Twilight Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Download the Twilight Strategy e-book!

Pages: 1 [2]  All

Author Topic: Epic 10-Turn Game (Tbody vs. Chimista)  (Read 18004 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

BamBix

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 37
  • Wargameroom username: BamBix_TS
  • Respect: +11
    • View Profile
Re: Epic 10-Turn Game (Tbody vs. Chimista)
« Reply #25 on: March 26, 2013, 07:39:25 am »
0

Chimista, why not use ABM treaty for ops, to prevent the defcon increase? Or did you gamble that the defcon decrease would work in your favor due to NORAD?
Logged

Chimista

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 109
  • Wargameroom username: chimista
  • Respect: +18
    • View Profile
Re: Epic 10-Turn Game (Tbody vs. Chimista)
« Reply #26 on: March 26, 2013, 07:45:38 am »
0

Chimista, why not use ABM treaty for ops, to prevent the defcon increase? Or did you gamble that the defcon decrease would work in your favor due to NORAD?
I used ABM's event because I wanted to coup Libya. The thing I didn't notice is that Defcon would stay at 3 because of my Nuclear Subs HL. This would have allowed USSR another BG coup. Fortunately for me he decided to save that coup for later, since he expected the Defcon to stay up despite my coups. Unexpectedly I had WWBY and used it to lower the defcon, denying the USSR another BG coup. I also got an extra ip with Norad which helped me to secure South Korea.
Summarising, it wasn't planned, just a lucky turn of events for me.
« Last Edit: March 26, 2013, 07:51:46 am by Chimista »
Logged

geraldkw

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2
  • Wargameroom username: geraldkw
  • Respect: 0
    • View Profile
Re: Epic 10-Turn Game (Tbody vs. Chimista)
« Reply #27 on: August 08, 2013, 02:15:45 pm »
0

So this report was never finished? Request rename or removal.
Logged

Comrade Pwnuby Khilemolov

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 55
  • Respect: +6
    • View Profile
Re: Epic 10-Turn Game (Tbody vs. Chimista)
« Reply #28 on: January 03, 2014, 03:35:55 pm »
0

How did this turn out in the end? Or has the game record been lost? :(
Logged

Chimista

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 109
  • Wargameroom username: chimista
  • Respect: +18
    • View Profile
Re: Epic 10-Turn Game (Tbody vs. Chimista)
« Reply #29 on: January 12, 2014, 05:34:04 pm »
0

I'll try yo find it, but I'm afraid it's lost, unless Tbody comes back
Logged

meshuggah42

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4
  • Respect: 0
    • View Profile
Re: Epic 10-Turn Game (Tbody vs. Chimista)
« Reply #30 on: January 21, 2014, 09:02:58 am »
0

T5 US AR1: how did DEFCON rise to 3?
Logged

Chimista

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 109
  • Wargameroom username: chimista
  • Respect: +18
    • View Profile
Re: Epic 10-Turn Game (Tbody vs. Chimista)
« Reply #31 on: January 23, 2014, 06:55:25 am »
0

T5 US AR1: how did DEFCON rise to 3?

I HL Nuclear Subs and then I used AMB Treaty to coup in Libya. It was actually a silly move cause I benefited from the Defcon Raise to be able to coup in the ME, but I forgot that Nuclear Subs would make the Defcon stay at 3, allowing the USSR to coup back. However my opponent didn't coup back, maybe he expected Defcon to stay at 3 cause of NS, so he wasn't in a rush to use the coup, but that got me the chance to use WWBY to lower Defcon and get +1 with Norad (At the expense of 3vp for the USSR, though). An interesting combination, I believe.
Logged

meshuggah42

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4
  • Respect: 0
    • View Profile
Re: Epic 10-Turn Game (Tbody vs. Chimista)
« Reply #32 on: January 23, 2014, 07:43:18 am »
0

Thanks, clear now. The log was confusing though, putting the DEFCON raise before saying the ABM line and directly after the AR announcement line, like it was from something previously played. It also reads like ABM was played for ops.
Logged

trevaur

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 32
  • Respect: +14
    • View Profile
Re: Epic 10-Turn Game (Tbody vs. Chimista)
« Reply #33 on: July 15, 2014, 09:26:52 pm »
+1

I know this game was posted over a year ago, but I'm going to critique your first turn anyways

I just read through turn 1, and I have a lot of comments on how both of you can improve your early games.

USSR:
Obviously you have a low ops hand, so this is going to take a little finesse. As far as openings go, I open 1EG 4Pol 1YUG about 95% of the time, but this opening hand falls in the 5% where I deviate from that. Suez is a great headline against the US player's opening (which is why I don't like the 4WG 3Ita opening as the US), so I wouldn't change that. Unfortunately, that means that your only other 3-4 ops card is Eastern European Unrest. Since you have such a low ops hand, you probably won't be playing into Europe at all this turn, and that means that when you play Eastern European Unrest for ops this turn you're just going to lose that 1 inf you dropped into YUG. For this reason, I would open up with 1EG 5Pol instead, that way when EEU triggers then you're left with 3EG 4Pol instead of 3EG 3Pol 1Fin. You're giving up all hope for domination in Europe, but if you get lucky you might be able to steal France or WG to prevent US domination.

AR1 you coup with the China Card, and I would argue that it's better to coup with EEU instead. I really don't like using the China Card on turn 1 because if you don't it really puts the pressure on the US on turn 2. You don't have either Decol or De-Stal, which means it's possible that the US will get both by turn 2. If you give them the China Card, they will play it and hold both through the reshuffle, which obviously sucks. Also, it makes turn 2 Blockade much more problematic for the US, regardless of who gets it. This is another reason that I don't like this opening as the US (empty WG never has these problems). Couping with a 3 isn't that much worse than a 4, and saving the China Card is really good. Of course, if he coups you back successfully then you probably want to re-coup with the China Card since you won't have any more 3 ops cards and it is pretty important to lock down Western Asia.

Another reason to use EEU instead of the China Card here is scoring card timing. You have Asia Scoring, but don't have the ops to really do anything in Asia even if you win the Western Asia battle. You're most likely going to play Asia scoring for between -1 and 0 regardless of whether or not you win the Western Asia battle, so that diminishes its immediate importance. You scored it for 5 points, but that was just due to sloppy play by the US (all they had to do was drop 1 additional influence in Asia to prevent you from gaining 4 points).

AR3 you played 2 inf into Afghanistan before playing Asia Scoring in the hopes of scoring an easy domination. It paid off here, but it certainly would not have against a better opponent. Your opponent easily could have responded by just taking Thailand and you would have just lost a point. Worst case scenario your opponent gets bold and plays a 4 ops to take both Thailand and South Korea to flip domination to their favor, and now you're screwed because you don't have the ops to wrestle it away from them.

Furthermore, if you immediately play Asia Scoring it gives you a window on AR4 to drop an influence into Syria (with RomAb) before the US can get there, and that makes it much more annoying for them to get back into the ME. Besides, you don't need Afghanistan yet anyways. Then AR5 you have a great opportunity to toss Europe Scoring before the US has a chance to take France, and I don't really see a reason to not take that opportunity. Plus, holding a scoring card until AR6 is risky because you can't respond to any AR5 US shenanigans. In this case, the US player plays Indo-pak, which gives you an opportunity to immediately take Pakistan with Fidel, allowing you to coup Panama T2 AR1 with impunity.


US:
I mentioned before that I don't like the 4WG 3Ita opening, and this game is a decent example of why. You got kicked out of the Middle East by the ol' Suez+Iran Coup combo, and it would have been even more difficult to get back in if the USSR had done what I suggested and stuck an inf into Syria. You don't have Decol or De-Stal, but you could still draw either on turn 2, and Blockade would force them into the Reshuffle. I personally almost always open up with empty WG for this reason. I usually open with 4Ita 2Gre 1Tur, and I certainly would have here. That might be a bit of a controversial opinion, but I really think these openings are the best. They are the least volatile since you will almost never be dominated in Europe. Sure, it reduces your chances of gaining domination, but for good players consistency is king. If you do this opening, you can basically ignore Europe and it will still turn out fine. If the USSR decides to dump 4 early ops to take WG that's 4 ops that could have been used in key areas on the board, so I'm fine with that as the US. Even if they take both WG and France (sometimes it's better to just let them have France if you don't want to deal DeGaulle or Suez), they will only have 4 countries, while you can easily take the 4 2-stabs, and UK for 5. They spent 7 influence while you spent 3 and they're only scoring 3 points from it. That's an alright trade for the US, and that's pretty much the worst case scenario. You can also easily take Canada if you need to. If they don't take anything, you just slowly take France and WG, and if they don't respond you end up with domination anyways. When you're adjacent to WG, you can also just stick one inf in if Truman is still out, and the USSR will most likely leave it alone. Furthermore, if you get eliminated from the ME, like you did in this game, this opening would have allowed you to immediately play into Syria to get back in.

Since this opening is so different from what the US player did, it's tough to critique the rest of the turn since it would have turned out differently, but I have some general tips. As mentioned before, the US player should have really prevented the easy Asia domination that the USSR got. I like how the US player moved towards India, but I didn't like his play into Jordan. The US placed 12 influence. I would have played them something like this: 1Mal, 2Thailand, 1Laos, 1Burma, 1India, 1Syria, 1Israel, 2Egypt, 2Libya. You could also consider swapping one of the Libya inf to South Africa/Botswana to shore up that region, or Panama/Costa Rica to protect against Panama Coups.
« Last Edit: July 15, 2014, 09:51:46 pm by trevaur »
Logged

budzo

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 83
  • Respect: +10
    • View Profile
Re: Epic 10-Turn Game (Tbody vs. Chimista)
« Reply #34 on: July 16, 2014, 04:19:20 pm »
0

And what would u do with empty WG opening if soviet has really good player decides to just take WG with 4ops. What is more he can soc gov headline and take u out of meditarenian countries. Heres what happens

1. Wow suddenly ur facing USSR domination (with warsaw pact and other stuff giving points into EE).

2. Take France or not? play Afghanistan? Egypt? If u take France u should like hell take it with like 5 ops even then u will be losing points with stuff like soc govs, sues, de gaulle. And then u can stay with Italy. How about succesful brush war or sth like reformer?

If u play Afgh or Egypt that gives u no advantage at all u can get couped easily. The smartest move seems to strenghten Iran but thats also non-asskickin play.

So is that really worth not discarding to blockade?

I personally would open empty WG with 5% cases like holding blockade and no 3 op card u want to discard or no 3 op card at all. But even then u can hold on blockade to the next turn.(assuming no decol in ur hand)
Logged

Chimista

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 109
  • Wargameroom username: chimista
  • Respect: +18
    • View Profile
Re: Epic 10-Turn Game (Tbody vs. Chimista)
« Reply #35 on: July 17, 2014, 07:22:01 am »
+1


US:
I mentioned before that I don't like the 4WG 3Ita opening, and this game is a decent example of why. You got kicked out of the Middle East by the ol' Suez+Iran Coup combo, and it would have been even more difficult to get back in if the USSR had done what I suggested and stuck an inf into Syria. You don't have Decol or De-Stal, but you could still draw either on turn 2, and Blockade would force them into the Reshuffle. I personally almost always open up with empty WG for this reason. I usually open with 4Ita 2Gre 1Tur, and I certainly would have here. That might be a bit of a controversial opinion, but I really think these openings are the best. They are the least volatile since you will almost never be dominated in Europe. Sure, it reduces your chances of gaining domination, but for good players consistency is king. If you do this opening, you can basically ignore Europe and it will still turn out fine. If the USSR decides to dump 4 early ops to take WG that's 4 ops that could have been used in key areas on the board, so I'm fine with that as the US. Even if they take both WG and France (sometimes it's better to just let them have France if you don't want to deal DeGaulle or Suez), they will only have 4 countries, while you can easily take the 4 2-stabs, and UK for 5. They spent 7 influence while you spent 3 and they're only scoring 3 points from it. That's an alright trade for the US, and that's pretty much the worst case scenario. You can also easily take Canada if you need to. If they don't take anything, you just slowly take France and WG, and if they don't respond you end up with domination anyways. When you're adjacent to WG, you can also just stick one inf in if Truman is still out, and the USSR will most likely leave it alone. Furthermore, if you get eliminated from the ME, like you did in this game, this opening would have allowed you to immediately play into Syria to get back in.


The initial setup you put forward is too risky, to say the least, specially without holding SG or Defectors. If USSR HLs SG, removes your 2ips from Greece and 1ip from Italy, they can coup Italy in AR1 with a 66% chance (rolling 3 or more with a 4ops card) of wiping you out of every European BG and only direct access to France... Pretty bleak.

I only setup with empty WG when I get Blockade + DeStal (or decol) in AR1, or when I get Blockade and no 4 ops, fearing a RS. When I do I always fear a SG HL + Italy coup combo, so it's a risk that I asume in dire situations, not as a standard setup.

Even if you don't get couped out of Italy and manage to secure Greece and Spain in T1 you could be couped later in the game, or suffer a Brush War (not with NATO activated, of course, an event I thinks is pretty nice, despite controversy)

Have you ever tried the setup you propose with advanced players? How many times?

I believe that 4WG 3Italy is the best standard setup, and they call it standard for a reason  ;)
« Last Edit: July 17, 2014, 07:52:12 am by Chimista »
Logged

Chimista

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 109
  • Wargameroom username: chimista
  • Respect: +18
    • View Profile
Re: Epic 10-Turn Game (Tbody vs. Chimista)
« Reply #36 on: July 17, 2014, 07:36:21 am »
0


Since this opening is so different from what the US player did, it's tough to critique the rest of the turn since it would have turned out differently, but I have some general tips. As mentioned before, the US player should have really prevented the easy Asia domination that the USSR got. I like how the US player moved towards India, but I didn't like his play into Jordan. The US placed 12 influence. I would have played them something like this: 1Mal, 2Thailand, 1Laos, 1Burma, 1India, 1Syria, 1Israel, 2Egypt, 2Libya. You could also consider swapping one of the Libya inf to South Africa/Botswana to shore up that region, or Panama/Costa Rica to protect against Panama Coups.

Totally agree with this part. The way I fought back into ME and Asia at the same time was fun, but naive and suboptimal. In that scenario now I would focus in Asia  maybe sparing a few ops in the mid-war regions, as you suggest.
« Last Edit: July 17, 2014, 07:44:41 am by Chimista »
Logged

Chimista

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 109
  • Wargameroom username: chimista
  • Respect: +18
    • View Profile
Re: Epic 10-Turn Game (Tbody vs. Chimista)
« Reply #37 on: July 17, 2014, 10:08:31 am »
+1


USSR:
Obviously you have a low ops hand, so this is going to take a little finesse. As far as openings go, I open 1EG 4Pol 1YUG about 95% of the time, but this opening hand falls in the 5% where I deviate from that. Suez is a great headline against the US player's opening (which is why I don't like the 4WG 3Ita opening as the US), so I wouldn't change that. Unfortunately, that means that your only other 3-4 ops card is Eastern European Unrest. Since you have such a low ops hand, you probably won't be playing into Europe at all this turn, and that means that when you play Eastern European Unrest for ops this turn you're just going to lose that 1 inf you dropped into YUG. For this reason, I would open up with 1EG 5Pol instead, that way when EEU triggers then you're left with 3EG 4Pol instead of 3EG 3Pol 1Fin. You're giving up all hope for domination in Europe, but if you get lucky you might be able to steal France or WG to prevent US domination.

AR1 you coup with the China Card, and I would argue that it's better to coup with EEU instead. I really don't like using the China Card on turn 1 because if you don't it really puts the pressure on the US on turn 2. You don't have either Decol or De-Stal, which means it's possible that the US will get both by turn 2. If you give them the China Card, they will play it and hold both through the reshuffle, which obviously sucks. Also, it makes turn 2 Blockade much more problematic for the US, regardless of who gets it. This is another reason that I don't like this opening as the US (empty WG never has these problems). Couping with a 3 isn't that much worse than a 4, and saving the China Card is really good. Of course, if he coups you back successfully then you probably want to re-coup with the China Card since you won't have any more 3 ops cards and it is pretty important to lock down Western Asia.

Another reason to use EEU instead of the China Card here is scoring card timing. You have Asia Scoring, but don't have the ops to really do anything in Asia even if you win the Western Asia battle. You're most likely going to play Asia scoring for between -1 and 0 regardless of whether or not you win the Western Asia battle, so that diminishes its immediate importance. You scored it for 5 points, but that was just due to sloppy play by the US (all they had to do was drop 1 additional influence in Asia to prevent you from gaining 4 points).

AR3 you played 2 inf into Afghanistan before playing Asia Scoring in the hopes of scoring an easy domination. It paid off here, but it certainly would not have against a better opponent. Your opponent easily could have responded by just taking Thailand and you would have just lost a point. Worst case scenario your opponent gets bold and plays a 4 ops to take both Thailand and South Korea to flip domination to their favor, and now you're screwed because you don't have the ops to wrestle it away from them.

Furthermore, if you immediately play Asia Scoring it gives you a window on AR4 to drop an influence into Syria (with RomAb) before the US can get there, and that makes it much more annoying for them to get back into the ME. Besides, you don't need Afghanistan yet anyways. Then AR5 you have a great opportunity to toss Europe Scoring before the US has a chance to take France, and I don't really see a reason to not take that opportunity. Plus, holding a scoring card until AR6 is risky because you can't respond to any AR5 US shenanigans. In this case, the US player plays Indo-pak, which gives you an opportunity to immediately take Pakistan with Fidel, allowing you to coup Panama T2 AR1 with impunity.

About the USSR everything you say is commonplace, stuff any begginer player knows if they bother to read the blog. If I was the USSR, given this hand, I would have most definitely hl a scoring card, probabily Europe. Getting rid of the US in the ME is cool, but I'd rather have the 3 ops instead, plus the earlier you safely dump a scoring card with such low ops the better.

Again, about my playing, it was sub-optimal, but fun. It felt good to "creep back" simoultaneously into ME-West Asia after being wiped out. It was irrational, of course, but it wasn't a tournament anyway. If you want to check how weak a player am I you are welcome to play in wargameroom.com anytime, so I can kick your ass into some humbleness  :D
« Last Edit: July 17, 2014, 03:49:13 pm by Chimista »
Logged

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 113
  • Respect: +51
    • View Profile
    • Twilight Strategy
Re: Epic 10-Turn Game (Tbody vs. Chimista)
« Reply #38 on: July 17, 2014, 06:41:45 pm »
0

FYI, you probably don't mean to be so hostile, but it does come off that way.
Logged

Chimista

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 109
  • Wargameroom username: chimista
  • Respect: +18
    • View Profile
Re: Epic 10-Turn Game (Tbody vs. Chimista)
« Reply #39 on: July 18, 2014, 05:38:51 am »
0

FYI, you probably don't mean to be so hostile, but it does come off that way.

Actually, I meant to be "fairly hostile", or lets call it "belligerent" if you will... at the end of the day this is a wargame forum, isn't it?  ;)

Logged

Chimista

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 109
  • Wargameroom username: chimista
  • Respect: +18
    • View Profile
Re: Epic 10-Turn Game (Tbody vs. Chimista)
« Reply #40 on: July 18, 2014, 05:44:06 am »
0

Of course, If someone feels offended by my post I apoligize. I was shocked by trevaur's lenghty annotations about my shortcomings as a player, so I probabilly overreacted
« Last Edit: July 18, 2014, 05:45:52 am by Chimista »
Logged

Tbody

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 27
  • Wargameroom username: TbodyTS
  • Respect: +5
    • View Profile
Re: Epic 10-Turn Game (Tbody vs. Chimista)
« Reply #41 on: July 25, 2014, 11:45:36 pm »
0

Two words: wow and sorry.  Sorry for not finishing the game log.  I got a bit burnt out doing it, and left it by the wayside.  However, today I'm introducing TS to a new friend and came back to the site to (wow!) seeing this thread still being discussed.  I'm in a bit of a rush but I'll look through the thread later tonight and make some comments on what others noted.  Furthermore, I'll try to find the game log and finish the post because to be honest, the ending was a nail biter. 
Logged

trevaur

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 32
  • Respect: +14
    • View Profile
Re: Epic 10-Turn Game (Tbody vs. Chimista)
« Reply #42 on: November 07, 2014, 04:58:13 pm »
0

Chimista, if anything by saying "About the USSR everything you say is commonplace, stuff any beginner player knows if they read the blog" you're calling Tbody a beginner because he clearly doesn't know this stuff or else he would have done it. If you're calling your opponent a beginner, I find it interesting that you seem so enthused by this game. I personally find that beating a beginner player is fairly straight-forward and not really comment worthy. I was merely suggesting ways for Tbody to improve his early game since nobody else seemed to be helping, so I'm not really sure why you felt the need to attack me (and Tbody) that way.

As far as the opening goes, I have played quite a bit against advanced players, and I play that empty WG setup every time and I have never had it turn out poorly. I guess my question to you, Chimista, is: have you extensively tested this opening, and have you found that it doesn't work as well as 4WG and 3ITA? This is an immensely complex comparison, but I find that if you run through all the scenarios that empty WG tends to come out on top. I think what it ultimately comes down to is that USSR almost certainly is not going to gain control of Europe against a good US player unless they have an absolutely huge ops advantage, plus a high Italy coup, in which case they were probably going to win anyway regardless of the US opener (If US opens standard, you go SG headliner, coup Iran, bust through to France, take Med countries, dump rest of ops into Asia to get dom in Europe and most likely dom in Asia as well. If the US comes back from that then it would be very impressive), and if the USSR isn't gaining control of Europe then the empty WG opening is better because you don't have to deal with Blockade bullshit, you're taking the 4 ops needed for WG and spreading them around lower Stab countries to boost your country count, making USSR dom almost impossible, and you're giving yourself immediate backdoor access to the ME. If the USSR spends the 4 ops to take WG on turn 1 then I'm very happy as the US because those ops would certainly be much more effective elsewhere. The most threatening way for the USSR to gain control is typically by a Mid-war brush war. In order for the USSR to even get to that stage, they will have had to dump tons of ops into Europe in the early war to take WG and France, plus defend against last AR/NORAD/Special Relationship shenanigans (Truman Doctrine anyone?), And the US will almost certainly have the 3 med countries. Then, if the Soviets get NATO, do they space it? Bam, another 4 ops spent. Meanwhile, as you sink more and more inf into this gambit, the US takes Austria/Yugoslavia. Now you're basically at the point where you've spent so much to make this work that if it doesn't you're pretty screwed, and now you need a 6 to get Italy, and then you're going to have to race the US in country count. And if the US gets NATO and they feel at risk from Brush War, they can just bite the bullet and play it for the event. The USSR already spent a ton of ops, so I don't feel so bad about wasting 4. Overall, it's SO risky to attempt this as the USSR that if it doesn't work then you probably lose because you've given up so much board positioning elsewhere.

Furthermore, if you feel uncomfortable with 4ITA, 2GRE, 1TUR because SG cuts you off from Italy, then you could easily just move the 1inf from Turkey to Spain to make yourself safer. I find it mostly comes down to the number of ops in your hand. If you have a low ops hand, then 1 in Spain makes it extremely difficult for a successful USSR Italy takeover (SG+8 strength coup, which is at the point where it's just too risky to attempt as the Soviets because an Iran coup just needs a 6) If you have a mid-high ops hand then you really aren't at any risk of allowing Soviet control of Europe, so I put the inf in Turkey because it's more accessible for the Soviets and it gives you a backdoor into the ME. IMO, one of these variants is better than 4WG, 3ITA in every situation.

Now, let's look at the WG opening. You say you use this opening unless you have blockade+destal/decol/no RS (If you have blockade and get RS'd, even if you have a 4 to punt, you'd probably rather just hold blockade until turn 2, but then you run the risk of drawing destal/decol and having to re-shuffle them). Ok, so what happens if you don't have blockade, so you open up 4WG 3ITA, and your opponent gets blockade and Red Scare? Even if you have a 4, are you willing to bite that bullet? I know I'm not if I can just avoid that possibility by just opening up empty WG. So, at this point for me to even consider opening up with WG I need Red Scare in my hand, but if I have Red Scare in my hand, I feel EXTREMELY comfortable opening up 4ITA, 2GRE, 1TUR, because there's no way that the USSR is going to be doing anything to threaten Europe while they're Red Scared.

When you break it down, if you open up WG then Blockade is almost certainly going to be annoying. Even without being combo'd with Red Scare, the only 3 that I don't care at all about discarding is Socialist Governments since it's a dead AR and it's recurring (all other Soviet 3's are starred, and I pretty much always trigger them to get them out of the deck), so unless you have that then you would rather keep your 3's than be discarding them to Blockade. Even then, SG is the third best card to hold through the turn 3 reshuffle after de-stal and decol. The only way you can guarantee that Blockade won't be annoying is if you have both Blockade and Red Scare in your opening hand without de-Stal or decol, and even then you're still discarding a 3 that could be used in a better way unless it's SG.

« Last Edit: November 07, 2014, 05:22:26 pm by trevaur »
Logged

Stryker

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7
  • Respect: +1
    • View Profile
Re: Epic 10-Turn Game (Tbody vs. Chimista)
« Reply #43 on: January 08, 2015, 11:18:24 pm »
0

So, how did the game end?
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  All
 

Page created in 0.183 seconds with 21 queries.