Skip to main content

The Powers - Part 4: Blühe, deutsches Vaterland!

In this series, I'm going to take a brief look at the seven powers in the game of Diplomacy.  This will be not much more than a brief introduction to each power, looking at their position on the board, their neighbours and the pros and cons of playing them.  More detailed strategy will follow in future posts.


OK, I admit - Germany looks strange in light-blue...

Like Italy (and Austria, but I haven't written that post yet) Germany is a central power.  However, unlike Italy (and Austria) it has a number of advantages.


Germany borders three neutral SCs: Denmark, Holland and Belgium.  Unless something unusual goes on, or she decides to forego one of them, Germany can have an almost guaranteed two builds in 1901.

This is somewhat lessened as advantage in that she has five immediate neighbours (again, I'm stretching the point to include Italy).  This means that she has a lot of communicating to do in 1901.  If she can persuade all these neighbours that they shouldn't come after her immediately, she's done well.

Austria isn't likely to, admittedly.  It is common for these two powers to leave each other well alone.  Both need the other to be peaceful at her back.  A German army heading into Tyrolia or Bohemia is rare.

Italy is also unlikely to move north beyond Tyrolia.  Germany would do well to persuade her and Austria to DMZ Tyrolia, or else encourage them both to move there.  However, it is common enough that Italy will order A Ven-Tyl that Germany probably has to expect it.

In fairness, Russia is also unlikely to move against Germany.  The two non-SC spaces of Prussia and Silesia, in Germany, tend to act as natural DMZs between Warsaw (Russia), and Munich and Berlin (Germany).  The usual flashpoint between Germany and Russia is Sweden.

So that leaves England and France.  England can't do too much harm to Germany directly but she can be an indirect threat simply by agreeing to an Anglo-French alliance (the Entente).  This frees France to move against Germany immediately.

France is an ever-present threat to Germany.  With Burgundy the barrier between Paris (France) and Munich, and a space which allows access to Belgium, this is the main bone of contention between the two.  So much so, in fact that Germany's Munich army is often ordered to simply HOLD.

Germany will often open with F Kie-Den simply because she can.  With a fleet in Denmark in F01, she can be guaranteed of holding either Denmark or Sweden - and perhaps both - at the end of 1901.  One well-used threat to Russia is that, if Russia opens with A War-Gal Germany will prevent Russia getting Sweden.  This is to protect Austria - as I've said, Germany would prefer a peaceful and stable Austria at her back.

This has always seemed a little bit of an empty threat.  If Russia can successfully move into Galicia, then she's going to get a build anyway, and if Germany is going to prevent her moving into Sweden, then she may as well try for Vienna or Budapest.

Still, whether or not this warning has been issued, Germany will still often move to Denmark in S01 simply to prevent an F01 order of F GOB-Swe from Russia.  This often makes some sense: Germany doesn't need or want a strong Russia to her east.

Often, Germany will also move A Ber-Kie.  This allows the army to move to Denmark, should Den-Swe work, or Holland; most often the latter.  Occasionally, however, Germany will move after Russia, and order A Ber-Pru, and if she's really going after Russia, A Mun-Sil.  But this is risky - it leaves the Low Countries (Belgium and Holland) to go to France or England.

The Munich army will be the key move.  It can move to Burgundy, either to bounce France from Burgundy or to threaten France.  It could move to Ruhr, where it can be used to support an attack on Holland or, if she's also ordered F Kie-Hol, then to try for Belgium as well as Holland.  And A Mun H is also a possibility, if Germany needs to be cautious.

As far as alliances are concerned, most of Germany's "alliances" will often be a non-aggression pact (NAP).  This is because, rather than actively allying with powers, she is more likely to be eager to prevent herself being attacked by other powers.

Germany will probably get a NAP with Austria and Russia, for instance.  With Austria to maintain the "If you have my back, I'll have your's" idea mentioned above.  With Russia, to prevent Russia stretching eastwards.  This allows Germany to concentrate in the west.  Italy is another candidate for a NAP, for the same reason, but Germany may need to accept A Ven-Tyl, whether she likes it or not.

However, Germany will look to ally with either France or England, and may ally actively with Russia.  So which is the best alliance?

The Franco-German alliance, the Rhineland, is clearly anti-English.  It may even be part of a triple alliance including Russia (the German Ocean Triple).  This simply means England is not going to survive.

With the Rhineland alliance, the problem is that it means a strong French fleet presence in the north, that isn't easily shifted south, so Germany will need to build fleets to counter this.  Not great.

With the GOT alliance, Germany is left sandwiched between France and Russia, so she needs to have a strong alliance with one from France or Russia to survive this.

The Russo-German alliance, the Chequered (which I've named because on the original map Germany and Russia are coloured black and white), is aimed at splitting Scandinavia between the two and pushing on against England, then France.  Assuming Russia can't expect to take any French lands, and therefore should be expecting to be taking all England's SCs, this means Russia is going to become big much more quickly than Germany... and is then sitting right behind her!  Not ideal for Germany.

The Anglo-German alliance, the Saxon, is potentially best for Germany.  She can build armies while England builds fleets.  They can split Scandinavia and move together against Russia, and they can work together against France.  Given their positions on the board, neither is likely to get much of an advantage on the board.

But, as always, the best alliance is with the player you can build the best rapport with... you just need to be aware of what position that puts you in.

THE POWERS series:

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Tournament Scoring - Part 5: Other Scoring Systems

There are, perhaps, three other types of scoring system: Placement or Rank scoring, hybrid systems that seek to combine DSS and SCS, and Tier scoring systems.  I want to have a look at each system. Placement or Rank systems Essentially, these are Supply Centre Scoring systems with the addition of bonus points.  I'm going to have a look at some more regularly used systems.  Again, here is the map I will use as an example: England  - 12 SCs Russia  - 9 SCs Turkey  - 8 SCs Italy  - 5 SCs France ,  Germany   and  Austria-Hungary   were eliminated, with 0 SCs each. C-Diplo In a drawn game points are awarded for: Participating in the game: 1 (for an online tournament, I'd only award this for participating and not surrendering). Each SC held at the end of the game: 1 . The player that 'tops the board' (has the most SCs): 38 pts. The second placed player (second highest number of SCs): 14 pts. The third placed player: 7 pts. If players are

WHAT IS DIPLOMACY? - Part 5: Variants

A variant is a game of Diplomacy where the rules or context are different from the standard game as designed by Allan B Calhamer.  There are three types of variants: context variants, map variants and rules variants. Context Variants Context variants are those games that are played with a wider context.  They may be tournament games, other scored games, or remote format  games.  These aren't often recognised as variants as such, as variants tend to be within the other two types discussed below.  But the context the game is being played in will have an impact on how some players will play the game, and so they are certainly a variation of Dip. Maybe they should be called "variations" rather than variants but does it really matter? Map Variants Diplomacy has been adapted to different maps, or boards.  Not surprising as the general idea of the game, pitting competing powers against each other in a localised region and time in history, can be adapted to any number

Tournament Scoring - Part 7: The Mystery Scoring System

Introducing the Mystery Scoring System.  This is a name that reflects that the actual points scored isn't known until the tournament is over. OK, enough.  Let's get to it.  Here's a breakdown of what the system looks like. The Mystery scoring system The Mystery scoring system is based on DIAS games, where all survivors share in the draw.  (I have modified it to work with non-DIAS games.) In a draw , all players involved in the draw score 100  points. For games which are non-DIAS, players that survive but who are not part of the draw receive 10 points. Eliminated players receive 0 points. If a game ends in a solo, all other players receive 0 points. Solos are scored using the following process: Find the sum of all points scored in games which end in a draw. Divide this total by the number of games that ended in the draw - the average number of points awarded. Divide the average number of points above by the number of games that ended in a solo. Each