Middle Earth: Battle For Arda - Official Thread


  • Admin

    @mattbarnes Generally, it is helpful to have some completed save games and that was @alkexr initial goal was to play a bunch himself. So attaching or linking to them here would be good.





  • @alkexr Hello,

    Great map sir! Myself (Dany) and Epinikion have had 6 games so far and we find that the balanced is achievable, we prefer dice so far too make every dice count, for example Air units can be vulnerable too multiple arches, and straff are never really safe. Different strategies for the map from both sides, and it allows a lot of give and take possibilities, that both sides can adapt. Epinikion and I have played a lot of games over the years, mostly vs each other and at a high level, and since this map we don't want to go back too another map. So far the good side is easier too play, but evil sure has a lot of possibilities. I don't think the map needs much change, i hope players can adjust to difficulty level by adding a bid. So far we have not reached a decision on if a bid is necessary. Thanks for your work. Best dice map!

    • I fear that special attacks in LL make the game too predictable

  • Admin

    @Dany @epinikion One thing that could be helpful for assisting new players on the map is creating a small strategy guide as part of the notes or here on the forum.



  • @mattbarnes Thanks for the savegames! They show some interesting strategies that I haven't so far seen played out. From a quick glance it seems that the first game was decided by Isengard stretching their forces too thin and a well-planned Last March of the Ents. The second one was over when Good missed a canopener and the forces of Gondor were more or less annihilated at Pelennor Fields.

    I also had a look at your choices of units. A wide variety of units were employed, with powerful units (like eagles and dragons) not being ignored but also not spammed. Some units, however (notably the cavalry of Rohan and one-hit air units) weren't appreciated by the two of you, and this could indicate a power-level problem if more save-games showed the same pattern. (And this is one of the reasons why save-games are so useful for balancing. @Dany @epinikion I'd most certainly welcome 6 save-games from players who have that much experience with the map!)

    What I still haven't seen yet is a Harad naval invasion that could be called succesful (although the mental image of oliphaunts crossing the river on rafts made my day). The "Saruman goes north" is another strategy that looks difficult to impossible to pull off, as reinforced by these games.



  • You’re welcome. I’m not sure how much you can read into our strategies because we were playing our first game on this map (albeit we had played previous versions) and making up the strategy on the hoof, making errors along the way.

    I think you’ve just about got the price right on dragons and eagles. It’s handy for Angmar to get an extra dragon but soon needs to prioritise bodies. The High Elves definitely want to spam Eagles and do start to try to do so but the cost slows them down. If the fight had remained in the balance a little longer then I think we’d have seen progressively more eagles around. Is there a possible mechanism to make each new eagle cost 1 more than the last?

    As you saw, my opponent did try an Oliphant landing and to be fair was mostly thwarted by dice else it might have been a good diversion.

    Saruman does seem to be quite forced to capture and hold Tharbad in this map version and the previous one. It’s not a problem but does seem quite critical and therefore a limitation on strategic freedom.

    As you say, we made little use of one hit flyers. They are handy for picking off lone spearmen, say, but there are so many anti-air units around that it makes the opportunities relatively rare.

    I agree that it was difficult to make significant use of Rohan Riders, although sometimes they were handy. I don’t think the points balance is wrong, it’s just hard to mimic the books given it isn’t that realistic that a nation surrounded by woods and mountains could be quite so cavalry focussed. It would be interesting though to see what 1 extra movement point might do, and/or adding Blitz ability.

    The siege mechanics were interesting. The one query I had was whether flanking should prioritise artillery targets, else any army with a few archers can keep its siege engines pretty safe. At a critical mass, the artillery becomes a juggernaut as it can knock down wall after wall in a succession of towns without loss.


  • Moderators

    minor bug: Just noticed that for Oliphaunts form when they've taken 2 hits, that form has a listed TUV of 0, which throws off the tuv calculations done by the battle calc (which really matters because the ai depends on them for its strategy). I don't know what others units' forms when taken a hit also have the default 0 tuv, thus throwing off estimations; as I was merely watching somebody else's game, and it's not so easy to check. I checked a few other units that happened to be wounded, and there weren't bugs on those, but I couldn't do a complete check.


  • Admin

    @zlefin Glancing at the XML, the reason is that oliphaunt_hit2 aren't purchasable and don't have the tuv unit option defined so it defaults to them being worth 0.


  • Admin

    hello all.

    I say: if eagles are not reduced to 4 movement evil is without a chance at this map. just a balance-issue. Dany agrees. besides that its not really understandable why eagles are so much better in air battles than nazguls (as the higher cost unit).

    best, epi


  • Admin



  • @zlefin Having the oliphaunt_hit2 unit is a purely cosmetic decision, and it should be removed from the game as soon as there is another way to display multiple hits taken by a unit. There is another unit, the dragon_hit2, which had to be removed because of some bug when transforming an air unit mid-battle (it couldn't move that turn in NCM or something, I don't remember).

    @epinikion @Dany I'm not currently in map-making mode, but those 6 savegames would be greatly helpful when I get back to polishing this map. From my experience I'm fairly certain that as it stands, Evil has a clear advantage. Prove me wrong with those games already, please! 😁

    And, eh, @redrum, the game xml is generated by a script from the TAGX.xml outside the map folder. I'll need to re-do the whole xml and get rid of that script now that 🙏 we have variables 🙏. Hacking the xml is not a very clean solution, but feel free to do anything that requires immediate action until I "return".


  • Admin

    @alkexr
    hi, i don`t have all files and probably some of them are not the files from the finish of the game. I add for you, what i found. They are live played in a relatively high speed so probably you ll find mistakes. That doesnt change our conclusion. Problem of evil is that angmar falls and then north is free to pressure moria and saruman, while rhun and mordor and harad usually go strong but not fast enough. high elves go for eagles and later in the game there will be a circle of 5 terrs radius in all direction around the eagle stack as a deadzone for evil. thats too much.

    dany bfa 7.tsvg dany bfa_6.tsvg dany bfa_5.tsvg dany bfa_4tsvg.tsvg dany bfa_3tsvg.tsvg


Log in to reply