I will try it next game I play, probably use it for Italy, since they need the Navy the most.
Report playtest thread for TOTAL PACIFIC US strategy
-
I also heard he said he can play basketball better than Michael Jordan…
-
There will be plenty of links once you man up and play Jen. Then she can show you the strategy first hand. Why do you keep avoiding this???
-
I really don’t want to take sides; but should moderators take sides? Seems counterproductive. :|
-
@mantlefan:
@M:
I really don’t want to take sides; but should moderators take sides? Seems counterproductive. :|
Someone could argue that the Earth is flat and IL would take that side as long as I was on the other.
What’s counterproductive is the fact that mantlefan here continues to stall with pointless posts & silly arguments. Instead he should be playing Jen to verify this strategy. It seems that he’s afraid to be beat by a girl….
-
@C_Strabala:
@mantlefan:
@M:
I really don’t want to take sides; but should moderators take sides? Seems counterproductive. :|
Someone could argue that the Earth is flat and IL would take that side as long as I was on the other.
What’s counterproductive is the fact that mantlefan here continues to stall with pointless posts & silly arguments. Instead he should be playing Jen to verify this strategy. It seems that he’s afraid to be beat by a girl….
Jebus people, he freely admitted he’s probably not as strong a player. If that’s the case, then no, playing her doesn’t really test the strategy if the goal is to find a way to beat it. In order to prove a strategy is broken, you need to test all possible ways to beat it, not just see the strategy in action. It’s CLEARLY a viable strategy, no one is arguing that, but what hasn’t been proven is that it’s a unbeatable strategy. A stronger player using a strategy against a weaker player will net a result which may simply be a false positive. Woooo, bad data point. Woooo, humiliated Mantlefan. woo.
It needs to be tested. It’s completely irrelevant whether Mantlefan plays Jen just to see it in action, because getting trounced by a stronger player doesn’t prove anything. Ooooooo, a strategy that’s claimed to be unbeatable crushed a weaker when executed by a player who has how many tourney wins? Wait, what does that prove? That Jen’s a better player? Hoorah. We already settled that (despite the fact that she has had some seriously flawed rule interpretations in the past). To be fair, I don’t always have a perfect grasp on the rules either, but I am NOT an experienced player by any means.
It wouldn’t hurt if Mantlefan played Jen and saw it first hand, but again, it doesn’t prove anything. His request for links to Jen’s games where she performed it isn’t exactly asking for the moon. She’s played dozens if not hundreds of games and only SHE would know which games were freaking relevant. She SHOULD post the links to those games. She SHOULD have posted them from the outset for review. It’s a bit perverse that she hasn’t, but it still needs to be tested without them (but since she’s played it, she clearly has them, so just bloody well post the links).
And everyone else that plays on the forums SHOULD try the strategy out, but for heaven’s sake, it would be most helpful if you were evenly matched. Besides, the only truly relevant games will be those done by players with OOOOOODLES of experience, who know exactly how to make the most efficient moves and purchases. And, if it’s not too much to ask, they should do the utmost to make sure they aren’t breaking the rules (cough retreating from a hostile seazone during combat move and loading and moving during noncombat cough).
-
i’m with kcdzim and mantlefan on this: anyone man enough to take on Cmdr jennifer?
:-)
-
i’m with kcdzim and mantlefan on this: anyone man enough to take on Cmdr jennifer?
The point is to test out the idea. Its not important who wins, only if the result can be replicated under game conditions. That is the only truth validation.
Once a result is measured after more tests employing the same strategy, a pattern will emerge.
It is obvious that some people want to avoid this direct test and throw up paper arguments and fake walls….anything except test out the ideas.
Seems counter intuitive to any positive development of the claims both for or against Jennifer’s ideas, unless a test shows a pattern of repeated results.
-
I’d be down to test it.
-
I agree. If only there was a section of the forums for actual game play, then we could all go there and see examples of these games played out….if only.
-
@Imperious:
…
The “user” is violating the rules repeatedly with off topic posts. I am telling him how he needs to stop and after repeating this many times allows some degree of stronger language at times.
…
In a way i am defending Jennifer from ignorant comments that are not needed unless the person who made them can at least bother to try the idea. Jennifer posted her idea how it works and its enough to test out the idea… not some 12 hour game, but a basic playtest at home…perhaps even a few turns… but nothing and still comment is asinine.
…
Mantlefans rebuttal post:
Proof? Seriously, come on. Why exactly is that logical? Where are your game reports showing that Germany can’t beat russia even when USA is going full Pac for 6-8 rounds? Where are the reports showing how the USSR has denmark even when USA goes full pac?
This is just another case of you saying whatever you want out of nowhere (or out of a meaningless or distorted context), then taking those assumptions, whether true or not, doing nothing to justify them, and then make conclusions based on them. Why should USA HAVE to split? Why? Should we then force Japan to put X IPCs into china? Why not? Should we force UK to put X IPC into Africa? Why not?
You simply SAY that Germany can’t handle Russia. Maybe you “back it up”with a few vague paragraphs. People then believe you unquestioningly and then agree that since Germany “obviously” can’t handle Russia and the UK then since Japan is doomed against 6 rounds of 100% US pac commitment, the game is unbalanced. Where is the proof? General statements don’t cut it. Play reports could help. I started one of my own, but since your comments are always so vague I don’t know if I am doing the USA strat you lightly talk about. I’m a decent USSR player but I’m not sure if I can get Denmark on a barbarossa like you can rolleyes
If you’re so right why not post a play report? If you don’t have time how do you have time to play Axis & Allies anyways, much less have played enough times to actually have an adequate perspective to make these claims?
People supporting your argument tell others just to “read it” Why are those supporters not reading about your claims of the Soviets in Norway and Denmark? Why are they not reading about your claims of Germany needing at least 13 rounds to take Stalingrad?
Even if we did read every single word three times, even if your games were good tests, the reports are garbage because they don’t supply enough information.
Where are your reports (I’m not talking 3 paragraphs saying generally what happened) detailing every move?…
The claims made by her are valid. She is just posting what result she discovered. He can ask you some online game result, but not having one does not mean it didn’t happen or is less credible.The apparent laziness to bother spending some time playing a game to see how it works, or to learn from it is staggering. The post in most contentious and argumentative and it was not presented in any manner to him where he should supply this form of combative subtext. As a mod, i feel the need to defend people who are attacked in this way and i choose to give him back his own medicine, since asking him to stop is of no measure.
Jen posts up a strat, with a solid - but not all encompassing - explanation. Mantlefan had doubts and expresses them. He then asks for data to ascertain whether or not his intuitions are correct.
I have employed this strat - and variations of it - a few time myself, prior to joining this forum. I am currently facing this same strat as axis. Hopefully I will have a result in by thursdayish, at which point I will post a few points. I personally would like to see a battle report, Jen’s or otherwise, to see if my movements and builds were superior or inferior. I can’t really post up details of games I played months ago. I recall the general thrust, but that wont add anything to this discussion. All that I will say is that the game did generally run as Jen suggested, except that Germany and Italy were successful at gaining the middle east. Which plays a huge part in determining the victor. A battle report would provide evidence as to why this does not happen to Jen.
Playing out a couple of turns is insufficient. From my experience the success is evident at maybe turn 6-8, around the time US turns its full attention to Europe - although this has happened a little earlier. Dice and delaying moves can play a part. Simply, it takes more then a couple of turns to determine the efficacy of this strat, and, i imagine, any strat.
To be fair. Mantlefan should just try out the strat, as I have previously stated. However, given that it appears that his aim is to develop a counter, possessing more information would be tremendously beneficial.
Your language, imho, was not appropriate for a mod. Yes, when a user is stepping out of line, strong language can, and indeed should be used. However, strong does not have to equal rude.
There is a difference.
Cheers
-
He does not know any better. If he did he would have stopped a while ago. The language is fine considering how he himself posts. Just look at how he uses words like “garbage” You don’t say anything or post anything till you got some idea of what is going on with some result. You don’t tell people what they say is garbage because they didn’t spoon feed you exact move by move. You take a more diplomatically way and ask once to provide evidence, not 50 posts if she does not have one does not mean its less valid. Once it was established she can’t offer a game you must just play one out and find out. Thats basic behavior. You don’t badger the people for a game result, you take charge and get the info yourself and withhold comments pending a result to validate the claimed result.
Most people understand this as very basic and rudimentary to discovering the truth about something. For mantlefan he must cry about the procedure, perimeters, even the epistemology of how to gain knowledge about something…anything except address a basic concept which is “have you played it out?”
If you want to discuss this further PM me. This is all off topic…
-
@Imperious:
If you want to discuss this further PM me. This is all off topic…
Cool.
-
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=22167.615
Mantlefan,
If you want to put your IPC where your keyboard is, I’ll be glad to play you in a best of 3 out of 5 games. I just need time to clear my plate a little, so do let me know if you are interested and we’ll make sure to keep the game links in this thread so others can follow the progress.
Typical game rules:
- No Technologies
- National Objectives - On
- Russo-Japan Non-Aggression Treaty - On
- Automatic Convoy Raiding - On
- No Bid
- ADS (The one provided here, so people can follow along.)
- ABattlemap (T40 Module)
etc.
I did your homework again.
She is playing 6 games right now, she will fit in a game with you just to get you a full understanding of what she is saying. PM her.
Sorry had to remove the other off topic post w/o reading, right now wasting time reading anything that is not a game result showing how Jennifer’s idea works or not is counter intuitive to this thread.
Please no more posts unless you produced a result of a game you played that uses her ideas to find a win.
-
Yes let’s keep this to a report thread from now on. However it is better if you go to the link at the front of this thread and report on Larry’s site.
PS- Mantlefan- Man up.
Suggested Topics
