Recommend
6 
 Thumb up
 Hide
35 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

Maria» Forums » Strategy

Subject: Ceding Silesia rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Andrew Kluck
United States
Hudson
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I have never seen Silesia ceded to Prussia in any game I've played or witnessed. No matter the circumstances for Austria it appears to only hold the gun at your head closer and cock the hammer. But Maria is all about the balance of power and the meta game surrounding it in a particular group is important. For all I know it's a potent power play and it's expected France is compelled to rush back to Bavaria to keep Austria from collapsing for a Prussian win or something.

Have you seen Silesia ceded? Was Austria ever glad they did it, or Prussia regretful they accepted? Why?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Björn von Knorring
Sweden
Uppsala
flag msg tools
badge
The picture is a swedish cartoon-figure Herman Hedning. English info here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herman_Hedning
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
This is a good thread on the subject.

https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/1064410/what-situation-woul...
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Björn von Knorring
Sweden
Uppsala
flag msg tools
badge
The picture is a swedish cartoon-figure Herman Hedning. English info here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herman_Hedning
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
This is a good report on the WBC-final last year. I was playing Austria and ceded Silesia immediately (basically) and I won so I was happy although Prissia came very close so he shouldn't regret it either.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Kluck
United States
Hudson
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
myth1202 wrote:
Thanks, I read it but didn't want to ask questions on posts years old.

Regarding your game you gave a TC, which you aren't allowed to do and settled on 2 turns of peace which I believe is in no way binding. You could have just agreed to a nonbinding deal of any stripe without ceding.

I disagree completely with the member who said the annexation is inevitable.


Other groups must have entirely different expectations of the powers and what they can and should do, for players that see this often would you explain how the powers usually play and who often wins in your games?

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Björn von Knorring
Sweden
Uppsala
flag msg tools
badge
The picture is a swedish cartoon-figure Herman Hedning. English info here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herman_Hedning
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The thing is that annexation is a very powerful tool in the Austrian diplomatic arsenal. Since you cannot win a war vs both France and Prussia you have to use everything you can to prevent a two-front war. This is actually in Frances interest as well since a costly war with Austria unleashes the Pragmatic army on an easy victory.

So the question to you is why Austria should not accept annexation provided that you get enough of a good deal?

All agreements are binding by the way.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Federico
Italy
Val di Non
Trentino
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
myth1202 wrote:
All agreements are binding by the way.

Exactly. From page 11:
Quote:
21 Negotiations […] All agreements are binding; promises must be kept.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Max DuBoff
United States
New Brunswick
New Jersey
flag msg tools
"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings: / Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
badge
Habeo in animo vivere in perpetuum aut mori dum conor.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Sitnam wrote:
myth1202 wrote:
Thanks, I read it but didn't want to ask questions on posts years old.

Regarding your game you gave a TC, which you aren't allowed to do and settled on 2 turns of peace which I believe is in no way binding. You could have just agreed to a nonbinding deal of any stripe without ceding.

I disagree completely with the member who said the annexation is inevitable.


Other groups must have entirely different expectations of the powers and what they can and should do, for players that see this often would you explain how the powers usually play and who often wins in your games?



I think I'm the one who said it's inevitable. I still maintain that. It sounds like your games don't have much diplomacy in general if annexation isn't negotiated...
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Kluck
United States
Hudson
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
MD1616 wrote:
Sitnam wrote:
myth1202 wrote:
Thanks, I read it but didn't want to ask questions on posts years old.

Regarding your game you gave a TC, which you aren't allowed to do and settled on 2 turns of peace which I believe is in no way binding. You could have just agreed to a nonbinding deal of any stripe without ceding.

I disagree completely with the member who said the annexation is inevitable.


Other groups must have entirely different expectations of the powers and what they can and should do, for players that see this often would you explain how the powers usually play and who often wins in your games?



I think I'm the one who said it's inevitable. I still maintain that. It sounds like your games don't have much diplomacy in general if annexation isn't negotiated...
Perhaps, I guess I can't compare my group to yours. But it's poker anyway, everyone wants to win and makes bets on the perceived strengths and weaknesses of their competitors.

Saying it's inevitable says to me Austria must do it if she wants to win. If your group assumes Austria never does it and wins only 10% of the games because of it the other players wouldn't consider Austria the greatest threat and therefore back off her until her chances improved closer to parity with the others.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Kluck
United States
Hudson
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Fede__ wrote:
myth1202 wrote:
All agreements are binding by the way.

Exactly. From page 11:
Quote:
21 Negotiations […] All agreements are binding; promises must be kept.
Ah, thank you.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Max DuBoff
United States
New Brunswick
New Jersey
flag msg tools
"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings: / Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
badge
Habeo in animo vivere in perpetuum aut mori dum conor.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Sitnam wrote:
MD1616 wrote:
Sitnam wrote:
myth1202 wrote:
Thanks, I read it but didn't want to ask questions on posts years old.

Regarding your game you gave a TC, which you aren't allowed to do and settled on 2 turns of peace which I believe is in no way binding. You could have just agreed to a nonbinding deal of any stripe without ceding.

I disagree completely with the member who said the annexation is inevitable.


Other groups must have entirely different expectations of the powers and what they can and should do, for players that see this often would you explain how the powers usually play and who often wins in your games?



I think I'm the one who said it's inevitable. I still maintain that. It sounds like your games don't have much diplomacy in general if annexation isn't negotiated...
Perhaps, I guess I can't compare my group to yours. But it's poker anyway, everyone wants to win and makes bets on the perceived strengths and weaknesses of their competitors.

Saying it's inevitable says to me Austria must do it if she wants to win. If your group assumes Austria never does it and wins only 10% of the games because of it the other players wouldn't consider Austria the greatest threat and therefore back off her until her chances improved closer to parity with the others.


No, I'm saying Prussia pretty much has to do it if he wants to win unless he's going for the early knockout, which I said is very uncommon in games with experienced players.

I can't quite understand your argument. It seems like you're saying Austria should try to win fewer games to have an easier time? I will say that Austria will definitely have a lower win % if she doesn't negotiate...
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Kluck
United States
Hudson
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I have no doubt Prussia wants to annex Silesia, Austria has to make the offer which I don't see as a good deal for them for one turn of peace. Though I concede now that I know other deals are possible and binding they could work something out.

For the second point regarding negotiations. You and a friend who both revel in the intense negotiations possible in this game sit down with me and I tell you, "I let my units do the talking, this is a cerebral exercise for me, I don't negotiate." So you and your friend think 'aha! Putz! My friend and I will work out advantages so at least one of us wins which automatically improves my odds over the quiet one' but as we play the deals you make take into account not my words, but my actions and they are still part of the negotiations you make with your friend. I am still a massive part of the equation without saying anything. And at the end of the day what really does the talking is the cards we all hold and can't show.

In something like Diplomacy there are so many countries you need to negotiate for a moments advantage, in Maria it's always one person trying to beat two people no matter what is said.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Max DuBoff
United States
New Brunswick
New Jersey
flag msg tools
"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings: / Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
badge
Habeo in animo vivere in perpetuum aut mori dum conor.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Sitnam wrote:
I have no doubt Prussia wants to annex Silesia, Austria has to make the offer which I don't see as a good deal for them for one turn of peace. Though I concede now that I know other deals are possible and binding they could work something out.

For the second point regarding negotiations. You and a friend who both revel in the intense negotiations possible in this game sit down with me and I tell you, "I let my units do the talking, this is a cerebral exercise for me, I don't negotiate." So you and your friend think 'aha! Putz! My friend and I will work out advantages so at least one of us wins which automatically improves my odds over the quiet one' but as we play the deals you make take into account not my words, but my actions and they are still part of the negotiations you make with your friend. I am still a massive part of the equation without saying anything. And at the end of the day what really does the talking is the cards we all hold and can't show.


In something like Diplomacy there are so many countries you need to negotiate for a moments advantage, in Maria it's always one person trying to beat two people no matter what is said.[/q]

For Austria, the game is all about not facing two enemies at once. Both enemies will have to be faced, but to attempt to fight off both at the same time is practically suicidal. Sure, it's possible that people can turn down every deal and play a strictly military game, but not only would that not be very fun, but it would also be suboptimal. The deals I offer as Austria help me but also help my opponents.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Kluck
United States
Hudson
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
MD1616 wrote:
Sitnam wrote:
I have no doubt Prussia wants to annex Silesia, Austria has to make the offer which I don't see as a good deal for them for one turn of peace. Though I concede now that I know other deals are possible and binding they could work something out.

For the second point regarding negotiations. You and a friend who both revel in the intense negotiations possible in this game sit down with me and I tell you, "I let my units do the talking, this is a cerebral exercise for me, I don't negotiate." So you and your friend think 'aha! Putz! My friend and I will work out advantages so at least one of us wins which automatically improves my odds over the quiet one' but as we play the deals you make take into account not my words, but my actions and they are still part of the negotiations you make with your friend. I am still a massive part of the equation without saying anything. And at the end of the day what really does the talking is the cards we all hold and can't show.


In something like Diplomacy there are so many countries you need to negotiate for a moments advantage, in Maria it's always one person trying to beat two people no matter what is said.


For Austria, the game is all about not facing two enemies at once. Both enemies will have to be faced, but to attempt to fight off both at the same time is practically suicidal. Sure, it's possible that people can turn down every deal and play a strictly military game, but not only would that not be very fun, but it would also be suboptimal. The deals I offer as Austria help me but also help my opponents. [/q]

So I'm Austria and send the bulk of my forces against your Prussia initially, I leave a scant force to only shadow and not challenge France which gobbles up territory and gets close to winning. Your choice is to press me with Prussia and hand the win to France or back off and try to win with the Prags. And I did that without giving you Silesia or even talking.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Max DuBoff
United States
New Brunswick
New Jersey
flag msg tools
"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings: / Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
badge
Habeo in animo vivere in perpetuum aut mori dum conor.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Sitnam wrote:
MD1616 wrote:
Sitnam wrote:
I have no doubt Prussia wants to annex Silesia, Austria has to make the offer which I don't see as a good deal for them for one turn of peace. Though I concede now that I know other deals are possible and binding they could work something out.

For the second point regarding negotiations. You and a friend who both revel in the intense negotiations possible in this game sit down with me and I tell you, "I let my units do the talking, this is a cerebral exercise for me, I don't negotiate." So you and your friend think 'aha! Putz! My friend and I will work out advantages so at least one of us wins which automatically improves my odds over the quiet one' but as we play the deals you make take into account not my words, but my actions and they are still part of the negotiations you make with your friend. I am still a massive part of the equation without saying anything. And at the end of the day what really does the talking is the cards we all hold and can't show.


In something like Diplomacy there are so many countries you need to negotiate for a moments advantage, in Maria it's always one person trying to beat two people no matter what is said.


For Austria, the game is all about not facing two enemies at once. Both enemies will have to be faced, but to attempt to fight off both at the same time is practically suicidal. Sure, it's possible that people can turn down every deal and play a strictly military game, but not only would that not be very fun, but it would also be suboptimal. The deals I offer as Austria help me but also help my opponents.


So I'm Austria and send the bulk of my forces against your Prussia initially, I leave a scant force to only shadow and not challenge France which gobbles up territory and gets close to winning. Your choice is to press me with Prussia and hand the win to France or back off and try to win with the Prags. And I did that without giving you Silesia or even talking.[/q]

So you're just going to let France win?

(That was my imaginary response as Prussia.)
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Kluck
United States
Hudson
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Like you said, Austria can't hold both back. The gun isn't to my head, it's to ours, there is no second place.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Max DuBoff
United States
New Brunswick
New Jersey
flag msg tools
"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings: / Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
badge
Habeo in animo vivere in perpetuum aut mori dum conor.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Sitnam wrote:
Like you said, Austria can't hold both back. The gun isn't to my head, it's to ours, there is no second place.


First of all, I would offer a deal as Prussia before any of that happens. I would illustrate in detail how your play is clearly suboptimal and how you can do well attacking France.

But in that case I would probably hold out and let France win if necessary. I don't think Austria would make that mistake again.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Kluck
United States
Hudson
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
MD1616 wrote:
Sitnam wrote:
Like you said, Austria can't hold both back. The gun isn't to my head, it's to ours, there is no second place.


First of all, I would offer a deal as Prussia before any of that happens. I would illustrate in detail how your play is clearly suboptimal and how you can do well attacking France.

But in that case I would probably hold out and let France win if necessary. I don't think Austria would make that mistake again.
Austria and Prussia don't have the same bargaining position because the person playing Prussia can win if the Pragmatics win.

If that isn't something The Prag/Prussian player understands France can win to drive the point home. Repeat as necessary.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Max DuBoff
United States
New Brunswick
New Jersey
flag msg tools
"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings: / Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
badge
Habeo in animo vivere in perpetuum aut mori dum conor.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Sitnam wrote:
MD1616 wrote:
Sitnam wrote:
Like you said, Austria can't hold both back. The gun isn't to my head, it's to ours, there is no second place.


First of all, I would offer a deal as Prussia before any of that happens. I would illustrate in detail how your play is clearly suboptimal and how you can do well attacking France.

But in that case I would probably hold out and let France win if necessary. I don't think Austria would make that mistake again.
Austria and Prussia don't have the same bargaining position because the person playing Prussia can win if the Pragmatics win.

If that isn't something The Prag/Prussian player understands France can win to drive the point home. Repeat as necessary.


Honestly, I assume that Austria isn't going to give the game away (at least not more than once). I've used that tactic before of moving away from one power to go after the other, but it was always a negotiating chip. Doing it for not reason would be inane. Also, Prussia doesn't have to automatically concede to Austria just because he has the Prags. I don't see what you mean at all.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Kluck
United States
Hudson
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
MD1616 wrote:
Sitnam wrote:
MD1616 wrote:
Sitnam wrote:
Like you said, Austria can't hold both back. The gun isn't to my head, it's to ours, there is no second place.


First of all, I would offer a deal as Prussia before any of that happens. I would illustrate in detail how your play is clearly suboptimal and how you can do well attacking France.

But in that case I would probably hold out and let France win if necessary. I don't think Austria would make that mistake again.
Austria and Prussia don't have the same bargaining position because the person playing Prussia can win if the Pragmatics win.

If that isn't something The Prag/Prussian player understands France can win to drive the point home. Repeat as necessary.


Honestly, I assume that Austria isn't going to give the game away (at least not more than once). I've used that tactic before of moving away from one power to go after the other, but it was always a negotiating chip. Doing it for not reason would be inane. Also, Prussia doesn't have to automatically concede to Austria just because he has the Prags. I don't see what you mean at all.
As Austria I wouldn't give the game away by giving Prussia a vital supply train and vp for something they would or would not do in the pursuit of winning anyway. You don't add Prag and Prussian VPs for a total or anything, Prussia will back off and Prags push forward as soon as that's the best option for that player. Not when they're begged properly.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Björn von Knorring
Sweden
Uppsala
flag msg tools
badge
The picture is a swedish cartoon-figure Herman Hedning. English info here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herman_Hedning
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
You asked why Austria should give a VP and a supply train to Prussia and the answer is of course simple; because he can you something you want. In the WBC-final I got 5 turns of peace with Prussia. Are you telling me that's not something you want as Austria? Why turn down that if Prussia offers that deal to you. Or how about that Prussia agrees to push the political table of Italy in your direction whenever he got the chance? Do you not want that? And you can can get that if you stop focusing on not ceding Silesia which are not gettying you anything anyway. Silesia holds no value of its own. I find it strange.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Max DuBoff
United States
New Brunswick
New Jersey
flag msg tools
"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings: / Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
badge
Habeo in animo vivere in perpetuum aut mori dum conor.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Andrew, I think there are two mistaken assumptions you hold that are causing this stalemate:

1. Prussia would get Silesia anyway. Sure, it's possible, but it's by no means a given, and if he does get it, it requires fighting battles, which uses up precious cards. By negotiating, Prussia can get Silesia with little or no cost, allowing him to save his cards for a more powerful push later.

2. There is no fair compensation for a VP and an extra supply train. No one's suggesting that Austria just abandon Silesia and let Prussia have it for free. The key is in finding the right price. Remember, if Prussia isn't fighting Austria, Austria isn't fighting Prussia, so Austria can save cards to use against France in the short term or for later in the game. Austria draws the most cards but starts with relatively few cards, so she'll be much better prepared to counter the Prussians when her superior draw has had time to make an impact.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Kluck
United States
Hudson
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
myth1202 wrote:
You asked why Austria should give a VP and a supply train to Prussia and the answer is of course simple; because he can you something you want. In the WBC-final I got 5 turns of peace with Prussia. Are you telling me that's not something you want as Austria? Why turn down that if Prussia offers that deal to you. Or how about that Prussia agrees to push the political table of Italy in your direction whenever he got the chance? Do you not want that? And you can can get that if you stop focusing on not ceding Silesia which are not gettying you anything anyway. Silesia holds no value of its own. I find it strange.

I didn't know until a few hours ago deals beyond the one turn by ceding Silesia can be binding. 5 turns of peace for Silesia is worthwhile for Austria, I agree.

What I believe I was discussing with Max was ceding Silesia was inevitable.

Austria is stormed by two determined foes early, but they are far from helpless an can get plenty without giving up anything.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Max DuBoff
United States
New Brunswick
New Jersey
flag msg tools
"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings: / Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
badge
Habeo in animo vivere in perpetuum aut mori dum conor.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Sitnam wrote:
myth1202 wrote:
You asked why Austria should give a VP and a supply train to Prussia and the answer is of course simple; because he can you something you want. In the WBC-final I got 5 turns of peace with Prussia. Are you telling me that's not something you want as Austria? Why turn down that if Prussia offers that deal to you. Or how about that Prussia agrees to push the political table of Italy in your direction whenever he got the chance? Do you not want that? And you can can get that if you stop focusing on not ceding Silesia which are not gettying you anything anyway. Silesia holds no value of its own. I find it strange.

I didn't know until a few hours ago deals beyond the one turn by ceding Silesia can be binding. 5 turns of peace for Silesia is worthwhile for Austria, I agree.

What I believe I was discussing with Max was ceding Silesia was inevitable.


Ok, on a literal level, you're correct. I was trying to say that Austria shouldn't fight so hard for Silesia that she wrecks everything else.

Sitnam wrote:
Austria is stormed by two determined foes early, but they are far from helpless an can get plenty without giving up anything.


No, this isn't true. If Austria tries to fight both France and Prussia at the beginning, the game devolves into a race between the two of them. Think of the situation sort of as a prisoner's dilemma: if either France or Prussia can work out a deal with Austria, he'll be better off than the other of the two.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Kluck
United States
Hudson
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
MD1616 wrote:
Andrew, I think there are two mistaken assumptions you hold that are causing this stalemate:

1. Prussia would get Silesia anyway. Sure, it's possible, but it's by no means a given, and if he does get it, it requires fighting battles, which uses up precious cards. By negotiating, Prussia can get Silesia with little or no cost, allowing him to save his cards for a more powerful push later.

2. There is no fair compensation for a VP and an extra supply train. No one's suggesting that Austria just abandon Silesia and let Prussia have it for free. The key is in finding the right price. Remember, if Prussia isn't fighting Austria, Austria isn't fighting Prussia, so Austria can save cards to use against France in the short term or for later in the game. Austria draws the most cards but starts with relatively few cards, so she'll be much better prepared to counter the Prussians when her superior draw has had time to make an impact.

1. I don't understand how this incentivizes Austria to turn Silesia into Prussian home territory, give them a VP, allow them to focus on a traitorous Saxony and still keep half of their VP markers in Austria with plenty of cards for another attack.

2. If Prussia backs off of her own free will we can agree to both attack France and Austria will now have the cards to do it.

Nothing you have mentioned explains why Austria would welcome a boot heel on her neck by ceding Silesia.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Kluck
United States
Hudson
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
MD1616 wrote:


No, this isn't true. If Austria tries to fight both France and Prussia at the beginning, the game devolves into a race between the two of them. Think of the situation sort of as a prisoner's dilemma: if either France or Prussia can work out a deal with Austria, he'll be better off than the other of the two.
The psychology of the Prag/Prussian player is to win with Prussia early. Austria's survival depends on convincing that player that isn't an option, ceding Silesia early doesn't convince them and allowing France an early lead does.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.