Of course, if the Japanese player knows what he is doing, the Allies Will be reacting to him.
But my point is: Europe is probably more scripted, historically.
Do Computer Programmers make better players?
-
Hmmm, anybody with 4 months of schooling can write code. Does that make them a programmer? Computers do math? Well who ‘tells them’ to do it and how?
A problem example, the travelling salesman problem:
You have 100 cities all connected by roads, each city has 99 roads that lead to each of the other 99 cities each of which has various lengths. So you have 99x99 roads. A small number really.
The problem is this: Find a shortest route path to reach all cities.
Simple solution for a coder and a really fast computer you think. Generate all paths, sort them and pick the shortest one. Problem solved before your first coffee break right?
A real programmer who knows math will understand the order of complexity of this approach. Would you believe me if I told you that if EVERY subatomic particle in the universe had as much computer power as the entire world combined has ever had in history. That is would take billions and billions and billions and billions as much time as the age of the current universe. Why? Because math will tell you that that problem is a N! or N factorial order of complexity. That means the number of paths equals 1x2x3x4x5x6x7x8x9x……x56x57x58x58…x97x98x99
Perhaps we are getting off target. I agree with you on most things, but a coder writes code, a programmer understands the ‘system’ and that requires lots of math.
-
I guess from Malachi’s perspective, I’m talking about a coder. (I’m not talking about what I learned in computer science back in 1993-1997 where we did very little programming.)
That said, I don’t think there are that many people who are only doing grunt work in software development - I think most people are taking on the bigger picture (though I might be biased since I’ve worked alone almost all the time). But I think it’s the grunt work, the attention to detail, that has the benefit.
-
I believe my 20 year passion for the World Wars is my best quality in my A&A game play. With that said, my opposition compared to some of you guys has been elementary. I would love to play in person with some of you guys.
-
I agree with Frimmel’s assessment 100%,
I have a friend I play occasional face to face. He is very good at crunching numbers but sucks at strategic decisions and more especially at making “command” decisions. While he can crunch the numbers very well his lack of being able to make strategic decisions and the indecision this creates for him kills his play.
-
I agree with Frimmel’s assessment 100%,
I have a friend I play occasional face to face. He is very good at crunching numbers but sucks at strategic decisions and more especially at making “command” decisions. While he can crunch the numbers very well his lack of being able to make strategic decisions and the indecision this creates for him kills his play.
I’ve seen it before. I call those players droids.
-
Oh sure, if the person lacks strategic vision or can’t see beyond the first ‘ply’ of moves then no amount of number crunching can make up for this. Not being able to see ‘deeper’ into the game means you gravitate towards ‘local maximas’ that the combat simulator says is a good move. “Sure, I’ll take that queen for the pawn.” thus setting up a checkmate in 2 moves.
-
In my expeirence computer programmers just take longer to move.
-
OK, can we take this premise is a slightly different direction?
what makes a great A&A player?
[Not sure if these are in order of importance of not, we can argue that after we create a list]
Also assuming a 1-on-1 game. Team dynamics are a whole other discussion.1). Experience
Knows the game and the ‘better’ strategies and more important territories as well some of the nuances of the game (like sub / DD interaction / vulnerabilities as well as how to coordinate moves with your allies countries)
2). Vision / Ability to see 2-3 rounds down the road in a game.
If you can not see what your opponent is trying to do to you or have a strategy for your side (at least a general one), it’s hard to win. Knowing HOW to win is not hard (your objectives), you can gleen that from the rules, knowing HOW to achieve those are much more vital
3). Understanding / mitigating the risks
Take good odds battles, unless you are falling behind, you might starting increasing your risks in order to increase your chances of winning.
4). Determining who is winning / losing (very tightly related to 3)
If you think you are winning when you are in fact losing, your moves may be counter productive. An example helps to explain my point. If I think I am winning, I may have no sense of urgency to force my opponent to counter my move(s), or properly increase my risk exposure.
5). Being able to realize AND take advantage of an opportunity
Many times in games, a battle may go awry for/against you (dice will do that!). Sometimes it can be so bad that no level of contingency plan you have created can save you EXCEPT for your opponents failure to realize and exploit this weakness. Good players recognize these situations.
6). Realizing any unit is disposable to meet your objective(s)
Often times, a player is hung up on the COST of some units that are risked/lost. “Oh, I took france but it cost me 3 bombers to do it!”
Well that just might be the best move for the situation, ESPECIALLY if you can afford it or needed that battle to get back into the game (see #3 about mitigating the risks)
Please feel free to add to my quick list. I am sure there are many more.
-
A & A is about experience; however, a person able to think critically will get more from each game as they gain experience.
An engineer can perform thousands of calculations to design a boat, and at the end, tell you where to paint the waterline within an inch or so. The fellow who builds boats can build the boat, making a few modifications along the way, such as adding a larger, heavier engine, and still paint the waterline within an inch. But give that same fellow a new boat design to build, and he will take some time to learn where the waterline is. The engineer can still compute it, but it will take many calculations.
This is sort of the difference between wisdom and intelligence.
-
OK, can we take this premise is a slightly different direction?
what makes a great A&A player?
[Not sure if these are in order of importance of not, we can argue that after we create a list]
Also assuming a 1-on-1 game. Team dynamics are a whole other discussion.1). Experience
Knows the game and the ‘better’ strategies and more important territories as well some of the nuances of the game (like sub / DD interaction / vulnerabilities as well as how to coordinate moves with your allies countries)
2). Vision / Ability to see 2-3 rounds down the road in a game.
If you can not see what your opponent is trying to do to you or have a strategy for your side (at least a general one), it’s hard to win. Knowing HOW to win is not hard (your objectives), you can gleen that from the rules, knowing HOW to achieve those are much more vital
3). Understanding / mitigating the risks
Take good odds battles, unless you are falling behind, you might starting increasing your risks in order to increase your chances of winning.
4). Determining who is winning / losing (very tightly related to 3)
If you think you are winning when you are in fact losing, your moves may be counter productive. An example helps to explain my point. If I think I am winning, I may have no sense of urgency to force my opponent to counter my move(s), or properly increase my risk exposure.
5). Being able to realize AND take advantage of an opportunity
Many times in games, a battle may go awry for/against you (dice will do that!). Sometimes it can be so bad that no level of contingency plan you have created can save you EXCEPT for your opponents failure to realize and exploit this weakness. Good players recognize these situations.
6). Realizing any unit is disposable to meet your objective(s)
Often times, a player is hung up on the COST of some units that are risked/lost. “Oh, I took france but it cost me 3 bombers to do it!”
Well that just might be the best move for the situation, ESPECIALLY if you can afford it or needed that battle to get back into the game (see #3 about mitigating the risks)
Please feel free to add to my quick list. I am sure there are many more.
Very solid list.
Suggested Topics
