Well, what to say? I have to admit that I was stunned by what happened last turn. Perhaps I should have seen it coming and taken better precautions but I didn't. In any event I must admit that John thoroughly deserves his solo and has my wholehearted congratulations. He has been the driving force behind what appeared to be a winning alliance and I have no problem at all being the victim of an extremely well thought out and executed final stab. It just didn't occur to me, lazily, that a jump from 10 to 18 was even on the cards. Anyway, back to the beginning. I was not exactly delighted to see that I had been allocated Austria but I think my greatest good fortune in the game was to have heard from the board’s two great communicators, Maslow and John, within three hours of the GM's initial message with solid offers of alliances (in John's case the ART triple alliance). I have to admit that I was slow to respond initially thanks to the organisers starting the game over the Easter weekend which I don't think was the greatest idea. 1901 was a great year with intensive diplomacy and both of my alliances were working well with excellent exchanges of ideas and I felt I could trust both of them to work, although in my mind I was more committed to the ART alliance and was lying to Maslow throughout. See my dilemma at the beginning of 1902 was to choose sides. The reason I chose to go with John and Stuart was partly because in my heart I was genuinely with them from the very beginning and partly because going with Maslow would involve moving eastward which would result in a delay before being able to engage the Western powers with all my forces. This latter point was decisive because I really wanted to get at Germany before the EFG triangle had the chance to resolve itself. Having said that, the scenario in which I choose to go with Maslow is one of those games which I would love to have played. Both John and I clearly enjoyed our communications with Maslow and so it was an easy decision to bring him into the alliance rather than eliminating him. Having said that we were cautious about letting him have more than one unit, and judging from Maslow's EOG clearly we were right to be so. The low point for me in the game was at the end of 1902 when I ended up being hospitalised for two weeks. I went from intensive communication and thinking about the game to checking my e-mail once a day and my involvement as a result plummeted. The problem was/is a bacterial infection of my knee, which doesn't sound too serious but left me unable to walk. Even though things are much better now and I don't need crutches, the doctors say it will be three more months in the best case scenario before I'm back to normal. The game was moving along smoothly but I have to admit that John was doing all the thinking and planning and I was just moving as he suggested. My heart just wasn't in it anymore and I merely did the minimum necessary to keep things rolling along. In any event, even if I had been fully engaged, I am quite sure the game would have unfolded in much the same manner. Having said that, I was always a bit suspicious of John leaving units lingering in the rear near my unguarded SCs and had I been fully on the ball I would have addressed this matter with him. In answer to Maslow’s question, I was starting to look at the board to judge how I would fare if I stabbed John. My problem was that I needed to wait one more turn due to my failure to build last time. My germ of a plan was to try to destroy the Marseille fleet and see if I could get enough fleets built to block Ion. So, yes, I would have been responsive to a suggestion from Maslow, but John beat us to it anyway! Overall, despite my limited engagement in the latter stages, it was a thoroughly enjoyable game. Many thanks of course to Adam who GM'd the game immaculately and even kept things in context of the tournament as a whole. I look forward to playing with you all again. Nick/Austria