Its always difficult starting as a new player, but I would question whether or not it is wise to start a newbie as a neutral. They do not know the game, unless they are sure of themselves, they can be easily manipulated, they have no support structure, except for 2 teams which want the neutral to side with them, not do well on his own or make the best decision for his own nation...there are a few positions that I could suggest, and you mention some of them, but having played my first 2950 game and second game as a neutral, lack of understanding coupled with lack of a support structure and everyone trying to coerce you is a recipe for frustration. IMHO.
>Some of the turn reports have been great reads, some of the
>articles (more than a few actually) have been feeble.
Bree #1 states or implies that N.Gondor, Noldo, Cloud Lord, and
Eothraim are good positions for new players to start with. I've
also been told by a new player that Harly sends this Bree to all new
players. Clint, if this is correct, can you please stop sending
this Bree out to new players!? This article is very much in error.
These positions are key position...especially Cloud Lord, Noldo, and
Eothraim. The only point in the article that made any sense is when
it stated that the Witch-king and Dragon Lord position shouldn't be
played by new players. New players probably should stick with
nations that won't cause the downfall of the team if played
poorly...like Cardolan, Arthedain, Dwarves, BS, and any of the 5
neutrals.
--- In mepbmlist@y..., "Kenneth Weed" <watakshi@h...> wrote:
Its always difficult starting as a new player, but I would question
whether
or not it is wise to start a newbie as a neutral. They do not know
the
game, unless they are sure of themselves, they can be easily
manipulated,
they have no support structure, except for 2 teams which want the
neutral to
side with them, not do well on his own or make the best decision
for his own
nation...there are a few positions that I could suggest, and you
mention
some of them, but having played my first 2950 game and second game
as a
neutral, lack of understanding coupled with lack of a support
structure and
everyone trying to coerce you is a recipe for frustration. IMHO.
I don't see it that way. As neutral you have 5-10 turns of being
left alone to learn and try and build your nation. You also have 24
other people, instead of 9, to try and get tips from. I feel there
is a good chance that one of the other neutrals will "take you under
their wing, or that the DS, or FP will give you pointers and tips to
try and make you more likely to join them. There is the chance that
one side will go "Newbie.. lets get him", but I find that other
neurals tend to Unite against such type of actions.
New players probably should stick with
>nations that won't cause the downfall of the team if played
>poorly...like Cardolan, Arthedain, Dwarves, BS, and any of the 5
>neutrals.
I would say more that they are able to pick up how to play the game without being too pressurised by the teams need to get it right. Time to make mistakes without getting over-run by the enemy hordes that sort of thing.
I've tried to collate this sort of information before so that we can advise players but there were some disagreements. Any thoughts on this? If players could send me a list for 1650 and 2950 that would be great (or add to this list). Say 5 nations in descending order of appropriateness for new players to play for each allegiance and each scenario.
(I agree that a new player should not play a Neutral though.)
(none of the Front Line nations for the two sides. Except Fire King and Dog Lord - because it is relatively easy to play but important for the team's defence of Mordor. South Gondor is important for the FP's aggression but is relatively easy to play. Northmen can get hit by the Long Rider, but won't destroy the FP offensive if it goes down and you can have lots of fun with it.)
2950
I don't know this well enough to judge I am afraid.
Anyone else got opinions on what nations are appropriate? This is off a player...
Clint
Generally, I actually think a neutral is a good place for a newbie. Give 'em
time to absorb the mechanics of the game a bit before being overwhelmed by the
Team Aspect.
Lists of nations (in descending order of preference):
1650: FP - AR, CA, DW (really the only ones that are not important)
DS - BS, DkL, QA, FK (last 2 would need a little help from the get-go)
Neut - any but Rhudaur, DU, EA, CO, HA in decreasing order
2950: FP - DR, DW, NM (not as vulnerable as in 1650)
DS - BS, DkL QA, FK
Neut - any but Rhun (KE, CO, DU, WW)
I'd tend to reccomend starting w/ 2950, as it's slower paced.
2950: FP - DR, DW, NM (not as vulnerable as in 1650)
DS - BS, DkL QA, FK
Neut - any but Rhun (KE, CO, DU, WW)
I'd tend to reccomend starting w/ 2950, as it's slower paced.
I'd dissuade from the Northmen. They can get pounded really early by
the Dog Lord and LR.
Rangers, Dwarves, Woodies seem like a good FP choice.
As for DS, Lts are the swing position and very important. I'd be
more inclined to say FK since it's pretty straight forward, or the
QA, BS, or maybe the Dog Lord since it is also straight forward like
the FK.
