Play by Play Analysis Thread

Forum rules
Please DO NOT POST BUGS on this forum. Please report (and vote) bugs on : https://boardgamearena.com/#!bugs
User avatar
nmego
Posts: 360
Joined: 27 December 2017, 07:08

Re: Play by Play Analysis Thread

Post by nmego »

Its Lji8, you start with the end of the shortest side of the L, and Tg98, as the T goes from 9 to 8 in the g column in this case.
---
Worth noting that out of the 4 Xs that Lji8 covers, only 3 of them can be captured and I think the only move that does that is Lij7.

So, your move protects 3 Xs below it, covers an O and protect another X above. it looks like a 5-pointer but I think that the situation in the north-east corner is a bit tricky, so the O and X you cover and protect are probably worth less than two points.

Seems solid, I don't think there's any other 4+p that doesn't give opponent a good counter.
User avatar
andycupid
Posts: 44
Joined: 31 July 2015, 14:22

Re: Play by Play Analysis Thread

Post by andycupid »

Yeah the move is as straightforward as it can get.

It's worth noting that the move is important because:
1)We can sort of expect to cover the top row of Xs. (Which I think is a misplay on whb's part because playing S4 is objectively better than T4 imo)
2)If we wander else where he might play Zj09 to leave a L4 hole, and that might be gg for us.
User avatar
gurthbruins
Posts: 33
Joined: 20 August 2017, 16:38

Re: Play by Play Analysis Thread

Post by gurthbruins »

Yep, I agree... the move is essential. 6.Zj09 would be horrifying - a 10-point swing. Losing 5 instead of winning 5 in that area.
T72on1
Posts: 671
Joined: 09 October 2019, 12:18

Re: Play by Play Analysis Thread

Post by T72on1 »

Agreed too. I will play that move suggested by csaphiro.
User avatar
gurthbruins
Posts: 33
Joined: 20 August 2017, 16:38

Re: Play by Play Analysis Thread

Post by gurthbruins »

whb has replied to our 5.Lji8 with 6.Sfg2, leaving us 6 points behind - (-6). I looked at 7.Led2 (-3 now) but it didn't seem to lead to great things. I prefer 7.Ief0(-3) with a 'mainline' continuation 8.Jb87(-6), 9.Ia76(-2), 10.Zab3(-4), 11.Led2(-1), 12.Zcd9(-1), 13.La90 (+1) End.
I don't fear 8.Icd1(-6) as we immediately better it with 9.Tcd3(-2) and whb has not made any progress by that imo.
If 8.Ldc7(-5), 9.Tba9(-2), 10.Ib76(-2), 11.Scb3(+0), 12.Icd1(-3), 13.Ted3(+0) wins (or 12.Jd21(-1), 13.Ide4(+0) wins)

I'll leave analysis of 7.Led2 to someone else, maybe he'll get better results?
User avatar
csaphiro
Posts: 9
Joined: 14 June 2020, 02:16

Re: Play by Play Analysis Thread

Post by csaphiro »

For 7.Ief0 I would submit a more likely counter of 8.Lcd7 to protect 3 O and 1 X as well as take two O. I haven’t worked out how the game would play from there, it might still be an X win, there’s plenty of other available O to take.
Still, I submit now might be the time for the Jed9 that was originally suggested for move 3. With the state of pervious moves it all but guarantees the Ief0 will eventually be played, unless whatshisbucket blocks with Icd0, which seems unlikely since that would be -2 for O and would still leave X powerful counters. The most likely move 8 counters are probably the same as they were for move 4, since that side of the board hasn’t been played on yet.
I do agree that the Icd1 is not scary enough to try to prevent.
User avatar
csaphiro
Posts: 9
Joined: 14 June 2020, 02:16

Re: Play by Play Analysis Thread

Post by csaphiro »

Although that said Tde2 might be an interesting move to think about too.
User avatar
Cheery Dog
Posts: 221
Joined: 28 January 2017, 04:08

Re: Play by Play Analysis Thread

Post by Cheery Dog »

I originally thought Led2 as well, but I see there's a better counter to that than my first thought as to what whb might do.So I'd like to therefore go with
Tde2 as the best option, as it prevents that better counter that Led2 had of where whb could sue the S/Z

Image

I prefer to leave the top of the board alone for the moment, there's no chance of interference with us getting the big sections away.
User avatar
Cheery Dog
Posts: 221
Joined: 28 January 2017, 04:08

Re: Play by Play Analysis Thread

Post by Cheery Dog »

And as I prefer to look at the scores, I only count the ones guaranteed to still be around in the final score. Such a move puts as +7 by what pieces have been saved so far. (hat's not even counting that one of the two o nthe left of the piece will be safe.
User avatar
gurthbruins
Posts: 33
Joined: 20 August 2017, 16:38

Re: Play by Play Analysis Thread

Post by gurthbruins »

I could go along with csaphiro's and Cheery Dog's move 7.Ted2(-4), as my 'mainline' would go
8.Zab3(-6) (This move is worth 2 killed plus 2 saved, whereas if whb allowed us to follow up our 7th move with Sab2 we'd be the ones killing 2 and saving 2 - a swing of 8 points - so 8.Zab3 is practically forced), 9.Tba5(-2), 10.Jb87(-5), 11.Tb90(-2), 12.Lde0(-1), 13.Ide4(0) wins.
If 10.Ldc7(-4), 11.Ia78(-1), 12.Lde0(0) (again he's forced to kill his own), 13.Ide4(+1) wins by more.
One reason I suggested 7.Ief0 was because it threatened the nasty-looking Sed9 and would force a show-down in the area.
I got a win by tie for that move and also for Ted2. But the win by Ted2 seems more certain than the other way.
Post Reply

Return to “Battle of LITS”