RUSSIA GONE. STOP.
FRANCE IN TATTERS. STOP.
WHO WILL WIN THE WAR. STOP.
So here, we in Winter 1906
Builds
Austria: Army Vienna
Austria: Army Trieste
Turkey: Fleet Constantinople
Removes
France: Army Picardy
Russia: Army Armenia
**Deadline for Moves for Spring 1906 is Wednesday 9th September at 20:00 GMT **
That would be a five-way draw, of course: France is very much still in the game. 
I’m all for this!
(hopes he can count on Austrian support)
I can’t complain too much about a draw. At least so long as everyone acknowledges that I’m the best and biggest country.
I would note, that I still think an Austria/French/Turkish alliance can take it home.
Indeed, but that means France being a loser in a Turkish or Austrian solo, as opposed to an equal fifth in a five-way.
I wouldn’t call him an equal in a five way draw. Heck, I don’t even look at Germany and England as equals. After this turn I will have nearly the same amount of SCs as those two combined. You aren’t that far from that number either. Its clear that we are the dominant alliance in this game. England and Germany barely made it to the stalemate line, and France is barely alive.
That’s what the rules say. All parties in a draw are equal, hence the draw. If you play the game hoping to be the one in a tie with the most SCs than you don’t really understand the point of the game and that explains why you were so eager to ignore alliances and diplomacy when a stalemate was easily apparent.
Hate to say it, but the detested German is right on this one. A draw is a draw. Think of it as Versaille Treaty for everyone.
That being said, if you are calling for this to be ended with you or your alliance declared as a winner, you HAVE to get the SC’s.
At this point, of course, it’s no longer a game of Diplomacy, and hasn’t been for some time. Now it’s a strategy game.
I know what the rules say and I know what the point is. My intention was not to have the most SCs in a five way draw. My intention was always a solo win. However, without the possibility of a solo win I recognize that ending up in a draw with 11 SCs is a better outcome than ending up in a draw with 6 or 2 SCs. If you wish to view those outcomes as equal than by all means do so.
Alright gents: Word of CIAS coming down from ceiling.
All those remaining at the end of the game can take equal share in the draw regardless of how many SCs they have.
Congratulations, you made it to the end of the game.
Should the current participants wish to play to an end, I will be happy to run it. If four of you wish to call for a draw, then it will be a draw.
Like Tristan intimated, there’s been very little substantive discussion for like 3-4 turns now. No-press can be a fun exercise, but that’s not what we ostensibly have here. Our chances of victory went up in a puff of smoke when the Italian committed suicide and left the way thru the Med wide open. In any event I will be going on vacation in about a week so the game would likely end at that time anyway.
France
Englad
Turkey
Those are who we have so far stating that a draw as it stands is equitable.
Anyone else, or do we keep going?
I see no point in continuing. No tactics will unseat anyone across the stalemate line and a stab is very unlikely at this point with open press. Count me in as voting for a 5-way draw.
Has anyone played an open press game that didn’t end in a DIAS?
I’m fine with a draw as well.
A well played Diplomacy game should never end with a solo victory. It’s too many territories and too easy to stop. You basically have to totally defeat three neighbors and take a chunk out of a 4th.
Anyone interested in doing a post mortem? I would be happy to share what my plans were throughout the game, as well as thoughts about others moves.
Judging by the lack of moves I received I am happy to call this a draw amongst the remaining parties.
Thank you to all the players for playing and I hope you enjoyed at least some of it.
Yes, thank you to our gracious adjudicator for putting up with late moves, unclear orders and general tomfoolery!
post Mortem:
I have only played Dip a handful of times before, and open press was new to me. I kept looking for deviousness and treachery, and while I was convinced I had found some in England, I may have been wrong.
I am, I think, not a fan of open press. Takes a lot of the “Diplomacy” out of the game, imo.
I was surprised to see Turkey exploding as large as it did, but I suppose with Italy out fairly early that was inevitable. Not sure what happened with the Italian, as he had a good start.
Myself, I think my quest for treachery became self-fulfilling, as I ended up fighting against Germany against what seems to be a preset draw line. He couldn’t break me, I couldn’t break him. This was a HUGE mistake. At that point, I should have negotiated for an alliance with Germany, then applied pressure to England.
A fun game, and I learned quite a bit.
I also hope that John DiFool harbors no ill will… I was playing a role, simple as that.
I can think of two key moves in the game.
Italy’s NMR which effectively sealed its fate and allowed Austria to survive and grow by only facing a threat on one front instead of two.
Russia’s attack on Turkey breaking their alliance against Austria and creating the Austria-Turkey alliance.
England and Germany did have several moments where it looked like their alliance would break but didn’t.
As to my thoughts:
I don’t really like the idea of an Austria/Turkey alliance. There’s no excuse for Austria to build fleets, and without fleets it is impossible to get to 18 centers. You can’t crack Turkey without some fleets, and there was no way for me to get enough fleets to break out in to the Med. On the other hand, there’s no way he could get enough armies to crack me, though he would have a better shot. Unfortunately with open press you only get one shot at making an alliance. I tried to go with Russia and got rejected. Luckily Italy went NMR which allowed me to get some breathing room.
After that I pretty much needed to take whatever was given to me. I was pleased with the speed that I was able to expand into Russia and Germany, but unfortunately it just wasn’t fast enough.
Russia: Really screwed up by not fighting off England up north. With an English/French alliance, it isn’t a matter of if England would attack. It was a matter of when. If he had worked with Germany, even independently of me, he would have taken Nor and had a solid stable north. Allying with Turkey when he is in the Black Sea is questionable, but getting tricked by England was inexcusable. A seemingly half hearted commitment to the Turkish alliance finished him off.
Germany: Pretty much never had a fighting chance after France built all armies. Did an admirable job of holding off England/France, but never got cooperation from an ally and never really had a chance. A smart move to Bal sealed the game as a draw.
England: Everything worked out well for him. However, he never really helped his ally expand, and thus was beaten to the stalemate lines by the opposing alliance.
France: Totally blew it by building a 5th army. Gave him no chance of turning on England and no chance of defending himself when England turned on him.
Italy: Attempting to attack an Austria that is expecting it wasn’t the wisest thing. Put him completely out of position to attack anyone else. With France building no fleets, England going east, and Austria tied up east the best move would have been to go neutral/ally with Austria and attack France.
Turkey: Not quite sure what the intention was here after an initial stab against Russia. I think Russia makes the most sense as a Turkish ally, but it is odd to stab someone and then try to ally with them. Once he attacked Russia the only thing to do was drive the attack on home. In order to win Turkey needs to expand on the land. By allying with me and giving me Sev, he was in no position to do so without telegraphing a stab. Also came up with one of the more bizarre proposals I’ve seen in claiming Vienna as spoils. I have no idea where that came from or why he did it because it didn’t end up helping him.
I grok that man, no prob.
My last game as England also ended as a draw, as I helped dismember France with Germany’s help. Problem was the same as in this game; hit up against the Iberian stalemate line, and draw was the result (as that France kept telling me it would). Thus when I got England in this game, I considered taking out Germany as a potentially superior alternative. Of course the First Tsar of Russia didn’t take kindly to that, and at that point the Western front was stalemated (as treis said if all players are mindful of the balance of power nobody should solo-heck I probably would have done the same thing if I was Russia). Unsure of the 2nd Tsar’s intentions, and wanting to extract an eye for an eye, I went after him instead of Germany (which with 5 units would have been a very hard nut to crack).
Suspicious of developments in the Med (first Italy’s NMR, followed by his inexplicable suicidal vacating of the Ionian, leaving the road west for Turkey wide open-really Italy typically gains little from being combative with Austria, as this game proved once again), I decided I had better get my fleets down there ASAP, rather than build armies to convoy to N Europe. This of course meant a (telegraphed) stab of France, but with just one fleet he had little chance to be either be proactive against me or to stop Turkey from breaking into the Atlantic. I toyed with the idea of getting my lead fleet into the Med, but it would have had no support and at best would have been a behind-the-lines gadfly.
In the end we were unable to take France down quickly enough to make a difference, and, once the Eastern alliance got the initiative, a draw was the best achievable outcome. I would have loved to help Germany get extra centers, but I needed to get my 2nd army down there to do so, and she arrived too late. The way the Standard map is riddled with these stalemate lines was why I was hoping for another map, either 1900 or Modern, which mitigates them to some extent; I likely won’t ever play a Standard game again in my life for that reason.
