France is a tough nut for Italy to crack early, and France is usually at war with either England or Germany, so its too risky to go to war with Italy

Italy attacking France, yesterday.

http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=65958

As Italy, it's usually only worth attacking France when she is also at war with Britain and Germany. Otherwise France can easily fend you off, and you get a pointless and wasteful stalemate. Then France and Turkey team up to spilt your scs.

when playing France, though, I love the "double swing" move for Autumn 1901/Spring 1902, which means getting the Brest fleet to south coast Spain and then building a fleet in Marseilles ... always makes the Italian nervous!

That is a neat 1902 move from France, and the interesting thing about France is that there isn't much standing between France and total Mediterranean dominance except a well played Italy, which is rare, or a strong, well played, non juggernaut Turkey, which is rarer still.

I took the time to study Italian openings statistically and based on the data, Italy's success rate for French openings fared far worse than any other opening, even when moving units in bizarre ways. Additionally, the Austrian openings tend to be the most favorable but I believe they are generally over-played.

To also add a bit to what the others are saying about French attacks, the best times to attack France is when there's a Western Triple Alliance simply because you do so out of necessity. If you look at the time it takes Italy to make gains in France, he is at least a full year from taking Marseilles and only then it's by outguessing your opponent and not by sheer force. Spain is a year and a half away even if you have a fleet already in the water while Portugal is 2 years away or more. Couple that with the fact that France can produce the necessary fleets to block you out along the stalemate line and your armies bottle-neck along Switzerland, an anti-French campaign is difficult at best and requires a very helpful Germany to do successfully. Lastly, attacking the French means turning your back on Russia and Turkey. While neither is a threat initially and Russia takes a while to reach your soil, after Austria is gone, you'll have to turn your attention east and you certainly don't want to be caught in the middle of a war in the west when an eastern country comes knocking.

One more thing...I have been TAing for the Italian player in the SoW game 1 and told MM that I'd post my opening statements to the player in the EoG's, so anyone that's interested in some advice on how to play Italy, stay tuned.

There is a variant with Fleet Rome instead of Army Rome, and I think that's been put there to give Italy more aggressive naval options. An Austrian attack is now rare if not completely out of the picture, without unlikely German support. An early French campaign becomes far more attractive.

You sort of answer your own question. By having peace with France in 1901, Italy sets up for a vicious 'underbelly stab' when the time comes to attack.

From the Italian perspective, it's much more useful to have France engaged in England/Germany, so that he cannot muster a good defense when you stab him. From the French perspective, it's stupid to attack Italy when Germany/England are still alive and dangerous. Italy only stabs if you make yopurself too vulnerable, so holding back F Mao and A Gas usually is enough to prevent his stab.

Moreover, if a French campaign in Italy, or an Italian campaign in France, is successful, it's still difficult to hold on to those gains.

In other words, both countries benefit more from a DMZ than a war (even if that war yields some initial successes).

I disagree, OP, in fact I never ever attack Austria and always lunge for France.

Trust between Austria and Italy is essential to both nations' survival.

I think for Italy to be successful after attacking F early: E/G need to have combined against F; following the demise of F, Italy needs to ally with G against E (who is a greater naval threat than G); and the resolution of RAT needs to end in the elimination of T. If either E or T is still in play, Italy is in trouble because he/she is overstretched and cannot sustain a serious naval attack in either the east or the west. I use "successful" here to mean more than just picking up Marseilles.

I think trust between Austria and Italy is essential to Austria's survival. An early stab of A by Italy puts Italy at the mercy of RT. It might turn out well if R or T side with Italy after Austria is gone, but it seems to me more likely than not RT feel they have a good thing going and stick together to steamroll Italy. Also, I'm a believer in Italy and Turkey as fundamental enemies (with a rare exception) so really, for Italy to do well attacking A early he/she is counting on an R/I alliance that wipes out T after A. If Italy succeeds, then Italy will do very well but it's a big gamble in 1901. I also think that many people say "crap, I drew Italy, might as well take a gamble".

The standard play for me as Italy is a Wintergreen. Make sure Russia goes to Black as to limit that area, and also to Gal and Ukr. Quickly scrap through Austria while making sure France goes north. Ideally, you want to have Greece in A01, even if you don't take Trieste. The best time to be done with Austria would be in 1903. By then, you want to have Trieste, Serbia, and Greece. During '03, you want to start moving your fleets to the Aegean/E. Med. Get R to go to Arm. Convince him to support to Con and Smyrna.

Meanwhile, build a front of armies in Tyr/Tri/Ser. Support yourself into Bul. Start going west in '06. Taking Munich would be nice. Dominate France with the other remaining western power (England, hopefully). Stab Russia with your line of armies.

18 centers: Italy (3), Austria (3), Balkans (4), Turkey (3), Tunis, Spain, Portugal, Marseilles, another one you pick off (Sevastopol, Brest, Munich, Edinburgh<---favorite :D )

If you can, actually, try the Key Lepanto...always wanted to try that.

i've tried it, pretty easy for the Italian to turn on the Austrian and decimate him

If you find an Austrian willing to take the risk of a Key Lepanto, of course go ahead lol.

As France and as Italy, I always want peace for much the same reason as with Germany/Russia. They both have their own fronts to worry about at the beginning. Though perhaps an F/I war is easier to do while picking up SCs, the fundamental reason is the same.

I agree with acmac that a wintergreen is a very potent alliance, but I prefer to get rid of public enemy #1 (Turkey) first. Then, if you get the timing right (which is much of what diplomacy is all about, after all), Austria can be squelched from two sides. Eliminating him early could make a Juggernaut happen, or an angry West, neither of which you need.

When I play as Italy, I will only ally russia against turkey from the beginning. Allying russia against austria just allows russia to choose between you and turkey as allies.

I think any decisive actions by Italy done early are a mistake unless you happen to luck into a firm alliance and can employ one of the long-term strategies (wintergreen, Lepanto). Going to war with either Austria or France early is a long-term loser as you are easily stopped and end up helping the country attacking your target from behind.

I like to play a slower game as Italy. Defend and try to gain in the middle game. The only thing you really have to fear is a juggernaut rolling over you. I have yet to see any strategy that will protect Italy from getting rolled up in that.

Actually, a really good Western Triple can make Italy a primary target of France's.

Those are all very interesting ideas... especially for me since I seem to always get stuck with Italy! Thanks for the thoughts!

I think Vody has it. Play slowly, talk to everyone, make sure you can defend your home waters. Lunging for Austria is a mistake -- others will make more gains, and Italy leaves its back door open to France. Even if Italy is stuck at four for a bit, there will be opportunities later in the game as some desperate neighbor really needs Italy as an ally and does more than encourage Rome to look in another direction.

I believe you're right. In both of my last cases as Italy I did 'lunge' for Austria. Later I worked out a peace with Austria in one case but they later backstabbed me. I'm really not a very good Italy-player but I knew that from the beginning so there really isn't any surprise there.

No offense to you Fiedler. The way you played that game at Italy wasn't too well. You got English Fever.. The old. FLEETFLEETFLEETFLEET build didn't help you much, because as you saw at the end. You didn't have what you needed to hold Trieste, or Marseilles.

italy is in my top three favorite nations to play.

i personally believe that a/i is the most powerful alliance in game and can continue much longer than a juggernaut or a western alliance (especially a triple entete that is the most gay alliance of all time)

As has been said, an early French attack is only worth it if England and Germany are in on it too. Good news is, letting England and Germany know that you're down for a three-way assault on France is usually enough to tip the scales into actually making it happen.

@Scmoo

"No offense to you Fiedler. The way you played that game at Italy wasn't too well."

Well I'm keen to learn. What should I have done to significantly improve?
(Without the benefit of hindsight please).

All opinions welcome.
http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=65958