Conquer Club

Game 2894372

In the above game I was subject to being called a dipshit by the person to whom I am going to explain my move too, unfortunately this will waste some of my time this morning as being a "Field Marshal" I thought he would of been able to work this out for himself but apparently not. So get out your risk boards as I go through this step by step (I hope those that are interested in a little insight on how I think will comment as I would like to know if I deserved to be called a "dipshit" or is this simply an oversight of play by our said "Field Marshal")

State of Play, Start of round 10. (Set value 55)

I have 8 in the Ukraine
19 in the Congo
I Have 1 card
Due 3 reinforcements

Green has 9 on the middle East
Owns Australia with 6 men holding it (3 on Western A.)
3 men on India
1 on Siam
He has 3 cards
Due 5 reinforcements

Scott-land
Owns the rest of the World (1man on most territories with 1 maybe 2, territories with 3 men)
With 17 men sitting on China
He has 1 card
Due 17 reinforcements

I have 2 Options in my opinion

1.
Try to kill Green which if I make it, I can not cash (4 cards) and am very week for Scott, or if I don't make it, have weakened Green so as for Scott to deploy his 17 reinforcements and walk over the winning line.

2.
Hope Green does not have a 3 card set. From Congo (19 men) +3 reinforcements attack Scott taking 13 territories including S.America up through N. America and back in to Europe(all single men to leave me with 15 territories[+5]) reinforcing Ukraine with any men I had left.
I only ended up being able to fortify 1 from Scandinavia to Ukraine.

I took option 2 which left the game As I wanted

Green has to deploy 5 reinforcement and take a card (leaves him with 23/24 men)
Scott-land has to try taking green out as green would now have 4 cards.
Scott has 17 men on China plus his now 7 reinforcements = 24
This gave me a good fighting chance with 9 on the Ukraine plus my 7 reinforcements all I want is for Scott-land to come close but not to eliminate green

Unfortunately Scott must of had very bad dice and did not come anywhere close to the kill and I was left with a mountain to climb and did not succeed.

I believe this was a very well worked tactic and strategy and would appreciate an apology from Scott-land for his "Dipshit" comment.
I would like other players opinion's, did I make the right play or not?

Thanks for your time,
Lordhaha.

sounds about right but being a field marshal probally thought he deserved the points more than a lowly ranked colonel 'his tactics being far superior to yours' cough cough..........

You made the right move for yourself but your moves cost Scott a win so outbursts like 'dipshit' are too be expected. I'd have prolly said worse.

Looks like your chances to win the game were very small no matter what. That being said, it appears you made the move that gave you the best chance to win.

Hotdoggie wrote:You made the right move for yourself but your moves cost Scott a win so outbursts like 'dipshit' are too be expected. I'd have prolly said worse.

yeah, when I beat him in an 8p he hired Rashid to bully me too

Kemmler wrote:

Hotdoggie wrote:You made the right move for yourself but your moves cost Scott a win so outbursts like 'dipshit' are too be expected. I'd have prolly said worse.

yeah, when I beat him in an 8p he hired Rashid to bully me too

Get your facts straight. Nobody hired anybody to bully you. A player outside the game called it like he seen it.

Bruceswar wrote:

Kemmler wrote:

Hotdoggie wrote:You made the right move for yourself but your moves cost Scott a win so outbursts like 'dipshit' are too be expected. I'd have prolly said worse.

yeah, when I beat him in an 8p he hired Rashid to bully me too

Get your facts straight. Nobody hired anybody to bully you. A player outside the game called it like he seen it.

either ways, he HATES losing. and he hired you too.

Ok now I that read the OP, I will just say all the players in these games are very intense most of the time. The "dipshit" comment as you put it was not that harsh at all. Weather you agreed on strategy or not is another story. Remember most all of these players in these 2500+ games want to win at all cost. People get mad over games. Yes everybody gets mad sometimes. Especially right after the fact. Now lets not pile on here. There are 2 sides to a story, so lets hear the other side, or even someone else from that game. Btw if you think Dipshit is harsh your skin is not that thick.

Kemmler wrote:

Bruceswar wrote:

Kemmler wrote:

Hotdoggie wrote:You made the right move for yourself but your moves cost Scott a win so outbursts like 'dipshit' are too be expected. I'd have prolly said worse.

yeah, when I beat him in an 8p he hired Rashid to bully me too

Get your facts straight. Nobody hired anybody to bully you. A player outside the game called it like he seen it.

either ways, he HATES losing. and he hired you too.

Everybody who gives 2 cents about this game hates losing. Now if your play was good, then so be. If your play was crap and you won that is a different story all together. Lets keep this on topic and not a bashing thread. I think what you are trying to get across is the same point LordHaha was bringing up. I took a quick look at the game chat and looks like Green did not make such a smart play and then got rewarded for it.

Ha Ha I dont know if it was the correct play because I had been well hung by then but I do know whose terrible earlier play had put both them and me in an awful position.....err yours !

Scott and Rashid both cry anytime you attack them and/or dont let them or prevent them from winning a game.

My skin is much much thicker than that, and no I am not here to bash Scott-land this is not "flame wars" in fact I admire a player of that rank. I simply want to make sure he understood the way I was thinking and see did other players agree with my play. There is no hard feelings from my side against Scott-land and my revenge for the "dipshit" comment will be to aim to beat him with the strategies I use and deploy in the future.

let me preface this by saying both of these guys are my friends
(and i hope they still are after this post)

the issue is not whether lord made a mistake in judgement or evaluating position
the point is no one should be spoken to that way.

when i am attacked in ways i dont like i will try (not always successfully) to
say your move is ill advised ,.unwise , shortsighted . poorly considered etc.

Scott is really clever in analysis, far better than 99% of players here , and he might very well
see move as unwise, blatantly foolish, or glaring obviously poor but that doesnt justify name calling.

i would add though that scott is not a hypocrite he calls himself names when he errs

so, a call for restraint- attack the move not the player.
let's give each other a little patience and respect.


steve

haha I was not referring to you when I was talking about bashing. As you can see others have gone off topic here. You know it takes a lot for a person to post the moves a player took for all the world to see, well all of CC who reads the forums. Any move can be criticized if you do not win the game. Even if you win your play can still be called into question.

steve066 wrote:the issue is not whether lord made a mistake in judgement or evaluating position
the point is no one should be spoken to that way.

when i am attacked in ways i dont like i will try (not always successfully) to
say your move is ill advised ,.unwise , shortsighted . poorly considered etc.

Scott is really clever in analysis, far better than 99% of players here , and he might very well
see move as unwise, blatantly foolish, or glaring obviously poor but that doesnt justify name calling.

so, a call for restraint- attack the move not the player.
let's give each other a little patience and respect.


steve

Generally you would correct, but you yourself say you blow up sometimes on people. Everybody does it. Some more than others. If a player does not like the fact another player called him a "dipshit" then that player can leave a lower rating for attitude. Simple as that.

JOHNNYROCKET24 wrote:Scott and Rashid both cry anytime you attack them and/or dont let them or prevent them from winning a game.

Maybe but they dont put people they lose to on ignore and they dont prey on noobs in 1 v 1 freestyle games.

JOHNNYROCKET24 wrote:Scott and Rashid both cry anytime you attack them and/or dont let them or prevent them from winning a game.

exactly. and so do you.

lordhaha wrote:Game 2894372

In the above game I was subject to being called a dipshit by the person to whom I am going to explain my move too, unfortunately this will waste some of my time this morning as being a "Field Marshal" I thought he would of been able to work this out for himself but apparently not. So get out your risk boards as I go through this step by step (I hope those that are interested in a little insight on how I think will comment as I would like to know if I deserved to be called a "dipshit" or is this simply an oversight of play by our said "Field Marshal")

State of Play, Start of round 10. (Set value 55)

I have 8 in the Ukraine
19 in the Congo
I Have 1 card
Due 3 reinforcements

Green has 9 on the middle East
Owns Australia with 6 men holding it (3 on Western A.)
3 men on India
1 on Siam
He has 3 cards
Due 5 reinforcements

Scott-land
Owns the rest of the World (1man on most territories with 1 maybe 2, territories with 3 men)
With 17 men sitting on China
He has 1 card
Due 17 reinforcements

I have 2 Options in my opinion

1.
Try to kill Green which if I make it, I can not cash (4 cards) and am very week for Scott, or if I don't make it, have weakened Green so as for Scott to deploy his 17 reinforcements and walk over the winning line.

2.
Hope Green does not have a 3 card set. From Congo (19 men) +3 reinforcements attack Scott taking 13 territories including S.America up through N. America and back in to Europe(all single men to leave me with 15 territories[+5]) reinforcing Ukraine with any men I had left.
I only ended up being able to fortify 1 from Scandinavia to Ukraine.

I took option 2 which left the game As I wanted

Green has to deploy 5 reinforcement and take a card (leaves him with 23/24 men)
Scott-land has to try taking green out as green would now have 4 cards.
Scott has 17 men on China plus his now 7 reinforcements = 24
This gave me a good fighting chance with 9 on the Ukraine plus my 7 reinforcements all I want is for Scott-land to come close but not to eliminate green

Unfortunately Scott must of had very bad dice and did not come anywhere close to the kill and I was left with a mountain to climb and did not succeed.

I believe this was a very well worked tactic and strategy and would appreciate an apology from Scott-land for his "Dipshit" comment.
I would like other players opinion's, did I make the right play or not?

Thanks for your time,
Lordhaha.

most if not all high ranks are very competitive and hate losing, so not uncommon for some to bark at poor moves or what is perceived as a not so good play if it cost them the game, heck, at one time, we all had people yell in our ear for making mistakes in the game, happens a lot more in singles 6 to 8 players it seems, i had my fair share of some yelling at me or questioning my moves, differences of perception of strategy.

try not to personalize and move forward, they are good guys that have a passion for competition and winning.

Blitzaholic wrote:

lordhaha wrote:Game 2894372

In the above game I was subject to being called a dipshit by the person to whom I am going to explain my move too, unfortunately this will waste some of my time this morning as being a "Field Marshal" I thought he would of been able to work this out for himself but apparently not. So get out your risk boards as I go through this step by step (I hope those that are interested in a little insight on how I think will comment as I would like to know if I deserved to be called a "dipshit" or is this simply an oversight of play by our said "Field Marshal")

State of Play, Start of round 10. (Set value 55)

I have 8 in the Ukraine
19 in the Congo
I Have 1 card
Due 3 reinforcements

Green has 9 on the middle East
Owns Australia with 6 men holding it (3 on Western A.)
3 men on India
1 on Siam
He has 3 cards
Due 5 reinforcements

Scott-land
Owns the rest of the World (1man on most territories with 1 maybe 2, territories with 3 men)
With 17 men sitting on China
He has 1 card
Due 17 reinforcements

I have 2 Options in my opinion

1.
Try to kill Green which if I make it, I can not cash (4 cards) and am very week for Scott, or if I don't make it, have weakened Green so as for Scott to deploy his 17 reinforcements and walk over the winning line.

2.
Hope Green does not have a 3 card set. From Congo (19 men) +3 reinforcements attack Scott taking 13 territories including S.America up through N. America and back in to Europe(all single men to leave me with 15 territories[+5]) reinforcing Ukraine with any men I had left.
I only ended up being able to fortify 1 from Scandinavia to Ukraine.

I took option 2 which left the game As I wanted

Green has to deploy 5 reinforcement and take a card (leaves him with 23/24 men)
Scott-land has to try taking green out as green would now have 4 cards.
Scott has 17 men on China plus his now 7 reinforcements = 24
This gave me a good fighting chance with 9 on the Ukraine plus my 7 reinforcements all I want is for Scott-land to come close but not to eliminate green

Unfortunately Scott must of had very bad dice and did not come anywhere close to the kill and I was left with a mountain to climb and did not succeed.

I believe this was a very well worked tactic and strategy and would appreciate an apology from Scott-land for his "Dipshit" comment.
I would like other players opinion's, did I make the right play or not?

Thanks for your time,
Lordhaha.

most if not all high ranks are very competitive and hate losing, so not uncommon for some to bark at poor moves or what is perceived as a not so good play if it cost them the game, heck, at one time, we all had people yell in our ear for making mistakes in the game, happens a lot more in singles 6 to 8 players it seems, i had my fair share of some yelling at me or questioning my moves, differences of perception of strategy.

try not to personalize and move forward, they are good guys that have a passion for competition and winning.

Thats spot on Mr Blitz
These things tend to even out but a pattern of particularly good or bad play soon becomes apparent, we all know who the consistently good players are.

lordhaha wrote:Game 2894372

In the above game I was subject to being called a dipshit by the person to whom I am going to explain my move too, unfortunately this will waste some of my time this morning as being a "Field Marshal" I thought he would of been able to work this out for himself but apparently not. So get out your risk boards as I go through this step by step (I hope those that are interested in a little insight on how I think will comment as I would like to know if I deserved to be called a "dipshit" or is this simply an oversight of play by our said "Field Marshal")

State of Play, Start of round 10. (Set value 55)

I have 8 in the Ukraine
19 in the Congo
I Have 1 card
Due 3 reinforcements

Green has 9 on the middle East
Owns Australia with 6 men holding it (3 on Western A.)
3 men on India
1 on Siam
He has 3 cards
Due 5 reinforcements

Scott-land
Owns the rest of the World (1man on most territories with 1 maybe 2, territories with 3 men)
With 17 men sitting on China
He has 1 card
Due 17 reinforcements

I have 2 Options in my opinion

1.
Try to kill Green which if I make it, I can not cash (4 cards) and am very week for Scott, or if I don't make it, have weakened Green so as for Scott to deploy his 17 reinforcements and walk over the winning line.

2.
Hope Green does not have a 3 card set. From Congo (19 men) +3 reinforcements attack Scott taking 13 territories including S.America up through N. America and back in to Europe(all single men to leave me with 15 territories[+5]) reinforcing Ukraine with any men I had left.
I only ended up being able to fortify 1 from Scandinavia to Ukraine.

I took option 2 which left the game As I wanted

Green has to deploy 5 reinforcement and take a card (leaves him with 23/24 men)
Scott-land has to try taking green out as green would now have 4 cards.
Scott has 17 men on China plus his now 7 reinforcements = 24
This gave me a good fighting chance with 9 on the Ukraine plus my 7 reinforcements all I want is for Scott-land to come close but not to eliminate green

Unfortunately Scott must of had very bad dice and did not come anywhere close to the kill and I was left with a mountain to climb and did not succeed.

I believe this was a very well worked tactic and strategy and would appreciate an apology from Scott-land for his "Dipshit" comment.
I would like other players opinion's, did I make the right play or not?

Thanks for your time,
Lordhaha.

what you did, did give you a slight chance. if i had've had to go to 5 cards you might've got lucky, but what you did after that didn't tally.

you took my 8 out of western europe and s europe. so if i did have to wait till 5 cards for a set, you had just made it very easy for scott-land to take me out.

I had 16 to take out 18 and decided that you having 4 card prob. had a set, so tried an auto attack on your 8 in Western Europe that failed miserably. lost 13 to 5 if I remember correctly. Last chance saloon and all that.

Instead of justifying your ridiculous plays, at least 3 that game alone, look inward and learn from your mistakes- apologize then move on.

Scott-Land wrote:Instead of justifying your ridiculous plays, at least 3 that game alone, look inward and learn from your mistakes- apologize then move on.

everything is a mistake to you when you are attacked or lose.

JOHNNYROCKET24 wrote:

Scott-Land wrote:Instead of justifying your ridiculous plays, at least 3 that game alone, look inward and learn from your mistakes- apologize then move on.

everything is a mistake to you when you are attacked or lose.

A lot of truth in that statement JR- more than you realize but I don't expect you to; considering that a very small percentage of your total games are multi-player singles.

Scott-Land wrote:Instead of justifying your ridiculous plays, at least 3 that game alone, look inward and learn from your mistakes- apologize then move on.

Obviously scott, you're a brilliant player. I think we all can recognize that. I'd have probably made the same move he made at that particular point in the game as as I'd like to learn to be better could you explain why its a particularly bad move at this point?

Thanks
B