INTRODUCTION

Diplomacy is not a game for the feint of heart. It combines the tactics of chess, the strategy of risk, the game theory of the prisoner's dilemma, the public chat of a MOBA, the rhetoric of a debate team, the campaigning of a Presidential election with a dash of psychoanalysis and statistics for seasoning.

In a nutshell, its Multilayer, Free For All, Chess with Trash Talking.

Diplomacy, at its heart, is not a war game. Its a trust game. Who can I Ally with? Who is going to do what they say they do? Does it really make sense for X to attack Y like he says he will or is he really coming after me?

You don't know. You can't know, because the moves happen at the same time. Surely if X wanted to attack me, he'd Claim to be doing this move set to lower my guard? Is Z really not going to attack me, when he's as sixteen centers and only needs two more to win?

War is merely the logical conclusion of a breakdown in trust. The thing is, much like in a relationship, it takes two to tango. One side no longer trusting the other is enough to trigger war.

GOAL

The goal is simple. To win, you will must capture 50% +1 of the 34 supply centers (represented by White dots)

18, my dear friends, is the magic number.

It is not uncommon for a game of Diplomacy to have no winner as the board is like a locked into stalemate after a few nations have fallen

In such a case, players argue that if a Solo (a win) cannot be achieved, a Draw is the next best result, the fewer players the better. A two way draw signifies greater skill than a three way draw and so on.

If another player's victory is inevitable, you have lost though many (myself included) argue that surviving to see the end of the game is a worthy third objective if the first two cannot be achieved.

The worst of all outcomes is not surviving

As such we get
WIN
DRAW
SURVIVE
ELIMINATED

Part of the beauty of the game is its balance. The ever shifting strategic alliances which dominate a board means that a growing power will be responded to by the rest of the players with a coalition, so the growing power must skillfully navigate these murky waters, proclaiming peace to his friends (and convincing them of his sincerity) while sharpening the knife behind him.

To be victorious, a player must have:
sound tactics -being capable of reasoning out objectively better moves against objectively worse ones

strategic flexibility and adaptability - your best laid plans will last exactly until the next phase begins

Diplomatic acumen - to convince people they can trust you

Ruthless killing sense - Being able to smell blood in the water and killing that part of you that says maybe I shouldn't do this, he was my ally. There is no room for hesitation when you betray your friends for victory.

And Self Control - just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. I do not mean morality, but delayed gratification. Sacrificing long term objectives for short term gains is a losing proposition.

STATE OF THE BOARD, PREGAME

Who to trust? You don't know, and can't ever truly be sure but first we assume rational actors are preferred to Irrational actors.

Catching someone who will lie to everyone and anyone (say X says to you he's going to Munich but Y says X said he was going to Belgium) is a tricky proposition, because third parties may have a vested interest in breaking up your own alliances and agreements to suit their ends.

But It is a mistake to think lying right away is a good tactic. There's an art to it, be too obvious and no one will trust you. Rather, the best lies are those with nuggets of truth and twisting things so that the narrative you want to sell emerges.

Engage in conversation with everyone. The more you talk, the clearer a picture you get of what they want (in the short term) and who they are, but be aware they're doing the exact same thing to you.

One common trick is the Bounce. Say Germany and France are distrustful of each other and fear the other might attack. They could agree to both move to Burgundy in 1901 Spring. If either player breaks the agreement, he's in a strictly worse position, so both are incentivized to keep their word and more importantly, keeps Burgundy free from occupation of an army be either side!

The skillful diplomat may twist this by proclaiming that they are at war with Germany to England, while secretly plotting his demise with Germany...

These "contested territories" exist between most neighboring countries.

English Channel between France and England
Burgundy between France and Germany
Piedmont between Italy and France
Venice/Trieste between Italy and Austria (not uncommon for both to move an army into the opposing center to lock that unit in place.)
Galicia between Austria and Russia
The Black Sea between Russia and Turkey
Silesia/Prussia between Germany and Russia.

Above all, remember my friends. WORDS ARE WIND.