my H2H running record...

[Legatus]

Thrasher, after reading your Aztec/Egypt battle, if you don't mind, I want to pick your brain in a little....

In our one legit game, India/Mongols, I ended up spending a fair amount of gold and time on building archers.

I would have, of course, preferred settlers, but you were coming at me fairly good. I did want to keep you from getting back your barb cities, but more importantly, I didn't want you to kill my horsearmy (which probably would have meant certain doom for me).

Didn't know if you found that to be somewhat intelligent strategy, or something I was only able to get away with thanks to me find Seven Cities earlier.


I will have to say, next time I play you again, I'll have to ditch the random idea and at least do my roll dice to pick a civ that would likely give an even matchup. Any matchup like the first three we got will just make boring games for you.

[elthrasher]

Thrasher, after reading your Aztec/Egypt battle, if you don't mind, I want to pick your brain in a little....

In our one legit game, India/Mongols, I ended up spending a fair amount of gold and time on building archers.

I would have, of course, preferred settlers, but you were coming at me fairly good. I did want to keep you from getting back your barb cities, but more importantly, I didn't want you to kill my horsearmy (which probably would have meant certain doom for me).

Didn't know if you found that to be somewhat intelligent strategy, or something I was only able to get away with thanks to me find Seven Cities earlier.


I will have to say, next time I play you again, I'll have to ditch the random idea and at least do my roll dice to pick a civ that would likely give an even matchup. Any matchup like the first three we got will just make boring games for you.

That's fine by me. I'm the guy who agreed to play several Mongol vs. America matches with Pedal2. Be whoever you want.

When you have a close city like you did, archers are a pretty good investment. If you put all those hammers and gold into settlers and then I broke through with some armies, you'd be really screwed. A lot of the time it's not really that necessary to expand (much) or tech (much) during the horserush phase. Now if the other guy manages to get sufficient resources on the field and then can expand in the back, you could have trouble, but if he's doing that he's either off to a better start than you or he's playing somebody like Rome or China.

I used to try to expand as early as possible all the time and won a lot of games that way, but when you play somebody like Duke, TyShine or Mawpawk, doing that will just get you dead. So archers and also legions, if you're close, can be pretty good. Otherwise you're probably better off with more horsemen or, with sufficient distance, try for a few settlers.

[Zefelius]

Zef
I was pretty much done when I retreated from a 9 vs 9 HA vs AA battle and most likely would have lost, and your galley drop(nice move BTW) was the decider for me.GG.

Galley drops can make a huge difference. Seems like one more reason to make galleys, although some players tend not to...

[Zefelius]

Since noone wanted to play me (saaaaad faaaaaaace) I went ranked and picked random.

Wound up against America (darn) and got a nice big island with 1 balanced spot and 1 barb for pottery....how joyfull....

I made a galley with a warrior in it to find the mainland, and grabbed 2 barbs for 70g, then found a nice Indian caravan which was handed over briefly to make peace for delivering it.

Put 2nd settler on my islands balanced spot (I settled near barb) in order to get a settler out, but I met the americans on the continent whilst making my way to Delhi with 3 warriors.
Got there quite late (1800BC), but after 6 more turns of struggling I got the cap

Then I realised I hadn't been stomped with horses yet, and waddayaknow, a settled GS was in Washington!
->I felt like I could win this one, so I sent over a horse from my island towards the continent, but bumped into a blue galley, which sank mine.

now THAT delayed me A LOT, but I managed to get a 2nd galley (hammers +3 cities on gold) and a HA got to the continent "soon" (500BC... *sigh*)
My gp was a GA, which did NOTHING the ENTIRE ff'n GAME

America was racing ahead in tech (3 total) whilst preparing defences for its settler.
2 AA's protected it, but once settled it fell to my 9 attack non-vet HA (9-6 ftw) increasing my culture with yet another point!

Anyways, I teched up to 5 techs, got cats out, veted'm up and wanted to sail towards my goal, but he sank me once more....
Eventually I had a ninja WA, vet HA and vet cat army at his doorstep, and he had 6 techs (won't say the date because it's emberassing), but I attacked 13.5-15 to soften him up....but I won!
Then he attacked with a HA.... a mighty 6 attack vs 12 def of my vet fully fortified warrior army in his forest, lol
I won that fight as well, granting me a Great General!

Then the cats brought 30 points of pain on his final AA and the cap (thus the game) was mine.



I'll never ever think of quiting a ranked match against America again...even with a smelly island start, lol

Sounds like your opponent's only major mistake was not building enough AAs!

[sn1p3rk1ll3]

Sounds like your opponent's only major mistake was not building enough AAs!

oh, he was.... he sent 2 AA's out to defend the settler, then had 3 more in his cap (forgot to mention my inf WA killed a 9 def army), and had some AA's protecting his single horses.... real bright fellow for bringing defences!

[Zefelius]

oh, he was.... he sent 2 AA's out to defend the settler, then had 3 more in his cap (forgot to mention my inf WA killed a 9 def army), and had some AA's protecting his single horses.... real bright fellow for bringing defences!

You see, that's just not enough AAs... That's why I always message noobs after my games that they probably would have won if they had just built one or two more AAs!

[Zefelius]

More good games lately. Perhaps I'm coming out of the biggest slump of my life! Some of my games, though, I've quit early as my record is already so messed up it just doesn't matter if I lose. REM is a good example of this. In one of our recent games he was disconnected early. In the next one he was glitched again as I was able to attack one of his HAs when in fact it should have moved elsewhere afer beating one of my warriors (where it would have been out of reach of my HA). So I quit that game knowing REM didn't deserve two losses in a row! So right now I don't care if I win.... I just want to play with a variety of civs---mostly French lately. It seems the more you play with bad civs the more you learn how to develop a multi-staged attack.

[REDAF]

Nice Zef! Good to see you with postive outlook and a skip in your step!!

I have to confess, I also met REM in a ranked h2h..

Unfortunately for him, I got a random Aztec draw in a game against his Stone Hedge Egypt. (Mispelled intentional cause it's worthless.)

I walked and got a naming tile and settled in the middle next to a barb. Barb gave me a galley, which led me to 7CoG by 3000bc. The militia found Thebes, about 7tiles SE of my cap and I dropped a HA, W and militia into His cap.

Felt horrible the second after. He was so high up on the leaderboard and I so low, it cost him a bunch of points. I won't play anyone on the forums in ranked anymore. We can play player matches all day long, frankly I would be happy too. But I hated to see his name drop so far. Not that I think I can beat REM every game, that one I was given a golden horseshoe. I think I'm 1-7 vs REM. Unfortunately the only win I had was the only one in ranked.

Sorry REM.
I'll quit out of 32 ranked matches with you if you want the points back. And have a couple hours...

[Zefelius]

Nice Zef! Good to see you with postive outlook and a skip in your step!!

I have to confess, I also met REM in a ranked h2h..

Unfortunately for him, I got a random Aztec draw in a game against his Stone Hedge Egypt. (Mispelled intentional cause it's worthless.)

I walked and got a naming tile and settled in the middle next to a barb. Barb gave me a galley, which led me to 7CoG by 3000bc. The militia found Thebes, about 7tiles SE of my cap and I dropped a HA, W and militia into His cap.

Felt horrible the second after. He was so high up on the leaderboard and I so low, it cost him a bunch of points. I won't play anyone on the forums in ranked anymore. We can play player matches all day long, frankly I would be happy too. But I hated to see his name drop so far. Not that I think I can beat REM every game, that one I was given a golden horseshoe. I think I'm 1-7 vs REM. Unfortunately the only win I had was the only one in ranked.

Sorry REM.
I'll quit out of 32 ranked matches with you if you want the points back. And have a couple hours...

I bet REM doesn't mind playing you ranked. Personally, I'd rather lose to most forum players in rank than to someone else. If I lose, they go up in the ranks and I can feel good about that. Plus it makes for a more intense game: people are less likely to quit early and fight harder in rank.

[Jackoneill]

I still say ranked sucks, unless you do play a forum member or a forum members 2nd or 3rd account.Id rather play player matches, but if I wan't a noob bashing then ill play ranked.

[REM018]

... Sorry REM.
I'll quit out of 32 ranked matches with you if you want the points back. And have a couple hours...

No big deal. If I play ranked against a forum member and I choose Egypt, I am very well aware that I might lose that game easily. It's just part of the game. And rank comes and goes. I just play these days for fun and if I happen to be in the Top 20, that's nice, but does not really matter too much anymore. All it takes is one freeze or a bad start against a Zulu noob and you drop 30 points anyways.

And why wouldn't another forum member get a shot at making some extra points and/or taking some away from me? No different than playing other players, except that it is more fun!

[Legatus]

That's fine by me. I'm the guy who agreed to play several Mongol vs. America matches with Pedal2. Be whoever you want.

When you have a close city like you did, archers are a pretty good investment. If you put all those hammers and gold into settlers and then I broke through with some armies, you'd be really screwed. A lot of the time it's not really that necessary to expand (much) or tech (much) during the horserush phase. Now if the other guy manages to get sufficient resources on the field and then can expand in the back, you could have trouble, but if he's doing that he's either off to a better start than you or he's playing somebody like Rome or China.

I used to try to expand as early as possible all the time and won a lot of games that way, but when you play somebody like Duke, TyShine or Mawpawk, doing that will just get you dead. So archers and also legions, if you're close, can be pretty good. Otherwise you're probably better off with more horsemen or, with sufficient distance, try for a few settlers.

Thanks for the feedback.

I've seen the phrase "he built an archer army, so I knew it was game over" enough times to learn that going with defensive units 100% of the time is usually bad.

I was looking to get literacy, then switch to gold and settle some of the islands near me. Smarter move probably would have been to get Iron working, then switch to communism to help mass produce Legions to push you back.

[Jackoneill]

I have a day off work I play one ranked game against a well known tool and you guessed it im frozen, WOW and you wonder why I prefer playing player matches.I just quit out I can't be fd with dicks that still cheat.I don't give a rats a$$ about points it's just the principal of the matter.Good luck too ya mate.

[Zefelius]

I have a day off work I play one ranked game against a well known tool and you guessed it im frozen, WOW and you wonder why I prefer playing player matches.I just quit out I can't be fd with dicks that still cheat.I don't give a rats a$$ about points it's just the principal of the matter.Good luck too ya mate.

Just out of curiosity, did he use a power civ? What I think is funny is that the freezers tend to use Zulu, Aztec, and the USA... but if you're going to freeze, why not just use Mongols and pretend like you're actually a good player!? Why have a good record with China when you can have an equally good record with France?

[Jackoneill]

Just out of curiosity, did he use a power civ? What I think is funny is that the freezers tend to use Zulu, Aztec, and the USA... but if you're going to freeze, why not just use Mongols and pretend like you're actually a good player!? Why have a good record with China when you can have an equally good record with France?

I just play random Zef, and I got china.I don't care about my rank and stats anymore.Maybe I should just start to pick civs before I play so I don't get the big 3, or even spain.

[Zefelius]

I just play random Zef, and I got china.I don't care about my rank and stats anymore.Maybe I should just start to pick civs before I play so I don't get the big 3, or even spain.

Oh no no no no no.... I meant the other guy's civ choice. What I think is odd is how these freezers will choose a power civ and then cheat. They should just choose France if they're going to freeze anyway... since that way they can brag to their cheater friends about how good they are with stupid ol' France or Russia!

[Jackoneill]

Oh no no no no no.... I meant the other guy's civ choice. What I think is odd is how these freezers will choose a power civ and then cheat. They should just choose France if they're going to freeze anyway... since that way they can brag to their cheater friends about how good they are with stupid ol' France or Russia!

Ok silly me, I have a day off work and what does jack do on his days off work(apart from talking in the 3rd person lol), I have a few beers of coarse.

[elthrasher]

Oh no no no no no.... I meant the other guy's civ choice. What I think is odd is how these freezers will choose a power civ and then cheat. They should just choose France if they're going to freeze anyway... since that way they can brag to their cheater friends about how good they are with stupid ol' France or Russia!

I doubt they have friends.

[turtlmtnchip]

Yea most cheaters block their friends list and keep status offline

[Jackoneill]

I played a surprise game yesterday against Emorgs, he always picks china so to give myself a chance I picked spain.But to my shock he wen't random and got the mongols.It took my bombers to win the game.He lost 3 knights armies to my 1 vet archer army, which I thought was funny, he was attacking in fundy too.The GW saved me, I had a bad island start, and took forever to expand.I lost my HA in a 9 to 6 battle.That slowed me down even more, and the gold I wasted.But it was a gg though, he did pretty good with the mongols.The next match he wan'ts to play his dirty little chinese lol against my spainish.

[Mike H 31]

my 19 game win streak was ended by a 2-4 night. 2 were freezes on my part. one was very first turn, it was my first game of session which i found weird. another i was just flipping thru my cities when i hard froze, so i backed out of a game i think i was behind anyways. another loss was due to american knights templar in 3700... knight found me in 3300. rushed warriors for awhile but could never get army or pull an upset. just quit the turn i was losing my last warrior. mabey thats the battle i would have won, but i was frustrated and he had just found 7cog. GG. walk 2 turns with rome next game, zulu warrior army in 3000 attacks my single warrior in rome. build warrior army in washington 2 spaces away(walkin at 3100). try to double move in but i wait till end of turn to move out, then he runs around me at start of next turn to win. what could i have done? there were 2 wins mixed in here. in one of them a galley showed up as i was assembling my spanish galleon fleet. lose 3v1, rush last few hammers on 2nd, lose 3v1... then galley unloads indian HA by my city. When it rains it pours. i did have offensive units so damage wasnt done... but the thought of the fleet that never became...

[Legatus]

Just out of curiosity, did he use a power civ? What I think is funny is that the freezers tend to use Zulu, Aztec, and the USA... but if you're going to freeze, why not just use Mongols and pretend like you're actually a good player!? Why have a good record with China when you can have an equally good record with France?

Simple: the consensus is that most freezers want the quick, easy win.

Which civs will give you the fastest win in H2H? The Zulu and the Aztecs.

It seems that most freezers are willing to stomp low-level competition - which would be harder to do as a civ such as France - and freeze out people who put up a fight.

i.e. it probably is quicker to pound a novice with an Aztec horsearmy, or get all the map's gold with impi's than to wait out a freeze.

[Zefelius]

Simple: the consensus is that most freezers want the quick, easy win.

Which civs will give you the fastest win in H2H? The Zulu and the Aztecs.

It seems that most freezers are willing to stomp low-level competition - which would be harder to do as a civ such as France - and freeze out people who put up a fight.

i.e. it probably is quicker to pound a novice with an Aztec horsearmy, or get all the map's gold with impi's than to wait out a freeze.

Yeah, that's a fair analysis. Nice job going 19-0!

[Legatus]

Not really sure what 19-0 means....

Anyways, that's my best guess as to their thought process.

[asmodeios]

Not really sure what 19-0 means....

Anyways, that's my best guess as to their thought process.

He quoted your post, but the 19-0 part was in response to Mike's post above yours. I think Zef had merged your two posts, in his mind, in his post.

[Zefelius]

He quoted your post, but the 19-0 part was in response to Mike's post above yours. I think Zef had merged your two posts, in his mind, in his post.

Holy crap Asmod, you're a mind reader! You got it exactly right: I merged the two posts. HAHA!

[asmodeios]

Holy crap Asmod, you're a mind reader! You got it exactly right: I merged the two posts. HAHA!

What can I say, I'm an INTJ.

[Zefelius]

I'm an INTJ.

Hmmmmm.... I can see that. Not at first glance, but after thinking about it.

[asmodeios]

Hmmmmm.... I can see that. Not at first glance, but after thinking about it.

What do you mean by the "not at first glance" part?

[Zefelius]

What do you mean by the "not at first glance" part?

Nothing huge. The introverted part wouldn't seem to quite fit you at first as you can be quite vocal and upfront when you want to be... most people here on the forum probably wouldn't think of you as shy. It's not as if you disguise your opinions, right!?!? But then again, you're not exactly gregarious either---not in the usual sense of the term. It's almost impossible to assess someone's personality online, but I could see how the introverted part might fit you in the sense of how for some people measured and calculated participation forms an external layer of introversion. That's pure speculation on my part, of course!

[Zefelius]

A couple years ago Asmod and I had some intense, classic games. This year REM and I are having some equally close, well fought games.

Tonight, after recording my first REV CAST (in which I mock and trash talk several players, and give kudos to only one: REM), I decided I should try playing a decent game after losing so many lately. I set my civ choice to Mongols, and when I came back to the TV I saw I was facing REMs Russians. I'm horrible beyond imagination with Mongols, much worse than with even France, but in this game I got some very good luck.

Although not at first. I ran into the Aztecs first off and timed everything poorly in terms of trying to take them. If I had headed in another direction I could have taken Rome and Thebes super quickly. Instead, my start was slow. Luckily REM was pretty far away. So I gave up on the Aztecs and eventually took Rome for CoL and Thebes for the almighty CoR. While I was doing that, REM was picking off my cities one by one, took an artifact, and even conquered the Aztecs while he was at it! That's what I hate about the Mongols---I just can't figure out a way to send out my HA and still defend when it's so expensive for them to get a second HA. But in this game it didn't matter, as I had CoR.

REM took about 5 of my cities, including Rome which had a barracks in it. I grabbed his Moscow which had a GS in it, as well as a couple of other cities for good 50% extra trade. Speaking of 50% extra trade: the Mongols with the CoR and a library is pretty nifty!

What was so crazy about this game was that there were really no clear fronts. We had so many cities scattered across the map in variegated, diagonal, and oddly juxtaposed arrangements, that it was a very unpredictable game (for example, my cap was surrounded by his cities for most of the game, and we both had cities in what could be called enemy territory). Indeed, I didn't dare expand b/c there was hardly any way for me to defend those cities. Although when I tried attacking, REM almost always repelled me, except with my surpise attack on Moscow and a couple of walk-ins he didn't expect.

But once I got Nav, found 7C late in the game (I think he got SoC early), and started settling islands, I think it was over. I also had a GS and was just about to use it for Indust when REM quit.

So I finally got revenge for his pummeling of me in recent games... very fun and topsy-turvy game REM!!

[asmodeios]

Nothing huge. The introverted part wouldn't seem to quite fit you at first as you can be quite vocal and upfront when you want to be... most people here on the forum probably wouldn't think of you as shy. It's not as if you disguise your opinions, right!?!? But then again, you're not exactly gregarious either---not in the usual sense of the term. It's almost impossible to assess someone's personality online, but I could see how the introverted part might fit you in the sense of how for some people measured and calculated participation forms an external layer of introversion. That's pure speculation on my part, of course!

lol...I see you are focusing on the I vs E.

INTJs are commonly referred to as the "masterminds" and are only like 1-3% of the population.

We tend to value objective criteria above personal preference. When making decisions they generally give more weight to logic than to social considerations. We derive a sense of control through predictability. And we tend to be more abstract than concrete. We focus our attention on the big picture rather than the details and on future possibilities rather than immediate realities.

We are best as scientists, engineers , teachers/professors, and law. Basically anything that requires research or complex theories as we are very analytical.

Despite being an INTJ I am very outspoken so I do get your point there Zef

[Zefelius]

If you're the logical and abstract type, Asmod, I'm the smart but self-destructive weirdo type who loses his marbles from time to time even though appearing to demonstrate self-restraint and a good sense of humor on the surface. I think we're called SBSDWTWLHMFT2TETATDS-R&AGSOHOTS for short, or RAGSHOTS for even shorter.

Case in point: a week or two ago I deleted all my friends from my friends list, except a couple I'm playing in the tourney, as a kind of self-inflicted punishment for playing so horribly lately. Kind of self-destructive, and hard to explain to nice and friendly guys like Chug E, whom I played today, in the middle of a match. I'm sure he thinks I'm a freak now, which is actually quite true...

BTW, I got lucky in my match against Chug E. He's Egypt, I'm France. We both take a cap (I actually win 1-1.5), but he doesn't get nav from Spain. What a bummer. When I send my HA to Madrid, I actually move it in the wrong direction and instead of attacking end up one tile to his East. He had an AA there anyway though. Doesn't matter: next turn I get the GA and win. That early GA for the French can be awfully sweet.

[HydroDragon]

That's interesting. I wonder what kind of personality I am, quite close to an INTJ I feel.

I'm definitely an introvert. Hard to tell from the internet but it's obvious in the real world. I like analytical subjects where I can predict things and calculate answers (Maths/Chemistry/Physics) but I'm also good at music. Then again, I take a very mathematical approach to composing music. Kind of neo-classical I suppose. I like controlled rhythms and chords that 'make sense' but throw in my own twists and turns. Not that I can't turn my hand to writing an essay or doing some practical work, the only things I really can't do are public speaking and art.

Having said that, I do tend to procrastinate and expend the minimum possible energy to complete tasks. However, I don't think the latter is a bad thing because if I see that the energy I'm currently expending isn't going to cut it then I'll switch gears and work harder.

For example, I knew that I had a Grade 8 piano exam coming up for months but I didn't work hard at all to get my third piece up to standard. Three weeks ago I realized I was going to fail at this rate so I started practicing 1-2 hours a day and it paid off and I now know that I passed.

The reason that I went on this rant is that I picked up on this part..

We derive a sense of control through predictability. And we tend to be more abstract than concrete. We focus our attention on the big picture rather than the details and on future possibilities rather than immediate realities.

When I was deciding whether I was going to do the Grade 8 exam I took a lot of things into consideration. I knew for a fact that it required some work and that I was going to be extremely nervous for a few hours before the exam (it happens every time I perform) but by weighing it against the benefits of the satisfaction that comes with 'completing the set' of exams, having it on my CV, and the fact that I knew I could do it because I'd done the other 7, I decided to do it.

Basically I ignored the 'details' of many hours of work and temporary intense anxiety and considered the 'big picture' of how my life would be different if I did/didn't do the exam.

But yeah, sorry about that whole rant. It's for my benefit more than yours.

[Mawpawk]

had a long 30 win streak but got taken out by fundy zulu , was over when tripoli fell(3500) i managed 2 make a good game but still lost due 2 zulu swarms, i receive a "gg"msg from uaintacrookson and thought that was very sportsmanlike, im sure he used 2 be some1 who used 2 smacktalk heavy but my opinion has changed.

[asmodeios]

hydro go to humanmetrics.com and take the myers-brigg personality test.

[Zefelius]

Speaking of personality types: Did you guys ever see Shanghai's introduce yourself thread? I'm sure Asmod contributed to it, but I wonder if the newer guys Hydro, Mawpawk, REDAF, Chug E and others have seen it...

[Zefelius]

That's interesting. I wonder what kind of personality I am, quite close to an INTJ I feel.

I'm definitely an introvert. Hard to tell from the internet but it's obvious in the real world. I like analytical subjects where I can predict things and calculate answers (Maths/Chemistry/Physics) but I'm also good at music. Then again, I take a very mathematical approach to composing music. Kind of neo-classical I suppose. I like controlled rhythms and chords that 'make sense' but throw in my own twists and turns. Not that I can't turn my hand to writing an essay or doing some practical work, the only things I really can't do are public speaking and art.

Having said that, I do tend to procrastinate and expend the minimum possible energy to complete tasks. However, I don't think the latter is a bad thing because if I see that the energy I'm currently expending isn't going to cut it then I'll switch gears and work harder.

For example, I knew that I had a Grade 8 piano exam coming up for months but I didn't work hard at all to get my third piece up to standard. Three weeks ago I realized I was going to fail at this rate so I started practicing 1-2 hours a day and it paid off and I now know that I passed.

Sounds like you could be a perfectionist.

[HydroDragon]

I took the test and I got INTJ.

Introverted: 89%
Intuitive: 50%
Thinking: 88%
Judging: 67%

I don't know if that's relevant or not, lol. Interesting though. I'm reading http://typelogic.com/intj.html and most of the points ring true, so there's definitely something in this. Thanks for the link, this is good stuff. I wouldn't consider myself a perfectionist, but maybe I am in my own way.

My 'minimum effort' attitude works when I'm doing calculations or a Yes/No question or something but it doesn't work as well when I'm writing an essay, anything that needs lengthy communication to get the idea across. It was still good enough for A grades but not 'full marks 100% perfect' in that sense. But you could argue that it's a 'perfect method' as in, the most efficient in terms of energy expenditure/results.

But yeah, sorry for taking this off-topic. I'd post about a H2H game but I haven't had one in a while, lol.

[asmodeios]

I took the test and I got INTJ.

Introverted: 89%
Intuitive: 50%
Thinking: 88%
Judging: 67%

I don't know if that's relevant or not, lol. Interesting though. I'm reading http://typelogic.com/intj.html and most of the points ring true, so there's definitely something in this. Thanks for the link, this is good stuff. I wouldn't consider myself a perfectionist, but maybe I am in my own way.

My 'minimum effort' attitude works when I'm doing calculations or a Yes/No question or something but it doesn't work as well when I'm writing an essay, anything that needs lengthy communication to get the idea across. It was still good enough for A grades but not 'full marks 100% perfect' in that sense. But you could argue that it's a 'perfect method' as in, the most efficient in terms of energy expenditure/results.

But yeah, sorry for taking this off-topic. I'd post about a H2H game but I haven't had one in a while, lol.

My I(introversion) and T were even higher than that and yours are pretty high! My J was more in line with your iN.

I've read the typelogic link before as well. I find it amusing that one of the first things they mention about INTJs are that they can be perfectionists.