League General Discussion Thread

i see why one ranking - 3 play offs is a good idea.

we all have personal lives, and it will be hard to play many games. And with only 3 games played its too little for getting a proper rating.

All though in ideal scenario i would prefer 3 standings, realisticly 1 standing for all games is ok, since we dont have information that somebody is good in one version and sucks in the other.

But i disagree with the idea that one cant play more then 1 play off. why not? its like in tennis, u can play both singles and doubles. and since we have 2nd and 3rd playoff in BM this year, we can have it in PTV and BM next year, whats the problem?

and 1 standings for all games also helps our Gamerman, otherwise he will have too much job

I encourage everyone to contribute in the 2021 support drive!

https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/36303/axis-allies-org-2021-support-drive/3?_=1609873977428

If you play, it is nice to contribute to the site I think. After all it is not free to maintain this service that all of us like!

@amon-sul I doubt it will be much of an issue since i expect most people at the highest level will focus on one or the other in any case so there should be a lot of room for others to join in even if a couple of people try their hand at two or more tourneys. But I think it is a bit more exciting to play for 1st then for 9th and this gives more people the opportunity to do so.

Also while I think we need to have only one ranking for all variants for it to be meaningful, and I also think the threshold to join a tourney should be low (8 games in total and 3-4 of the variant) I can see situations arising where a top oob player is kept out of that tourney because someone else who has a higher ranking due to their play in another variant decides to play in two.

Also, I’ll just note that right now, the league is much more competitive than it was a year ago. There are players in each of the three tourneys this year that played in the top 8 last year. That may change when covid passes, but right now we can have a pretty high level of competition with the top 24.

I don’t think you should be able to play in the playoffs with less than 8 games played of that particular variant.

@gamerman01 said in League General Discussion Thread:

I’m thinking the seeding/ranking for playoffs (2021) would be determined by your PPG in that version, not the overall. That way you can try another version, like P2V, and lose without wrecking your great BM record.

Completely agree with this. Sounds like a pain to administer the 4 sheets though.

@gamerman01 The Server or the game right now is having an issue with dl the games to the Forum. However, you are able to start the game threat and/or continune with your ongoing games via email for the moment. DJensen is on it!

@gamerman01 said in League General Discussion Thread:

Thank you again for all inputs - I read everything and each person’s view was helpful.

Here’s what’s looking like a great idea to me now. 3 separate standings, one for each of the 3 most popular versions of G40 (I’m not concerned with variations within each version, for example 14 IPC bombers in BM - BM will be BM)

A 4th, overall standings sheet that is a composite of the other 3. If you’re 3-0 in P2V and 0-1 in BM you would be 3-1 overall.

How many games are required to be in each of the 3 different versions’ playoffs will not be determined this month because we don’t know how much each will be played. We could establish a date, like July 1 possibly, when the # of games to participate in end of year playoff will be set, because that will leave plenty of time to prepare for everyone (to get the # of games you need) and also plenty of time (first half of year) to see what a realistic # of games requirement will be

I’m thinking the seeding/ranking for playoffs (2021) would be determined by your PPG in that version, not the overall. That way you can try another version, like P2V, and lose without wrecking your great BM record.

Thanks, gamer! You said it all.

@aequitas-et-veritas said in League General Discussion Thread:

@gamerman01 The Server or the game right now is having an issue with dl the games to the Forum. However, you are able to start the game threat and/or continune with your ongoing games via email for the moment. DJensen is on it!

Works with copy&paste of the game history along with uploading the game-file in a post here.

@gamerman01 said in League General Discussion Thread:

Here’s what’s looking like a great idea to me now. 3 separate standings, one for each of the 3 most popular versions of G40

That was how they did it at Axis and Allies Members Club (AAMC) when I played there. I think the site is closed now. Does not appear to be any new posts since 2016 however it still seems to be up and I was able to log in and pull these screenshots. Weird. As you can see we had a different ranking for each game version and then a summary page with all of the records in one spot.

What is also interesting, at least to me, is I was still on the top of the Leaderboards in each game version even though I stopped playing there in 2011. :)

@trulpen said in League General Discussion Thread:

@aequitas-et-veritas said in League General Discussion Thread:

@gamerman01 The Server or the game right now is having an issue with dl the games to the Forum. However, you are able to start the game threat and/or continune with your ongoing games via email for the moment. DJensen is on it!

Works with copy&paste of the game history along with uploading the game-file in a post here.

Copy Paste never worked for me. It doesn’t le me highlight all, only a line and even the line I cannot coppy, nor paste. But will try to post the savegame file manually now. Thank you.

Not even with ctrl+c and ctrl+p? That’s weird. Well, the important thing is the save. Saves the day.

@trulpen I figured it out what you meant. It is at the end were you can click on View History and it is letting you copy and paste it. What I was allways thinking was the History log on the Left side wich you can’t copy nor paste.

Thank you again, it works!

@gamerman01

The League is fracturing! And just when I thought I may return!

I haven’t played POV, but isn’t it pretty close to BM3? If not seriously different, I wouldn’t care if it counted.

@andrewaagamer As a more experienced player, how could we have further strengthened Moscow? I totally agree regarding the neutral crush.

@karl7 said in League General Discussion Thread:

I haven’t played POV, but isn’t it pretty close to BM3? If not seriously different, I wouldn’t care if it counted.

It is a completely different game. Dramatically different map; especially in the pacific. Different National Objectives, different combat capabilities for a couple of the pieces, different pricing for some units, different airbase scramble rule and now revised carrier scramble rule.

@pejon_88 said in League General Discussion Thread:

@andrewaagamer As a more experienced player, how could we have further strengthened Moscow? I totally agree regarding the neutral crush.

Well you had everything in place; you just didn’t focus on defending Moscow.

At the end of G5 the German army was in Ukraine and Rostov. Frankly, because since @Majikforce and I didn’t think we could take Moscow, we were thinking of heading to the Middle East to try and get some great money and Egypt. However, on UK5 instead of buying 3 fighters for Persia you only bought 1. Then during combat you moved 2 Persian fighters to counter attack India so they could now not make Moscow in time for a G7 attack. Thus, seeing the Allies were down 4 fighters from what we had expected to defend Moscow, we decided on G6 to go for Moscow and moved into position for the G7 attack.

The G7 attack on Moscow had an 83% chance of success. Add in the 4 additional UK fighters that could have been there it drops all the way down to 45%. In addition, there was 1 UK bomber that could have made the defense that at 83% I understand not wanting to lose it but it would have dropped the 45% battle down to 40%. Even if we could have won at 40% the loss of units would have made it a Pyrrhic victory at best.

Considering you did such a great job setting up Russia for additional income from Africa and the Middle East it didn’t make sense that you didn’t make the defense of Moscow your number 1 priority. You instead settled for minor gains elsewhere and let us have a great shot at winning the game. When we won the Moscow battle I IM’d Majikforce and said “We just won!”

Your play was impressive. You deserved to win. We certainly appreciate you letting us win instead. :)