Finished: 10 PM Mon 13 Apr 20 UTC
Thanks giving game
1 day /phase
Pot: 150 D - Spring, 2023, Finished
Fall of the American Empire IV, No messaging, Anon, WTA
1 excused NMR / no regaining / extend the first 5 turn(s)
Game drawn

< Return

Chat archive

Country:


12 Feb 20 UTC Spring, 1999: Rip this game I guess
12 Feb 20 UTC Spring, 1999: Quitting before we start? It’ll fill.
12 Feb 20 UTC Spring, 1999: Quitting before we start? It’ll fill.
16 Feb 20 UTC Spring, 1999: GameMaster: Game was extended due to at least 1 member failing to enter orders and having an excused missed turn available. This has un-readied all orders.
17 Feb 20 UTC Spring, 1999: GameMaster: Game was extended due to at least 1 member failing to enter orders and having an excused missed turn available. This has un-readied all orders.
17 Feb 20 UTC Spring, 1999: GameMaster: Someone has taken over Peru replacing "cooleniek". Reconsider your alliances.
07 Mar 20 UTC Autumn, 2005: GameMaster: Texas voted for a Draw. If everyone votes Draw the game will end and the points are split equally among all the surviving players, regardless of how many supply centers each player has.
13 Apr 20 UTC Good game you guys. It was a lot of fun for me. I could've potentially gone for the solo, but I felt that I would've been stopped somehow. British Columbia (Tulkas) you played very well in defending against my attacks as we stalemated and Quebec (Šmajdalf) you did well at contesting my navies in the East, though I would've recommended attacking more as you could've broken through when I did my convoy orders. Overall it was a very good game that was (based on for me) a lot of early game trust. I didn't even put a bet in on this game, I joined the civil disordered Peru from the first phase
13 Apr 20 UTC Oh, and if Mexico (Sexy Wet Magic) is reading, sorry for betraying you, I didn't have any other route of expansion. Also British Columbia (Tulkas), you confused/amused me with some of your around the early 2010s as you supported my fleets as I attacked you
13 Apr 20 UTC I did not expect the game to go as well as it did for me
13 Apr 20 UTC I had a very slow early game expansion and thought that Heartland (Dr. Recommended) was going to win due to his broad expansion
13 Apr 20 UTC Oh! I didn't know you could chat after the game! No worries dude. I would have done the same thing, though I wish we could have talked and coordinated a bit. :) Good game y'all!
13 Apr 20 UTC Thanks for keeping Guerrero green. The Mexican people live on!
13 Apr 20 UTC Gg all.
My appologises Heartland.
I survived thanks to your attacks to California and Mexico.
but then I noticed you were going to defeat easily Quebec while me and Peru were still taking Mexico last SCs. If I hadn't attacked you perhaps I would have taken a better position against Peru, but then you, once Quebec was defeated, would have crushed easily Peru and me and get the Solo.
13 Apr 20 UTC Great game, thank you all.

Peru - I could attack you more but firstly, there was no point in doing so. You had too many units and I had no chance to defeat you. Secondly, I wanted to keep a stable stalemate line and don't risk you breaking through my fragile navy.

British Columbia - great play from you. The stab against Heartland was the thing that put us into a draw, otherwise Heartland would most probably be unstoppable and would solo. Thanks also for the aliance at the end of the game. I really appreciate your ability to decide who is the biggest threat because of soloing (regarding Heartland and Peru mostly).

Heartland - I thought for a while you're going to win this game but the others (mostly BC) were reasonable enough to stop you. Then I realized your stab against me should have come a bit later - we wouldn't be able to stop you then probably.
13 Apr 20 UTC Ouch. Very well-played by the three of you. Despite my early expansion, I never saw a legitimate chance to solo. Of course an NMR etc could have changed that, but I do not plan around them. I saw a three-way draw as my best outcome, and had to choose between stabbing BC or Quebec. There was more room for Quebec to expand than there was for BC, but I was in much better position to sustain an attack on Quebec and that led to my choice to stab him. I hoped that BC, Peru and I could mop up the remaining centers quickly enough to avoid trouble between us, and I was confident that BC and I could contain Peru before he could become a true solo threat. BC stabbed me at a critical time, and it was very effective. From there, my only hope was to fend off the attacks from east and west enough to stay viable while leaving Peru as much access to my centers as possible, in hopes that he would look enough like a solo threat that Quebec and BC would work with me to grind him to a halt. It just never materialized, and I couldn't fight on all fronts. The three of you were steady and relentless. Well done.
13 Apr 20 UTC Heartland (Dr. Recommended), I would've expanded further (and quicker) into your centers when everyone else was invading, but, in this game due to my corner position, my main strategy was defensive, so my main priority was preventing British Columbia (Tulkas) and Quebec (Šmajdalf) from breaking through my lines. If I had expanded more aggressively, potentially I could've split either British Columbia or Quebec with you, but it was a well fought game nonetheless.
Also, though it was not my main viewpoint, I feel that you (Heartland) defended very effectively against Quebec, and only fell after we all ganged up against you
13 Apr 20 UTC Thanks Peru. Yeah, I was hoping you'd be more aggressive, it would have played into my plan - but your defensive, deliberate approach worked for you.

Rematch anyone? gameID=42714