Czar Thausler and I know each other in real life. We didn't have a metagame commitment to cooperate (in fact, I stabbed him briefly, to little effect), but it did help us coordinate.

Now, a chronological summary of the game from my perspective. I'm sure I've left out something important, but here goes.

I've played France several times before, and always opened by taking the Iberian centers and pretty much ignoring everything else until 1902. I decided to mix things up a bit and go for Belgium in 1901 instead. However, Kaiserin Tenshiko decided that Belgium should go to Britain, which made any attempt on it by me pretty much impossible, so I reverted to the more usual strategy. Tenshiko then further decided that her opening strategy would be to invade France, and she loudly broadcast this desire. This allowed Prime Minister Kevin to play us off against each other, and made life rather frustrating for me for the first three years, during which I had a continuous standoff against Germany in Burgundy, and Britain kept switching sides between us.

I made the mistake of not building a fleet in 1901 in order to appease Britain. Since I had no further room for expansion, I could not build a fleet, and, since it's pretty much impossible to invade Britain with only one fleet, I had no leverage against Britain until I got into Burgundy in 1904, allowing me to build another fleet and crush Britain. Instead of occasionally switching sides between me and Germany without any gain, Kevin should have allied with Germany and crushed me. This is because Germany actually had a possible path of expansion other than towards Britain, meaning that such an alliance would be stable and they could split my supply centers. I, on the other hand, had no possibility of gaining supply centers from Germany unless Britain conquered a large portion of Germany first and decided to hand me the leftovers. This meant that I had great incentive to stab Britain as soon as I got the chance, which he made the mistake of giving me.

Britain was quickly shut out of the continent by a French-German-Russian coalition. We initially planned to split Britain evenly, with each of us getting one British home supply center, but by the time we got to the taking-over-Britain stage, I had the ability to take two British supply centers on my own, aided by Prime Minister Kevin's resignation. So of course I did so.

At that point, Russia was frighteningly large, and I had started taking steps to slow its growth. Czar Thausler had been consulting me on strategy in the South, and I started leaking information to Sultan Hugh Ristik and Kind Alexandros. Additionally, I started coordinating with Germany against Russia. I convinced her to forgo Edinburgh (which I probably would have given her if she insisted on it) so she would have more units to move against Russia.

Eventually, it became evident that my backing of Germany would ultimately have no effect whatsoever on Russia's expansion, so I stabbed Germany, and divided up her supply centers with Russia. Thausler was concerned that I was gaining supply centers earlier than he was, so he supported Edinburgh hold, which I was not terribly concerned about, given that he could not take Edinburgh without my consent either. Russia and I took down Germany before Turkey took down Italy, so we then started arranging a stalemate while we waited.

Sultan Hugh Ristik and I briefly discussed attempting a two-way draw along the diagonal from North Africa to northern Russia, but I was inclined to try to bring the game to an end with three players. Two-way draws are tough to pull off, and it looked like Turkey would be more likely to be able to stab me and turn it into a win than I would. Additionally, I was in a tedious position because Russia had several fleets in the North, but few in the South, and Turkey had several fleets in the Mediterranean, meaning they could each deploy their fleets against me, but not against each other.

Okay, here's my version of the story. It is a rather depressing tale of a naive girl who really needs to consume much, much less Axis Powers Hetalia-related works.

At the outset, I made the rather simplistic decision that out of the three available alliances in the West, the Anglo-German one was clearly superior and the most long-term stable. So I told England this... and really could have almost heard the selfish champagne-popping that Richard Sharp describes when, for instance, your Austria proposes a Key Lepanto for you. I have this distinct aversion to unnecessary lying in Diplomacy (in fact, I don't think I really misled significantly anyone in the entire game, that was probably one of my great mistakes) so I was rather open about this with France. Demanded Belgium for England, which was very nice of me and which probably made it much worse for me when things went sour later.

From there England proposed a rather bizaare strategy of making France think that we were fighting each other and make us think we were fighting France and basically it was apparently a very complex justification for claiming to be in an alliance with me and France at the same time. I'm very curious as to which he viewed as his true ally. (Obviously, Alex has stated he thought it was him; I was under the impression it was me at the time, but am leaning towards him given how things turned out.)

Eventually things started to tilt rather inevitably towards England's decline, considering how he was really playing in a rather incompetent, casual matter, having quite significant professional commitment outside of the game. It was around this time that my constant exchange of information with Russia solidified into something of an actual alliance? I liked having him around, anyway, and had a general preference for a plan where he stuck around.

Unfortunately, it was also around this time that some situation I didn't really understand significantly at the time came about in the east which meant Turkey would send frequent whining emails to the Western powers about how we had to ~unite~ to ~stop Russia~. And then I was approached by Italy, who had this strange obsession with ~justice~ and was also kind of a sweet guy. I defended Russia mostly for having been the only person to really help me with a straight face at all in the whole game. The retreat to Munich was coordinated, however, and I reluctantly began to become an actor in Russia's defeat.

...and also around this time I seemed to have run out of chances. I had like two centers and, eventually, France and Russia saw what they needed in each other, however short-term they might need it, and came together against me. Kind of sad, really.

Part II

In the South, my general plan had been to ally with Turkey until Italy was reduced to four or five centers and then offer to save him from the Juggernaut by offering him a place as a junior partner in a Russian-Italian alliance.

This was a strategy that I had used often in my high school, where the players are generally of lower caliber and don’t use TDT. Once I have reduced an enemy to the size when he can no-longer fight as an independent power, I offer him survival in return for the use of his units. In our group we call this “puppeting”. This offer is always accompanied by a promise not to eliminate him unless he stabs me, unless I need his center to win. Using this strategy I have, as Austria, fielded a navy out of St Petersburg. I have a perfect record for survival of loyal puppets.

So when I approached Italy, who I had been on good terms with before the stab and to whom I had sent an e-mail after the stab acknowledging my betrayal, I expected to explain to him that I was still open to allying with him in the future. I didn’t expect him to throw himself into his arms, but at least to establish a dialogue again. At the very worst I hoped that by making overtures to Italy I could pressure Turkey into giving me more control in the alliance.

I was mistaken. Italy had no interest in allying with me unless I burned all of my bridges with Turkey, and then would only consider my alliance. I decided that it wouldn’t even be possible to pretend to have an Italian option against Turkey and dropped the idea entirely.

The only option that remained in the South was to loyally support Turkey forward while making sure that I had a strong enough frontier that he couldn’t stab me. Hugh would occasionally make a reference to how he was considering betraying me but didn’t, which I mostly assumed to be him trying to extort concessions from me. We made lip service to demilitarizing the Black Sea and talked about a two-way draw in passing, but I was always doubtful that we would be able to pull it off.

In the North I was worried by England’s deployment to the Norwegian Sea in Fall 1903. Because of this I supported my move from Sweden to Norway in Spring 1905, so that if Denmark tapped me I could still prevent the British from taking Norway.

As I was still ostensibly at peace with Britain, I apologized for the incursion and promised to move out. However, now having a stronger position in the South and with the British stabbing the Germans yet again, I now had enough independent strength that I felt comfortable challenging Britain. I conspired with France to move out to the North Sea, which would make a French attack on Belgium more likely to succeed.

To my surprise, and slight disappointment, I got into the North Sea and as a result didn’t get a build from Norway.

The important work of breaking into the British position had been accomplished, though, and with France’s shiny new fleet and the Germans eager to avenge Denmark and Holland we were able to make pretty quick work of the British supply centers in 1905.

As England quickly fell, however, it became difficult to maintain the Russian-German-French alliance. I suggested that the Germans be given the North Sea and an English supply center, partly to keep them from attacking me and partly as a shield from France’s burgeoning strength. This was rendered a moot point though by the Grand Alliance of 1906.

The strength of the Grand Alliance wasn’t in its operational security. I repeatedly pressed Alex Mennen to discuss his future plans with me, but he coyly avoided the topic and talked about “mopping up the rest of Britain.” Furthermore, I began hearing less details about Hugh’s press to the West, which worried me. When I offered Germany help against France she responded strangely, pointing out for the first time that it would be difficult for her to help me against either France or Italy. Then Hugh sent me an e-mail with the plans he had proposed to the Western players. While I was impressed with the speed with which the alliance formed and the cleverness of the moves (they would have utterly crippled me if I had not tapped Denmark) the element of surprise was not on their side.

What the Grand Alliance did accomplish was the destruction of my hopes of keeping the board divided long enough to pull out a win. If I had been able to stay allied with Germany longer I would have been able to pick up Edinburgh and possibly Liverpool before I activated the Polish front, placing me in an excellent position to solo. Unfortunately, German hostility forced me to rush armies into Poland and cede England to France.

The last touch that finally made the three-way draw inevitable was a phone call that I made to France urging him not to do a two-way draw with Turkey. I pointed out how difficult it would be to precisely balance the fall of my centers so that each player ended up with 17.

From there on, it was merely the formality of completely eliminating Germany and Italy.

I'd like to thank Randaly for being the gamemaster and patiently adjudicating all of the moves.

Part I

The first half of this post will cover up until Winter 1903, focusing on the East. I will have the rest up by tomorrow night.

As Alex Mennen has noted, he and I know each other in real life. The major effect that this had on the game was the exchange of information early game and my late-game switch to mainly telephone based communication to reduce the credibility of French leaks. We have played Diplomacy against each other among our high school friends, so we both had a good estimate of each others’ strengths and weaknesses. We had no meta-game commitment.

The opening impressions I got of each country greatly influenced my decision to open North. Turkey was pragmatic and polite, and was obviously very familiar with the normal sensitivities that surrounded the Black Sea. He immediately stuck out among the players as someone who had previous experience playing Diplomacy. He took the time to explain his points thoroughly, both before and after he knew that I had Diplomacy experience.

Austria’s first press was a single but beefy paragraph, proposing that we establish a DMZ in Galicia. I had not planned on this, instead expecting to arrange a bounce, so I made a counter-proposal that he accepted that we bounce in Galicia. I later changed my mind when I decided to go North and he agreed to a DMZ again.

My communications with Italy in Spring 1901 were politely stilted, although we hit it off in the Fall. I learned (importantly) that he was opening to Tyrolia, so I figured that Austria would be properly pre-occupied in the South and West and allow me free access to Rumania.

Germany was the most conversational in 1901, and made allusions to Richard Sharp’s “The Game of Diplomacy.” Her decision not to move to Denmark in the Spring earned her major kudos points from a grateful Russia, guaranteeing at least one build (or so I thought).

I initiated communication with Britain, proposing mutual non-aggression. He replied politely, but given what I had heard from France about his ambitions in Belgium, I was a bit worried that an unchecked leviathan would be descending on my in 1902. I decided that the move to St Petersburg would be the most bang for my buck because I anticipated that Italy and Turkey would keep Austria tied up.

Then, out of the blue, Austria moved to Galicia. This put me in a bind because I had to choose between supporting an attack on Rumania and defending Warsaw. I supported myself to Rumania. The gamble did not pay off.

My moves for the rest of 1901 and 1902 were mostly dictated the necessity of recovering Warsaw. This forced me to withdraw from the North and halt any action in the South. During this period Italy and I began cooperating closely.

It was here that our differing strategies became more apparent, with me wanting to offer Austria a position as a puppet/buffer state in the Russia-Italy alliance and Italy wanting to eliminate him and move on to Turkey. My gambit fell through, though, when WrongBot didn’t reply until late on the day of the update. Deciding that WrongBot was unreliable and wouldn’t be useful as an ally, I let Italy take Budapest.

I was also slightly disappointed with the proposed division of centers proposed by Italy. Italy had just picked up all of Austria and wanted to take the easy pickings of Serbia and Greece while promising me the unappetizing prospect of cracking into Turkey for my next build. This made me uneasy about our alliance because I was worried about a Parfit’s Hitchhiker scenario in which I never got my builds.

Despite my military weakness in the South, though, I was negotiating from a position of strength. With Italy and Turkey both maneuvering their fleets in the Mediterranean, their chances of both allying against me plummeted. I had continued to negotiate with Turkey, telling him (correctly) that I was worried about Italy’s size. Turkey responded favorably to my hints that I was interested in building a Juggernaut (R-T alliance).

Here is where I made two mistakes that severely complicated the rest of the game. The first was not articulating clearly enough with Turkey that I was not allying with him in the spring. I had made this decision to delay allying with Turkey until after Serbia fell because I felt his position was so superior to mine that if I allied with him I would be a junior partner. The omission of this fact was a mistake that only made Turkey mad and did nothing else. It was not a ploy to open him up to attack; I did not expect Italy to take Greece.

The second mistake occurred shortly after the spring turn was resolved showing Italy with two extra supply centers. This sudden, unexpected gain by Italy did not fit with the slow, even advance that I had been hoping for against Turkey. I decided that Italy was too big and needed to be stopped. However, I chose to wait for Turkey to contact me that season instead of contacting him early. By the time I was able to convince Turkey that I wasn’t going to stab him again, he had already sent out an e-mail to the West decrying me as untrustworthy.

Amusingly, I heard about this e-mail from multiple sources in the West before I heard from Hugh, tipping me off that I had made a major misstep and needed to mend my fences. As far as I can tell, his e-mails had little effect in the West until 1906, three years later when Britain was dying and I had actually become the dominant player in the North. The only person who I didn’t hear from concerning his e-mail from Turkey was Britain. This was definitely a factor in my final decision to cooperate in his downfall.

In the West I was wary of England’s power in Norway, but without an ally I had no way of stopping him, so I maintained my “good fences, good neighbors” policy of keeping a militarized frontier. Contrary to a rumor I heard, I did not ask Britain to take Denmark. I actually preferred a German Denmark as it made any operation to take Sweden more complicated for my enemies.

That's the game up until and including my stab of Italy. My next post will cover Italy vs the Juggernaut, the fall of Britain, and the three-way draw.

Part II coming soon.

Did playing with LW folks seem any different than playing with non-LW folks?

Was there a discussion of the First Game? I was under the impression that a common post is being planned for both games.

A question on Diplomacy strategy:

I've only ever played one game, and it didn't finish. I was playing Italy. Based on my analysis of the personalities of the players, I decided that my most trustworthy alliance would be with Turkey. What strategies are useful for an Italy/Turkey alliance? (Incidentally, any cooperation with either Britain or Russia is out of the question.)