TWW 2 vs. 2 with gully, Nothingtoseehere, ubernaut and colin
-
@Gully i dont agree communication should be restricted to here that will make this too difficult.
@Nothingtoseehere i would say @colin and i are actually pretty even, but whatever.
-
-
@Gully I think it could be interesting, but maybe with some talk about strategy allowed at the beginning and every now and then. As for the teams, that works for me. I'd prefer the allies as I just started a game against ubernaut as the axis, but I'm flexible with that too
-
@colin which part of the allies do you want? As I saifd Yesterday I think splitting them into Russia/USA and China/UK makes the most sense in my opinion. Are the others fine with playing axis?
-
fyi i don't think i can handle more than one TWW game at a time and now that 2.0 is out already albeit a bit buggy i personally would rather table this until our current match is done since we were forced to start in 1.9. maybe you guys can practice agasnt each other in the meantime and get more even?
-
here's another question how should we handle multinational battles? seems like we will need to make arrangements for any multinational defenders.
-
also, i think splitting of factions should be between teammates and subject to private conference prior to the start of the game. i think if anything is going to make the extra hassle of all of this coordination worth it, that would be improved strategy by a sort of meeting of the minds amongst teammates.
-
@ubernaut: I don't think me nor Gully will come even close to you guys speed so maybe we should give the start a try and see if we can't run both. I don't think Gully is particularly eager to play just me or we would have done so a while ago. The only Thing to decide in multinational battles is order of loss, so in my opinion this can be handled by one of the participants unless both are availlable.
Also if the axis split into Germany/ Italy for one and Japan for the other they shouldn't have many instances where both Players are needed. bThe same could probably be said with a Russia/China and USA/UK split with the exception of the occasional Russian ship in a mostly UK/US-fleet, though I'd imagine that'd be a bit boring for the Russia/China player.
I didn't mean to say that everyone has to agrre to my proposed split of the factions I just thought It would give the most even Distribution of things to do/ variety /power in a 2vs. 2. It certainly can be decided by the teams to do it another way. I think for the multinational battle problem an axis split into Germany/Italy for one and Japan for the other player and an allies split into Russia/China for one and USA/UK for the other player does remove most of the problems.
@colin: Do you have a preferred voice chat option I have Steam and Teamspeak immediately available. -
Yeah, if UK and USA are the same player (and Germany and Italy), it's never a problem to have multinational defenders. Even if, it's an easy decision what to lose first and can be corrected by edit. Realistically, it is only mixed fleets in the Pacific and they can provide an OOL beforehand.
I think the Allies split into Russia/China and UK/USA is not even, UK/USA is a lot more to do. Maybe split it Russia/USA and UK/China?
-
@Nothingtoseehere so if you think you are slower than we are then we definitely should not start a game until 2.0 is stable enough to use.
Also, OOL in our games often times depends on the perceived intent of the attacker and roll outcomes it is not simple a lot of the time.
Again i think the faction splitting should be between teammates to decide personally.
Finally, with regards to my previous comment even if time were not an issue i just don't have the bandwidth to play more than one TWW game at a time. Even playing a revised game and a TWW game at the same time is a bit much imo.
What time zones are you guys in maybe the split should be decided that way.
-
@Gully That Split was my first suggestion when we discussed the possibility of a 2 vs.2 I also think it's the best in terms of even split in power/variety of things to do.
-
@Nothingtoseehere I have steam, I've never done voice chat but I could figure it out, although it seems it may be a bit in the future
-
@ubernaut Me and Gully are both from Germany so MESZ.
-
@Nothingtoseehere hmm i guess that wouldnt be much of a factor then. Just curious why are you guys not interested in playing each other?
-
We did a few times and tbh I'm frustrated. At some level, TWW becomes bookkeeping and NTSH is just better at that than I am. I'm more of a "crazy ideas" guy.
-
@Gully though to be honest we never played with dice. So in a way we're less experienced in that regard than you guys.
-
Well, actually the dice take away a lot of the bookkeeping thing. So I'm not completely boycotting to play you NTSH with dice
About Low Luck on Tech, well, I can see the point of Dice in Tech as well. Just because of the way it works out in Low-Luck, the third Research Center doesn't make much sense, but in Low-Luck it does. Can be frustrating to get blocked by bad Tech Dice, but oh well, that's randomness for you. Can still play around any bad dice.
-
@Gully It would probably be best to see how much of a change dice especially battle dice are before we start the 2vs. 2. So should we start one with the distribution we will have in the 2vs. 2 so me allies and you axis?
-
So how does the TWW Version 2.0 thing work? I downloaded it, but there is no .exe file or I'm blind...
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login