 |
| |
|
|
Master Zen
|
 |
of naughty
Jan 2003
time: 23:36
|
|
Call me a party pooper, I don't care, but I seriously concerned about the success of this strike due to the decisions taken during the last couple of polls. I think we have not stopped to consider the changing situation of the game and have entrenched into a possibly erroneous view of our chances, and objectives.
It is all regarding the Parthe strike, which I was initially very in favor of. That was 10-15 turns ago, while CGN was alive and kicking, when they didn't have a great leader to spare, where GWT's Ansars were down in Netatolia and when their core was likely to be very poorly defended.
Things have changed.
1) CGN is gone. GWT's fastmovers can be in both their cores by the time we land and can possibly be in position to hit our landing forces on the very first turn.
2) The Parth strike is coming hoplessly late because we incorrectly estimated at first that there was a larger sea lane towards GWT. By the time we approach Parthemunde, not only will GWT notice due to a 4-tile line of sight, but they'll have various turns of warning.
3) CGN's collapse means that CFC's landing will fall right at the teeth of GWT's transit area and might serve no purpose whatsoever. Whatever good we can find in CFC's trashing of GCA instead, this helps in no way the success of our own objectives.
4) Moreso, CFC's assault was to be in coordination to our own, as a support mission. Our new task for CFC is to work independently of our own objectives. In short: not only are we facing stronger opposition, we are doing this in essense without support from CFC.
5) GWT's GL was a temporary reason to strike at Parth since suddenly taking out the FP was a not-so permament victory. GWT has played into our hands by using up their FP in a brilliant deception move by us, and now we are spoiling it by continuing to consider Parth almost as an equal objective to the FP. If anything, the fact GWT wasted their GL should give more reason to hit at the FP with all we got.
6) Because Aidun said so (insider chat room joke)
Like the title of this thread says, we are getting too ambitious. Our victory disease is making us lose focus on what was the original intent of this attack and not only that, making us blind towards the fact that the world is NOT THE SAME as it was 15 turns ago when we first started debating this.
In any case, don't say I didn't warn you 
-MZ
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
E_T
|
 |
Orlando, Florida
Mar 2001
time: 00:36
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Togas
I hate watchin MZ :cry: all the damn time.
Let's fight the war already. I'm sick of seeing a new whiney thread from the pacifists every other day trying to talk us out of this invasion. We've planned and planned for it for three months. The rewards FAR exceed the risks we're taking. Quit trying to manipulate everyone into doubting this great opportunity and just take a chance at it.
Failure is possible. Failure is acceptable. Saving those 9 knights means next to nothing in the grand scheme of things. But destroying that city ... that is EVERYTHING to GWT, and it's worth double the force we'd throw away to do it.
--Togas |
Togas, If you have to blame someone, then blame me (or better yet, CGN for royally screwing this up).
Yes, I've been the most outspoken, when it comes to the need for a strike on Parth. But the reality of the situation is much different now, after CGN abandoned Micco.
CGN could have moved the 4 Muskets from Washington to Micco in time to help that city stand.
But they didn;t
IF they had, it would have taken everything, PLUS more, in that UBER Stack to take it. I know, I've run some sims to see how things would go and they WEREN't Pretty for GWT. They would have been left with a few wounded Units and a bunch of Pikes and Cats. Then they would have had to move more units down to reinforce.
OR, they could have starved and Bombarded Micco fro several turns, to get it down to size 6, that would have helped immensely.
Either way, it would have taken valuable time away from GWT and given it to us. Time for us to make our advances and time to get ALL of the strikes (CFC included) to their destinations and succeeded beyond our dreams.
But now, the reality is, that that isn;t the case.
CGN has 7 Muskets in open terrain (unfortified, too) and GWT's Army won;t evem blink an eye taking it out.
So, what does this mean?? It means that that Uberstack is free to head home
That means, that the slow movers WILL be in Beta, when CFC lands their strike.
It means, that if those Ansars were to head directly to Ruhrpott, they will be 4 tiles away from our Intitial landing spot, WHEN we make our landing.
That means, that we might not have enough units to survive their initial attack, before we can build our city and bring in the reenforcements. That means, that we will have less offencive power, to take anything that is in Rhurpott, out. That means, that this whole thing could be the worst fiasco in this game, since CGN warped their Army home.
Unfortunately, it;s a risk I'm even not willing to take. I think that, for this to even have a chance to succeed, we need to send everything to Ruhrpott.
We now, more than ever, are against the clock, for when we either have to defend against multiple GCA/GWT Invasion points on this continent OR Launch our main invasion. If anything, we need to be as close as possible, knowing that we can get this to happen, or WE will be doomed and there will be no one to save us...
E_T
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Adrian Hon
|
|
Living in Perplex City
Nov 2001
time: 05:36
|
|
How accurate is our assessment of the units they've built lately? I recall that we did some stuff with unforting our units so we'd appear weaker than we really are - are we taking that into account when making comparisons?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Adrian Hon
|
|
Living in Perplex City
Nov 2001
time: 05:36
|
|
Ah, OK, I just wanted to check whether we'd taken the forting into account.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:36.
Apolyton Time is 00:36. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
23-06-2004 05:31
Why risk more than we have to?
Consuls/Presidents/Ministers are there to be disagreed with. That should really be written in to the job description. I know this all too well, and from Togas too (remember, Togas?) 
|