@Private-Panic You’re up as Italy/Arabs.
NML 1914 Team Game 9
-
@Elrood said in NML 1914 Team Game 9:
@Witt @captainwalker @FMErwinRommel @Private-Panic the Centrals humbly surrender to the might of Entente.
Good game allDid @witt do something amazing to suddenly force your surrender? Have I been failing to spot his strategic brilliance all these years?
-
@Private-Panic finally!
-
Well played the CPs. Was a good game by you all. Enjoyed it . Thanks .
-
@Private-Panic said in NML 1914 Team Game 9:
Did @witt do something amazing to suddenly force your surrender? Have I been failing to spot his strategic brilliance all these years?
Yes, when he conquered neutral Sweden this turn, he decided to celebrate by luxuriating at a sauna resort; and who should he find there, but German General Ludendorff and Austrian General Franz Conrad in the not so buff, buff, with several very buff Swedish beauties. That explains the sudden decision to surrender.
-
Don’t let the Entente win make you think we must continue giving Turkey Industry tech plus infantry to balance the game.
Turkey got armor tech on round 2, captured Mecca on round 3 with cav and gas, and captured Cairo on round 8 with 21 tanks and a final build of 11 gas on round 7. Colt did a great job of being aggressive and single mindedly focusing on Cairo and avoiding distractions; while building subs to force UK to use its limited build capacity to build ships.
CP and C seemed on the verge of breakthroughs against Rus several times. This game could have gone either way earlier.
-
Good game. i would play another
-
Thanks guys for another great game.
I’m in for team game 10.I enjoyed this game because some different opening strategies were used, particularly with G dominating the Pacific and T & C opening aggressively.
-
@FMErwinRommel if Austrian tech would have been a bit luckier the last few turns… e.g barrage or mustard, the map would have looked differently soon, but if France manages to take Swiss casually with 70 units… there is not much Austria or Turks can do about it.
Is three moves from Vienna through empty territories. I would have had to retreat everywhere to protect my capital and that would have been it. -
I am in for another!
-
i’m in please
-
Mich auch, danke.
-
@Witt me2
-
@captainwalker @Entek We just need to hear from Entek and CW.
-
I do agree with FM’s comment about this match not being representative of the effectiveness of Turk bid. I’m ok with keeping or nerfing them again
-
What if we tweak the game by activating technologies at the start of the inventing players next turn. That would need defensive techs and produce less of a stalemate potentially
-
I wonder how smoothly the game handles all those tech edits
-
@FMErwinRommel I’m in
-
@Elrood said in NML 1914 Team Game 9:
What if we tweak the game by activating technologies at the start of the inventing players next turn. That would need defensive techs and produce less of a stalemate potentially
You brought this up previously regarding delaying defensive tech to help CP. In that case, it wouldn’t make a noticeable difference most of the time. For Propaganda, it would mean a one time loss of 3 infantry. If Entente gets a defensive tech on a certain turn, it might make a diff if CP attacked on their next turn, but no effect thereafter.
If we apply delay to all techs, economic and naval, it would hurt both sides. Players would lose a few income on war bonds, for one turn. No big deal.
It’s not worth trying to edit that feature every time someone gets a tech (as Colt already said), for an unproven benefit.
What’s more significant is tech dice luck. In our team game, we’ve had Italy get Propaganda on turn 1 with 1 tech die; and C getting science on turn 1 with 1 tech die, and then getting averaging another tech every 1 1/2 turns on recurring free tech dice. -
Those examples were not in this team game, but in our earlier team games.
-
@FMErwinRommel wem I don’t know, the game is inherently flawed… like all a&a based games I guess… that is why bidding exists.
If we want to balance the game for a sich a team game which brings its own volatility to it, then we could e.g. strengthen the minors and make the big ones weaker but such tweaks could lead to all sort of unforeseen consequences… I still think centrals are in disadvantage here, since the games promotes defense like no other and defense is what entente need to bring e.g. the resources of the Americans into play…
What if we decrease the number of trenches possible per territory per turn to 2 instead of 3. that would force to plan defense better instead of just getting 3 trenches if need be.
Suggested Topics
