|Page 1 of 1|
|Author:||Placid [ Fri Dec 17, 2004 5:56 pm ]|
|Post subject:||Placid's Replays|
In this thread I'll post some of my more interesting replays to date (both wins and loses), and I plan to add more as time goes on. Any feedback concerning the strategies/tactics used by either player in these games will be helpful for everyone reading. I'll include a short blurb for each game myself.
Edit: I manually named most of the earlier replays excluding the game number and total number of turns, but now the Mac version of MA allows me to name them automatically with all the standard info.
|Author:||Placid [ Fri Dec 17, 2004 6:10 pm ]|
Here they come, three at a time...
ANT - Placid(W)-Arkangel(L)
In the NE, my opponent invades a $2 neutral with his $3, but my resistance there lasts basically the whole game. I have an ally just across the small straight, and support my guerilla guard tower on a peninsula with rocket launcher fire from my ally across the water. This works well.
On the southern end, Arkangel invades a neutral with a disclosure of LAVs and mortars, but I surprise him with a bunch of rocket launchers, which quickly turn his offensive into a retreat, and when my RLs don't have an ideal attack on this ally, they just turn the other direction to pound on another one of my opponent's nearby disclosures.
WASS - Placid(W)-MENTOR Donut(L)
In another thread, Wasserland replays were requested by Quitch. I'd like to see more of them as well, since this map does seem to require the most different sort of playing style. So here's the beginning of my own Wasserland contributions, one of the most recent games on this map I've played:
I'm PL and I hit Donut hard from the start, quickly grabbing a $4 neutral. My tritons zip around aiding my battleships in sinking his smaller naval forces before he could group together a navy of any significant size. This replay demonstrates the value of mobility on this map.
EM - Placid(L)-Tiger(W)
After being pounded by Tiger several times in my first few games, I finally try a game against him where I play the PL, hoping I might at least stand a chance. And, in fact, I did stand a chance. This game was really very close.
However, several little errors on my part compound to produce a negative result for me: Tiger gets indemnity from one of my countries, and right about the same time, I should be getting indemnity from one of his next door...a fair trade, and then it looks like I have the advantage around the rest of the map. But what actually happens? Several times, I am just a hit-point or two away from taking this country from him, but I can't eliminate every unit.
After Tiger gets indemnity, he starts hitting me harder and it becomes obvious that I can't clear the country and would ultimately lose. I play it out, and my only satisfaction comes from the fact that the neutral $3 Tiger invaded on the first turn produced one particular guerilla mortar who destroyed, well, a lot of units.
Additionally, I don't think I transported quite as efficiently as I ought, and that could have well made the difference in this game...if units could have moved only a few hexes faster then Tiger's troublesome SA may have been fully defeated and the tide turned.
|Author:||Placid [ Fri Dec 17, 2004 6:40 pm ]|
NP - Iceman67(L)-Placid(W)
This game begins as a contest of "who can grab the most neutrals the fastest." We both have the vast majority of our SAs all in one portion of the map, so we are trying to overwhelm neutrals as fast as possible while using distant guerillas to delay one another. I am able to grow my income with more speed, and when we finally meet in battle (particularly the naval battle in the center of the map), I have superior and better coordinated forces.
Because our $4 countries were actually very close to one another, I saved my high disclosure until after his units moved out of the area. This was a good move, as he probably could have overwhelmed my $4 early on if he knew it was my SA. My opponent did make several tactical errors, including losing a loaded transport or two.
EM - MortonHQ(L)-Placid(W)
My opponent is PL and invades my secret ally with a powerful force on his first turn. Not good. With an interesting "guerilla exchange" move shortly thereafter, my opponent applies some serious pressure. However, I clear out a neutral $3 sooner than he anticipated via a guerilla transport in this exchange, and I think this is the key move that turns the tide in my favor.
NOB - Placid(L)-Rocklizard(W)
Rocklizard beats me soundly. Notice his nice guerilla move early in the game: he recruits a transport and uses a double-transfer of distant amphibians to nail my battleship. Impressive. I should have seen it coming, but I didn't. Lesson: considering the array of guerilla transport possibilities is important. Rocklizard takes me out pretty easily with some tricky tactics along the way (e.g, in one swift stroke, he leaves my planes with nowhere to fly and no units to protect, even though plenty of my units were nearby).
As an aside, it was nice to see Rocklizard sending me several taunting messages throughout the game; wargames are always more fun when "verbal diatribes are not only allowed, but encouraged.*" But apparently these messages don't show up in the replays. Of course, I don't send anyone messages at present, but that is because the buggy Mac version I'm using garbles them, not because I wouldn't like to try to mess with my opponents' tempers.
*A quote from my Risk manual...
|Author:||Placid [ Fri Dec 17, 2004 6:51 pm ]|
ANT - Goatman(L)-Placid(W)
Early in this game I make a dumb decision to invade my opponent's $3, and worse, he spots the fact that I left a rocket launcher too close to his borders; thus, he promptly deploys a guerilla rocket launcher himself, and continues to demolish the remaining LAVS left in my ally. At this point it looks like I'm going to lose badly, and I was about ready to surrender.
But I'm glad I stuck it out! Slowly but surely I grind up my opponent's forces which he somewhat recklessly throws at my artillery. He didn't really have a good plan to deal with my rocket launchers and guard towers; they ended up costing him a lot. Interestingly, my opponent has far more income than me almost the entire game, but it is because he takes so many casualties due to the use of this income that he ends up surrendering. He probably would have won with some better micromanagement/tactics and more coordinated attacks.
BIZ - Placid(W)-Manko(L)
Some say Bizzaria is the most "chance-based" of the maps, essentially boiling down to where the starting positions turn out to be. Perhaps this is largely true. However, I think that disclosing well in Bizzaria takes a good bit of skill, particularly in the initial disclosure. To even stand a chance, you have to take some risks. You simply can't cover all your borders (naval transports can go right around a LAV line). In this game, I think that both Manko and I take reasonable risks. The initial turns of this game are instructive. My opponent loses his gamble, though.
ANU - Placid(W)-Melkiot(L)
My overall strategy is good enough to make up for several mistakes in this game. Melkiot is to be credited for his nice guerilla move that destroyed my battleship in the NW; he laid a trap and I cluelessly walked right into it.
My other "rookie mistake" was saving up $2 in a completely empty conquered country that could have been Melkiot's SA. Sure enough, he discloses it as his SA, immediately regaining control and my $2 treasury and this takes a little pressure off of him at the point of my main attack. I knew this type of disclosure could happen "in theory" and told myself I'd guard against it, but isn't it striking how experiential learning really drives the point home?
In spite of these blunders, I whittle down his $4 and eventually get his $18 indemnity and because I'm advancing on other fronts as well, he surrenders.
|Author:||Placid [ Fri Dec 17, 2004 7:21 pm ]|
NP - Arkangel(W)-Placid(L)
Arkangel does some interesting mini-navy recruiting with several guerillas in the beginning of the game. Things are pretty even for a while, but I just didn't foresee how hard and perpetually Arkangel was going to slam me at his main attacking point, nor did I foresee how well he would block my main attacking point from doing anything useful (I probably should have bought a carrier for my planes which just sat there due to his good defense...) All around well-played by my opponent.
EM - Placid(W)-Drakenfeld(L)
My opponent's $3 and $2 quickly invaded two adjacent countries, one of which was my SA. It is always a more dangerous to allow guerillas to aid one another... I deploy 2 guerilla towers, and 2 towers as my SA disclosure. I can see that without the help of his two invading SAs, I will win the rest of the map, and that 4 towers will require a more concentrated assault than my opponent can afford to launch without neglecting the rest of the war.
Looking back, it probably would have been better to get 3 towers and 2 mortars or 4 LAVs so I could move a some units from my SA into the adjacent neutral with the single guerilla tower. At any rate, the four towers worked very nicely. There was little he could do about them, except for slowly bomb them (and this is what he ends up doing after I destroy a cluster of approaching LAVs).
WASS - Placid(W)-Tiger(L)
I finally beat Tiger. An $8 transport mistake on his part was probably the most significant factor in this outcome, so I can't claim grand strategical insight. Still, my playing was pretty solid.
|Author:||Placid [ Fri Dec 17, 2004 7:34 pm ]|
ANU - Placid(W)-Maelstrom(L)
My opponent and I face off in a serious land and naval battle right at the center of the map, though there are a few much smaller fronts elsewhere. We both make silly mistakes, e.g., we take turns surprising each other with transport-boxing SA disclosures like a couple of newbies. (Again, isn't experiential learning amazing?)
NOB - Placid(L)-Roth(W)
Roth applies pressure to my $4 early on, and pinches my naval forces nicely. The game is still somewhat close for a while, but I think I make a major mistake later in the game: after I capture the neutral $4, I move my troops away too quickly, and Roth easily grabs a foothold, blocking valuable revenue.
BIZ - melkiot(W)-Placid(L)
We played this game fast, taking turns every 10-20 minutes. I probably should have won this game based on our initial disclosures, but melkiot manages to get an early indemnity from one of my countries with some smart tactics (he chose to only half-destroy several units, preventing me from pushing my units with full health into the battle, and then finished the helpless half-destroyed units off in the next turn). Simple enough, but I wasn't expecting this move, and this indemnity is surely the turning point.
|Author:||Placid [ Fri Dec 17, 2004 10:35 pm ]|
Though this is one of my earlier games on Anubis, it is interesting. I am in control basically the whole game, but my opponent does keep me alert and takes advantage of my mistakes. E.g., I carelessly lose some planes due to his SA disclosure in the capital. I think I intended to move them before ending my turn but neglected to actually do so. (Not to excuse my silly failure, but as a related issue, sometimes I forget about moving planes because I don't see them as a "dot" on the map since one's capitals already appear as a dot. Anything that could be done to help with this situation? Maybe these planes could be included in the "do you want to move/bomb" message that you get for planes that have enemy troops in range?)
ANT - Placid(W)-ChrisCraven(L)
I have the PL advantage and make good use of it. Once I invade one of my opponent's SAs with a bunch of LAVs, his disclosure of all LAVs and mortars just begs for an artillery death. I simply keep a couple of LAVs in the country, and his slow-moving troops are peppered as they advance toward my RL/mortar combo, never reaching their destination. Similarly, with RLs and mortars functioning well, I turn his two invasions into retreats in the center and the south. Note especially that mortars don't always need a LAV line to be a better unit selection than tanks or LAVs.
WASS - Placid(W)-Whitehawk(L)
Wasserland games are always interesting! My opponent invades my $4 on first turn, but I disclose a ton of LAVs and catch his invaders by surprise. Meanwhile, my three lows in the north take a neutral $4. I nail a couple of transports with guerillas early on, making this game a fairly speedy win. Additionally, this replay demonstrates why it is a bad idea to invade partially wooded countries with amphibians.
|Author:||Mrakobes [ Sat Dec 18, 2004 5:01 am ]|
are all those games already finished?you should not post if they are going...
|Author:||Placid [ Sat Dec 18, 2004 9:24 am ]|
are all those games already finished?you should not post if they are going...
Yes, all these games are finished as you can see in my battle list here. Sorry if I didn't make that clear (though I am curious, what got you thinking they might not be completed?).
|Author:||Placid [ Sat Dec 18, 2004 11:54 am ]|
A few more...
ANT - Placid(W)-nblawat(L)
Okay, you might notice a pattern here... The RL/mortar combo strikes again. Think of the mortar being used here as a short-range mini-RL. In conjunction, the two units can destroy slow units before they ever even get a chance to get close enough to attack. It just seems that people don't anticipate this $6 guerilla choice (I haven't had it used against me yet), and it has been very effective for me in games so far, especially on Antarticus. It is a far better choice than a RL + 2 LAVs, for example (which I have seen used from time to time). Since it generally costs at least $6 to deal with this combo (e.g., a bot + transport could take it out), a slow-moving $2-country invasion is going to be significantly delayed at best, or often completely stopped and even turned around into a retreat. Anyway, maybe this combo is old news to many folks, but here's another replay clearly displaying its power against an intelligent opponent.
WASS - Pitor(W)-Placid(L)
In this game versus Pitor, I make a $11 transport mistake early on, but the game still seems reasonably close for a little while. However, Pitor does some wise retreating to regroup, which takes away any possibility that I could gain an indemnity from his $4, and soon it becomes clear that I am going to lose.
WASS - Placid(L)-Shura-by(W)
Shura-by makes some very creative moves in this game. Note early on the effectiveness of his guerilla naval-land transport combo right into the capital of my $2, with a subsequent disclosure on the other side. This game doesn't last long...
|Author:||Placid [ Sat Dec 18, 2004 10:51 pm ]|
WASS - Placid(W)-Metis(L)
This game is over quickly. I have my offensive forces present when they need to attack and then move them efficiently. When my opponent threatens, I take effective defensive positions.
I believe my opponent's main mistakes are invading a $4 and a $3 where my SAs can clearly support the guerillas. Thus, the guerillas are just extra cash for me to spend right at the beginning of the game, which aids me significantly. There are other factors too: My opponent put his amphibians in too much danger as the initial invaders. At one point, he recruits 4 destroyers to deal with a battleship; I simply move out of range and ignore the slow-moving ships.
EM - Placid(L)-GreenRiver(W)
This is one of the best games I've played on Emerald so far, lasting 19 turns total. My opponent and I are almost dead even for a long time, but he ends up edging ahead and ultimately claiming victory.
Probably my biggest mistake was using too many tanks and not enough artillery. I think I would have been better off with more LAVS and an extra RL or couple of bombers.
NOB - Porutchik(L)-Placid(W)
Serious amphibian fun here. With the help of a few transports, I pull amphibians from several countries to unite with other naval forces in one swift motion to win a naval battle near the beginning of the game, and after this I'm just in clean-up mode. (By the end of the game, I have roughly 20 amphibians running around...)
|Author:||Donut [ Sun Dec 19, 2004 9:07 am ]|
|Author:||Placid [ Wed Dec 29, 2004 12:58 am ]|
NOB - Placid(W)-MENTOR Gleb(L)
My opponent's early invasion of a neutral $4 with his $3 is risky, and with a little artillery and support from my adjacent $2, I turn the tables on this attack. Upon my adjacent disclosure, I think he probably should have just blocked the revenue in the $4, and taken his forces elsewhere and/or maintained a more defensive posture so the battle would take longer and he would suffer fewer casualties. As it actually happened, I destroyed the mass of tanks he threw at me with little trouble.
NP - Mrakobes(L)-Placid(W)
This game is intense from the start - my opponent and I both invade a $4 on our first turn. I invade the NE $4 more or less out of necessity since I have the "boxed in" $3 country in the NE. Upon my invasion, my opponent reveals his adjacent $3 to assist the guerillas. (I think he made a mistake here by using his guerillas to attack immediately and choosing offensive troops for his SA. If he had opted for a LAV-heavy defensive setup near his $3 border, his resistance could have lasted much longer.) Next, I disclose a $2 behind his $3, which keeps his available cash busy and unable to help the $4. Hence, I slowly win this front (and also do well in the NW).
On the other hand, my opponent invades a $4 in the SW with three of his own $2s assisting. With my guerillas and the help of a nearby $2 ally, I put up significant resistance with LAVs and a battleship, also quickly bringing a few amphibians to help out. I think I make a few mistakes with my SW $2, but I make progress more quickly against my opponent in the other areas of the map than he does at this main attacking point; thus, he surrenders.
NOB - Placid(W)-Mopsoo(L)
This is a good game. My initial disclosure options are limited, so I take the risk to disclose my $2 against a neighboring $4 where two of my other $2 SAs might be able to assist soon. I'm still not sure if this was the best move, but in this case it worked (the $4 turned out to be my opponent's SA). I manage to sustain a block of my opponent's revenue in his $4 due to his somewhat immobile disclosure, but he invades my $2 and takes the indemnity fairly quickly. Further, he pounds on my $3 from two directions right from the beginning of the game.
Nevertheless, my opponent makes two other mistakes later on that play an important part in my ultimate win: (1) he leaves too few troops in his eastern $2, allowing me to gain indemnity and (2) his $3 disclosure is almost useless (he could have more profitably applied pressure to my $4)
|Author:||Placid [ Wed Dec 29, 2004 11:13 am ]|
EM - RMJ(L)-Placid(W)
Here I thought I'd post a flat-out boring game. Why? Just in case anyone is interested in seeing what I consider a "typical" game on Emerald. Though especially interesting games are what I try to post in this thread, they naturally tend to be the exception; this sort of game is the rule. For someone new to MA, seeing a "standard" film like this might be helpful.
I am FNU and play conservatively, winning slowly but surely. My opponent plays well; probably his biggest mistake was invading my SW $2 when I could drive him out immediately (this merely gives me guerillas as quick extra forces to use against him).
NOB - ChrisCraven(W)-Placid(L)
Though I drag this game out for well over 20 turns, the outcome is pretty clear the whole way through: I am going to lose. ChrisCraven plays very well, and when compounded with some tactical errors and faulty judgments about where to concentrate my forces, indeed, I do lose.
Near the end of the game, I finally figure out what my naval transports are good for: synchronized swimming. Well, if I can't send chat messages with this Mac version, the least I can do is taunt the enemy with some synchronized swimming...
WASS - Placid(W)-Vi(L)
This is a Wasserland game that shows the value of commanding the seas. With their outstanding mobility, I quickly mass a slew of tritons and overwhelm smaller naval forces. I also use tritons to form a protective barrier against a transport invasion in my isolated $2 in the NW; note the effectiveness of this move (my opponent's $4 never gets around to actually doing anything the entire game).
|Author:||DIEHARD [ Wed Dec 29, 2004 9:57 pm ]|
|Post subject:||nice play placid|
wishing to play some game with you.
I am trial player, so only can play emerland.
Just play about 25 game.
got some win and some lose.
Maybe can learn something from you a lot.
|Author:||Placid [ Sat Jan 15, 2005 11:50 pm ]|
BIZ - EL DIABLO(L)-Placid(W)
The RL/mortar combo strikes again.
ANU - ChrisCraven(L)-Placid(W)
My opponent could have avoided a lot of rocket launcher mayhem with just a slightly different invasion in the central $3 at the start of the game; e.g., simply have the ostrich cover the northern area where I deployed my RL. Oh, yes...one of my guerilla transports comes in very handy in this $3 country later on too.
I am a little puzzled why my opponent doesn't disclose his two $3 countries earlier. They could have been put to quite a good bit of use and defended each other if I managed to break into one of them. Plus, keeping so many forces in reserve made it difficult for him to mass enough troops to make any real progress...I was only holding back one $2. As it happened, my opponent allowed me to have a sizable army breathing down the back of both of these $3s (I knew a least one had to be his secret ally) before he disclosed either of them.
Additionally, my opponent's main attacking point comes entirely from one direction against the highly defensible southern $3. Despite my bonehead deployment of 5 LAVs here, my defense holds strong against a much larger invading force for the entire game. My opponent really needed a battleship or some other form of support before attempting to slip a naval transport by me. Because of his unit selection, my single amphibian and a naval transport twart his naval invasion plans altogether.
WASS - Placid(W)-Shura-by(L)
As usual, my opponent presents some interesting guerilla challenges to deal with and is skilled at blocking revenues.
However, the key to my win in this game was an early indemnity from my opponent's central $2. Needless to say, my two triton guerrillas from a nearby invaded $3 were not expected to help out - they loaded up in a naval transport, and with some fancy footwork, assisted in the swift destruction of this $2.
|Author:||Placid [ Tue Apr 26, 2005 3:29 pm ]|
It's been a while since I posted replays here... I have plenty of good ones from recent games though, so here is another batch:
NP - CSW (L) - Placid (W)
My opponent quickly gains control over the center area of the map with his carrier and many other supporting naval vessels. Rather than confronting this daunting force, I keep dodging out of range as much as possible, making quick strikes with mobile troops + transports. My opponent keeps me on my toes but ultimately the speed of my maneuvers triumphs over his high-range but slow carrier.
EM - Placid(W) - Pitor (L)
For having a relatively poor starting position and playing as FNU, my opponent still puts up an amazingly tough fight in this game. One of the most intense games I've ever played on Emerald.
The key to my win turns out to be destroying my opponent's unit in the capital of an undisclosed SA of mine that he invaded, and then disclosing that SA in order to kill his three planes there. Although this move might sound simple enough (and often is relatively simple to pull off), it was not easy at all in this case because my opponent clearly saw the possibility coming and blocked several attempts. After much pondering, I eventually devise an unstoppable (but costly) method of attacking the capital. Though the game is still close even after I destroy these planes, I start to edge ahead and my opponent surrenders.
ANU - Well (L) - Placid (W)
Notice the tricky move early in this game to use my invaded $3 to capture my opponent's $2 and get indemnity before he can clean out my $3. Also, thanks to my opponent raising my guerilla forces while I could instantly re-take the country, my $2 in the south did quite a good job holding off enemy forces.
Hmm...as I try to replay this film now, it says it "appear to be broken" after a few moves. Perhaps my updated Mac version of MA has broken some films? Does this film still work for others? Do the other films that people have looked at all work?
|Author:||Placid [ Tue Apr 26, 2005 3:31 pm ]|
This is an older game, but very instructive. I learn a hard lesson in the first few turns: always check to make sure what you think looks like the sea borders of a country are in fact the sea borders of a country. I thought I had a secure shore defense, but to my utter astonishment my opponent slides a heavily armed transport right by my LAVS and into the center of my $3 where he promptly destroys a RL and a mortar! I probably could have held off his forces for a while here if I just would have taken the time to check the actual borders by noting where it is possible to place naval units in the recruitment phase. Well...I won't make that mistake again, or, at least, shame on me if I do.
Nevertheless, despite this initial blunder, the game is close for a while, and as it is said, "he who makes the next to last mistake wins." My opponent accidentally gives me the opportunity to creatively (i.e., via transport fun) re-capture my old $3 back. He was even kind enough to leave me a buck in the treasury to spend on annoying the main battle. The game is now turned definitively in my favor, and it is soon over.
Delicately holding on to my central $3 was important in this game - if my opponent managed to get my indemnity there, I would have been in trouble. I slowly chip away at his mid $4 forces with the combined effort of several of my countries. I also tempt my opponent to disclose his $3, and then clean up the mess with my late-disclosed $4. And to top it off, some battleship + LAV defense works wonders up in the NW.
My opponent could have beaten me if he played things just a bit differently in this one.
One key mistake my opponent made was invading my $4 at a point when I could take the extra $8 in guerrilla forces and immediately apply them to drive him out. Also, my opponent could have applied more pressure to my $4 a little more quickly. These two factors combined, I'm confident that he could have broken into and ultimately taken this country, and with the indemnity and remaining revenue, won the game.
I also caught a loaded transport in a SA in the south, which helped me out significantly. On the other side of the coin, I clearly misplayed my guerrillas in the neutral SW $3, but it didn't matter that much in the bigger picture I suppose.
|Author:||Placid [ Tue Apr 26, 2005 3:36 pm ]|
Early in this game I raise my opponent's guerillas in his $4 with a single LAV. (This should be a clue!) He uses the guerillas to smash this LAV and proceed with his plans...but, of course, I was summoning his guerillas for a reason. I disclose my adjacent SE $3 and proceed to block his revenue in his $4 for the rest of the game. Thus, when choosing guerilla forces, it is important to consider this sort of move and prepare for a revenue-blocking attempt from a nearby undisclosed country. Had my opponent kept some guerrilla units near the rear of his large country, he probably could have thwarted my plan.
My opponent found his $4 in a tough spot, so I gained momentum fairly quickly as I immediately targeted and defeated this large country. My own $4 was able to take an effective defensive position while I worked on this primary objective. Also, note the surprise disclosure in my NW $2.
Both my opponent and I make some careless errors in this game. He loses a few transports, while I let him take back a SA I had already invaded by merely disclosing it and also miss the potential for a very nice land-to-naval-to-naval transport guerilla move my opponent pulls off to take $6 I had saved up and use it against me. Anyway, watch the replay and you'll see.
A few things to note strategy-wise. I had the SE $2 and $4, while my opponent had both of the $3 countries on each side of my $4. Even though he has slightly more income, I overwhelm this side of the map quickly. Many players make the mistake of conservatively disclosing this SE $4 on the first move, guarding against both $3 countries, only to be quickly whittled down and invaded if in fact both $3 countries are opposing SAs, and at least slowed down in attacking if not.
I waited to disclose my this $4. First, I disclosed the SE $2 to see if my opponent would bite and go after it with the $3 in the corner. Sure enough, that was his SA and he left his border to my $4 wide open. Thus, I disclosed my $4 and invaded with full force the next turn. Even though I knew he might have the $3 on the other side, by targeting this corner $3 first, I knew I could take his indemnity before he took mine, and then swing back pendulum-style to liberate my $4 if need be (and then take his other $3 if indeed he had it), and that's exactly what I did. My opponent could have put up a much better defense in his corner $3...I took it very quickly, faster than I usually can take the country as a neutral.
And when it comes to defense, I took an excellent defensive position in the NW. My opponent lost gobs of money for many, many turns trying to take my little $2 which was only a few hexes away from his $4.
|Author:||Vixen [ Wed Apr 27, 2005 2:05 am ]|
Normally viewed (no "broken" message if put the "Skip" button) replays between EM-Placid(W)-Pitor(L) and 58085-WAS-azzzy(L)-Placid(W)-19.rep.
The replay NP - CSW (L) - Placid (W) is broken.
There are replays of more early posts are have another format (it may to see visual difference in signature of replay file) and not loaded at all.
Could you try recreate theirs and attach again?
--- edited ---
It seems need just cut first 128 byte in any hex-editor for normal viewing.
Ps: The replay 49208-ANU-Placid(W)-Silicor(L)-12.rep at fact is xxxx-NR-Snowman-Placid.rep
|Page 1 of 1||All times are UTC - 5 hours|
|Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group