England France Split

What are your winning tactics? Kill them all? Discuss strategy for the classic and variant games using the classic map, or visit the sub-forums for the variant maps.
Forum rules
Strategy
In addition to the general Forum Guidelines (see here: http://www.playdiplomacy.com/forum/view ... 30&t=15441), there are additional rules for posting in this forum.
1. When discussing strategy, reference should not be made to any active game. This section of the Forum is for general strategy discussion, not specific situations within games.
2. It follows that links, images, game name and/or number should not be added to a post if the game is active.
Posts which refer to a specific situation in an active game, or which link directly to an active game, are subject to editing or removal.

Re: England France Split

Postby sirdanilot » 04 Mar 2016, 17:13

Yeah the history of that account is a bit bizarre isn't it? It's been solved now and I now use this account which has been renamed sirdanilot like the old one was named. No idea why the rating of that account went through the roof, haha. But you betcha I know stuff about dip ;)

Years and years ago I used to play the game by email. I presume play by email is dying out a bit right? I was in some PBEM tournaments and I have also played in real life.
sirdanilot
 
Posts: 30
Joined: 17 Oct 2012, 19:59
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: (930)
All-game rating: (932)
Timezone: GMT+1

Re: England France Split

Postby gsmx » 29 Mar 2016, 19:23

Truth is, there's really no fair split for those guys long term as really E/F just aren't designed in a way where they can stay friends forever. You can negotiate in however you need to cement the friendship or improve your position, depending what's more important, but overall you're either going to have to go to war or hold onto your friendship at the expense of accepting you'll be in a 3WD or higher.

There is an interesting Richard Sharp article on this topic with a creative approach to prolonging the alliance called they "Hey Bresto". Here's what he said...

"Show any novice the Diplomacy board, run over the rules, then ask him what country he thinks is strongest. Pretty often he'll say, as I did, 'England' (if he says, 'Italy, run over the rules again). So it's a great tribute to the natural self-effacing modesty of the English that England's performance in our postal games is abysmal - at the last count I believe England had won fewer games than any other country, except of course Italy, which doesn't really count.

There is a lemming-like sameness about the way England is played. We open F(NWG), F(NTH) and A(Edi) or A(Yor). In Autumn 01 we land triumphantly in Norway. Aided by our loyal German allies we knock over St Petersburg in A03 (flourish of trumpets) . . . and remember too late that we left the back door open, so that France, who has been pottering aimlessly about in Iberia, has suddenly come to stay: F(MAO)-IRI, F(Bre)-ENG, and it's goodbye England yet again.

Even if France misses the opportunity, this northern attack is useless; it leads nowhere. The chances of getting beyond StP are minute. And a great deal of time has been wasted, so that there is little chance of catching France on the hop, while there is no way England can really hope to attack Germany: where are all the armies coming from?

It is a fact that England and France are completely incompatible. Did you know that there is no genuine case yet of these two countries finishing in the first two places? Yet England and Germany constantly do so. The reason is simple enough: England and Germany can easily form a long-term alliance, since although they are neighbours neither is equipped to attack the other. But England and France are both essentially naval powers: although France might possibly win without occupying any English centres, England can't hope to win without attacking France, and France knows it. Try it and see: try to build an 18-centre England without Par, Mar, Bre, Spa or Por. You end up in Trieste or Sevastopol.

In this clash, France has most of the advantages. England has one, though: that a move to ENG in Spring 1901 is advantageous for England and not for France. For reasons I have never fully understood, a great majority of Englands don't move to ENG in Spring 1901; yet the move is obviously right, and can reasonably be presented to France (before or after it's made, according to choice!) as a bid for Belgium, to which England has a better claim than either of her neighbours. When not coupled with A(Lpl)-Wal, this move is not necessarily anti-French - a comparable case is F(Sev)-BLA, which is just common sense, and only become anti-Turkish when harnessed to A(Mos)-Sev.

Sitting in the Channel recently (with French permission, this time), I found myself thinking, as so often, what a pity it was that England and France couldn't ally. Then it occurred to me: they can, but only if France takes on the role of Germany, i. e. becomes totally land-bound in the north, though unlike Germany France would still have fleet activity available in the south. The only way for England to ensure France kept to such an agreement would be for England to take and keep Brest. I proposed this very logical scheme to France, and rather to my surprise he accepted.

Yes, I know, I know, you wouldn't have agreed. I wouldn't have caught you with a flimsy excuse like that - I'd have had to come out in the open and stab you like a man, right between the eyes. I know. But then, if you'd been playing France, I wouldn't have suggested it. It works: the fleet in Brest is no threat on other French centres; while the plan does involve the fleet moving down through MAO there is little risk in this, as England is unlikely to try a one-unit stab at 50-50 odds when the only result would be to lose Brest again. Both countries have better security as a result: England can't be stabbed, and France won't be.

It is, after all, no more dangerous than the Key Lepanto (actually it's a hell of a lot safer, given the respective strengths of France and Austria in defence). The only thing wrong with it is that I can't think of a suitable name for it, unless by analogy with the Key Lepanto we call it the Hey Bresto. "


It's not something a lot of people would jump at as France, I've actually had somebody propose it to me once and I had quickly shot it down (or rather i got forced into going along with it after he opened EC and quickly stabbed a year later out of spite). It takes a certain duo to make something like this work, but it's plausible.
The first quality that is needed is audacity.
User avatar
gsmx
 
Posts: 1469
Joined: 22 Aug 2011, 14:50
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (2097)
All-game rating: (2475)
Timezone: GMT-8

Re: England France Split

Postby Durkeety » 30 Mar 2016, 20:43

It doesnt sound all that crazy to me, but I wouldnt agree to it as France, and I find it hard to believe any France's would agree to such a proposal. Its hard enough to get France to agree to let england into English channel
Durkeety
Premium Member
 
Posts: 161
Joined: 08 Oct 2015, 22:20
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: 1655
All-game rating: 1632
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: England France Split

Postby gsmx » 30 Mar 2016, 22:00

In my instance it was a little more compelling when he pitched it after already being in EC and nobody else around me was offering an alliance. Still, nothing I'd ever be so bold as to suggest.
The first quality that is needed is audacity.
User avatar
gsmx
 
Posts: 1469
Joined: 22 Aug 2011, 14:50
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (2097)
All-game rating: (2475)
Timezone: GMT-8

Re: England France Split

Postby NOS482 » 03 Sep 2016, 21:19

I just completed PDES 1C (#120037)as France to gsmx being England. We won a 2=win without France having to surrender BRE to England. However, while we ran tight all game, when it came down to a 2=Win vs Solo, the tensions started to build. I can't say the BRE exchange would have made me feel any better that late in the game and we really didn't have the option in the beginning as our assault on Germany was a first year blitz. But, then again, England was able to break out of the Northern STP cul de sac, so we had a lot more wiggle room for diplomacy and anxiety control. (It was also a fun game! We pretty much steam rolled them!)
That which does not destroy us, makes us stranger (and leaves scars).
User avatar
NOS482
 
Posts: 129
Joined: 15 Aug 2010, 03:46
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: 1529
All-game rating: 1650
Timezone: GMT-5

Previous

Return to Diplomacy Strategy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests