BriantheWise

Heuristic, Tuesday, unfortunately is turning out not to work for me. I wanted to let you know asap. Wednesday will be excellent. Brian

Egads, I just realized that I'm Axis. I'm really not very good as Axis. I think this will be a short game.

I like! the dutch gambit. It's fun, and I don't think it's ahistorical, either. If the French have time to get a good defense set up, it's not really a game winner, but it sure gives the Germans a punch in the nose. As far as history, try pretending it this way: The Lowlands, France and England all remember what happened in WWI. They've seen what Germany did in the East with Chech and Poland, so the Lowlands invite the French and Britain to help defend them. We just don't have a model for it in this game (Clash of Steel did, but that's another thread). I don't think it's all that farfetched. Just my opinion

Two Points: 1) I never thought about disbanding the Russian navy. Sounds like a pretty good idea, actually. 2) Have you ever considered trying to take Finland in the first few turns. You have the ships to pound, you move the air units up there for practice, add one corp and your first HQ, and you should have Finland finished in 4 turns, unless the Axis brings an HQ and an army up there. It's tight, but helps with the front and the air units get experience. Just a thought.

Wellll, it was worth a try.

Hi Heuristic Here's my basic schedule. Monday, January 6th: Bad. Tuesday, Free from about 7:30PM to about 10. Wednesday, same. Thursday: Bad. Friday: Free from 7:30 on Saturday: Pretty flexible. Let me know. This is PST. My email address is bpoulsen60@hotmail.com. I'll talk to you there. Thanks Brian

There was a tournament, and you promised to play the winner. There was no winner. The tournament fell apart, for some reasons clear, some not. With me, Rambo conceded, then he didn't, then he had too, Waltero lost. Irish guards won. Brad got annoyed. It became a soap opera, but without the pretty women. I take the blame i should, but not the blame I shouldn't. They say the Axis always wins. I disagree. You also disagree. So, if you don't mind, I'll take allies. (Weekends are best - it gives people time to make odds and wager). Oh, by the way, what do HQ's do? (kidding) Brian ps. If I win, I get to help with SC2. If you win, you get a six pack of your choice. Fair.?

Waltero and I finally played. I got very lucky. Almost Rambo lucky, but it was actually simply luck. Very bad dice for him. He decided to concede, "surrender", I quote (never surrender!) in June, 1940. I don't know if it counts. I don't know if it is too late. I don't know if it matters. But I do know that it was great fun. Thank you Waltero, for a wonderful playing experience. Brian

Counter to what Defense said, Don't take Norway early. Wait till the french fleet is dead.

Very possible. Once you understand the nuances of the game, it's even fairly easy to do against Allies +1. I think many of the experts can even win against Allies +2. I haven't tried that yet though.

Rambo, Rambo, Rambo... Winning friends and influencing people again... Not counting PBEM (which was comparatively horribly boring but cool at the time), I've played you what, about five times? Started the games at least, until you declared you won. I never said you cheated, but others have. Our last game seemed suspect, but in retrospect, I think you were just doing some very cool moves And with a lot of luck. Sweden, one turn, simultaneous with Greece, one turn, followed by Egypt, one turn. In your tips, you suggest taking notes of ships locations and all that. As you know, I don't bother. Our games were far closer than you like to admit. And you never beat me (well, I did have to concede that once). You always wanted to start a new game. Go head cracking. In conclusion, I don't think you cheat, I just don't think you can beat me. Not in a mirror match. Now is not the time, though, vacation is over. But you sure talk alot. Be well.

I kind of agree with Rambo, Les And Archibald on all of this. Here's my personal take on all of this and Rambo's notes on the other threads. I love long books. It lets me know the characters longer. Tai Pan, Noble House, The Waste Lands, The Wheel of Time, etc. Similarly, I love long games. CIV2 and 3, War in Russia, Some roleplaying games, those kinds of games. And that's one reason why I love SC. It Can go on a very long time. In fact one of the things I do Not like about playing ICQ is starting games that do not finish. It makes me feel like I started a great book, and then it got lost. The victory conditions award the winner early win victory points, but perhaps not enough. I've seen the AAR's of the game between Zap and Rambo, but not the map specifics. So if Zap is just prolonging the game for extra killing of units and the points therein, I'd get bored. And I probably not want to play the game. If Rambo is against the wall in this game, Zap should move in for the kill, begin eliminating the major countries and be done with it. That's fun too, for the winner. And he should have a bit of mercy on the loser, time wise, since it's no fun to lose, really, when there's no contest and you don't have many units to move. That's like a great book that didn't know when to end. Just my opinion

Hi Waltero, Sorry if you've seen some weird stuff in your games. I don't think I would have been "crafty" enough to pull it off in the game we are (were) supposed to play in the tournament. I posted my preferred times, email address, etc. Unfortunately, I never heard from you. We did play once for about a hour or two, you as Axis, me as Allies. It was going pretty well, but then you advised me that you had a prior commitment with another player. We were going to continue it, but again, I never heard back from you. I guess these are some of the troubles I see. I don't mean it to be harsh, I just miss having the opportunity. Brian

Heuristic, Brad, fellows... Here's the scoop, as far as I know it: On December 26th, I posted my schedule here on this thread (which was flexible) for Waltero, along with my Email address. On December 27th, I played Waltero, but it wasn't Waltero, as we know. On or about December 30th, Waltero got upset for reasons that are described in the forum, and decided he was leaving and going off to play a different Battlefront game, CMBB or something. I never did get an Email from Waltero, we have not started our game, I have tried to post to Waltero now again, to play now, if at all. Tomorrow, I work and cannot play. Friday, I work half day and can play during the second half and stay up all night if necessary. Saturday I am free. So, referring to my earlier post on this thread from yesterday, you are without either of us, unless, you need a fourth to even things. If so, then if Waltero and I can't meet, soon, he should get precedence and I concede. If he doesn't announce that he wants to be in the next round, and you need that fourth, I am available and will be as flexible as possible (and probably fodder). I think that's where things stand. Sorry about that. Brian

I would have liked to, Comrade, but it was New Years, and I had other things to attend too. Sorry. Brian

Rambo! Again I smile! And disagree Playing weaker players gives you time to explore the unreasonable; the bold, since you know you have nothing to lose. Playing a weaker player, means you have the opportunity to make the mistakes, be bold, and still pick up the pieces if it goes sideways. Against you (whether you are cheating or not, as posts have implied, although I have not seen this in the games I have played with you) I have been bold, crazy, forceful, new (oh, and emotional!, so to speak). That's why it's been fun. I'm still mad that you falsettoed as Waltero. Issues, now finished. I must conclude abrubtly here. It's new years. Be well, new start. Sorry if the post strayed (i kept getting a countdown).

So....for Round Three: Who's left, and should I be allowed to participate? Round one: I play Rambo, and we all know about the dispute therein. But in summary, I win without winning (I think, again, based on his strategy at that time, I would have won, but it is not known). Round two: I play Waltero (but it's Rambo, actually), and again I win, without winning, because Waltero is pissed, and leaves the contest (and the room), I think, so he implied when he said he was leaving the channel, because he was getting annoyed at things, key things, I felt). Round three: If Waltero still wants to be in this, I concede to him. At round three, I still haven't beat anyone, so it's kind of false for me. However, if Waltero does not decide that he wants the spot, and I am allowed, and there are the number of opponents remaining, such that I would fill the fourth, I would love to participate in a game against someone who has joined into this game and played it a few times, now!, and is ready and willing to win against me, and not be all mad, if in case, I might play a decent game. And get lucky. Brad Tennant, thank you for putting up the tournament. It was cool before it got cross ways, and it's cool now. I thank you.

Thank you, Jollyguy. I thought that was how it worked. In my favorite game against Rambo (which I conceded, sadly, because late English mistakes), I did a move that Rambo never expected. He's agressive, France is losing, dying even, but my Maginot armies are untouched. I abandoned the line, and attacked like a mad dog drinking old english (the beer). It caused him much consternation. And he knows it. But he won. That was just a side note.

I think it's a game design issue. In this game, all the MMP's are linear and there is really no calculation for industrial improvement. Clash of Steel did this relatively well, but a bit preponderant. I won't go into this into detail, but I think, without dismissing the balance and excellence of this game, there should be a larger measure of racheting up (and racheting down) of the powers involved, inclusive of the events that took place. This is the Italian channel, so in respect to this country, the Italians did start out somewhat industrious, relatively speaking and then lost in north africa, and won no where else. John Jersey could (and would) describe it better. But the whole war effort collapsed pretty quick. I'm not sure how better I would do it, but the Italian losses (or victories), would be better reflected in adjusted MMP output. Say, for example the base is 100, but as a country loses, it's effectiveness reduces, counterbalanced by their increased industriousness (didn't happen in Italy, but it did happen in Germany and most certainly in Russia). As the tide changes, the effectiveness increases, multiplied by the industriousness. I'm just stating a very basic matrix, but it would reflect things like the sudden output of Russia, and American, And even Germany, while, Britain (tired), and Italy (disillusioned), began to play less of a picture. Just thoughts. I don't have the matrix for the game concept as yet.

I did not know that a little stand in place foiling attack would kill the entrenchment. like, oops.

Smiles at Rambo: The game where I played as Axis against you, and you did the dutch gambit, was not concluded. I was making progress, and the Allied war readiness was in the neg. But when I was playing you in that game, I thought you were Waltero, who wouldn't play like you. I still think I could beat you on that one. You said adjust to the game, and the moves and countermoves (or some such). One also has to adjust to the players. I've shown you some things. And I know this. I think my best ability is to effectively react to the opponents moves. Even when things get scrambled up, and my intended strategy is not going as I wished. I agree with many of the tactics that you have suggested, but disagree with how it relates to the strategy. Against an obviously agressive Axis player like you ("I will always win!", quote un quote), using my carriers to assist in forestalling you in France is, I think, a fair gamble. The carriers are useful in the beginning, useless in the middle (unless SeaLion), to a large extent, and then extremely helpful during the counter attack by the allies. But if I don't get to that point, the carriers were like a poorly invested 401k. In all games I have played you (excepting Waltero's game), I have been an attack dog allied player. I felt I had good strategy, and tactics. But I do know one thing. By the third game you were playing the player, and I was predictable. From my perspective, that drops me the grade, not that I am emotional (but I just want to scream....kidding). Just a good strategy, over used. My thoughts.

Thank you, Rambo, for the tips. Rules clarification: If I attack out of my entrenchment, but do not take the hex (ie spoiling attack), do I lose my entrenchment? If so, all levels, some? (Nice to see a slightly more helpful attitude)

can't

Jersey John, I remember subscribing to SPI. It was a great idea. Get a cheap game, a good magazine, every two months. Some of the games were pretty bad, but hey, it was ok. (The Waterloo game was great. I wore out those counters!) Rambo, you date yourself. You can't be too! much younger than me, if you were playing Squad Leader, and reading the General. It was good stuff. Then came computers, and SSI, and those great games (some. lot's actually): War in Russia (in black and white on an Atari on the TV. Took me a year to play through. The Surface fleet games. I can't even remember some of them, but there was a time that if SSI came out with a game, I bought it. Then of course, came Civilization and my perpective changed. Strange how they can figure out how to make that work on IP.

Copying this quote, by kuniworth, in his post: Brianthewise; You ****in cheater, you cheat cheat and cheat. So you mean you that you are good a playin but cant save a game. You stink Rambo. I think this might be falsely attributed to me. I certainly don't recall saying this. If I had said this, I think I would have used better syntax. And if I did say, this, I apologize (because of the poor syntax. smile. Actually, because I think I'm a bit more subtle that this, and I don't recall having ever accused Rambo of cheating. Other things maybe, but not that. Others can). On the other hand, it's probably not relevant (People forget but you say, but now what you write).