Man, every way I analize this I'm gonna get the @#$% end of the stick.
I'm yellow, holding a fortified Africa with two other stockpiling opponents.
Same familiar story, whoever attacks first, will get mopped up with his opponent by the third party.
I'm open to opinions and suggestions, as this one has NO end in sight.......
Game Number : 657962
Thanks!
Johnny Rockets. ( No relation to whats-his-face....)
Looks to me like you're pretty buggered ... Blue has two continents so maintaining a war of attrition is in his interest, and you're the closest target.
He's getting an extra few armies a turn on you so my advice would be to attempt to blitz Europe. You need to sacrifice something to the dice gods first, because you don't really have enough to pull it off with fair dice – but as I say it's only going to get worse.
To take your analogy a step farther; if your game is a mexican stand-off, you are the gunslinger who got shot in the leg and is slowly bleeding to death. You can still keep your gun pointed at your opponents, but its only a matter of time until you pass out.
You need to take action:
Option 1: pull out of the Middle East, put those troops in North Africa. Desired Effect: This encourages Green to go for Asia. The only person with a real interest in stopping a Green Asia is Blue (because you are slowly dying anyway). If Green takes Asia, then Blue loses his advantage. By pulling out of Middle East, you might be able to draw Green and Blue into a fight. You put your 13 armies from M.E. into North Africa becase North Africa with 50+ troops is a huge threat to Brazil and an even bigger threat to Greenland. Blue is forced to commit even more resources to both Greenland and Brazil until his growth advantage catches up. The only places he can pull extra troops from is Alaska and Ukraine, both of which help Green in Asia. If I were you I would concede M.E. and see what happens. It is really a no risk move for you, and it could change the game.
Option 2: Move to North America. Blow through Iceland and Greenland, and take N.A. out. It is a chaotic and irresponsible move, but you will likely end up with a better continent and the same number of borders to defend. The move starts the same. Concede M.E. and put those troops in N.A. Next turn, take your 50+ and blast through Iceland. At the end of the turn you only need large fortifications in Alaska. Your opponents need at least two turns to mount a serious attack through either Central America or Greeneland.
The worst thing you can do is nothing at all, Blue knows that if no one moves, he wins.
The problem with abandoning the Middle East is that Blue has a pile in Kamchatka, however it might stir green out of his hole.
I think I'll flip continents, but not Europe because it puts you at the whim of both green and blue. South America gives you distance from green, and they can fight over Africa while I sheep f*ck blue in Central America.
This wont win me the game, but it will unbalance blue, force green to fight, and make it interesting.
Thanks for the replies Gentlemen. I appreciate the insight and perspective.
Johnny Rockets.
( No relation to whats-his-face. )
Now if you and blue just keep him boxed so he cannot get cards, you have a good chance. Blue is still getting one more army per turn than you are (once you lock down NA). But he is going to have to defend 4 borders to your three. His one per turn advantage dissappears in that situation.
You are now the low player with armies, but in the most easily defendable position. Whenever you are ready, you can just drop out of Kamchatka and watch the sparks fly.
Nicely played. I would have gone the northern route to take NA first, but going through SA was just as effective.
Look at the game first, Bavarian, he has the fewest armies. There's no chance that will work.
Rockets, you could try to convince green that it's in HIS interest that you get 7 bonus armies from North and South America. And what are those 33 armies in Central America doing? Nothing! And armies that do nothing aren't helping you directly, sometimes it can be a good idea to place armies like that because it makes you look less threatening, but you're already not very threatening in that game,
So... Why isn't green ripping blue a giant new asshole since Blue only has 1 army defending Africa and a mere 11 in Ukraine?
Green has spread out to 100 in Siam and 50 - 50 - 50 near it for completely no reason. He needs to urgently take 70 or so guys into Ukraine and leave them there.
I'd say Blue is fucked.
Alex..? Alexander the Great, my Commander, what's wrong? Did someone leave you negative feedback again?
Also, I didn't know places like Iceland had the physical space to accommodate 88 armies. This always strikes me as funny in Conquer Club, when someone has like 100 armies in Wan Chai district of Hong Kong. Like, where do you leave them all?
Alex..? Alexander the Great, my Commander, what's wrong? Did someone leave you negative feedback again?
Now let's see what your contribution has been to this topic. Here we go:
Helmet wrote:Tsk...Tsk...
and then the one above this one.
Maybe you can come back to this topic when you feel worthy of letting your light shine on the topic matter at hand?
Edit: Oops, I just noticed you're one of the players in that game. In that case I understand it if your analysis gets deferred until after the game. Still, why the big need for name calling in the chat? I really hope it's because you're 13 years old or something.
Alex..? Alexander the Great, my Commander, what's wrong? Did someone leave you negative feedback again?
This always strikes me as funny in Conquer Club, when someone has like 100 armies in Wan Chai district of Hong Kong. 