wow, messages in that game were hilarious, and then later HILARIOUS... what a bunch of whiners!

@YJ yeah I did a good portion of the whining: admittedly I am a very, very bad loser. (ever since I was a kid I've been a bad loser haha)
Anyways I hope you had a good fix of laughter (did you see the memes? ;) )

No there was a LOT of global tl;dr. You guys had more global chat than I have private chat in my games!

wow guys....red you got man handled...

EoG Germany, "A painful lesson"

Game paramters:
Classic, full-press, WTA, 1.5 day phases, Anonymous, PW protected, 8 point buy in

Line-up, result in A'12
F: Tasnica (winner)
T: MrcsAurelius
I: dubmdell
R: LakersFan
G: redhouse1938 (organising player, I always try to find this out myself :) )
E: Tru Ninja
A: Diplomat33

Result: 1912 VICTORY for France

Pre-game
This was one of these games where several of the events that would later become determining for the future of the game was foreshadowed in a post by Austria:
(To: Global, from Austria) - Spring, 1901: !@#$! Austria again! You're kidding me, right. 6 times out of 11!?! REALLY!
Because earlier that same day D33 had publically asked why he was getting Austria all the time it was pretty clear he was Austria. I was a little unsettled. Austria and Germany can make a great central block with a lot of liberty on how far to go in their cooperation. The game was anonymous and D33 had effectively exposed himself, which lead to irritation of the other players and destabilized the center as a consequence.
But D33 gets bashed enough on this forum, just let me say that I believe it's best to reveal as little of one's personal identity as possible in an anonymous game (although I admit it matters less and less as the game progresses and the players find out who's who.)
Also, I'd made a mistake myself by allowing (and even inviting) players I'd earlier been in games and even in a strong alliance with. I didn't meta-game (I believe the game was investigated and my name was cleared) and if I did, it was because I was hoping rather /not/ to pursue on a previous alliance.

Spring 1901, Ganging up on the big guy
As I got Germany, and Tasnica - whom I'd allied with in another game - was France, we were forced to have some kind of interaction from the beginning. Given the strength of his opening message and the fact that Austria was destabilizing the board, I decided to ally with France. I immediately knew France was played by my former ally, as his style is precise, while also being very zen.
I believe I tried to make an ally of Turkey by helping him organize a coalition against Russia, also to take any English heat off myself.
I agreed with England to split the benefits of war. I believe it must have been my strategy to provoke a war with Russia by my anti-Russian diploming and northern opening rather than to spark a war myself.
Effectively, I was trying to form a triple alliance.

Autumn 1901, England, Y U No Move Army?
The relationship between me and England deteriorated, because I thought his attack on Russia was insufficiently committed and he was putting too much strain on his relationship with France and me by leaving his army on the British mainland and building a fleet in London.
He had a perfect opportunity to advance on Russia and didn't. He must have had his reasons not to do so, but I guess I saw it as a pretext to go to war with him.
No problem, I had six units by S02 :).

1902, a French-German Alliance
In this stage, I establish a closer cooperation with France that is founded on my irritation with England's rather limited war on Russia and the availability of a new French fleet in Brest.
The boarder in this period is secured by a series of bounces in Burgundy and one in Bel. Both of us proved reliable in our agreements and I guess this is the reason why we DMZ much of both our home territories later.
Now, I'd worked with German-French alliances before and made a comment on them in an earlier thread (I'll look it up) and I find them /extremely/ powerful. I was not too unhappy about the way the situation was developing.

Meanwhile in the south east (1901/1902)...
I'd noticed what could only be interpreted as an extremely nasty stab (this is a good thing too: when stabbing, you have to be extremely nasty about it, mild stabs generally don't work) against Austria by Turkey in A01, with Austria supporting Turkey into Greece bidding for Serbia while Turkey instead left Greece alone and moved to Ser as well.
The stab was followed by a Turkish attack on Bud, whereas Turkey had just helped Italy into Bud. Turkey also occupied Rum, which is usually Russian.
I concluded that a very manipulative and aggressive player was playing Turkey (both being good things in diplomacy, let there be no doubt about that) and I tried to organize the board against him now instead of against Russia, who seemed more interested in building long-term relationships. Again with the reasoning “as long as the others are ganging up on somebody else, that should somehow contribute to my safety”.
By A02, a Juggernaut under Turkish leadership, with Rum returning to Russia, had emerged from the complicated battlefields in the south east.

1903, Italy joins the alliance
As Austria is collapsing under the weight of the Juggernaut, I obtain help from Italy to take Vie. At first the army was sent to Austria to stabilize the country, hoping to turn Austria into a loyal and controllable ally, but once the army arrives the situation has deteriorated and I judge it best to simply take Vie. I feel no remorse stabbing Austria, as he didn't respect the anonimity in the beginning of the game. I believe this marks the beginning of a French-Italian-German alliance.
I remember from this period that I try to find a diplomatic solution for the war with England, but failed.
The failure to negotiate something productive with England, the cooperative attitude of France, Italy and myself to this Triple and a closely allied Juggernaut marked the constellation for the coming years, with the Triple gaining the upper hand by force of numbers and effective deal-making.
Roughly during this same period, I also start negotiations with Turkey about invading Russia. I insist that given Turkey's history of early stabs, it be him to assure I make some kind of profit first before returning the favor. He insists that I attack Italy if he helps me attack Russia.
Negotiations fail due to these two reasons, and due to the fact that I am sufficiently backed up by other powers. I simply decided to make the price for Turkey to buy my allegiance to be extremely high, so that I would be more than compensated when dissociating from Italy/France.

1904-1907, Progress
The Triple progresses, with the 1907 center division among us being France 10/ Germany 10/ Italy 6. Italy addressed this asymmetry and inquired as to my ambitions for the rest of the game, so I told him that I was probably going for the solo, finding it a feasible target and the three-way draw between the three of us being an option, but not one I was being very enthusiastic about.
Since the asymmetry in the alliance was so obvious, I judged it best to be honest about my intention to solo the game and that the alliance was for tactical rather than strategic purposes.
I told Italy that once I'd go for the solo, I would either stop talking to him or, more probably, send him a declaration of war, which I was honestly planning to do.
Italy appeared to want to pursue the alliance despite my noncommittal stance toward it, and I later learned that France also didn't offer Italy the prospect of a three-way draw.
During this period, England is being used to equilibrate the balance of SCs between France and myself. France, IMO, correctly pointed out that whereas he provides a lot of tactical support to the Triple, he is not directly gaining from it and England is the perfect area to settle the score (see the German attack on StP).
Although strategically and tactically France, Italy and me are cooperating very well during this period, I believe our diplomacies couldn't have been more different.
In 1904/1905, France explains his presence in Italy to Turkey as nothing more than a preambula to stab Italy mercilessly. Turkey is very displeased when he finds out this is not the case. I believe France is employing a similar line of communication to Russia on his presence in the North, although I'm not sure about this. Although France will stab me in 1908, I believe his stab comes much later than was agreed with Russia (and much earlier than I expected it).
I found France's diplomacy toward Turkey a little odd: he found himself in an effective alliance with me and Italy and lying about it appeared to be a waste of diplomatic credit. Also, during this period, I try to push France harder and harder to actually make the stab (or an attack) against Italy, because I find Italy to be a little too erratic; communications that should be sent three-ways arrive at my inbox much later than France's, he forgets a unit here and there when advancing a tactical plan, but also my intention to commit France south rather than north are the elements that prompted my attempts to provoke a war between France and Italy.
Meanwhile, Italy is preparing a plan that comes to complete fruition (to my surprise!) by the end of 1907. Turkey insisted to Italy that the time has come to dissociate himself from the Triple Alliance he finds himself in and to form a holdout or stalemate line with Turkey and Russia to protect him.
Italy has had some bad experiences with Turkey at this point (see my analysis of his 1902 play: I am not surprised) and decides to let Turkey set up his part of the stalemate line while mercilessly stabbing him.
With the relationships between Turkey and Italy already soured during the prior period, this was the event that made all future cooperation between them impossible, although at that moment I couldn't begin to imagine how deep the animosity was.

1908-1910, France prepares the solo, German decline
In the period leading to France's S08 stab (he invades the North Sea, which we had DMZed, and crushes Tyo whereas we'd agreed to land it on Vie), I'd opened my terrain wide up to him. I definitely should have seen his stab coming by his rather peculiar A07 build F Bre, although his decision not to build A Par was probably what comforted me. This, however, probably prompted me to move Swe-Den.
The opening of the Nth area by me, in combination with the soured Italian-Turkish relationship are, IMO, what determined the final outcome of this game. Although I believed I could convert the given situation in a multiple-nation draw with little effort, it appears impossible to convince Italy and Turkey to cooperate.
But it gets worse, not only will Italy and Turkey not cooperate, for some reason still unknown to me Italy decides to take the French side in our conflict and actually aids France in his efforts to send troops north.
I hope with this EoG to obtain a settling answer to this question, it being the largest mystery in a game I've ever encountered.
Worse still: not only does Italy help the nation that dissolved the alliance, he appears to be setting no price on his cooperation.
Whereas in A07, the France/Italy SC balance is still 10/6, by A10 it has widened to 14/5. I desperately try to explain that whatever Italy is doing, it's not getting him anywhere and although I'd never wronged Italy in the slightest, he aids France in a deadly campaign against my country.
Because of my extreme surprise with the developments on the board and Italy's tarnished relationship with Turkey, both of which suggesting the presence of various layers of diplomacy under the most superficial ones, part of the discussions that would normally be private now flow over to the public forum, in a large part provoked by myself: from 1907 I consistently try to establish board-wide conscience of the following mechanics:
1) It is clear France stabbed me, destroying one of my units that was in a collaboration with him earlier and penetrating a sea that is obviously a DMZed area.
2) If France desired any draw, it would have been a two-way draw with me, as I am similar in size and such a draw is very feasible, particularly given the French advantage of neighboring the junior partner in the alliance, allowing him the edge in such a two way-draw attempt.
3) One can infer from 2 and 3 that France is going for the solo.
I never expected a stab from France. Although my strategic positioning was inviting such a stab, I was counting on my diplomatic positioning (not having sold the alliance with France and Italy as the preambula for some extraordinary stab, but simply for what it was: an alliance with France and Italy) being iron-clad defense against a French stab and since we were so aware of the differences in our diplomacies, I thought he was thinking the same way.
To my surprise, the mechanics outlayed above were best understood by Russia (or at least he acted on them immediately) whom I was at war with and I converted my war with Russia in a very strong and loyal alliance, which is probably what caused France to take five more years to solo. I am pretty sure this is much longer than he expected.
Turkey, although less flexible in his tactical disponibility and strongly disagreeing with my interpretation of affairs, was however – from the looks of it – equally seriously committed to stopping the solo.

1911-1912, Death
I become frustrated with Italy's refusal to work with me and Turkey, and our relationships appear to become more and more personal. A part of me tries to accept the fact that it's not working and tries to turn the atmosphere on the board to the positive by trying some very corny jokes, another part tries to rationalize the situation and diplomes to a solution. (My apology for disrespecting the word “diplomacy” as a non-count noun).
The frustration becomes deeper when Italy keeps talking to me as though I am his ally and/or partner in this game, while since 1908 I considered myself to be in a very bitter war with him, due to his selfless aid to France in my disadvantage.
All my attempts to persuade Italy to take the side of those stopping the solo fail, and even an attempt to get Italy to assume neutrality by submitting only support hold orders until it becomes clear what the intentions of all other players was ultimately fails.
Part of the explanation that I receive is that since 1907, the relationship between Turkey and Italy is so soured, that he doesn't believe to be able to participate in any draw, which is why – feeling confronted by a hopeless choice between a survive and a defeat – he chooses full cooperation with France in exchange for a survive. France cunningly nurtures his despair. IMO a four center Italy has ample space to restore relationships and find some kind of benefit on the board, or at least to be the pursuit of that worth the effort. Going for a survive in such a situation is way too fatalistic for my taste.
Now, before I assign full blame of what happened in this stage to Italy, it was clear that Turkey did do some very nasty diploming with Italy in the beginning and was partly responsible for the depth of their disagreement. Turkey appeared rather crude and insensitive in his communication. However, it was clear that Turkey continued to adopt a /much/ more rational stance to the entire situation than Italy was and although not entirely dismissing Italy's view of things, nor his solution to it (a terrain transfer from Turkey to “neutral powers”) in this particular conflict I was largely (90%?) on Turkish side and am confident that was the right side to take, even though my intel was naturally limited.

Aftermath
During this game, I believe I learnt a crucial lesson for my future survival as a diplomacy. First of all, irrationality (or "incalculability") can play a role. Even though I dismissed the chance of France stabbing me for strategic reasons, he probably had good reason to do it because after all I'm not aware of every single thing that's being said on the board. Also, I had to take into account that the souring of other relationships could frustrate my efforts to organize an Anti-Leader Alliance even if, for strategic reasons, it was absolutely necessary, a fact that is obviously reflected in the final result of this game. This is a lesson I will definitely incorporate into my future games.

EoG Italy

Pre-game
I had just returned from a long hiatus and was looking for a game. Redhouse had his advertized on the forum, so I PM'd him for the password. I got Italy and was fairly excited to be playing again.

1901
I set up normal DMZs with France and Germany and talked to Austria, Turkey, and Russia about an alliance with each of them. I didn't hear much from Austria, so when Turkey agreed to let me have Greece if I stabbed Austria in the fall, I agreed. Turkey built two fleets, which I read as a stab since it could only mean he was going to take Greece by force (and then gun for my peninsula).

1902
Turkey offers me Budapest, which I accept. We were working together with Russia for a triple southern alliance at this point. Germany and France were still far away and tied up with English things, so they were not really on my radar yet.

Turkey performed his second stab in the fall by taking Budapest. I decided it was shame on him for Greece, but shame on me for Budapest, and our diplomatic relations ended for a few years.

1903
I think I can convince Russia to work with me against Turkey since there was the stab in Rumania, but Russia didn't want to do so. I found the choice curious, but presumed they had prearranged it. This is when France and Germany began working with me (or me with them, however you like to order it).

In the fall, Turkey made painfully annoying gains on me and the juggernaut began solidifying. France seemed very keen to work with me, and the fleet build was approved as a way to a) help me against Turkey, and I'm sure b) prevent the Turks from getting close to France. I had become woefully small and so was glad to not be run over by the French and Turks.

1904
This year saw my reduction to a minor 3 center power. This is when I began working with France more closely than Germany, which later proved to be a terrible error. There were a couple of occasions that I requested we discuss the plan before sharing with Germany, and one of those times, Germany sent me the message regarding my plan before I contacted him. I see now, in retrospect, how poorly I chose to work closer with France than Germany during this year and the next few.

1905
Turkey reaches out to me with empty hands. France becomes interwoven with my own country and units.

1906-1907
This is when things became interesting. Turkey approaches me with the names of specific powers and accuses them of planning a two-draw, citing other games as evidence of this meta-gaming (which, in his defense, he never explicitly calls it "meta-gaming"). I decided to report this accusation to the mods, thinking that if he was correct, they should be punished by the mods and not by the players (a decision I still believe was 100% correct). The mods were a little slow to get back to me, so I decided that Turkey may be correct and that I should shift my allegiance and make a stalemate line with him. He hadn't input any moves (not even his own suggestions as saved moves) and when the deadline was nearing the 1 minute mark, I decided he was going to NMR and I should take advantage. I save my orders, clock reads <1 min, no moves by Turkey submitted, I log off. A few hours later, Turkey actually did submit moves, but I had already written him off in my mind as unreliable, and so I preyed on his desire to make a stalemate line for the fall and the next year to score some huge gains. Had 1908 stayed the course of 1906 and 1907, Turkey would have been history and my gambit would have been worth every effort.

Turkey also thought it wise to threaten me with public embarrassment on the forums and with helping France to solo (the latter of which he did not do, and the former he has not done). All through these two years, Turkey would always talk of a four-way draw, leaving Russia out. I believed this unfair, since Russia had been my friend initially. Every time I said five-draw, Turkey said four-draw, putting clearly in my mind that he had no intention of a four-draw either, but rather a three draw that involved my elimination once the stalemate line was formed.

The fall of 1907 also saw the transfer of Liverpool to the French, which struck me as very odd. I asked both France and Germany about it, and both gave me the same explanation.

1908
Tragedy strikes. France was hedging about moves and being a little more coy than usual. I found it odd but assumed it was just RL interfering. When I saw his huge stab of Germany, I was somewhat unsure how to proceed, but given that he was all tied up with my country, I couldn't very well turn on him that very moment.

Germany posted long orations in the global tab and personal appeals in the private message tabs. I reasoned quickly from prior information that, if I turned on France then, Turkey would eliminate me once the stalemate line was established in the south, then he could re-form it himself. I did not see drawing as a possibility, which I explained in the global tab and to Germany several times (to no avail). Because I wanted insurance that I could draw, I had a simple demand, that Turkish forces be separated from mine so that he could not stab me, and I could not stab him (this was to make him comfortable). It was mutually assured non-aggression by allowing "neutral powers" (Russia, Germany) to take Budapest and Rumania. I was the necessary power to stop France, the other players needed me, and all I was requesting was that Turkey not have the opportunity to stab me by the transfer of centers from him to Russia or Germany (though in my last appeal I included myself as a possibility, since it was clear they wouldn't accept my deal anyway). I also thought that France and I would be a little more successful in the south than we were. This was a miscalculation.

One of the biggest tactics attempted to get me to go against France was by claiming that he would destroy me for his last centers to reach 18. I asked France that, if at all possible, he not take any of my centers to prove this fatalistic scare tactic false. He honored this request and never took a single center of mine, much to his credit. But in all honesty, I think he stabbed too soon.

1909-1910
These years saw tremendous setbacks for me, and it made my "if I turn on France, Turkey *will* destroy me" scenario more plausible. Turkey and Germany had both said that five and four draws were too large, so I believed neither of them when they said that I could be included. Interestingly, only France seemed to appreciate my position on the matter, and I think that it scared him somewhat that I was stating my terms of shifting allegiance so readily (even if they were not being met). The year ended with me regaining Greece though, and so the tide seemed to be turning.

1911
Spring. I threw up my draw flag so that Germany would give me the time of day. I had been convinced of a change of allegiance more by the intellectual curiosity of it than anything else. However, I misordered by failing to save the changes I made before sending messages. Whether the other powers believe I misordered this season or not is their own business, but I did indeed misorder.

Fall saw the final chance to stop France. I requested a pause for the weekend which was not granted until late Saturday night with only an hour and a half to go (since Turkey was, again, so belated in his response time. I do not hold this instance against him, but France told me early game that he likes to wait to input orders because he thinks it "throws people off. This event cemented in my mind the accuracy of France's statement). I told Germany, in very clear, specific terms what was necessary and precisely what was needed. Turkey *had* to give two centers to Russia in order for him to build a fleet in the spring (since France was supporting me into Vienna), and preferably, Turkey would give up three centers (one to me) so that Russia and I could both get builds and actually stalemate with France. Germany shunned my read of the board again and told me to man up, that Turkey shouldn't have to give up territory since I was equally untrustworthy as he was. I explained that Turkey could not have any influence on France from his tiny corner and that he had plenty of units to spare, on top of which, with four units, he could defend against any assault I may want to try, if this was indeed an attempt at a stab again. When I received the definitive message from Germany that he and Turkey would absolutely not see the board for what it was, I laughed at Germany and asked him to please unpause the game. Our discussions were ended and that led us directly to 1912.


Post-game
Redhouse taught me that the first time he is fooled (referring to my dealings with Turkey over Greece), that he would declare war (since the fleets were effectively a declaration of war anyway).

Mrcs taught me that petty stabs that only gain one center at best are not worthwhile, as they discredit a player for much of the game. In another game, I had made the same error, and so I profusely apologized to the offended, explaining from where my wisdom and apology come (and the apology was accepted in that game. Yay!). I should here praise Mrcs for his deceit in the early game. You convinced me twice to trust you when I really shouldn't have. You earned those centers.

The overarching values that I take from the game are, 1) this community abhors anyone who doesn't fight for a draw, even if they would be defeated in the process; 2) everyone is willing to preach "sacrifice" as in my first take home point, but they are not willing to do so themselves; and 3) even if you are the most valuable player on the board and can alone decide the outcome of the game, no body really cares unless they themselves can benefit immediately.

The most moving speech in the global tab was given by redhouse. "Give me a solo, draw, or death!" Very rousing, very enjoyable.

The petty name calling and mockery that I received from redhouse, Lakers, and Mrcs were inane and uncalled for. I think I handled myself rather well in that game. My "inability to work towards a draw" is to be criticized as much as Turkey's inability to cede territory to provide a safety net from stabs, and Germany's inability to see my read of the players and the board as valid, and Russia's inability to communicate. I respect each opponent as a player, and I think we are all good, and with the exception of 1912, I am fairly certain I kept my composure in all diplomatic messages.

At the end of the game, I still stand by my reads of the board and the players. I know how to change my diplomatic style for future games (thanks to redhouse for that, he pointed out specific ways in which my messages were unintentionally ambiguous) and I think I have a good handle on how to play Italy in the future. I understand better how detrimental seeds of distrust can be and how irrational everyone can get when a solo is on the line (including myself). Until the very end, I considered Germany and Russia to be friendly, if not allies, even though the feeling was not reciprocated. These lessons, in total, will carry on into future games.

I should mention, a lot of the game is hazy now, since we went on for a good two and a half months. =P
If I have been unclear or misremembered something, I will definitely provide an explanation or correction.

Crikey !!!
I do not think I have seen so much global chit chat in a Dip game,
or so many "post mortems", self justifying analysis etc etc
and all this for a 56 point pot.
There can be no criticism of the level of interest or passion of the players

This is a rather busy weekend for me, so my EoG will be somewhat delayed. Good game to all involved, though.

Something is that the above EoGs don't yet reflect the "draw flag game" that kicked in at the end of the game, which may be covered a bit by France if he thinks it's relevant.
A last thing I wanted to add is my compliments to France, who played an apparantly perfect game, carefully maneuvring yet merciless when he set his goals. Flawless strategy, tactics and diplomacy.

Something is that the above EoGs don't yet reflect the =
Something that the above EoGs don't yet reflect is the

The draw flag that I threw up in 1911(?) was to truly negotiate a change of allegiance. I presume this is to what you are referring? When in 1912 you and Austria refused to see the board the way that I did (and later I learned, Russia also), I dropped my draw flag as a sign that I was through trying to persuade or be persuaded.

Cant not react to the above, so here we go.. :)

For me what constitutes a stab is roughly the following:
When you manipulate a player into believing you will move a certain way, while actually moving differently, exploiting his trust. Mostly you will actually attack said player and to try to diminish his position or sc count, while you promised him the opposite. You lie to him about your moves and exploit his trust.

The gravity of the lie and impact can vary and are probably related to how upset the player will become.

If one doesnt tell where he is going and attacks you, this is not a stab in my book. Also, I believe you should be flexible, if I am stabbed in a game, that really doesnt mean I wont work with a player ever again. If I get stabbed over and over, I loose all my trust in a player, but still if the prize is high enough I will move in unison with my stabber.

@Dumbdell:
You havent been really stabbed by me in this game at all. And if you think that the move in 1901 (me building two fleets) and autumn 1902, me reclaiming Budapest, are stabs they are of the lowest tier in 'gravity of stab ranking' ever. Both moves were not preceeded by a lie of mine. We never agreed on what to build, never even spoke about it. I did promise you Greece if you would move to Trieste in autumn 1901, but we agreed you would get support to Budapest instead in spring 1902. Now the only thing that comes close to a stab is evicting you from Budapest in autumn again, altough I made sure I never promised you could keep it and I only promised you a one time “support in to Budapest”.

Did I want to attack you? Sure I did, one has to attack someone in a game of diplomacy.. Is attacking somebody stabbing? No, lying before you do to exploit somebody his trust is.

Now if all in the first paragraph is regarded as a stab by you, which frankly is in the eye of the beholder, always. How do you think your actions and messages can be measured, using your scale, in 1906 and 1907 to me? Where you lied to me in +/- 20 extensive messages? In four subsequent turns, promised to move one way and move completely the opposite to hurt my position? Dont you think that in your perception of a stab, your conduct has far more upsetting impact than what I did to you in the early game?

But lets forget about all that, lets assume quid pro quo in stabbing exchanges. After your subsequent stabs I was more then willing to work with you and include you in the draw, I expressed that explicitly in global and many times in personal messages to you and to Germany and Russia. I kept saying that if you and me wanted to get a draw, we could, under no circumstance attack each other, else our hold out position would be broken. The fact that you dont understand, that achieving a hold out position together is a very balanced set up and guarantees you safety from attacks from the partner with which you actually are trying to set up that hold out position with, is a lack of understanding of the game by you. I told you a good 10+ times that if we would attack each other, we would loose and if we wouldnt, we would draw. And it has actually worked out towards the first, you kept on attacking me, regardless of the four times I completely complied to your moves to gain your trust again and we lost.

Now all of the above is relatively subjective, as it involves trust and feelings and I cant completely place myself in your shoes and you not in mine. So lets look at the facts: France won and from autumn 1908 onwards it was clear that he was attempting a solo, he stabbed his main ally Germany. From that year onwards you had the chance to reach a drawing position and stop somebody else winning. Instead you proactively helped France to solo, for four years in a row. I think such behavior is a disgrace to WTA game. Only in very, very rare circumstances is something like that tolerated in my opinion. For example, when somebody just stabbed the hell out of you. But that doesnt apply to you, because it was actually you who did the last stabbing in that game.

Then one more thing and that is your perception of alliances in this game. You cant be allied to two countries at the same time that are out to destroy the other. In the mid game you were allied with Germany and France, I was with Russia and England, thinking that you are also allied to Russia, while Germany was fighting him towards extinction is a bit silly in my eyes. The same happened when France attacked Germany, how can you think that you are allied with both still? While one is wiping out the other and you dont do anything about it?

You say that you helped France to a solo, because you were afraid I would run over you if you started working with me. How so? I moved four consecutive turns exactly as you wanted, every message I sent you, just kept repeating I was willing to do anything to get in the drawing position with you. Also, I explained to you time and time again that I couldnt even attack you, even though at some point you exhausted my patience to an extreme low, as my chance for a draw would be compromised as well and I prize results above everything else. In the end, its just a game and a game is meant to be won. And on top of all that, at the end of 1907, you were the bigger country of the two of us, how could you even feel threatened then?

You say I didnt want to include russia in a draw.. Not true, look at your message in (2nd of Jan 2012, 1906 Autumn)


@All:
Now as stated I wont write a complete EOG. This was a very frustrating game for me, with a player that full knowingly helped somebody to solo four game years in a row, without a clear reason for doing that. That is inexcusable in WTA in my opinion and until this player learns this, I would recommend not playing him. Certainly as in the end he claims he: “ I still stand by my reads of the board and the players. ”

But my frustrations didnt start there, earlier in the game, there was a horrible misorder from England, destroying the advantage Russia and I had, in autumn 1903. Also, Germany took up a position that was completely open for France to stab him and solo. Interestingly, he just came out of a two draw with France and was undoubtedly counting on a similar scenario? He knew who he was dealing with even though it was anon and the others had no clue, I felt he had an information advantage over me. He attributes his poor position against France, to France's credit to manipulate, I attribute it to Germany's naivity. I feel that Germany was influenced to open up extremely to France and being very difficult in wanting to work with others, by his past experience with Tasnica. He will probably deny this of course.. And its just my experience and perception coming out of the game, wont make any further fuss out of it. At the very least, I had less information than he had to base my decisions on.

Nevertheless, I think France played a very good game. Lucky to have such willing neighbors of course. Normally this would have never happened. I also thank Germany for playing, he already explicitly told me that publishing an entrants list before the game next time is his top priority! Thats learning from an error (take note italy). Russia was a nice ally to work with, thanks for the game also. And to who ever is reading, sorry for the sour undertone.. ;) My frustration runs deep, it feels like a stolen draw..

Hope to play most of you again with a happier resolve! (for me at least hehe :) )

"me reclaiming Budapest,"
Reclaiming? That's a bit strong of a word, considering it was Austria's when you helped me in.

"I did promise you Greece if you would move to Trieste in autumn 1901, but we agreed you would get support to Budapest instead in spring 1902. Now the only thing that comes close to a stab is evicting you from Budapest in autumn again, altough I made sure I never promised you could keep it and I only promised you a one time “support in to Budapest."
Instead? Budapest instead of Greece? No such thing!
And what's this business of never promising me that I can keep Budapest? You promised to give me a support hold if I wanted it! For the viewing audience, here's the messaging that occurred:

(To: Turkey, from you) - Spring, 1901: Howdy Turkey. I'd like Greece. If you're cool with that.
(To: You, from Turkey) - Spring, 1901: I'd allow you in to Greece if we can make some other arrangements as well. austria will be moving to ALB, you want to take advantage of that?
I will support you into Greece if you also move VEN -> TRIE. Let me know if you will!
(To: Turkey, from you) - Autumn, 1901: I'll make the Trieste stab
(To: You, from Turkey) - Autumn, 1901: So congrats with Trieste! I guess we have to discuss Greece a bit. Do you mind me taking it?
(To: Turkey, from you) - Autumn, 1901: I'd really like Greece. Let us see what disbands and whether Austria puts in moves.
(To: Turkey, from you) - Spring, 1902: Your fleet builds are unnerving.
(To: You, from Turkey) - Spring, 1902: As i said i really want to have greece, you didnt want me to get it, so i need some leverage. We can deal if you want. i can support you into BUD, while you let me take Greece.
(To: Turkey, from you) - Spring, 1902: Actually, no, you didn't say you "really want" Greece; you asked if I minded you taking it, not an entirely assertive question. I had no idea you wanted it that badly.
A support to Budapest would be tremendous goodwill on your part. ... I shall input a move to Budapest and not stop your movement into Greece. In the future, I would appreciate more talk.
(To: You, from Turkey) - Spring, 1902: i am happy you want to take my deal! I will support you into Bud this turn. Vie is all up to you :) I really hope you get it
...
(To: You, from Turkey) - Spring, 1902: I can support hold your unit in BUD with SERB. I will retreat RUM -> BUL. Could you please support me into Greece with ION then? Then I can move Eastern Med to Aegean, DMZing us a bit. If you could, that would be great!
(To: Turkey, from you) - Spring, 1902: The only way Budapest can be displaced is by your units. No support hold is necessary, though I appreciate the offer. It would make more sense for you to support yourself into Greece while I set up for the next phase


"From that year onwards you had the chance to reach a drawing position and stop somebody else winning"
I have explained my case numerous times. The major point I always go to is, you and Germany both said (at different points) that a four or five draw was too big, and I have watched enough gunboat and PPSC and WTA games to know, the weak link gets eliminated to make more bounty for the dogs. Don't tell me this is false when I can point you to any number of games where this is the case!
Furthermore, if I turned in 1908, he would have easily been stopped and then I would have been easily crushed by you coming from behind, after all, where else would you have gone? Perhaps I misjudged Autumn 1911, maybe by then I was integral to the stalemate, but in 1908, I was still not vital. So maybe you're right, that my view was invalid by 1911, but in 1908, I think it was every bit valid.


"how can you think that you are allied with both still?"
Since when do I *have* to choose a side in every conflict? Maybe that's the point of the game, to recreate WWI. If so, I have been misinformed.

I will point out here that, given that I believed Russia and Germany to be my allies, when I requested the ceding of territory in 1908 to them so that you and I could no longer quarrel, this was completely dismissed as unfair (it would also have moved units from the corner of the board where they had no influence to the front lines, where they could be very useful!). Even in Fall 1911, our last possible chance, I told Germany explicitly what had to happen with the three of you to get a fleet build in St.P, and, if we wanted to turn the tide on France the four of us, then there was an additional move that would give me a second build. I explained to Germany that I had no reason to not go for the draw as a stab for territory was, at that point, petty. The only reason I could want territory in 1911 was to draw with France, our last chance, and he declined to go for it, and he indicated in his messages that you were declining the idea also.
You and Germany both talked very good games about sacrifice and the greater good and whatnot, but when it came down to working with the lynchpin, whose price was security, you both said that was unreasonable, even when I pointed out that I was vital to obtaining a draw. I can understand not believing me in 1908, when there was still a reasonable chance that Germany could stalemate in the north, but by 1911?


"You say that you helped France to a solo, because you were afraid I would run over you if you started working with me. How so? I moved four consecutive turns exactly as you wanted, every message I sent you, just kept repeating I was willing to do anything to get in the drawing position with you. .. And on top of all that, at the end of 1907, you were the bigger country of the two of us, how could you even feel threatened then?"
You have meshed a couple of key details together. For one, you immediately stabbed back in 1908 (and I don't count that against you. I'm surprised you went along as far as you did). France didn't make his stab *until* 1908, so I had stabbed you rather relentlessly, you stabbed me back, we were really in quite the quandary, and there arose the Franco-German war. It wasn't so clear cut as "you did super trusting moves, France stabbed Germany, now let's draw!" There were a couple of intermittent details that derail that thinking.

The more important detail you are missing is that, had France not stabbed, you would have been overrun. As Germany and you were so quick to point out, after France's stab, I diminished in size. The reason is that Germany and he were redirecting their attention. After your 1908 stab back at me, I had lost enough position that you really could have trounced me if I turned my back to you.


"You say I didnt want to include russia in a draw.. Not true, look at your message in (2nd of Jan 2012, 1906 Autumn)"

I am glad you called my attention to this message. The message isn't exactly as you imply, but close enough. However there is an interesting note you left me: "(To: You, from Turkey) - Autumn, 1906: Let me know if you agree with the moves. If not, I am thinking of CDing I really dont want to be part of a pre arranged puppet show."

I think this was the first threat you gave me that game, followed with one to embarrass me ("(To: You, from Turkey) - Spring, 1907: Well all said and done, I dont have much of a choice, but let me tell you that if you screw me on this and you get wiped out by Germany and france, to a two draw, what they have done before, I will laugh my balls off and make sure the rest of the forum will too, after the game."),

and one to help France solo yourself ("(To: You, from Turkey) - Autumn, 1907: As you will be defeated otherwise, either tasnica and redhouse will do their two draw dance, or I will help france to a solo.", which was interestingly attached to this analysis of Germany and France: "But at the end of the day you remain my best chance to a survive/draw, as I know france and germnay will not solo, because of their principles and their 'special relationship' toward one another").



Perhaps I should note that, when I asked Germany his long term intentions (when we were 10/10/6 in size), I went along with them, hoping to become large enough that I could balance the two while not becoming a target of both, and consequentially three-drawing. Obviously this didn't work, because France chose to go for the solo himself.

This game sucked from beginning to end. Needless to say, I couldn't keep up with the volume of public posts being sent out during it.

It really comes down to 2 things.

1) 56 is nothing, so who cares?

2) Italy is MVP of team France.

http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m198/narcbliss/0653_homer-eating-popcorn-small-c78.jpg
Can't wait for France's EoG XD

Keep on crying italy and keep on violating the privacy of messages.. way to go. In the end, I have reached out to you a million times, so did Russia and Germany. We all specifically promised you would be included in the draw in global and in private. Instead, you helped France to a solo when that was absolutely not necessary. That is your choice, but don't think that that's an accomplishment. And don't think that any of the players in this game found that 'good play', live your own illusion buddy.

About my threats, they were all communicated when you stabbed me three times in a row.. Who wouldn't exert some pressure at that point?

Ladies and gentlemen, behold: its dumbdell the solo maker.. Please go play ppsc man.

Italy, I would have to look back on my messages with you, but I don't believe I called you names very much. I mostly just pointed out the futility of helping someone solo when survival nets nothing in a WTA game.

Russia, you're correct. I rather rashly lumped you in with Germany and turkey due to the final comment you made in global. I apologize for unduly exaggerating your name calling.

Now if you could also apologize for helping a player solo, when there was ample of opportunity to turn it into a draw, we could close the thread..

I'll write Tasnica's Eog then:
Oh wow, Germany is really super friendly, lets exploit that, then oh wow italy is helping me solo, that's also super friendly.. Oh wow, I have won. ;)

See, done!

MrcsAurelius, I find your continuous effort to assign the blame of what happened during this game to me not only incorrect, but also an insult from a player of proven inferiority.

Mwhahaha.. 'proven inferiority'? Probably proven by the tremendously appraised, consulted and implemented carnivor system right? Haha. And don't bring up that game you won from me in Christmas past.. A rematch anytime, anywhere, would love to.

I find your defence of Italy insulting, as your unwillingness to mildly acknowledge you gave open house to France..

I think France his eog won't be far off from my 'sarcastic simplification'. Do you? Seriously though, in all honesty?

Re: rematch
Challenge accepted :) gameID=80542
Re: Defense of Italy.
When do I defend Italy?? I practically assign full blame to this guy!
Re: France's EoG
I'll await what he has to say and bring out the popcorn in anticipation

What's the password on your rematch game, RH? I'll join up.

Hey red, am I still in this edition?

Dang. I dunno, are you choosing my side in the challenge? ;-)

No I'm kidding. I'd have to discuss with Mrcs, I'll let you know.

gameID=80544 this will be a more worthy field of valor

gameID=80545

I fight for freedom, liberty, and justice. But I'll take your side red.

haha.. can we open another thread for the recruitment of a new game? I would really hate to see my pathetic rant about this game bumped on top of the forum all the time :( I regretted my commentary the moment I posted, I resisted for so long, but my mind was weak and my annoyance endless..

@Reddie, I would love a rematch, but maybe I should host this edition, as I believe you hosted every game you and I played in. Right? Btw: do you mind if its starts in a week or two, as I expect to be in less games around that time?

All play btw, my comments, except at Italy's adres.. there I go again *dang* :)

In looking back through everything, I should take the time to note that red house was the only name caller to apologize (almost immediately) both in global and in private press. I extend an apology to red house for not acknowledging this fact the first time in my EoG.

@ Aurelius, I offer you the most sincerest of apologies now, the I bumped this thread unduly. I refrained throughout the night posting this comment and apology to red house, hoping that the French EoG would bump the thread for me, then I could piggy back the bump, but alas, my heart was heavy with repentance on this day of love universal. I hope you can forgive this bump in this thread you loathe.

Thanks dubmdell that's very nice of you. I find your text very poetic, are you a poet? Today would be the day to shine if you are ;-)
(PS MrcsAurelius can mute any thread he loathes so don't worry too much about it ;) )

France EOG "France Tells All"

Pre-game
This game was a reboot of a similar game that was drawn early due to France CDing. I knew that Redhouse would be in the game, as he was the one organizing it, and that at least some of the following players would be involved: Diplomat33, Lowell, Tru Ninja, President Eden. While I eventually deduced that President Eden was not playing, due to him leaving all the games he was involved in, I wasn't aware of which of the other three were playing until the endgame reveal.

1901
This was my second game as France, the first having been a relatively casual game with six friends that ended in a two-way France/Germany draw. I knew that I would have to step up my game for the high caliber of players I expected to face, but nevertheless entertained hopes that this game might be my first Classic solo.

And then, the game begins (time for present tense!).

Austria inadvertently reveals his identity almost immediately through loud complaints over drawing Austria, and I cringe at the amount of attention he is drawing to himself. It is nice for France to have Austria around to distract the neighboring powers, and an early Austria slaughter doesn't bode well for me.

I make the usual peace and DMZs with my neighbors, and only Germany provides me with any early worries. He turns down my offer to bounce in Burgundy and wants Belgium as well. In response to my concerns regarding him getting three builds, he offers to support me into Venice, a direction I am not really looking in at the moment. I am intentionally vague about my expansion intentions, but imply that I might be moving into Burgundy. This ends up having the desired effect of convincing him not to move there himself, freeing me up to move my army elsewhere.

I also reach out to the other nations, seeking out useful information. I almost convince Russia to make a northern opening, but he later changes his mind. He is open about this, however, and I keep him in mind as a possible ally.

At this time, I have no idea who Red, the only player I know for certain to be playing, is. I suspect England, due to England's writing style, but considering that I'm France I already have more than enough reasons to tread carefully around my northern neighbor!

Reasonably certain that relations with all three neighbors are friendly, I make the extremely non-committal opening of Bre-Mid, Par-Gas, Mar-Spa. Eng, Bur, and Pie all end up vacant after the Spring moves, which I consider to be a great start. Turkey also moves to Armenia, and Austria to Galicia, meaning the Russian is going to be very distracted in the south.

Russia begins complaining loudly in Global about being attacked by everyone, and England suggests that we exploit this by ganging up on Germany, something that Russia will likely welcome. I outwardly agree with the proposal, though really I remain uncommitted. I decide to see if I can't find a way to position myself to stab either England or Germany, and only choose at the last minute.

The Fall moves suddenly leave me in a rather disconcerting situation. England lets Germany into Belgium, Italy stabs Austria, and Turkey and Russia do an about-face and start working together. Furthermore, both Germany and England approach me about a Western Triple. This concerns me, as I suspect that such an alliance will inevitably lead to me being stabbed by England, and with a possible Juggernaut Italy is unlikely to be a threat to me and is an undesirable foe. That England and Germany also seem to be on the same page worries me.

I immediately set to work prying England and Germany apart. Oddly, Germany is the one who is most insistent of the benefits of a Western Triple, and he is unswayed by my suggestions that Italy should be left alone and that England is a threat to him. My results with England are a bit more mixed. While he agrees to work together to stab Germany and approves me building in Brest and Paris, he insists on building F London as insurance against a stab. I can work with this, though, and accept.

Meanwhile, Turkey attempts to convince me to build F Mar and attack Italy. I remain uncommitted, but in truth have little interest in aiding what I see as an emerging Juggernaut.

England builds as stated, while Germany makes a triple army build. This is a mixed blessing, as while he will be very strong on the mainland he will have difficulty controlling the north.

1902
Seeing our builds, Germany realizes that his Western Triple proposal has been shot down, and immediately offers to help me stab England. He offers me Belgium in exchange, but wants London and Edinburgh. I agree to move to Picardy and the English Channel so long as he doesn't move to Burgundy. Simultaneously, I arrange with England to make the exact same moves, ostensibly for the purpose of taking Belgium.

At this point, I am fairly certain that I want to stab England. He is the greater long-term threat, in my opinion, and Germany's lack of fleets means that, with England out of the picture, I can dominate the north and will have plenty of options for stabbing Germany. Germany is clearly a savvy player who knows what he wants and how to get it, but I am convinced that I can out-maneuver him when the time comes.

Spring moves reveal Austria's rapid demise, paired with a rather unexpected German support of Russia into Sweden. Germany justifies this by saying that he needs a friendly Russia, and that Turkey will likely stab Russia soon. I highly doubt this, and we extensively debate how the invasion of England will proceed. This disagreement eventually results in a failed German attempt to convoy to Wales, which ends up being a blessing in disguise as success would have resulted in England slipping into Holland.

Meanwhile, the other Fall moves reveal the board working in my favor. Turkey, increasingly considering me to be a friendly power, stabs Italy in Budapest. England, at my encouragement, moves into St Petersburg, ensuring that I'll have Russia's support against him as well. Austria is reduced to Vienna, but I am fairly certain that Germany will soon have new pressures from the growing Juggernaut.

1903
England, of course, is furious at the stab, but he is in deep water thanks to attacking both Germany and Russia on the same turn that I stabbed him. Which, of course, was the plan. Thus, kicking off my third year, I'm feeling fairly confident. I have one enemy, who has just stabbed two other players. Every other player is either too far away to harm me or has far more pressing matters to worry about. Germany is the main potential threat, and amazingly he still remains convinced that the alliance between Turkey and Russia won't last much longer. I resolve to minimize his threat to me until war can be arranged between Russia and himself.

The first step is to convoy an army of his to England, which removes the last of his units on my border. Meanwhile, I begin contemplating what to do about Turkey. He is set to defeat Italy, given time, and is actively requesting my assistance in hastening this process. I decide to give the same "have it both ways" strategy that I used with Germany and England another shot.

I convince Italy to allow me to move into Piedmont, as an assisting unit against the approaching Turks. Simultaneously, I tell Turkey that I am setting up a stab of Italy. Russia also seems pleased with the development, helping to confirm my suspicions of a Juggernaut.

In the Fall, I support Germany into Liverpool in exchange for Belgium. This leaves me even more secure against the Germans, especially when I convince them to build A Berlin. Germany also takes Vienna while Turkey grabs the Ionian and retreats from Russian Rumania after disbanding the southern Russian fleet. You know, in case there was still any doubt that there was a Juggernaut...

A Juggernaut, that is, which considers me to be on its side. This places me in the interesting position of being both a member of the Juggernaut and a member of the anti-Juggernaut alliance that is finally beginning to form between Germany, Italy, and myself. England is the odd man out, and Turkey is unable to convince me to spare him.

Speaking of England, he decides that he hates Germany more than myself, and throws himself against him with a convoy (supported by Russia!) into Denmark. Russia had earlier spoken with me about attacking Germany, and while I had supported the idea I had been vague about when and how I would actually assist.

It ends up not mattering, as England horribly misorders by not matching the destinations of his moving army and the convoying fleet. As a result, England completely collapses, while Germany becomes irked at Russia for the attempted stab.

1903 builds also go perfectly, with Germany building the aforementioned A Berlin. Meanwhile, I have Germany, Italy, and Turkey _all_ ask me to build F Marsailles. Well, if they insist...

1904
Extensive negotiations bring about some satisfactory Spring moves. I get an army in Tuscany, Italy keeps Turkey out of the Tyrrhenian, Russia and Germany clash, the Russians take Norway, and England takes Denmark. So far, so good!

In the Fall, I get London, North Sea and Burgundy (with Germany's approval), and Tyrrhenian (at Italy's request!). The Juggernaut continues to grow, and is now set to dominate the board if I don't take action against it soon. This is great for me, as both Germany and Italy now desperately need my help. Germany even offers me passage through Munich, while Italy offers me Tunis.

I build in Brest at Turkey's request. In actuality, its purpose is to cover North Africa when I stab the Juggernaut.

1905
In the Spring, I "stab" the anti-Juggernaut alliance by moving into Rome and Munich. I probably could have gotten myself a three-way draw by actually turning this into a real stab, but I didn't trust the Juggernaut and, had they so desired, they probably could have gradually worn me down. Would certainly be interesting to play the game again and try it out the other way, though!

In the Fall, I reveal my true allegiances by vacating Munich and Rome and kicking the Turks out of Tunis while helping Germany into Sweden. Turkey had somewhat seen this coming, as my Spring stab wasn't quite as effective as it could have been. Russia, meanwhile, ceases communicating with me altogether.

Germany, despite my efforts, builds F Kiel. This is annoying, but it is only his second fleet. Still, I know that I will have to stab him before he gets many more if I want to dominate the seas.

1906
While things look good for my triple alliance, there are many disagreements about how to proceed, particularly between Germany and Italy. Knowing that I will likely stab Germany sooner or later, I encourage his lack of trust in Italy and Italy's in him. This pays off as both pursue increasingly divergent strategies, and the quality of their communication dwindles. Germany begins to grow frustrated by this, and requests that I prepare to move against Italy to eliminate him as well.

Turkey, meanwhile, ascertains the respective identities of Germany and myself and concludes that my strong alliance with Germany in another game is the reason behind the FG alliance and my stab of the Juggernaut. I attempt to explain that I would do nothing of the sort, and that we were years into the game before I was fairly certain of Germany's identity, but Turkey will have none of it. In a pair of messages to me, he all but accuses me of metagaming, threatens to contact the mods on the matter, and suggests that he is no longer willing to put effort into the game, and that it should immediately be drawn.

Despite feeling rather insulted, I do my best to maintain my composure. Turkey has a habit of being dramatic, after all, perhaps even using it as a diplomatic tactic, and I decide to see if he'll come around before I say anything that I'll later regret.

Knowing that I am likely being vilified by Turkey and Russia, I am very careful to play the part of the loyal ally this year. Both Germany and Italy get a build with my assistance, while I receive none.

1907
With my help, Russia begins to collapse under German pressure. This is fine with me, as my price for said assistance is another English center and Germany convoying his last army off the island. Now I control two corners of the map, and arguably a third with Russia's inability to build fleets in StP.

Meanwhile, Italy completely hoodwinks Turkey by convincing him to help set up a stalemate line against Germany and myself. Then, when Turkey makes the requested moves, Italy stabs him brutally. This drives even more of a wedge between the Turks and Italians, and with Germany having been opposed to the idea it also weakens relations between my two allies. It is clear now that Germany has little confidence in or respect for Italy, and wants me to stab him as soon as possible. I tell Germany that I will do so.

With the Juggernaut reduced to 8 centers, I decide that now is the time to stab Germany. Among my main reasons for doing so are the double build that I am receiving, compared to Germany's one, and the fact that my position relative to Germany is about as good as I will be able to hope for in the near future. I have complete dominance over the northern seas, he only has two fleets, he is heavily committed against Russia, and if I don't stab him I will have to give up my superior position if I don't want to give away my intentions.

Also contributing to my decision is the fact that there is a great deal of mistrust between the players. Germany doesn't like Italy one bit, and hasn't had the nicest things to say about Russia either. Turkey and Italy absolutely despise one another, and the only solid alliance on the board seems to be Turkey-Russia.

Finally, Turkey also messages me an offer to help me solo. I don't buy this for an instant, especially given that me stabbing the anti-Juggernaut alliance is his only real hope for survival, but his frustrations with Germany and Italy seem genuine, so I play along. I make it clear that the solo will be conducted my way, and that I won't always pass on all my plans to him. He agrees, with the only conditions being that I go for the solo and that I don't eliminate him.

I build A Mar and F Bre following negotiations with Germany and Italy. Germany's only real request was that I not build A Par, which I didn't really need anyway.

1908
Solo time!

I seize Edinburgh and North in the Spring, with Holland guaranteed in the Fall. I also force the disband of one of Germany's southern armies, which gives me a strong position in central Europe. Germany remains fairly out of position, but I am just short of being able to guarantee myself Munich.

I present the stab to Russia as a pre-emptive strike against Germany before he could solo himself. Part of me hopes that, if Turkey's offer is actually genuine, he will steer Russia my way as well. Negotiations with Russia seem promising, particularly when Germany actually takes Moscow _after_ I've stabbed him, but despite my best efforts I am never really able to win Russia over. Oh well, on to the other two!

While I don't trust Turkey to help me solo, I also don't expect Italy to be very eager to help me unless his situation is desperate. To ensure that this is the case, I arrange with him a set of moves that I can then pass on to Turkey for him to exploit. Both Turkey and Italy move as requested in the Spring of 1908, with one key exception.

Italy arranges with me to bounce in Rome, but fails to move there himself. Furthermore, Turkey supports me there, despite this not being one of my requested moves. This results in my fleet ending up in Rome and out of position, and furthermore leads Germany and Russia to believe that I am stabbing Italy as well. I see this as sneaky way for Turkey to undermine my solo, but I continue to pretend to accept his help while I do damage control with the other nations.

In the Fall, I turn the tables on Turkey and propose movesets to both nations which benefit Italy overall. Turkey makes some minor deviations from the plan once again, though, and ends up retaking Bulgaria from Italy. He loses Greece, though. I leave Rome, and overall I achieve my desired goal. Turkey and Italy are firmly entrenched in warfare, with Italy doing well enough that Turkey is relatively contained but not so well that he does not need my help to survive.

Around this time, the war spills over into the Global Chat. Germany makes, in my opinion, the mistake of opening the "re-post private messages in Global" can of worms, forwarding my rather mild agreement that the two of us should eliminate Italy. This, of course, leaves me with no reservations about re-posting Germany's messages, which unfortunately for him are _far_ more juicy than any I sent to him.

I begin negotiating heavily with Italy, working to convince him that Turkey will eliminate him if given the chance (which I believe to be true), and that Germany similarly only sees him as a tool to stop me from winning (probably exaggerated). Soon afterward, Italy publicly declares that he is still loyal to both Germany and myself, and will not assist in forcing a draw unless Turkey makes some major concessions, as he considers Turkey to be an existential threat.

Naturally, I work very hard to make sure that Turkey continues to be a threat to him!

Fortunately for me, both Germany and Turkey publicly shoot down Italy's proposals and demand that he help stop my solo. In fact, unbeknownst to either of them, this is more than fortunate for me. These two global posts, in fact, help to cost them the game.

What they didn't know was that Italy had actually accepted at least part of their earlier requests and had informed me that he would be building F Rom and retaking the Tyrrhenian Sea. Following those two global posts (and some persuasive words from myself), he changed his mind, telling me that the Global Chat had convinced him that neither Turkey nor Germany was on his side.

Accordingly, Italy builds F Nap. I'm convinced enough by his words to build F Bre and A Par. Germany disbands A Mos. So much for keeping that war going.

1909
Turkey demands that I stab Italy immediately if I want him to continue helping me. In other words, he realizes that I've called his bluff and hopes to tempt me into sabotaging my one shot at a solo by stabbing Italy. I tell him that I won't stab Italy unless it immediately guarantees me a victory, and that if he genuinely wants to see me solo he can help by attacking Russia.

Thus ends my orchestration of both sides of the Turkey-Italy conflict, but by this point I am convinced that Italy is by far the better ally anyway and my better hope of attaining the solo. From this point forward, I genuinely do make every effort to protect Italy and help him expand against Turkey and Russia.

Turkey, unsurprisingly, immediately evicts me from the Balkans, taking advantage of the position he has carefully been building over the last two years, and he grabs Greece as well. This leaves Italy in a dire position in the south, and the two of us begin planning how to form a stalemate line against Turkey.

Things go better in the north. I sacrifice Holland to guarantee myself Munich, one of the key centers for my solo. Russia begins fully cooperating with Germany, though, and the Germans build a third fleet.

No builds for me, and the clock is ticking. 1910 had better be a great year.

1910
I continue working closely with Italy, and we frequently discuss tactics for both fronts. Meanwhile, he feigns cooperation with Germany and Turkey, and I plan contingencies to fall back and protect Tunis in case this is actually genuine. Italy's moves, however, continue to confirm that he is indeed on my side.

Meanwhile, Germany and Turkey continue to sabotage their own Anti Leader Alliance. The 1909 Builds phase features some particularly delicious (for me!) gaffes. After making some admittedly solid points in the Global Chat, Turkey immediately undoes all his hard work by bashing Italy and stating that he would not hesitate to destroy him if it could be done without allowing me to solo. Because, you know, that totally isn't the thing that Italy fears most and the main reason why he is helping me.

Germany follows Turkey's lead and also shoots himself in the foot, endorsing Turkey's message and throwing in a few harsh words of his own. Then, to really seal his coffin, he declares that not only does he want me stalemated, but that he wants to counterattack and eliminate me as well. Sure, that's nice, except that _Turkey just said that he would kill Italy if I couldn't solo as a result_. Italy is convinced that my presence is essential for his survival. If you want to win him over, don't tell him you're going to kill me. You're giving him, in his mind, the choice between a French solo and a Survive, and his own Defeat accompanied by a Draw between his enemies. Which of those sounds more appealing?

On the actual board, I immediately retake Holland and force the disband of Germany's fleet, bringing him back to two, and I out-predict him in the Fall to take both Denmark and Kiel while disbanding yet another fleet! My fleet advantage is really starting to shine, and confirms in my mind that eliminating England early while steering Germany toward an army-heavy build was the right choice.

I also manage to predict the majority of Turkey's moves in the south, which I pass on to Italy. This nets him Greece, making his position suddenly look far less dire, which is mixed for me because I need him to need me. Fortunately, my strong relationship with him seems to pay off when he builds A Nap!

Why such a fantastically friendly build? The reason, I suspect, is related to the Global Chat that continued throughout 1910. There, the almost astronomical level of hate between Italy and Turkey continues to boil (with some whispers in the ear from myself, but the two do a fine enough job on their own of hating each other). Germany occasionally chimes in, and makes another massive blunder with some "I'm not accusing you of breaking the rules I'm just heavily implying it" statements.

Sorry, Germany, but if you have to resort to throwing questionable interpretations of the rules at other players in order to guilt them into doing what you want, that just says to me that your diplomacy has failed.

To his credit, Germany swiftly realizes his mistake and returns the focus to the events of the game instead of discussing who is and who isn't breaking the rules. Perhaps now he will finally win Italy ov-... never mind, you just started insulting Italy again. My inner soloist does a little dance at this point.

Germany, being a far more competent diplomat than those few global posts make him out to be, quickly apologizes, but the damage has already been done. Italy stays on my side, and Turkey, dramatic as ever, decides to write a "pre-EoG".

I'm not making any of this up! Seriously, for those players who have enough time on their hands to read this EoG, check out our Global Chat! That alone would have made the entire game worth it even if my solo hadn't succeeded. Oops, spoiler. ;)

1911
After some very extensive discussions with Germany, primarily in a bid to predict his moves, I manage to do just that and slip into the Baltic. I also get a few more units down south, which basically guarantees that I will have ample time to set up a stalemate position around Tunis if Italy ever turns on me. I am fairly certain at this point that, if I can get Bohemia, I can guarantee myself the win without having to stab Italy, which I think would be a nice token of appreciation. Not that I wouldn't have stabbed him had I no other choice, of course. I can be quite the loyal ally at times, but even I wouldn't turn down the opportunity for a win unless literally nothing could stop me from obtaining it at a later point.

Speaking of loyalties, I reaffirm Italy's with some more help from Germany and Turkey. Both offer me a draw, and while they leave it up to me whether or not Italy is ultimately included they fail to censor their commentary about hoping for Italy's demise. Why yes, I'd be happy to forward that to Italy for you! ;)

I am fairly certain that I won the game when the Fall 1911 moves were revealed. I completely surrounded Germany and Italy with my units, and I supported Italy into Vienna to deny Russia a crucial build in StP. Had Italy stabbed me in Spring 1912, I could have captured one of his centers for the win, and had he stabbed me in the Fall I could have held the line until I'd captured StP.

1912
I capture Berlin and Sweden, forcing disbands in both, while Italy takes Budapest and graciously gifts me Vienna. He probably knew that there was a good chance (though not certain!) that I would have simply walked into Naples for the win otherwise. In the Fall, I decide not to stab Italy and simply take a defensive stance in the south while seizing Norway and preparing to take StP in the north. Italy _technically_ could have delayed the solo by coordinating with Russia and Germany to retake Vienna, but I knew I'd win anyway and decided to keep my promises to at least one player in this game.

Italy didn't stab me, taking Serbia instead, and thus the game came to an end. Italy and Turkey, enemies till the end, emerged with equal supply counts. Germany ended up in the unusual position of a zero center Survive (perhaps someday I will see a zero center Draw!), and Russia ended up almost exactly as he had begun.


And that's the game! My solo basically consisted of three stages:

Stage 1: I play England and Germany against each other, ultimately defeating the former and attaining superior influence over the spoils. I benefit from England's lack of allies other than Turkey, who provides little assistance.
Stage 2: I play the Juggernaut and the anti-Juggernaut against each other, ultimately crippling the former and obtaining a superior position over the latter. I benefit from the extremely effective Juggernaut and the trust I've built with the anti-Juggernaut through various discussions and concessions.
Stage 3: I stab one of my former allies while effectively winning over the other. I owe this decisive diplomatic victory in no small part to Turkey and Germany, who consistently failed to adequately recognize and address Italy's needs (to be treated as an equal and be assured a place in the draw). Both powers made the mistake of letting their frustrations over relatively minor setbacks affect their diplomacy, which pushed Italy away and lent greater credence to my own claims about their hostile intentions.

Overall, a very enjoyable game. Germany and Turkey, you were excellent opponents both in politics and on the field of battle. Italy, you were a great ally and it is a shame that our alliance was so uneven. England, I enjoyed our alliance while it lasted. Sorry it had to end so soon. Russia, I also enjoyed working with you. Shame that my alliance with Germany, and later my war with Germany, both necessitated that you be my enemy. Austria, I do not envy you. Getting crushed between a Juggernaut and an Italian stab is never fun. Better luck next time!

gg

@Tasnica, Your EoG is the best summary I have yet read of this game, perhaps because you knew so much of what was occurring! Interestingly, in the game and now out of it, only you understood and appreciated my position, and summarized it very effectively both in the global tab and now in your EoG, and because of this understanding, you played me (and the others) very well to ensure that remained my position. Good job, but considering how you described everyone else behaving and communicating, I am wondering if I really earned the title of "MVP France." Seems like it was a team effort of Germany, Turkey, myself, and you naturally, the way you describe things occurring. Congrats on your excellent diplomacy. I was keen to see where you were manipulating me, and I am happy that it was minimal (and the places I believed). Hell, you even said in game you were probably playing Germany up a bit! Good show.

@red, when I asked you if you had sent a message to France about my destruction in 1910/11 and you denied it, it was the Turkish messages he also sent me that led me to believe you were lying.

@Tasnica, beside playing an excellent game you wrote an excellent EoG about it, I'm very impressed. A good laugh too. Overall, very educational to see where my own mistakes were made.

@dubmdell, see PM.

Thanks, guys! Good to see that at least someone took the time to read through that whole thing. ;)