As for "archtypes" I can think of another one. The "professional neutral", who only, or almost only, plays neutrals. I beleive there is a deep psychological reason for this.
1) Quick Declarer. For whatever reason, this neutral is rip roarin
and ready to go. Anyone declaring before turn 5 falls into this
category. There can be a lot of reasons for this including quick
deals cut in the opening turn of the game, a pathalogical hatred of
your neighbors, or even a pressure to act quickly. Rhun in 2500 often
meet this mold.
Advantage? catches neighbors off guard. Can net quick wins.
Disadvantage? Not enough capital orders spent downgrading can mean
emissary take outs of capital.
2) Slow Declarer. For whatever reason, this neutral rarely declares
before turn 12 or later. There can be a lot of reasons for this as
well. It can include organizing the perfect nation, making sure all
downgrades/upgrades are in place, or (shudder) looking to see who
will likely win and then join the band wagon.
Advantage? Awesome nation development and game winning moves attract
the power gamer.
Disadvantage? Both sides may team up to carve up the nation (Actually
happens).
3) The Demander. Can be either of the above, but this neutral sets
down the rules of war early and clearly ("If you do not send me 500
bronze every turn I will attack"). I'm unclear why ANYONE does this,
meglomania perhaps, but I suppose its to keep everyone on terms the
neutral can deal with.
Advantage? Both sides may cave in and give the Demander its tribute.
Disadvantage? Look for a strike by one side or the other.
Anyone have any other archtypes?
Jeffery A. Dobberpuhl
_________________________________________________________________
Join the world�s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com
Well, I do love playing neutrals, specially Dunlendings, which I believe it
is the most interesting one.
Unfortunatelly Ia have not been able to play Neutrals right now, but when I
play neutrals, always I change alliegance to the side which demonstrates
more union between their members, and also the one who pais more.
For one reason or another almost all Neutrals can afford the game without
change their alliegance.
I also believe that a Neutral which changes alliegance between the first 3
turns, it is not really a Neutral, if both sides are in contact with the
related kingdom, unfortunatelly in my current games, both times rhudaur has
attacked Wk in turn 2, without reason / chance.
Ricard.-
···
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ovatha Easterling" <ovatha88@hotmail.com>
To: <mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 6:10 PM
Subject: Re: [mepbmlist] Neutrals and the Game
As for "archtypes" I can think of another one. The "professional
neutral",
who only, or almost only, plays neutrals. I beleive there is a deep
psychological reason for this.
>From: "reedrichards2001" <webguys@lakenet.com>
>Reply-To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
>To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [mepbmlist] Neutrals and the Game
>Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 15:06:18 -0000
>
>Hi, Lurking Jeff here...
>
>Neutrals seem to come in a few flavors:
>
>1) Quick Declarer. For whatever reason, this neutral is rip roarin
>and ready to go. Anyone declaring before turn 5 falls into this
>category. There can be a lot of reasons for this including quick
>deals cut in the opening turn of the game, a pathalogical hatred of
>your neighbors, or even a pressure to act quickly. Rhun in 2500 often
>meet this mold.
>Advantage? catches neighbors off guard. Can net quick wins.
>Disadvantage? Not enough capital orders spent downgrading can mean
>emissary take outs of capital.
>
>2) Slow Declarer. For whatever reason, this neutral rarely declares
>before turn 12 or later. There can be a lot of reasons for this as
>well. It can include organizing the perfect nation, making sure all
>downgrades/upgrades are in place, or (shudder) looking to see who
>will likely win and then join the band wagon.
>Advantage? Awesome nation development and game winning moves attract
>the power gamer.
>Disadvantage? Both sides may team up to carve up the nation (Actually
>happens).
>
>3) The Demander. Can be either of the above, but this neutral sets
>down the rules of war early and clearly ("If you do not send me 500
>bronze every turn I will attack"). I'm unclear why ANYONE does this,
>meglomania perhaps, but I suppose its to keep everyone on terms the
>neutral can deal with.
>Advantage? Both sides may cave in and give the Demander its tribute.
>Disadvantage? Look for a strike by one side or the other.
>
>Anyone have any other archtypes?
>
>Jeffery A. Dobberpuhl
>
_________________________________________________________________
Join the world's largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com
There's a perfectly good reason why Rhudaur often does this Ricard - he (and he is the only neutral for which this is true) starts with armies whose maintenance costs grossly exceed his revenue including his capacity to generate more revenue from sales of production. Rhu either has to disband troops or attack before turn 3/4. This is why you'll often see Rhu suddenly vanish from the game for no apparent reason - it's a "Clint's Own" newbie, who's let himself go bankrupt.
I also believe that a Neutral which changes alliegance between the first 3
turns, it is not really a Neutral, if both sides are in contact with the
related kingdom, unfortunatelly in my current games, both times rhudaur has
attacked Wk in turn 2, without reason / chance.
Hi Lawrence, in Spanish games, it is usual to have rhudaur transfer his
20.000 initial food and maintain rhudaur neutral up untill turn 5-6 without
vanish for economy, (remember his 2 major towns and his 4 initial towns wich
means reasonable tax base)
usually they become Evil, since Rhudaur as free is not as funny as becoming
Evil, if Witch King keeps contact, It is really peculiar the diferences of
play between Spanish teams and games, and English ones.
Personally I'm really enjoying a lot my games here, but it has upset me that
point, involving Rhudaur, maybe it has been something not usual, but I mean
that beign Witch King attacked at turn 2 without answering anything to Witch
King is quite strange.
Obviously all options are respectable, so enjoy your games!
At 17:26 14/10/2002, Ricard wrote:
>I also believe that a Neutral which changes alliegance between the first
3
>turns, it is not really a Neutral, if both sides are in contact with the
>related kingdom, unfortunatelly in my current games, both times rhudaur
has
>attacked Wk in turn 2, without reason / chance.
There's a perfectly good reason why Rhudaur often does this Ricard - he
(and he is the only neutral for which this is true) starts with armies
whose maintenance costs grossly exceed his revenue including his capacity
to generate more revenue from sales of production. Rhu either has to
disband troops or attack before turn 3/4. This is why you'll often see
Rhu
suddenly vanish from the game for no apparent reason - it's a "Clint's
What exactly makes you think that the other Neutrals are just making up the
numbers alongside their bigger brothers ?
Every nation under the Neutral Flag has been producing outstanding results
and I have no doubt they could crush you and your kin as the age of man
comes to fruition.
You may fight on valiantly but it wall all come to an end soon enough.
Leave Middle Earth now whilst you still have legs upon which to carry
yourself.
As for "archtypes" I can think of another one. The "professional
neutral",
who only, or almost only, plays neutrals. I beleive there is a deep
psychological reason for this.
A "professional neutral" would, due to playing so many
neutrals so often, declare eary one game, late the next,
try demanding artifacts with his crappy Harad characters in
another, and may never declare some other game as the WW
whilst he tries to build the largest nation to ever do nothing
in a world war....
As one who would fit into your brief definition of a PN. Mind
if I ask what your (my? deep psychological reason is?
>From: "reedrichards2001" <webguys@lakenet.com>
>Reply-To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
>To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [mepbmlist] Neutrals and the Game
>Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 15:06:18 -0000
>
>Hi, Lurking Jeff here...
>
>Neutrals seem to come in a few flavors:
>
>1) Quick Declarer. For whatever reason, this neutral is rip roarin
>and ready to go. Anyone declaring before turn 5 falls into this
>category. There can be a lot of reasons for this including quick
>deals cut in the opening turn of the game, a pathalogical hatred of
>your neighbors, or even a pressure to act quickly. Rhun in 2500
often
>meet this mold.
>Advantage? catches neighbors off guard. Can net quick wins.
>Disadvantage? Not enough capital orders spent downgrading can mean
>emissary take outs of capital.
>
>2) Slow Declarer. For whatever reason, this neutral rarely declares
>before turn 12 or later. There can be a lot of reasons for this as
>well. It can include organizing the perfect nation, making sure all
>downgrades/upgrades are in place, or (shudder) looking to see who
>will likely win and then join the band wagon.
>Advantage? Awesome nation development and game winning moves attract
>the power gamer.
>Disadvantage? Both sides may team up to carve up the nation
(Actually
>happens).
>
>3) The Demander. Can be either of the above, but this neutral sets
>down the rules of war early and clearly ("If you do not send me 500
>bronze every turn I will attack"). I'm unclear why ANYONE does this,
>meglomania perhaps, but I suppose its to keep everyone on terms the
>neutral can deal with.
>Advantage? Both sides may cave in and give the Demander its tribute.
>Disadvantage? Look for a strike by one side or the other.
>
>Anyone have any other archtypes?
>
>Jeffery A. Dobberpuhl
>
_________________________________________________________________
Join the world�s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com
deep psychological reason is?