AARs

GM: Pedros. Winner: asudevil (Russia)

Re: AARs

Postby asudevil » 30 Dec 2011, 22:56

First off...I keep seeing ALA...what does that stand for. Is that just short for alliance?

And although I know Pedros is a little upset with the end game. I did talk to Morg about my inevitable win, and how he should punish the stabber for stabbing when you guys had the chance to stop me and turn the tides.

Flatley had the message that the 3 of them would work together and if any of them would stab, the others would turn on that player. So my ability to convince Boomsticks to stab (foolishly on his part I agree), demonstrated my communication in convincing them to penalize the stabber and be more angry with him, than being concerned with the soloist.

Now Morg, forfeiting territories to me, that was neither punishing the stabber, or stopping the soloist, that was just good fortune. But dont underestimate the revenge factor when Flatley and Morg knew they had a shot at driving me back and Boomsticks screwing it up.
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, 23:09

asudevil wrote:First off...I keep seeing ALA...what does that stand for. Is that just short for alliance?


ALA= Anti Leader Alliance
"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 » 31 Dec 2011, 00:24

I stabbed just because I didn't want to end up as the looser. Giving Spain + Norway all the SC's (both would make them about 15 SC countries), leaving me at 6 would mean inevitable defeat. I still had a chance to win if I had done the stab, but I stupidly NMR'ed, and after that I, though still thought I had the initiative, and I hoped for Norway to not try and throw me off of my game. I think the game could have continued if I had altered my moves to:

Nwy - Stp (nc)
Sib S Nwy - Stp (nc)
Ska - Swe
Nth - Den
Lon H
Kiel S Rurh H
Ruhr S Kiel H

And then letting Flatley move into Norway.
If I remember correctly we were discussing to give Flatley Norway, but we chose to do something else.

But anyways, we weren't too far off to stop the Russian war machine even though we lost in the end!
I guess I should have gambled a bit more.

But as stated a few times before, imo I had no real choice except doing the stab. (I have allready explained it like 4 times! :lol: )

Still, it was a enjoyable game, and it would have gotten boring if a stalemate line was met. (Wich nearly was met!)
BoomstickS
 
Posts: 394
Joined: 03 Jun 2010, 19:16
Class: Ambassador
All-game rating: (1000)
Timezone: GMT+1

Re: AARs

Postby haroonriaz » 31 Dec 2011, 02:51

I didn't spend a lot of time in the game since I took over as Turkey, but for the exhibitionist that I am, I cannot help but not post anything.

First of all, I completely concur with Flatley, he was the player with the greatest vision in the game, after asudevil of course. Congratulations to him, again and respects to Flately, especially for fighting and not giving up til the very end. However, to be true, I was deeply offended with Flatley's proposal of surrender, which came out of frustration I know and I know he had valid reasons for that, but still that's just not my style. He's had the analysis spot on so not going into all that. The surrender proposal was what motivated me to write to everyone, in what I largely considered a hopeless game with Turkey's missed builds.

I am particularly proud of the fact that I as a dying Turkey did convince the board to combine against Russia, if only for a couple of seasons, particularly the apparently insane Munich move. But that's what Diplomacy is all about. But later we saw why Flatley was so frustrated out of the unresponsiveness of the other powers on the board. BoomstickS' England and Italy were disappointing in the end and Morg's Norway helpless. I just didn't think it really was anyone's "fault" as you guys have been discussing, it is just that Russia (asudevil) won, he was strong enough to get the better of everyone's nerves and let's acknowledge that. One player that managed to impress me for the time that I was involved in the game beside Flatley was diplomat42, for his spirit.

This game is a great study in any case.

I like this variant, which appears to have been created by a Norwegian if I'm not wrong (explains why the hell Norway is in the scenario), and it would be thrilling to see another game anytime soon.
More than half of Diplomacy games are ruined because players leave them half-way.
Silver Member Classicist, Cavalry, Captain CLD, Winner: War in the Americas, Joint: GoT I, 1792 Napoleonic Diplomacy 1, Zeus 3, Stew 2, East Asia 2, Loeb-9 3, Manifest Destiny I, 1905 2.0, Napoleonic E&C, Seismic 6
User avatar
haroonriaz
 
Posts: 266
Joined: 18 Mar 2009, 23:06
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: 921
All-game rating: 923
Timezone: GMT+5

Re: AARs

Postby asudevil » 31 Dec 2011, 03:32

haroonriaz wrote:I didn't spend a lot of time in the game since I took over as Turkey, but for the exhibitionist that I am, I cannot help but not post anything.

First of all, I completely concur with Flatley, he was the player with the greatest vision in the game, after asudevil of course. Congratulations to him, again and respects to Flately, especially for fighting and not giving up til the very end. However, to be true, I was deeply offended with Flatley's proposal of surrender, which came out of frustration I know and I know he had valid reasons for that, but still that's just not my style. He's had the analysis spot on so not going into all that. The surrender proposal was what motivated me to write to everyone, in what I largely considered a hopeless game with Turkey's missed builds.

I am particularly proud of the fact that I as a dying Turkey did convince the board to combine against Russia, if only for a couple of seasons, particularly the apparently insane Munich move. But that's what Diplomacy is all about. But later we saw why Flatley was so frustrated out of the unresponsiveness of the other powers on the board. BoomstickS' England and Italy were disappointing in the end and Morg's Norway helpless. I just didn't think it really was anyone's "fault" as you guys have been discussing, it is just that Russia (asudevil) won, he was strong enough to get the better of everyone's nerves and let's acknowledge that. One player that managed to impress me for the time that I was involved in the game beside Flatley was diplomat42, for his spirit.

This game is a great study in any case.

I like this variant, which appears to have been created by a Norwegian if I'm not wrong (explains why the hell Norway is in the scenario), and it would be thrilling to see another game anytime soon.


You can join my crowded variant...similar but with 11 powers and no neutral SC's...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 » 31 Dec 2011, 05:32

Morg wrote: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?


It was a ruse. I hate to lose, hate hate hate it with a passion. But I had to do it, because, as you mentioned, I could not directly engage with Russia myself. To preserve the balance in the game, I had to change the hearts and minds of those who were in a position to act. If I had waited until Russia and I shared a border, one of us would have been doing very well, indeed... and I didn't have Russia's wealth of NMRs to hasten my ascension. But my persuasive arguments weren't convincing enough, so I thought a different kind of threat might work.
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 Flatley » 31 Dec 2011, 05:47

haroonriaz wrote:The surrender proposal was what motivated me to write to everyone, in what I largely considered a hopeless game with Turkey's missed builds.


You see? My ploy simply lacked the necessary audience to yield the results I had hoped to achieve! :-D
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 Pedros » 31 Dec 2011, 06:52

First, can I say thanks to everybody for this AAR. Usually the winner posts a reasonably detailed account, one or two others write a short paragraph, and that's it. Plain speaking here all round, but the game is actually becoming clear for once. As GM, I always say "It looked like this..., but of course I have no idea what was going on behind the scenes" This time I have, and thanks for it.

Maybe I was a bit hard on everybody, but to me it was obvious what was likely to happen for about 5 game years (and it only lasted eight!) One player wrote to me a while ago saying that a real alliance against a likely soloist almost never happens. I can only say that when I'm playing, especially Forum Games where players are usually much more serious about things, they pretty well always do. Not to attempt it (unless of course you think you can maybe solo yourself) is in my book almost a crime.

The one thing after reading all of this which really startles me is BoomstickS saying he believed, from a position with six centres, that by stabbing he could possibly win. Did you actually mean "get a solo" BoomstickS? If so, respect - I certainly didn't spot it.
"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 Flatley » 31 Dec 2011, 06:58

Yeah... I completely disagree with Boomstick's rationale. How could you possibly feel that stabbing Norway before reducing Russia's SC count would work?
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 asudevil » 31 Dec 2011, 07:15

Flatley wrote:Yeah... I completely disagree with Boomstick's rationale. How could you possibly feel that stabbing Norway before reducing Russia's SC count would work?


Well, as I was just talking to Pedros in PM about this very thing. I had convinced Boomsticks (apparently successfully, although maybe he knew it was a ruse), that he would be able to knock Norway down to almost nothing that turn, and I would then help him finish of Norway. This would get him up into double digit SC's. I also told him all of Spain would be his.

I told him that I was sure the rest of the board would continue to whittle me away even as Norway got eliminated. (At the time there was still Italy/Austria/Turkey/Spain to try and push me back down south). I knew I was stronger in the south than the north, so I had better odds of doing ok down there, but the north was my weak spot. I also hoped that the board would do something similar to what it did, which was be so mad at Boomsticks, organized resistance would be too hard to pull off.

Had I ever intended to keep my word, he would have had a shot at a 2man draw with me (which I continued to tell him was my goal), and in your ALA he was going to stagnate as Spain/Turkey/Norway got all my SC's while he stayed the same. And then Spain/Norway would turn on him, so his best chance was to join me.

I wont lie, it was the wrong move, but look at how he continues to hold that mindset. He was already thinking it, but I did spend a good deal of time working him and convincing him of that idea.

Also, not to brag, I dont know how many of you keep/organize your messages from a forum game. However, I just deleted my LOEB folder. At the time I had over 200 messages in the folder. These were just the replies I got that were directly related to the game. Not including anything that was just "yeah" or "sounds good" or obviously anything that was ignored.

I dont know how many of you had that many messages going trying to convince people to see things your way.

I am not messaging nearly that much in my other forum game (Manifest Destiny), and I am not doing nearly as well in it either.

Not trying to deny that Boomsticks made the wrong move, but trying to let you guys know it wasnt a spur of the moment decision by him. I had been working on getting him to do that for a solid 5-6 days over 2 seasons.

Also, not trying to get you guys to heap praise on me or sound cocky, as I feel this may be coming off as.

You guys played a solid game, I think I may have just devoted a little more time to it (which is natural as I was doing well, God knows I dont work as hard when I am losing, which is why haroonriaz still is impressive for any player, much less a replacement player). I know that in regular dip, I work well/believe/am influenced by whoever talks most to me, which was kinda my goal for this game too.
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

PreviousNext

Return to Loeb 9-player Game 2

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest