TTT Ambition & Empire: After Action Reports

10-player variant with minor neutral units and DP. First round of the 2018 Tournament Through Time. GM'ed by NoPunIn10Did.

Moderator: Morg

TTT Ambition & Empire: After Action Reports

Postby NoPunIn10Did » 17 Mar 2018, 01:29

Image

Ambition & Empire: After Action Reports
The 2018 Tournament Through Time: Round One

Hello everyone!

Last night, the first round of the 2018 Tournament Through Time ended in a ranked draw after seven years of gameplay. Here on the PlayDiplomacy forums, it's customary to provide a space After Action Reports (AARs), where you can share your experiences of the game.

These AARs can be especially helpful to GMs, as each Play-by-Forum game is archived.

As this game was part of an ongoing tournament, I expect that these AARs may not be quite the tell-all they usually are. After all, you might not want to share too much information about your private conversations.

However, if you have any stories to share from the game, or any feedback to provide (to either the design of the variant or to the handling of the game), this is as good a place as any to post it.

I look forward to hearing from you!

Image
NoPunIn10Did
Organizer for the Classicist C-Diplo Series

Variant GM, Designer & Collaborator
User avatar
NoPunIn10Did
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1285
Joined: 17 Aug 2011, 00:17
Location: North Carolina
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: 1000
All-game rating: 1273
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: TTT Ambition & Empire: After Action Reports

Postby NoPunIn10Did » 17 Mar 2018, 01:57

I'll start!

I feel like some of this is getting to be "old hat" now, but oddly enough, this was only the fourth game I've GM'd here on the PD forums. I feel like I've gotten a good set of templates together to build adjudication posts quickly and cleanly, and I hope that the consistent formatting has been helpful to my players.

Baron VonPowell's Ambition & Empire is a fascinating variant. The DP system, which has been adapted to several other variants, provides a sound mechanism for introducing NPCs (non-playable characters) into a game system that is normally only inhabited by the competitors. I have grown to love running DP-based variants quite a lot, which is why there are three of them in this year's Tournament.

While I set the game-year limit for scheduling reasons, I must say that it is a great relief to me, as GM, to know when a game will end. A long Diplomacy variant can take several months to work through at this pace; this is by design, of course. But I found the dynamics of the rank-based system and the race-against-the-clock to provide an interesting set of goals for players to work with. Instead of being resigned to losing, the seven players who managed to survive the duration fought to claw back every point they could before time ran out, but they still had to balance that against the risk of one player getting the solo.

Since it was secretly recorded, I would love to share some information about how efficiently DP was used in this match. Getting those minor neutrals to do your bidding is no small effort! Unfortunately, however, that will need to wait until the end of the tournament. I have been maintaining a spreadsheet of all DP expenditures, how much they contributed to actual orders, and how often such efforts were in vain; I will share these metrics in December.

I'm very pleased with using Slack for interpersonal communication, though I do wish that it would stop trying to convince me to pay for the upgraded version. It's a significant step up from the messaging interface on the forums, though the additional communication created by making such discussions easier to have seems to have exhausted some of my players and their teammates!
NoPunIn10Did
Organizer for the Classicist C-Diplo Series

Variant GM, Designer & Collaborator
User avatar
NoPunIn10Did
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1285
Joined: 17 Aug 2011, 00:17
Location: North Carolina
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: 1000
All-game rating: 1273
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: TTT Ambition & Empire: After Action Reports

Postby nanooktheeskimo » 17 Mar 2018, 05:35

I stepped in for stalin when his RL got super busy. By then HA was pretty well cut down to size. Russia and OT had been dicks. Spain hadn't been recently. There was reason to believe Spain would work with a good janissary and reward it. There wasn't a lot of reason to think RU/PRU/OT would keep us around very long. Plus Spain was funny and likes Kemba Walker. We worked with Spain. Then France was a dick. Then we died, but we died not last so that's a win.

Other people will have much more interesting stories.
Platinum Classicist
(h/t lordelindel)

I am your (co-) Leader.

GM of Sengoku, Heptarchy 14.

NorthEast

Need a forum game GM'ed? PM me!

Mod (but I'm normally not talking as one)
User avatar
nanooktheeskimo
Premium Member
 
Posts: 6143
Joined: 19 Jun 2014, 19:52
Location: East TN
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: 1209
All-game rating: 1397
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: TTT Ambition & Empire: After Action Reports

Postby Aeschines » 17 Mar 2018, 20:26

Russia's game, in brief:

Trusted Sweden
Trusted Prussia
Trusted Spain
Trusted Turkey
***
Trusted Denmark
Trusted Prussia
Trusted Britain
Trusted Turkey
Trusted Spain
***
Trusted Denmark
Trusted Prussia
Trusted Turkey
***
Trusted Denmark
Trusted Sweden
Trusted Prussia
Trusted Turkey
***
Trusted Sweden
Trusted Prussia
Trusted Britain
Trusted Spain
***
Trusted Sweden
Trusted Prussia

Then the game ended.
Platinum Member of the Classicists
User avatar
Aeschines
Premium Member
 
Posts: 1629
Joined: 20 Apr 2009, 23:51
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: 1240
All-game rating: 1515
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: TTT Ambition & Empire: After Action Reports

Postby asudevil » 18 Mar 2018, 16:25

nanooktheeskimo wrote:I stepped in for stalin when his RL got super busy. By then HA was pretty well cut down to size. Russia and OT had been dicks. Spain hadn't been recently. There was reason to believe Spain would work with a good janissary and reward it. There wasn't a lot of reason to think RU/PRU/OT would keep us around very long. Plus Spain was funny and likes Kemba Walker. We worked with Spain. Then France was a dick. Then we died, but we died not last so that's a win.

Other people will have much more interesting stories.


Was a dick only cause Austria didn't talk...hard to communicate with a mute
Captain FANG, forum team championships WINNER
Part of the surviving nations of WW4/Haven

Unless I am in the cheater's subforum. 99% of what I say is NOT as a mod.

Want to play fantasy football next season here...Reigning Champion
User avatar
asudevil
Premium Member
 
Posts: 16254
Joined: 18 Jul 2011, 02:20
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: 1368
All-game rating: 1535
Timezone: GMT-7

Re: TTT Ambition & Empire: After Action Reports

Postby nanooktheeskimo » 18 Mar 2018, 16:29

asudevil wrote:
nanooktheeskimo wrote:I stepped in for stalin when his RL got super busy. By then HA was pretty well cut down to size. Russia and OT had been dicks. Spain hadn't been recently. There was reason to believe Spain would work with a good janissary and reward it. There wasn't a lot of reason to think RU/PRU/OT would keep us around very long. Plus Spain was funny and likes Kemba Walker. We worked with Spain. Then France was a dick. Then we died, but we died not last so that's a win.

Other people will have much more interesting stories.


Was a dick only cause Austria didn't talk...hard to communicate with a mute

No judgments made, you know that I don't hold it against you or Aeschines.

Still a dick though :)
Platinum Classicist
(h/t lordelindel)

I am your (co-) Leader.

GM of Sengoku, Heptarchy 14.

NorthEast

Need a forum game GM'ed? PM me!

Mod (but I'm normally not talking as one)
User avatar
nanooktheeskimo
Premium Member
 
Posts: 6143
Joined: 19 Jun 2014, 19:52
Location: East TN
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: 1209
All-game rating: 1397
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: TTT Ambition & Empire: After Action Reports

Postby Subotai45 » 19 Mar 2018, 00:09

I know NoPun wants the AAR to be here so here's my responses to some of the questions

1. I flipped back because while I was being promised the world pre-stab, it swiftly turned to "we'll do anything but help you solo" after the stab. Which is completely rational, but if both are promising me a share in the draw, I might as well go with the easier one, which was the west.

2. I regret flipping back. I feel like even if the east was playing me, it couldn't have gone worse for me. There weren't too many seasons left, and I think that I could have held more than eight.z

3. I don't regret not trying the bullshit random attacks on other people that Waka seems to think was a good idea. Yeah, maybe I could have taken Moscow for a small gain in points. Maybe that would have weakened cooperation between me and Russia - and we only held you to 14. It was a real close-run thing. Also, Russia needed a build in Crimea if Turkey was wholly trying to throw the solo to you, which we suspected. Taking Mos would have prevented that.

4. Don't regret not cooperating more with HA near the end. It's not their fault, but in the beginning I identified HA as a threat and tried to get everyone and their mother to attack them. I fought HA for a couple years. Then Spain decided that they were a janisarry when I periodically advocated for their removal. Again, not personal, but I was really being deprived of space to expand by Spain just talking all our enemies into being in our alliance. So I knew there was enough shit to sink me. Also, this game leaked like a sieve - it was a real bad idea to share any information with even your imaginary friend. So I couldn't talk pre-stab, and post-stab there was only a small window before I was with the west again. Sorry.
Empire of Venus
PM me if you're interested in Create Your Own Country!
User avatar
Subotai45
 
Posts: 10856
Joined: 08 Oct 2012, 22:55
Location: Pitt
All-game rating: 4127
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: TTT Ambition & Empire: After Action Reports

Postby nanooktheeskimo » 19 Mar 2018, 00:14

I don't begrudge France not talking with us, for the record. It's just my opinion that, if you're going to try to solo, it's a lot easier when you have he small powers on your side. Which is what made it weird to me that France never seriously engaged with HA, since we were in a very good position to help him make a solo bid, had he won us over (and honestly, we were a free agent, whomever made us the best offer to stay alive was going to win us over!). So i don't begrudge it, it just didn't make sense to me personally if the stab was intended to lead to a solo rather than a board top.
Platinum Classicist
(h/t lordelindel)

I am your (co-) Leader.

GM of Sengoku, Heptarchy 14.

NorthEast

Need a forum game GM'ed? PM me!

Mod (but I'm normally not talking as one)
User avatar
nanooktheeskimo
Premium Member
 
Posts: 6143
Joined: 19 Jun 2014, 19:52
Location: East TN
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: 1209
All-game rating: 1397
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: TTT Ambition & Empire: After Action Reports

Postby Subotai45 » 19 Mar 2018, 01:31

Maybe, especially given my misunderstanding around the build rules, an extra unit could have come in handy. But an extra unit vs the risk of you revealing my plans to Spain, especially given how your centers were on the easiest path to solo, didn't seem like a good gamble in that specific case.
Empire of Venus
PM me if you're interested in Create Your Own Country!
User avatar
Subotai45
 
Posts: 10856
Joined: 08 Oct 2012, 22:55
Location: Pitt
All-game rating: 4127
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: TTT Ambition & Empire: After Action Reports

Postby pjkon » 19 Mar 2018, 04:51

Alright, here's my AAR. As I promised it will be a complete explanation of everything that happened in the game from my perspective.

General thoughts:

This was, without a doubt, the most difficult diplomacy game I have ever played. In every game that I made any serious commitment to before this one I always had the same basic strategic philosophy: 1) Look around the board and determine what kinds of maneuvers will benefit my power. 2) Determine who's help I will need to carry out those maneuvers. 3) Devise a strategy by which they can benefit from assisting in those maneuvers. 4) Devise a contingency plan for their stabbing me that is worse for them than working with me, the one turn of surprise notwithstanding. 5) Sell said players on the plan's superiority to both other available options and to stabbing me. 6) Devise strategies for cooperation with all other powers that maximize joint gains in case the primary powers are uncooperative. 7) Sell those other powers on those joint plans. 8) Faithfully carry out the strategy planned for whoever agreed to it and was honest with me. 9) If multiple powers were honest with me, and the plans for working with them are inconsistent figure out which one of them I can stab the most lethally i.e. with the least possibility to retaliation, and stab them.

The reason that this game was so difficult for me was the total in-applicability of this method to the game. It was a viable tactic on exactly one turn: the first turn. On that turn I determined that the optimal strategy would be to attack Russia and take a badly needed corner position. To make this effective I would need the help of three powers: Denmark, Poland and Prussia.

Denmark I would need as a shield against Britain. Unless Britain was willing to expand into France, which Britain didn’t show any indication of until much later in the game, British expansion into Scandinavia was inevitable. That expansion would include my centers unless I was powerful enough to resist it by the time it arrived, and to accomplish that I needed time, time which could be bought in direct proportion to the determination and success of Danish resistance.

Prussia I would need to supply units for the fight against Russia, and Poland I would need both to not attack Prussia which would distract him from maneuvers against Russia, and to help Denmark get into supply centers in order to keep in both friendly and alive.

Because I viewed (accurately as it turned out) cooperation between Prussia and Poland to be unlikely I had little confidence in this plan actually working and so put more effort than usual into my diplomacy with second tier powers, specifically Russia and Britain. I explained, in less than my usual detail therefore, the superiority of my plans to stabbing me to Prussia, Poland and Denmark. To my not very great surprise Prussia stabbed Poland, but to my shock Denmark stabbed me.

Denmark's stab should not have been nearly as surprising as it was. When I initially reviewed the map for this game I saw and understood the fact that an immediate attack on Sweden might be Denmark's best chance for survival. Essentially Denmark's geography forces it into an unwinnable battle with Britain, unwinnable because Britain starts with four units to Denmark's two, and forced because both have home centers bordering the critical north sea space. One way for Denmark to try to survive this is to gain more centers by attacking Sweden. In my negotiations with Poland and Britain before the move I was very careful to lobby for centers for Denmark to try to offset this, but like my own proposed gains they were dependent on the cooperation of other powers, which at least notionally gains from destroying me would not be for Denmark.

When I analyzed Denmark's incentives to stab me though I made one big mistake. I assumed that because I had canvased half the board asking for DP on Courland moving to GoB and therefore not supporting a Danish attack on the Baltic thereby denying the use of the Baltic to any Danish fleet, Denmark would avoid an attack which would fail to take any centers due to the impossibility of getting two fleets on Stockholm in the fist year. Such an attack would commit him to a multi-year war with all his home centers open to Britain. Surely my plan was better from his perspective. What I overlooked though, and should not have, was that I had deliberately concealed the varied nature of my requests for DP on Courland-GoB from the people to whom I made the requests including Denmark that way no one trying to outbid me would realize the true magnitude of the force they were opposing and so underbid and be defeated. This meant that Denmark erroneously believed that I had very little DP strength supporting Courland-GoB, exactly as intended, and concluded reasonably that an attack on me could succeed. I might have been lulled into a false sense of security by Denmark's able diplomacy but that was no excuse for missing this basic logical conclusion that cost me any chance of a good result in this game.

After Denmark stabbed my universal diplomacy philosophy was irrecoverably broken. The simple reason for this was that I could not honestly sell to certain powers for the rest of the game that attacking me was a worse choice because of specific tactical reasoning. The fact was that I was so weak that I had to rely on impressions created by vague generalities to convince people not to attack me when doing so was 100% in their best interests.

This pattern of crappy reasoning was initiated immediately. I contacted Denmark and immediately attempted to patch up our relationship. Denmark was apologetic and willing to work with me. I needed something very specific from him which I could not do without: a Scandinavian fleet in the baltic.

Why was this so important? Well, most of my diplomacy of this time period revolved around a fear of Prussia, namely that Prussia would build a fleet shattering the only asset the Scandinavian powers had: domination over the baltic. As long as Denmark and I had that, we had a knife at the back of Prussia and Poland, and could exert some influence in getting their cooperation against Russia and Britain. Naturally though Prussia and Poland would not like this and try to get rid of it. That meant that Prussia building a fleet was both very problematic and very probable. A Danish fleet already in the baltic couldn’t be stood out by a newly built Prussian fleet and could still threaten Prussian and Polish scs.

So I talked and talked and talked telling Denmark to go to Baltic and Holstein. Denmark insisted that I go to Gulf of Bothnia to stand out a Russian attack. Doing so however would render cooperation on Denmark’s part completely irrational as it would mean that he could complete the stab he had just started. To try to get Denmark on board I relied on three items.

First Denmark said that he had been promised help by Russia in his attack on me, help which had not materialized. I did not know for sure if this was true since the alleged help would have come in the form of DP on Courland to support his move on the Baltic. I had gotten offers of just barely enough support to overcome a combined Russian and Danish bid and send the fleet where it actually went, but if even one person had lied Denmark would be right. So I played up this idea that Russia was untrustworthy and Denmark would therefore be ill advised to rely on anything he said.

Second I protested loudly and explicitly about going to GoB in the expressed hope that Denmark would consider my move as not guaranteed and therefore be reluctant to stab on its basis.

Third, I talked to Russia and asked him to go to GoB to bounce me and prevent Denmark from having any real shot at stabbing me. Russia was very kind to me in these first moves, something which set the tone for the rest of the game. I didn’t know whether to believe Denmark’s allegations about Russia being behind his attack, but Russia’s moves were all to the good.

While this wretched irrationality play was going on I created a grand scheme to try to get back into the game. Poland, under a promise of supply centers and with newfound British trust for aiding in the capture of Berlin would attack Britain and cripple his ability to launch attacks towards Scandinavia for a long time while Prussia under pressure from the owners of the Baltic and also under a promise of supply centers would help me to invade Russia with Polish units supporting.

With the irrationality flying think and fast and the enormous scheme fitting into place several amazing things happened in the space of two years.

First off Denmark kept his word. It was my first experience in diplomacy selling something that I knew was false. That might sound like a weird statement to make in a game that is a lot about lying, but before this game I never explicitly sold a bad strategy before. Even when I’m about to stab I always think of the best possible alliance strategy and propose it and discuss its merits. I just don’t explain, as I often do, why I won’t stab that phase, because as far as I’m concerned no explanation is possible because I in fact am going to stab. Even stabs I cover either with bare assertions or by not discussing the possibility. When discussing explicit strategy I always try to create plans that are really beneficially to the player I’m talking to. In this case I was convinced that the best thing for Denmark to do was to talk to Russia and offer him Abo if he would just not stand me out of GoB and then walk into Sto. I don’t know if Denmark was being more honest about his relationship with Russia than I thought, or if Denmark was being honest when he said he expected an inter-game vendetta if he stabbed twice in such rapid succession, but for whatever reason to my astonishment that phase passed and I was still alive. I was and still am immensely grateful for that and will try to ensure that Baratheon profits in later games from that as it was a loyalty paid for with very risky credit and therefore entitled to a big return.

Second off, the first stage of the plan worked perfectly and Prussia did not get a build. Prussia’s probably going to be ticked off to learn that I designed that plan, but in the very next phase I went first to Poland and then to Prussia and both agreed to reform what Prussia had at least claimed to support in the first phase: a quadruple alliance of central powers.

All that needed to happen for that phase was for everyone to keep their word and we would have had Russia retreating in the face of Prussio-Polish armies, leaving Stp and Cou open to me, and I finally would have been able to build the strength I needed to negotiate entirely rationally with the other powers. But it was not to be. Poland stabbed and became a British janissary.

I saw the stab coming but could do nothing about it. The fact that they discussed their moves in a thread other than the three way I had set up for the planned attack on Prussia was a dead giveaway that Poland had spilled the beans, as was the fact that Poland became terribly uncommunicative. I had to hope for the best though and sent Poland several messages trying to argue for the quadruple alliance. The only response I got was a halfhearted claim that he had never considered stabbing which was as good as an admission. Still, I had to try since the plan was my only chance and so I didn’t raise the alarm. I was especially angry with ccloughly over this because I considered it to be a very irratonal stab. His chances with us against Britain were at least as good as the reverse and as a British janissary he had no opportunity for growth. Whatever the wisdom of his decision though it’s effect was the permanent destruction of Prussian willingness to fight Russia. That turn was the only one in the game where Prussia made anti-Russian moves, and with Prussia’s willingness to fight went any chance I had of taking the centers I needed to ever become a relevant force in the game.

My interactions with Russia around this time deserve some mention as well. For this entire part of the game Russia and I agreed on certain moves that made it look like we were fighting. The purpose of these moves was to allow us to move on central Europe together, a plan that I had proposed to Russia on the first move. After the Polish disaster this plan was the only one I had for expansion and that possibility quickly faded.

On the same phase as the polish stab though, there was a quiet Russian stab. The Russian plan for that move was to bounce me in GoB again, but, on a promise by Denmark, that Denmark told me of before the move, to go to Sto, he stood in place and let he into GoB. Denmark kept his word to me though and did not go to Sto. This I considered evidence of real mistrust between them over the first move. Russia had let me into Nov as part of our agreement though, something I pushed for because it would delay any real Russian attack on me, and if my plan worked would put me in position to take Russian scs during the invasion.

In the same phase as Poland stabbed though Britain stabbed Denmark and I, probably in retaliation for the plan he had learned from by way of Poland by going to Chr. At this point I knew the game was up. Denmark was imploding, the Scandinavian powers had no route of expansion, and Britain was knocking at the door.

At this point I swore my services to Russia as a janissary. Russia, despite the attempted stab by way of Denmark had, with his own units, been very benevolent towards me considering our geographic positions, and as such I owed him my throw (I consider it standard practice to, when defeated, pick a power to reward and a power to punish and launch a suicide attack in the appropriate direction.) I didn’t feel particularly good about attacking Britain since objectively all he had done was respond to my treachery even though throughout the entire game he refused to admit the obvious (that Poland had told him of my plan) but between the two of them Russia had been the more honest and less directly aggressive (despite being the target of more of my schemes) and so I thought him the more appropriate recipient of my dying favor (that and Britain had actually struck the crippling blow, and, what I considered more heinous, propped up the irrational Poland).

For the next several phases I sent my units towards Britain as Prussia sent his units towards Poland. Russia graciously did not destroy us for our centers during this time, whether this was out of loyalty or out of the comprehension that was dawning at the time all over the board that the western triple had formed I did not know, but as grateful as I was for it I knew it would eventually come to an end.

As a result of this the west advanced to the limits of Polish and Austrian territory and then came to a halt. In the east, an alliance which now included Turkey Russia Prussia and me, we were discussing stalemate lines and other ways to slow down the west. Our outlook was grim but optimistic as we thought we could limit further losses to two-3 scs on all fronts over the course of the game and all survive, and get at least better results than the western janissaries which would be something (assuming Russia didn’t eat us).

As the front lines were ossifying a type of diplomacy was initiated which would come to typify half of my interactions throughout the rest of the game, namely communication via Spain.

One this that became blindingly clear over the course of the game prior to this point was that telling Spain something was as good as posting it in public chat. While Spain was an unapologetic western partisan and founder of that alliance we would tell anyone anything barring perhaps specific move lists for the western allies. As a result when he came and tried to talk be out of my suicidal charge I knew both that he spoke for the west and that he as the ears of the west. Through volume if not qualify of messages Spain slowly brought me around to the idea that I should turn and fight for the west as Russia would inevitably eat me. I annoyed me greatly that he refused to answer any of my tactical questions about why it wasn’t in Britain’s interest to eat me as soon as Russia was no longer fighting on my side, which I took as an admission that I was being bamboozled.

Against Spain’s plan of pressure towards irrationality though I had a plan of my own. I would not have thought of it had the combination of Britain's’ basic innocence of aggression towards me and Spain’s constant pressure convinced me to try to find a way to make it work. The way that I picked was, as Spain found out despite my denials, to talk to France and convince him to stab the west.

After this stab I had to disclaim any responsibility for it and this was one of the least fun parts of the game. I knew no other language than the language of rationality of irrationality and so had to phrase in those terms my protestations of total innocence, but it was true, though perhaps not obvious that it was rational for me to get France stabbing.

The basic calculation was that although I trusted Britain to help me for one turn to get a center (Chr) out of the hands of the backbone of the opposition to the west (Russia) and get me firmly on the west’s side at least for a while, I did not trust for a second the player that I knew had full knowledge of my failed plan to betray him and had every geographic incentive to take my centers to not eat me as soon as Russia had been pushed back safely to the point where Britain would not have to share my centers. Distracting Britain with a French stab would prevent him from doing this.

The stab that I planned out with France and Prussia had another enormous benefit to it: it wiped that little piece of irrational scum Poland off the face of the map. I watched that phase’s resolution with immense pleasure as my betrayer was annihilated entirely with zero warning.

Unfortunately my follow on plan to the french stab fell apart immediately upon it’s first move’s completion. While Prussia had been quite prepared to promise France anything before the stab, once the stab was in progress he was unwilling to even spend the effort to talk much. I lobbied him hard to at least delay his opposition to France on solo-prevention grounds to no avail. At this point in the game I really wouldn’t have minded a French solo myself because I viewed my chances of long term survival as so slim that ending the game early with another power soloing might be my only chance to get more than a handful of points. Prussia understandably disagreed and admirably chose to preserve his credibility rather than lie to keep the intra-west war going.

Despite Prussia’s irresolution I continued to lobby France to keep up the fight (I needed the pressure on Britain). I pointed out (correctly as it turned out) that the other members of the west would not forgive an that France would be well advised to prepare for the coming assault. I drew up stalemate lines to defend French soil and plans that could hold the taken territory all to no avail. Without Prussian support France was unwilling to fight (understandably so as at least some ground would be lost in the face on an all our Prussian attack). Still though, this forced Britain to pull his forces away from me, and I was for the first time in the game on 3 centers. It would have been 4 but Russia stabbed me at the same time I stabbed, which, while it did wonders for my conscience, prevented me from achieving the strength that I would have needed to defeat him in battle, which would have been a real possibility had he not. Again I came within Russian prudence of becoming a significant force in the game but that was enough to come up short.

For the next few phases I grimly held the line against Russia, negotiating here and fighting there, while Britain was distracted. I was consciously trying to run out the clock at this point knowing that as soon as Britain finished with France i was next on the menu, and just hoping to preserve some pathetic remnant for the scoring round with increasingly diminished confidence in my ability to do so.

And then it came: the fell phase. It was fall 1767 and I had just had a successful round of diplomacy in which Russia agreed to maneuvers that didn’t leave me vulnerable (but did leave him so) and Britain agreed not to take Chr. I was pleased with the Russian negotiations primarily because they would allow me to defend Chr against what I believed might be British treachery.

I was busy IRL that day but realized that I had the option of stabbing everyone, taking a center from Russia and forcing Britain to stay out of Chr. Had I done so I would have been on four centers with Russia disbanding and a serious chance of fighting Britain. I would have been a real power, with the ability to conduct reason based diplomacy again. But with all the benevolence Britain and Russia had treated me with over the phases leading up to it I just couldn’t pull the trigger. Both of these were players I had stabbed before and both of them had gone out of their way to mend our relationships and work with me when they could have instead done me significant harm. I failed to repay that generosity with treachery and I didn’t stab either. As a result I was the one stabbed and Britain drove me back down to two centers taking Chr.

Not only did Britain take Chr from me, he did it with an army. At this point I just stopped trusting anything he told me and tried to survive on the presumption of hostility. I had no expectation that he would do anything but try to eat me. Convoying an army into such a position under guise of a lie was a definite signal that my centers were his target. So I tried to propose plans that would keep him off my centers but otherwise wasn't able to negotiate much. Over the next several phases I was shocked that Russia did not betray and eat me. Prussia and I were preserved by Russia while turkey was stabbed. I’d appreciate any information from Russia on why the different treatment. I for one was probably less loyal than turkey. Nonetheless, as Britain’s forces closed in Russian and Prussian forces had to be moved up (Prussia had built the fatal fleet, but actually used it to help me against Britain) since they had to be near my scs or let me fall to Britain which made inevitable that they would stab me at the end for my centers.

Then Spain stabbed. Yes Spain gloriously stabbed the west and forced all Britain’s armies into panicked retreat into the British Isles buying me precious time to solidify my defenses and run out the clock. Once Spain had been repulsed however Britain covered another invasion through sca in a round of lying.

I remembered what had happened the last time I had been honest with everyone and resolved not to repeat it. I had promised Russia one of my two scs if he would keep me alive, but switched which one at the last second in order to prevent the capture from being consistent with taking my last sc. I also lied to Britain about my moves if only slightly in order to get what I hoped would be a more passive position of his units against my centers.

Unfortunately, thanks to additional British deception, even this deception put the last game phase on only a 50-50 shot at defense for either one of my scs. I did not know going into the end if I would face a supported Russian attack on Abo with Britain cutting Lap and Prussia going to Sto, or a supported British or Prussian attack on Sto with a supported Russian attack on Abo, and no set of moves could deal with both. I took a guess and sent in order only to be surprised when everyone kept their word to me. I had just lied to Russia and Britain had lied to me every other phase yet for some reason on that final phase everyone told me the truth and didn’t work together to kill me. I guess the built up animosity from the western wars prevented it, but either way their advances on Sto canceled each other out and I was amazingly left on two.
It is better to have scs then allies, assuming something aproaching equal combat power in each

Your credibility with eliminated powers is irrelavant

Keep your allies happy enough that they stay allies

If you are receiving a message from me ignore this signature
pjkon
 
Posts: 361
Joined: 06 Feb 2012, 22:05
Class: Diplomat
All-game rating: (1000)
Timezone: GMT-5

Next

Return to 2018 TTT: Ambition and Empire {All Maps Visible}

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest