Recollecting Game #102

[Hawk_]

I played the Sorcerer and intended to make this a pure adventure game with no conflict. I was successful. My treaty with Cargus the Ranger, and outstanding neighbor, allowed me to take Synisvania for my ESO.

I spent the game raising wizards and looking for unusual sightings. It was fun, but I doubt that I will do it again anytime soon. Maybe if I had been more active, the game would have lasted longer. It was a learning experience for sure.

Interesting in that I have in mind the Arda extension will have smaller starting kingdoms, an agent and emissary range of 7 instead of 10, dragon subduing in maybe five encounters and so having flying for a lucky patrol flying on a named dragon. In general, a longer game with less rushing and more development and more artifact hunting. Am I on the right path?

Yeah, I'd love a game with a bit more buildup to it. Maybe a larger map as well (and, um - hexes instead of squares?) to draw out some of the battles. Maybe concentrate each kingdom more instead of the current spread out into 3 regions thing. As it stands now, far and away the most viable tactic is the blitz, to the point that is really all you see almost. Larger distances might allow for some defence in depth and longer campaigns with more time for interesting stuff to develop.

I kind of like the idea of a larger map. The MEPBM map was much larger.
I am fine with the grid system. You could simply make the map wider by using numbers for the horzizontal axis instead of letters.

It is interesting reading the recap of game 102.

[Jumbie]

I prefer the current blitzkrieg-required game.

I feel like it demands prioritizing orders and anticipation. Not that I'm doing too well at it mind you. I just appreciate the challenge of trying to do a whole lot in a small amount of time with a restricted amount of orders.

[Cargus10]

I prefer the current blitzkrieg-required game.

I feel like it demands prioritizing orders and anticipation. Not that I'm doing too well at it mind you. I just appreciate the challenge of trying to do a whole lot in a small amount of time with a restricted amount of orders.

I'm not knocking the current system. Just saying that an alternative would be a nice change of pace too. And require a bit of a different mindset.

[Kalrex]

He dealt more casualties in the battle, but owing to how badly he had been mauled by a huge (19 brigade) BL army

I was so badly mauled I defeated your group in a battle the following turn (sorry, a turn later but with the same actual group/troops from previous battle when the Black Dragons fled the area)... I wasn't badly mauled whatsoever- Losses were proportional and he flew away the same turn cause he was scared. - I would have defeated your group AGAIN the next turn... and AGAIN...

I had so much attention on me that another player had obviously very little attention on him and he won rapidly. Everyone else lost. I don't subscribe to the chart of 6th-7th-8th place finishes having any relevance insofar as relevance to some concept as if they played better or no.

If someone gets dogpiled such is life. If someone wins by virtue of not having much/little interference the same. In both instances I think it means the majority of the rest of the players in the game had little knowledge of the actual game-state and made poor choices. Unless they subscribe to Diamonds "experience" notion that he wanted to be a bystander and not actually play the full game...

[Cargus10]

He dealt more casualties in the battle, but owing to how badly he had been mauled by a huge (19 brigade) BL army

I was so badly mauled I defeated your group in a battle... I wasn't badly mauled whatsoever- Losses were proportional and he ran away the same turn.

Um, if you defeated me...ah never mind. Yes, you are all powerful and awesome. We pale in your very presence.

[kevindusi]

He dealt more casualties in the battle, but owing to how badly he had been mauled by a huge (19 brigade) BL army

I was so badly mauled I defeated your group in a battle the following turn (sorry, a turn later but with the same actual group/troops from previous battle when the Black Dragons fled the area)... I wasn't badly mauled whatsoever- Losses were proportional and he flew away the same turn cause he was scared. - I would have defeated your group AGAIN the next turn... and AGAIN...

I had so much attention on me that another player had obviously very little attention on him and he won rapidly. Everyone else lost. I don't subscribe to the chart of 6th-7th-8th place finishes having any relevance insofar as relevance to some concept as if they played better or no.

If someone gets dogpiled such is life. If someone wins by virtue of not having much/little interference the same. In both instances I think it means the majority of the rest of the players in the game had little knowledge of the actual game-state and made poor choices. Unless they subscribe to Diamonds "experience" notion that he wanted to be a bystander and not actually play the full game...

Kalrex, rather than the bluster about how you got dogpiled, life isn't fair, yet you still out-witted all of us... perhaps you'd care to do your own write-up? Then you could get all of your thoughts and comments out in one swoop rather than continually belittling people and/or trying to take from what they feel is an accomplishment. Sure, they didn't win, but I for one am proud of my non-winning performance, as I'm sure many others are. I'd hate to have people not post their views on how the game went out of fear that you'll just turn around and dim their light so that yours shines the brighter for it. The point of the thread is to share our personal experiences in the game, from our point of view. Please share yours.

[Kalrex]

Kevin: That was my experience of the game

but owing to how badly he had been mauled by a huge (19 brigade) BL army

The above comment I found belittling, personally, and responded.

Nothing in the game "Mauled" me asides agents and I did considerably well militarily. Wouldn't one think that after I just got "mauled" by some huge AG Dragon group the Rangers wouldn't have taken considerably more losses than me in the subsequent battle between our near complete armies (his not having been "mauled", till after our battle...)- His 10 Brigades of Rangers + 2 Recruits versus my 5 Brigades of Darkelves and 1 Monsters. End result:RANGER LOSSES WERE ESTIMATED AT 7400 TROOPS. RANGER LEADERS FOUGHT COURAGEOUSLY. ALL RANGER LEADERS SURVIVED THE BATTLE. THE RANGER WIZARDS WANDIAK AND ABURITH AND EXCEL SURVIVED THE FRAY. THE INTENSITY OF THE RANGER VICTORY INSPIRED THE ASSEMBLY OF VICTORIOUS TROOPS TO EARSPLITTING CRIES OF TRIUMPH AND INCREASED THEIR MORALE! DARKELVEN LOSSES WERE SAID TO BE 4400 TROOPS...

Just telling it like it is from my side of the map/turns.

I'm surprised nobody got in the Giants way more than apparently happened. I was obviously preoccupied.

yet you still out-witted all of us

All of "you" who were trying to eliminate me from the game. Yes. You all "LOST" just like I did. My 1 position kept all 4 of you from any chance at winning the game. Nice try at rationalizing it though

[kevindusi]

No, making a deal with WA to delay my taking a city cost me the game. I had everything lined up to take the city (final piece for my svc) and declare, but GI beat me to it by a turn. You just buffered my status points but giving me easy access to your emissaries to use as prisoners.

And, for the record, I was first loser. You were like 8th loser or something like that. I get the loser gold medal.

[Loric]

That means I get the loser silver medal. Yes!

[Jumbie]

Kalrex,

This thread is for us outsiders to get a recap. I'm lost with you referencing battles etc without a context. We desire a narrative. What you did, in the order you did it and why.