1x1 Total War, SchuryVSJanSorensen ROUND2

[schury]

i learned a lot from the last game versus JanSorensen. and i found something new to challenge him.
i know he's busy now, but i only wanna challenge the best players. my last strategy worked very well against a lot of foes. but facing JAN......that really helps to improve for both me and my foes, i think. or i'll still regard the one as almost perfect. so if JAN's doing one turn per week or less is also ok for me. so it may a slow game, but here i try to explain every move i conduct, and welcome to make comments and discussion about it. as there's not much good Axis AAR(my last one is also a bad one, too brief, no comments and explaination). it really needs some kind of textbook AAR to show how to fight a decent Axis war.[;)] hoping this time, it would be more splendid.
so let the party get started! as what JanSorensen said, it would be a fun game with lots of dirty tricks, which i try to promise you guys[8D]

[schury]

the first turn, Poland falls, i take no casualty.
but it was not that normal. i do play some tricks, since it is commonly believed that Axis is kinda weak now, so we managed to gain some advantages. JAN's totally ok with dirty tricks, that's what he hopes. he's quick minded, he finds your attentions through that. but i can't explain it now. but you may discuss it here. so that helps to make it more like an teaching thread, oh as well as a lesson and learn thread.[:D]
 

[kondor]

Well I welcome another AAR... I hope you will wright this AAR with some delay (year or so). Otherwise all your plans will be doomed even before you put them in action[;)]
Good luck!

[schury]

hey, come on, no one is invincible. there's only invincible sides~
yes, in all the 1 ON 1 AAR these days, allies ends in victory, but......keep trying, schury tryer[:D]
further more, if this AAR illuminates, i'll be very glad even if i lose, quite likely so......

[schury]

and kondor, after reading your AAR again, i think Dahnyul should take the responsiity for the AV mostly. when the war started under that kind of circumstances, not much can Russia do to stop the Axis.

[kondor]

I disagree there. Altough my ally did made some initall mistakes, I did my share too. It is a team work, and the other team was better[:)]. And we are trying to compensate that AV defeat with an AV victory in our other team game... We are close, but not quite yet there[;)].
We (as a team) performed a little better there....
I´ll have to constrain myself from spamming this topic[:D]

[schury]

frankly speaking, people are not very good at Allies, as a matter of fact they are strong.
if Allies don't put enough pressure on Germany, no one can stop the AV cause they use the both side strategy, let alone the caucasol front is open

[WanderingHead]

ORIGINAL: schury
frankly speaking, people are not very good at Allies, as a matter of fact they are strong.
if Allies don't put enough pressure on Germany, no one can stop the AV cause they use the both side strategy, let alone the caucasol front is open

Am I right in assuming that you will play Allies in this game, to really prove your point?

[schury]

the point is i am not good at Allies, i play the weak side to get fun. but surely i can play Russia and China, i can ask other guys to be Allies, if you wanna try it, i'd be very glad.[;)]

[JanSorensen]

ORIGINAL: schury

the point is i am not good at Allies, i play the weak side to get fun. but surely i can play Russia and China, i can ask other guys to be Allies, if you wanna try it, i'd be very glad.[;)]

Complaining that one side is weaker and insisting on only playing that side makes for a very poor argument. The best way to show that one side is weaker is to play the other side and constantly win easily against everyone else.

Its a bit like the two noblemen who were arguing who had the slower horse. They each insisted that their own horse was the slower one. Now, if they both rode on their own horse in a race trying to prove that it was slower that would obviously show nothing. Now, if they instead swapped horses for the race it would suddenly make sense.

So, if you want to add credibility to your crusade to show that the Axis is weaker then you need to swap horses and play the Allies (including the WA) yourself. No amount of arguing can change that in my opinion.

[schury]

i think you made a philosophic mistake. it's not the horse but also the rider that determains the result. it will not be called balanced even if i can beat everyone, it depend on the player's skills. that's the logic. and according to yours, you seems like pointing out i must be the best if the game is a balance one, if i am not the best, then the game is surely balanced, cause there's sb better than me who can defeat me.
for example, if you play chess with Paulo Murphy, without a queen, think he can still beat you, can you say a game without a queen is balanced game? it just because of your low level. so if i am poor at Allies, your asking me win as allies to spport my view is totally illogical.
and i don't know what's wrong if other's help me to test it? or you'd rather kick sb weaker?

[kondor]

There is some merit to Jan´s words... But I must point out, that even if two equal skilled players fight it out, and then swap positions next game- it wouldn´t tell us much... Every game is like no other. World for it self... This is only one thing that makes this game great!
IMO for balance issues one will have to look larger number of games and the process the results...
IMO balance is very good as it is. But there is always room for improvement[;)][8D]

[schury]

yes, and checked, allies win alot more in the 1 ON 1AAR[8D]

[MrQuiet]

I am just curious Schury if you plan to never play the Allied side in PBEM for as long as you own this game??
Seems like you are missing out on  half of the expierence.
I know that is the issue that kept you out of the 1 vs 1 tournament.
Had you joined the tournament you might have a very different view on your crusade.
 
I will say that I think the Allies have a slight adv at winning the war in time to get a decent victory (mostly due to there strong late war economy) and Japans not to difficult surrender conditions. But the advantage if any is not huge and I have yet to lose a game as either side, but many games have been very very close, like it should be.
 
I am axis vs Forwarn45 in round3 and I will be happy with a draw.

[schury]

ORIGINAL: MrQuiet

I am just curious Schury if you plan to never play the Allied side in PBEM for as long as you own this game??
Seems like you are missing out on  half of the expierence.
I know that is the issue that kept you out of the 1 vs 1 tournament.
Had you joined the tournament you might have a very different view on your crusade.

I will say that I think the Allies have a slight adv at winning the war in time to get a decent victory (mostly due to there strong late war economy) and Japans not to difficult surrender conditions. But the advantage if any is not huge and I have yet to lose a game as either side, but many games have been very very close, like it should be.

I am axis vs Forwarn45 in round3 and I will be happy with a draw.

yeah, you are right. and i am trying. as to the balance thing, maybe i am not good enough to find the whole right answer, but i do believe besides the Japanese surrender thing, the over-powerful ART should also be changed for all the sides?

[Dahnyul]

Well, Schury, relating to your note to Kondor, I do take responsibility for that AV loss as Allies. I am relatively new to online play, and I made some big mistakes.