Have you ever had a time when you win a roll or game against unbelivable odds? Well post them here.
One time in an assassin game, the other guy was about to eliminate his target. He had a 7 and I had a 5. I attacked him thinking I could weaken him enough so he couldn't take out his target. I ended up winning.
3 vs 6 to eliminate someone, i took all 6 lost none, got his cards and a mixed set (was flat rate) took out 16 with 13 to eliminate another, then another mixed set, had 13 to take out the last player with 5 armies, lost all 12 to one of his......
jaydog wrote:one time in a Real time game, Trestasin was wiping the board with all of us, my only chance was to attempt a major upset to get his cards
i had 43 to take 56 or so and one with a final one on one, i went on to win the game.
Winning 43 vs. 56 is actually not that unlikely. The attacker has some advantage over the defender and with increasing number of armies, the odds grow stronger that the attacker wins (even when he has a little less number of armies than the opponent).
jaydog wrote:one time in a Real time game, Trestasin was wiping the board with all of us, my only chance was to attempt a major upset to get his cards
i had 43 to take 56 or so and one with a final one on one, i went on to win the game.
Winning 43 vs. 56 is actually not that unlikely. The attacker has some advantage over the defender and with increasing number of armies, the odds grow stronger that the attacker wins (even when he has a little less number of armies than the opponent).
Assuming just one country is involved, it is 26% chance of success. The odds decrease significantly if those armies are spread out over several countries (as I assume they were). For instance, if they were 2 countries with 22 on each and 12 with one army, the odds go down to 5%.
jaydog wrote:one time in a Real time game, Trestasin was wiping the board with all of us, my only chance was to attempt a major upset to get his cards
i had 43 to take 56 or so and one with a final one on one, i went on to win the game.
Winning 43 vs. 56 is actually not that unlikely. The attacker has some advantage over the defender and with increasing number of armies, the odds grow stronger that the attacker wins (even when he has a little less number of armies than the opponent).
Assuming just one country is involved, it is 26% chance of success. The odds decrease significantly if those armies are spread out over several countries (as I assume they were). For instance, if they were 2 countries with 22 on each and 12 with one army, the odds go down to 5%.
All right, I didn't notice that this wasn't a 1 vs. 1 fight.
I've found auto-attack works both ways - sometimes you lose everything but sometimes you win everything. Try it when you're about to lose and you never know...
nmhunate wrote:Speak English... It is the language that God wrote the bible in.
i once won a game cos i was down to my final territory and i had 1 on it. the other guy had 6 or 7 i think and failed to kill me. i then cashed really high and pretty much wiped him and won next turn. that was really hard luck on him cos overall he came out down about 19 armies
joeyjordison wrote:i once won a game cos i was down to my final territory and i had 1 on it. the other guy had 6 or 7 i think and failed to kill me. i then cashed really high and pretty much wiped him and won next turn. that was really hard luck on him cos overall he came out down about 19 armies
... and this is why I don't play escalating games.
Lol, i was watching my brother play, and he killed a 21 with a 26 and still had 15 left. This was in indochina against someone who was about to win. Actually, he had me click because I'm luckier. Then he killed like 8 more territories and only lost like 1 or 2.