Welcome, Guest -
(Log on)
| 10 Jun 11 UTC | Spring, 1901: Sorry I wasn't able to respond instantly. You still online? |
| 10 Jun 11 UTC | Spring, 1901: Yes I am. |
| 10 Jun 11 UTC | Spring, 1901: We will remember the tenets of 1v1 play, build parity. You must not build less than your opponent, or you will lose. |
| 10 Jun 11 UTC | Spring, 1901: ok, so my issue with GvI is of the first 54 games, 35 were one by Italy and 19 were won by Germany Since then 95 have been won by Germany and only 33 were won by Italy. So our objectives through these tests should be 1) See what players were doing wrong with Germany to give Italy such a strong start 2) Determine why the stats turned around so quickly Other then that we need to determine what are the best opening moves. The two best GvI players use different openings for Germany. So we need to test both the German standards. As for Italy, the current tactic clearly fails, but every experianced IvG opens the same way with Italy, and ends up loosing, so we need to examine what is wrong with this tactic and why people keep using it. Thoughts? |
| 10 Jun 11 UTC | Spring, 1901: Indeed. I will attempt to make a common Italian open move. Please start. |
| 10 Jun 11 UTC | Spring, 1901: "We will remember the tenets of 1v1 play, build parity. You must not build less than your opponent, or you will lose." Exactly, in most peoples opinion the most important territory on this board is Tyrolia. With it, a Germany can prevent a build in Venice and an Italian can prevent a build in Munich. However this is not always the case, as examined by my last GvI game, Italy had control of Tyrolia the entire game, and was building 3 units per turn while Germany was only building 2. So why did Germany win? |
| 10 Jun 11 UTC | Spring, 1901: As for openings, there are two popular German openings (sorry this is my last post before finalizing): Munich-Burgundy and Munich-Tyrolia. Which should we test? |
| 10 Jun 11 UTC | Autumn, 1901: Just choose one at random. |
| 10 Jun 11 UTC | Autumn, 1901: Let's all make obvious moves now. |
| 10 Jun 11 UTC | Autumn, 1901: interesting opening, most people move Rome to Apulia and then convoy it to Greece... However I have never seen that strategy pull off a win... |
| 10 Jun 11 UTC | Autumn, 1901: As for build parity, I have realized it gives the Germans an advantage. The Italians have to match the German builds in order to win, but the Germans are allowed to fall behind... |
| 10 Jun 11 UTC | Autumn, 1901: I tried that too, but it seems to violate the rule of build equality. Maybe the popularity of the Lepanto IS the problem. |
| 10 Jun 11 UTC | Autumn, 1901: Then again Tuscany also violates that principle. The only one that really is non-violating is Rom - Ven, Ven - Tyr. |
| 10 Jun 11 UTC | Spring, 1902: exactly, every time I have done that opening and not see it countered (as in blocked in Tyrolia) I have won (except for once when I took Greece instead of Tunis with my fleet in Ionian) |
| 10 Jun 11 UTC | Spring, 1902: The German army in Tyrolia was unavoidable. Now let us see how weak that makes Italy. |
| 10 Jun 11 UTC | Autumn, 1902: The game continues...the Build Parity rule stands. |
| 10 Jun 11 UTC | Autumn, 1902: However the most succesful opening for Germany is Munich-Burgandy, not to Tyrolai. I thinking Italy having Marseilles instead of Germany gives Italy an advantage. However that advantage is lost by a weaker front in the Balkans... |
| 10 Jun 11 UTC | Autumn, 1902: To which there exists a counter, Rom - Ven Ven - Pie. |
| 10 Jun 11 UTC | Autumn, 1902: and already Germany has the advantage with the additional unit and double the sc... |
| 10 Jun 11 UTC | Autumn, 1902: Don't be so sure yet... |
