|
INCOMING! END-GAME STATEMENTS
GM:
Brian Frew
Started: May 2003
Finished: October 2003 (Autumn 1905)
Result: 3 way draw France; Germany; Turkey.
| Country | Player | 01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05 | Result | | Austria | Matt Williams | 4 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | Eliminated 1904 | | England | Chris Gillotti | 4 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | Anarchy 1903 | | France | Alex Williams | 5 | 6 | 8 | 9 | 9 | Drew 1905 | | Germany | Peter Scholey | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 10 | Drew 1905 | | Italy | Matthew Schweizer | 4 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | Defeated 1905 | | Russia | David Jackson | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 0 | Eliminated 1905 | | Turkey | Robert Gilman | 4 | 5 | 7 | 8 | 10 | Drew 1905 |
FRANCE (Alex Williams) In a sense this was a very orthodox game for France or at least what I would guess as an orthodox game. My first priority was to develop a friendly relationship with Italy to secure my Southern border and then try and gain an alliance with Germany or England to do away with the other. My preference as France was to get rid of England and thus the lurking threat to my rear. This choice was made very easy by the fact that Germany (Peter) was immediately responsive and replied regularly to mails, Engalnd on the other hand was pretty quite and when he did write it tended to be very brief. I had decided before hand that I would move to Eng channel and I did this anyway. I also wanted to pick up my Iberian centres one at a time allowing me not to worry anyone by a fast growth spurt and also so that my builds would reflect the changing strategic position. Getting several builds at once would force me to make builds where I did not want them when I did not want them. My moves were Paris-Picardy, Marseille-Spain, Brest-ENG. Disaster Germany has entered Burgundy! Rapid correspondence with Germany and I think England's lack of communication has played me in as a better option, Germany's other moves are not particularly anti-French and he claims it was a defensive move (he thought I would move there), I would be interested to hear what his true reasoning on that was. Anyway I think this move actually helped us in the long term since it kept other players (especially England) thinking we were at war and also forced us into a trust situation in which Germany's evental withdrawal cemented our alliance. We fed England some lines but I would try and outmanouver his fleet (letting him into ENG) while building a second fleet in Brest. The move worked and I was ready to pounce upon England. Throughout this period I had established an excellent correspondent with Italy which would later on cause me to make the only real mistake that I really made in the game. So by 02 Germany and myself are in position to take out England, I had also captured Belgium. In the East, Italy, Russia, Austria and Turkey seemed enmeshed in a complex conflict with Austria clearly struggling. 02 spring and Autumn saw my moves against england succeed brilliantly with an nice little convoy onto English soil in Autumn. Ironically Engand NMR this go so I could have gained a centre. I had assumed he would try and cover his centres and thus had made the convoy as a piece of tactical brilliance!! I was pleased with this move and a little disappointed that it ended up succeeding through an NMR how much more rewarding it would have been had England put in orders. Through 02 and 03 my relstionship with Germany and Italy continues to be very good a problem since my next major strategic decision will be which one to stab. I have occasional contact with Russia and Turkey. Turkey strikes me already as being a pretty good player and one to watch. I begin to suggest to Italy that I would like to get into the action in the east by getting him to convoy armies against Turkey. 1903 and I break my pact with Italy by entering the med and building another fleet in Marseille. He has left Tunis temtpingly open and is fully occupied in the East he makes a so much better target than Germany my other neighbour. I am not too happy at doing this since I have a very good relationship but I hope to keep him in the game and work with Italy after my 'stab' I had even figured out that I'd take Tunis (still Neutral) and Naples while helping Italy against Turkey in Austria and the Balkans.
Now the key decision sentiment gets in the way of what is the obvious thing to do; a ruthless all out attack upon Italy. Instead I still want to work with Italy against Turkey and so hold back my army in Marseille believing that I had done enough to persuade him to go along with the plan. The fact that Italy does not recognise this blatant act of goodwill does annoy me for the rest of the game as he resists cooperating and inevitably any chance of a more favourable result. I should have moved to Pidemont while the whole of Northern Italy was open but hey I'm just too nice and I guess I underestimated how some people react to being stabbed even on a very small scale (breaking a pact about occupying sea spaces). For me the rest of the game consisted of the complete occupation of England and becoming frustrated by Italy as he more or less became a Turkish stooge (good diplomacy by Turkey I guess) my alliance with Germany became stronger and it was clear that any breaking of this alliance from this point onwards would have had more negatives than gains. The game drifted into a stalemate and while I think there was a bit more playing left in it most of this would have occured in the East and I would have faced a slow torturous set of moves for the next three or four moves. My biggest frustration was Italy not wishing to trust me or work with me complaining about my betrayal and yet was happy to work with Turkey who had taken centres directly off him. Could never work that out and by the end regretted not just going for the jugular as my brian was telling me all along.
Germany: A good ally and kept in contact well. We combined to good effect. There was never really an opportunity when stabbing him would have been of any benefit to me in the context of the game as a whole although I would have done so had a solo opportunity presented itself. In a sense we were forced together from the start (England's faliure to communicate effectively) and then later by events in the East (collapse of Austria and Russia). On saying that I think I would have worked with Peter anyway since we had a good criss-cross of correspondence and were able to work together on our general play and strategy.
Italy: Matt is a great guy and I hope to keep in contact and help him out if he does still think about coming to Manchester to study. He played really well during the start and middle but did frustrate me during the later stages. Then again I guess he had good reason to as in a sense there was no real logic to my desire to work with Italy and not against him in diplomacy terms.
England: Short on the diplomacy made it difficult to get any where with him. I guess he was maybe a younger player and I would have helped him out had I had more time and correspondence from him and had I not felt that England was a better target for me.
Russia: I had some conatct and feel a bit bad about how he went out. I would have gone with the plan but we did not get the confirmation we were looking for especially Germany. I guess the lack of an ally in Turkey, Italy or Austria did for you and thought that you could have worked with Italy pretty well at one point but in never transpired.
Turkey: I was convinced from 02 onwards that Turkey was the only threat to my getting a solo or two way draw with Germany and so it proved. We never really did any proper diplomacy since I wanted to try and keep you small untill I was able to engage you directly and when I failed this I tried as mentioned to get Italy to join me in an anti-Turkish alliance and failed here. Had the board looked different I woudl have been ready to work with you more (had Russia been stronger for instance or Italy continued his early promise).
Austria: sorry never really made much contact you were gone before I was in a position to have meaningful correspondence.
Anyway thanks for everyone for keep going and Peter and Matt keep in contact. Thanks Brian for your GMing and advice. I guess this is another quick game in a sense partly to the way the game panned out and partly because we all want to get onto regular games also.
Alex (France)Return to Top
GERMANY (Peter Scholey) After picking Germany as my first choce I was pleased to acting as the Kaiser in my first game of e-mail diplomacy. From the off it was going to be a difficult choice as to where my allegiances would lay. Both England and France offered help whilst Italy and Austria made polite introductions. Turkey was not to be ignored and Russia posed the obvious threat of a northern attack. However, it quickly became apparent that France, ITaly and Turkey were the diplomats whilst Austria, England and to a much greater degree , Russia, kept quiet council. This made things very simple. Open fairly neutral and see what everybody else did.
With Russia moving south I decided to make a play for Scandinavia, try and gain Bel and Holland whilst making polite overtures to both England and France.
I remained ambivalent as to which of the two I wanted to attack and my mind was half made up when England made an early NMR. This came at an unfortunate time as if I am honest- the position of my force and Englands were much more favourably aligned to attack France than to join with France against England(hope that makes sense). Then England went into anarchy and this gave France an easy pick of her three centres.
My aggression towards Russia was only to the extent of taking sweden and whilst I tried to encourage Turkey to make more progress against the Tsar, I was frustrated by his stubborn position regarding him supporting Russia in Warsaw.
I therefore made a tentative alliance with France, who was in a very strong position after having England lay down and die for him. It became apparent that Austria was in trouble as both Russia and Italy made a play for her centres with Turkey adding influence from the south.
But I was finding the game more and more frustrating. This was diplomacy, and to me the essence of the game is communicating andbuilding up rapport with your opponents.
I had spoken at length to Italy, France and Turkey but got nothing from Russia. It became evident that I was not the only one suffering from the Tsar incommunicado, perhaps his translators were on holiday. With England having an early bath, Austria almost out early and Russia not talking then the game focussed between the four remaining powers.
My alliance with France grew to the point that it was evident that we would be in it to the very end. In the east Turkey was playing a crafty game, expanding angd suddenly becoming a real threat.Italy in the centre held the balance. Matt was really pulling all the stops out in an attempt to remain a major force in the game.Russia was still a loose cannon and could not be relied upon to reply let alone offer suggestions.
In the end the fate of the game was sealed when Italy surrended his homeland and ultimately his position to Turkey.That was a real stroke of diplomacy Tucker which I still think was the best of the game.From a position where me and France were offering Italty a share in a three way draw by eliminating Turkey, he suddenly turned on us and invited a Turkish army onto his soil whilst the Sultans remaining forces put a tight grip around his forces.
That was it. Myself and Alex dug in and planned a stalemate line in the centre whilst I still tried to edge into Russia in the north and east. However, I think Russia finally got to everyone and in the last turn of the game a four way attack eliminated him in an attempt to force the issue and rush towards a draw.
As it happened,Tucker almost spoiled things with a withdrawl of support of my army into Warsaw.But it was immaterial as I still marched into the beleagured centre to hold a tight grip in the east.
With the proposal for a draw on offer I thought with attrition I could have forced my way into Turkey.Ultimately I think I was in the best position to go for an outright win but that would have relied on Alex being prepared to gnaw away in the west and Med whilst I got stroinger through Russia and into Turkey.
It would not have been much fun and ultimately might not have been successful as Tucker Im sure would have put up fierce resistance.
No in the end the draw was the right result.
From my point of view it was an odd game.Other than attacking Russia I never got physical with anybody, never fell out diplomatically and everything was very gentleman like. The game sort of shaped itself from early on with Englands anarchy, Austrias difficulty and Russias incommunicado.
I would like to thank everybody concerned for a very enjoyable first game. I hope to play against all of you again in the future and will miss speaking to you.
Perhaps if Matt comes over to study then we can have a face to face game sometime.
Thanks to Brian for GMing so efficiently and I look forward to my next game.
Return to Top
ITALY (Matthew Schweizer) Well, this was certainly an interesting and exciting game. First off I want
to thank Alex, Tucker, and Pete for the amount of communications we had --
it definitely became one of the highlights during my break from classes to
get a response from you guys. Before I get into the moves, I feel like I
should regale you with a little background. Feel free to skip it if you'd
like =).
I've been playing for 3 years now, and with the exception of this game I
played in high school. More often than not, playing was a total joke; I
eventually ended up winning solo as Italy and Turkey, and was always in the
winning alliance at the end of the game. Naturally, once I found Dip2000, I
was ecstatic. Finally, I could test myself against real players. After a
long (month-long, I think) wait I finally got into my first game. And this
is where I will begin the story of Italy's epic journey from the Italian
mainland to the Italian mainland (plus Vienna, minus Apulia -- it's about
even, right?)...
I wanted to try something new this game, something I had never even thought
about much: an Italy 100% dedicated in the East. Generally Italy takes
Tunis, gets her 4 armies, and sits there until the dust settles. I decided
to be much more aggressive, offensive, and rely on a LOT of diplomacy to
keep France and Germany at bay... Obviously this had mixed results.
Things were definitely looking up the first turn or so. Everyone talked a
lot (except Chris; a shame he didn't communicate with me until after his
anarchy) and it seemed like I had a free hand to do as I pleased. Turkey and
I had conspired against Austria from practically the get-go; I myself was
leary of a Turkish partner but I decided that it was the best bet for the
time being.
Russia tended to be a sporadic ally. If his borderline insane moves were
designed to throw everyone off, they certainly worked. Although Turkey and I
decided early that Dave had to go, it wouldn't be until the last turn, when
all hope of Dave pulling through and helping draw a stalemate line, that we
would finally see that met.
Meanwhile, in the West, Alex witnessed a rare historical event: the English
conceded their island nation to the French with minimal effort! Indeed, not
since the Norman invasions of 1066 have we seen something like this. With
the crowns of the United Kingdom tied to France's for all eternity, France
saw a huge increase in armies and a newfound desire to unite all of Europe
under her control. With a combination of a powerful ally and a whimsical
neighbor (Russia), Germany could exercise her influence over the
Scandinavian Peninsula, and ultimately the greater northern half of the
Motherland itself.
With England gone and Russia falling apart, the Franco-Prussian alliance
(ironic, eh?) seemed unshakable. This huge surge in the F/G's power happened
at about the same time Russia and I planned to invade Turkey -- sorry
Tucker, it's true. Please don't kill me =) -- yet with Russia's track record
I decided to play a safe first move, so I could write said move off as
purely defensive or some other rubbish... I've already forgotten what the
excuse was. Being as overextended as I was, France invaded the
Mediterranean, much to my frustration. Facing imminent defeat or becoming a
Turkish pawn, I decided (after much going back and forth) to become the
Sultan's front-line Janissary unit until the end-game. I started with the
Italian mainland, and I ended up with it. Praytell, Matt, what was the
crowning achievement of your reign? Why, Vienna, of course. After centuries
of Austrian domination, The City of Lights came under the control of the
Italians. I may not have done much, but I certainly got Vienna. So there. I
win =).
Now here's what I thought of my fellow rulers...
Alex: Especially in the later half of the game, I think I talked to you
about as much as Pete. Granted, we had our... Minor differences... But all
in all, you were an amazing diplomat and quite the tactician as well. You
made this game extremely enjoyable for me -- after all, fending off
impending doom makes the game fun. Great game, congrats on the outcome, and
I hope to see you in other games!
Pete: I'm confident that I talked to you the most out of everyone else...
Not so much in the last few turns, but up until then you were always the
first I replied to. I had figured you were allied to France, and when Alex
would get a little quiet you were always there for me to rant to =). Even
though we coordinated only one move, it was very informative to get your
view of the overall game and future outcomes. Thanks for always replying, I
had a great time! Good game and I hope we meet again!
Tucker: I think the biggest thing I have to say is "thanks for not killing
me after I halfheartedly tried to stab you". We always talked a lot and you
had some amazing ideas for moves. I enjoyed the communication and
coordination we shared. Good job on the draw; you certainly deserved it.
Hope to see you in other games!
Chris: I didn't get ONE message from you this whole entire game!!! God knows
I tried. A shame you had to let France assimilate you so quickly -- I have a
feeling this game would have been much different otherwise. I didn't even
talk to you until after your anarchy, on AIM (a chat service). Oh well, I
guess you did a good job for the 3 turns you played. Next time can we see it
through to the end, or at least make sure I can be the one to take your
territory??
Matt: Heh, sorry buddy. It just wasn't in the cards for you this game. A
3-pronged attack against Austria is nasty, and I think you did a stellar job
of not only defending yourself, but also sticking it out to the last piece.
You should be commended just for that! Maybe in another game we can really
work together? Thanks again for playing it through.
Dave: What can I say? If you had been party to the draw, I'd consider your
moves brilliant. The lack of communication was a bit unsettling, and the
sparse messages were even more unnerving. I had this thought in the back of
my mind that you were some sort of criminal mastermind and you were using
these little tricks to dominate the board. Really.... original.... use of
the Russian army, I must admit. In a strange masochistic way I hope to play
another game with you again -- the tension you can send to others is
uncanny. Thanks for playing!
Brian: Great job GM'ming! You were always as quick as possible, replied to
sent orders, and were always friendly. Thanks for everything!
So, in conclusion: awesome game everyone. I want to thank everyone for
playing, wish you all the best in future games, and hope to play again with
some of you. And Alex, Pete, and Brian... If the studying abroad plan works
out next year, maybe we can meet in person? I'd be more than honored. I hope
to keep in touch with everyone, and thanks again for a great game!
Return to Top
|