法国开局策略介绍           

By Richard Hucknall

毫无疑问，我可以算作一个异类，而法国是众多国家中我最不喜欢玩的。我不知道为什么会这样，即使法国在通信式的强权外交中有着良好的胜绩而且还有着最好的平局纪录。然而，当我看到法国的开局布置，它无法燃起我的兴趣而奥匈和俄国却能吸引我。

法国最大的优势就在于那三块中立资源点。其中两个（葡萄牙和西班牙Por and Spa）常常在1901年秋季就能得到。因此在第一年末拥有5个资源点的法国并不令人感到惊奇。在Nikcy Palmer 的文章 “北方突击战 The Northern Dash”中用“伊伯利亚半岛的软垫”来称呼它们的，尽管这篇文章是基于 法国能承受在第一年无视西班牙和葡萄牙，并且在之后空闲的时候再占取这个论点的。 这两个资源点可以通过多种不具有侵略性的方法占领，但如果英国、德国或者意大利在第一年发动进攻，那法国可能就只好接受从伊伯利亚半岛占领一个点的情况了。而如果同时遭受来自这些国家中有两个甚至三个的进攻，对于法国而言，就是灾难性的打击了，而最终迫使法国陷入负隅顽抗的境地。

游戏之初的外交努力主要是为了在和英国或者德国建立联盟以对抗另一个。而能够和两国同时结盟而使得他们兵戎相见是更好的选择，这需要一个顶级玩家的才能。个人来说，我更喜欢和德国结盟，因为光看着英国那庞大的北方舰队就使我紧张。如果英国被消灭，那法国和德国就有了各自发展的空间而不需要内讧，而一个英法结盟消灭德国常常意味着法国接下来必须去啃意大利这块硬骨头（十分困难）或者背刺他的英国前盟友。如果他去和意大利开战，那英国可能就让舰队和陆军通过布瑞斯特Brest，在法国登陆了。

正如在其他文章中提到的那样，比利时Bel是1901年的主要焦点，而法国在对这个资源点的最终归属上有很大的发言权。这一点可以帮助他在游戏前期制定规则和决定走向。法国最敏感的区域应该是英吉利海峡ENG, 伯干第Bur 和皮蒙德Pie。除非想要支援一个针对法国的进攻或者干脆自己上，德国没有任何理由进入伯干第。他也许会十分强硬地表示要进驻比利时以便之后前往荷兰或者鲁尔，在让出比利时的同时不威胁到法国资源点。然而，提前安排好一个伯干第不驻军协议将是个好事情。德国通常乐意让慕尼黑陆军 A（Mun）原地不动一防来自奥匈、俄国或者意大利与他开战，而这可以通过安排伯干第不驻军来实现。法国可以在 巴黎陆军 A（Par）或者 马赛陆军 A（Mar）来把德国慕尼黑陆军 A（Mun）挡回去。我比较倾向于使用马赛陆军，这样在秋季可以用来抵抗意大利入侵或者占领西班牙。我相信这种不驻军隔离政策可以在加固法德联盟上发挥长久的效用。

不论是英国还是法国，进驻英吉利海峡都会被对方当做十分有侵略性的行为，除非你有足够的外交能力还说服你的盟友，但和伯干第不驻军不同，在英吉利海峡安排一个不进驻协议显得意义不大，因为这样布瑞斯特和伦敦的舰队在01年秋季就会显得用处不大，并导致另一个资源点不进驻协议而阻碍建造。

皮德蒙可能是这三处里最有趣的地方。尽管在1901年这里显得并不重要，但作为地中海地区和阿尔卑斯地区唯一的陆地区域，到了游戏中后期，这里总是十分重要。通常情况下，这里在01年能保持中立，因为此时法国主要关注着德国和英国，而意大利则担心着奥匈、土耳其、俄罗斯以及它的南方拓展计划。从法国的角度来看，即使意大利在1901年进入皮蒙德，马赛驻军仍然可以游刃有余地进行防御，尽管这意味着占取伊比利亚半岛资源点的延迟。一个有用的策略是告诉意大利你将通过不进驻或者撤出马赛（假设此时马赛空置）而建造一支马赛舰队来抵御它的皮蒙德陆军。这具有强大的威慑力并从而足以让皮蒙德陆军乖乖地从哪来回哪去，尽管你的马赛陆军也要回到它开始的地方。皮蒙德的另外一个特性是它在法国这边只有一个出口而在意大利这边却有三个。一支在皮蒙德的法国军队可以突入泰罗利亚Tyr, 威尼斯Ven（注原文为yen，校正为Ven）或者 塔斯坎尼Tus。这可以形成一次对德国的后方袭击，但需要来自意大利的信任和保密，而且在1902年前都不会有什么成果。这么做的优势在于很容易说服德国自己的皮蒙德陆军是在意大利边境内。

通常情况下，大多数游戏都是从法国和意大利签订互不侵犯条约开始的。偶尔在1901年会有摩擦，但是两国会同意保持里昂湾GOL, 西地中海WMS, 北非NAf 和皮蒙德Pie 无驻军。而且会在就第热尼安海Tys（注：原文为Tyn）和在西班牙南海岸Spa.sc舰队有严格的协议。一个普遍的要求是法国不得建造马赛舰队 F（Mar）。 我总是笑着同意，因为布瑞斯特舰队和马赛舰队一样迅速地可以移动到西地中海。如果你在布瑞斯特建造舰队来麻痹意大利进入一种假安全的感觉，然后移动到中地中海ＭＡＯ（承诺一个对爱尔兰海IRI的攻击），这支舰队可以冲入西地中海并且同时在马赛建造舰队来巩固战线，那意大利就有麻烦啦。
                                                                                                                                         

一篇关于英国的积极性战略的，挺好  水平不高加上时间不多暂时没有翻译过来 leaf你看看？
　或者我两天内翻译　
England
(A Personal View on Opening Strategy)

by Stephen Agar
Let me begin by repeating the warning I gave last time. This is not intended to be an in-depth analysis of all the possible options open to England in Diplomacy. It is an insight into how I play the game and you may think a lot of what I say is simply misguided or stupid. If so, please write and tell me. All statistics have been gratefully taken from The Numbers Game available from Richard Sharp and Steve Doubleday at Norton House, Whielden Street, Amersham, Bucks, HP7 0HU which is thoroughly recommended for all those with an interest in such things.

Attack France!

Let's be honest. It is easy for England to get to four or five units and get stuck. Attacking St.Petersburg is a deadend strategy which usually results in you being attacked from behind. Germany is difficult to attack at the beginning of the game, although you must always guard against a German F(Hol)-NTH or F(Den)-NTH. You need to build fleets, you need to get armies on to the continent and, most importantly, you need the Mid-Atlantic and access to the Mediterranean. The logic is inescapable; attack France sooner rather than later.

Usually England orders F(Edi)-NWG and F(Lon)-ENG, a combination that happens in some 64% of games, the A(Lpl)-Yor being more common than the A(Lpl)-Edi variation. In my view this is an opening for wimps. Okay, so you can guarantee that you can take Norway, but what then? You are into a 3-way negotiation with Germany and Russia over Scandinavia, with no guarantee that you won't be the odd man out. France has probably built another F(Bre) in A01 and someday soon you will find a French F(MAO)-NAO up your backside.

I have always favoured the French Attack - F(Edi)-NTH, F(Lon)-ENG and A(Lpl)-Wal. The preparation for this opening is to try and ensure that Germany orders F(Kie)-Den and above all else to make sure that France does not move to the Channel. The statistics for the battle for the Channel are quite interesting. In 56% of games, neither France nor England attempts to move to the Channel, in 25% of games England takes it, in 10% France takes it, and in a mere 9% of games is there a stand-off. The moral is clear, negotiate an empty Channel and then move there yourself - your chances of getting in are over 75%, yet surprisingly only some 34% of English players order F(Lon)-ENG and only 7% of them risk the full-bloodied French Attack. German support is crucial for a successful and quick assault on France. You will have to commit yourself from the outset and it is vital that you do all in your power to keep momentum and take Germany along with you, even if you have to promise him Belgium.

England takes the Channel

So far so good, but guesswork now takes over. There will be a French fleet in the Mid Atlantic and probably a French army in either Picardy, Burgundy or occasionally both. German armies may be in Kiel and Ruh, but you hope there won't be a German F(Hol).

Let's consider the options:

1. F(ENG) C A(Wal)-Bre; F(NTH)-Nwy

The ideal English solution is a successful convoy into Brest, however if France covers Brest with the F(MAO) then the result is total disaster. The convoy fails and France will build another F(Bre). Whatever the experts may say, it is a guess. Good luck.

2. F(ENG) C A(Wal)-Pic; F(NTH)-Nwy

A safer strategy in that it more likely to succeed, depending on whether or not there is an existing French army in Picardy and the likelihood of France being able to take Belgium. Assuming it works, at least you have a toe-hold on the mainland and you can actually use the army to do something, rather than just sitting forlornly in Wales enjoying the sheep and scenery. If this move can be coupled with a German move into Burgundy this can work very well indeed. Even if France has Belgium behind your back that can be taken care of by an Anglo-German alliance.

3. F(ENG) C A(Wal)-Bel;

If you are firm in your alliance with Germany, and Germany has ordered F(Kie)-Den, A(Ber)-Kie why not try and negotiate support into Belgium, allowing Germany to push his third unit into Burgundy? F(NTH)-Nwy gives you two builds if it is successful. However, don't be greedy, England doesn't need two builds in 1901, the position you achieve is far more important than the extra unit. However, I would not support Germany into Belgium as that raises the possibility of three German builds in 1901, one of which will inevitably be the threatening F(Kie). Of course, if Norway's neutrality is assured, you may decide to forgo Norway in 1901 and use F(NTH) to support a move into Belgium.

If Russia has moved A(Mos)-StP you must in all honesty expect A(StP)-Nwy. The possibility exists, I put it no higher, to make virtue of a necessity and ally with Russia and order F(NTH) S A(Wal)-Bel anyway. Assuming the French and German opening moves make a supported move to Belgium likely to succeed, you could go for it and allow Russia to walk into Norway. This strategy concedes Scandinavia to Russia and is therefore probably suicidal.

4. F(ENG)-MAO; F(NTH)-Nwy; A(Wal)Std.

This is probably the long-term devious strategy. If France does cover Brest it will be a spectacular success, provided you have taken Norway. A build of F(Lon) which is then supported into the Channel by F(MAO) puts England into a very strong position indeed. AO2 can then be spent by conducting speculative raids on places like Portugal, Spain or having a supported attack on Brest. You can afford to order F(Nwy)-NTH to prevent a German stab. If Germany joins your attack France is doomed.

On the other hand, if France moves F(MAO)-Por or Spa in AO1, ignoring the threat to Brest, he may be able to build a second F(Bre) that year (provided he didn't cover Brest with A(Pic)-Bre) and your strategy will fall apart. F(MAO) is now dangerously isolated and your attack can only be continued with support from Germany.

So which of these alternatives do you choose? Don't ask me, I haven't got a clue. Look at the state of the board after the SO1 moves, consider how much you can trust Germany, assess the personality of the French player -is he the sort to play safe or take risks - and then guess accordingly. If you guess right you will appear to be a genius, if you guess wrong you will look foolish. Still, I believe it is better to make a calculated guess as a result of making a French attack, rather than end up with fleets chasing their tails in the Barents Sea or some other such place.

Stand-off over the Channel

Of course, as everyone knows, a stand-off over the Channel is a disaster for England. If this happens you will be forced into the difficult decision of do you go for the Channel in AO1 and risk a German move to the North Sea or do you order F(Lon)-NTH and risk France taking the Channel. The latter is probably the better course as you simply cannot afford to let a German fleet into the North Sea. This raises the prospect of A(Wal) being ordered to take a holiday as the badge of your failed strategy.

A failure to get into the Channel in SO1 will leave England knocking his head on the brick wall of the Mid-Atlantic Ocean. France merely has to vacate Brest and build another fleet and England is stuck. Germany is probably still well and truly on the sidelines waiting to pounce on whoever falters first. With a maximum of three fleets in 1902 England can only make head way against France by using them all, leaving Germany the option of the devastating F(Den)-NTH. If you have promised Germany support into Belgium from the start, that may be enough to secure German co-operation in the short-term. However, it would be a long hard slog against France with little immediate gains. You should really consider a U-turn, apologise to France for all you are worth and order F(Lon)-NTH, A(Wal)-Yor. Of course you will have to trust France not to attack you as soon as your back is turned.

Believe me, as one who has tried it, if the initial attack on France fails at the first move, forget it.

http://www.diplomacy-archive.com/resources/strategy/articles/basics_england.htm