Last night I wrote a WWIV opening strategy guide from the perspective of Texas and I thought I'd share it here. It's rather long though and I apologize if it clutters up the forum. Just posting it to test the waters. If people like it, I would be happy to write more guides from other countries I've played in WWIV. If others also want to contribute their own opening strategy articles and the guide reaches a critical mass, maybe the developers can create a separate section on this website to house them all.

---
WWIV Opening Strategy -- Texas
by Amwidkle

Congrats! You drew Texas. You know what they say, nobody messes with Texas. Also, everything is bigger in Texas. With a bit of luck and skill, this saying should also apply to your empire, for Texas occupies one of the more promising starting positions in WWIV.

Texas's early advantages derive mainly from a combination of an easily defensible position (all three Texan home SCs border each other) and the close access of neutral SCs. Corpus Christi (CCR), bordering two Texas home centers, is so clearly within Texas's orbit that CCR can be safely bypassed and picked up in the second year if an opportunity for a different SC presents itself. New Orleans (NO), while not quite as clearly in Texas's control, is still a very likely gain since Texas's Houston (HOU) unit (whether a fleet or army) is the only one of any country that can reach NO in the first move. No nation acting by itself has the ability to take NO from Texas in the first year and so no one is likely to. The other neutral SC's within Texas's first-year grasp are Kansas (KAN), Denver (DNV), New Mexico (NMX), Chihuahua (CHU), Monterrey (MON), and Memphis (MEM), though gaining this last SC is quite unlikely since, even assuming success in taking ARK in Spring 2101, capture in fall would require anti-Illinois support from the U.S. Your neighbors also have a more or less equal stake in all these other SCs, so diplomacy will be necessary if you plan to begin holding rodeos and NASCAR races in one or more of them.

In the build phase, Texas only has one choice to make: whether to build fleet or army in HOU. An army is slightly anti-Illinois/anti-California/anti-U.S., while a fleet is slightly anti-Mexico/anti-Cuba. In most cases the choice will not be a major one since HOU is most likely to end up in NO or CCR by the fall anyway. The main advantage of an army is it can take (or bounce Illinois out of) ARK, while a fleet can take (or bounce Mexico out of) WGM. So if in doubt about Illinois, build an army; if in doubt about Mexico, build a fleet.

To the east, Texas's primary rivals are Illinois and Cuba. They form two sides of the same coin -- one threat by land (Illinois) and one by sea (Cuba). Of the two, Illinois can cause more initial damage. If Illinois moves to Arkansas (ARK) in spring, then Texas will be caught in a guessing game in the fall -- a 50/50 shot whether to cover HOU or hold in NO, in addition to having to worry about the threat to Dallas (DAL). This would be a very uncomfortable situation, and it is almost worth it to move an army to ARK in the first move to prevent it. But with other opportunities for SC gains and bigger threats on his horizon, Illinois is unlikely to take the ARK gamble. More dangerous, but even more unlikely, is a joint Illinois-Cuba attack on NO in the fall. In this unfortunate situation, Texas will certainly lose NO, but thankfully this is highly unlikely to happen since both Illinois and Cuba each have better shots at gaining other centers in their surroundings (such as MEM for Illinois or MIA for Cuba). To strip NO from you, one nation would have to voluntarily give up a crucial first-year build by issuing the necessary support to the other. These are no excuses to neglect your diplomacy with Illinois and Cuba, however. For while NO is tactically easy for Texas to gain, ironically, NO can only be held through diplomatic means. This is because, in the medium-term, Texas will likely have more pressing matters to attend to (Mexico, California) and leave a thin garrison at NO and HOU. In this event, either Cuba or Illinois could swing in with two units and pick up NO easily even without the direct support of the other power.

Thankfully, if you just cultivate friendly ties with Cuba and Illinois -- for instance, setting up DMZs in ARK and Eastern Gulf of Mexico (EGM) -- then it is very likely that at least one, if not both, nations will send their forces elsewhere in the first year. As a consequence, both Illinois and Cuba will likely get involved in conflicts elsewhere in the medium-term, leaving the Longhorns the enviable choice of maintaining the peace or stabbing (with long horns, no doubt) the exposed rears of Illinois and Cuba. Strategically, the best situation for Texas would be if Cuba provides you with minor help against Mexico while investing in navies and adopting a primarily Atlantic Seaboard or South American strategy. Meanwhile, if Illinois makes a dash for the northeast corridor of North America you will certainly be in the clear as concerns him. However, if Illinois and Cuba are firmly coordinating action together on the North American continent, then preferably stoke a war between these powers with the United States -- far better than becoming their target yourself! However, it is important to stress that any Cuba-Illinois war against the U.S. is not too successful, for if Illinois and Cuba succeed in destroying the U.S., then Texas will be an easy, and natural, next target. So in this situation do not give overt assistance against the U.S., even if offered tokens such as ATL. Instead, strive through any and all means to keep the U.S. alive and kicking for as long as possible. In sum, in your eastern relations try for no more than friendly neutrality with Illinois and Cuba (unless Cuba offers help against Mexico, which you should eagerly accept). At the same time, it can hardly hurt to be pro-U.S., since the U.S. will in all likelihood be hemmed in by Quebec, Illinois, and Cuba for the foreseeable future. In the event of a cowardly attack upon your eastern border by Illinois or Cuba, the U.S. can be your ace in the hole. These eastern powers are trapped in a highly competitive game and will probably be leaving you alone as they desperately seek to gain an advantage over the others. As such, if any problem threatening to Texas arises from the east there should be a way to diplomatically solve it.

While likely enjoying a strong start, Texas can face problems in the medium-term, stemming from two main sources -- south of the border, and west. Concerning the southern threat, Mexico is without a doubt Texas's primary rival. This is mainly because of geography -- due to the way the North American continent narrows in Central America, neither Texas nor Mexico can really thrive without eliminating the other. The alternative to war -- a Texas-Mexico alliance -- is not very synergistic. For if Texas and Mexico team up to take out Cuba, then both nations will end up with a bunch of fleets in the Gulf of Mexico/Caribbean Sea area with nothing much to do but consider stabbing each other. A Texas-Mexico attack on California is slightly more promising than attacking Cuba, but only just. For if Mexico builds armies and sends them up the west coast, again, there will be nothing much for the Mexican armies to do but sit there and consider when to stab Texas, and as a consequence Texas will have to maintain a garrison on his western border. Therefore, it seems the best hope for a long-term Texas-Mexico alliance would be if Mexico can be persuaded to adopt a Pacific strategy while Texas builds fleets on the opposite coast and expands through the Gulf of Mexico. This arrangement might be workable if Monterrey (MON) is left as a DMZ, or voluntarily given to the weaker of the pair, but it is still an awkward arrangement since neither power could directly help the other expand. In truth, the best this Texas-Mexico "ideal alliance" would amount to is de facto non-aggression. So perhaps it is best to begin plotting the Mexican demise. Si?

The problem with attacking Mexico right off the bat is that both powers are of approximately equal strength. If Mexico is played by even a middling tactician, it will be next to impossible to simply bludgeon him to death. The tense north-south situation here is somewhat analogous to that of Russia and Turkey in Classic. The key strategic territories here are MON and WGM, but tactically speaking neither Texas nor Mexico can capture MON or WGM by himself if the other opposes it. However, a protracted series of bounces over MON and/or WGM would probably spell demise for both nations, since the surrounding American powers will grow in strength and note the excellent opportunity for growth occasioned by the Texas-Mexico war. This prisoners' dilemma can only be solved through diplomacy and deception. Texas must somehow orchestrate a situation to to distract Mexico and take MON by stealth, while following up with a crushing blow on the Mexican homeland before getting bogged down in MON. If Mexico is gullible, then this feat can be accomplished as early as the first year by setting up a DMZ in MON and then immediately breaking it, allowing in fall a 50/50 shot on either Mexico City (MXC) or Veracruz (VCZ) -- a win-win situation for Texas because, even if your filibuster into the Mexican homeland is bounced out, you will still pick up the build from MON and deny the Mexicans a build. A similar DMZ arrangement can be made and broken over WGM. If you can count on the support of the Cubans, Californians, or even Colombians, then Mexico is already dead in the water. If Mexico is not so gullible, however, then you will not get an army into MON so easily. In this case you will be left no choice but to patiently bide your time for a riper opportunity.

In the near-inevitable war with Mexico, Texas's inherent advantage is that Texas has better growth potential to his north (the American heartland) than Mexico does to his south (the isthmus of Panama). So if stalled against Mexico, Texas can pick up extra builds from the north to break the stalemate. Paradoxically, however, this same advantage can turn into a disadvantage, since foreign armies can rain down from the American Heartland to pressure Texas's north more quickly than fleets can sail up to harass Mexico's south. So it is best not to rely on these geographic factors. As always, the best tie-breaker is diplomacy. Find an ally to help you take out Mexico, while ensuring that you are not attacked in the process, and the balance will shift in your favor. If instead Mexico's diplomacy is better, then he will win. If the two of you are approximately equally matched in tactical and diplomatic ability, then prepare for a grueling, costly, and probably fatal war.

Turning to California, we reach the final threat to Texas. Initially, California seems somewhat distant compared to Texas's other neighbors, but do not be deceived. Unless California is adopting a purely Pacific strategy, then he will be sending armies east into the American Heartland, and these armies will close upon your border very quickly. At a minimum, California absolutely must be kept out of NMX and CHU, and preferably kept out of DNV as well. To the end of containing California, giving KAN (even DNV) to Illinois can be beneficial, so long as Illinois and California do not find common cause and team up to dismantle the Texan.

Luckily, California's other neighbors will probably be highly suspicious of him as well. So play this up in your negotiations with California's neighbors and seek help from anyone against him -- Canada, Illinois, Mexico, and even Japan if he is doing well in the Pacific. You will probably succeed in getting help against California from at least one of them, which will distract him as you gather your armies and prepare to fulfill your Manifest Destiny all the way to the Pacific Ocean. Unaided, California cannot fight a two front war.

As the North American conflict develops into the middle-game, keep a very close eye on any one power beginning to dominate the American heartland. All things being equal, this power will most likely be Canada. But whoever it is, cultivate close ties with this Midwestern power, and insist on full equality and an equal share in the Heartland centers which, in all likelihood, he could gain by himself if he was stubborn and tenacious for long enough.

In conclusion, Texas's initial position is promising and, barring calamity, a good diplomat should find ways to milk it to his benefit. Follow sound strategy, make good moves, and communicate, and soon enough you'll make all their exes live in Texas.

---

"Named Texas Openings"

Texan openings with initial build of 3 armies:

Texan Hedgehog (prioritizes defense, anti-Illinois, anti-Mexico)
(A) HOU --> ARK
(A) DAL --> WTX
(A) SAN --> MON

The Filibuster (extremely anti-Mexico)
(A) HOU --> CCR
(A) DAL --> SAN
(A) SAN --> COA

Tornado Alley (anti-Illinois, pro-Mexico)
(A) HOU --> ARK
(A) DAL --> OKL
(A) SAN --> HOU

Tornado Alley, Mexican variation
(A) HOU --> ARK
(A) DAL --> OKL
(A) SAN --> MON

Tornado Alley, Corpus Christi variation
(A) HOU --> ARK
(A) DAL --> OKL
(A) SAN --> CCR

The Cornhusker (neutral)
(A) HOU --> NO
(A) DAL --> OKL
(A) SAN --> CCR

The Clinton Presidential Library (anti-Illinois)
(A) HOU --> support (A) DAL to ARK
(A) DAL --> ARK
(A) SAN --> CCR

The Clinton Presidential Library, Mexican variation
(A) HOU --> support (A) DAL to ARK
(A) DAL --> ARK
(A) SAN --> MON

The Clinton Presidential Library, Destiny variation
(A) HOU --> support (A) DAL to ARK
(A) DAL --> ARK
(A) SAN --> WTX

Texans @ Saints (neutral)
(A) HOU --> NO
(A) DAL --> WTX
(A) SAN --> CCR

Texans @ Saints, NFL scout variation
(A) HOU --> NO
(A) DAL --> OKL
(A) SAN --> CCR

Manifest Destiny (anti-California)
(A) HOU --> NO
(A) DAL --> OKL
(A) SAN --> WTX

Manifest Destiny, Corpus Christi variation
(A) HOU --> CCR
(A) DAL --> OKL
(A) SAN --> WTX

Manifest Destiny, Clinton variation
(A) HOU --> ARK
(A) DAL --> OKL
(A) SAN --> WTX

Mexican Destiny (anti-California, anti-Mexico, pro-Illinois)
(A) HOU --> CCR
(A) DAL --> WTX
(A) SAN --> MON

Siesta (lazy, retarded, insane... but neutral)
(A) HOU --> hold
(A) DAL --> hold
(A) SAN --> hold

Siesta, Fiesta variation
(A) HOU --> SAN
(A) DAL --> HOU
(A) SAN --> DAL

Siesta, Atseif variation
(A) HOU --> DAL
(A) DAL --> SAN
(A) SAN --> HOU

--

Texan openings with initial build of 2 armies, 1 fleet:

The Mexican Honeymoon (anti-Mexico)
(F) HOU --> WGM
(A) DAL --> WTX
(A) SAN --> MON

The Mexican Honeymoon, Carnival Cruise variation
(F) HOU --> WGM
(A) DAL --> WTX
(A) SAN --> CCR

Beached Cruise Ship (anti-Mexico)
(F) HOU --> CCR
(A) DAL --> WTX
(A) SAN --> MON

Beached Cruise Ship, Wanna Go Home variation
(F) HOU --> CCR
(A) DAL --> OKL
(A) SAN --> HOU

Beached Cruise Ship, Wanna Go West variation
(F) HOU --> CCR
(A) DAL --> OKL
(A) SAN --> MON

Beached Cruise Ship, Kerouac Road Trip variation
(F) HOU --> CCR
(A) DAL --> WTX
(A) SAN --> MON

Mardis Gras (neutral)
(F) HOU --> NO
(A) DAL --> WTX
(A) SAN --> CCR

Mardis Gras, Cornhusker variation
(F) HOU --> NO
(A) DAL --> OKL
(A) SAN --> CCR

Mardis Gras, Corn tortilla variation
(F) HOU --> NO
(A) DAL --> OKL
(A) SAN --> MON

Rick Perry's "Oops" moment (boneheaded)
(F) HOU hold
(A) DAL hold
(A) SAN hold