This is what happens when you have a win-condition being contested - Both blue and orange needed army to win, which forces them to compete against each other!

Blue saw it, Drew pushed him off by focusing him on Orange via the win condition table talk.

Yeah but sheep mono is way more disrespectful 🤪

Hope you enjoy the new videos I am sharing in the membership! I will be updating all the members with more gameplays consistently moving forward.

It’s an Oompa Loompa 😂🤣

Would be funny bcs you played on the Tal account 😂

Yeah, he had arguably the best setup and starting rolls, and really flubbed it. This is why I say outplaying is better than out-placing.

Maybe at some point but not for majority of the learning player base. The difference is are you trading with an intention or just randomly throwing out random deals all the time?

@@dandydrew I'm thinking more of giving too many trades or cards to one player in order to get what you need. Example: let's say blue is the only one accepting your trades, is there a point you stop trading with blue even if it costs you to not get the settle/city/dev/etc.?

@@TranzeknoI LOVE this question and there is some serious nuance to it. I tend to be more than willing to give away a lot of heavy trades because I know most players won’t use their hands as efficiently as they could. In a way, it’s an exploitative way to play. So I definitely factor in the skill of the player when giving them a good trade but I still think learning players should experiment and be willing to mess up a few games to improve their trading skills.

Think of it like this: every time you make a trade, you are increasing your and the other persons winning chances at the cost of the remaining 2 players chances. Any trade that is good for both parties in a 4 player game will make them more likely to win at the expense of the other players. So there are really few situations where you shouldnt do it, here are a few: - if the other guy is close to winning and even though the trade is good for you it means you lose the short time you have to overtake him - if the other guy is very clearly in front (same reason - your window to get ahead of him diminishes greatly) Even if the other guy is the only one to trade you and the trades slightly benefit him, until a certain point you should still take them. In short, imagine a game start where each player has 25% chance to win. If you trade one person regularly and that increases his chances to 45% and yours to 35%, even if he gets more out of the trades than you, you still will win the game more often than by keeping everyone at 25.

Lmao! I am not THAT old 👴

I didn’t mean that 😁

In ranked games, I hover around 45-50% WR - I do my best to share a balanced amount of wins and losses. Tournament games/voice chat games are different… I usually run at a very high win-rate since I have a lot more control and ability to influence the board in my favor. You’ll be seeing the viewer games from the anniversary stream here soon as an example… Regardless of win-rate, it’s important that whatever I post has educational AND entertainment value first!

The point of the video was to do a side by side challenge where I place my settles next to one another.

@@dandydrewYeah, wouldn't that be variation 2?

You got it! If orange just takes 810, rolls 2 8s and cities the 8510… he most likely has a winning position. Orange actually really messed up his position since he could have taken the 84 water and build to 810 desert. Instead he took the 810 desert and initiated a losing race.

Much better is 810 right and drop an early city with a few 8s or 84 coast up to the 810 desert!

Many people come and go in doing content. I am sure he is busy too. I believe Hugh hit a tough downswing and most likely needed to reset. Up to him if he wants to continue.

Great players just make it look easy. :) All 3 players here are 1600-1700 ELO with +30% win-rate, which is more than a fair range of a good player on the leaderboard.

“Trade Masterclass”