Winter 1901 (Builds) – France vs. Italy?

To go back to the previous entry, click here.

Developments: apparently France was enraged by Italy’s opening

• • England: 100% (6/6)
    • I flipping knew it. This moveset was the only logical progression to opening with the army to Yorkshire instead of Edinburgh.
  • France: 50% (3/6)
    • Well, I guessed quite wrongly here, but not to my detriment. I was right that France didn’t lunge for Munich, but I am surprised France bypassed Portugal. By these moves – moving the fleet to Spain, pushing Marseilles into Piedmont, and not attempting to take Munich, France is sending a clear signal to all other players: “I want war with Italy because he damn moved into Piedmont on the first move – and I don’t want to fight anybody else right now, just let me take on Italy please.” The attempt to take Belgium is just as much a defensive move to stop another player from taking it, or a tiny gamble to see if he could get 2 builds. It’s not hostile in my opinion.
    • But most importantly, France is just getting 1 build! So even though I guessed wrong, I am very happy with the result. I am the only western power getting 2 builds in 1901.
    • I wonder why France considered it such a priority to come after Italy that he gave up a moveset that would guarantee 2 builds. Maybe he thought Italy was going to move Ionian into Tunis and come after him with that fleet + a second fleet in 1902, so he decided he really just had to get a fleet into the Mediterranean.
  • Russia: 100% (8/8)
    • Told you!
  • Turkey: 66% (4/6)
    • I’m going to give myself the point for my Bulgaria guess, but I’m rather disappointed that Turkey didn’t take a risk and move Black Sea to Constantinople (I myself took a small risk in venturing to predict Turkey would make those moves).^[1]Since publishing this journal, the only point anywhere in my analysis to receive significant negative critical feedback is my idea that Turkey might try to get that starting fleet through Constantinople in 1901. Several players have said that the loss of momentum to Turkey is too great such that … Continue reading Attempting to take Greece and Bulgaria was a wasted turn, and it appears that Turkey will have to face off against a sea invasion by the Italy–Austria alliance, so I think Turkey will come to regret not moving that fleet to Constantinople when he had the chance. However, from my perspective, this is a pretty good development as Russia is somewhat menaced by Turkey now, and since Italy looks committed to attacking Turkey first instead of France, I would probably like to see Turkey swiftly disposed of so that I can get help against France later on.
    • Let me add this: I observed that Turkey initially saved some orders without readying those orders, and then left them un-readied for quite some time. I considered this more evidence that my prediction of a riskier move (moving the fleet to Constantinople instead of Black Sea) was true, because the main reason for Turkey to hesitate was if he was thinking about taking a risk. The moves that he ultimately locked in are standard and boring, they are the follow-up moves Turkey makes probably 75% of the time, and they just as often fail when made. So I wonder if Turkey chickened out and revised his orders to be standard orders at the last moment.
  • Austria: 100% (6/6)
    • I would have been shocked to see anything else.
  • Italy: 66% (4/6)
    • You cannot see this on the map, but the order log shows that Italy attempted to support-hold Marseilles with Piedmont. I’ve seen this maybe once before, and I consider it kind of weird or even foolish – moving to Piedmont to show Austria that he can trust you as Italy, but not wanting to attack France specifically either…I think this gamble has worked out to Italy’s detriment, because now he has antagonized France pretty harshly. France could still pull back (it is easy to retreat back west out of Spain), but Italy has apparently GREATLY angered France. In other words, if Italy wanted France to be his ally or at least friendly-neutral, Italy should have stayed out of Piedmont. That’s common knowledge.

Strategic thoughts: looks like Italy will attempt Lepanto

• Italy is gearing up to attack Turkey in 1902, possibly with a Lepanto opening (an Italian opening where Italy makes a double-convoy to bring an army into Syria). Limited to just 1 build and with his fleet locked up in Black Sea, Turkey cannot block Italy from coming into Aegean Sea or Eastern Mediterranean Sea indefinitely – either Austria will use his fleet in Greece to support Italy, or Italy will eventually outguess Turkey because Turkey has only a 50/50 shot at blocking Italy. Or possibly even Austria will move his fleet in Aegean Sea at the same time Italy goes to Eastern Mediterranean Sea, in which case Turkey can’t block both, and then probably even the blocked fleet will just walk in eventually as Turkey retreats to play defense.
  • As a result of this potentially very powerful attack on the horizon and the apparently (for now) good alliance between Italy and Austria, I suspect that Russia will continue to play nice with Turkey. Russia will be fearful of Austria coming after him as his first target, and Russia can’t profit from attacking Turkey when Turkey controls Black Sea. I think Russia will play nice with Turkey and try to get Turkey to voluntarily put his Black Sea fleet into Constantinople to fight Italy and/or Austria with. At that point, Russia can either just let Turkey defend, or backstab Turkey by taking Black Sea himself once it is empty, and thus actually profit from some kind of attack on Turkey. We shall see.
• England is all-out attacking Russia in 1901. Because of this, I am glad I decided to support Russia into Sweden. The extra build will ensure that Russia has some ability to defend himself in the north, slowing down England’s progress. If I help Russia at all – either by holding Sweden or harassing England – he can probably defend himself indefinitely.
  • Another fortuity of England attacking Russia all-out and my allowing Russia to get Sweden is that both powers will have to keep their units committed against each other (and not against me, Germany) because whoever blinks first would probably get completely wiped out of Scandinavia. And furthermore, as Germany, I can intervene and cause one power or the other to emerge on top, which encourages both of them to try to curry my favor.
• Tactically speaking, I have a decent chance of taking Belgium in 1902, as England and France would have to coordinate pretty well in order to stop me and that’s difficult in a gunboat game – plus they would both have to prioritize stopping me, and they might not.
  • I also have a chance, perhaps a smaller chance, of taking Sweden as well. I will discuss this further.
  • If I were to somehow take both Belgium and Sweden and reach 7 points at the end of 1902, I would probably become the strongest player on the board. That is usually pretty awesome, but can also be diplomatically a bad idea as players who are struggling to decide who to ally may decide against allying a player who became so strong so quickly (and thus looks greedy and threatening).

Orders: I’ll build 1 army and 1 fleet

With two builds, I have several possible plays here. My choice of which unit types I build and the centers I build them from will communicate a lot of information to the other players. I will discuss what I believe would be communicated with each possible build:

• Two Fleets: foolish, suicidal; I am not going to discuss this.
• Not building an army in Munich: does not make sense to me. Munich is an incredibly important location tactically as it can move in any direction, and furthermore is my only unguarded home center at this time. Not building in Munich would imply I won’t fight France, which is nonsense because Belgium is my best target in 1902 and both Russia and England would be alienated. I think I would also seem like a weak player (and thus potentially a good target).
• Army Munich, Army Berlin: I am 100% committed to allying England. I plan to attack France, and apparently intend to attack Russia over land while still allowing Russia to have Sweden.
  • This would be a foolish build, because I communicate an intention to attack Russia immediately after helping Russia (which makes me seem like a crazy person and/or an incompetent player, which in turn makes it hard to get allies), but also to attack Russia in a way that Russia can see coming and won’t work.
• Army Munich, Army Kiel: I am 100% committed to attacking France. I have no intention to attack England, and no intention to attack Russia (especially in combination with my previous support for Russia into Sweden).
  • I am considering this build because I would come across as politically reliable, choosing only 1 enemy at a time.
  • However, it doesn’t really make sense for me to commit so hard to attacking just France, as without the help of other powers (England, Italy), Germany does NOT possess the ability to invade France through Burgundy, even with control of Belgium. Since Italy and England have both expressed a clear intention to NOT attack France, I should not foolishly be the only one to do so, as I will just bash my face on Burgundy over and over while the other powers accomplish important goals.
• Here’s what I’m going with: Army Munich, Fleet Kiel: I appear to be preparing to battle England, since I could move that fleet into Heligoland Bight and start making supported attacks on North Sea with the help of Denmark (such attacks would be easy to predict and easily blocked, by the way), especially after I helped Russia into Sweden. The army in Munich is ambiguous, but not specifically threatening since, after all, a French army sits right next to that center and guarding myself isn’t hostile.
  • HOWEVER, I could move that fleet to Baltic Sea (and I could support that move with Denmark) to set up for a supported attack upon Sweden in Autumn 1902, which Russia will not be able to support unless he builds an army in St. Petersburg this turn and also moves that army into Finland in Spring 1902. Even if that happened, England might still cut that support or force Russia to try to defend St. Petersburg instead of Sweden. It is possible if I go for Sweden that England would take revenge on me (for letting Russia into Sweden) by support-holding Sweden even though he is warring against Russia (and after all, if Germany takes Sweden that doesn’t help England exactly), but it is also possible that England is so locked into war with Russia that England will feel too much pressure to attack St. Petersburg with Norway, since that is very likely the only way England will get a build when Autumn 1902 rolls around.
  • Furthermore, Russia may not see all this coming because the fleet build does appear to be hostile to England, at least a little bit. Or to put this another way, I simply MUST build a fleet if I am to fight England, and building that fleet in Kiel is what I must do. So even though this build still makes an attack on Russia possible, there is no build I could make that is more allied to Russia and hostile to England.
  • I have chosen this build because, well, this plan often works. I have been in games where Germany, sometimes myself, sometimes another player, has supported Russia into Sweden in 1901 to create a pest for England and get Russia some builds, only to seize it in 1902 after Russia has put up a defense and perhaps trustily built a fleet in St. Petersburg (north coast).
  • Finally – I can always decide to just attack England and continue to try to ally Russia. I am not in any way locked into going for Sweden if, after seeing the builds, I change my mind.
• Army Munich, Fleet Berlin: (included just for the discussion) Similar to the last plan, except I completely telegraph my intention to move into Baltic Sea in Spring 1902 and, therefore, Sweden in Autumn 1902. This has pros and cons vs. the previous plan. The pro is that I communicate to England that I want to ally him, so I diminish the chances that he will pull back from fighting Russia and come against me. The con is that Russia, seeing my intent to immediately attacking him after helping, has a full turn to consider doing something dastardly to me before I can take away Sweden.
  • If England were in any way menacing or menaced by France, I would do this build to show that I am 100% England’s friend, and that I am just coming after Sweden and not him, so that he can commit more forces to fighting Russia and France. But since England and France have played friends this entire game, I am reluctant to do this. I am not so desperate that I need to blindly ally someone who has shown no specific friendly behavior towards me. If I built in Berlin, I would be completely locked in to attacking Russia – and may not want to after seeing the builds. I am not considering this build this time.

Predictions: the others’ builds are fairly obvious

• England will build a fleet in London. A second army as the first English build is incredibly unwise, so it has to be a fleet. London is the strongest place to build the fleet, as it could guard against or attack France by moving to English Channel (realistic since France could build a fleet in Brest) or to backfill North Sea if he moves North sea into Skagerrak, Heligoland Bight, or Norway.
• Normally France would build 1 fleet and 1 army, but here France only gets 1 build, so I have to guess. So what France decides to build will convey something about France’s assessment of the board and France’s intentions. A fleet in Brest could come into Mid-Atlantic and prosecute a serious attack on Italy, but I think France would only do this if he felt safe from both England and Germany, and the board is still pretty intimidating to France. France doesn’t need to defend against England right now, or at least he has no reason to think England will attack. I think France will value defense over offense. Especially since he will probably pick up another build in 1902 with Portugal and build an army in Paris to protect himself from me (Germany). If France does this, I think he might bring his fleet back out into Mid-Atlantic in 1902 to guard Brest against England.
• I predict that Russia will build an army in Moscow and an army in St. Petersburg. I was hoping that the board would develop in such a way as to cause Russia to get another northern fleet (such as Turkey leaving Black Sea empty). Furthermore, due to England moving all of his units into the north, a fleet can’t really help Russia right now, because Russia, in order to attack Norway, needs to get a unit into Finland and backfill St. Petersburg with Moscow. So if Russia wanted to go for Norway, Russia would need an army in St. Petersburg as only an army can cross over into Finland. Furthermore, Russia has to hedge his bet against giving up in the north, as England may possess the power to shut him down or he might not be able to commit enough units if Austria or Turkey is a threat. For Russia, fleets are very offensive and a huge gamble, so now is probably not the time.
• Turkey will build a fleet in Smyrna. Nothing else makes sense. His armies are already logjammed and he has to guard against an Italian naval attack in 1902.
• Austria will build 2 armies. Once in a blue moon I see Austria get a fleet in 1901, but I don’t see the circumstances for that here. Italy looks prepared to attack Turkey by sea, and Austria is not allied to Russia.
• Italy will build a fleet in Naples. Italy almost always wants a 2nd fleet as the first build, and here that is completely sensible as he needs another fleet to fight Turkey (or France), and he is allying Austria.

To continue to the next entry, click here.