Another Great Turn For Me

France and Russia are gone. Mid-game starts in 1904!

That was quite a turn, so let me take inventory of what has transpired.

Germany and I accurately told each other what our moves would be, and the moves worked exactly as planned:

We destroyed the Russian fleet (not that it really mattered, since Russia will have to disband). What I like about this move is that I now have a fleet in Skagerrak at Germany's request. That sets me up for a backstab that Germany may not sense coming. More on that later.
My convoy to Norway worked. Thank goodness, because the army would be tactically worthless next turn if I didn't convoy it successfully. I'm supposed to move that army to St. Petersburg next (that's what I promised Germany), but there's a lot of options here.
Germany's army is in Burgundy. This is awesome, because Germany and I can successfully attack Marseilles if we want (or Germany can support-hold Munich).

Other developments:

Germany got into Warsaw, which is what I expected. I'm glad Turkey was truthful to me about not supporting Austria. Last turn, I explained to Turkey that I thought it would be good for me if Germany got Warsaw, even if I intend to attack Germany in 1904. That was a truthful statement, and I think my analysis will hold true:
- Because Austria and Italy lined up 3 armies to fight Germany next turn, Germany will feel intense tactical and strategic pressure to build another army this turn (in addition to the pressure to keep the promise to me to build no fleets). So even though Germany got a build (something not so good for me as England) it happened under such circumstances that I don't think I will have to do anything to persuade Germany to build an army.
- I'm now hoping that Germany will throw more and more effort into fighting for the center of the board (specifically, fighting for Warsaw). I think Germany will not succeed, but the struggle for Warsaw will distract Germany from fighting me and possibly cause Germany to lower defenses against me (like moving Denmark to Baltic Sea).
Italy supported my fleet into Portugal. That's HUGE, huge, huge, huge.
- Portugal is probably the single-most-difficult center to conquer. France might have lingered in Portugal for years if Italy did not support me into Portugal. That would have significantly slowed down my solo win plan (get Tunis or Moscow, then backstab Germany). Moving quickly into the Mediterranean is especially important because Turkey keeps getting more powerful (Turkey now has 7 centers to my 8) and I need to secure Tunis before Turkey (or a combination of Italy and Turkey) forms a stalemate position that runs through Tunis.
- With Portugal under my control this turn, I might build a new unit if I can get Germany comfortable with that (I did offer to forebear my build).
- Tactically speaking, my having a unit in Portugal is more valuable than the build. From Portugal, I can support attacks on Spain and break into the Mediterranean.
Italy vacated Gulf of Lyons. I suppose Italy did this because Italy sensed that Austria might attack? I'm not quite sure. If Italy wanted to fight Austria, Italy should have moved Piedmont to Trieste, which would have greatly harmed Austria. Regardless, this is a tactical misstep by Italy that I will exploit to my advantage:
- Germany and I can immediately push Italy out of Spain and Marseilles, so long as we cooperate. Italy needs 1 turn to get any units into a defensive position to support-hold Spain and Marseilles, and that's 1 turn too long.
- I never even fantasized about convincing Italy to move out of Gulf of Lyons. To me, moving out of Gulf of Lyons was so obviously a disadvantageous move that it did not enter my mind that I could convince Italy to abandon that position. I wonder if I would have said anything, that might have spooked Italy.
Italy's tactical misstep confers on me some diplomatic/strategic advantages:
- I will make statements to Germany about how we can crush Italy now, and Germany will believe those statements. Germany won't have to fear that the only way I can grow is by backstabbing because it will be so obvious that we can easily grow by fighting Italy.
- I have a decent excuse to Turkey as to why I would be backstabbing Italy -- that Spain and Marseilles were ripe for the picking, so I changed my mind and attacked Italy. I have planned to backstab Italy all along, but now I can come across to Turkey as merely opportunistic.
Austria moved a fleet into Ionian Sea. W....whu..what? I don't get it.
- That looks like a miscalculation. I expect that Italy will consider this an offensive move and react accordingly. I also expect Turkey to take advantage of how all of Austria's defenses keep getting lowered more and more. I can't wrap my mind around this move. It seems like a blunder.
- However, this move is probably fortunate for me. If Italy and Turkey try to attack Austria together next turn, that might be the opportunity I need to acquire Tunis. True, Italy will understand that I am all-out attacking as soon as I push through Spain, and might be able to put up a defense. But if Austria, Italy and Turkey are all at war with their fleets, I might be able to gain the tactical upper-hand against Italy (I could simply out-guess Italy and acquire Tunis due to Italy spreading out to fight Austria, or Austria might seek revenge against Italy and Turkey by directly helping me get into Tunis).

What Can I Accomplish?

Of course, I want Germany to be comfortable with my building this turn. But if Germany requests me to hold off a build, I will do it. I think I can backstab Germany (if I want to) even without a build.

My options next turn are:

Work with Germany and attack Italy
Work with Italy and backstab Germany
Backstab both Italy and Germany

Work with Germany and Attack Italy

This strategy would be straightforward. I would follow through on my plan to push Italy out of Spain, and continue to reach for Tunis.

Pros: this is the plan I've been following this whole game. For reasons I've previously explained, I think it is a strong strategy not to backstab Germany until I have control of a defensible center on the southern side of the traditional stalemate line (Tunis or Moscow). This map I use for teaching English gunboat strategy illustrates my point:

All Northern centers, plus Tunis, Moscow, or Warsaw.

Even though I made this for explaining gunboat strategy, the main idea holds for any match: the centers in green are much easier to acquire than the centers in yellow, orange, or red, and I need at least one of those non-green centers to get the 18 needed to win.

Cons: To cooperate with Germany, I would almost certainly have to back out of Skagerrak and move Norway to St. Petersburg. Those moves would reduce my ability to backstab Germany on a later turn.

Work with Italy and Backstab Germany

Even though I have written a lot about how I shouldn't backstab Germany until after acquiring Tunis, I think there's a huge opportunity this turn that may not come again: my fleets are in North Sea and Skagerrak, and Germany expected those fleets to be there. I also have an army in Norway. If I cooperate with Germany this turn, I'll have to move all those units away from Germany, and ever moving them back will telegraph my intention to backstab Germany a turn before I can actually attack Germany's supply centers.

If I backstab Germany, I will make my attack this coming Spring turn instead of moving away my fleets (if I don't move away my fleets, I will be giving away my intention to backstab Germany, so I might as well just attack). That's a little unusual, as typically the best turn to backstab is Autumn so that your victim has to disband many units. That means I have to think out how my backstab would play out over the next 2 turns.

What makes this plan seem viable, or worth exploring, is that Italy doesn't seem very good, especially compared to Germany. In endgame, I will probably have to fight tooth-and-nail to go from 16, to 17, to 18 supply centers. The German player seems very experienced and a strong player; accordingly, the German player likely will know how to successfully block my solo attempt. Germany will probably not be successfully tricked by me again once I have backstabbed our alliance. Italy seems to be easily manipulated and capable of making tactical blunders. Therefore, I would much rather fight Italy when struggling for that 18th centers.

Tactically, here's how my backstab might work:

Tell Germany to attack Marseilles with Burgundy, expecting my support from Gascony. Instead, I move Gascony to Paris. Germany won't be able to push my army out of Paris in Autumn. That should result in a capture for me (+1 SC).
Attack Sweden and Denmark using North Sea, Skagerrak, Norway, and Barents.
- My four units (3 fleets and 1 army) should be sufficient to overpower Germany out of both Sweden and Denmark, especially if I sucker-punch Germany by luring Germany into moving those units out of position voluntarily.
- I could give up St. Petersburg to Turkey or even Germany. Why would I allow that? Because St. Petersburg is indefensible from the South in the long run. If I get on a path to a solo win, I can go back and take St. Petersburg in the endgame. Letting Turkey have St. Petersburg could also give Turkey a false sense of security, a false belief that I am trying to play for a draw with Turkey.
- This should result in a net capture for me (+1 SC).
The tricky part would be to somehow defend Belgium from Burgundy in Autumn. I could cover Belgium with North Sea, but that would mean not using North Sea to fight for Denmark. That means my tactical plan for attacking Sweden and Denmark should maybe prioritize Denmark.
- I could move my Skagerrak fleet to Denmark in Spring supported by North Sea, and convince Germany not to support-hold Denmark with Sweden (which seems really easy, Germany just has to have a reason to move either unit). At the same time, I could move Barents to Norway and Norway to Finland, which will work as long as I also convince Germany not to bounce me out of either of those positions.
- In Autumn, I would make a supported attack on Sweden with Norway, Finland and Denmark. If Germany's fleet borders Denmark, then Germany would likely support Sweden to Denmark using the fleet, which would work. Crap.
- I will think harder about it. I need to find a way that I can cover Belgium while also conquering Sweden and Denmark.

The ultimate outcome?

If I gained Sweden, Denmark, and Paris and lost only St. Petersburg (and not Belgium), I would be at +2 supply centers at the end of 1904.
If I gained Sweden, Denmark, and Paris but lost St. Petersburg and Belgium, then I would only be at +1 supply center at the end of 1904.
Either way, Germany might lose as many as 3 supply centers (if Germany loses Warsaw, Denmark and Sweden and fails to take any other centers from me in Autumn). That's pretty devastating to Germany.

I doubt any other player would be able to opportunistically profit from my attack on Germany. Austria and Italy would have to cooperate if anybody is to take Munich, but I think Austria will get attacked by Italy, Turkey, or both on the very next turn. Therefore, I doubt any player will be able to take Munich. That's a big deal, because I'll have to build and convoy armies that fight their way to Munich faster than anybody can incorporate Munich into a stalemate position. This opportunity to fight my way to Munich counts in favor of attacking Germany now.

However, sitting here today, I haven't been able to come up with a solid tactical plan for how to simultaneously capture Sweden and Denmark without risking the loss of Belgium to Germany and giving up St. Petersburg. That is the biggest deterrent to my attempting this plan.

Here's what I think I need to do: talk to Germany about our moves for Spring 1904 and see what Germany is willing to consider. If Germany is willing to make some moves that will somehow leave Sweden and Denmark open to my conquest, then I should probably backstab Germany and get it over with. If not, then it's probably not worth it to backstab Germany at this time (backstabbing an ally just to get +1 SC is rarely worthwhile).

Backstab both Italy and Germany

I can almost certainly get Germany to help me attack Italy in the Spring. In addition to that, I could also backstab Germany at the same time. This is intriguing, but probably premature. Let me think it through.

So I have to weigh the value of how successful my backstab might be this turn against the fact that I will clearly be attempting a solo win without having first crossed the stalemate line.

Here are the biggest downsides I foresee:

I won't have enough resources to go past Spain. I will have to use all my new units to finish off Germany. That means Italy will have time to get replacement builds by conquering Austria, and might have enough fleets to block me off before I can ever get to Tunis (especially if Turkey cooperates). That means I will only get, at most 17 centers. (17 supply centers is nothing to scoff at with sum-of-squares scoring, as I will take home more than 50% of the tournament points for the match.)
Attacking in all directions will be a diplomatic disaster. I will obviously be attempting a solo win if I attack both Italy and Germany at the same time. I only have a mere 8 units. Most players would say to avoid attempting a solo win until you have something like 11, 12 or even 13 units. If every player on the board unites against me, then I'll have no chance of getting a solo win. I might even put Turkey into a solo-win position as everyone rushes over to form a stalemate line against me.
- The idea that Turkey might end up having an easier time getting a solo win than me is probably my greatest deterrent to attacking both Italy and Germany this turn.

This is just too much risk. I won't attack both players this turn.

Messages with Germany #1

Haaaaaa ha....hahaha. wow. Wow. I went to bed without seeing your last message, or Italy’s similarly late 1-sentence message about supporting me (that I probably wouldn’t have believed).

Please take a moment to enjoy this song from a movie I took my family to see two times in the theater and that won best animated picture:
https://youtu.be/lAVZp0vW9PY

So Italy blinked first. We can get Marseilles and Spain on spring 1904, if we want them. Can’t be stopped. I did not at all anticipate that Italy would move GoL away from us, but I’m glad I was wrong about that and we moved everything up against Italy, since now Italy has no chance to stop us. No guessing is required. What a fortuitous outcome to our moveset.

Like dang. We were so pessimistic about how many turns it would take to accomplish anything, and now we took 2 more centers and can easily take 2 more next turn.

Austria and Italy both made weird semi-hostile fleet moves. I have no idea what that’s about.

I can hold off my build as I suggested, since my prediction was incorrect and I ended up with the build. I have no problem with that as it will take me a full year to haul my fleets out of SKA and North Sea towards MAO.

Whether you hold onto Warsaw depends mostly on whether Austria and Turkey continue to cooperate. In my thinking, this problem was inevitable. We have a small advantage: my army is going to be in STP during autumn so if those two don’t cooperate or we outplay them somehow, we have at least the possibility of moving your army into Moscow, or I can cut support from Moscow.

We have to get a sense of how they’re going to move and then decide what tactical risks to take to counter their moves. And actually, I think this affects where you should build this turn.

If you think warsaw is a lost cause for 1904 and instead need to pick belgium, you could build in Kiel. Move Prussia to Berlin and Warsaw to Prussia. Then you would have a unit freed up to grab Belgium.

Other options include: trying to bounce Turkey out of Livonia; trying to move into Silesia, or support-holding while successfully persuading turkey or Austria to give up fighting you.

A chink in the armor: Turkey wants Warsaw mostly likely as an ultimate goal here, but Austria badly needs a build. Turkey is also set up to stab Austria pretty massively, but turkey’s attck would have to start on the spring turn.

Secret Thoughts re: Germany #1

I lied about not reading Germany's and Italy's final messages to me. Those messages did come late at night, so my denial of having read them is plausible. I don't want Germany to know that I knew that Italy's messages contradicted what I was telling Germany about Italy. I'd rather just say that I didn't know what Italy was going to do.

I decided to send the German player a link to "Can't Stop Us," featured in the Spider-Man: Into the Spider-verse (2018) soundtrack. I'm just trying to show goodwill and build rapport. There was a lot of tension last turn because we were worried about our alliance just stalling out and running out of potential gains for me, and that roadblock undoing our alliance (or at least, bringing the game to an unexciting end). I was also "wrong" about Italy supporting my move into Portugal, so I have to act like this is a pleasant surprise.

My points about how we have the ability to immediately drive Italy out of Spain and Marseilles are true. I do consider it an unexpected opportunity. This is why I chose "Can't Stop Us" as the song to send.

I retained my offer to forebear by build. What I'm really hoping is that Germany will just say "no that's okay, just go ahead and build" because Germany will feel like it's the right thing to do for such a trustworthy ally. However, if Germany insists that I don't build, I probably won't.

My tactical analysis on how to fight for Warsaw (or defend Berlin) is sincere and accurate.

Messages with Germany #2

Initial thoughts:

That song was excellent and perfectly expressed my feelings upon seeing Italy support you into Portugal. The fleet in Tyrrhenian is icing on the cake. And now I'm listening to the entire movie soundtrack.

Maybe, just maybe, Italy and Austria will attempt a late-game Lepanto, but I put the odds of that at slim to none. It would be very entertaining and an enormous boon to our chances at a 2-way draw. But once again Austria would be putting himself at great risk to help another power (this time Italy) while remaining trapped at 5 supply centers. Plus it would require a degree of coordination, communication, and trust that I'm just not seeing from/between Austria and Italy.

I think I'll probably build in Berlin and try my luck at hanging onto Warsaw. If Austria and Turkey cooperate and I'm forced to disband that army, I can still hold the line at Munich and I'll still have the army in Prussia to help push back.

I'm undecided as to whether we ought to strike Italy immediately, or wait until Autumn 1904. Even if Italy builds an army in Venice, I'm not expecting that Tyrrhenian Sea fleet to leave Tunis unguarded, and I think there's a better chance that Italy hits Trieste than moves to Piedmont. But, I'm also risk-averse, and I'd hate to miss a perfect window to liberate Italy's colonies quickly and easily.

Even if I lose or appear to be fated to lose Warsaw, seizing Marseilles will permit me to maintain my stalemate line. And even if I don't have a unit freed up to move into Berlin (which I'd only see as necessary if Warsaw seems likely to be lost), I think I could move to Norway instead.

I sent Turkey the following message, mainly in the hope that it improves my chances of hanging onto Warsaw:

My optimistic prediction: Italy takes Trieste and perhaps Vienna. Turkey takes Serbia or Greece, maybe both. Germany takes Marseilles, England takes Spain. The E/G/T coalition cleans up what's left over the next several turns. England and Turkey both contemplate trying for a solo win, but the threat of Germany throwing the game to the other power serves as an adequate deterrent. The coalition hits the Draw button.

Secret Thoughts re: Germany #2

Germany's positive reaction is wonderful and just what I expected.

I think Germany is kind of crazy to imagine that Italy and Austria are organizing a Lepanto. "Lepanto" is a Diplomacy jargon term for when a player (usually Italy) double convoys an army into Syria using fleets at Ionian Sea and Eastern Mediterranean Sea. That attack plan seems absurd to me at this point in the match for the reasons Germany said.

Germany's suggestion that we should wait until Autumn to attack Italy is intriguing. I honestly hadn't considered that, so I should follow up with Germany about what's the best plan for us.

Germany's assessment of how to defend is accurate, and it is reasonable for Germany to request Norway after the loss of Warsaw, considering that I am about to take Spain.

I believe Germany has truthfully shared that message with Turkey. It seems like Germany is completely on my side.

Messages with Germany #3

What you've said makes sense and I agree. We're thinking along the same lines as usual. Let me continue off of your ideas that I think warrant further discussion:

1) I honestly hadn't considered attacking Italy in Autumn. It does seem possible that Italy won't assemble a defensible position on the Spring turn for the reasons you stated. I'm not ready to say yes or not to that plan. Two concerns come to mind that may cause Italy to move into defensive positions in the Spring: First, if I build in Liverpool, I give away my intention to attack Italy. I think I might give that away also if I don't build at all, because Italy expects you and me to go to war this year. Second, I supported your army to Burgundy, which is pretty obviously an attack position.

2) I think we need to think long-term on how to wind up with control of as may centers as possible while playing for a draw with Turkey (or heck, even the 2-way draw since we're QUITE a ways out from 1925). For example, if Turkey winds up with 12 centers, that'll be just 11 for each of us (11+11+12=34). I can't stomach the idea of Turkey winding up the "victor" of this match. So if you and I are to end this match with an equal number of centers AND have more than Turkey, we need to conquer at least 24 centers between us (12+12+10=34).

To accomplish this, we'll have to control something like:
+ everything in the north (17)
+ Tunis & all of Italy (4)
+ Warsaw and Moscow (2)
+ Vienna (1)

I think this is doable. Here's what I think we'll have to do incidentally to this plan:
* make a crushing attack on Italy this turn. We're going to need to capture Spain and Marseilles and then keep going hard. We'll need to bring your armies into Piedmont and Tyrolia eventually so that you can capture Venice down the road. Italy simply has to be obliterated, and we have to do it without giving anything to Turkey.
* Go to war with Turkey over Moscow and Warsaw. I think Turkey wants those centers dearly, especially Moscow. But Moscow is obviously on our war-path because it's a center we can realistically conquer with our large number of armies in the east. For now, you should absolutely by as friendly as possible with Turkey (your message to Turkey is just great) so that Turkey focuses on Austria. But I think we need to be prepare to just take Moscow for you from Turkey, and say "tough luck" to Turkey when we do it. (By the way, Turkey is already suspicious about my convoy to Norway and is asking me why I need to be able to attack Moscow -- so I think Turkey has some sense of where you and I are going with our alliance)
* Slip your armies into the middle as soon as Austria starts making disbands. Your control of Tyrolia could be essential to us taking the Italian home centers and Vienna, and if you ever get an opportunity to slip into Galicia, that could be what we need to take Moscow.

3) Finally, are you cool if I build a fleet in Liverpool or do you have something else in mind?

(1) & (2)
* I agree with your argument in favor of immediate attack on Italy. As Cato might have said in an alternate universe in which he was Carthaginian: Italia delenda est!

* I also agree that our aim should be to play nice with Turkey while still doing everything we can to try to snatch Moscow.

*I'm glad you did the arithmetic to assess what we should be aiming for at a minimum to prevent Turkey from winning (and in the context of this tournament, I don't think we even need to put scare quotes around the word). I also share your optimism and agree with the plans you have laid out.

*I'll add that I'm very excited about our newfound flexibility to send your armada cruising south. I think that, to the extent that I get bogged down in the middle, your fleets have a good shot of flanking and breaking up that stalemate. Austria, after all, just has the one fleet, and even if Turkey and Austria cooperate, there will be confusion/uncertainty/distrust involved with getting Bulgaria, Constantinople, and Black Sea past Greece and into a position to help hold a line. And if Austria and Turkey are NOT cooperating, Turkey's hands will be full building armies to finish off Austria and to hold the line on land. Italy may prove trickier to obliterate than we hope if she takes either or both of Vienna and Trieste, but I think our blitzkrieg still will triumph in the end.

(3) I would only object to a build in Liverpool if we thought we might want to try fooling Italy for one more turn (in which case I would advocate in favor of a fleet build in London as the only credible build if Italy is to believe you plan to move against me). But, I am 100% swayed at this point by the argument that we should strike Italy immediately. So, Liverpool fleet sounds good to me.

Secret Thoughts re: Germany #3

Because this is the Winter turn, the only real question is how to use our builds (which is a very small issue). But I am using the time allotted to this turn to build up my relationship with Germany. I'll explain each of the points I made to Germany:

1) I don't want to attack Italy in Autumn. My given reasons are completely accurate. As usual, I'm not being too forceful about the matter because I want to be friendly.

2) Whether I backstab Germany or not, I need Germany on my side. To make that happen, I have written Germany detailed ideas on how we can move our alliance forward in the coming years. It's critical to keep an alliance forward-looking and to focus on how the alliance can keep each of its members growing. If Germany doesn't see a way to gain more centers, then Germany may lose interest in the alliance. If Germany doesn't see how I (England) can gain more centers, then Germany may worry that I will change sides.

Assuming that I would play the game out to a draw with Germany, everything I'm saying here is accurate. My point here is complex and thoughtful, and definitely is the right way to think about the long-term strategic situation if Germany and I keep working together. I don't have to follow through on this plan, but it will seem very credible to Germany that I took the time to plan all this out.

I could actually follow through with this if I wanted to (it's not a bad plan), but if there's a better opportunity, I'll go with a plan that leads me to higher scoring in the end.

3) I want to make sure Germany is OK with my using my build this turn.

The only thing that matters about Germany's response is Germany's suggestion that I build a fleet in London. Holy crap!

Building a fleet in London would be a win-win situation for me. Such a build greatly increases my ability to stab Germany. Then one of two things will happen:

I successfully stab Germany; or
I don't take advantage of a clear opportunity to stab Germany, greatly increasing Germany's trust in me long-term.

Either way, it's a win for me.

Messages with Turkey #1

I did receive a message from Italy in the end and he confirmed that he was going to support you to Portugal which he duly did. He asked me whether there was truth in your statement about my suggesting a T/I/E alliance and I confirmed that. Besides the support for Portugal I am pleased about Italy's support for Bohemia and his move to TYS. Whether the latter is misgivings about me or Austria is irrelevant at this point; I think we can utilize that move, particularly in the light of Austria's move to ION. I think that is a serious mistake which will not go down well with the Italian.

France and Russia are gone and everyone except Austria gets a build. This is decent news, I think. My biggest concern regarding last turn is your convoy to Norway. If you want to defend StP from my greedy clutches then a fleet is quite sufficient but an army can be put to other uses...

Thank you for sharing all that information. I did also get a message from Italy at the last moment. Italy seems very amenable to working with us, and a reasonably-reliable ally. Italy is also telling us both the same information. This is all a good development.

I promised Germany I would convoy my army to Norway quite a while ago and never considered doing anything else. You're right that I'm set up to move my army to St. Petersburg, since that's what Germany expects me to do with that army. If I were to continue working with Germany, then that's where I would have to move my army.

Thank you for explaining the Norway move and Germany's expectations. So we can keep track of expectations, I can inform you that Turkey expects not to feel threatened by moves made by collaborators, and that expectations of potential targets come second. While I will not interfere physically with whatever plans you have for St Petersburg by ordering Mos - StP I will need to have a long, hard think about my future strategy.

Now, it is winter and the time to reflect and revisit plans.

Right now, I am set up to make a pretty devastating backstab on Germany. You can see that just from my positions. I think the builds will make that even more apparent. I don't think I'll have a better opportunity to do so on a future turn.

I understand the gist of your message - that you are pressuring me to do something against Germany - but the form of this pressure is rather vague. I'm not trying to say this in a critical or frustrated way; I'm explaining why I want to understand more of your thinking. I guess my questions for you are:
1) What can I count on you to do differently if I promise to make such an attack?
2) What can I count on you to do differently if I once I follow through on that promise?

Secret Thoughts re: Turkey #1

I think Turkey's messages to me are honest and accurate. As usual, there's not a lot of content to them.

I decided to employ some more of the "mirroring" technique I wrote about a lot at the beginning and then kind of neglected recently.

I responded to Turkey's usual trite and/or vague statements with some of my own. The important part is keeping open the idea of working with Italy and backstabbing Germany.

I'm glad Turkey is trying to talk to me about being concerned that I might move my army to St. Petersburg. In my view, that's fairly paranoid since I could easily attack Germany from my current position. However...Turkey is right here; I am definitely keeping open the idea of attacking Turkey from St. Petersburg if I move my army there.

I'm afraid to outright tell Turkey "I'm going to attack Germany this turn" even if I really will. I think Turkey would leak my intention to attack Germany in the hopes that my backstab would not work out right (I know that's what I would do; I keep trying to tell Austria that Turkey is about to attack).

I wonder what Turkey will do if/when Turkey believes that I'm going to work with Germany instead of backstabbing Germany? Turkey was pretty cryptic on this point. Will Turkey decide to work with Austria and try to kick Germany out of Warsaw? I'm really not sure. Therefore, I have to find out.

I'm trying to be as polite as possible with Turkey. My messages about how I am set up to attack Germany are undeniably accurate. But I'm actually quite frustrated here -- is Turkey making a threat? Is Turkey saying that something I don't want is going to happen now as a direct consequence of my convoy to Norway? Turkey's communication is unclear to me, which (in my opinion) makes it a poor-quality message. Just saying "I don't like that, and I'll have to think about how to punish you for it" is not, in itself, going to cause me to do something that Turkey wants (because I don't know if Turkey is saying that the punishment is happening now or of it's merely a threat).

Messages with Turkey #2

Thank you for your message. I am a little bit disappointed in myself after reading it as I try to make a point of being clear rather than vague.

I do not want you to move an army to St Petersburg while, apparently, Germany wants you to do so. This is in conflict and one of us will be disappointed and I do not want it to be me. That was the point of my note about StP. If putting an army in StP is part of a bigger plan of getting Germany to look in a different direction while the knifes slide into his back, then that must be backed up with other moves. It is not entirely correct that I am pressuring you to do something against Germany - I just don't want you to do anything against me.

While your stabbing Germany would be sensational news around the board, no one fails to see that you and Germany can combine to remove Italy from both Marseilles and Spain.

I can reasonably only attack either Germany or Austria. Italy is still a bit far and this option would require me to split my forces in two while attacking the former two will allow me to keep my units more or less as a single mass. So:
- If you and Germany continue your cooperation and you move into the Mediterranean then I will stay friendly with Austria and only attack Germany.
- If you attack Germany and stay friendly with Italy, I will attack both Germany and Austria and work towards the I/T/E draw. The reasoning here is that in this case Italy will have nowhere to go except against Austria.

In essence, if you attack Germany then I attack Austria. The only alternative that I see is that you attack Italy and it is E/G vs. I/A/T.

I am disregarding the option of you attacking me outright as that would be very slow going and just too horrible to contemplate.

That is a crystal clear message and I am very happy to receive it. That is everything I wanted to know in precise terms. Thank you kindly, and I will try to use this information to our mutual benefit.

I'm going to find out what sort of build Germany will tolerate. I can attack Germany next year no matter what, but it could be much easier depending on what I can build without upsetting Germany.

Secret Thoughts re: Turkey #2

In my opinion, this is the best message I've received from Turkey all game. This caliber of conversation is what I initially expected from all the players competing in this tournament. Alas.

I believe Turkey is being honest with me, as I can't think of any reason for Turkey to deceive me.

Even though I think Turkey does sort of want me to attack Germany, this information actually makes me want to attack Italy all the more. If Turkey doesn't attack Austria, that will:

Keep Austria strong, which is good for England.
Keep the board divided somewhat, which is good for a solo win attempt.
Keep Germany weak, which is desirable for various reasons I've said before in this journal.

In addition to that, I also want to see if I can use this information to persuade Germany to let me build a fleet in London.

Messages with Germany #4

I want to make sure I have my story straight with yours before I reply to the following message from Turkey:
“I have expressed my concerns to England about his move to Norway as an English army in St Petersburg is a big threat to me. He claims he's doing this at your insistence. Is there truth in this?”

Turkey goes on to note that he will be building an army in Ankara and convoying to Sevastopol unless new information comes to light.

I was thinking I’d just tell him that yes, I do indeed want your army in St. Petersburg to function as a deterrent to any funny business, which isn’t exactly untrue. But I wanted to see if you have a different narrative you think we should spin.

Also: if you haven’t told Turkey that I insisted on your moving an army to St. Petersburg, it might be better if I deny that assertion. I want to respond in such a way that Turkey does not perceive you as a liar. Though I haven’t properly contemplated whether it might be better for us if we presented conflicting narratives to Turkey.

Turkey is telling the truth about my messages. I said that I had always intended to convoy to Norway and move to St. Pete, and that this had long been arranged between us. (I don't know what we could gain by telling different stories to Turkey.)

In response to this, Turkey told me that what happens going forward depends on my next moves. A summary:
* Under all circumstances, Turkey will attack Germany and not attack Italy.
* But if England attacks Germany, Turkey will attack Austria as well.
* If England does not attack Germany, Turkey will stay allied to Austria.

I don't know exactly when Turkey will make this decision. Maybe based on whether I move Norway to St. Pete on the next Spring move or not. I have an idea, and I'll check my messages tonight or tomorrow morning:

I had simply never considered that you would accept a fleet build for me in London, even as a deception. Right now, I have my build saved as fleet in Liverpool. But if you get back to me before tomorrow morning, I should check in time to change my move if you are interested.

In order to get Austria attacked, we can fool EITHER Italy or Turkey. I already suggested that I think Italy is unlikely to fall for a deception, but that was when I didn't even consider building in London. Italy might be tricked. And, in addition to that, Turkey could be tricked. It only takes ONE of them to attack Austria in the Spring to collapse their alliance structure and to get Austria off your back. I think there's maybe a 30% chance that we can trick Italy, and maybe a 10% chance that we can trick Turkey, but adding those possibilities together in my mind sort of make it worth it to try something. Or heck, the simple possibility of them changing sides might make Austria do something (like how Austria already moved to ION).

To be clear, I am still in favor of attacking Italy on the Spring turn. I'm only thinking that we could trick Italy and/or Turkey into attacking Austria in the spring. It's not a big chance, but it's something.

Therefore, if you get back to me that I should build a fleet in London, I will do it. If you don't get back to me or say no, I'll build in Liverpool. It's entirely up to you and I won't be even slightly disappointed if you think it's not worth it to try one last deception before we blast up Italy on the spring turn. I leave it up to you.

I vote for the fleet in London. I think the story I present to Turkey if he inquires should be as follows:

-You and I had agreed that you would build in Liverpool
-You messaged me immediately after the build went through explaining that you had to build in London to keep Italy from expecting your attack
-I don’t trust you as much as I did before but I have no alternative other than to accept your explanation.

A+++++

now THAT is a reason for us to lie to Turkey. That is a very, very good deception and might increase that 10% chance (where do I get these numbers from? haha) that Turkey attacks Austria to something like 50%. I wish I'd thought of it myself. We make a very good team.

Secret Thoughts re: Germany #4

I believe Germany's messages are completely sincere.

Every word I said to Germany is something I believe to be true. I would not build in London unless Germany asked me to. It's far too disruptive to behave otherwise.

The only manipulation involved with my messages is that I secretly am considering stabbing Germany.

I think this interaction is a really good demonstration of how letting your ally have choices or letting them think a plan "their" idea is an effective form of manipulation. Germany enthusiastically endorsed my fleet build in London. Germany would never lie about wanting me to build my fleet there; the message has to be truthful. Not only that, but Germany's idea about how to confuse and mislead Turkey about my build is excellent and is a plan that will benefit me whether or not I backstab Germany:

Turkey has no way of ever knowing that Germany was lying on my behalf.
The misinformation might trick Turkey into making a mistake.
If I actually backstab Germany, then Turkey will feel in control because Turkey saw it coming (and even sort of requested the backstab).

Final Thoughts

I am building a fleet at London. The tactical and strategic advantages of my building in London (as opposed to Liverpool, or withholding my build) are undeniable. My build will either create a smokescreen for an attack on Italy by appearing to be a backstab on Germany, or else set me up for a very powerful backstab on Germany.

In my opinion, Germany's play is consistent with the "servile ally" approach I often criticize on this blog. Germany's deference to me may be Germany's downfall. If Germany had pushed me on building at Liverpool or asked me to withhold my build altogether, I would probably have agreed. But by letting me get away with "appearing" to be hostile to Germany, Germany is tempting me to be actually hostile.

[I forgot to save a new preview picture after I changed my orders from "Build a fleet at Liverpool" to "Build a feet at London" -- sorry!]

Online Diplomacy Championship R1 Winter 190338 min read