Tuscany - What is it for?

[Enriador]

I wrote the post mainly because I noticed that pretty much every variant aiming to make an overhaul of Classic *always* make Rome annex Tuscany. I wondered why that province was so hated by variant designers, and if somehow its reputation can be saved.

From an Italian perspective, it comes into play mid to late in the game if you have to bottle up aggressive fleets in the med--with the unit in Pied usually being an army, Tusc becomes a vital support for or against TYS and GOL. It's not as immediately and obviously helpful as, say, Albania, but it serves a purpose and helps balance the Med region.

So it serves a similar purpose to Clyde in that regard. However, for a variant designer Rome annexing it is still better since it protects GOL, TYS TYN, *and* makes westward expansion easier.

On a serious note I can only guess that Tuscany exists because every country has 6 provinces, so it's for symmetry and equality in attacking/defending.

Yeah, perhaps it's the reason! Yet as you said Turkey has only 5, so Tuscany's very purpose is still so far unjustified.

Russia has 7.

Would there be any push-back if the official game included a 7th Italian or Austria province to separate the Ven/Tri centres?

The Croatia variant already does just that, by partitioning Trieste into Croatia (bordering VEN, BUD, VIE, ADR, TYR) and Split (home supply center bordering CRO, BUD, ALB, SER, ADR). However if we are to change the map, the Milan variant is already a superior alternative (Savoy apart).

I recently read an article about a "Tuscan Opening" (http://www.diplomatic-pouch.org/Zine/S2 ... icken.html). It's A Ven-Tus, A Rom-Ven, F Nap-TYN. From the article:

Alternatively we could order A(Ven)-HOLD, A(Rom)-Tus, F(Nap)-TYS . [...] The purpose of this opening is to guarantee that Italy cannot interfere with Austria taking both Greece and Serbia in Fall 1901. Of course Austria must be relied upon to make the appropriate moves in the Spring. These would be F(Tri)-Alb, A(Bud)-Ser, A(Vie)-Gal/Bud. With this assurance made, Austria can now afford to lend Trieste to Italy.

Basically it's a strange merge of the Key Lepanto with the French Attack, where Italy both asks for Trieste and attacks France.

Do you think this opening has any merit? If the goal is to convoy Army Rome to Tunis in any case, why care moving to Tuscany, if you can just Hold? But if you do move A Ven-Tus, A Rom-Ven, then you can 1) swap the units and 2) point out to Austria that your tactically inferior set of moves (compared to A Ven Hold) is a show of confidence.

[Nanook]

That seems...kind of stupid, honestly. Unless you've agreed to a bounce with Austria in Ven, or you're playing with easily bedazzled players, that's just motion with no point to it. Just hold Ven and move Rom to Tusc. Again, unless you're playing with easily confused players that aren't capable of putting together it's the same thing (or if you're planning a Ven bounce), the extra motion serves no point.

If I were Austria and Italy opened with that set then tried to sell it to me as being somehow a sign of good faith because it was tactically inferior, I'd smile and nod then get France on the line because Italy's obviously trying to spin straw into gold and I don't have the time to guess angry short men's names.

[Enriador]

The author himself does consider the opening a joke of some kind.

A Rom-Tus is identical to A Rom H. Even in a French Attack/Western Lepanto, it only serves as a psychological weapon to scream "I AM GOING FOR YOU FRANCE". As Austria I'd never lend Trieste to see it used vs France, instead of Turkey.

There is a use for A Ven-Tus though. Let's consider the following hypothetical situations:

1) Juggernaut has formed.

2) Austria is going for GAL, SER, GRE.

3) Italy is willing to ally Austria, who is paranoid.

So, nothing uncommon right? Ok, so let's say Austria, desperate to defend Galicia and the Balkans, wishes to safeguard Trieste too in order to go full eastwards. Italy wants Austria focused and as relaxed as possible to act as a proper anti-Juggernaut shield.

Italy will be moving A Rom-Apu, F Nap-TYN... and A Ven-Tus! The goal here is to guarantee that Trieste will be safe in Fall, even if Italy change their mind later, while enabling a safe Lepanto.

It's the superior move over:

a) Piedmont - annoying France does a Lepanto no good.

b) Tyrolia - annoys two key allies vs the Juggernaut even more than just holding in Venice.

c) Rome - blocking a home center, however marginal, can only be negative since it limits your possibilities. Besides, from Tuscany an army is just 2 seasons away from Marseille, thus still enabling Italy to quickly influence western affairs if needed.

What do you think? Is it valid?

[FloridaMan]

I would say the primary value of Tuscany is in the mid-to-late game, when people are wrestling over centers. It provides an extra place to get leverage over Italian centers, and there are several ways it can be used by either an Eastern or a Western power. Just having that space fused with Piedmont or something would make a qualitative difference (and would weaken France, I suspect).

[Enriador]

I would say the primary value of Tuscany is in the mid-to-late game, when people are wrestling over centers. It provides an extra place to get leverage over Italian centers, and there are several ways it can be used by either an Eastern or a Western power. Just having that space fused with Piedmont or something would make a qualitative difference (and would weaken France, I suspect).

Indeed, Tuscany's midgame role reminds me of North Africa's, being mostly a gateway between two key areas of the board.

If I had to fuse Tuscany, I would fuse it with Rome - giving Italy some western relevance. But it is quite an intriguing idea that one of yours!