Topic: Bechafen?

[Demonslayer]

Well, it seems that, by popular demand, we are going to march unto Middenland first. However the following came to my attention:

If we wish to attack Middenland, then we only have one position to attack from (the uneasy watchmen). If Middenland starts fighting us, and we start fighting Middenland, then Bechafen (a contested area, by my knowledge) is easy prey for Talabecland. That means our only acces point to our target (the uneasy watchmen) is threathened from two sides. Should middenland, or even worse, Talabecland, succeed in taking that location, then we will have wasted a large amount of energy. In order to prevent this, I would like to see a smaller group of our generals trying to take Bechafen. Doing so will, in the long run, enable us to focus on Middenland.

Of course, all this is written not knowing whether Bechafen is actually contested, and whether the campaign map is up to date or will be replaced soon anyway... Any information on this would be highly appreciated.

[PygmyHippo]

Your idea of assigning a general or two (or more) to Bechafen is a very good one.

The final tweaks (for the backup plan) for the campaign results form are basically done.  I need to check with the rest of the campaign staff first before I discuss the particulars, since we want to make sure all the factions get the same info at the same time (fairness and all that).  Once I get the OK, I believe I have the info to answer your question satisfactorily.

<update>  It seems we're all set to start on Monday.  Check here for more info.  http://www.warhammer-empire.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5857

I can volunteer to fight skirmish scenarios in Bechafen.  To be honest, it will be easier than regular, full-size battles, for me (time constraints being what they are).

I can also split my empire forces up to have an emp-vs-emp battle, and have my friends register for another faction.  I will use the newsletter scenarios as well as regular skirmish scenarios, whichever yields more bonus points.

[TheBuilder]

I stand by the plan to attack Talabecland.  My reasoning is that an attack on middenland might be turned back.  An attack on talabecland is more likely to succeed.  Likewise if we defend against an attack by middenland they will be squandering their superior forces (as compared to talabecland...certainly we are stronger).  

However the idea of harassment fighing in bechafen is a good idea given either plan, but especially for attacking middenland.

I think going head to head with middenland in the early going might be imprudent.  If we can gain initial success vs talabecland we will have the upper hand and we will be able to assess the actions of middenland.

[Demonslayer]

Attacking Middenland has its pro's of wiping the big fish out while they're still getting organized (if the bantering did any good, they'll be expecting us to attack Talabecland...). Attacking Talabecland has the advantage of winning terrain easier. Both options have its benefits, but it seems that most of our generals would opt for attacking Middenland. I actually voted for attacking Talabecland first, but since only you and me voted to do that, it would not really be democratic to decide to do so...
So unless you can convince the others to attack Talabecland, our battle plan will be:

- To send a large portion of our generals to Middenland;
- Have a few try to retake Bechafen (more to annoy the enemy than to actually retake it),
- Send a smaller group up against Talabecland, mainly to defend against them.

[PygmyHippo]

Also, bear in mind that the results of each day's posted battles are compiled every 2 or 3 days.  If we keep our eyes open to the boards, we should have a nice buffer of time to change our plans as needed.

[TheBuilder]

Yea the time buffer will be quite nice in the early going.  In either case i think the idea of contesting bechafen is a great one and should be in our plans no matter what.

I stand by attacking talabecland.  Especially given the time buffer middenland will be able to respond to our attack much better than talabecland.  Talabecland is the safe bet.  We can gain an early victory and will be able to better assess the strategy and abilities of our opponents for future campaign moves.

[furiousj]

Is there an advantage to taking bechafen?
Like central location or something?
I know, i haven't read much, but it would be nice to take out middenland early (nasty opponents on large scale. I know, i played siege game against them)

[towishimp]

Hey all.  I just signed up for Stirland (I know, I'm a late-comer...I just wasn't sure how many battles I'd be able to fight, so initially didn't sign up).  For my part, I should be able to do some skirmishing to help contest Bechafen, especially since it seems to be the most important location (judging by the FAQ).  For what it's worth, I think I'm more in favor of attacking Talabecland instead of Middenland.  Attacking the strongest first seems risky.  (Oh, and out of curiousity, how do we know that they're stronger?)  Just my two cents.  Glad to be aboard.

[Demonslayer]

Seems like the builder, towishimp and myself are already forming a anti-Talabecland group...

[Heretic 01]

I guess I'll do some skirmish fighting in Bechafen, I don't have a complete army made yet. I can also try to get a few campaign scenarios