Media Wars - DiploStrats PoV (Diplomacy Playthrough as Russia)

[@DiploStrats]

This video isn't meant to be watched in one sitting. Please don't do that to yourself! I've been working on this video for the best part of three months now; it's a pretty incredible feeling to have it finally see the light of day. I hope you all enjoy it! And thank you all so much for watching - the reaction to this channel in general over the last year or so has been seriously uplifting and motivating. You can check out all the other content creators involved in this game in the description - I'll also compile a list of direct links to their Media Wars content when it comes out in this comment: England: kzbin.info/www/bejne/qWiQkod4fJx2i7c (Periodically releasing, not all out yet) France: thediplomats.net/media-wars-2020 (Releasing daily, not all out yet) Germany: brotherbored.com/media-wars-video-journal-1901/ (Periodically releasing, not all out yet) Italy: (Releasing Friday) Austria: kzbin.info/www/bejne/nIXJXod3aZ2dl6s Russia: kzbin.info/www/bejne/iV6nk4tuebt4kNk (You are here!) Turkey: diplomacygames.com (Talked about in various Episodes)

[@TheGameKat]

Oh this is awesome. Thank you so much.

[@anthonydoyle72]

Not in one sitting. I was planning to

[@deeznoots6241]

I’m gonna watch it twice in one sitting, the clearly intended amount of watching time

[@josephjagusah8668]

I'm gonna say that disbanding north sea in winter 1909 just looks ugly. It made Austria mad but Austria was already being irrational and aggravating him more wasn't going to accomplish anything. That being said, you needed to throw, and Austria needed to know you were throwing, and even though you made moves in that direction it's not clear that the message will get through. This is my first impression, I'll revisit as I get a look at how the game develops.

[@josephjagusah8668]

Okay, I think you had a good idea when you planned to attack Austria in S1910. It's completely irrational but it's the kind of play Austria would have understood. He's still thinking as if his own solo is worth playing for, even if ultimately he'd be willing to settle for a draw. that irrational attack might set his head a bit straight. He wasn't going to throw because he literally didn't understand what position he was in.

[@Sploack]

*receives a hostile message* Diplostrats: he's clearly going to attack me *receives a friendly message* Diplostrats: he's clearly going to attack me

[@DiploStrats]

They proved they were untrustworthy by being Diplomacy players!

[@Sploack]

@@DiploStrats so basically it's more like this: *receives a message from a diplomacy player* Diplostrats: he's clearly going to attack me

[@DiploStrats]

@@Sploack Don't forget *doesn't receive a message from a diplomacy player* Diplostrats: he's clearly going to attack me

[@Sploack]

@@DiploStrats Damn, how could I miss that!

[@Zogerpogger]

@@Sploack I just realized that you play on WebDip Edit: I see you everywhere on diplomacy yt

[@xavierreichel8254]

There are professionally produced media properties nowhere near as compelling and enjoyable as this. The narrative and character development couldn't have been better if you wrote it. This is one of the most fantastic KZbin videos I've ever watched. Nice one, Meme.

[@Autonomous_Automata]

That end conversation, where Austria talked himself down, quoted that great quote from you when you were trying to convince him, and then Italy talking about respecting you and making the choice to get this draw genuinely made me cry. What an amazing game to watch! I don't know enough diplomacy strategy to know whether throwing the north to Germany was the right decision tactically. I don't think it matters! I think the game you got out of that choice was worth it.

[@DiploStrats]

These kind of comments are what makes the time put into recording this video feel so worth it. Thank you, and I'm really glad you enjoyed it! There's so much raw emotion that can come with Diplomacy, and this video managing to convey some of that makes it by far my favourite of anything I've made, even if I waffle a bit much in it!

[@Minion_on_the_cross]

Have never played diplomacy, only watched games of it through your channel but this one in particular was awesome, you should do more POV live commentaries like this

[@DiploStrats]

Thanks! These ones are always going to be few and far between - they take a lot more time to make than anything else - but there are more coming! Specifically, Media Wars 2 just started, so that'll be a video in a couple months (although that one's being played by Ezio, not me).

[@Shannon_Lynch]

I can't believe I watched this whole thing, you played a good game. BrotherBored played a great game

[@HighlyCruciferous]

They both played an excellent game. And VillageIdiot's last turn was nothing short of brilliant.

[@LegendaryTactics]

Thanks for the kind words Cap. It was a pleasure playing alongside/against you throughout. I'm not sure I deserve the praise you offer at the end, but it was indeed a glorious finish. I loved the tension of those last few moves and the final messages that were going to make or break the game. That final stalemate line was a thing of beauty and all orchestrated by you.

[@DiploStrats]

You absolutely do deserve that praise! For players who are used to stalemates being the 'standard' end to the game, I think it's easy to interpret this ending as 'Austria made moves that didn't make sense for much of the endgame, so he doesn't deserve much respect for finally making them when it was almost too late'. I wanted to highlight that we weren't given objectives going into the game, so you were initially playing to a completely different set of objectives. That was an absolutely valid thing to be doing. You changed your entire outlook on what consitutes a valid endgame state in order to get us that draw, and in my view that was the biggest thing anyone did in achieving that stalemate line.

[@LegendaryTactics]

@@DiploStrats LOL. One confession I need to make is that I was always playing to stop the solo and to not die, which by definition is playing for the draw), and I was really hoping that some of you would write me off as the guy who wasn't as dangerous as the rest so you might open your flank to me. Unfortunately, I couldn't get you or Italy to budge (good choice). My only hope to not being annihilated was to hunker down vs my nearest neighbours, leave no openings, and to use the only thing I could to contain Germany, which was offering him a reasonable path to a solo by not moving to the line until his threat was too great. My main tool with both you and Germany was to dangle the potential for a solo out to each of you because I knew what that meant to both of you. It was a dangerous game for sure, but this is high stakes diplomacy!

[@iv9753]

DiploStrats when he gets angry: I should not have said that. I should NOT have said that.

[@Zogerpogger]

The whole orders going through 3 hours early thing had me in stitches, quite a creative way to get around attacking Turkey...and the fact the ruse was swallowed hook line and sinker just makes it great.

[@LegendaryTactics]

Over 10 HOURS!!!! Oh wow. I love that as I'm watching this, you have 488 subscribers and 488 views. That's a pretty good click-through. Looking forward to spending the next 3 weeks watching this.

[@Fummy007]

Hands down one of the best diplomacy videos. As a newcomer I had no idea how the game actually functions in practice.

[@ChaChanchilla]

I always love seeing these in-depth discussions, awesome vid (definitely nearly watched it all in one sitting oops). I love the emotional rollercoaster with the discussions in post... I for one share a very similar view to the end game as you, and I believe the beauty of diplomacy is that even when you cant possibly solo win there is still the chance to create a stalemate line. Giving up the centers in the north may have been overkill to get Austria to see the German threat but maybe I have too much hope that Austria would notice otherwise. Nonetheless, it ended up just barely working out for the draw and thats a well earned victory in my books.

[@DiploStrats]

Austria actually released a video recently that might be of interest to you wrt endgame: kzbin.info/www/bejne/pqPVgKqGdtiiqpo It talks about how his view on the endgame changed as a result of this game. I think it's still slightly off the mark in that there's nothing intrinsically better about being eliminated later compared to being eliminated early, but I think it backs up what I was saying in game and what you're saying here - the fact you can still play for the stalemate after you're out of solo contention is the best way to play, and it becomes pretty obvious that that's the best way to play after you've tried playing that way!

[@Zogerpogger]

Wow, damn. Just finished the whole video (watched on 1.75x speed I'll admit). Thank you for putting this together! I learned a lot from it and really enjoyed seeing you talk through everything. I definitely felt for you when the Austrian wasn't cooperating, but I'm really glad you managed to draw!

[@DiploStrats]

Congrats on joining the elite few who have made it through this video! I'm glad you enjoyed - and I'm glad I managed to draw too :D

[@michaelkensbock661]

The thing I took away from this game is: Always define the scoring system before the game starts!

[@iv9753]

this game makes people talk like lawyers

[@DiploStrats]

A surprising number of Diplomacy players actually are lawyers! There was at least one in this game.

[@iv9753]

@@DiploStrats I can see where the skill sets overlap.

[@obnoxas]

The 3 hours early move was absolutely devious and I love it. This is really entertaining, I'm very glad I found this channel!

[@kandrenai]

Watched it all in one sitting. Great game! I'm glad to see the AIR alliance come together at the end there.

[@Sploack]

Ok, 3rd and final comment on this video. Great work Cap! You played masterfully and your analysis was so good it convinced me to watch a 10 hours video! The best thing is that this game brought you to discuss what is the real goal of diplomacy, so it went on a level deeper than just a simple AAR. You asked our opinion on whether giving Germany the north was the right choice or not. You know the game of diplomacy a million times better than I do, so I don't know how much my opinion is worth, but I think that if you wouldn't have abandoned the north this video would contain your commentary of BrotherBored's solo. You blamed youself way too much for that choice, when it was the right call to move the Austrian, who seems a very "emotional" player, or as BrotherBored put it, a "dangerous" player, because he doesn't act in the optimal tactical way, but he follows his feelings a lot. Probably your only "mistake" was asking Italy to blow up your fleet in Naples, because that convinced the very trusting and emotional Austria to make moves that went against the one that betrayed his trust instead of "poor innocent Germany". I don't know, maybe I'm wrong, but you have my compliments for what a great diplomacy player you are.

[@LegendaryTactics]

Austria here. I've never really considered myself an emotional player tbh. Interesting that this is the perspective. I don't get upset by stabs. I expect traitors. It's more a clinical response with a pretense of needing revenge. I find that other players will often let a revenge plot play out if they believe I'm singular in that vision. I also like to use the belief that I'll get revenge to disinsentivize betrayals. In terms of trust, I want to trust freely, but words and orders need to align. If they don't, then I fall back to caution. Dangerous? Sure I can get behind that. I don't follow a typical path in the game for better or worse. Sometimes high level players make the assumption that all players will put the optimal orders in, which is why I will sometimes not do what is expected. I don't think that blowing up the Naples fleet was a mistake. It was brilliant actually. I believed that Meme was baiting me with Italian and German centers so he could backdoor me, which I why I reversed course to prevent that. I think you're right that the issue was asking Italy to do it and allowing France to discover that fact. Too easy for leaks to get back. I then didn't tell him whether it was Italy or France who let me know, which sowed distrust with both of them. As to the North, had Captain not given it up, I would have likely stayed with him until he got close to the solo, and then I would have stabbed him around the same time he would have stabbed me. We would have ended with Captain pushing for the solo instead of Germany I believe.

[@Sploack]

@@LegendaryTactics I feel obligated to specify that I said "emotional" as in "driven by emotions" and not in any other meaning. Anyway, I guess on that I was wrong, now I understand you play to *seem* driven by emotions when in reality you're not. Yes, the "mistake" I was referring to was in the act of asking Italy to blow up that fleet, allowing him to leak the information and sow distrust between you and Russia. Blowing up the fleet in itself was brilliant, as you said. Using that kind of threats and feigning emotions that may not be there is a very effective way to keep an ally from stabbing. In my very first game of diplomacy my main ally told me that if I attacked him he would "make the game as hard as possible for me". It totally worked. Other than that, I must say it's very interesting seeing how even the most experienced players of this game can disagree on key moves or strategies. Russia's evergrowing frustration, leading to drastic decisions like the one in the North, bringing you to the dramatic ending of the game was really entertaining. Your video in documentary style was very good and light, but I wish we could have seen your in-depth point of view too :)

[@HighlyCruciferous]

@@LegendaryTactics I think you are still misjudging the situation at the point where Russia felt compelled to "abandon" the north in order to get you to react to the threat of the German solo. As Meme elaboratly explained, the North was not tenable in the long run and the urgency was for you to carry out your role in establishing the stalemate line. Your failure to do so almost cost everyone the draw and would very probably have done so if not for Italy's brilliant deception in the last year of the game.

[@LegendaryTactics]

@@HighlyCruciferous one thing that hasn't come out yet, that brother bored has yet to release, and that I didn't cover in my video, is that while the map may show that I wasn't doing anything to stop the solo, the press reveals quite a different story. As proof, I offer two results. Why did Germany never cross the main stalemate line when the threat was high? Why did he always hold that line, even though it would have been tactically advantageous to do a full court press? Russia and I couldn't have stopped him from the positions we were in. We were both badly out of position. I was madly trying to broker a Diplomatic truce along those lines with Germany. They worked right up until sending his army into naf. That was the first time Germany extended beyond what was an acceptable level of danger towards earning the solo. Russia had no knowledge of the extent of those dealings. The second evidence I offer is my final position. In Diplomacy, it's no accident that I got every last unit to the line and was well dug in. I didn't leave a lot of room for error to be sure, but in a game with this caliber of player, the mere fact that I survived, and formed a beautiful stalemate line playing between VI, BB, and Meme, is a small miracle that I'll take any day of the week. They are all tremendous players.

[@Deniecu]

This video was a great watch, I think it is one of my favorites of yours as of yet. It was great to get an insight to your thinking and how you play and it's been quite helpful to my own games. So thanks for making it. :)

[@DiploStrats]

Thanks! This was hands down my favourite to make (although also took by far the most effort out of anything I've done). I'm really glad it was enjoyable and helpful!

[@chalkchalkson5639]

This was a great watch! I got through in 2 sessions á 2.5h at 2x speed. I love the format exploring press alongside the board.

[@LyriaSiders]

What a video. I watched the first 5 hours over several days, but the last 5 hours were just a straight roller coaster I binged in one go. Incredible how one disband continuously escalated more and more into all-out hostility between you and Austria. Every turn it seemed Austria did the exact things that worked you up, while you did the exact things that send Austria into a rage. The province of Ukraine will never feel the same to me now xD. All the credits to BrotherBored for playing such a great game, both tactically and diplomatically. Glad to see for you that you still got a result from this game, I was so impressed seeing the effort you took into outlining and explaining all tactical options to your colleagues. I really felt along with the frustration you were feeling in sending those giant messages, and very happy that it did pay off eventually.

[@DiploStrats]

I'm glad you enjoyed it! And I hope it was worth the 5 hours straight of hearing me get increasingly frustrated :D Yeah, that mid to late game felt like escalating tensions - Austria would do something to annoy me, so I'd do something that annoyed Austria a little more, and it just kept going on and on. Absolutely a diplomatic failure on my part; the best way to stop something like that is to back down and stop raising tensions and I wasn't willing to do that for a long time, but I'm glad it worked out in the end anyway too!

[@thomaswall7685]

Only 90 minutes in and I’m loving this!

[@splashfart]

Would really like to hear Austria's perspective on this game for comparison! His intransigence in the endgame being explained in his own words would be great.

[@DiploStrats]

You can find it here: kzbin.info/www/bejne/nIXJXod3aZ2dl6s It's in a very different style to mine, but it's still an interesting watch!

[@JamiesonLock]

It seems like a big issue here was not discussing what the endgame goal was with all the creators. In a tournament, you know what you're trying to do. Setting it out before this game would have saved a lot of headaches.

[@DiploStrats]

I think the GM wanted it to have a more 'natural' atmosphere, like a casual house game would. But, given how competitive we all were that definitely didn't work!

[@sunwookim5046]

The amount of effort put into this video is incredible, it helps me with improving my own game thx:))

[@mcsjenkins1]

Congrats on all your hard work, both in-game in managing to eek it out at the last possible moment; And maybe even more so, on all your work editing and making this video. Really enjoyed watching!

[@DiploStrats]

Thank you! Really glad to hear that you enjoyed. Hopefully I'll get another one of these out at some point!

[@Deronimo4]

Awesome vid from Captainmeme as always! I have been playing on webdip for a few months now. My goal is to get into a tournament and end up in one of your commentaries. It may be a long way off but it’s good to have goals! Keep the content coming it is fantastic!

[@DiploStrats]

Glad you enjoy the videos! It's usually much easier to get in one of these if you play Virtual Face to Face, since the tournaments there are faster so there's more of them, but ODC and Nexus are good bets if you're trying for extended deadline games. Good luck!

[@Deronimo4]

@@DiploStrats yeah extended deadline fits better around my work and family etc. When is the next Nexus or ODC? And are they open to all players?

[@DvdAvins]

Done now. Wow! I not only watched all of this, I went back and forth between you, BrotherBored's vlog, England's early coverage, and Austria's video, following the game phase by phase. (The other player's coverage seems to be unavailable now.) How much Austria learned, I don't know. I know I would not want to go back in time and play with who he was at the beginning of the match. Bing a good interviewer and content producer doesn't mean you're a good player.(Though is wasn't as frustrating as the original Italy.) In the end, I think you were right to give up the northern supply centers. Austria wasn't going to come around until a crisis was reached. And had Germany been taking your supply centers more slowly, he would have had more builds before Austria woke up. Those extra builds would have meant that had he taken Tunis, he could have held it and held the rest of the stalemate line while taking StP or whatever your last holdout(s) in the north were. As was, you would have had a fair chance of thwarting him, even if Tunis had fallen for a while.

[@CraigGrigg1]

Thanks for this vid - i have always wanted tonsee this game played. Only got the first hour or so in, will def be back 👍

[@StrategicGamesEtc]

I really enjoyed the video; thank you for making it. These videos are very interesting from the perspective of exposing me to various aspects of Diplomacy play that I would not otherwise have been cognizant of. I get far too easily annoyed by players (in any game) not acting in their best interest as defined by the stated objectives to probably ever allow Diplomacy to be my "main game", but the game is so unique that I would be happy if I could achieve the necessary frame of mind to enjoy games from time to time. I just jumped into an open lobby on backstabbr a few days ago, so now it's the Spring 1901 "Find Replacements" phase. :D I'm sure that's not a phase any other Diplomacy player has ever encountered. ;D

[@FreeAsInFreeBeer]

This is the first game of Diplomacy I've viewed. I've never played. This kept me captivated all the way through! I've been inspired to try to setup a game with some friends. If we get to it, we'll make sure to define scoring up front! What are some normal ways of scoring? 100 points divided between the remaining players?

[@DiploStrats]

Glad you enjoyed! Thank you for watching :D The scoring... I've kind of flipped back and forth on how important it is a lot since I made this video. I think particularly for games with new players, you don't need a rigid scoring system, you just need everyone to have a general idea of what the objectives are - the best system in my eyes is just: A) Solo (18 centers) is a win B) If you can't solo, aim to end the game with as many centers as you can get C) BUT if someone else solos, your center count is treated as 0, so don't let anyone else win! If you want a more rigid system, I'd say use a slightly modified version of Classic Scoring: if no solo: 3 points for surviving to the end of the game 1 point per SC controlled at the end of the game 3 points for having the most SCs at game end (this isn't awarded if there's a tie) if solo: Soloing player scores 34 Everyone else scores 0

[@FreeAsInFreeBeer]

Thanks a bunch for your recommendation! I've started watching Germany's videos of this game. It's a lot of fun comparing your thoughts, especially about the events with the Austrian. I'll watch your next media wars game when I get time for it. Hope to see more fully commentated games like this.

[@phoenixav9550]

Oh boy! Newly getting into all this diplomacy stuff. Honestly had no idea this existed until I discovered the mobile app conspiracy and while asking for tips to improve as I am new (I asked a Russia who was my fiercest ally and almost eliminated to not give away that I am new😂) Coming to the video! Hats off! That was a brilliant game and a brilliant video! Learnt a lot. Had a lot of fun. Have some catch up to do on my studies due to binging it in two days though xD but just wanted to leave a comment for the algorithm and to show my appreciation. I don't usually comment cause I am lazy xD but if anyone deserves it, it's this video!

[@DiploStrats]

Thank you - I'm glad you enjoyed! Binging this over two days is uh, definitely not what I'd recommend though :P Conspiracy is a great platform (if you can find games without dropouts). And thank you for the algorithm help :D

[@HighlyCruciferous]

I was initially quite surprised that so much of the press revolved around concepts such as loyalty, trust, fixed alliances, revenge and the like. We even got to read a proposal of a three-way draw in 1901 ! I would have thought that at this level, it would be a given that every player was only looking out for his own objective interests and aiming only for the win (or failing that, survival and a draw) and that it would be pointless to pretend otherwise. And then I witnessed Austria's endgame play and I realised that even in a game such as this, irrationality and emotions can overcome certain players' pursuit of their own interests.

[@HighlyCruciferous]

And I suppose that ultimately, it was the pretense of such irrationality ( his purported willingness to be eliminated in order to exact revenge) that allowed Italy to save the game. And he was able to convince a player of BB's calibre that he was indeed intending to act against his own best interests !

[@DiploStrats]

It's an interesting one. I wouldn't say this game was the highest level game I've played - most tournament finals are considerably more cutthroat than this - but the press isn't actually all that different here than it was in the Nexus finals. I think it comes down to a combination of some people genuinely pursuing other objectives, and other people who actually were playing objectively presenting themselves as being willing to play for the draw early on. With regard to the former, it was most striking with Austria's "Play for the solo no matter what" and England's "I will kill France no matter what" plays, but there are also more subtle ones. Solos being so rare in Diplomacy mean some people genuinely do play for draws from the start even at a high level, especially in systems like Draw-Size Scoring where player elimination is encouraged (since in these systems going for a solo often means getting a worse draw if you fail, since players who would otherwise be eliminated find a place on the line). With these players, longterm alliances are often incredibly important, because the easiest way to aim for a draw is to find 1 or 2 players who are willing to go the distance with you and stick with them throughout. As an aside, I think trust and loyalty actually do have a pretty big impact even when all players are playing objectively, because having someone you can push across the stalemate line with is the most consistent route to a solo at a high level. That said, it's usually very guarded trust - you always stay alert and try to make sure neither of you have a great position to stab. The relationship between myself and Germany in the midgame is a good example of this; if you watch BrotherBored's videos, you'll see he never really trusted me but we both saw that it was in our best interests to push forward together and so we could trust each other to do that (until he stabbed, anyway :D ). With regard to the latter, because there are players who don't play completely objectively, the best opening press is always going to cater to them - you can identify the objective players later and start pivoting towards a more objective press style with them, but they generally won't mind if you start the game with 'Hey, I'm looking to build loyalty and go the distance' because they also know that that's the best way to get people onside in the early game and they'll probably be doing the same.

[@HighlyCruciferous]

@@DiploStrats Thank you very much for your take on this. It's very interesting and quite unfamiliar for me as the vast majority of my experience is in 7-year gunboat games where Balance of Power is everything. Videos such as this one certainly tempt me to play some more Draw/Press.

[@agamemnonofmycenae5258]

3:56:41 *Your fleet... takes Norway* _Thunder booming_ *Yes, just according to plan*

[@Zogerpogger]

Also cheers to a fellow ublock origin user

[@josephcohen734]

Great vid! I saw you linked to everyone's channels but do you have a link to that specific "player archetypes" video?

[@DiploStrats]

Thanks! And I forgot to link that - here you go: kzbin.info/www/bejne/hpWzZKF5Z7qCjdU

[@josephcohen734]

@@DiploStrats Thanks

[@Shepherd1234]

28:21 Technically it could be seen a tiny tiny bit meta for him to do that :)

[@DvdAvins]

It's Fall '04 and you've been talking for a few turns how it was your idea to stab Austria and get I/A distrusting each other. But the phase before you did that, it was indeed Italy's idea, and you thought it was crazy. (You may well have been right, both about when Italy proposed it and when you did.) My general impression of Italy is he talks a good game but when it's time to put moves in, he's been a flake since Spring 1901.

[@Sploack]

I know I already commented on this video, but this is the equivalent of 20+ videos, so I'm allowed to comment multiple times! I'm at 1909/1910 and basically this video could be split into two halves: Part 1: Wow Austria is such a good ally! Why is he trusting me so much though? Part 2: *Omg Austria why you so dumb*

[@DiploStrats]

Definitely accurate :D It's interesting to see how BrotherBored's perspective is basically the exact opposite! He has a Part 1 of saying Austria is an extremely dangerous player because he was too unwilling to stab, and although his second part isn't out yet I imagine it's going to be him being very happy about how loyal the Austrian is!

[@Sploack]

@@DiploStrats Yeah, I thought the same thing!

[@robertsegovia1418]

I got to this from Brother Bored’s website and initially thought “10 hours! No thanks!” Then, I started being curious from the other players blogs/vlogs about the Russian perspective and you sucked me into watching this whole thing - you really poured yourself into this! I think you made the right choice by taking yourself hostage and giving up the north. I think Austria would have attacked, but who knows because it didn’t happen? I think I read somewhere in the comments that Austria basically agreed, but maybe I misunderstood. Would you please post a link to the Legendary Tactics video of him reviewing one of his games that you commentated on? At some point in the video you mentioned it but I don’t recall when. I do remember you saying it wasn’t getting the views you thought it deserved.

[@DiploStrats]

Thanks for giving it a watch, and I'm glad you enjoyed! I think making the video 10 hours instead of splitting it up a bit was maybe a mistake, but it saved me some editing word :D I think it's really impossible to tell what Austria would have done otherwise - I feel like at least some of the post-game commentary has had a bit of revisionism in it, which is why I prefer this commentary style (and I'm glad BrotherBored used it as well). My thoughts on throwing the north eventually settled: I think tactically it was fine, and with another player it might have been the best move, but I would have done much better by being less standoffish in press and taking a more friendly approach. My Spring 1910 moves weren't particularly friendly to Austria on the face of it, but because they were accompanied by me being less aggressive in chat, Austria viewed them as friendly and started properly working with me - even if his moves still weren't quite what I hoped for. If I'd done that earlier, I think there would have been some chance of him turning on the German. The Legendary Tactics video I was talking about is this one: kzbin.info/www/bejne/mpOyc4l9rLqFfJo The full DBN commentary for the same game is here: kzbin.info/www/bejne/pZDTmWanbq2irJo

[@robertsegovia1418]

Thanks! I didn’t think about it until I read your reply, but I wasn’t trying to criticize the length. I actually prefer longer, in-depth analysis more. I agree that splitting them up would be more marketable yet certainly understand the decision to keep it all together. One thing I appreciate about the live vlogging from you, DBN, and YBB is the raw emotion that comes along with it. I think anyone playing gets emotionally wrapped up in it, even though it’s a game and we all know there are more important things in life (a really great part of England’s last video). To see others react/feel as I do when things don’t go my way, yet pull themselves together and make professional videos, rise above their base feelings, and ultimately look to understand the other person’s POV instead of continuing to complain is something sorely lacking in our world and in the media at large. Thanks!

[@HighlyCruciferous]

Have only watched a third so far, but I already felt the need to comment on this brilliant video and thank you for the outstanding content that you provide. I strongly disagree with your move Var-Sil in S02 and your subsequent support of Austria into Munich. Of course I can't know if this is what cost you your presence in Scandinavia or if Germany would have supported England into Sweden regardless, but with France in a weaker state than usual, this situation was an absolute godsend for England, since it forced the bisbanding of one of the German fleets and basically ensured Denmark would fall shortly thereafter. As I said, I haven't gotten further than 1904, but I'd have a hard time imagining a case where England does not at least draw from this position. Other than that, I am very much enjoying your play and press. Italy's falsely naïve persona is hilarious ! Will surely comment further once I've gotten to the end. Edit : Oh dear, S04 England did not protect his backdoor from France. Well, that changes everything !

[@DiploStrats]

If I had the chance to go back and change things, I'm not sure whether I'd have made the same move. It definitely cost me the north earlier than otherwise, but I think ultimately this did end up being better for me than just letting the EG roll - BrotherBored talked in his videos about how the Kie fleet was basically staying in place until he made up his mind on where to send it, and given that I had an extremely strong south, he would have stuck with the EG and kicked me out of Swe later (this is something he mentioned wanting to do in his videos if I had a strong start in the south). My plan at the time was to get England onside with an attack against Germany so I could keep Sweden, but I almost think that losing Sweden worked out far better for me than that would have. England's position was so strong as a result that he had a huge target painted on his back, and that allowed IFGR to gang up on him and take him down. I think in most games he would have had a solid position to get a guaranteed draw at the very least from his '03 position, but the players around him were all very strong and identified the threat in time to neutralise it.

[@HighlyCruciferous]

@@DiploStrats England could have made better use of his extremely stong position. Certainly he should not have left his western flank open to attack by France. Also, he could have waited before grabbing Denmark and propped Germany up in exchange for the promise not to rebuild a second fleet. Taking StP and trying to destroy your northern fleet would no doubt have been a better course of action and he would have been well on his way to becoming completely untouchable. Faced with a menacing E/G, I believe England should be priority target for the eastern powers. Gains against Turkey might have allowed a fall move of StP-Fin and the build of F StP nc. Germany can always be dealt with later on by a combined R/A/I force.

[@drdelightify]

I'm only partway thru so I don't know how it ends, but what was the argument for building fleet sev in 06/07? I'm not great with tactics but to my eyes it looks like that build can *only* be used to attack austria.

[@DiploStrats]

So, I had an interesting choice there of builds - because basically everything aside from F Sev would look anti-German, and F Sev (or A Sev) would look anti-Austrian. I figured that since we were about to launch the attack on the German, I shouldn't tip the German off or put them on their guard - and the Austrian had let so many things go that he really shouldn't have (like A Gal holding there) that I could get away with placing another unit south. It being a fleet had the added bonus that I could *say* it was to protect Turkey and actually just wait around in the Black Sea until I could stab him. I won't spoil how it turned out, aside from saying that it was a bad choice :D

[@HighlyCruciferous]

Armed only with guile and deception, a 1 center power was able to single-handedly turn a situation where a draw was statiscally highly improbable into an immediate stalemate. What a hero !

[@DiploStrats]

I definitely should have given Italy more credit in the ending summary - I think at that point I was just wanting to publish and rushed it a bit. I think from my perspective, holding Tunis hostage for that extra turn by going to TyS was incredibly risky, because had the German convoyed over we would have lost the game there and then, but at the time he was just looking to punish Austria so it did make sense. His turnaround on the last turn was huge, especially since he basically forced us to put him in an unkillable position if we wanted to get a result.

[@HighlyCruciferous]

@@DiploStrats But are you sure it was a tournaround and not part of his plan to force the immediate stalemate ? That would seem much more in character for this player than a petty wish to punish another player (however much Austria deserved it). An if it was premeditated, would Italy have told you about it in the spring ? Perhaps not, and he certainly would not have told this Austria. Also, was trying to deceive Germany a "riskier" play than having to succeed an unfavorable guess several turns in a row ? With hindsight, I wouldn't say it was.

[@DiploStrats]

@@HighlyCruciferous I've talked to the Italian player postgame, and he did only decide not to throw the game in the Fall. Prior to that point he was so annoyed with the Austrian that he counted the Austrian losing as a win for him. Looking at what happened, we did end up in a better position for him doing it! But that was only because Germany made what I would argue were slightly suboptimal moves by not convoying there.

[@HighlyCruciferous]

@@DiploStrats That's disappointing. Can we at least still consider it an accidental brilliancy ?

[@iv9753]

The comments on the video are almost as long as the paragraphs you're sending to the other players lol

[@lolledopke]

I've never played Diplomacy, I'm just curious if this amount of metagaming is normal? Like sending messages when people are asleep saying "yo, I'll do this instead of what we agreed on, let me know if you object", knowing they probably won't respond in time. Or what happened with Turkey early on with the pause.

[@DiploStrats]

Yes and no. The Turkey pause situation was a bit over the top and far more than *most* diplomacy players would do. The sending messages when you know people are asleep is fairly common. The original rules basically said that if you can get away with something, you can do it. Face to face tournaments back in the 60s and 70s had a lot of what were called 'Flying Dutchmen', which was a practice where someone would slip an extra unit onto the board and use it until someone noticed they were up an extra piece. I've heard a story of someone taking someone else outside to negotiate, running back inside and locking the door so they couldn't get their orders in on time. With adjudicators and such (and people trying to make tournaments that were more tournament-esque and not cheating fests) there are a few extra rules; you obviously can't do anything to the board, getting into someone else's account will get you banned, and in face to face now interfering with the orders box or with someone's ability to put orders in the box are not allowed. But on the negotiation front, practically anything still is, short of abuse, and people can and will take advantage of that in all sorts of ways - especially at a high level.

[@docman4128]

Am at 3:12 here and does anything not ring alarm bells for you?

[@DiploStrats]

3:12 or 3:12:00? :D I'm definitely a paranoid player. But to be fair, these are Diplomacy players; you really can't trust them!

[@docman4128]

3:12:00 I am not used to watching videos this long

[@freyeik]

I know this video is old but do you recommend any way i can actually study the late game of diplomacy? I absolutely hate looking at stalemate lines and crap like that. It's just simply extremely tedious and not fun because i don't fully understand the best possible one to set up and when to set it up to and getting EVERYONE to go in on it to. But i can only worry about my own game play. Is there anything amazing out there about end games. I want to read and study it or a program computer calculation of sorts i could use too?

[@DiploStrats]

There aren't very many video resources on Diplomacy's late game - there are a lot of articles but most of them are around the specifics of stalemate lines rather than when to go for them. I think maybe the best article is Seren's 'Gunboat Diplomacy Stalemate Lines' over on BrotherBored's blog here: brotherbored.com/gunboat-diplomacy-stalemate-lines/ - it's supposed to be for no press diplomacy, but most of the information there applies equally to Full Press. I think if you play enough, you'll also just eventually get a feel for it. That might involve losing in some games, and sometimes even after you're experienced you make massive mistakes in your approach to negotiating with people in endgame (see the near-disaster in this Media Wars game for example) but every mistake is a learning opportunity and that's how people get really good.

[@DvdAvins]

Spring 1907: Austria's *stated reasons* for not joining you against Germany may not make sense, but it was right for him not to. You would solo. He would lose.

[@michaelwaters2477]

10:33:30 he humbly asks for his video to be liked. What a sellout! (haha jk) Amazing video! I lost track of it, but Italy's response to getting in the way of Austria's effort to lose the game was hilarious and Cap breezed over it because he's not a vindictive guy.

[@iv9753]

Am I the only one who always forgets how Nwy is connected to Stp?

[@DiploStrats]

I used to forget this all the time when I started out! Also the Pie-Tyr connection, but that's because it's incredibly small on the maps I was using at the time.

[@rightfool6436]

Wooo! made it the end.

[@AS-nu8sc]

Most stable Austria-Russia alliance:

[@drewa6891]

hey khruschev, were you pounding a shoe on your desk while you recorded this? It's really uncomfortable to listen to

[@DiploStrats]

Howdy! I made the mistake of getting a very sensitive microphone and only having the desk to put it on, haha. So any touching the desk at all caused loud noises on the mic. I've mostly solved those issues now but this video is a relic of its time in that respect :D

[@ARandomMonitor]

You spent a lot of time trying to cover for Austria in this video. I've yet to actually play Diplomacy myself but this video is hard to watch with how Austria is behaving. Yes, detonating your fleet was stupid, but his sudden realization that you were in position to stab was too little too late after actively offering you the opportunity throughout. He's taken zero responsibility for his own actions and actively denies it any ill intent. He keeps saying he's never lied, despite lying. He refuses to work with you, but demands you work for him. You agree to a DMZ, he breaks it to steal a center and proselytizes that all he cares about is SC's, before again demanding you move in to attack first. He claims you're his equal in power by ignoring that you're currently fighting on three fronts while he has one. This is childish gaslighting and you're buying it. If he's lying about what he thinks and how he's acting then so be it, but at some point you have to realize this isn't about diplomacy anymore, this is a problem with a person.

[@dbrothershow]

wow. I can tell you haven't played diplomacy

[@DiploStrats]

This is a really difficult comment to answer, which is why it's taken me so long to get to it. In short - I think that basically everything that you've said is correct to some extent. Austria's realisation that I could stab was very late, and most of the deals he offered after that happened were stacked heavily in his favour to the point where if the game was lost to Germany, I could probably have reasonably stuck the blame on him for it. At the end of the day though, that's never a great way to look at Diplomacy. If your takeaway from losing a game is 'this person was to blame for it', then a) you learn nothing from the game, and b) you're setting yourself up for giving up more easily in the future. Regardless of how unreasonable that person was being from your point of view, there was always a chance you could have convinced them to do something else! Figuring out what that chance was is the key to becoming a great Diplomacy player, and if you can actively figure that out during the game, you can often recover from a situation that you would have 100% lost if you'd just assigned blame to the other person and refused to change what you were doing. From a purely competitive standpoint, Austria played poorly in this game. I think I definitely made points of that throughout the video. But Austria also came from a completely different background to the purely competitive players - he was a jack-of-all-games who dabbled in Diplomacy casually - so things like not realising that my endgame position was far worse than his are kinda reasonable. The fact I took a lot more years than I should've to ease up on the aggression/stubbornness and accept a deal that wasn't as favourable to me was a mistake on my part, regardless of how bad that deal looks. At the end of the day, it's what *I* do that impacts my result. Yes, other people do things too, but if I want those things to change, it's on me to make them change! So I'm always going to focus on my own play in these videos rather than criticising someone else's.

[@DiploStrats]

Uh, I should say that comment was specific to Diplomacy and not to other places where gaslighting is often an issue (relationships etc). I don't endorse always placing the blame on yourself in those situations :D

[@MrVarder]

Using real timezones as a weapon in a game is scummy the same way hacking the website to see enemy orders would be. I really don't see how this is considered fine and something to laugh about.

[@DiploStrats]

This is kind of a controversial issue in Diplomacy, and it's one my opinion on has changed a fair bit in the years since I made this video. Diplomacy's rules actively encourage underhanded tactics - listening at doors to conversations is explicitly allowed, for example. The game's creator famously wrote an article saying he was in favour of the practice of slipping extra units onto the board when nobody was watching. There's a story of a guy who was locked in the garage to prevent him getting his orders in on time, etc etc. The modern hobby has shunned *some* of that. Order sheets, the orders box and the board are considered to be off-limits - you can't interfere with someone's ability to write or submit orders, you can't look inside the orders box until adjudication, and you can't modify the game state. But prior to about three years ago there weren't really any restrictions on anything beyond that, and if anything, you'd be congratulated on coming up with underhanded tactics that don't involve those things. More recently, more things have been restricted in competitive play, e.g. 'Chainsaw Diplomacy' (a term for throwing abuse at someone until they quit the game) is now banned, as is following someone around for the entire phase to prevent them talking to anyone. These were things very few people were doing - they were considered unsportsmanlike - but because they weren't banned previously, a few people did do it and give the 'its in the spirit of the game' defence. I think in general timezone use isn't a huge problem, because everyone knows the phasing time and some players not being around at deadline is something we can't really solve. But the specific way I used it in this game - using a quirk of the website and the fact a player didn't know about said quirk as a diplomatic tool - feels pretty damn scummy looking back. I think at the time I had the 'this is a unique tactic that doesn't break the rules' outlook on it, but it is just poor sportsmanship if you look beyond that.

[@MrVarder]

​@@DiploStrats So if I'm reading it correctly, currently it is considered acceptable to: 1) hack the website and read another player's diplomacy 2) bribe the GM to kick other players mid game 3) show up to IRL diplomacy game with spiked snacks and poison your competition. If that is the case, then I'm incredibly happy that my local gameclub runs Diplomacy as a board game where you may lie to, cheat and betray other players about in-game politics but nothing beyond that. If people really want a real 'no restrictions diplomacy experience', they can always ditch the board game and go into actual politics. No game can beat true experience, after all.

[@DvdAvins]

Fall, '09: This is really good content, but it would be better if you repeated yourself less. Also, you'r blaming yourself too much. Had you attacked Germany earlier (but after the Apulia fiasco) Austria would have attacked and likely eliminated you.

[@naturalwizard2226]

Can you make videos not 10 hours long

[@DiploStrats]

Roger that, we'll aim for 12 next time