|
COLLATERAL DAMAGE END-GAME STATEMENTS
GM:
Brian Frew [EGS]
Started: February 2003
Finished: September 2003 (Spring 1905)
Result: 2 way draw Italy; Russia.
| Country | Player | 01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | Result | | Austria | Patrick Mcdonald | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | Eliminated 1904 | | England | Maiyuran Arumugam | 4 | 3 | 3 | 4 | Defeated 1905 | | France | Michael Smith | 5 | 5 | 5 | 3 | Defeated 1905 | | Germany | Glenn Matchett | 5 | 6 | 6 | 4 | Anarchy 1905 | | Italy | Craig Yankes | 6 | 8 | 8 | 11 | Drew 1905 | | Russia | Doug Stewart | 7 | 8 | 10 | 12 | Drew 1905 | | Turkey | Arash Sedighi | 4 | 3 | 2 | 0 | Anarchy 1904 |
AUSTRIA (Patrick Mcdonald) Austria: Patrick McDonald.
On my first game on the Diplomacy 2000 website I decided to play Austria. I had always liked Austria's high win/loss potential and thought would be a good country to start with. First of all I would like to thank Brian for his GMing this game.
A few notes about my fellow players:
Arash Sedighi (Turkey):
I often wonder what you were thinking... First of all he kept changing his mind about what he wanted confusing me to no end. He suggested so many contradictory things that I stopped listening to what he was saying until in S02 he suggested that he would let me into Bulgaria in exchange for Greece. I agreed to be let into Bulgaria but disregarded his part of the bargain because there was no way that it could happen (cannot support the dislodgement of your own unit.) His nmring in S03' kept me alive thanks to Russian/Italian confusion. I had secured his support in A03' but he did not send in orders, eliminating me off the board.
Craig Yankes (Italy):
It seems that half that nearly all of my messages were with you. Though in the end I received 4 emails in the last year and one after the A03' adjunction. You could have just told me you were not going to support me before hand! Good talking to you, hope we meet again in the future with different results. I still think that you should have taken Munich...
I wanted you to gain two fleets in 01' just not at my expense! I tried and tried to get you and Doug (Russia) to fight. At a number of times I thought I had convinced you or him to stab the other with my help. But It seems that all my effort was in vain. Good luck with the rest of the game.
Doug Stewart (Russia):
First of all I vaguely remember some sort of agreement to leave the farmers in Galacia alone... Sorry about the lack of e-mails I sent have as many as should, and meant to send twice as many as I did. Thanks for the support into Bulgaria but not to the later lack of support. You could have told me you were not going to support me and there was little I could have done. You and Craig took a huge risk in S03' when neither of you supported me and muddled things up with your confusion. Arash could have taken back Bulgaria if had not NMRed. I had fun and hope to meet you again in the future. I remember sending you and Craig lots of emails only for them to get lost in the mail.
Glenn Matchett (Germany):
Never received one message from you. I sent a few to you pre-S01' but they never got a reply. That led to the hole Munich fiasco. Sorry about that.
Maiyuran Arumugam (England):
I enjoyed are discussions about sacking Stp. or Petrograd. To bad it can never happen....
Michael Smith (France):
Nothing much from you though I saw no need for us to communicate regularly. Though I did hope to secure your support against Germany.
I shall not go into detail about the individual seasons because my moves generally show my plan of action. As for the 2 way draw....... I think that G/E/F could have stopped I/R or atleast delayed them until they started fighting. Good luck in future games all!
Return to Top
ITALY (Craig Yankes) Italy, Craig Yankes
Pre-1901
Ah, the tension, the excitement, the possibilities, the dangers and the potentials of looking at a fresh Diplomacy board. The impassability of Switzerland dictates that I can't easily go north, so I can go east or I can go west, but above all else I need allies. In this regard, Italy is in an interesting spot. The countrys' opening positions divide nicely among the "eastern camp" with Russia, Turkey and Austria all looking at those lovely free supply centers in the Balkans and there is the "western camp" of England, France, Germany and Russia's St. Petersburg fleet that will naturally gravitate to the Low Countries and/or Scandinavia. Italy, though, is in an odd position between these camps and besides Tunis, doesn't really have any obvious direction to go. This makes for some interesting diplomacy. Exchanging the usual diplomatic pleasantries with the other countries revealed a few interesting things:
- Germany seemed like a good country to work with and we agreed to work together
- Austria didn't seem to trust me at all
- Turkey was, well, where is the Turkish player???
- Russia wanted to go after Germany (hmmm, that is different) since he had never tried that opening before
- France and England were both interested in me going east since they were going after Germany
Take a look again at the first and last two items on that list. The country I initially felt most comfortable with was facing a three-way attack which would probably lead to a quick elimination. If that happened, I felt that I'd be next on the firing line if they formed an alliance, so that didn't look good. Germany and I agreed to begin an intense diplomacy mission to either sway England and France to go after each other or to get Russia to fight in the normal eastern camp. We tried to get a three-way going with England, Germany and Italy against France, but that didn't take hold. We did succeed, however, in getting Russia to change from attacking Germany to going after an eastern enemy with me, but which one: Austria or Turkey? Turkey at this point was still a silent player which meant having to make a deal with Austria. Austria proposed an interesting opening scenario: he and Russia would go after Turkey and I'd move my forces northeast to make it look like I was going after Austria, but would then attack Germany supported by one of Austria's armies. Or, alternatively, Austria proposed that I join him in attacking Turkey. Either way, I'm stuck conducting battles far from home in a position where it is difficult to defend my home centers. By the time the Turkish player was replaced, Russia and I were talking about turning Austria's "head to Germany" option against him. So, except for the Italian fleet that almost has to head to Tunis, I put in orders to head northeast to keep my options open. Not the option of attacking Germany, though, since he and I were in agreement to eventually work together, but the option to either stab Austria or to move up through the Trieste / Bohemia / Silesia corridor and attack Russia if needed.
Spring 1901
Surprise, surprise, there was a definite lack of surprises! Everyone who told me what they were going to do did exactly what they said they were going to do. Nice. Germany and I especially heaved a sigh of relief that Russia didn't doublecross us by heading towards Germany plus England and France bounced in the English Channel, so things were looking good for those of us in the middle of the board.
At this point, Turkey started to turn on the diplomatic heat. As a late pre-1901 replacement, he came into the game with more than a small disadvantage, but he made up for it with an excellent barrage of diplomacy. He very nearly had Austria convinced that I was going to stab him (well, that was one of my options but that's besides the point :-) and I had to do quite a diplomatic tap-dance to undo his damage. My congratulations to Arash - nice diploming! But, the net effect was that Austria now trusted me even less than before which makes for an untenable alliance. Therefore, the real effect of Turkey's anti-Italy diploming was to solidify that Russia and I had to go after Austria first. We decided to try an all-or-potentially-nothing "decapitation" attack with me attacking Vienna and Trieste and Russia attacking Budapest.
Fall 1901
...and it worked! Austria lost all of his home centers so he couldn't build, the army on Bohemia had to be disbanded and with other gains added in, both Russia and I ended this turn +3 centers each. Add to this that Russia and I now had forces positioned to support each other and that our enemies (Austria and Turkey) were bottled up in the southeast corner and surrounded by our units made for an incredibly unusual and advantageous F01 position for both of us. However, at this point Turkey and Austria could have succeeded in striking back at us if they chose to work together, so we had to keep them apart. Austria wanted my help to regain one of his home centers, so that could be used to keep him from turning to Turkey for an alliance. Austria agreed to work with me against Turkey to hold open the hope of getting a home center back. (Which I never promised, but it was his best hope and option.)
Spring 1902
In this turn, the main target was Bulgaria. As long as Turkey owns it and has a fleet sitting in the Black Sea, the number of attacking options if Turkey and Austria were to get together was too high for comfort. The deal was that Austria would support his own unit into Bulgaria (also supported by the Russian F Rum) and I'd move A Tri and A Vie south so that I'd be positioned, supposedly, to do a supported attack on Austria's Serbia in the Fall to keep it out of Russian hands. (For a reason that is still not clear to me, Austria was willing to see me expand but not Russia. I didn't understand it, but I was willing to make use of it! :-) This plan would let Austria stay at two centers and help me by pushing Turkey back into his homeland.
Fall 1902
Ok, so I stabbed Austria for a second time. Instead of using A Alb and A Tri to take Serbia and letting Austria end the turn with two centers, Russia and I ganged up to capture both Serbia and Greece which left Austria with just Bulgaria. He was rather dejected but understood that it was to our benefit to eliminate him instead of having another small player that could complicate the negotiations and moves. At this point, even if Austria would have turned to Turkey for an alliance, Russia and I had sufficient forces in the area to guarantee an eventual regional victory. This turn gave me two builds, and I built only fleets seeing that they would be needed against France.
Spring 1903
This turn was the most bizarre turns I've seen in Diplomacy. Russia and I had planned on knocking Austria out by capturing Bulgaria, but we had changed our minds on who was going to support whom, but that change didn't reflect itself into changed orders, so Russia and I looked like "The gang that couldn't shoot straight" by ending up supporting each other into Bulgaria but nobody moving there! Not only did that happen, but there were mistakes all over the board that turn. Perhaps the best way of showing this is to quote from the email I sent to Russia after the adjudication came out:
"I can't believe that with the exception of Austria keeping track of his one single unit, I'm the only player this turn that managed to both send in orders *and* remember where all his units are! Sheeze... What a screwed up turn. England NMRs. Turkey NMRs. You think you have a fleet in the North Atlantic. France thinks he has an army in Paris. Germany thinks he has an army in Holland. Are all you guys looking at the same map that Brian and I are using??!!?? :-)"
Seeing the adjudication was one of those moments to just shake your head in disbelief. France was also probably shaking his head, seeing that I had moved 5 units westward including moving an army into Piedmont, which had been agreed upon as being a DMZ between us early on in the game. I sent Germany a note (remember that he and I had agreed to work closely together early in the game and we figured on linking up after I was done in the southeast) saying "hey, the time is right to join me and stab France"; I just didn't expect the answer back to be "nope." Turns out that Germany and France had also agreed to work together and Glenn didn't want to stab his ally. Oops. I offered to join them in attacking England, but the thought of Italian fleets sailing around the Atlantic wasn't something they found humor with, so that didn't go anywhere. They wanted me to stab Russia, but even when I pointed out that my fleet on the Western Med was closer to Norway, Sweden and St. Petersburg than it was to Sevastopol going to the east, they wouldn't let me peacefully enter the Atlantic. Smart guys.
I did an odd thing in this turn - I proposed to Russia that he capture Vienna from me. Looking ahead to his eventual attack on Germany, moving those armies to good positions would be difficult if I held Vienna so we made a deal to swap it for me getting an additional center in Turkey.
Fall 1903
Hurray, Russia and I managed to coordinate our moves and capture Bulgaria! J The bad side was that to do so required knocking a good player out of the game. I sent Patrick a note and never got a reply back, so let me say it here again in the hope that he reads these end game statements: Patrick, while it didn't turn out like you hoped it would, I really applaud your curiosity and willingness to try out new openings. That keeps the games fresh and that is good.
In this turn, Turkey NMRed for a second time and thus went into anarchy. Now the situation in the southeast got interesting since Russia and I had lots of units close to each other, Austria had just been eliminated and Turkey was now in anarchy. What would happen to our alliance? We had worked together well so far, but this was certainly the moment (ok, 3 weeks) that could determine how we end up.
In this turn I did what turned out to be a really, really stupid move. In an attempt to (falsely) convince France and Germany that I'd stab Russia, I moved A Pie - Tyl and A Tus - Ven on the basis that my fleets weren't ready to attack France yet and I could always move A Ven right back to Piedmont. Besides, this would play in nicely with Russia capturing Vienna this turn and look like we were getting ready to attack each other. However, looking back on it I shouldn't have left Piedmont open since it meant tieing up my F GoL to support getting it back.
Spring 1904
This turn saw the creation of a solid wall of armies from Prussia to Piedmont that would let us start to attack Germany's eastern flank. I moved F MAO - Por thinking that it would be just a temporary capture in F04 and started pulling more units out of the Turkish area.
Fall 1904
This was another NMR turn for both France and Germany which let Russia capture Berlin and for me to get Marseilles in addition to Portugal. Russia and I captured the last Turkish center in a strength of 3 move to celebrate our alliance. England decided to join us and captured Belgium. I started up the "freight train" and moved A Pie - Mar, A Tyl - Pie and A Tri - Tyl to start to reinforce the attack on France. With the double NMR, if it wasn't clear before how the game would end (a two-way draw between Russia and myself if we continued to avoid stabbing each other), it certainly was clear now.
Spring 1905
With the exception of Russia and I bumbling our orders on the Spring 1903 failed attack on Bulgaria, this turn saw the first (and only!) time in the game that a move that I thought would succeed was blocked. I was intending on continuing the "freight train" and move A Mar - Bur (to surround Germany), A Pie - Mar and A Ven - Pie. England, however, decided to block it by moving A Bel - Bur. Even with that blockage, however, lots of fleets were moving westward to capture Spain and flood out into the Atlantic. Additionally, in this turn Germany NMRed for the second time in a row and was thus now in Anarchy. This left France with no ally to have fun coordinating with and England essentially had given up and was just "being random", so Doug and I talked it over and decided to raise the question of whether the game should be declared as a draw or not rather than just have it linger on.
So, bottom line, I was very lucky. This game shows what can happen when two countries have a fortunate opening that gives them good strength coupled with a strong alliance between them. This is rare, and I'm sure my next game will turn out quite a bit different. My thanks to Brian for the excellent job moderating this game and a hearty toast to all the players of "Good game, thank you and see you in the next!"
Return to Top
RUSSIA (Doug Stewart)
Russia: Doug Stewart
I was surprised with how quickly this game sorted itself out.
I had never played with any of the other leaders, and was very happy that early communications with Italy (Craig) provided the Ally I was looking for.
I have determined that the criteria for success in a game is based upon two simple rules - no-one threatens your centres in 1901, and a good ally who is prepared to communicate heaps is found early. both of these were satisfied in the first few days as messages flew fast and furious.
The change of personnel for Turkey made little difference to my strategy, and Arashi's attempts to have us work together were too light-on given the fast rapport I had made with Italy.
My tactic now simply became how to get Austria and Turkey fighting each other, as I roll over the both of them. Craig was also in a position to stiff Austria, so we simply decided to hit him hard and fast. Crunch Austria lost all his home land in 1901 - our alliance was secure.
1902 was positioning set of moves as we used Austria to spearhead into Turkey (Bul) while Italy and I maneuvered to take out Turkey quickly.
In the north I stole Norway from England who's Fleet disbanded to my surprise. I also had Germany on my side, and would have completed the attack on England except for a misorder .... grrrr.
This game was suddenly struck with NMRs to Germany, followed by England and Turkey; factors that caused me to dispense any idea of an alliance in the north. All I needed was for England and Germany to attack each other, allowing me to get the position I wanted. Meanwhile Italy finished Austria, and I took Smyrna - Turkey would be gone next year.
1904 saw me ally with England against Germany and my wall of units was ready to finish Germany quickly [I] Tyl, [R] Boh, [R] Sil, [R] Pru, with units in Scandinavia about to move in as well.
Come the end of 1904, Turkey was gone, and all our units were being redeployed to the west. France was in big trouble from Italy, although England was doing enough to keep France alive, and Germany had lost Berlin to me and Belgium to England.
Germany anarchied again as I took Kiel and helped Italy into Munich. Craig and I retained our high communication levels and had demiliterised the east. We could see the end, and no-one could stop us now. The 17-17 draw was an obvious suggestion at this stage of the game, and in the fall of 1905 was accepted.
Player comments: [A] Patrick and I could have had a good alliance, had I not already decided on my tactic for this game (very unusual for me). [E] Maiyuran failed to communicate enough and coupled with a few move errors meant his influence in the game fell away fairly quickly. [G] Glenn was indecisive early due to the EFG not getting their collective act together. His failure to attack successfully either E/F left him as a prime target for me. [F] Michael and I never really talked after 1901. [T]Arashi and I never really got to know each other, but importantly he offered me nothing to have an alliance. I hope we get to try again some time. [I] I really enjoyed this alliance with Craig, and to be honest it enjoyed a just result.
Finally, many thanks to the GM (Brian Frew) for a sterling effort, and prompt GM resolutions. A job well done.
Return to Top
GM (Brian Frew) Brian Frew (GM)
The players have covered the details of the game in much better detail than I could. A sound result for Italy and Russia and I am sure that is where it would have ended up. All those who didn't disappear will I am sure be welcome additions to the Diplomacy 2000 community.Return to Top
|