Game History
Round: 8 Purchase Units - Japanese Japanese buy 2 artilleries, 1 destroyer, 1 fighter and 9 infantry; Remaining resources: 0 PUs; 6 SuicideAttackTokens; Combat Move - Japanese 1 transport moved from 21 Sea Zone to 20 Sea Zone 1 infantry moved from Shantung to 20 Sea Zone 1 infantry moved from Jehol to 20 Sea Zone 2 infantry and 1 transport moved from 20 Sea Zone to 36 Sea Zone 1 infantry moved from Java to 43 Sea Zone 1 battleship, 2 carriers, 2 destroyers, 2 fighters, 1 infantry, 1 submarine, 2 tactical_bombers and 1 transport moved from 43 Sea Zone to 36 Sea Zone 2 fighters, 3 infantry and 2 tactical_bombers moved from 36 Sea Zone to Paulau 1 fighter and 1 tactical_bomber moved from 21 Sea Zone to 22 Sea Zone 1 submarine moved from 6 Sea Zone to 22 Sea Zone 1 armour moved from Shantung to Kiangsi 1 artillery and 5 infantry moved from Anhwe to Kiangsi 3 artilleries, 1 fighter, 4 infantry and 1 tactical_bomber moved from Kwangtung to Kiangsi 1 fighter and 1 tactical_bomber moved from 21 Sea Zone to Kiangsi 1 marine moved from Kwangtung to 21 Sea Zone 2 carriers, 1 cruiser, 1 destroyer, 1 marine and 5 transports moved from 21 Sea Zone to 6 Sea Zone 1 artillery and 8 infantry moved from Japan to 6 Sea Zone 1 artillery, 8 infantry and 1 marine moved from 6 Sea Zone to Korea 1 armour, 2 artilleries and 5 infantry moved from Southern Manchuria to Korea 1 fighter moved from Japan to 22 Sea Zone 1 bomber moved from Japan to 36 Sea Zone Combat - Japanese Battle in 22 Sea Zone Japanese attack with 2 fighters, 1 submarine and 1 tactical_bomber Americans defend with 1 destroyer and 1 transport Japanese win with 2 fighters and 1 tactical_bomber remaining. Battle score for attacker is 8 Casualties for Japanese: 1 submarine Casualties for Americans: 1 destroyer and 1 transport Battle in Kiangsi Japanese attack with 1 armour, 4 artilleries, 2 fighters, 9 infantry and 2 tactical_bombers Chinese defend with 4 artilleries and 9 infantry Japanese win, taking Kiangsi from Chinese with 1 armour, 4 artilleries, 2 fighters, 3 infantry and 2 tactical_bombers remaining. Battle score for attacker is 25 Casualties for Japanese: 6 infantry Casualties for Chinese: 4 artilleries and 9 infantry Battle in 36 Sea Zone Japanese attack with 1 battleship, 1 bomber, 2 carriers, 2 destroyers, 1 submarine and 2 transports Americans defend with 1 destroyer Japanese win with 1 battleship, 1 bomber, 2 carriers, 2 destroyers, 1 submarine and 2 transports remaining. Battle score for attacker is 8 Casualties for Americans: 1 destroyer Battle in Paulau Japanese attack with 2 fighters, 3 infantry and 2 tactical_bombers Americans defend with 1 artillery and 1 infantry Japanese win, taking Paulau from Americans with 2 fighters, 2 infantry and 2 tactical_bombers remaining. Battle score for attacker is 4 Casualties for Japanese: 1 infantry Casualties for Americans: 1 artillery and 1 infantry Battle in Korea Japanese attack with 1 armour, 3 artilleries, 13 infantry and 1 marine Russians defend with 1 infantry Japanese win, taking Korea from Russians with 1 armour, 3 artilleries, 13 infantry and 1 marine remaining. Battle score for attacker is 3 Casualties for Russians: 1 infantry Non Combat Move - Japanese 1 aaGun moved from Southern Manchuria to Korea 1 aaGun moved from Anhwe to Shantung 1 infantry moved from Shantung to Anhwe 1 artillery, 1 infantry and 1 marine moved from Java to 43 Sea Zone 1 artillery, 1 cruiser, 1 infantry, 1 marine and 1 transport moved from 43 Sea Zone to 36 Sea Zone 1 artillery, 1 bomber, 1 infantry and 1 marine moved from 36 Sea Zone to Davao 2 fighters and 2 tactical_bombers moved from Paulau to 36 Sea Zone 1 fighter and 1 tactical_bomber moved from Kiangsi to 6 Sea Zone 1 fighter and 1 tactical_bomber moved from Kiangsi to Kwangtung 2 fighters and 1 tactical_bomber moved from 22 Sea Zone to Davao Place Units - Japanese 3 infantry placed in Shantung 2 artilleries, 1 fighter and 6 infantry placed in Japan 1 destroyer placed in 6 Sea Zone Turn Complete - Japanese Total Cost from Convoy Blockades: 1 Rolling for Convoy Blockade Damage in 42 Sea Zone. Rolls: 1 Japanese collect 44 PUs (1 lost to blockades); end with 44 PUs Objective Japanese 6 Home Islands: Japanese met a national objective for an additional 3 PUs; end with 47 PUs Objective Japanese 4 Control Dutch East Indies: Japanese met a national objective for an additional 5 PUs; end with 52 PUsLeague General Discussion Thread
-
@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.
-
TIME TO SIGN UP for 2020 playoffs IF you want to participate. Playoffs are entirely optional, even the top one. But NO ONE is in the playoffs unless they tell me that they want to be in, not even the #1 ranked player! Same as every year.
To sign up, please private message me in A&A.org.
-
In!
Pm sent!





