Winter 1909 (Builds) – this game heats up!

To go back to the previous entry, click here.

Developments: Where do I start!?

• Boy oh boy! I think my chances of getting a solo win went up slightly. My chances are not high, but I think they went up. There’s a lot of chaos in the south, which gives me time to consolidate my power in the north and to contemplate centers across the stalemate line that I might take.
• First, Austria kicked the crap out of Italy this turn, taking two of his supply centers and destroying Italy’s fleet in Bulgaria.^[1]By “destroy” I mean that Austria forced Italy to disband the fleet in Bulgaria because that fleet was dislodged without any retreat possibilities. Austria, who I previously thought might be eliminated, is now at 7 points and one of the 3 strongest powers on the board. Not only that, but Austria pulled his army into Tyrolia, setting him up for, perhaps, powerful follow-up attacks against Italy, preventing Italy from ever retaliating effectively against Austria’s betrayal. Bravo, bravo, Bravissimo!
  • Italy is the big loser here. He’s in no shape to defend his home centers. Oof.
  • I wonder if Austria will build a second fleet?
  • Austria gutting Italy is a strategic opportunity for me. If Italy moves his forces to defend himself from Austria, then I have a big opportunity to scoop up Portugal, Spain and/or Marseilles at a later time. Should Italy abandon his home centers to Austria and instead try to struggle/sneak into a draw by holding onto Marseilles and Spain for dear life, I may still be able to get those centers for myself as long as I make wise moves…but that will be harder.
    • Because Italy must make a strategic choice between defending his home centers or trying to hide out in Marseilles and Spain for the rest of the game, I need to keep his choice in mind and find a way to encourage him to fight Austria…to bait  Italy into fighting Austria so that I can make a surprise attack on Spain and Marseilles after Italy leaves them poorly defended.
• Turkey has reacted to Russia’s move into Black Sea as though it were treason! Probably the fact that Russia encroached on him in Black Sea combined with Italy’s back-stepping from Ionian Sea caused Turkey to calculate that Russia – not Italy or Austria – was now the greatest threat to his survival and accordingly pulled back more than half his forces. That’s a huge development.
  • Russia’s encroachment on Turkey, and Turkey’s reaction, are good developments for Italy given than Italy has to fight off this Austrian attack. Turkey will likely not be piling on against Italy.
  • This is good for Austria as well, I think, because it means Austria has time to try to break through Russia‘s defense before Russia gets any builds. At this point, Russia will have a very hard time getting another build, since Turkey has defended himself and Russia‘s other neighbors are the two other strong powers (Germany and Austria). It also is good for Austria because it means Austria can profit from attacking Italy, and probably Turkey won’t get anything from Italy’s collapse.
  • This is probably good for me (Germany) as well. I don’t want Russia to get any more builds, and the massive Austrian threat will probably keep Russia from ever being able to fight me.
• My attack against England worked as planned.
• I’m glad I guarded Brest. You can’t ever fully predict when players will decide to just lunge for your centers, which is why I guard my centers when at all possible.
• And speaking of that, I sure am glad I guarded Denmark. I truly did not think Russia would attack me, but I feel wise that I guarded Denmark anyways. Russia did support-hold North Sea, so maybe Russia was sure I would move to Denmark and just wanted to bounce me to prevent me from building in Kiel? Who knows!
  • Because Russia didn’t actually take my center and did support-hold North Sea, I am willing to forgive what Russia did and still try to work with him, but it won’t be the same between the two of us after that. My trust was pretty high before, and I was erring on the side of strategically keeping Russia in the draw, but now I don’t feel so strongly about that.^[2]Many Diplomacy players are uncomfortable with cutting a loyal ally out of a draw. This is something every player should keep in mind before backstabbing an ally just to take a single center.

Orders: it’s a tough choice, but I should build an army

So I can only build in Berlin, and I have to hold off one of my builds this year (again) because I don’t have enough home centers open (again). Darn… I was pretty confident my army would get into Denmark and did not really evaluate the possibility of not getting to build my 2 units. It feels like an oversight on my part.  To be fair, in order to make sure Munich was open I would have had to leave it vulnerable to Austria, and in the moment it looked very possible that Austria would lunge for Munich. With hindsight it looks like a mistake, but I stand by my choices last turn – I think it was the safest moveset.

I have to choose between fleet and army, and the choice this time is really tough. The strategic and tactical implications of my build here are HUGE and I think I need to think through possible endgame scenarios to make the right choice. 

Generally speaking, taking over the entire north (France, England, Germany, Northern Russia) requires naval dominance, which requires a lot of fleets. Easy enough. The difficult part is that those fleets become practically worthless once the north is under the control of a single power, since there’s only a single southern center (Tunis) that is both realistic for a northern power ^[3]More specifically, England or France to conquer and can be attacked with fleets. The viable southern centers for Germany to take (Venice, Vienna, Warsaw, Moscow, Sevastopol) must all be attacked entirely with armies.^[4]These ideas are explored further in my gunboat strategy guides.

So for Germany, it makes a WORLD of difference to be able to roll up northern Russia (in this game, Norway, Sweden, St. Petersburg) with minimum fleets and maximum armies, because an army in St. Petersburg can continue on to invade southern Russia, whereas a fleet in St. Petersburg is at a dead end. To solo win, Germany will usually need to put enough armies into Silesia, Prussia, Livonia and/or St. Petersburg (probably almost all of those places) to crack through the defenses in Warsaw and Moscow. If taken, Warsaw and Moscow can be defended from the north, but only if the area is saturated with armies. Thus, German fleets eventually become useless. ^[5]Probably the Mediterranean has already been walled off against Germany at that point, so sending the fleets west won’t accomplish anything either.

Therefore, to play for a solo win Germany has to build just barely enough fleets to take over the north, but probably not even one more than necessary. In the process of attempting a solo win, all but 2 or 3 German fleets (which will guard or attempt to get into Mid-Atlantic Ocean) will eventually become superfluous/inconsequential units.^[6]For further information on this topic, read my gunboat guide for Germany.

Now to apply these general ideas to this game in particular:

• Once England and France disband their fleets, they’ll each be down to a single unit that probably just has to guard the one center they have for as long as possible, and probably they’ll both get eliminated anyways. Russia only has 2 fleets in the north and will probably not get a build. Italy is under an existentially-threatening attack from Austria and is unlikely to ever send any fleets into the north. That means, effectively, I am already the dominant naval power in the north with my 3 fleets.
  • However, if I am to achieve a solo win, I will probably have to split my naval forces between getting into Mid-Atlantic Ocean (which will require at least 2 fleets) and clearing out Russia (which my experiences tells me will require at least 3…but 4 would clear Russia out faster).
• Austria and Russia are my biggest threats, and especially right now Austria (who is getting away with warring in almost every direction simultaneously). If Austria were to attack me, it would almost certainly be in Munich. If Austria keeps pumping out armies, I will eventually need to have several of my own armies guarding Munich with multiple support-hold orders to prevent Austria from breaking in. Munich is a center that Austria can likely hold forever if he ever conquers it, so I have to play carefully (as usual). And if I ever become a serious solo-win threat, Austria will certainly attack Munich with everything he can muster.
  • If I build too many fleets and fail to get replacement army builds (e.g., if Russia blocks my fleet attacks for a year or two) before Austria (or maybe even Russia) can come after me on land, my solo-win chances are probably toast.
• If I build a fleet in Berlin…Russia will almost certainly interpret the build as a threat. This is the worst part of not being able to build in Kiel. Even though it was Russia’s fault I can only build in Berlin, Russia will absolutely see a Berlin fleet build as the first step towards my invasion of all his northern centers.
  • Russia and I would be put into a prisoner’s dilemma^[7] So-called “Prisoner’s Dilemma” situations pop up all over Diplomacy games, from the first turn onward.  over moving to Baltic Sea…whoever gets into Baltic Sea first would be immensely powerful against the other (because I would be able to take Sweden the following turn most likely, and because he’d menace 3 of my centers if he got in….but also because, and perhaps most importantly, neither of us would be able to dislodge the other if he got in first).
    • So due to the prisoner’s dilemma, we would probably bounce each other over and over in Baltic Sea, essentially forced to keep bouncing each other’s fleets indefinitely.
  • Russia might interpret the fleet build as some kind of revenge for his attempt to take Denmark, consider it a declaration of war against him, and start all-out warring against me to keep himself alive. If he attacked, it would include moving his armies into Prussia and/or Silesia, a scenario I have been able to avoid all game and would very much like to never see (if anybody sends armies into those territories, I want it to be me, as part of my solo-win attempt!).
  • So even though I previously wrote about the importance of getting fleet builds early on as Germany (because of the distances German fleets needs to cross), I think my strategic  analysis counsels in favor of an army build:

What about the raw tactical situation though? Let’s suppose I were to start attempting my solo win now and gamble that the lack of alliance structure in the south is enough for me to make a solo win attempt – if I went with that plan, which unit would I build? Let’s think that through:

• What will France do?
  • If France keeps his Mid-Atlantic Ocean fleet, that complicates my strategy because I’ll have to leave an army to guard Brest until I can force France into Portugal or at least out of Mid-Atlantic Ocean. France would probably have to move to Portugal anyways though, to stop Italy from taking it (they might or might not bounce).
  • If France keeps his Portugal fleet, he’ll probably stay there until I come finish him off. This would mean I can move my Gascony army to Burgundy and my Brest army to Gascony, putting them into position to attack Italy as soon as the chances look good.
  • So likely I can effectively “gain” another army by pulling Brest back towards the action.
• England will probably keep his Wales fleet, so my follow-up attack will probably have to be using English Channel and London to make a supported move into Wales while moving Edinburgh into Liverpool so that I can virtually guarantee that I take Liverpool in the Autumn and finish off England.
  • This means that on the year after next (1911), I should have 2 fleets close to Mid-Atlantic Ocean, and likely there will only be a French fleet (or else nothing) guarding Mid-Atlantic Ocean in 2 years (I don’t see Italy taking his fleets there, but I guess anything can happen). That means I might be able to take Mid-Atlantic Ocean with the fleets I already have.
• If I can get a fleet into Norwegian Sea, North Sea and Denmark before Russia senses anything, I’ll be able to take Norway.
  • Ideally, I would take Norway by convoying my army on Britain back out of Britain into Norway. I don’t want that army stranded on Great Britain where it’s useless once I control all those centers, and I don’t have any reason to convoy that army into France, since I already have enough armies there and need to use fleets for fighting.
  • An army in Norway is a huge tactical and strategic advantage, as it can cross over land into Finland to support follow-up attacks on Sweden and St. Petersburg (a fleet cannot move from Norway to Finland). Also, I will eventually need an army in St. Petersburg if I am to have a hope of conquering Warsaw or Moscow (since such an army can poke units support-holding Warsaw, support an army into Livonia, or even invade Moscow outright).
• However, both plans (getting  Mid-Atlantic Ocean and getting Norway) require 2 fleets, but I only have 3. That means with the fleets I have, I could continue to press on into Mid-Atlantic Ocean OR start invading Scandinavia, but not both. This is a problem. 
• Furthermore, what’s really got me stuck here is that it’s very difficult for me to figure out how I could get my fleet into Baltic Sea. If I place an army into Denmark, it can attack Sweden or else do nothing; an army can’t support a fleet into Baltic Sea. If Russia moves his Sweden fleet to bounce me in Baltic Sea, my move into Sweden would also fail since Sweden’s move order would fail and Sweden would hold.
  • I could try to let Russia into Baltic Sea as a juke, but Russia could still cover Sweden by back-filling with Norway, which would ALSO still actually protect Norway as well against a single-unit attack if I bounced Norway out of Sweden with Denmark.^[8]The failed move orders (“bounces”) would result in hold orders, which means that Norway would not move and could not be dislodged without a supported attack. And on top of all this failure, Russia would then be in Baltic Sea with no way for me to get him out. Ugh!
  • Meanwhile, in response to my attacks, Russia might move into Prussia and/or Silesia. I could defend Berlin with a fleet, but would never able able to push an army out of Silesia. I guess this isn’t that important but I did think about it.
• After thinking about all this (and this is a LOT to think about), I have come up with this idea that I think gives me the best chance of protecting myself and also gives me a shot a solo win:
  • Build an army this turn and gamble that I can stay friendly with Russia for one more year. Move Kiel into Denmark next turn, but pass it off as a friendly self-defense (and not an attack).
    • That way if Russia moves into Baltic Sea, he might just retreat back to Sweden on his own (trying to bounce my army from taking Sweden) and I can still cover all my centers with a self-bounce. If Russia has his fleet in Norway and Baltic Sea, he might bounce himself in Sweden to defend it while keeping Baltic Sea, but if my idea is to hold with Denmark anyways, I could support one of Russia’s units into Sweden (which I usually call “hostile support”) to either get the fleet out of Baltic or maybe make a surprise attack on Norway.
    • Then I will try to end the year with both Kiel and Berlin somehow open (if I have to leave one center unprotected to do this, then that might be the big gamble I have to take that makes it worth having established my otherwise adamantine defensive moves), and build two fleets in Winter 1910 ( one with my leftover build, one with the build from taking Liverpool). That would bring my fleets up to 5 and almost certainly be all the fleets I would ever build. If that plan works, I can support myself into Baltic (overcoming any Russian move there) while using all my armies to guard my home centers. If it goes well, I will take Sweden in 1910 and start rolling Russia up in the North.

To continue to the next entry, click here.