PETUNIA ENDGAME STATEMENTS
GM: Brian Frew
Game Started: 6th May 2000.
Game Finished: 14th July 2001.
Result: A three way draw between France, Russia and Turkey.

AUSTRIA: Rye Braune - ANARCHY
ENGLAND: Oliver Hoehle - ANARCHY
GERMANY: Don Coder - ANARCHY
FRANCE:  Mike Eddleston
ITALY:   Tapani Saarinen - ANARCHY
RUSSIA:  Carl Brewer
TURKEY:  Michel Vogelpoel 

        01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13
AUSTRIA  3  5  5  7  4  4  2  2  1  0  0  0  0
ENGLAND  3  4  5  7  7  6  5  3  2  2  1  0  0
FRANCE   3  6  7  8 10 11 11 13 15 15 16 16 16
GERMANY  3  4  3  1  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0
ITALY    3  3  4  2  1  1  1  1  0  0  0  0  0
RUSSIA   4  5  5  2  3  2  2  3  4  4  4  4  3
TURKEY   3  5  4  6  8 10 13 12 12 13 13 14 15

Carl Brewer: Russia.
Well my first internet game was a quasi-success, large in part to Michel. Although he stabbed me a few times in the beginning, hindering any chance at all I had of winning, he stayed true to his word throughout the latter parts of the game. Coming in I had played in my High School in the good 'ol US of A but that was the extent of my playing of Diplomacy. Playing against people I had never been in contact with before and not knowing their playing tendencies did nothing to help me. It was a sort of hinderence as well. However, through it all I stuck to it, although I might have messed up a few times. Hopefully when I play again I will learn who to trust better in the on-line games and who not to. And quite possibly I won't be Russia, who I have come to dislike. I thought for the longest time at the end someone was going to stab me and win the game. It did not happen and I am very grateful for that. Thank you to all for playing, and even more to Brian who put up with my numerous questions.

Mike Eddleston: France.
Petunia will haunt me for ever as the game I carelessly threw away. It will be argued [especially by Michel ;-)] that all three anarchies favoured France and that any victory would have been devalued considerably; still a win is a win and I failed miserably at the end.

Unfortunately having changed computers in recent months all the early e-mails for Petunia have been "lost" when my over - enthusiastic daughter carried out a cleaning exercise on the old machine. So much of what follows is from my non too good memory.

Early diplomatic exchanges served to reveal the latent weaknesses in both Germany & Italy. Correspondence with the former was virtually non - existent and mail from the Italian was sporadic. Still with Austrian help Italy was persuaded to move south and I somehow persuaded England to let me have Belgium in 1901 which meant that I had 3 builds and hadn't upset any neighbours ;-)

The next year saw Germany go into anarchy which allowed me to get to Munich and at the same time I had a fleet in TYS ready to "protect" my interests in the event of an Italian collapse. Elsewhere England was pressing home his attack on Russia and Austria and Turkey seemed nicely embroiled in the Balkans. It was then that I made what was to be the first of several errors of judgement. In 1903 England was wide open and I sailed a fleet into the Irish Sea. At the last moment instead of taking an unsupported Liverpool I reversed the fleet and issued an abject apology to England. My only reason for not pushing home my advantage was that I suddenly feared fighting a war on two fronts since it was likely that there would be some bloodshed in Italy. It was a stupid decision which allowed England to get two builds (both fleets) which he then proceeded to sail in my direction.

So the middle years of 1904 /05 found me fighting on two fronts. England not only pressuring through the Atlantic, but also supporting Austria against my positions in Germany. At the same time I was still contesting the Italian s/c's with Austria. For me 1904 was the most enjoyable part of Petunia and there was plenty of scope for spreading rumours and misleading information. The result was that France successfully fought off the English threat and by autumn 1905 had emerged with 3 more s/c's. Of greater significance however was the Turkish stab on Austria in 1904. No doubt Michel will go into greater detail, but needless to say it was executed with such skill that I didn't see it coming. It proved fatal for Austria who shortly afterwards placed his remaining units at my disposal. It was here that I believe I made my second error of judgement. The Austrian units now under my command were spread between Italy and the Balkans and I failed to provide any coherent defence line against the advancing Turkish forces. If anything, my diplomacy with Turkey was hurried and weak. Rye was still taking an interest in the game and all mail between Austria & Turkey landed on my desk. With hindsight I think I could [& should] have handled these units differently. Also I failed to bring Russia onto my side. This was to prove costly later in the game and more on this later. The upshot was that the southern arena saw a gradual extension of Turkish power pushing me back to the normal defence line.

In the north, England's failure to make a break through against me must have upset him and he went into anarchy in 1906. This should have left the way open to me in the north. The key centres were always going to be Tun/StP. By 1908 I had Tunis and a solid defence line in the south. The north was a different matter. I managed to get into StP(nc) but I left a rogue Russian army in Finland. Michel had already spotted that this unit could be used to break the stalemate and I presume that he persuaded Carl to make the right moves. I then made another mistake. I lost time by needlessly taking the Edinburgh s/c which allowed Russia to make a critical attack through Swe & Den. This in turn allowed Michel to take Berlin. There was some brief discussion with Michel about a two way draw but I made an unforgivable crass error in my next orders which weakened my position still further and lost me Munich. Suddenly I could almost see a Turkish victory so I cut my losses and agreed to the 3 way tie which Michel had been proposing since about 1908.

What about Russia? Firstly congratulations to Carl for getting a piece of the result with only 3 units. There was never much diplomacy between us and for some considerable time I believed that control of his units was with Turkey. Perhaps if I had made more effort to offer support when he looked down & out things may have turned out differently. However I think I also wrote under the guise of Austria but didn't get a response. Congratulations also to Michel who exploited all my weaknesses to the full. I hope we can meet in another game soon.

Thanks to Rye for his participation and "proxy". Pity I couldn't have done more with it :-( Finally thank you Brian for GMing the game; even though you logged all but my last moves under the tag of MARK Eddleston. This means that I have two entries in the stats tables. Is this a first? ;-)

Brian Frew (GM)
Mike covers the sequence of events very effectively. NMRs conspired to give France the best opportunity for a win, which I am was within his grasp at one point. However Michel battled on effectively and vitally gained the support of Russia despite an earlier falling out. Carl deserved his participation in the draw for fighting on in adversity and then making maximum use of his pivotal position. I hope all three finishers continue playing on Diplomacy 2000.