Game History
Round: 9 Purchase Units - Japanese Japanese buy 1 carrier, 10 infantry and 1 submarine; Remaining resources: 0 PUs; 6 SuicideAttackTokens; Combat Move - Japanese 1 armour, 3 artilleries and 13 infantry moved from Korea to Southern Manchuria 1 fighter and 1 tactical_bomber moved from 6 Sea Zone to Southern Manchuria 2 fighters and 1 tactical_bomber moved from Davao to Guam 1 tactical_bomber moved from Kwangtung to Guam 1 marine moved from Korea to 6 Sea Zone 1 artillery and 1 infantry moved from Japan to 6 Sea Zone 1 artillery, 2 carriers, 1 cruiser, 2 destroyers, 1 infantry, 1 marine and 1 transport moved from 6 Sea Zone to 22 Sea Zone 1 artillery, 1 infantry and 1 marine moved from 22 Sea Zone to Guam 1 fighter moved from Kwangtung to 22 Sea Zone 1 fighter moved from Japan to 22 Sea Zone 1 armour moved from Kwangtung to Kwangsi Japanese take Kwangsi from Chinese 1 armour moved from Kwangsi to Kwangtung Combat - Japanese Battle in Southern Manchuria Japanese attack with 1 armour, 3 artilleries, 1 fighter, 13 infantry and 1 tactical_bomber Chinese defend with 1 artillery and 2 infantry; Russians defend with 1 artillery and 2 infantry Japanese win, taking Southern Manchuria from Chinese with 1 armour, 3 artilleries, 1 fighter, 13 infantry and 1 tactical_bomber remaining. Battle score for attacker is 20 Casualties for Chinese: 1 artillery and 2 infantry Casualties for Russians: 1 artillery and 2 infantry Battle in 22 Sea Zone Japanese attack with 2 carriers, 1 cruiser, 2 destroyers, 2 fighters and 1 transport ANZAC defend with 1 destroyer Japanese win with 2 carriers, 1 cruiser, 1 destroyer, 2 fighters and 1 transport remaining. Battle score for attacker is 0 Casualties for Japanese: 1 destroyer Casualties for ANZAC: 1 destroyer Battle in Guam Japanese attack with 1 artillery, 2 fighters, 1 infantry, 1 marine and 2 tactical_bombers Americans defend with 1 airfield and 1 infantry Japanese win, taking Guam from Americans with 1 artillery, 2 fighters, 1 marine and 2 tactical_bombers remaining. Battle score for attacker is 0 Casualties for Japanese: 1 infantry Casualties for Americans: 1 infantry Non Combat Move - Japanese 1 submarine moved from 36 Sea Zone to 22 Sea Zone 2 fighters moved from Guam to 22 Sea Zone 1 tactical_bomber moved from Guam to 36 Sea Zone 1 tactical_bomber moved from Guam to 22 Sea Zone 1 fighter moved from 22 Sea Zone to Davao 1 tactical_bomber moved from 36 Sea Zone to Davao 1 infantry moved from Shansi to Chahar 1 infantry moved from Anhwe to Shansi 3 infantry moved from Shantung to Anhwe 1 artillery moved from Kiangsi to Anhwe 1 artillery moved from Kiangsi to Kwangtung 1 armour moved from Kiangsi to Kwangtung 1 infantry moved from Kiangsi to Kwangtung 1 fighter and 1 tactical_bomber moved from Southern Manchuria to 6 Sea Zone 1 aaGun moved from Korea to Southern Manchuria 1 infantry moved from Japan to 6 Sea Zone 1 infantry moved from 6 Sea Zone to Korea 1 transport moved from 6 Sea Zone to 7 Sea Zone 1 infantry moved from Japan to 7 Sea Zone 1 infantry and 1 transport moved from 7 Sea Zone to 22 Sea Zone 1 infantry moved from 22 Sea Zone to Guam 1 artillery and 3 infantry moved from Japan to 6 Sea Zone 1 artillery, 1 infantry and 1 transport moved from 6 Sea Zone to 36 Sea Zone 1 artillery and 1 infantry moved from 36 Sea Zone to Davao 2 infantry and 1 transport moved from 6 Sea Zone to 36 Sea Zone 2 infantry moved from 36 Sea Zone to Davao 2 transports moved from 36 Sea Zone to 6 Sea Zone Place Units - Japanese 1 carrier and 1 submarine placed in 6 Sea Zone 3 infantry placed in Shantung 7 infantry placed in Japan Turn Complete - Japanese Total Cost from Convoy Blockades: 2 Rolling for Convoy Blockade Damage in 42 Sea Zone. Rolls: 2 Japanese collect 41 PUs (2 lost to blockades); end with 41 PUs Objective Japanese 6 Home Islands: Japanese met a national objective for an additional 3 PUs; end with 44 PUsLeague General Discussion Thread
-
We need more players if we’re going to create two or three different leagues. I believe that it is the proper solution to the issue, yet it wont be as fun if there are only 5 OOB players/10-15 P2V players. I suggest advertising the league/s in the Facebook groups
-
BOOOO!
Did I scare you?
I am at rock bottom. My gym is shuttered. I got no woman. I’ve put on ten pounds. It’s time to get back to basics.
WE NEED A LEAGUE IN A&A CLASSIC! NO FANCY BS BALANCED MOD NERD SH*T!
GOT TIME!
-
@WindowWasher said in League General Discussion Thread:
We need more players if we’re going to create two or three different leagues. I believe that it is the proper solution to the issue, yet it wont be as fun if there are only 5 OOB players/10-15 P2V players. I suggest advertising the league/s in the Facebook groups
Well,
Thats the problem of OOB.
As for PTV with time it will have more people playing it. I expect a lot of people participating in both BM and PTV leagues.
-
@WindowWasher said in League General Discussion Thread:
We need more players if we’re going to create two or three different leagues. I believe that it is the proper solution to the issue, yet it wont be as fun if there are only 5 OOB players/10-15 P2V players. I suggest advertising the league/s in the Facebook groups
i go back in my games to see who i havent seen in a while and message them. i get some takers. its worth a try. theres some upper level players i’ve never played if someone in an upper level wants to go back and message them.
-
My two cents, been doing this a LONG time here, seen a few playoff, year end, and league changes.
Any games played in the league thread count in the standings, BM, OOB, P2V. People who choose to play here agree to their opponent and which version is played. Simple.
For year end tourney or playoffs, players can agree to the version of the game played, and if they can’t decide a standard is selected at the beginning of the year, let’s say the most popular version played the previous season, as an example BM.
That’s it. One league thread, One league standings, let’s keep it simple.
Is @gamerman01 still around? is he still maintaining the league standings doc? If so has he chimed in?
-
@666 not yet but he will for sure.
-
@666 said in League General Discussion Thread:
My two cents, been doing this a LONG time here, seen a few playoff, year end, and league changes.
Any games played in the league thread count in the standings, BM, OOB, P2V. People who choose to play here agree to their opponent and which version is played. Simple.
For year end tourney or playoffs, players can agree to the version of the game played, and if they can’t decide a standard is selected at the beginning of the year, let’s say the most popular version played the previous season, as an example BM.
That’s it. One league thread, One league standings, let’s keep it simple.
Is @gamerman01 still around? is he still maintaining the league standings doc? If so has he chimed in?
I agree, under one notion.
As long as BM is the dominant version. (or in future PTV as dominant).
What shall we do if in a year or two we have BM and PTV equally popular?
Or there is one option.
We can give a rule that the higher ranked or lower ranked player chooses the game if there is no mutual agreement.
-
@Amon-Sul not a fan of.
Because this started the discussion in the beginning. -
@aequitas-et-veritas said in League General Discussion Thread:
@Amon-Sul not a fan of.
Because this started the discussion in the beginning.I am for 2 separate leagues, or 3.(if we count oob)
I am just exploring other options.
-
@Amon-Sul i meant your suggestion to let either the high or the low Tier decide.
-
what if two players have the same PPG , what will be the tie breaker?
-
https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/28660/2020-league-rules
It’s rule 3c in the league rules
-
@666 said in League General Discussion Thread:
My two cents, been doing this a LONG time here, seen a few playoff, year end, and league changes.
Any games played in the league thread count in the standings, BM, OOB, P2V. People who choose to play here agree to their opponent and which version is played. Simple.
For year end tourney or playoffs, players can agree to the version of the game played, and if they can’t decide a standard is selected at the beginning of the year, let’s say the most popular version played the previous season, as an example BM.
That’s it. One league thread, One league standings, let’s keep it simple.
Is @gamerman01 still around? is he still maintaining the league standings doc? If so has he chimed in?
Yeah, I’m here, from time to time and I read some of what’s in this thread but not all. You made a good post here.
If @Curtmungus wants to play the 1980 version or whatever, in league play, you can totally do that if you get an opponent to agree. You just won’t probably be able to play it in the playoffs, but playoffs are optional. -
@gamerman01 said in League General Discussion Thread:
For year end tourney or playoffs, players can agree to the version of the game played, and if they can’t decide a standard is selected at the beginning of the year, let’s say the most popular version played the previous season, as an example BM.
I also agree wholeheartedly with 666’s sentiments. The default playoff game should be whatever was most popular that season. In this case, BM. Also, i agree that making separate leagues is not needed. One league works just fine now.
-
When does a match officially start for the two opponents? Has the question of game dodgers ever came up?
Hypothetical: Opponent Y badly wants to play Axis and tries to whittle Opponent Z’s Allied bid down but Opponent Z sticks Y with Allies(+insert bid), requests bid placement. Darn! Y makes up an excuse like an indefinite real-life obstacle to dodge the match. Do game abandonment rules apply?
Basically, does the match start the moment the two players agree to play or does it start after G1 combat phase posting? -
Good question. My guess is that it only starts when G1 scramble orders have been posted. Otherwise, no one can verify that both agreed to play.
Has this ever happened though?
-
@simon33 indeed a good question.
But I would not bother with it @Colt45554 as long as the game thread isn’t up. And that implies for me that no Real decission and comitment was made by the other Player.
It happens from time to time when players realize that they put to much on their plate and agreed without knowing the other Player that well to play a best of three or something like that.
There a plenty players in the league now so you should still find easily replacement for the miss.
If you don’t, contact me via PM. -
@simon33 @aequitas-et-veritas thanks for the responses, gentlemen. It has not happened to me. I was just curious if there was precedence for this throughout the League years.
As simon alluded to, if bidding was done via PM then it might break forum etiquette to release that private conversation to accuse a game dodged. -
And AEV, the “too much on their plate” bit is a good normal reason not to start a game but in this hypothetical, Opponent Y could abuse to dodge
-
I would suggest to not insist on making the game count but to just not play the weasel anymore and advise anyone else in the league to do so, too.
Suggested Topics
