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.
"Woohoo!" yells the uninitiated. "I got Russia! Four units!"
Ah, yes. The only power on the board that starts with an extra unit. Russia has two armies and two fleets. Unique. As a more experienced player will tell you (and it doesn't take that much more experience) she also has a loooooooong frontier to worry about, one that places her in both the northern and southern arenas. And this isn't quite the advantage it seems.
Ah, yes. The only power on the board that starts with an extra unit. Russia has two armies and two fleets. Unique. As a more experienced player will tell you (and it doesn't take that much more experience) she also has a loooooooong frontier to worry about, one that places her in both the northern and southern arenas. And this isn't quite the advantage it seems.
Having said that, Russia often does well. She has a decent win ratio, after all. She needs to be played by someone who knows what they're doing with her, but when this happens, she is a serious threat.
If Russia survives the early game, she is always a threat. The problem is that, despite her SC advantage, surviving the early game isn't always easy. She is under-powered in at least one arena, perhaps both.
The key to Russia's start is often what she does with her Muscovite army. She can move it north, east, or south. If Russia orders A Mos-StP, then she is probably looking to prevent England walking into Norway. If she moves it east, that is A Mos-War, then she is looking to attack Germany, most likely. If she moves it south, to either Sevastopol or Ukraine, then she is looking to secure her position in the southern arena.
In truth, only the latter choice can give Russia a solid place in the game. Although she will have just a solitary fleet in the north, probably having been ordered to the Gulf of Bothnia and hoping she can get into Sweden, the south has become a more equally competed place to be. She'll probably secure Rumania by doing this. So a build.
Frankly, A Mos-War is pretty useless, even with A War-Pru/Sil/Gal. She's going to be lucky to steal anything from Germany and she's isolated both her fleets. Yet it happens.
Should Russia go for her northern options and order A Mos-StP then she has divided her forces completely. It seems like a sensible idea: two units in the north, two in the south. But it simply means she is under-powered in both arenas.
The fact that Russia is going to be a minor power somewhere, if not everywhere, in the early game, means that she needs to find a good ally. It should also mean that she needs to do her best to guarantee herself a build, and this is only possible if she has three units in the south.
Nevertheless, A Mos-StP is an increasingly common move in Spring 1901. I haven't worked out why. The most it achieves is possibly preventing England from moving into Norway... and even that isn't guaranteed. The only other option is to order A StP-Fin in Fall 01, which might give her a chance at take a Sweden denied her by Germany. However, she may well need an ally to help with this anyway, so why not work on that alliance? After all, the best option for this is England and she won't have been chuffed with A Mos-StP!
Russia does have options for allies. Germany could be a good ally (the Chequered alliance) because it allows the two to split Scandinavia and turn on England. England could be a good ally (the Anglonaut alliance) because it allows the two to split Scandinavia and turn on Germany! The E/G/R triple alliance (the Northern Triple) works well as long as you're not Germany.
An alliance which is seldom used is the Franconaut (Franco-Russian). It's not much use at the start of the game other than being part of either the Triple Entente with England or the German Ocean Triple with Germany but once the target of these triple alliances is dealt with (Germany and England respectively) the Franconaut alliance can effectively deal with the third power.
The Austro-Russian Pepermint alliance can be effective but only really for Russia, in practice. Russia is always there in the background. The other two potential southern allies for Russia are more often used and more usually effective.
The Wintergreen alliance of Russia and Italy spells doom for Austria. This is simply because she's attacked from both east and west and there's little hope of help. Austria will try to get Germany on board but the Dual Alliance (Austro-German) is often about as good as the paper it's (not) written on. If Austria can get Turkey to attack Russia she may gain some breathing room but the Wintergreen alliance can afford to ignore Turkey.
The A/I/R triple alliance the Gobbler can is the one effective way to get rid of Turkey quickly. Although any of the western powers could get involved to mess with it, why would they? It still leaves three powers to squabble over the Balkans and the southern arena unsettled.
And finally, probably the most well-known alliance of all, the Juggernaut, the Russo-Turkish alliance.
This is particularly feared. It almost doesn't matter what Russia and Turkey do in 1901, other than an all-out bloodfest in the Black Sea region, "Juggernauttttttttt!" is likely to be yelled from the ramparts of almost every capital on the board.
There is a history of the Juggernaut rolling across Europe. It doesn't matter if it is spotted and called out, in many cases, because - by the time the doubters or ignoramuses can be persuaded to do something about it - it's probably reached the top of the hill and is freewheeling down the other side.
It's received something of a bad press more recently, though, because it can be stopped if the frontline powers act against it. By frontline I mean almost everyone else. England, Germany, Italy and Austria all have something to lose by ignoring it. And, if they can organise together, this is likely to push England and Germany into an alliance to stop France from distracting them.
In reality, though, a triple alliance is hard enough to put together... a quadruple Anti-Juggernaut alliance has even less hope. And with a potential Bridge triple alliance - with France joining the Juggernaut - this makes it more difficult.
Russia should jump on board the Jug if she can. The chances are that she will gain more from it early on, while Turkey faces Italy, often with only limited Russian support.
Russia does have options for allies. Germany could be a good ally (the Chequered alliance) because it allows the two to split Scandinavia and turn on England. England could be a good ally (the Anglonaut alliance) because it allows the two to split Scandinavia and turn on Germany! The E/G/R triple alliance (the Northern Triple) works well as long as you're not Germany.
An alliance which is seldom used is the Franconaut (Franco-Russian). It's not much use at the start of the game other than being part of either the Triple Entente with England or the German Ocean Triple with Germany but once the target of these triple alliances is dealt with (Germany and England respectively) the Franconaut alliance can effectively deal with the third power.
The Austro-Russian Pepermint alliance can be effective but only really for Russia, in practice. Russia is always there in the background. The other two potential southern allies for Russia are more often used and more usually effective.
The Wintergreen alliance of Russia and Italy spells doom for Austria. This is simply because she's attacked from both east and west and there's little hope of help. Austria will try to get Germany on board but the Dual Alliance (Austro-German) is often about as good as the paper it's (not) written on. If Austria can get Turkey to attack Russia she may gain some breathing room but the Wintergreen alliance can afford to ignore Turkey.
The A/I/R triple alliance the Gobbler can is the one effective way to get rid of Turkey quickly. Although any of the western powers could get involved to mess with it, why would they? It still leaves three powers to squabble over the Balkans and the southern arena unsettled.
And finally, probably the most well-known alliance of all, the Juggernaut, the Russo-Turkish alliance.
This is particularly feared. It almost doesn't matter what Russia and Turkey do in 1901, other than an all-out bloodfest in the Black Sea region, "Juggernauttttttttt!" is likely to be yelled from the ramparts of almost every capital on the board.
There is a history of the Juggernaut rolling across Europe. It doesn't matter if it is spotted and called out, in many cases, because - by the time the doubters or ignoramuses can be persuaded to do something about it - it's probably reached the top of the hill and is freewheeling down the other side.
It's received something of a bad press more recently, though, because it can be stopped if the frontline powers act against it. By frontline I mean almost everyone else. England, Germany, Italy and Austria all have something to lose by ignoring it. And, if they can organise together, this is likely to push England and Germany into an alliance to stop France from distracting them.
In reality, though, a triple alliance is hard enough to put together... a quadruple Anti-Juggernaut alliance has even less hope. And with a potential Bridge triple alliance - with France joining the Juggernaut - this makes it more difficult.
Russia should jump on board the Jug if she can. The chances are that she will gain more from it early on, while Turkey faces Italy, often with only limited Russian support.
Comments
Post a Comment
What do you think?