Diplomacy IV: The Congress of Vienna

[TheExecuter]

There is something about the way you play this game that I just dislike...

Let's get this straight. You betrayed reis on a deal, built forces on his goddamn border with the spoils of that betrayal, and you expect him to trust you? WHAT?!

Nope.

Anyone who makes a deal that includes 'right of passage' is incredibly foolish unless extraordinary high levels of trust already exist and the moves are enforceable by serious consequences of failure. Italy did not need an Austrian fleet in Greece to achieve its aims. An Austrian fleet in Greece was incredibly dangerous, seeing as Italy would not be able to dislodge it, should it be decided to hold onto Greece. Italy had no way of enforcing Austria to leave Greece. Why did Italy make such a boneheaded offer?

Anyone who makes that sort of bargain...or believes that the force will leave without inducement, is way too gullible to be playing this game. I mean, give me one good reason why Italy should abandon Con now...or ever. Will he really risk a force disband to foster trust?

Let's also look at the turn in question with the builds. Notice which of the three Austrian home centers was unoccupied. Now, Austria and Italy planned their moves for that season...Italy KNEW that Austria would get two builds (and if they didn't, they should have strongly realized it. No sane person would believe that Austria really would give up Greece). The only two centers that could be built in included Trieste.

Again, Italy made a stupid decision, and expected Austria to hamstring herself solely to keep an 'alliance' going, that never was more than an agreement to attack in the same direction, and to share the spoils.

I had more written here, but I've realized that you won't understand it at all.

I don't EVER expect my neighbors to trust me.

I expect my neighbors to recognize what is in their best interest, and, when that interest and my own coincide, to cooperate with me in reaching our shared aims.

At one point, Russia and I shared an interest in gaining Ank. Instead of doing what was in your own interest, you brushed me off, and went galavanting into my friend (which required a response in the form of Warsaw) and you also stopped your attack on Ank...which resulted in your failure to gain builds. The fault of that turn going against you was entirely your own.

Until you recognize that trust is not earned by talk, or by keeping agreements, but in the trust that the neighbor will do what is in his best interest, rather than his emotional feelings, you will always be flailing about, trying to avenge some petty slight from three seasons ago, instead of patiently building and scheming your way to the top.

[TheExecuter]

There is something about the way you play this game that I just dislike...

Let's get this straight. You betrayed reis on a deal, built forces on his goddamn border with the spoils of that betrayal, and you expect him to trust you? WHAT?!

Just to drive the point home.

This is Diplomacy, not cricket.

If you expect players to play 'fair', to not reneg on deals when it is in their interest, and generally to never 'stab in the back'...you are playing the wrong game.

Here's a brain opening vista for you.

No nation, at any time, is your friend.

Conversely, no nation, at any time, is your enemy.

Think about what Germany wants to achieve this spring. Look at where her forces are placed. What can they possibly achieve? What is your goals for this spring? Would Germany benefit by assisting you this spring? Can you offer him assistance in achieving his goal? In what ways can Germany take advantage of your trust? What is the probability that he will take the option to attack you instead, and WHAT IS THE REWARD FOR HIM DOING SO? What moves or force placement would make the gains from attacking you so small that he would rather cooperate with you?

Do this for every power on the board. Then discuss your shared interests and potential plans WITH EVERY POWER ON THE BOARD. Examine opportunities. Draft orders. Ponder the probabilities of success or failure. Ensure that whatever happens, you have the best orders for the upcoming turn, which may not be orders you discussed with any of the powers. Under no circumstances cling to alliances that have achieved their purpose. Recognize that a full alliance very rarely benefits both players. Recognize that their are plenty of states of agreement short of full alliance.

In short, this is why I am withdrawing from this particular game. The time commitment required to do all of this is impossible given my increased responsibilities in my personal life.

[Taiisatai64]

I find your tone... disrespectful. I spent more than three months moderating this game, and I know how it works as well as someone who has played the game for such a short time can. I am not saying you should not have betrayed Italy, betrayal is a part of the game, I fully accept that, but I do not accept that this was in your best interests. Instead of finishing up me and Turkey and gaining more supply centers, you opened up another flank, that was a mistake, you then started asking around between us for people to backstab the other, potentially gaining supply centers. Your offers to everyone were far from acceptable, removing allies who could help us long-term in exchange for short-term gains which you could then wrest from us quickly. Italy itself benefits from leaving Turkey alive for a little while longer, bearing in mind that, without a doubt, Italy will stab Turkey and take those supply centers, but it will do it at a better time.

By the way, I absolutely hate cricket. Never mention it again.

I'll actually say I'm sorry to see you go, you frustrate me, which makes the game more fun.

[TheExecuter]

I find your tone... disrespectful. I spent more than three months moderating this game, and I know how it works as well as someone who has played the game for such a short time can. I am not saying you should not have betrayed Italy, betrayal is a part of the game, I fully accept that, but I do not accept that this was in your best interests. Instead of finishing up me and Turkey and gaining more supply centers, you opened up another flank, that was a mistake, you then started asking around between us for people to backstab the other, potentially gaining supply centers. Your offers to everyone were far from acceptable, removing allies who could help us long-term in exchange for short-term gains which you could then wrest from us quickly. Italy itself benefits from leaving Turkey alive for a little while longer, bearing in mind that, without a doubt, Italy will stab Turkey and take those supply centers, but it will do it at a better time.

By the way, I absolutely hate cricket. Never mention it again.

I'll actually say I'm sorry to see you go, you frustrate me, which makes the game more fun.

Italy thought that Austria would not be willing to share the spoils equitably between the destruction of Turkey and Russia. She then, it seems, doubled down and made the foolish deal regarding Greece...which resulted in the inevitable strengthening of Austria, rather than her weakening...most likely a miscalculation on Italy's side of the strength of good feeling. This 'betrayal' (or misunderstanding) resulted in a material gain for Austria. The upshot being that Austria since then has gained no supply centers...but neither has Italy. And the combined strength of the nations involved guaranteed a stalemate. In fact, the only gain seems to be to you, Russia. Which means you played it perfectly.

What was Austria supposed to do? Should she have materially weakened herself just to foster the agreement? Difficult to say...

I am sorry to go as well...but I just don't have the time right now.

[reis91]

Make room for the lasagna-typed message, Cakravarti.

[Taiisatai64]

Seboden, you don't deserve sleep. Get on here and put my army on the map, you slacker.

[esemesas]

I guess to add to the discussion, I should say why I chose to stab Italy. Now, when I took over, Italy had her flank right open for an attack. That Fleet in Albania could have taken Naples in one year and nothing could be done by the Italians. I sent propositions to the French and Turks, but the French refused and Vainglory says he had some hardware issues and thus couldn't reply. So I chose to continue with the plan reis suggested - moving my fleet into Greece to make it look like a stab. The fact that I was sending out propositions for one only worked to strengthen the idea of Austria stabbing Italy. But I knew that was not what reis had wanted. He wanted to draw my fleet to Bulgaria so that he would have less pressure on his home SCs. And once I took Bulgaria, would I have gotten anything else? Perhaps Sevastopol, if reis chose to support me. On the other hand, he would've gotten all three Turkish home SCs.

I was right to stab Italy. You were lining up to do the same to Austria. In retrospect though, I should have kept my word with Turkey. It would've made things much easier. My thirst for power clouded my judgment and I apologize, Vain.

[reis91]

I think his irritation started when he invited Austria to have a 'right of passage' through Greece...then was shocked, SHOCKED when Austria stayed. His irritation at his own poor play then made him foolish, and instead of taking the spoils of Victory Austria offered, and becoming strong in his own right...he formed a coalition of the weak, and has been able to accomplish nothing. This failure has enraged him still further, entrenching him into his bad decision...a decision that will, if I am not mistaken, eventually lead to his dismemberment by the nations on the board that do not cling to emotional feelings about the past, but ruthlessly exploit the opportunities in front of them.

Turkey should make note of this whole 'right of passage' thing. Once established in Con, I bet Italy will not leave without being forced out by Turkey.

Vainglory / Suirantes, beware...

So, we arrange for Turkey to be able to secure Con regardless of my intentions, and steal Trieste or something to make up for it. Italy doesn't renege their deals without very good motives.

I admit, it was poor play, as I did not take into account that you only give a damn about builds and not about the whole geostrategic situation. Yes, I could have got two builds, but builds for the sake of builds are not the objective of the game. The objective is to reach 18 builds first, so, a good part of it means that you must sacrifice your personal advancement to prevent others from getting out of control, and ensuring a more sustainable growth.

What would happen if I took your offer was Turkey out of the game, and Italy powerless to prevent the fall of Russia. After Russia, or even before, you would come up with a split of Italy between yourself and France. Instead, Austria has been contained, it is now in strategical disadvantage, and the French clock is ticking on and on, knowing that if they take England or Germany out, they will be nigh-impossible to stop. You made the poor call, we replied the only way we could, to safeguard our long-term interests.

Still, sad to see you leave, although I believe I will have plenty of fun tormenting esemesas and Bagricula.

[Vainglory]

The trouble with your method, TE, is that it has alienated all your neighbors bar one. It's exceedingly unlikely that Russia or Turkey would work with you again in this game because you've betrayed us; irrelevant now because you've stepped down, but Esemesas behaved in exactly the same manner, so he's inherited your bad reputation. Tai's opening moves left him wide open for a quick elimination, but after nabbing an SC you persuaded Reis to Lepanto me. You thought you'd deal with Russia later, and kill me first. Not such a bad strategy, but then, as Tai pointed out, you stabbed Italy. Stabbing Italy got you Greece and now Venice, but lost you Bulgaria, and now you're outnumbered - your advantage lies only in interior lines of communication. What's more, there's no prospect of prying Russia and Turkey from the alliance, and it's more by the manner of your casual and repeated betrayals than by the betrayals themselves; I hung Tai out to dry at some point, and he did it to me, but we're cooperating now because of the manner of our respective betrayals.

Maybe Italy betrays me in the end and I lose without ever getting my home SCs back. But if the Crescent Alliance has defeated you before then, or mortally wounded you, it just means Italy's strategy was better than yours. Think about it - you've made such implacable enemies that I asked Reis into Constantinople to aid our efforts in containing you. If you hadn't bitten off more than you could chew, or weren't so casual with your diplomatic partners, you'd be far better off right now. To my knowledge Italy has upheld all their bargains thus far. If they were to take me out in a strategic stab once you're in your death throes, I'd be displeased, but I'd understand. If they were to stab me now for 2 SCs, thereby allowing you to steamroll them, that wouldn't make sense.

[reis91]

I guess to add to the discussion, I should say why I chose to stab Italy. Now, when I took over, Italy had her flank right open for an attack. That Fleet in Albania could have taken Naples in one year and nothing could be done by the Italians. I sent propositions to the French and Turks, but the French refused and Vainglory says he had some hardware issues and thus couldn't reply. So I chose to continue with the plan reis suggested - moving my fleet into Greece to make it look like a stab. The fact that I was sending out propositions for one only worked to strengthen the idea of Austria stabbing Italy. But I knew that was not what reis had wanted. He wanted to draw my fleet to Bulgaria so that he would have less pressure on his home SCs. And once I took Bulgaria, would I have gotten anything else? Perhaps Sevastopol, if reis chose to support me. On the other hand, he would've gotten all three Turkish home SCs.

I was right to stab Italy. You were lining up to do the same to Austria. In retrospect though, I should have kept my word with Turkey. It would've made things much easier. My thirst for power clouded my judgment and I apologize, Vain.

I offered Con for discussion, and Executer agreed on myself getting Smy and Ank, IIRC. Yes, I could stab you over Con, because Bul (sc) isn't the best strategic position, but so could you stab me in return with Tyr (and you did). However, evaluating the advantages of a stab on Austria working with Russia vis-a-vis stabbing France and working with England and Germany, the latter looks a bit more appealing, don't you think?

I contest that I would be able to get in Ank without your help, though. I had Smy and Aeg, while they had F Con and F BLA. Your F Bul (sc) would have called the shot and thus forced me to support it to Con, or maybe even getting stabbed by Austria and Turkey together (I trusted Vain's obstination to prevent that, though :P).

[esemesas]

The trouble with your method, TE, is that it has alienated all your neighbors bar one. It's exceedingly unlikely that Russia or Turkey would work with you again in this game because you've betrayed us; irrelevant now because you've stepped down, but Esemesas behaved in exactly the same manner, so he's inherited your bad reputation. Tai's opening moves left him wide open for a quick elimination, but after nabbing an SC you persuaded Reis to Lepanto me. You thought you'd deal with Russia later, and kill me first. Not such a bad strategy, but then, as Tai pointed out, you stabbed Italy. Stabbing Italy got you Greece and now Venice, but lost you Bulgaria, and now you're outnumbered - your advantage lies only in interior lines of communication. What's more, there's no prospect of prying Russia and Turkey from the alliance, and it's more by the manner of your casual and repeated betrayals than by the betrayals themselves; I hung Tai out to dry at some point, and he did it to me, but we're cooperating now because of the manner of our respective betrayals.

Maybe Italy betrays me in the end and I lose without ever getting my home SCs back. But if the Crescent Alliance has defeated you before then, or mortally wounded you, it just means Italy's strategy was better than yours. Think about it - you've made such implacable enemies that I asked Reis into Constantinople to aid our efforts in containing you. If you hadn't bitten off more than you could chew, or weren't so casual with your diplomatic partners, you'd be far better off right now. To my knowledge Italy has upheld all their bargains thus far. If they were to take me out in a strategic stab once you're in your death throes, I'd be displeased, but I'd understand. If they were to stab me now for 2 SCs, thereby allowing you to steamroll them, that wouldn't make sense.

You have only your computer to blame. Had you taken my first offer for a stab, things would've been different. I agree that Austria is in a pickle. 1906 will show whether or not France is going to emerge victorious.

[reis91]

Nope.

Anyone who makes a deal that includes 'right of passage' is incredibly foolish unless extraordinary high levels of trust already exist and the moves are enforceable by serious consequences of failure. Italy did not need an Austrian fleet in Greece to achieve its aims. An Austrian fleet in Greece was incredibly dangerous, seeing as Italy would not be able to dislodge it, should it be decided to hold onto Greece. Italy had no way of enforcing Austria to leave Greece. Why did Italy make such a boneheaded offer?

Anyone who makes that sort of bargain...or believes that the force will leave without inducement, is way too gullible to be playing this game. I mean, give me one good reason why Italy should abandon Con now...or ever. Will he really risk a force disband to foster trust?

Let's also look at the turn in question with the builds. Notice which of the three Austrian home centers was unoccupied. Now, Austria and Italy planned their moves for that season...Italy KNEW that Austria would get two builds (and if they didn't, they should have strongly realized it. No sane person would believe that Austria really would give up Greece). The only two centers that could be built in included Trieste.

Again, Italy made a stupid decision, and expected Austria to hamstring herself solely to keep an 'alliance' going, that never was more than an agreement to attack in the same direction, and to share the spoils.

I had more written here, but I've realized that you won't understand it at all.

I don't EVER expect my neighbors to trust me.

I expect my neighbors to recognize what is in their best interest, and, when that interest and my own coincide, to cooperate with me in reaching our shared aims.

At one point, Russia and I shared an interest in gaining Ank. Instead of doing what was in your own interest, you brushed me off, and went galavanting into my friend (which required a response in the form of Warsaw) and you also stopped your attack on Ank...which resulted in your failure to gain builds. The fault of that turn going against you was entirely your own.

Until you recognize that trust is not earned by talk, or by keeping agreements, but in the trust that the neighbor will do what is in his best interest, rather than his emotional feelings, you will always be flailing about, trying to avenge some petty slight from three seasons ago, instead of patiently building and scheming your way to the top.

Well, I don't know why the Key Lepanto became so popular in Diplomacy games, since it involves passing an Italian Army through Trieste. It is completely possible for Italy to stab, but in normal circumstances, that means that you're making it easier for Turkey and Russia, which both gain more than you do with such a stab, seeing that the successful conclusion of the Lepanto would yield Serbia to Italy and possibly Greece to Austria, which defends the Med against Turkey and sets things up to eat Turkey in a couple of years.

[Vainglory]

I trusted Vain's obstination to prevent that, though :P

You mean my obstinacy; obstination is not the correct noun form of obstinate. You know how inconsistent English is.

You have only your computer to blame. Had you taken my first offer for a stab, things would've been different. I agree that Austria is in a pickle. 1906 will show whether or not France is going to emerge victorious.

I did accept your first offer. It was just that I didn't reply to something you said later due to the computer being down. Even then you still could have sided with me: you didn't stab me that turn you just didn't come through for me. You could have kept your bargain next turn, but you opted to betray both me and Italy instead.

[reis91]

Yes, damn English should not have mangled Latin. Just pretend it was in French.

Still, I could find a wiktionary page for obstination, in English, so it's probably an accepted but out of use form.

[seboden]

Winter 1905

British Orders

French Orders

German Orders

Austrian Orders

Italian Orders
Retreat A Ven to Rom

Russian Orders
Build A StP

Ottoman Orders


Results

---

Next deadline is in 30 hours, 17:00 GMT on Monday, March the 5th.
If you need more time you can ask for a 24 hour extension via pm.

[Vainglory]

Yes, damn English should not have mangled Latin.

It is a truly infuriating language. Hypercorrection is an interesting feature; Bristol was apparently Bristow originally, but got hypercorrected into Bristol because people thought Bristow was wrong. There are words I nearly hypercorrect because English gets so badly mangled by people in my hometown. Then there are forms like "whom" that are becoming obsolete...

[Taiisatai64]

It is a truly infuriating language. Hypercorrection is an interesting feature; Bristol was apparently Bristow originally, but got hypercorrected into Bristol because people thought Bristow was wrong. There are words I nearly hypercorrect because English gets so badly mangled by people in my hometown. Then there are forms like "whom" that are becoming obsolete...

And you can also be sure that some writer is going to use obsolete and outdated words to make his work appear more sophisticated, which just further complicates the language. It's a real tangled mess...

[TheExecuter]

The trouble with your method, TE, is that it has alienated all your neighbors bar one. It's exceedingly unlikely that Russia or Turkey would work with you again in this game because you've betrayed us; irrelevant now because you've stepped down, but Esemesas behaved in exactly the same manner, so he's inherited your bad reputation. Tai's opening moves left him wide open for a quick elimination, but after nabbing an SC you persuaded Reis to Lepanto me. You thought you'd deal with Russia later, and kill me first. Not such a bad strategy, but then, as Tai pointed out, you stabbed Italy. Stabbing Italy got you Greece and now Venice, but lost you Bulgaria, and now you're outnumbered - your advantage lies only in interior lines of communication. What's more, there's no prospect of prying Russia and Turkey from the alliance, and it's more by the manner of your casual and repeated betrayals than by the betrayals themselves; I hung Tai out to dry at some point, and he did it to me, but we're cooperating now because of the manner of our respective betrayals.

Maybe Italy betrays me in the end and I lose without ever getting my home SCs back. But if the Crescent Alliance has defeated you before then, or mortally wounded you, it just means Italy's strategy was better than yours. Think about it - you've made such implacable enemies that I asked Reis into Constantinople to aid our efforts in containing you. If you hadn't bitten off more than you could chew, or weren't so casual with your diplomatic partners, you'd be far better off right now. To my knowledge Italy has upheld all their bargains thus far. If they were to take me out in a strategic stab once you're in your death throes, I'd be displeased, but I'd understand. If they were to stab me now for 2 SCs, thereby allowing you to steamroll them, that wouldn't make sense.

You are deceived. Italy was the one begging for a Lepanto at the beginning of the game. I rebuffed him. When Suirantes refused to communicate with me for the entirety of 1901, I figured that Turkey was coming my way...and lo and behold, she did. Then the challenge became managing a situation where Italy would always be ready to stab me at a moments notice (Ven, Ion, etc.). I refused reis' offer for me to take Greece, knowing that if I did so, Austria would be 'too strong' in his eyes, and he would be tempted to stab.

Unfortunately, reis' INSISTED that we transit through, and esemesas made the decision to quit pussyfooting around with jockeying for position and starting the inevitable Austria / Italy war. Not the way I would have played it, but, I was away...and it is his show now. Was it optimal play? Certainly not. Idealy, reis and I could have weathered the cooperation issues, expanded with similar build numbers, Russia would have continued to be foolish, and Turkey would have been destroyed. But, now we have the situation where Austria is outnumbered, true...but with a decent defensive position, and with plenty of offers to make to the players involved. Indeed, had Germany not had a civil disorder...we might not have been outnumbered at all.

In short, Austria's position is far from hopeless.

Could I have played it better, certainly. Could the rest of you, also certainly.

[Vainglory]

You are deceived. Italy was the one begging for a Lepanto at the beginning of the game. I rebuffed him. When Suirantes refused to communicate with me for the entirety of 1901, I figured that Turkey was coming my way...and lo and behold, she did. Then the challenge became managing a situation where Italy would always be ready to stab me at a moments notice (Ven, Ion, etc.). I refused reis' offer for me to take Greece, knowing that if I did so, Austria would be 'too strong' in his eyes, and he would be tempted to stab.

Turkey never came after you at any point. I understand your belief that Turkey had hostile intentions due to the woeful communications, but we never attacked you.

Unfortunately, reis' INSISTED that we transit through, and esemesas made the decision to quit pussyfooting around with jockeying for position and starting the inevitable Austria / Italy war. Not the way I would have played it, but, I was away...and it is his show now. Was it optimal play? Certainly not. Idealy, reis and I could have weathered the cooperation issues, expanded with similar build numbers, Russia would have continued to be foolish, and Turkey would have been destroyed. But, now we have the situation where Austria is outnumbered, true...but with a decent defensive position, and with plenty of offers to make to the players involved. Indeed, had Germany not had a civil disorder...we might not have been outnumbered at all.

In short, Austria's position is far from hopeless.

I wouldn't consider 10:8 hopeless even without interior lines, with it, I consider it balanced.

Could I have played it better, certainly. Could the rest of you, also certainly.

Yes, but the real question is whether stabbing people at the drop of a hat is a successful strategy long-term. Which will be answered at the end of the game, I guess.

[TheExecuter]

Yes, but the real question is whether stabbing people at the drop of a hat is a successful strategy long-term. Which will be answered at the end of the game, I guess.

Who did I stab 'at the drop of a hat'?

Russia I was lenient with...(very lenient, it turns out).

Turkey and I never agreed on anything to stab.

Italy only was the stab...and it was done, not by me, but by others...and was motivated by Italy's foolishness over Greece, which then led to threatening builds, which then led to a season of peace (during which Italy never mentioned Greece or her grievances, but instead actively plotted against Austria). See Spring 1905 orders...Austria still continues her support of Italian aims, while ITALY turns about and stabs Austria.

Had Italy communicated her fears and grievances to Austria, she would not have had to resort to armed conflict. I would not have been compelled to take Venice to protect the forces in the field...Greece could have been exchanged for Con...etc. There were plenty of options short of breaking up the relationship. But, in a fit of emotion, rather than calm, reasoned logic...Italy decided to cease communication, and to abandon the certainty of more gains at Austria's side...for the uncertainty of a long, alliance war with one of the strongest powers on the board. All because Italy couldn't TALK to Austria about her issues.

As I said to Russia in 1904...I say again to Italy in 1905. TALK to your neighbors. Sometimes what you think is threatening behavior is only being done because your neighbor fears the worst.