Game History
Round: 6 Research Technology - Germans Purchase Units - Germans Germans buy 1 artillery, 2 destroyers, 3 fighters and 8 infantry; Remaining resources: 0 PUs; Combat Move - Germans 1 armour and 1 mech_infantry moved from Leningrad to Archangel Germans take Archangel from Russians 1 armour and 1 mech_infantry moved from Archangel to Karelia Germans take Karelia from Russians 1 armour moved from Leningrad to Vologda Germans take Vologda from Russians 1 armour moved from Vologda to Leningrad 1 armour moved from Leningrad to Novgorod Germans take Novgorod from Russians 1 armour moved from Novgorod to Leningrad 5 armour, 1 artillery, 1 infantry and 5 mech_infantrys moved from Leningrad to Vyborg 1 transport moved from 116 Sea Zone to 117 Sea Zone 1 artillery and 1 infantry moved from Poland to 117 Sea Zone 1 artillery, 1 infantry and 1 transport moved from 117 Sea Zone to 116 Sea Zone 1 armour, 2 artilleries and 2 infantry moved from Germany to 116 Sea Zone 1 artillery and 2 infantry moved from Western Germany to 116 Sea Zone 1 armour, 4 artilleries and 5 infantry moved from 116 Sea Zone to Norway 1 fighter and 2 tactical_bombers moved from France to Norway 1 bomber, 2 fighters and 1 tactical_bomber moved from Western Germany to Norway 1 fighter and 2 tactical_bombers moved from Germany to Norway 1 armour moved from Eastern Poland to Southern Belarus Germans take Southern Belarus from Russians 1 armour moved from Southern Belarus to Eastern Poland Combat - Germans Russians scrambles 2 units out of 128 Sea Zone to defend against the attack in Norway Battle in Norway Germans attack with 1 armour, 4 artilleries, 1 bomber, 4 fighters, 5 infantry and 5 tactical_bombers British defend with 1 armour, 1 artillery and 2 infantry; Americans defend with 1 armour, 1 artillery, 1 bomber, 2 fighters, 3 infantry, 1 mech_infantry and 1 tactical_bomber; Russians defend with 1 aaGun, 3 armour and 1 mech_infantry Germans win, taking Norway from Russians with 1 armour, 3 fighters and 5 tactical_bombers remaining. Battle score for attacker is 57 Casualties for Germans: 4 artilleries, 1 bomber, 1 fighter and 5 infantry Casualties for Americans: 1 armour, 1 artillery, 1 bomber, 2 fighters, 3 infantry, 1 mech_infantry and 1 tactical_bomber Casualties for British: 1 armour, 1 artillery and 2 infantry Casualties for Russians: 1 aaGun, 3 armour and 1 mech_infantry Battle in Vyborg Germans attack with 5 armour, 1 artillery, 1 infantry and 5 mech_infantrys Russians defend with 1 infantry Germans win, taking Vyborg from Russians with 5 armour, 1 artillery, 1 infantry and 5 mech_infantrys remaining. Battle score for attacker is 3 Casualties for Russians: 1 infantry Non Combat Move - Germans 1 aaGun, 2 armour, 2 artilleries, 11 infantry and 2 mech_infantrys moved from Bessarabia to Eastern Poland 1 destroyer moved from 118 Sea Zone to 116 Sea Zone 1 transport moved from 94 Sea Zone to 95 Sea Zone 1 artillery and 1 infantry moved from Southern France to 95 Sea Zone 1 artillery, 1 infantry and 1 transport moved from 95 Sea Zone to 93 Sea Zone 1 artillery and 1 infantry moved from 93 Sea Zone to Morocco 1 carrier, 1 cruiser, 1 destroyer, 1 submarine and 1 transport moved from 94 Sea Zone to 93 Sea Zone 1 submarine moved from 116 Sea Zone to 108 Sea Zone 2 fighters and 1 tactical_bomber moved from Norway to Leningrad 1 fighter and 4 tactical_bombers moved from Norway to Western Germany Place Units - Germans 1 artillery, 3 fighters and 1 infantry placed in Western Germany 5 infantry placed in Germany 2 infantry placed in Western Germany Germans undo move 1. 3 fighters placed in France 1 artillery and 1 infantry placed in Western Germany Germans undo move 3. 2 fighters placed in France 1 fighter placed in Western Germany 2 destroyers placed in 116 Sea Zone Turn Complete - Germans Total Cost from Convoy Blockades: 3 Rolling for Convoy Blockade Damage in 128 Sea Zone. Rolls: 4,3,1,6,5,2,3,6,4,3,4,5,4,1,4 Germans collect 54 PUs (3 lost to blockades); end with 54 PUs Trigger Germans 7 Atlantic Wall: Germans met a national objective for an additional 3 PUs; end with 57 PUs Trigger Germans 4 Presence In Egypt: Germans met a national objective for an additional 5 PUs; end with 62 PUs Trigger Germans 5 Swedish Iron Ore: Germans met a national objective for an additional 5 PUs; end with 67 PUs Objective Germans 7 Control of Balkans: Germans met a national objective for an additional 3 PUs; end with 70 PUs Objective Germans 2 Control Stalingrad Or Leningrad Or Russia: Germans met a national objective for an additional 5 PUs; end with 75 PUsPost League Game Results Here
-
@gamerman01 said in Post League Game Results Here:
Yeah, that’s not how it works here. Unlike chess, we have a very small number of games played because this game takes a lot longer than chess. Not really comparable. This system really works well for our purposes, and if I get much more criticism, someone else is going to have to take over because I’m not even playing the game any more.
Actually :) there’s correspondence chess, which takes a lot longer than A&A. And that carries an Elo as well.
The trick I believe is rather to incorporate the element of luck, which is a lot less in chess, reflected in the ratings. But that’s no biggie. Just tweak the algorithm. Like I said before, I think @DizzKneeLand33 has done it already.
-
@gamerman01 said in Post League Game Results Here:
Yeah, that’s not how it works here. Unlike chess, we have a very small number of games played because this game takes a lot longer than chess. Not really comparable. This system really works well for our purposes, and if I get much more criticism, someone else is going to have to take over because I’m not even playing the game any more.
Okay, this is a slight fallacy. Back in the 1980’s when I started playing correspondence chess, there was an ELO system in place for both the USCF and the ICCF (international organization). My longest correspondence game (in time) ended in 2 years, 8 months (67 move draw). So, our games indeed do not take as long as that. ;)
For an ELO system to work for us, however, it has to take in account dice. So, a master beating a Class C should be minimal in gains, but yet it should be worth something, because the “master” is taking a dice chance of losing.
So, for those who want an ELO system, remember that this isn’t chess, it’s a strategy dice game.
-
@gamerman01 said in Post League Game Results Here:
I hear you, and I’ve listened to these arguments for years. This is my philosophy, however. League ranked play is not the place to learn from a much stronger player - play outside of league ranked play if that’s what you want. As many hours as this game takes to play, a tier M really doesn’t need to be messing around with 2’s and 3’s, frankly there’s such a huge difference in ability they’re not even competitive games. League ranked play is intended for competitive play
I’ve never had ANYONE else pipe up and volunteer to handle all these calculations, updates, and rankings, so until that happens, my system stands.
Again, in chess tournaments grand-masters meet patzers. No problem.
I respect that you are not so keen on change. Hopefully there’s no hurt by discussing these matters though.
-
We rarely have any significant upsets in the tournaments at the end of the year, and the rankings have always been very successful in creating great matchups at the end of the year. I understand people are always looking for continuous improvement, and no matter what system is in place, there will be criticisms.
-
No hurt, I’m just kind of tired of defending my system for so many years.
It’s not chess, it’s not starcraft, there’s weaknesses in every system, but frankly I think this system is dynamite.Length of game, I meant in hours of effort, not in how many years of correspondence - again, apples and oranges, you guys! lol
-
I have played thousands and thousands of games of chess, so I totally understand ELO and what you guys are arguing, just so you know. How many hours of thought was put into that 55 move chess game? I’m no grandmaster, but I’ve never had a chess game come anywhere near the level of effort of an A&A game
-
Now, if you’ll excuse me, I’m still updating the rankings.
-
@gamerman01 said in Post League Game Results Here:
I have played thousands and thousands of games of chess, so I totally understand ELO and what you guys are arguing, just so you know. How many hours of thought was put into that 55 move chess game? I’m no grandmaster, but I’ve never had a chess game come anywhere near the level of effort of an A&A game
Gamerman, your system is SOOO annoying because I am not No. 1!!!
-
lol I was waiting for someone to spice this up
-
@gamerman01 said in Post League Game Results Here:
No hurt, I’m just kind of tired of defending my system for so many years.
It’s not chess, it’s not starcraft, there’s weaknesses in every system, but frankly I think this system is dynamite.Length of game, I meant in hours of effort, not in how many years of correspondence - again, apples and oranges, you guys! lol
Again, this system is really good. The problem is that it discourages play between the ranks. Gamer, honestly, I think this only happened (as an issue) when the M was introduced, and then there were games where beating someone wasn’t as good as losing to someone. Maybe the losing to M equals beating a 3. I’ll have to look, but this change (5 years ago or so???) was the bad part. Otherwise, it’s really cool.
-
I really appreciate that, Dizz, again, I know some will hate this, but I don’t think M’s have any business playing a 3 in league play - play in the play boardgames section or something if you must
-
@gamerman01 said in Post League Game Results Here:
I have played thousands and thousands of games of chess, so I totally understand ELO and what you guys are arguing, just so you know. How many hours of thought was put into that 55 move chess game? I’m no grandmaster, but I’ve never had a chess game come anywhere near the level of effort of an A&A game
Okay, you don’t understand old correspondence chess at all. I mean, there could be 200 hours in a game lol.
Of course now since the late 90’s there are computers. Sad days.
-
And I hear you on the adding one more tier - 5 is a lot - pluses and minuses
-
@DizzKneeLand33 said in Post League Game Results Here:
@gamerman01 said in Post League Game Results Here:
I have played thousands and thousands of games of chess, so I totally understand ELO and what you guys are arguing, just so you know. How many hours of thought was put into that 55 move chess game? I’m no grandmaster, but I’ve never had a chess game come anywhere near the level of effort of an A&A game
Okay, you don’t understand old correspondence chess at all. I mean, there could be 200 hours in a game lol.
Of course now since the late 90’s there are computers. Sad days.
There could be 200 hours on a move. LOL
-
OK, that’s all I wanted to know, is how many hours put into those games, yes
LOL what else could you guys do, play with sticks? ;) ;) -
But none of this is as complicated as trying to figure out how to put your own fishing line on a reel, when you’re a tax accountant lmao. bb soon. :D
-
@gamerman01 said in Post League Game Results Here:
And I hear you on the adding one more tier - 5 is a lot - pluses and minuses
Big plus is, playas like Adam, AD, and Oysteilo are in a class of their own, not mixed with the 4.5’s
-
You’re excused. ;)
-
Before I took over, league ranking was by straight win percentage, gents.
-
@gamerman01 said in Post League Game Results Here:
Before I took over, league ranking was by straight win percentage, gents.
This system is immensely better than that!
Suggested Topics
