As far as which powers hold the advantage, the Variant win percentages for each power could be a helpful starting point.

Classic - England* vs Turkey - England 1243 (50%), Turkey 956 (39%), Draw 273 (11%)

Classic - France vs Austria - France 1319 (39%), Austria 1863 (55%), Draw 202 (6%)

Classic - Frankland vs Juggernaut - Frankland 760 (57%), Juggernaut 501 (37%), Draw 76 (6%)

Classic - Germany vs Italy - Germany 1366 (60%), Italy 821 (36%), Draw 98 (4%)

Classic - Germany vs Russia - Germany 183 (26%), Russia 480 (68%), Draw 45 (6%) (These stats seem skewed. Germany can't win 26% of the time, starting with 3 units against Russia's 4. Something else is going on. Maybe it's become standard for Russia to reveal its moves to Germany in advance? I played it that way the one time I tried this variant.)

Cold War - USSR 1447 (46.7%), NATO 1508 (48.6%), Draw 145 (4.7%)

Duo - Red 645 (46%), Green 592 (42%), Draw 161 (12%)
(Given the number of games, Red's advantage seems statistically significant, even though the two sides are mirror images of each other. Maybe Red's advantage is starting at the bottom of the board and working toward the top, as in online chess or standard board games.)

Fall of the American Empire: Civil War! - Confederacy 1208 (51%), Union 976 (41%), Draw 195 (8%)

Lepanto - Holy League 92 (39%), Ottoman Empire 91 (39%), Draw 52 (22%)

You can see the full statistics for each variant under Variants-->[Select variant]-->View statistics.

Strategy:

Hit first, hit hard, do not care about tempting SCs lying in your back, you can pick those up later. Put all pressure on the opponent and close their ability to move freely, to expand, and in the best case, to build. Then, all it needs is a unit in year 2 or 3 starting collecting those rear SCs, building more units for that out of those SCs and eventually win easily.

Thanks for the contribution, both of yall. The statistics are pretty handy

I daresay Duo as a map with a significant winrate is mostly a result of a small sample size. Chess isn't the best comparison for that, as black going 2nd is the biggest reason for its disadvantage, not its position.

I think I would go through the 1v1 maps per win rate. I should have started with Cold War, but Duo is supposed to be the most even map, theoretically

@God interesting viewpoint there. I find it that taking the back SCS first is somewhat more advantageous. Not exactly being "tempted" but more so being able to place more units in the front lines some time at year 5 or so

That is wrong and can only lead to success against a likewise hesitant opponent.

If you get pushed at your home borders and cannot keep building units, those SCs will get you nowhere. This is especially true for the classic classics like AvF or IvG.
A especially clear point on this is Cold War, where blocked Home SCs will frequently determine the outcome of regional battles.

When the bases are located far from each other, as in Lepanto, Duo or TvE classic, you will likewise have to rush everything that you have to the front line to breach the relevant chokepoints and stalemate lines of the map. If you fail to do so and eventually lose steams before reaching those critical positions, you will have no or little chance of ever reaching the target amount of SCs.

I think the optimal strategy probably varies by game. In FvA both strategies mentioned are viable for Austria. It is a common Austrian strategy to open by contesting the front just enough to keep France honest, while gobbling up the Balkan and Russian centers as fast as possible. Then around 1903-04 bring the new builds to bear on the front while also chasing the last Turkish centers needed for 18. France does not have so many easy back SCs available and is left with a difficult choice whether to put its more limited resources into holding MUN-BER, securing Scandi-StP, securing Tunis, contesting Italy, grabbing back SCs, etc.

This is an opening theory I want to test out. I vaguely remember trying to play both strategies and massively preferring taking the backs; then again, taking the back centers is via the convoy opening. I'll try testing these:

-convoy opening -> taking backs
-convoy opening -> not taking backs
-standard opening -> taking backs
-standard opening -> not taking backs

I noticed that in England+ vs Turkey, England has a slight advantage (both seen in the stats and felt while playing). So I conducted an experiment: I played several games with the rule that the England player always announces all his moves. I wanted to see if England can force a victory (if Turkey cannot prevent one even with full information), it turned out it cannot. So the map is inbalanced but Turkey still has a decent chance. Now I did the experiment on Russia vs Germany with Russia telling all moves. Russia still won. So Russia vs Germany is extremely unbalanced as Russia can force a win with optimal play.

Those are of course no hard mathematical proofs, they would be rather hard to do (I might look into it at some point), but they are an estimation. I think all the other 1v1 maps are akin to England+ vs Turkey in that no side can force a win.

Also I hate Duo. I love the idea of having a symmetrical map, but the way it is set up is super annoying. It takes ages for troops to get somewhere. My favourite 1v1 map is American Civil War.

Bumping this just in case

Should i make a separate thread for each 1v1 map? I feel like certain maps don't have much to talk about anyways

@lambda.nrx you must play duo more often. I thought i would hate it, but despite the near-symmetry of the map, the strategies are surprisingly diverse. Sort of a fresh breath of air compared to cold War

Recent game of mine ended in a victory, but I think I could have easily lost if they played better

Will test openings that actively try to take the center

I don't like Duo because it is just annoying to play. I would love to have a good symmetrical map, but Duo is annoying. It takes ages to move troops forward. I really like the player dynamic on American Civil War in the beginning, With the home centers being close to each other. I like Cold War more than Duo, but it is a map that stresses me out, as there is no front line.

Back to the Duo openings. I haven't played a lot of games, but at this point I favor the convoy opening. Yes, you only get 2 builds the first year. But you make it up the next year and it seems to keep building. The convoyed army picks up another SC where a fleet couldn't. The convoying fleet finishes the first year on the ocean. That sets you up to take the back 2 SCs faster. Which then allows you to move out of the back waters faster.

So @CoffeeAndKeyboards, of your four options, I'm liking convoy opening->taking backs

I don't think the winrate makes much sense. In some games one player plays much better than the other. For example Germany vs Russia, I suspect that Russia should win every game if both players are experienced.

@Xenon,in the game between Germany and Russia,R should tell its move to G.

Not on vDip, but an interesting 2-player is 1862 Civil war: https://imgur.com/a/7APrP1M

It has some special rules on winning, namely you have to hold both Richmond and DC to win.

Poking around in the forum, I found this old thread on 1v1s. It's interesting, folks talking about who created them, how balanced, different strategies.

https://vdiplomacy.net/forum.php?viewthread=63510#63510

I've been testing out some different country combinations. Germany v. France and Germany v. Austria. Both are quite fun and I have some games up for takers right now. I'm open to trying other combinations but struggling to think of any others that could be remotely fair.

vlgambini, thank you for finding this amazing 9 year old thread. Amazing

Oh goodness. I'd take a look at that thread as soon as i can

It's funny, I came across a post on that thread that I actually made on a previous account from 9 years ago that I forgot even existed. Just rejoined a few months ago (for what I thought was the first time)

Update on Duo:

As of today, I think the optimal opening is a convoy 2-build into taking the backs. Assuming the opponent does the same, year 3 needs 2 fleet builds and rush to the inner seas is optimal

Bumping this. Will be making more Duo games. If anyone is seeing this, I'll keep sticking to my preferred opening until proven that another is better. Feel free to take advantage of that information

Let's try some more!