Request for an Important Thread: "Rules of Engagement for PBEM Games"

[Herr Straße Laufer]

Correct me if I am wrong, but I sensed ( it is always a bit risky to base the judgement on my senses ) a bit of stereotyping in this thread that long term members who have been here sometimes from the inception of the club are considering those who adapt the rules as little bit as nobel knights and those who do not are seem to be tainted as the ones lacking honour. I know noone has said it that way, but this is the impression one might get (again one with the sense like mine ).

I did not see anyone as noble or tainted.
When a player says that they want to play it as a simulation then they should have a set of personal ROE's that remove the "gaminess" from the play of the game?

I do not see the problem with both as a different way of playing the game. And the Blitz can be home to any way (except the cheater are not welcome).

You mean one as a simulation and the other as a game?
Kinda like making a banquet for a meat eater and a vegetarian?

Either can be equally tainted by a cheater?

It player do not agree the rules beforehand, they equally guilty of wrongly assuming....
It is a bit unfair to assume the one with more "chivalric" and "realistic" rules is the good guy and the second party is the one is playing "gamey" because they should have know better and did the research of the first party view on ROE..

Chivalry and realism? Not sure they can be put together.

How about a player who believes that trucks and transports are valuable in their role? Like the creation of the Red Ball Express, which immobilized three infantry divisions because the trucks were more valuable than to have the three divisions in the line? Trucks and transports should be husbanded and kept safe.

Then about another player who is willing to stack up unarmed transports in a hex to block line of sight. Or, move trucks forward to absorb opportunity fire so that following infantry can move forward unhindered? Or, line a road with transports, nose to tail, so that your opponent cannot exit units from the map or drive into open victory hexes? Or drive an unarmed truck miles into the rear to spot "?" question marks?

To me, one is realistic and the second is gamey. Nothing chivalric about either. Though, I personally would have more respect for the first player over the second player.

if it is not shared by anyone else treat me as a

Your opinion does not make you a jester, nor should you be treated as one. You have a valid opinion and should be respected for it.
Also, it does not mean anyone has to agree with it? And, if they disagree that they are disrespecting you either?

I always have respected the opinion of others. Though, I sometimes get prickly when, during a discussion, the "facts destroy the hard held theories" that some are unwilling to let go.

Here the only fact is that we all have various views of how to play the game?



HSL