P.S. I will watch (and learn) from the peanut gallery. 
Well Darrel,
as Ed has just pointed out in one of these “improvement” threads, sometimes you have to think differently. If the DS are going to commit the resources to have a “greeting party” there (wherever there is - and by the way, there are LOTS of potential “theres”) to wait for the FP, then guess what that “greeting party” (or worse for the DS, “greeting parties”) is’nt doing? Think it through and as I said, I think it’s potentially worse for the DS…
Brad’s point is pretty good though. There are strategies that a team can employ that the other team needs to recognize and react to quickly. I can name both FP and DS strategies that fall into this camp. Brad’s point is that there is, in summation more of an onus on the FP to play exceedingly well than there is on the DS. I think the statistics (should they ever be published) will bear witness to some truth here. My own personal belief is that the “accepted status quo” of how a side should be played is much closer to the optimum for the DS than it is for the FP. See below.
Which takes us back to what Brad opened the thread with - should the FP be given some sort of nudge at game-in, or other mods to make the outcomes more even? GSI tried to do this back in the latter 1990s by supposedly making guarding more effective (hah!) and making agents less effective at K/As, especially in fortified pops.
The counter argument is that people play the FP for an early military win, instead of building up their character assets from turn 1. If FP teams built up the FP character assets (agents & emmies) from turn 1 with an eye toward going toe-to-toe with the DS in the mid-game, then perhaps the vaunted DS advantage would only be the CL’s +20. Surely the FP’s military advantage and ability to take out WK/Rhu, thus owning a theater, should counter balance that +20… I do think there’s somethign to this argument. Maybe most teams over time just play the FP too much toward the pure military, and lose in the mid-game as a result? Maybe the game is really more balanced than the statistics indicate because most FP teams focus on an early win, to the detrement of a mid-game contest. I think this is the central question and your personal answer to it determines whether you come down on the “FP tweaks are necessary” or “FP should play better” side of the argument.
After thinking about it a lot, I’m on the “FP should play better” side
Dave
Yes, if you’ve used it once before…it’s not officially new.
Correct! 
Actually, it was about a year ago that I heard of this particular trick. DS Harad was the banker in that one (not sure about game #, prior to the last game counter reset).
Played both sides, won with both sides. From my experience the darks play better together because it is required. The free can not make up for poor or rogue players in theaters as easiliy and more to the point, there is more impetus to go dark as a neutral than free in most cases. I think overtime the results show these advantages are enough to place the DS in the “stronger overall” catagory. Also the free tend to have it good turns 1-10 then the dark have it better from 11-25 and then it evens out a good bit. Of course most games end before turn 25 so the DS win more often.
I think the reason free quit is more about the feel of the game then just “we were winning, now we are losing”. Losing to military is something you see and can react too. As it occurs you can accept it easier than just losing 6 characters turn 12. In otherwords the way the darks win (character war) there is much less strategy to counter it. There is no chess or tactical choice, they just show up and kill you or you spread your people to the wind and attempt to minimize there effect when it comes. But the point is you do not get to see it coming. You do not get to react and fight back. You either hide or they just randomly kill you. That is to a lot of people demorlizing and more so not much fun. If you beat me in chess game by besting me in play, ok, but if you win because you get to remove three of my pieces from the game after X number of turns (which only you know) and the only thing I can do to stop it is to not have them on the left side of the board, it takes away from the game. In otherwords it is not a tactical game, it is just something uncounterable (and guarding is a joke).
Occassional things like that hurt, but when they occur often and half your nation is kidnapped, it takes the fun from the game and on average more people quit in this situation then they do when they are losing the military war.
Should the free be nudged up? I think the 1650 game is pretty well designed and at best the changes, if any were made, should be minor and should mostly involve improving kidnapping victims chances to escape.
I think changing point values on characters is a bad idea.
See ya,
Ken
IMO, it was the right idea… even if it failed in implementation. Tone down the agent game a little, particularly in FP territory.
The counter argument is that people play the FP for an early military win, instead of building up their character assets from turn 1.
While I agree with this to some extent, it is important to consider that the DS can prey on the FP character base right from the start, particularly the “softer” targets (i.e. pretty much anyone who is not an army commander). Generally, I don’t think the FP are able to contend straight up with the DS in a character war - the FP need the military successes in the early going to lay the foundation for their character game.
Excluding One Ring victories, you win this game just like you win a war in the Real World. You erode and break the enemy’s will to resist. That is why psychology is important in this game. Deliberately you fine-tune things to promote discouragement. Newbies are near impossible to read, but you can shrewdly judge the vets and act accordingly.
I have always considered wargames to be a ‘window’ of sorts into the souls of the players. As I have mentioned before, this game was intended to be an ‘alliance’ game, not a ‘team’ game. Hence, like a Byzantine Emperor, you cause divisions amongst your foes and aggravate any seeming discord. This game can be played on many levels.
Dave, I am currently playing on a FP team against a certain DS grudge team composed of GMs of said game system, who are employing said mkt tactic. Let me point out that there aren’t nearly as many “theres” in 2950 as 1650, if you pick the right banker. I’ll let ya know how it all works out.
Darrel,
I cannot speak for anyone other than those involved in game 16, but I do know that those of us that hadn’t heard of the tactic before were begged to not reveal it. The team that one of the members was playing on had been using it for quite some time, or so I was told.
Frankly, I’m surprised in two ways.
- That it has taken this long to speak of it openly.
- That it IS actually being spoken of openly.
There was trust violated somewhere…
Wade
I don’t think so. Lots of other players knew about it, and in fact posted about it on this board (see the Game 90 thread). That it remained “uncommon” knowledge this long is quite surprising.
- Keith
It’s pretty easy to spot what the DS are doing when you see a trillion gold transfers and the market explode on turn 1. I’d be shocked if your opposition never figured it out…I guarantee you most of my teamates would puzzle it out it’s pretty easy.
Dave, I agree with most of what you are saying.
Here is what I would do as the DS…I ship all the gold to the Long Rider…transfer Olbamarl and jack my tax rate to 100% imploding my camps in short order.
I name a couple a30’s who practice guarding, I place a camp off map in the plains somewhere so people can ship me gold, goods to sell etc. (What is the maximum someone will get via theft even if they find it as it produces no gold?)
Yeah, you might crack this nut eventually…but it’s going to take you a while and it doesn’t tie up an obscene amount of resources to give reasonable protection.
Well Darrel,
If you want to cripple the LR in order for LR to be banker, then consider the following. From a very cursory analysis of what you propose, i’d be concerned about:
a. new camps won’t last with 100 loyalty unless you park an emmie there. If you park an emmie there, you’re taking one of your chars out of useful service.
b. if you have no infrastructure (pop centers), you can’t afford to hire new characters, field armies, etc. unless you eat into the bankroll.
c. if you really eat into the bankroll each turn, you’ll defeat the whole purpose of the banker nation.
d. all the agents you keep home defending against gold thefts aren’t out training, stealing gold, etc. i.e. their ramp to A60 is much slower
e. Reveal Pop Center is a spell the FP can learn & cast also.
f. If you want to keep enough high-powered characters at home to defend against the inevitable character swarm attack, those characters aren’t out doing what they should be doing - whacking FP…
So, I continue to believe that there are good counters to this strategy.
Dave
Two point’s to add. 1 ) It will take a bit of time to pull enough Free agent’s over to take the gold. The Free have to hit the LR with at least a five agent company. Then one agent must 215 and 930 each turn. The agent company driver will just 215 and read a good book. Giving the Free three agent’s to put a dent into LR gold. At best 7k to 10k a turn. Also not a lot of team’s will pool all their starting gold.
2 ) This whole time LR has to dip into the gold to stay above water. True LR does not have to worry about haveing armies. But LR does have upkeep cost, name character cost, imp pc and creating camp’s. Plus the LR’s emi. will be locked down with pc issue’s. Cmd’s will have nothing to do but cap order’s. Making em good target’s along with LR mages. Then some good LR agent’s will have to stay close to home. In hope of a making a good defence. Now if I was the LR player. It would be a real drag playing the nation. With each turn already set with little to plan. Not much fun imo.
Rob
Doesn’t this strike anyone as being just a flat out exploit? It’s gaming the game big time. Trust people to find loopholes in any system.
Bernout
“Why does it do what it does?” is why we are here and not in caves. It’s not a loophole, it’s merely a single item in a constant progression from the game that was originally designed to the game that exists today, forever scarred by human inquisitiveness. I do believe that the Game Designers intended for characters to always start in the same hex, leading the same armies, every single game. This has been randomized (we’re left with the army loyalties…). Wonder what else they would have done if they had the foresight we recognize as hindsight today?
Brad
I was on the Free in Game 16, and I can assure you that the market strategy in question was deduced and noted. The key to it seems to be that you need to devote significant resources to stop it. Considering that my agents really just started to get going just before we conceded, I was unable to do much about it.
Also, if you don’t deal with it within a few turns of it occuring, the result is still going to be a net positive for the DS. The other nations will not be ignoring their own economy during this time and with good prices, they can quickly recover any contributions to the bank and then some.
I imagine counter-strategies will be developed, or already have been developed. Like anything else, counter-counter strateges will be developed, and so forth. Properly coordinated, I can think of a couple possible counters. I might just have to play a pathetic FreeP to try them out.
I am more than a little curious. The mathematics that is involved (as I understand it) states that no 1 nation will have the ability to buyout two resources. So, what if two resources are continuously flooded into the market (say food and leather), while the others are sold at a more measured rate. would this have any effect?
Probably not, but it would be interesting to try. I’ve seen buyouts tried, but I don’t know that I’ve ever seen anyone succeed at flooding the market…shrug
Wade
Word from some folks who have been playing since the original market system was in place is that you flood resources to counter a buyout strategy, as the Free. The key is to guess whch resource is going to be bought out, and sell as much as possible. You can really screw a team that puts too much into a buyout or goes to the well one too many times.
The strategy everyone else is speaking of does not require buyouts, and appears to have a certain resilience to it from interference, other than precognition.
Occassionally there comes a strategy which is easy to impliment and difficult to counter. When they be come used commonly enough, they become an aspect of the game (dragons are now “part of the game” instead of bonus encounters cause everyone knows where they are and the way to get them). Sure you can send Glorfindel out to kill them, but the damage is already done by the time this occurs. I foresee this becoming one of those “parts of the game” where the free will have to make an extreme effort to counter an easy set-up of the darks to the point where it just becomes another standard part of the game with people saying “well the free are always stupid, if they just had precognition and remembered to make all agents instead of emmys early to go camp the enemy, they could counter the strategy easily” situations. Of course, perhaps there is an easy counter, we’ll just have to see.
See ya,
Ken
I played DogL in G16. The market manipulation was a HUGE plus to the DS. Infact, imo it made us unbeatable. If this is replicable in every other 1650 game, then DS get an unspeakable advantage to their power. Infact, I think 1650 would become unplayable. I am not at all convinced by the counter strategies offered up above: I cant see them working much before t10 if at all, and after then, who cares? There may be other counter strategies…
A separate point and acknowledging Ed’s comments above (and Dave Holt who has previously been persuasive on the topic) is that it could make the FP unbeatable too: fancy running economies on 19% tax with unlimited gold to improve pops? Pretty hard to knock people out in those circumstances…