|
|
Austria: Builds 2 units
England: Builds 1 unit
France: Builds 1 unit
Germany: Builds 2 units
Italy: Builds 1 unit
Russia: Builds 1 unit
Turkey: Builds 1 unit
Message from Germany to Russia
Well you are certainly under pressure down south. We can arrange a definite
build for you from NWY. Build in STP and we are in business. At worst you
lose SEV sometime in the near future but with the build from NWY then at
least you will have a stable rear. With me supporting you in WAR if need be
we have quite an army front running from WAR/MOS/SIL. It would cost AT a
great deal to advance against you.
I can cut support from NTH allowing you to take NWY. I will be building two
armies so if need be I can help support WAR. Let me know.
Message from England to Russia
Eric -
I will continue to be your friend in the North - do not worry about me. God
knows you have your hands full elsewhere. . .
We may be able to get you a dot or two, even, as things sort themselves out,
without you having to suffer a counterattack.
Good luck, my friend. I am pleased to see the Raiders did not lose this
weekend - hopefully they will be closer to full strength when they return on
Sunday.
Ben
Message from Austria to Russia
Eric,
Sorry, but once Andy told me you suggested he go for Greece,
I wasn't about to pass on Rumania, even though he told me he
didn't intend to follow your suggestion; and it seem it was the
right thing for me to do.
Philippe
Message from Germany to Russia
An army build in STP will allow you to support SWE - NWY in the spring. It
is also a good backup for our front of armies in the east as it can be used
to good effect in defence of MOS if needed later.
No doubt england will build a fleet in EDI.
Message from Russia to Austria
Philippe,
>Sorry, but once Andy told me you suggested he go for Greece,
>I wasn't about to pass on Rumania, even though he told me he
>didn't intend to follow your suggestion; and it seem it was the
>right thing for me to do.
Well, I can see how from your position it would have made sense. I
was just surprised you used so transparent a deflection to my
question.
FWIW, it's been pretty clear to me (whether I am actually correct or
not) that you have been focusing on AT cooperation, and because of
that, I'm happy to see that Andy moved to Gre (though I didn't expect
it). Even though I suspect he moved there with your blessing, it
still leaves you with a concern to pay attention to, and as long as
there is an AT, I will do whatever I can to take advantage of his
position there.
I trust you are a better player than to have made a decision about
moving against me based on the possibility that I may have suggested
an anti-Austrian move to Andy. Whether or not I actually made any
such suggestion (I did in fact ask him if he thought there was a
strong AT, and if so, whether he thought that taking Gre was a good
counter), I'm in for a very unpleasant game if Andy can manipulate
your moves by making such a straightforward comment. And it's not
like you're not out there talking about anti-Russian moves with other
players yourself.
Obviously I don't like your moves, but as you say, they turned out to
be the best moves you could make given the situation, at least from
the point of view of maximizing SCs. FWIW, had I gotten Rum (which
clearly I did try to take with the fleet) I would have built a fleet
as promised, so without knowing your thinking on longer term issues,
I'm not sure it was the best move for you. I'm just frustrated that
yet again a neighbor has chosen to stifle discussion with comments
like "let's just see how the moves go". Not a very satisfying way to
play the game.
On to more productive points: was Andy's move to Gre something you
negotiated? Despite the hypothetical discussion he and I had, he told
me he would not be moving to Gre. It seems odd to see A Gre there --
F Gre is more conducive to an AI.
--- Tzarface
Message from Russia to Italy
I wish you would have admitted that you were going to Gre. Had you, I
would have taken Gal. Thinking that you were not going to be there
(whether you got there by trickery or through negotiation) made
attacking Austria straight out seem stupid given Turkey's position.
Not blaming you for my position, just saying I wish you had told me
that you were taking Gre. There was no reason that I would have
passed that information on to Austria (and if I wanted him to think
you were, I could have just told him you were doing it anyway).
--- Eric
Message from Russia to Germany
Tony,
There is no one on the board more interested than I am to see me get
another center. But I don't see how a build in StP makes sense at the
moment. With France having done the Alpine Chicken maneuver, I don't
see how you are going to have any units to spare to help me against
AT. Austria has to build two armies, and that will allow him to force
Gal in Spring. StP is needed to take Nwy, but also to hold it in
Fall. And your armies are going to be needed against all of France's
forces, and so don't seem to be available to defend War.
Am I missing something? Can you spell out more specifically how I can
take Nwy and hold it in Fall, while still defending War? I don't have
a problem with attacking England, but I want to make sure that
however I do it makes sense.
--- Tzarface
Message from Italy to Russia
Eric,
> I wish you would have admitted that you were going to Gre. Had you, I
> would have taken Gal. Thinking that you were not going to be there
> (whether you got there by trickery or through negotiation) made
> attacking Austria straight out seem stupid given Turkey's position.
It was the kind of move that I couldnt tell anyone about. Its way too easy
to stop and I think the slowdown is what kept him from moving Tri - Alb
like he was supposed to.
> Not blaming you for my position, just saying I wish you had told me
> that you were taking Gre.
I didnt know I was, the Turk was supposed to support me in.
There was no reason that I would have
> passed that information on to Austria (and if I wanted him to think
> you were, I could have just told him you were doing it anyway).
True.
But where are we now.....
What can we do.
Message from Germany to Russia
Well this is how I look at it. You will need all 3 units just to even hold SEV in the spring.
As you pointed out Austria will build two armies. This means that one unit will be in GALthis spring.
This means that by fall SEV will fall as UKR can be cut.
Even if you built in WAR you would still be in trouble up north.
Why wouldnt England just go for STP?
If I see an army in STP then I will attack the NTH cutting support. England can never get more than two units on NWY by fall. My unit in DEN can ensure that. I cant see how NWY can be denied to you.
SEV will fall, UKR can be cut, RUM can be covered GAL will be taken by Austria.
You and I both need a friend. If England builds a fleet in EDI and I dont have an ally then I may just as well ask him to push for BAR and convoy YOR to Norway whilst I push two armies at PRU and SIL. I could even offer him SWE. I have to build two armies, I can push one to SIL and still have two covering MUN.
I will have to give up BEL. The sooner French and English units meet up the better. Then I just make sure I say to both that I will only allow one of them my SC's.
If EF are against me then England will see Russia as an easy target if he groes quickly. I would have to offer my SC's to England to deter France. Its the thing to do in a crisis.
SEV is lost but not all is lost. NWY is guranteed this year. I know Italy is a little worried about his fate. He sees AT coming after him once you fall. Build an army in STP and you have yourself an ally and a build to compensate for SEV. I am desperate. As stated I may have to move on you too if I have no one to turn to, what else can I do? Then surely trying to pick up WAR and offering Sweden to England would be my best bet.
I didnt bounce you for a reason and that reason is I anticipated we would need each other.
Luck is France only gets one build. I can always pick up Holland if need be.
I would rather carry on with an ally. Let me know.
Message from France to Russia
Eric:
Looks like you're staring down the barrel of an AT alliance. Not pretty.
On the plus side, you won't have to worry about Germany for a little
while. England and I (as the moves have demonstrated) are making a run at
taking him down, though I suspect it's going to be a protracted fight.
Do you have any idea what Italy's position is right now via-a-vis AT? Most
of his messages to me have been along the lines of "please don't attack",
but I don't actually know much about what he's planning. I'd love to see
him provide you with a little relief, because I definitely don't want to
see you get chewed up by AT.
I know you probably can't afford to make an enemy of G right now, but if
you can spare F Swe for a support move against Tony, it would be very
helpful to me. I'm doing everything I can to keep England out of the north
while you get your southern border taken care of, and as long as Ben and I
are working together against Germany, I think I can do that. If you could
lend a hand, it would probably help me argue to keep English fleets from
venturing further than they've already gone into Scandanavia.
Erik
Message from Russia to Austria
So from what I'm hearing it was actually Turkey who arranged with
Italy to see Gre taken. Jason apparently offered to support Andy
there, but realized it would be less hostile-looking to you if
instead he got you to use Ser against Rum.
Any chance you are worried about IT cooperation? You know that I'm
not a threat to you now or for several turns, and now I have a vested
interest in seeing you focus south. Are you willing to consider
cooperation? At this point it wouldn't be more than you going south
and me not moving in behind you, but I'll take what I can get at this
point.
--- Tzarface
Message from Russia to Germany
Tony,
I really don't want to alienate you, but I still am not convinced
that building in StP makes sense. With A StP, I still can't hold War
against AT, so long as A StP is needed to support Nwy. If Italy takes
action against Austria (and I'm hoping he will) then I'll have some
flexibility, but with two neighbors fighting me in the south I cannot
afford to invite a third to come assault me in the north.
>If I see an army in STP then I will attack the NTH cutting support.
>England can never get more than two units on NWY by fall. My unit in
>DEN can ensure that. I cant see how NWY can be denied to you.
My point wasn't that it will be denied to me, but that I will require
StP to hold it. The end result is that I would be able to build A
War. And from that point on, I'd be forced to cover my remaining home
centers indefinitely.
I have not entered my builds yet because I am seriously considering
the possibility of building A StP despite my reservations. I'm not
trying to be difficult, but obviously, my own defense has to take
priority in my planning, as yours does for you. Keep in mind that
even if I do build in War, there is still the possibility that I
could move Mos-StP in spring (sacrificing F Sev, obviously) and then
taking Nwy in the Fall. Whatever happens, we can keep that on the
table.
--- Tzarface
Message from Germany to Russia
Thanks for the reply.
> My point wasn't that it will be denied to me, but that I will require StP
to hold it. The end result is that I would be able to build A War. And from
that point on, I'd be forced to cover my remaining home
centers indefinitely.>
You will be doing this anyway. SEV cant be held. The sooner AT forces meet
up the more likely they are to turn on each other if they cant make a
breakthrough. Building an army in WAR wont help the situation now.
I will move to SIL to help you, I have the resources. I am being up front
when I say at the moment I wish to ally with you. But I will have no choice
but to ally with England by offering him Sweden now in the spring and I
would have to try and get a piece of you too to survive. You would have to
bounce me in SIL or PRU. I really am desperate.
Sorry about this but I thought it best to be up front. You have no friends
down south for now unless you can diplome your way out. I am not weak but
neither am I strong. England hasnt commited himself yet to attacking me, he
is still being flexible. The bounce in BEL or HOL was agreed upon just not
decided which one.
If he sees me and you working together then he wont be to willing to move on
STP himself. Build in WAR and have austria, turkey and me attacking you then
he will want a piece of the action.
SEV is lost. UKR should just bounce in GAL or RUM and retreat when need be.
They cant force anything but SEV this year. You will have 4 armies and mine
to protect your homeland until they turn on each other.
> I have not entered my builds yet because I am seriously considering the
possibility of building A StP despite my reservations. I'm not trying to be
difficult, but obviously, my own defense has to take
priority in my planning, as yours does for you.>
And that is where our problem yet opportunity lies. We are both in trouble
if we dont team up. I am just lucky enough to be able to drop back on an
attack on you to survive another year or two.
I also dont mean to be difficult but I am being up front.
> Keep in mind that even if I do build in War, there is still the
possibility that I
could move Mos-StP in spring (sacrificing F Sev, obviously) and then
taking Nwy in the Fall>
I think by then I would have convinced England (after seeing your build) in
taking Sweden as a gift and I would have to attack WAR and HOL just to try
to survive. I will be doing all I can to keep the peace with EF. Luckily
France only has one build.
>Whatever happens, we can keep that on the table.>
I am not sure of this. Building in WAR ensures that England doesnt have to
be friendly towards me, I would have to convince him. Sorry to be putting
this pressure on you but I rather it this way than having let you believe
building in WAR would be ok to then give england sweden and attack you
myself. Its going to take 3 units to remove SEV even if you dont use UKR in
its defense. Pushing UKR to GAL ensure he has to use two to get to GAL. So
by the end of this year your worst scenario is the loss of SEV. A build, and
an ally.
A desperate for survival, will sell my soul to anyone,
Germany.
Message from Austria to Russia
> So from what I'm hearing it was actually Turkey who arranged with
> Italy to see Gre taken. Jason apparently offered to support Andy
> there, but realized it would be less hostile-looking to you if
> instead he got you to use Ser against Rum.
Haven't had much time to get back to you, but I must say I didn't
expect this one. I had assume that Andy took your suggestion as
an indication to attack me.
> Any chance you are worried about IT cooperation? You know that I'm
> not a threat to you now or for several turns, and now I have a vested
> interest in seeing you focus south. Are you willing to consider
> cooperation? At this point it wouldn't be more than you going south
> and me not moving in behind you, but I'll take what I can get at this
> point.
I'm always open to cooperation with my neighbours and will
accept all the help I can get to defend myself from Andy.
Philippe
Message from England to Russia
Eric -
Congratulations on making it to the VGFP semi-finals, an achievement in itself.
Ben
Message from Germany to all
Yup, that was the press I was on about.
Well you are at a little crossroad. As we are sure France will be an army then there is no pending threat for you. Usually when playing England its always difficult to get the right amount of armies into play. Usually you need fleets to keep pace with GER fleet build.
This is not the situation in this game. Not only would an army build make me feel more comfortable ;-) but a move nwy - bar, yor - nwyand depending what happens after that edi - nwy sets you up firm in northern russia. Usually to get 2 armies up there is quite a challenge.
But if I were England at this point I too would go for a fleet, probably in EDI but maybe for the show in London ;-)
I will be playing safe and I will be considering all neighbours as hostile in the spring.
Depending on that outcome then anything can happen.
First we have to awit the interesting builds (Italy, Russia, France).
As for me, two armies it has to be. I dont see the point at this stage for a fleet in BER to go after Sweden. If we so decide then either of us can pick it up in the spring or leave it till fall.
It will be interesting to see what the realionship is between AIF.
Speak to you after the builds
Message from Russia to Germany
Tony,
Against my better judgement I have put in build A StP. I have set wait to
give me a chance to pain over it for an hour or two and maybe change my
mind again. If I do this, you had *better* come through on your promise of
support. If you support England against me, I will suicide against you.
--- Eric
Message from Russia to England
Ben,
I don't have much time but really wanted to get a message out to you.
(Well, actually I don't want to send this, but I feel compelled to).
Late yesterday Germany's press got much more desperate. At this point, he
is threatening to attack me directly (via Pru or Sil) if I build in War
instead of in StP. On the flip side, if I build in StP, he offers to help
me against AT (in addition to offering you support to Swe). His messages
have enough of a ring of truth that I believe that he is as desperate for
an ally in the north as I am in the south. Unfortunately I didn't have time
to check in with you about this yesterday (recall that Mon and Tues nights
I'm usually unavailable). While I tend to doubt the threat, I am hoping
that he would actually follow through with the support he's offered.
The result is that I would like to consider putting in an order to build A
StP (NOT F StP). I feel like a total shit raising this idea, but hopefully
you will take this message combined with my actually desperate situation as
evidence of my sincerity when I say I'm NOT interested in RG vs. E. Also,
if you check the timestamp on this you'll see it's earlier than any other
message I've sent you -- I got up early to allow me to send it and give you
a chance to respond.
The only purpose of A StP is to let Germany think I am on his side, which
may buy me some time against AT. I have two potential plans for A StP
should I build it, depending on how much risk you are willing to take. The
first is to just move StP-Lvn and set up a defense. This would be best for
you, but if Germany follows through on his "promised" to move a unit to
help me support War in return for A StP, he'd still be able to hurt me,
which I'm afraid he'll do in a suicide mode.
The second possibility is what I'd prefer, but a real risk for you. I could
take Germany's offer to cut support from Nth and evict you from Nwy. If you
move Nth-Hel and retreat to Ska, you could then take Swe and Nth in Fall
which sets you up for and attack on Den in 03. I would use Nwy to support
you to Swe, while moving StP-Lvn a season later. If France gets a
sufficiently advanced position (so he can tap Kie) you can actually attack
Den directly, and maybe I can get to hold Swe and get a build to help me in
the south.
The ONLY reason I am asking you to consider this is that I really need an
ally in the south that can help me break up AT. The real point is to get
Germany to work with me long enough to try to shake up the southern situation.
What's in it for you? Well, it's a lot riskier than me staying out of the
way, but the advantage is that if Germany really does assume that you are
under control, he may send units my way to help me. That would make your
attack on him in the Fall a complete surprise, and more effective. Is it
worth the risk? I don't know, it's hard for me to tell from my
Russia-centric viewpoint whether or not it's a stupid thing to even ask
this, but I can't see what else I can do. I will try to get AT fighting,
but it's going to take a season or two for anything to come to fruition.
I doubt that you are going to like this message, and it's hard for me to
tell from my Russia-centric viewpoint whether or not it's a stupid thing to
even ask. As I said, at a minimum, I can move StP-Lvn and take up a
defensive position. If I am being totally crazy, please point out the
errors of my ways, which I'm sure are legion.
I'm going to repeat that I absolutely hate that I feel driven to this
desperate move, but I really am desperate at this point. Again, I hope that
giving you a heads up -- which gives you a chance to change your builds if
you *really* don't like this message -- is evidence to my sincerity. I
should have a chance to see any response you send before the deadline hits.
--- Eric
P.S. I appreciate all the comments you made in the last several messages,
though I haven't had a chance to respond. I particularly appreciated your
comments about the Raiders not losing over the weekend. I hope we can keep
up these conversations even if this message leads you to decide you need to
side with Germany against me; they've been the most enjoyable element of
this game for me so far.
Message from Russia to Turkey
Jason,
I'm disappointed to have not heard from you after my last message.
I'm hoping Andy's move to Gre makes you think about taking on Austria.
Obviously, I cannot hope to hold out against a combined AT. If you are
willing to take Sev with your fleet, then I would be willing to use my
remaining units to help you attack Austria (initially by pressuring Ukr, if
I get there, cutting support in Gal, etc.) That means that I would not be
trying to retake Sev.
--- Eric
Message from Russia to Italy
Andy,
I don't see an obvious way for us to cooperate directly at the moment. I
will certainly be moving north, unless AT break up. Don't get me wrong -- I
was very happy to see you take Gre. All I was saying was had I known it was
coming I would have bounced Bla, which would have given us both better
negotiating leverage with Turkey against Philippe.
The point was to get you thinking that in the future it might actually be
useful to coordinate planning, because there is still no incentive for me
to do anything that would inhibit you from successfully attacking AT.
What can I do (moves or negotiation) to help you be effective against one
or the other of them? Unless France makes a surprise move, I won't be
making any progress towards you on the board.
--- Eric
Message from Russia to Austria
>Haven't had much time to get back to you, but I must say I didn't
>expect this one. I had assume that Andy took your suggestion as
>an indication to attack me.
Yes, I'm sure he didn't see the possibility on his own. :)
>I'm always open to cooperation with my neighbours and will
>accept all the help I can get to defend myself from Andy.
Well, if you are coming after me, it's in my best interests to see Andy
attack you. I'm not clear what I can do to convince you that working with
me is a good idea. The best I can say is that Jason knew A Gre was coming
and didn't tell you, so he's probably looking to use you for a quick build
in Sev, get your units embroiled against me, and then turn on you. If you
are worried about this (I would be in your case) the I'm hoping we can work
something out. For instance, you could take Bul (I doubt Jason will be
defending it) and Gre this year. I could complete my capture of Rum with a
fleet, and line up against Jason. You end up with a new build, and lots of
leverage over both me and Turkey.
It's largely dependent on how seriously you take the threat from Andy in
Gre, and his ability to influence Jason.
--- Eric
Message from Russia to Russia
That message to England will probably seal my fate in this game. I am
really not sure it is a good move, but realistically I can't see how
England could leave an undefended F Swe alone if he's got no pressure from
Germany or me. And maybe it will buy me an ally in Tony. Given that I am
leaning (though very uncomfortably) towards A StP, I felt it is better to
give warning than to spring it as a complete surprise. I will soon know
whether that was the right call.
All in all, it is looking like a quick exit for me.
--- Eric
Message from England to Russia
Eric -
> I don't have much time but really wanted to get a message out to you.
> (Well, actually I don't want to send this, but I feel compelled to).
You did the right thing.
> Late yesterday Germany's press got much more desperate. At
> this point, he
> is threatening to attack me directly (via Pru or Sil) if I
> build in War
> instead of in StP. On the flip side, if I build in StP, he
> offers to help
> me against AT (in addition to offering you support to Swe).
> His messages
> have enough of a ring of truth that I believe that he is as
> desperate for
> an ally in the north as I am in the south. Unfortunately I
> didn't have time
> to check in with you about this yesterday (recall that Mon
> and Tues nights
> I'm usually unavailable). While I tend to doubt the threat, I
> am hoping
> that he would actually follow through with the support he's offered.
The chances of him following through with assistance to you are zero. He is desperate *to you* because he knows he may be in trouble from me. If you build in STP you will be destroyed by AT and he will never have to repay his debt to you. He is not worried about promises to you - particularly this one. Why would he keep his end of the bargain? Once you've done yours, GAL is lost and everything else soon after.
> The result is that I would like to consider putting in an
> order to build A
> StP (NOT F StP). I feel like a total shit raising this idea,
> but hopefully
> you will take this message combined with my actually
> desperate situation as
> evidence of my sincerity when I say I'm NOT interested in RG
> vs. E. Also,
> if you check the timestamp on this you'll see it's earlier
> than any other
> message I've sent you -- I got up early to allow me to send
> it and give you a chance to respond.
I believe you but I think you are getting set up.
> The only purpose of A StP is to let Germany think I am on his
> side, which
> may buy me some time against AT. I have two potential plans for A StP
> should I build it, depending on how much risk you are willing
> to take. The
> first is to just move StP-Lvn and set up a defense. This
> would be best for
> you, but if Germany follows through on his "promised" to move
> a unit to
> help me support War in return for A StP, he'd still be able
> to hurt me,
> which I'm afraid he'll do in a suicide mode.
Tony is much too slick to go into suicide mode. If you build a WAR, which I think is a *must*, the worst-case scenario for him is perfectly playable. You do not have to sell your soul to work with him - why would he suicide on account of A WAR?
> The second possibility is what I'd prefer, but a real risk
> for you. I could
> take Germany's offer to cut support from Nth and evict you
> from Nwy. If you
> move Nth-Hel and retreat to Ska, you could then take Swe and
> Nth in Fall
> which sets you up for and attack on Den in 03. I would use
> Nwy to support
> you to Swe, while moving StP-Lvn a season later. If France gets a
> sufficiently advanced position (so he can tap Kie) you can
> actually attack
> Den directly, and maybe I can get to hold Swe and get a build
> to help me in the south.
Let's table this discussion - I think it's premature.
> The ONLY reason I am asking you to consider this is that I
> really need an
> ally in the south that can help me break up AT. The real
> point is to get
> Germany to work with me long enough to try to shake up the
> southern situation.
He won't help you. If you build in STP he will never have to fear your retribution.
> What's in it for you? Well, it's a lot riskier than me
> staying out of the
> way, but the advantage is that if Germany really does assume
> that you are
> under control, he may send units my way to help me. That
> would make your
> attack on him in the Fall a complete surprise, and more
> effective. Is it
> worth the risk? I don't know, it's hard for me to tell from my
> Russia-centric viewpoint whether or not it's a stupid thing
> to even ask
> this, but I can't see what else I can do. I will try to get
> AT fighting,
> but it's going to take a season or two for anything to come
> to fruition.
I think it's bad for you. How will he help you defend WAR and SEV?
> I doubt that you are going to like this message, and it's
> hard for me to
> tell from my Russia-centric viewpoint whether or not it's a
> stupid thing to
> even ask. As I said, at a minimum, I can move StP-Lvn and take up a
> defensive position. If I am being totally crazy, please point out the
> errors of my ways, which I'm sure are legion.
I tried to point out what I see as the weaknesses. Tony says lots and he has a way with his tone - try to look at it from his point of view, too. Do you really think he'll suicide if you build in WAR? He didn't get this good by playing that badly. . .
> I'm going to repeat that I absolutely hate that I feel driven to this
> desperate move, but I really am desperate at this point.
> Again, I hope that
> giving you a heads up -- which gives you a chance to change
> your builds if
> you *really* don't like this message -- is evidence to my sincerity. I
> should have a chance to see any response you send before the
> deadline hits.
I hope you have time to reconsider. . .
Ben
Message from Russia to England
Sadly, as of now (about 20 minutes to 10:00AM my time) I haven't seen
anything from you, and am about to leave for three+ hours of
meetings. I'll expect to hear from you on my return whether the build
of A StP is simply a major problem for ER relations or spells the end
of them completely.
Yours,
--- Eric
Austria: BUILD Army Budapest
Austria: BUILD Army Vienna
England: BUILD Fleet London
France: BUILD Army Paris
Germany: BUILD Army Berlin
Germany: BUILD Army Munich
Italy: BUILD Fleet Naples
Russia: BUILD Army St Petersburg
Turkey: BUILD Army Constantinople
Centers
Austria: 5
England: 4
France: 4
Germany: 5
Italy: 4
Russia: 5
Turkey: 4
|