I would add that you can consider the sub rules as an exploitable loophole, but I would say they refect the very real problems subs caused in naval battles. One unaccounted sub could cause massive disruption to a naval force (hello HMS Ark Royal)
Is Paris the Only Re-Roll Battle?
-
I dont agree that minor battles are cannot be game changing. If a lot of minor combats go against you, or in your favor this can add up to a huge deal.
MODERATORS, How can I delete my Discussion Post Here? I have found that most people would rather play on if Paris was defended. Ok. It’s seems I’m in the minority of opinion which sounds like it’s 52/48 in favor for not re-rolling Paris or re-cocking the game. But it’s my post, so I can put in another comment, :-)
I agree that minor battles make a difference in the long run. Losing lots or winning a lot of minor battles are important. In a PBEM game right now…those minor battles post-Moscow fall are critical for Germany trying to get to Cairo. I don’t think I’m going to make it. For instance, while defending Moscow, a US bomber kept picking off 1 infantry every round and never died until the Moscow battle. This could have had an impact on the amount of German tanks left over post Moscow battle which in turn effects the drive to the middle east and then Cairo. Post-Moscow, Japan tried to pick off a lone UK mech in Kazachstan with a bomber. It hit but so did the mech whereas the US bomber got away with that I think 3x. Before Japan was all but knocked out of the game, Japan had a chance to re-capture the Philippines. It was defended by 2 infantry. Japan landed 4 ground and hit it with air. Only 1 Japanese infantry survived the battle. But if 2 or 3 made it, then the Philippines would have had the chance to defend for at least another turn because the only the thing the US could get there was 2 infantry (not an infantry/art) and the 2 infantry beat the lone Japanese infantry defender. The game is now a complete race towards Cairo.
-
I agree with Garg’s comment. If you can’t handle dice, don’t play dice. Play low luck or play chess or something.
That said, there’s absolutely nothing wrong with giving up after a terrible start - it should just count as a win for the other player in that situation.
Allowing rerolls of any sort changes the game in ways that are difficult to measure. It would speed things up, but almost certainly to the benefit of the Axis.
-
I said “not-particularly game changing”. Not “meaningless”.
My point is that if you look under the hood, the little battles all contribute to the outcome of a big battle, whether the odds there are 47-53 or 49-51. The small things all lead up to a legitimate odds advantage or the failure to reach the power level needed to have a chance to do the big things (kill the pacific fleet, take Moscow, etc.)
The assumption is that a failure to take Paris during that battle is game ending. Even if that is the case, you’re ignoring my other point about being fully able to bring 10+ planes to that battle to ensure a blowout–I have seen many players attack southern france, Normandy, and Paris, (and both fleets), not even bringing all the units that can reach Paris–then blame the dice when that battle goes south (even though they spread out as much as possible–having succeeded in this opener would have given them much more money and flexibility)
Yes, UK then flew in all their planes, which Italy destroyed, so the game proceeded on a new path–UK demolished, no Taranto, Germany and Italy stymied. If you eliminate this outcome, you eliminate the possibly of the game running according to anything but the script that the critical path encourages, and every game turns out more or less the same, except for how the dice operate.
There isn’t a big problem with resetting the game either, I agree it supposed to be fun and if something goes wrong, there is very little harm in resetting (though with live games we wouldn’t probably have time to restart that session, better to play out a shorter, losing game). But I’m just saying its a kind of bias, that things should have to run according to a plan and when that goes south, the game is over. That is part of why the Allies are so weak in many versions is that it takes much more patience to overcome the setbacks (some of which you can’t even affect, they just happen to you, like the loss of the UK navy) that you won’t really have a chance of winning until the late game, which isn’t even being played because people either retire or concede before it ever happens.
-
Well I had two instant wins yesterday, guy pearl harbor me so USA had 36% attack, I took it off course and won. Another guy went sz 110 light I scramble and blow him away with 6 out of 6 hits and I only had a tilt lol
-
I’m kinda with you Ichabod. Granted we play 39 game. But of over 30 games Germany never failed to take Paris until 2 games ago. There was a like 2 % chance of losing and it happened.
So we played on because we never scene this happen. The axis almost won because UK let Italy get to strong in Med and delayed Normandy landing.As Gar said it was a great game for the axis to almost win it which should of never gotten that far.
So for me and group we will just do a reroll battle for Paris.
We all know what to bring to Paris as Germany so we will know if you don’t bring the kitchen sink and lose, game goes on. Last game Germany brought 2 extra planes which didn’t matter because the dice went the normal route.So instead starting a new game I would just reroll
Paris battle. But only if that 2 % fail happens.Just a reminder in our game There’s no way Italy can take Paris turn 1. So Germany has to spend over 90 icps to take Paris and hold by end of turn 3. They will never get Moscow.
-
@Shin:
I agree with Garg’s comment. If you can’t handle dice, don’t play dice. Play low luck or play chess or something.
That said, there’s absolutely nothing wrong with giving up after a terrible start - it should just count as a win for the other player in that situation.
Allowing rerolls of any sort changes the game in ways that are difficult to measure. It would speed things up, but almost certainly to the benefit of the Axis.
I can handle dice and it wouldn’t count as a “win” for me either if it was re-roll or Allies victory on round 9. I didn’t earn it.
On a side note people have mentioned chess as a substitute. I happen to like chess (which side is the Axis in that game?).
-
Taamvan, I ignored your comment about the planes. Sorry, I just assumed that the chances of that occurring are just as likely as Paris being defended. I guess my counter is that I think I would be cheated on a good game if someone did that to me while playing allies. I never heard of someone giving the UK both fleets.
I’m also a little shocked about how strong of opinions people have over this too. I actually thought this post would not have generated any comments. I grew up participating in debate in high school and always like discussing politics in college. So it’s fun for me.
I said so much about this topic and now realize that I don’t really care anymore over a 1% chance (which I’ve seen happen). However, having said that disclaimer, I really wish there was an option to delete your own topic.
-
@Shin:
I agree with Garg’s comment. If you can’t handle dice, don’t play dice. Play low luck or play chess or something.
That said, there’s absolutely nothing wrong with giving up after a terrible start - it should just count as a win for the other player in that situation.
Allowing rerolls of any sort changes the game in ways that are difficult to measure. It would speed things up, but almost certainly to the benefit of the Axis.
I can handle dice and it wouldn’t count as a “win” for me either if it was re-roll or Allies victory on round 9. I didn’t earn it.
On a side note people have mentioned chess as a substitute. I happen to like chess (which side is the Axis in that game?).
Sure you did. Your opponent took a big risk, and lost. Therefore you won. You have to consider the possibility of failure - what then? Say you’re about to assault Moscow, and you’ve got 95% odds. Gotta have a plan for a bad first round! If you don’t have a plan, it’s because your opponent left you no options.
-
@Shin:
@Shin:
I agree with Garg’s comment. If you can’t handle dice, don’t play dice. Play low luck or play chess or something.
That said, there’s absolutely nothing wrong with giving up after a terrible start - it should just count as a win for the other player in that situation.
Allowing rerolls of any sort changes the game in ways that are difficult to measure. It would speed things up, but almost certainly to the benefit of the Axis.
I can handle dice and it wouldn’t count as a “win” for me either if it was re-roll or Allies victory on round 9. I didn’t earn it.
On a side note people have mentioned chess as a substitute. I happen to like chess (which side is the Axis in that game?).
Sure you did. Your opponent took a big risk, and lost. Therefore you won. You have to consider the possibility of failure - what then? Say you’re about to assault Moscow, and you’ve got 95% odds. Gotta have a plan for a bad first round! If you don’t have a plan, it’s because your opponent left you no options.
True. Converting from an assault to a strafe can take some wisdom on top of dice calculators (I don’t use calculators - has cost me games, but almost always, unless it’s a huge battle, I don’t use calculators.)
And, as I said, sometimes its fun to lose Paris and have Italy do cleanup. I’ve seen Italy with India and Japan pulling off a VC win. We’re not forgetting the Axis can win in the Pacific too, you don’t have to take London and Moscow to win. Eh? :evil:
-
I think there are two different questions in this thread:
(1) When should the Axis be allowed to re-do a battle and keep the second set of results?
(2) When should the Axis be allowed to walk away from a losing position without any sense of shame?The answer to Question 1 is “never.” As other commenters have said, if you don’t like extreme results, then play with the low luck rules, or use a more conservative opening. It’s part of your responsibility as the player to select a strategy that maximizes your odds of winning, even including and allowing for the occasional “disaster” where you roll a 1-in-50 or 1-in-200 result that’s shockingly bad for you. Conservative strategies are slower and less likely to succeed, but they’re also less likely to trigger a disaster. You get to choose how much disaster you want to risk in order to further your strategy, and that’s a big part of what makes the game fun. If you change the rules to try to have your cake and eat it too by using an aggressive opening while artificially insulating yourself from the risks associated with that opening, then you’re removing one of the core dilemmas that makes the game great, and you probably won’t have as much fun.
The answer to Question 2 is “when the position is truly hopeless, or when all players cheerfully agree.” The mere fact that Germany doesn’t take Paris on G1 doesn’t automatically mean the Axis will lose – if you sent the Luftwaffe to sink both British fleets and succeeded in that mission, or if you successfully strafed Yugoslavia to setup a G2 attack on Russia, or if you captured Marseilles and sent some German naval units around the coast to get ready for an Afrika Korps strategy, then Germany still has some compensating advantages, and with a little luck and skill, you could still come out ahead. On the other hand, if you fail to take Paris, fail to sink the British fleet, and fail to weaken Yugoslavia, all in the same turn, then maybe the Axis really are doomed, and maybe it would be more fun to concede defeat, set the board back up again, and start a new game. Not every position is worth fighting to the bitter end, but many players are far too quick to give up. If you end the game whenever an unexpectedly bad result happens, then you’ll never get to enjoy any surprisingly unexpected positions.
-
Man - look at the posts in this thread - it’s like reading a novel.
-
Sorry. I don’t believe in do-overs. That’s BS.
If you’re the Axis and fail to take Paris, then either:
1) Surrender.
or
2) Play it out and see what happens.
I recently conceded a game where I failed to take Paris, but I also got my clock cleaned in sz 111 and in the sz off Nova Scotia, so I saw no shame in surrendering. But I’ve also had a game or two where I failed to take Paris but did OK elsewhere and played it out.
Asking for a do-over is kindergarten, at least from the perspective of an old curmudgeon like me.
-
Stuck Tojo,
Are you referring to a friendly table top game or a league/tournament type through the forum?
-
Good point.
I haven’t played a friendly table-top game in several years, since my regular opponent went into booze rehab (too bad, too, it’s really easy beating a drunk guy).
I guess for a table top game we would both just start over and agree that we played two games that day, and the Allies won the first one.
I also agree with those who say that Taranto is waaaaaaaaay too late to for a do-over, whether that’s tournament or friendly.
-
Since most people agree that the game is tilted in axis favour, it seems weird to me to give the axis a do-over. Use your damn planes in paris, allow some of the british fleet to survive and the game might be more even after that.
-
hello ichabod, I happen to be the player that this occurred with. just a few points to clarify here.
1. I quit because of your rather poor attitude.2. I was not rude to you. I simply said “yeah i don’t think ill enjoy playing you, bye!”. Rudeness was when you berated me in public chat afterwards.
3. as so many others have stated, it’s a dice game. if you lost, and wanted to concede, I’d have said “sure! game 2?”. I’ve conceded early, and I’m pretty sure most of the people here have too. since then, I played a game where Paris did NOT fall g1. By that players choice. he withdrew to avoid heavier losses. he solidly trounced me, and I took some great ideas from him.
I wish you all the best ichabod, I’ve seen you around alot, but try to change the “my way or the highway” attitude. if you would like to reconcile this, I’d be more than happy to play you at global, revised, or pretty much any map. I won’t hold a grudge.
-
ltbluelight,
Crushed my ego, but I can recover :x
I’m tired of this post and topic. Oh well. And by the way, your viewpoint was supported more than mine. I did think you were rude to me at that moment which is why I asked for a discussion. Saying poor attitude and then leaving real quick with no time for chats seemed unfair.
I did not mention your name in this post to be respectful. I was taken aback how you abruptly quit before any dice rolling. Never had run into a disagreement before that couldn’t be resolved at that moment.
I don’t pathetically whine about dice results and at that same time am hesitant to accept them when my opponent is the one getting diced. Most people make reasonable comments about the dice of course. A good game is more important to me because this is all about fun. I would have stated that it would be worth starting over if Germany was diced in Paris. I’ve seen people purposely give Paris to Italy before also. The merits of that is for a different thread.
“My way or the highway attitude.” If you thought that no sorry. I never got the chance to discuss anything. I really don’t want that perception from you or anyone else. In this particular game community, I do care about my reputation. I’ve played lots of games against many different players in live triplea.
If we meet again on triplea, and you’re looking for a game, I’ll play Global. No grudge here either!
As of others have said, we do this for fun!
-
That is good to hear.
Happy gaming both of you. -
@wittmann:
That is good to hear.
Happy gaming both of you.This is a dreadful outcome for this thread. Both parties kiss and make up and wish each other…… (PainState reaches for the closest vomit bag).
-
PainState,
Very funny!
Just a word here…I will destroy you in a live triplea game sometime soon I hope!
Suggested Topics
