The description does clearly state that the Norwegians have a starting unit at the wall. I would agree however that this variant is tilted against the English as it is almost a given that both of the other powers will look to expand there first and not against each other. A well-played Danish wall unit can really create a headache during the first year or two...by that time the Normans are stormin' and extra danish fleets are coming in from the north and you are just hoping for a draw. Kudos to those who have played England to a successful solo (though from the stats, this happens a very small percentage of the time).

I won that game !!!!
:))

But i took much succsess of you not knowing i have unit on the wall.

Ok, maybe I did not read carefully enough... And it did not help that God waited for his move with the wall unit until I left my sc open. Plus after I took the wall there was no extra sc for me... I don't think I'll try the variant again anytime soon!

The map ist great.
http://vdiplomacy.com/board.php?gameID=5027
you could maybe play it with choosing a nation.

I still think it's a little lopsided. Still congrats on your win though.

I understand the positions put forward here re: England's position, although he does start with an extra SC over the Normans and Norwegians. That said its not perfectly balanced as the stats have shown over now a hundred games.

So as a co-creator of the variant, what ideas do people have to ever so slightly improve England's position so the game is a little more balanced?

Make more lands in France and Germany so the Vikings and the Normans will battle each other more.

Good suggestion God, but I must admit (and maybe I should've said this earlier) I'd like to keep things as historically accurate as possible. The existing Free Cities Passage is just pushing things to the extreme about what could've happened. I guess the only other alternative based on your thinking would be to create a very different game (4 person) that included the Holy Roman Empire (opening up greater conflict elsewhere for France and the Norwegians.) But again, that type of battle wasn't historically correct so I'd prefer to avoid that option.

I think you should make the wall into a proper sc. That way once England takes it, it will actually get a build out of it. That should give it the extra fleet in the east it needs to build up strenght. It might tip the scales the other way, but you won't know until you try it out.

http://vdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=5191

Let me show you how a pro plays England.

Damn butterhead beat me to it by a split second!

good think, I would hate to play the creater of the variant, anyway no talking about an ongoing game.

Especially a gunboat.

I would have to agree Hamburg (with the Poles burning the city down in 1030) and other German cities were raided and occupied by raiders like the Norwegians and not too much of a stretch to include the Normans either

Start in 1066 rather then 65

Make Sweden impassible
Remove the SC from Flanders
reducing the total sc count by 2 and scs required to win by 1,

Change starting units:
Norway:
Fleet NWN Sea (invasion force sent to England)
Army HW (As explained in the info)
Army Oslo
Army Free Cities Passage (Harald Hardrada failed an invasion attempt of Denmark in 1064, the army sacked Hedeby (on the Dan/HRE border) for supplies at the end, this army went south (aka ending up in FCP) before returning home)

England:
Fleet EA
Army London
Army York
Fleet Win

Normandy
Same

This will give a more historically accurate (in some senses) of the map while at the same time (hopefully adding balance)

Special notes:
The game can almost definetly be decided in the first year:

Normandy can force himself into both North EC and S of D (or sneakly convoy to Hastings in the fall) while England is occupied by with Norway.
England can't defend off both the intial Norwegian invasion and the Norman and will have to choose defending on or the other (or convince one to back of via diplomacy) However England could defend against either one easily depending on which is chosen.
Norway's army is overfunded and he will have to disband an army unless he takes either York or Edi (which was his reason for invading England in the first place). He can no longer get an easy grab in Sweden (for Sweden would have been much to powerful of an enemy)
Norway can now attack Normandy through Flanders (unhistorical,but provides balance)
England has no way of defending York from Norway's attack in the Spring (if it comes) but if he chooses to leave himself open for Normandy he can retake York in the fall.

This will essentially make it as historically accurate as possible, while still added the occasional twist which will allow us to 'bend' history.

Thoughts?

Another alternative would be adding additional powers to the mix:

Denmark: 2 sc (DI and Denmark)
Scotland: 2 sc (Gal and Edi)

Although that might make it more unbalanced and less historically accurate...

I like your ideas.

Making it it historically correct seems to be impossible to me because then the ppstion of the british has to be unfair and thats not fair, if you understand me :))
Or you could make the english SCs neutral and make it a twoplayer-map between the Normans and the Vikings.

Thanks everyone for contributing. I've got one variant in testing mode at the moment, then I plan to tackle another that I've been wanting to do for ages. After that I'll re-assess the 1066 ideas with the variant's co-creator (Tadar es Darden) to see what changes we may make.

Ok so I just looked through the English wins deleting every game where there was an NMR by Norway or Normandy with in the first 2 years of the game or where England was a multi account or where Normandy or Norway failed to take a neutral sc in the opening year (in most cases not knowing the nuetrals are armed and didn't support themselves in)
In which case I found 3 games. (one of them had a Norway disband, but I deemed this disband to be insignificant because Norway and England were allied at the time).
gameID=923
gameID=935
gameID=1140
so really its 3 wins

What did England do right in these games which he failed to do in others?
gameID=923 : Both England and Norway wanted to ally with him, and as a result helped him survive the early game before he stabbed and devoured one. This diplomatic victory was due to words not swords, and in a gunboat England wouldn't have faired well...

gameID=935 A great game by England, he allied with Norway and outsmarted Normandy in early moves and then Norway in the late game

gameID=1140 This one he allied with Normandy and crushed Norway

In otherwords, an English win without the aid of allies hasn't happened yet, but it has for Normandy and Norway.

I prefer playing this gunboat so it becomes more of a free for all, rather then 2 guys conspiring against the 3rd, and one of them winning (or a 2-way draw). England can only win if he puts absolute trust in the person he allies with and gets more scs then his ally (which isn't that hard given that he is inbetween them)

The hard part is convincing Norway or Normandy to ally with him, since it is much easier to fight England then the other of the two.

Two points-

@Ambassador: no slight intended - I enjoy the variant and appreciate the work that went into it. Tough to make things perfectly balanced.

@fasces: nice analysis. Indeed I would really recommend that this game simply must be made full press (no gunboat) - is that even possible? Playing England with no press is brutal.

gameID=5191

Just won a gunboat as England (linked this game earlier in the thread with sheer arrogance, demonstrating how England aught to be played), however Norway NMRed on the last turn (in my defence I was gaurenteed to take Edi and Gla anyway, so still counts)

I figured out a strategy that could give England the win, however I relied on the fact that Normandy didn't anticipate a possible convoy. Had he counted my convoy I wouldn't have won.

I also used the fog to my advantage, trying my best to conceal units until I needed them. Meanwhile Norway made absolutley no attempt to do so, and by the end of the game I was able to tell where every single one of his units was, making it incredibly easy for me.

I made this game a gunboat because I posted this game in the thread daring people to join with the phrase "Let me show you how a pro plays England.". The last thing I wanted was the Norway player and Norman player to ally and coordinate moves to prove me wrong.

Too funny - and in the end I even missed the last phase. Based on your somewhat arrogant dare, I wanted to show you how easily I could win as Norway without even trying hard... and I did end up making several mistakes throughout the game. Congratulations anyways, certainly well played from your side.

Make sure I don't meet you in a dark 1066 alley... (and well done too!)

Your biggest mistake was forcing yourself into York in fall 1067, had you bounced me you could have built an addiontal army in York and I would have been screwed.

I had a few misorders in the final year, but luckily I was pretty confident I would win by that stage.

@Ambassador: one thing that could give England in advantage would be disabling the build anywhere. That would balance the game because Norway could only build units all the way out in Norway, giving him a huge disadvantage.

Englands central placement at the map would serve as an advantage given quick builds. Thoughts?

I agree, after that bad York move I felt obliged to use a very nice swear word several times over... :-) Build only in home sc's might be interesting.

did you think it was build anywhere before that?