Finished: 08 PM Fri 25 Jan 19 UTC
Featured Gunboat-815
1 day /phase
Pot: 840 D - Autumn, 1912, Finished
Classic, No messaging, Anonymous players, Draw-Size Scoring, Hidden draw votes
1 excused missed turn
Game won by jollycream (969 D)
24 Jan 19 UTC Well, I thought either England and Germany were the same player, or Germany was being waaaaay too trusting. And it turned out the latter. Turkey and I tried at the end, but that stab produced way too many holes in Germany's back.

Good game!
24 Jan 19 UTC that’s on me all - I was waaaaaay too trusting and got to a point of no return.
24 Jan 19 UTC Good game regardless!
24 Jan 19 UTC This matched was stupid to behold, and the kind of nonsense I hoped to avoid with a 100 point bet. Oh well.
24 Jan 19 UTC This play did not resemble a gunboat game and looked exactly like cheating. Not only did Germany throw to England, but England did not play in such a way that he thought Germany would do anything but throw To him.
24 Jan 19 UTC thanks France - appreciate the input
24 Jan 19 UTC you suck Germany.
24 Jan 19 UTC Germany, if you ever see a 120 point bet game, with 80% Required Reliability. those are always my games, please never join one ever again, I do not enjoy playing with totally worthless noob players.
24 Jan 19 UTC sword, did you actually check with mods to see if it was cheating? If not, I will.
24 Jan 19 UTC Moderator: (Claesar): Please refrain from public cheating accusations. We do not allow this
24 Jan 19 UTC Yes, you have a point France.
24 Jan 19 UTC It does stick in the throat to be accused of cheating when winning. I will agree to taking advantage of a Germany that opened himself up, but from my side it felt that I nurtured the trust, weighing every build between what could be used for the coming stab vs how Germany would see it and stop moving forward.

I believe Germany’s big mistake was in 1901 of not building any fleets. Germany’s anti-French opening together with an uncontested Belgium gave me the choice to decide if I wanted to signal an E/G with my builds, which I gambled on. Had he built a fleet then it would have been reasonable at that point in time and kept an alliance going nonetheless. But any fleet build after that would have been an attack. Then he would have needed a two vs no-build situation, which is what I was paranoid about, as it was the only time I would have been exposed. I tried to do my best to keep the short-term incentive for him to not attack this year, and get the majority of the centres.

The stab needed to wait to be sure to have Tun and enough territory in Russia to have broken the stalemate on Mun.

I am happy to see an investigation but I would damn well appreciate an apology once cleared.

Apart from the after game comments, thank you everyone for the game.
24 Jan 19 UTC Anyone could win if someone completely suicided to them. That’s why I don’t play games with 20 point bets and no invite code.

Autumn 1906 was double army builds by England even though England has already crossed the stalemate like at Moscow and cannot logically have had any other intention or ambition but to solo win by attacking Germany.

Germany does not react to this at all, and it turns out England is trying to get even further past the Stalemate like before attacking. That kind of cooperation and trust is normal in press diplomacy, but absolutely unheard of and absurd play for a gunboat game.

England crosses the stalemate line in a second place in autum 1908 and builds yet ANOTHER army, and Germany has no concern at all about what is happening, builds an army in Munich. England immediately backstabs of course because England is already in an unbeatable solo win position (Munich is no longer even needed), Germany doesn’t react to the army build and up the spirited defense of a motionless dead slug.

Anyone could win if another player suicides to them completely. The whole reason for trying to play in a big-bet game is to avoid stupid wins based on players throwing the game.

In a press game I’d say, congrats on hosing a naive Germany. But in a gunboat game, neither of you had any idea of the intentions of each other or what kind of players you were. You did not communicate through subtle moves that showed and intention to work together and then move that way. Germany just trusted England blindly and gave away the game. It’s outrageous to see this happen and I’ve played 100+ gunboat games.

I never want to see another gunboat game like this as long as I live.
24 Jan 19 UTC I have contacted the mods regarding what you are implying. It frankly disgusts me.
24 Jan 19 UTC There was no collusion or Meta playing in this game at all. Just poor judgement and tact on my part. Took a leap and went all in on my alliance with England and the game reached a point of no return for me. Everyone’s accusations are unfounded.

I’ve been participating in games on this site since 2015, don’t know if that deems me a “worthless noob” but I don’t deny this wasn’t a shining moment for me.

I understand being upset with your indiviual loss but there’s really no need to be rude/viscous. At the end of the day this is game and we are all a community on this site. Try to keep things in perspective.
24 Jan 19 UTC Moderator: (Claesar): After a thorough investigation no indication of foul play was found.
24 Jan 19 UTC A) The mods have completed their looking at the game and found nothing. done.

B) Your long drawn out analysis England is such total bullshit, don't take any credit for German shit play. Germany played like a five year-old, and you won, congrats! I can beat up my 7 year old nephew too, if I really wanted to. I can beat my 10 year old daughter at chess too.

C) Germany, you played like total shit. Don't ever join any high stakes games ever again.

D) and no, I am not apologizing for any of the above, or anything else.

E) as far as disgust goes => German shit play. France and I have every right to question it. Three fingers extended, read between the lines.
24 Jan 19 UTC Germany, joined since 2015 and you have 40 points? Ah... clearly an expert noob. I joined in 2017 and have more than 7000.
24 Jan 19 UTC hahaha alright man, best of luck to you -
24 Jan 19 UTC I think I lost a lot of the respect I held for you as part of the community here Tugster.
24 Jan 19 UTC i am not here for your respect. don't kid yourself
24 Jan 19 UTC Wow. I missed a lot while at work... Good Game England.
25 Jan 19 UTC Tugster is probably the harshest post-game commentator on the site, and always points out the mistakes that led to a solo win — including mistakes that led to his own wins. A solo win is not really possible in this game without someone making a mistake, but usually the mistakes are subtle and the conversation after the game helps tease out those hard-to-spot mistakes. Tugster’s harsh criticism is also insightful commentary that makes it possible to learn “what went wrong.”

Here, the German’s play was bad for years upon years and would have inevitably resulted in a solo win for any English player that wanted it. There’s not much to say other than to express nerd rage about how this was supposed to be a high-level game and not a noob game.

Tugster is harsh, stern, and a rude a-hole sometimes, but he’s among my top favorite players to play in gunboats with because his skill is incredible and he understands almost every aspect of the game, and like me he is willing to have a deep post-game conversation. Tugster is one of the few people who I believe has something to teach me about gunboat.

My previous messages are not about implying that there was cheating. Im saying that the play was so *terrible* that it is indistinguishable from cheating in terms of the moves actually used. Truthfully, I think cheaters would have been more subtle. So to be clear, I have to say that I don’t believe cheating was at work.

What I am not implying - I am stating outright - is that the poor quality of the play by Germany is such that I have never seen. Inexperienced players throw games due to incompetence, but Germany clearly has experience and understands how the game works and all that, but nevertheless handed a solo win to England for no apparent reason. Not due any reasonable miscalculation or common mistake. The only way that England could NOT have solo won was if England refused to go for it - something Germany cannot reasonably assume in a gunboat game. That is an astounding level of incompetence.

And jollycream wants a pat on the back or something for taking candy from a baby. If I were in that position I would absolutely take the free solo win (don’t get me wrong I’ve taken my fair share of free wins when they came), but I’d be just as embarrassed about it as I am to be participating in the game on the losing end.
25 Jan 19 UTC LOL

Yes, indeed, I am harsh, stern and an asshole, thanks for the plug! It's true on this website, but not in real life, I am totally calm and cool. Great with kids, etc.

I play this game to keep myself mentally sharp, it's quite a high level mental exercise when played properly, a hundred times better than chess and bridge. So low quality play irritates me, that's all.

So making yourself out to have played well, England, well, that's a total joke, that you somehow engineered that mess with your subtle play, such total bullshit, admit it. You won because Germany played like shit, why cant you just say that?

And hell yes, when someone hands me a solo like this, I take it. as compensation for shit messes like this one, where I got screwed.
25 Jan 19 UTC So, deep post-game analysis. Given a weak player in a game of strong players, how do you act? I can accept that for France it is difficult in this game as Germany opens anti-F and England goes along. But the rest? For me, being across Moscow is past the stalemate line but not a tenable hold once I stab (vs the rest of the board I don’t have enough armies if I assume competent play). This should be obvious to the board (in my mind). Therefore I need an unassailable hold on Tunis before I can stab, or be able to rush Munich. I believe that I won’t be able to rush Munich before Austria/Germany can defend it, so I will need to slug it out. I don’t have enough armies for that and to hold Mos. That was my reasoning for not stabbing earlier and risk ending up at 17. I don’t know where Turkey/Italy were thinking, but my hope was that Turkey would be attacking from the back, and wondering what I would have to show to make him dare do it.

If I had been stopped from Tun, I am not sure I would have stabbed as it was too high risk it would end up at 17 in a five-way draw. I was mentally prepared to withdraw and support Turkey at that moment to try to engineer a three-way draw (or a situation further down the road where I could be first to Munich because Germany was too far in).

I agree I was given a good hand here, but it didn’t feel that certain in my seat until the stab had succeeded.

That is my view of the late-game strategy as I saw it.
25 Jan 19 UTC I wrote that above before Tugster’s comment.

Did I win because Germany didn’t defend his back? Yes. Is it one of my easier wins? Yes. Is it the worst I have ever seen? No.
25 Jan 19 UTC well, there was one turn, where I moved out of Ionian, and needed Turkey to go there and Tunis could have been held, but it would have required a on turn inspired guess and he missed it. Fall of 1907, i needed a Turkish fleet to Ionian.
25 Jan 19 UTC By the time I got to Italy I was convinced the game was over. I love playing Turkey but in my experience, it takes a while to break out as Turkey, and this time it took me a bit too long. That was partly to do with a early blunder I made, allowing A-H to take Bulgaria in Autumn 1905 (great move BTW). If it weren’t for that single blunder i think I could have gotten to Italy much sooner, and maybe we would have had a different outcome.
Tugster I don’t disagree with your analysis but next time try to be more civil, if for no other reason than you’ll be able to get your message across better that way.

Start Backward Open large map Forward End

jollycream (969 D)
Won. Bet: 120 D, won: 840 D
18 supply-centers, 16 units
palesman (833 D)
Survived. Bet: 120 D
7 supply-centers, 7 units
Tantrum (4185 D (B))
Survived. Bet: 120 D
5 supply-centers, 4 units
Tugster (13048 D)
Survived. Bet: 120 D
2 supply-centers, 2 units
AJPietro (266 D)
Survived. Bet: 120 D
2 supply-centers, 4 units
swordsman3003 (14036 D (G))
Defeated. Bet: 120 D
czechveck (620 D)
Defeated. Bet: 120 D
Archive: Orders - Maps - Messages