This season saw some very good, some good, some bad and some very ugly moves. It also saw probably the best and worst moves of the game and we will get to each of them in turn.

In the West:

#1 France: Smashing the top position in two excellent moves put him into the clear top spot. The first (and least among his excellent choices of moves this season) was the movement behind the English Island instead of trying for London. Although this doesn't net a build, I strongly believe that it is better to forgo a build attempt in lieu of a stronger position that will yield future gains and this move was one example of that. The pay off will be at Liverpool and at least one other center while maintaining a strong position to keep anyone from stabbing him.
The second move (and this was worth a picture) was the support move for the English fleet for London. For those that may not recognize it's beauty, France (or possibly Germany) recognized that there could be a bounce between two English fleets at London to keep France out of London yet still maintain control of the North Sea, and therefore supported the North Sea to London to allow the NTH fleet move to succeed and guarantee Germany a move to control the sea zone and push England to a spot that couldn't be used as a future defensive position in the year to come. The support move to trump a self-standoff rarely finds a place where it can effectively do anything but every time it can do something and is employed, it is always amazing, and this one was picture-perfect even though it wasn't necessary.

#2 Germany: Control of the North Sea was paramount to dominating England and who better for the sea zone to go to than G. England's blunder of supporting a hold on Denmark (more on that later) played out to Germany's favor and not only has G successfully ensured between 1 and 2 future builds next year, he has also sealed off his homeland from easy invasion. The only thing I disagree with is the bounce at Bel. Although I understand that it was a defensive maneuver to keep the NTH out of Bel and still maintain security of Hol, I wouldn't have done it. England had far too much to worry about to deal with whether or not he would move to Bel or Hol and the bounce wouldn't have been necessary. It merely allows France to be the same distance away from one of his centers as he is, and that's not recommended. A player should (almost) always be closer to his centers than his allies and opponents both in order to prevent stabs.

#3 England: While the best move of the game (thus far) goes to F with the support move for the English fleet, the worst move of the game goes to England in not merely being duped into a self-standoff at London but rather *willingly* giving up the North Sea with his own support to move to London. It's common knowledge among the veteran players that fleets do not have the defensive capability as armies for E. An army at home and sitting at Yorkshire can move to any one of his 3 home centers while a fleet positioned at any point in the Island can only protect two of them at best and in order to go from 1 center to another, a fleet must traverse its way around the entire Island which takes anywhere from a year to a year and a half to make progress--not something that any player on the rocks wants to see. The North Sea helps control this imbalance among fleets and armies in times of defense. The North Sea is the most vital of all sea zones in the game bordering 7 centers, half of which are under English control by the end of 1901, and more so in this game given that England controlled Denmark. By vacating the NTH, he gave up any possibility of defending himself and instead crawled up into a little ball to die a horrible death. Edi is undefended, Liverpool is poorly defended and by the end of next year, he may be down to just 1 center. He surely had to make some tough decisions on which locations to not defend and he selected Norway when it should have been Denmark. The first thing Denmark should have done is to convoy to the Island at Yorkshire while the fleet in Wales moves to London. This would have gotten an army on the Island and Skaggerak could have supported a hold on Norway or even supported Nwy-Swe for a possible gain. He cannot defend Denmark forever against Germany and giving it up now would have meant giving up less later. I usually try to look for a bright spot in a difficult position, but here, I see none. If he cannot negotiate his way out of this cesspool he has found himself in, he will be eliminated instead of surviving. I do not at all expect he will participate in a draw for this game.

Things to look for in the west: When will the next stab come and who will do the stabbing? In my analysis of various players, one common thread I saw among the various TA's in both this SoW and the other one was that of the early stab. Often a country will ally with another until they gain a clear foothold on their opponent. At that point, and before their common enemy is eliminated, it was seen that one ally turns on the other before the other can do the same to him and a stab could be in the works within the next year or two (or it may never come). At this point, Russia has a strong presence in the west controlling all of Scandinavia and will have something to say about who gets the blade. F/G/R could all see the brunt of an assault by a combined force of the other two and I expect to see a clear standout in the west to develop within 2 years.
Second, who will get Edi? Clearly France will control Liverpool and Russia gets Scandinavia but it could be that Germany gains Lon and Edi or only Lon while R gets Edi, or even the French controlling the northern center. My opinion is that it goes to G and London is between F and G but R has some measure of say given that G will gain Den this next year. Whoever controls Edi will help determine the future stab.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the East

Things in the east are also consolidating and clear winners are beginning to develop.

#1 Russia: Russia's excellent year led to massive gains across the board with +2 centers and a strong foothold and presence in both the east and the west. +2 builds, Austrian support, Turkey's support blunder (that to come) and Italy making no clear voice on Austrian soil all led to Russia's top spot and by no small margin. Russia was also notably the only player on the map last season to gain centers from the prior year and well out-performed his peers. The big shocker here was Bulgaria going to Russia for a second build and it's easy to see that all of Turkey will go to Russia. At this point, R has secured a draw position for himself and now is working toward the solo.

#2 Italy: Italy made a less-than-stellar decision around Austria which, coupled with Russian advancement, dropped him from the top spot in the east. Italy's good move was getting a fleet into the ION that can now convoy the army off Tunis where it has been stranded for far too long but his holding in the north led to possibly no gains next year. A note for the others, once you have a player on the ropes defensively, the most inadvisable thing to do is to spend your time holding. Italy needs a unit in Tyr in order to make gains against Austria. Secondly, if there is some strange A/I alliance going on here, Austria attacking Tri while Italy holds is a pretty poor choice of offensive for either of them to gain ground. Italy needs to find where his next build is coming from and he will be hard-pressed to find it.

#3 Austria: Austria this season appears to have only supported the lion against the wolf. His support of Russia gaining Bul should have been switched to Austria gaining Bul instead. Turkey is on the defensive and Russia's control of Bul means that he ill gain all of Turkish soil with no one to dispute it. The only thing Austria can do now is negotiate away one of Russia's centers in the coming year in return for the support this year. I get the feeling, however, that the only thing that will happen is that Russia will run over both Turkey and Austria.

#4 Turkey: Ouch. An NMR and then a failed support hold out of the BLA guaranteed his demise. Had he successfully supported a hold on Bulgaria instead of ordering the unit to move, he would have been in a much more secure position and even have the possibility of getting out of the bottom spot. I love ya man, but you've got to somehow get your head back in the game. Now Turkey will have to find a way to negotiate away an even more dismal position against a clearly superior Russua. Next year I anticipate the loss of another center unless you can find an ally.

Things to look for in the east: when will Russia slow down?

Could you clarify what you mean about France's support. It appears to me that England never ordered a self-standoff and France supported Germany to NT.
I could be mistaken though.

You're right, France did indeed support the German fleet into the North. The yellow line is hard to see on my computer and when I looked at the orders, I misread them. +1 Yonni.

England still should not have moved as he did, and botched his ability to survive. The coordination between F/G/R is decently coordinated given that 3 countries are working in tandem.

Looking at Russia, maybe you could comment on the army-fleet balancing. With russia having occupied both naval SCs he will be forced to build armies or postpone - do you think there will be trouble arising from this and if so, what can he do against it? Can the other countries make use of the Russian lack in sea power?

I don't mind touching on this issue to some degree but I also left it alone in my commentary because I see some things that are likely coming down the pipe and I didn't want countries changing what they were planning to counter for these issues. It's up to the TA's to spot certain things and assist their students which I should say, to this point, they have all done a fine job in working with their students. A country losing, or being in a poor spot is inevitable and even the best find themselves there. Secondly, someone has to be at the bottom and I think that even though the advice they're likely giving at this point might not be winning the game for some countries, the advice is likely applicable in a large majority of games they play and I would love for the students to carry with them the nuggets they've heard so far and not merely discard them because they lost in this game.

To begin with, I read an article a little while ago from Diplomacy World issue 2 I believe (might be issue 3, I'd have to look it up) where the writer talked about countries controlling Scandinavian centers. He made a good point in saying that any country that wishes to dominate these centers must have a strong naval presence because Armies can't take most of the territory alone. Denmark and Sweden each have only 2 access points via land and Norway has 3. This means that to occupy these locations and maintain control requires the conqueror to have the upper hand in the naval battle convoying units and supporting holds from off-land locations. He went on to say that of all the countries, only 3 had any claim to the centers (E/G/R) and they each had varying claims to lay. England, with its naval might, had the greatest say in the matter and can unequivocally take Norway outright in the first year. Additionally, England can produce up to 3 fleets in any given year helping to dominate the various locations necessary to control the centers and that even where St Pete is concerned, it's much easier to take it from the west than it is to maintain control of it from the east. Germany had the second say in the matter taking Denmark without opposition, and in any given year, can produce only 2 fleets. This power helps to be able to take and secure the 3 primary centers and St Pete with some degree of success but not with the degree that England can if they have an equal number of units on the map focused on taking the locations. Russia, on the other hand, has the least control over any of the region because not only can it produce only 1 fleet per year, that fleet must be dedicated to either the north side of Scandinavia or the south side limiting its capacity for control. In addition to this, it is not guaranteed a center in that area in 1901 which is unlike any of the prior two powers because Germany can bounce Russia out of Sweden if it so chooses. Lastly, locking up St Pete (which we see in this game) is pretty easy to do and prevents Russia from producing more units to maintain control of the 3 centers. This problem is something that all Russians must eventually cope with whether it is consciously or unconsciously done and much of it comes down to diplomatic negotiations early on.

I was asked to jump in and help prof the game... so I'll try to put something in from what I've seen up to this point sometime this evening...

good to hear FK. Nice to have you on board.

Considering this has almost slipped onto the 2nd page and in 10 hours the phase ends. I'll bump it, and just ask where FK's commentary is. :P I was looking forward to it.. :(

same here

OK, initial thoughts by country, by year. I'll let it be known that I love playing as France and I'm terrible Turkey, so there are my biases.

-----
1901
-----
France: There appears to be a few 'threatens but not follow through's like pic threatening bel, then not bouncing bel at all. The fleet build at both bre and mar is a big mistake in my mind. While having a large fleet is usually necessary as france, a bre build angers england and a mar build freaks out the italian. Don't risk making two enemies on two opposite fronts (ask Hitler what he thought about opening up a russian front when he was still battling england).

England/Germany: I'm putting you two together. While it looks like you are working together (probably even a western triple that was established in the fall, which is why I assume pic didn't attempt belgium), your moves give me pause. Yes, it seems like a brilliant ploy to allow england all of scandinavia from the start, it allows russia to get a build with sweden, which means a build in stp and a tough avenue in 1902.
Also the fleet build in lvp just screams "I'm going to attack france in case anyone wants to know!!" And the fleet in berlin does the same, though maybe a bit less.

Italy: I can't tell if that was a planned taking of tri with you and the aus, or if he's going to be quite angry about it. It was nice, as Italy usually plays the small neutral party until midgame. Italy requires a little more diplomacy than the rest, especially early, unless you are coniving or aggressive. Seems like you may be a bit of both. Though your start screams of a lepanto, you don't want to establish two enemies at once if you can avoid it (and lord do I hate the lepanto).

Aus: A greedy aus always wants ser AND gre. Of course, that is usually coupled with a bounce in gal. If you get away with ven not invading tri in the spring, I'd rather give up gal to russia than a home center. If you get that home center, you make your two builds, you can build an army to push the gal unit away, or work a deal with russia so you can take on that stabbing italian. Lesson learned?

Russia: You are a lucky dog. You gave up the sea for an unattested rum. And somehow turkey didn't help you, but decided autumn wasn't worth moving around for and just sat all his units. And germany was nice enough to give you clear passage to sweden, and you have a heads up that england is headed your way so you can use your builds to prep for it.

Turkey: The first move was great. Please tell me autumn was an NMR. If so, give me your hand and let me give you a slap for the faux pas!

-----
1902
-----
France: As England projected his attack with his build, france was lucky to have 3 fleets (and was able to keep italy from freaking). England should have seen the invasion coming... especially since he instigated france. France was smart and good in his diploming... not only getting italy calm, but getting germany as a friend!

England: I was down on france last year for the same thing you did. You have an established route to go on with russia... then build a fleet in lvp to instigate the french. Two front wars are not worth having. Even if you knew france was coming your way, you either play the woe is me card with germany or russia. Get germany to take advantage of france while france heads your way, or convoy those units back home and prepare to dig in with a defense. Instead you try to do both and life is not looking good.

Germany: Change of heart or in your plan the whole time? It didn't take long for that work you did with england to change. It worked great as long as you keep in good with russia and france. I wonder how you'll mitigate having strong countries to the west and east of you, though...

Italy: Giving up the ionian was risky, but with the turk in trouble, you lucked out. Unfortunately, the balkans are so thick that aus can stonewall you and you won't find much place to advance. Anytime italy works against austria you have to be extra careful that turkey and russia don't start working together and the jugg steamrolls over the map. Fortunately for you, turkey's lack of move ends up being his downfall as russia aims south... but will the stonewall continue while russia takes the center rich balkans? What happens when he has the balkans and turkey and scandinavia in control? He's an early favorite on the map, already... Something italy needs to think about each and every turn... Especially since you've worked a touch with the turk.

Aus: Things are dim right now, already. Aus is a hard country to play. Just when you have russia and turkey not busting down your walls, italy hits you in the back. It looks like you've talked to the russian, though, so you have some life left... especially if he's willing to help protect you. But you aren't going to make any progress as long as you and italy bump heads against each others walls...

Russia: You are looking good right now. Germany and france are battling your nuisance in the north, and the lax turk fell under your thumb. Here's the problem, though. We are just about to finish up the early game and move into the mid game. I -never- want to be the biggest country in the mid game, because he becomes the biggest target to the rest of the map. Unless you are in a position to run away with the game, being too big can be a big problem. You may want to help prop a neighbor up and slow down your growth if you don't want to be a major target... While the south looks established, scandinavia may soon become a battleground...

Turkey: You picked italy to be your ally, and NMR'ed. The problem with italy as your ally (instead of russia or austria) is that italy can do nothing against your battle with russia, where austria could have. You have to use some serious diplomacy to work out of the enormous can of worms you appear to be in. Being a stoolie (do whatever your ally says, just to stay alive) is not fun... but it keeps you alive!

-----
Spr 1903
-----
France: Well established moves into mainland england. England is in bad shape as you have a dominant position. However, the simple hol-bel move along with germany helping england into normandy would have my eyes trained on bur. I wouldn't want to have to setup two fronts but the F/G war tends to stalemate on the border, so I'd make sure I'm on it if it happens.

England: Somehow you talked Germany into help, which you need desperately. Maybe you mentioned something about russia too big? You still have a serious issue at home. Without home centers, you can't build...

Germany: Would you like some syrup with your waffles? I have played like you before... waffling between allies and enemies. Unfortunately, everytime I did it I ended up the odd man out. Yes, it is smart to work with people desperate to survive. They don't mind if you are bigger than them as long as they don't get eliminated... but you can't go back and forth. Working with england is ok, but going against france after you just poked the bear (russia)? Not a good option.

Italy: While aus moved against russia, you've finally gained position and can move forward. I do not see why you are helping the turk, though, as his days are numbered. It isn't a bad idea to send a fleet to help protect him just to slow russia, but pushing him into gre just forces the austrian fleet into albania and now you have to hold tri again...

Aus: I understand the fear of having the 'big' player in your back yard, but he hasn't made a move towards you and you need help taking on italy. Attacking russia and moving out of vie are terrible moves. I have no idea why someone would be faced with an attacker you barely are holding against, then move 2 units away to attack the guy behind you. 2 front war where you are losing one of the fronts? I know I'm not reading the diplomacy, but that move is flat out insane.

Tur: Well, you got into gre.... keeping the rest of your units sitting, though, was pretty dumb. Why not at least move bla-arm or sev or rum or bul? Why sit there and let him take you?

Russia: Austria turned against you, but if you ally with italy, aus won't have the units to do any harm because he'll lose the centers behind him. No idea why austria suicided unless you are giving him a place to sit until you can get control of the balkans...


Thoughts on autumn 1903:
France: Work with germany or setup your defense. You are setup in england and it'd be a shame to have to focus back on your home centers.

Germany: Quit waffling and choose someone and stick to them for longer than a turn or two. You probably angered russia, so why are you looking towards france?

England: Two words: make friends. Give away your first born, be a stoolie... do whatever it takes to survive. There are 3 goals in diplomacy and you play them in the following order: 1.) survive, 2.) establish yourself as a power to end in a draw, 3.) solo and win the game. You are losing grasp of #1... get a firm grasp of it before even attempting anything else.

Italy: Decide if your alliance with turkey is worth the effort. If you want the center rich balkans, you need to rip through it fast before russia does. To do that, you do not need to help turkey push austrian units up against the stalemate wall you just cracked.

Turkey: Move more than one unit. Beyond that, see england.

Russia: Play your cards right. Scandinavia is a mess, and austria is kamikazing your way. None of these are major issues as you have the centers to establish a defense, but decide where you want to setup a hard defense and where you want to grow. You need these in place in the next year when the game transitions to midgame. I expect turkey to fall and england to either fall or be a minor player at the start of midgame. If you are going to be the biggest, you better have something established with defense and growth potential (and be willing to modify your plan each turn as the board changes).

ok... I'm all caught up, right? *whew*

For countries that are very small: do not give in, do not check out. EdiBirsan was down to two centers in a championship game (in south africa, I think?) and ended up winning. Sometimes playing the small country has its perks. If you can convince your biggest rival to ignore you (usually by showing them they can take your SCs anytime they want, so why not wait until the end and use the units you have established), you can survive for quite a while. I have a few games where I'm in that position and will show them once the games end.

In fact, I remember a game where I was the 4th player eliminated and the two major powers (russia and france, I think) were both in position to win or duke it out, and italy was right between them with like 4 SCs. But he was in such a position, that he showed the other how he could give the game to the other if he was attacked. It was brilliant and worked. He was a part of the 3 way.
Then there is a game which left me (who's usually pretty laid back and admits defeat) a bit bitter at the time (I've gotten over it after a couple days), and it was the GFTD championship game: gameID=56094
If you look at the start of 1912, you'll see that I was a single unit in berlin. I could help TrustMe with the win, but I also could let the opponents into the draw line, which I was the edge of. When I go there I was so proud that I was in the perfect position for a one unit player. If E wanted to hold his position, he had to help me. If the rest of the map didn't want me to help E, they'd hold me.... then E decided that if he wasn't going to win, he was going to let the rest of the map in... and before I could convince them to continue into E's territories, I was eliminated and the game was drawn.

I was sour because the game could have continued, but everyone was fatigued from the long, complex, and tough game that they just wanted it to end. Oh well. But the point is... look how long I survived with just a single unit... to the bitter end. This is a tactic that has served me well. I used to have a much smaller elimination rate (until Crazyter started dominating me in the leagues... and, yes, she had the honor of doing it in the game, too) ;)

Anyway, the lesson: Do whatever you need to (within the rules... I am a mod, ya know) to survive and continue. You never know when your dominator may need you to get another build, and you get reestablished into the game...
And big countries: There is nothing better than having a little dominated country to do your bidding. They already have established units and they are universally thankful to you for helping them out. You never know when you get stabbed and they are the ones who hold your fate....

Anyone regretting me helping out, yet??? ;)
I tend to go on tangents a bit ;)

You tend to talk to yourself... :)

@ fortknox:

Since we aren't supposed to make comments, let me ask a question. When you are down to your last few supply centers, is it more important to try to keep all of your supply centers for as long as possible, or to identify a goal or specific few centers or area that could have specific tactical significance?

You're going to hate my response:
it depends. It depends on the diplomacy and the board. If you go straight for the tactical SCs, then the world knows what you are doing. I prefer to try to prevent my elimination through diplomacy. Most players don't want to be responsible for killing someone outright, so you can use that to your advantage. Through diplomacy and careful planning, you want to get into position to take those strategical SCs, but I wouldn't suicide for them right away.
As an aside, I'm a big believer in the organized retreat. If you know you are going to be beat, pull your troops back on your own instead of being displaced (there are exceptions, of course, but as a rule, it is easier to retreat the way you want instead of being forced). An example would be knowing that you will lose norway as england. Why not convoy that army back into the mainland (or germany)? Why displace or disband it? Especially in the spring. If you are going to lose it and know you are going to lose it, don't just let them displace it like some type of pride. Sometimes the mere act of an organized retreat puts fear into your opponent like you have everything planned and may be a step ahead of him...

For the S03 moves, I will have quite a bit to say. Things are a mess all around this season as scales tip across the board. Very few people are in a real secure position (I dare say only one). I will first address the moves as I have always done, then I will disagree with FK on some issues and agree with him on others. Lastly, I will close with a comment to uclabb addressing his question, although it was originally intended for FK

In the West

#1 France: Not much has changed for this country. You're in a good position to continue making ground against England and it looks like you might be the sole owner of the Island if Germany keeps up on whatever he's doing. You'll see 2 builds this year barring German support of England and then have to make the decision on where to go next. On a sour note, your homeland is pretty bare. If there's going to be a stab, I expect that it will occur in the fall. Clearly, diplomacy is the bigger picture here. Lastly, I give France 2 years before being the dominant force in the west instead of a shared kingdom.

#2 Germany: The move to Belgium I can completely agree with. It's a defensive move along your border but the double support hold at your home centers? Not sure where you're going with that one. Additionally, you've turned a blind eye to England (also the product of successful negotiations on behalf of England) and are now concentrating on Russia. The next year will either be filled with glamor or filled with knives. It would have been better for you to simply take Denmark and move on to Edinburgh before beginning a new campaign. I'm guessing that you were fearing a F/R after the demise of England and decided to negotiate away Scandinavia before it became your downfall. However, with Russia only filtering armies into Swe/Nor, fear of losing ground to him was minimal at best, even if coupled with cooperation from France. Hopefully the future years will be good to you, but only time will tell.

#3 England: Although you managed to talk Germany into giving you soil in return for soil of your own, I think that this is merely relocating your units further from home. Soon, you'll be faced with French-controlled centers at home and you'll be temporarily vacationing in Scandinavia. It is good to see that you haven't given up hope yet and although you are in a tight spot, it's clear that you still have something to bring to the table. If you're not gone in 3 years, you will still likely be in the #3 spot.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the East
#1 Russia: Your grip on the south is waning but you still control a good position. Losses in the north will be staggering and you may even see additional losses in the south. I would attribute this to the Tall Poppy Syndrome. You were clearly unmatched in might last season weighing in 3 units stronger than your closest competitor and it made 4 people nervous enough to attack you. I expect that you will be sliding to the #2 spot by the end of this year with the loss of Sweden and Norway and possibly one location in the south. It looks like it will be time to get your house in order.

#2 Italy: I must first point out your blunder. It seemed like you were actually going to get your army off of little Africa but failed your convoy. That blunder will cost you some ground this fall. It would have been far better to get your army to Albania in the Spring and support Turkey in the fall. Things may not be an entire loss, however, and huge hits to Russia might put you back into a top position in the east. If you can manage to gain one center this season, you'll be back on track. Otherwise, it will be a year before you can gain some traction.

#3 Austria: Not entirely sure who you're allied with at this point. If things go completely awry, you'll be at the bottom of the list at the year's end. You'll have some very tough decisions to make about where to focus your units. In some respects, I'd rather be in Turkish shoes than your own but all is not lost. You will certainly lose Greece and then either be able to offset those losses with another gain, remain at the loss of 1 center, or if all goes wrong, you'll be down 2 centers. Out-thinking your opponents is the only real way to go at this point, and that type of action is difficult to do, especially given that you're not necessarily dealing with the scripted player for this game but also a TA on the other end. Good luck in F03.

#4 Turkey: I love the hit on Greece. It will give you some room to grow and some negotiating power if you play your cards right. I won't go into any details here but there are some things that I'd be keeping on the negotiating table for the fall that would really benefit you at this point. As for your back two...not your best moves...not your worst either, though. I'm not entirely sure what you were really going for on the far side. You had a very strange convoy listed and a hold with the army. I'm guessing that you expected Russia to convoy his army to Bulgaria and do what with the fleet? I'd have still coupled this with a move to Armenia to bounce any Russian movement there as well.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
More to come tomorrow.

Alright, as promised, I'm going to finish my post:

Things to look for:

In the east: as last turn: who gets Edi? It's still up for grabs and is looking like the French will control it at this point, although not anytime soon. Second, how will Russia handle the losses to his northern gains?

In the East:

Who's going to come out as the clear power. The west has nearly eliminated a country while the east is still broiled in combat and flip-flopping. At some point, someone has to be out so that countries can begin focusing attention on somewhere else. In 2 years, France and Germany could be picking new targets. Might be each other, might not.

Now, on to FK's comments. As I said earlier, there are some things I agree with and others I disagree with.

First, I don't agree with FK's assessment of the German move to Belgium. That was probably based on the fact that France had an army at Picardy and I mentioned that it's not a wise idea to allow anyone else to have units as close to your centers as you do. Germany should have had an army there to begin with. Germany's support of England was probably more about making sure there wasn't going to be a F/R in future years over simply helping England. I do think that it's not going to net him much but we'll see. Russia wasn't poised to take much outside Scandinavia as it was and a F/R would have been pretty weak in the north and the only fear Germany would have had was a build at War which could be countered by gains at England.

I also disagree with Italy helping Turkey. It's best to take on 1 opponent at a time and Italy's clearly after Austria. Better to get Turkey on his side than on Austria's side. I do agree with giving him Greece so early since he needed the unit in Albania and not Tunis but now faces the loss of Trieste or no gains this year for the second straight year in a row. His only bright spot is that the other countries are on the decline or merely maintaining and there's no longer a clear dominant force.

Lastly, I agree with his following season's assessments. I would have more to add but I will leave it alone to allow countries to play the game and try not to influence much in the following season.

@ uclabb: Your primary goal should simply be not to shrink. If you're down to two and going to lose more for sure, it's better to try to find a weakness in your opponent's defenses where you can slip in. This might give you the ability to not only hit him in the gut but also negotiate with the other players into helping you. Guarding your home centers often leads to losing them and a country that is losing shouldn't reduce himself to holding and supporting holds. However, there are times that you can hold out and convince one power to turn and support you because he's not going to gain ground but his opponents will. This will often lead someone to aid you and not fight you...usually, but not always. There are always players here that think 'staying the course' is the only way to go even if it means they lose in the long run, and it sucks playing with people like that.

Tru, please disagree with me. I'm a very conservative player who is very conscious of how my moves can be perceived by others. The belgium move to you is defensive, though there has been an established bounce... why not go ahead and bounce again? Why the move west. Those perceptions are always on my mind.

Of course, there is no wrong and no right, just two opinions of the moves.

And I have to reiterate that we can't read the diplomacy, so things that I call ridiculous make complete sense when you read the diplomacy that goes along with it...

a rumpa-bump bump... (retreat over in 2 hours)

So how exactly does a person get admitted as a student into this school of diplomacy?

Well, goldfinger asked in a threat for interested people (students, teaching assistants, professors) and as far as I know for students it went on a first come - first serve basis, if you were sufficiently inexperienced.

Here is the thread in which the planning took shape: threadID=737431

I think it is still possible to be added to the list as a substitute in case people have to stop playing.

Nope, the thread is closed. That was before I got here so I guess I just missed out. Thanks for the info though. Maybe they'll do another one at some point.

I think you could ask in this thread (which you have done) or send a personal message to goldfinger (userID=28372), but he is away until Saturday or Sunday.

There was also another thread, from a different group of people, but I don't know if that went anywhere.

Thanks. I'll just wait till he returns then. I've already asked so I don't want to look like a pain in the derriere or anything.

@ FK: I totally agree that without the press, the moves are an incomplete story. I, for one, would have moved to Belgium as Germany did. If a bounce occurs again, France can't convoy to the Island and if there's no bounce and you agree to DMZ Bel, then you risk a stab (a small one which is usually near-worthless unless it nets you strong ground).

To me, the move is more defensive on Germany's part.

Bump... Autumn went through.