Forums

Myself and another are forming a team. Neither have participated as a team before this. So some questions.

1.What are your suggestions for dividing command?

2.What scenarios should we play?(that would be good for team play.

3.Any other wisdom you have to share.

Thanks in advance Zap

Hi Zap,
One team game I played is "A close run thing ". Its easy to divide the command because the Allies land on a beach, as Americans and Brits and, the Axis has commands on both sides of the board seperated by a forest and a paved road. As far as wisdom goes all I can say is keep the game moving, the slower the turn rate the quicker the intrest fades and people lose intrest. When I play team games I like my teammates to let the others know if your going to be out of action for a while so somebody else on the team can move his forces, while on vacation, hospital stay or work piling up. Team games are hard to get going but once started they can be more fun than playing a game with only 2 people.

Chuck

I'm currently playing in two team games, have finished a few others and been part of others that died out for one reason or another. One started in 2006. So be prepared, it can get a little frustrating, especially when no one seems to know who has the file. Smooth play is best when each team has a leader who is really into the game, gives orders and takes it upon himself to keep track of the file and communicate with the other team's leader. Definately set up a system for file tracking, with email return receipts.

I also recommend having at least one alternate player for each team on standby. The longer the game lasts, the greater the likelihood of a dropout. I think we've had three drop out in the 2006 game, maybe 4. I forget, it's been so long.

It helps too, I think, if the players know each other a little bit, either personally or through PBEM. I was involved in one game where three of us knew each other and one guy didn't. He ended up getting into an argument with the guy I was playing with and the whole thing went downhill from there. Awful.

Personally, I've always liked team games, but after the two I'm playing in now, I think I'll be done for awhile. Of course, that won't be for a couple more years at the rate we're going.

Have fun!

Scud,
Is that time factor(for your games taking so long) partially due to the number of turns in a team game? What should/would be a turn # in a team game?

Is there a best way to divide forces on a team? By Divisions?/ Divide the board?/ One take armor the other Infantry?


Anything else to add to this list?



So far this is the list of advice I have for team games.
1. Frequency of turns to keep up interest.
2. Organizational
a. Team Leader (each side) in charge of Giving Orders.
b. Team Leader (each side) keep track of the file and communicates with other team leader.
c. Use a file traking system with e-mail return reciepts
3. Best results if team members know each other.
4. Have an alternate player(in case of a drop out)
5. Communicate to others if your going to be absent

Zap,

The division of forces depends purely on the scenario. Designers usually organize OOB so they can easily divided between specified number of players. The problem arises when a game designed as 2 x 2 is played as 3 x 3. So in that case my advice will be, read carefully the scenario description and look for those who were designed as 2 x 2, the look at the initial dispositions etc.

The length of the team battle depends not only on the number of turns (which itself is significant factor) but also on turn return rate of opponents, real life commitments and system of exchanging of turns team adapts.

Best regards

Slawek

zap Wrote:So far this is the list of advice I have for team games.

There are many choices of specifically designed teamgames in EF, WF, and to a degree RS.
Taking a theatre that everyone is interested in helps.

zap Wrote:1. Frequency of turns to keep up interest.

To me, this is the most important part of a teamgame. It helps with flow and cohesion of play. Teamgames break down when a team often fumble around with the turn, or one teammate fails to complete their portion in a timely manner. This delays the file return to the opponent team and begins to erode the "fun".
I was just in a 3 X 3 where turns were exchanged almost daily. :bow:
A while ago I was in a 3 X 3 where turns were exchanged quickly among my team but our opponents took days (and sometimes weeks) to return their turn. That was torture. :kill::censored:

zap Wrote:2. Organizational
a. Team Leader (each side) in charge of Giving Orders.
b. Team Leader (each side) keep track of the file and communicates with other team leader.
c. Use a file traking system with e-mail return reciepts

a. Not always the case. I rarely follow orders so I do not play with one who thinks he should "give orders". :rolleyes: I don't mind a team leader or coordinator who makes suggestions for where to go within the strategic framework.
b. Not needed if you play by a strict; Leader One goes first, followed by Two, and then Three (who will then close out the game turn and send it to the opponents.) Or, you use "call the ball" in which the first person to open the files sends a message to his team that he will be playing first, and then send the files for the next teammate to "call the ball". Obviously the last person to call the ball closes the file and sends it to their opponents.
c. I keep a record of the team file's status on a piece of note paper next to the computer monitor. I "tic off" who has played and the dates that the files were sent. Even if I am not team leader, it helps to keep a side record of events. :smoke:

zap Wrote:3. Best results if team members know each other.

It does make it easier to play the teamgame. But, I have benefitted from meeting others through team play.

zap Wrote:4. Have an alternate player(in case of a drop out)

Always have someone in mind who can take over for a drop out. But, do not wait for the replacement to play their turn. The remaining teammates should send the replacement the game file but, they should finish out the turn by playing the drop out's portion and sending the file to your opponents. The replacment can view the game turn and "practice" movement. But, can get into the flow of the game with the next file exchange. Always try to keep the turn around pace on track.

zap Wrote:5. Communicate to others if your going to be absent

This is key always! :smoke:
Communication is critical. Even without an absense, exchanging information about the game turn, upcoming game turns, and strategy should be a large part of the teamgame.
Separating the e-mails into "team comms" and "game file" is a must. Some guys like to mix up communications between game play by using the reply button off a previous game file exchange mailing.
If you keep a separate "comms" mail it will lessen the confusion that sometimes occurs during play? This often is where you hear words like "hey, did you do your turn?" or "did you send the file?" when you are simply discussing tactics and strategy.
You can say "watch out for those loaded trucks" when sending a game file. Just try not to discuss what you will be doing next turn in that mailing.

All that said, Teamgames are as complex as you wish to make them within the parameters of fun you wish to have?
They are truly an enhancement to the game.

RR

zap Wrote:Is that time factor(for your games taking so long) partially due to the number of turns in a team game? What should/would be a turn # in a team game?

Yep, around 40 turns. Fun, but grueling.

Quote:Is there a best way to divide forces on a team? By Divisions?/ Divide the board?/ One take armor the other Infantry?

The team scenarios are usually set up in such a way that it's easy to see how to divide up the players, assuming you're playing one that's made specifically for 3 vs 3, 4 vs 4, etc. I think it's usually by division, but I can't swear to that. You can see the obvious setup, though, under the "Find Org" menu. As for how to pick who gets what, I never care, but some ask specifically for armor or an area of the map, then the team leader is given the ultimate choice. In regards to Roadrunners comment on "taking orders" that, too, is up to the players. Personally I find it kind of fun to take a literal chain of command. However, that doesn't mean micro-managing. More that the leader, after suggestions from his other "Generals", decides on the overall strategy. For example, eastern player head west and converge with player 2 to double the attack on Objective X, while western player head north to flank...

In the end, it's all good. Just have fun.

Scud Wrote:In regards to Roadrunners comment on "taking orders" that, too, is up to the players. Personally I find it kind of fun to take a literal chain of command. However, that doesn't mean micro-managing. More that the leader, after suggestions from his other "Generals", decides on the overall strategy. For example, eastern player head west and converge with player 2 to double the attack on Objective X, while western player head north to flank...

I often think of Patton's advice. "Don't tell them what to do, tell them what you want them to do. They will often surprise you with what they can do well."
I can do the "example" above. :smoke:
When all the team's players are skilled the commander needs to "lead" less?

And, "Where's your Sergeant?" ... "blowed up, Sir!"



RR

How about dealings with rules.

"no funny stuff" was mentioned in a post. Halftracks running around.

1.Could you explain what some of the rules that might be implemented.

2. Like Bad game play being dissallowed.

3. Is there a list of practices universally not accepted during gameplay?

4.Is it normal for there to be a lot of negotiations about rules before a game is settled on?

zap Wrote:How about dealings with rules.

"no funny stuff" was mentioned in a post. Halftracks running around.

This is a general comment that covers most uses of HT's deemed to be "bad" or unrealistic. Mostly in the area of intentionally using an armored HT to draw opportunity fire from enemy units so that your own armor can move forward and then fire on the exposed enemy. HT's are less points than armor losses.

zap Wrote:1.Could you explain what some of the rules that might be implemented.

I use simple rules. Non combat units should not be used to draw fire, block LOS or roads, and/or surround a unit to be assaulted. Nor should they be used to occupy road crossing or victory hexes.

zap Wrote:2. Like Bad game play being dissallowed.

Mostly cheesy play that exploits rules and would be something not done in the "reality of combat". Like "combat" Ht's assaulting armor by themselves. Most players require that armored or infantry units assault with Ht's.

zap Wrote:3. Is there a list of practices universally not accepted during gameplay?

Most players have personal ROE's that are used along with club standard ROE's.
Most personal ROE's revolve around trucks and HT's.
My simple standard is "if it fights, use it to fight. If it cannot fight do not use it to fight."
Swarms of trucks moving forward to block LOS, surround disrupted enemy, block road use, "secure" victory hexes, or block exit hexes is pretty much frowned upon.

zap Wrote:4.Is it normal for there to be a lot of negotiations about rules before a game is settled on?

For the most part, no. But, if I play a new member I will often ask about the ROE's they use. Communication does not hurt. And, will go a long way to prevent ill feelings later on?

RR