@AndrewAAGamer it looks like I posted twice, but they are the same.
L20 #1 trulpen (X) vs Amon-Sul (A+7) BM3
-
@trulpen said in L20 #1 trulpen (X) vs Amon-Sul (A+7) BM3:
Don’t remember any ac. And the mistaken roll was a sorry situation.
Well, all in all a very well played game on your part. Would love to try it again. I’m not so sure of the validity of the all-out Chinese support, but perhaps I just lack rational insight.
Well, i do not know too, but it worked in this game and i did not know U are an Elite player, with 5-1 win loss rating, so it was tested on a very strong opponent. But the thing is there was an element of surprise on my part which i would not have on any future battle with me as the allies against u
-
@trulpen said in L20 #1 trulpen (X) vs Amon-Sul (A+7) BM3:
When was it? Before I hit sz112 the forst time and failed?
Just before that battle where i scored 5/5 and we nullified it.
-
@trulpen said in L20 #1 trulpen (X) vs Amon-Sul (A+7) BM3:
Oh, I didn’t see that. Sorry. Would’ve contemplated it atleast.
I said i wont changes so dont worry. My bad. I have to play more patiently.
-
Me too.
It definitely worked! I underestimated the power of that opening and didn’t respond accordingly. Played in a standard way, trying to control all of China, which dispersed power too much.
-
Think I’m tier 1 now and with a 5/5 win ratio.
-
@trulpen said in L20 #1 trulpen (X) vs Amon-Sul (A+7) BM3:
Me too.
It definitely worked! I underestimated the power of that opening and didn’t respond accordingly. Played in a standard way, trying to control all of China, which dispersed power too much.
And the Korea move confused U.
I personally think I am not a bad player, but that U are better, but in this game I think the element of surprise whas much more on my part.
In some parts of the game i felt like chess player playing against a powerful PC. Xd
-
@trulpen said in L20 #1 trulpen (X) vs Amon-Sul (A+7) BM3:
Think I’m tier 1 now and with a 5/5 win ratio.
U play so many games at the same time so maybe that affects the results. I am, sure U ll be a, high 1, or come back to E again
-
And I think that my constant attacks against U when i had 30, 40 or 50 % odds confused U too. I ve combined attacks with allies, made some sacrificies, but disrupted Ur plans.
And economy was working for me so I could afford it
-
The thing that confused me is your mechanized german stack. Ok U ve threatened India, Egypt, Russia, even China, U took some middle east money. But why havent U attacked Russia? Or India? Or Egypt? Especially Russia, U could taken IMHO
-
Thanks for reassuring. At the moment I feel like a degenerate clown. Mainly for atleast three other games that I’ve lost or will lose, where I’ve made really silly, stupid blunders.
Yes, I also play too impatiently. I also play so many games at the same time since it’s nerve cracking to wait for moves. It’s a bad strategy. It does confuse things at times. I make a move and somehow mix things up with other games.
There’s also a strain on a personal level, but I won’t go into that here.
I also feel your win was well-deserved. I would’ve continued if I had taken Hawaii and then been able to secure it. I would just skip over China and leave it almost forever. That’s actually interesting that China can very well have over 500 units and it doesn’t matter so much. A bit of income loss for Japan and two VCs, but not crucial.
-
Yes, I should’ve pressed harder on Russia.
-
Well I wouldnt (totally) agreed to that. Ok i dont know what would happened if U quited China earlier,
But China is very important (for Japan) because its a 20+ ipc, and for japan the economy is crucial in fighting usa and other allies.
There are 2 big pools for japan, 1st is china, 2nd are the big islands.
-
The thing is if u loose china, u loose kwangtung, and burma is sealed. So its harder to take Indochina against the Brits, but still not impassable though
-
No, it’s not a light decision. Preferable for Japan is to control China. But if it can’t be done it’s not the end of the world.
If Japan has to choose between China and atleast two of Hawaii, Calcutta and Sydney, I’d choose the latter without a blink.
I’d say the DEI are top priority in the early game and then China. They are parallell entities though.
-
Yeah the problem with more games at the same time its not just loosing focus, u almost had no tactical mistakes and oversights against me, but probable mixture of various games in ur had.
-
@trulpen said in L20 #1 trulpen (X) vs Amon-Sul (A+7) BM3:
No, it’s not a light decision. Preferable for Japan is to control China. But if it can’t be done it’s not the end of the world.
If Japan has to choose between China and atleast two of Hawaii, Calcutta and Sydney, I’d choose the latter without a blink.
I’d say the DEI are top priority in the early game and then China. They are parallell entities though.
Dei are the big four islands?
-
@trulpen said in L20 #1 trulpen (X) vs Amon-Sul (A+7) BM3:
No, it’s not a light decision. Preferable for Japan is to control China. But if it can’t be done it’s not the end of the world.
If Japan has to choose between China and atleast two of Hawaii, Calcutta and Sydney, I’d choose the latter without a blink.
I’d say the DEI are top priority in the early game and then China. They are parallell entities though.
Its hard to take India, on sea only, but it can be done. There are ways, but with heavy, casualties
-
Yes, it’s the money islands.
-
Sydney is a hard sheel. Its weird but Honolulu can most easily be taken and held for a rd
-
Analysis trulpen vs Amon-Sul #1
Now I’ve looked through the game history quickly. I’ve started some analysis of dice, but am not sure I’ll finish that. I believe though that it can be shown how great impact a strong bias may have. It does however take a strong player to be able to take advantage of benifical occurrences.
As a general aspect I can say that I played all my nations rather slentrianic during the opening. I was not impressed by your opening moves, especially with Russia, and I realized pretty late what poison it could carry. Therefore I didn’t put much thought into my moves during the early game, but just did what I more or less usually do. Did not yet understand what a strong player you are. That’s a very dangerous attitude, and I’ve learned that lesson also from chess.
Europe
Germany was close to being able to sack Moscow already in G5. i should’ve probably focused on putting more pressure on Russia during G6-7, making a take-over a real threat. G early lost a lot more air than expected from bad dice (1 fig G1 and 3 fig, 2 tac G2 - of course expected to lose air in the G2-battle, but just not that many planes).
The loss of air made a big impact in EU with G having to replenish the luftwaffe, which in reality is a lot less land units being produced. G also lost focus by helping out the italian navy. Still more focus and pressure of Russia was possible and I believe that was the route G should’ve taken instead of dabbling in the ME and Med.
A big difference in our third game is that I prepare for a G3DOW there with the 2 inf, 6 art purchase. I believe that’s stronger in BM3 than the G1-purchase here of 1 ac, 2 mech, 1 tank. The idea is to G2DOW and being able to get a grip on E Poland immediately. It’s not necessary though, since G’s first step priority is to control Ukraine. Usually that is possible only in G4 anyway, whether G2- or G3DOW.
In OOB I really like the G1-purchase of Graf Zepp (ac) along with 2 mech and a tank. The idea is to strafe sz111 and secure the dmg Bismarck, while at the same time securing an intrusion into E Poland G2. Actually I think that a G3DOW should be better in OOB as well, because of the possibility of I2DOW, allowing Germany to enter into Russia without DOW if Italy takes either E Poland or Bessarabia.
I haven’t looked into it closely, but I think being occupied with Moscow and the ME and not really succeeding there, the allies were able to put very strong pressure and get control of several key positions on the western front. Especially Norway is a big blow for G.
Pacific
I definitely played J very much slentrian. I pursued a full expansion in China. The resources put into the west thinned out the power in the south. Also J was super-unlucky against C on many occasions, losing a lot more land units than what is expected. Eventually the japanese were overcome by the multinational pressure in the mainland, failing to get enough reinforcements into action. I’d say that especially here the dice made a huge difference regarding the situation around Anwhe and Yunnan.
I also think I tried too much to get a hold on FIC and Malaya.
The allied defense of Yunnan was super-strong, but so is J and it should be possible to atleast hold out defensively, keeping up the pressure. You definitely played very well with the allies in this area, creating threats and inconveniences.
When J fell through I believe the game was more or less over. Well played by you, but unfortunately under-achieving opposition on my part. The dice-bias was only part of it. I’d say you out-played me mainly through strategy and tactics.
In our third game I wasn’t sure that you’d go with the same strategy. I understand why you want to try it out. The element of surprise is gone and J focus much more on putting pressure on Yunnan, while controlling Kwangtung. Malaya and FIC are much less important and are second priority. As is Korea, despite the big annoyance of having a US stronghold there with support of a huge russian stack.
Suggested Topics
