Brisk i did calculate that and it went that he will eventually brake me. It was the same calculations wich You were made but from mine it went he will kill me :) hehe

Glad to see someone is getting that at last... aldo i was after 2 drinks making it, now i am after 3, so i wont recalculate it again :D

He couldn't make a larger blockade. Look at turn 3, he needed exactly all armies to take CA+defend SA.

Ah you're right. Then it's a good blockade. +1 army would've been decisive, but not possible.

Don't get me wrong btw, I thought turn 6 was a good prediction and it's not by any means a bad game to learn from. It's just not as impressive as turning a disadvantage into a win. In this game I feel Mike has the advantage from pick stage, and just doesn't make a move that gives Gnuffles any room to outplay Mike. It's a very good show of how to have an advantage and maintain it very well.

I didn't check the math, but nevertheless, your attack on Brazil is not possible therefore it doesn't count as a move. Wouldn't have been the same to simply attack with -1?

Edited 10/30/2015 22:28:21

Thanks for the clarifications, people.

Wouldn't have been the same to simply attack with -1?

okay I know the answer to this - it is "no" :)

when you put the order as "attack with x number of armies" but the enemy attack makes you lose some armies, the WL algorithm works like this: "check if Mike still has x armies. If yes: attack with x. If no: attack with the max number of armies left."

so if Mike hadn't saved that 1 army in the dummy order, it'd have been used in the compensating attack (the one with the max number of available armies left, which would've been 9 in this case), and would've been definitely lost.

Edited 10/30/2015 22:48:37

Yep you are right. Now I remember there was a famous thread or post on this issue couple of months ago.

i enjoyed watching that game, but mostly because that one army you are so proud to have safed, you wasted in the beginning by bad expanding. still, wp.

You know Mike, I think we should play more. Anyway one thing I like about analysing is that different people see different things as relevant. Now when I'm analysing the game, I'm always lookng at possible earliest mistakes and there is one very small one that could be detrimental to the game. Turn 1 Gnuff attacks in scandinavia and imo that is a very, very slight mistake that in that particular game could have been huge. First, Gnuff plays without intel, but it's highly likely he know both SA and CA. With that in mind he wants to expand in ant first to border SA asap. Also he want the maximum number of OD moves on 2nd turn for antarctica hit. There are some potential obscure strategies with west russia where also delaying taking scandinavia helps a bit. Anyway my point is, not attacking first turn in scan gives him the same amount of OD moves on 2nd turn and his leftover is in the right position to greet any kind of potential early counter. Now, that may not seem like a huge deal, but the whole strategy by Mike is hanging on by a thread. Not only he has early income disadvantage of 9 to 11, he tries to blockade scan at the same time. So in general he kills 2 neutrals while gnuff gets a temporary income advantage. And I think that 1 extra army in scan makes a huge difference, because he is allowed to make an attack of 11 at least giving Mike an option of not using blockade, or making the blockade very weak. Fun game though, I really like the prediction mechanics you showcased, all of those were based on solid counting and game awareness.

i enjoyed watching that game, but mostly because that one army you are so proud to have safed, you wasted in the beginning by bad expanding. still, wp.

I don't think it was bad expanding, I think it was to have 1 delay more

Edited 11/4/2015 16:58:23

I don't think it was bad expanding, I think it was for having 1 delay more

All i see is an army wasted, you can have just as much delays turn2 without that 1 army attc.

50% of the time people have been found to always correctly predict the result of a coin toss.

25% of people have been know to do this twice in a row.

I don't think it was bad expanding, I think it was for having 1 delay more


All i see is an army wasted, you can have just as much delays turn2 without that 1 army attc.


You are misstaken it gave me extra delay.

You are misstaken it gave me extra delay.

turn1: deploy: 3 argentina, 2 cuba
take brazil with 6, Venezuela with 5, danmark haven with 3
turn2: deploy: 3 cuba, 2 danmark haven
take bolivia with 3, colombia with 3, transfer 1 brazil -> colombia, take mexico with 3, take svalbard with 3