presser84 wrote:Is the suggestion for the Shire because you find it unrealistic for an army of Hobbits to go to war or because you see something specifically about it's location? Remember the Shire was protected by the Dúnedain Rangers, though they were all over the map, being Rangers and all.
sinnybee wrote:presser84 wrote:Is the suggestion for the Shire because you find it unrealistic for an army of Hobbits to go to war or because you see something specifically about it's location? Remember the Shire was protected by the Dúnedain Rangers, though they were all over the map, being Rangers and all.
Protected or not, it realistically shouldn't be a home supply center. In my opinion, home supply centers should be areas owned by a country or group with a significant military.
asudevil wrote:But under that thought, the dunedain, wouldnt have any home SC
Mouse wrote:sinnybee wrote:I won't be playing, but thought I'd give my two cents:
Nice job with the map and colors on Middle Earth VIII, presser.
Five Armies:
Mordor has a powerful position, which is (a bit unbalenced but) realistic.
The northwestern player (light-blue) is the second-best starting position in my opinion (should it be?)
Middle Earth VIII:
Mordor is relatively weak.
I would think The Shire should be a neutral SC?
Anyway, just my first impressions. Godd luck and have fun.
30-years ago I made a variant. It was based off England. It encompassed the powers within the country and those that wanted to enter said country. The time period was roughly 1066 and was grossly inaccurate. I think it was a 8-player game. It had flaws. I ran the game on a board at high school. So long ago and my memory is fading. It was not balanced.
What I want to express is that we all know that Diplomacy is not a balanced game. If it was a balanced game then I would have more chance of winning. I am a piss poor diplomat. The beauty of the game is the asymmetrical aspects. It is not a fair game. You get unlucky on the draw. But like life, you deal with what you are dealt. Even those countries doomed to failure can turn the tide. That is what makes the game have depth. The powerful countries at game start are recognized as such and they better do a lot of sweet talking unless the lands rise against them. You talk as if the game is a two player one without diplomacy; diplomacy makes all the difference.
Pedros wrote:Can I just throw in my two pen'worth as somebody who isn't going to play this game.
Reality is all very well, but the important thing is a balanced and playable game. And anyway, aren't you playing an existing variant? If so you want a good reason to change it!
GhostEcho wrote:Only one game on at the moment; if there's still a spot I'd be interested in filling it.
(Nerd comment: interesting that the map appears to be set up in ME8 as a recreation not of LOTR but of some period between the two Third Age wars against Sauron... despite the creator's comments.)
Keirador wrote:Stop being a dickasaurus rex.
presser84 wrote:You are right though. There are several inconsistencies to the the exact Tolkien Lore. My goal was to play a game that was based on the Tolkien map that would be as close to balanced as possible. We could develop a map and variant that closely mirrors the events of Silmarillion or LOTR trilogy but that isn't my goal here.
Return to Middle Earth VIII {All Maps Lost}
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest