What would you do if you were blue? (and who do you think has the better position?)


Details: This is turn 2. Blue knew that green started in Thailand, but green did not know any of blue's starting locations.

Blue has the obvious advantage of a higher income. I would just deploy all my 8 of my troops to the 5 I have, and attack there as a last order. I would first move some of my 2 armies up north around first.

At first glance I think that I would actually prefer to be green.

For that turn but greens income would increase really quickly if they don't attempt to defend the bonus. I bet green probably won that game.

Same as Seb. get into India, then get Indonesia and Greenland, then possibly East China.

By the way, that game didn't have fog or is it just a screenshot from history?

This game looks familiar :)

As blue, I'd keep it simple, put 2 units in Greenland, 6 units in Malaysia, issue 2 attacks.

I think blue has a very slight advantage.

Informational advantage has just been reversed. Green knows that blue doesn't have African properties, so Scandinavia is now very likely and naturally accessible. Blue probably expects green to be in Africa and/or Central America, so he won't see defense of Scandinavia as very important here.

I don't think green yet knows that blue doesn't have an influence in africa, as he can't even see SA, and blue could of been placed in WA and had went for the western portions while focusing elsewhere *namely indo*

Im famous...!

I have to agree with Loki and Troll, I think green has the more ideal position here mainly because they have a higher income potential.

If I were blue, I have to assume that green has a strong presence in Asia based on where the wastelands are. It appears that green had a bit of bad luck attacking Pakistan from Tadschikistan and didn't end up with the bonus, though I would assume he had that bonus and thus equaled my income.

I see a few choices

1. Put everything in Malaysia and attempt to break the bonus.

2. Leave the 5 there as defense and put everything into Greenland to up my income for a later attack.

3. Put 2 into Svalbard and 2 into its-alongnameingreenland, 3 into Borneo and 1 into Malaysia. Work on my Greenland and Indonesia bonus.


I think I would probably go with choice one, just in case he didn't have the bonus.

I'd prefer to be green. But if I was blue I'd do what Seb said, just go all out on green from malaysia.

Advantage blue, after a few turns he could park himself on Myanmar or even better (India maybe) and focus on taking greenland and indonesia. Afterwards, when green turns the tides with a temporarily higher income, blue can go around green through tibet and then Xingjiang into Caucasus, or even pincer him with a double-defense option with scandinavia towards georgia. He just has to be smart with evaluating his information and watching income to determine where his enemy is.

I think green has a very significant advantage. Blue has to put everything he can into taking India on this turn, because if Green can protect that bonus Blue loses on the spot. Green's play is to get Africa and most of Caucasus and leave India undefended (or use a small "token" defense). Then the following turn Green gets Caucasus and begins to expand through Africa, while putting enough defense in India to create a stalemate there. Blue works on getting Greenland.

Green gets to 14 income a turn before Blue gets to 13 income. Blue has absolutely nowhere to expand from his spots in Scandinavia and Greenland, and so after he takes Indonesia (which takes 2 more turns, enough time for Green to get West Africa, and again maintain the income lead) his only expansion spots are East China and Australia. East China is threatened directly by Green's presence in Caucasus and India, and while Australia is a good bonus he has nowhere to expand past that point, because he and Green very likely meet in Antartica as well.

On the other hand, not only does Green have the income lead, he also has West Africa, North Africa, South Africa, South America, Central Russia, Central America, and Middle East as viable expansion spots. All green has to do is keep blue at bay with his superior income and continue expanding until his income advantage grows too much for blue to handle and then grind out the win. Even Caucasus, a typically very difficult bonus to protect, is fairly easy to protect on this map because of the wasteland positioning.

If blue does what Waya suggests and goes Tibet->Xinjiang in order to threaten Caucasus, combined with a dual-threat attack from Scandinavia, all Green has to do is take the stack he has in India that he was using to defend it and march it straight down through Indonesia, which would also shut down any possible expansions Blue has from that point, including Australia/East China. Green in that situation trades Caucasus for Indoensia and loses 1 net income from it, which again equalizes the game and makes it come down to a battle of expansion and attrition, a game that Green has significantly better spots to win with.

I feel like between two good players of equal skill that green will win this game fairly convincingly.

looks like Imp took a look at the history because thats almost exactly what happened...

:)

Everything here has been said and it was a game that I watched the history of so I think my suggestion would be influenced by what actually happened. What I more or less wanted to say is that I really like the thread. Especially since there was obviously a split among players.

I think you should post another one Fizzer. It's a worthwhile exercise.

Assuming there was no fog all of a sudden, it's a lot closer game. I go 4 and 4 for Blue -- attack India with 8 and put 4 into an attack on EU from Scan with 5 to set up busting Causacus.

Green has the superior position, only because Blue isn't racing for Causacus. If Blue can block both bonuses, then Blue can fill in Indo and Greenland and win. Green wins easily because Blue doesn't get the block in Causacus and can't clear its bonuses quickly enough.

I'd take Blue if fog were gone (which is the presumption of the exercise). Assuming Green puts all 5 of his income into taking West Africa this turn -- Blue ends up with strong blocks in Causacus and India and has the time to fill in.

I'm a contrarian...

I actually haven't watched the history of this one, although I'm not surprised that Green won or did so in the method I described. I'm assuming green here is Teddy and Blue is BM?

I do think it can result in a close game, but I definitely believe that Green is ahead here without question. I also agree with Duke that in a no-fog game Blue has good fighting chances, because Blue can see that Green isn't going to defend India and then jump on it, while also putting armies into Greenland to get that bonus as well. Blue also has better chances knowing to go for Caucasus or when to do so.

In a fog game, though, the blue player doesn't have the luxury of knowing that green doesn't have India yet or that he won't deploy any armies there. Without that knowledge, Blue can't afford to skimp on the attack there, because failing to break into India is basically an auto-loss.

No doubt -- with fog Blue doesn't make the one mvoe that woudl save his game which is the rush on Causacus. Without that it's over in a couple of turns. But without Fog, I see a close game that could go either way.

Yeah, I kind of assumed my blue strategy on a game without fog. Impaller's analysis was very convincing though...not to mention the possibility of abandoning Caucasus to follow blue up to both of his incomes.

Duke, I presumed there was fog, purely due to the fact that it was a standard 1v1 strategic map.