david@fisher.UUCP (David Rubin) (06/28/85)
------------------------------------------------------------------- | "[Diplomacy is] the art of restraining power." | | | | - Henry Kissinger | ------------------------------------------------------------------- It seems that the discussion of best "openings" has petered out. After a lively discussion of the optimal tactics for France, the limited choices open to the next country, England, apparently dampened the discussion. I will now "open" the discussion of Germany's first move, and we'll see if there's any interest in continuing the exchange of favorite Spring 1901 recipes. There's lots that's extremely plausible for a German player, but most of it is just bad policy. In particular, (1) Germany should almost never open with an attack on Russia. Most German players accept the notion that an opening attack on Austria is almost always a bad idea, but seem to think that a surprise attack on Russia has a good chance to work out well. In fact, an attack on Russia carries precisely the same critical disadvantages that an attack on Austria accrues: by abandoning the Low Countries to be divvied up by France and England, Germany allows both Western neighbors quick access to German home centers. Even if they were not hostile at the outset, the temptation will likely prove overwhelming. This is not to say it can NEVER work out, but only that German players either attack Austria too infrequently or Russia too often in 1901. It is my opinion that it is the latter that it is the case. Of course, once some Western centers are secured, the parallel between attacking Russia and attacking Austria becomes far less compelling... (2) Never, NEVER even drop a HINT to ANY power that F Kiel is not going to Denmark. Even if F Kie -> Hol, let everyone know that you're planning F Kie -> Den. There is no substitute for ensuring good behavior from the Russians than the belief in St. Petersburg that Berlin holds it within its power to deny Russia Sweden. (3) Go for it. There are three neutral centers within easy reach, and occupying all three makes Germany a much safer place. Perhaps you won't get all three, perhaps you will have to deal one away, but there's no good reason to choose an opening move that does not permit Germany a chance to, with some astute negotiations, gain them all. Even if you are crossed by an Eastern power, you can defend yourself. (4) Encourage A Mos -> StP. Encourage A Ven -> Pie. If both occur, you WILL gain Hol, Bel, and Den in 1901. See, it's not a pipe dream. If you agree so far, then you will order A Ber -> Kie, A Mun -> Ruh about 9 times out of 10. The question is, whither F Kie goest? To Holland maximizes your chance for three builds (you can SUPPORT an attack on Bel), but to Denmark provides you with the means to punish Russia (if you don't trust your bluffing powers) and avoids an awkwardly placed ARMY in Denmark. Tough choice, but I usually prefer the latter on the grounds that if Bel remains open at the end of 1901, the odds are greatly in Germany's favor to pick it up in 1902. Even if you prefer F Kie -> Hol, #2 suggests that you not do it all the time. A common worry: what if France threatens A Bur -> Mun? If France is your only revealed enemy, ignore it; go for Bel anyway. If you defend Mun and France goes for Bel, you may have missed your best chance for that center. If you attack Bel and lose Mun, build two armies and triumphantly reclaim Mun in 1902. David Rubin {allegra|astrovax|princeton}!fisher!david
westerm@ecn-aa.UUCP (Westerman) (07/05/85)
In article <689@fisher.UUCP> david@fisher.UUCP (David Rubin) writes: >If you agree so far, then you will order A Ber -> Kie, A Mun -> Ruh >about 9 times out of 10. The question is, whither F Kie goest? To >Holland maximizes your chance for three builds (you can SUPPORT an >attack on Bel), but to Denmark provides you with the means to punish >Russia (if you don't trust your bluffing powers) and avoids an >awkwardly placed ARMY in Denmark. Tough choice, but I usually prefer >the latter on the grounds that if Bel remains open at the end of 1901, >the odds are greatly in Germany's favor to pick it up in 1902. >Even if you prefer F Kie -> Hol, #2 suggests that you not do it all >the time. > > David Rubin > {allegra|astrovax|princeton}!fisher!david I cannot agree more. Germany's moves, despite the appearance of great flexibility, are fairly well fixed for Spring and Fall '01. The interesting question is: Knowing what Germany HAS to do, what can the other countries do to take advantage of this information? Without a firm alliance with another power, any country that tries to attack Germany in '01 is just weakening itself. Even alliances against Germany are not going to fare too well, i.e., France & England: With a F North Sea, A Picardy, and A Bur; most likely the alliance can deny Germany one of either Denmark (if it is not alreay occupied), Belgium, or Munich. To do this, however, forces France to not occupy Spain or Portugal and risks the possibility of Russia denying Norway to England. At best, the alliance can end up with Belgium, Norway, and Spain/Port -- a total of three builds while Germany is kept to one build -- Holland. Most likely, the alliance will end up with the three builds above while Germany has two builds -- Holland and Denmark; the same end results as if the attack was not made. If Russia decides to join in on Germany's side, then the results could be 2 builds for the alliance and two builds for Germany ... not a happy feeling for the alliance. France & Russia: With France once again moving A to Pic and A to Bur, she does not take advantage of Spain/Port. As Dave pointed out in his letter, Germany will often be able to punish Russia by denying her Sweden. This alliance will go down the tubes rapidly as it will not get many first turn builds and during '02 outside forces (especially England) will harass the alliance. France & Austria-Hungary: This alliance of two land powers against another land power offers great potential. The problem is that the alliance is weighted in favor of France. While AH is occupied against Germany, wither her southern front? It would take a lot of smooth talking by France to get AH to join into this folly. England & Russia: Again, good potential in this. Both countries can gain and outside influences, such as France, can not help Germany much nor hinder England much. It should be relatively easy to convince France to go south and munch up Italy while Germany is being chewed upon. The problem is with the '01 turns. There is not much that can be gained by the alliance. At the best they will get Norway, Sweden, and Berlin -- although it would take a rather stupid German player to concede the latter -- while limiting Germany to Holland. More likely is a 2-2 split or a 1-2 mismatch (Norway for the alliance; Den, Hol for Germany). Note that Russia moving A War to Berlin makes sure that Germany is limited to two builds. England & Austria-Hungary: Russia & Austria-Hungary: Both alliances have the same problem as that of France & AH: wither the southern AH front? In summary, despite Germany being inflexible in her moves, they turn out not to be such bad ones. Most countries and alliances can not do much against her, even knowing in advance what she is going to do. In almost all cases Germany will pick up at least two, maybe three builds -- not too shabby. Rick Westerman {decvac,ihnp4}!pur-ee!westerm P.S. Shall we tear apart poor Italy next? P.P.S. Does anyone know of a good PBC Dippy game that I could join? I've been playing Dippy for years and years and just last year moderated a local PBC game, so I'm fairly experienced. Please send mail if you know of an opening somewhere.