War and Peas - Hortlund (J) vs. Canoe (A)

[GreyJoy]

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Well, I think the key to finding an opponent that you can rely on is just keep reading this board. I for one will choose carefully and try to find somebody who reflects my playing needs. And, you can be pretty much assured that if the person has been posting on this board for a long time, he/she will be around to play a game for a good while.

There are excellent players who who I have a high opinion of that I will not challenge because they have different views as to how the game should be played than I. But I would say that there are at least a dozen or more posters on this board that I know I would enjoy playing. Canoe is one. Of course, he would have to play the Japanese...[;)]

One thing I am not going to do is go to the opponents wanted section and just play the first guy who posts a challenge. I am too gun shy to try that anymore.

By the way, that is how I found my current opponent, Viberpol, who has been banging away with me for three years now. Had no idea who he was. But that one did work out pretty good.

Agree CrSutton, but, as you just stated in your last sentence, the opponent wanted forum may work just fine. There are TONS of players out there who don't post on the forum for whatever reason and many of them, i bet, are relieable opponents.
But i get your point...this game is like a wedding and you have to be carefull of which partener you chose... but, also, we don't have to forget that new players are the real treasure of this game. Without them we are like a Panda in a zoo...
Each of us started at some point. Each of us has been a newby that noone knew.
When i started to play i simply bought the game and asked in the opponent wanted forum...and found Rader and we ended up where you all know... so, let's keep on giving new guys a chance!

[fcharton]

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy
When i started to play i simply bought the game and asked in the opponent wanted forum...and found Rader and we ended up where you all know... so, let's keep on giving new guys a chance!

Ben detto!

I'm in my second long campaign, both against great opponents found on the opponent wanted forum. I might have been terribly lucky, but I am under the impression that most of the players who advertise or reply to challenges on the forum are conscious of the responsibilities that go with such a reply, somehow, this community is very honor-driven. And anyway, early turns are such bears that anyone not really serious will drop before January 1942. In other words, any game that makes it to the end of December will probably last. After that, well, it is like a couple, there are good times, and bad times, and boring times, for both, but so long both players agree that they will make it together, it is fine.

No offense meant, CR, but I think asking for an experienced opponent that will go for AV is not necessarily the best idea. By doing so, you put a lot of responsibility on your opponent, for a benefit which might not be as important as you believe. Greyjoy vs Rader is the perfect example of how a total newbie can provide a good challenge, I think jrcar's current game is also a case in point.

Francois

[Canoerebel]

I've never asked for an opponent who will go for auto victory. I've only sought players who were capable of doing so. There's a huge difference.

[Canoerebel]

I'm mildly concerned about PzH. I haven't heard from him in 2.5 weeks. He hasn't replied to several emails including the "let's call it a game" one. It's possible he's away, or busy, or irritated, or even embarrassed about how the game ended. If you happen to know him well enough to drop him a note or PM, do so to encourage him. I don't have a good feel for his psyche, but everybody can use a word of encouragement from his friends (the AE community) now and then.

[JocMeister]

Some wise advice here I think. Asking for someone that could possible achieve AV is attracting a certain kind of players I think. Very competitive ones. I have no knowledge of the Japanese side but I´m guessing if you are playing for AV and fails your economy and disposition won´t be very good. I think it would be easy for a player to loose interest once its clear the effort is a failure.

Didn´t you actually get what you wanted CR? A player to shoot for AV. Not defending PzH here but I can see why he lost interest when it was obvious AV wasn´t achievable any more.

Have you considered playing a game just for you know. Fun? [:)] I can bet you that you will find a drove of people that would like to play you. Not for AV but just for fun. I think those game have a much greater chance to go the full length!

[Canoerebel]

I think people aren't reading carefully enough to know what I asked for and sought.

I have never asked for an opponent who would pursue AV. Twice I did seek players who were capable of AV, but left it up to them what they wanted to do. In both cases, neither player (Chez and PzH) tried for AV. So I didn't ask for it and therefore it can't be said that I "got what I asked for."

All of my games have been very tense and exciting. I do play just for fun. But I reached a point where I felt sure that a good Japanese player was capable of earning an AV. I don't think it's been done yet, and I wanted to see if I could draw an opponent that might (if he so chose) aim for it. That would be a very exciting match, I think. Certainly, there's nothing wrong with trying to set up the conditions where it was on the table.

[Chickenboy]

I hate to defend Dan, as he's an inveterate AFB, but he's exactly right in his description of what he advertised for in an opponent. It was pretty clear to me when he posted what he was looking for: someone with the skills capable of getting an AV in scenario 2. Seeking AV was never mandated.

[MAurelius]

I have to disagree there - I have seen a few games (on another forum) that reached AV - but were either terminated before or continued afterwards....

[GreyJoy]

But that's not the point guys. Sorry but the only problem i do see is that an opponent simply disappeared. It can't be Dan's fault. Steve could simply say: "sorry, lost interest", or "Sorry, my RL has some concerns and i have to focus 100% on them"...
 
Everybody must have the chance to quit whenever he wants. It's a game after all, and it's stupid to play it if you don't have fun anymore. But it's just not logic, nor polite, to simply abbandon your partner without sayin a word.
 
You did the right thing calling yourself out CR. Now relax, de-compress, and wait untill the will to play comes back again.... and i can tell you: it will! Been there, done that [:)]

[JocMeister]

Ah, English isn´t my native language and its hard to express myself sometimes. Didn´t intend it as any kind of criticism to you CR or PzH for that matter. I´m just saying that asking for a player capable of AV to me seems like asking for a player to try it and I´m not so sure its possible to try for AV and then have an enjoyable late game (43-46) as the Japanese. Again I know absolutely nothing about the Japanese side so its pure speculation on my part.

Sorry if I offended you CR. Wasn´t my intention at all.

[MAurelius]

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy

But that's not the point guys. Sorry but the only problem i do see is that an opponent simply disappeared. It can't be Dan's fault. Steve could simply say: "sorry, lost interest", or "Sorry, my RL has some concerns and i have to focus 100% on them"...

Everybody must have the chance to quit whenever he wants. It's a game after all, and it's stupid to play it if you don't have fun anymore. But it's just not logic, nor polite, to simply abbandon your partner without sayin a word.

You did the right thing calling yourself out CR. Now relax, de-compress, and wait untill the will to play comes back again.... and i can tell you: it will! Been there, done that [:)]

of course the interest will come back - I just restarted a campaign after a break of over 4 or more months... and I am having a really good time...

finding reliable and long term opponents via the internet without really knowing them is always an issue... the one and only opponent I have played with and against for over 5 years now (not only WITP AE) , and who has never let me down I talk to almost every day via skype (although he lives on the other side of the planet)... and I have had to stop countless campaigns/battles whatever in various games - from disappearing to saying "I'v#e had enough"... it's simply a risk we all take...

[CaptDave]

ORIGINAL: adsoul64

+1

Indro Montanelli (1909 - 2001) arguably the prominent Italian journalist and one with a huge ego as well, used to say "if a reader cannot understand me it's me to blame not the reader"

Wish someone had made my Atmospheric Thermodynamics professor aware of this!

[Canoerebel]

I'm worried about PzH. Since I sent the last turn to him on October 22, I've never heard back from him. I've sent four additional emails, the first terminating the game, the following three asking (and then urging) him to reply to let me know that he's gotten my emails and that he's okay.

Either something's gone terribly wrong for PzH or he's particularly discourteous at the moment. I hope it's the latter.

I'll close out this AAR by saying this: Two previous PzH opponents told me a month ago that he was prone to dropping games. It appears they were correct. If he shows back up (and I hope he does, albeit committed in a new way), be warned.

[Miller]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I'm worried about PzH. Since I sent the last turn to him on October 22, I've never heard back from him. I've sent four additional emails, the first terminating the game, the following three asking (and then urging) him to reply to let me know that he's gotten my emails and that he's okay.

Either something's gone terribly wrong for PzH or he's particularly discourteous at the moment. I hope it's the latter.

I'll close out this AAR by saying this: Two previous PzH opponents told me a month ago that he was prone to dropping games. It appears they were correct. If he shows back up (and I hope he does, albeit committed in a new way), be warned.

He'll be fine, just too embarrassed to acknowledge you. Good luck in your new game.

[Crackaces]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Okay, I read through all the posts and re-read Chapter 17 on auto victory and victory in general. I didn't catch anything new, if you don't mind me saying that.

Just to close this particular conversation in this thread for the future AFB looking for AV. Something sometimes overlooked is simply adding up victory point totals as shown on the map. The particular rule I was referring to is that the maximum victory points for base totals are only if the base meets minimal supply:

"This full amount of the final VP value is only scored at the end of the game if the base has supplies at least equal to its needed supplies. If supplies are lower than the required amount, the VP’s scored will be less than this maximum, (the lower the supplies the lower the scored VP’s). Bases with 0 supplies would score 25% of the full final points."

I think one restrictive barrier to autovictory is keeping all the stratigic bases supplied. None can have a red exclamation mark at the time of the autovictory check. Note that the high-value autovictory type bases tend to have long LOC from the home islands to keep these bases supplied. The conundrum might be that high value bases make juicy counterinvasion targets, which rases garrison requirments. More garrison troops raises supply requirements. In my opinion, this situation makes autovictory a siren song in scenario #2 against an agressive and focused AFB. The IJ spend their proverbal wad seeking high value bases that eventually becomes the begining for thier early downfall. I propose that the temptation for an autovictory that CR seeks might actually cause a game to end early in resignation.

BTW) WitP AE/WitPTracker seems to report the totals from inside the game correctly. I sometimes look and see an extra point value or points subtracted and yet the totals do not sync and say WTF! Finally I looked on the map to see bases either meeting minimal supply or losing minimal supply, and noted the point changes.