<< Back to General Forum   Search

Posts 1 - 19 of 19   
Analyzing a Game: 8/29/2015 12:13:17


Diplomatic Immunity 
Level 54
Report
So here's the game:

https://www.warlight.net/MultiPlayer?GameID=9363411

What do you guys think would have changed the game? What could I have done to win?

I really want to improve in Warlight so any advice would be appreciated.

Cheers
Analyzing a Game: 8/29/2015 12:36:01


Sephiroth 
Level 60
Report
i would have surrendered on turn 10 instead of forcing my opponent to play until elimination
Analyzing a Game: 8/29/2015 12:50:14


Diplomatic Immunity 
Level 54
Report
Turn 10 didn't look like a lost at the time, more like Turn 14-15
Analyzing a Game: 8/29/2015 12:51:58


powerpos
Level 48
Report
Not fighting over Caucasus, less fighting over SouthEastAsia, more expanding.
Analyzing a Game: 8/29/2015 13:00:22


ps 
Level 60
Report
just looking at picks, you are completely ignoring the first turn bonus in africa and pick number 3 in SEA makes no sense, it takes 3 turns to finish a +3 and will put you headed into an area you will already be present in because of the picks in scandinavia. would have made much more sense to pick 3 in africa for countering FTB or in south/central america for safety with expansion.
Analyzing a Game: 8/29/2015 13:13:50


Diplomatic Immunity 
Level 54
Report
powerpos: Can't really expand when my bonuses are right next to Caucasus. Seems pointless.

ps: I'm not great at picks, so I didn't see the ftb. I guess that I'll have to look out for similar situations. Thanks for pointing it out.

Edited 8/29/2015 13:17:45
Analyzing a Game: 8/29/2015 13:37:17


Min34 
Level 60
Report
On the game itself:

I agree that your number 3 doesn`t make sense at all. Takes three turns to complete and there are no real expansion options.

On turn 1 you deploy in Sweden, but you do not move. I hope that this was a mistake (you forgot to attack). If you did it on purpose please explain.

If you had attacked norway and you hadn`t wasted armies on SEA you could`ve had Scan and Greenland in turn 3. I`m positive that you could`ve finished Greenland earlier (If you had only deployed in Greenland you could`ve had it in the second turn if your leftovers were good) than that you took it.

In other words, even if your picks weren`t that great, you still didn`t get the full potential out of them, your income could`ve been higher earlier on in the game.

You also should try to keep expanding (if 3v2s always work this is quite easy) and not focus all your armies into the fighting. You put all your armies into fighting since turn 4. You knew the income was close. Try to calculate how many armies you are going to need to make a certain move (if the move is even necessary) and try to invest more into expansion.

This is where the next problem with your picks begins; The expansion options aren`t that great. You know he is in Caucasus, so you can`t take russia. The only things that are left to take are Europe and Canada. Those take a long time and quite some armies. Try to pick places that are better for expension
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In general

Your SEA pick was bad and cost you the game. SEA gives no expansion, but also doesn`t make sense in combination with your 1 and 2 on this board. If your enemy is in one of the russias (I think you could expect him to be) you are in a bad position. Your pick in Scan already connects you with Russia, no need for SEA at all.

Besides that, leaving SA, CA and Afrika open while there are no Wastelands in any of those bonuses is bad. The expansion is great and with the wastelands in asia and Ant it is also harder to counter. Why did you leave this area open?
Analyzing a Game: 8/29/2015 13:40:49


Min34 
Level 60
Report
you are completely ignoring the first turn bonus in africa


Do you think it is worth to go for this triple pick PS? Cameroon looks quite dangerous in that scenario. I think it would be interesting, but it wouldn`t suite my playstyle.

Should you expect your enemy to go for it? There is a chance they didn`t see it (it is not the most obvious FTB) and even if they saw it the risk from Cameroon might be to big to even consider going for it. Any thoughts?
Analyzing a Game: 8/29/2015 14:01:40


ps 
Level 60
Report
Do you think it is worth to go for this triple pick PS? Cameroon looks quite dangerous in that scenario. I think it would be interesting, but it wouldn`t suite my playstyle.


in this case no because it could be easily countered from cameroon like you mentioned and middle east would be hard to secure against russia picks. but in either case you need to have a foot in africa in case your enemy goes for it (either FTB or just 1 pick with expansion possibilities), you need to be there to block him or take those safe expansions yourself if he is not there.
Analyzing a Game: 8/29/2015 14:16:30


Diplomatic Immunity 
Level 54
Report
On turn 1 you deploy in Sweden, but you do not move. I hope that this was a mistake (you forgot to attack). If you did it on purpose please explain.


Yeah this was a dumb mistake I made, I noticed it just as I committed but he had already taken his turn so I couldn't modify.

If you had attacked norway and you hadn`t wasted armies on SEA you could`ve had Scan and Greenland in turn 3. I`m positive that you could`ve finished Greenland earlier (If you had only deployed in Greenland you could`ve had it in the second turn if your leftovers were good) than that you took it.

In other words, even if your picks weren`t that great, you still didn`t get the full potential out of them, your income could`ve been higher earlier on in the game.


This is true, and the kind of advice that really helps. I'll remember it for future games.

This is where the next problem with your picks begins; The expansion options aren`t that great. You know he is in Caucasus, so you can`t take russia. The only things that are left to take are Europe and Canada. Those take a long time and quite some armies. Try to pick places that are better for expansion


Again, advice I can really use, thanks.

Besides that, leaving SA, CA and Afrika open while there are no Wastelands in any of those bonuses is bad. The expansion is great and with the wastelands in asia and Ant it is also harder to counter. Why did you leave this area open?


I probably should have picked in better options for expansions and gotten around the map more. Something to improve on.

Thanks for all the advice :)
Analyzing a Game: 8/29/2015 14:17:25


Diplomatic Immunity 
Level 54
Report
On turn 1 you deploy in Sweden, but you do not move. I hope that this was a mistake (you forgot to attack). If you did it on purpose please explain.


Yeah this was a dumb mistake I made, I noticed it just as I committed but he had already taken his turn so I couldn't modify.

If you had attacked norway and you hadn`t wasted armies on SEA you could`ve had Scan and Greenland in turn 3. I`m positive that you could`ve finished Greenland earlier (If you had only deployed in Greenland you could`ve had it in the second turn if your leftovers were good) than that you took it.

In other words, even if your picks weren`t that great, you still didn`t get the full potential out of them, your income could`ve been higher earlier on in the game.


This is true, and the kind of advice that really helps. I'll remember it for future games.

This is where the next problem with your picks begins; The expansion options aren`t that great. You know he is in Caucasus, so you can`t take russia. The only things that are left to take are Europe and Canada. Those take a long time and quite some armies. Try to pick places that are better for expansion


Again, advice I can really use, thanks.

Besides that, leaving SA, CA and Afrika open while there are no Wastelands in any of those bonuses is bad. The expansion is great and with the wastelands in asia and Ant it is also harder to counter. Why did you leave this area open?


I probably should have picked in better options for expansions and gotten around the map more. I realise after looking back on the game leaving it open wasn't smart. Something to improve on.

Thanks for all the advice :)
Analyzing a Game: 8/29/2015 14:20:36


knyte 
Level 58
Report
Let me (or another person with the ability to do so) know if you want to make Custom Scenarios based on some particular stage of the game so you can replay this out and test out other strategies.
Analyzing a Game: 8/29/2015 15:10:46


Diplomatic Immunity 
Level 54
Report
Thanks for the offer Knyte, I might just do that.
Analyzing a Game: 8/29/2015 15:19:09


[IM]YouMustBeKidding
Level 58
Report
Triple picking in Africa is very bad here and this is not because of a Cameroon opponent.

- Don't attack 2 neutrals with 2 (or 1)
- Don't forget attack stuff
- Apart from that I agree that (given your number 1+2) your number 3 lacked map control.

Edit: Most obvious choise is Scandinavia + South America + Central America

Edited 8/29/2015 15:21:35
Analyzing a Game: 8/30/2015 02:18:23


Potatoe
Level 57
Report
Hello, Diplomatic :)

Thank you for the thread <3

Now I'm not claiming to be an expert on this game.

I'm going to analysis your game.

To Improve, On this game you need to have the hunger to improve. You have shown this in this thread which is a good step in this. This what you need to do to improve at anything so good job.

Here we go :)

Picking - We aren't here to be nice. Want to improve get hard on yourself.

Your picking is as if you don't know what to do..

Scandiavia is good pick.

South-East Asia is horrible pick. Takes 3 turns to take.

Greenland.. Horrible takes 3 turns to take.

Central America - Fine.

West Russia - No Point.

Central Russia- No Point.

These are all in the wrong Order. Your #5 and #6 should be your #4 and #5 and Central America should be #6.

Your picks lost you this game and I don't see the point in analysing everything if you are losing games at this stage.

So I'm inviting you to Invite me games to 1v1 Strat where we can discuss boards and improve you and I strategy in Picks.

Your picks Lost you this game. Plain and simple. So lets Improve this first?

The offer is there :)
Analyzing a Game: 8/30/2015 02:50:43


Potatoe
Level 57
Report
Also here is a response I gave to a player who is losing games alot..

"SuperSeizure I played you in a game which I won and you just said "gg" and moved on to the next game.

PROBLEM - I think you just go from one game to another hoping to improve and now you feel you need to make a thread as you feel your not improving.

There is no point in playing game after game after game and not knowing where you went wrong... I was a 1300 player when I was first ranked about a week ago... I kept working up and down.. Losing to top players in the ladder and managing just about to win against low-rated players.

Now I am a 1450+ player at the moment. I've increased by 150 points in a sense rather I keep it that way is to tell in the future.. But how did I get up there?

Everytime I lost a game I go over it. Doesn't matter if it was luck or skill.. I will always look over here is a few examples that I've learnt from and made sure I didn't do it the next time.

Example 1. https://www.warlight.net/MultiPlayer?GameID=9360471 If I controlled Xinjang I would've defended my 2 valuable bonuses... Now I know that if I go for a combo there.. I control that territory before I take a bonus from my combo.

Example 2. https://www.warlight.net/MultiPlayer?GameID=9360543 I went for coral coase + South Austrailia. Which I learnt is a very unsafe combo and has made realise to watch for counters which are likely to be taken.

Example 3. There is no example 3..On that same page of my past games there is a 8 man tournament I won and 5 RT Ladder games in a row when I dreamed of just winning 3 in a row. That is the reward of self-analysing.

I will tell you another story.. I never felt comfortable with picking or my gameplay. Played against this guy who is a top guy. We spoke for about 3 hours playing 3 strategy games.. One of them was analysed fully.. Made completely rethink my picking strategy. He answered questions about "What if scenarios"..

So I started this RT Ladder last week. Was 1300 rated. Now I'm 1450+.. With a 8 man tournament won and have a comfortable rating with 1900 not ranked of course in 1v1 ladder.

You can improve... Anyone can. You just have to force yourself to improve. "

This can apply here.
Analyzing a Game: 8/30/2015 03:13:48


MindPalace
Level 55
Report
+1 to Platinium, the most important part of improvement in thinking games is about reviewing and trying to find all the little misteps and what you could have done to improve your play by a little, and it is the sum of these little things that lead to the real improvement. Not that asking for other's help is bad, but to truly understand why you should or shouldn't make a particular play, reviewing by your own is a must. That said, according to your play in this game, I believe you could also learn a lot from the few great warlight strategic guides, starting with this one:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B024HXqzvoGCejhhajNFa1ZOVlE/edit

P.-S. Thanks to Odin for the awsome guide ;)
Analyzing a Game: 8/30/2015 03:58:43


Diplomatic Immunity 
Level 54
Report
Platinum: I take all advice I can get, even if it's harsh. It'll help me improve.

It seems picks are one of biggest downfalls in most games. After reading through various guides and taking advice from those here and in games, I've managed to at least spot what won't give any advantage, most of the time.

I appreciate the fact that you're willing to advise me through some scenarios in game, and I want to use that to improve.

I'm trying to make analyzing my games a habit to see where I went wrong and what the opponent has done to beat me.

Again I appreciate all the advice and it'd be great to discuss some scenarios in-game. :)
Analyzing a Game: 8/30/2015 04:03:18


Potatoe
Level 57
Report
Come and invite me to games and we can discuss the pick strategy! Offer is there :)
Posts 1 - 19 of 19