If Germany liberates and America succeeds in another Hail Mary, then Germany would get another chance to liberate before the end of the game.
But what are the odds of two hail Mary’s succeeding in a row?
Meanwhile, in a big battle, it’s easy for a hail Mary to succeed, even if Germany ran the numbers and the numbers came back 100% German survival, we all know 100% means diddly when your attacker gets 50 hits in Round 1 and you get 3 hits on your defense, right?
I thought about this ‘house rule’ for a while now.
I do not think it helps/hurts either side more. All this is is another way to play the game.
Different win conditions require different thinking in playing the game.
It is NOT better, nor is it WORSE to play by the current LHTR end of round victory condition determination.
The rules for how to win are a KNOWN fact at the begining of the game.
Account for this in your game play.
Argue all you want till your blue in the face… I’ve reached MY conclusions.
Axis,
How do you justify one infantry killing 100 armor and winning the game? You cannot possibly be expected to account for that situation! But if the allies are going to lose, as was the case in the scenario I posted, what’s to stop America from at least trying, especially since they are the last to move and thus they can single handedly decide the game! All they need is to be extremely lucky!
How do you justify one infantry killing 100 armor and winning the game?
Here we go, again we see Jen’s real argument. It has nothing to do with fairness of giving every country a chance to gain victory territories, but about controlling bad luck. Maybe her heart is in the right place, but do you see how easy it is for anyone to construe her argument as doing with bad luck rather than the victory system?
Even Craig made a big quote earlier about something like giving every country a chance to deal with bad luck
One should try to have rules that are able to handle all scenarios and give the player a chance to rectify the problem.
If we start creating rules to counteract bad luck, there’s no reason not to simply play low luck. Do we start making more rules like you can’t attack a capital unless you can prove that you have a 80%+ win or higher, based on the reasoning that you could send 1 inf and win a capital and end the game? Do we allow people to reroll bad battles to give them a chance to rectify the problem?
Regardless of victory conditions, if you can capture a capital with one dude, you’re in pretty good shape to win the game.
Capturing a capitol does not necessarily end the game without giving the other team a chance to keep going or surrender. Beating astronomical odds with America (and it only works with America) does.
So yes, the real crux of the problem is that America can end the game through sheer good luck. Thus you have negated skill, strategy and game mechanics just because you threw good dice and your opponent threw bad dice. Yes, in any other battle it could be decisive as well, but in any other battle, as I said about capitols, the other team gets to chose to surrender or continue play. Here you are claiming victory by fiat instead of victory through surrender or by superior game play.
Here you are claiming victory by fiat instead of victory through surrender or by superior game play.
“The gate is down” - Ender’s Game :evil:
That was strategy.
He didn’t luck out. He out witted his opponents.
Sending 1 infantry to attack 100 tanks and winning is lucking out, not out witting.
So why pick on victory conditions? 1 inf beating 100 tanks shows how bad luck can upset superior strategy/skill, not just in victory cities but anywhere on the map. I would concede the game if 1 inf invaded my capital of 20 units and won, even though there is a mathematical possibility I could recover from it.
Low luck solves it :-D
Here you are claiming victory by fiat instead of victory through surrender or by superior game play.
“The gate is down” - Ender’s Game :evil:
Nice.
Ender’s opponents thought he cheated too…
@Bean:
So why pick on victory conditions? 1 inf beating 100 tanks shows how bad luck can upset superior strategy/skill, not just in victory cities but anywhere on the map. I would concede the game if 1 inf invaded my capital of 20 units and won, even though there is a mathematical possibility I could recover from it.
Agree 100%
We all manage the luck / bad dice throughout the game…
1 infantry beating 200 of my tanks! :lol:
If that inf is Rambo, then I have no hope in winning!
When this will happen the game will be suspended and the winner will pay to me at least three beer! :-D
By the way the relevant point is if is it worthy that USA may conquer the 9th VC and then winning the game for the allies.
I have alredy said yes.
I think that it is so for balancing other USA disadvantages.
The 1 INF killing 50 or 100 ARM is a strawman argument.
While THEORETICALLY possible, I can’t even get a sim to show odds for killing more than 2 ARM if there is 1 INF against only 10 ARM (0.02% chance to kill 2 ARM in that case… 1 in 5,000)
In fact w/ only 3 ARM, the odds are 99.9% for a defender win, 0.1% for mutual destruction, 0% for the INF to survive.
Now, if you want to argue the current method of determining victory in a VC based game, then try doing so from a realistic viewpoint instead of a bogus “Rambo” argument. :roll:
It’s not really a strawman argument. It is representative of the allies winning despite having a defensive force that no realistic simulator would say the allies have a chance of winning at.
Say America hit you with 6 Infantry, 2 Armor, 4 Fighters and a Battleship in S. Europe. You defended with 12 Infantry, 3 Armor, 2 Fighters and an AA Gun.
America only has a 0.03% chance to win that one to get the 9th VC. With the most likely odds of being COMPLETELY destroyed and only killing 7 infantry, so there is a LOT of fudge room for bad dice with Germany still being more then able to defend itself.
Now, in MY alteration, even if America won by some outrageous coincidence of bad dice for Germany and good dice for America, they still wouldn’t necessarily win the game until Germany has had one chance to liberate.
This would forever end the hail Mary and require that you actually be winning the game when you get 9 VC.
It’s like court. It’s better to let the loser have another turn then to steal a victory from a winner.
@Cmdr:
It’s not really a strawman argument. It is representative of the allies winning despite having a defensive force that no realistic simulator would say the allies have a chance of winning at.
Say America hit you with 6 Infantry, 2 Armor, 4 Fighters and a Battleship in S. Europe. You defended with 12 Infantry, 3 Armor, 2 Fighters and an AA Gun.
America only has a 0.03% chance to win that one to get the 9th VC. With the most likely odds of being COMPLETELY destroyed and only killing 7 infantry, so there is a LOT of fudge room for bad dice with Germany still being more then able to defend itself.
Now, in MY alteration, even if America won by some outrageous coincidence of bad dice for Germany and good dice for America, they still wouldn’t necessarily win the game until Germany has had one chance to liberate.
This would forever end the hail Mary and require that you actually be winning the game when you get 9 VC.
It’s like court. It’s better to let the loser have another turn then to steal a victory from a winner.
So German in this case has another army near the VC, not in the VC, ready to counterattack. It should have better if those units was in the VC.
Otherwise, if there is not a big army near the VC, what shall we do?
Allow the Grmany to do his own Hail Mary attack?
Or wait two turns for the Germany to move the army near the VC and then allowing the attack?
Yea, what was I thinking. :roll: Germany should have left their capitol vacant to defend S. Europe!
Germany left Karelia and W. Europe pretty much empty because the odds of getting S. Europe was insanely small, not Germany’s fault that S. Europe fell because of the dice when all the odds calculators show less then 0.03% chance for allied victory (actually less if you figure they would have to keep an infantry and kill the fighters first to succeed.)
But thing like this may happen in each battle in the game.
But each battle of the game doesn’t win by fiat. It just wins a territory. You can lose a territory to this bad luck and still win the game. But not if they magically get 9 VC.
If Germany is trading Southern, they are pretty much fracked anyway… :evil:
Yes, well look at the scenario I posted. Germany wasn’t intending to trade Southern. They had it very well defended. America got lucky. But on the next German turn, two Allied Capitols were going to fall, Moscow and London as well as karelia and W. Europe would be liberated. (Add S. Europe if you allow Germany 1 more turn after a 9 VC attainment.)
So in this game, the Axis are by far the victors in reality, but the Allies are the victors by luck and in title.
