G40 League House Rule project

[gamerman01]

Updated

AA Gamer’s League Rankings.xls

[tcnance]

i dont have a ranking # by my name, does that mean im just rank.

[boldfresh]

alexgreat should be tier 1 gamer.  he’s on the Ancients with Me1945.

[gamerman01]

@tcnance:

i dont have a ranking # by my name, does that mean im just rank.

After 3 completed games you will have a ranking  :-)
And red print, and bigger, non-italicized font

If that’s not incentive to finish 3 games, I don’t know what is  :wink:

[gamerman01]

@Boldfresh:

alexgreat should be tier 1 gamer.  he’s on the Ancients with Me1945.

I thought about it, but it only affects MostHoly by 1 point

If you think he’s tier one based on your play with him, I’ll change him.

[gamerman01]

@Eggman:

@Gamerman01:

He’s not nearly as good as you think he is.� Shall I stop buying tech now, just for you?� I’ve wasted 20 IPC’s so far, so that would be quite a handicap.

My opinion isn’t relevant, his record speaks for itself.  Your comment about the expense reveals why you can’t really evaluate the results on a game where tech was allowed to skew the outcome.  If you spend little on tech and get it, you should expect to win since tech has no counter except luck.  If you spend a lot on tech and get nothing, you would probably expect to lose since in hindsight it would seem obvious that the money would have been better spent on units.

If you continue to spend money on tech in your second game v. love and fail to get a major one (some are clearly far less useful than others - I’m looking at you, War Bonds!) and still manage to win, then I’ll be impressed (not that this matters) and will eat a virtual hat or what have you.

Egg, Allweneedislove left Berlin wide open and undefended and I had to point it out for him to change his noncoms so that UK wouldn’t just walk in on about the 4th round.
He lost that game badly and tech had absolutely nothing to do with it.

Now that he’s completely reversed his earlier, adamant, stance (and long-winded thread) that tanks are a waste of money and bought them en masse with Germany on round 1 and round 2, he will probably take Moscow early, but it remains to be seen whether he can win the game.  And I threw away 5 IPC’s on R1 on tech to boot.

Find someone else to worship.

[gamerman01]

@Eggman:

My opinion isn’t relevant, his record speaks for itself.

So does yours.  It says we really shouldn’t pay much attention to anything you have to say regarding strategy.

Sorry - truth hurts

[gamerman01]

Updated

Changed Allies vs. Axis tally at far right

I now have a total by tier, of Allied vs. Axis results, with the grand total at the bottom.

Over all, the Allies are 57-53

.518 win pct

Please welcome our newest ranked player, Snake eyes, weighing in right now at #15
There are now 27 players who are ranked (have completed 3 games)

At some point, maybe half way through the season, I may up the minimum count of games for rankings, maybe from 3 to 5 or something, because of the over all relative volume of games.  Not that it matters

AA Gamer’s League Rankings.xls

[gamerman01]

Updated

AA Gamer’s League Rankings.xls

[gamerman01]

Updated

AA Gamer’s League Rankings.xls

[gamerman01]

Updated

AA Gamer’s League Rankings.xls

[gamerman01]

Gentlemen,

(Jennifer aka Snow White, aka Wendy (and the lost boys) hasn’t started playing in league this year yet)

We have a tie score!

Axis - 57
Allies - 57

Updated

AA Gamer’s League Rankings.xls

[gamerman01]

Allies surge ahead on Karl’s victory

Karl, you need to pick up the pace, man, Jeff has still finished more games than you

Games played leaders -
Jeff - 23
Karl - 20
Egg - 16
JWW - 14
Kabloom - 13
Boldfresh - 11
Ziggurat - 11
Wheatbeer - 11
Odonis - 10
Variance - 9
Fortress - 9

Updated

AA Gamer’s League Rankings.xls

[Karl7]

I’m working on it!  :lol:

I got a couple coming down the pike.

I have to say, the allies are kicking butt.  Allied play has really picked up.  Despite being one of the big believers in the Axis advantage, I am beginning think there might be a alight allied advantage!  What?  :-o :-o

[gamerman01]

Wow, that is big news.

You saw the light earlier than I anticipated  :-)  But we must still be in the minority because everyone’s bidding bonuses to the Allies….

Germans could sure use another sub to start with!  :-)

[Karl7]

What can be said?

The Allies are getting really good at getting in and disrupting the Axis expansion.  I have yet to see a game in the last 2 months where Japan expanded and managed to hold the DEI for more than a couple rounds.

Further, I haven’t seen or been able myself to get Moscow in any game for months.  (I lost moscow to Most Holy but that was because I made a really dumb move and could have held it otherwise….  I blame BOLD for distracting with his vengeance game :-P)

Yeah, Germany, alas, I am starting to worry may be under powered.  Maybe another fighter, say in Romania, and another easy NO?  Like say France?  Those couple turns in between R1 and when Germany can get Leningrad when Germany only makes like 50 really hurt the Axis cause.

[Karl7]

The other thing I am seeing is that even slightly bad luck for the Axis in the first couple rounds can be devastating.

Losing a couple planes in the G1 fleet battles is a potential game ender as can be the whole Taranto battle/R1 med battles if the UK gets lucky and can shoot down the Italian air force in defense.

Also, failing to take Yunnan J1 is a game ender in my opinion for the Axis.  This actually happened to me in my game with Zhukov.  I attack with everything I could, got like 1 hit and China responding with 3 hits or something.  Long story short, if China holds Yunnan, UK fortifies and Japan basically will never get moving in Asia.

[gamerman01]

Intelligent comments and observations and lessons learned - thank you for sharing.

I agree.  The Allies are numerous and the ones with more options.  They know what the Axis must do to win and have numerous ways of disrupting or stopping it.  As people learn that the Allies need to “rotate and pray” (Cow’s words), the Axis will have less success.  It is often a good idea, for example, to throw ANZ planes out there in the line of fire like on money islands and sometimes they take out 2 or more Japanese infantry.  Those Japanese infantry are worth much, much more than 3 IPC’s because of their timing, opportunity, threats projected, and position.

Perhaps the Allied bids will diminish over time and maybe approach zero.  If 2 players recognize an Allied advantage, their bid may even go to the Axis.

I haven’t tried it enough times, but I find Japan very difficult to play against a good Allied player.  Too many enemies, too much space to cover.  It’s very difficult even to take out 1 of the Allied powers, and Japan has 5 enemies, often.

I think India and Australia are overpowered.  Japan shouldn’t have such a hard time taking and holding money islands, as you observed.  ANZ and India shouldn’t start with 3 planes, IMO.  Maybe 2.

[gamerman01]

@Gamerman01:

It’s very difficult even to take out 1 of the Allied powers, and Japan has 5 enemies, often.

I had India and New South Wales in mind, not Russia or China.

[Karl7]

I haven’t tried it enough times, but I find Japan very difficult to play against a good Allied player.  Too many enemies, too much space to cover.  It’s very difficult even to take out 1 of the Allied powers, and Japan has 5 enemies, often.

Here I think the issue is that the US can go 70+% against Japan because the UK and the USSR can hold out against Germany long enough before the US would really have to help them.

If Germany were able to seriously threaten the USSR and UK, the US would have to put more in the Atlantic allowing  Japan to get moving.

As is, your right, Anzac/India go devil may care and throw their stuff in the line of fire to whittle down Japan and the US rolls in and does clean up.  You don’t really have to worry about losing India and Sydney.  Not good to lose them, but to do so Japan would basically be allowing the US to overrun the entire Pacific.