In a game of good players, people will work together to stop a solo no matter what. Its easy to catch a glimpse of a solo attempt. I just want to say that whatever happened to your game, it was because you played with some wackos deciding on revenge then rather looking at the big picture and deciding whats best for everyone.

This game was the most frustrating thing for me. Not to take anything away from TWA, he played a spectacular game, but Turkey and Italy both made that game very difficult for me.

@Turkey - It was too late when you realized that the solo was coming. You never pressed draw and your move kept being aggressive against me and against russia while it was clear that each of us was doing our best to try and stop France. At the end, there was some condusion in Apulia but I don't think that mattered. I amde a mistake trying to poke Piedmont that i believe ultiamtely cost us at the end. We had no stalemate so I mae a guess to try and take one and it turned out to be the wrong guess.

@Babak - No disrespect, but I have absolutely no idea what you were trying to do that game. We had a reasonable alliance that was getting us both gains and then you come and set up three on Trieste and blockade me. I defended myself and offered you support to show I wanted to not fight and instead worry about the Turk and Russia. When you didn't respond positively it made me take a "fuck this game, all that matters is Italy being defeated." I honestly cared mroe about that than drawing because I was so frustrated by your moves. I am curious as to what you were thinking/trying to do.

All in all, I kept thinking stalemates would be achievable. Holding berlin would ahve beenc ritical but russia never mvoed north. Holding Rome was critical but I kept being attacked at the back.

No draw was deserved that game. TWA played a very strong game and the rest of us could never get on teh same page. This outcome is right.

Congrats again, thatwasawkward, nice to see you with a bgi stack of points.

I will admit I played that game pretty poorly... in fact, i've had about 5 italies in the past few months, every single one of which is doing poorly =P

but specifically Lando - I was stuck with no way to get builds against Turkey, and russia doing poorly I felt I'd lose out to you in the long term if I tried to keep going after turkey.

i pull back and held a turtle like defensive posture for a few wasted game years, where you continued to try to take ion. then finally in 1906, that is when I COULD have gone towards France and I should have, but I felt I had one LAST shot to get a few builds before I had to turn towards France and felt it would be best if RTI took out AH so we could hold the line against F in the south. you defended it and I guess after that, even though I did finally turn to face France and voted for the draw, you did not think you needed me for the stalemate.

it was a poorly played game on my part, but also just a well played game by France

I agree on thatwasawkward played very well, though I don't see why most of your blame should land on me (Turkey). In the beginning Austria, Italy and Russia were against me, and when you all chose to draw, I was in a very bad position with both Russia and Austria attacking.
Even when "We" had Berlin Russia didn't move north and kept attacking me (even in 1909 with the move to Armenia and afterwards to Smyrna). My only choice was to get at least some SC to defend and get another fleet to maybe help press against France.

My conclusion is: I couldn't do much, as a border power, especially with 2 countries (3 in the beginning) attacking me!

I tried very hard to give support to turkey to attack you so we could get rid of you before we went to stop France, but he never looked at the orders I guess...

looking back, I guess Turkey did finally get the msg and the convoy almost worked.

but in 1908 when I turned to face France after his 2nd set of 3 builds, you came after me despite the obviousness of my intent to stop France at that point. and this was where I think you should have maybe moved from ion ot tys instead of to nap.

but anyways... a poorly played game by me maybe, but poorer play elsewhere as well.

reality is - once France takes Tunis and has germany, there is no way to stop his solo. so once you let him take tunis without moving to tys, it sealed the game at that point. he had his path to 18 and nothing could have stopped him.

Babak: I have to admit I was occupied with Russia and indecisive in my attacks against Russia/Austria. I was in such a defensive position that I kinda had a tunnel vision. Also I had to defend myself and couldn't really react to your supports.

But agreed: I didn't pay enough attention it seems...

What Bugs me most was the reaction/moves of Russia to be honest:

What where you thinking in spring 1909 with France attacking you hard in the north and that move to Armenia? I was nowhere near attacking you (quite focussed on Austria). And instead of holding the line and ship your additional units north to defend you opened up and tried to go after me ... (even though you pressed draw, which I admit I didn't)

Thanks for starting this EOG holloway - it was a very interesting game and TWA took control of it with great skill. Well done to him.

A lot has been said about why the other players failed to pull off a stalemate and some criticism has been landed at me (as Russia). I will deal with the criticisms first - most of which come from holloway and are, in my opinion, incorrect - and then I will address the reasons why I think we failed to reach a stalemate.

In response to all this:

Italy - I thought we could hold a stalemate without you. But your moves throughout the game left me with little faith in your abilities (I obviously know you, babak, know stalemates but I am talking about Italy).

I also disagree about Tunis being the clincher. Berlin/Rome was the clincher. Berlin was held, but no stalemate was ever set there. I lost Rome on a guess, which is the position I put myself in by pursueing my vendetta.

Turkey - I don't blame you. I just wanted to say that it was hard to put trust in someone who had not pressed draw and who was continuing to attack my centres even though I was holding the defensive position.

I agree with your questions about Russia. Why he did not move into a stalemate position in the north I am not sure.

But babak summed it up in saying that France played great while the rest of us had some difficulties.

Ok, holloway, you have made a number of wild claims in this thread which I would like to put right:

1. Your main criticism is that I 'kept attacking you'. You state that:

"In the beginning Austria, Italy and Russia were against me, and when you all chose to draw, I was in a very bad position with both Russia and Austria attacking. Even when "We" had Berlin Russia didn't move north and kept attacking me (even in 1909 with the move to Armenia and afterwards to Smyrna)."

This is completely incorrect. Please look at the map. You were immediately aggressive towards me in 1901, when you took Rumania. If Turkey and Russia are to work together, Turkey would never take Rumania. You then built an army and in Spring 1902 attempted to move to Armenia, which I correctly interpreted and I bounced you out. After I reclaimed Rumania I never, once, attacked you and in fact tried to work with you against Austria. I was completely at a loss as to your strategy because after taking and losing Rumania you sat in your corner and did nothing most of the game.

France began to dominate and it was clear that everyone else needed to work together - Italy, Austria, and myself as Russia, all voted draw. You ignored our draw votes and continued to attack Austria. In Spring 1908, I moved my units towards France and away from Austria - Lando correctly interpreted this as a sign to work together against the greater evil and moved away (although after reading this, it may have simply been to spite Italy) but instead, you took Greece and moved a unit into the Black Sea and still no draw vote. What was I supposed to think in such a situation? I threw some units at you to waken you up - I correctly bounced you out of Serbia in Spring 1909 and I threw a unit into Armenia to get you to stop attacking Austria, whose units were vital on the front line against France. You then, finally (!), seemed to get the point and in Autumn 1910 moved out of Austria's centers and tried to join the line against France. It was far too late though and your feeble draw vote in 1911 was disappointing.

2. Holloway you also say that "Holding berlin would ahve beenc ritical but russia never mvoed north."

There was very little I could do in the north - armies alone would not have done anything. I needed to free St Petersburg to build another fleet but TWA kept bouncing me and although I tried for a number of years to get my fleet out of St Petersburg to build further fleets in the north, by the time it was free, I had lost centers and was forced to disband. You can look at the map yourself to see this.

3. You yourself have already admitted that you were "indecisive in my attacks against Russia/Austria." and that you "didn't pay enough attention it seems...". Based on that, how can you attack other players when you yourself did not know what you were doing? Can you see now how difficult it was in my place when your units are flailing around pointlessly and you don't even vote draw when every other civilized nation has?

As for the reasons we failed:

1. As Lando has already said in this thread: "Turkey - It was too late when you realized that the solo was coming. You never pressed draw and your move kept being aggressive against me and against russia while it was clear that each of us was doing our best to try and stop France"

2. It seemed there were revenge issues between Austria and Italy. If Italy had been allowed to keep his units and Austria not have bounced Turkey out in Apulia - a stalemate may have been reached in the south.

3. That may have been futile anyway based on my belief that I could not guarantee the northern centres. Without the extra fleets that I deemed necessary - there was no way for me to stalemate the north on armies alone. Both Lando and holloway have said that they 'don't understand' why I didn't stalemate in the North so if they can see something I missed, please share it? Thanks!

For clarification, by 'north' and 'northern centres', I mean Scandinavia and St Petersburg. In my opinion, there was no way I could protect these. Berlin, itself, could have been protected - and it remained non-French.

Yes, Berlin was the only centre you could hold up north. And War and Mos, obviously.

Like I said the issue that caused us to lose was me giving up Rome. I lost in 1910 on a guess. I couldn't risk letting him past Munich so i poked Piedmont, but he took Rome. The guess lost us the game there but it was due to the movements leading up that we were in that position.

Thanks to everybody for the kind words. Considering the skill of my opponents, I went into the game thinking I'd be happy with a draw, so I'm simultaneously pleased and humbled by the result.

The most crucial thing I can point to that led to what turned into a somewhat dominant position over the board is the year 1904, in which I got lucky a few times. Firstly, in the Spring of 1904 I invaded Germany, apparently quite unexpectedly. Germany and I had cooperated a bit to repel the initial British continental invasion and Russia had moved into Prussia, and I assume Germany's expectation/hope was that I would continue attacking England. My position against England, due to unit positioning, was basically bulletproof at that time, though, so I thought it might be safe to just go all-in against Germany. I expected I'd be able to take Belgium and Holland if things went well. They did indeed, with England and Germany fighting for the North Sea, Russia pushing into Silesia, and my armies driving into Belgium and Ruhr with no resistance.

Assessing the board at this point, I couldn't help but think about the two builds that I was guaranteed to get and what I could use them for... and England's unit positioning was such that it was very, very likely that I would be able to take Liverpool in the next year if I just went for it. I pondered this decision for a while, and I honestly almost didn't attack England because of concerns over stabbing two neighbors in the same year... But it actually worked. I knocked back the fleet in the Irish Sea and even unexpectedly took Munich without support. From that point on, although the end was not yet certain, I definitely felt like I had the wind at my back.

As for concerns about whose deserves blame for the lack of a stalemate line, I honestly don't think any one of you ruined it. There were a lot of little mistakes, sure, and I guess some bigger ones... I don't really need to go into it, because I made mistakes too and the only thing separating us from one another is a few lucky guesses.

Good game, all.

Very gracious TWA. All that said, I definitely look forward to the next Culture and Imperialism game - and hope we can set one up in the next few weeks and have a good rematch!

Count me in, I'm more than willing to give up some of these points. I feel like I have a giant target painted on my head now...

I felt I was lost once Germany sided, very unexpectedly, with France in 02 despite my strong opening position in Bel and EC. I'm thinking the only alternative that may have more called for a pro-England Germany would have been EC-Bre in Fall of 01 instead of supporting Yor-Bel. I am curious if that support made Germany feel that I was Anti-Germany and not Anti-France. Other than that I thought it was an exceptional game played by France, but I wonder at what could have been if Germany had allied with me instead of France.

Also, I have to give big props to TWA for his stab of Germany as I believe that was the decisive moment as he gained W. Germany too quickly for Russia to beat him back.

ok, sorry for the late response here Sargmacher, and thanks for your explanations! It clears it up a bit for me!

I didn't want to blame everything on you, from my point of view I just didn't understand the moves, and I created this threat to clarify it ;)

Back to analysis: Why didn't you send a support hold or some singn like that to Bulgaria instead of "[...] throwing some units at you to waken me up"?
I just felt threatened the whole time in the corner, with no perspective to gain centers or to help effectively against France.

Finally I want to say that I think it was an interesting game well played with a well deserved victory for twa! I learned a lot and would join a rematch if anyone would be interested ...

Thanks for the game everybody - and I hope there are no hard feelings ;)

-- hollo

Absolutely no hard feelings on my part holloway - all part of the game. I'm sure that's the same between Lando and Babak as well.

Look forward to the next one!

Holloway - when an endgame begins "gaining centres" becoems fairly irrelevant. Usually there is enough units in the defending coalition so it is just a matter of positioning the ones that exist, not trading centres and units

Agreed - though I had 4 centres, and only 1 fleet in that particular situation. There was literally not much to do for me, and as I stated earlier I felt threatened.
Though I can only "defend/justify" the actions from my game perspective, I do agree that some moves were indeed not the smartest ones! (I still feel we could have needed a fleet in the Med Sea area to defend against the French avalanche ) ;)

You're right. I had an extra one that i couldn't get out, which was tough. But we did need more for sure....