Hi all (MP chat)

Hallo Puzz, CBR, Ra's and Tosa

its been a while, i hope you are all doing fine. I will return to the Sunday mp sessions from tomorrow since gladly my life duties are starting to loosen up.

I got a couple of questions:

1. I noticed in a thread in the Jousting fields that Ra's mentions a return to beta_5 due to random desync problems; is beta_5 the version that i need to wear?

2. I also read about a set of larger maps in a thread here; do i need to install that to play?

Thanks in advance and see you all tomorrow

Noir

Yes install the beta5 and mappack to a clean MTW/VI install and you are ready for Sunday. R'as has also released a small addon https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showt...19#post1649919 but it is not required to play


CBR

:bow:

I smell 4v4's. :2thumbsup:

Probably something of the order of 4 Vs 3 & 1/2 Ra's :laugh4: it's been a while since i last played TW.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Noir

Probably something of the order of 4 Vs 3 & 1/2 Ra's :laugh4: it's been a while since i last played TW.

---

You played well enough. :shame:
I've completely missed that my Yari-Cav was shot at by your Archers. When I realized it it had gone to 36 men. :wall:
It was so nice being able to play without desyncs. Ok, we had the occasional lag but that didn't interfere too much. Now I only need to work on winning games. :clown:

R'as

Thanks Ra's,
i realised that you meant your YC being shot, but i was "trotting" along the battle line to control the reinforcements i've sent against Tomi on the other side of the map and couldn't reply.

Thank you for the games - it was great - after you've retired we played 2 or 3 4v4s i think and 2 or 3 3v3s for a total of 8 hours straight... It was an amazing session even with the moderate lag.

Noir

Seems I missed a lot of Fun. I want the replays.
But it's good to hear that 4v4 worked, too.

R'as

Seems like people were having fun because the guys in Europe stayed up all night playing! I posted the replays: five 3v3 and two 4v4. The final 3v3 has a particularly well executed attack, and was probably the best played game of the night. There were no desyncs or drops except for that one game with Warman. He's going to check for a new video driver. The lag might be being caused by my internet connection. Next week I'll sit out of a game, and we'll see if that clears up the lag.

I finally decided to give Beta 5 a whirl. It's been a long time.
Had to keep 'thinking', been playing RTW and M2TW for so long, a few years now.

Had a great evening/night, yes Yuuki, it was past 2.00am when I went to bed.

Yes it was very long and great session we had yesterday. Lots of good games, good company and chatting :beam:


CBR

Yesterday was great fun, great company, great games. I am sooo glad I was able to get back online to enjoy the afternoon/evening (late night for our Hardcore! European Samurai Warlords). Hope y'all get a good night's sleep tonight, heh.

It was especially nice to have Jochi Khan, Noir/AsanoRin, and Fool join us. Please come again. :bow:

I find myself really looking forward to these meets. :yes:

Cheers, and thanks all.

It sounds like an oxymoron, but I believe is true to say that we are serious about our fun. And that is why it is so intriguing, drawing us back week after week. The Samurai Warlords mod is all about balance. We all have the same money and opportunity for the same units. This places the demands squarely on the player’s skills. And not just their individual prowess, as we play team games, they must excel as team members also.

After this last Sunday, I realize that this to me is the best part. The teamwork is the thing above all else that I enjoy. And I would like to invite any and all who are also serious about their fun, and who also truly enjoy being a member of a team fighting for a common cause, to come out and join us. We have some of the best team players I have ever seen. These guys are the greatest! Come out and see :charge:

Hello Noir.

Quote:

---

The final 3v3 has a particularly well executed attack, and was probably the best played game of the night.

---

Some impressions from that game:
Defenders:
Red - Mori - MizuYuuki/Puzz3D
Fawn - Ryuzoji - Asanorin/Noir
Dark Green - Shimazu - Fool

Attackers:
Light Green - Satake - Masamune
Light Blue - Imagawa - MizuCBR
Blue - Date - MizuTosaInu


https://img297.imageshack.us/img297/3286/39pk0.jpg

https://img213.imageshack.us/img213/5752/41cg8.jpg

https://img101.imageshack.us/img101/2816/46no5.jpg



:bow:

Nice screenshots Ra's,

after watching that replay, i realised why the final phase after the attackers stormed the hill was so extremely chaotic: Fool aided by Yuuki and myself managed to beat back with his melee forces the infantry line of the attackers (Masamune and CBR), however his melee forces (WMs,YS & ND) got spread out at the resulting chase. Tosa's numerous cavalry and relatively intact melee infantry made a final push at that time aided by CBR's remaining infantry and deadly-as-always cavalry.

Fool's forces were isolated while chasing off the retreating Masamune and CBR from my last nucleous of teppo and YS on the hill at that time and were off the hill; they were picked off by CBR, Tosa and later Masamune almost one by one. Notably 1 WM, 2 YS and 1 ND of his were routed and chased off almost full strength. Masamune also rallied just before the edge of the map and came back to finish off with the others.

I realised after watching the replay that it was a very close game - closer than i realised while we were playing. Had Fool's forces stayed on the hill more coherently after the second attack the game would have had another melee phase that the defenders had a good chance of withstanding melee wise and reasonably enough guns to play the end game if needed. Fool played very well; it was indeed true chaos after the 2nd attack and it was impossible to foretell the outcome of decisions made (chase more or not? etc).

Myself and Yuuki lost substantial cavalry and melee infantry to very little enemy losses in the initial skirmish and first attack; Yuuki mainly in the skirmish and me while trying to initially aid the skirmish and later while attempting to "cover" his retreating/fleeing infantry units during Masamune's first attack depicted above.

The 1st attack was very good and quite scary; Masamune moved all his line together and Yuuki's forces as can be seen on the 2nd shot were either retreating or on the run; you can see that he is also commiting all his melee reserves. On the right of the 2nd screenshot 2 ND of mine attempted to slow down the attackers bearing the grunt as well as very few men of my YC that moves to meet Msamune's. BTW that screenshot is probably the last time anyone saw them.

*edit* = Needless to say that Tosa and CBR coordinated with the 1st attack very well. Notice for instance Tosa's Naginata Cavalry that charged my ND and the other that is about to engage Yuuki's WMs. The effect was deadly as the defending forces already outnumbered and half surrounded either routed or got flanked and exterminated to the last. For the truth of that, notice that Yuuki is left with something more than 2 depleted melee units on the 3rd screenshot that covers the shootout after the defenders retrenched on the hill.

It was really a great game as are most on these sessions. I think i can safely say that Samurai Wars mp is the best TW experience that i've ever had and as things look, the best TW experience that i will ever have.

Many thanks to all that worked to produce this exceptional gameplay (with lovely aesthetic touches like the great mons etc) and to all that had the willingness & patience to introduce me into it.

Noir

I did manage to get 759 kills, but it would have been more prudent for me to initially deploy along the line shown in the 3rd image that R'as posted.

I was by far the least effective of our team getting just over 450 kills i think (470?) and so costing us dearly.

The main reasons probably were:

1. I helped the skirmish initially with the wrong unit (HC instead of YC) and almost sacrificed one YC as it arrived to the skirmish too late - i had better saved it.

2. Twice small parts of my melee infantry were anhihilated trying to buy time during the first and second assaults. On second thought it would have been better to keep them tight and commit them with Fool's troops in the second assault.

3. Last but not least my last pocket of men (3-4 teppos and 2 YS) were isolated by Fool's infantry at the chase. I reckon that had our forces stayed closer we had a better chance - but it happen otherwise.

There were plenty of lessons to learn and re-learn for me in that game.

Noir

In my review of replays, I find myself thinking: "Why the heck did I do that?" or "Why the heck didn't I do this?!" It's humorous and annoying at the same time. Really, we can analyze replays up the yin-yang, but making effective use of what we see is a long time coming. Knowing is easy; doing isn't, etc.

During the featured battle, there was one point in the initial cav skirmish where I saw CBR's YC coming right behind me as I charged Yuuki's second YC unit. I decided in a flash to divert my YC's charge, to backstab Yuuki's other YC that was refusing to kow-tow on the far flank (*shakes fist at Yuuki*). I figured CBR's cav would intercept Yuuki's second YC in the flank or rear as it chased me, and we'd get both without big losses.

Unfortunately, CBR saw the farside backstab opportunity at the same time and saw where I was initially headed, and diverted for the far flank as well. As it turned out, my YC got hit in the side as I tried to correct back to Yuuki's second YC, and CBR also slowed and turned. My second YC unit took a bigger hit than it needed to despite eventually driving off Yuuki's YC. CBR ended up getting in a great charge against AsanoRin's incoming support YC--connecting right through the middle of Yuuki's CA, which routed them instantly.

Battle dynamics--when we watch replays we think Gah! it's so obvious! But it really isn't in the heat of the moment. There are only a handful of players I've seen (not that I've played MP nearly as much as some) who eventually develop that "no mind"-ish sense, where in this example, I would intuit what CBR would do, and he would know what I would do. I think this comes with a lot of games played together, and a certain amount of natural blend in style of play.

It was my army's "honor" to be the vanguard of the attack in that battle, but taking my entire infantry line in when I did was not my commander's idea, but my rather opportunistic (some would say "reckless") nature. I'm not a big fan of the long drawn out shooter game--reminds me too much of smoking an entire pack of cigarettes waiting for a pav war to finish in VI. CBR was probably having heart palpitations when he saw me go in with everything, heh.

I've noticed most of you keep reserves. In this mod this seems to work especially well because units rally a lot, much more than in STW MI 1.02 MP (which is the TW MP game I've played the most). In MI, if you routed the enemy's main line in your attack, chances were that your enemy would rout completely, and even if some stalwarts managed to rally, it was not difficult to rout them again permanently afterward. Hence, most used their infantry line as a carefully timed and precisely executed all-or-nothing attack like I tried to do here. As far as I was concerned, CBR and Tosa were my reserves, and my job in the vanguard was to hit, and hit hard. Your team did a great job in halting my momentum before I gained the hill, and CBR wisely held back the majority of his infantry despite my troops eventually getting pushed back and away. During the game I was thinking "Gah! ... put the sake away and git your monk butts up here, CBR!" But watching the replay, it made sense. Fool was camped for the most part, waiting to take advantage of the late battle after we'd tired ourselves out--a static but prudent decision considering your team's superior position, and that two enemy armies were expending themselves with vigor but not yet threatening the heart of your formation.

In that game I got less kills than in the others. But I felt I did a much better job in my role than in the other games that day, and it was much more exhilirating. This is an example of why I don't think using kills as the sole metric is a good way to determine performance in a battle.

TosaInu is so often an "unsung hero" in these games. During the battle, I hardly noticed what he was doing until my attack was spent and I took a backseat for the remainder of the game. Watching the replay, it was brilliant to see Tosa all over the map, assisting CBR and me here and there and everywhere very effectively. In the end, it was Tosa who saved the day for us.

In another thread, I commented on how chasing routing units can be tricky, and this game was an example of why. Seemingly eager for kills, Fool chased some pretty small, low-threat units clear across the map, giving our remaining units and Tosa's relatively fresh units time to clean up the hill. If he had returned sooner, I think things might have turned out differently.

I've not seen anyone use an ashigaru unit as general until that game. I figured it was pumped with upgrades, but my log file proves otherwise. An odd choice, that. I wonder what the rationale behind it was.

Tosa is simply deadly; his armies fight with mobility, tenacity, snipping and wearing down and with calculated precision of deployment during attacks that he often executes in calculated infantry waves with cavalry flankings @ key times and locations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Noir

I was by far the least effective of our team getting just over 450 kills i think (470?) and so costing us dearly.

The main reasons probably were:

1. I helped the skirmish initially with the wrong unit (HC instead of YC) and almost sacrificed one YC as it arrived to the skirmish too late - i had better saved it.

2. Twice small parts of my melee infantry were anhihilated trying to buy time during the first and second assaults. On second thought it would have been better to keep them tight and commit them with Fool's troops in the second assault.

3. Last but not least my last pocket of men (3-4 teppos and 2 YS) were isolated by Fool's infantry at the chase. I reckon that had our forces stayed closer we had a better chance - but it happen otherwise.

There were plenty of lessons to learn and re-learn for me in that game.

Noir

---

Well, I must disagree with you here. Your support of Yuuki was not badly timed, and crucial. Yuuki (and for that matter, CBR and Tosa) can do with one unit what I need two or three to do, so you not only helped preserve the assets of a shrewd general (*shakes fist at Yuuki*), but depleted mine significantly. Your nods, in tandem with Yuuki's monks, halted my momentum and prevented me from reaching the hill. Even though Fool's many infantry were there (and your other half), CBR's infantry was waiting to pounce, and Tosa had his full infantry on the other side to sandwich. If I had reached the hill and spent myself, chances are good that in pursuit of my retreating troops (heh, I like that word "retreating" ...), Fool's infantry would have met both CBR's and Tosa's main infantry, and the remainder of our cav. Not good odds there. You played a pivotal role in your team's defense. Again, kills are just not a good indicator of overall performance in MP; it's one factor.

Here's more to boost that opinion: Fool sent one NC to help with the initial engagement, and sent it late--into a cav skirmish, in which NC do not excel. It wasn't effective (27 kills). Later, well after I launched my infantry attack, with CBR and Tosa backing me with lots and lots of cav, he sent one ysam to assist. He didn't commit other units until Tosa's cav hit his flank gun unit. Then he sent his YC to chase down Tosa's cav and protect his own guns. Of course he dominated the end game; he didn't do much to help you guys in the opening and mid-game. He got more kills that you did because he cleaned up our exhausted units. But your kills were worth three times his in glory and teamwork.

I don't understand the tendency to think so much in terms of cost and match-ups in this group (I affectionately think of it as "Yuuki-itis," lol). It's just not that simple. The dynamic factors--terrain, weather, timing, speed, formation, grouping and positioning, style and moment-to-moment choices by team mates on the field and how you respond to them--wreak havoc on the numbers and one-to-one unit matching in my opinion.

I hope I'm not sounding overly critical here, it's just my opinion. It was a great game.

My positioning was generally correct - however when it comes down to the actual numbers they betray the fact that several of my units were eliminated or routed before inflicting casualties that would have given other members of the team a better chance - i think the numbers or the Yuuki-itis if you want, tell an undisputable part of the story - not necessarily as you say the full story, but nonetheless.

For instance i should have moved the YC first for the initial skirmish - the HC could help better in melee against infantry; also i should have combined the 2 ND with a YS that would have make their life duration better against Tosa's NC. And finally i should have grouped my two monks and stay behind Fool and close to my guns on the hill.

It was a really great game nonetheless :)

Noir

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Masamune

I don't understand the tendency to think so much in terms of cost and match-ups in this group (I affectionately think of it as "Yuuki-itis," lol). It's just not that simple. The dynamic factors--terrain, weather, timing, speed, formation, grouping and positioning, style and moment-to-moment choices by team mates on the field and how you respond to them--wreak havoc on the numbers and one-to-one unit matching in my opinion.

I hope I'm not sounding overly critical here, it's just my opinion. It was a great game.

---

Yuuki-itis! :laugh4:
Yes I guess we're all infected to different degrees but that doesn't nessecarily mean that we think in spreadsheets when playing. Nevertheless, it's important to know the rules of the game and that includes match-ups. But match-ups are only the basics when considering what unit to engage with which. The dynamic factors, as you call them, are important modifiers for the basic match-up rules. They can be expressed in numbers, too.
However, in the heat of a battle like the one we've been discussing, you can't always make solid number based decisions, I agree with you there. What helps in those situations is the fact that the whole "unit vs unit" is very intuitive and logical.

R'as

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Noir

My positioning was generally correct - however when it comes down to the actual numbers they betray the fact that several of my units were eliminated or routed before inflicting casualties that would have given other members of the team a better chance - i think the numbers or the Yuuki-itis if you want, tell an undisputable part of the story - not necessarily as you say the full story, but nonetheless.

For instance i should have moved the YC first for the initial skirmish - the HC could help better in melee against infantry; also i should have combined the 2 ND with a YS that would have make their life duration better against Tosa's NC. And finally i should have grouped my two monks and stay behind Fool and close to my guns on the hill.

It was a really great game nonetheless :)

Noir

---

Your nods sure did better in one-to-one matchups than mine. I can only figure mine didn't get up velocity for a good charge, and were probably co-mingling and thus losing combat efficiency. I expected my nods to lose to Yuuki's monks without assistance from support units, but I thought I'd do much better, much faster against your nods. As it turned out, yours only broke when I brought my ashigaru unit behind and attacked from the rear.

I tease about the number-emphasis because I am more of an intuitive player than a numbers player (in real life I'm often the opposite, which is odd). I think that's why my play is mediocre when facing human calculators ( :clown: again, with affection--it's a drag no one can hear my voice when I post here, as I tend to "speak" with a lot of tongue-in-cheek and self-mockery that isn't apparent in written word).

Your team's cav did well (and I made some critically poor choices in the heat of it all). We had Yuuki's cav outnumbered at the onset of the skirmish, and when you responded we brought our Gens in, and Tosa brought some over too. We had really tipped the numbers in our favor at that point. Yet, your team managed to reduce my cav by about two-thirds (3200 koku value; a third of my total army investment), which clipped my claws nicely. A good thing CBR and Tosa had plenty of cav in that game to support during and after, and tend to have better unit control and be less impetuous than me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Masamune

I don't understand the tendency to think so much in terms of cost and match-ups in this group (I affectionately think of it as "Yuuki-itis," lol). It's just not that simple. The dynamic factors--terrain, weather, timing, speed, formation, grouping and positioning, style and moment-to-moment choices by team mates on the field and how you respond to them--wreak havoc on the numbers and one-to-one unit matching in my opinion.

---

I agree with you that dynamic factors are very important, and can offset loss of material. However, a dynamic advantage is temporary, and must be capitalized upon in a timely way otherwise you will be left with the material loss without compensation. That material loss will be significant in Samurai Wars if you don't get good matchups because you can't use upgrades to moderate the differences in combat power between the unit types. The morale is also high enough that you can't depend on chain routing a fresh enemy army simply by outnumbering it, although, outnumbering does cause units to rout sooner than they would otherwise. There is a balance between attritional and positional gameplay in this mod, so both are important.

I might return this Sunday.... Depends on how I feel and rather or not BF2 is running around my ass.

Best Experpience I ever had, is here on Samurai Warlords :-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Noir

My positioning was generally correct - however when it comes down to the actual numbers they betray the fact that several of my units were eliminated or routed before inflicting casualties that would have given other members of the team a better chance - i think the numbers or the Yuuki-itis if you want, tell an undisputable part of the story - not necessarily as you say the full story, but nonetheless.

---

Remember there is a morale penalty on a unit that is outnumbered by enemy units, and this penalty increases the more the unit is outnumbered. This morale penaly can be as large as -18 if a unit is heavily outnumbered and flanked. So sending a single unit, even if it's a high morale unit, into the proximity of a large number of enemy units will not be effective. I saw a fresh but heavily outnumbered WM with 53 men rout on contact in this battle. This was during the second attack near the small hill on the defender's left. When I saw the enemy infantry advancing, I messaged to pull back from the left, but I guess you missed it. In the replay, you can see my teppo pull out and head for the main hill which is just after I issued the message.

Outnumbered 2 to 1: up to -4 (range = about 75 meters)
Outnumbered 10 to 1: up to -12 (range = about 75 meters)
Outclassed in quality and speed: modifies the outnumbered penalty.
One flank threatened: -2 (range = about 60 meters)
Two flanks threatened: -6 (range = about 60 meters

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Noir

For instance i should have moved the YC first for the initial skirmish - the HC could help better in melee against infantry; also i should have combined the 2 ND with a YS that would have make their life duration better against Tosa's NC. And finally i should have grouped my two monks and stay behind Fool and close to my guns on the hill.

---

I sent my remaining infantry in to support the units that you sent in to support the units that I already had engaged. I was trying to retrieve the YS, but Masa's infantry attack caught me by surprise, and the two YS were lost. It was a case of trying to support each other in a situation where we should have fallen back, and not tried to save the first cav units already commited. Fool is actually playing correctly by not sending his units into a hopeless situation.

Not a lot of time, but to clarify my comments:

I meant your HC, not YC, in my stories above AsanoRin. Noticed in additional reviews of the replay and conversation with CBR. Thought it was a YC initially, and that your HC was on the far side for some reason.

My opinions about Fool's gameplay extend to several games, and I still think his inactivity during the skirmishes and initial attack put you two in a difficult position. CBR, Tosa and I were all in motion. There were points during and after the infantry attack where a unit or two of his would have made a different for you guys imo. But we can analyze it to death ... it was what it was.
On the flip side, Fool's support of Tomi in the first game I played in was exemplary. An interesting contrast to his playing in the subsequent games.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Masamune

My opinions about Fool's gameplay extend to several games, and I still think his inactivity during the skirmishes and initial attack put you two in a difficult position.

---

If ShingenMitch had been playing at defender's center, he would have said "refuse the flank", and I could have stayed out there confident that he would send adequate support to do that. In this case, it would have been his whole army, and Asanoirin would move over to center. It's not my place to say refuse the flank because I don't control the center army.

If the center ally is going to stay at home, the wingman really has no choice other than to fall back in the face of a double team close to the center ally. However, if the defenders compress their armies too much, they will suffer many back kills during the teppo skirmish. It's not as though I'd be dropping straight back. I'd be falling back into Fool's army which is why I was reluctant to fall back all the way to the high ground.

An alternative strategy would be a counter double team attack on Tosa by Fool and Asanorin. I'd do my best to block Masamune and CBR from coming to assist Tosa.

It is a shame that an otherwise great fun evening/night should be spoilt IMO by this so called analising.
From Post#16 onwards this Topic has detereated, again IMO. These types of posts are not constructive.
I only hope that Fool is not a member of .Org. Just imagine his reaction on reading this....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [B]Masamune[/B]

Here's more to boost that opinion: Fool sent one NC to help with the initial engagement, and sent it late--into a cav skirmish, in which NC do not excel. It wasn't effective (27 kills). Later, well after I launched my infantry attack, with CBR and Tosa backing me with lots and lots of cav, he sent one ysam to assist. He didn't commit other units until Tosa's cav hit his flank gun unit. Then he sent his YC to chase down Tosa's cav and protect his own guns. Of course he dominated the end game; he didn't do much to help you guys in the opening and mid-game. He got more kills that you did because he cleaned up our exhausted units. But your kills were worth three times his in glory and teamwork.

---

Suddeny Masamune ............:no: I'll say no more.
That is enough to turn away a player. I am not so sure that I would want to be involved with this type of play.

Samurai Warlords is having difficulties getting enough players as it is to make MP viable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jochi Khan

That is enough to turn away a player. I am not so sure that I would want to be involved with this type of play.

---

The discussion is about the importance of total kills, and isn't a criticism of the way Fool played. Fool has played very well in every battle that he's been in even though he has very little experience with Sam Wars. He played very well in the battle under discussion. The mistake of using an NC to counter a YC is one I've seen many players make, but look at what I did in that battle trying to hold back an NC with a CA which was probably the worst play in the entire battle. I also got caught trying to fend off an NC with a no-dachi because it's all I had in the vicinity.

It's up to each individual player how much assitance they want to send to an ally, and it's only by experience that you get to know how much assistance a particular player is likely to provide. I wasn't sure how much assistance Fool would provide, and I was preparing to fall back to the central hill when I saw Asanorin's units come over. However, it was still a mistake for me to stay out there. I think Masa's point is that killing routers isn't as impotant as those kills you get before the enemy routs, so a player's total kills can be misleading. My point is that getting more kills is better than getting fewer kills because it reduces the grand total kill burden on your allies that's necessary to win the battle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Puzz3D

The discussion is about the importance of total kills, and isn't a criticism of the way Fool played. Fool has played very well in every battle that he's been in even though he has very little experience with Sam Wars. He played very well in the battle under discussion.

---

There has been no mention of the importance of total kills. My quote of Masamune in my earlier post

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Masamune

Here's more to boost that opinion: Fool sent one NC to help with the initial engagement, and sent it late--into a cav skirmish, in which NC do not excel. It wasn't effective (27 kills). Later, well after I launched my infantry attack, with CBR and Tosa backing me with lots and lots of cav, he sent one ysam to assist. He didn't commit other units until Tosa's cav hit his flank gun unit. Then he sent his YC to chase down Tosa's cav and protect his own guns. Of course he dominated the end game; he didn't do much to help you guys in the opening and mid-game. He got more kills that you did because he cleaned up our exhausted units. But your kills were worth three times his in glory and teamwork.

---

was a total criticism of Fools play in that last game you played.

Now Now, Lets keep our tempers under control :-)

Who is losing their temper??

It is called open discussion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jochi Khan

Who is losing their temper??

It is called open discussion.

---

No, It seems people were getting little upset (no offense, but i.e. you).

http://www.wikihow.com/Make-up-With-Friends

How to Make up With Friends
Everybody has friends. Everyone has enemies. Whether we like it, or believe it, it is true. There will always be someone who doesn't like you for whatever reason they can find. But sometimes a friend may find something about you that causes them to change their opinion about you, be it something you said or someone you dated, or even something as obscure as a TV show you watched. Or maybe you and your friend got in a big argument about something personal. Now your friend "hates" you. Well if they are your friend they will find a way to forgive you.

Steps

Let some time pass. Allow your friend to cool off and think about what happened and possibly move on with their lives without you. Patience is key. Don't push for redemption.

Send an IM or email to your old friend out of the blue just to see what's up. If your friend answers you, this means that they've calmed down and want to talk to you. Be friendly. Don't bring up the subject of why your friend is mad at you in the first place. Talk casually-- "What's been going' on" "How's the basketball team doing" "I see you got that scholarship" simple things like that. If they keep up the casual conversation it’s a good sign that they are warming up to your presence once again.

Grab the chance to ease into a conversation about the troubles between you. Wait for the opportune moment. It’s better if they mention it first, but if they don't, you will have to. Swallow your pride and apologize for whatever upset your friend. Try to resolve the issue while both of you are calm rather than with loud voices and misunderstandings.

Try your best to resolve any issues between you and your friend. Talk calmly about what really happened between you two. Talk about what is true about the situation what got fabricated through the grapevine. Maybe the entire event was caused by a lie perpetrated by someone else. If you know you were the one at fault be sure to explain to your friend why you did what you did, apologize for it, and reassure your friend that it won't happen again, and that you value their friendship greatly.


Tips

Patience is key.
Remember that no argument can be solved if the conditions are hostile between the two of you.
Think before you speak.
Be casual, don't move right into talking about the issue right off the bat.
Be cool.


Warnings

If you genuinely hurt your friend, it may take more time than you like.
If your efforts are rejected don't keep persisting, give up for a while and maybe try again later.
No means no.
This might not work all the time, sometimes people honestly don't like you.


Things You'll Need

Open mind and an open heart
Lack of pride
Grip on reality
Realization of what really happened
Facts

Hmm .. just seeing this new development. A misunderstanding, surely. I think you are taking my comments as personal, and they're not. I had assumed Fool does read here ... he found us, after all. It's not a criticism of him. I just didn't agree with some of his choices in game. I did compliment his play in another game too.

Frankly Jochi, I think you are letting our historical conflict color your interpretation of me and what I write. Let's really think about what we say on this from this point on. I will remain calm and try to understand the point of view expressed. Let's not make a mountain out of a mole hill. Let's try and let that water under the bridge flow.

I am at still work after a 12 hour day and four hours of sleep, exhausted, and it is my last day here for 12 days before I leave on a trip back west on family business (unfortunately, not a vacation). I'll respond more to this if necessary when I am home and rested a bit.

If you'd prefer not to play with me, I can post when I will be there and when I won't. This weekend I will likely be there; the next, I will be back West and won't be able to attend. Enjoy.

Fool played very well IMO in the battle under discussion, and in every other i've seen of that session and of other sessions that i wasn't there - that is all the more true since as Yuuki says he is a new player to SWs.

Post #16 on this thread (my post) states the above explicitly.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Noir
I realised after watching the replay that it was a very close game - closer than i realised while we were playing. Had Fool's forces stayed on the hill more coherently after the second attack the game would have had another melee phase that the defenders had a good chance of withstanding melee wise and reasonably enough guns to play the end game if needed. Fool played very well; it was indeed true chaos after the 2nd attack and it was impossible to foretell the outcome of decisions made (chase more or not? etc).

---

Noir

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Masamune

Again, kills are just not a good indicator of overall performance in MP; it's one factor.

Here's more to boost that opinion: Fool sent one NC to help with the initial engagement, and sent it late--into a cav skirmish, in which NC do not excel. It wasn't effective (27 kills). Later, well after I launched my infantry attack, with CBR and Tosa backing me with lots and lots of cav, he sent one ysam to assist. He didn't commit other units until Tosa's cav hit his flank gun unit. Then he sent his YC to chase down Tosa's cav and protect his own guns. Of course he dominated the end game; he didn't do much to help you guys in the opening and mid-game. He got more kills that you did because he cleaned up our exhausted units. But your kills were worth three times his in glory and teamwork.

---

The last sentence of the previous paragraph in Masa's post clearly indicates he's talking about kills as not being a good indicator of performance. Yes Asanorin's intent was good to actively support me, but we weren't effective enough in terms of inflicting losses on the enemy. Fool probably recognized that Asanorin and I were taking too much risk. We left Fool with a situation where he had to get around 950 kills in order to win, and he had already lost 2 units trying to help us. It's not at all clear that, if he had sent more units to the left, they would have been effective. The truth is that I hadn't seen such aggressive play from Masamune before this game, and I misjudged the situation because of that.

If a player doesn't pull his weight in kills, his allies have to make up the difference. Army size is 900 + the general's unit which puts total army size for each side in a 3v3 at between 2733 and 2880. Looking at the 3v3 game previous to the one under discussion, the winners got 2215 total kills and the loosers got 2187. It was a close battle, and I only got 548 kills in that game. Masa got 735 and CBR got 932. Clearly, CBR made up for my 200 shortage in kills.

The winners of a 3v3 need to average around 700 to 750 kills each. In the final game which is the one we have been discussing, the winners got 2165 total kills and the loosers got 1976 total kills. In one of the other 3v3, winners got 2254 and loosers 2054. In another 3v3 which was a decisive win, the winners got 2424 kills and the loosers got 1495 kills. So it appears that you have to knock out about 80% of the enemy army to win.

Moderator's note:
I feel a bit uncomfortable with the turn of the discussion.
I didn't read Masamune's opinion about Fool's play as a personal attack. Criticism yes but nothing out of line.
Jochi's post made me rethink that and I've looked for passages that I might've misinterpreted.
I can see Jochi's point but I think he has misinterpreted Masamune, who has admitted that his posting style may lead to that.
Given Masa's last response and the fact that members have also pointed out how well Fool played, I come to the conclusion that this is not a flaming of a player, but criticism of one style of play and a misunderstanding. Yuuki also pointed out that Fool actually played correctly in that situation.

I know nothing about a past quarrel between Masamune and Jochi. If you have one I'd ask you to clear that in private, please.

The discussion on battles, style of play, tactics and whatever may continue, even if the player in question has no account yet. I think it's fair because a) his real identity is unknown and b) I consider the games "public" and open to discussion. I'll ask Fool to join .org as soon as I meet him, though.

At last I ask you to remember that communication via a text medium is difficult and often leads to misunderstandings.

:bow:

R'as

Fool was there again yesterday and I've asked him to join totalwar.org. I tried to explain to him what's going on here and he said it wasn't his "scene". But he seemed surprised that we engage in a battle "discussion" at all. Perhaps I made him curious enough to check out the forum.

-------------------------

Apologies to Asanorin for double-rushing him and kicking him out of the game so early. It's not exactly good form. To our excuse I've to say that the map and the rain made such a move nessecary.

I still need to work on my micromanagement. Especially gun micro. My teppos were raided two times when I was busy elsewhere. I have rarely used any shortcuts apart from "Group" or "Run" till now but I think I need to start to. Being able to toggle "Fire at will" for the guns quickly is essential.

R'as

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Puzz3D

Remember there is a morale penalty on a unit that is outnumbered by enemy units, and this penalty increases the more the unit is outnumbered. This morale penalty can be as large as -18 if a unit is heavily outnumbered and flanked. So sending a single unit, even if it's a high morale unit, into the proximity of a large number of enemy units will not be effective. I saw a fresh but heavily outnumbered WM with 53 men rout on contact in this battle.

---

Yuuki,

if two allied armies with 5 units each meet one enemy army with 10 units, do the two smaller armies suffer from being outnumbered each or are the allied units in the vicinity factored in?

R'as

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R'as al Ghul

if two allied armies with 5 units each meet one enemy army with 10 units, do the two smaller armies suffer from being outnumbered each or are the allied units in the vicinity factored in?

---

Allied units in the vicinity (i.e. within 75 meters) are factored in. The only morale penalty that is army specific is the death of the general. However if an army routs as a result of death of the general, it will affect the moral of nearby allied units because they loose any morale support the routing units were providing, and there is a morale penalty to units that are in the proximity of routing friendies. So, if you have a weak unit it may be detrimental to engage that unit within the proximity of allied units because if it routs it will give the allied units a morale penalty.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R'as al Ghul

Apologies to Asanorin for double-rushing him and kicking him out of the game so early. It's not exactly good form.

---

Doubling an isolated player is a fundamental team strategy. It's very effective against teams that are slow to respond. It's something that players should learn how to handle because it's necessary for a doubled player to survive long enough in order for his team to implement a hammer and anvil counter strategy. Samurai Wars has the necessary defensive capability in the gameplay for a hammer and anvil strategy to work if the hammer moves promptly to hit the flank of the enemy after the anvil is engaged.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [B]R'as[/B]

Criticism yes but nothing out of line.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [B]R'as[/B]

I can see Jochi's point but I think he has misinterpreted Masamune

---

Throughout my post criticism was the operative word and no mention or indication of anyone 'flaming' a player..
It was Masamune that read otherwise into it. He chose to bring up something that had happened years ago that, as far as I was concerned, was dead and buried and was irrelevant to this post.

I will say no more on this post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R'as al Ghul

...I come to the conclusion that this is not a flaming of a player, but criticism of one style of play...

---

Yes that's it. Some players don't want their mistakes pointed out. This kind of analysis is done all the time in chess. I think it's ok as long as the replay is available to prove or disprove the analysis. Maybe some players won't join a group that analyzes games, but other players will join because they benefit from the analysis.

Thanks for the consideration Ra's but there is no need to apologise; i enjoyed particularly that game very much. BTW i was trippled rather than doubled as after Tosa's 4 NC and your YC (2,3?) initial charge CBR smashed in his main line to break my Naginatas, and i think your infantry came upon me too. For a few milliseconds before the charge i felt a certain awe for what i was witnessing (a bit of a Migata-ga-hara feeling) - Tomi felt that too from what he messaged in the team channel..

I did realatively well given the fact that the mount isolated me from assistance for quite some time getting 450+ kills; Masamune in the mean time cleared plenty of Tosa's and CBR's gunners before joining Tomi to the resque resulting in a victory for our team. It was a very enjoyable game, and honestly as i said many times i enjoy watching as much as playing.

The "nothing personal i hope" was a joke and i felt i should put it in the message as parenthesis (joke) as i did to avoid misinterpretations.

Doing fighting retreats in order to escape from the doubleteam in the flank or learning to make a stand against a double team is essential in 3v3's i find. While we were playing mostly 2v2 games, double teams worked less effectively as the defending team is more promptly capable of helping each other due to the smaller space occupied by the armies (less distances to run). 3v3 games on the other hand are less "stable" as dynamic systems as if the double team works effectively then the rest of the defense is bound to collapse very rapidly because of the larger number of units on the field in absolute terms.

I feel that i have accumulated enough experience to be a relatively worthile addition as a co-player and as an opponent in 2v2's - however in 3v3's i have much less experience (i have played only one 3v3 prior to my return last session i think) in what armies to take (that relate to the map and the position that one takes center or flank) and what decisions to make during the game and expectedly i perform better if i am on the flank with an experienced co-player taking the center.

The center position is very tricky as it requires to take leadership decisions (good judgement) as well as giving assistance to the flanks and simultaneously holding the center (good control); conversely i feel that the most challenging 3v3's are those with one of the more experienced players in the group taking up that position in each team.

Noir

Hello Noir,

The only thing we knew about that map is that it was large and flat, I knew to be on the flank, so let's take 4 NC, 2 YC, 2 CA, 1 hatamoto, 4 wm and 3 teppo. I was not the only one surprised by the huge hills.

We decided to open the attack on the left, I would move the 4 NC and 2 YC over there, the hill and woods would (almost) cover this manoeuvre. The 2 CA were trying to trick Masamune in believing action would happen there, the infantry was hidden in the forrest and that was big enough to hide a whole army. The six NC/YC moved quickly to the left, a glimpse can be seen in the replay from the defenders side. Masamune moved up, but the CA seemed to do their distraction job.

R'as al Ghul and CBR advanced to the left/left center, everything seemed calm and peaceful and we had a 2.5 force on the left.

We didn't really decide what to do next, but an opportunistic sentiment took control. I decided to launch the attack (more units, CBR was angled to hold off Tomisama, Masamune far away, rain to render Asanorins teppo less effective). The six charged (dense pack to make it look like an innocent skirmish).

R'as quickly charged his cavalry too, but there was no proper infantry backup, the spears would hurt the NC, viewed from a unit matchup it was not too great, but there's more in a battle.

This was what should have happened: CBR's guns were already setup to fence off Tomisama, R'as al Ghul would reinforce CBR's left flank and back with spears and a few guns, his cavalry and shock/other gun and perhaps some of CBR's monk/cavalry (but he would mostly stay where his guns were) would help to remove Asanorins army.

Then it would become a 3v2/3v2.1 and time permitting, the right infantry flank (still concealed) would advance and add extra pressure.

That was my impulsive plan and it was not communicated, sorry for making a mess.

A very nice mess, if i am allowed to say :)

I saw the plan materialised, and it worked; it was Tomi's mass response and Masamune's swift attack on your teppo and circling move on the right that saved the day after quite some hard fighting.

I remember that you employ in lines to hide the intentions and i realised that this was no skirmish when i saw 4 cavalry flags come straight on at full speed!

The monks held back was also brilliant as it would hammer Masamune on the back while assisting.

Noir

Uneasy.

Hello,

The money, not the karma.

It was a 4vs4 36,000 per team, only 6 players could play and thus everyone had 12k at his disposal. I spent all of it, sorry. :embarassed:

I started to think about the army and the cost this afternoon, but only checked the log just now, hence the uneasy comment.



There were some very good moves in the battle, Masamunes sacrifice of ashis to slow my wm was superb.

Right, in this case i'll alter slightly part of my above post:

"I did realatively exceptionally well given the fact that the mount isolated me from assistance for quite some time getting 450+ kills..."

:laugh4:

Yes.

Gah! I'm missing all the fun...:drama1:

Hopefully I'll be up and ready this Sunday.

Hello Hunter KIng George.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jochi Khan

Throughout my post criticism was the operative word and no mention or indication of anyone 'flaming' a player..

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Puzz3D

Yes that's it. Some players don't want their mistakes pointed out. This kind of analysis is done all the time in chess.

---

Jochi,

I thought that you saw Masamune’s criticism as too much in so far that it borders on a personal attack. I now understand it was only the criticism you object to.(?) Yuuki’s post seems to confirm that.
In that case I’ve to say that I’m all for a discussion of battles and players’ playing styles. I will keep a close eye on the posts and their wording, but discussing and criticizing is generally perfectly alright with me.

R’as

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Noir

Thanks for the consideration Ra's but there is no need to apologise; i enjoyed particularly that game very much. BTW i was trippled rather than doubled as after Tosa's 4 NC and your YC (2,3?) initial charge CBR smashed in his main line to break my Naginatas, and i think your infantry came upon me too. For a few milliseconds before the charge i felt a certain awe for what i was witnessing (a bit of a Migata-ga-hara feeling) - Tomi felt that too from what he messaged in the team channel..

The "nothing personal i hope" was a joke and i felt i should put it in the message as parenthesis (joke) as i did to avoid misinterpretations.
Noir

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Puzz3D

Doubling an isolated player is a fundamental team strategy. It's very effective against teams that are slow to respond. It's something that players should learn how to handle because it's necessary for a doubled player to survive long enough in order for his team to implement a hammer and anvil counter strategy.

---

I generally agree with Yuuki but in this particular game though we rushed Asanorin with 6 NC and 4 YC :grin2:. From my perspective it was as if his army just seized to exist. One second it was there and then it was routing or gone. When Asanorin posted his “nothing personal I hope” I felt a bit guilty that we had kicked him out of the game in such a short time.

R'as

Quote:

---

One second it was there and then it was routing or gone.

---

That's why i said in the chat later on that "i will enjoy the replay, especially the first part as that is the part i saw less" :laugh4:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R'as al Ghul

I generally agree with Yuuki but in this particular game though we rushed Asanorin with 6 NC and 4 YC.

---

In Samurai Wars you can construct balanced armies that can defeat all cav armies of twice the value.

My line almost held to the initial cavalry charge as i moved my 3 YC and 2 YS forward and they met them.. spear in hand. It was CBR's infantry attack and those cavarly that sneaked on the rear (which i could not hold as... i had no more units to do that) that did the damage as they circled my main line of Naginata's that had entered the fray and cleared the teppos i took behind to avoid the melee.

Noir

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Noir

My line almost held to the initial cavalry charge as i moved my 3 YC and 2 YS forward and they met them.. spear in hand. It was CBR's infantry attack and those cavarly that sneaked on the rear (which i could not hold as... i had no more units to do that) that did the damage as they circled my main line of Naginata's that had entered the fray and cleared the teppos i took behind to avoid the melee.

---

You had a very good army for countering this type of attack. I can tell you a better way to handle this situation. Don't advance any units. Put you naginata's in hold formation flanked by the two YS which can be set back a bit. Keep your YC in reserve to counter flanking cav. If there are too many enemy cav units, put the YC into a wide deployment and hold formation so that each one can block more then one enemy cav. Drop your teppo back behind your naginata line when you see the enemy charge, and put them in hold formation so that they won't skirmish backwards. If you have any swords, position them near your YS to protect them against enemy swords. Use your general to bolster your weakest point after everything is engaged. The longer you can hold the line, the more damage your teppo will inflict, and since you haven't advanced, the enemy's flank will be more exposed to your ally.

Yes that's true, i was lucky in that department. If i had plenty of shooters or weak swords it would have been really disastrous.

Thanks for the advice; in my view this is where instinctively knowing the match ups in every situation matters. To do promptly this kind of response i would need to be 100% tuned in with "this type of attack" as well as "the type of army" that i was playing.

This type of awareness is definitely linked to how much you need to manage at the same time at a particular phase of a battle and also on how concentrated you are i guess.

However it mostly relates to how much the gameplay has rubbed off on you IMO. As an example of this awareness i will say that in the previous session i was consciously snipping YC with SA at various games. In one game, i took down about 34 (with your help by CA) before they withdrew to safety and about 27 in another game (the occasions are completely different and the numbers included only for indication purposes). When i started diverting fire to one of CBR's YC with one of my teppo in the game we previously were discussing in order to do the same, he took them out of range as soon as the first of his cavalry man fell and had totally three casualties. This sort of "tuning" with match ups, that is knowing where to persist and where to avoid things and give way is a key element and needs practice, observation, conscious effort and time so as to be achieved IMO.

Noir

I would like to put forward something I am trying to work out for my self, let’s call it conceptual thinking for lack of any real title. It is really just specification driven imagination, developing a character idea for each unit type.

For example, the Samurai Archer’s range capabilities are not well employed against armor bearing units. The more armor, the less chance of making a kill, so looking at battle from the SA’s point of view, it is probably best to create target classifications.

First priority would be the light and unarmored swords, the No Dachi and Warrior Monks’s.

Next the light and medium armored, all other range units (SA, CA, PT, JT), and all spear units (YA, YS, YC).

And last, the heavily armored Naginata infantry and cavalry (NA, NC), and most of all the Heavy Cavalry, are best left to the Japanese Teppos for shooting (if at all).

I believe that the above is correct, but in any case you can see that personification of a particular unit type, and imagining things from their perspective, can be a way to understand match-up priorities.

For me this is very much a work in progress. I just though I would throw
It out there for whomever it might help :wink:

Hello,

That position doesn't leave great flanking options to either the defender or attacker. Sit still when you're shaved. My experience from STW classic and up is that immobile armies are tougher to beat than expected. Turn them on hold and be the anvil for your hammer allies.

It's interesting to know how to co-operate with allies in team games while taking into account the sort of army picked; for example i realised at some point that a Naginata heavy selection (with lots of cavalry to complement) has a natural anvil strength either for flanking with one's own cavalry or in a team manner (engaging enemy line and allowing the ally to act as the hammer). I often made the mistake to engage my monks or melee cavalry first (as they timely join melee), but the right thing to do is to engage the NA line and search for opportunities to flank or allow such opportunities to your allies(y).

Team coordination is essential and builds up slowly by reckognizing the allie's army selection, playstyle and dynamic conditions of the game at hand.

MP is a very different beast than SP altogether and takes the game to the limit; its really a shame that it doesn't get the attention it deserves in TW as the game has great potential.

I understand it though from a sales point of view; a really good MP game like STW for example could do with engine improvements ignoring incarnations but the appeal would be more difficult to establish and elnarge in absolute terms compared with the graphical emphasis and variety that sells the SP game; few people have the nerve to endure the string of defeats and slaughters that is to be expected in the first few tens if not hundred battles. Most probably want a hostorical/war "escapade" on their own terms and time.

Its also difficult in the interpersonal level as without a group that makes you feel at home and allow you to slowly improve, its easy to feel lost.

However i have to say that once you "taste blood" its hard to go back; MP battles are many times more interesting, satisfying and fun even to watch than SP battles that are repetitive and limited to the AI's capabilities. Bugs and misbalances though hurt the MP game badly as does an innapropriate pace.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Noir

Team coordination is essential and builds up slowly by reckognizing the allie's army selection, playstyle and dynamic conditions of the game at hand.

---

Teams games bring an additional strategic layer to the gameplay. At the highest level, army composition and playing style become subject to the strategic plan, and players can be assigned starting positions that allow them to make good use of their individual skills in the execution of the battleplan. However, players must master basic tactics before the teamgames can be played at this strategic level. The strategic plan will likely fail if the team members haven't mastered basic tactical play, and at the very least, tactical errors on either side rob a battle of theoretical value when evaluating a particular strategy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Puzz3D
However, players must master basic tactics before the teamgames can be played at this strategic level. The strategic plan will likely fail if the team members haven't mastered basic tactical play, and at the very least, tactical errors on either side rob a battle of theoretical value when evaluating a particular strategy.

---

Very true

I thought I'd commend the group on some very fun games this weekend. Lots of interesting things going on in the replays.

Shout out to my team m8s in various games: those were particularly fun games sweeping attacker left in 4v4 with a lot of cav, followed up rapidly by infantry engagement, no dilly-dallying. You guys were right there, and it ROCKED. :thrasher:

There were moments when I felt like I was playing with my old wingm8, and I can give no higher compliment than that. Great fun, all.

I thought the games on Sunday demonstrated that poor strategy in 4v4 battles cannot be offset by good tactics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Puzz3D

I thought the games on Sunday demonstrated that poor strategy in 4v4 battles cannot be offset by good tactics.

---

Did you have a strategy?
Just curious, because we had none. We didn't even chat.
I'm beginning to think that we should take the 2 or 3 extra minutes to communicate some basic plan before the game starts. :wink:
I watched the replay of the 4v4 and I think the defenders made two mistakes. First, it would've been better if Tosa had deployed his teppos in front of the forest. The way they were positioned they couldn't open fire on Masamune who had deployed very foward. I don't know if that would've been within Tosa's zone, though.
Secondly, I hesitated too long to join Tosa in that situation. By that time, Fool had joined Masamunes attack and there were too many enemy units for us to defeat. In the end we were tripled on that flank. Masamune's initial attack was quite bold and I think if he didn't have Fool coming right behind him we probably would've repelled that charge.
I'm still fretting about the horrible mistakes I made that evening. In the first game I clearly defeated myself.

R'as

Strategy before a game consisted of a few words during deployment: attack right, attack left. etc., nothing specific.

That several of the coordinated attack openings went well overall was what delighted me, and why I said it was beginning to feel like I was playing with my old wingm8. Several of the attacks felt intuitive--flowing with the events that were occuring. Support was lent by two other armies, and coordination of arrival at the attack line was good. Timing of infantry support, and third-party cav support, was good. Use of mass to affect morale was good. Each team m8 did well in complimenting the actions of the others, and the attacks were effective, though we had only a very simple strategy.

There was one point in a game where I was in Attacker Front Left position and the strategy was attack left. I advanced but was taking too long, caught up in a shoot out. A senior team m8 suggested I attack soon, etc., so I did, but long after the action started on the right. I said I would need assistance, and was assured, so we were communicating a little during battles. Not often though. It was funny watching the replay of that game, all hell breaking loose on the far right side (Yuuki and Tosa attacked the Attacker Right position, KensaiSylvan's army, and I'm stuck in a shoot out with well-positioned opponents).

Deployment position is obviously a crucial part of battle strategy, particularly for attackers. I set up out front in a couple, but had communicated to team m8s, who assured support. I was also prepared at opening to do any of a number of things. The starting position of Attacker Left Front in 4v4 is a "hotseat" position; I play it better aggressively than defensively provided I have effective support from Center and Back Left.

I've been paying attention to how each of us plays in the replays. I'm beginning to get a sense of how much support one will provide given their position on the field, how much support they might require given their position on the field, etc.. How fast and discerning, how quick to respond, accuracy of response, the nature of judgment. I wouldn't set up far front if I knew that the army behind and to the right of me weren't likely to respond effectively, or if there were terrain features that would prevent response. Or if my enemy was Yuuki (*shakes fist at Yuuki*).

Don't let the tough games get ya down. I've had my fair share, ramping up to SW and how it plays. I sat out on the end of several of those games, my army wiped out. I think a key is to try new things. Analysis is cool; application is key.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Masamune

I've been paying attention to how each of us plays in the replays. I'm beginning to get a sense of how much support one will provide given their position on the field, how much support they might require given their position on the field, etc.. How fast and discerning, how quick to respond, accuracy of response, the nature of judgment. I wouldn't set up far front if I knew that the army behind and to the right of me weren't likely to respond effectively, or if there were terrain features that would prevent response. Or if my enemy was Yuuki (*shakes fist at Yuuki*).

Don't let the tough games get ya down. I've had my fair share, ramping up to SW and how it plays. I sat out on the end of several of those games, my army wiped out. I think a key is to try new things. Analysis is cool; application is key.

---

No, I'm not down, just a bit angry about my own mistakes. But that's okay.
I've watched the replays of the three games I had and it wasn't as bad as I first thought. Of course, I faced you three times and I lost three times but I know what I did wrong and that's most important to me.
Next time I'll crush you. I hope you don't mind being my personal nemesis? (you devil :laugh4: )

:bow:

R'as

P.S.: Anyway.....my taisho won that 4v4 after single handedly killing Yuuki's taisho and hatamoto. Noobs! :yes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R'as al Ghul

...
I've watched the replays of the three games I had and it wasn't as bad as I first thought. Of course, I faced you three times and I lost three times but I know what I did wrong and that's most important to me.
Next time I'll crush you. I hope you don't mind being my personal nemesis? (you devil :laugh4: ) ...

:bow:

R'as

P.S.: Anyway.....my taisho won that 4v4 after single handedly killing Yuuki's taisho and hatamoto. Noobs! :yes:

---

Now That's the spirit! :devil:

You give me a good game every time R'as, and have knocked me off my horse on several occasions, and will again many times, I'm sure. Remember the week before? That was a great back and forth cat-n-mouse exchange, and you ended up chasing me off the field.

I know how you feel--my nemesis is this Sashimi Kojiro guy. You want to get frustrated? Play that ... :stwmean: in ten 1v1s in a row, and see how you feel afterward. I would get SO FRUSTRATED. But I learned a lot playing against him. I had to get very creative to achieve much of anything. He knew responses to all the "normal" things and could execute them near-perfectly with consistency--and did so with this casual matter-of-fact indifference that drove me frikkin' bonkers. I had to come up with unexpected things, and ones that worked. He must have thought I was insane given some of the things I tried. When I did manage to win a game against him--as much as I hate to admit it--it made me feel really good. That insufferably excellent dweeb gets my MP Nemesis of the First TW Decade award, hands down. But you know ... for every good player out there, there's another who's better.

The replays reveal so much that I don't notice in game. Yes indeed, anything could have happened in a great many situations. Any one of them could have easily gone the other way. Little things can make big differences.

When I find myself cranky after a game because of my perceived crappy performance, I remind myself that this is team play in MP--it isn't all up to me. I can do all the "right" things; it doesn't mean squat if my opponents team better than we do, or my team doesn't gel well in a particular game. If I made mistakes, well, so does everyone else at one point or another. It happens. So I just shrug it off and focus on the next game. Sucks a bit when it happens in a bunch of games in one day. But, it happens. There are some really good days too.

I think several of the victories happened because I was correctly guessing what CBR would do in response to what I did, and AsanoRin too (as team mates). In the game with Fool, I didn't do as well because I hesitated, not sure what Fool would do with all those cav, and with his infantry, which was still way behind us. In a complete attack like that, cav is not enough. Success rides on the correct timing of attack waves, unit match-ups, and how well or not the opponents respond, etc.. I've noticed even the Great Yuuki-sama holding units back, or withdrawing from a risky charge, when in my mind, had he followed through. and committed those reserves, the results would have made a big difference. I say if you're going to attack, GO FOR IT. I've seen other teams in 4v4 absolutely CRUSH (and I mean CRUSH) opponents in such a superb coordinated attack that two attacked players were out within a few minutes--attacking and defending (when the defenders chose to attack as their initial strategy). It's a huge glory feeling to pull this off, and a week-long sulk to be hit by it. Had a number of those.

Earlier I did a lot of ribbing about those who emphasize the numbers. I didn't do that just to annoy peeps. It drew out responses that clarified much more specifically why they felt how they did. I consider and adjust. Changes in unit choices has resulted in a dramatic increase in average kills for me over the last couple of sessions. Yuuki made a simple but oh-so-true point that each player really needs to achieve a certain number of kills or it becomes difficult for his team to make up the deficit and win the game. In most of the battles last weekend, I had very little left during End Game--but I felt I'd done a decent job, damaging and perhaps demoralizing opponents. I had my hata left in some of them, and so could run around with the other generals during the final mop up. That was fun.

Your respect and candor honor me, thank you :bow:. Please crush me as best you can; I ever desire an opponent's best game. You can count on me to give you mine. I do enjoy teaming with you too ... I like having lots of cav on my side :yes:

In an ideal TW MP team game, I don't want to have to discuss much strategy at the onset--just a general intent, subject to change at any time given unexpected developments, and perhaps some stated projections of what might happen and how we adjust if such events occur. I want to achieve "no mind" partnership with good players on the battlefield, where talk is rarely needed; where familiarity, intuition, and coordinated action is such that the left hand knows what the right, and feet, will do--more "reflex" than action--where we don't really think about it, just do it. I have had moments like this in STW MP with my wingm8 Anskar, and man ... do I hunger for it again. This particular TW "high" satisfies like no other MP game. A distant second is, of course, collecting as many enemy heads as possible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Masamune

Now That's the spirit! :devil:

You give me a good game every time R'as, and have knocked me off my horse on several occasions, and will again many times, I'm sure. Remember the week before? That was a great back and forth cat-n-mouse exchange, and you ended up chasing me off the field.

---

:bow: I need to review that game to boost morale.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Masamune

I know how you feel--my nemesis is this Sashimi Kojiro guy. You want to get frustrated? Play that ... :stwmean: in ten 1v1s in a row, and see how you feel afterward. I would get SO FRUSTRATED. [..] When I did manage to win a game against him--as much as I hate to admit it--it made me feel really good. That insufferably excellent dweeb gets my MP Nemesis of the First TW Decade award, hands down. But you know ... for every good player out there, there's another who's better.

---

I know Sasaki Kojiro/Mimesaka Akechi/Shinano and I played him many times. An exceptional player, I think he even won the "Most feared player" award. I once managed to defeat him with nifty gunwork, as he said to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Masamune

Your respect and candor honor me, thank you :bow:. Please crush me as best you can; I ever desire an opponent's best game. You can count on me to give you mine. I do enjoy teaming with you too ... I like having lots of cav on my side :yes:

---

I'll sure try my best. :charge:
I also enjoy teaming with you and I'm glad you take my post as intended, as a friendly....."Could you please remove your neck guard so that I can cut off your head?" :grin2:
Looking forward to future matches.

:bow:

R'as

P.S.: Love your haiku. I didn't realise that you've changed it.

Thanks for the compliment on my haiku. I change it from time to time, depending on my mood. This one just popped out when I was replying to your post. I wrote the previous one after looking in on my Goddaughter as she slept. She was my candle in a time of darkness and despair.

Just to be sure no one misunderstands: Sasaki was the first person I got to know here at the Org, and the only person I've met in person. I make fun of his name in humor only.

Hey Tosa,

You still need to finish that third 1v1 with me.

Well, if you guys can tell your stories, I will to :2thumbsup:

Last Time I played Beta 8 Regulary, I played TOsa twice in a 1v1. THe First game, we fought on a,hmmmm,don't remember what map, got the replay though. on a hilly/forest map. Ironically, he had the forest/hill, and I was attacking :yes:

But he move down a bit, but I told him to stay on the hill, I want and needed a challage. so I went, musket fight,etc... But I sent my army over to a somewhat hiller part, so my musket won't be at a complete dis-advantage. I also had 1 foot archer unit and 1 HA, and my HA routed after I attacked of his muskets. Then I him with the HA and expose some of his units. Then I prounce on it. but he lured my guys back just a bit up the hill, mabye that was his plan all along, and even into the forest, where I discovered a bigger force.

"Uh Oh!", then we fought. I started to rout his cav on his left flank I think, then my right flank started to fail, and I routed.


2nd game, we played on a flatland map, then has a little ditch in the middle...

TOsa put his army up against the line, going to rush.

"son of a" I thought "I'm in touble"

so I hurried and got my muskets ready. I purosuly had 1 unit of archers (foot) all the right on my right flank, instead of normal closeby flank. THen he rush and slam into me. I was barley holding on, but my archers and such I flank pr partialy flank TOsa guys, so they could fire easily into his guys. then his Gen, a Hamoto, snuck around my flank. THen I send my Hamoto and killed his gen, and sent a yari after mine, only to have it get destroyed, and his army getted routed at the right time. Any longer and I would have been a particular word that starts with a F :laugh4: .



Good 1v1's. Only ones I fought. I had so Many Team games on Beta7/8 with them, (few on Beta 8 that worked for me, but still :yes: ) the only ones I could tell a story about is my first 2 3v3's, which I won, but hm, can't really tell them all.


I will return this SUnday!! :yes:

Hello {BHC}KingWarman888,

There's a 3rd?

We can play it this Sunday?

yup there's a 3rd. This SUnday will be a excellet Time Tosa :-).

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Puzz3D
I thought the games on Sunday demonstrated that poor strategy in 4v4 battles cannot be offset by good tactics.

---

Agree on that despite being present in 3 games only. Lots of predisposition for immediate offense without it being always the best option, bad initial deployment and miscommunication in the sense that play some times didn't consider ally position.

In 3v3's and above its crucial to play with the others and the other's actions and relative position in mind as doublings and triplings are way more effective than in 2v2's that ally communication lines are shorter and more immediate IMO.

I suggest to distribute evenly experienced players in teams so in a 4v4 say, there are 2 experienced players in each team in most games (they can be different every time so the line up changes). 4v4's that line a team with 3 exerienced players vs a team with 1 can be a bit one sided i feel.

Noir

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Noir

I suggest to distribute evenly experienced players in teams so in a 4v4 say, there are 2 experienced players in each team in most games (they can be different every time so the line up changes). 4v4's that line a team with 3 exerienced players vs a team with 1 can be a bit one sided i feel.

Noir

---

I agrree with you Noir
I was going to make this same suggestion next Sunday in the SamWars Foyer.
After having played a few games now and watched a few replays, I have also noticed the trend that certain players seem to ally with the same players each game.

Not to compare with M2TW but, when a group of us played we made a point of playing with anyone regardless of skill levels. To clarify, a lot of the players were 'new' to the game so we tended to play 50-50 teaming to allow others to get a 'fairer' game.
I hope this reads as I write it. No offence intended.