Smid's Diplomacy Game Thread #1

[muon2]

It's good to see another game get started. Smid seems to have a good sense of how to make the game go forward. Keeping orders on the same day of the week is a good choice. I would also strongly encourage anyone who has a conflict to let Smid know, as Erc did.

I also would encourage the players to keep at it even if there are bad turns. The last game disintegrated when one alliance picked up a big advantage. There's always a role for a kingmaker. Don't get frustrated if allies don't want to hear from anyone else. In my experience there will come a time if minor players stay active.

If any of you must drop out, I would recommend letting Smid know as soon as you can. Civil disorder really throws off the game for everyone else.

[muon2]

Has anyone seen Happy Warrior around? I haven't seen him since we started and I'm a little worried he's not been on and France won't submit orders or something. Anyway, we'll see what happens.

I don't think there is ground to worry.

It looks like there was ground to worry. If France stays in disorder it will greatly affect the dynamics. Since there is two weeks until the next move, I might suggest to Smid that if Happy Warrior does not check in by next Sat, France is declared open and an alternate is named to take over.

[muon2]

Rules question:  If two players both have units dislodged, and their retreat orders are to the same place, what happens?  Do they both need new retreat orders?

I'll look into this to make certain I know the correct answer to this, but my understanding (without looking it up in the rules) is that in this instance, both units would be disbanded, in the same manner as if they both had no territory in which to retreat. I've got a PDF of the rulebook here and will look into this today and get back to you.

As I understand the rules, you are correct and both would be disbanded.

[muon2]

Indeed, Austria is now the first nation to fall from the game.

Technically, the Russians could vacate Vienna in the fall and allow Austria to rebuild.
It does show the need for the Central Powers to make good alliances early and couple them with strong moves. In comparison, France was able to survive an early civil disorder and still come out well at this point.

[muon2]

One thing that's interesting to note - although Austria's last-ditch march on Munich failed, it still impacted on the game, cutting French support of Kiel, resulting in England's capture of that province.

Actually, Munich was moving and not supporting, so the final, valiant Bohemian thrust was without effect.

[muon2]

The moves for Spring 1904 are:

England
F Beligium - Holland (*Fails*)
A Edinburgh - Norway (*Bounce*)
F English Channel - Belgium (*Fails*)
F Holland - Kiel (*Fails*)
A Kiel - Denmark (*Bounce*)
F London - English Channel (*Fails*)
F North Atlantic Ocean - Norwegian Sea
F North Sea Convoys A Edinburgh - Norway

The long sequence of fleet bounces was in part due to a key move by F Hol in the sequence. By changing only F Hol - Hel, the chain of fleets Lon, Eng, Bel, Hol would have all advanced instead of bouncing while changing none of the defensive capabilities presented by those moves.

[muon2]

One pattern that has appeared in this game seems to be a frequent occurence in many games, and I thought it worth a comment. Italy made the decision to go into Austria rather than head west toward France. There is little doubt that with aggression into the Balkans from either Turkey or Russia in the early moves, Italy can expand faster into Austria. Yet, as seems often the case, Italy runs into a wall from either Turkey or Russia after Austria's demise then must fall back in the mid-game.

In a few games I've seen Italy allied with Austria, and it works well for the Italians. The downside for Italy is that growth is slow in the early years. The upside when I have seen it is that Austria keeps up the fight with Turkey or Russia much longer into the game giving Italy time to score big against France or stab Austria at an opportune time later in the game. The big risk is the huge trust needed since Italy and Austria have adjacent home supply centers.

[muon2]

I think it's also quite difficult for Italians to expand west due to the fact that Switzerland allowing only a single land province providing access to France. Italy is only slightly less waterlocked than England, but England starts with two fleets. I think this is one thing that certainly puts Italy in a difficult position.

In retrospect this would have been a game where westward expansion would likely have worked. The first turn disorder in France would have been an opportunity. Similar situations can occur with an active France facing strong attacks from England and/or Germany. The Lepanto opening year moves go for Tunis only, and this gives Italy the option of going east or west in 1902.

[muon2]

I probably should have given the numbers:

England
Build 1

Russia
Build 2

Italy
Remove 2

If I read it correctly I think Russia builds only 1. They gain Ser, Gre and Con, but lose Swe and Tri.

[muon2]

I probably should have given the numbers:

England
Build 1

Russia
Build 2

Italy
Remove 2

If I read it correctly I think Russia builds only 1. They gain Ser, Gre and Con, but lose Swe and Tri.

I had my Sweden fleet disbanded, so I get another 1. Not that it looks likely to help me, of course.

Of course, my bad. I forgot about that spring disband.

[muon2]

Question: Can a fleet on a coast, SUPPORT, but not attack, an inland province?

A unit A can support another unit B in or moving to any area that unit A could move to itself. Thus, a fleet cannot support an army in an inland province that the fleet could not move into from its current position.

[muon2]

Will check out your map in just a moment, but will address the whole rules enquiry first.

Turning now to page 5 in our rulebooks (second paragraph, directly below first diagram), we see:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Note that the italics are in the rulebook.

There's actually an article written by the creator of Diplomacy, Allan B Calhamer, entitled "The Coast of Moscow" (a humourous, rather than serious piece) which plays upon this exact concept. It is located here:

http://www.diplom.org/~diparch/resources/humour/coast_moscow.htm

And to follow up with the other half of the question, since the fleets can't move that way they can't support actions in those provinces.

[muon2]

Ah, thank you.  No need to check out the map unless you're curious at my attempt for extra credit in an upper division political science class.

I did check, and with your alliance you look to be in decent shape. Th Russian seem to have quite a strange position. It's hard to see who their friends are.

[muon2]

Another way to phase it is that you can't cut support on a unit with unit being attacked with help from that supporting unit. Secondly an attack on a moving unit has no effect on support associated with the attack from the moving unit.

[muon2]

Some Drama:

1) Will France try and squash the last drop of life out of Turkey?
2) What will happen in Italy?
3) Can Lunar push Lewis back out of Finland and hold the North?
4) Where will Lewis go after StP - should he get it ?  He'll only have 2-3 armies and all of my other SC's are inland!  Will he let France get the lion's share of everything else?

On 1), I was a bit surprised that the squash didn't happen in 1906. The fleet in the Gulf of Lyon was static for two turns and might have been used for the destruction of the Tuscan Turks. One scenario I saw would have left Turkey rebuilding back in Ankara that year, and I suspect that would have made for some quite different moves after that.

[muon2]

Damn, I thought Lewis might attack StP from Norway to get his army up there instead of his fleet and I could sneak into Norway.  That was my dream.

Only thing I'm disappointed in is Southern Italy, that area looks more hostile than I had hoped.

Question:  If I disbanded my army in StP, could I rebuild it that very same turn?

Builds are determined after all dislodged units are resolved. If a unit disbands after fall moves and there are centers available for a build, the build could be the same type of unit that just disbanded.

[muon2]

Russia's position is a good illustration of the importance of keeping home supply centers open particularly in the fall. Three additional units could help Russia immensely, but unfortunately they can only take one of their builds this year.

With Turkey eliminated, I wanted to comment on an interesting possibility that existed a few turns ago. France had a static fleet in the Gulf of Lyon, and with Turkey's knowledge there could have been an arranged dislodgement in the while the Turks still had their one home center. The rebuild of a Turkish army deep behind the Russian lines would have been a stunning stab, and the Turks would have almost certainly recaptured two if not all three of the Turkish home centers.

[muon2]

The vote on a draw was resolved in the negative at this time.

Draws are very difficult to arrange, particularly if one front is still in motion.

[muon2]

I think it is worth noting the incredible patience shown by England. It's now fall 1912 and England has held the same 11 centers since fall 1908. Many other players would have shifted strategies in frustration, so I salute the King for his stalwart play.

[muon2]

I think Russia/Italy might just end up with a surprise victory over France/England

this game could get boring while I slowly collapse if not though

Even if there is some collapse, the form and direction can change the game.

[muon2]

So perhaps the admirable patience of England has worn out. I'm not surprised, since France was in position to win outright in perhaps three years. However, I wonder if England missed some opportunities in a great westward shift (though of course I am not privy to his real designs.) For instance:

F Hol-Bel
F Nth-Eng
F Hel-Nth
F Kie-Hel
F Bal C A Lvn - Kie
A Lvn - Kie
A Ber S A Liv - Kie
A Pru S A Ber
F Bot S A StP
A StP H
F Bar - Nwg

This adds an extra army to the western front and leaves F Bot to support StP indefinitely.

[muon2]

Assuming the Fall goes as expected, I believe this is the best Diplomacy game that the Forum has seen. Props to Smid and to the players, especially those who came in after the first move (and in Jas' case go on to win.)