Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 11/03/84 (WLS Mods); site fisher.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!princeton!astrovax!fisher!david From: david@fisher.UUCP (David Rubin) Newsgroups: net.games.pbm Subject: Son of Best First Moves (Germany) Message-ID: <689@fisher.UUCP> Date: Thu, 27-Jun-85 21:11:26 EDT Article-I.D.: fisher.689 Posted: Thu Jun 27 21:11:26 1985 Date-Received: Sat, 29-Jun-85 00:58:36 EDT Distribution: net Organization: Princeton University Department of Statistics Lines: 73 ------------------------------------------------------------------- | "[Diplomacy is] the art of restraining power." | | | | - Henry Kissinger | ------------------------------------------------------------------- It seems that the discussion of best "openings" has petered out. After a lively discussion of the optimal tactics for France, the limited choices open to the next country, England, apparently dampened the discussion. I will now "open" the discussion of Germany's first move, and we'll see if there's any interest in continuing the exchange of favorite Spring 1901 recipes. There's lots that's extremely plausible for a German player, but most of it is just bad policy. In particular, (1) Germany should almost never open with an attack on Russia. Most German players accept the notion that an opening attack on Austria is almost always a bad idea, but seem to think that a surprise attack on Russia has a good chance to work out well. In fact, an attack on Russia carries precisely the same critical disadvantages that an attack on Austria accrues: by abandoning the Low Countries to be divvied up by France and England, Germany allows both Western neighbors quick access to German home centers. Even if they were not hostile at the outset, the temptation will likely prove overwhelming. This is not to say it can NEVER work out, but only that German players either attack Austria too infrequently or Russia too often in 1901. It is my opinion that it is the latter that it is the case. Of course, once some Western centers are secured, the parallel between attacking Russia and attacking Austria becomes far less compelling... (2) Never, NEVER even drop a HINT to ANY power that F Kiel is not going to Denmark. Even if F Kie -> Hol, let everyone know that you're planning F Kie -> Den. There is no substitute for ensuring good behavior from the Russians than the belief in St. Petersburg that Berlin holds it within its power to deny Russia Sweden. (3) Go for it. There are three neutral centers within easy reach, and occupying all three makes Germany a much safer place. Perhaps you won't get all three, perhaps you will have to deal one away, but there's no good reason to choose an opening move that does not permit Germany a chance to, with some astute negotiations, gain them all. Even if you are crossed by an Eastern power, you can defend yourself. (4) Encourage A Mos -> StP. Encourage A Ven -> Pie. If both occur, you WILL gain Hol, Bel, and Den in 1901. See, it's not a pipe dream. If you agree so far, then you will order A Ber -> Kie, A Mun -> Ruh about 9 times out of 10. The question is, whither F Kie goest? To Holland maximizes your chance for three builds (you can SUPPORT an attack on Bel), but to Denmark provides you with the means to punish Russia (if you don't trust your bluffing powers) and avoids an awkwardly placed ARMY in Denmark. Tough choice, but I usually prefer the latter on the grounds that if Bel remains open at the end of 1901, the odds are greatly in Germany's favor to pick it up in 1902. Even if you prefer F Kie -> Hol, #2 suggests that you not do it all the time. A common worry: what if France threatens A Bur -> Mun? If France is your only revealed enemy, ignore it; go for Bel anyway. If you defend Mun and France goes for Bel, you may have missed your best chance for that center. If you attack Bel and lose Mun, build two armies and triumphantly reclaim Mun in 1902. David Rubin {allegra|astrovax|princeton}!fisher!david