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 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

You are atleast E. As I am. We are pretty evenly matched, so I simply just have the opinion that dice has favoured you and that it has made significant impact on both of our games. It’s crazy, and I’m not stating that as a sore loser. You are a deserved winner. You play very interesting and well. Still, your opening plans seem to have serious flaws. Main point, like you said, has been surprise. It’s a strong effect.

well as one of my professor in high school said about the right tehnique for shootin a ball/scoring a point in basketball.

the right tehnique is the one that succeds. so my play can be unorthodox, different, odd, but it functioned in both games. pretty well. without much bigger remedies.

and i am happy for it. if in the long run it proves bad, i ll change my strategies. its normal.

but the thesis that in this game u are on the brink of a loss because of 3 inf, and 3 subs, and 2 destroyers for me is totally unreal.

I was tier 1 last time i played here 2 years ago.

but i am not saying i did not win because i surprised u . that was one of the key elements of my game, though not only and the most important one, but very important definitely.

but one thing is to surprise someone, and the other thing is to win because u roll 1 all the time

@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:

the dices can not be on average all the time, its normal that they jump up and down

Exactly. 😊

Despite my extensive whining, I’m ok with it.

and the dice server is good now, definitely better then it was a few years ago , that is my humble opionion, its much more averaged than it was

I can’t say, since I didn’t play then, but I absolutely trust you on that.

especially in big battles

Italy did not took Egypt because of dice.

Japan did not became godzilla in the Pacific because of dice.

and Germany did not surpressed a potential USA landing in Europe because of dice, actually it was almost the other way.

low luck still has some luck, but its more like a chess

i feel good for playing our game in that way since i do not relly on luck outflaws in my strategies, and would sign averagiality with no problems, but it spoils the fun, so i dont play that way, but one time LL why not

@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:

Italy did not took Egypt because of dice.

Japan did not became godzilla in the Pacific because of dice.

and Germany did not surpressed a potential USA landing in Europe because of dice, actually it was almost the other way.

I agree.

U do not have to. I know it hurts when u had repeatedly bad dice in similar battles, cus i played A A a lot in different editions,

But,

Its very brave to say u would win if u had passed better in some battles, and you just add urself some units on the board retroactively, but what is with my powers, dont u think ita ger and japan would addapt to it? Or at least try to?

I am a patient player, i look for long term strategies/victories, avoiding risky battles especially big ones as much as possible. Its untipical for axis especially germany to play that way, and not rushing moscow but winning over economy too but its my way.

But i do not have a problem with attacking 1 inf with 2 inf, especially with some circumstances and especially with allies.

As for messy battles i sometimes go to them because :

1. i have the economical advantage
2. i can distrupt ur plans
3. i can achieve something really good if luckY
4. I CAN retreat if it goes bad
5. or even if i loose i have some backup forces

All though i primarily rely on achieving my goals, i like to destrupt my enemy s plans, even if i do not know them.

And i like to add a country fellow friend in danger. With allies by joining forces, and with axis, well i was pushing allies with italy and especially japan just to give germany a space to breathe.

Especially russia and usa witth japan.

I ve could go for India earlier and take it but i ve decided this is the better path. And altough its not typical japan tries to take LA, but it worked

@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:

low luck still has some luck, but its more like a chess

i feel good for playing our game in that way since i do not relly on luck outflaws in my strategies, and would sign averagiality with no problems, but it spoils the fun, so i dont play that way, but one time LL why not

Ok, perhaps we can try it out? What’s the principle?

No, its different than chess. A half way from no luck and much luck

So the thing is for every power of 6 (2 figs, 2 tanks, or 1 bom 1 marine etc) u score a hit.
If u have power of let s say 7 (tank, artillery, inf) u have 1 hit and roll 1 dice on 1

If u have power 11(2 bom, 1 fig) u have 1 hit and roll one dice on 5

So for many sbrs, small battles luck stil stays. As if there is no LL

But, if u attack me with 2 inf 1 bom, u must score at least a hit, and i cant score more then 1 if i have even 3 inf

Its particularly safe for big battles. I think its made because of them.

And as for small ones, they are affected too if u have a power of at least 6, and opponent does not have a power of at least 7

@trulpen 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:

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.”

As i thought

But can they go totally neutral if allies attack true neutrals? I do not ask for them to become pro axis, just not becomeing soviets or pro soviets if i attack amur

@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 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

You are atleast E. As I am. We are pretty evenly matched, so I simply just have the opinion that dice has favoured you and that it has made significant impact on both of our games. It’s crazy, and I’m not stating that as a sore loser. You are a deserved winner. You play very interesting and well. Still, your opening plans seem to have serious flaws. Main point, like you said, has been surprise. It’s a strong effect.

I would like to here more about my opening flaws, not because of this game but my future ones, any good advice is welcomed.

And i would liike to hear how so u didnt capitalize on my seriously flawed opening, becides the dice as the reason?