Page 1 of 1

AARs

PostPosted: 20 Oct 2011, 16:12
by Kian
Well, I certainly did not expect that....

I thought both Palin and Stalin MUST see that I was within reaching distance of the required 9 SC's.

That and Palin going silent on me meant I was attempting to hold the lines and lose as little as possible with the guaranteed gain of Scotland.

Palin and I had an alliance based on two main premises.

A drawn victory in a 3 player game would not be in the spirit of the game.

That we would combine against France and then go for the solo.

I was pretty incredulous to get to seven so easily ad quickly.

By concentrating his defence on the threat posed by the Burgundians, France did succeed in severely limiting Burgundian growth, but allowed England far too much leeway.

Spain was also, I feel, a mistake. It was so easy to put a stopper into Aragon and simply remove the French force in Spain from further meaningful participation.

I fully expected a joint French, Burgundian onslaught to put me back in my place.

I can actually see how this variant could be a very long game indeed - with much to-ing and fro-ing - I think I was very lucky to be allowed so many early gains.

I would be interested to hear perspectives from Burgundy, France and Pedros...

AARs

PostPosted: 21 Oct 2011, 11:22
by stalin813
As France, I was not the happiest taking over for Ninja without a turn having been processed, but significant time passed that the other two powers could have used to talk. Even though I was given extra time to negotiate, I really had nothing extra to offer to insert myself if an alliance had been made. I however sent messages to both players, got a very simplistic response from Burgundy basically saying he didn't want to help me and no response from England. From there, I basically played the game as a gunboat game. No messages were sent my way and I sent no more messages. It made no sense for me to offer help to England and Burgundy had already shown he was out for my blood, so trapped between a rock and a hard place I was happy to hold of Burgundy for as long as I did.

I ran into two other problems, the mercenary rule I misread and thought I had two moves to take a SC for the build phase, not one turn. I think it should be two move phases. Second, I made the mistake of moving on Aragon, that is a failed move for either party in hindsight as England pointed out.

Finally, I think France is at a significant disadvantage with no Fleet. Not that fleets are that crucial to the map, but it does allow England to move on the south and almost guarantees England will eventually control Spain. Also, I really wish I had been able to bid for my country as France was by far my least ideal choice, All in all, I tried to make the best of the poo sandwich I was given.

Re: AARs

PostPosted: 21 Oct 2011, 12:27
by Pedros
I've tidied up the AARs into a separate thread.

I don't know that I've got a lot to add on the play of the game as such. stalin had made it clear to me when he joined that he expected a double assault from the two already in the game, and that's what happened. But the first turn suggested that the alliance wasn't communicating well, which I would have thought could have given an opportunity to split them. I don't know whether the lack of communication lay at the feet of both or not, but if one wanted to communicate and the other didn't, the communicator might have been persuaded he had a better deal with a France who clearly was willing to talk.

However, one of the frustrations of being a GM is that you never know what's actually happening behind the scenes, so the real story could have been very different. But in the end it didn't surprise me that France and Burgundy didn't get their act together - with no talking going on (and Palin known to be overcommitted) it was very unlikely to happen.

It's interesting that Kian thinks this could be a lengthy game; I shall have to run it again some time. One thing that I will take some persuading of, however, is that it's necessary to start the English fleet in ECH "to strengthen England" (as the original rules have it)! The question of the French fleet is more tricky. It would have to be in the Med, which wouldn't be much use; if stalin's right then perhaps the map would need to be less historically accurate!

What is clear, however, is that France needs the help of one of the others to get that quick gain. Which means that they need to be talking to each other! I think when I re-run this it may be invitation only, with invites to serious negotiators who could make this a very interesting scenario.

Re: AARs

PostPosted: 21 Oct 2011, 12:53
by stalin813
If you do re-run this at some point in the future, I would like a legitimate try at it, if possible. And as always, well run game.

Re: AARs

PostPosted: 21 Oct 2011, 13:20
by Pedros
Thanks stalin. It won't be soon I think, with Loeb just started and London Nights about to! Two's my limit.

Re: AARs

PostPosted: 22 Oct 2011, 19:39
by Palin
Palin wrote:I am also thinking of running another game when Ancient Med finishes.

Which game Palin? Do tell!