First off, I apologize for the big letters in the post above, I was trying to do numbered points and I guess I should've previewed it first.

Anyways Ruth, what are your thoughts to what I said and/or your response to what Szeweningen is suggesting? What do you think of specific deployments/strategies? I really feel like this needs to be a turn we hammer out collectively as a team and make it count cuz I think it's gonna be a crucial one so even cursory thoughts would be good and maybe we can pass some ideas around.

You're right, we need backup from other players, because from this turn on it is unlikely we'll get significantly more bonuses. At this point it is clear we have to break some of Impaller's bonuses to convert the advantage to the victory. Since he has some counterchances we have to pick the direction of the attack correctly. I'd love to hear from other players about the details or variation of my proposition. There are tons of variations in how to prevent caucasus from being taken (because it also is a potential threat if we neglect it) and how to defend west russia. Generally my proposition is a solidified bet that Impaller won't attack Moscow (because it seems very unlikely to me that he chooses such a risky tactic), but it'd be nice if someone who actually played against Impaller on a regular basis can tell us if it's possible.

The problem with Imp is that he's able (and likely) to pull off any of our "worst case scenario" moves. He sees almost every option that we see and is smart enough to know what we don't think he'll do and then do just that. That is ultimately why I'm so torn with the different options we have available to us cuz no matter what we do, Imp is likely to either counter it or pick something up elsewhere, it's pretty rare that he'll go a turn without gaining some kind of positive edge.

I agree with your sentiments regarding Africa. I think one of his most likely moves is to load up there, let us hit him, attack late in behind us, potentially take W Africa and border us in S America. That being said, if we load up a bunch of troops in Africa to prepare for that and then he just concedes it and deploys elsewhere to cause damage we could be in pretty rough shape. He only has a 3 and a 4 in Africa right now and it may not be worth it to him to invest a lot in defending those when he can push to crack our other sets instead and make an even trade while spreading elsewhere.

I think we for sure need to take Hawaii but again I'm really torn on how heavy we need to take it. If he has the same idea of taking Hawaii this turn then we probably wanna go bigger than smaller but if he isn't planning on taking it then any armies we send there (let's say above 5) would just be a waste that we could use elsewhere.

I really don't like the fact that he touches everything we have in W Russia and I think he is clever enough to at least try throwing a couple armies around there to try and take that set from under us while protecting us from doing the same in Caucasus.

Let's remember we do have a +5 Card if we feel the need to gain an extra couple troops for any plans this turn. I've left it out of the majority of my options as they're not really big deployment specific and I thought we could save it for a turn or 2 (we should still be ahead of Imp in card pieces by 2 or 3 if I remember correctly?) other than option #3 where the entire premise of the turn is to load max armies and hammer Arkhangelsk.

The main question is what is the counterchoice for every of our moves. For my option it is going heavy to Moscow and taking west russia, but since he's commited in africa, I was positive he wouldn't try that (because in that scenario he fold the whole africa). If you want to save the card we could forget deploying 1t to west russia and taking alaska, but still it's a risky bet. Still, I'd like to post my official option 5:

1. Fold scandinavia, take alaska, take hawaii with major forces, advance in africa, border india and china, consolidate in west US, use reinf. card:

Use reinforcement card +5, Deploy 4 to British Columbia, 10 to Nigeria, 10 to California, 1 to Vorkuta, 7 to Eastern Kazachstan

Attack 12 from California to Hawaii, transfer 3 from Texas to Southwest, transfer 1 from Rocky Mountains to Southwest, transfer 1 from Rocky Mountains to Great Basin, transfer 1 from Great Plains to Great Basin, transfer 1 from Pacific Northwest to California, attack 33 from Nigeria to Chad, attack 4 from British Columbia to Alaska, attack 2 from Moscow to Ufa, attack 7 from Eastern Kazachstan to Tadschikistan.

Oh, and one more thing, Impaller is running out of ways to attack us, Antarctica is blockaded, in africa we are the dominant side, going through scandinavia is slow, so there is a possibility he tries to go through Hawaii, he could do major damage from there, so going for Hawaii should be the top priority for both offensive and defensive reasons.

Sounds good Szeweningen, I'll add your orders to the vote as option #5.

Guys, please join the discussion, because the status now is that my option has only 1 vote (mine) and has currently the best rating. It is supposed to be The World vs Impaller...

Last day for voting! Get them in!

Hey guys, I meant to post this earlier but in lieu of what Ruthless was saying about the long weekend and the complexity of this next turn (not to mention the total of 2 votes we have at the moment...), we've opted to let it run another week and will be tallying votes as of Saturday nite (Sept. 10th) and will have the new turn posted by Sunday (11th) or Monday (12th).

Would definitely like to see some more discussion/voting on here. It seems like once we started getting into the gritty turns, no one wants to speak up but these are the most important turns in a game that could use as much deliberation as possible.

Just bumping the topic, so that those more lazy players can see that this turn is still not over;)

It's like you can almost hear the crickets...

Has everyone else just given up on this game then?

No, I simply thought the same idea I would have used was already out, and nobody posed an argument against it, so I didn't feel the need to say anything. But here I am!

I like #5. At least that's the best one I see. If anything it would only be tweaks to that one (order of the moves, deployment amounts), but the strategy is what I see that will work.

True, but those tweaks are kind of important. For example the attack in caucasus is also a bit risky. For example if Impaller tries to take Caucasus we can be in trouble, because he may weaken our forces and we won't take 4 in Tadschikistan (if we get a late order) or, if we get no luck at all, we may take 4, but he takes behind us and strikes from india. That is actually an important point to discuss. Should we forget about alaska and reinforce the attack in caucasus? I still stand behind the option I gave, but that is something we should collectivelly consider.

Been busy catching up with things after the vacation, I will read up on the last few moves and post my thoughts later as soon as I find the time.

Thanks for moderating this game, Eitz. It sure is entertaining.

Hmm Eitz?
I kind of find it hard to follow up on the different options that were suggested by you and others. The game gets more and more complex and the number of orders per turn constantly grows, I believe that's why you get so little feedback here.
Instead of the descriptions, would it be possible for you to generate a screenshot for each option? Just like the outcome screenshot you post every turn? Simply hack in the orders for each variant and make a screenshot of the confirmation screen (but make sure you don't hit commit accidentially!)
This wouldn't even be more work for you, since you could skip writing detailled descriptions and could just refer to the screenshots?

Option 5 sounds most reasonable to me, the only problem I see with it is that we should divert more than 1 armies to Western Russia to make 100% he won't get it.
If we succeed in taking Hawaii we might even consider clearing that blockade in Central America. That will cost us ~8 armies and will thus pay off on the 3rd turn already. It will compensate us for the potential loss of Scandinavia.

I was personally considering that while posting my option, but I didn't see from where could we safely take those 3-4 extra troops (we already use a reinforcement card). The options are:
a) don't take Alaska, and deploy those 4 in vorkuta

I'm not a big fan of this for the following reasons:
- we have surprisingly little intel on the exact Impaller location in Asia. Still eastern Russia is unlikely, but possible.
- we saw that almost every turn Impaller was using a substantial portion of his income to expand in Asia, so he was flexible and he could try to launch an attack through Japan-East Russia-Alaska. Still very unlikely, but possible.

b) take it from California
Reasons were mentioned before, it is very likely he'll make at least a scouting expedition to Hawaii and since it is one of the most important routes to attack for us I would prioritize this

c)Take 3-4 from Africa deployment
Probably the best out of 3 options, but without those 3-4 troops there is also a possibility that we won't get a net income on the africa attack (in case he loads up there)

Actually I had a thought in the meantime, there was surprisingly little discussion on the attack in Caucasus. There is also one more threat, Imp deploys in india and china, hits Tadchikistan late with 9-10 and tries to take Caucasus from benind and Kyrgyzstan from China. So, since Tadschikistan has 4 troops, did anyone consider my option 5 with attackinh Kyrgyzstan instead of Tadschikistan? I'm quite torn here, Tadschikistan is a natural target, but maybe a bit too obvious. What do you guys think?

It is a gamble ... will he predict us NOT to deploy heavily in Western Russia and/or Caucasus?
We might end up losing Western Russia or even Caucasus, but if we don't, we can pressure him next turn in Asia.
I was thinking: if we really give up Scandinavia, we might as well move those 14 in Moscow out of the line of fire to Ufa first move this turn, so we have control over Caucasus in Georgia and the two Khazakstans next turn?

I really like the idea.

Maybe we should post options 6 and 7 which are modified nr 5, both transfering to Ufa on first turn, and one of them would take Kyrgyzstan instead of Tadschikistan. I'd like especially the last one.

Diabolicus: Thx for the recognition =) Unfortunately, it's actually Fizzer who inputs the orders that we vote on into the game and it would be a significant amount of extra work (not to mention direct coordination with Fizzer) to make snapshots of the possible orders a reality. If it makes you feel any better, I have to be the one to stare at the screen right at the beginning and write down all of the orders you see without the aid of any kind of useable playing system to work with =P That's why I try to make the orders as clear and easy to follow as possible.

Regarding the current discussion: it's impossible to really know what Imp's gonna do with every piece of deployment he has. I like the orders you currently have set for option #5 and don't necessarily like the idea of changing the Tad attack as it gets us to border India and W China with still a foothold in Caucasus. Yes, Imp could take that hard but I think it's unlikely and probably worth the risk.

I also don't really like the idea of moving the troops too far away from Moscow. Even if we concede Scan in the near future, we definitely don't want him getting into Greenland and we'll likely need those troops there to be able to push back.

The only viable option I see if you want to add troops elsewhere would be to take away from the Alaska attack and maybe do that next turn (altho I do think that we should head that way at some point even if it's only to protect our Canadian border better).