  |
|
| Author |
Topic |
Genghis_Ray
Emissary
 |
 Fri Feb 19, 2010 7:54 pm   |
GM EoG:
“When you play the game of thrones, you win or you die. There is no middle ground.” -Cersei Lannister
I’d like to thank you all for playing the game. I’d also like to thank you all for, despite the delays, all players hung in there until the end.
When I set up this game, it was in response to a request for an odd number of players. The 4 player ASoS had been tagged as really 2v2 games in one. I also wanted to see how the ASoS tactics played out on the big board. I think they are a bit overpowered for the main board. From my (albeit limited) ASoS plays, I don't recall the Control Westeros being so dominant.
Tomasz/Baratheon: Congratulations on the win. You made a couple of odd moves (1st Battle of the Reach comes to mind), but you were able to come back.
Davlin/Tyrell: I'm not sure this is what you were thinking when you asked for a 5p game  It seemed to me that you had focused your attention on the wrong foe (probably due to Highgarden being adjascent to the Sunset Sea)
Vince/Greyjoy & Kenny/Stark: I think 5 battles is the most I've ever seen for any one particular location
Emil/Lannister: You stayed intact. Always an impressive feat for Lannister
Thanks again for playing and hopefully you were able to enjoy the game.
I will be cross posting this EoG at Redscape and I am cordially inviting you all to post your thoughts on what you learned, what went right, what went wrong for you or what I could have done better. It would be appreciated.
Done in the name of the gods old and new,
Grand Maester Ray
_________________
"The enemy of my enemy is probably still my enemy." KoDT#85
 GM - RoR - VENI 2
GM - AGoT - One King Means Peace 2
Tyrell - AGoT - Cersei's Whim
Iberia - AC - Celtic Fury
Parthia - AC - EotE |
|
| posts: 1697 | location: Slums of Northville, MI | joined: 04 Oct 2003 | medals: 3 |
GMPatrick
Administrator
|
Sat Feb 20, 2010 6:41 am |
|
|
| posts: 37 | location: Lake County, Illinois, USA | joined: 04 May 2008 |
DWP
Emissary
|
Sat Feb 20, 2010 10:29 am   |
Thanks for doing the game, Ray. And thanks for not cheating on the westros cards this time  I don't think the Tactics were overpowered, maybe not the most balanced with each other, but not a bad change. Thanks for the 5 player game  While it did devolve into sides, it wasn't such from the start. Or didn't seem so anyway.
Baratheon: I really didn't understand a number of your moves, but you did manage to pull through in the end. Good job.
Stark: You came close. It was nice working with you, too bad it didn't pan out in the end.
Greyjoy: A number of your moves confused me too. I also don't like it when people throw a game, but different strokes for different folks.
Lannister: Didn't talk much, but we were able to work together some.
_________________
Issaac, Garret... Don't Die.*OIW*
"Aaagh! Fire!! FIRE!!!!!! There's FIRE everywhere!! Noo! Oh, the humanity! The sorrow!! It's Spreading!! We'll be burnt to a cinder! Out flesh will be seared to the very bone! HOT HOT HOT!!" |
|
| posts: 1025 | location: Waukegan, IL USA | joined: 08 Jul 2000 | medals: 1 |
edzikus
Statesman
|
Mon Feb 22, 2010 2:38 am |
Thanks all players for playing and especially Ray for running the game. Speed of the game was good because you put pressure on us
All of you are atonished by my odd moves. Yes I made some mistakes but paradoxically it helped me to win. In almost of all games I am an early leader. After 1st battle of The Reach I wasn't perceived any more as a main candidate to final victory by the rest of you (BTW choosing Salador was too risky and the potential benefit was not worth its price). Vince/Greyjoy determined Kenny/Stark as a most dangerous player and his help let me win.
Probably if I won 1st Battle of The Reach Stark, Lannister and Tyrell would attak me in next turn.
Later I thought that Kenny/Stark would win the game.
Kenny/Stark as I said I thought that you would be the winner but a little bit of luck let me win (no Clash fo The Kings and Supply last turn). You took Cracklaw at the beginning (very good move) and I had no idea how to get it back. I decided to concentrate on Tyrell . I think you didn't any mistake maybe you should concentrate more on me then on Greyjoy. Taking King's Landing wouldn't be so complicated with Lannister and/or Tyrell support.
Vince/Greyjoy thanks for help . It is a question how to play when you don't have a chance for the win. You decided to fight against Stark and help me.
Emil/Lannister - is some points of the game I was afraid that you will attack me but since Stark took Cracklaw we had only one border territory - Blackwater in which you had only 1 footman and it wasn't a danger for me. That was nice move with attacking Tyrell in last move. BTW is it possible not to support your own army ?
Davlin/Tyrell - You made one mistake which let me win. You didn't spend tokens to remain your support in Searoad marches it lets me take Highgarden and The Reach in single turn. With Searoad Marches support I wouldn't take this 2 areas and You would have counterattack from Highgarden. Attack on Dornish marches in 3rd turn was very good. I have lost all turn 3.
Tomasz/Bartheon
Sorry for my poor english
|
|
| posts: 16 | location: Warszawa Poland | joined: 21 Oct 2006 | medals: 2 |
The New Guy
Emissary
|
Mon Feb 22, 2010 12:51 pm |
Congrats on the win Tomasz. I needed the game to last another turn to get my fleets north and pressure Stark, but the way it was the winner was going to be decided that turn.
Kenny, you play a very challenging opponent. I definately learned a few new moves with the tactics, but that probably comes from only playing a couple games with tactic cards.
Emil, Lannister is always a tough position and other than supporting Stark I didn't hear from you.
Davlin,
As far as the comment on throwing the game I take exception to that. Sure I could have taken Highgarden in the prior turn and stopped a Baratheon win, but the way I looked at it the only way I could stay in the game was to get Stark to move south towards Baratheon. I was in no way going to be fighting the Stark / Lannister alliance and then get involved with stopping Baratheon without concessions from Stark. But with Stark refusing to give into suggestions / blackmail... (call it what you want) that would take him out of position for an immediate win I saw no need to stop Baratheon just to allow Stark to win the same turn.
I did make the call to allow Baratheon the win over Stark, both players earned the win and both were positioned to do it. I could only stop one and if Davlin or Emil had any suggestions on how to stop both I didn't hear them. If you call that throwing the game then so be it.
Besides he wasn't in my home city at the end
|
|
| posts: 8 | location: Home of Superbowl XVI | joined: 21 Sep 2005 | medals: 3 |
EvilEmil89
Adjutant
|
Thu Feb 25, 2010 3:24 am |
Yeah - congrats Tomasz
I think that, after a few rounds I was kinda locked in my endgame position. Vince had me by the balls there, even though he was kinda crippled by stark, having lost Seagaard, and a fair amount of troops. I felt locked in position, until I managed to move my main army to Stoney Sept.
Stark is of course the most likely alliance, since 2 against one is a good position.
I feel that lannister still holds somehow a weak position to win in the game, because they are surrounded by enemies, and therefore only seldomly is allowed to win. what is your experience with this?
Regarding the Tactic cards I think that they were, a bit odd, because while for example the hold territory was somehow minor compared to control westeros. but maybe that's just encourage aggression.
Regarding mails and stuff, my view is that davlin didn't respond much.
Emil
|
|
| posts: 4 | location: Denmark | joined: 25 Oct 2009 |
EvilEmil89
Adjutant
|
Thu Feb 25, 2010 3:25 am |
Yeah - congrats Tomasz
I think that, after a few rounds I was kinda locked in my endgame position. Vince had me by the balls there, even though he was kinda crippled by stark, having lost Seagaard, and a fair amount of troops. I felt locked in position, until I managed to move my main army to Stoney Sept.
Stark is of course the most likely alliance, since 2 against one is a good position.
I feel that lannister still holds somehow a weak position to win in the game, because they are surrounded by enemies, and therefore only seldomly is allowed to win. what is your experience with this?
Regarding the Tactic cards I think that they were, a bit odd, because while for example the hold territory was somehow minor compared to control westeros. but maybe that's just encourage aggression.
Regarding mails and stuff, my view is that davlin didn't respond much.
Emil
|
|
| posts: 4 | location: Denmark | joined: 25 Oct 2009 |
Draugr
Adjutant
|
Fri Feb 26, 2010 5:41 am |
Congrats Tomasz!
Contrary to what you might think, Lannister and I never had any alliance as such. We made some instaneous agreements (like I agreed to play a raid order in seagard turn 4 or so, to make sure Vince couldnt play one, which meant Lannister COULD do so and counterattack Riverrun  ) Tyrells and Lannisters positions were shaking all the way from round 2, and I needed them to be able to assist one another as much as possible to keep the game alive in the south (which ultimately failed) so I hoped to draw as much of Greyjoy’s attention as possible to me, leaving Lannister some room to assist in the south. So it was all in my interest to support him, and I assume it was all in his interest to recieve this support too.
Its very very difficult as a Stark player to sustain an offensive while leaders, sieges and control westeros are in play through crackclaw. In fact, its so close to impossible it might as well be called that. Attacking KL, counterattack isolating at crackclaw, then eliminating the army and leaders at KL is game over, and nearly the only possible outcome of such an attack. For this reason, I couldn’t play in this way.
My only chance was to strike south by the sea, to take away most areas from where offensive could be launched against my invading army, and THEN attack through crackclaw. I was waiting for a chance at this, but the supply needed to gather my fleet on the eastern side didnt come until the last turn, when it was too late.
While I agree the risk taken in the first battle for the reach didn’t really stand in proportion to the hoped gains, I must say I disagree a little with this move being the big mistake. A calculated risktaking isn’t a big mistake just because it came out wrong. It was a small mistake from Baratheon deciding to take this out-of-proportion gamble and a well executed play by Tyrell that almost turned things around. The big mistake, and a very easy one to do, was overlooking the queen of thorns effect that stopped his offensive for a whole turn, as well as denied him reclaiming his leader. Tyrell has, in my opinion, the strongest set of cards in this pack, and are rightly to be feared (Although in general Tyrell has a weak position). One can argue that Martell or Stark has the strongest too, but I disagree, mostly because while Martell is perhaps the most annoying to play against, its not quite so beneficial to play *with*. Tyrells set is both difficult for the opponent and very useful for his player. Stark overall has a good bunch of cards and a killer in Robb+Bran, but not really any gamechanger text ability which leaves it inferior to the Tyrell set in my opinion.
Back to this game. I saw you as the frontrunner from start to finish though, even after the battle of The Reach. I had too many openings to prevent Greyjoy from controlling Flints and Seagard before a winning attack. He had needed Riverrun, Pyke, Lannisport, Harrenhall Highgarden and one of flints/seagard before making a winning attack somewhere. It seemed far-fetched in the short term and I was rather confident he couldn’t advance far on me,. Lannister had a defensive position that wouldn’t let him get near seven for a long time, and Tyrell had too few units to make it happen. You were the only real candidate for a win before turn 7.
At the time, it didn’t seem like a mistake sending my knight on a possible death mission in crackclaw. I wanted to relieve Baratheon of his 3 or 4 card more than I wanted to keep my knight alive. If I didn’t, Id taken crackclaw with a minimum of effort.
However in retrospect, Im wondering if it wasn’t a grave mistake anyway. I didn’t read it out far enough, but I had needed some unit in castle black to have two orders threatening Flint’s (and covering Crackclaw) the turn after. Since every unit was where I wanted him, that knight was the missing piece who could have given me this order.
It’s the first time I play with tactics on this map, since we decided from a theory point of view it probably wouldn’t be a good idea in my gaming group. The game hasn’t really changed that impression.
Control westeros, yes, it’s the main reason why tactics don’t work very well with this map. With all the sea access, with cities almost everywhere, defense isn’t an option. Attacking (or well, counterattacking at the end of the turn) is really the only way. So even without the bonus during bidding, it’s the strongest tactic. And the bidding bonus is a very big bonus too.
Another reason is manage troops. In combination with sieges, leaders and sea access, manage troops get powerful, really powerful.
The third, finally, is the starting positions. For example, with control westeros, baratheon can take 4 cities (6 points of muster) on the first turn while getting a bidding bonus. He can, alternatively (this isn’t a better play necessarily, just cruel to Stark) play a careful planning. If Stark doesn’t play 3 marches, you switch control westeros, take KL and storms end, then attack narrow sea with third march. If he DOES play 3, you have the option of playing Hold Territory and move two ships to narrow sea, also securing it from any counterattack.
Finally, Greyjoy can, for a first, play careful planning and take control of the golden sound round 1 (with a +1 march, unless Hold Territory and defense+2) or otherwise go manage troops, raid the force to Greywater watch, manage troop a ship into bay of ice and take winterfell.
Got longer than I had intended. Oh well, next time I don’t want to be sealed off in the north (I guess the prayer was heard, taking up Tyrell in the Bastard Sword game)
|
|
| posts: 6 | joined: 14 Oct 2009 |
Draugr
Adjutant
|
Fri Feb 26, 2010 5:55 am |
Emil, on this map, my experience is that just about every game is won by a power centered around either Pyke or Dragonstone.
Of the Pyke wins, maybe 70-80% are Greyjoy wins the rest are Lannister (Greyjoy has an early advantage in the sea that usually brings him the win). Who wins control of the sea is the contender from "Pyke". Dragonstone wins are usually Baratheon, with the occasional Stark if Baratheon made some major mistake inviting him.
Tyrell and Stark have their best chances of winning in a drawn-out game. If game ends on 6 or less claims Tyrell has a decent chance, as this usually means no one has collapsed. Stark has a good chance of being the winner in this case too. Lannister rarely wins in this manner. He needs control of Pyke really. And with the start favoring Greyjoy in the sea, this usually doesnt happen.
|
|
| posts: 6 | joined: 14 Oct 2009 |
| |
Page 1 of 1 |
You cannot post new topics
You cannot reply to topics
You cannot edit your posts
You cannot delete your posts
You cannot vote in polls
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
|
|
Site redesign in progress...
Please excuse the mess!
|
