Feudal Lord 1st scenario, play #2

2nd time through the 1st solo scenario:

The 2nd game, I played it safer. Instead of spending a lot of war funds scheming, I, just as a sort of 'scouting party',only placed 1 war fund in each of the 2 adjacent provinces to where I started during the 1st scheming phase. 1 province had a 10 combat value fortress, which I now knew to stay away from, and luckily, no neutral power at all appeared in the other province (and there was no neutral power in my home province, as the neutral powers occurrence check during setup was low enough to have none ap

Now, I had a relatively easy time of it, because I could spend a couple years relatively unopposed working to get complete control of the two provinces. (Complete control being tougher to achieve, but giving you more in taxes than partial control).

I got greedy and tried heavy taxation in a province, but failed again and caused unrest in the province. No revolt occured, so I managed to at least get normal taxes from it.

Luckily, I managed to suppress unrest the next year. I learned at least that perhaps heavy taxation is not something to risk casually (unless you have a general with better than 3 in domestic administration value that you do in this scenario)..

In year 3, I had some soliders assault the 10 combat value neutral fortress, and succeeded in lowering it from 10 to 5, losing 5 combat value of soldiers in the process. I still had 10 combat value of soldiers remaning. As that it twice the combat value of the fortress, I was able to encircle the fortress, which is basically 'locking down' a general, and twice the combat value of the fortress in soldiers, on top of the fortress.

They remained there through the next combat phase. Keeping an encirclement from one battle phase straight through the next lowers the combat value of the fortress by 5, which removed it. In retrospect, I would've been 'safer' (but slower) to wait until I could get 20 combat value of soldiers to encircle the fortress originally, and take it down by keeping it encircled through multiple battle phases.. But it worked out. After that, it was relatively easy, but it was still useful to see how tight money was e

As said before, an extremely good learning scenario. There is a 2nd solo scenario which adds in fortune cards to throw in more unexpected events to deal with.

I'd pretty much consider it a requirement to go through the 2 solo scenarios before trying to teach it to other people. In fact, the 1st solo scenario is quick enough that playing it and showing the other people what you're doing is a good way to teach them.

The 1st year you tend to only scheme, force obedience, perhaps heavy tax (and fail if you're me), and in general teach about zones of control and such. Depending on money, perhaps more soldiers and generals can be hired.

The 2nd year you consolidate power a little more, perhaps show transferring movement, and get a few more soldiers

The 3rd year you can attempt a siege assault (perhaps showing that you can repeatedly assaulty the same fortress as long as you keep a 1:1 ratio, or if you somehow have enough soldiers still, start an encirclement).

The 4th and 5th years are where you're more likely to be able to get complete control of provinces, perhaps show isolation of powers (if you get 25 power in a province with only a 5 combat value fortress), and be more likely have enough soldiers to encircle a fortress.

As a side note, as there is only you and neutral powers in the solo scenarios, there is no 'defenders decision' or field combat to worry about, and no death in battle checks (you only lose combat value during an assault, and never enough to wipe out your soldiers, just reduce them). Without other players, fortune cards, and field combat, the only way for your daimyo to die in this scenario is if he's left alone in a province that you lose control of (a careless mistake that's avoidable). The scenario is wo

So, got a better feel for it..

Back to Japanese Wargame Database main page