I had played Brush War as my headline on Vietnam in an effort to lessen the blow of the Asia score. But since Syzygy knew what I had in my hand, it was an easy to see what I was doing and take Thailand, making Asia lopsided again.
There are several things I identified as bad plays a couple of turns AFTER I made them. I didn’t headline Red Scare/Purge when I probably should have. My hand in the first turn was a bunch of bad Russian events, so I’m sure I didn’t play them anywhere near optimally. I probably played a little too aggressively with the DEFCON level, leading to a turn where I had to send the Olympics to space to keep from losing outright.
You can play it for influence or realignment without risking the defcon, too?
Quite a terrifying hand you had: I thought I had hit the bottom with a bunch of 1 and 2 ops event and 3 score cards in Mid-War. That prooves it can always get worse!
But what is odd is that I received a note yesterday that my game against borblestump is ready to play. I have no idea who that is and did not invite him. Then that game disappeared from the list and this morning I received a note that my game against broskiier is ready to begin. I also have no idea who that is, but the game is now on my active list.
Maybe those are unrelated to my invite to gamers and the tourney. I’ve no idea. @gumers, if you’re out there, please see if you have a pending invite.
Yes, we are doing +1 this time. There has been at a lot of discussion about what is the right handicap and it’s not a deal issue to my knowledge. Best would be handicaps but unfortunately the Playdek interface is a bit confusing on that point and I was worried we’d have lots of newer players giving the USSR a handicap.
Only if both sides agree. (Not everyone will own it.)
I’ve noticed, in my time with Ascension, that when you issue an invite and the invitee declines, then your game is given an open invite. So it was likely a decline (either time out or intentional) and someone looking for open games hopped on.
Hmmmm…I hope only having +1 won’t tilt this in favor of the people who happen to draw Soviets. I guess it will even out if we’re playing multiple rounds but there’s no real way to ensure people will get to play both sides evenly.
I don’t own Turn Zero so will be sending out vanilla start to Brian Reynolds tonight.
If you look up thread you will see that I proposed the game settings more than a week before it was finalized. And no one raised a concern about the +1 US handicap suggestion. In individual games, luck in die rolls and card selection will have far more importance than the initial +1 or +2 handicap.
Thanks, @tylertoo, that’s exactly what you should have done.
Ended via held scoring card on turn 4. But the Soviet position was strong (+17 VP and control of Europe with Europe Scoring still in the deck). Game went downhill early for the US with some fortunate Soviet realignment rolls in Europe leaving both W Germany and Italy in Soviet hands.
I honestly don’t recall how this happened. We were playing two games simultaneously and both ended with a VP victory at the same time (one ended, I hit the Next Game button, and the second ended). Both were Soviet victories, but the other was on Game Turn 7. Still, I can’t remember what happened in which game. I noticed on review that only three scoring cards were played the entire game: Middle East on Turn 1 and Europe/Asia on Turn 3. And the ME card was a Headline that got the US 4 VP due to Presence in Iran vs zero. I need to look carefully at the log. I will say, the last turn was a tough one: USSR got +2 at the end of Turn 3 for unfulfilled US MilOps, then +3 for We Will Bury You headline, +4 for OPEC and +1 for a successful Brush War to make the VP count +19, and facing a guaranteed -2 VP for MilOps again, the US made the very reasonable decision to take a die roll shot at Summit, but lost. Good game, @Left_Empty - maybe you can fill in some details.
I won’t comment much, as I was caught in the same blur as well!
For the whole game, I felt like I was trying to patch various holes in the world’s fabric with my little hands, while @Brooski was leisurely strolling around the map, scoring VP now and then. Although definitively one-sided, it was a very stimulating game, from my side.
I remember vividly only a few things:
Brooski’s opening move on turn 1 with Socialist Governments, which was the equivalent of a strategical impalement. I was to spend a lot of my time and resource trying to prevent Red European domination, which I failed to do on time of course. I then proceeded to aim for my own domination, thinking I was making a fair menace while in fact, much of the world scene was on fire and a menace to me by then.
The worst streak of wars. I triggered the Korean War* event when it was 4 for the USSR/2 for me. I needed the influence, but still, how could I think that gamble was worth it - of course, I lost the war. What did I do next? How about triggering the Israel-Arab one - but this time, I am the Stratemaster and I will take Lebanon using the card’s ressources for an advantage to turn the… nope.
I’ll rationalize the following by claiming now it was because of the shock of the Korean fall, but I failed to see the Asian theater for the opportunity it may have held for me.
Overall, I feel the hands didn’t screw either of us - if anything, I think I had the better cards - and we both had a lot of bad luck on our rolls, which is always fun!
It is a joy to play the game in such conditions. A lot of Brooski’s moves where just multilayered pieces of hurt, and trying to think of what to do next was always very exciting. This is also because this game is sooo good (I bet none of the people in this thread knew that) : being able to set short, little goals to make the game exciting even when it is nearly lost for yourself is just tremendous design.
@Syzygy I know you said @tcgamer was a friend of yours and would be out a few days. I went ahead and sent an invite today. Any idea when he’ll be available to start?
