From the Mouth of Sauron
Issue: E-9
Date: 02-17-94
Note: all authors retain exclusive rights to their material.
Reprinting is allowed for non-commercial game use only.
Editorial
Another happy Friday to you! Of course, you're all going to get
this on Thursday, but that's because I'm going to be on vacation
until next Tuesday.
New guys: many, many new people have asked to be signed up. I can
only put a few names on at a time, and my primary contact person is
leaving for two weeks of vacation. Unfortunately for you, you're
going to have to get the Mouth from a secondary source for a while.
File availability: it's been awhile since I said this. I have
files on encounters, artifacts, riddles, setups, etc. which you
might find useful. For those who've been getting the Mouth for
awhile, this is the same set of files I dumped to you when you first
signed on, modified by all the info that's appeared in this
newsletter.
If you want these files, drop me a line and I'll send them to you as
time permits. If you already have the files and copies of the
Mouth, please! Make the modifications yourself. Mailing via our
router here can be a time-consuming task. Again, to those of you
who aren't yet on the mailing list, I'm sorry, but you're going to
have to wait or get the files from someone who has them.
Submissions: I love those submissions! Without your tireless
efforts, this newsletter'd be dead in the water. I do have a couple
of suggestions for authors:
- I have to format the newsletter with a 1 inch left margin and a 2
inch right margin. This is to accommodate people with older
systems, where the character length per line is extremely short. If
you format your submissions with these margins prior to sending it
to me, if would save me alot of work. Why is that? Because longer
line lengths get hard-returned and look like this:
As you can see, this line length is too long given the 1 and 2 inch
requirements. The line
'bleeds' over for a few words and then gets slapped with a hard
return, meaning that I
have to go through and erase, manually, every such hard return that
I find. If I didn't, each Mouth would have twice as many pages as
it really needed, and would be very difficult to read.
- paragraph styles. Most of you use casual letter-style paragraphs
indented from the left margin. The Mouth uses the full-block
business style. I use this style because it makes it easier to read
the newsletter and better separates sections from each other. If
you could use this style as well, I'd most appreciate it.
- tabs and indents are fine for your tables and formulas, as is
plain old spacing. Do me one favor though, and don't mix methods in
the same table. If you do, the table will look something like this:
Test .001
Test .002
Test .003
Test .004
Test .005
With complex tables, I have to go in and clean things up so that
people can tell what numbers belong in what columns. Again, all the
above methods are fine, just use the SAME method within the table.
- I don't run spell-checks nor correct grammatical errors. I don't
think this is important; so long as you convey your thoughts, who
cares if it's spelled correctly? Still, if YOU care, I suggest you
spell-check prior to sending the article to me. I just cut and
paste the baby into the Mouth file, so all your errors will be
retained in the final product. Sorry about that, but I just don't
have the time to go over each article word-by-word.
Leslie Foreman: Leslie left me two articles, one of which you'll
see here in the Mouth. The second you'll just have to wait for.
Enjoy, they'll probably be the last for quite some time!
Tom
Artifacts
No new info.
Encounters
Comment by Brian Mason: On the Lake/Swamp encounter, it should be
"monsters are Mewlips," or a "Mewlip." The Mewlips are a species of
creature allegedly inhabiting wet areas and comes from the poem "The
Mewlips" in JRRT's collection of Hobbit poetry "The Adventures of
Tom Bombadil."
Ghostly Army: OFFER to negotiate a truce = escape with injuries for
Dark Servants.
Generic Dragon: a reliable source says it's possible to steal gold
from the generic dragon-in-a-lair encounter. The agent who did this
was around an effective 90 or so skill rank.
Thanks to Brian Mason and Keith Peterson for this information.
Dragons
Can it be? No new info?
Other Corrections and Notes
From Keith Peterson
Overrun -- we had long discussions with GSI about this on the CI$
forum. The overrun has a threshhold of troops after which overrun
becomes impossible. The point of overrun is to stop people from
continuously throwing a few hundred troops out and stopping large
armies. An army of 400-500 MA MIGHT get overrun by 5000, but an army
of 1000 will never get overrun, even if the enemy has 20,000 troops.
From Tom Walton
I've successfully overrun a number of armies. In two instances,
scouts reported the army to be around 900 troops; I ran into them
with a better than 5:1 advantage in numbers. In the other cases, I
never found out how strong the armies nor, alas, what characters
were killed.
I will say this, though. For purposes of overrun, each opposing
army is compared to your own SEPARATELY. It could be that there are
four armies with 500 troops in the hex, 2000 total; but if you have
5,000 troops, you'll overrun each army individually when moving
through. I've done this before as well.
Also, it isn't necessary to actually move THROUGH the hex, just INTO
it. And as a last note, you can't overrun an enemy force that's
sitting on one of it's own (not an ally's) fortified pop centers.
You can, however, sabotage the fortifications that turn and THEN
march into the hex, overrunning the stunned enemy (did that too).
From Brian Mason
In response/comment to Eric Schurr's questions.
Opening strategies have been provided in "The Mouth" #8 for the
Eothraim and the Dragon Lord. One on the Dwarves is "in the pipes."
(Editor's Note: it's in this issue of the Mouth). I would not
presume to write a strategy article on the Northmen or Sinda, for
I'd just ask Jeremy Richman and Glen Mayfield for their moves in
game 131. I might come up with a few variations, but it's best to
let that game "cook" for a while, and then let them write the
articles!
Which nations, and how can they, form a "curses squad?" I believe
this technique was described in "Blood & Glory."
Prior to writing my article on Population Center Development, I
asked GSI about production values being different for population
centers versus hexes open at start. The answered point blank that
they were the same.
In response to Jeremy Baxter's "Kill Guard" wish list request, if
you know who is guarding whom judicious use of assassinate and
kidnap with two different agents will allow you to get rid of the
guard before the primary target.
From Darren Beyer
Response to Guards and the Equation
I've seen the agent assassination model and one thing strikes me as
odd in it, the double the guard agent rank as a negative modifier to
success.
I would've believed this double guard rank modifier a few months ago
when (as the Cloud Lord) I had Kadida have his assassination attempt
foiled by a 40's rank guard who captured him in the process, Kadida
was an 80 (+20 = 100). This was prior to GSI's annnouncement that
agent actions were tougher.
Now here I am being much more careful as the Cloud Lord when as the
Rhudaur, I have a number of characters meet up with a lone Tormog
(Dark Lts agent). Tormog scouted out as an 80's agent and I figured
it was likely that he had the Cloak of the Abyss (40 pt stealth
item). I also knew that my best agent in the hex (base rank 68, +15
point item, +25 point stealth item) was being tracked and that he
was the likely target of Tormog. I issued challenge on Tormog, and
tried to assassinate him. In case he refused and acted before my
assassin, I had a 65 point agent guarding my good agent. Under a
double guard rank, this should have been more than enough even IF
Tormog had the 40 point stealth item.
The result:
Tormog refused, went prior to my agent, and CUT THROUGH MY 65 POINT
GUARD!!!!!!!
Needless to say I was miffed and muttering "so much for the new
agent rules" for days. My friends consoled me and brought to my
attention that a lucky role on an 80 agent/40 stealth could have cut
through a 65 guard, I agreed and stopped cursing GSI.
A few days later...
The Dark Lts called me and gloated a little and said that Tormag
didn't have the item, he was a base 80 agent with NO added
bonuses!!!!
Back to being miffed and muttering, I'd never heard of a 65 guard
being cut through by an 80 agent even before the new rules, but
after ...?
Basically, my point is that there is a LARGE random factor in the
agent equation when a 100 rank agent gets captured by a 40's guard
and an 80 rank agent cuts through a 65 rank guard on his way to kill
his target.
From Tom Walton
One thing people aren't taking into account on character actions,
which can sometimes influence things beyond rational analysis:
double agents. I balk at discussing this in depth, because I've
used this tactic to great effect on some occasions.
Taking a double agent is an emissary action and thus happens prior
to assassination, kidnaps, etc. If you want to influence a guard's
action before assassination/kidnap but don't have the resources
available to kill the guard first, you can take him as a double-
agent with an emissary. If successful, the guard will in all
likelihood conveniently 'forget' to cover his target, allowing the
primary assassin to waltz right through and take out his victim.
This works very well in my experience, and seems to be easier than
actually killing the guard in many cases. Best of all, that guard
will remain doubled for all future actions and continue to provide
you with interesting information as well.
So if you start getting really screwy results with your guards, or
your favorite assassin suddenly starts failing every mission against
a particular nation, you might consider bringing him in for a little
counter-intelligence. You might be surprised at what you find.
I surely hope none of my enemies in the game are reading this....
From Holger Eichmann
Because I want to learn the programming under Windoze
(pronouncements of compassion will be accepted), I have started to
write a program, by which you can calculate how many troops you will
lose, if you attack an enemy army/town. But now I had to find out
that I need some quantitative information, where the game
description doesn't want to tell details. (If you don't want to
bother to write an article, you can mail me directly:
eichmann@ceres.amp.uni-hannover.de. I will collect the answers and
write an article, if I get enough response.)
1. Which are the climate modifier of the different nations? I
already got the terrain modifier for mild climate of all nations,
but the climate modifiers are still needed.
2. The description tells how the different troop types are fighting
in the different terrain, but it doesn't tell, what that 'good',
'average' and 'poor' means quantitative.
3. The same with the Troop Tactic Modifier (I think the Tactic vs.
Tactic Modifier isn't so important, because normally you don't know
the tactic of the enemy).
4. The game description says (p. 58): 'In cases where more than one
opponent appears, then strength is split proportionally between the
opposing forces and tactics adjusted accordingly.'. Strength is
split proportionally to what? To the strength, constitution or
number of men of the different armies?
5. Are there some traps, probably I haven't seen like that an army
gets some advantage if a friendly town is present (how great is that
advantage?).
6. Last, but really not least: How does the battle work? The
description says (p. 58): 'What follows is then a round by round
activity where, starting with the strength and constitution computed
above, the strength of each Army is subtracted from the constitution
of their enemy until one or both Armies reach constitutions of zero
whereby combat ends.' It says that in every round the constitution
of the fighting armies will be reduced, but it doesn't say that the
number of troops and therefore the strength will be reduced, too (of
course the number of troops will be reduced after battle ended). I
can't believe that.
This means, e.g. army A (strength: 50000, constitution: 50000) meets
army B (s: 25000, c: 49999). After round 1 the constitution of army
1 will be reduced to 50000-25000 = 25000, that of army B to 49999
50000 = -1. Therefore army B will be destroyed and army A will lose
half of his troops. But now suddenly before the fight starts, a Man
at Arms appears and strengthens army B. Now army A has s: 50000, c:
50000 and army B: s: 25001, c: 50001. After round 1 army A has s:
50000, c: 50000-25001=24999 and army B: s: 25001, c: 50001-50000=1,
if the strength isn't reduced, too, as the description tells.
Because army B isn't destroyed, fight goes into round 2. After that
army A has a constition of 24999-25001 = -2 and army B one of 1
50000 = -49999. Now both armies are destroyed after that battle. If
I understand the description correctly, then only one man at arms
can cause the destruction of half a huge army (really a great hero,
even though a dead hero).
So thats all. Of course you can correct the text, if something is
written in bad English (I know my English isn't the best) or
misunderstandible.
Holger
Reply to Holger Eichmann
From Tom Walton
Holger, I'll answer questions 5 and 6 and leave the rest up to those
interested:
5. The defensive bonus only applies if you own the pop center in
question. The bonus varies between 10% and 20% depending on the
level of fortifications, i.e., 10% for a tower, 20% for a citadel,
with everything else falling in-between. This bonus is a direct add
to the constitution of the defending army, recalculated every round
and destroyed prior to any actual damage being done to the army
(think of the bonus as Star Trek 'shields').
6. The combat strength of the armies is also reduced each round.
The computer takes losses inflicted, spreads them out among your
troop types, reduces these troops accordingly, and THEN recalculates
offensive potential and constitution. Thus, two evenly matched
armies may fight for many rounds as they whittle away at each other.
A large army might destroy a smaller one in one round.
In Your Ear
Nothing this time around.
Personals
No personals.
ME-PBM Wish List
From Brian Lowrey
Would like something more discriptive when you kill a character with
curses. Currently all you get is the message: "no character with
that id exists" - you know the message.
From Holger Eichmann
It would be of great help, if one can give a parameter to the move
orders that one only wants to move, if the other command has been
successful. E.g. if an army commander wants to threaten a population
center, he would give the commands: 'Threaten Population Center' and
then 'Move Army' (only if the threatening has been successful), so
he can try it again, if he wasn't successful. Then he needn't to
stand around one turn, if he didn't risk to move away and he had
success, or he needn't to move back, if he decided otherwise. The
same e.g., if an emissary wants to create a camp in a hex with great
production or if a mage searches an artifact.
And to the improvement wishes to the game description:
The game description could describe more exactly, which orders a
navy commander can give and which not and which orders will anchors
his ships. The description says: 'Most orders that can be given to
Armies can also be given to Navies as long as the Navy could anchor
its ships and become an Army. If the Navy could not anchor and
become an Army, then orders pertaining to the troops or baggage
train may be restricted. This does NOT mean that the Navy will
become an Army by issuing such orders...'. You can't write things
more diffusely. The words 'most' and 'may' alone take care that you
don't know whether that one command you want to give will be
accepted and will anchor the ships. Additionally the description of
the different orders says 'army commander only' for some commands a
navy commander in a shore hex can give, too (like 'put troops on
maneuvers').
From Tom Walton
Okay, so I'm shooting off my mouth this issue. There's just so many
interesting things to comment on....
I'd like to see the use of Conditional orders as well. These
wouldn't be terribly hard to program and would give the game greater
flexibility. Some orders I'd like to see:
Track Character: an agent could attempt to track and follow a
character who starts the turn in the same hex, essentially following
him around the map. This wouldn't work if the character uses magic
to move, or is attached to an army.
If the agent fails, he might fail to move, move some distance and
stop (lost the trail), or even move in the wrong direction!
Track Army: allows a characer in your own army to track an enemy
army that starts in the same hex. A device to allow one army to
pursue another.
If the agent fails, the army could simply not move, move a couple of
hexes and then stop (lost the enemy), or move in the wrong
direction. Moving in the right direction might be bad news, as the
enemy could lead your forces into an ambush or an encounter with
many agents....
Emissaries: give Emissaries something better to do than uncover
secrets/spread rumors as their secondary orders. Or, add nation
message rumors to the 'uncover secrets', allowing them to actually
garner some useful information with this order. It also makes the
'spread rumors' order more useful.
Mage Training: allow one mage to train another with a 'train
apprentice' order. The first mage would get no skill increase, the
second 1-5 points (if the second could also Prentice) or 1-10 points
(if the second can't also Prentice). Limit the train order to
characters whose skill rank is more than 10 points lower than that
of the trainer.
Example: a character will a mage rank of 50 could train another
character so long as the second character doesn't have a skill rank
of 40 or better.
This would allow a nation to train new mages faster, but would be
limited by the skill rank of the trainer. Unless you had a very
good mage, your training would top out with just a few orders (but
make that new mage much more useful in a much shorter period of
time). This would definitely help mage-heavy nations, yet wouldn't
allow these nations to create supercharacters through faster
training. It would also keep the Ring safe from being found early
in the game.
How I Got Shafted in ME-PBM
From Dan DeYoung
As a new player, I made certain to read and reread the rule book
from front to back (and I vouch for that being the sister-in
law/typist) before making my first moves. I made several mistakes
which I openly admit were pure oversights which I should have caught
from my reading. For instance, I tried to move 14 days movement
with the normal `Move Army` order rather than the `Force-march',
and I even moved a Navy to a rough hex and tried to move directly
off as an army not realizing the ships had to be anchored and this
could only occur on a shore/plains hex. Also, I was bummed to find
that my Sinda kingdom did not include Galadriel or Celeborn, elven
lords in Lorien for ages including the T.A. 1650 when the game was
set, but I understand such things as game balance and forgave MEPBM
for this. (I, the typist, was also disappointed when I found out
Beoraborn (a shape-changer) in the book--real cool character) was
a normal man with no extraordinary characteristics--and I had no
forgiveness to ME because my characters (the Woodmen) were far from
balanced!!!!)
One thing which made me crazy that I couldn't figure out until
enlightened by a veteran player (Thanks Dave Forman!) was artifact
retrieval. I had an 80 pt character on a hex with a report of a
trail to be investigated. For 3 turns I issued the #900 order Find
Artifact, each turn astounded at my bad luck at not picking up my
artifact. Silly of me to assume that Find Artifact should find a
missing artifact. Seeing a hidden path did not seem like the kind
of thing that should be investigated with an Investigate Encounter,
and the rule book does not clue the novice into this. Perhaps I'm
just dense. (Maybe it runs in the family!!) I have been told that
Find Artifact works on the sea for retrieving missing artifacts.
Consistency........
My second gripe has to do with Dragons. As I came to understand the
play balance of MEPBM, it has become apparent to me that the Freeps
have the large economies and armies while the Dark Servants have
character power and some valuable nation abilites backed by strong,
though unsustainable, starting armies. This balance is excellent on
its own, but Dragon-wise evil condoms tip this balance quickly to
the evil side. One Dragon can kill an opposing army of nearly any
size in one round of combat, thus offseting the Freep numbers
advantage. The Freeps have no such balancing mechanism to offset
the character power of the servants (Editor's Note: Throkmaw and
Scorba will join the Freeps if you know the right response). Some
might argue that the numerous Good NPC's offset this, but to my
knowledge in game 88, only 1 kingdom has had characters effected by
an NPC. This by no means offsets the 15000+ troops evil dragons
have devoured across the Good kingdoms by turn 18. I guess I think
they eat too much!!! Also, historically in Middle Earth, I cannot
recall Sauron ever having the power to control a Dragon in his
armies. Morgoth used them in the Silmarillion and their presence
was so great as to inspire a mention in the story at every
encounter, so I believe that Sauron himself couldn't use them or
we'd have known about it. (He deserves a medal making it through
the Silmarillion!) Certainly some fast-talking servant shouldn't be
able to do what his nearly all-pwerful master couldn't do.
One geographical beef; is there no mountain or hill in all of Middle
Earth that a Free People emissary may move on without running a
serious chance of encountering a Dragon or Balrog? It seems that
Freep metal production has no hope of being developed.
Spells are really quite wimpy in this game. Battles seem to occur
between many - thousands-of-man armies and spell-casters have little
to no effect. Nearly all of the Offensive and Defensive spells are
essentially the same, killing or saving various small numbers of
troops. Locating artifacts and some scrying spells are virtually
the only reason to keep mages around. It also seems that most
kindgdoms would need 30 turns to develop a 75 pint mage who could
learn spells with any chance of casting them. That's a lot of gold
for a lot of turns before a character begins to be worth the money.
(I think a solutions to this is to have good people mages have
awesome spells if a dragon is present in the army--else small spells
keep the game balanced --especially for Woodmen who have no desire
for magic (though artifacts would be nice ...I think...since I
never owned one.))
My last beef has to do with troops types, and I've heard it from
many other players in my game and in the hallowed pages of the
Mouth. I really like the way Army movement is measured and tracked
in this game, and the fact that equipment and training influence
army performance (though the percentages could be shifted some to
stress these factors even more), but (this is where the beef is) the
fact that it is NEVER worthwhile to have anything but Heavy Infantry
or Heavy Calalry is disappointing. In fact, it's a waste of a
combat system designed to take various troop types and equipment
into consideration. What makes a recriut hired with wooden weapons
and no armor a heavy infantryman rather that a light? Such flaws in
logic and execution at the value-assignment end are a real shame
since the conceopt and capability of the system are magnificent.
My list of complaints is long, but minor (I'm sure glad I don't have
to type his brother's complaints ) I find MEPBM to be an execptional
game and its consistent 2 week turnaroud is fantastic. Maybe if
enough of us mention our gripes and suggestions, a good game will
get that much better!
(Victoria DeYoung as the typist!)
Yet Another Editor's Note: Unbeknownst to you all, Bill Field at
GSI will receive a list of our 'suggestions' by the end of next
week. I've collected, collated, and organized all the comments made
here in the Mouth and elsewhere, then taken the most common
complaints and suggestions to pass on. No one's name is attached to
any of these comments or complaints.
The point is exactly as Dan says: to make the game better, and
remove the flaws that most of us encounter at one time or another.
Using the Mouth and the net as info-gathering devices, I've
accumulated the responses from more than 100 players, which should
have some weight. It's my hope that the most flagrant flaws will be
corrected or at least examined, since it appears that nothing is
being done at GSI right now concerning these topics (at least we
aren't hearing about it if any rules or code are under review).
Still, remember: we're in a seller's market. GSI grows by leaps
and bounds regardless. Until this growth levels off, we might have
difficulty getting the company to examine the game.
The Dragon Lord
Editor's Note: last issue, Brian Mason proposed an opening strategy
for the Dragon Lord. Here are the responses:
From Keith Peterson
I enjoyed the work Brian Mason put into the DragL theory. Unless you
can get those loyalties pumped up, it simply isn't going to work,
however. He's hypothesizing a 70% tax rate, which makes it even more
unlikely. Since you, Tom, didn't jump on it, I wonder how many
people understand how loyalty affects the ability to improve pop
ctrs. The program assumes that the pop ctr needs a base 40% for a
village, a base 55 for a town, a base 75 for a MT, and 100 for
cities. Anything under that is apparently a direct negative modifier
to your chance to improve the pop ctr. Loyalty over that base
improve your chance to increase the size of the pop ctr.
In Brian's example, you've got 30 pt emissaries making camps --
which will have 15 loyalties (before the decrease for taxes!) Now he
wants to make them villages -- but he'll have a -25 to his roll (40
-15). With a good emissary, you might pull this off, but not with a
30-35 emissary. To assume that you'll get to make this a town with
a -40 (55-15) modifier is even more unlikely. The Compuserve players
have been working under this system for about two years, and it
seems to work very well. Players who try to make MTs with 25 loyalty
can't, for example.
Note that this means that there is a severe penalty for high taxes
- you can't increase your pop ctrs very easily -- if at all!
Response to Keith Peterson
From Tom Walton
In regards to upgrades, I've used 45-50 point emissaries to improve
camps to villages on a regular basis, when the camp loyalty was only
in it's low 20's. I've also used mid-50's/low-60's emissaries to
improve villages to towns on a number of occasions, again with
loyalty in the low or mid 20's. I've only improved one town to a
major town, but did so with a mid-70's emissary on a town with a
loyalty in the low 40's.
I've found I'm much more likely to fail to place a camp than upgrade
an existing pop center, using emissaries of the listed skill ranks.
Loyalty is no doubt important, but I have some doubts about it being
a direct modifier to the emissary's skill rank. Given that
assumption, I should've failed my upgrades about half the time (at
least), and to my recollection I've only done so three or four times
across twelve games.
From Brian Lowrey
Unless the Dwarfs screw things up an agressive Dragon Lord & Witch
King can take out both the Woodman Major Towns by turn 3.
Witch King recruits 400 HI and moves to Buhr Fram. Also takes cav
from capital and moves to Buhr Fram. This is a large enough force
to take out the army from the Woodman capital if he moves on Buhr
Fram; this will also eliminate the Witch King army. Dragon Lord
combines troops and moves to 2711. Turn two: Witch King either
Kills the Woodman army or Threatens and moves to Woodman Capital.
Dragon Lord Captures or Destroys 2711 and Moves to Woodman Capital.
Characters:
Definitly Emissarys and Definitly the Misty Mtns. Between the Witch
King and Dragon Lord creating camps here - well thats a lot of
Dragon Names.
I also feel its important to build one or two Agents. If you want
help from DS Agents you equal the best scouts in the game,
effectively scouting for characters you will befriend a lot of
agents and the Dragon Lord and Witch King can use some friends.
Starting Characters:
It is tempting to stack some mage artifacts on Celedring. Pump his
challenge rank to 190 and suprise Bain. Very nice +40 ring and a
sword for Duran. If you show off your 190 challenge rank early they
should waste a lot of orders refusing challenge this will slow them
down a bit. This reduces the effectivness of your mages but a 190
challenge rank can be worth a lot early in the game.
Mt Gundabad:
The idea of giving this up to the Dragon Lord is interesting and
worth doing if the Witch King cannot get the Blind Sorcerer or
Cloudlord to exchange Gundie. If the WK can get an exchange its
better for the Witch King and the presence in Mirkwood is now
maintained by either the Cloud Lord or Blind Sorcerer and the Dragon
Lord Economys, all of the witch King Economy can now be focused in
the west.
Outlook:
Against good FP players the Dragon lord should be removed from
Mirkwood early with one Major town a hidden town and a few camps
remaining. This is definitly the economy of a character based
positon, this should be planned for. The Dragon Lord has some good
characters it could be fun.
Help:
Besides the obvious help from your teamates I think GSI needs to
seriously consider strengthing this position by giving at least one
more major town in Mordor. For that matter most Dark Servant
positions need some Economic help!
Boy this position looks grim when you write it up - its fun to run
play though.
Commentary
by Leslie Foreman
When most people think of STRATEGY, thoughts of the Battle of the
Bulge, Pearl Harbor, etc. are the events which are likely to come to
mind. I would like to propose that strategy is, in fact, a much
more widespread idea than one only associated with military
campaigns. I hear and see strategy at work every time I watch ME-
PBM gamers writing up their turn. I also see strategy at work every
time I go to the grocery store. I know that there is a leap of
faith here, but stay with me.
The first strategic decision you have to make is choosing the
parking place in the parking lot. Do you choose a place under the
light, near the door, next to the other store you need to go to,
between the two stores, etc. Then you have to decide whether
backing in is a good idea. I have seen similar situations with the
gamers I watch. Basically, "Where am I going to go, and how am I
going to get there?" The other parking lot adventure centers around
the 'little dance' you do with the other cars who are also looking
for the "right" place. This is the time when you are called upon to
move evasively so that the Enemy doesn't see you and beat you to the
prize spot. Force marching is also called upon occasionally, but it
is at that time that the pedestrians take their lives into their own
hands because your philosophy is 'I SAW THAT PLACE FIRST!!'
Once inside the building, you need to decide on a character type. I
recommend a multi-class character, a mage\agent. The mage will
allow you to use special abilities and the spy will allow you to
move quickly in and out. Of course, there are advantages to all of
the character types, but this is the combination which works best
for me.
There are two special abilities which need to be developed to be a
successful grocery shopper. The first is to be able to use coupons
wisely. This is truly a gift. I have seen people receive money
FROM the cashier at the check-out because they have effectively used
coupons. What do you say - a mage rank of 80? The other skill is
the ability to figure out the unit price of items on the shelf.
Many store now have them listed for you, but not all of the stores
do nor are all of the items listed. An 80 mage should be able to do
this easily, but with a calculator modifier the job becomes much
easier. And then, only the valiant will attempt to figure out a
unit price after factoring in the deduction of the coupon. Strategy
is again playing a significant role in the grocery store outing.
We're not done yet. What about the encounters you do NOT want to
have? In ME-PBM there are other armies, characters and dragons. In
the grocery store there are neighbors, previous co-workers, friends
of you parents, etc. Again. strategy plays a role. HOW DO I HANDLE
THIS SITUATION?? Do I walk right up and say something quickly and
then leave before they have the chance to answer? Do I skip an
aisle and then go back and get the stuff on 5B after 'they' have
moved on? Do I abandon the cart filled nearly to the top with yummy
stuff I really wanted and flee the store? or Do I suddenly become
interested in the article in the STAR about how Bill Clinton is
really Elvis in disguise ( only they couldn't hide the voice.)?
Again, strategy in action.
Last, but not least, is the choosing of the check-out line. Wow,
what a task. You have to consider the length of the line. You have
to look at the scanning speed of the cashier. You have to factor in
the number of items belonging to the patron ahead of you. Heck, you
have to consider the age of the patrons ahead of you. Do they have
children - and are they well behaved? Are they using cash or a
check? Finally, there is that last scan for the "dragon" you missed
on aisle 5B - the check-out line is NOT the time to talk to them.
YOU CAN'T GET AWAY!!!! Once you have considered your options and
examined the data, you guess like you always do and get in a line.
Sometimes you do well, and other times "You choose poorly."
I asked you in the opening paragraph to have faith in me and I hope
that I have not disappointed you. Strategy is everywhere!! I
probably have pointed out something which you had never considered
before and quite possibly will never think about again. If, on the
other hand, you think of this commentary and a small smile appears
on your face the next time you go to the grocery store, then I have
done well. I have succeeded in making an otherwise tolerated job a
little bit more fun. Isn't that what it's all about? Good gaming
and good shopping!!
HOW MANY WOODMEN COULD A DRAGON LORD CHUCK IF A DRAGON
LORD COULD CHUCK WOODMEN.....?
By Dan DeYoung
Contributing to the continuing discussion of opening moves for the
seemingly hapless Woodman kingdom in MEPBM, I offer the following
statements-
The Woodman can defeat the initial Dragon Lord armies if that Dark
Servant commits to a 'berserk' attack in an effort to knock the
Woodman out fo the game by turn 3.
and
This can be accomplished without allied aid!
I fully agree that with Sinda aid, the Dragon armies can be stopped
handily, and with Dwarven aid, the Dragon can be destroyed utterly,
but such aid is often unavailable (in an individual game) or sent
elsewhere by farsighted (Editor's Note: you being just a bit
facetious here, Dan?) teammates.
I offer the following strategic plan for the Woodman based on the
following starting force locations which occurred in game #88. This
plan assumes a worst case scenario for the Woodman- An all our
attack by all Dragon Lord armies determined to destroy the two
Woodman major towns at 2711 (on turn 2) and 2508 (on turn3) before
inevitably failing to the superior Freep forces in the area.
Turn 1-
Woodman Order of Battle
2508-Woodman Army 1- 1200HI, 900LI
2711-Woodman Army2- 600HI, 600LI
2711-Woodman Army3- 600LI,600AR
Dragon Lord Order of Battle
2715-Dragon Army1- 600HC, 600HI, 300AR, 600MA
2715-Dragon Army2- 600LI, 600AR, 300MA
2409-Dragon Army3- 300LC, 300HI, 300LI
Dragon armies 2 & 3 recruit 400HI each before moving. Celedhring and
his 2000 point weapon join Dragon Army1. (This is 'worst case' ).
Dragon Army 2 transfers all but 100MA to Dragon Army1. Duran
leading Dragon Army1 puts army on Maneuvers and moves directly to
2711. Dragon Army3 also moves directly to 2711 to join in what he
assumes will be an easy pummeling of the comparatively weak Woodman
forces there, since the powerful Woodmn Army1 cannot reach 2711 in
1 movement. Easy victory, thinks the Dragon Lord.
I THINK NOT! The following moves will allow the Witch King to take
the Woodman town at 2405, but that army supported only from Mount
Gundabad cannot stand against the entire Woodman nation when it
finishes with the Dragon Lord turns its attention northward.
Woodman Army1 recruits 400HI and moves 1 hex to the hidden town of
2609. Woodman Army 2 recruits 400HI and remains at 2711. Woodman
Army3 moves SE to 2612 to intercept the main Dragon Army from 2715
(1200men will not be 'overrun' by the large Dragon force; I had 900
archers intercept the same force in game #88). For completeness '
sake, the Woodman Army3's actual movement might be SW, H, H, H, H, H, NE
to return them to 2711 while still allowing them to intercept the
main Dragon force. The decent Woodman commander at the capital
should DNSTNAT the Dragon Lord. Woodman character Odagus with his
10 command pointts should movjoin Woodman Army2 at 2711.
So ends Turn1 with Dragon Army1 and Woodman Army3 at 2612, tiny
Dragon Army2 at 2715 and Dragon army3 at 2711 with Woodman Army2.
Woodman Army1 is at 2609.
Turn 2
Woodman Order of Battle
2609-Woodman Army 1- 1600HI, 900LI
2711-Woodman Army2- 1000HI, 600LI
2612-Woodman Army3- 600LI,600AR
Dragon Lord Order of Battle
2612-Dragon Army1- 600HC, 1000HI, 600LI, 900AR, 800MA
2715-Dragon Army2- 100MA
2409-Dragon Army3- 300LC, 700HI, 300LI
The festivites begin with a waxing of Woodman Army3 by Dragon Army1
at 2612. Duran need not fear personal challenge so proceeds after
the attack to 2711 suffering minor losses (14%). Woodman Army2
defeats DragonArmy3 at 2711, but it costs 50% losses (Urgubal has a
500pt sword). Woodman Army2 commander Osric is an even match for
Urgubal and should not risk personal combat, so Odagus should
recruit another 400HI into this army. Woodman Army1 recruits 300 HI
and moves to 2711. Dragon Army2 begins recruiting a defensive army
at Dol Guldur and is no logner a factor in the Anduin Battle. The
Woodman commander at 2805 becings another army at the capitol
(400HI) to stifle any over enthusiasm by the Witch King in the
north, possibly moving one hex NW to intercept that force if it
seems inclined toward a southward move.
At turn end, the massive Dragon Army1 is poised to assault 2711
facing Woodman Army1 and the remnant of Wooeman Army2.
Turn 3
Woodman Order of Battle
2711 -Wood Army1- 1900HI, 900LI
2711- WoodArmy2- 900HI, 300LI
Dragon Order of Battle
2711- Dragon Army1- 516HC, 860HI, 516LI, 774AR, 688MA
The Turn3 battle finds the 'mighty' Dragon Army1 outnumbered and
slighlty out-gunned (even with 2500pts of combat artifacts). A long
battle ends in the annihiliation of Dragon Army1 though it costs
nearly 60% casualties to the victorious Woodman. All Woodman
commanders will have to refuse Challenge to survive the battle which
freezes these forces in the hex for until turn 4 movement, but the
WK army from the north, weakened slightly by the new army at the
capitol cannot take the MT/tower at 2508, and may be dealt with by
the surviving Woodman forces as they head north for the eventual
capture of Mt. Gundabad.
The Dragon Threat is eliminated!
The willingness to throw troops away so that superior force can be
gathered is the key to this battle plan, and is certainly worth the
losses in the end. No Dragon Armies means a peaceful Anduin Vale
for many turns to come and will allow the Woodman time to buy an
emissary to start camps and begin enlarging his (hers in some cases)
various hidden pop ctrs. The Woodwomen in game #88 benefited from
a combined entrapment of the Dragon army and went on to be a major
contributor of troops against enemies on all fronts!! (Thanks to the
aid by her military advisors !!!)
(A Somewhat Bleak, For the Woodman) End Note:
I have seen a set-up where the Dragon armies were located at 2715,
2409, and 2809. This complicates the woodman position considerably
since there are 2 armies on 2711 at the end of turn1if the woodman
intercepts the main army from 2715 at 1612. I believe that having
the Woodman Army1 intercept the Goblin Gate force at 2610 and having
Woodman Army3 leave the 600LI with Wood Army2 will still give the
Wood the victory at 2711 on turn3, but the numbers are much closer
since the Dragon Lord can recruit and extra 300HI from 2809 and the
Woodmen lose the 300HI recruited from 2609 by Army1 on turn 2. The
6000 point swing in Constitution and a battery of Dragon
spellcasters with 'Blessings' or Offensive spells would be bad news.
Better hope from some help from your allies!!!!
(Victoria DeYoung as the typist!--sorry about typos getting tired
and hands are shaky at this point!)
A Reply to the Previous Article
By Tom Walton
Dan, you assume that the Dragon Lord will be predictable. Maybe so,
most of my opponents tend to stick with the 'tried and true', but
some are either innovative or just plain new and might do crazy
things. This can upset your plan badly; the Anduin has a good deal
of maneuvering room for a Dragon Lord that likes to destroy things
but doesn't want to clash with your armies head-on.
As for the alternate setup: this is from a very old game. In the
new game, no armies start at Sarn Goriwing, and haven't for quite
some time now (about a year and a half in real time). Please review
the setup sheet for the Dragon Lord in my file on the Dark Servants;
that's current up to 117, and was reconfirmed as being correct in
game 138.
Stratey and Tactics: The Dwarves
By Brian Mason
What follows was prompted by a series of discussions carried out
between the author and the editor last November.
Because of the at-start military power (both in troops and in combat
artifacts) of this position there are many options which can be
exercised. What follows is a plan, but by no means, the plan.
In the following strategy for the Dwarves there are two critical
needs, one to maintain a very effective fighting force in two
theaters, and two, to somehow improve the position and get a back-up
capital. On the first point, the two areas are, first, in and around
the Dwarven capital and to the East on the plains of Rhovanion. To
protect the Dwarven capital, an agressive action must be initiated
East of the Misty Mountains against the Dragon Lord and elements of
the Witch-King. Following the development of this fighting force,
the armies to the East should be combined into an effective battle
group to engage forces of the Dog Lord, Long Rider, and Dark
Lieutentants in coordinated efforts with the Eothraim and Northmen.
Emissaries are needed to develop camps in profitable, and preferably
secure locations (Dimrill Dale and in and around the Blue
Mountains), and then to improve one of the Blue Mountain population
centers into a major town. As the inital attack is delayed somewhat
to maximize the size of the fighting force, adequate time is given
to utilize all combat artifacts.
Turn 1: Bain takes over command of all armies at Moria. All bronze
transported to Moria. Tax rates increased to 70%. All combat
artifacts put into use. The Barak-shathur (3607) and Azanulinbar-dum
(3707) move onto Nahald Kudan (2809). The Kheled-nala (3916) army
begins moving North, as I consider this location currently
undefendable (As a side note, I also consider Zarak-Dum (2004)
undefendable). The plan of reorganizing forces in Rhovanion far to
the North might generate opposition from the Eothraim or Northmen.
If you have active, reliable allies in those two, there is no reason
that the reorganization cannot take place at Kheled-nala. However,
given the initial unpredictable nature of allies, I favor an Iron
Hills buildup as the location is more secure.
Turn 2: Relations downgraded with Dragon Lord. All bronze
transported to Moria. An emissary is created. The Barak-shathur and
Azanulinbar-dum capture Nahald Kudan. The Barak-shathur moves toward
Erebor. The Azanulinbar-dum army moves onto Lag-auris (3104). Five
hundred heavy infantry (bronze/bronze) recruited at Moria.
Turn 3: All bronze transported to Moria. Another emissary is
created. First emissary into Dimrill Dale. The Azanulinbar-dum
destroys Lag-auris (while this and the previous moves against the
Dragon Lord are very limited they serve three real purposes: one,
they reduce overall Dragon Lord loyalty and production, second, they
reduce the morale of the Dragon Lord player, and third they greatly
increase the morale of the east armies). The Barak-shathur moves on
Erebor. The Kheled-nala army reaches Azanulinbar-dum. Five hundred
heavy infantry (bronze/bronze) recruited at Moria.
Turn 4: All bronze transported to Moria. A Commander created. Third
emissary is created. First emissary creates a camp and moves into
the North Downs. Second emissary also moves into North Down.
Relations downgraded with Witch-King. Camp posted at Erebor. Five
hundred heavy infantry (bronze/bronze) recruited at Moria.
Turn 5: All bronze transported to Azanulinbar-dum. Two camps created
in North Downs and move into Blue Mountains. The third emissary
moves into North Downs. Relations downgraded with Dog Lord and Cloud
Lord. Two of three east armies consolidate. The next will join on
the following turn and heavy infantry will begin to be recruited
here to increase the size of this army (as of turn six it will be
3600). Five hundred heavy infantry (bronze/bronze) recruited at
Moria for Bain's army, which now numbers 4700 heavy infantry. It
moves off Moria and towards wither Goblin Gate or Dol Guldur
depending on prevailing conditions.
At this point, the West army is very strong and can do effective
damage to the Dragon Lord. The East army is posed to recruit and is
also prepared to do damage in Rhovanion against targets of
opportunity. Several camps have been created, and more will be soon
in the relatively secure region in the far west. Camps are placed in
mountain, hills/rough, and forest, this allows for production of
gold (for the economy), metals (for troops), and timber (for
fortifications at new camps).
Editor's Note: what follows is the comments I made on Brian's
strategy. He transmitted these comments along with the original
article above.
My Dwarven strategy is rather simple: concentrate on one target.
I used this to great effect in game 70; or rather, it would have
been of great effect had my allies not decided to ship me gold on a
critical turn.
It goes like this: Moria army marches to Goblin-Gate on turn 2,
joins up with Woodmen. Iron Hills armies march to Barak-shathur and
capture it, then fly down the Narrows road to Gundabad. The army at
Rhun marches west as well. In combination with the Woodmen
(actually, the Dwarves can do this by themselves), you can take
Goblin-Gate on turn 2 and Gundabad on turn 6; with the Sinda, you
can take Dol Guldur on turn 6 as well. We did exactly that,
although all of us were recruiting like crazy to make that final
assault on Dol Guldur.
Once you accomplish these goals, the remaining forces of all three
nations can march via the Mirkwood road to the southern Rhovanion,
intervening in the Rhun area by turn 11. We had about 12,000 troops
in the region after we forced the Dragon Lord out (I had about
6,000, my allies 3,000 apiece); can you imagine Mordor's surprise
when they showed up to reinforce the other Free in the east? Had
the Gondors shipped us gold like we agreed, the game would be over
by now.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Brian: And this was your reply after seeing the above strategy...
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Your Dwarven strategy is solid, maintaining a strong presence both
in Mirkwood and in the Iron Hills. I would definitely consider it
as an alternative to the plan I outlined (and used in game 70). One
thing: when making out my plans, I tend to set up for either
inactive or unresponsive allies. Thus, my dwarves smash Goblin-Gate
and Gundabad in a manner which allows them to accomplish these
missions without any outside help at all - then move back to re-
establish themselves in the east. Essentially, I plan on the Sinda
not bothering to intervene, with perhaps a dropped Woodmen player
(that position goes out early alot). Hence the total concentration
of force on the primary objective.
Winners and Losers in Middle-Earth
What follows is commentary from Jeremy Baxter, who's playing in the
UK version of the game:
I was interested in the article about 'winners and losers in MEPBM'
I just thought I would say that the first game to finish in the UK,
game 2 I think, was won by the Dragon Lord! perhaps this is because
of large numbers of early dropouts. Also I suppose we should all be
considered 'Incompetent' players since we all took quite a while to
get used to the set up. For instance all the talk about how quickly
the dragon lord's pop centres go, well it was turn 3 or 4 before I
knew who owned what and could begin planning attacks.
Another interesting note is I have just been knocked out of the top
three by of all people the Rhudaur! perhaps early games, full of
dropouts and players learning the game are not representative.
Emissaries in Middle-Earth
By Tom Walton
When I started playing Middle-Earth, I took nations which were noted
for having a definite disadvantage in the agent arena, especially
before the changes to the rules were made. After discovering that
my new agents couldn't stand up to the gods that issued forth from
Mordor or Noldo-land, I turned to experimenting with emissary teams
as a viable alternative. After all, my setups said that pretty much
everyone sucked when it came to emissary power, and there were only
two relatively weak emissary artifacts, so I was on even ground with
others here.
Now that agents have become less effective in Middle-Earth,
emissaries in relation to other characters are far more important
than they used to be. Yet in my later games, I'm still seeing both
old and new players alike concentrating much of their activity on
agents. Emissaries, if used at all, seem to be an afterthought. I
find this perplexing, as the thoughtful use of an emissary team is
at least as critical, if not more so, than an agent team.
Let me outline a few of these uses for you, and give you some
examples. Veterans will no doubt already know all this, and might
want to skip the article entirely.
Camp creation: after reviewing my emissary orders, I found that
even a 30-point emissary has a 67% chance of creating a camp in the
early game (before the population starts to run low). This means
that said emissary can place 2 camps every three turns, and his odds
will get better each time as his skill rank increases. Even better,
the loyalty of the camps will also improve (since loyalty is one-
half of emissary skill).
So what, you say? Take two examples:
In one of my neutral games, I created 3 emissaries out of the first
four character slots, plus three more on turn 6. By turn 15 I had
17 (!) camps down; of these camps, three had been improved to towns
and the rest to villages. Total increase to tax base was 50,000
gold, which translated out to 30,000 additional gold per turn at a
60% tax rate. Add the 15,000 gold these new pop centers produced
naturally, and you have a final real increase of 45,000 gold to the
tax base. The investment for this was 2,000 per camp + 4,000 per
upgrade to village, +6,000 for three upgrades to towns. Total
investment: 120,000 gold over 15 turns, or 8,000 gold a turn.
Now you say, 'but I don't have 8,000 extra gold a turn'. Ahhh, but
you do! Most nations start out with a hefty treasury, meaning that
your initial investment in camp creation comes from starting funds,
not future production or sells. Once you place a half-dozen or so
camps, you immediately upgrade to villages, increasing your tax base
by 15,000 gold (or 9,000 gold at a 60% tax rate). At this point,
camp creation and upgrades are done entirely off the newly-created
base, no longer requiring sells or money taken from your starting
pop centers. And this doesn't include any gold production you may
get from the camp itself. Total initial investment here is 36,000
gold, after which the camp creation effort pays for itself and has
funds left over (not to mention all the excess production you can
sell or use for other projects).
Any nation can do this, either with the total effort given here or
with a smaller effort involving, say, two new emissaries at game
start and one more on turn 6. It'll take longer to build up the
base, but once you pass the turn-around point each camp created and
upgraded is already paid for from other new villages and will add
it's funds and resources for your direct use. With an early drive
in the camp creation department (getting the jump on others), you
can easily take care of that nasty deficit you start with and make
your nation into an economic powerhouse.
Second example: while playing the Dwarves in one game, I had the
misfortune of having some very good allies in Mirkwood and some very
poor ones elsewhere. Those poor allies decided not to send some
critically needed gold they promised and my nation's economy,
supporting some 7,500 heavy infantry, collapsed. If you've played
the Dwarves, you'll realize that their production is terrible, so
selling to support troops really isn't an option.
I faced only one option: disband most of my troops or go bankrupt.
This I did, and then turned to creating emissaries and making my own
tax base (I didn't do this earlier because as a group we were just
a few turns short of barrelling right through Mordor and ending the
game).
It took a long time to do. My economy was thoroughly wrecked and
even though I only had a couple of thousand troops for defense (and
a very long war with the Dragon Lord in the Iron Hills)I was running
a huge deficit. Yet, 15 turns later, I now have 14 new camps,
almost all of which are villages and many of those have been
upgraded to towns (for recruitment purposes). Total real tax base,
along with natural gold production, has more than doubled my
economic power; combined with captures, the economic base is more
than three times what I started with.
My Dwarves, who essentially were a lost cause on turn 10, are now
the third strongest nation in Middle-Earth among both Free Peoples
and Dark Servants. The nation can support 10,000 HI under it's
current configuration, a goal which I'm just about to reach. Best
of all, the emmissaries are now on a roll which actually allows them
to increase the tax base faster than I can recruit!
The keys here are simple: start early and devote a few of those
character slots on turns 1 and 6 to pure emissaries. Don't go for
double-class characters, they have to be trained up to be useful; by
that time, your treasury will be empty and it'll be difficult to put
down any camps at all. Most importantly, don't stall or stop; get
those first half-dozen camps down and upgrade them as fast as
possible. After that, more camps won't cost you a dime. Finally,
don't put down a dozen camps before upgrading; if you do this, you
may find yourself short on gold by the time you finally get around
to improving them.
(I almost didn't write the next couple of sections. I use these
tactics regularly and to such good effect that I shudder at the
thought of someone doing unto me as I do unto others.)
Offensive operations: emissaries are, in my opinion, some of the
best weapons around. A good emissary team is capable of inflicting
more harm upon the enemy than the best agent company or army.
Remember those emissaries you've been using to increase your tax
base by leaps and bounds? By turn 15 or so, many will have skills
in their 60's and 70's, good enough to go on the offensive with
'Influence Other'. I have seen, and used, emissary companies
capable of stealing towns in a single turn, moving from one town to
the next each and every turn.
The mechanics: 'Influence Other' results in a loss of 5-15 points
of loyalty. The exact loss is directly related to the skill of the
emissary. With a 60-pointer, the loss seems to be around 11 or 12
points. Put four of these guys in a group, and they can regularly
lower loyalty 45 points in a single turn!
Now consider: towns start with a 55 loyalty. Most people raise
taxes right away, especially the DS. Average loyalty drop is one-
half the tax increase, so if we assume that the player has raised
taxes to 60% (the breakpoint after which loyalty continually
degrades each turn), then average loss is around 10 points. Those
towns suddenly have a loyalty of 45, and they won't be getting any
better. This means that your four-person emissary group can steal
one town each turn, adding 5,000 tax base to your economy and taking
it from the enemy. Best of all, it costs nothing and requires no
armies or troops.
Another use: hit enemy camps with just one emissary apiece. I've
found that most camps are created early by unskilled emissaries and
have terrible loyalties. It seems many people just don't bother to
improve the loyalty of these camps. This means that you can send a
single good emissary into the camp and take it in one turn. With
four emissaries, you can steal four camps per turn, thoroughly
messing up the enemy's production.
Examples: in that neutral game I spoke of, I ended up with six
emissaries with skill ranks in the 50-75 range. Because enemy
loyalties were so low, I found that I could divide them into two
groups of three and steal two towns per turn. Not bad.
In the Dwarven game, I only have 6 pure emissaries, but another 8
characters who either started with emissary rank or ended up with it
as a bonus during creation. All of these characters have emissary
ranks of 50 or better, with several in the mid-80's. Considering DS
loyalty, I could put together four effective teams and take three or
four towns per turn. This is much better than I could do with my
armies, large as they are.
Double Agents: one of the difficulties I've faced is playing
nations that have lousy agents. Out of 12 games, only two has had
decent agent power (Long Rider and Cloud Lord). As hard as you
might try, it's nearly impossible to match the agent-heavy nations
in this area, especially if you play a neutral and don't get any
stealth bonuses.
So what's a guy or gal to do? Those same emissaries which you used
to create your new tax base and steal the enemy's can also be
employed to eliminate the agent threat. If you make an effort to
track down the most effective agents, you can double them with your
emissaries and render them useless. A doubled character will in all
likelihood 'fail' agent actions taken against your nation on a
regular basis, frustrating the enemy considerably. Better yet,
doubling is invisible (no nation message) and lasts until counter-
intelligence is done.
How do you find these agents? Well, dropping in on local hot spots
is a good way to do it. Since doubling comes before
assassinate/kidnap, you can turn the agent before he has a chance to
kill your emissary. Another tactic I once used was to sit in an
enemy pop center with high-level emissaries (showing up on the pop
center report every turn) and wait for the agents to come to me. I
had two agents doing 'scouts' and tracking every character as they
came in. Once I spotted them, I doubled them before they could kill
my emissaries. No doubt the enemy was quite perplexed over his
failure to kill a few lousy characters.
A last use for emissaries: in most cases, a single skilled emissary
can steal a camp in one turn. If you don't expect to hold on to
that camp, then on the next turn issue 'Abandon Camp' and run. The
enemy will still have to waste an emissary to replace it as he would
if he wanted to steal it back, and he'll have to fork over 2,000
gold to boot. This can be a real killer for a number of nations who
always seem to be in a world of economic hurt, among which are the
entire Dark Servant team except the Cloud Lord. Speaking from
personal experience, it may also result in the diversion of a number
of enemy agents to hunting down your emissaries (great for the team,
but you might want to think twice about it).
Keys on offensive operations: it's best to operate in a company.
Try to get a commander/agent, so he can move the company and scout
for characters on the place you move in to. Attaching a 50 point
agent to the company is also a good idea; two scout attempts in one
turn will generally pick up all but the stealthiest of enemy
characters.
When stealing enemy pop centers, never go some place where there's
likely to be an army. An army negates 'Influence Other' orders, and
usually has agents floating around as well. Also, try not to remain
in one spot for more than a single turn. This simply baits the
enemy, and unless you're prepared to double his characters you'll
lose your emissaries. Even if you don't manage to steal the pop
center, you might lower the loyalty to the point where it'll begin
to degrade. And you can always come back later for another shot.
That about covers it. I'd be most interested to hear of any tactics
which might counter the ones discussed here (for purely selfish
reasons).