http://warlight.net/MultiPlayer?GameID=6114994

on starts it seems it is absolutely impossible for me to lose.

tut tut pulse

Woah this zacatron guy has mad game. That picking strategy is fascinating. Reminds me of how the boston/myhand combo used to play.

He did have the better luck on the 3v2 attacks

his picks were terrible, his fascinating 3v2 luck, him getting all the first turns and my shitty play lost it :(

Yeah, extremely wild picks and extremely bad luck for you in this game decided it (3 leftovers twice? 3 successfull 3v2 attacks?). Call it karma perhaps. : D

Look deeper. He got a lot of luck getting Greenland by turn 2 and you got bad luck not getting SA. Stop assessing a game based on the luck! I see it all the time and it misleads you. Asses the srategies. Strategies are almost never close enough that luck is the deciding factor.

noob pulsey

Hit in Norway was unecessary, especially missing 2nd turn bonus and opponent showing no deploy first two turns you shouldn't hit him

Your picks in this reminded me of something, Pulsey. Oh, the hypocrisy!!

http://warlight.net/MultiPlayer?GameID=5232458

Read that chat and chuckle. :)

Why were his picks terrible? His 5th was terrible.

I like the way he reassessed on turn 1. He should have gone for aus first. It wasn't incredibly *good* it was incredibly *interesting* because it was creative problem solving and that's what I like.

OK, let's take a look at the game...

zacatron losing his 3+4 gave him the intel that Pulsey was going for the first turn counterpick. Very good map understanding. Try a first turn counterpick with the picks 3-5 against someone competent and you end up with Europe + Greenland.

I have to admit zacatron picking his number 5 in Australia and then going for Greenland first seems quite strange. On the other hand stuff worked out perfectly for him. I think both weren't bad choices. zacatron needed both +5 bonuses to compete with Pulseys two smaller bonuses. If he wasn't able to get them both he would lose the game. Going for Greenland first allowed him to take Greenland in 3 turns and having the leftovers at the right places if Pulsey was pushing.

--> I still don't agree with zacatron. If Pulsey played it more competent first turn (by hiting Scandinavia weaker) he would have been able to take South America in two turns and Greenland usually takes 3 turns. This would give Pulsey in a couple turns both an income advantage and a position advantage.


I don't see a gold star in Pulseys profile btw.....

If Pulsey played it more competent first turn (by hiting Scandinavia weaker)

i disagree. your idea is too risky. If you had been in my position it seems more than obvious that zac would either take the ftb, or be aware of someone in EU, and hit an 8v2 towards Sweeden.If i hit weaker it would mean he can either wipe me from the area the following turn or take Scan bonus.

zacatron losing his 3+4 gave him the intel that Pulsey was going for the first turn counterpick. Very good map understanding.

no good map understanding. It would mean he has my 3,4 but is there anything he could have done about it? reachiing me through Hawaii would take too long, and going through Ant means breaking a wasteland and only having one front. The normal way of playing zac's picks wuould ghave meant that i can play this 12v10 the entire game, and have greater positional advantage. I'm just posting this because its intersting how zac's make the worst possible choice (taking greenland(, yet beats me anyway.

Edited 5/9/2014 16:18:07

Well, countering the way you did puts yourself into quite some risk. A counter with 3-5 isn't worth the risk if this prevents you from getting your own bonus turn two. Since the only way countering the first turn bonus effectively was by picking the other two spots in America zacatron knew what was going on. That's what I meant by him understanding the board.

Pulsey didn't get his own bonus turn 2 because of bad luck. His strategy would get him a bonus turn 2 just over half of the time, and would guarantee that his opponent couldn't get one if he went for his FTB. The flaw in pulseys plan was that his opponent could decide to go for a different bonus by turn 2 and get it, while P would not be guaranteed to get his own. Zac saw this and exploited the hole in the plan, which is why I think hes cool.

"Strategies are almost never close enough that luck is the deciding factor."

How should I have won this game?

http://warlight.net/MultiPlayer?GameID=6171359

No card pieces turn 1.

Wow you got really unlucky. Its quite funny to watch.

There are ways that someone could have won this game while getting the same luck you did. Picking East china/ South east asia / East Africa / West Africa / South Africa would have given you a win if played out correctly, no luck needed. But your picks and play were excellent.

I said almost never. This is the game in a thousand that is decided by luck.

Edited 5/10/2014 03:57:37

I was just very glad it wasn't a ladder game when playing it. The opponent would likely be ranked 1100ish, and if I'd lost to a 1100 rated player on the ladder due to luck I'd have been much more disgruntled than losing an auotogame that way. With an autogame it merely amused me, and when I saw this thread it made me remember the game.