Want to try a great online web game...

[Rhydderch Hael]

The Fall 1902 Moves
Russia (2 Supply Centers & 2 Units)
Civil Disorder (Player left game)
A – Ukraine Disbanded (Rule applied to dislodged units under Civil Disorder)


Austria (5 Supply Centers & 5 Units)
Civil Disorder (Failure to submit moves on deadline)


England (6 Supply Centers & 4 Units)
F London ---> Wales
F North Sea ---> Helgoland Bight
A Sweden ---> Denmark
F Norway ---> St. Petersburg (North Coast)
Build (2 Units)


Germany (5 Supply Centers & 5 Units)
F Berlin ---> Prussia
F Denmark ---> Denmark (Skaggerak) -unclear order, army simply holds-
A Kiel ---> Munich
A Silesia s A Kiel ---> Munich
A Holland holds


France (6 Supply Centers & 5 Units)
A Picardy ---> Belgium
A Marseilles ---> Piedmonte
-Rule applied for partial orders. All unmentionned units are considered to hold
Build (1 Unit)


Turkey (6 Supply Centers & 5 Units)
A Stevastopol ---> Ukraine
A Rumanina s A Stevastopol ---> Ukraine
F Black Sea holds
A Bulgaria holds
A Armenia ---> Stevastopol
Build (1 Unit)


Italy (4 Supply Centers & 4 Units)
A Venice holds
A Apulia s A Venice
F Tunis ---> Ionian Sea
F Naples s F Tunis ---> Ionian Sea

I should state that I think most of the players in this session are actually new at this. I'm not exactly a seasoned player myself, but I have played it before and have: 1) an understanding of the mechanics behind standoffs and tactical moves; and 2) a sneaky, Machiavellian streak that understands there are two kinds of Dippy players here: those who play on the board, and those who play on the players.

I've been sweet-talking France this entire time, holding to an overt mask of honesty. The French and German communicating with each other—that was obvious to me once I saw the Low Countries play in Fall 1901 carry out. Rather than make a hurried resource grab and get three Builds for his efforts, he let Belgium alone and instead moved to reinforce Denmark against a (then) weak foothold I had in Scandinavia. He could have easily reinforced Denmark by building a third unit in Kiel instead of moving there...I thought myself lucky in that instance.

I think I have maintained France's trust whilst moving F Lon-Wales, citing that I was merely clearing the docks of London for a new build against Germany.

Russia is truly out. Player left the game, and all Czarist units are on Hold. Depending on the winds, that stranded Russian fleet in GoB would either be a roadblock against a German move at St. Pete, or an obstacle in my way to rescue Pete from a German expedition.

As to the Warsaw issue of Fall 1902: the German in Silesia supported the drive into Munich, anticipating an Austrian stab at Munich (which I brokered to Austria) in order to preserve his resources. The sole purpose of the Munich stab was to cut the German's numbers for the next turn. But alas, the Austrian player failed to submit his moves by the deadline. Civic disarray. In a way, it worked best for me: had the Austrian been on the ball, there may have been a standoff (should Silesia have paid attention to Warsaw) and Kiel would remain occupied. Now, it's a game of waking Austria up and telling him to keep up pressure on Germany, thus fixing the German forces south and spreading him out a bit.

The trouble is, the German knew exactly what the Austrian plan was. The Munich stab was supposed to be a surprise, but I have determined the leak. Only three players knew of the Austrian stab: Austria, me, and Italy (submitted to Italy to ease his fears on Venice and encourage a play against France). I didn't message Berlin. The Austrian surely would not have. The Italian is the snitch and a secret ally of Germany!

Then again, knowing this, I now have a channel for disinformation. I wonder what I can get Germany to do through the Italian puppet? ;)

The Italian's lack of experience was obvious from day one. It was reinforced when he failed to take the Ionian in Spring 1902 (F Tunis-Ioninan, whilst Austrian F Greece-Ioninan. You guessed it. Italian F Naples H!) When I pointed out the mistake of his decision, I also pointed out the merits of my Anglo-Austrian alliance and forehand knowledge the Austrian would not go for Venice (hinting Italy to go after France). Not only did the Italian fail to move west, he repeated the (now defunct) moves of Spring 1902 despite knowledge that the Austrian was not going to be going for him!

Nonetheless, I think France in subtly prepping for an English attack. The only explanation for his lack of resolve on his eastern front (he's not even in on the hub of Burgundy!) is that he's spreading his units around for a universal defense. Namely, hanging one army back on Gascony to protect the Iberian peninsula from either an Italian (or an English) stab.

There's no build negotiations, but I did reveal the Italian-German alliance to France, hoping that the French build this turn is in Marseilles.

I'll admit I'm not much of an experienced player myself. My Builds for Spring 1903 have a decidedly anti-French look to them. (F Lon, F Liv) :huh: I was hoping to negate his alarm diplomatically and trust on an Austrian distraction of Germany in time for me to stab Iberia and attempt to neutralize the French sea power. The only thing that encouraged me in ignoring France for so long was that he has fielded only one Fleet this whole time. I was debating in Fall 1902 whether or not to standoff Belgium in order to prevent a French build, thus keeping him at one Fleet and trapping the majority of his forces on the Continent whilst I built my western defenses and an invasion of Spain, Portugal, and Brest.

I'm encouraged, Skan. But only on the grace that I am only the guy who least looks like a rookie (but still far from being a master). Of course, I have been making my time sowing discontent among the players, if not the actual board.

---I opened the game with an indigant and heated refusal of a German resolution to the Russian-German-English standoff of Scandinavia (where I would exchange my hold on Norway for German support of a French invasion). It took some time, but the German wrote back by saying he never sent such a plan. This laid down the idea that another player (presumably Russia) sent a Back Mail letter in Germany's name to me in an attempt to further their own agendas.
The trick? I knew that Germany never sent such a letter. There never was such a letter in the first place! Result? No German-Russian negotiation, and the Russian was more open to my proposals when I tabled them.

---The task I had to accomplish was get the Russian army in St. Pete's to give up reinforcing a claim on Sweden. This meant enticing the Russian to see that it would best left be that he moved his armies south to deal with Turkey rather than press for Sweden. I sent an anonymous letter to Russia, stating the chance for a Turkish-Austrian standoff of Rumania (thus preserving the Fleet there). The Russian latched onto that hopeless hope with all his might, and played it through. Encouraged by this path to salvation, he was more open to the idea of moving A StP-Mos to reinforce his lines against the Turk. And fully believeing that he had a chance of surviving the south, I had him happily agreeing to an open alliance with England to solve the Swedish problem with that British probing attack in Spring 1902. But to help drive a nail into the Russian coffin, I sent one late letter to the Turk, warning him about the standoff threat. I don't know if my words were taken to heart, or if the Austrian and Turk had already planned their alliance out long beforehand, but the rest is history...