Diplomacy Game Draw

ACD 229: Italian End of Game Statement

12 Centers

Three way draw with Russia and Austria

This post sums up the results of a Diplomacy game I have been playing by e-mail since January 2009. More information about the Diplomacy hobby can be found at The Diplomacy Pouch.

When a Dip game ends, it is tradition for the players to write an End of Game (EOG) statement about their strategy. The following post, complete with some maps, shares the Italian viewpoint.

Perfunctorily Accolades

First, thank you Brian for serving as a Game Master for our game. You did a fine job of keeping the game on schedule and you were extremely prompt in publishing the turn results. I know that took a lot of work, and you have my thanks.

I enjoyed playing this game. This was a dynamic game with a lot of fluidity. The other players were quite pleasant and enjoyable people. I am glad to have met and re-met everyone. As I wrote in this
January post, it is very cool to hear from some old friends.

About the Compuserve connection

To many, we are the aging pioneers of the Internet. We were piddling with the Net in the early 1990s. Not many can say that. Those were the days of access through Compuserve, Genie, and AOL. The kids today who read this won't have a clue about a dos prompt, and they don't know what in the heck that last sentence meant.

On Compuserve, we played some Dip by email and our games were published weekly in The Armchair Diplomat (TAD). We also had lengthy discussions in a Diplomacy Forum. There, we talked about everything from politics, to evolution, to baseball, to the meaning of the 1983 edition rule against ambiguous orders.

The actual participation and/or reunion with old friends in this game did not disappoint me, and did much to rekindle some good memories. On to the Italian strategy . . . .

Italian Strategy

My strategy during pre-Spring 1901 was to advocate for an internal triple alliance with Austria and Germany. I figured the I/G/A alliance agreement would protect each of the partners' borders, and enhance the chances for all to focus power against the initial victims. We could each chip in forces as needed for mutual defense, or offense as the case might be. Our alliance diplomacy would be directed toward manipulating the outside powers into fighting and squabbling amongst themselves. Meanwhile, all three of the internal allies could grow to the mid game. Once we were dominant, it would be every man for himself.

That was my proposal.

Both of the other internal powers agreed to the Italian internal triple alliance (I/G/A).

The game developed strategically to the benefit of the internal triple. However, I am not convinced that the German player (JD) was fully committed to the theory. His alliance with England proved stronger than the triple at critical points.

Nevertheless, the initial diplomacy strategy worked out great for our triple. Austria and Turkey attacked Russia. England attacked Russia. (Not good for Russia.) And, Germany and England attacked France. Nobody attacked Italy. This was a perfect environment for the internal triple to flourish!

I am not sure if any of the outside powers ever figured out that we (Germany/Austria/Italy) were in a triple alliance. If they did figure it out, it may have been too late to remedy the diplomatic situation.

The first challenge for Italy in this game was Turkey. As noted above, my ally Austria joined with Turkey to attack Russia. However, that attack was going so well I became worried about the Turk.

By the end of 1901, it appeared likely that my Austrian ally would decide to work with the Turk well into the mid-game. That decision (by Austria) would have been very bad for Italy. There was no question in my mind--despite contrary assurances by Marc (Turkey)--that Turkey intended to attack Italy as soon as possible. Based on the communications with his neighbors, I concluded that Turkey intended to build fleets with the fruit of the Russian centers. That fruit would have sailed for Tunis and Italy would have to give up her plans for westward expansion and return defend home centers from a growing Turk. No Italian growth would mean an undefended French and weak Austrian border. It was only a matter of time, I foresaw, before a weak ineffectual Italy would be overcome by her relatively stronger neighbors. I foresaw Turkey grinding Italy up with her navy, and Austria succumbing to temptation and taking Venice.

Thus, Italian late 1901 diplomacy was heavily directed toward persuading Austria to severe the A/T alliance and stab the Turk. Here is a map of the situation that had me so worried about my budding G/I/A.

Fortunately, the Austrian accepted my argument and decided that 1902 was the best time for a Turkish stab. Mike moved aggressively to attack Turkey at that point, and my alliance with Austria flourished. On the other hand, the resulting A/R alliance between Mike (Austria) and Doug (Russia) lasted the rest of the game.

Austria had only one fleet deployed in the eastern Med (in Turkey) and the Italian navy was able to continue its journey west to rescue France, then under assault by G/E forces. By agreement, Italy first supported Germany to Marseilles, and then re-took Marseilles a turn later. As Italian navies moved to shore up French defense against English attacks, Italy gained dominance over the Iberian centers but she did not take them immediately. Doing so would have let England rebound and the French fleets were pounding the Englander.

The f/I alliance worked well in the mid game for both France (DJ) and Italy against England (Frank). But the tension caused by the war of f/I versus e/G put stress on the German/Italy relationship. During the course of that conflict, Italy asked Germany repeatedly to consider a stab of England in exchange for an Italian stab of France. That would have allowed G/I to maintain its alliance, and its strength. G/I might have used our power to persuade Austria it was past time to stab the Russian. Unfortunately, Germany was reluctant to stab England. Italy was therefore forced to stick with France all the way until the total demise of England. France, which had no home centers by that point, soon followed England into elimination. Unfortunately, the whole mess created a rift in the I/G alliance that proved irreparable.



Germany deteriorating as she was under attack by A/R. With Austria and Germany now at full war, Italy was forced to choose between attacking Austria or Germany. The German centers in France (Paris/Brest) seemed more tempting and a better long term strategy. Thus, Italy snagged the two German centers, accelerating Germany's fall.

At around that point, Austria ended the A/I alliance by stabbing Italy and taking her undefended center in Turkey. Perhaps an Italian decision to fortify her defenses by deploying a fleet in the Adriatic Sea was the straw that broke the alliance between I/A.

Fleet Adriatric did make Venice unassailable. It was a good "home guard." [smile] However, Fleet Adriatric also represented a convoy threat to the entire Balkans coast that Austria was unable to ignore.

Meanwhile, Italy took all of England and was maneuvering to gain Bel/Hol as Germany was losing her final centers. Russia was not advancing quickly.

I tried to get Austria to stick with the A/I and attack Russia. There were a couple of beautiful opportunities where Austria could have taken several Russian centers, including as late as the fall of 1911 after Russia build F Stp instead of an army. The wise Austrian would not pull that trigger.

In my view, if Austria had attacked Russia, such an attack would have opened the door for a possible Italian victory. That would have motivated Russia into a vigorously counter-attack. Italy had some fleets as far north as the North Sea. poised to move toward Scandanavia if Russia moved to attack Austria. That could have opened the door for an Italian drive to 18 centers. (See map below.)



In the end, the threat of an Italian win was probably my undoing with regard to diplomacy directed at persuading Austria to attack Russia. Perhaps Austria and/or Russia will confirm this speculation in an EOG Statement.

With regard to the draw votes controversy over the final several turns, Italy did vote yes for the draw for three or four turns once it became apparent Austria would not stab Russia. I suspect Germany was the power vetoing the draw vote.

Why? I figure Germany was having too much fun writing the Nobby Nobb press.