Choices

mepbmlist
#21

--- In mepbmlist@y..., "Richard John Devereux" <devereux@l...> wrote:

> Jeremy
>
>
RD: Understood. I'm just taking part in the discussion, but playing
'devil's advocate' if you like. You guys in North America have

been

playing the game a lot longer than us in Europe, and it's

interesting to see

that your FP use mass camp building as a game-winning strategy

whilst the

team I usually play with is still divided over its usefulness.

Surely this could be countered by the DS naming more emis

themselves?
True in the same sense that the free can counter the dark agent edge.
It is possible, but the SNAs and starting characters make it
difficult. This tactic is far more effective in 2950, where camps are
crucial, than in 1650 where the lore is that the free need to pour
everything into an early military win. Since an early military win in
2950 is effectively impossible, the whole shape of the game is set by
which team has the economic advantage at the
camp limit. If you can make it 2-1 in your favor - and the free can -
it is very difficult to lose.

cheers,

Marc

I see your point that if starting with an E40, Nor could name 3

more, but

would any player dare do so? Nor is bound to lose pops to a

competent DS

team, and needs new coms to hire armies to defend them. If DS keep

taking

Nor pops because he has only named emis, Nor loy will tumble

everywhere and

the extra camps created by the E40s will not last long. Correct me

if I'm

···

wrong!

Richard.

#22

--- In mepbmlist@y..., "Richard John Devereux" <devereux@l...> wrote:

RD: Understood. I'm just taking part in the discussion, but playing
'devil's advocate' if you like. You guys in North America have

been

playing the game a lot longer than us in Europe, and it's

interesting to see

that your FP use mass camp building as a game-winning strategy

whilst the

team I usually play with is still divided over its usefulness.

Surely this could be countered by the DS naming more emis

themselves?

Yes, if they know that the FP are doing it. It's a bit
like blind man's buff. My favorite analogy for this
is the old scissors-paper-stone game of "bucking up"
(or is this just an Americanism?) No matter which
you choose, the other team can pick a strategy that
loses to yours or beats it.

I see your point that if starting with an E40, Nor could name 3

more, but

would any player dare do so?

I would certainly name at least 2 and would try
to squeak out a third.

Nor is bound to lose pops to a

competent DS

team, and needs new coms to hire armies to defend them. If DS keep

taking

Nor pops because he has only named emis, Nor loy will tumble

everywhere and

the extra camps created by the E40s will not last long. Correct me

if I'm

wrong!

I'm not sure; the third (say) camp created by each
E40 would have a 25-loyalty. How much loyalty do you
lose for each random non-capital pc lost? And if
the camps do go away, well the NM probably got their
2K investment back by the time that happens and have
high level emmies to try to create new camps.

It is sort of another guessing game, since some Eothraim
come around east in force and neutralize the eastern
DS armies giving the NM a major lease on life at the
expense of other things, and some DS send nearly all
of their Mordor armies west to 3124 also giving the NM
a longer lease on life. If I were Nor I wouldn't count
on either, but I would still name 2-3 E40's and wing them
westwards creating camps until coming to the Noldo
and Arthedain/Cardolan homelands, then create camps
there and improve them ad infinitem. I'd make do
with fewer commanders defending and if my (NM) homelands
fell, get a backup from a western ally.

Jeremy