C3C PBEM: Alba II - Great Armada scenario

Well, I am done and Semental too. Akots might enjoy taking the last cities or you might want some fighting vs Maghrib but for us, no real point I think.

The only action I have done for a while was attacking a reiter with my last musketeer (of course the reiter retreated but I lost many HP !). So now, no more action I think.
 
Hawklord said:
Does this mean the English are no longer under the Papal boot heel. :dance:

That would be the French boot heel now - is that better?

sank a privateer and lost a caravel.

lost 3 ggs to no particular end.

I am surprised the domination numbers are not closer. It does not much matter to the Irish as they are not long for this world anyway it goes.
 
There is a huge desert continent up north which basically prevents the Domination victory. It might be possible to get there if Maghrib will gift all cities to France but it is out of the question.

And England is finally a free country! All citizens are happy there since they were liberated from the Scottish, Spanish, Irish, and League oppressors! That is a lot of oppressors for poor England. Now, the suffering ends and all new citizens there have willingly accepted French nationality.
 
Thanks for playing, guys! It was the most exciting game I played in Civ3 so far!

Really, we were losing badly up until around turn 85. France was stuck and England and Holand were simply overrun. I've essentially lost all hopes but then, for some strange reason I still do not understand, the League has slowed down. I'm completely puzzled and clueless as to what happened in St.Quentin. It might very well be that I was able to cause an exchange of troops (reiters and armies) near Rouen and than had put a big dent in League's military. Also, a few League troops were lost while battling the Dutch. For me, the exchange at Caen/Rouen area was a blessing because it allowed France to lower down huge unit support and start actively cash-rushing additional musketeers and reiters.

However, I'm thinking that if Spain and League have had played a purely defensive game in the north-east, it would be very hard for France to capture all these huge cities there. On the other hand, Scotland would have been dead long ago as well as apparently Ireland.

Of course, all credit indeed goes to Loulong for that great concept and brillian scenario!

Lets exchange the thoughts about strategical stuff and find a reason for possible developments since I'm absolutely sure that this game could have turned either way at around turn 85.
 
Yes, he does. I think the game is pretty much done with the bugs found. The balance sems good - there will always be differences in skill but it looks pretty good.

I toasted the league around the turn mentioned - Plymouth I think - and never recovered. Lesson - Don't make big moves when you are in a hurry.

In any event, I would be happy to play again, it was fun! In fact it was the best game I have had going.
 
Yeah, there was some communications snafu around Plymouth where we didn't time our attacks properly, I don't think it made any difference to the final outcome though.
 
Yes, I've noticed some weirdness around Plymouth because you were unable to move to Bristol in time. This enabled me to cash-rush barracks there, heal both remaning armies and wrap up all 5 Spanish tercii which landed in England. But it were a minor issue indeed. I think still that critical point was when League was unable to keep up with military production of France. It might be that the Reiter force League were keeping as a counter measure against possible French strike (about 35 reiters iirc) had somehow somewhere dissipated. Some of them were killed in Holland/England, some others were eliminated during the exchange while more had been built and it could have been musketeers instead for a more defensive tactics.

Also, if not for the cannons, I could not have taken Paris/Orleans that "early" in the game. That could have been a critical point as well. Since when Paris fell, League rapidly collapsed. But I was still very surprized with Spain not leaving any defenders in Flandria. These troops were indeed for some reason shipped to England where they were killed rather easily not probably even providing their worth in VPs before they died. IMHO, if these dozen or so musketeers were accumulated in Atwerpen, it would require me to drag cannons there all the way which could have saved you at least 5 turns. Also, France, would be unable to amass that many troops in Scotland allowing some time for Lou to build more defenders there. Overall, it might have been slowing the French advance down so much that elimination of League became impossible before turn 120. In the end though, I've had about 70 musketeers which seems to be a formidable force. The problem was with shifting this force around the map rapidly between Belgium, England, Ireland, and Southwestern France. I was still afraid of Spain mounting an assault of Bordeaux again and kept a large garrison there up until the end.
 
The Plymouth snafu put me behind in production without taking anything out of France. The next attack could not be completely contained as I could not plug all the holes. Once Blois fell I was toast as I could not defend Orleans against a build up there. Overall, many smaller tactical errors earlier left me in this position but that was the tipping point for the League.
 
First congratulations to Hawklord and especially Akots for their victory. No, no, I am NOT doubting their victory at all ;)

I am definitely all ears for all suggestions, remarks concerning balance, unit strength, costs... but probably more in the scenario thread.

About the strategic aspect, we definitely made a terrible mistake around Plymouth. Instead of attacking together we just attacked separately which provided Akots both experience AND the time to heal !!! Killing his armies there would have made a huge difference for Scotland as you stormed our "new" cities just right when they started producing.
Scotland also made a large mistake by emphasizing too much on improvements and maybe wonders, which you guys apparently completely ignored. That + my (obviously) normal mobilization left me with few troops. They had been enough for England but I was definitely not prepared for the French invasion (most English cities did not even have a garisson).
So I should remember this is a war-scenario.

About it I think I might just add Scotland and Maghrib to the alliances since it feels otherwise really awkward. I tried once to play the wild card but my propositions were not accepted so basically I was in one alliance from beginning to end.

I think I will make reiters' chance of retreat smaller or lower their stats and will make them upgrade to dragoons (lower cost) so they cannot be buildable in such huge numbers at the end.
 
ironduck said:
Lou makes fantastic scenarios!

:banana: Three cheers for Lou! :banana:

:cheers: :cheers: :cheers:

Well, thanks. Not sure I deserve that (and I am very bad at receiving compliments) but thank you ! At least it means I did not waste my time.
 
LouLong said:
Well, thanks. Not sure I deserve that (and I am very bad at receiving compliments) but thank you ! At least it means I did not waste my time.

You certainly deserve it. The combination of a creative scenario with a historical basis and competitive balance is no easy feat. I know the art work for the units was not yours but it certainly added well to the overall feel and you and the artist deserve full credit for it for putting it together so well.
 
Reiters - They are OK, reducing the retreat would be all right.

The only other changes are the Mahgrib pirate ships - as discussed before - I would make their defense 1, the rest I do not care so much.

The lack of mobility for Spain and England is by design and makes it both interesting and challenging. It could strengthen their positions be making riders 2-4-2 so that there was a defensive unit that could move quickly. Maybe not but it might help the game some. England has fallen in both games and Spain is vulnerable even without shipping horses to continuous pirate attack.
 
England fell in both games for the same reason - getting clobbered in Ireland by allowing the Irish to conduct their guerilla warfare.

I don't think England or Spain should have fast units until dragoons. It makes for more variety and if Spain had fast units Maghrib wouldn't be as big a threat with the pirates. Spain should be vulnerable to pirates and basically struggle to stay coherent for a while.
 
Yes, I am mixed about it. If England did not try to take out Ireland, they would have had real issues from them later as well. But I agree, they would have been better off just building at home and sea. Spain as well. But I think as fast, expensive defender would create some variety. Maybe 2-3-2? not so strong.

On the other hand it fine the way it is.
 
Back
Top Bottom