f9929b41-ac2a-4cd9-8120-c813881e2646-triplea_41790_4 IT Scramble in Malta.tsvg
13L G40 Stalingradski (Axis) vs Karl7 (Allies+9)
-
Hey Tobias, great question, and I have two answers :-)
The first is yes! Of course I should. I should always take a swing at the fences before going down. It makes rational sense. If I’m going to lose anyhow, shouldn’t I blow up as much of the world as possible on the way? What if I won the battle? I might be right back in this game, just maybe.
The second answer is no, and based on a visceral rather than rational outlook. I play the game for the most part by odds; by math, by probability. I have a very strong (perhaps absurd :wink:) aversion to winning games based on chance rather than skill. Karl outplayed me, hands down. I don’t feel I deserve to have a chance to win based on dice, just as I don’t feel he should have a chance to lose based on dice. I know this is a very rare way of looking at A&A, but for me it’s an important part of the experience.
To me, A&A is a skill-based game with the element of chance, rather than a chance-based game with an element of skill (think Risk). This difference means everything to me, and is the exact reason I play Axis & Allies instead of Risk :-D
Also, most of the time, big battles tend to the odds minimizing the likelihood of chance miracles. That being said, I once lost a massive battle for the UK when I had 98% odds in my favor.
-
Thanks for your reply and sorry for my late reaction. Got your point and totally makes sense. However we all decide not to play the low luck variation of the game, so I would have tried this battle under the condition a top10 percent battle would bring you in the game again. In principle it is a question of degree to me. While 20plus percent would be worth a shot to me I would not do a 2 percent shot.
But I totally understand and respect your point of view.Cheers tobias
Suggested Topics
