My view on the game...

Firstly, I really don't like playing Germany - in the past I've got to 6-8 centres then hit a wall...

Anyway, similar to Mikael, I reviewed the records in the first round of all the players and noted soloes for England, Italy and Austria. However, I also knew that the French player had just NMRer in a couple of games I was already playing, so I figured I'd have to at least work with England initially to divide up France - and Mikael proved to be a communicative and sharp ally in this. Ideally, I'd have worked with Russia and Turkey, but given England was guaranteed to get a fair few builds due to France NMRing, I figured I had to go with England on this and hope to get some opportunity for stab (which I figured would be diffcult and so it proved).

England and I worked out an arrangement for me to be land based, him to build fleets, and a division of france and the surrounding neutrals. I was nervous about this a little, as it involved England vacating certain SCs for me to take, but he proved good to his word.

Communication from other players was limited in the early part of the game - Italy and Russia made warm noises, but came across as non-commital, so nothing much happened with them.

Russia was on my back from the start about Sweden - I chose to bounce him out, which annoyed him no end, and, thankfully, he didn't get any builds in the first year, which put me in a good position. A couple of good guesses about his fleet moves in the Baltic/GoB kept him out of Sweden, and I was able to mobilise armies to push on to Warsaw and Moscow and eliminate him with Turkey and England's help in north and south.

Austria's moves in the early part of the game seemed very odd to me - almost suicidal. The thought did cross my mind that he was deliberately throwing this game to give him a chance of a win in Round 1, but anyway, he was quickly gone...

The game quickly descended into a EG v IT stalemate which, if no one was going to budge, was going to result in a four way draw. Turkey and I discussed things a little, but I was unwilling to stab England (as it would have proved very difficult) and Turkey didn't seem interested in a stab on Italy. I figured at this stage that a four way draw with me and England on an equal number of SCs would be the best outcome for us both, leaving the tournament result down to a tiebreaker (a tiebreaker which I couldn't quite work out!)

England was also diploming with Turkey, and I got an email from Mikael implying a Belguim stab which was Turkey's price for a Italy stab...i picked up the subtext and bounced in Belguim, with Turkey carrying through the Italy stab. I became paranoid over the next few turns, as Mikael had plenty of chance to stab me, but didn't.

In the meantime, Italy got squeezed - his ultimate downfall was partly my fault for not supporting him in the way I had suggested, plus him not making the guaranteed play for NAP on the same move.

Just after this, England stabbed me, just as I'd convinced myself that he wouldn't due to him keeping his word over the previous few seasons. This gave him a couple of centre lead over me, and a much stronger position in the tournament - Mikael noted that he only carried out this stab due to the tournament nature of the game, and I believe him. I tried to play England in the next couple of turns (somewhat unconvincingly), by pretending to acede to being a junior partner in a continuing alliance, but I worked with Turkey for a couple of turns, taking venice myself and taking back Moscow. I genuinely think we could have beaten back Germany if Turkey had kept to our arrangement, but he grabbed Venice for himself, and that was the end of that.

Following this, I veered back to the English side, a three way draw proposal came up, and I voted for it - England and I could force a stalemate, and I'm pretty pleased with a three way draw at that stage, as Turkey could have grabbed Warsaw and Moscow, giving him two more centres, and me two less.

And in answer to Mikael - no I wouldn't have settled for a two way draw...I held the balance of power in the game at the end - neither you nor Turkey could have soloed without my cooperation, so I'd have blocked any two way draw votes, with the (implicit) threat of a solo for the other player. My Gas army could have proved a distraction for England, and, although English gains could have been made in my northern holdings, Turkey had most to gain in the east.

Lessons learned from the game? Tournament conditions change the dynamics of the game, and I still don't like playing Germany!

As a final point, many thanks to Christine for GMing the game and the players for making it a challenging and entertaining game, particularly Mikael, who was a pleasure to work with!

Michael
Sent from Yahoo! Mail.
A Smarter Email.