Losing England AAR: the (failed) Comeback (game over)

joerock22 · Post by **joerock22** » Wed Mar 23, 2011 1:37 am

Email sent to CEAW opponents:

I realize now that it's been awhile since any of you heard from me. I have been unable to get CEAW to work on my computer, which continues to be buggy after it's recovery. It nearly crashed last night, with the same problem as before. Somehow I was able to save it; "directory services restore mode" actually worked this time.

To tell you the truth, I had lost interest in playing CEAW for several weeks even before the crash. You probably noticed my turns getting more and more spread out. Part of that was time, and part of that was I couldn't force myself to play more than 2 turns a night. It was becoming a chore rather than fun, which is totally a reflection on myself, not on any of you. Now that the games have been dormant for so long, I don't see myself starting them up again, even if I can get the game to work.

So I sincerely apologize, but I'm cancelling our games. I would like to remain on the GS email list, if only as an observer and occassional participant. I could see myself getting back into the game sometime in the future, but not anytime soon. And I think it's unfair to keep you guys waiting until then.

So there you have it. After exchanging emails with Crazyg, my gut feeling was more or less confirmed; I was going to end up losing this game. He said he was planning to bring more forces to England, including enough fighters to at least maintain air parity. The Soviets were already on the ropes after his clever adoption of the kill-Russian-corps strategy in late 1942. And he had plenty of oil. I probably would have recaptured London eventually, and kept Moscow, but I'm not sure I would've gotten to Paris. So that would be a projected Strategic or Major victory for Crazyg. Great game to him; he played exceptionally well. I don't feel luck had too much to do with my dire situation at all.

Crazygunner1 · Post by **Crazygunner1** » Wed Mar 23, 2011 6:12 pm

It has been fun to read the AAr you have done Joe, answers some of my questions that i have been pondering. I think this game could have gone in different directions a couple of time. First was ofcourse the landing in brittain, since you so nicely covered all the landing zones i had to resort to luck, i tried 3 turns in total each turn luck attacks as i put it, to see if i got any lucky results. That means i tried 8 times and on the 9th i got lucky, or should i say lucky enough.

There were some decisions on the Eastern front as well, especially in the beginning of Barbarossa when you counter attacked in the south. I manage to repair the line a little bit and you decided to withdraw witch probably was the right decision. The most frustrating part for me was in 42 when you skillfully avoided my somewhat superior force. I became very frustrated since i knew if i couldn´t force you to a deciding battle during summer i would have a real tough time rest of the game. My change of tactics worked ok it seems, destroying corps around Moscow instead. Maby not such a strategical win but it atleast slowly decreasing the strenght of the Russians.

My plan at the end was to hold England in 43 almost at all cost. That would surely grant me victory i think....Allies couldn´t bomb germany until 44 at the earliest. In the east during the summer 43 i was hoping to take Moscow, i think i had a fair chance doing that.....continue

Crazygunner1 · Post by **Crazygunner1** » Wed Mar 23, 2011 6:30 pm

The best part is that i have heard that many player complain about Axis oil and Manpower. I can´t see how they can, think this game is really good balanced. At the end of my turn i had 82-83% in manpower and at the end of the last turn i played around 450 barrels oil. If no major operations would have taken place during winter i would have had around 1000 barrels of oil for summer action in 43.
That is more than enough to supply a huge axis army.

I tip my hat of to Joe and thank him for a really exciting and time consuming game. But that is the fun part to change and adapt new strategies in the middle of the game, to really think the turns through, some turns i spent up to an hour doing. Love it....Joe is an excellent and formidable player who masters this game to completion and i am really sorry to see you leave....

Take care Joe and thanks

Crazyg

TotalerKrieg · Post by **TotalerKrieg** » Sun Mar 27, 2011 2:51 pm

@joerock

I hear what you are saying in terms of this game becoming a commitment rather than fun sometimes. I just play one game at a time which for me allows it to stay fun and not seem like a chore. I do want to thank you for posting the AAR even if you couldn't finish it. It inspired me to try my first Sea Lion which I was able to pull off and I made sure to take Ireland as well since you showed that it could be taken as a foothold for the Allies.

@crazygunner

First was ofcourse the landing in brittain, since you so nicely covered all the landing zones i had to resort to luck, i tried 3 turns in total each turn luck attacks as i put it, to see if i got any lucky results. That means i tried 8 times and on the 9th i got lucky, or should i say lucky enough.

If I understand this correctly, you replayed three turns three times. Did Joerock know you were doing that? I am happy you did because I enjoyed the AAR, watching 2 great players combat each other, but I personally don't think this is fair. Are most players doing this? In games I play this would be considered cheating (unless Joerock was ok with it). Thoughts?

rkr1958 · Post by **rkr1958** » Sun Mar 27, 2011 3:16 pm

TotalerKrieg wrote:@crazygunner

First was ofcourse the landing in brittain, since you so nicely covered all the landing zones i had to resort to luck, i tried 3 turns in total each turn luck attacks as i put it, to see if i got any lucky results. That means i tried 8 times and on the 9th i got lucky, or should i say lucky enough.
If I understand this correctly, you replayed three turns three times. Did Joerock know you were doing that? I am happy you did because I enjoyed the AAR, watching 2 great players combat each other, but I personally don't think this is fair. Are most players doing this? In games I play this would be considered cheating (unless Joerock was ok with it). Thoughts?

I hope this is not what crazygunner meant because replaying turns is cheating.

joerock22 · Post by **joerock22** » Sun Mar 27, 2011 3:31 pm

When I read that, I thought he meant attacking 3 garrisons each turn trying to get lucky. For example, hitting each with a Tac and seeing what kind of results he got, then picking the best and hitting it with another Tac and BB. Or something like that. I did not get the impression that he was cheating.

Crazygunner1 · Post by **Crazygunner1** » Sun Mar 27, 2011 7:49 pm

Poor choice of words i would say....when i read my own text i can easily see how it can be misinterprited. But exactly as Joerock says i hit a GAR with 3:0 and 4:0 odds at best i hope to get lucky, then hit it again if results were good with another tac and BB or the other way around. If i remember correctly i had 4-5 bombers in total. Since i didn´t wan´t to send a lot more troops and force a bad landing without aircover i decided to just stay put and see if i got lucky. That way i could easily return to France and reset for Barbarossa without loosing valuable resources and still have a chance in the game. I think i would have tried 1-2 more turn then call off the operation cause of to close to the winter. So if we look at Joes test and asume it is correct i would have succeded 1:20 but i got lucky on the 9th try.....and i would probably stayed for 15 tries then given up....so in general it is not impossible but unlikely.

Personally i don´t like people who replay there turns, that is why i take so long to play the turn....cause it is fun to really think over your moves, plan a strategy and have some reserves if things go south. For me this is not about acheving the perfect game but rather the great challange between eaqually good players...

Crazyg

rkr1958 · Post by **rkr1958** » Sun Mar 27, 2011 8:09 pm

Crazygunner1 wrote:Poor choice of words i would say....when i read my own text i can easily see how it can be misinterprited. But exactly as Joerock says i hit a GAR with 3:0 and 4:0 odds at best i hope to get lucky, then hit it again if results were good with another tac and BB or the other way around. If i remember correctly i had 4-5 bombers in total. Since i didn´t wan´t to send a lot more troops and force a bad landing without aircover i decided to just stay put and see if i got lucky. That way i could easily return to France and reset for Barbarossa without loosing valuable resources and still have a chance in the game. I think i would have tried 1-2 more turn then call off the operation cause of to close to the winter. So if we look at Joes test and asume it is correct i would have succeded 1:20 but i got lucky on the 9th try.....and i would probably stayed for 15 tries then given up....so in general it is not impossible but unlikely.

Personally i don´t like people who replay there turns, that is why i take so long to play the turn....cause it is fun to really think over your moves, plan a strategy and have some reserves if things go south. For me this is not about acheving the perfect game but rather the great challange between eaqually good players...

Crazyg

Thanks for clearing that up!!! I couldn't agree more with all you wrote!!!

TotalerKrieg · Post by **TotalerKrieg** » Tue Mar 29, 2011 2:32 am

@Crazygunner

Thanks for explaining...I found it hard to believe that you actually replayed three turns three times but that is the way it looked to me just reading it. I like the strategy you went with. Fairly risky but high reward if you get lucky and destroy one of the garrisons and you still have a chance even if you can't get ashore. Anyway, hopefully you have no hard feelings...