1650 Changes - Forget Gunboat....

General
#121

This makes no sense.

Again, you can already employ the tactic of going after mordor, stealing etc.
Having massive markets makes it tougher to hurt nations as there is just more money sloshing around. Also, if you are used to playing against DS that leave large cash balances sitting around instead of sending product etc. they’re not what I’d call top tier competition.

Heck, the DS can just run zero balances and natsell market limit each turn easily. Leaving you one nation to TRY to steal from.

I think you might want to just take a sec and read and mull over some of these topics and don’t make the DS a straw man.

#122

I will take that bet. :slight_smile:

#123

I sense a challenge game forming…

I wanna be FP.

Dave

#124

Yeah, I name Emissaries and Agents and Mages with every FP nation possible… Terry, you playing all 12? Name name name…gotta find a way to inspire your allies to do the same, and THAT my friend, is one of the toughest things about this game… Be smart, manage your orders to maximum effect, see the long term, yadda yadda yadda… Unfortunately, the other 9/11 (to start) might have other ideas. I’ve been trying to beat the DS at their own game for years, lonely voice lost in the woods… Tried against Clint once, he tried to beat the FP at THEIR own game (HC, etc…damn, he didn’t pay for them by stacking the LR balance sheet either…) and it still got ugly past turn 10… as the DS agents, well, did what they do…

Burn camps, steal, train, everyone min 2 emissaries, 2 FP curse squads to 1 DS sickness squad (NOT common…), off map War Machine armies on fortified capitals, stealing gold, stealing DS mage artifacts, filling the map with Palantirs, surprise arty-laden challenges, combined Curse/Emis ops following up agent-softened pops, etc. And on and on.

I started this thread stating that the DS had the distinct advantage in this game, knowing full well the economic “power” of that supposed “theory” that I deigned not mention (knowing full well that it would Trump any counter argument to mine in spades…so why waste it…?). And I didn’t start it as a typical whiny free (whatever brush my “whining” might have tarnished me as…) who names 40 coms, builds army after Army after ARMY and then, when the DS don’t quit and I don’t know what else to do after turn 12, start dying off. I’ve burned every mountain hex at least 3 times, I’ve killed dozens of dragons (Coms folks, give him the right toys and any old starting 50 com can swat most dragons like gnats, don’t waste good Noldo for this, cripes already…). I’ve stolen MT’s, camps, stolen more gold per turn than the enemy, had multiple curse squads working with prelude agents and follow up emis/armies, etc. You can’t toss out a FP “strategy”, box or no box that hasn’t been discussed and tried in combination with multiple others on numerous occasions (how many games have been played…??).

The numbers yet speak for themselves. There’s a reason for those numbers. The game was designed to be balanced. The world has changed, the balance was somewhat illusionary at best AND has only been slanted in the DS favour with virtually every change since. Changes being learned Dragon and Encounter tables (encounters benefit DS because they have 2x the mages). Hidden pops not being hidden. Better team play and coordination (Give Ji Indur artifacts that start with other nations…THAT wasn’t something that happened in the early games, give Cloud Agents RoC and RoW that are located by 1 nation and picked up by another THAT certainly didn’t happen “automatically” on turn 4 in the early games…!!) etc. The game isn’t balanced. “On Paper” counts as much here as it does in professional sports - nada, nil, zilch.

Sigh. Still frustrated.

Brad

#125

No, Brad, you are not whimpering. This looks more like “burnout”. To many games in to short a period. The doctor says use restraint—no new games and cut back what you have. Keep this up, he may prescribe laying fallow for awhile.

#126

Brad

The unfortunate part of all this is what you say is true… It takes the team changing thier view not just one player… one nation sending or 2 emmy’s and or agents into mordor simply will not do it…
Until the FP players going into the game as a group decide that the 6 or 8 turn blitz by thier military will almost always fail and plan for a longer game at turn 1 to develop a character war strategy against the DS early in the game…
I know I will be playing a few FP and trying to persuade them to move in this direction… It means a change in my style of play that I enjoy to do it… But the end results should be worth it… It will be completely unexpected for those who have played with and against me before…

#127

I have never led a team before… But if their is enough interest in trying this I will be glad to put it to practice in a game…

Terry

#128

I too agree with what you and Veo are saying here.
I wrote earlier that I think the FP blitz assault strategy (little or no character development in agents etc.) is still commonly used because it does work against some competition but just isn’t going to work against a coordinated DS. I believe that some of the strongest adherents for this tactic often find excuses as to why the tactic occasionally doesn’t work justifying no need to modify the plan.

#129

Extremely well written and spot on. Nice job!
I agree with Ed, reduce your games for a little bit and come back refreshed…I’ve been in the same position and it’s helped me.

#130

I wrote earlier that I think the FP blitz assault strategy (little or no character development in agents etc.) is still commonly used because it does work against some competition but just isn’t going to work against a coordinated DS. I believe that some of the strongest adherents for this tactic often find excuses as to why the tactic occasionally doesn’t work justifying no need to modify the plan.

Um - not sure I agree with that - I think that all things being equal, the FP early blitz will work (ie similarly co-ordinated teams). In our GM team the only time it didn’t work was due to Corsairs going pop… LOL :wink: and even then we gave it a good old go. Sustained aggression is also the key-word here. No point sending it troops to Mordor with no back-up though.

Clint (player)

#131

I never said not to blitz them still… Use your advantage early but if that’s your only plan it’s simply to easily countered and the unexpected delays by good teamplay by the DS or one greviuos error by even 1 FP spells doom for the entire team… With what I was suggesting with a the miltary campiagn still keeping the pressure on… That allows FP to have a fighting chance if it does go to midgame turns to still win becuase they have developed thier own character war and still have the tax base.

Terry

#132

We may just be mincing words over definitions of little or no other actions beyond a FP military rush. I’ve not seen a FP blitz do enough damage (yet) to crush a good DS team enough to take them out. I trust that you are also stealing some gold from them etc?

#133

Not really. Big armies was enough.

Clint (player)

#134

Yes you have…you just got a 4000 HI massive luck-out named Sauron in that game…! :wink:

#135

Sigh. You mean cut back on the caffeine and sugar too…?

#136

And no sex for a week. By next Sunday you will be aggressive again.

#137

Ok, Wade, who is passing my turns onto you. I have three emmies with stealth and no other character came with stealth in my current game. I do have talent.

tim

#138

In the end, ten strong nations fight better than 12 nations (four of them weak) and have a greater chance of victory. Those resources used to prop up the shadows can mean the difference between victory and defeat.

#139

In the end, ten strong nations fight better than 12 nations (four of them weak) and have a greater chance of victory. Those resources used to prop up the shadows can mean the difference between victory and defeat.

I totally disagree here… 12 Nations even if 4 are weak are still better than 10 strong ones… If this thoery was true Qa and Dragonlord should be broken up in every game… If you cutout the weak links of a chain you just wind up with multiple short chains that can do less.

Every nation has a role and function even if they have very weak characters they often have something else vital to a team success… Weak nations are at the mercy of their team and often change thier tactics in support of the stronger ones… It is which side that utilizes all thier assets best that wins… Keeping all you team alive even if on lifesupport gives the team more orders and flexibility over the long haul.

Terry

#140

Terry, are you arguing with yourself? :wink: