@pejon_88 said in L21 AndrewAAGamer (X) vs Pejon_88 (L+60) OOB:
Wow, did not see that coming and sorry the dice were so against you at times. I mean not only the last battle, but mainly the bombing raids… Like you said, now you can always say you lost due to 23 consecutive successful bombing raids. They definitely helped me get a pause from German land unit spamming. Of course you would go for it, with the chance to sink 17 transports for free in addition to those odds.
Well, the 22 consecutive bombing raids made a difference by, as you said, limiting the amount of “German land unit spamming” I was able to accomplish. However, that is not why I lost the game. I lost the game because I misplayed your attacks on the Italian region. If I had done that correctly I would have won. I didn’t, so I lost. Everything else is just fluff. I could have easily stopped you had I realized what you were trying to do and if you were successful how powerful it would end up being. I didn’t think what you were doing would work and I was wrong. I learned something very important for future games but my bad play cost me the game, not the bombing raids. If anything, besides my bad play, it was losing the 94% battle that cost me the game however I really should not have been in the position to have to depend on that battle. Did the 94% battle end the game? Of course it did. But that is like saying a receiver dropped a touchdown on the final play of the game and that cost the game and ignoring the 5 fumbles, 4 interceptions and 125 penalty yards that made the game close. I should not have had to depend on that battle and being that I win 15 out of 16 times it was the right choice based on the circumstances. The dice just didn’t cooperate. That is how the game goes sometimes which is why I dislike having to depend on dice rolls.
I understand you completely there.
Thanks for your praise regarding my take-down of Italy. Means a lot.
Well deserved. As I mentioned usually seeing something new and really good costs a game in payment and due to your error in the Pacific I almost got the lesson for free but that last roll made me pay after all. The way you reinforced with transports and fighters was masterful and if I had not brought back Russian forces to kick you out, I would never have been able to dislodge you. If you had told me that could happen before the game, I would have vehemently argued against it. Seeing it now 1) I will never let that happen again against the Axis and 2) use it myself as the Allies in the future if the situation allows it. Really good information.
Let’s discuss a couple of things about the game, but first you are right, I missed the route via Spain to SF. Was probably blind to this since Spain usually is a restricted zone… To my defense I was about to build an AB with UK for an additional 3 fig scramble, but then thought by making Normandy and Holland 50-50 battles for an Italian can-opener you would not go for it and I would negate you a landing spot other than you building 4 ACs, which would have been your whole treasure that round, as well as only giving you 70-ish odds, i.e. almost a coin flip with 2 less aircraft. Trying to play my enemy, I figured you would not go for that.
I figured you missed that attack. You had stacked Normandy and Holland so Italy could not take it to deny me a landing zone. Why do that if you were willing to give me a 94% chance on your fleet via Southern France? And why in the world would you give me a 94% chance to sink your fleet? That made no sense. If I had sunk your fleet, I win. Unless you were way behind and hoped for a 6% miracle it is crazy to give me that attack and you do not play like a crazy player. Therefore, I was sure you just missed it.
So, for me the issue was do I risk the game on that 94% chance? For if I lost that battle, I knew I was going to lose the game. Normally I would not do an all or nothing attack, even at 94% odds, just for what happened. If the dice betray you, you lose and game over. Normally I would take my lead and expand on it, continuing to build up until I had a 99% or 100% to win the game. Unfortunately, I was not in that position. You were winning. I certainly could have won, I certainly could have fought on and hoped to come back and win but based on the current situation I don’t think I had a 94% chance to win or anything close to that. Therefore, taking that 94% chance was my best chance to win. Alas, I lost.
Estimating how your opponent will react is key. Depending on if I am winning a little or winning a lot will change the way I play the game. If I am way ahead, I don’t want to give my opponent even 1% on Berlin. If it is a close game, I will go up to 10% or so and if I am behind all the way up to 20%. Knowing your opponent will or will not take risks means you can take advantage of that.
First of all it was an honor playing you. I remember reading your long post/thread on “how to be successful” in Axis&Allies, got inspired and wanted to challenge you. I have played quite a few OOB games tabletop before joining aa.org. Now I mostly have play BM3. As most guys I never played with a bid tabletop and never realized the unbalance either, so was surprised when I saw bids around 50-60 on aa.org! Anyway you talked extensively about luck, dice etc. and that a good player should win regardless of dice and I realized how much certain you want to be in important battles, ~100% to engage, which is wise. Tried to use that to my advantage against you at times in our game, knowing you would not go for certain attacks in order to even out against experience and skill. I remember clearly losing early against JDOW in a BM3 game when attacking with 80% odds, thinking I had nice odds. Learned my lesson there haha.
I am glad that article proved useful. As I pointed out the dice are fickle and there is no reason to take a risk if you are winning. If you are winning you should NEVER make an attack that is not 100% that would reverse the situation in the game. If I had been winning I promise you I would have ignored that 94% battle.
Can we discuss a couple of pivotal moments during the game. First of all, I messed up losing Moscow at turn 10, which we have talked about earlier. Had I managed to hold out a couple of turns longer, things might have been looking better for the Allies already. Any additional thoughts here?
Yes, that is why, before I messed up in the Med, I had the game. I took Moscow at least one, if not two, Turns earlier than I should have based on your play. Each Turn you hold is that much money more for Russia and thus the Allies and that much less for Germany and the Axis. Plus, it gives the Allies more time to make hay against Japan, Italy and the Atlantic Wall.
Then I need to ask you about the permanent loss of India. How could I have stopped the German can-opening at that point? Or are you talking about messing up way before this, when we were contesting the territory maybe?
Your error was in moving the Allied Fleet to Sumatra. That allowed me to move the IJN to Java and cut you off from Sydney and Allied reinforcements. You had to either retreat the fleet and keep air on it to save Sydney and the fleet or move your planes to India and lose the fleet and Sydney. You made the correct choice to save your fleet and Sydney, but it cost you India and let me back in the game. You could have flown your planes to India from Australia, held India, and still had a large enough fleet to keep me from taking Sydney. I did appreciate the error because I badly needed it to get back into the game.
I have rarely played a more structured and focused player than you. You have a goal and then simply go for that successfully ignoring minor things not important for your end goal, impressive!
Thanks. As I said in my article don’t let things that are not your main goal distract you. I live by that rule.
Last thought, in your experience is the 50-60 bid enough to even things out for Axis or Allies winning 50% of the time when equally strong players play?
That depends on the strength of the Axis or Allied Player. Different people play either side not as equally strong. For example, my partner in Face-to-Face games happily takes 50 to be the Allies against anyone else but against me he wants 63 if I am the Axis. I will admit I am a better Axis player than I am an Allied player. If I had to play myself, I would want 60. Against someone else I would take less. Against equal players with the same strength I think 60 is a fair bid and makes it a 50-50 game.
