Say it isnt so! I am enjoying fighting for my bleak chance of survival!!!
NM
Looks like there is a fat lady singing here 
Sorry to see this one ending so soon and if that is the case thanks in advance to everybody on both sides.
I assume that we all like the 1 week game because we prefer the faster turn-around and it seems a shame when these games’ outcome is largely determined by what the neutrals do.
Does anyone actually like having the neutrals? Both sides and even one of the neutrals in this game has complained about it - how about for just the next one-weeker we ask for the 12 v 12 variant, cut out the diplomacy nonsense and get on with some evenly matched, fast paced action?
Sure if 1650 was played 12 v 12 every-time it would get pretty samey but just the once without the hassle of the neutrals? Plenty of two week games going if you absolutely need this randomness!
If I can get 11 names as a base, I am sure Clint will open it up.
Cheers,
Mike
Oh my, no no no… I have to be a neutral again… 
I had some similar thoughts Mike, but ultimately decided I prefer the neutrals. Consider that in the past two one-week games there were 2-3 neutral splits in both games. Certainly the neutrals had an impact, but I don’t think it was the primary decider in either of the last two.
From my perspective, the DS lost this not because Harad and Corsairs went FP, but because the FP played a very good game around Mordor. The Gondors, EO, and Dwarves in particular put a lot of troops into the passes. Meanwhile, we made a few very key mistakes - bouncing on Ithil was a much bigger problem for us than it may have seemed at first. We failed to recruit enough in Mordor. We sacrificed a little too much development for our opening gambit (capturing Osgiliath was great - until we bounced on Ithil and didn’t take down the bridge).
All in all, I think the DS played very well as a team and pretty well in general.
The FP played better. Corsairs and Harad notwithstanding, they would not have carried the day if the FP had not put so much pressure on us already.
It was a closer thing than it may appear - an order here or there, a dragon that kept flying away as we arrived, etc., and this would still be a lively game.
Doug - Dark Lt’s
Truth, to some extent. The DS opening strategy failure aside, was distinctly surviveable. A 12v12 game with Cor/Har FP and Dun/Rhu DS is a distinct slant towards the FP. And, in the spirit of Earliness prevalent in the 1 weeker, everyone was engaged quickly - no “By Turn 10 I might consider making up my mind…” Neutral BS here - To War~! Throw in the odd choice of neutral direction and the early diplomatic shenanigans, well, the only way to sum up this game is that the DS, and by extension ALL players due to the shortness of the game, got shafted.
Pretty simple, really. It was a screw up whose momentum resulted in all of us having a game that barely started suddenly…end. The individuals involved will likely never make those mistakes again…not to say that new individual’s won’t saunter on into our little 1 week club and shaft us in the future, but that’s the risk we run, yes? So No - 25 distinct nations is how the game is. You don’t like that, find some fellows and get a Grudge on. Now, let’s put in and set up and off we go.
Brad
Um, don’t the Easterlings factor in here somewhere. Or are they standing in for the feeble QA?
Note that it very easily could’ve been all neutrals going DS, which would be far more obviously imbalanced.
IMO, the neutrals can do no right.
Exactly. Neutrals can do no right. By logical extension, the only obvious conclusion is that they’re thusly absolutely necessary.
But of course… <grin>
I had some discussions with General Brad about the Dwarf removing fortifications in anticipation of DS taking the pop center. This removing of fortifications being a standard ploy.
I thought it was a mistake for the Dwarf to do that and a mistake to remove fortifications as a standard ploy.
Removing the fortifications at Zarak-Dum saved me thousands of gold in maintenance fees - gold that I well used.
Removing the fortifications at Norr-Dum allowed me to capture it. I would not have been able to capture it against the Norhtmen army and a fort.
Not significant mistakes by any means. As it turns out our war in the NW didn’t really matter in the long run - unfortunately.
Just not something I would have done.
Early in the game I like to keep the forts there… but later on, when dragons are ruining loyalties on a regular basis and DS emissaries start flipping pops, the forts are a liability. Without the forts, a small cav force can show up and destroy the towns if they end up in enemy hands… and if you are serious about keeping dragons under control, you will need have a few hundred camp-burning cav working in that vicinity anyway.
When I see two nuetrals in two consecutive games teaming up to take out another nation whether it be another nuetral or aligned nation it becomes unbalancing… In this game it was very clear from turn 1 Harad had intentions of going FP from the start… market prices clearly showed that intent… At this point I’m tired of the whole one week comunity!
One week games have become recently more about who i want to play with not about game balance at all by some…
I just done with this scenerio is a waste of money and time… There was simply No way DS could overcome Harad and Cosrairs teaming up on Qa to knock them out… Ds would have had to play a perfect game in order to merely survive for a long win… It did help us recruit Easterlings…
Fp and the Nuetrals did play a great game… So kudos to the FP…
To my Ds allies we play a good game I’m proud of how well we played together… Sorry we couldn’t stick around longer…
No problem - suggestion withdrawn.
I have submitted my set-up for the next one on the basis it is a normal game. Hurry up the rest of you - let’s get started already!!!
Terry, you are just making **** up. Seriously. Harad bought product to build high quality troops. I was first planning on going after the Corsairs, then after we came to an agreement it turned into the whole “knock out the QA, then join the DS” thing the Corsairs wanted to try.
You guys couldn’t stomach that, so we went FP. You might want to look in the mirror a little more when you are assigning blame.
- Keith / Harad
I must say I wasn’t expecting it when both Harad and Corsairs joined us; I found it really hard to predict which neutrals would go free. And I was communicating with all of them incl. providing turn reports (Easties sorry I neglected you for your last neutral turn - I was too tied up in work).
I don’t agree with “Harad and Corsairs join free makes dead DS”. None of the neutrals in this game told the opposition that they’re joining the other side (I had that in a few games). So Freeps had 3 “surprises” while the DS had 2. Plus the DS had more orders with having an additional nation which does count for something, doesn’t it?? Can be quite important if you ask me…
With regard to my nation, to tell you the truth, I was thinking I was stuffed when turn 1 came back - life expectancy of about 5 turns. When I failed to take my bridge down on turn 2 and 3 (that’s why the navy stayed at Oz) I always expected you to cross the bridge. You would have screwed me up completely with the need to refuse and I wouldn’t have been able to recruit aso. I just couldn’t believe the DS armies kindly stayed at Oz waiting for SG, Sinda and my own armies to come and get them. So that’s a part of the Oz strategy that I really, really don’t understand. Apart from decorating Ithil’s walls :)). I’m sure pretty much everybody knows that I sort of loathe armies and enjoy characters, especially agents. So NG for me is sort of DOH!!! I was so stunned that I didn’t look at my turn 0 for days; and then I thought "ok it’s recruit recruit recruit and get the bloody chain going. So I moved everything as far as possible towards the front and named commanders. I didn’t go into the niceties about “shall I defend Ithil or not” or decided on a elaborate strategy.
Cheers, Tine NG
Quote from Terry: "In this game it was very clear from turn 1 Harad had intentions of going FP from the start…
There was simply No way DS could overcome Harad and Cosrairs teaming up on Qa to knock them out."
Terry, knowing Brad was playing CL I really didn’t think we would get Keith on our side - a least not without an uphill struggle. And from the early communication it definitely sounded like EITHER Harad or Corsairs for the Freeps.
Plus every QA in every unaligned game knows the possibility of being attacked by the southern neutrals. It’s part of the setup. Say Easties and Corsairs or Easties and Harad had attacked QA And the third southern neutral had not decided for a couple of turns the outcome would have been just the same. If none of them has declared after a few turns I’ve always had an emmy in range of a MT in case of a surprise attack - and I think pretty much every QA does the same. It’s just the position…
Cheers, Tine
Hi Tine,
I agree – the QA needs to be energetic in their diplomatic efforts.
Jeremy
The Southrons going free upset everyone, them, us, and the FP too, it appears… Next time boyz, just do what’s right in your heart - who cares if it’s 15-10…?
Blaming means nothing… You guys did what you wanted to… Diplomacy meant nothing in this game… When Corsairs and Harad join the FP and take out QA game over period.
After what happened in previuos one weeker then this one… Why sitting from my chair would I want to be a part of another one week game…
Yes Corsiars or Harad solo could take out QA alone… But a coordinated attack between the two… I guess I must but one of the Few players who desires a competive game not just a another easy fast win…
So I guess If I ever want to play this one week game it will only be as a nuetral Harad Corsairs or easterlings to ensure the game is at least competive for both sides…
The results tell the story a turn 10 game over! Enjoy you easy win… I sure this game will be amongst you most savored victories!
To my teamates we did our best but we really had little chance against the southron nuetral might added to FP!
Well stop being a player seeking an easy win!! What kind of Moron even thinks we would take in two players to a team where you take out one of our players! That is total BS! While true in character The DS in the fantasy world would… I would never do that to a player on MY TEAM! I would drop from any team that would!
If that is kind of person you are I wouldn’t trust you taking out my garbage! So yes I AM TO BLAME for not allowing Harad and Corsiars to join us! Blame ME! there are some things I simply cannot do that is one of them turn my back on one person just to win!