Gamers' Lounge :  forum
Arrange meeting times for new games, discuss past games and strategies, socialize with other players. 
Pages: PreviousFirst...23456789101112...LastNext
Current Page: 7 of 29
Re: --- Results 3v3 ---
Posted by: acro ()
Date: June 08, 2009 08:36AM

I am not one for documenting things for the sake of it, but this was an awesome game so has to go on here.

Map: Scotland (sixamplayer) Saxony (tic-tac) Muscovy (Xerxes)
Leon (acro) Sardinia (Hubert) Cyprus (LNO)

Sixam found the map and it started with Xerxes assuring us it would be a very quick game and a bit of a waste of time, but I, being acro, would not take no for an answer. So the brave players took their spots in south and the game began.

There would some odd starts: acro and LNO moved out fast, while the other four players all struggled with tough forts and rebellions. After not long, tic-tac looked to be dominating the map and quickly made contact with both Hubert and LNO, though cleverly kept a buffer between himself and acro. It wasn't looking good for Hubert: despite some help from LNO, he got lots of pressure from above, and Tripoli was extremely annoying with its rebellions. Meanwhile, acro was putting a lot of pressure on sixamplayer and developing very fast, but couldn't really help in the centre.

Towards mid-game it really could have gone either way. tic-tac still had a good hold on lots of europe, Xerxes was giving LNO a good battle. I was still much more developed in the west and did not stop farming throughout.

Hubert left and was replaced by Zox and it seemed as though south were making progress: acro got England/Holland a few times and both LNO and acro were helping out a little with tic-tac. Eventually acro stopped farming and made an attack on Saxony one year, taking the cap in summer. We decided to play on, though the next year it was over as acro stormed through to Scotland and LNO/Zox took Saxony once more, despite Xerxes' best efforts to help out a bit more in the dying stages. At this point it was clear south had definitely won.

Ended about turn 40, really awesome game.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: --- Results 3v3 ---
Posted by: LikeNoOthers ()
Date: June 08, 2009 09:20AM

Yeah, it comes around the game good enough.. But, you said i was off with a good start.. That is true.. But having mostly prim lands +0 is hard to use and get armies from

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: --- Results 3v3 ---
Posted by: empError ()
Date: June 08, 2009 11:23AM

I'll keep on documenting for a while. Might potentially give some interesting stats in the end.

Ulster (pippo) - Saxony (SwiftDominat) - Muscovy(or Lith?) (hst)
vs.
Aragon (LNO) - Roma (empError) - Crete (godzilla801/jenny)

pippo seemed a bit noobish, in farming his cap very late, and later farming it to 60k developed. LNO got the better there, and helped me in attacking SwiftDominat. Godzilla (or was it jenny already?) also had a run through Poland and Brandenburg. Hst got strong vs. Crete, though. Swift had no chance to advance, and jenny, LNO, and SwiftDominat agreed that the game was over. I think that was right, although hst might still have had a chance to turn it around. We must have been around turn 25, when players left, considering south to have won. There was no unanimous agreement to concede, though.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: --- Results 3v3 ---
Posted by: LikeNoOthers ()
Date: June 08, 2009 11:45AM

no chance to win that game for north

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: --- Results 3v3 ---
Posted by: empError ()
Date: June 08, 2009 01:23PM

Ulster (sixamplayer) - Hanover (hst) - Lithuania (LNO)
vs.
Grenada (arf) - Corsica (Squeegie) - Nicaea (empError)

LNO had a very bad start, and hst's wasn't too good either. Nevertheless, hst got up on his feet, and soon pushed Squeeg back. I missed how that happened, but I guess he got some good support from 6am. Soon hst took Dalmatia, and he ravaged through Macedonia, proceeding to destroy the ensuing advancement in Byzantium. That kinda ruined my game.South hung in for a long time, but it was clear that both Squeeg and me were struggling, and only arf had enough strength to put up with his opponent.

South conceded turn..., I guess 40 or so.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: --- Results 3v3 ---
Posted by: empError ()
Date: June 12, 2009 08:14AM

Ulster (Thomas) - Saxony (empError) - Lithuania (mason)
vs.
Castile (oddjob) - Roma (limbo) - Nicaea (IceQueen)

Both Thomas and mason turned out to need guidance. Thomas farmed his cap in turn 10 or later, and mason never advanced his. Ice soon decided not to attack me, to make things not too hard for me. Oddjob took England in turn 25, and after some taking Holland, and some skirmishes at Lux and Burg, he also relented (if that's the proper term). Thomas took Sweden from me, and Finland from mason, without notice. Limbo got stronger than me, and mason and me conceded. It was past turn 40 by then.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: --- Results 3v3 ---
Posted by: empError ()
Date: June 17, 2009 10:59AM

Wales (empError) vs Muscovy (Xerxes)
Grenada (Hubert) vs Dalmatia (dannyray)
Tunis (LNO) vs Palestine (hst)

Both Palestine and Tunis looked tough, before playing. LNO had some bad luck vs his neighbors, in particular Algiers. I also experienced trouble gaining control over the coastal lands, and Xerxes was twice as big as me, soon after the start. With Hubert progressing through Provence, LNO could progress to Macedonia. Hst used his time to advance Egypt, and soon worked up till Tripoli, which he got while Tunis was empty, in turn 17. As the west looked bad, overall, it conceded in turn 17.

The map would probably be fairer with Aquitaine or Burg instead of Grenada, which basically took away Tunis's backlands.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: --- Results 3v3 ---
Posted by: Master ()
Date: June 17, 2009 11:10AM

castile or Aragon would be better since Palestine sucks as well.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: --- Results 3v3 ---
Posted by: empError ()
Date: June 17, 2009 12:34PM

Ulster (?forgot, maybe hst or Xerxes?) - Saxony (Kobra) - Muscovy (master)
vs.
Grenada (arf) - Rome (Squeegie) - Nicaea (empError)

Bad start for Kobra, and Squeegie soon put high pressure on Saxony. Master saved the first cap attempt, which was before turn 20, from Bohemia. Master's helping out in center, together with some first moves, gave me the opportunity to roam master's lands.

A bit later north conceded, I guess around turn 30 at the latest.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: --- Results 3v3 ---
Posted by: empError ()
Date: June 17, 2009 12:40PM

Ulster (Kobra) - Saxony (Xerxes?) - Musc (master)
vs.
Leon (empError) - Corsica (hst) - Nicaea (Squeegie)

Bad start for hst, but he recovered well. My start was also bad, but was balanced by Kobra's equally bad start. I couldn't help letting a few of Kobra's troops slip through to hst. Master got the better of Squeeg, and soon added to hst's misery. Turn 33, I think, south conceded.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: --- Results 3v3 ---
Posted by: empError ()
Date: June 19, 2009 11:00AM

Ulster (IceQueen) - Saxony (sixamplayer) - Muscovy (Tonkietjai)
vs.
Grenada (Riolu) - Corsica (empError) - Nicaea (ee)

I gave some advice to Riolu, as he appeared to be quite new to team games. Around turn 25, he took England with a 40+ army, and moved to Holland, to take Saxony in winter. The game continued for a few turns, and wasn't decided yet, but in turn 30 6am had to leave, and north decided to concede. In the east, ee appeared to be outplaying Tonkietjai.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: --- Results 3v3 ---
Posted by: Hubic Hair ()
Date: June 19, 2009 10:26PM

I couldn't sleep tonight so I took ALL the matches that have been posted in this thread, crammed them into the ranking equation I came up with, and viola, this list appeared:

Name - Points - Win/Played

Icequeen - (1407) - 5/6
Noble ---- (1311) - 4/6
Ibg ------ (1309) - 5/7
Paars ---- (1292) - 5/8
Sixam ---- (1293) -11/18
Nen ------ (1284) - 9/13
Kobra ---- (1281) -11/19
LNO ------ (1260) - 9/14
Gratis --- (1258) - 4/6
Adriano -- (1253) -11/20
Osetsky -- (1245) - 3/7
HST ----- (1241) - 4/7
Sirbela -- (1240) - 3/5
Ghost ---- (1237) - 4/7
Squeegie - (1237) - 3/6
Hubert --- (1236) -12/20
Jenny ---- (1236) - 3/5
Master --- (1233) - 4/7
Jbf ------ (1215) - 3/8
Xerxes --- (1214) - 8/14
Emperror - (1210) -39/74
Adrien --- (1210) - 9/18
Acro ----- (1187) - 3/6
Oz ------ (1158) - 2/5
Sargon --- (1150) - 5/12
Izzle ---- (1149) - 3/7
Kenji ---- (1139) - 7/15
Kalle ---- (1111) - 4/11
Xuul ----- (1100) - 2/6
Schopen -- (1012) - 0/6

The formula takes into account your opponent team's average ranking and compares it to yours. Icequeen is far ahead because she consistently wins versus good teams of ranked players. Playing against non-ranked players is equal to playing against players on 1200 points.

The only way to change your ranking is for your game to appear in this thread, so get posting!

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: --- Results 3v3 ---
Posted by: acro ()
Date: June 19, 2009 11:24PM

The key problem with this is that many good players will consciously always pick the worst side, in order to give them a challenge. Quite amusing how emp has 74 games compared to everyone else's 5-20 though.

I doubt there is any real correlation. In fact, I am quite sure that if you kept it up for long enough, most players would tend to somewhere not too far from 50% wins. The variation in maps/team-mates is too big to make conclusions, even over long periods of time, in my personal opinion.

More interesting for me would be map-based statistics, eg ratio of south wins for various different maps. Again the variation in players could have an effect, but with big enough numbers maybe it would be clear to see which is best out of Hanover/Saxony-Roma/Corsica for example.

If you're prepared to crunch the numbers (too boring for me), I'll join emp on the posting.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: --- Results 3v3 ---
Posted by: LikeNoOthers ()
Date: June 20, 2009 11:04AM

Acro, remember who it is that post most posts in here :)

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: --- Results 3v3 ---
Posted by: acro ()
Date: June 21, 2009 12:40AM

Haha, I know LNO, I do understand the reason emp has so many more games. It isn't like I've actually only played 6 3v3s since this started.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: --- Results 3v3 ---
Posted by: MrScientist ()
Date: June 21, 2009 12:47PM

Nice the statistics idea getting finally picked up;
We could for better -read fairer- distribution of people posting,
agree that always, the player in lets say saxony/hanover posts.
If he doesnt or is a noob, the player in cors/rome should do so.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: --- Results 3v3 ---
Posted by: empError ()
Date: June 22, 2009 05:32AM

I always had this statistics-idea at the back of my head when posting, since MrScientist proposed it in the first place when starting this thread. That is also the reason I posted every game I played, from a certain time on, because otherwise I might introduce a bias ('That game sucked, because we had far worse lands, so I'll not post it', etc.).

If we decide on the above, to post every game from now on, I think it is important to stick to that rigidly. So also post bad games, whatever the reason is.

Indeed other statistics will be interesting too, like the strength of different lands, in various compositions. I can imagine that Nicaea would do better when playing with Rome than when playing with Corsica, for example.

And of course, with enough posts, one could even get a reliable interaction effects, e.g. LNO wins most games from all positions, except when he is playing Tunis.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: --- Results 3v3 ---
Posted by: LikeNoOthers ()
Date: June 22, 2009 06:14AM

1, we cant use the list made by Hubert to anything very good.
2, We cant say that Nicaea will be stronger when playing with Roma, than when playing with Corsica. Luck, lands, players.. Too many things aren't being taking into consideration.
3, i still think its smart to post results :)

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: --- Results 3v3 ---
Posted by: empError ()
Date: June 22, 2009 06:54AM

About LNO's point 2:

Of course a lot of variability is introduced due to factors such as luck, and players. But the idea of statistics is that some of the 'random', uncontrolled, variability, will cancel out in the long run. If we'd find out that Corsica wins 560 out of 1000 games, and Rome 500 out of 1000, then we'd have an indication, at least, that Corsica works better. Luck should cancel out. And good players never take Rome, for example, we could in principle make stats about who takes what position, and take that into account.

About LNO's point 1:
The scoring system may be quite arbitrary, there are other possibilities. I'd prefer statistics as Hubic Hair posted them, but maybe without the score added, especially because strong players may tend to choose weak lands. This is probably the reason Xuul is so low in the list - I can only remember him playing from lands such as Portugal and Natolia. A rigid scoring system might induce people to take good lands only, and I'd hate that.

Options: ReplyQuote
Re: --- Results 3v3 ---
Posted by: LikeNoOthers ()
Date: June 22, 2009 07:05AM

Well, my first point: I have seen IceQueens games listed here, and i dont see the reason that she should lead with 100 points..

2, If Rome is there, isn't there a bigger chance that Castile is there too? Imo we cant use these stats for anything.

and, i choose late in 3v3, because i usually goes on the opposite of the best ones in the game. I think many should think about that.

Options: ReplyQuote
Pages: PreviousFirst...23456789101112...LastNext
Current Page: 7 of 29


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.