Debriefing of Game 10476657 (With Photos)

[kierkegaard_2]

BLUE -
kierkegaard_2 deployed 3 troops on Moscow
kierkegaard_2 assaulted Astana from Moscow and conquered it from Viceroy63
kierkegaard_2 reinforced Astana with 4 troops from Moscow

Played too fast here. At this point, I should have deployed mainla, taken hk, moved bangkok through hong kong to manila.

Green is building up in Oz which will eliminate bangkok and pink appears to be eyeing SA, which threatens Mex City.

[bman8397]

Hey pink here, haha:

I really wish I had put some on london instead of havana. It may have been nice to have a stack in europe instead of 3 or 4 in the 1 area. This wasn't as big, but looking at how I set this round up, I wish I put the 5 on N1 anchorage, on N5 vancouver instead. Thoughts?

[Viceroy63]

In all the time being here with CC I had never missed a turn, Until this one. This was my first missed turn and it bothered the hell out of me.

I lost plenty of sleep that night brother.

[Viceroy63]

Hey pink here, haha:

I really wish I had put some on london instead of havana. It may have been nice to have a stack in europe instead of 3 or 4 in the 1 area. This wasn't as big, but looking at how I set this round up, I wish I put the 5 on N1 anchorage, on N5 vancouver instead. Thoughts?

Definitely London with all those stacks of 3's to protect you. The odds of a stack of 3 attacking you is slim at best. Vancouver is another nice one in my opinion.

[Fewnix]

Red here with my plans for Move 2. As a good SoC student, I had turned down the temptation of an easy spoil in move one, going by the F4M rules, opting to build small stacks in different parts of the board. Now I planned to take a spoils and had, no insult to anyone, identified Blue, kierkegaard_2 and yellow as potential targets for elimination. i was seeing pink and cyan as opponents likely to gain in strength. I consider one of the most important lessons SOC offers for Terminator games is to identify as soon as possible potential targets for elimination:

Always know who is the weakest player and whether or not you can eliminate him

.

and would welcome discussion on that point.

Your Plans:Thinking of deploying 2 on Novo, giving me 8 there enough to take the singleton yellow Yakutsk for a spoil,no advance , and deploy one on Dubai to give me there, .After taking Yakustk I hope to have 7 on Novo, 5 on Dubai, 5 on edmonton and 4 on Capetown- a not bad offensive /efensive set up.

Blue with olny 19 troops is the weakest player and my most likely target for elimination, followed by yellow with 25 troops. It should be noted pink with 23 troops has the South America bonus and cyan with 26 troops has the Oceania bonus and are likely to gain in strength over the next few rounds. making blue and yellow likely weaker playres and better targetsl

[Viceroy63]

Game 10476657 Round 02

show

Viceroy63 Reply To kierkegaard_2

show

[kierkegaard_2]

Red had very easy access to blue (me). I think it was a fair assessment to say I was the weakest from red's perspective. Cyan can't get to green in Oz, so I understand why blue was eliminated first (by cyan).

It also appears from the log that red identified green as the next target. Based on the amount of hits blue took, I'm surprised I lasted to round 6. I lost Sao Paolo and Mex City in Rd 3.

I'm not sure how much more defensive I could have played.

What do you think of the theory of not taking spoils at all as a defensive tactic? I was eliminated with 5 spoils and gave cyan the opportunity to cash in for 6 and 8 troops. Not enough for cyan to eliminate other players.

Also, how about the tactic of missing turns? It does allow you to deploy an additional 3 troops after your next turn. Plus it gives you the advantage of others thinking you will disappear.

[Viceroy63]

10476657Game Log Round 03

show

Viceroy63 Assessment of Round 03

show

[dhallmeyer]

I like the plays made by red, blue, yellow and cyan. Good tactics.

Green, having secured the bonus already, should now start playing catch-up by protecting the bonus with 1 or 2, and developing stacks across the board. Likely green will be isolated in O with little else when the spoils start dropping.

Pink should not be taking SA. It's a waste of troops for small reward. Also by taking the bonus you've isolated yourself and made others more vulnerable. Dangerous play at best.

[Fewnix]

Red here. while it may seem premature o start looking in round 2 at the possibility of eliminating someone, that is one part, one important part of the F4M guidelines - always knowing who is the weakest player, and even more importantly, whether or not you can eliminate him. Two separate questions. . In a map with settings - Terminator, sunny, unlimited forts- the search for answers to those two questions should be a priority. we also need to keep in mind the flip side all the other players are looking at the chances of eliminating This started to be my focus in plans for round three as I sucked up to the SoC instructors.

Your Plans: Deploy 2 on A1 Dubai, giving me 8 to take singleton blue Cairo F7, no advance and deploy 1 on A4 Novosibirsk to give me 7 there.

I really appreciate the discussion and can feel my play sharpening. I recognize it is a balancing act between different priorities, even

Always know who is the weakest player and whether or not you can eliminate him.


I am now, in round 4, about the second weakest player on the board . One of my concerns has to be surviving to round 6 at which point I could, while still being a prime target for elimination, be well positioned to eliminate one or two opponents,

Assuming the plan works I would end this round with 3 spoils and 7 troops in A1 Dubai, 5 in N2 Edmonton, 7 in A4 Novosibirsk and 4 in F5 Capetown, I should be able to survive one more round to round 5, build up my forces, take another spoils and survive to round 6 .

The most likely target for me to eliminate in round 6 is Blue currently the weakest player on the map with 19 troops and 3 spoils. Assuming my plan listed above works, in round , 5 I would have 18 troops basically adjacent to blues 19 or so troops, depending on what happens between rounds. With only a 3 deploy and a set only IF I I pick up a third red this round ,that would give me about 25 troops to eliminate 20? or so blue troops. possible but not likely, and I hear you teach, trying would just make me a target,.>

But If I take a spoils this round and a spoils round 5, I start round 6 with 4 spoils, I could have a set to cash and that set could be worth more than 4. if someone has cashed a set, While there are other possibilities, blue is most likely to be the weakest player then , I would probably have a reasonable chance of eliminating him and then and it would trying. Blue is about my rank so eiminating him would give me about 20 points virtually guaranteeing I do not lose any points this game. Picking up blues 5 spoils would give me another set and a good chance to survive and eliminate at least one more player, before being eliminated. giving me a net gain of over 20 points . Etc.

, . .

[kierkegaard_2]

Good comments.

This debrief shows the the risk/reward of bonuses.

Playing strategically with hindsight,my weakness to red is evident. It would have been interesting if I had used the active game log to ally with green, reinforce all to Bangkok to protect green's bonus and convinced green to deploy all to NY to spread the stacks out.

I may attempt to start using the game log in active SoC games for this type of discussion.

If I had taken this action and alerted the other players, what would have been your reaction to green's strength? Would it still have been to eliminate me?

[Viceroy63]

Red here. while it may seem premature o start looking in round 2 at the possibility of eliminating someone, that is one part, one important part of the F4M guidelines - always knowing who is the weakest player, and even more importantly, whether or not you can eliminate him. Two separate questions. . In a map with settings - Terminator, sunny, unlimited forts- the search for answers to those two questions should be a priority. we also need to keep in mind the flip side all the other players are looking at the chances of eliminating This started to be my focus in plans for round three

Hi Fewnix;

First of all I think that we need to understand that the F4M are not commandments written in stone to be obeyed or we are put to death if we disobey. The F4M are really guidelines which if we follow we should be OK in the formation of our game. This does not mean that there are not exceptions to those guidelines which would serve us better not to follow the F4M. For example, A hypothetical situation...

It is your turn to play. It is the first move. Your drops are Chicago and New York, two neighboring regions. Also you have Moscow and Stockholm, another two neighboring regions. And your final three drops are all in the south of Oceania. So you got Perth, Sydney and Port Moresby. And just to sweeten the deal there is only 1 troop on Jakarta. All your regions have 3's on them. What do you do?

The F4M states that on the first move you "Deploy Only" and do not attack on round 01. And if that was a command then that is what we should do. But obviously in such a hypothetical situation as this one, it would greatly be to our advantage to assault Jakarta and take Oceania in that first turn. Thus the F4M is a guide to us which states that all things be equal and even, the best thing to do would be to "Drop Only" and do not attack. But obviously when a situation presents itself that is toward our best interest, to follow the suggestions of the F4M is then only to our detriment. Our own harm.

Let us also notice that the F4M only mentions to be alert of weaker players starting in Move 4. That's because the first three moves are really Survival moves. You very well can't be thinking of eliminating any players when your priority should be based on the survival of the game. That's what the F4M first three moves is really all about. Survival. Building up numbers, combining stacks of 3's into stacks of 5's because stacks of 3's are easier to kill then stacks of 5's.

For example, if a stack of 7 assaulted a stack of 5 the assault may very well fail simply because the odds of two dice would allow a double chance of a 6 or other high number to come out for the defender. Where as if the defender only had one die to defend himself with then his only hope might be a six because out of three dices attacking, one of them got to beat the defenders die. So 7 troops against 5 troops are not good chances of winning. But a stack of 7 can more easily take on two stacks of 3's and have room for dessert.

That's because after the stack of 7 gets the first two troops then that last troop can only use one die. and so the 7 wins easily there and if only four are left, 4 vs 3 on the second stack of 3's, the odds are better then 7v5 simply because if by sheer luck the first roll eliminates the first two defending troops then the defender is once again reduced to only one die. So it is more conceivable that a stack of seven has better chances against two stacks of 3's then a single stack of 5. Or look at it this way, two stacks of 3's will be using a single die in their defense, twice, but a stack of 5 will only be using a single die in it's defense just the one time. every roll in a stack of 5 will be two dice until the last troop. That makes a stack of 5 harder to kill then two stacks of 3's.

So it's all about survival. That is what the F4M really is; A survival guide. and that is why we "Deploy Only" and do not attack and combine our stacks and all of that. But then in the fourth move, now we can keep our eyes open for potential targets because if we did the first 3 moves correctly, we should be surviving and thriving. If we did not, then it makes no sense to keep alert as to weaker targets because then we are the weaker targets being looked at.

The only reason why I just went into such detail about this is because your focus up to now should not be about looking for easy targets but about survival and that is all. The first 3 moves is all about survival. Survival and growing strong because no weakling survives for too long.

[Viceroy63]

Good comments.

This debrief shows the the risk/reward of bonuses.

Playing strategically with hindsight,my weakness to red is evident. It would have been interesting if I had used the active game log to ally with green, reinforce all to Bangkok to protect green's bonus and convinced green to deploy all to NY to spread the stacks out.

I may attempt to start using the game log in active SoC games for this type of discussion.

If I had taken this action and alerted the other players, what would have been your reaction to green's strength? Would it still have been to eliminate me?

Under the same circumstances I would still have eliminated Blue when I did simply because if I did not some one else would. Better it be me then another.

But lets keep in mind that this is still only round 03. We are jumping the gun when we analyze what has not happen yet. If we analyze the whole game in this round then what will we have left to say for those rounds. when we get to them.

So far everyone is playing well and doing their best. Up to this point. The next round is the round that truly shows some of the errors and horrors of our play.

[Viceroy63]

Red here.

The most likely target for me to eliminate in round 6 is Blue currently the weakest player on the map with 19 troops and 3 spoils. Assuming my plan listed above works, in round , 5 I would have 18 troops basically adjacent to blues 19 or so troops, depending on what happens between rounds. With only a 3 deploy and a set only IF I I pick up a third red this round ,that would give me about 25 troops to eliminate 20? or so blue troops. possible but not likely, and I hear you teach, trying would just make me a target,.>

But If I take a spoils this round and a spoils round 5, I start round 6 with 4 spoils, I could have a set to cash and that set could be worth more than 4. if someone has cashed a set, While there are other possibilities, blue is most likely to be the weakest player then , I would probably have a reasonable chance of eliminating him and then and it would trying. Blue is about my rank so eiminating him would give me about 20 points virtually guaranteeing I do not lose any points this game. Picking up blues 5 spoils would give me another set and a good chance to survive and eliminate at least one more player, before being eliminated. giving me a net gain of over 20 points . Etc.

I sincerely hope that I am not sharing too much information here with everyone. I wouldn't want to bore anyone. If I am wrong in anything that I write I am sure that sooner or later an instructor will make a correction in what I am saying. I think however that the important thing and the purpose of this debriefing is to just share our thoughts and ideas because the truth of the matter is that when we try to teach others by sharing our thoughts, even if we are wrong about something, we still learn and get more from the sharing then if we just stay quite. Some how just participating in the thing, whatever it may be helps us to learn and to appreciate and to grow then when we just only read and sit stagnantly, and so I sure would like to see more participation in this thread just to see more people understand what it is that I just finished saying. I am sure that Fewnix understands 100% what I am talking about here. If you never leave your house, then you never go anywhere.

Now one thing that I am learning, just like I am sure that Fewnix is as well; Is that when you eliminate another player, if you do not do it in a proper fashion and way then you yourself get eliminated. I am learning that eliminating other players in rounds 6 through 8 is way to early for that kind of activity unless you do it correctly, and here is why.

In a 6 player escalating game, assuming that everyone has been earning spoils on every play since round 02, the last person to trade their spoils for troops in round 06 will have received 15 troops for their spoils. That's about half of the total averages of troops per player. In other words, the average player would or should have about 25 or 35 troops by the end of round 06. How do we know this? Lets do the math.

We start out with 7 regions times 3 troops per region, that's 21 troops. We gain an additional 3 troops times 5 rounds, that's 15 troops. for a total of 36 troops. Assuming that we lose about 9 troops or so because our single troops will be taken by other players who will be carding off of us and we also may lose an average of 1 troop per round trying to get spoils perhaps even more, brings our total troop count to 25 - 30 troops or so by the end of round 05. So in round 06 we have an average of about anywhere from 30 to 40 troops on the board that's including the spoils trade in, which is obligatory in round 06. That's assuming that everyone plays by the book.

It is rare to see anyone with a spoils trade in round 07 and so in round 08 the spoils trade begin at 20 troops for the first trade perhaps 25 if anyone had traded again in round 07. Usually people just hold on to them cards looking for a higher trade in. At any rate to use a spoils trade of say 30 troops to eliminate a player who has 30 troops in round 08 leaves you at the same troop strength as you started unless that player has a set for you to trade in. If they do then you are right where you should be if not better off at around 50 troops or so but if not then you are left behind at about 25 troops or so and easy prey for the next player to come along and eliminate you from the game.

So any thought's of eliminating any other players in round 06, 07 or even 08 is way to premature and risky at best. The right and proper time to think about eliminating another player from the game would be around round 09 and up when the spoils trade in would more then make up for what you would lose in eliminating another player. otherwise you may be eliminating a player with 30 troops only to gain 20 or 25 troops in return. In other words it would be like taking a step backwards in terms of troops strength and survivability. You could eliminate someone early enough in round 06 or 07 and then find yourself eliminated in round 08 because you would be just to weak to defend yourself from another player by then. It would be better to wait and see who might try such a thing and then eliminate that player gaining a much better trade in of troops in return. At least in those early rounds.

[Fewnix]

F4M as Opening Move and a reply to some points

Much of this discussion involves the First Four Moves( F4M) that are the core of SoC teaching and that we should all attempt to master. Here's my thoughts and an attempt to reply to some points..

I see F4M as an excellent "opening move" covering the first phase of a Terminator game, played on the Classic map with settings - sunny escalating spoils, unlimited fort. As in chess the opening moves cover only the first phase ot the game , the other phases being the middle game and the endgame. While there are defense elements in F4M, decreasing the chances of you being eliminated early in the game, it is strong on offense, putting you into a position where the odds favour you making 1-2 kills per game (winning 25% or so) and "that will be enough to see your score move up and your fun increase",

Sorry Vice, F4M tells us, I believe correctly, that in the first move, except in certain situations, you should pass on trying for a spoils and concentrate on building up the stacks, It also tells us you may pass on getting a spoils in the second round, if the circumstance are not right, but should look to taking one if reasonable. If you have not taken a spoils in the first two moves, you should look to getting spoils your third and fourth moves, even in unfavourable circumstances. Putting that together, as the game enters round 5 and the middle game begins, you, and most of the other players, should have 2 or 3 spoils - a pass in one of the first 4 moves equals 3 spoils, a pass in two of the first 4 moves equals 2 spoils.You should also have a reasonable number of troops 20+ concentrated on 3 to 5 stacks 6+? in different parts of the map- North America, Europe, Eastern Asia?..

I try in the first four moves to:

Always know who is the weakest player and whether or not you can eliminate him

.

That doesn't mean that I would try to eliminate someone in the first four moves, most likely the odds would be against a successful attempt., but I would attempt to know from teh beginning of the game to the end, if there is someone I could eliminate or am close to eliminating and adjust my play accordingly..

At round 5 we can say the middle game begins, with most players in the game looking for someone they have a reasonable chance of eliminating. There will almost certainly be one or more elimination attempts by round 9, quite possibly by round 8 and possible by round 7 or even 6 or even 5. I see any attempt to eliminate someone, whether tried by you or someone else, whether successful or not, as the start of the end game. . Not the end of the game. though it may be the end for someone, the start of the end game.,