 |
| |
|
|
Tall Stranger
|
 |
Northern Virginia
Nov 2002
time: 00:31
|
|
I am starting this thread at Theseus's suggestion as a way of trying to elicit high-level strategic thought to guide overall game play. The intent here is to think through how we envision winning this game. I am aware of the irony of starting this thread at a time when our position looks, shall we say, challenging. In my view, all the more reason to think this through.
In my view, before we can develop our strategy, we have to assess the situation and strategy of our opponents. Here is my estimate, which is really based on little more than hunches and the map.
Opponents' Assessment:
Lego:
Strengths: Their power is rising rapidly, they still have not had their GA, they have a pliant vassel state, and they have a continent to themselves.
Weaknesses: Everyone knows that, if left unchecked, they can't be beat. Ability to get troops to Bob is limited.
Apparent strategy: Keep GS, ND and GoW in constant conflict, sapping their strength.
GoW:
Strengths: In their GA, currently appear to have backing of Lego, possess great opportunity to backstab ND.
Weaknesses: Smaller and more spread out than ND, meaning their long-term production capability is questionable.
Apparent strategy: Control as much of Bob as possible, and develop military power. Get the game down to 3 big players, side with one of them to eliminate the other, and have a battle royal to determine the winner.
ND:
Strengths: In their GA, control most of the territory on Bob.
Weaknesses: It seems that both Lego and GoW want to see them eliminated as a power. The reason for GoW wanting this is obvious. Not clear why Lego would support such a move.
Apparent strategy: Drive RP and GS from Bob while limiting GoW territorial increases. Would not be surprised if ND was considering backstabbing GoW.
With that in mind, let me lay out what I see as our 3 strategic goals.
1. Retain a foothold on Bob, preferably enough to develop a core of productive cities there. (Wasn’t there some talk of moving our Palace there?)
2. Eliminate either GoW or ND as a major power and expand our Bobian holdings at the loser’s expense.
3. Convince whomever remains on Bob that Lego must be the next target. (This will be VERY challenging.) From there, who knows? My guess is that the ultimate winner will be determined by war.
Please keep in mind that much of this is speculative. Any changes/ thoughts/ criticisms/ firebombs are welcome. If these are in fact our goals, I have some ideas on specific tasks we need to complete in the short-term to achieve them.
Thoughts?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Tall Stranger
|
|
Northern Virginia
Nov 2002
time: 00:31
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Theseus
Hmmm... How will we WIN??
|
Well, aren't you picky? You expect me to tell you how we win? The thread is only titled "Road To Victory" after all. 
quote:
Didn't we determine a looong time ago that we NEED a piece 'o Bob? Not to mention the luxuries, and now, it turns out, saltpeter.
|
While I was not here a loooong time ago, I should hope you all had determined this a while back. 
The reason I put this in was because there has been some talk of withdrawing to Stormia. I think that is a bad idea, and must be our last resort. Virtually any deal we can cut with GoW would be preferrable.
quote:
Look at the mini-map... who is the impediment?
ND, that's who.
We need GoW to backstab. |
Absolutely. The goal must be to break ND's power and turn this into a 3 man game. We also have to do it quickly, before Lego can get involved. Reason: if you're GoW, would you rather have your final adversary be Lego, who is still waiting to trigger its GA, or us?
That's my thought process, anyway.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
zeit
|
 |
Meet my blade!
Sep 2002
time: 06:31
|
|
Hi everyone!
I've been creeping around for some time- but my participation has been at zero level mostly due to RL concerns, especially my academic year starting, which involved me running around chasing Uni administration staff...
Anyhow, that's not what's important now, obviously.
The **** really hit the fan here, and it calls for dire actions, from looking at the map, the only real card we have right now is our chance to hit GoW- we have to use it to the fullest. Striking a deal with GoW is our only alternative if we want a chunk of Bob, and also has some potential of getting more than that (tech, for example). Lego does really care about GoW, nor the future of any certain nation, protracting this conflict is their main goal, and they now that given the current situation, any alliance between ND and GoW would not hold out for long.
I mean, look at the map- ND is in the prefect position to crush GoW after RP and GS is driven off- will they pass this opportunity? I don't think so, and I think Lego does not as well. They figure out that standing by GoW side is they're best bet- if war breaks out between the two allies, there's every reason to think Lego would help GoW, but only to the extent of maintaining the balance, so the war is kept off-Legoland, and neither sides gains the upper hand...
Gaining GoW as as "ally" in our struggle to prevent Bob from becoming 2.5 continent- which cannot threaten Lego, means preventing a guaranteed blockhead victory...
RP in former Estonia, GoW, GS AND ND in Bob as a first step, minus ND in the second, and enough balances and common interests gives us a chance to maintain some threat on Lego, and perhaps turn it in the future into an assault- we can't do that without the techs, and not while we're fighting 2.5 teams.
In short- I'd say a deal with GoW, in which we carve up Bob, including building a common strategy with regards to the handling of the blockhead threat in the way to go. A limited alliance with GoW sure sounds crazy, but it seems like our last chance of winning this game (and could also be real fun!).
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Cort Haus
|
 |
London
Apr 2002
time: 05:31
|
|
I'm not sure I see 'slicing up GoW' to be a realistic option. We'd soon be at war with 3 civs in GA and unlikely to hold both GoW land and the south. No way do I want to do this.
If we are to get a deal with GoW we will not only need to relocate RP, but also to get GoW and RP to drop their grudge-ventdettas against each other, and hopefully for GoW to permit RP to return to Spain some way down the road, and for us to get resources in S. Bob.
On the other hand, we can enable GoW to fullfill their current contract far easier than they could by fighting us in the south, and we offer better long-term prospects for their position on Bob.
Finally, while we have been applying carrot-and-stick to GoW to persuade them to consider joining us, maybe they've been doing a similar thing to get us to join them. Aggie said that he thought we might respond like this - so maybe both GS and GoW are presenting each other with unpallatable alternatives to future co-operation.
Also, they were impressed with the appearance of two RP cities on Stormia. That may have worked a treat for us. Instead of raising a storm about teleportation, it was seen as a gesture-of-possibility, a first step of relocation, and a carrot for GoW.
If we can't get the GoW deal then I'm not convinced we should attack them unless we counter-threaten Lego. RP's offer of declaring war against Lego might only help Lego happiness short-term, but I can't yet agree with criticism of the longer-term WW goals as being bad for the game. It's been said that a broken state should not be able to inflict such damage on great powers but why not?
The mighty Soviet Union was broken by tiny Afghanistan. The mighty USA suffered severe WW fighting in tiny Vietnam. Let's not even talk about WW and Iraq.
So unless persuaded otherwise, I don't see RP's suggestion as 'bang out of order' at all. In fact I see it as an essential counter-threat to Lego. Lego held their turn while they discussed and made their decision - I doubt anyone begrudges them that - but it shows that it wasn't an easy step for them to take. A counter threat such as we could issue thanks to RP might wibble a few Lego hearts.
The last resort option would be the 'Dunkirk' scenario, which Arrian has outlined. I don't think this is as bad as some have reacted to it - by keeping our heads down we could come back into the game in the industrial era - particularly with RP researching for us in their new peaceful home. After all, those who ran away at Dunkirk came back another day with a mighty ally...
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Theseus
|
 |
The warmonger formerly known as rpodos. Gathering Storm! Apolyton Spirit!!
Apr 2002
time: 00:31
|
|
A reminder to us all:
This game, this PTWDG, is brand new, virgin territory.
Imagine: Lego stakes out a compelling lead. Whoever the remaining powers are, both great and small, finally realize that Lego is the threat that cannot be ignored... but they have rails, and Rifles/Infantry.
Then come Marines.
And further tech development, and everything else that that entails: sea power, air power, beach heads... Shifting alliances. PRODUCTION POWER.
The Great War... the War to End All Wars.
World War II.
The Cold War... and its end.
This game is FAR from over. vondrack et al have been Machiavellian and masterful thus far, but DAMN, there is a ways to go. Lego's successes will be their downfall. 
(My god... the more I think about it, the more I feel the sweep of history, the complexity, and the ever-shifting shores. I love this game.)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Tall Stranger
|
|
Northern Virginia
Nov 2002
time: 00:31
|
|
Theseus, I agree with all your points. I'd hate to lose a vassel state, but a disloyal/ difficult/ unreliable vassel is worse than none at all. Unless RP gets its act together, we may have no choice but to destroy them. (Too bad, since it would be fabulous to be able to harness their GA.) The irony of us riding to RP's rescue, fighting a brutal war to protect them, only to destroy them ourselves is not lost on me.
Based on the PR Chat thread, it seems like we see two potential futures for the game:
1. Lego and GoW team up against ND.
2. ND and GoW team up against Lego.
Problem is that we have good reason to suspect both of these contingencies. The fact that Lego came to GoW's rescue so quickly and GoW turned down our peace feelers supports 1). The basic fact that Lego is looking like the world's powerhouse supports 2).
Based on this assessment, it seems clear that we need to:
A. Finalize RP's status: if they can remain loyal, great. If not, we destroy them and use the cities on Bob as bargaining chips with ND.
B. Try to get more info from ND about what they are expecting, and specifically if they are having conversations with GoW about a Lego invasion.
C. Draw up contingency plans for both a Lego + GoW vs. ND war and a ND+Gow vs. Lego war. What can we offer? What do we need? How can we play both sides off each other?
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
asleepathewheel
|
|
listening too long to one song
Mar 2002
time: 00:31
|
|
Great thread, but Tiberius made a huge mistake. I hope that one of us could catch something like that before it bites us in the ass.
The moment someone can build marines, we withdraw everything into the cities or coastal mountains. We place galleons and frigates a few spaces from our cities to keep a look out. We don't tolerate any, any penetration of our seas. the former wittlich city gets garrisoned with 20 spanish rifles or hopefully infantry. We build a ton of artillery (thank god they are resourceless, we might be killing stuff with guerrillas!!) and smash them the moment they land. Railroads and artillery are the key.
I don't see hot enamels maneuvers as being all that great, its just a huge mistake by his opponent. Keeping the empty transports in his water was a great move, I wonder how he explained that to tibi without tibi killing them.
I know that tibi didn't have bombers, but I was just thinking that it would be cool if air support would be defensive like artillery. Not bombers, but fighters I suppose. Say the first unit could attack, and then the bases would be alerted. Also I wish that artillery could kill outright naval units.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
vulture
|
 |
Leeds, UK
Jun 2001
time: 05:31
|
|
Why garrison interior cities? Tiberious's mistake wasn't leaving the interior undefended, it was not guarding the coastal cities enough.
Consider, for the sake of argument, that we have 5 coastal cities and 5 inland cities. And 50 units to guard them. Should we put 5 units in each city (scenario A), or 10 in each coastal city and none in the inland cities (scenario B).
To take one inland city you need to take a coastal city first. In scenario A, the invader needs to overcome 5 units with his marines, and then another 5 with whatever non-marine invasion force has come along for the ride (cavalry or tanks). In scenario B, he needs to overcome the same number of units, but only using his marines. If he has any non-marine attackers, B works better than A.
In a more realistic example, more than one inland city can be reached from the beach-head. Then the choices become defending with 5 units aganist marines, and then 5 against land units for each city, vs defending with 10 units against marines and having undefended cities. This depends on the ratio of marines to land attackers IMHO, and also the ease of movement between inland cities. With no armies built yet, and marines not getting an amphibious assault bonus in PtW (AFAIR) I think we'd do better defending just the coast, if we can get a lot of defenders in each city. But a lot depends on looking at what 2 move and 3 move attackers can reach from any given beach-head (not forgetting the mountain-travelling abilities of Ansars, since ND should keep some of those around for mobility purposes).
My suspicion is that throwing everything into preventing a beach-head will turn out to be better than defending inland cities, although if that goes wrong it does so catastrophically.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
asleepathewheel
|
|
listening too long to one song
Mar 2002
time: 00:31
|
|
wouldn't that make you sick, to play a game for over a year, develop your civ that much, and then screw it up over a very simple mistake? I would hate myself for being so careless.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Arrian
|
 |
Kneel before Grog!
Jul 2001
time: 00:31
|
|
I too was surprised he didn't freak out when he saw bunches of transports off his coastline.
But there were many mistakes made:
1) failure to take the threat posed by the transport seriously enough
2) failure to accurately calculate the full range of H_E's Magellan's-boosted transports (note the cities closer to the ships were much more heavily guarded)
3) failure by H_E to nail the Hoover city!
Anyway, we've discussed this in the last turn thread and here, and I think we understand that we must do a better job.
I figure we need picket/blockade ships + heavy garrisons in "at risk" cities (cities within range of a 1-turn strike. This means very carefully working out which cities could be hit. It is the most likely place for a mistake to be made) and coastal mountains + a large garrison in Elipolis, regardless of whether or not it meets the "at risk" criteria stated above, because several RP cities will be "at risk" cities. That means RP is going to have to gear up their military by the mid-industrial era. Lots of infantry for their cities.
Here's what worries me:
We can make ourselves difficult (costly) to conquer, but I do not think we can make ourselves invulnerable, or even close to invulnerable, and have anything left over for research and other city builds.
If we garrison our cities properly, there is still the weakness of a more standard coastal landing. If we try to garrison the cities AND the entire coastline, we will be spread too thin.
The attacker has the advantage of being able to concentrate their force (especially given the proximity of N. Stormia to GoW's coastline). The defender must spread his forces to counter all possible threats. Result: the attacker has the advantage.
Of course, that works in the reverse. They could be scared of the same thing. I hope they are.
-Arrian
|
|
| |
|
|
|
asleepathewheel
|
|
listening too long to one song
Mar 2002
time: 00:31
|
|
I can easily see a situation where they offload maybe 10 inf and 15 cavs (once they see the sea wall gone) next to a city. It would take a lot for us to deal with such a group, pulling units out of other cities. Then either that civ or another attacks a city a few spaces away, weakened severely.
I can also see a scenario where ND lays into a city with marines, captures, then gifts the city accepted to GoW, who offloads their entire army, we have no empire at all the next turn. Seriously, played right, at the right spot or two, and we could have zero cities one turn.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:31.
Apolyton Time is 00:31. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
08-11-2003 02:26
)
|