PDL 2. Round 2 Game 1. AAR

After game reports for PlaDip Diplomacy League games

Moderator: mjparrett

PDL 2. Round 2 Game 1. AAR

Postby mhsmith0 » 10 Apr 2018, 21:54

ENGLAND (Saturos)
FRANCE (Iggy) 3 WAY DRAW
ITALY (Astrup) 3 WAY DRAW
GERMANY (Uffington Horse)
AUSTRIA (Frenchie07001)
TURKEY (boldblade)
RUSSIA (mhsmith0) 3 WAY DRAW

Final position:
Image
Proud holder of the Superior Tophat of Solving, an item entrusted with the forum's most prominent smartass
User avatar
mhsmith0
 
Posts: 3616
Joined: 11 Dec 2015, 06:55
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1269)
All-game rating: (1439)
Timezone: GMT-7

Re: PDL 2. Round 2 Game 1. AAR

Postby Astrup » 10 Apr 2018, 22:39

Here is how things looked from my perspective (Italy). I am not gonna do it round by round but just my overall description of how this game evolved from my position:

The first three things I did was pretty standard I think (I think most of my game was pretty standard): I made a non-agression pact with France dmz'ing all of the western part of the mediterranean. I made a 3way non aggression deal with Austria and Germany where we also would protect each other from aggression. And then my primary target was to get rid of Turkey as fast as possible. I almost always do that, since it is quite easy to agree between Russia, Austria and Italy, that Turkey is a threat and must go. My initial thoughts about those deals were: I hope France keeps his word. Let's get Turkey out of the way. And when Turkey was gone the ideal thing for me would be to ally with Russia to squeeze Austria between us.

Already when the fall orders of 01 had been placed the map was very easy to read. France, Germany and Russia had all just pounced on England who looked half dead already. The AIR deal was going forward and it looked like it could easily go all the way. So already in the build phase of 01 I reached out to France and Russia and offered a 3way deal that we all three agreed to right away. France and Russia should keep working with Germany to eliminate England, and after that Russia and France should turn on Germany. Me and Russia should keep working with Austria to take out Turkey, and when that succeeded we should kill Austria.

The southern scene far from went according to plan though we succeeded in the end. Austria attacked Russia allied with Turkey. Germany started worrying about Austria and came to Russia's aid. Germany reached out to me to find out if I was okay with him going for Austria, and I of course said yes, since it played so well into our overall strategy. But I also emphasised that I could not help him with it. I kept my focus on not letting Turkey grow aiding Austria to take Bulgaria from Turkey to break up their alliance against Russia. Germany and Russia got successful in going at Austria. It was pretty much a gift for our alliance that Austria and Germany ended up fighting, as Germany grew weak in the back and Russia and France could easily swoop in when time was right. When the time was right for me I aided Germany against Austria, and while I was gaining Germany's trust, Austria hated Germany so much that he left his fate in my hands by leaving Trieste open, so I took it. I still kept Turkey shelled up, but I couldn't find a way in, and it grew more and more frustrating that my two allies were growing large while I was stuck at 5-6 centers. At the time I took Trieste I also got Smyrna but lost it again right away. At this point Russia was growing huge in the Balkans and France was getting big as well but still honouring our deal in the Med. There was still a single English center left in Edinbourgh but France had gone for Germany. Russia was holding back to find the right moment and to finish off Austria. I started feeling that Russia deliberately was not aiding me, because he would stab me at some point. He had excellent position for it. And the new Turkey was to my experience a really skillful diplomat. So I feared the worst.

Austria and England both went out in 05 where Russia also joined the French war on Germany who had three centers left. Turkey was still at three as well and I was going nowhere. I could also feel that my two allies didn't trust eachother enough, as they were both afraid that the other would kill me off for the solo. France threw a ship in the Western Med and Russia had a million armies in the Balkans. So I played the only card that I had in my hand. I told Russia and France, that if either of them stabbed me I would kingmake the other one. If they attacked me at the same time I would kingmake the one with the least centers. If they had the same amount of centers I would just kingmake the person I liked best. I felt at that point that I had worked really hard (especially diplomatically) for that threeway, so I was pretty desperate. I don't know all the messages going on behind the scenes, but it was pretty obvious that a lot of people called for my head. Maybe mainly to drive a wedge in our alliance. So I was really happy that the game ended in a 3way with me at 11 centers. I don't feel I could have played the game a lot better, and I am glad I got a result from that.

There was a lot of bad blood in the shoutbox in the end, but I just considered that attempts to try to split our alliance and there are no hard feelings from me over that. I just consider that great plays. At some points I thought it would actually break our alliance. But when the comments got too venomous I think it actually got our alliance alligned again. Everyone played a good game, and there was a lot of good diplomatic tricks being pulled here and there. I felt pretty bad for England because you can just do nothing if they decide to sea lion you like that. And I also kinda feel bad for Turkey, because I pitted everyone against them from the beginning. But I always do when I play Russia, Austria or Italy. A Turkey at five centers is just horrible to deal with later, so I'd rather try to kill them or post them up early.

Well, that was how the game was experienced from my side. As player without a lot of experience I feel proud that I read the map right that early and was able to make the deals already in the fall of 01 that would eventually carry through the entire game. Kudos to everyone because it was a fun game to play. I really got nervous at points.
User avatar
Astrup
 
Posts: 30
Joined: 12 Oct 2014, 15:17
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: (1136)
All-game rating: (1145)
Timezone: GMT+1

Re: PDL 2. Round 2 Game 1. AAR

Postby boldblade » 10 Apr 2018, 22:51

"The game that lacks ambition"

I came in a few turns deep to replace some guy that had some good real-life reasons for having to quit. Hope everything clears up well for him. On the bright side, he didn't have to sit through this tragedy of a game.

Upon joining as Turkey I was looking down the barrel of a green gun that was pointed at me. Me being me I began firing off messages all over the place. Trying to win some friends and turn my position around. Really the only friend I seemed able to win was Russia but in hindsight, I don't know why he was friendly towards me at all. I suspected an FIR was in place but Russia assured me it was not. He didn't assist Italy in any way against me so I trusted his word and just went with the assumption that it was merely he and France looking to run the table together.

Someone, I don't recall who, maybe Austria, tried to organize a resistance against France and Russia but Italy was always apart of it so nothing came of it. Here is where things got... annoying, insulting infuriating, pick your word I guess. Russia comes to the shoutbox and throws out the first draw offer with himself, France and Italy included in the draw. They were giving the rest of us a "fair and reasonable offer" to end the game early so the rest of us would do better in tiebreaker points. How generous. Nevermind the fact that Germany still has 4 centers, Austria and I both have 3 and... one of the draw participants is sitting at only 5 and the only reason he was up to that many was that he stabbed his buddy Austria when he was down after brutal offensives from Russia and Germany. So, yeah a few of us left out were a little offended by the prospect of Italy being included when we were not considering it certainly didn't appear he was any more deserving than the rest of us. Especially when my position was a result of "nothing at all [I] did wrong in terms of play or strategizing or diplomacy." So how is it that I played such an excellent game and I get excluded and Italy does not? Well, I wonder that a lot as did someone else going by anon in the chat box. My guess is everything thinks those messages were from me as I argued hardcore for why Italy didn't belong in the draw over others of us via private message. However, those anon messages were not actually me. My position on the matter is known so there is no reason for me to lie about that but I digress.

Finally, I made my last effort to convince my friend that the Juggernaut could live!

Image

As you can see Russia is sitting on 12 centers. I still have my corner carved out and all 3 of my home centers. Meanwhile, Italy and France are sitting on 16. And if Germany were to pick a side where might he go? Well, the turn I joined the game France stabbed Germany pretty thoroughly. So, if I had to guess I would think Germany would gladly work with Russia towards a different conclusion than the one that was being forced down our throats. So, I tirelessly tried to persuade Russia to go for it. I pummeled him with message after message explaining in detail his path to a solo. But he wouldn't bite. He wouldn't even consider it. He could come up with a dozen what-if scenarios that scared him away (most of which were complete nonsense but some of them were at least plausible, for example, what if Germany sided with France and screwed him). I went from nice to disappointed to downright mean to try and convince him to not puss out. But alas. When a solo was on the table in front of him he decided to strengthen Italy to create a barrier between himself and France to curb France's solo ambitions and force the 3-way.

Everyone was complaining about why hadn't the turn processed and who wasn't finalizing. I refused to finalize as Russia can attest. I used al 48 hours to hammer Russia with messages trying to convince him to not only rescue this game from a sad ending but to rescue the league itself from endless 3-way endings. But apparently, he is not the hero we needed. In fact, he was no hero at all. He gave it all up and convinced himself it was the only move he could make.

Later, of course, I begin talking with France and learn that he and Italy had been swamping him with the opposite propaganda I had been sending him. They, or at least France, recognized Russia's solo path and did everything they could to convince him it wasn't possible when they knew it was and feared it enough to try and convince him otherwise. Russia's ambitions were lacking and thus he was easily drawn to their arguments and persuaded. France even divulged that he tried to get Russia to cut Italy out and go for the two-way (he wasn't too pleased when I revealed this tidbit in the PP). But again, at every turn when he was offered more he settled for less.

Now I won't deny I have been very hard on mhsmith, maybe too much so. At the end of the day while I vehemently disagree with his decisions and his carebear approach I also respect his right to play his game how he wants. A lot of my bombast in-game was intentional to bother him to hopefully cause chaos and force an error. I did fail my mission so I apologize for any time being overly venomous in-game as it was mostly for show. Besides, I still have a good deal of carebearism within me so who am I to judge (just look at my record).
boldblade
 
Posts: 338
Joined: 05 Feb 2014, 17:33
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1474)
All-game rating: (1488)
Timezone: GMT

Re: PDL 2. Round 2 Game 1. AAR

Postby Saturos » 10 Apr 2018, 22:57

Like I said in the public press, the game literally boiled down to a 4v3, with an oblivious German player that played into their plans for a 3 way.

I warned him immediately how obvious it was when Italy did not turn on FRG and instead pressed on to Turkey. What more can I do?

A waste of a game, really.
Saturos
 
Posts: 34
Joined: 17 Aug 2017, 23:13
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: (1374)
All-game rating: (1497)
Timezone: GMT

Re: PDL 2. Round 2 Game 1. AAR

Postby mhsmith0 » 10 Apr 2018, 23:06

1902 was actually kind of funny in retrospect

After spending 1901 doing stuff in the north, in the southern theater I start out as


Then A-T come after me and I'm like
Image

Then Turkey bails on the attack and I'm like
Image

Will chat on the other stuff when I have time.
Proud holder of the Superior Tophat of Solving, an item entrusted with the forum's most prominent smartass
User avatar
mhsmith0
 
Posts: 3616
Joined: 11 Dec 2015, 06:55
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1269)
All-game rating: (1439)
Timezone: GMT-7

Re: PDL 2. Round 2 Game 1. AAR

Postby boldblade » 10 Apr 2018, 23:08

Astrup wrote:At the time I took Trieste I also got Smyrna but lost it again right away.


Mostly a lucky guess on my part (though I did try to send a message indicating I would be cutting Agean support hoping he would defend me as if that was true so that might have been a bit of manipulation that worked on my end).

Astrup wrote:I started feeling that Russia deliberately was not aiding me, because he would stab me at some point. He had excellent position for it.


Everyone saw it but him I guess.

Astrup wrote:And the new Turkey was to my experience a really skillful diplomat.


You are far too kind but thank you.

Astrup wrote:So I played the only card that I had in my hand. I told Russia and France, that if either of them stabbed me I would kingmake the other one... I don't feel I could have played the game a lot better, and I am glad I got a result from that.


You played this card well (I assume, I guess I didn't read the messages but it sure did end that way). And honestly, I think you are quite deserving of your end result. I hope you understand that at the time the draw was first proposed was the time that it was insulting to other players. Not because you did anything wrong but because apparently neither did we (according to messages we received) and yet we still weren't picked.

Astrup wrote:There was a lot of bad blood in the shoutbox in the end, but I just considered that attempts to try to split our alliance and there are no hard feelings from me over that. I just consider that great plays. At some points I thought it would actually break our alliance. But when the comments got too venomous I think it actually got our alliance alligned again. Everyone played a good game, and there was a lot of good diplomatic tricks being pulled here and there.


I touched on it in my analysis as well but you called it. It was all about using the last tools in our box to force a more satisfying result

Astrup wrote:As player without a lot of experience I feel proud that I read the map right that early and was able to make the deals already in the fall of 01 that would eventually carry through the entire game.


Nicely done. I'm sorry we didn't get to talk more or ever work together in game. But not much to talk about when your fleets were on my shores lol
boldblade
 
Posts: 338
Joined: 05 Feb 2014, 17:33
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1474)
All-game rating: (1488)
Timezone: GMT

Re: PDL 2. Round 2 Game 1. AAR

Postby boldblade » 10 Apr 2018, 23:12

Saturos wrote:Like I said in the public press, the game literally boiled down to a 4v3, with an oblivious German player that played into their plans for a 3 way.

I warned him immediately how obvious it was when Italy did not turn on FRG and instead pressed on to Turkey. What more can I do?

A waste of a game, really.


Yeah you got the short end of the stick that is for sure. Not much can be done.
boldblade
 
Posts: 338
Joined: 05 Feb 2014, 17:33
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1474)
All-game rating: (1488)
Timezone: GMT

Re: PDL 2. Round 2 Game 1. AAR

Postby Iggy » 10 Apr 2018, 23:13

First, I'd like to thank all involved in playing the game. I thoroughly enjoyed the experience. It was quite the fun game with a couple interesting twists along the way. I had big dreams of turning this into at least a 2 way draw with a decent chance at a solo but it wasn't to be.

To start the game, I had great conversation with all of my neighbors. England opened things up immediately wanting to go for a WT. Germany and I both gave the right answers in kind of agreeing to it. I was reaching out to both of them for individual conversations as well. Germany seemed to be on board even when England suggested some moves that were very pro-England and going quite further than I felt comfortable with. I had also been talking to Russia a lot about possibilities for a Sealion. Once the issues with the England proposal of moves were raised, Germany and I made moves to go North instead of working with England on a WT. Italy and I had great discussions about a huge DMZ in the med.

So, after the first year things looked great for me:

Image

England was left without a partner and was quickly reduced to a non-factor. Sorry about that England. It stinks when you end up with a 3 on 1 with no help to be had. I appreciate your efforts and your commitment to the end when you were without a hope from the start. Maybe next time we will end up on the same side of the battle.

Fast forward 2 years to the end of 1903:
Image

At this point it was "decision time". Stick with Germany and turn south against Italy or stick with Italy and turn on Germany. A lot of the decision was made with input from Russia. We had had great communication throughout at this point and figured having his input on deciding the next target was very beneficial. The talks went very well with Germany becoming my next target. That was my preference but didn't want to alienate Russia along the way. That was Russia's preference too, which makes sense because if I'm not working on Germany, Germany is probably heading Russia's direction. Russia basically made this into me stabbing Germany alone but I was ok with that as long as I was gaining centers. Russia was able to work on the south with Italian help and all proceeded very smoothly.

Russia continued to work "with Germany" while also feeding me German moves to assist in his downfall without providing much military assistance. That gets us to here before the 1905 Fall moves:

Image

At this point I started a very long side conversation with Russia about going for a 2 way. Italy had pretty much been stalled all along in the south and the plan gave Russia 3 builds to 12 and would put him at 11 builds and moving south. That's 23 between us and not much of a defense to be made from anyone - units would be quite disjointed. The plan would have had me holding all that I have in the above map take EDI and HOL. Germany would get VIE, SER and DEN with an army. He was supposed to cut support from BER. I'd be at 11 centers, he'd be at 12 and in position to take TUN and Italy ends with only 1 build and a likely crumble. Eventually Russia gets BER and the Turkish lands, I get MUN and the Italian lands and the 2 way is on.

The only "downside" was that a couple of Russia's centers would have to be in the German area. I was fine with that and think that I probably get the solo if he goes through with the moves. The plan would leave BAL in place, SWE in DEN, my fleets out of the northern seas and me pushing south. It was a lovely, glorious plan and I was very interested to see how it played out. I felt good about my chances to solo and was willing to risk that Russia would get there first. And then the fall moves happened (dramatic music played here...).

Image

Russia balked, moved his fleet to DEN, allowed Germany to retake KIE and to hold MUN and it all fell apart. At this point, Russia has his 12 centers but I'm only at 10 and one of my armies was forced to disband and rebuild behind the lines. So at this point I have to go into damage control. I had broken the DMZ with Italy and thought for sure that Russia had made a premature play for the solo. I run to Italy and apologize and promise to head back north ASAP to stop Russia and promise to play nice. Luckily Italy had a cool head on his shoulder and was good with it. He also went to both Russia and I and promised both of us that the next one to make any anti Italian move would see Italy playing kingmaker for the other one.

Turns out that I don't think Russia was making a solo play. Will find out here if that is so or not but he professed to have cold feet on the dual plan. It was a great plan and couldn't be stopped. Yes, there's a chance that one of us soloed instead of a 2 way but I think you have to take that chance there. Play smart with it the rest of the way but you have to go for it!

As it played out, Italy's cool head and my quick reversal led to the dull, unfulfilling 3 way draw that we ended up with. I "stole" an extra center for tie break purposes but means so much less than the extra 10 points that we could have had or the extra 30 that one of us could have gotten had Germany just tapped BER and moved his army to DEN.

Oh well... what could've/would've/should've been is all in the past. I'll take the 10 points and move on to round 3. Maybe there will be a chance for something more bold the next time around!

Albert aka iggy of France!
Iggy
 
Posts: 1007
Joined: 20 Jan 2009, 03:05
Location: Indianapolis
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1187)
All-game rating: (1259)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: PDL 2. Round 2 Game 1. AAR

Postby mhsmith0 » 10 Apr 2018, 23:23

Saturos wrote:Like I said in the public press, the game literally boiled down to a 4v3, with an oblivious German player that played into their plans for a 3 way.

I warned him immediately how obvious it was when Italy did not turn on FRG and instead pressed on to Turkey. What more can I do?

A waste of a game, really.


I mean in our round 1 there was a three-way alliance that had the potential to run the board... and then AIR went down
And then EFG went down
And then RAT went down (though in the end 2/3 of them shared the result)

So things certainly COULD have gone differently here... they just didn't.

boldblade wrote:
Saturos wrote:Like I said in the public press, the game literally boiled down to a 4v3, with an oblivious German player that played into their plans for a 3 way.

I warned him immediately how obvious it was when Italy did not turn on FRG and instead pressed on to Turkey. What more can I do?

A waste of a game, really.


Yeah you got the short end of the stick that is for sure. Not much can be done.


I actually disagree with this one, at least wrt England's merit on the result. From the diplomatic perspective...
1) At least one of (and I think both?) F/G told me England wanted a western triple
2) England told me directly that he was opening against me
3) I made a DMZ pact with Austria for Galicia, and both of us honored it
4) I had early friendly relations with Turkey, and neither of us acted against the other in 1901
5) France and Italy opened with a large-scale DMZ and very friendly relations
6) I was able to convince France to open against England, and apparently this was a big surprise to England since it went through easily. Moreover, I think he was quite surprised that I made the northern opening, though discussions with Italy and/or Turkey and/or (particularly) Austria might have shown England that I wasn't super interested in being at all aggressive down south... and if that's true, then either I'm lying to someone down south (plausible) or I'm just opening north and England has problems that he needs to address.

The spring 1901 moves went about as horribly as humanly possible for England... which I think suggests a diplomatic issue, not a issue about game fairness or the like. I can't speak to what England was or wasn't saying with F/G/anyone else, but my recollection was basically that he more or less tried to convince me that a sealion was bad for me (which I disagree with generically, and strongly disagree with in the context of this game), and I also recall getting feedback that England was worried about F/G/R, when in fact it was F/I/R, and the possibility of F/G/R gave me a lot of space to play around with fighting Austria (effectively IMO) without ever having to commit to anyone down south.

PS A lot of my discussions with Turkey were
1) me keeping options open in case F/I/R collapsed for some reason
2) me trying to be nice (the stuff at the end wrt "you didn't do anything wrong" and the like was me trying to soften the blow of the loss - it being taken as a slap in the face was kind of shocking to me to be perfectly honest)
Proud holder of the Superior Tophat of Solving, an item entrusted with the forum's most prominent smartass
User avatar
mhsmith0
 
Posts: 3616
Joined: 11 Dec 2015, 06:55
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1269)
All-game rating: (1439)
Timezone: GMT-7

Re: PDL 2. Round 2 Game 1. AAR

Postby Saturos » 10 Apr 2018, 23:28

mhsmith0 wrote:
Saturos wrote:Like I said in the public press, the game literally boiled down to a 4v3, with an oblivious German player that played into their plans for a 3 way.

I warned him immediately how obvious it was when Italy did not turn on FRG and instead pressed on to Turkey. What more can I do?

A waste of a game, really.


I mean in our round 1 there was a three-way alliance that had the potential to run the board... and then AIR went down
And then EFG went down
And then RAT went down (though in the end 2/3 of them shared the result)

So things certainly COULD have gone differently here... they just didn't.

boldblade wrote:
Saturos wrote:Like I said in the public press, the game literally boiled down to a 4v3, with an oblivious German player that played into their plans for a 3 way.

I warned him immediately how obvious it was when Italy did not turn on FRG and instead pressed on to Turkey. What more can I do?

A waste of a game, really.


Yeah you got the short end of the stick that is for sure. Not much can be done.


I actually disagree with this one, at least wrt England's merit on the result. From the diplomatic perspective...
1) At least one of (and I think both?) F/G told me England wanted a western triple
2) England told me directly that he was opening against me
3) I made a DMZ pact with Austria for Galicia, and both of us honored it
4) I had early friendly relations with Turkey, and neither of us acted against the other in 1901
5) France and Italy opened with a large-scale DMZ and very friendly relations
6) I was able to convince France to open against England, and apparently this was a big surprise to England since it went through easily. Moreover, I think he was quite surprised that I made the northern opening, though discussions with Italy and/or Turkey and/or (particularly) Austria might have shown England that I wasn't super interested in being at all aggressive down south... and if that's true, then either I'm lying to someone down south (plausible) or I'm just opening north and England has problems that he needs to address.

The spring 1901 moves went about as horribly as humanly possible for England... which I think suggests a diplomatic issue, not a issue about game fairness or the like.


That's amusing. Because playing/planning to get 3(4)v1'd and going out a year later is surely a great strategy. /s
Saturos
 
Posts: 34
Joined: 17 Aug 2017, 23:13
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: (1374)
All-game rating: (1497)
Timezone: GMT

Next

Return to PDL AARs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest