Re: AARs

First off, thanks everyone for a great game. I have my reservations about the quality of WitA as a variant, but with these players a quality game was assured. That said, I think I drew the longer straw – the greater diplomats seemed to be in North America, South America was more of a tactical challenge, but a fascinating one.
My opening messages were focussed on finding at least one ally in the inevitable bloodbath to come. Fortunately, I found that Chile, Brazil and Argentina were all at least friendly, with Chile perhaps the strongest potential for an ally. Only Colombia worried me and as GhostEcho has said, we came to a prickly non-aggression pact, which I was never sure would hold long term. In 1840 I took my Bolivian neutrals and waited.
However, Argentina took no centres in 1840, and it was clear he was already crippled (Argentina is one major blot on the variant, see my comments elsewhere). Brazil and Chile would carve him up. I could join them, but I was too far away to benefit. I could stick with my seemingly highly loyal Chilean ally and move out north or east. But I looked at the board and realised the truth. I was a boxed-in middle power. A strong Chile would soon control the south tip of the continent, and from there would be unstoppable. Geography is destiny as they say, and for me, if I was to figure at all in the game it was Cape Horn or bust. In 1841 I attacked Chile.
However I also kept up a stand-off with Brazil over the crucial space of MGr. It wasn’t an attack at this point, more positioning, but it meant I had not an ally on the board, and was making no significant progress. My NAP with Colombia was the one thing at this point keeping me alive, and every turn for the next few years I ground on south and east, and waited for the inevitable stab from the north. It never came. In the interim, Venezuela had grown strong and was looking to expand, and I was able to pick him up as an ally against Brazil. Somehow through this crucial phase I survived, but wasn’t really advancing.
By the end of 1843, the wars were at something of a stalemate. However this was true for Chile as well. He and Brazil had carved up Argentina and with his border with me locked, he had nowhere to expand unless he stabbed Brazil. So before Fall 1843 I sent Brazil the following message:
Chile did not stab Brazil in Fall 1843, but he did in Fall 1844. Meanwhile, through clever tactical use of a deliberate forward retreat, I was able to secure Uruguay on the same turn. I immediately affirmed my commitment to the above offer to Brazil, and we became allies. But by a stroke of luck, at that moment, all my units were south of Brazil, and pointed at Chile. So I became an ally of Brazil against Chile and Venezuela without having to fight Venezuela! That meant I could maintain friendly relations with Venezuela and Brazil at the same time. I just told both repeatedly over the next few turns I was focussed on Chile and nothing else, and would happily join them against the other when that war was over. All my units charged against Chile. And still the stab from Colombia never came (he had Mexican problems to worry about by this stage).
It took until 1848 to conquer Chile (he quit towards the end, too late to need replacing, but early enough to allow me to complete the conquest more rapidly). Meanwhile, Venezuela had conquered the Brazilian home centres but had stalled there. That meant Brazil could no longer build, and as such he had virtually become my puppet. My SC count dwarfed his 13 to 4 and he was relying on my generosity to survive. I had achieved the objective I’d set myself in 1841, now I could think about winning for the first time.
By this point however, North America had more or less resolved itself. Aside from agreeing a sea border and NAP with Mexico, I’d completely ignored the North all game (as he had the South, the map really does split that way). Now I looked. Mexico and Spain now dominated the North with limited resistance to mop up. There are 61 SCs in this game, so 31 to win. By my count, that is the entirety of mainland South America, plus the Malvinas. In positional terms it was not impossible, but Mexico/Spain could hold the north coast against me if they cooperated, and the seas were easily blocked. The only way I could pull it off were if Mexico and Spain fought each other and were distracted long enough for me to knock out Venezuela and force my way through before they noticed. I had a flicker of hope when I saw Mexico had taken Jamaica off Spain that turn, and I made enquiries, but it turned out it was an agreed concession. The two of them were working together that closely that I knew the game was up. A 3-way agreement was quickly mooted and I knew I had to accept. Such was our combined strength that (on my part by attacking Venezuela then executing a final stab of the stricken Brazil) we were able to achieve it within two years. That unlikely NAP with Colombia survived to the very end.
I will post my fuller thoughts about the variant over in the thread in Suggestions some time later, but in summary as I said I still have reservations about WitA as a variant (particularly as a main site variant) that were more or less the same that I came in with, particularly the weakness of Argentina, the number of extraneous provinces, the difficulty of achieving solos on this map and the difficulty of actually designing a WitA map that the main site could use. But as a game, this was excellent, thanks to everyone, and in particular to Morg for immaculate GMing.
My opening messages were focussed on finding at least one ally in the inevitable bloodbath to come. Fortunately, I found that Chile, Brazil and Argentina were all at least friendly, with Chile perhaps the strongest potential for an ally. Only Colombia worried me and as GhostEcho has said, we came to a prickly non-aggression pact, which I was never sure would hold long term. In 1840 I took my Bolivian neutrals and waited.
However, Argentina took no centres in 1840, and it was clear he was already crippled (Argentina is one major blot on the variant, see my comments elsewhere). Brazil and Chile would carve him up. I could join them, but I was too far away to benefit. I could stick with my seemingly highly loyal Chilean ally and move out north or east. But I looked at the board and realised the truth. I was a boxed-in middle power. A strong Chile would soon control the south tip of the continent, and from there would be unstoppable. Geography is destiny as they say, and for me, if I was to figure at all in the game it was Cape Horn or bust. In 1841 I attacked Chile.
However I also kept up a stand-off with Brazil over the crucial space of MGr. It wasn’t an attack at this point, more positioning, but it meant I had not an ally on the board, and was making no significant progress. My NAP with Colombia was the one thing at this point keeping me alive, and every turn for the next few years I ground on south and east, and waited for the inevitable stab from the north. It never came. In the interim, Venezuela had grown strong and was looking to expand, and I was able to pick him up as an ally against Brazil. Somehow through this crucial phase I survived, but wasn’t really advancing.
By the end of 1843, the wars were at something of a stalemate. However this was true for Chile as well. He and Brazil had carved up Argentina and with his border with me locked, he had nowhere to expand unless he stabbed Brazil. So before Fall 1843 I sent Brazil the following message:
Ok, I know you have no reason to trust me, but that may be about to change. I want to say that Venezuela made me a generous offer to help him in his war against you, but obviously he's not coming through with his side of the war, so my loyalties may have to change. My first and foremost priority has always been Chile, and so long as I believe there is a chance that you two are working together (as you did against Argentina), I have to be opposed to you. However, I see Chile is now in a position to stab you. So I make you this promise: I can't guarantee I won't make any moves against you this turn (but I suspect they will be of minimal effect), but should Chile stab you I will immediately switch to your side and help you wherever I can, including against Venezuela. For me, Chile must be contained at all costs. Let me know if you'd be interested if it happens.
Chile did not stab Brazil in Fall 1843, but he did in Fall 1844. Meanwhile, through clever tactical use of a deliberate forward retreat, I was able to secure Uruguay on the same turn. I immediately affirmed my commitment to the above offer to Brazil, and we became allies. But by a stroke of luck, at that moment, all my units were south of Brazil, and pointed at Chile. So I became an ally of Brazil against Chile and Venezuela without having to fight Venezuela! That meant I could maintain friendly relations with Venezuela and Brazil at the same time. I just told both repeatedly over the next few turns I was focussed on Chile and nothing else, and would happily join them against the other when that war was over. All my units charged against Chile. And still the stab from Colombia never came (he had Mexican problems to worry about by this stage).
It took until 1848 to conquer Chile (he quit towards the end, too late to need replacing, but early enough to allow me to complete the conquest more rapidly). Meanwhile, Venezuela had conquered the Brazilian home centres but had stalled there. That meant Brazil could no longer build, and as such he had virtually become my puppet. My SC count dwarfed his 13 to 4 and he was relying on my generosity to survive. I had achieved the objective I’d set myself in 1841, now I could think about winning for the first time.
By this point however, North America had more or less resolved itself. Aside from agreeing a sea border and NAP with Mexico, I’d completely ignored the North all game (as he had the South, the map really does split that way). Now I looked. Mexico and Spain now dominated the North with limited resistance to mop up. There are 61 SCs in this game, so 31 to win. By my count, that is the entirety of mainland South America, plus the Malvinas. In positional terms it was not impossible, but Mexico/Spain could hold the north coast against me if they cooperated, and the seas were easily blocked. The only way I could pull it off were if Mexico and Spain fought each other and were distracted long enough for me to knock out Venezuela and force my way through before they noticed. I had a flicker of hope when I saw Mexico had taken Jamaica off Spain that turn, and I made enquiries, but it turned out it was an agreed concession. The two of them were working together that closely that I knew the game was up. A 3-way agreement was quickly mooted and I knew I had to accept. Such was our combined strength that (on my part by attacking Venezuela then executing a final stab of the stricken Brazil) we were able to achieve it within two years. That unlikely NAP with Colombia survived to the very end.
I will post my fuller thoughts about the variant over in the thread in Suggestions some time later, but in summary as I said I still have reservations about WitA as a variant (particularly as a main site variant) that were more or less the same that I came in with, particularly the weakness of Argentina, the number of extraneous provinces, the difficulty of achieving solos on this map and the difficulty of actually designing a WitA map that the main site could use. But as a game, this was excellent, thanks to everyone, and in particular to Morg for immaculate GMing.