Massive Assault

Maybe this is an old complaint, but I'm going to "raise
Page 1 of 1

Author:  Arkon7 [ Mon Jun 20, 2005 11:42 am ]
Post subject:  Maybe this is an old complaint, but I'm going to "raise

I am sooooo frustrated at games that get ended on 300% balance on what I want to call "Transport" invasion.

An opponent's ability to attack three (3) neutral countries in one turn and declare victory because he / she lauched a transport into each with a loaded unit and me not be able to raise guerilla is unacceptable to me.

What I describe is theoretical and probably not possible but it gets the point across. Is there not any way that the program can be constructed such that both sides must complete their turn before a victor is determined, such that the game can end only after:

1.) Both sides have completed their entire turn
(Guerrilla / Combat / Recruitment / Disclosure)
2.) The game therefore can only be called at the end of the FNU turn
3.) AND there is no "guerrilla trigger" to the PL player as a result of the FNU turn invading either a neutral or PL controlled territory.

If a participant fails to disclose, that's one thing, but to not be allowed to disclose guerilla just because it happened on move 6 instead of move 1, doesn't make sense.

Surely the above three tests can be readily applied. I'm begging you! Must I make a fool out of myself and become some kind of "Hyde Park Ranting Lunatic" standing on top of my soap box to find satisfaction? Ask my clan mates! They'll tell you what a nuisance I can be! :roll:

And yes, I have heard the objection about FNU refusing to make their move, thereby denying victory, but that is such a moot point considering that PL can finish the game when the time limit is reached.

Author:  Mrakobes [ Mon Jun 20, 2005 12:04 pm ]
Post subject: 

1)this is old MA bug but problem is solved in MA:PR-Domination - in this new version taking control of neutral with unused guerilalz does not change balance at all
2)yes this is not very nice to use this trick but...IF opponent was able to do it this means you are already losing and on low balance..if you are doing okay he wont be able to reach 300% this way.So this trick allows to make inevitable end faster...nothing else.

Author:  deimon [ Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:31 am ]
Post subject: 

I really like this "Transport Invasion@ trick. It allows to quickly finish game in which you already have 150+ balance instead of dull "kill'm all"... IMHO it's not a bug, it's really useful feature that add spice in the game.

BTW I've expiremented around this trick and was able to get 300% at first move with AI, but game wasn't won. In manual it's clearly said:
To win a World War , a player must generate a Balance level а 300% or higher t the end of any turn.
I did it (see replay), but haven't win... Why?

0-EME--AI-2.rep [8.47 KiB]
Downloaded 732 times

Author:  Enforcer [ Fri Jun 24, 2005 4:40 am ]
Post subject: 

don't think u can win until the 3rd turn at the earliest. A restriction in the game.

Author:  Arkon7 [ Fri Jun 24, 2005 1:41 pm ]
Post subject: 


In a majority of the games, I might tend to agree with you, but there ARE cases when that is NOT true. I was involved in a match game on Bizarria, (tough enough of a crap-shoot, as is) vs. a very worthy opponent where first to victory wins. With this strategy, my goal was just to hold off and delay his inevitable victory and "rotate the front line" at my next opportunity. He had made a flanking threat that could have easily be thwarted with a guerilla response and I it was down to analyzing movement of a amphibian unit vs his transport along the edge of the world. Instead, the transport on the right does unload both tanks, invades the neutral and my controlled territory, bringing him over 300%.
Had I acquired guerilla, it would have been moot and we would have been back to a stand-off, while I waxed him on the other game that I will win. The question was only a matter of if I win before he won here.

Your may see it as "moot" but if it is inevitable, then where's the loss in having fun demolishing what's left of the opponents army? I have had literally turned around games on players that have become complacent and taken a 60% position and turned it to victory. Make the fix that is in Domination in MAN and then there are no more issues.

Example of that may hold.rep [19.6 KiB]
Downloaded 706 times

Author:  Mrakobes [ Fri Jun 24, 2005 4:53 pm ]
Post subject: 

oh well....Bizzaria..VERY good example...reasonable and fascinating
i dont have any objections against such examples..

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Author:  deimon [ Wed Jul 06, 2005 6:07 am ]
Post subject: 

But look at chess. If I can make mate on this turn - no matter how many units you have on the desk or how many my units can be demolished during next turn. Such "transport invasion" is the same thing. Everybody can use it and you should keep it in mind. I always check if my opponent can do such invasion and try to prevent it. Also I'm looking for posibility to make such invasion. It gives more fun than dull confrontation. In war all ways are possible! =)

Author:  Arkon7 [ Wed Jul 06, 2005 2:26 pm ]
Post subject: 


Would you feel the same way if someone cut your belt buckle from out of nowhere causing your pants to drop around your ankles, but did not allow your to respond and forced you to walk around the rest of the day bare-assed only because it occurred in the afternoon after numerous prior attempts during the day rather than occuring first thing in the morning when you would be allowed to put on your pants? (*wink*) I know it might not seem to make sense at first, but think about it...

Author:  deimon [ Thu Jul 07, 2005 11:23 pm ]
Post subject: 

Arkon7, if someone become bare-assed he is already shamed - no matter what he will do AFTER that. You should do something BEFORE an evil man cut your belt buckle. For example keep him in distance with shotgun... :lol:

Author:  Arkon7 [ Fri Jul 08, 2005 11:53 am ]
Post subject: 

LOL! :lol: I stand here ashamed and chagrined. I surrender....... :roll:

Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group