Flexibility. Sticking to an alliance way after it is serving your purposes is a common failing. I can't tell you how many times I've watched people seen people stay in alliance "because X is a good ally" far too long and then get long faces when they get crushed by their former ally. It's pretty frustrating to talk to people who are so bad at seeing where their interests lie. It's usually a lot harder to negotiate with someone with a bad read of the game, I find.

@ CB Not sure what you mean by flexibility and obstinance. Can you elaborate?

Yes, I mean in regards to your negotiating. Do you find it more valuable in the long term to be considered flexible with your negotiating or steady and unwavering. I am of the impression that both have their merits but I am curious what type of player each prof is and what each prof likes to see in an ally.
Flexibility- Willingness to work with other players not always to your own highest benefit.
Steady / Obstinate- Staying strong on all goals and deals, example: if you want Belgium, your taking Belgium.

Generally, I would go with flexible all things being equal. It depends on the other players in the game and the circumstances, I think.

I've got a question for the profs on negotiation style. Let's say you've decided to give your potential ally a centre (Belgium, why not?) in order to secure what you hope will be a long lasting and mutually beneficial relationship. Would you make this offer early on to portray yourself as a generous ally willing to put the alliance above short term individual desires. Or would you stage an intense negotiation in which you allow yourself to be "persuaded" after much debate to portray yourself as a tough negotiator who is nevertheless willing to listen and can be beaten by reasoned argument.

Bump

My grades are an accumulation toward your final grade. They are not turn by turn.

Austria C-

Pretty standard Austrian opening. But in 1901, Austria needs an Italian ally, and the Italian opening here is hostile. Austria must now decide how to deploy A Serbia. Use it to defend Trieste or to take Greece. At least Russia isn't enthusiastically jumping into the Balkans at this time.

England C-

England boldly opens F London to the English Channel. Most Frenchmen do not like that move. Maybe there is a lot of trust on the French side. Maybe not.

What now for England? He could face three hostile neighbors. He has some diplomatic work ahead in the Fall 1901 negotiation period.

France C

I am not a fan of the French opening here. I like A Paris to Gascony if you're going for the Iberian builds. But IMO, A Marseilles to Spain would have been better in conjunction with the move into Gascony. It might still work out for France though.

Germany C-

It is hard to understand the Germany opening. F Kiel to Holland is usually undertaken when Germany wants three builds. I don't understand A Munich hold in conjunction with F Kiel-Holland. Move A Munich to Ruhr and try to take Belgium.

Italy C

A bold anti-Austrian move. It doesn't look like Russia is too enthusiastic the project. Color me skeptical on the merits of this strategy at this point. Maybe Italy sneaks into Munich?

Russia C

A Moscow to St. Petersburg is a bold northern opening for Russia. Anti England or Anti-German, the Russian opening to St. Pete indicates a Russian who wants influence in Scandanavia. There are three dots up there so it's a worthy investment. Fleet Bothnia sails into Sweden for some shore leave.

In the south, Russia has a tough choice. If he orders F Sevastapol to Rumania, then he might get a second build, but loses a strategically important space (Black Sea) to the Turkish fleet. F Rumania is weaker tactically for an anti-Austrian campaign with Italian and/or Turkish allies.

Turkey C+

Normal moves. But the other eastern powers openings are pro Turk. Turkey has a lot of early strategic options on the table. Possible two-build 1901. Gets a + just for his diplomacy.

@ Octavius it depends on the circumstance and player. Generally, a negotiation between allies is aimed at goals that roughly benefit the alliance in an equitable manner. I would have to understand how Bel helps the alliance establish long term equity within the partnership, or how it might unbalance the game elsewhere with other players.

Thanks professor! I willdo your proposals.

Professor eturnage, there are some things I don't understand about your analysis of spring moves. First, why should France move to both Gascony and Spain simultaneously when he only needs one of them to take Spain and can take Portugal with the fleet? Moreover, the move would leave his eastern flank entirely undefended. Secondly, I feel like Russia did a better job than you're giving him credit for, since he probably negotiated for Germany not to enter Denmark in Spring (thus unable to bounce Sweden). Finally, I don't see why Russia would necessarily lose the Black Sea to Turkey by taking Rumania with his fleet, given that Turkey's move to Black Sea this season was probably a mutually agreed upon bounce.

Such an exciting, non-regular opening!

I agree with you in I did a better job than my note. But I have to deal with Turkey or he mustn't build fleet in Ankara or Con. I can dislodge him.

@ Leon. I like the French opening to Gascony and Spain in S01 because of the ability to convoy A Gas-Portugal for the second build instead of moving the fleet to Portugal. A convoy to Portugal allows you to keep the fleet in Mid Atlantic where you block F English Channel to Mid Atlantic! and your tactical options for the spring 1902 moves are better. If you move F Mid-Portugal for the second build, your only viable options for the fleet next turn are to move back to Mid Atlantic or maybe Spain(sc). You lose a turn.

As for Russia, I agree his diplomacy must have been good with Germany. And you're right. He can try diplomatically to persuade Turkey to DMZ the Black Sea and give him Rumania. But what is Turkey getting out of it? If Russia pulls that off, I'll probably bump Russia up to a C+.

But what if Germany were to move to Burgundy? Your moves would leave France pretty much defenseless. Is the fleet staying in MAO worth the risk?

I mean, it seems like a pretty standard move in a Juggernaut to bounce in spring and then let Russia take Rumania in fall. It's pretty much a given in my experience, and Turkey gains a long term ally by not moving to the Black Sea, which he has no gain in doing if he plans on allying with Russia.

I have to say, I rather clearly disagree with eturnage' suggested French moves simply because moving all three units south to protect MAO while leaving burgundy screamingly open seems like something you only do with extreme confidence in Germany which no one should ever have in 1901. Burgundy is key for France to have a say in Belgium and to be able to protect Marseilles with a bounce if need be. Thus I tend to support myself to burgundy or move to Picardy and burgundy. Spain should be there.

Also, Is give Russia higher marks because I am guessing he had solid press with Germany. Russia has a solid presence in the north and won't be bothered ther anytime soon.


In the south he needs to ally with either Austria or Turkey. With Italy opening that way the juggernaut looks juicy.

Wow I've never seen grades that harsh for opening moves.

I've never really understood why opening moves are given grades this early. It's damn near impossible to work out how good a player's diplomacy has been in the first turn until after you've seen the fall turn at the very least. If you are going to give marks this early then the minor tweaks to the benchmark C level seems as close to sensible as you can get.

@yavuzovic

You're not supposed to be posting here.

I liked the marks.

Well, first of all well done to everyone - nobody NMRd!!!

I'm not going to score you guys as I don't have enough elements to judge. So maybe a few observations:

England - it is ok to open to eng but you need to be aware that you have made an enemy which should mean that you have secured the favours of your other neighbours, which you have not! The move is quite uncompromising so now you are going to have to work hard to identify a strategy and some good alliances.

Also, what is everybody else going to think? England is not trustworthy! So the question for you is - was it worth it?

France - did you see it coming? The move to gas is fine -gas is a great square as you can go anywhere from it! And it therefore gives you options. However I find it more of a GB opening where you don't know anything. If you went to bur to ensure G didn't go then you would have been better off bouncing yourself as that would have allowed you to cover bre and take 2 builds.

TBC

Italy - I like that. In my experience Italy must be incisive from the start otherwiseyiu will be sandwiched between the east and the west. You must pick your side and go for it!

Germany - in my experience there is hardly ever any justification for a hold move. And it means that you are not making the most of your forces. In s01 you need to be able to use all your units. Your move is a bit of a contradiction - on the one hand you are trying to get 3 builds - on the other you probably held with mun not to upset anyone?

Austria - hey, what can I say. It's hard work playing A, particularly in 01. The moves are fine but it's all about the diplomacy which probably wasn't good enough, as you also bounced in gal...lots of work to do, get yourself a good keyboard!

Russia - bold opening, maybe a bit too much - with an army in stp I would have expected you didn't need to bounce gal and could have gone to ukr. But G and E look good so you now just need to firm up your strategy and alliances.

Turkey - good solid standard opening, even better considering how Italy and Russia ha e opened. A cool head and opportunistic approach are what the doctor orders now!

I've had professors that only give Cs as well. Nobody takes their classes. Turkey’s opening phase could not have gone better, and yet he gets a C+ for what, the fact that he hasn’t soloed yet? What about Russia? He’s in fantastic shape. Are you for real, eturnage? Your analysis itself is supposed to be an accumulation of everything that has happened so far, but that’s not how grades work. Please change your tune so that the players can get an accurate grasp on their game.

Aside from the stupid benchmark C, I completely disagree with the blatant evenness of the grades given. Some players’ opening phases were clearly quite a bit worse than others’ and I want to dig into that. I’ll throw in a little bit of my own flavor regarding the openings, with the caveat that I’m strictly guessing as to what sort of relationships formed and what kind of press floated around between powers in S01, so players should be mindful of their actual situation before taking any of my advice.

England:

As I believe eturnage said, you have a problem on your hands. You opened against France. Germany did not park a fleet in Denmark, which means that Russia is guaranteed a build in Sweden. Russia opened north, which means that Norway could possibly be contested and you may not actually get it. These are three problems that you have to contend with, and in my opinion, your best option is to hedge your bets by solving two of them and leave the last one open ended.

If you want to work things out with France, you can. Perhaps he’ll allow you to convoy into Belgium and support you there. If not, you might still be able to do it anyway - Germany is in a position where he might support your convoy and France is in a position where taking Belgium for himself isn’t really feasible, so giving you a reason to get off his back early on might be appealing. If you make this move, supported by your other fleet, you have the opportunity to get both Germany and France tentatively working with you, which gives them an opportunity to work against one another. With good diplomacy, this could end up in your favor and give you an opportunity to repair your relationship with each of the other western powers this phase.

That, of course, means that you have to leave Scandinavia to Russia. Is this a good idea? That’s up to you. Your relationship with Russia is obviously not that great, but perhaps he might not come after you if he doesn’t have to fight you for Norway. This is something that you will have to gauge in your press. I can’t give you a concrete answer for this.

France:

F POR is not ideal for an attack on or defending the Mediterranean, so you are quite fortunate that Italy made the moves he did. Perhaps you helped orchestrate that - well done, if that is the case. I don’t particularly love this opening, but given the state of the board, you’re fine, even with England attacking you.

You have a couple of options with regard to Belgium. The first relates to whether or not England is going to end up attacking you or whether he has your blessing into Belgium. Given your opening, it doesn’t seem as if you particularly want him there, but it gives you leverage to coax him eastward into Germany. After all, you’re the one setting him up to actually get a build this year. If he likes you more after this phase than he likes you currently, you could probably consider that a diplomatic success and it might lead into an E/F, albeit a late-blooming one.

Your other option is to work with Germany, who you may already have a working relationship with given that he did *not* bounce you in Burgundy, to deny England that build. Ideally, he’ll be supporting you there, and if England decides to go after Norway despite Russia’s opening, then his support would net you a third build. Be careful about that, though. Getting three builds in 1901 is kind of like making a deal with the devil. It’s a lot harder to find friends if people are worried about you.

Italy:

Dude. Really? Did Austria insult your mother?

(Temporarily) putting aside my hatred for an anti-Austrian opening, there are ways to make it work other than hoping Austria NMRs. You need an ally, either Russia or Turkey - but not both - to help you as a supporting party. Your options are Russia and Turkey, and there are pros and cons to both.

Russia, firstly, has already committed a move north, which will hinder any move of his against Austria for a few phases, but to his surprise, England went south. This means that Russia could very quickly own Scandinavia, at which point he will have at least 6 units, a decent number to mount an attack. Whether he wants Vienna and Budapest or whether he chooses to work southward against Turkey while simply supporting you in Austria, you could have a working relationship with him and could find your way into a pretty devastating wintergreen (I/R) alliance, but it won’t happen with the same haste that it would have had Russia been able to put an army in either Galicia or Rumania this year, which means you’re going to be on your own for a little while.

Turkey is your other option. My guess is that you are at least marginally confident that you two are friendly in order for you to commit against Austria so quickly. Perhaps he sold you that there wouldn’t be a juggernaut, but thus far, there is. That puts you in a tight spot with him. However, he has more to gain in the short term by attacking Austria than Russia does, plus he has more to gain in the short term by attacking Austria than he does by attacking you. Even if he is allied with Russia, there is time to break that partnership. In the end, while Turkey is probably going to have more immediate success against Austria than Russia will, he’s a more dangerous ally to you than Russia, so if you choose this route, make sure to cover your bases with him.

Germany:

It is odd that you elected not to put a fleet in Denmark. Rarely do players move that fleet to Holland and not regret it if and when a fight with Russia breaks out, but perhaps your relationship with Russia early on will lead to peace between you two for a lot longer than usual. For you, that means that you have the chance to pick your friend in the west that gives you the best opportunity to grow.

Given Italy’s move to the south, your unit in Munich has a fun option that you wouldn’t have had you moved it. Your position in the middle of the board sometimes necessitates a CPA, or a central powers alliance, where you, Italy, and Austria each work together to stave off the incoming threats from both east and west. Whether or not you will be facing both a juggernaut (R/T) and an E/F is to be foreseen, but it may be wise to consider breaking up the fight between Italy and Austria yourself by moving Munich to Tyrolia. Italy will likely want to move both of his armies one more space forward and build a third army in Venice before he attacks Austria - this not only prevents Italy from moving both armies forward to threaten Vienna and Trieste at the same time, but it also prevents him from building in Venice since that unit bounces. This can put an end to that fight rather quickly, but it can also tick Italy off, so be prepared for some serious backlash if you choose to make that move.

You have the same options regarding Belgium that I listed for both France and England, so you can read those if you’re interested. If they’re smart, they’ll both be asking for your help this phase. Don’t take that choice lightly.

Austria:

I don’t think that your situation is worthy of a C-, even if a C is quite literally the average. In my experience, an Italian player sets himself on attacking Austria without giving Austria a whole lot of opportunity to prove himself a good partner and I expect that that is what happened here. As such, I can’t pin the blame on you for the Italian move. Regardless, that is a bridge that you now have no choice but to cross. Getting creative and working with Italy’s current position as opposed to demanding he retreat and start his whole game over is probably the only way you are going to have a chance to work with him in the near future.

My guess is that you and Russia have a good relationship, which is a blessing for you. You are going to need to keep that up. His move north signifies that he is working with you, but it also signifies that he is not working against Turkey, who might become a problem for you. Perhaps you can slowly coax him into making a move that way.

You should take a look at what I suggested to Germany regarding his army in Munich. It might be useful to you.

Turkey:

Please ignore the letter that your professor put next to your name and listen to me instead. Your S01 was solid and you are in fantastic position moving forward. You have a friend in Italy - he is attacking Austria and will have no strength to harm you in the near future. A lepanto against you is almost certainly out of the question. You have a potential friend in Austria, as he is being attacked by Italy, and even if you choose not to ally with him, Italy’s moves make it easier for you to gobble (ha) up the Balkans all on your own. You may only have one build this year, but you are in a good spot to be a diplomatic partner of just about everyone on the board. Be friendly, likable, and patient and your window of opportunity for big growth will open up down the road.

You do have one concern, though - Russia. He is clearly friendly toward you and you toward him, generally a good thing for both of you in the early stages of the game. However, despite having three other potential nightmare neighbors, nobody is picking a fight with him. England moved against France, and whether he continues to play that game or not, he is likely going to get shut out of Scandinavia and have no chance of fighting Russia. Germany chose not to open to Denmark, which means that Russia is not only guaranteed a build in Sweden but guaranteed a friendly Germany at least in the interim. Austria, as you know, is under pressure and will likely do nothing to piss off Russia any time soon. That leaves you as the only one that could potentially pick a fight with him early on. Do you need to do that? He might, of course, fight with someone else on his own volition, but he may not. You will have to be careful with him, but for the time being, he is another friendly face. You two could be devastating if you partnered up for the long haul.

Russia:

I have no idea how much influence you truly had in the actions that various players made around the board, but if you can take credit for influencing even one of England, Germany, and Italy to open the way that they did, kudos to you. Diplomatically, you are set up for success. Neither England nor Germany have any leverage over you, and it seems that neither of them were worried about having any leverage over you to begin with. Austria is preoccupied, so your likely planned bounce in Galicia might be as close as he comes to attacking you during this game. Turkey opened conservatively, which gives you time to grow your borders and organize your defenses back home. Italy has positioned himself to be your best friend, if you feel that attacking both Austria and Turkey is in your future plans. You did marginally disadvantage yourself by not taking Rumania with an army right away, but you did well for yourself.

For the time being, you have two questions to ask: a) if you want to work with Italy, what is the best way forward and what territory do I want to focus on acquiring, and b) do you want to leave the west be or do you want to build fleets up north and commit yourself in that direction?

Obviously, these questions have some overlap. Both are fair options. You and your TA should definitely talk about it during builds this year.

ITT - lots of people who didn't read eturnage's methodology for grading. He's not doing turn-by-turn grading. The grades are so low precisely because it's too early to tell who is doing well or not.

I read it. I said that that's stupid. Analysis accumulates. Grades don't do that. If it's too early for him to tell who is doing well or not, then don't grade, but it's not too early to tell who is doing well and who isn't.

I mean, I agree with you Bo, but a lot of people aren't making that clear in their comments. I also think Russia moving fleet to Sev can be a really good move, depending upon the alliance situation

As this is my first post in the forum in quite some time, it pains me beyond belief that I have to agree with just about everything Bo said. :(.

I think Octavious said the one thing most can count on is seasoned players disagreeing. So true.

SoW is a wonderful thing that this site runs. Allowing players to get some help, either tactically or in the social/diplomatic responsibilities to the game. And the Professors taking their time to put thought out there for the benefit of growing the user base of this site

CK had said talk to everyone, and when your done that talk some more. The game has to never get out of reach. Even if you are getting double teamed, talk to other players and have an explanation why they should try to help you. Either with their units or just in a diplomatic fashion or both. Diplomacy shows off your social skills.

@enturage. Thx for taking the time to offer your insights. They seem to have served you well so far, I guess. Your win rate is impressive but your wins have come at the expense of newbs, kinda like VI. Your win/draw rate falls exponentially against real competition. That does not deter from taking your time to offer what you think is valid advice, but I must agree with BO here. Grading people on each move is much better because you have no context to the press between nations. New players need to feel glorified and praised, that's what I think this school is about.

Just my opinion.

Apologies for not explaining my grade system better. I am not as smart as many of the other people on this site. It is a great honor to serve as a professor. Octavius, Goldie, and Djanti are correct about my grading system. I will give everyone a final grade at the end of the game. At that time, I will be able to judge performance and will be glad to give someone an A. These early moves just tilt the grade slightly a bit toward your final grade whether it is an A or an F.

Think of the opening grades I gave you this way. If you got a +, I think you had a good turn. If a C, you had a solid, but normal move. If you got a -, your turn was below average. Bear in mind that the C or the + or the - are really just educated guesses on my part. You and your TA know better than any outsider peering through a glass darkly at what is happening in your game. That is because you have the benefit of diplomacy with the others in your game. I feel I must apologize again for not being clear. I hope that some of what I've told you may help. But obviously, smart people have different takes and that is fine also.

@Ogion I don't disagree with what you're saying about the French opening. That said, if love the A Paris-Gascony, A Mar-Spain opening for France under the right circumstance. I would need great confidence that Germany wasn't going to Burgundy before I would consider it. I don't know if I've ever seen A Par-Gas; A Mar-Bur before. Seems a bit schizo.

@ ssorenn I did ok in the tournament. The south team advanced to the finals. I totally agree that I have racked up my solo rate playing against inexperienced players. It is much harder to solo against competent players. If you're quibbling about me being a prof, you need to take the complaint to PF. He asked me to do this, probably because of the GR. But I am having fun . . . at least so far.