bid: 1 Fighter Malta, 1 Transport SZ71, 1 Sub SZ91, 1 Sub SZ98, 1 Sub SZ106, 1 Inf Anglo-Egyptian Sudan
hf
L20 #2 Amon-Sul (X) vs trulpen (A+7) BM3
-
Italian African inf hero!
and for NW Persia, i had some problems there too, messy mountainious territory, hard to take
-
@Amon-Sul said in L20 #2 Amon-Sul (X) vs trulpen (A+7) BM3:
@trulpen said in L20 #2 Amon-Sul (X) vs trulpen (A+7) BM3:
@Amon-Sul said in L20 #2 Amon-Sul (X) vs trulpen (A+7) BM3:
I think if it happens its not because of dice, but because axis play was better. the dice were with me in some small battles, but i had a big loose in a key battle in sz 91. the dice are then just an add to the play that marked its path to victory.
what really hurt for u was sz 110 in first round, other things are bunch of small battles later in the game which i dont think if went on average would secure allied win.
axis are dominant on all fronts.
I only partly agree to that analysis. Nevermind.
we dont have to agree, but i know the feeling when U are behind in a game , trying to even, and u expect slightly more then average dice, and u get the opposite. it hurts
That’s not true. I expect even less than average dice and still fail. I didn’t do anything fancy neither in FCA nor NW Persia. Secure battles. Atleast in NW Persia, and main point in FCA was to atleast kill the fucking dude.
-
I don’t care so much about FCA, but NW Persia is really wretched. That’s why I went in with a fig there instead of using both in Afghanistan.
-
@trulpen said in L20 #2 Amon-Sul (X) vs trulpen (A+7) BM3:
@Amon-Sul said in L20 #2 Amon-Sul (X) vs trulpen (A+7) BM3:
take ur time with the edits
Can’t play anymore now for a while, so you go with Italy when you feel like it.
i cant play now too will do when i find some time
cheers
-
@trulpen said in L20 #2 Amon-Sul (X) vs trulpen (A+7) BM3:
@Amon-Sul said in L20 #2 Amon-Sul (X) vs trulpen (A+7) BM3:
@trulpen said in L20 #2 Amon-Sul (X) vs trulpen (A+7) BM3:
@Amon-Sul said in L20 #2 Amon-Sul (X) vs trulpen (A+7) BM3:
I think if it happens its not because of dice, but because axis play was better. the dice were with me in some small battles, but i had a big loose in a key battle in sz 91. the dice are then just an add to the play that marked its path to victory.
what really hurt for u was sz 110 in first round, other things are bunch of small battles later in the game which i dont think if went on average would secure allied win.
axis are dominant on all fronts.
I only partly agree to that analysis. Nevermind.
we dont have to agree, but i know the feeling when U are behind in a game , trying to even, and u expect slightly more then average dice, and u get the opposite. it hurts
That’s not true. I expect even less than average dice and still fail. I didn’t do anything fancy neither in FCA nor NW Persia. Secure battles. Atleast in NW Persia, and main point in FCA was to atleast kill the fucking dude.
thats dice
cant change itthats why i dont have big expectations from small battles
-
And three land units. That’s pretty secure.
But you hit 2/2 first round (which made the huge difference, of course), 0/2 second round and 1/1 third round. That’s 3/5 with 33 % probability per dice.
I hit 0/4, 1/2, 0/2 with much higher probabilities.
It’s a more or less sure battle. Unless it’s me against you, of course…
-
@Amon-Sul said in L20 #2 Amon-Sul (X) vs trulpen (A+7) BM3:
so U ve attacked the neutrals. what a surprise i must say.
Why? It’s more or less forced.
-
@trulpen said in L20 #2 Amon-Sul (X) vs trulpen (A+7) BM3:
@Amon-Sul said in L20 #2 Amon-Sul (X) vs trulpen (A+7) BM3:
so U ve attacked the neutrals. what a surprise i must say.
Why? It’s more or less forced.
i didnt expected it
-
I’ll check one thing.
-
@trulpen said in L20 #2 Amon-Sul (X) vs trulpen (A+7) BM3:
And three land units. That’s pretty secure.
But you hit 2/2 first round (which made the huge difference, of course), 0/2 second round and 1/1 third round. That’s 3/5 with 33 % probability per dice.
I hit 0/4, 1/2, 0/2 with much higher probabilities.
It’s a more or less sure battle. Unless it’s me against you, of course…
yeah, it must hurt especially when it happens a few times , and the odds were totally in ur favour, but its not the reason allies are behind in this game, and the dices are numbers they get even sooner or later, in the long term, of course
-
i want to say, even with average dice, axis would be leading, but leading less then now thats true of course
-
@Amon-Sul said in L20 #2 Amon-Sul (X) vs trulpen (A+7) BM3:
i want to say, even with average dice, axis would be leading, but leading less then now thats true of course
I very much disagree.
-
@Amon-Sul said in L20 #2 Amon-Sul (X) vs trulpen (A+7) BM3:
i didnt expected it
Of course makes Italy the ruler of the ME with 8 fresh inf coming in.
-
Well, well. Moving towards being more stoic and condense the horrible outcomes. It’s just a game. And it ain’t over 'til the fat lady sings. :male-singer:
-
@trulpen said in L20 #2 Amon-Sul (X) vs trulpen (A+7) BM3:
@Amon-Sul said in L20 #2 Amon-Sul (X) vs trulpen (A+7) BM3:
we have messed up mongolia politicaly here so we cant rely on triple a
but i think that mongolian treaty stays still
No, we haven’t, since I restarted the Russian round at that stage. But I’ll check the rules.
Excerpt from the rules: “The Mongolian territories (Olgiy, Dzavhan, Tsagaan-Olom, Central Mongolia, Ulaanbaatar, andBuyant-Uhaa) will never become pro-Axis unless one or more of them is attacked by the Soviet Union.”
-
@trulpen said in L20 #2 Amon-Sul (X) vs trulpen (A+7) BM3:
@Amon-Sul said in L20 #2 Amon-Sul (X) vs trulpen (A+7) BM3:
i want to say, even with average dice, axis would be leading, but leading less then now thats true of course
I very much disagree.
so what, allies would be kicking the axis ?
ask someone neutral to look for this game, and U ll see that the dice impact is not that important as u think it is. we would come to the same, but slower. it would just slow axis.
-
@trulpen said in L20 #2 Amon-Sul (X) vs trulpen (A+7) BM3:
@Amon-Sul said in L20 #2 Amon-Sul (X) vs trulpen (A+7) BM3:
i want to say, even with average dice, axis would be leading, but leading less then now thats true of course
I very much disagree.
then i Think U re biased here. My play in both games was better, all though UR was good. in this one i avoided messy big battles, i was patient, Italy and Japan were growing from the start, Germany holding, few inf more or less for one side or the another wouldnt change the outcome of the game. with so many units, money and everything U re overpriceing the impact of dice, especially those that disrupted U.
in the end, we can alter dice, just our play. if we can play good and win with some lower dice, we will do easier with average and good ones
and in the long run, in one battle, and especially in one season (u ll play like 20 30 games) dice will have no big impact,
actually in global the dices importance is reduced to the lowest level of any A & A game so far., but it still exists of course, and can make some impacts in some games, but in the long run, it gets even, u get some, u loose some, u get somewhere , loose otherwhere. its life. we cant olther that, just our play, and addapt as best as we can to bad and good dice, and try to avoid messy battles as much as possible.
-
we cant alter dice , sorry
-
No, it wouldn’t. More units and territory would make a significant change in income and battle power. Just imagine WUS with 3 more des, 2 more subs, 7 more figs, And 2 more sb. Taking into account rational losses, like when SBR.
-
i think that future games of u , me against other good players will show we play good and we win against some, loose against some. but still i wont be tier 2, and u wont be tier M
Suggested Topics
