Quick reminder. You are NOT allowed to talk to others in the game about ANY aspect of that game.
Please respect those rules. If you don’t want to stick to them don’t play the game.
We have some formats of GB with 50 word diplos every 5 turns if you want but then it’s still limited solely to the 50 words and NOTHING more.
Clint
Clint,
Thought I would jump on this thread since it already carries the right subject.
I just noticed a thread that mentions another FP victory in a gunboat game and would be interested how many FP wins there are vs. DS wins in the 1650 gunboat games.
Cheers,
Alain
Alain,
Clint has said that it’s “roughly even” split between DS and FP victories in GB.
However, there are many of us 1650 GB players who believe that the FP have an advantage in 1650 GB, player skill being competent on both sides.
The arguments can be quite detailed, but they can be boiled down to this:
The FP enjoy an economic & military advantage. Several DS positions are vulnerable to concerted action by the FP. In team 1650, these positions are supported via constant communication and coordination while the DS build their eventual character advantage. In 1650 GB, the DS disadvantages are:
a. lack of ability to coordinate market manipulation (exacerbating their economic disadvantage)
b. lack of ability to coordinate support of WK/Rhu/QA/DrL
c. hindered optimal targeting of character assets due to incomplete information
Finally, when a team-mate quits in GB, it is quite a blow to an alliance, unless it is done with strong nations, in which case it helps the alliance by resulting in two 3-nation pairings. I have yet to play a GB game where no one quit. I long to do so.
cheers,
Dave
Me to!
I Dont like the 3 player combo as it can be to powerful and that message format gives the free the advantage if they can target there forces early on if you ask me.
Vandal
response to dave holt:
second try to post, its all about cookies
my first game of gunboat, i got schooled by the freeps.
the dun/ n gondor pairing went right after 3224, and the s gondor showed up at the same time. add to this, a determined eothraim atatck with his cav on 3221, and its lights out bad guys. once that kinda breakthrough occurs, if the freeps have the stomach for the character losses( the cloud lord tax), with no contact among the evils, its game over. and it was.
sm
Dave,
I had the same feeling, I have played several gunboat games already and I have only once seen the FP team win, that was the reason for my question.
And I agree, dropouts seem to ruin the game on the DS side as generally one of the nations out of each pair is in need of economic aid and that nations almost always disappears into bankruptcy afterwards. On the FP side however it is an added coordination advantage.
Cheers,
Alain
Gentlemen,
I have to disagree 
This is mainly because I played FP in two 1650 GB games so far and have received a sound beating both times. I concede that one of the games doesn’t count as I took over SG on turn 10 with the WM partner already out, so that game was screwed. In GB 136, though, the DS made for a clear victory. I played Art/Har and failed to eliminate WK which was then paired with BS which is a hell of a combo, with built-in curses and good economic support from the BS. Harad held out it until t 20 against Cor and QA, getting no support from SG, though. The DS seem to have had the better players overall, and they won. So, your theory might work if the sides are evenly competent, but, as in normal games, that rarely happens, and so, as in normal games, the better players win.
Your points about FP advantages and DS disadvantages hold some truth, but there are DS advantages, too:
So I would not doubt the initial statement of victories being roughly even.
I’ve played in 3 2950 GB games, all as DS. First as Dog/LR, second as WK/CL, third as FK/BS. The DS managed to win the first two games, and from what I could gather quite soundly, but did lose the third game, with one big mistake on my part that likely hastened the demise.
The key to Gunboat isn’t necessarily skill, although knowing what you’re doing certainly helps, rather it is CONSISTENCY. What do I mean by consistency? Consistently making armies? Characters? Having gold to spend? No, what I mean by consistency is two fold.
First, and most important, GET YOUR ORDERS IN. The biggest foul-up I’ve seen with Gunboat happens because people either forget to do their orders or people drop and their duo of nations becomes ruined to the detriment of their side.
Second, have a plan and consistently stick to it. I’ve railed on and on about Gunboat what makes for a successful Gunboat game and I don’t think it has anything to do with the nation pairings. Focus on establishing and developing your economy, play to your duo’s strengths, concentrate on one enemy nation at a time, and hope for some teammate support.
And there’s Gunboat for you in a nutshell.
Pretty much agree with Ben here. I don’t think either side is particularly stronger than the other but if a player misses a turn then that’s two turns missed rather than the normal one. Ouch. 
Big fan of recruiting big armies myself though… 
Clint (player)
Ben I have no clue about 2950 GB as I can’t stand 2950 regular and think 2950 GB must be penance for something you did in a former life… 
jk
Regarding those of you, including my admired friends Bernd and Clint, who think that DS 1650 are not underdogs… well then, after GB 71 is over please consider playing DS against a group of us playing FP and we’ll show you once again how wrong you are. Clint - you should play DS in that next game with Bernd. Let Tony/Tim and some of the rest of us play FP and we will show you very quickly why DS are the underdogs… <grin>
Or heck, you guys can play FP and Tony/Tim and some of us will play DS and then you can prove to us why the DS are underdogs… I don’t much care which side I’m on, but I do respectfully disagree with you guys. The FP do have an advantage if the competency of the players on both sides is equal. Of course if there are players who drop or who muck it up, or miss turns, or whatever, then of course that can throw the game. But that has never been my point of argument.
anyway, i’m going to have a baby any day now so in a few months and/or when GB71 is over, we’ll start up a new GB to attempt to sway minds one way or another, in a nice, friendly, non-communicative GB sort of way…
cheers,
Dave
I agree with Dave Holt on the gunboat side about the dark servants having a huge disadvantage. When 71 ends I am willing to take any freep combo preferably against anyone who thinks the game is balanced and or possibly favoring the dark servants. If we have 12 players willing to play until the end without quitting/missing turns, I think the dark servants will learn just what a challange they face.
Tim Huiatt
What is it with people named Dave who play MEPBM and having babies just now?
Oi!
[i have to pass the praise along to my luverly wife, who did most of the work]
:rolleyes:
My thoughts are that the message format of game 71 favours the good as if they can plan army actions early on its very bad for the dark guys.
Knowing what some of my allies planned for several turns let me kick the butt of certain nations in that game, which i would not have bene able to do and indeed would have played another game if I had not known it.
Vandal
Although the concept of the communication is a good one, I personally think it favors the free side. Gunboat probably needs to go back to non communication to help the dark servants.
Vandal, which side do you think has the advantage in Gunboat, if any. Assume players are relatively balanced and noone quits.
Tim Huiatt
I agree with Frank and Tim. GB should have no communication. Back to the original concept.
Diplos (per game 71, 1 per 5 turns) favor the FP. It is possible to coordinate attacks quite easily using diplos in a 1 per 5 turn format. It is not possible to coordinate defense (military or character actions) as that info has to be transmitted within the turn window. Defense isn’t so much planning as reacting.
Thus, given that the DS have a lot of defending to do in the early going of 1650, Diplos favor the FP and don’t help the DS.
I’m happy either way. It was brought in due to player request and we’d be happy to remove it if that’s what players want.
Clint (GM)
Clint,
none of this discussion is meant as a dig at ME Games. You guys are doing great.
Rather, this is all about how do we craft a “fair, fun, and even” GB game. GB is truly a blast. I have as much or more fun in my GB games as in the team or individual games.
cheers,
Dave
Well so far I have played on 4 games oF GB, 3 good, 1 dark and the side I played on did not lose in the end.
So you can win with both sides, but its much harder work for the dark guys and you have to play a mean game to win it. No Dragons to where you need them or agents either. But if you adjust your game and play it as if its not a normal coordinated game and keep the good guys out then you can grind the good guys down.
Sadly those players who view GB as a game to experiment in and research artifact skills at the start, for instance, seem to effect the dark side more than the good and undo whatever other players may do.
The IK cannot afford to lose his capital early on and the dark side not suffer where as the say the Eo can sacrifice one or two in exchange and I still think the dark side are hurting more.
Its been said before at the end of the day the team with the best players seem to win and drop outs and bad play effect the game, but the dark side early on have less margin for error early on and so when it does go wrong it tends to be reflected in there play more often.
Well you can agree or not but take out the messages have experienced players (this is not for new players), do away with 3 player nations (far to powerful in a game based on lack of information) and you get the game back to its routes and more fun for all(well experienced players). If new players want to have a game let them play in there own games first before progressing so at least they have some idea (hopefully) of the chaos they may cause. (no offense to all new players but some sure do).
I myself like the idea of invite GB to test myself against the best, call me eletist if you like but I do like a nice hard game and so far only one GB has been testing.
Does that answer the question?
Vandal
Vandal
You did answer my question with the exception of do you think the dark side can win with equal opponents. I for one do not. This does not mean I wont play the dark servants for playing a challenge is much more fun than just playing the side I think will win every game. So far the results seem to be 50/50 on which side wins, but I still think with my limited knowledge of one completed gunboat game won by the free side and the two games I am currently playing where it looks like the free side will win both of those as well that the dark servants have a disadvantage.
I to think allowing someone to play three nations is NOT (edited from previous entry) fair, but it is nigh impossible for Clint and Company to find someone that wants to pick up dropped positions. Although I like a challenge, picking up dropped nations is not something I would prefer to do.
Hopefully Clint will allow us to put together our own gunboat game (one where I would want Clint to play as well) where the chances of players dropping is decreased. I have yet to play in a game that someone has not dropped prior to turn three. Gunboat is my game of choice although I am playing in one grudge game as well. It will be fun to play with or against you in the next gunboat game Vandal.
Tim Huiatt