The Emu Pub and Krzystof game will be remade.

https://www.warzone.com/MultiPlayer?GameID=17386441

Edited 12/27/2018 00:06:47

I think you overestimate me, Norman :)

Thank you for the praise !

seriously Norman, I can almost here you "having fun with yourself" from over here. Njord ignored both +3 ftb on the board and gave leopard a huge first turn advantage. Imagine Leopard not getting the +3's free and getting his 4,5 pick. which would surely be countered by agaean or athens. Not saying his picks were bad, but geeze... calm down.

@Emu Pub:

Njord ignored both +3 ftb on the board and gave leopard a huge first turn advantage.

I don't want to commentate to much on what the non M'Hunter players are doing however I believe I did state that it's "very wrong" that both players got their first 5 picks. I'm pretty sure that Leopard was quite surprised getting his first 5 picks.

I see your thoughts about Leopard losing his picks 2 and 3 as justified, however in that case, his opponent most likely picked his first 3 picks exactly as him which quite often doesn't happen and if it did there is that other 50% chance of Leopard ending up with his picks 2 and 3. Apart from that you could always think about an opponent with the perfect counterpicks and the perfect knowledge. What you are assuming here is an opponent stopping a 2 turn South Cyclades by (despite immediate opponent contact) immediately barraging strong towards South Cyclades.

The art of perfect WarLight play usually has to include adding a weighting factor to different viable strategies and then choosing out of them by throwing a dice (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvEQujUcPv4) in order to not lose more than 50% of your games. The previous games all had flaws in execution and I can't see any looking at this game. I don't think I'm overly critical, it's just that stuff like delaying ones 4v2 expansion steps in weighted random games is something one should think about in 2 minute boot games.

Edited 12/27/2018 07:05:44

Leopards game against Njord on the old 1v1 ladder ended with Njord getting booted (https://www.warzone.com/MultiPlayer?GameID=17321418):

This map had two special things going on. Namely there was
a) a first turn bonus on the board and
b) the danger of getting locked out from Asia which offered superior income.

Both players picked with those 2 points in mind. Njord went more for the big income approach with the +5 and a possible positional advantage in Asia. Leopards pick number 4 looks mainly like an aggressive counterpick against the support pick of the first turn bonus. Understandably both players didn't want to go for the first turn bonus themself.

I quite like Njords picks 1-4 here while I find Leopards pick number 4 quite problematic. As I have written previously such counters are very hard to pull off and too often just don't work. Since none of the players were willing to go for the first turn bonus I'd like to argue that in fact there wasn't even a real first turn bonus on the board. A player ending up with a possible first turn bonus outcome would most likely haven't taken it anyways first turn and after that he would be more or less in the dark about where to expect to get attacked by his opponent. I see no need building a strategy around such a terrible first turn bonus, might as well just ignore it.

All in all it looked like a very sound game from both players and there are certainly scenarios where Leopards pick number 4 could have worked out perfectly. However because of the threat from Central Russia I would have adviced against this strategy.

As the game ended Njord had both the income and the stack advantage however the income situation was about to shift drastically to Leopards favor next turn. In th following turns it would then come down to what Njord could achieve with his army advantage however he would be on a timer with merely breaking the +4 not being enough. If Njord hadn't failed with the +4 on turn 3 it would have been way worse for Leopard.

Turn 2 Leopard played it quite safe against Australia but imo he should have just gone for the greedy 2 turn 12 income by then. Having one possible dead pick due to Central Russia is a situation where I'd like him to stop playing it safe.

Looking at what both players did here this was imo the best game so far without any nonsense from both guys.

Edited 12/27/2018 15:59:47

Leopards game against Njord on the China template ended with Njord getting booted (https://www.warzone.com/MultiPlayer?GameID=17321423):

Both players picked the board very similar and they only diverged in the order of their higher picks. The problem with the north here is that it somewhat gets countered from Beijing. With Beijing being the only viable pick closeby I prefer Njords picks ranking Beijing higher, however I see Leopards other strategy as also viable.

Again both players picked the board very solid. As for the "template quality" imo this game shows the worst case scenario with both the north and the islands being safe.

The victor didn't seem decided here. Leopard was about to get the income lead and threatened to eliminate Njord from the west. On the other hand Njord was moving towards the center.

Again this was a great game from both the players without any nonsense.

. Njord vs Leopard (0-3)
https://www.warzone.com/MultiPlayer?GameID=17321409
https://www.warzone.com/MultiPlayer?GameID=17321418
https://www.warzone.com/MultiPlayer?GameID=17321423
https://www.warzone.com/MultiPlayer?GameID=17386441

Leopard sweeps Njord with 1 earned game and 2 undecided games where Njord boots. Pity... it was interesting to see the conclusion.

M`Hunters 8
Outlaws A 3

Go MH.

lets do a rematch once this is over with. too many boots

I think starting clan battles in December was probably the dumbest idea I've had in a very long time. I won't do that again lol

It wasn't a terrible idea. CL started around Jan/Feb last year so it is reasonable to want to get the games done before CL 11.

True, anyways I'm retiring. I will probably update the scores at the very end when all the games of the battle are done. Although knowing Norman he'll probably do it automatically with the game analyzing ;)

Sad to see you go Plat. Who is taking over Outlaws?

@♪♬ (☞ﾟ∀ﾟ)☞ Maayan ☚(ﾟヮﾟ☚) ♪♬ / Lightning McQueen:

Since you are already M'Hunters biggest external fan, how about you just rejoin? Only relevant rule for you would be to no whistleblowing around, we still call them whistleblowers rats.

12-8 now, outlaws needs to win 6/7 remaining battles to still win this.. And Rogue still hasn't accepted any games :p

Typical Outlaws, sandbagging before CL.

"Only relevant rule for you would be to no whistleblowing around"
hmm, what is there to whistleblow about?

Edited 1/9/2019 01:30:05

I hope you win 2-1 against Odin, get your first pick on the China template and lose the game.

@ Norman: Goddamn, guess what happened, haha.

Typical Outlaws, sandbagging before CL.

Yeah, it's definitely a probable scenario that that a whole clan conspired to not stomp M'Hunters on purpose in order to get underestimated, so their opponents in the next clan league... uhm... play their game as usual???

However there are probable scenarios and then there are likely scenarios. And the most likely scenario for me looks like M'Hunters is set up to poop the elitist div A party next season.



=== AyanM goes 0:3 against Facetroll ===

Facetroll is probably a great player however I'm only looking at AyanM here. Before the first game ended, I randomly opened up the chat in one of their games:
Facetroll: gl and hf for all games
AyanM: sorry cant wish you the same, i wanna win
As I read this, I immediately properly guessed a 3:0 victory for Facetroll. Sure, I believe my guy when he say that he "wants to win", however there is a difference between "wanting to win" and "wanting to win hard enough to actually care about ones moves".

Here some examples:
https://www.warzone.com/MultiPlayer?GameID=17321518 --> There was some talk here going on about the North brokenly being OP. I respect players challenging this talk by going for a creative different strategy, however as in AyanMs case, he most likely just doesn't read those strategy discussions.

https://www.warzone.com/MultiPlayer?GameID=17321525 --> AyanM somewhat countered the +3 first turn bonus in Sporades. However he never bothered about moving in there until his opponent showed up there himself turn 3. I understand a thought process of not moving into that bonus, guessing that the opponent won't finish it due the danger of getting snipped. However as in AyanMs case, I'm just to certain, that he just didn't bother at all. Well, as I said, there is just this difference between "wana win a game" and "wana win a game hard enough in order to form a valid hypothesis about the opponents picks".

Edited 1/9/2019 22:59:49

Well with AI winning 2-1 vs Odin it's official then; M'Hunters won this battle (: congrats!

Thanks dude. First I was sure that Meldarion sounded an awful lot like Melethron, so I just ignored you. However it's nice to have finally a non M'Hunters alt chearing for us :)