Thx! Enjoyed the game, well played. Dice were unkind to you, especially the AA hits.
2013 - AAG 40 League
-
It is outrageous that you would throw these bid rules out there late in the year.Â
Negotiating number of victory cities? Bad idea
Can only keep 2 IPC’s in treasury? Why would you want to keep more? It’s always better to get stuff on the board immediately.I did not say negotiating number of victory cities was a good idea, I just said it did not violate the rules of bidding.
As for 2 IPCs max in treasury, that rule has been codified since day 1. It’s listed on page 1.
-
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=30762.0
Actually, several others have already given their opinions as well, in the above thread from April.
Karl, Seth, tcnance, variance, WheatbeerNo need for those gentlemen to repeat themselves again.
posting there
-
Excuse me for being a little frustrated -
You just kind of freaked me out about the haggling for victory conditions idea, and yes that does seem both arbitrary and unilateral. Also, it came out of the blue (was very unexpected).I am also just concerned about adding major house rules to the game, because only by playing by the uniform rule book can you count on what the rules will be, and your game is transferable to other venues, face to face, etc.
The fact that you consider me an unofficial league moderator assistant is news to me, and will help quell the angst, I think. I would just advise you not to change the rules of the actual game and there will be no revolts.
Oh, and yes you were gone for 4 months with no explanation and the league went on, but what you don’t recognize is that was in no small part due to my efforts.
-
Vote! Yes we can! Who do you want as a moderator?
No voter registration needed!
-
quote author=Gamerman01
Excuse me for being a little frustrated -
You just kind of freaked me out about the haggling for victory conditions idea, and yes that does seem both arbitrary and unilateral. Also, it came out of the blue (was very unexpected).**Sorry about that. It started a joke like response of ridiculousness, probably in poor taste. **
I am also just concerned about adding major house rules to the game, because only by playing by the uniform rule book can you count on what the rules will be, and your game is transferable to other venues, face to face, etc.
I whole heartedly agree! Outside of bidding, which is a house rule that Larry said he won’t touch and Krieghund as refused to ever comment on other than we can do whatever we want with bidding, I would prefer to keep ALL rules per the books! However, the way I see it, I am just one voice of the league, I am not the Dowager Princess. If the community comes and says “we want to use German pieces for America and American pieces for Japan instead of how they are now” I have to go to the rulebook to see if it’s explicitly forbidden, if not, I want to go to the community, ask the question, and let the players vote. (I selected that example because I could give a flying leap, TripleA locks you in on color I think anyway and if you play in person, no one is going to KNOW what color each country is using, right?)
The fact that you consider me an unofficial league moderator assistant is news to me, and will help quell the angst, I think. I would just advise you not to change the rules of the actual game and there will be no revolts.
Pretty sure I told you that last year. Perhaps I did not and for that I do apologize. I do ask, of course, that we TALK about major issues.Oh, and yes you were gone for 4 months with no explanation and the league went on, but what you don’t recognize is that was in no small part due to my efforts.
**I honestly never bothered to go back and check what you did or did not do in my absence. When I came back and things were running smoothly, I assumed you kept things on track as backup moderator and decided not to meddle. (Yea not only do I play Axis and Allies but I am also the only girl you will ever meet who won’t meddle. :P deal with it. - sarcasm font!)And no, I am not going to get into why I was in the hospital. They say they corrected the issue and they also said if they did not correct it, I would never know about it, so I figure the matter is dropped.**
-
OK, Jenn, that’s pretty clear, thanks
-
I didn’t realize the bold would be that BOLD Hope it’s just my resolution on my screen. Trying to type and eat, just got off work an hourish ago. (had to give up my teaching job so now I’m a clip on tie wearing GEEK which is way too much fun, I mean seriously, I used to laugh at people who said if you do what you love you never go to work, but really it’s true! Boss has come back three times and said “Jenn, you have to leave now! Your shift ended an hour ago!”)
-
As it was never officially offered and accepted, let’s fix that NOW.
Gamerman01, I invite you to be the official Assistant League Moderator for the AAG40 2.0 League. If you choose to accept the position I only ask that before any MAJOR decisions are made, you discuss them with me first. (Minor decisions are upholding the current rules, major changes are those that change league rules for this and/or next year.)
If djensen ever decides to say I overstepped my bounds I will take the heat for it fully. Officially and in actuality only he can bestow moderator powers and authority, but I don’t think he will mind this alteration.
-
Thank you for the invitation, and I accept the position.
I enjoy helping people enjoy A&A, and am willing to accept the responsibility of making binding decisions and helping to plan next year’s league, etc etc
I value comaradarie and game-enjoyment, so will always endeavor to maximize the game-playing experience of all league players. I promise to make decisions without respect (bias) for any players, as I have tried in the past with my league rankings project. I look forward to serving everyone in this increased capacity. Thanks again for the invitation and the flexibility that you have shown.
:-) :oops:
-
Hi everyone,
I am new to the League System here. In the first post, all the information is a bit outdated. You only state rules for Alpha3, instead of 2nd Edition. Can you clarify that? I assume that you play the 2nd edition, which, among other things, would mean we bid for allies instead of axis, right?
-
Good point, it does say Alpha3.
Don’t worry, it is 100% 2nd edition. The only difference of 2nd edition from Alpha3 was- 1 less infantry in Egypt
- Korea added to Mongolia rules
- Yukon territory deleted (or was this between Alpha2 and Alpha3?)
You are bidding for Allies, yes. If the bid goes negative, then the one taking the bid can add units as Axis. (-6 bid means I’ll take the Allies and you can add 6 to your Axis)
Way over 95% of bids have been non-negative.If you have any questions, please just feel free to ask here or PM me or Cmdr Jenn, the league moderators.
-
The league standings/rankings are located here:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AhOB4pSke42ydEhlX0RfbGxmM3RMSHJQd083TV9JUGc#gid=0This should help you immensely in sizing up the potential competition. These rankings are updated multiple times per day. You will be added to the list as soon as you’ve completed 1 league game.
Game rules questions can be asked on the G40 FAQ thread, which is stickied.
If you have any more league rules questions, again, feel free to ask them here for the benefit of all. -
Good point, it does say Alpha3.
Don’t worry, it is 100% 2nd edition. The only difference of 2nd edition from Alpha3 was- 1 less infantry in Egypt
- Korea added to Mongolia rules
- Yukon territory deleted (or was this between Alpha2 and Alpha3?)
You are bidding for Allies, yes. If the bid goes negative, then the one taking the bid can add units as Axis. (-6 bid means I’ll take the Allies and you can add 6 to your Axis)
Way over 95% of bids have been non-negative.If you have any questions, please just feel free to ask here or PM me or Cmdr Jenn, the league moderators.
there’s only 1 negative bid that i am aware of… :lol:
-
Thank you very much for the updated information. Now I only need to find opponents :-)
Of course I found the ranking-thread. But the link to the google doc was missing there (at least in the first couple of posts). Since no one wants to search through 65 pages, you might think about at least adding the link to your first post (or maybe I am blind and the link can be easily found somewhere else?).
If I understand the rules correctly, I get 1-3 points for a win (depending on the quality of my opponent). Does PPG means “points per game”? probably not, since there are people with more than 4 PPG. And how differs the official ranking from yours?
One last question: There are several players highlighted in blue. What does that mean, “eligible to play to best of 5”? Can u clarify that for me please?
-
Thank you very much for the updated information. Now I only need to find opponents :-)
That should be easy. Use the private message system or the “Find League opponents here” thread. You won’t have to wait long.
Of course I found the ranking-thread. But the link to the google doc was missing there (at least in the first couple of posts). Since no one wants to search through 65 pages, you might think about at least adding the link to your first post (or maybe I am blind and the link can be easily found somewhere else?).
I do not have the power to edit posts in the Play Boardgames thread, so I cannot change the first post. I do post it every once in awhile. If you would have scanned through the posts for just 2-3 pages you would have found the link. Thanks for the suggestion.
If I understand the rules correctly, I get 1-3 points for a win (depending on the quality of my opponent). Does PPG means “points per game”? probably not, since there are people with more than 4 PPG. And how differs the official ranking from yours?
There is no official ranking system, the only thing that is official is league standings. League standings are strictly by Win %.
The ranking system changed during the year by popular demand. Again, unfortunately it is impossible to edit the original post of the Rankings thread.
Players didn’t like the negative numbers. Now everything is 3 points higher, so
Play a tier 1, you get 2 points for a loss, 6 points for a win
Play a tier 2, you get 1 point for a loss, 5 points for a win
Play a tier 3, you get 0 points for a loss, 4 points for a win
Play a tier 4, you get 0 points for a loss, 3 points for a winOne last question: There are several players highlighted in blue. What does that mean, “eligible to play to best of 5”? Can u clarify that for me please?
As you can see in parentheses, a player must complete 13 games vs. at least 6 other opponents to be eligible to play a best of 5 against another player who has also met the requirements.
Best of 5 means you can play until someone has 3 wins, so 3-0, 3-1, 3-2.
The limit on # of games against an individual is meant to cause players to play against a wider variety of opponents and not just keep playing the same person. -
Tier 4 should be -1 for a loss. Since there can be no negatives maybe bump everythin another point?
-
Tier 4 should be -1 for a loss. Since there can be no negatives maybe bump everythin another point?
Thanks for the idea
Tier 4 don’t win very often and when they do, it’s against tier 3 or 4. They don’t need to be kicked around any further. Earning 0 for a game lost is penalty enough I think :-)
Pretty sure just the idea of losing points for a loss is unpopular, even if it’s only -1 vs. tier 4. -
@Gamer, @Jen
1-Do we have information about the number of players that will participate in the play-offs?
This is pretty important because it affects our decisions who to play with and how many games to play.2-Also, are the standard biding rules the one that allow unlimited number of units per territory? So if a player would like to limit it he should tell it on the start of the game just as the tech option being turned on?
3-Is it allowed to put a sea units in a sz in which U do not have a ship, or your allies do not have one?
As for land territories is it allowed to put (bid) units in an allied territory?
-
@Gamer, @Jen
1-Do we have information about the number of players that will participate in the play-offs?
This is pretty important because it affects our decisions who to play with and how many games to play.2-Also, are the standard biding rules the one that allow unlimited number of units per territory? So if a player would like to limit it he should tell it on the start of the game just as the tech option being turned on?
3-Is it allowed to put a sea units in a sz in which U do not have a ship, or your allies do not have one?
As for land territories is it allowed to put (bid) units in an allied territory?
I guess this is my main issue with this league. Players who are mid-tier don’t get many opportunities to play upper-tier players as they would worry about their winning percentage and a loss to a mid-tier player would hurt them far more than a win would help them. Nearing the end of the season especially, there would seem to be little incentive for anyone in the upper tier to play any games as it may risk their playoff standing.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m loving the league and the effort people are putting in to make it both fun and organized. But I would like to see some incentive for better players to play with “improving” players so that the league is even more rewarding.
Perhaps for next season we could implement a system whereby, depending on your standing from the previous season, you must play x number of games with players in your tier and at least x games against players 1 tier below the tier you begin the season in?
Just a thought…
-
Currently the rules stipulate you must have ownership of the territory at the start of the game, or you must have a ship from your nation in the sea zone where the bid unit is placed. There is currently no limit to the number of units placed in any specific, legal, sea zone or territory but many have stipulated a maximum of one. Restrictions to bids is legal as long as both players agree to the limit. Just like technology is legal as long as both players agree to use technology.
So for example, ANZAC cannot place a destroyer in SZ 35. Yes there are American ships present, but they are not ANZAC ships. Likewise, Russia cannot bid an infantry to Alexandria because they do not own Alexandria at the start of the game.
Next year, after a discussion of the league members of this year and with concurrence of the league moderators, the bidding rules may be changed.
As for the playoffs, the members selected for the playoffs will be the ones with the best percentage of wins to total number of games. Next year that may change to the tiered system that Gamerman’s been working on for over a year. But as you point out, there are concerns about players shunning each other to protect their rating.
Currently the safe guards for that behavior are as follows:
- You can only play your friends or “easy” targets a maximum of 5 times (that means until one player has achieved 3 wins against the same opponent.) That encourages people to play many other players.
- Ranking is determined by number of wins divided by total number of games. (#Win/#Game) Which means playing the worst player in the league actually helps you as your odds of winning against the worst players is significantly higher than playing the top or second best player in the league.
As for the number of people in the playoffs, I am not sure yet. Gamerman and I need to talk about it. Last year we only had 3 people qualify for the playoffs at all, and 1 of them did not want to participate which is why the opening post has it called a championship game and not playoffs. This year is significantly larger which means we will have many more players qualify. Now, what I can say are these kinds of competitions (championships and tournaments) break up nicely in blocks of: 2, 4, 8, 16 and 32 (just keep doubling it.) That’s so you can easily have winners play winners until you only have 2 players remaining.
I would assume that Gamerman and I would agree on top 8 players (that’s 4 games to determine champion.) The idea is to finish the 2013 league before the 2015 league after all!
Suggested Topics
