Gunboat Rules Alter the Balance of Power

Gunboat Diplomacy (the variant where the players may not communicate through written messages) is a little different. When playing Press Diplomacy (also called "Classic" or just "Diplomacy"), the players are able to use complicated messages to overcome some of the inherent limitations of the powers they've been assigned to play. But in Gunboat Diplomacy, raw force plays a much larger role.

Some powers have an advantage in that their positions allow them to influence how other players act by offering deals or alliances ("diplomacy"). This sort of advantage is diminished in Gunboat. Other powers have a disadvantaged starting position that needs to be overcome with clever diplomacy. That disadvantage is painfully exaggerated in Gunboat.

Thus, the balance of power in Gunboat Diplomacy skews in favor of the countries which have inherent tactical, military advantages and against the countries that depend on their diplomacy.

What is a Tier List?

For games where the balance is skewed between the starting choices, the community usually creates a "tier list" that helps players understand the relative power of those choices. Game communities rank the choices into "tier" lists (as opposed to a list that just ranks everything in order from best to worst) because grouping some of the choices into tiers is much easier than splitting hairs over precise rankings.

Although I have seen published tier lists that divide the choices into all manner of different tiers, I deem that unnecessary. Objectively speaking, there are only really 5 tiers:

1. God-Tier a.k.a. S-Tier. Unbeatable by any choices from lower tiers. A well-made game will not include anything that is in this tier, because an unbeatable choice ruins the game for everyone who wants to choose otherwise.
2. Top-Tier a.k.a. A-Tier. Stronger than average. Although it is possible to overcome these choices with ones from lower tiers, the battle will be an uphill fight.
3. Middle-Tier a.k.a. B-Tier. Average. These choices do not suffer from a disproportionate ability to win or propensity to lose.
4. Bottom-Tier a.k.a C-Tier. Below average. These choices can win, but will always face an uphill battle.
5. Trash-Tier a.k.a. F-Tier. Unwinnable. No degree of finesse or fortuity will overcome this weakness. A well-made game will not include anything that is in this tier (except maybe as a joke).

A tier list like this will help new and experienced players alike because the information sets the players' expectations and helps them understand what is happening in their matches. Players can then improve their strategies by accurately accounting for the strengths and weaknesses of the choices. For example, I like knowing if a fighting game character is in the F-Tier so that I don't waste my time trying to learn how to play that character.

I learned some of my ideas on this topic from game designer David Sirlin. If you want to read more about tier lists in general and how they should affect game design, click here!

Where Does a Tier List Come From?

For some game communities, there is a quasi-official source for the tier list (e.g., Smogon University for competitive Pokemon battling). For other communities, the experienced players share a consensus of what the tiers are and this becomes common knowledge for all the players. And in some game communities, there is room for debate about the true nature of the tiers (leading experienced players to propose their own tier lists for public comment).

In my experience as a longtime gunboater, the Gunboat Diplomacy community is somewhere between those last two; the experienced players have similar opinions about the capabilities of each of the seven powers, but this apparent consensus is not publicly discussed enough for the opinions to become common knowledge.

So today I decided to publish my personal tier list for Gunboat Diplomacy. Because this tier list is not common knowledge, I cannot claim to speak on behalf of the community at large. However, I consider myself to be one of the best Gunboat Diplomacy players in the world, and I understand that this assessment of my capabilities is shared by other players. I also have friends who are among the best gunboaters. I have formed my opinion based on my personal experience as well as my many conversations with other players. So although this blog is by no means the definitive authority on the Gunboat Diplomacy tiers, I think any reader should seriously consider what I have to say.

France: No Weaknesses

France can simultaneously prosecute wars against both England and Germany, so long as those powers don't cooperate (and it is difficult for them to cooperate because they can't exchange messages in Gunboat). The Gunboat metagame (the way players usually play out the match) disfavors an early Italian attack on France.

France's most common solo win plan (conquer the entire North plus Tunis) is easy to learn and execute compared to the other powers' ways of winning. The plan goes something like this: build fleets, destroy England, build armies, sneak into Tunis, conquer the rest of the North. Because this plan is relatively easy to complete, France can become a realistic solo-win threat at a mere 9 supply centers (3 home centers, 2 Iberian centers, 3 English centers, Tunis). The inability of a defending alliance to communicate with written messages greatly hampers their ability to defend against France's attacks.

France is also strong on defense because France can create interlocking positions through narrow areas like Burgundy and Mid-Atlantic Ocean.  Attacking players will face difficulty supporting each other's attacks against France because they cannot exchange written messages. France's strong defensive position encourages a metagame where France's neighbors (England, Germany, and Italy) choose some other power as their first target of conquest.

France is born strong. When I start a new Gunboat match and find out I am playing France, I think to myself, "This match is mine to lose."

Turkey: If You Haven't Lost, You Can Win

Turkey can simultaneously fight Russia, Austria, and Italy so long as those powers don't coordinate their moves (which is, of course, hard for them to do in Gunboat). The Gunboat metagame strongly favors war between Russia and Austria (because these powers cannot negotiate a truce through words as they commonly do in Press Diplomacy).

In Press Diplomacy, it is strategically difficult for an alliance of powers to send enough units into position to dig out Turkey's strong defense; every unit they send vs. Turkey gives the neighbors a better opportunity to attack or backstab. In Gunboat Diplomacy, Turkey's defenses are on steroids because the powers cannot use written messages to coordinate their support and/or convoy orders. Sometimes Turkey successfully defends without even doing anything to actually outplay the aggressors; the aggressors might just enter the wrong support orders. Every turn that passes creates anxiety that the aggressors will backstab each other or get attacked from another side of the board. Each turn that passes gives Turkey another chance to recover and break out of the encirclement.

Turkey is also strong on offense. As a corner power, Turkey is almost impossible to outflank once Turkey has made a few conquests. This permits Turkey to concentrate almost every single unit on the front line where those units can make attacks. This way, Turkey can build momentum that is difficult to stop.

Germany: Find Yourself an Ally

Germany needs to recruit an ally out of England, Russia, or France. It is difficult for Germany to win if Germany fails to recruit at least one neighbor-ally. Veteran players understand how to communicate using their orders, and thus veteran players typically perceive Germany as powerful and even quite interesting to play.

The Gunboat metagame strongly discourages Russia and Austria from attacking Germany early on, and even somewhat discourages France and England from attacking immediately. This gives the German player some time to decide who to ally and to communicate an intention of alliance. However, newer players may find Germany difficult to play. If you don't have a developed idea on how to choose between potential allies, or don't know the nuances of Gunboat communication, you may struggle to survive as Germany.

If you want to learn more about playing as Germany in Gunboat, try reading my journal for The Biggest Game of All Time, which records a high-level Gunboat match I played as Germany.

England: Between a Rock and a Hard Place

England is a corner power, which makes England difficult to attack from multiple directions. If England can gain a foothold somewhere on the continent, England can start expanding and gain momentum. If England can reach 6 or 7 centers, England can create a nigh-unconquerable defensive position. But in the early years, England is extremely vulnerable. England's initial strategic/diplomatic situation is precarious because each of England's neighbors has an incentive to attack England. England is often one of the first powers eliminated.

First, the metagame strongly favors an early French attack on England. France and Germany can defend against each other with relative ease, and their early fights often go nowhere. France cannot easily attack Italy early on, and Italy is usually occupied with Austria and Turkey. England's is also tactically vulnerable to an all-out French attack because England cannot guard North Atlantic Ocean, Irish Sea, and English Channel all at once with England's starting fleets (and England also has to guard North Sea from Germany!).

In other words, in most Gunboat Diplomacy matches, war will quickly break out between England and France, and France has the tactical and strategic upper hand in this war. Furthermore, a French conquest of Great Britain typically puts France on the path to a solo win. Thus, England is the obvious (juicy!) target for France.

At the same time, Russia will almost always challenge England for control of Scandinavia (the area into which England can most easily expand). Although Germany will often block Russia from getting a foothold in Scandinavia, this is typically because Germany intends to take control of the area. Many English players will commit virtually all their units to fighting for Scandinavia, only to leave Great Britain wide open to a French invasion.

Abandoning Scandinavia in favor of all-out war with France does not ensure English growth, as it is extremely difficult for England to conquer and consolidate French centers without help; France's defensive position is just that strong. Lacking press, it is difficult for England to create a situation where Germany and/or Italy desire to help England vs. France. Even if one of those powers is recruited as an ally, it is difficult to wordlessly coordinate support orders.

Because of the difficulty in working out alliances and support orders, and the inability of France or Germany to (alone) overpower each other, a common strategic situation is that France and Germany effectively decide to fight their war against each other over in Great Britain. This is a disaster for England.

Adding to English misfortune, England also has a poor ability to limp into a draw because none of England's home centers or natural neutrals sits on the common Gunboat stalemate lines. Other powers can sometimes "sneak into the draw" solely by controlling Portugal, Munich, Moscow, etc., even if they get off to a bad start. England has no such luck. (Note: I appreciate that the ability to sneak into a draw is only relevant in Draw-Size scoring, but DSS is the most common scoring system on webDiplomacy.net, where I play.)

If England can survive the early game and gain some momentum, England is as strong as any power. But it's difficult for even veteran players to overcome the anti-English Gunboat metagame.

Austria: The Glass Cannon

Austria's central position and proximity to a huge number of supply centers gives Austria explosive growth potential. That tactical advantage, combined with Austria's straightforward path to a solo win, makes Austria one of the strongest powers in Gunboat... when it comes to offense.

When it comes to defense however, I find it easy to declare Austria to be the weakest. Turkey, Russia, and Italy all desire Austria's home centers, and it is much easier for any of them to attack Austria (tactically speaking) than to attack each other. This gives rise to a metagame where Turkey and Russia tend to attack Austria immediately and relentlessly — even if those two are at war with each other!

Furthermore, Italy is in a position to immediately attack Austria and tends to maintain that tactical position for most of the early game. Because there exists a metagame where Turkey and Russia tend to attack Austria right from the start, Austria is at Italy's mercy. Austria simply must block Turkey's and Russia's early advances while hoping and praying that Italy does not strike. And most of the time, the only thing keeping Italy from striking is the fear that Austria will retaliate with mutually-assured-destruction: leaving all of Austria's centers to Turkey while harassing Italy with Austria's dying breath.

By the way, I do advocate mutually-assured-destruction if Italy dares to immediately attack you. I'm not criticizing this move. I am saying, though, that when your best defense is suicide, you don't really have a defense. Because a near-dead Austria is rarely needed to form a stalemate line, it's quite difficult to sneak into a draw as Austria. Revenge is usually all you can hope to accomplish.

In low-level games, there is usually an early, messy war between Italy and Austria (to the detriment of both). In high-level games, however, most Italian players refrain from an immediate attack on Austria, which gives Austria some hope of doing well.