Pointlessly Broken

[Eqqman]

Something that alarms me is that HBG is apparently willing to make changes to the game based on the word of one guy (no offense intended to vonLettowVorbeck1914, you could be 100% correct, that’s not the point here).  It’s not that uncommon for game designers to actually be bad at playing their own games, so I can easily envision a situation where the game design staff just misses something and slaps down a rule change that then creates another imbalance someplace else.  Hence my advice to see how many top league players think they can hold out as the USA in this situation (allweneedislove comes to mind in particular).  If somebody that can consistently clobber you has some advice, that is probably worth more than your own guesses.

Hopefully there is in fact some kind of rigorous process in place to vet issues before rules changes start coming out the door.

[gamerman01]

I agree with Eggman.  Let’s not be too hasty to change rules, here.

Starting a game with VonL to test this.  Here is the game thread for anyone interested.  Feel free to give me advice - after all, I’m playing against an unstoppable strategy.

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=29837.0;topicseen

[vonLettowVorbeck1914]

@Eggman:

Something that alarms me is that HBG is apparently willing to make changes to the game based on the word of one guy (no offense intended to vonLettowVorbeck1914, you could be 100% correct, that’s not the point here).  It’s not that uncommon for game designers to actually be bad at playing their own games, so I can easily envision a situation where the game design staff just misses something and slaps down a rule change that then creates another imbalance someplace else.  Hence my advice to see how many top league players think they can hold out as the USA in this situation (allweneedislove comes to mind in particular).  If somebody that can consistently clobber you has some advice, that is probably worth more than your own guesses.

Hopefully there is in fact some kind of rigorous process in place to vet issues before rules changes start coming out the door.

Didn’t Krieghund also  say that after reviewing the situation he saw a problem?

[gamerman01]

@Krieghund:

We’ve got around half a dozen possible fixes we’re considering, but we’d like to wait a little while and see if someone comes up with a counter (slim chance, I know).  If no counter is forthcoming in a reasonable amount of time, we’ll publish a fix for testing.

He also said this.  Give me a chance to come up with a counter.

[vonLettowVorbeck1914]

Then please play me live. I have been at this for almost 3 hours now and have 1 turn of the first round to show for it. Otherwise I will just throw up a few of the savegames I happen to have from other tests, if I can figure out how to do that. This is increasingly ceasing to be worth my time and effort.

To be honest you are coming across as a little arrogant (The “enter gamerman” comment was worthy of at least one scoff) and that is also a big turn-off. I don’t really care whether you are god’s gift to balance testing or not, I am not going to spread out over days what can take merely several hours.

[gamerman01]

Oh, please.  Look who’s bragging about how he’s broken the game - found by a newbie, no less.  Somebody who’s never played the game just waltzes in and shows it’s biggest flaw.

I come along and contend that perhaps it’s not all it’s cracked up to be, and now look at how you’re talking.

Why did it take almost 3 hours to make a J1 playing by forum, and it takes so much less time playing “online”?  It’s the same program, and you make the moves the same way, don’t you?  I don’t understand your problem.

Dude, I have played way over 100 games of A&A in the past few years and consistently win over 80% of the time.  I think I have reason to be confident.  If you decide I’m arrogant, well that’s up to you.  If you’re going to get all huffy and whiney and not just play the game with a challenger, then you need to shut up about your grand strategy that you spent well over 3 hours typing it all up painstakingly to tell us.  I don’t know what to make of you…  Can we just play the game without further comments, or not?

[Eqqman]

@vonLettowVorbeck1914:

Didn’t Krieghund also  say that after reviewing the situation he saw a problem?

Yes.  The other part of my comment was that (sometimes) game designers are not the best players of their own games, so their own opinions can also be unreliable.  This doesn’t mean I don’t think Krieghund is a good player or not, since I couldn’t say.  I just mention it as a possibility.

[vonLettowVorbeck1914]

@Gamerman01:

Why did it take almost 3 hours to make a J1 playing by forum, and it takes so much less time playing “online”? Â It’s the same program, and you make the moves the same way, don’t you? Â I don’t understand your problem.

I ran into numerous issues with passwords, email registration, and plain  learning the darn PBF format.

Had you met me in the TripleA lobby like I had suggested we would already be done with the first game.

Again, please correct me if I am wrong about your “enter gamerman” comment sounding extremely arrogant.

Lastly, I am not convinced if Pac is worth spending a week on just one game. As you said in another thread “Few people give a crap about P40 anyway.”

Playing by forum simply does not seem to be worth my time. My invitation for a live game on TripleA still stands, as it has for a long time. You told me PBF would be a lot easier that I thought, but sorry, it’s not. It’s incredibly tedious, and I just don’t care for checking back all the time over the course of the week (or more) when I can finish the same game with the same moves in a few hours. You challenged me, so my terms are that we play live if we are to play. In my opinion it is unreasonable for you to challenge me and expect me to invest  immensely more time than I have previously offered.

Perhaps I am scared of playing pbf, but it’s not because I am scared of your counters. In fact, I am sort of rooting for you to find a counter. I don’t like rule changes after release, and it would be good to avoid having to do that. I just hope that there are no better strategies than I have for this type of strat. What I am “scared” of in PBF is wasting colossal amounts of time.

[Imperious Leader]

As soon as Gamerman01 whips your idea into ashes, perhaps no more arrogant threads like “Pointlessly Broken?”

Perhaps saying less would be a better idea.  :roll:

[vonLettowVorbeck1914]

Here’s two games, don’t really remember who was allies and who was axis in all of them. I am not claiming that the optimal Japanese or Allied strats were done in any of these. Part of my problem is that I name most games by who was playing them, so there are probably more saves in there somewhere, but w/e, the basic idea is here

Pac Broken Sword J7.tsvg
Pac Broke 2 USA Block UK Dec J5.tsvg

[Eqqman]

@vonLettowVorbeck1914:

Here’s two games, don’t really remember who was allies and who was axis in all of them.

Thanks!  In which of these do you think the Axis player performed most effectively?

[vonLettowVorbeck1914]

Probably the sword one (I think that was the one after we switched sides), but IMO the allied play in that one wasn’t that good.

[gamerman01]

I see in one (the one that goes up to J5), on USA1 he moved 3 infantry and an AA gun to the Aleutians and blocked it off with all kinds of blocking ships.

I haven’t studied it long enough to see what that accomplished, but I note that those 3 infantry and AA gun reduce the odds on WUS on J5 from around 80% to around 40%.  No doubt there was a method to the “madness” of defending the Aleutians to the teeth on US1, but those 3 infantry and AA ended up stranded after that.

I might look at the other one too, but really the only way to test it is to have other players try their hand at it and play out more games.  I’ll move the Allies in round 1 tonight, and hopefully you’ll respond with a J2 after that.

[vonLettowVorbeck1914]

Just let me know when you got 2 hours free, and we will save a lot of time. I have alread explained earlier in the thread why I think that move is important. Please don’t expect me to commit several days to this game when you won’t read what has already been posted on the subject. Fair?

[Zhukov44]

couple random points without having read the whole discussion

-Trying to figure out an effective counter to a devastating strategy is something that takes time.  Which means its ideal for pbem.  It’s also ideal for triplea live, since there are no timers and most players are quite patient.  But either way, something like this can’t be rushed.  If you play pbem you ought to give each other a day to make moves, especially during the workweek.

-It’s not really fair to ask a live player to test a strat with a pbem game or vice versa.  So somebody has to compromise.  Live is the shiz niz, but pbem gives each person plenty of time to think and fits well into busy schedules.  It’s a matter of taste and experience.

-Pacific happens to be ideal for pbem–Japan-Allies-Japan-etc.  So any Pacific pbem should move along fairly briskly.

Pacific is unbalanced and needs a bid whether Hollywood works 100% or not.  I suspect the Hollywood strategy does work but I’d need to study those maps to be sure.

[vonLettowVorbeck1914]

Good point about the compromise, I posted an idea for one awhile back in the other thread.

In the meantime, if anyone is looking for a live game as the allies (or as the Axis if you are doing a similar J1), PM me so we can work out a time.

[gamerman01]

OK, I have studied both of the games you posted, for about an hour.
I see what you mean about the sword one being more effective.

I do have some ideas.

1. Can’t the USA deny Japan taking British Colombia on J3 by moving everything to defend British Columbia, blocking Z9 to protect WUS and blocking Z7 to block the Z6 transports from attacking British Columbia?

Perhaps Japan could prevent this by leaving ships in Z7, clearing the whole path to Canada.  The ANZAC cruiser should be moved to Z26 on ANZ1, though, and possibly with some positioning of the USA fleet in Hawaii or other places, the express lane to Canada can be clogged.

2. Why didn’t the ANZAC fleet go straight north immediately?

3. Why not have UK build a bomber on UK1, fly it to Queensland on UK2, and to WUS on UK3?

I don’t know about 2nd edition, but Japan was nigh unto unstoppable in OOB.  They had a better chance of winning NOT going for USA first, even though they had a decent (30-70% depending) chance of winning that way.  Like Zhukov said, Pacific is unbalanced and needs a bid.  Even a small bid of 3 or 6 would give USA an infantry or 2 that could be huge in stopping this.

But now that I’ve studied the 2 games, I think I will make the Allies round 1 move.

Zhukov - can you explain to me why it is not fair to ask a live player to test a strat with a pbem game?  I don’t understand the problem, nor why he’s claiming it took him THREE HOURS to do a J1.  I took care of setting up the thread and the game with the e-mail addresses and told him what to click.  He got stuck on the “password” and I told him to use his e-mail password.  Then he went crazy telling me what a jerk I was for wanting to play by forum…  I don’t understand.

[Zhukov44]

Zhukov - can you explain to me why it is not fair to ask a live player to test a strat with a pbem game?

Sometimes live players do not find pbem fun, at least at first.  We play A&A to have fun, so if he’s not having fun perhaps he’s feeling frustrated.

On the other hand, it’s easy for anyone familiar with TripleA and forums to get used to Triplea by forum, once they get past the things some people find tedious (how long it takes TripleA files to load, waiting for opponents to post etc).

The format of pbf should be easy for anyone familiar with TripleA.  But the ‘art’ of playing by pbem takes longer to master.

[gamerman01]

Thanks

US1 is done.  I did something very different than in the sword game, moving the USA fleet to Hawaii.  It is very safe for J2, and is in much better position to possibly clog sea lanes.

Also, in the sword game a destroyer and cruiser were used as blockers on US1 that are unnecessary.  USA has sufficient forces without even buying artillery to keep the Japanese from taking and holding British Columbia.  It appears the intent of the blockers was to prevent a landing on Br Col on J2, but I find this wholly unnecessary.  I am using 2 destroyer blockers to keep the USA fleet safe at Pearl Harbor for J2.

Debated about keeping the 2 infantry in Hawaii, but was nervous about being able to get them to USA later, and they help with the threat to take back Br Columbia.

Finishing other allies now.  Will be buying bomber UK1, I think.

[gamerman01]

Round 1 is in the books.
I do believe I’ve improved the Allied response significantly from the Sword game.
Meanwhile, VonL is pitching a fit because he’s so opposed to playing by forum.  Jeez, it’s a 3 round strategy, we’re 1/3 done already.  You only have 2 more moves to make - we’ll be done in a day or two depending on my work schedule.

I can’t spend 5 hours at one sitting playing a “live” game.  I’m spending about an hour per move, here.

Listen to Zhukov, buck up, and finish the damn game.

Man, I’ve already spent about 4 hours on your stupid idea today - don’t tell me it was all for nothing.
How long do you spend on your moves?  You already know what you’re going to do - what will it take, 20 minutes a move?  Tops?

This one game is going to have to prove things well enough, and I’m pretty sure it will, one way or the other.  No way I’m playing more than one game with a guy that freaking bitches as much as you do.  Good knight!