Best posts made by ksmckay

AD and Adam are both better than me. Hate to say it but you just made things easy by messing up in Europe. I had no reason to take any risks in Pacific or worry about anything there because I knew the game was already won in Europe. I think your strat has some merit, but needs some tweaks.

@Amon-Sul said in [Ksmckay (Axis) vs Amon-Sul (Allies +17) BM3]

i am glad i am testing my strategies against the best. its the best way to improve them, or abandon them if they can not improve

Yep.

@Amon-Sul said in Ksmckay (Axis) vs Amon-Sul (Allies +17) BM3:

well the map says it all , i ve let germany become a godzilla and italy and japan may crack but its probably enough for the axis to win the game

i just do not get it , how can uk efficiently attack germany in first few rounds without usa in the game

Its not necessarily attacking, but keeping them honest. Maybe UK can land in normandy/Hol on UK 3 but if they stack 92 they threaten landings that germany has to respond to. And once US can show up with a minor force on T3, then more options show up. Even if UK/US dont conduct any meaningful attacks, germany still has to defend and thats enough to give russia a little space.

Germany wont be ready till later.

@Amon-Sul said in Ksmckay (Axis) vs Amon-Sul (Allies +17) BM3:

i got very lucky in anhwe

beyond expectations

yeah i didnt defend it well. little sloppy in pacific. But all I need to do in pacific is not give up tokyo. The islands are where the money is. I couldnt care less about Korea or Japan even. If you take all the islands, suddenly you have enough US money to fight in europe and pacific. Or to put serious pressure in atlantic. But at 84 per turn and Japan still making 40-50, I dont really care. China cant save europe.

Im not saying they arent important. But I have to give up something in the pac with the pressure you applied. And I am saying Id much rather it be China and Korea than the islands.

Submerge no scramble

you can try :)

Thanks for the game. Interesting strategy but I think the focus on Italy hurt and you moved a bit too much from Russia, perhaps just the two mech, two armor and tac to China could be interesting.

@regularkid said in L20 PTV-first game! Surfer(L) vs. AndrewAAGamer(X):

hey bro, you got Adam to the point where he thought, albeit momentarily, he might lose. Believe me, that is a huge feet.

ha, thanks. The game will take some time to sort out, don’t make changes too fast, too many new things in it to be sorted out.

trulpen didnt declare war properly with Japan on Russia J1. He just edited it but didnt do all the proper edits which is why you are having trouble. TripleA doesnt handle edited DOWs well and requires lots of extra user action to correct.

@trulpen said in L20 #2 trulpen (X) vs aagamerz13 (A+17) BM3:

I don’t find a clear answer, but to my experience it’s only legal if you abstain from attacking the sub. We have to resolve this so there’s no doubt.

I’ll add @JDOW, @regularkid and @Krieghund to the list of potential helping hands.

The situation you are probably confusing this with is when you want to do a NCM with the transports. If you were interested in a NCM with the transports and you wanted them to leave the sea zone that is not legal as you cant load units into a transport during CM unless those units are being used in amphib assault. So in that case the transport can move during CM and the sub could be attacked but the transport couldnt load anything that turn. Or the transport could stay in the sea zone, be a participant in the CM and then not be used for NCM. Or you could ignore sub and conduct NCM with transport.

This is a case of CM with the transport so its a different situation as loading units onto the transport for combat during CM phase is legal.

sorry OOB

@oysteilo I think the league is totally fine and nothing wrong with diversity when nobody is forced to play anyone or any game they dont want to play. So I see no real reason to change the standard league play rules as they are - though I can understand concerns that some might have - but no way to make everyone happy.

But in the playoffs, you dont get to pick your opponent and while nobody is forced to play anything (you can always withdraw), the current playoff rules will/do/have lead to conflict over the different versions.

these last few japanese turns have been very challenging.

please note the german bomber in FIC, imagine you saw it but dont want you to be caught unaware. Couple opportunities to run into scrambles for the allies this next turn. I wont scramble suicidally but in any case thats not completely obvious, probably safer to ask.

@oysteilo
No need to apologize.

Sorry for me continuing to drag this out. I promise this will be my last post on the subject.

But it isnt a matter of two hits. When the defender rolls all he needs is the 16% chance that the sub hits for him to effectively win the battle. The cruiser doesnt matter - Two hits would just be icing on the cake, but the result would be no different. One hit by the sub and the battle is over. While 16% odds arent great, they are far better than the 3% odds the defender started with. But once you only rolled one offensive hit, he has a way out that allows for a 16% chance at a pretty decent result.

None of this to say that there arent good reasons to select the sub as casualty first. But there is a very legitimate and reasonable argument for selecting the cruiser first, just depends on your goals.

Sub first definitely provides the best option at dealing damage to the british. But cruiser first, is the best chance at direct harm to the russians. Considering Russia is clearly priority number one for the axis and defending russia is priority number one for the allies, its closer to a toss up then it might seem.

@oysteilo said in League General Discussion Thread:

right now we have 3 levels of playoffs so what harm does it do to have (potentially) one OOB bracket?

None. I think we have to do something like that with P2V gaining popularity and being so different from BM3 (and OOB) of course.

The trick is who gets to play in it? The league rankings are shared across all the games. So you could potentially have the top 8 signing up for all three which of course makes no sense. Or you could have it so you only sign up for 1. But I think thats a little off too because I think there is room to play multiple versions. I would like to play some P2V next year but I continue to enjoy BM3.

Separate rankings for everything would be a bit tedious but maybe? I don’t want to see different forums for different versions. That just isolates people and makes the community feel smaller.

But Id certainly be in favor of multiple tourneys. Perhaps there is the littlest bit of presige associated with league champion and that would be dulled or debated, but I think the best thing about the tournament is that it pits the best against the best in a best-of-one format.

@oysteilo said in League General Discussion Thread:

I think:

• 1 combined ranking for all games, OOB, BM, PtV etc etc
• You sign up for playoff in OOB or BM or PtV or all. Your ranking above decides you seed in the bracket, simple as that
• Everyone gets to play their prefered game(s) in the playoffs

So you would be ok with the top 8 signing up for all three? So now we have three playoff tournaments but only 8 people get to participate?

We already have an 8 game minimum for top playoff bracket. Maybe we could expand requirement to 8 total games, and then minimum 3 to sign up for the playoff.

So if you played 3 games P2V, 3 games OOB, and 3 games BM3 you could play in all three or if you played half p2V have BM3 you could sign up for those but not the OOB. So then to participate in the tourney you actually have had to play the given game in the league that year a few times.

@trulpen

I dont see how your response addresses one ranking vs three rankings.

You can still do whatever you want, are you saying you would never play the other versions because you are worried about your BM3 rank being affected by a handful of games in the other version? If so then why bother playing league games with those versions in the first place? Regular non-league games are an easy way to experience variation without affecting your ranking.

@owentoo said in League General Discussion Thread:

@ksmckay As Tizkit said in his post, that the playoffs are the most enticing part of the league, and if that is so, and players know there will be a OOB G40 playoff, then likely there will be far more than 16 OOB league games played by Dec 2021, as players that want to play that version prep and prepare for the playoff.

Players knew there would be an OOB playoff this year since it is/was the default. Same as the last few years when the number of OOB games was just a fraction of the number of BM3 games.