+1 CB

I think Italy is just getting into a position where he's guaranteed to take Portugal in fall of next year.

Bump

Ok. Sorry for the delay. Here are grades for the previous turn. And while we are still in the retreat phase for a bit, I’ll say right now that this is the most important build phase of the game. Between RUS and AUS disband choices, and whether ITA/GER/TUR build an army or a fleet will have an enormous impact on the following years – so think hard on what is the best direction to go.


ITA: A

Things are shaping up quite nicely for Italy here. Starting in the East, it was a great year of re-positioning so that you get Serbia, and Turkey takes Rum. This makes the most sense if you want this alliance to work for a while yet as it gives TUR a better avenue to head north and not feel the need to advance through you. It also allowed you to put your fleet in Greece, which is a huge deal in terms of both keeping Turkey in check, and allowing the potential for a late game stab to shoot for 18. Your units are placed nicely so that all of them have a significant amount of utility, and none are in particular danger of being forced back. With Russian and Austrian disbands coming soon, the Balkans will clear up and you TUR to continue to make gains. I did think it was a little odd that Tyr had a failed support hold of Vienna, but it that miscommunication did not come back to bite you as AUS didn’t support himself in, so no harm no foul. Regarding the move to MAO, I believe it was the correct one when you look at the game through the lens of trying to solo. Had you made a swipe at Spain, you may have grown faster but so would have ENG and one of the keys to pushing for a solo is stunting the growth of the opposition. The move to MAO significantly stagnates ENG, and you always have the option to swipe Portugal if you desperately need a build. You now have a delicate balance to maintain as France made a deal with the devil (you) to stay alive in the game. But you better bet that once he feels that he doesn’t need your help, he’s going to want that fleet out of MAO. So you need to keep working that angle – cause chaos and stagnation in the west while you continue pick up centers. Your path to 18 remains in good shape.

FRA: B

So you made a deal with the devil – sometimes it must be done. I really like this decision, in particular I think many diplomacy players would be hesitant to support another country to MAO, but its that sort of outside the box thinking that often pays off in the game. You needed help against the English fleets and now that you have fleets in Brest, and Pic or Wales when you retreat, and a friendly (for the time being) fleet in MAO – ENG is hard pressed to make gains against you. Obviously this situation would be much better if it was your own fleet in MAO, but all things considered your defense is strong, and the relationship you have with Italy is win-win for the time being. The key for you is to make sure that it continues to be win-win and that Italy doesn’t feel the need to be a problem. You have bought yourself some time, and should be chatting the ear off of an ENG that looks to be pretty trapped throwing all his units your way with little success. The only reason I dropped you down to a B is that you were unable to get ITA to move to Munich which would have allowed you to reclaim Bur (something I view as a very strong move by Italy, as it continues the stalemate position in the west – slowing 3 countries down while he continues to make gains). Tactically you had a strong turn, and have played good defense, but now your diplomacy must shine and you need to get at least one of these guys off your back. Your path to 18 is limited, but there is some light still at the end of the tunnel.

ENG: C-

Not a great turn for the Englishman – mostly due to Italy’s decision to prop up France instead of aiding in her destruction. So let’s start with the good: You have an army in St. Pet. Getting armies through RUS is one of the biggest indicators of ENG’s solo potential, so the fact that you have one in St. Pet with room to move south is a great thing. The bad thing? The fact that you are unable to ferry more armies through – by the time you are able to do so, likely a strong power in the east will have taken the gains. That being said, just holding St. Pet from the north is a very important stalemate position, so it should not be discounted. In the west, you have a bit of nightmare. You have three fleets and an army in London that look like they will be doing very little if you continue the course you are taking. France has outplayed you to a degree here, and so long as Italy has his fleet in MAO helping, you are going to be fighting an uphill battle. This wouldn’t be so bad had you not given up North to force the Channel. That fleet in North can cause some headaches for you if RUS decides to keep it – more of a short term problem as you have the ability to expedite RUS’s loss of centers, but its never a good thing to deal with a rogue unit behind your lines, especially when you’ve committed your units elsewhere. The good thing is that you continue to be in very little danger (the only real threat is the RUS fleet), but you need a change in diplomacy, or a change in direction if you want to move from draw potential to solo potential. The most immediate task for you coming up is influencing what Italy and Germany decide to build. Your path to 18 seems to be closing some, but some shuffling around could see it open up again.

GER: B

I feel like I’m going to short change you a bit Germany, but there is less to say about your turn than some of the others. That is not to say a simple turn is a bad one, just that your moves were logical and expected. The biggest victories for you this year is that you have some space from ENG breathing down your neck with his move out of Sweden and Denmark, and that Italy did not help France retake Burgundy. You have no immediate threats against you (except the potential for RUS to move to Holland from North), and you continue to hold a strong position against France. You get a build, which you need to help solidify your position. The issue with where you are at is very similar to the issue I have with ENG – you have committed three units to the west where they are stalemated and not gaining any ground. You picked up Belgium this year in exchange for helping ENG into St. Pet, which was good, but I’m having a hard time seeing where you are getting your next builds from. In many ways the Italian move to MAO hurt you as much as ENG – potentially even more so as at least ENG has a couple of more centers and an army in St. Pet which has limited growth potential. Your units look stuck if things remain the same, which is a bad thing as ITA and TUR look to pillage the remaining Balkan and Russian centers. What you choose to build here is important – as is finding a way to expand. Your path to 18 looks pretty crowded.

RUS: B

So your board position is pretty terrible, but I think you made some really good moves this past turn considering the bind you were in. Tactically the decision to send St. Pet south to protect Moscow was good as you knew you were losing St. Pet anyhow. Managing to keep Vienna was a surprise, and not only does that allow you to keep an additional unit to cause some mayhem. I love the move to North as it can cause a hell of a lot of problems and is a great unit to “rent out” in order to stay alive. Same with wherever you choose to retreat St. Pet to. They key for you is to figure out who has the most influence on you staying alive and find out what you can offer them. You can definitely barter a deal to stay alive so long as you can articulate how you can help someone more than your center can help them (the key to do this is to emphasize how your positioning is better than them taking your center and having to build in their home centers. For example, Turkey or Italy can take a center from you – but what they can’t do is have a fleet in North causing problems, or an army in Livonia etc.). You path to 18 is pretty much nonexistent – but you can fight your way back to relevance.

AUS: D

You had three units in Rum, Gal and Bud. You needed to find a way to either hold on Rum or find your way into Vienna, but coming out of this without a build is a pretty big failure. I know hindsight is 20/20 but had you held onto Rum you would be looking at a very interesting board where Turkey doesn’t get a build and you can push for an Italian invasion of an ill prepared Turkey. Now you have to disband two units and have little to offer other powers. Similar to RUS you need to find a way to be useful to someone who is invading you – the problem for you is that you are in a weaker position to do so. Throwing yourself at RUS may have been a mistake considering ITA/TUR doesn’t need any help from you in taking Russian centers – your influence may have been greater had you stayed close to the Germany line of Berlin/Munich. Your path to 18 looks closed.

TUR: A

The exchange of Serbia for Rum was a bit risky but it paid off. You get a build, you are in a strong position in the Balkans, and you have a northern avenue to expand. Things are looking up – much more so than just a turn ago, so kudos on that. I would have been very concerned about Italy moving a fleet into Greece, but the fact that Ionian went to Tunis is a good sign that you have a solid defensive position for the immediate future. You both still have benefits to offer one another, so the tension should be low until you reach the point where you’ve both made all the gains in the Balkans. Italy’s fleet moves are great for you, as slowing down ENG is as beneficial for you as it is for ITA. The West is slowed down, while the two of you are rolling forward. Pair that with the fact that a stab of France is much easier for Italy to pull off than a stab on you, and you should feel good about how the board looks. The alliance with Italy is give and take, and the key for you is to make sure you don’t give too much – Italy has a slight edge on you in terms of board position, so you need to make sure that you pick up centers and keep the alliance close in terms of power. Your path to 18 remains strong.

Finally getting to this! I also apologize for getting this up late. I’m at a wedding this weekend so my next post will probably be on Sunday. That said, let’s get to this turn. There were a couple of particularly pivotal moves this turn which have set the stage to go well for some players next year. I’ll start with the east.

Turkey: A-
If Italy and Turkey together were “shooting for the stars,” you might have tried a move like supporting Bulgaria to Rumania and Tyrolia to Vienna. That would have been a risky move for Italy, because neither the move to Rumania nor Vienna would have been guaranteed, but it would have meant one build for Italy and two for Turkey. The approach taken by Turkey and Italy this turn is more balanced and, I suspect at Italy’s behest, more favourable to Italy. Serbia is a big pressure point for the border between these two powers, and it’s smart to have a fleet in Greece and an army in Serbia to preserve this alliance. It makes the trade a little better for Turkey because Italy’s Greek fleet can’t actually defend Serbia. And other than that, taking the Black Sea and Rumania gives Turkey something most players on the board don’t have right now: a strong assurance that you won’t be eliminated. Corner positions are great for that, and Turkey has finally capitalized on it.

Russia: B+
Not a lot of great options, and I don’t think Russia is going to survive much longer, but Russia made some very good moves this turn. The move to Moscow was smart, if obvious. The move to NTH was good. Russia had to choose between moving to Sweden, Norway, and NTH based on the tactical tradeoffs England faced and as it happens either Sweden or NTH would have been a good guess. The move to NTH was pretty good. The move to Sev, also, while basically necessary, was very good. The only downside is the unit in Vienna needed to find a friend to work with if it were to be useful and it didn’t. Italy even mistakenly left Trieste underdefended against the very real possibility that the two underdogs might make friends (Italy probably won’t repeat that mistake).

Austria: D
It looks like Austria sprung for a bunch of tactical cuts this turn, rather than supporting any moves, and I think that was a mistake (it also signals a lack of confidence in Austria's negotiations). The main reason I don't like this approach this turn is that it was reasonably unlikely any unit other than Vienna would move to Budapest, so betting that Budapest could support a move was as safe-ish a call as you can get in this position. There was no power with 2 units bordering Budapest, and the two allied powers who did border Bud (Italy and Turkey) had more attractive targets. And note also that if Italy and Turkey had attacked Budapest together, Turkey wouldn’t have had two units to attack Rumania, so the worst case scenario of using Budapest to support either Rum-Ser or Gal-Vie is close to the outcome we got now (if you rule out the possibility of Russia working with either Turkey or Italy, which I think you could have). Plus, a good rule of thumb is that if you are on what looks like the path to defeat, sometimes you have to tolerate more risk to get a build and get back in the game, rather than playing defensively. I am guessing next year will be Austria’s last.

Italy: A
A player in Italy’s position might have been tempted to move to Spain this turn, so imagine for a moment Italy had done so without forging an agreement with France. Then, Italy would have Spain, yes, and a 2nd build, but France would have MAO, and would still have armies in Gascony and Marseilles. Italy’s position in France would be extremely tenuous, but he’d still be the target of all the diplomatic blowback that comes with a bigger SC count. Patience in your play is an asset in Italy’s position, because it makes it harder for other players to argue all must be united in the war against you.

But is Italy propping up France, as Tom suspects? I have to admit, that was not my first suspicion, although the support from BRE clearly indicates that is France’s belief. I was hoping for a move from this out of Italy, and I would expect the main motivation is to ensure Italy has more fleets in the west when he starts taking SCs from France - and also to guarantee that he is the first player to draw blood from France. His agreement with France may even include a token SC - sometimes a deal like this goes that route. Italy could also renege on his agreement with France and take Portugal next turn or the turn after, leaving France with no recourse. But France knew Italy would have that option after this turn, and I would hope that has entered the diplomatic discussions.

As an addendum, the only thing I don’t like from Italy this turn is Tyrolia’s failed order. Italy should have known the support would be accepted if he was going to order it, and that he didn’t means he risked losing Trieste to (however unlikely or likely it may be) cooperation between Austria and Russia.

Germany: B-
Man, it has been a long time since Burgundy did anything, hasn’t it? I remember once being ecstatic on Germany’s behalf for this advance, and it hasn’t born any fruit. In part, this is because England and Italy have both made choices which means the war against France will proceed very slowly (although both are probably still interested in France’s defeat - it is the terms of defeat I imagine they disagree on). Anyway, as Italy and England jockey for position, it may be worth it for Germany to think about whether he wants his only expansion path to depend on a resolution of this dance. Curious to see where this build goes, especially given Russia’s retreat.

France: B-
It looks like France has made some kind of offer to Italy, and Italy has accepted. The terms of this offer, its cost to France, and its benefits to Italy, are a mystery to the rest of us. My grade would really depend on those things we can’t know, so this is kind of a stab in the dark. But as I alluded to in my commentary on Italy, when you’re on the ropes and you offer something to one of your aggressors, it usually involves given them some kind of positional advantage against your other attacker, but also against you. How do you build your agreement so that it is more valuable than reneging on the deal? I’m not sure how France did that here, but I’m excited to see it play out. My concern is that Italy’s gains from immediately or imminently reneging on his agreement appear to be large - so what more could France have offered? France’s position is probably a lot of fun right now. He has a lot of units, he has to defend, but he also has a lot of potential. It wouldn’t be crazy to imagine that France can recover from this.

And, of course, this isn’t a strict matter of the numbers. I don’t know what else is going on behind the scenes. It’s possible, for example, that Italy’s relationship with England is more a push factor for Italy than France’s offer to Italy was a full factor. You could tell other stories with these moves. But a plain examination of Italy’s options next year makes me very curious about France’s negotiations with Italy.

England: C+
This grade would be a lot lower if England hadn’t gotten an army into StP. Most players will agree that this is usually a top priority for England. More generally, England does need to land convoys to have a chance to solo, and if those convoys aren’t landing in France or Germany, they better be landing in StP (Norway isn’t good enough). But England faced a difficult position this turn - he couldn’t retake the Channel and take StP without risking NTH, and it wouldn’t have taken much communication between France and Russia for those two players to know Ska would either end up in North Sea or France would keep the channel. Russia keeping Vienna is also bad for England, because it increases the possibility Ska lives to next year. And while we don’t know what England’s influence on that side of the board is, Tyrolia could have done something this turn to make England’s life easier (or harder) and it did none of those things. I’m talking about Tyrolia and not the elephant in the room (Italy’s fleet in MAO) to underscore just how much Italy’s moves are now holding England back. But England still has a great position and a lot of options for next year, even if it looks like progress against France will proceed at an even slower pace than the slow pace I was worried about last year.

Bump for having a busy forum.

The interplay between grand strategy and tactics is often muddled. I find builds generally offer some of the most clear tactical insights into the future plans of a power.

Some of the things builds show are fairly evident, like how Germany or Turkey's lack of fleet build means they probably don't have the intention of stabbing England or Italy, respectively. (Or if they do, it's going to be quite limited.)

Some are a bit less evident, like how Germany's build in Kiel rather than Berlin means they likely have no plans to head east this year.


Now for a few comments on the adjustments themselves:

Russia:
Keeping Nth and Lvn are pretty obviously good choices. Lvn can currently defend Mos, since no one power has clear dibs on getting that centre over anyone else. Nth is a very important space on the board. Keeping the fleet there means it has the ability to affect a lot of what happens in the north this year, which is could, and could possibly pick up a centre to keep itself alive.
I question the merits of keeping Sev. A fleet cannot defend Mos, (no matter what MoscowFleet might think) and the centre is likely to be lost this year anyways. I think Vie would have been the better choice to keep, as it's more in the thick of things in the east. Some powers may actually have some use for Vie, which can keep you alive longer. On the other hand, Sev has little to offer either Austria or Italy, which means they don't really care when Turkey disbands that unit.
Your position is not great, but not an immediate death-sentence

Germany:
I'm curious what you plan to do with your new Kiel army. On your French front, you already have a lot of armies doing very little. Adding yet another there is unlikely to see that tide shift, given how entrenched France is.
I also can see the possibility of sending it to Holland to cover against Russia. But, you might also be able to convince Russia that England is a better target.
I think there might be a better argument to have built in Ber. Given how close Germany's production centres are to the stalemate line, I think that Germany should regularly exert influence in the eastern sphere. A single unit can do a lot to turn the tide in a direction that suits your needs. You're currently stuck in a slow slog against France, and need to turn the board into your favour.

Austria:
You're in a tough spot. There are no great moves for you. But, given your adjustments, I don't see how you keep two centres this year. Neither Italy nor Turkey have a reason to let you keep Bud, or into Vie. (Unless they stab each other) Keeping Warsaw makes sense, since it's very unlikely anyone can take that from you this year. I question whether Gal would have been as useful as keeping Ukraine. Specifically looking at War S Ukr-Mos, it seems relatively likely you could have taken Moscow and perhaps kept two units this year.
I suspect you'll be down to one unit by the end of the year, but you should attempt to leverage Galicia into a better position as much as you can. Gal is also a very important space, and controlling it does give you quick access to a lot of different regions, and more influence than otherwise.

Italy:
I think the fleet build is an obvious one. If you want to control the Mediterranean, naval power is necessary. Sending it west gives you an increased likelihood of continuing past the MAO bottleneck and securing more of France when the time to stab France comes.
That said, Italy cannot solo off of fleets alone, especially not in an IT. At the start of the game, Tom gave everyone the assignment of counting their 18 SCs for soloing every year. When I count yours, some of Paris, Munich, Warsaw, and even Moscow invariably make it in. All of those require strong army presence to take and hold. I'm not saying that a fleet was the wrong build now, but nor am I sure it's the right one. How you leverage your fleet build and armies this year will be very important for opening up your avenues of expansion.


On a spearate note, I find it quite interesting how much Munich has remained in place across both SoW games. In four years, each army in Munich has only moved out once, and in both cases immediately moved back in the following turn.

Thanks for the insight PF – I too agree that build are often telling in what direction a power plans on going in the long run. Moves can be more deceptive as you always have the ability to shuffle around your units – you don’t however have the ability to switch between fleets and armies, so deception is more difficult when building.

I agree almost entirely on your discussion of builds. I thought RUS would have been better served keeping Vienna - a unit with much greater leverage in negotiation than a trapped fleet in Sev, and AUS should have kept Ukraine for similar reasons (though Gal does still have some utility).

I actually like the German build in Kiel rather than Berlin. Obviously its helpful in potentially deterring a move to Holland from North. But moreso I like the leverage it gives GER against ENG. ENG is on the ropes a bit, and GER will have units threatening Denmark and Sweden this year. It gives him the option to change direction, or gain some goodwill from ENG. Given the board state, I question how much influence a build in Berlin would have given that it looks like ITA/TUR will spend another year mopping up some gains.

I don't have a detailed commentary to add for builds, but I will chime in with a quick note on the Russian choice to disband Vienna. My guess is the thinking was that Vienna is surrounded by enemies and isolated, so the space cannot be defended and thus the unit should be disbanded. This logic pretty much applies to Sev equally, but it has a logic to it. I agree with Tom and PF that keeping Vie would have been a better choice, and I'd infer from its disband not that Russia didn't notice that, but that Russia's negotiations with Italy, Turkey, and Austria all did not bear fruit.

You can't always read that into the board, but when a unit that looks like it could be valuable to multiple players disappears, I tend to conclude those players don't see mutual value in each other. That could be because Turkey is implacably committed to defeating Russia now or not interested in any alternatives to his alliance with Italy, and Austria is too spurned an enemy for Russia to make diplomatic inroads, but I'm just guessing. Diplomatic challenges like those are sometimes very difficult to overcome.

Bump

Bumpity :)

Bump

El Bumpo

I’m getting a sense that folks are interested in some commentary and I wonder why! Maybe the last turn was interesting for some reason?

In all seriousness, sorry for the delay folks. I’m glad to get this up before retreats are over because this was an exciting turn. For reasons that I’m sure will become clear to observers and players alike, I think this is the kind of turn where a lot of players and observers may disagree about where things are heading and I’ll explore why I think that’s the case in my grades. Let’s start with the east.

Turkey: C
That stab from Italy really hurts, but that’s not the reason for my grade. The reason for my grade is that the stab worked because of what looks like unforced errors, fueled by a little too much ambition. I have been grading Turkey high the last few turns because Turkey looked to be consistently making moves which capitalize on the benefits of a corner position. What’s one of those benefits? It is that in a corner, there is often only one player that can attack you, so it costs a lot less to “hedge your bets” so to speak while still devoting a fair amount of firepower to expanding. Going into this turn, Turkey’s foes had been all but vanquished, leaving really just one key risk that could jeopardize Turkey’s position: getting stabbed by Italy. If Turkey wanted to solo, in the long-term, he needed to remain in a position that was difficult to attack and work for a board realignment against Italy, but not really going to war with Italy given his current fleet disadvantage. That meant that priority #1 was probably not taking Budapest (kind of a strange place for Turkey to want to be), it was just expanding in a way that kept him secure from Italian intransigence. It looks to me like Turkey trusted Italy 100% this turn and that was a mistake.

Russia: B-
In order, I think the move to Edi was predictable and easy to counter, but fun if Russia’s main goal now is to make life a little more difficult for England, and this move has a lot of potential in the coming turn. The move to Moscow is fine, and Sevastopol couldn’t really do a whole lot without making amends with either Turkey or Austria -- but it might have been a mistake to keep it on the map in the first place, given how few useful moves were available to it. In the big picture, I don’t think Russia’s moves this turn did very much to take Russia off the path to elimination, but I am not sure many moves exist. Russia did do a lot to make England’s position less stable, though, and that may be good for Russia’s survival in the short term.

Italy: B+
Congratulations on making it into a draw! But first, let’s go over the positive for this turn: another extremely well-timed stab for Italy, one where his victim has no friends and no recourse of his own. Depending on how retreats go this turn, Italy will be occupying 3 new SCs and risks losing, perhaps, just one of them if nothing goes his way in the fall. Clear board leader, big gains, and an almost unassailable position, so what’s not to like? Well, if the deal with France wasn’t for the purpose of getting more fleets past France or, as many players would say, across the stalemate line, then I don’t know what it was for. It also should have been at least suspected by Italy that MAO would be attacked, so I am puzzled a bit by Italy’s motives. MAO can go into many French SCs on retreat and give Italy a build, but I can’t help but see that as sacrificing long-term potential for short-term gain. And, of course, if Italy doesn’t take that option this turn, and it’s not his only good option so he very plausibly might not take an SC from France this year, then he makes it very easy for England to take a French SC. That his its own downsides for Italy.

I am also concerned because now it looks like Italy has no friends in the east and (potentially) no friends in the west. This board leader status has come at great cost, and it is not clear to me there are many more benefits forthcoming. I fear Italy is about to peak, but I can totally imagine that a lot of players would kill for Italy’s position and perhaps will argue I should be more excited for him now. I’m sympathetic to those arguments.

Austria: B+
Getting Italy to stab Turkey is among the very best options Austria had, so that’s great to see. And now Austria is in a position where multiple players have multiple reasons to want something from him, and several players have quite a bit to trade too. The Germany entry into Bohemia looks like it is by Austrian design, too, but it could have other motives. Either way, Austria now has a chance of finishing this year still on 2 units, which, if it comes to pass, would exceed my expectations from last year.

Germany: B-
I find it very hard to grade Germany, because I do not see a clear intention or purpose from Germany’s moves, except to stay alive and not make enemies. I also cannot tell, really, from where Germany may expect to gain his next build, if he does at all. This current turn is really quite strange to me: ceding Burgundy, perhaps, has a certain sense to it considering how little that unit has done since taking the space. But now Belgium is deeply imperiled, so I must ask if this is a peace offering with France gone awry, or if Germany has simply put himself at France’s mercy in the hopes of turning against England himself. The return to Baltic Sea certainly gives Germany some leverage over England, leverage England can’t possibly answer. And the move to Bohemia has hints of cavalry coming to the rescue of Austria, but also perhaps to just join in on the spoils. I really don’t know, and my difficult in discerning where Germany is going makes me wonder if Germany knows. I can only assume the conversations Germany is having are more indicative of a plan than these moves.

France: B-
I think this was a good turn for France, but I am also not sure. Exactly how good of a turn it was depends on how some things that I can’t know are going. Was the likelihood of Italy’s retreat discussed, and is there a plan? It surely should have been if it was not, and it was a grave oversight of France if there was no discussion of this point. But that aside, the cost of Italy’s retreat, unless if it were to result in some reunification of England and Italy, is one SC at most. That may be worth what looks like a chance to get Germany on board against England (perhaps), or at least to get Germany out of Burgundy and to have an offensive position against Belgium this turn. Russia’s presence in Edi, while not necessarily of great benefit to Russia by himself, may actually end

England: B+
This was a good and bad turn for England. Taking MAO is very nice, and risking ENG was good. England’s move may have also put some tension between France and Italy, which had to be one England’s highest goals this turn. And England has managed either to push MAO back south, or get in position to be the first to draw blood from France. On the other hand, there is some bad. The move to the Baltic Sea coupled with the withdrawal from Burgundy makes me nervous that Germany is no longer England’s ally. It looks to me like the threats to England’s position are growing, and I would feel a little uncomfortable if I were in this position. There’s going to be a lot to resolve in the coming turns, but with the right diplomacy, England is on track to end this year in a better position than he started it, both in terms of the threats he faces and his path to a solo. Not every player on the board can say this.

Sorry I'm late. I think Stackel's post summarized most of my thoughts. Rather than spend my energy repeating much of the same, I'll concentrate on giving analysis for the next moveset.

And now that we are getting into the thick of the midgame soon, I will spend some time talking about that phase of the game in general terms - in addition to my normal grades.

Bump

I'll try to get my commentary up tomorrow. This latest turn was really cool. We just learned a lot about the shape of allegiances on the board.

Bump

Bump, just so it doesn't get forgotten underneath Mafia...

I haven't forgotten all - working on it currently.

Grades for the previous turn:

ENG: B

Overall I think this was a pretty sounds year for England, but quite a bit depends on how the relationship develops with France. Obviously with the movement by ENG, he is trying to create some peace with France which I believe is the correct thing to do given the state of the board. Tactically, ENG has a pretty good base of defense and no imminent threats besides France, though I think that even considering France as a threat is a stretch at this point. The rest of the board made moves that indirectly benefitted the Englishman as well this year. ITA and TUR squabbling gives ENG some time to get things in order. The French move to Belgium suggests he is looking elsewhere for avenues for expansion. I think the best move of ENG’s turn was the support of AUS into Moscow. This accomplishes two different things – 1) It causes the quicker destruction of RUS, who has a fleet that is occupying many of ENG’s units and 2) It keeps AUS somewhat of a player in the Balkans where England wants to see some chaos to stall the growth of Italy. Overall it was a good turn for ENG, but each year sees his window to 18 closing. The retreat to NAO instead of Brest is a move of a player thinking long term instead of short – it was a good decision.

France: B+

France had a good turn as well, especially on the diplomacy/strategy side, less so with regards to tactics. I don’t think I can emphasize enough how important it was for France to get a build here, and that extra French unit can really influence the shape of the board depending on what it is and where it ends up going. Getting ENG to back off was a win – something you’ve been battling throughout the game. Enlisting Italy to help you out was a great diplomatic move and likely saved your entire game. All of a sudden you are in great shape, with the only caveat being that Italy has a fleet in MAO that you are eventually going to have to deal with. Luckily Italy is tied up in the Balkans for the time being – and with the ability to build a fleet in Mar – he doesn’t have all the leverage, so you should be able to strike a bargain with him. The only reason I bumped you down to a B is the move to Spain. I do understand that it was a “just in case” move to protect your center, but the army would have much better used supporting a move into Burgundy. As it stands, it leaves you a turn behind if you do decide to move west through GER. In any case, working with ENG to have his fleets move the way they did, and for him not to retreat to Brest is a huge win. I’m very interested to see where you go from here. You’ve turned this game around nicely.

Italy: B

So I think this past year was a good one for you in the East, but not so much in the west. Not that you did anything wrong tactically in the west – being in MAO is always a great thing, but with ENG and FRA seemingly finding a way to work together, you lose the chaos that helped stall out the west. While you have so many units committed east, it would be nice to continue to make sure there is conflict between the western powers – and your fleet in MAO has little influence in helping GER – which is not a great scenario for you if he becomes the odd man out. The positive of the situation is that your fleet in MAO is hard to dislodge if you choose to keep it there, and better yet it has problematic retreat options. The key for you is to make sure you don’t bite off more than you can chew. With two builds coming your way, its hard to imagine a scenario where you are in any real danger – so the key is to make sure you keep the board from galvanizing against you as you move forward. In the east, I think your stab of Turkey was sound as you have the edge on him and getting AUS to help was a good tactical move. Austria is now getting a build however, so you need to make sure you continue to offer more in the relationship than Turkey can. Those two working together would put a major wrinkle in your aspirations. I think it is very important that you spend some time thinking what 18 centers you plan on taking as decisions such as builds become important for how you shape the late game.

Germany: D

This is more a product of what happened last turn when you voluntarily gave up Burgundy and instead opted to move to Boh and bounce yourself in Holland. This shows me that there was some paranoia of an English attack, but for you to give up Burgundy you needed to be very sure that France was not going to move against you. Obviously France did so, and now you are quite out of position. This should have been foreseen as you have very little to offer France in the relationship. You aren’t in much of a position to help him expand in the north, and you can’t do much to help him in the south. It was only logical for France to take Belgium as he didn’t have any use for the units you could offer him. The unit in Livonia looks to be lacking in useful options, as is the unit in Bohemia. Luckily you have a turn to try to get in better position because of France’s error in not taking Burgundy. You are in the unfortunate spot where you have very little leverage against anyone – you need to rely on others for growth. You have some time, so when considering your disband and spring moves, find ways to give your units more influence so that someone has need of them.

Austria: A

This was a great turn by the Austrian. You are getting a build in an extremely influential spot, and you remained useful enough to stay alive (and even pick up a center), and will surely remain useful enough to someone this year to possibly do the same. Getting English support into Moscow was a great diplomatic success and all three of your upcoming units will have great utility. With GER and RUS both having to disband a unit, your units will be elevated in importance as there will be more space in the Balkans. You’ve obviously done well to make yourself useful enough to Italy for him to keep you alive. The key for you moving forward is to use your usefulness to position yourself so that after your usefulness has worn away, you aren’t easy to defeat. Certianly Italy’s goal is to use you, and then take you centers when he is done with you. You need to walk the tightrope of helping him (or TUR if you switch sides) while also hurting his solo chances by finding a way to position yourself to not be eliminated in the years to come.

Turkey: B

The convoy was a good move because Rumania is much harder to hold onto than Bulgaria. A 4 center Turkey with Bulgaria is a difficult nut to crack, so you have plenty of time to try to swing things back your way. I don’t want to comment too much on your situation because I don’t want to influence your decisions, but the key here is that you have two other small powers that may be willing to work with you. You just have to find a way to offer more than Italy. They know they may be on the menu next, so use that fear to your benefit.

Russia: D

Not too much to say here. The fleet in the north was doomed, so not much could be done. The support into Moscow really hurts as it costs you a build. And some miscommunication with Turkey regarding Sev, but in the end it wouldn’t have mattered much. Its not impossible to come back from this, but if you do it would be one of the best comebacks I’ve seen. Think about how you can become useful enough to stay alive each year, and try to make your way to a center that would be useful in a stalemate line if you can. Offer players anything to help you stay alive (the key to this is finding the player who actually has the power to keep you alive!)

I'll type up some thoughts about the mid game as well - I didn't want to get game specific and influence decisions.

A tactical decision was brought up to me that I want to touch on briefly as well.

Above I discussed Germany's decision to bounce in Holland in the spring and said it was likely due to paranoia about the English. This is the decision that caused him to lose Burgundy in the spring. Someone rightfully messaged me that Germany probably bounced to protect Holland from the Russian fleet in North Sea. This is likely the reason for the bounce, but I still think it was a very poor move for Germany for a couple of reasons:

1) The likelihood of RUS trying to swipe Holland was pretty low considering Edi was open for the taking.

2) Even if RUS moved to Holland in the spring, Germany could have forced it out in the fall, and been in roughly the same spot. Giving up Burgundy to protect against a move that was unlikely to happen was the wrong decision - especially because had the worst case scenario happened and RUS took Holland, it had an easy solution in the fall turn when holding the center actually mattered.

Anticipation and small risk taking is key. In this case, GER should have anticipated that RUS going to Holland was rather unlikely, and thus risked leaving it open to hold a more important position in Bur

Bump

Bamp!

Bump

Bump

^ what they said ^

Sorry for being AWOL! I'll get some posts up tonight.