

Italy - I typically don't like the opening set you chose but it definitely worked out in your favor with both France and Turkey looking friendly toward you. If Russia and Turkey fight, you're fairly clear to go after Austria yourself if you think you can handle it, but don't assume that that's your only option. You could still go after either France or Germany with some force here if you chose to.

I'm also very curious to see if an early I/T develops. The I/T is one of the most exciting alliances in the game as it's one of the most powerful but also most fragile. There's even potential for an I/R - tough to say yet.

Germany - You might not have gotten what you wanted from France, but you have little to worry about because your neighbor to the east is clearly looking elsewhere for right now. His move to Finland instead of the GoB coupled with an early move to Galicia suggests that you're the last one on his mind, plus he's under direct assault in the south. Now you get to decide whether it's worth bouncing him out of Sweden or not.

As for the west, you have a couple of options. France is almost certainly going to control who takes Belgium, so you should plan on having two builds and working with those units (assuming you trust Italy not to take Munich). You can try to line up your armies against France and either stalemate or attack him or you can prepare an assault on either England or Russia. Maybe you establish a better relationship with one power over another and let your press decide.

Austria - First things first, you're not screwed. While Russia might try to go for one of your home centers, he's clearly got company. You might have an opportunity to work with him if you decide to play it a little bit more recklessly. You have a lot to discuss with your TA, but my primary advice to you for this phase is not to get discouraged and to talk *a lot* with your neighbors. You could weasel your way out of this with the right moves, good press, and maybe just a little bit of luck.

Turkey - I've always found it difficult to attack Russia early on because Italy tends to pose a threat, but it looks like you and he trust each other and that that's not going to be a concern. Given that, you have an opportunity to be aggressive and establish yourself as the dominant power early on, but you should be careful and remember that that might put a target on your back. I encourage you to talk a lot with everyone (yes, every single other player) and determine how you think you can grow most efficiently in the coming year or two.

Russia - The move to Finland makes a lot of sense and I'm glad that you made it. Germany can be pretty sensitive when it comes to fleets in the Baltic (and rightly so), so a move to Finland instead is a clear sign of trust and intention to ally. The hope is that he receives the message and allows you into Sweden so that you can either go all out for Scandinavia or focus on securing your southern border.

As for the imminent Turkish attack, it is important for you to consider whether or not an attack on Austria will inhibit you from being able to properly defend. If you think it will, you may have an opportunity to work closely with Austria in order to slow Turkey down. That said, Turkey can only do so much damage, so if you think there is an opportunity to make yourself more formidable, that should be your first priority.

On the topic of Sweden:
First, let me remind oneself that the personalities, private press, and alliance structure you have chosen for yourself trumps general advice. I recently played a house game where I, as Germany, allied with Russia. Even when Russia was board leader with 11,8,7,5,3 or something like that. Why? because they were my ally. And even with the rest of the board yelling at me, I didn't stab them for Sweden. Why? Because they were my ally.

The general advice for Sweden is in the context of being Germany. It's Fall 1901. You only have one set of move orders to base your board-state approximations on and not everyone has showed their true cards yet. Every single southern power tells you sternly to now allow Russia into Sweden, as well as England. France, sometimes yes, sometimes no.

Well, what's the situation? It seems like you're pissing off ~4.5 people, in a game where there's only 6 other people, just to give someone who could attack you more power. and not take it for yourself!

Well hold on, let's address that last statement.

You see, as Germany, canonically, bouncing Sweden or not is purely symbolic to Russia and the other powers on the board. The thing is that *whether or not* you bounce his fleet in Sweden you can force it anyways next year with
Build F KIE and/or BER
KIE/BER-BAL; DEN s KIE/BER-BAL
DEN s BAL-SWE; BAL-SWE

Because Russia has absolutely no way to stop the force to Baltic and rarely, if ever, will have something to support hold it. The only way to stop it, essentially, is having England support hold him but that is a rare instance since England and Russia's health, traditionally, are inversely proportional.

So the question isn't whether Germany wants Sweden for oneself, because whether they takes Sweden is fairly agnostic to whether he lets them in F01 or not, strangely enough.

However! Even though it doesn't affect Germany's strength doesn't mean it doesn't affect Russia's strength!

The Russia fleet on the south coast of St. Petersburg is a bit of an oddity; it can really only be used against Germany and to take Sweden to build another unit...elsewhere. Most of Russia's war is on land, and it by no means holds a defensive position in the south (Russia gets fucked all the time by a particularly aggressive A, T, or A/T). F STP(nc) or A STP are not truly uncommon builds when paired with another (from getting both RUM and SWE in 1901), but extremely rare as the only build, which can allow you to infer the proportional needs of Russia's theatres of war. The point is: Russia gaining Sweden, *even if* Germany immediately then takes it, *even if* Russia doesn't commit to a Northern campaign and just uses the build to make an army in the South, is **extremely** powerful for Russia (as compared to being bounced out in the first place). The ability to effectively slingshot the suboptimal unit to where it's more immediately needed is not to be underestimated. And for those of you who enjoy Northern campaigns as Russia, if the unit DOES get into Sweden then building A/F STP and supporting it to Norway, in many contexts where England is either Southern or Weak, can save the build at no cost to you (effectively having Germany take a dot from England).

So, in summary from this section:
Bounce or not: Germany can probably take Sweden so it doesn't effect his powerlevels
But! Russia in Sweden still makes Russia stronger even if he doesn't get to hold it

So that's a more tactical and strategic look at the outcomes. What about the diplomatic ones. Is a friendly Russia worth annoying 4.5 other people?

Well, first let's take a look at the "4.5" number.
France probably is super fine with you letting Russia take Sweden. He doesn't want a strong England or strong Germany and a strong Russia helps out with that. So let's drop him as half a person and that leaves us with : 4 people.

Next, let's take another look at the south. Russia almost certainly has at least one ally, and whether unironically or to make the other two have a Scary Other Person To Attack, that wants to see Russia do well. If it's an IR, Italy sincerely wants Russia to do well since they are depending on them to collapse and crush the other two. If it's AR, Austria probably is more on the side of wanting Turkey to be more likely to worry about Russia than themselves. Either way, it's easy enough to say at least one person in the south actually does want you to let Russia have Sweden, and that leaves us with : 3 people

3 people ain't bad. 3 people is only half the board, no more and no less, and you can't please everyone, unless you're Edi Birsan or Sasha Grey.

So, again, back to diplomatically. You're only annoying three people at worst probably, and it's probable that only one of them is of your immediate neighbors of EFR(IA doesn't count). So really it comes down to this:
Bounce Sweden if you want a stronger England and weaker Russia.
Let Sweden in if you want a weaker England and stronger Russia.

Take it anyways, or not, based on your personal relationships and goals with the other players.

Hopefully that brief summary on Sweden strategy was useful.

________________________________________

Belgium is a bit of a different beast than Sweden because the geography doesn't allow the tactical outcomes to be nearly as pre-determined. England, France, and Germany all can lay roughly equal claim, both diplomatically and tactically, to it and it remains a source of contention in almost every game initially.

Warning: I have a particular bias about taking Belgium as England. I hate it. I feel like it's isolated, stranded, hurts my Diplomacy for no gain to my Strategy, and makes me feel pulled apart in multiple directions, and can easily be kicked out anyways. It's the same reason you don't see people often taking Munich with Tyrolia as Italy (especially if it's not in some concerted shenanigans with France in Burgundy): a single dot in 1901 that doesn't gain me any friends and I can't actually hold because it's surrounded by enemies and far away from my new builds just isn't worth it. Especially if you're headed North and not in the channel /personalbias

Who gets Belgium, in the context of an alliance, is nominally who needs it the most. Of course, good players will convince others that they need it the most or will simply command it in an authoritative manner. All in all though it's not that important here. HOW it's taken can be important. For example, if the orders are PIC-BEL; BUR s PIC-BEL, that's pretty anti-Germany IMO.

Frankly, Belgium isn't as interesting *a priori* as Sweden is due to the flexibility, and *post priori* is subject to individual conversations among the players rather than board state. All we can say for certain right now is that France, barring some peculiar play by German and England that would require extensive coordination and sacrifice, can force it if he wants it.

______________________________________________

SEV-RUM is peculiar. I don't like it at all unless there is an extensively coordinated and, since deal was made in 1901, trusting operation by AR to actually take BUL from an unsuspecting Turkey in F01. However this is not only extremely unlikely but falls apart in the face of a pitchfork opening by Turkey as seen here.

Whether Turkey gains one of Russia's centers of SEV/RUM is 50/50 coin flip left as an exercise to the reader, assuming no SER involvement, which is standard but a non-trivial assumption in a full press game.

The reason SEV-RUM is so suboptimal is two fold, one tactically and one strategically.
1: Tactics
SEV-RUM gives up the Black Sea. NOW, I wish to emphasize, in this case, I would suspect, but cannot know, it was a stab on Turkey's part and he promised a DMZ. Most probably. But Diplomacy exists as a superposition of states that collapses every adjutication and even with an agreement in place one must always know that this is a possibility. It's simply one of those existentially painful realities which makes this game so fun:
You know there are times where Turkey will be loyal and it's very powerful and you know there's times where Turkey will betray you and then you're screwed. And whether you go with the more conservative option or risky options is an option in itself that I reference in my initial post about Action vs Inaction. There's not much more to say here about that without beating a dead animal, but I wish to emphasize that, in my eyes, the move SEV-RUM *suggest that Russia trusted and wanted to work with Turkey* unless there's a VERY peculiar feint/sacrifice/etc going on here because it ties into the second problem with it.

2: Strategy
Let's say you're in an RT. There's something that's almost always true that you want, as the RT. You want RUM and BUL to both be Armies. It's almost self-evident: only armies can go further inland towards Austria, while fleets can only be used against each other.
SO
SEV-RUM
and
Desire(RT)
have *huge* cognitive dissonance. There's one exception:
A slingshot Juggernaught.

A personal guilty pleasure favorite of mine in F2F much to the chagrin of 2ndWhiteLine, Abgemacht, etc, a Slingshot Juggernaut (SJ) involves purposely dislodging and then voluntarily disbanding Russia's southern fleet in order to rebuild it up in STP. There's many ways to go about this, some more favorable to Russia and some more favorable to Turkey, and this one is particularly favorable to Turkey obviously since he holds all the power.

The dirty technical details:
ARM-RUM
BLA c ARM-RUM
BUL s ARM-RUM

RUM holds
GAL/UKR do stuff, maybe cover SEV for UKR and go VIEorBUD for GAL.

Then, during retreats, Russia voluntarily disbands instead of retreats and then has an extra unit for builds, where it can be built, probably in the north, where it's more useful for the alliance.

I don't wish to make any statements whether Russia should accept this (both because Turkey might come out better in the long run and/or stab the shit out of Russia) or whether Turkey should accept this (both because Russia might come out better in the long run and/or he should just stab the shit out of Russia), I'm just saying it's a possibility. A possibility that Russia should almost assuredly be thinking about offering to get out of his position right now.

But that's the only way these Russian moves make sense, and even then it's very scary.

I'd like to take this time to remind all players they should be keeping notes/diary in order to aid their End Of Game statements.

This dude deserves +1s ^

Bump

England: 7/10

Came to an agreement with Germany which is interesting to see. The support move Ruhr to Belgium has put France in an embarrassing position with only one build and two enemies. Fleet London is probably the reasonable build here, forcing English Channel next turn.

France: 3/10

Your diplomacy has gone awry. You went for an agressive opening against Germany and then failed to convince England. You are now stuck with one build. Do you build fleet Brest but lose the Channel anyway, or build army Paris and risk losing the guess and letting England into the mid Atlantic? At least you get another build next turn; can you not lose too much position this turn?

Germany: 7/10

Very standard play, good start guessing right on Munich and getting England on board. You let Russia take Sweden which is probably correct as you want the southern powers to be balanced. Now Russia has a build which he can use to contest the south and you won't have to worry about a huge Turkey.
Builds are army Munich certainly; will you build another army or will England tolerate a fleet build? Ideally you build a fleet but it is probably not worth angering England over it.

Russia: 5/10

You were in an awkward position already. With hindsight you could have kept Sevastapol too but it was a 50/50 and you can't be blamed for the incorrect guess.
Germany gave you a build which you should be thankful for and it is definitely army Moscow. Now how well can you leverage your Galicia army? It will determine your fate.

Italy: 4/10

Fail play, gaining zero position. You really needed Russia to hit Austria but he didn't because Turkey went all in. Austria builds army Vienna and you proceed to never get anything done. I suggest you find something else to do. Like cutting down your natural enemy Turkey a few notches.
Fleet Naples is the only build that makes sense.

Austria: 6/10

You chose the safe play forgoing Greece. Personally I would roll the dice on Trieste/Vienna and go Greece knowing you probably get in because Turkey is going north and Italy will take Tunis. You also obviously came to an agreement with Russia. There is nothing stopping him from stabbing you though; you can't retaliate if he takes say Budapest. So you should try to make sure his Galicia army is occupied; preferably gone.

Build army Vienna is the only option.

Turkey: 8/10

You guessed right and gain Sevastapol. Yay! Russia gets to build in Moscow but he was probably getting that build no matter what you said to Germany. You now have more guesswork to do, and regardless the best you can hope for is getting Rumania. You should look into attacking Italy or Austria pretty soon; Russia can blockade you forever unless you can flank him.

Build army Constantinople for sure because if you want Rumania then some unit has to cover Bulgaria. But do you want an army Ankara or a fleet Smyrna? I would take the fleet and secure Greece, but an army could move to Armenia and secure Sevastapol.

Pursuant to Gobbledydook's comments, perhaps some thoughts on the, ah, flexibility of 1901 alliance structures would be in order.

I disagree on the implications of the Bel bounce, whether Germany should let England's attitude dictate his second build, and especially the idea of Austria rolling the dice on letting Italy into home centers. The net dot cost/benefit is 0 (50% Austria gets an extra build, 50% Italy gets an extra build), but the worst case costs more than a dot for Austria because it lets Italy reach out to Russia.

Gobbledy, it's funny that you advocate for Austria leaving one of his centres unprotected yet absolutely hammer Italy for trying to take one of them.

Autumn 1901 Commentary:

England - Clearly, you and Russia have a friendship going. I don't think that's a bad thing at all, especially since Germany allowed Russia into Sweden. If the three of you (G/R/E) remain peaceful with one another, I think you have a very productive road ahead of you. I encourage you to work closely with either Germany or France in order to get Belgium next year. Another build for you then would be huge and allow you.

Your build options vary. I disagree with those who say that you have no choice but to build a fleet in London. A fleet in Liverpool would be very defensive. It would prevent France from even considering an attack on your homeland and give you a fleet presence on both sides of your island. An army on your east coast also has merit *only if* you plan on convoying to Belgium and Norway next year. It would potentially open some doors for you but seriously hinder your opportunities to advance against France. You could also build a fleet in Edinburgh and work on claiming Scandinavia for yourself, though likely to Germany's mire, and again, it would hinder your opportunities against France. In all, while I disagree with those saying that you have no choice but to build a fleet in London, I think that it's the best move for you in this scenario if your ultimate goal is to drop a couple of armies on the continent.

France - You're not screwed, but your diplomacy has to improve, as Gobble said. That's not to say that your skill is lacking - we all have games where our neighbors simply don't want to do as we would like whether we like it or not. Simply, you need to either change your approach with them or find some common ground and you need to do it pretty quickly.

I can't give you a whole lot of advice on what to build even though you only have two real options (F Brest or A Paris) because your build completely depends on which of England and Germany you trust more. You need to try to gain the trust of one of them during the builds phase and hopefully convince them that they're better off working with you than against. Practically speaking, your best bet to find a western ally is Germany, but again, I can't see your press, so I can't say for sure.

Hopefully you recognize that, while Spain is open, it may not necessarily be in your best interests to leave your fleet stuck down there for an entire year. That second build might have to wait if things keep going wrong.

Italy - Hindsight is 20/20 and you took a chance. There are definitely ways that you could have improved that chance - digging for intel from neighbors like Germany or Russia that Austria certainly talked with, trying to get a feel for how angry and desperate Austria is with you in your own press, or even trying to support Russia into Vienna in order to strengthen him (thereby better containing Turkey) all could have helped you. As it turns out, if you tried any of these things, none of them worked.

You have a choice of who you want to work with between Austria, Turkey, and Russia and your build is going to speak the world to all three of them. You could definitely get away with building a third army if you trust Turkey with the Balkans, but I don't think I would suggest that. You could also build a fleet in Naples, though that will undoubtedly bother Turkey and might make your friendship a little bit more delicate. Whichever of these you choose, someone's going to like it and someone's going to be upset.

Your other option is, in my opinion, far more interesting - turn on France. If you leave Austria be, he'll be able to defend himself from Turkey, who will in all likelihood have an army in Rumania shortly. France is under pressure from both England and Germany. If you can keep them interested in fighting France and convince France to keep fighting back, you might be able to sneak into Iberia before anyone realizes what's happened.

Food for thought.

Germany - I'm glad that you allowed Russia into Sweden. It was a very smart play that should help maintain the balance in the south. While Turkey is your friend in the long run, you don't want him or anyone else to get too big too fast because when it comes down to someone trying to solo, they're going to be trying to get to your home centers. You don't want to give anyone any help getting there.

Your attack on Belgium is interesting in that England agreed to support you there instead of going the other way around. Typically, if Germany can't ensure Belgium himself, he supports England's convoy and hopes that England uses that mainland army to go west. If you end up taking Belgium for yourself, I think it will be interesting to see how England reacts having his easiest access to the continent taken away.

As for whether you build a fleet or an army alongside A Munich, you should consult England and Russia. They've been your best buddies so far, you should keep an open line of communication going with them. Don't let them decide but be open to what they have to say.

Austria - You're not looking so good. Italy didn't lay off of you at all and while I don't think you should have left Greece completely unattended, you ensured that he couldn't take anything at all. If I were in your shoes, I would continue doing that until he agrees to turn his sights elsewhere, which shouldn't be too long now.

You have to worry about Turkey. He's just so formidable in the corner that, even if he's playing nice (which I'm sure he is), you just have to. Even if you end up striking an alliance with him after he puts an army in Rumania, he can only expand through the seas or through Russia. Either way, he's surrounding you, and once that happens, you don't have a long-term future. Hopefully Italy will help you and Russia deal with that possibility.

Turkey - A+ work. You have some room to get a little bit cocky right now. By guessing right and securing Sevastopol, you ensure that you'll either get into Russia or get into Austria. One way or another, you are set up to grow with force in the next couple of years.

You have the most options when it comes to builds. You are always welcome to build an army in Constantinople and a fleet in Smyrna - it allows you to both defend yourself if Italy decides to turn on you or try to force your way into Greece if he doesn't. You could also try to convoy a new army into Rumania, though with Russia in Galicia, I don't expect that to work. You'll probably have to surrender Sevastopol in order to get Rumania at all. You might also consider going fleet-heavy if you think that Italy is going to build a third army, but be very careful about this. It can backfire terribly if Italy builds another fleet because not only can he defend himself but it also basically forces him into an alliance with Austria. It has the highest risk potential but also the highest reward if you can get into the Ionian by next fall.

Grades and ranks:

For what it's worth, my grades and ranks do not always line up with each other. My grades are based solely on how well I feel that country performed this year. My ranks are based on the larger picture of where each country stands in the grander scheme.

1.) Turkey - A

Far and away the best opening year. Playing the aggressor, potential to expand in the next 2-3 years to as many as 8 or 9 centers.

2.) Germany - A-

Didn't sneak into Belgium but easily could this coming year. Early friendliness with Russia will pay dividends and may allow him to take Sweden peacefully. Volatile friendship with England, but if both are patient, they'll both grow into the top powers alongside Turkey.

3.) England - B

Might have been better off trying to convoy into Belgium himself but it wouldn't have worked anyway. Getting armies into France would make him the most powerful western player.

4.) Russia - A-

Negotiated his way into Sweden, doesn't have to worry about English army in Norway, can easily hold his ground against Turkey. Good defensive year. Unlikely to grow very much for a long time unless he gives up Rumania.

5.) Italy - C

Took a chance, didn't work. Not the end of the world by any means.

6.) France - D-

I feel bad giving Fs. Hopefully he'll find a way to get the build in Spain and not lose ground next year.

7.) Austria - C

Could have had Greece but didn't lose a home center to either Russia or Italy. Still alive, kicking with those rubber sandals on that don't hurt at all but kicking nonetheless.

Three neutrals left unclaimed is almost impressive. Interestingly that was also true of the last FP SOW; most F2F games I play have 0-1 neutrals unclaimed at the end of 1901 curiously enough. Just something I've noticed.
_______________________________________

I think the Bohemian Crusher, and the Lepanto, gets unfairly criticized on the site. Just because they aren't avant garde doesn't mean they aren't strong or interesting. But Italy here didn't play it correctly. VEN-TYR; ROM-VEN should be follow up, as it's namesake, TYR-BOH; VEN-TYR. You don't need a second fleet build (right away) since Turkey is so heavily invested in going North.

Now, Italy might say: "but Russia promised me VIE, which made great tactical sense because it's unstoppable!". Well that was never happening with Turkey's opening. GAL couldn't be afforded to go after Budapest for personal builds much less be spending time getting YOU centers. So if that's the reason you chose those moves, well, not shame, but a lesson learned. Not to crow hindsight too much, but notice armies in VEN/TYR/BOH, while not guaranteeing build, especially if GAL *can* be afforded in the next turn, is a powerful position.

Plus you can always think about shenanigans with Munich. Shenanigans.
_______________________________________

Thanks so much for the post Bo. I'm going to be a bit rushed and only comment where I disagree, if only because I think getting multiple perspectives is part of the fun of having multiple professors.

I think France is in a fine position. Sure, England and Germany denied him Belgium. But that doesn't mean he can't be friends with either of them, even both, depending on how smooth he talks. In addition Spain is a free build. France is not only effectively at 5 supply centers, there's no possible way, basically, outside of him purposely doing so, he can lose any of them, so he's certainly getting another build, at least one, next year, and perhaps most importantly, getting his build after seeing what everyone's true cards was. I feel if England was REALLY vested in attacking France we'd have either seen LON-ENG or YOR-BEL. I'd give France at least a B.

Bump for builds

Highlights:

-The most ambiguous build from England. Is he going to HEL or ENG?

-Turkey--Since BLA isn't convoying anyone anywhere anytime soon and the fleet isn't going to EMS, I think A(Smy) and F(Con) was a tactically superior way to achieve the same goals. Can you tell I hate armies in Ank? I hate armies in Ank.

-"I'm going after Germany, honest, be a pal, England." -France

-Italy is not tactically committed to attacking Austria anymore. He has the most fleets in the Med, but no clear path to a center. Whose coastline does he harry?

Bump, I'll get on it tonight. Been moving the last couple of days.

England - The fleet in London was the right choice even though France didn't build a fleet. It's easy to say that you could have predicted that and potentially done something else with your build, but what would that be? While I opened the door to other options in my last analysis, a fleet in Liverpool doesn't help you enough to consider taking the chance that you won't get the channel.

You still have options, though. You could have to Heligoland, as Leth pointed out, which, given Germany's build in Berlin instead of Kiel, looks fairly appetizing. You could also try to sneak one on Russia - knowing that he's likely to move Moscow to Sevastopol, St. Petersburg will almost certainly be open. The build would certainly help you in future fights against either France or Germany and it is basically impossible for Russia to take it back away from you if he loses his fleet.

France - You are going to have quite a fight on your hands. I'm glad you built the army, because with England's fleet build it turned out to be the wise choice, but you have to be quite confident that you can handle England's advances if you plan on taking Spain and building again.

I'm curious to see if your diplomacy has improved. England has other places he can go and you clearly look peaceful toward him. You'll butt heads with Germany and likely won't gain anything on that front, so it's important to keep England off. If you can do that, you'll survive for now and be able to thrive later.

Germany - The army in Munich is no surprise. The fleet in Berlin may be, particularly for Russia, who, while he should have expected to lose Sweden, might be a bit blindsided because that fleet didn't show up in Kiel. It is solely intended for use against Russia, and if you remain in the Baltic beyond taking Sweden, you might be inclined to convoy into Russia. The second fleet also gives you potential to both defend and attack England down the line. There was no need for a fourth army at this stage, so your build makes quite a bit of sense.

Italy - Your fleet leaves the door open for basically anything. You are no longer committed to attacking Austria, and while Turkey built a defensive fleet, you don't necessarily have to attack him either. Had you build another army or a fleet in Rome instead of Naples, you would have been committed to one fight and one fight alone, so you made the right move to keep your options open. I'm sure you and your TA have been discussing your options this phase too and I can't wait to see what you choose to do.

Austria - I was wondering if you would build in Budapest and try to protect Russia, but you went with the conservative, defensive option - the better option too. Your build looks long term - it allows you to continue working with Russia, potentially ally yourself with Italy, and prepare to defend against Turkey in the phases to come.

Turkey - The fleet in Smyrna is very defensive and a wise build you can't live without. The army in Ankara, on the other hand, is more interesting. It suggests that you have no intention of working with Russia and would love to advance beyond Sevastopol. While I have no long-term issue with that, I wonder whether or not that's possible in the short-term, especially if Italy and Austria find a way to work with one another. That said, you still have the option to move that unit to Constantinople and use it to take Greece by convoy or defend Bulgaria against the A/R, so I don't think that it is necessarily a dead end unit. Hopefully you find an immediate way to use the army.

Russia - Build in Moscow was a given. Maybe you can take Sevastopol back, though Turkey has clearly indicated he doesn't want you to. While you might also be a bit shaken by Germany's build, I encourage you to stay the course - defending yourself against Turkey is priority #1 for you. That said, I warn you about losing the north entirely. Once it's lost, you're highly unlikely to get it back.

Looking forward to the spring moves.

Bo (and the other mods), not sure if you're checking the public press in the game but it looks a little odd..

lol. I'll have to remember that excuse for a stab sometime.

I think it's not legal to claim game malfunction falsely.

pft, people claim misorder or that's not what I entered all the time. But hack is new to me.

If your account is compromised, email the moderators at [email protected] and change your password and we can go from there.

I think for this game he was just talking about press, not moves. Either way it should be strictly an emailing matter, of course.

Bump for fall moves.

Is Turkey's destruction AIRtight? Will England turn on Germany in pursuit of rich dark Belgian chocolate, or try to get a grip on France's Brest? When will the Swiss make their move? Tune in next time on Diplomacy: Straight outta Waltham!

Spring 1902 Commentary:

England - I think there were more productive move sets for you here, though I imagine that Germany made some sort of promise to you regarding Belgium. If he did, then you might consider how that betrayal affects your relationship. Clearly, you and Russia have been discussing things at least on some level, which is not a bad thing. If your relationship with Germany is in fact deteriorating, his friendship is pretty important, so keep it up.

You have multiple options for the fall. You can, obviously, continue your attack against France or you can postpone it. If you choose the latter, then it may be worth setting up some sort of arrangement with him regarding Belgium. That way, you both build, Germany is forced to retreat, and the west is back to square one, except your army is in Belgium now.

France - Germany's move to Belgium is huge for you. It means multiple things, but most importantly that the door might be open for a stronger alliance with either England or Germany. You will be building, so this is a great time to consider who you have had a better relationship with and whose help would be more practical for you.

It might be a little nitpicky, but I would have liked to see you in the MAO right now instead of in Spain. Had you moved to the MAO, you would still have the option of taking Spain but you also would have been able to use your fleet as some leverage against England. That said, the move would have been a little risky in that it would have left you exposed to Italy.

Italy - I like the decision to back off of Austria. He was clearly prepared to defend to the death, so there was no reason to keep beating on his door. Moreover, with Austrian support, you have the ability to take Turkey head on with a fleet advantage. Hopefully you find a way to do that in a way that benefits both of you.

The door on a French attack isn't necessarily closed, but it's definitely closing. Had you elected to move his direction, you likely wouldn't have gained much, if anything, from it, so in this instance, it looks like avoiding that stalemate battle was the right choice.

Germany - If you ended up going alone on Belgium (which you may not have), you might end up losing more than you gained from it right now. If France and England end up allying, not only do you have a difficult alliance to break up again attacking you, but you probably won't even hold onto Belgium. Moreover, if England continues to support Sweden, you'll be left without an opportunity to build until you can break into Russia, which certainly won't happen this year. I suggest you talk to all of your neighbors, Russia included, and see if there isn't some way that you can forge a stronger alliance with at least one of them.

Austria - You're not out of the woods yet, but you can definitely see the light and it's definitely getting brighter. You did a good job defending against Italy and you were both fortunate and skilled in keeping Russia from attacking you. Hopefully the build (or two…?) you have coming will allow you to grow into a more powerful player in the game than you have been.

Whether or not you or Italy particularly like each other at this phase, keeping an open line of communication and being fair in your negotiations will help keep the alliance alive for as long as it needs to be. Turkey is much less of a threat at this point than he was a phase ago, but he could easily break out of the hole he's in in the blink of an eye if he's left with too much space to maneuver. I like your chances if you and Italy can stick together for awhile.

Turkey - The build in Ankara makes sense as a support unit for Sevastopol, but it leaves much to be desired since the I/A looks to be intact again. Moreover, depending on how the coming phase goes, you might not get the help against Russia from Germany or England that you were expecting. Getting left out to dry wouldn't kill you by any means, but you have to ensure more than anything that nobody else gets into your homeland, so defense should be the priority right now given this turn of events.

It may be useful at this stage to negotiate with Russia, as hard as that may be with your armies and your fleet in the Black Sea. It appears to me that your units could be used more efficiently, but so could his. That fleet in Rumania is nothing more than a dead unit - a sitting duck were Austria to try to attack and of very little assistance against you once (/if) he regains Sevastopol. Agreeing to return Sevastopol, giving Russia a build, and disbanding his fleet, meaning that you gain Rumania, don't have to disband, and set yourself up to effectively combat the forming I/A would put you and Russia in a good position to counter the alliance with an alliance of your own.

Russia - It looks like you might just snake your way out of losing Sweden after all. If the E/G is broken, then you have potential to form a neutral relationship with both England and Germany, meaning that you can leave your focus on the south. Turkey has moved aggressively against you consistently and he needs to be kept under control.

That said, Austria has a build coming and he doesn't have a western invasion to worry about anymore. That build is almost certainly going to be an army in Budapest, which means that while Galicia is in his personal space, he can actually do something about it now. You might be wary of this and consider the potential for a fight in your negotiations because you wouldn't be able to effectively hold off Austria and Turkey if they attack you together.

Homework question: what moves should Russia have ordered here?

Guaranteeing Sev at the potential cost of Rum was probably best. If for some reason Turkey doesn't try for Rum, yay, you get a dot. But Turkey will try for Rum. Congrats! Now he's rubbing shoulders with Austria, and the contentious southern Russian fleet is disbanded, and you didn't actually lose anything.

I think moving Gal-Ukr and Ukr-Sev was correct since it guarantees Sev in the fall, meaning Turkey has to turn west, and Austria won't get anything out of attacking you because you're rebuilding in War before he gets there. So you engineer AT conflict while reducing your threat to both parties and making yourself an unappealing target for everyone. I don't think this can be done without giving up Gal, but I'd be happy to learn otherwise.

Of course, you have to keep Swe or all this is pretty pointless.

Autumn 1902 Commentary:

England - This is definitely interesting. You and Germany are still working together and you have an agreement that happens to be fairly solid using Russia as a third party. This is incredibly wise and I'd like to call attention to the situation surrounding Sweden as a creative yet effective way of establishing borders. Simply put, Sweden is used as a buffer, effectively controlled by nobody (since Russia would lose it in an instant without a mutual three-way agreement and since the unit he gains from it is not being used). The agreement you three have is beneficial mostly to you because it gives you a channel to put armies on the mainland and the army you have in Picardy will undoubtedly help you secure territory permanently that you can't get with your fleets alone.

While you would be in better shape with a build, you have little to complain about. You have no immediate threats and the only way that this changes next year is if Russia or Germany stab you. The only way that they are capable of doing this is through their build, which means that they'll have to show their hand in advance, at which point you can plan accordingly.

France - England and Germany's gain is ultimately your loss. Moreover, Italy chose to come your direction. This means that you are currently defending against all three of your neighbors and there is no way to sustain yourself in this position. If you're going to survive, you have to find a way to get one of them (preferably two) to redirect their assault somewhere else - in the best case against their ally in attacking you.

You have a build and you have a retreat. With a retreat in Paris and a build in Marseilles, you should be able to hold your ground for a little while, but the status quo has to change in your favor and it has to happen soon.

Italy - I don't think you stand to gain a ton out of France unless you get some help from either Germany or England, which may very well happen, but it also may not. Ultimately, France may choose whether you gain anything at all depending on who he chooses to defend against and who he allows to take his territory. If I were in his shoes, I would promote a fight between Germany and England and let them roam freer than you, the single power without any conflicting interests. We'll see, though.

Your move to the Aegean does you a lot. Not only does it allow you and Austria to fight for Turkey's homeland, but it promotes some sort of trust between you. That said, Turkey isn't going to have to deal with a Russian fleet anymore and he moved out of Armenia, so his Black Sea fleet may get freed up soon. Hopefully you'll find a build somewhere in order to match his fleets but I don't see where you're planning on getting it. You also have to worry about covering the Ionian, which you can't do without retreating, so you might have a long year ahead of you.

Germany - As I told England, I'm really, really impressed with this set of moves. You didn't gain anything that you didn't already have and you likely won't get Sweden, but you still have a build and you're still more than capable of claiming Scandinavia by convoy. Moreover, you've completely broken France, though I'm not sure how much of it you'll end up getting unless England does you a favor and lets you have Paris. Even so, you have a very stable alliance with two different players here and eventually, whenever you decide who you're ready to go after next, you'll have another loyal ally to turn to and that's extremely important.

Austria - It's difficult to tell who has the advantage between the I/A and Turkey, though I think you have more potential to come out ahead. That said, other than pushing Italy into the Aegean, I'm not sure that you did yourself any favors here. You could have very easily positioned yourself to retake Galicia, for example, by moving Vienna to Bohemia and Trieste to Vienna, still with a build in Budapest. Italy also could have used a build in order to build another fleet to use against Turkey, though I understand why you wouldn't have wanted to surrender Trieste to him in order to do that after all you two have gone through together. Likewise, you would have been better off assisting Russia in holding Rumania with a fleet, which can't hurt you, than allowing Turkey to plant an army there, which means that you have to protect Serbia and also risk allowing Russia and Turkey to arrange an alliance together since Russia has his homeland and Turkey has a way out. All in all, I think that there are a number of little things like that that you could have considered that would have made your moves quite a bit more productive than they ended up being.

Turkey - Hopefully, putting an army in Rumania will allow you to align yourself with Russia in order to stall the growth of the I/A, but very little is going to happen until that fleet in the Black Sea gets back out on open water where it belongs. While I appreciate that it was necessary to use it to take Rumania, there is absolutely no reason to leave it landlocked now. Even if it could be used to protect Rumania or Bulgaria, you have to be sure that you can defend your homeland.

I don't think you're in trouble, though. Even going down to three centers, which, obviously, hasn't been written in stone yet, doesn't put you on your deathbed at all. Italy hasn't found a way to bring his full forces at you and I'm not sure that he'll have the chance to any time soon. Hopefully you can weather the storm until something opens up for you.

Russia - The arrangement with England and Germany makes a lot of sense for you, but you need to remain cautious and be ready to defend because it could break at any moment. Sweden, as Valis demonstrated earlier in this thread, is not all that important and you've expected to lose that anyway, but your home centers are, and an attack will threaten those. An attack is the only way that Germany is going to be able to grow if England puts another army into France, so stay wary and stay defensive.

You have a build coming because of your disbanded fleet in Rumania, which is excellent for you as that build could help you defend or potentially make a move to the west to expand even more. If you and Turkey are able to come together on an agreement, it may be in your interests to move on either Austria or Germany, whoever is more vulnerable, and hopefully grow into a power to be reckoned with.

Grades and rankings:

1.) England - A - I love this move set because it gets an army on the mainland and leaves Germany with no immediate way to threaten you. England is in full offensive mode and has no reason not to be.

t2.) Russia - B - Russia is in an excellent position to grow and has two potential targets plus potential friendship with Turkey that could last him quite a long time. Only receives a B because he couldn't get Austria's help to hold Rumania, but that's not necessarily his fault at all.

t2.) Germany - B- - Good, safe set of moves. I don't necessarily think that helping England's army into Picardy was the best move but it was certainly a way to preserve the alliance. Hopefully there will be a chance to grow in France, but if not, this coming build could be used effectively against either Russia or England.

4.) Turkey - A - I don't see any other set of moves that made any sense for him this phase. Despite being ranked well lower than he was last year, he'll be just fine.

5.) Austria - C - While the grade is lower than Italy, I think you have more potential to grow and I think you'll be in better shape *if* Russia and Turkey don't tightly ally. More productive moves might have built a better defense against that.

6.) Italy - C+ - Had he had a build, these moves would be excellent. Without a build, these moves overcommit. France has a build that will undoubtedly go in Marseilles, which means that both Marseilles and Spain are covered without German or English support. Moreover, the Ionian is exposed and Naples may be unblocked. Hopefully he wiggles his way into a build in order to cover his back.

7.) France - C - I have no major issues with his moves but I can't compliment your diplomacy. Given your failed support, England clearly duped you and Germany helped. Italy's attack may be the nail in the coffin.