You are given first 5 messages from a series of message exchanges between 2 persons playing the game of Diplomacy which is an American strategic board game. You need to generate the next message. The message should be generated such that it fits the context seen so far. Avoid the text that is (i) tangent to the context, (ii) repeats the context.

Input: Consider Input: ['Hi there! I think us attacking each other early game is pretty dumb, what’re your thoughts?', "I agree. Even with the element of surprise, it's just too easy to defend the Piedmont/Marseilles corridor.\n\nIf France attacks Italy, it will most likely be Austria who benefits, and likewise if Italy attacks France the spoils probably go to Germany.\n\nGiven that, what are your plans? Are you planning to attack Austria early, or thinking of the standard move of: \nF Naples - Ionian\nA Rome - Naples\nA Venice H", 'Yeah I’m not planning on going for Austria off the bat, I feel like it usually just locks the two weakest countries into a fight that hurts us both', 'Understood, good to know!', 'Seems like everything went pretty much according to plan. Not sure why Turkey stayed in Smy instead of backfilling to Con. Seems a bit passive to me.']

Output: He’s scared of me pulling off a lepanto. What’s the deal for you guys, seems like you and england have an agreement at the very least to stay out of ENG. Did you and germany agree to that bounce in Bur?


Input: Consider Input: ["Good morning, France.\n\nI wanted to reach out to you to see where your mind is at initially.  I also wanted to let you know up front that, unless something changes, I will be moving to Ruhr.  I'm not worrying about Belgium at this point, but I do want to ensure that I have Holland locked down.  Most importantly, this isn't intended as hostility towards you.\n\nWith that out of the way, what's going on so far?  Have you heard from Italy, England, or Russia?  What are you hoping for early?", "Checking back in with one more question: would you prefer to plan a stand-off in Burgundy?  I'm not excited about it, but I'm open to it.", "Hi Germany! \n\nBounce in Burgundy sounds good. But your move to Ruh... idk, not really liking that. Holland is guaranteed to you winter 1901 no matter if you have Ruh or not. The main reason you would move it there in 1901 would be to take Belgium, and then move in on me. It feels pretty anti-france. Hopefully we can work something out, and maybe even arrange an alliance against England? About that, have you heard anything from them? I havn't. \n\nLooking forwards to a good game! -France", "Yes, England reached out to me, and asked if I was interested in an alliance of the three of us.  I told him I wasn't, as that rarely ends well for Germany.  I told him I was definitely interested in allying with one of you, but not both.\n\nI'm not a big fan of a bounce in Burgundy.  It's kind of a fear maneuver that puts both of us behind overall.  It's nice on your end, since it functions as your defense and frees up Marsailles.\n\nSpeaking of Marsailles - nothing from Italy?  I haven't heard from him yet.", 'What would the rest of S01 look like with the Burgundy bounce?']

Output: So... what are you going to do about ruhr? The rest of S01 really depends on where we want this to go. Do you want a full on alliance against england or just an agreement of DMZs and who gets what territories.


Input: Consider Input: ['Hi Turkey! Wishing you good luck this game. Wanted to ask what your plans are for relations with Russia.', 'Hi well depends if austria is on board brobably containment', "That sounds like a good plan. Russia has indicated to me that they're looking south (so long as I don't cause too much trouble), so I would be prepared. Have you all come to an agreement on the black sea?", 'It’s a bounce in the black', 'Cool, thanks for the info! Mostly just trying to get a sense for whether you and Russia are in cahoots and preparing to mow over the whole board.']


Output: Probably not