I would be interested in the War of the Ring varient even though I
have only played in 2 games of 1650 so far - and been thrashed in
both.
Would players need to be very experienced to be able to handle it -
or is 2950 harder
I 'd rate the 1650 & 2950 about even, and I agree with Laurence that the
main problems for new players are ones of communication and co-ordination.
In this respect beginner DS players would maybe find 1650 harder since
they're economically outclassed at the start, and the need to co-operate is
thus greater.
I don't think it's always easier to go bankrupt in 2950. Whilst this may
well be true of the FP whose 1650 economies are much lkarger than in 2950 I
reckon that it's actually easier for many of the DS to go bankrupt in in
1650, because their economies are in many cases only marginally bigger than
in 2950 yet they have much larger armies to pay for. For example the Dog
Lord gets loads of extra cavalry in 1650 that isn't in 2950 and all he gets
to pay for it is one extra camp! The Blind Sorcerer is particularly badly
off since all he gets is 1 extra village to pay for a 5000 man army instead
of the 300 odd MA you get in 2950, and it starts miles away from the enemy
so if you want it to do anything you have to keep paying it until it can get
to the action.
It was also suggested that you might be able to get away more with mistakes
in 2950 due to the need to build up prior to attacking. However, because the
economies are generally smaller this makes 2950 nations more vulnerable to
early attacks, so whilst the action is on a smaller scale it can be just as
decisive.
Regards
Adam Mitchell