 |
Send 9 of our Knights to Parthemunde?
This poll is closed. |
| Yes, send them; 21 knights at Ruhrpott |
   |
14 |
43.75% |
| No, don't send any to Parth; send all 30 to Ruhrpott |
   |
18 |
56.25% |
| Total: |
32 voters |
100% |
|
| |
|
|
Kloreep
|
 |
of the pillow
Jun 2002
time: 00:36
|
|
Discussion Thread
Close Previous Poll
Several points have come up over why Parthemunde is no longer a good idea. (If it ever was.  ) Let's do one last poll on whether or not we send a force to Parthemunde.
New point against a Parth strike:
CGN collapsed, abandoning Micco without a fight. This means that more of their army (specifically, their Ansars, which are dangerous to our operations due to 9 moves on roads) will be intact; and can head back home earlier, too. There may be more to fight us at Ruhrpott, thus maybe requiring 30 knights instead of 21, and the Parth strike is less likely to succeed as well due to the larger amount of remaining forces.
Also, another effect of the early CGN defeat is that they may re-deploy some Ansars to Rhurpott earlier than we anticipated. Ansar can be 4 tiles away from our landing zone when we land, and then able to attack the landing stack before we can hit Ruhrpott at all. That could mean some damaged or dead Knights when we go for Ruhrpott. Again, having 9 more waiting in the wings, or landing on D-Day, could make the difference.
Further points I'll re-iterate:
There is a large gap between the Ruhrpott landing and the projected time of the Parthemunde landing. (7 is the estimate, and it'll probably be true, but we don't know Parth's exact location and surrounding terrain.) We'll likely be gone from the Ruhrpott area by then, with good or bad results left behind, giving them time to redeploy Ansar to their remaining core which contains Parth.
Even 9 knights is a small force. If they have many defenses in the area whatsoever, they can take down those knights on their landing turn. Defensive terrain may be around to help, but we _cannot_ count on that.
As mentioned above, we just might end up needing those 9 knights at Rhurpott.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
BigFree
|
 |
Acampo, CA
Oct 1999
time: 21:36
|
|
Will 21 Knights take Ruhrpott? That's the real question here folks.
I say that 21 is overkill as it is. As said in another thread, I believe that 6 will take care of it. In games against humnas it's all about concentration of forces. GWT has the majority of it's Army down South. granted there are liklely some stationed near the Cap, Leo's and so on. Possibly right in the middle so that they could be ready to go South or West or East; sort of prepared for all eventualities. But, I say that the stationed Ansar's in GWT's North are not within 1 turns striking ability of our LZ. They would have had to station them to close to that spot for them to reach their east coast as well. I'd say that the closest that they are is 2 turns away. Which gives plenty of time for the Ruhrpott strike. We'd land and strike before they got there. The stationed Ansar in GWT's North would be able to attack the remaining Knights outside of Ruhrpott's rubble and possibly even those sent to other cities in that area. But, oh well, the FP will be gone and that's that.
Back to the 9 knights...
If 21 is more than adequate for the Ruhrpott strike then why not take a chance with 9 Knights on Parth? Is it likely to succeed? Honestly, no, it's not. But, we do have a shot. I'd love to take that shot because of the difference in payout it may have. To take the Pyramids and the Colossus out, not to mention a huge producing city, would be gang busters for us. 9 Knights would not be too much to risk for such a payout.
Now, if I thought, for a second, that we may just need 30 for ruhrpott, then i would be the first to say "Scrap the Parth Strike." But, that's not the way I see it and I'm sure most of you see it that way as well. 21 Knights is more than enough for Ruhrpott.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Wooglin
|
|
It is interesting to me how it seems that issues are polled and repolled until the desired result is reached.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
mrmitchell
|
|
Togas and Wooglin 
The public has already spoken, not only in favor of Parthemunde, but in favor of an increased commitment.
Those against this strike are instead striking at the very foundations of our fragile Democracy, by hosting poll after poll, intimidating the Citizens into believing we will lose.
What is to be gained by destroying Parthemunde, will be one hundred thousand times larger than this risk, this small, controllable risk.
Those who are against this attack do not believe in our chances, in the Great Banana, or even in Apolyton at all. They are defeatist, and believe we will go nowhere no matter what.
In closing, I call on all rational, reasonable citizens of Apolyton to unite against this common menace to our Victory, and vote IN FAVOR of the Parthemundo strike.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
vondrack
|
 |
Praha, Czech Republic
Jan 2002
time: 06:36
|
|
Whatever the result, I would like to ask everybody to think twice before calling others cowards. Repolling on an issue that evolves every turn is no sign of cowardice, but of wisdom.
Majority of our leadership (MZ & Kloreep, right? I am not completely sure where Arnelos stands ATM, but I think it's hardly the direct opposite of MZ/Kloreep) is against the Parthe strike. Even one of the most vocal proponents of the strike, E_T, has changed his mind. CGN did not make their last stand in Micco and the bulk of the GWT army will likely be heading back to their homelands very soon. Plus, GWT apparently used their MGL to rush the Sistine, making it less likely that rebuilding their FP would be instantaneous.
If this is not enough to justify a re-poll...
Frankly, I would only mildly object a simple consular override - and only because there is still time enough to re-poll.
So, let's stick to the issue at hand and avoid labelling people with cowards and such, please. 
BigFree is right that human games are about concentrating forces. Note, please, however that we are seriously considering splitting our forces, which is exactly the opposite.
If I was the leader of GWT, I know I would focus my homeland defenses on two areas: Ruhrpott (second core with their FP) and Webringen/Parthe (original core). Everything else can be lost and regained, no big deal. Not these two. I'd be shocked if GWT was unable to stuff 10 units of any kind into Parthe on the turn we land there (and that is just about all they need, since if we fail to raze the city on the turn following the landing, it's over - their fast moving ansars will tear our knights apart, no matter how many of them we send).
I admit there are good reasons to give this secondary strike a try. In my eyes, they are not good enough, but that's just me - I'm far from calling those that advocate the Parthe strike reckless or crazy, which would be the "proper" reaction to coward-labelling, I guess. 
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
MrWhereItsAt
|
 |
New Year's Resolution: 2005 is the year of Where It's At - come get some.
Nov 2001
time: 17:36
|
|
'Just might' is a big argument here. We 'just might' need an additional 9 Knights to take Ruhr. With the numbers of suspected extra GWT Ansars quoted around here (22 or so is what I have heard) 9 more Knights doesn't make a dent in that. To me 9 extra Knights at Ruhr and losing the potential of a second strike that does major damage is not worth the extra few % points chance for victory at Ruhr.
Yes, things are looking less certain with the new info. BUT, things were less than certain from the beginning when we decided to go through with a limited strike(s). Potentially waste 30 Knights on one target or potentially waste 30 Knights on two targets? I think forcing GWT to split their forces at the very least increases our chances of doing SOME major damage. We will split GWT's forces more than we split ours. GWT can't be in force everywhere, they can't protect everything valuable to them, and they do not know when we are coming or where, let alone that we may come in two waves.
And again, if they have all these new troops and attack 30 Knights at Ruhr, they have more chance to get another GL (thus negating the whole Ruhr strike easily) than if they had to attack 21 Knights in one location and 9 in another, since their promoted units can't be everywhere.
We are playing an EXTREMELY risky game in attacking just their FP, which can be rebuilt quickly with just one GL - a 1/16 chance, I think, if they have the Heroic Epic (someone will doubtless correct me if I'm wrong). Parthe would be for keeps. This is a point that none of the opposing arguments seem to consider much, but is to me every bit as important (if not MORE so) than hypothesising on where GWT could strike and when.
We can analyse to the death, but we just don't know enough about GWT's troop numbers and placements to say much for certain. At some point, once you've read all the facts and hypotheses you just have to think for a moment, then consider your gut instinct as well. The new evidence is worrying, but IMO not enough to make a big difference to our chances from earlier for certain.
My gut is rumbling. In light of no new damning evidence, I say we continue.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
wervdon
|
|
I didn't vote in the first poll cause I didn't care, but after thinking about it, I think its a strategic mistake to split our forces up without a very good cause on a foreign continent with no realistic hope of reinforcements.
30 for Rup is likely overkill, but a concentration of 30 is going to be a lot harder for them to wipe out than a group of 21 and a group of 9. We are likely to do more overall damage with 30 in one place than split up.
The only way I'd have a different opinion is if the 9 were landing first far enough way to cause them to shift defenses away from the real target.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
E_T
|
 |
Orlando, Florida
Mar 2001
time: 00:36
|
|
This is my analysis of the situation
With CGN bailing out, there will likely be enough Ansars in the Rhurpott area, to do this
Lets assume that there are 10 Ansars in position to intervine, also a handful of pike, muskets & MI's.
The Units that can, move to Rhurpott. If they also have the movement, they move to Rhur 4 (right between us and them). the 10 Ansars attack from that point, hitting the 5 Muskets, but also wounding most of our Knights. Any Slowmovers, would also attack from that point. Depending on the Balance of forces, they might even take the Landing stack, but if anything, they are badly wounded. They THEN stay at that point anf fort what they can and leave the rest to stay.
We then build our city and bring the remainder of our forces intoplay. But, again, with the Balance of forces, we DO NOT have enough of a punch to break through and even get a shot at Ruhrpott. And the Strike is a failure, by this time, GWT is able to bring up more Ansars and wipe the rest out, that turn, if not the next (assuming that we don't get out).
Then there is the CFC strike. It was supposed to help slow down the South ansars from getting back up north as quickly as possible. Instead, because of GWT's main slowmover stack will very likey have traveled back north, they will actually be inside of Beta, when CFC lands. What would this do?? CFC would waste their meager Riders against a bunch of slowermovers and would also be defeated.
So, we move their strike, but unfortunately, to someplace of little consequence, so the intended plan of slowing down the South Ansars is out of the window. Mostly, because they will already be back up north, past that point as it is.
And then that leaves Parth. With the failure of the Ruhrpott strike (or if it does succeed, we will have left), GWT will have time to move their units to help to cover that city. And it too will be doomed to failure.
Unfortunatly, I'm of the opinion that the only thing that we can even make an attempt on IS Rhurpott. It's the only one that has a decent chance of making a difference, with all of the facts and timings involved.
If CGN HAD stayed, AND even better, had gotten some of those Muskets moved via Galley from Washington to Micco, then all of this would be ready to go. ALL of the strikes would have had a very good chance of success, plrobibly better than we would have hoped.
No, we have to now concentrate on the one Strike and making it work.
No Plan survives first contact with the Enemy, but also, Plans have to change, to fit the circomestances, and fortunatley, we ARE at a point, that we can make that change in our Plans, so that we get the best success out of this attack.
Vote NO, because I will.
E_T
|
|
| |
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 09:34
|