Heptarchy: trial of Anglia in Flanders: Analysis

British Isles based variant starting in 651. Created by Geoff Bache. Brought to site by sroca. {Final Map Visible in Game 8}
Enjoyment rating: :D :D :D :D

Re: Heptarchy: trial of Anglia in Flanders: Analysis

Postby Girion » 30 Aug 2012, 23:08

So first some general comments on the two years from Anglias point of view:

Initial negotiations was ok got to hear from everyone and they sounded the way I wanted them to, usually initial negotiations always seems ok though. Some things to note though
-Most importantly Cornbuia demanded both Southhampton and Portsmouth. While I have taken the stance that Anglia should be ok to offer that in normal Heptarchy to ensure an cornubian alliance. How ever there I'd suggest taking it with one army in two years. Stalin demanded both in first year, and would not tell me anything more then that. The prospect of having two cornubian armies in Portsmouth and Southhampton first year, and fleet that's probably close to the English channel, all this backed up by at least two builds was to much an treat to me, especially considering that Anglia is slightly weaker deffensively in ths variant.
-Another interesting note is that it's very hard for Anglia to make sure to get all SCs that would be considered theirs in normal, Oxford, Cambridge and Essex. I decided that given Cornubia an Mercian ally was very important and I decided to Sacrifise Cambridge. Most irritating though neither did he want to follow my suggestion in taking it the second year, or to open aggressively against Cornbuia. There was not much to do but to hope for the best, if he indeed ver to attack me it would not matter that much if he promised me things anyway.

I also put lot of effort into giving Mercia ideas of or futher cooperations, were I would almost entirely build fleets, an just armies when he wanted, that way we both could wiork well together and feel safe from each other.

Except for that I wanted to see Wales attacking Mercia or Cornbia, didn't really matter who, hard and early, also I wanted to make sure that Northumbria would be possitive for actions against Merica under the right circumnstances, but also make sure that things in the north took time.

So after first season, Cornubia opened slightly strange but to my liking, Ireland going south was an good thing and seeing Wales and Cornubia together against Mercia was really good. At this stange I was pretty confident, Mercia would need my help, myself I was pretty safe and had good chances of an successful war.

Given the Spring, things turned out as expected in fall. Then again next year were not that surprising, Ireland did not convoy to Wales as hoped but instead choose to focus on Northumbria, but given that I had more success then necesary and made two gains to seven that did not mean anything really, Mercia made no progress and Cornbuia lost ground, so all in all it turned out well for me.

Well all in all I'd say things turned our ok. There acctually managed to be an alliance Mercia-Anglia, which should be an good thing, but there seemed to have been help from missorders? Some comments:
-The fleet in flanders did i9ndeed offer me some more interesting negotiation and opening options, given that I'd had manage to secure and calmer south and hadn't expected 2 Cornubia armies close to my heartland I had interesting options to move it north against Scottland/Northumbria, and still get 2 gains. Probably not the sharpest opening but if many games were to be played this would probably be played sometime as an nice variation.
-Deffencewise the position is weaker, that's not really an good thing but if it allows for alliance with Mercia that's an good thing.
-The big amount of space opened in the area around Mercia and Anglia, and Cornubia as well gives arise to an strange situation, many neutrals to claim and all will hardly be take first year, even now when I and Mercia tried to divide them.
-I did try very hard to point out that I did not necessarily need to be an as immidiate treat to Mercia as in normal Heptarchy, and hence an more possible ally early on. But I don't know how affected Yhanthlei was of that?


All in all I would say that I think the set up is ok, but I'm not sure if I'd like to consider it something final it didn't really have the feel of it. However I think the trial was successfull in that it will give us much good information, hoping to hear more comments.
User avatar
Girion
 
Posts: 187
Joined: 29 May 2010, 21:56
Class: Diplomat
All-game rating: (1000)
Timezone: GMT+1

Re: Heptarchy: trial of Anglia in Flanders: Analysis

Postby Yhanthlei » 31 Aug 2012, 01:04

Girion wrote:-I did try very hard to point out that I did not necessarily need to be an as immidiate treat to Mercia as in normal Heptarchy, and hence an more possible ally early on. But I don't know how affected Yhanthlei was of that?


That particular point didn't matter very much to my decision making. In the short term you were still a threat as long as you had an ally against me, so Mercia's security in the south still needs and only needs to ally with either Anglia or Cornubia. In the longer term the threat posed by a stab from you depended less on your number of armies (as you can always build more armies) and more on the proximity of our centers and on our relative number of centers. It seemed easier to make a DMZ between Cornubia and Mercia than between Anglia and Mercia (due to Cambridge and Norwich bordering Anglian centers and due to your fleets plausibly using North Sea South, and due to the natural Cotswolds-The Downs-Sussex DMZ line between Cornubia and Mercia) and because I was more confident in my ability to gain quickly from an alliance with Cornubia than from an alliance with you. So even prior to negotiations threat assessments didn't work in favor of an Anglian-Mercian alliance from Mercia's persepective.

I'm not sure if that assessment would have been accurate, but it's the impression that I got as Mercia from examining the map.
Anglia in Heptarchy test game A
Yhanthlei
 
Posts: 238
Joined: 27 Aug 2010, 21:36
Class: Diplomat
All-game rating: (1000)
Timezone: GMT-8

Re: Heptarchy: trial of Anglia in Flanders: Analysis

Postby Pedros » 01 Sep 2012, 10:00

In our discussions about this setup it always seemed odd to me that Girion thought it would make Anglia a more attractive ally than standard, certainly for Mercia and probably for Cornubia as wel. That fleet in Flanders is now closer to Mercia and not very much better at going north, and the loss of the Dover unit is bound to give up something of Mercia's - either the fight for Portsmouth or Oxford.l
"Sooner or later, one of us will stab the other. But for now we're both better off as allies" (kininvie)
User avatar
Pedros
 
Posts: 12465
Joined: 25 Jan 2009, 12:59
Location: Somewhere full of gorse and brambles, West Cornwall
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1085)
All-game rating: (1314)
Timezone: GMT

Re: Heptarchy: trial of Anglia in Flanders: Analysis

Postby Girion » 01 Sep 2012, 15:54

Some comments on what other prople have said here, mostly to Yhanthlei as Mercia.
I have played Mercia as well, an most of your comments of your thoughts on Anglia-Mercia relations I've had as well,

The biggest problem is that when Merica and Anglia start dividng the centers Mercia will be more spread out and have an hard time protecting there gains from an Anglia stab, when it comes, this problem is even worse in normal were the SC in Oxford makes Anglias build centers wholly situated behind Mercia lines, with this variant I wanted to shift that slightly, even though comparing any other ally there's still no doubt that Anglia will have much better use of the alliance.

On your note of "natural DMZ" I'll have to argue that you have thought of things wrong, sure the DMZ Cotswolds-The Downs-Sussex is very good, but you won't get an Cornubian ally from it. Of the 9 Supply centers that your alliance will secure in that war (all Anglia + thoose in the area Anglia-Mercia-Cornubia) Mercia will make 7 gains and Cornubia 2, also thoose 2 centers I would gladly give to Cornubia myself without you haveing an ability to interfere.

On Pedros note of the possibilities of an fleet in Flanders, I as Mercia would prefare that many more times over an army in Oxford, the war Mercia-Anglia is very land based and thoose two fleets will have limited uses. One thing I will admit how ever, it was in misstake letting Dover me fleet, I still think that some type of shift will be needed to prevent the necessety that Mercia players feel to eliminate Anglia and whenever Dover is Fleet or Army does not matter that way. Letting Dover be an army would really strenghen Anglia deffences and also allow Anglia to have much better position when demanding early gains, for example he will be able to take both Oxford and Cambridge.
User avatar
Girion
 
Posts: 187
Joined: 29 May 2010, 21:56
Class: Diplomat
All-game rating: (1000)
Timezone: GMT+1

Re: Heptarchy: trial of Anglia in Flanders: Analysis

Postby Pedros » 01 Sep 2012, 18:00

Thanks Girion. I think that when Heptarchy A is finished, with Anglia starting on 3 armies, we'll learn more around that. It's boiling up to a nice conclusion!
"Sooner or later, one of us will stab the other. But for now we're both better off as allies" (kininvie)
User avatar
Pedros
 
Posts: 12465
Joined: 25 Jan 2009, 12:59
Location: Somewhere full of gorse and brambles, West Cornwall
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1085)
All-game rating: (1314)
Timezone: GMT

Previous

Return to Heptarchy [Games 1-15] {Maps Visible in Games 9+}

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest