145215. C-Diplo Series 2018 Bravo Segundo

[NoPunIn10Did]

145215. C-Diplo Series 2018 Bravo Segundo

This was the second filled game of the C-Diplo series. The games are unranked with respect to the site, but we are tracking performance and scores using the C-Diplo scoring system. All games terminate in a a draw after Fall Retreats of 1907 (unless the game ends in a solo or draw earlier than that). Draws must include all survivors. This was a Casual Classicist game, meaning that every player was at least an Aspiring Classicist at the game's start.

Read more about the Classicist C-Diplo Series:
https://tinyurl.com/pd-c-diplo-series

Code: Select all

Rank/                           Year  Final
Power  Player               SC  Elim  Score
-----  -------------------  --  ----  -----
1. EN  kimbyrle             10           49
2. IT  NoPunIn10Did          9           20.5
2. RU  Justinrs2             9           20.5
4. AU  Malachite             6            7
5. GE  chaserh11             -  1907      1
6. TU  nanooktheeskimo       -  1904      1
7. FR  (civil disorder)

X. IT  AKFD                 Surrendered
X. FR  Ceasars Geezers      Surrendered

[AKFD]

Congrats to everyone!

And thanks to NoPun for replacing me

[NoPunIn10Did]

I was not an original player in this particular session. I came on to replace AKFD, who had NMR'd and surrendered as Italy. My first played turn was Spring 1903.

Italy had only two centers at that point, and Austria had just walked into Venice and Rome (seen below).



I offered to make myself useful to Austria if I could get Rome back. France was already attempting to push into the Mediterranean, and I played a vital role in building a wall between France & Italy.

For two years, that's really all I did. I had Rome, Naples, and Tunis, and I was the little barrier in the mid-Med.

In 1905, I saw that England was growing in strength and was likely to send France into a defensive frenzy. I positioned for attacks on Marseilles and Spain, and as luck would have it, that was the point France (Caesars Geezers) NMR'd out.

I notified a player who'd been inquiring about the C-Diplo series to let him know that an opening was available, but to no avail. I certainly profited from France's absence at the table, and I would not have done nearly as well were it not for his disappearance. I likewise wouldn't have had the units to spare to stab Austria in the final year (or, at most, it would have been a 1-center stab rather than a 3-center stab).

For all these reasons, I managed to grow from the worst position on the board to tie for second-best. Not bad, really! I wish for the game's sake we had not had the NMRs, but I won't complain about the nice juicy C-Diplo points that I racked up as a result.

[Justinrs2]

Congrats to England on the win. As I said in the After Game Chat, they fully deserved the win, but it's hard not to feel a little cheated by all the surrendering players benefiting my rivals. Oh well.

NoPunIn10Did, I really got the feeling you really didn't trust anything I said. Did I say something that prompted this, or was I just imagining it?

[NoPunIn10Did]

Congrats to England on the win. As I said in the After Game Chat, they fully deserved the win, but it's hard not to feel a little cheated by all the surrendering players benefiting my rivals. Oh well.

Remember that England topped the board, but that's not quite the same as winning. A solo is still the true win. England got best-in-the-draw.

NoPunIn10Did, I really got the feeling you really didn't trust anything I said. Did I say something that prompted this, or was I just imagining it?

Until the very last turns, my survival was dependent on maintaining a cordial relationship with Austria. It was nothing personal, but it was clear you wanted me to turn on Austria before I was ready. Had I been playing since the start, we might have had more productive communications, but the writing was on the wall for Italy when I joined. You don't bite the hand that feeds you, at least not until you're sure you're able to feed yourself.

[hedge trimmer]

I have to admit that I kind of lost interest in the game after Italy surrendered. Even if I had a good result in the game it felt like I wouldn't have earned it. That's probably why I went really easy with NoPun who took over Italy's position even though I probably should've pressed on with my attack. It didn't help at all that Turkey played gunboat almost the whole game (I think I got a single message from him in S01) and he decided to attack me with his last units. So Russia was going to get all of the Turkish centers, and England would rather let Russia win than help me, which meant I was running out of options. Maybe I could attack Italy when he attacked France, but...

Then France surrendered, and for the first time ever I felt like surrendering too. There was absolutely nothing I could've done to improve my position, so I decided to ruin someone else's game too by turning into another suicidal gunboater and focusing entirely on Russia. Sorry about that, but I didn't want to hear anything along the lines of "Sure the game had some surrenders, but they only helped Russia's enemies so in the end they didn't affect the game much." In a normal game I don't care much if someone or even half the board surrenders since you implicitly agree to that being a possibility when you join a random game, but I guess I expected more from a Classicist game.

Apologies to all who I offended, and congratulations to all who managed to get some enjoyment out of the game.

[Justinrs2]

Until the very last turns, my survival was dependent on maintaining a cordial relationship with Austria. It was nothing personal, but it was clear you wanted me to turn on Austria before I was ready. Had I been playing since the start, we might have had more productive communications, but the writing was on the wall for Italy when I joined. You don't bite the hand that feeds you, at least not until you're sure you're able to feed yourself.

We'll agree to disagree on that. I saw Italy's position as a no-brainer: you either bash your head against France, which 9/10 times won't work and will at best give you a dot, or you work with Russia to take down Austria, gaining a good shot at 2nd and at least 3rd. If we both attacked once you were at 3, they wouldn't have been able to eliminate you, and you would have gained a lot.

France's surrender meant you benefited from the former strategy, but without it you would've ended the game at MAYBE 5.

I have to admit that I kind of lost interest in the game after Italy surrendered. Even if I had a good result in the game it felt like I wouldn't have earned it. That's probably why I went really easy with NoPun who took over Italy's position even though I probably should've pressed on with my attack. It didn't help at all that Turkey played gunboat almost the whole game (I think I got a single message from him in S01) and he decided to attack me with his last units. So Russia was going to get all of the Turkish centers, and England would rather let Russia win than help me, which meant I was running out of options. Maybe I could attack Italy when he attacked France, but...

Then France surrendered, and for the first time ever I felt like surrendering too. There was absolutely nothing I could've done to improve my position, so I decided to ruin someone else's game too by turning into another suicidal gunboater and focusing entirely on Russia. Sorry about that, but I didn't want to hear anything along the lines of "Sure the game had some surrenders, but they only helped Russia's enemies so in the end they didn't affect the game much." In a normal game I don't care much if someone or even half the board surrenders since you implicitly agree to that being a possibility when you join a random game, but I guess I expected more from a Classicist game.

Apologies to all who I offended, and congratulations to all who managed to get some enjoyment out of the game.

I wasn't offended at all. We play this game to win, and when we can't win we adjust the parameters and play to that. Of course I was hoping you'd aim for a solid third, which you easily could have gotten even in that last fall move, but I can't blame you for wanting to play Kingmaker when you feel boxed in. I just wish I could've done more to convince you to go along with me.

If the East had actually had players in it, I think we could've developed a great relationship. We got along well, but it became clear pretty quickly that once we divided the Turkish centers we didn't have too much common ground. I tried to keep us moving with an attack on Germany that would secure us 1 and 2, but a series of miscommunications and mutual suspicion due to the nature of our position meant we were fighting soon enough.

If there's one big takeaway I have from this game is that its potential was wasted. I enjoyed the interactions I had with England and Austria, and felt they were good players. Everyone else.... (besides Italy at the end, but they were replacing) not so much. It almost felt like a 3-player game.

[hedge trimmer]

Of course I was hoping you'd aim for a solid third, which you easily could have gotten even in that last fall move, but I can't blame you for wanting to play Kingmaker when you feel boxed in. I just wish I could've done more to convince you to go along with me.

That sounded like an insult when you and England were obviously carebearing your way to the first and second place and didn't seem to have any interest in attacking each other. I'm pretty sure you could've convinced me to do something else, but it would've required more than promises of finishing a solid third (i.e. you would've had to attack England in order to give me some chance of finishing second).


I'm interested in hearing how I could've gotten more than a shared third place from this position. If I attacked Munich while defending Trieste and Greece, I would've still lost Bulgaria to you, which would've put both me and Italy at 7 while you would've won. I would've gained 4.5 points from that.

[NoPunIn10Did]

We'll agree to disagree on that. I saw Italy's position as a no-brainer: you either bash your head against France, which 9/10 times won't work and will at best give you a dot, or you work with Russia to take down Austria, gaining a good shot at 2nd and at least 3rd. If we both attacked once you were at 3, they wouldn't have been able to eliminate you, and you would have gained a lot.

You weren't really paying attention to what units I had at my disposal. I had two fleets and one army that my predecessor left in Tunis. Up until the final years, France had a fleet at Tunis's doorstep. I didn't have the flexibility to build more armies on the mainland for quite some time. It's possible that I might have been able to attack Austria a year earlier, but at that stage I knew that I'd see more benefit just by biding my time.

Moreover, in the final turn, Austria had an opportunity to bounce Trieste rather than occupy all his units in a defense against you. He would net one less SC either way, and he had to choose between us. I guess that you managed to tick him off more than I did; it might be that waiting so long to stab may have quietly influenced that.

France's surrender meant you benefited from the former strategy, but without it you would've ended the game at MAYBE 5.

This is certainly true, but even that seemed like a satisfactory end to me. I could have easily ended the game with 0 SCs. Five SCs wasn't really all that bad, to be honest.

[Justinrs2]

Of course I was hoping you'd aim for a solid third, which you easily could have gotten even in that last fall move, but I can't blame you for wanting to play Kingmaker when you feel boxed in. I just wish I could've done more to convince you to go along with me.

That sounded like an insult when you and England were obviously carebearing your way to the first and second place and didn't seem to have any interest in attacking each other. I'm pretty sure you could've convinced me to do something else, but it would've required more than promises of finishing a solid third (i.e. you would've had to attack England in order to give me some chance of finishing second).


I'm interested in hearing how I could've gotten more than a shared third place from this position. If I attacked Munich while defending Trieste and Greece, I would've still lost Bulgaria to you, which would've put both me and Italy at 7 while you would've won. I would've gained 4.5 points from that.

My expectation was you covering Trieste with Budapest, Bulgaria with Greece, defending Rumania, taking Munich, and taking Smyrna. That would put you at 8 and in third ahead of Italy. It'd also leave me at 10, in 1st. That's what I was counting on in that last turn, but it turned out not to go down that way.

On England, I was trying very hard not to create a hugbox with them. But when France drops out of the game and Italy only seems to have an interest in working with England, there wasn't much I could do otherwise. Or at least that's how I felt about it.