Re: MEPBM 2950

From: "Laurence G. Tilley" <laurence@lgtilley.demon.co.uk>

Date: Wed, 14 Aug 1996 00:00:00 +0000

In article <4uq7e2$jua@bach.convex.com>, Patrick F <?@?.?.COM> writes
>
>Now that some experience has been had with the MEPBM 2950 game,
>I would like to hear some opinions on the relative difficulty
>of playing the Dark Servants in that game.
I think that the 1650 scenario is biased towards the DS, the 2950
scenario even more so.
>  I've been on a Free People
>team and we won in spite of only recruiting one neutral.  I like to think it
>was due solely to good team play <grin>,
You are absolutely correct.  This is always what makes a difference in
ME.  In 2950, the economies are so precarious that inexperienced
unsupported players, or any nation which is put under enemy pressure and
does not receive aid, goes out very quickly.
> but others have suggested that
>the Dark Servant position is crippled by economic considerations in the 2950
>game.  Can anyone who has played as Dark Servant confirm/deny such
>assertions?
Deny.  All the nations are crippled economically in 2950.  The FP are
also crippled militarily, whereas the DS still have their huge benefits
in character superiority.
>
>Your opinions welcome...
If you were playing against a TEAM in your game, then you did VERY WELL
INDEED to win as the FP.

As a matter of interest, how many of the nations seemed to collapse or
drop in the first few turns?
>

Regards,

Laurence G. Tilley

References

MEPBM 2950
Patrick F. McGehearty <patrick@convex.COM>
Tue, 13 Aug 1996 00:00:00 +0000

Referenced By

MEPBM 2950
Patrick F. McGehearty <patrick@convex.COM>
Tue, 13 Aug 1996 00:00:00 +0000