AARs

GM: Pedros. Winner: asudevil (Russia)

Re: AARs

Postby Flatley » 29 Dec 2011, 19:41

I call it like I see it. We're talking about frustration that's been building for nearly the entire game.
The enemy's gate is down.

Don't go thinkin' you so bad jes cuz you was in SOLDIER.

We've always been at war with Eastasia.
User avatar
Flatley
 
Posts: 1815
Joined: 08 Jan 2009, 01:29
Class: Diplomat
All-game rating: (1000)
Timezone: GMT-6

Re: AARs

Postby BoomstickS » 29 Dec 2011, 21:43

Even though Flatley had some pretty hard opinions about the players, I think he got the (kind off) right opinion about me.
I did fuck up the board after my stabs, but then again, if I hadn't stabbed my SC count would forever stay at 6 SC's, and if one SC (like Stp) would have been granted to me then I'm pretty sure Norway would have taken it from me after Russia was dealt with, leaving me to get conquered non-the-less.

Thus I only partially agree with Flatley.
BoomstickS
 
Posts: 394
Joined: 03 Jun 2010, 19:16
Class: Ambassador
All-game rating: (1000)
Timezone: GMT+1

Re: AARs

Postby asudevil » 29 Dec 2011, 21:48

Flatley wrote:I call it like I see it. We're talking about frustration that's been building for nearly the entire game.


I actually like your call of the game. Your plan to knock me out in 05 by rallying the board, really did have me worried. I knew that I was over-extended, because for most of 04-06 I didnt have all my builds down. I was frequently playing 2 units short of where I should have been. I knew that if you guys could turn Norway against me, I was going to be hurting. When you guys got Turkey into Munich with Norway's help, I knew I had to pull out anything to get the alliance broken.

I agree with your assessment of haroonriaz. I am in several games with him (including some I am GM'ing) and he is a top-notch player. When he came into the game, I knew he would turn on me if I gave him the chance, which was part of why I didnt want to keep him as an ally. I knew you would be able to turn him against me.

I wont lie, I was STUNNED when Boomsticks turned and helped me out. I knew that the early stab, when I wasnt really out yet, would give me the game because I figured someone would do as Morg did and just end the game...But as he just stated, I used the fact that his ability to grow in the alliance was limited. He couldnt grow naturally through Norway or Spain, so his only real chance was to stab. I would like to say, I of course promised him a 2man draw, which may have helped sway his opinion.

Side note, I am afraid this game may hurt me in the team championship, because many of you are in it, and I may find allies scarce...lol
Captain FANG, forum team championships WINNER
Part of the surviving nations of WW4/Haven

Unless I am in the cheater's subforum. 99% of what I say is NOT as a mod.
User avatar
asudevil
Premium Member
 
Posts: 16606
Joined: 18 Jul 2011, 02:20
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1351)
All-game rating: (1437)
Timezone: GMT-7

Re: AARs

Postby Flatley » 29 Dec 2011, 21:58

BoomstickS wrote:Even though Flatley had some pretty hard opinions about the players, I think he got the (kind off) right opinion about me.
I did fuck up the board after my stabs, but then again, if I hadn't stabbed my SC count would forever stay at 6 SC's, and if one SC (like Stp) would have been granted to me then I'm pretty sure Norway would have taken it from me after Russia was dealt with, leaving me to get conquered non-the-less.

Thus I only partially agree with Flatley.


I doubt Norway would have been able to attack you effectively, not the way things were likely to develop. But you feel for the warm-and-fuzzy trap. Notice how many SCs you ended the game with? Moreover, did you notice that I had plateaued at 6 SCs for nearly the entire game? I had consciously made the choice to forgo cheap stabs in favor of a healthier gameboard. You can't put trifles like SC counts ahead of strategic positioning. When you do, you lose.
The enemy's gate is down.

Don't go thinkin' you so bad jes cuz you was in SOLDIER.

We've always been at war with Eastasia.
User avatar
Flatley
 
Posts: 1815
Joined: 08 Jan 2009, 01:29
Class: Diplomat
All-game rating: (1000)
Timezone: GMT-6

Re: AARs

Postby Morg » 29 Dec 2011, 22:17

I wouldn't have been able to really attack Britain effectively. In fact British unit placement was hampering my ability to attack Russia effectively.

Yeah, I fully understand Flatley's description of Norway and I think it fits from a Spanish perspective, but as Asudevil & Boomsticks said, Britain didn't have anywhere to grow except through me or surrounding me. So from that point of view, I figured Norway's best bet would be to grow allied with Russia and then turn to join the ALA when Russia was closer to 17 SCs. At that point desperation would keep the ALA together and if they were fewer players an ALA would have been easier to maintain. I really would have rather had Spain and Britain fighting so that Norway and Spain could take out Britain (to Norway's advantage of course) and then regroup into an ALA. As it was, as soon as Britain decided to join the ALA I became suspiscious.

I'm sure he figured that having fewer people in the ALA was better too and since I was in his way so for him so much the better. I didn't expect to see him take Munich though.
"He says there are no easy answers. I say he's not looking hard enough!"
User avatar
Morg
 
Posts: 3105
Joined: 25 Feb 2011, 22:50
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: (1428)
All-game rating: (1561)
Timezone: GMT-8

Re: AARs

Postby BoomstickS » 29 Dec 2011, 22:24

Flatley wrote:
BoomstickS wrote:Even though Flatley had some pretty hard opinions about the players, I think he got the (kind off) right opinion about me.
I did fuck up the board after my stabs, but then again, if I hadn't stabbed my SC count would forever stay at 6 SC's, and if one SC (like Stp) would have been granted to me then I'm pretty sure Norway would have taken it from me after Russia was dealt with, leaving me to get conquered non-the-less.

Thus I only partially agree with Flatley.


I doubt Norway would have been able to attack you effectively, not the way things were likely to develop. But you feel for the warm-and-fuzzy trap. Notice how many SCs you ended the game with? Moreover, did you notice that I had plateaued at 6 SCs for nearly the entire game? I had consciously made the choice to forgo cheap stabs in favor of a healthier gameboard. You can't put trifles like SC counts ahead of strategic positioning. When you do, you lose.


Yeah, sure, I understand your opinion. But also please think, what would have happened to me if Russia got defeated? Norway with probably around 10 SC's, you having around the same, if you'd gang up on me with my 6 SC's I'd be doomed. I was looking ahead, and I knew that in the short term it would be a hard ride, but in the long end advantageous. But alas, I failed to stop Russia's advance.
BoomstickS
 
Posts: 394
Joined: 03 Jun 2010, 19:16
Class: Ambassador
All-game rating: (1000)
Timezone: GMT+1

Re: AARs

Postby Pedros » 30 Dec 2011, 13:57

Flatley - I was joking! I knew from odd things you'd said how you were feeling about it.

Now that most people have had their say pretty thoroughly, I have to say that I couldn't believe the lack of any serious, coordinated attempt to stop asudevil. And Norway helping him to the solo I find simply unbelievable.

I'm with Flatley
"Sooner or later, one of us will stab the other. But for now we're both better off as allies" (kininvie)
User avatar
Pedros
 
Posts: 12465
Joined: 25 Jan 2009, 12:59
Location: Somewhere full of gorse and brambles, West Cornwall
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1085)
All-game rating: (1314)
Timezone: GMT

Re: AARs

Postby asudevil » 30 Dec 2011, 14:31

Yeah, it was an odd game, and had the NMR's not occured (especially Austria's and Germany's...although Norways/Englands/Turkeys were big too), I never would have solo'd.

However, lets keep in mind that had Turkey not NMR'd, I would have only been going for the draw with Maucat, because at the beginning, I just wanted to survive until the end in my first forum game...

Side note, if you liked playing a 9 person game, check out the 11 person crowded variant I am looking at GM'ing...(link in my signature.)
Captain FANG, forum team championships WINNER
Part of the surviving nations of WW4/Haven

Unless I am in the cheater's subforum. 99% of what I say is NOT as a mod.
User avatar
asudevil
Premium Member
 
Posts: 16606
Joined: 18 Jul 2011, 02:20
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1351)
All-game rating: (1437)
Timezone: GMT-7

Re: AARs

Postby Morg » 30 Dec 2011, 22:08

Hmmm...

So it looks like there is more explanation needed for Norway's decision to help out the Leader to the Solo in the last couple of years.

Well, primarily I was reacting to the British stab. I'll freely admit this was not my best game played. But I not sure anyone would've simply ignored a stab like that and reactions to that stab are quite limited. I really couldn't have expected Britain to stop his war against Norway, so continuing to attack Russia while leaving home bases open to Britain would have simply erased me without any gain for anyone expect Britain (perhaps indirectly Spain). Attempting to turtle up into a defensive shell without attacking anyone usually isn't feasible in Diplomacy and there was little to no chance that Spain would convincely stop Britain for me. Turning to fight Britain while defending against Russia I suppose was another option that I could've tried, but a 3 SC power spread out sandwiched between an 8 SC power and a 15 SC power attempting to fight both is really hoping for a miracle (yes, I know it's possible to come back from near defeat, but no one was in a postion to stop either Britain or Russia from concentrating their efforts on taking me out, and neither was particularly interested in helping me survive). So as I saw it, playing to win was no longer an option for me. When someone takes the step to ensure that another player can't have that option, they should be fully aware that such a situation changes the calculus of that player or a cornered animal is very unpredictable.

I really just saw two options. I could ignore the stab and make a charge of the light brigade swing at Russia, rewarding Britain with my SCs and eliminating myself or I could make it abundantly clear to Britain why his stab was foolish by helping his enemy though at this point helping his enemy would ensure both his enemies solo and that some of my own remaining SCs would likely be eventually surrendered. Both options that I saw were lose-lose and so I took the one more likely to assure my existence at the end of the game. So yes, I sold my soul to the devil in this game in exchange for survival. I suppose it might've been a more noble option to go kamikaze against the potential soloist, but I don't know how anyone could expect me to do that. And that is my reasoning for doing what I did.

As a side note, I don't think I've ever seen an ALA work when one member of the alliance has almost no ability to engage the leader.

Also a quick question for Flatley if he's still reading, were you serious about being ready to walk away from the game when Russia had 11 SCs or was that a ruse to get everyone cooperating against Russia?
"He says there are no easy answers. I say he's not looking hard enough!"
User avatar
Morg
 
Posts: 3105
Joined: 25 Feb 2011, 22:50
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: (1428)
All-game rating: (1561)
Timezone: GMT-8

Re: AARs

Postby Pedros » 30 Dec 2011, 22:26

Looks like the ball's in your court then BoomshickS. It was all your fault!!
"Sooner or later, one of us will stab the other. But for now we're both better off as allies" (kininvie)
User avatar
Pedros
 
Posts: 12465
Joined: 25 Jan 2009, 12:59
Location: Somewhere full of gorse and brambles, West Cornwall
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1085)
All-game rating: (1314)
Timezone: GMT

PreviousNext

Return to Loeb 9-player Game 2

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests