League General Discussion Thread


  • @trulpen said in League General Discussion Thread:

    @amon-sul said in League General Discussion Thread:

    i suggest we patch OOB with BM, but if the OOB guys want their own league, fine by me.

    Problem there is that then no problem is solved. :) We would be in the same situation of having to define a default for the playoffs being unfair to atleast someone.

    I think the division into 3 standings and playoffs is as simple as great idea.

    Actually, I think I understand now what you were driving at. Keep OOB and BM3 together, but have the option of separate playoffs. Sure, that could work. Maybe even be good. Still think the best solution is a separate standing also for BM3 and OOB. Makes a bit of sense, since there are pretty different prerequisites for the two versions.


  • as for OOB i dont play it much worse then BM, its not abot that. its about BM beinge more balanced, upgraded, better, gives much more options, totally dominant comparing to OOB. (the bombers cost 14 is just another great add).

    i personally hope since PTV is a different game that we BM dudes will see another remakes of BM similar of that boms from 12 to 14.

    (by that i mean the cost of units, tech and national tech options)


  • @trulpen said in League General Discussion Thread:

    @trulpen said in League General Discussion Thread:

    @amon-sul said in League General Discussion Thread:

    i suggest we patch OOB with BM, but if the OOB guys want their own league, fine by me.

    Problem there is that then no problem is solved. :) We would be in the same situation of having to define a default for the playoffs being unfair to atleast someone.

    I think the division into 3 standings and playoffs is as simple as great idea.

    Actually, I think I understand now what you were driving at. Keep OOB and BM3 together, but have the option of separate playoffs. Sure, that could work. Maybe even be good. Still think the best solution is a separate standing also for BM3 and OOB. Makes a bit of sense, since there are pretty different prerequisites for the two versions.

    no, i wasnt for the mix model.

    i was for one league and one playoff for them just like this year but without ptv, and with bm as the default version

  • '19 '17 '16

    @trulpen said in League General Discussion Thread:

    @simon33 said in League General Discussion Thread:

    BM4 (14 IPC bombers) as standard

    It is already, and still called BM3 (designer’s decree). ;)

    Reference?


  • @simon33 said in League General Discussion Thread:

    @trulpen said in League General Discussion Thread:

    @simon33 said in League General Discussion Thread:

    BM4 (14 IPC bombers) as standard

    It is already, and still called BM3 (designer’s decree). ;)

    Reference?

    @regularkid

  • '19 '17 '16

    @trulpen That is not a reference.

  • '21 '20 '19 '18 '17 '16

    Can we already start our leauge game?


  • @simon33 said in League General Discussion Thread:

    @trulpen That is not a reference.

    I’ve read a statement about it, but finding it, nah, would take several hours of manual search. Won’t do it, sorry.

  • '19 '17 '16

    I say that it is BM4. It is not the same as BM3 by intention.

  • '21 '20 '19 '18 '17 '16

    @giallo said in League General Discussion Thread:

    Can we already start our leauge game?

    I mean play-off game ofcourse


  • @giallo yes you can start the bidding process as well as the Playoff game.
    This discussion is about the next Playoffs in '22.
    You may start yours against Tanios allready. GL HF


  • @gamerman01 said in League General Discussion Thread:

    OK, great! Great discussion, I mean.

    Not a bad idea to have separate playoff brackets for separate versions - not a bad idea at all - but I think I have a better one!

    It’s no trouble for me to maintain 3 different standings sheets for 2021. Therefore, I’m confident the majority will agree that for 2021 we will still have 1 league together (shared results thread, shared discussion thread, shared everything) but with a separate standings and PPG calculation by version, which is actually what I was saying before I read the last 2-3 hours worth of posts. There will be a league champion playoff for each of the 3 different versions.

    Again, this is a proposal and you all can shoot it down (with radar enabled AA guns), but surely this will be the most popular idea, no?? :)

    I would very much like to have ONE ranking for all games, after all that is what we have to today. Today @gamerman01 would record any result as long as someone is posting a win for their opponent (even chess would be ok I think?). That is good and is not a problem.

    Like several people have suggested maybe it makes more sense to record the number of games each individual has played in each version rather than a spesific rating for that version. This number of games played (minimum, maybe 3 or 4?) determines if you are eligible to play that version’s playoff, the overall ranking however, is always the master for your seeding regardless of version.

    I think ONE ranking is prefered because sometimes you will have persons with 0 or 1 game in one version (but many games in other versions) playing a person with several games in that version. This way of handling the ranking will put people at a rating sooner, remember it is a 3 game cap before you have a firm rating.

    We need to avoid a situation where someone plays 2 OOB, 2 BM and 2 PtV and is still without a rating.

  • '19

    I agree with having one ranking. 3 tourneys sounds great, and recording results in each sounds great too, but I dont like the idea of having 3 different rankings. The more games players play the more the rankings stabilize. 8 or so games seems to do a decent job at that with our particular ranking system.

    E or M in one version probably translates well to other formats provided that player has actually played those other formats. I think we just need a minimum of games in a particular format to qualify for that particular tourney.


  • @ksmckay said in League General Discussion Thread:

    I agree with having one ranking. 3 tourneys sounds great, and recording results in each sounds great too, but I dont like the idea of having 3 different rankings. The more games players play the more the rankings stabilize. 8 or so games seems to do a decent job at that with our particular ranking system.

    E or M in one version probably translates well to other formats provided that player has actually played those other formats. I think we just need a minimum of games in a particular format to qualify for that particular tourney.

    exactely my point. I agree 100%

  • '17

    I haven’t played PTV … is the game mechanically similar enough that a person with a good PTV record is likely to have a good OOB/BM3 record?

    Or conversely, is there any player who’s very sucessful at PTV but very poor at OOB/BM3?

  • '19

    @wheatbeer said in League General Discussion Thread:

    I haven’t played PTV … is the game mechanically similar enough that a person with a good PTV record is likely to have a good OOB/BM3 record?

    Or conversely, is there any player who’s very sucessful at PTV but very poor at OOB/BM3?

    At first you probably wont be at the same level, but once you play a few games and learn the rules and basics you will be fine. In order to be a good player in this game you need to make good decisions, be able to develop strategies and adapt as needed, and such. All those things apply to all the versions. The different versions have their own nuances but if you are good at fundamentals you can learn the new games with just a bit of effort.


  • @trulpen said in League General Discussion Thread:

    Just take our game in the tourney as an example. We got a huge bid of 56 for Allies and I’ve thought on several occasions that the Allies were crushing it (for instance getting an early firm hold of both Spain and Scandinavia), but Axis still seem to be winning. I’m amazed.

    Actually you guys were winning early on. However, you made two mistakes which is going to cost you the game; barring some unlikely eventuality. 1) You let us take Moscow. And I say let because you could have stopped us and chose not to. 2) You went for the Neutrals too early. Yes, you ended up with Scandinavia and Spain but it cost so much time and effort that it allowed Japan to bounce back from some pretty impressive Allied play in the Pacific.


  • I think a playoff tourneys for each version is a good idea and it also makes sense to keep track of games played in the different versions (at least if that is easy for the moderator).

    I do think one ranking (regardless of games played) is better for the reasons Oysteillo and Ksmkay have suggested.

    I’d also prefer it if one can only enter only one of the tourneys at the end of the year. I think that would encourage more participation and also encourage players to play more PTV and especially OOB as those become other routes to the end of year playoffs.

    @gamerman01 said in League General Discussion Thread:

    OK, great! Great discussion, I mean.

    Not a bad idea to have separate playoff brackets for separate versions - not a bad idea at all - but I think I have a better one!

    It’s no trouble for me to maintain 3 different standings sheets for 2021. Therefore, I’m confident the majority will agree that for 2021 we will still have 1 league together (shared results thread, shared discussion thread, shared everything) but with a separate standings and PPG calculation by version, which is actually what I was saying before I read the last 2-3 hours worth of posts. There will be a league champion playoff for each of the 3 different versions.

    Again, this is a proposal and you all can shoot it down (with radar enabled AA guns), but surely this will be the most popular idea, no?? :)


  • I prefer the original offer/suggestion from @gamerman01.

    When contemplating how L21 would play out for me comparing the two alternatives, I’m seeing a scenario when I play only BM3 all through the season and another where I play mainly BM3, but also some games of P2V and even OOB if I’m not too disgusted.

    I believe the latter alternative actually is the more fun one. Atleast for me. Variation is beneficial.

  • '19

    @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.

Suggested Topics

  • 6
  • 14
  • 26
  • 14
  • 35
  • 349
  • 83
  • 98
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

36

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts