Game History
Round: 3 Purchase Units - Americans Americans buy 1 armour, 1 bomber, 1 fighter, 1 infantry and 3 transports; Remaining resources: 0 PUs; Politics - Americans Trigger Americans War Production Eastern: has removed 1 factory_minor owned by Americans in Eastern United States Trigger Americans War Production Central: has removed 1 factory_minor owned by Americans in Central United States Trigger Americans War Production Western: has removed 1 factory_minor owned by Americans in Western United States Trigger Americans War Production Eastern: Americans has 1 factory_major placed in Eastern United States Trigger Americans War Production Central: Americans has 1 factory_major placed in Central United States Trigger Americans War Production Western: Americans has 1 factory_major placed in Western United States Combat Move - Americans Trigger Americans Unrestricted Movement: Setting movementRestrictionTerritories cleared for rulesAttachment attached to Americans 2 infantry and 1 transport moved from 16 Sea Zone to 17 Sea Zone 2 infantry moved from 17 Sea Zone to Iwo Jima Combat - Americans Battle in Iwo Jima Non Combat Move - Americans 1 artillery, 1 battleship, 1 carrier, 2 cruisers, 3 destroyers, 1 fighter, 1 infantry, 2 submarines, 1 tactical_bomber and 1 transport moved from 16 Sea Zone to 17 Sea Zone 1 artillery and 1 infantry moved from 17 Sea Zone to Iwo Jima 2 carriers and 4 fighters moved from 7 Sea Zone to 17 Sea Zone 1 infantry and 1 mech_infantry moved from Western United States to 10 Sea Zone 1 battleship, 1 infantry, 1 mech_infantry and 1 transport moved from 10 Sea Zone to 26 Sea Zone 1 infantry and 1 mech_infantry moved from 26 Sea Zone to Hawaiian Islands 1 fighter moved from Aleutian Islands to Siberia 2 bombers moved from Alaska to Siberia 1 bomber moved from Western United States to Siberia 1 armour moved from Eastern United States to 101 Sea Zone 1 infantry moved from Eastern United States to 101 Sea Zone 1 armour, 1 infantry and 1 transport moved from 101 Sea Zone to 91 Sea Zone 1 armour and 1 infantry moved from 91 Sea Zone to Gibraltar 1 infantry and 1 mech_infantry moved from Eastern United States to 101 Sea Zone 1 infantry, 1 mech_infantry and 1 transport moved from 101 Sea Zone to 86 Sea Zone 1 infantry and 1 mech_infantry moved from 86 Sea Zone to Brazil Americans take Brazil from Neutral_Allies 1 cruiser and 1 destroyer moved from 101 Sea Zone to 91 Sea Zone Place Units - Americans 2 transports placed in 101 Sea Zone 1 transport placed in 10 Sea Zone 1 armour, 1 bomber, 1 fighter and 1 infantry placed in Western United States Turn Complete - Americans Americans collect 53 PUs; end with 53 PUs Objective Americans 1 Homeland: Americans met a national objective for an additional 10 PUs; end with 63 PUs Objective Americans 3 Defense Obligations: Americans met a national objective for an additional 5 PUs; end with 68 PUs Objective Americans 2 Outer Territories: Americans met a national objective for an additional 5 PUs; end with 73 PUs Purchase Units - Chinese Trigger Chinese Loses Burma Road: Chinese has their production frontier changed to: productionChinese_Burma_Road_Closed Chinese buy 2 infantry; Remaining resources: 2 PUs; Combat Move - Chinese 1 fighter and 11 infantry moved from Suiyuyan to Chahar Chinese take Chahar from Japanese 1 infantry moved from Suiyuyan to Chahar 1 fighter moved from Chahar to Suiyuyan Combat - Chinese Non Combat Move - Chinese Place Units - Chinese 2 infantry placed in Suiyuyan Turn Complete - Chinese Chinese collect 8 PUs; end with 10 PUs Purchase Units - British British buy 1 carrier, 1 destroyer and 3 infantry; Remaining resources: 0 PUs; Combat Move - British 1 carrier, 3 cruisers, 3 destroyers and 2 fighters moved from 98 Sea Zone to 97 Sea Zone 1 bomber, 1 fighter and 1 tactical_bomber moved from Egypt to 97 Sea Zone 2 destroyers moved from 81 Sea Zone to 97 Sea Zone 1 infantry moved from Tobruk to Libya British take Libya from Italians 1 artillery and 2 infantry moved from Egypt to 98 Sea Zone 1 artillery moved from Trans-Jordan to 98 Sea Zone 2 artilleries, 2 infantry and 2 transports moved from 98 Sea Zone to 76 Sea Zone 2 artilleries and 2 infantry moved from 76 Sea Zone to Ethiopia 1 battleship moved from 76 Sea Zone to 80 Sea Zone 1 armour moved from Egypt to Ethiopia Combat - British Battle in 97 Sea Zone British attack with 1 bomber, 1 carrier, 3 cruisers, 5 destroyers, 3 fighters and 1 tactical_bomber Italians defend with 1 battleship, 2 cruisers, 1 destroyer and 2 transports British win, taking 97 Sea Zone from Neutral with 1 bomber, 1 carrier, 3 cruisers, 5 destroyers and 3 fighters remaining. Battle score for attacker is 55 Casualties for British: 1 tactical_bomber Casualties for Italians: 1 battleship, 2 cruisers, 1 destroyer and 2 transports Battle in Ethiopia British attack with 1 armour, 2 artilleries and 2 infantry Italians defend with 1 artillery and 3 infantry 1 armour owned by the British retreated to Anglo Egyptian Sudan Italians win with 1 artillery and 1 infantry remaining. Battle score for attacker is -8 Casualties for British: 2 artilleries and 2 infantry Casualties for Italians: 2 infantry Non Combat Move - British 1 infantry moved from Belgian Congo to Anglo Egyptian Sudan 1 infantry moved from Belgian Congo to Anglo Egyptian Sudan 2 fighters moved from West India to 80 Sea Zone 1 bomber moved from 97 Sea Zone to Egypt 1 fighter moved from 97 Sea Zone to Malta 1 fighter moved from Gibraltar to Egypt 1 fighter moved from Gibraltar to United Kingdom 1 artillery and 4 infantry moved from Iraq to Persia 1 aaGun and 2 infantry moved from Trans-Jordan to Iraq 3 aaGuns, 1 armour, 1 artillery, 9 infantry, 1 mech_infantry and 1 tactical_bomber moved from West India to Eastern Persia Place Units - British 1 carrier and 1 destroyer placed in 80 Sea Zone 1 infantry placed in Persia 2 infantry placed in Egypt Turn Complete - British British collect 33 PUs; end with 33 PUs Turn Complete - UK_PacificLeague General Discussion Thread
-
@gamerman01 @surfer back to surfer’s suggestion. It’s not that bad if you allowed one game pr top tier player against a low/unranked player. I think it can be a neet addition to the ranking and s fair comptomize to silent the discussion.
@gamerman01 and if you are worried it will mess up your bookkeeping just have this game reporter at deg 31. Or make note at the name. It’s fairly easy to keep track of, isnt it?
-
OK, Oysteilo is a heavyweight. Yes, I thought about making a little notation, and no, it wouldn’t be a big problem, you’re right.
If for example, you Oysteilo, wanted to play a newcomer who was tier 3, I could count the game and not count the 4 points and make a notation. Until that player reaches 3 games and is probably no longer tier 3 any more. But then we need to define some more things, and I fear this opens a can of worms.
-
@oysteilo i hate that autocorrect when i try to write English with Norwegian keyboard
-
Now what would be the limits - they would all have to be defined. We’re not going there. I have a better idea. As you all could have all along, write me about your situation (I’m a high tier E trying to make the playoffs and this new guy wants to play me in league but I don’t want 4 points dropping my score, what can we do?) and I could make an exception for you. AD isn’t the only guy who gets exceptions. Then it wouldn’t even have to be limited to 1 game a year, a tier E or M could do several if he wants them to count toward 8 league games but not lower his score.
Now even with this exception, we’ll see how many tier E’s and M’s actually spend their time with newcomers.
-
Are the top leaguers wanting to rack up wins against new or rusty (like me) players?
Considering that there is no money on the table in a league game, seems like far too much is being read into the ranking system.
-
If I make a new rule like 1 game per year that you don’t get a score for, it’s one more thing for all league participants to learn about, and I think it could open the floodgates. Let me know when this hypothetical situation of a newcomer getting turned down for games happens. I never hear about it.
-
@jim010 said in League General Discussion Thread:
Are the top leaguers wanting to rack up wins against new or rusty (like me) players?
Considering that there is no money on the table in a league game, seems like far too much is being read into the ranking system.
No, top players want to have fun playing games, and can easily smash a tier 1 or E, they don’t need a 2 or 3 to get their jollies.
Thank you, well said. We are very analytical people, so we analyze everything to death.
-
Somebody help me remember - who was the guy AndrewAAGamer played that he said would normally be like a tier E but might never play 3 games? I could take a look at that.
Or he knew of someone else who played a guy who should be a tier E or something? -
Reading a text can come across not in a way that was intended. I am not trying to sound condescending or the like. But with that being said, the league is all about bragging rights and nothing else, no? Otherwise everybody would be playing in the open games section for fun. I lost 3 straight in the league, and I’m out now. Want to play for fun and fine tune my tactics without the pressure of a humiliation for everyone to see in the rankings.
-
LOL close. Yes, if you don’t want to be humiliated with your sucky record up in lights, you should stay away from the league lol
The league is about everyone seeing your record, so yeah
-
@gamerman01 said in League General Discussion Thread:
Somebody help me remember - who was the guy AndrewAAGamer played that he said would normally be like a tier E but might never play 3 games? I could take a look at that.
Majikforce
-
For a little extra, Jim, I could literally make your name flash in the spreadsheet until the end of time…
-
@jim010 You might want to study some games by the top players. Triple A is amazing that way as you can review an entire game move by move using the history function and the “next” button.
-
Thanks Andrew, majikforce is a high tier 1 right now, so no problem, right? Or are you saying majikforce played somebody who was under-rated…?
-
@akreider2 said in League General Discussion Thread:
@jim010 You might want to study some games by the top players. Triple A is amazing that way as you can review an entire game move by move using the history function and the “next” button.
THANK YOU akreider - exactly. Easy to review anyone else’s games.
-
@gamerman01 said in League General Discussion Thread:
Now what would be the limits - they would all have to be defined. We’re not going there. I have a better idea. As you all could have all along, write me about your situation (I’m a high tier E trying to make the playoffs and this new guy wants to play me in league but I don’t want 4 points dropping my score, what can we do?) and I could make an exception for you. AD isn’t the only guy who gets exceptions. Then it wouldn’t even have to be limited to 1 game a year, a tier E or M could do several if he wants them to count toward 8 league games but not lower his score.
Now even with this exception, we’ll see how many tier E’s and M’s actually spend their time with newcomers.
Okey, if that is the way you want to handle it i support it 100% I also question that all M’s suddenly are going to start playing rockies… But we will see! Also it should end this discussion!
-
Guys like you or JDOW or Adam or AD piping up is pretty effective at ending the discussion too.
Bottom line: I’m not real keen on changing the system for little anecdotes when there are workarounds. We CAN be a little bit informal, like it IS possible to play a league game and if both players agree, PPG won’t be counted for the expert player - exceptions do need my approval
-
Not sure, but as I remember it was majikforce who discussed playing other players and how it hurt his record.
For me now that I know there is a friendly area to play n to help players get better I am content with the League as is. trulpen and I are doing a Tutor game and I expect to do at least 2-3 of those a year for those interested. In fact our first one is just beginning! CHECK IT OUT!!!
-
Yes, thanks for posting that again, Andrew, that you discovered the non-league area, that’s good, glad to have you in the league and A&A.org in general
-
@gamerman01 lol! Haha! I did beat you back in the day, didn’t I?
Suggested Topics
