The biggest drawback to the fleet rome variant is that it totally removes the option of the attack against Austria in year 1. That wouldn't be so bad if the extra fleet gave a very good shout at grabbing a second neutral, but it doesn't really. You're still reliant on support into Greece.

Speaking of Rome, yesterday (April 21) is the date of the traditional founding of Rome.

As a person who has played plenty of games with the green blocks, I think the Milan variant is a very interesting one, insofar as it gives Italy a greater influence on the French-German situation while removing the pressure-cooker with Ven-Tri; thus, allowing a more rational bargaining position that the other neighbors get to enjoy.

Randy
I don't see the Milan variant as a substitute necessarily for a weak Italy. Personally, I love playing Italy. However, I do not see Milan as an unfair advantage (in what way?). Piedmont is something of a threat in and of itself, but I will agree that the revised border with Burgundy could be seen as providing an extra threat from the Italians. On the other hand, it is also a handy enforced entry by France into Piedmont, so I think they balance each other. The only thing that really makes Italy difficult to attack in 1901 is its geography, which also makes it difficult for Italy to attack out of. Ven-Tri is a unique combination in the game that Germany, Russia and Turkey love, because it keeps Italy and Austria preoccupied. I don't see any advantage it gives Italy except for removing the forced confrontational importance of Ven-Tri. Milan's position, in fact,has no additional geographic advantage on non-Italian lands. But it does make Italy more like all of the other countries with regard to shared borders.

With regard to the nature of playing Italy or of negotiations in general, that's for another thread. But I do agree that may players see the green blocks as an albatross and too often play a waiting game, hoping a center will drop in their laps. But when there is a choice, I usually ask for Italy.