TGC (Allies) vs VF (German) D-day with Balance
-
@victoryfirst I put it to the Discord. WELL DONE @VictoryFirst You played exceptionally. I am very very happy with this game because I really cannot say I would have done anything different as your side. I think you played the Germans exactly as they can best be played. I am very happy with this result for you. I feel like its not just me that can see what and how the Germans can be so lethal in this game.
Again, well done!
-
@the_good_captain Cool, thank you so much! I'll share my thoughts in the Discord!
-
@victoryfirst discord became a disaster - I guess ragnell is not the only one who doesn't like andrewAAgamer now. did you ever play with him?
-
Yeah, I saw it. I think he's a nice guy, until you get into an argument with him...
I have not played with him but I have planned a G40 game, which he said he will be ready for in about 3-4 months.
In any case, if you want to hear my thoughts about the game - I think what I did wouldn't have been possible without the Allied cold dice on the first and second turn. You lost a large amount of units and because of that I concluded that I could attack you every turn and in the end come out on top. From turn 5 or 6, I was expecting a German win.
You are saying that the game is balanced and that we played with equal skill, and that the Germans in the end seized the victory because the dice leaned towards them. I agree with that, however I am not sure about the game's balance. I think the Germans won because from turn 2 there was a red carpet laid down that led to victory, and they just had to make sure they walked along it. It's like seeing a mate in 8 that existed from turn 2 that was created by the dice. Not that easy to see, but it's definitely there.
I am not sure what would have happened if the Allies rolled average during those critical turns. A German victory would have certainly been a lot more difficult. I think I wouldn't have been able to defend St. Lo that aggressively and should play more passively. The outcome of THAT scenario will be a good measure of the game's balance. In my opinion the dice rolls of this game were a bit too extreme to say if the game is balanced or not.
All in all, I think the game has reached a fun and enjoyable state. Even though - in my eyes - it is uncertain if the game is perfectly balanced, it's certainly close, much closer than the OOB rules. This game was very fun, and in the end I still had to hold my breath because the Allies hit 5/7 hits and therefore captured St. Lo, such a roll in Cherbourg too and the game was an Allied win!
-
@victoryfirst said in TGC (Allies) vs VF (German) D-day with Balance:
I think he's a nice guy, until you get into an argument with him
sorry, that made me chuckle
-
@victoryfirst what I'm about to try to say is not best said through text but I will make a short attempt.
The Allied beach assault forces rolled poorly, yes. They scored 1 hit when they should have realistically scored 5 (and in some cases six).
But I will argue that those four extra German pieces that "shouldn't" have been there at the end of Allied 1 would not quite qualify as a locked in German win. But maybe the German side of the turn made it worse? I'll do a pip count of course and share my findings with you but for now, I don't care to share them publicly because I am convinced the person who is making the counter argument is not acting in good faith. I'm convinced he will choose to interpret it in a way that benefits his side and disparages the other no matter what the data says. I'll also take a close look at the moves turn over turn to see if I missed anything. In any case, I'm beginning to feel that the results of the opener in games of D-Day matters less than was previously thought but that point I will have to "table" for now.
My other issue is experience. I feel I am a prisoner of what I know. I feel I know too much about this game and others in the series. Do you know how many challengers have contested me in 1914 as the Entente and lost (as an example)? At least 7 that I can think of. Invariably, after this happens I get a comment "I guess the game is balanced after all - I guess the CP can win pretty easily". But 1914 has the worst balance I've seen out of box. I have so much experience playing 1914 that I seem to fool opponents into the wrong conclusion. That game is terrifically imbalanced but my own excessive experience creates an illusion.
I feel this is happening with D-Day. This is why I was and am so excited to lose this game to you. It tells me that the 'better strategies' can be (as it was for me) learned through experience. But there is still a difference between someone who has played 100 games and someone who has played 20. Both will be experienced but I will place my bet on the fellow who has played 100 games. I don't know why but I feel this concept is completely ignored or discounted.
For example: I crushed Dave Jensen twice last weekend as the Allies (we used the balances but none of them mattered since both games were over before turn 10). He has since PM'd me saying he feels it was too easy for the Allies to win. He hasn't played D-Day in 10 years and I have played now 70 something games in the last 1.5 years. But if he posts his opinion about balance it will be treated with the same weight as mine or anyone else.
I'm in a weird place. I told Dave to post whatever he feels of course but also added "I think it would have been best if we had found an opponent for you that had also not played D-Day in 10 years and then seen how you feel about balance. I feel the imbalance was in experience, not the game." I don't think he understood what I was trying to say.
Finally, I will say that I am always fearful over overbalancing. In the case of D-Day, here is the link to my rules change document on balance. https://www.youtube.com/redirect?event=video_description&redir_token=QUFFLUhqbDVyb3g0aml6LURYYTloX05iMlVEMEtFRzdNd3xBQ3Jtc0tsN3dtLWhZLWc0aHRzQWxYRTNYamhYODhWa09MQzZjSVE2b2xaMnAtUml0RFBJQmNQY3E0VF9wa0hLN2E3Q3NLU2dHUTJ5MGNreFZ0MWhESVBBMzZKeUpfQTA0eGh2N1huZTNZZEtUSFNNd0w5azZ3VQ&q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.mediafire.com%2Ffile%2Fw392kw7bang3ilu%2FDDday_optional_rules.docx%2Ffile&v=g8hiM192-zk
Notice it says that if the Allies are still having a hard time winning, to change the bomber attack value from 3 to 4. Ragnell804 was appalled that I did not announce this in my video. He insists and still insists the game is too pro-German. I told him what I just said above - "Sorry Ragnell, I would rather be sure we don't over correct than advertise something that MIGHT send the balance to the other side."
Anyway, I cannot thank you enough for your comment on discord. I will ponder on what to do next... I hope this was clear or comprehensible, but text feels insufficient. I wish we could all sit at a table and discuss this. Alas, that is not possible.
-
@the_good_captain Thank you so much for your comments. I can fully agree with you about the "feeling a prisoner of what I know". I respect you a lot for your experience and your sheer knowledge on several A&A versions. Usually I think twice before disagreeing with you. Not everyone seems to understand that you have stacked so many games. 70 games is crazy. This was my 7th D-Day game, and my 4th as the Germans. I think Andrew has a similar level of experience in D-Day (probably even less since he has mostly played against himself).
What I want to say is, yes, you need to take Andrew's, even my opinion with a grain of salt. You are aware of that, I am aware of that, just Andrew needs to be aware of that too.
The comments about 1914 made me laugh. You are are a true master in that sense, when you make playing the CP look so easy.
That game is terrifically imbalanced but my own excessive experience creates an illusion.
I feel this is happening with D-Day.
So do you think the same about our game? That the Allies were almost victorious because you played them as best as possible, and not because the game would be slightly in favor of them? (Just wondering because that would be a good point, but not sure if that's what you mean).
Finally, I will say that I am always fearful over overbalancing.
In that case, IF the game with the current ruleset is in favor of the Allies, we could always make the 3rd revision (no beach head restrictions for Utah) an optional rule. That way, players can choose themselves what's best for them and there will be less blame placed on the developers.
-
@victoryfirst I will crunch the numbers on our game. I might even make a video to share with you if I can to help the dialogue.
The return fire by the Allies on the first turn already looks promising for the Allies. But if I can just get off the discord... I should have this done tonight. I've done this so many times, I feel confident we will "see" why the game ended up being closer than it might have otherwise "felt". Or not. In which case, I should be able to change my mind. I don't want to be wrong a second longer than I have to be so... let's see... I'll post in the next 24 hours or so.
-
@victoryfirst I have everything up through turn 7. I am going to make a video about our game and post it to the discord. The dice leaned German. The beginning was very bad for the allies, so why was it close?
The Germans ate 134 strafes. To be competitive the Germans should try to eat less than 100 strafes. In the fewest words: the extra strafe rolls caused the game to appear closer than it otherwise should have been. There are a few other points to make but that was the main culprit. I will review it all and share the data, etc.
This does not denigrate your victory - you 100% earned it. I did not notice the strafes you were eating as I wasn't looking too closely at the turn results. The core concept of control of the territories adjacent to the cities as opposed to the cities themselves was something you adhered to and you reaped the reward imo. I was very happy to be frustrated playing against you in this game
Most opponents cannot bring themselves to play in that way but you did. -
@victoryfirst said in TGC (Allies) vs VF (German) D-day with Balance:
@the_good_captain Thank you so much for your comments. I can fully agree with you about the "feeling a prisoner of what I know". I respect you a lot for your experience and your sheer knowledge on several A&A versions. Usually I think twice before disagreeing with you.
The last thing I ever want to be is anything close to Andrew. I embrace disagreement from everyone but especially from players with decent resumes like yourself.
So please don't think twice before disagreeing with me. I don't want to miss any opportunity to improve. As they say, "light comes from heat."
Andrew is a special case of player that comes off as 'having all the right answers' and needs no improvement - and I just don't have the time for 'one way' conversation. So he is an exception for that reason.
