Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Aftermath of the First Warlords Game - 5 players, 15 Kingdoms
#1
Alright, a special place in history might be here since we have subsequently changed the format, so your game will have been unique for the immediate future. So even if you posted before, copy it here, or better, talk about what went right and wrong, how you evaluated situations, what you would pass on to your offspring even in the new 4 player format.
Reply
#2
"I felt that this would give us the advantage, but it turned out not to be the case for a number of reasons."

Anytime you "feel" you have an advantage over KAL REX it will turn out not to be the case for a number of reasons... This sums up my G10 synopsisWink
Reply
#3
(07-02-2013, 11:25 PM)Kalrex Wrote: "I felt that this would give us the advantage, but it turned out not to be the case for a number of reasons."

Anytime you "feel" you have an advantage over KAL REX it will turn out to be the case for a number of reasons... This sums up my G10 synopsisWink

We need a report, that the Gnomes can dissect into a summary, and then we can have a synopsis of that. We can't have only a synopsis and go backwards. Well, with imagination we can, but we wanted to hear how it actually happened in this game. And we're not going through 52 pages of posts on the when it was then 103. Give us the low down.
Reply
#4
Here is a re-post of what I wrote earlier today"
So, this game is being conceded and all are crowing Wfrankenhoff as the EL/GI/WA player the winner. Just a few thoughts on how this game went down, since I don't think they'll do a recap thread. Before turn 1, the two 'evil' positions and the neutral position joined common cause. I felt that this would give us the advantage, but it turned out not to be the case for a number of reasons. In my own case, I had never played anything other than an individual game - not even as a player on a team game - and there were some things I did not consider. I did not expect the GI position to move at the NM full-tilt on turn 1 and this caused me to make some miscalculations there. I kept the WI fighting in the Mists much longer than I should have.
But the basic problem was lack of coordination. The DA/DE/TR player was in too many games to keep things straight - on turn 1, he'd said he would divine the towns in Torvale and move to Meridon with his TR position. Instead, he divined something else and moved to Avalon, totally screwing up my UN moves. And the GN/RD/SO player, after the first couple of turns, seems to have been very busy in RL and had some contact problems as well. I'm not complaining - my RL is busy too - but the three of us were no coordination and it showed. The RA position should have been easy to take down with the SO and BL working together, but with no info, I moved the BL into Amberland and that didn't work out very well.
I did learn a lot playing this variant and am looking forward to a new game. The only time I really didn't enjoy this one was a turn that was re-run and it wiped out most of the gains I had received in the previous version with a bunch of unlucky throws. Congrats to the winner!
Reply
#5
So, the problem in this 5 player game was still lack of coordination between other Alliances? I've seen that in the Magic (Alliance Victory Potential) games but didn't think early turn inter-Alliance planning would be that critical in Warlords. So you guys are looking six turns down the road on T1? Some comments on how while this is going from 15x zoom to 5x zoom but not that much changes? Or does it?
Reply
#6
Warlords game, from the "neutral" perspective...

From the beginning I elected to join with the evils because DuPont was the only player to contact me. I readily admit that my communication has been limited the first few months of Alamaze because I did not have a computer at home (bought new house, tons of furniture, etc... but didn't replace computer until recently). Doing everything on my cell phone made my diplomacy extremely limited and usually too blunt. Sorry guys!

Anyhow, I used the RD to quickly destroy the DW. The SO took Almaren and was soon joined by the RD so that together they had the RA nearly removed from Synisvania. Meanwhile, the GN built defenses and gold production at Cradia. At game end Cradia was over 60k defense and over 60k gold production, I believe. Additionally, GN had 6 or 7 Princes spread throughout the region and had used a standing order on raising influence from the beginning of the contest. GN wizards were all level 3 or 4 also. In short, GN was a beast and fully capable of funding both RD and SO far into the future. Of course, neither position required much funding. RD does very well when in control of a region and three or four towns in Synisvania to boot.

The problem for the evil team was the combination of too many kingdoms building up their positions while the good team focused their efforts against one position at a time. The good team played as though this contest was a sprint while the evil team prepared for a marathon. First the WI was removed from the Northern Mists then the good team all focused on removing the RD from the Talking Mountains. RD was still in a fine position due to Synisvania production but the WI was not likely to get enough funds to be much of a force (just my opinion). The UN also had a poor start and this was compounded by the BL failure to gain traction in Amberland.

Anyhow, the game was still definitely in balance (because the neutral team had joined with the evil team) but because nobody was communicating or coordinating on the evil team the game simply didn't feel like a team game and nobody seemed to be enjoying this contest as well as the other games they were in. So we all decided to conclude the match and give the win to the team that was in first place. I think the neutral team was still in second place, but there are no points for being the first loser... Smile
Lord Thanatos
Reply
#7
First of all, I like to thank all my opponents in the game and give kudos to my ally, Kal, who did much of the heavy lifting (yes, I love my Oscar and would like to thank the game designer-Rick--the production chief, Cipher, etcSmile

I'll do a quick break-down of my position but first a couple of observations:

1. The "neutral" team did join the evils turn 1. While it probably resulted from a lack of communication from our side, it was also a matter of geography which has been pointed out many times--i.e. RD almost has to go after DW; SO against RA; GN's most logical expansion is Torvale. Our esteemed game masters have recognized this issue and the new warlord format reflects it.

2. From what I saw, there really wasn't much coordination between the evils--as LT said, they focused on building their individual positions and scattered their efforts.

3. That said, Kal and I (the goods) only coordinated in the loosest sense of the word. I don't believe we ever had military or diplomatic forces working together in any region at the same time. Kal ended up stuck with the heavy lifting (DW got pounded by RD early). SO, DA, RD attacked RA. DE/TR, going after AN (That left me alone to go one on one with UN/WI/BL and the GI/EL/WA has an advantage in that match-up) What we did do is keep each other informed of our general plans and each concentrated our forces one region at a time.

Enough of general comments.

Breakdown:

EL grabbed OAK early. WA grabbed Amberland. GI moved into NM (as Dupont noted, it's not a normal move in the individual game. In the team game, it's almost assured) and gained control by turn 5. For the next few turns, GI concentrated on capturing all remaining WI pop centers while EL and WA built wizards. Turn 11 saw the capture of the last WI pop center (most of his mages had perished in sea-battles). BL tried to help out, but by that time the GI had 3p3s and major BL army was destroyed (4 GI, 6 OG versus 6BL and 8 WY). Total destruction of BL army (and wizards) to the loss of 2 OG brigades. GI moved into TM on turn 13--jumping the RD while he was busy chasing the RA--and gained control by turn 17...game then ended.

General breakdown of positions at end of game:

EL was weakest of the three. 17.6 influence. 1 Major army (10 EL, 2VE), 1 minor (2el). Wizards of p6, p4,p4,p3,p3. BTW: Lord Thanatos: There was an invisibile EL patrol at QW this turn. Though you 2SO was hidden/invisible...I think you might have lost a number of wizards to kill spellsSmile

GI: 16.2 influence. 1 Major Army (3GI, 13 OG--82K combat), 1 minor army (5 GI, 6 OG--57K combat strength). Wizards of p3,p3,p3,p2. One was about to head into ES, the other to intercept the 1RD (hit by two demonics over the last two turns)

WA: Influence 17. This was the position that would have been the "backbreaker" against the evils going forward. After screwing around in the early going, I started concentrating on raising the wizards big time (at the urging and help of Kal, I might add...he did transfer the stone of all minds to me as well!). At game end, the WA had p8, p8, p6,p6,p6,p5,p4,p3 and was raising three a turn (depending on defensive necessity). Scattered, into four groups, they were positioned to either ward pop centers (you did try and attack DU, didn't you, LT?) or cast demonic regionals in TM, Amberland and NM. The p8s were just going active (assassination via demon in TM, then releasing scandals on RD). BTW: Dupont....your capital village at NI with your 11 characters would have been destroyed by spell this turn (as well as the pop center at NC)...village at MB would have been following turn. Since the WI was--I believe--eliminated and the SO crippled (RA knocked off 1SO early on in sea-battle and he would have lost mages in 2SO to kill spells from hidden EL this turn), the evils didn't have an effective counter to WA wizards and--in the long run, if the game had continued--that would have been the difference. General note: Sometimes it's not the best idea--in a team game--to spend the resources to build defenses/increase production at a pop centers. While Cradia's stats were impressive, the p8s could have knocked 17K off the defenses a turn (p9 would be more) and the armies running around at this stage (1Gi and probably 1TR) could take the pop center.
Reply
#8
If the above post sounds self-congratulatory or "preachy", I apologize. The game was still in balance and could have gone either way (though I do still think the WA wizards would have made the difference in the long run...that, and the fact the DW was getting back on his feet.) I also realize I got lucky in this game (Again, Kal took most of the Evils attention and allowed me to build my nations in relative peace).
Reply
#9
The WI had no PCs but he was still active. He was taking a village in the Sands to relocate his capitol to. But I knew my UN village wouldn't last much longer. What was frustrating was I thought doom would come by sea. I HPd the sea forces a few turns ago and found the AN with 8 fleets and I ordered my agents to destroy them the next turn, only to find he'd sold them all. Gaaa.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)