Removing units from the map

[Kool Kat]

But that's my point exactly. My non-gamey tactics arsenal is quite likely at least somewhat different in comparison to some one elses arsenal. Exiting combat units from map a case in point.

Remember, I believe I have never exited a combat unit but will defend my right to do so if I so choose! Unless I've agreed not to do so, which could be easily something I could agree into.

If we would find ourselves arguing about the truck-blocking technique at turn 24 of a 26 turn scenario, what would the outcome be? No ROEs in place, remember?

Who'd be right, who'd be wrong here?

Petri:

My head is "hurting" from this ping-pong debate! :eek1:

Here are a few "guidelines" you can follow to avoid potential conflict from different rule interpretations:

* Spell it out - be explicit on ROE that you always follow... especially when you play opponents for the first time

* Compromise - When issues arise, deal with them between you and your opponent. In my experience, most players are reasonable... and you can work out a compromise.

* Communicate - Often and as early as possible. If a situation arises during play... deal with it at that moment... don't wait until near game end and then mention it to your opponent.

Again, I don't believe the issue is what ROE are "correct"... and which ones are "wrong."

We can "debate" ROE until the cows come home... but we are NOT going to come to a common ROE set to be used by all players. Personally, I don't want a "force fitted" "standard" ROE because we are not "rules lawyers" here... but game players trying to have fun and enjoy our hobby.

The "issue" (if you wish to call it that?) is not being explicit on ROE prior to match start... and not communicating to your opponent during the match.

[Crossroads]

[quote='Cpl K. Kat' pid='323256' dateline='1275473705']
The "issue" (if you wish to call it that?) is not being explicit on ROE prior to match start... and not communicating to your opponent during the match.

Mike, this is the issue precisely. Or the reverse of it? :smoke:

If there has been no discussion of ROE before the game commenced, it should mean there are no ROE of any sort in play, right?

You see, I am not discussing about the ROEs as such (until those cows come home). I just wanted to be sure that if there has been no communication - well, then there should not be any assumptions of game play either?

Apart from Blitz ROE of course.

We are perfectly in sync that yes, it is a good practice to agree about the rules before playing. No problem there at all.

Sorry about the headache my friend :)

[Chuck10mtn]

I think it comes down to a matter of playing for fun !!! who cares what happens, win or lose having fun is the most important thing. And those who play to win, win at all costs and if it wasn't spesficly spelled out its not a rule. I play to have fun look at my record, and to me it really doesn't matter what tatic you use, as long as you have fun. Block hexes use trucks to spot if winning is that important to you then do all that. To me its just not that important, have fun and enjoy the game for what it is A GAME and no more,people are reading a lot more into this than need be. Have fun people, just have fun !!!

Chuck

[Kool Kat]

If there has been no discussion of ROE before the game commenced, it should mean there are no ROE of any sort in play, right?

Yes, I agree. But, players may be operating off an "assumed" ROE... again it goes back to communicating with your opponent prior to match start. Get both players on the "same page" so to speak.

You see, I am not discussing about the ROEs as such (until those cows come home). I just wanted to be sure that if there has been no communication - well, then there should not be any assumptions of game play either? Apart from Blitz ROE of course.

Yes, I agree.

We are perfectly in sync that yes, it is a good practice to agree about the rules before playing. No problem there at all.

Upfront, explicit ROE with on going communications and a willingness to compromise between players... goes a long way to overcome any potential in game issues or conflicts.

Sorry about the headache my friend :)

The aspirin are helping. :smoke:

[von Manstein]

When attacking side force other side to retreat and to leave the battle area (map) it's some kind of success and should be rewarded, maybe not so much as killing those units.

[Herr Straße Laufer]

When attacking side force other side to retreat and to leave the battle area (map) it's some kind of success and should be rewarded, maybe not so much as killing those units.

That is determined by the scenario designer, when he sets up the victory conditions/levels? :chin:



HSL

[Glint]

As an overview of all the above, I would state that some have their own ROEs, that are by no means the Blitz's ROEs.
Of course they are entitled to play with those in force, with whoever accepts them.
I can't remember, out of the 200+ games I've played where ROE's were ever discussed and so, have accepted a loss however it has happened. Many like me accept there are no roe's except the Blitz ones and I can't see anything listed there that implies certain tactics are not allowed, apart from cheating?
To avoid confusion to new players, I think this should be clarified.
Equally, Chuck's post is the most relevant one imho, surely most of us are in this for the fun of playing, if certain players' tactics spoil that enjoyment for you, play with the many members that are in tune with you.
For me personally, I wouldn't want to play against anybody who needs to be so specific about ROEs, too much bother. (That's not directed at anybody btw, just my feelings. As has been said before, 'one man's meat is another man's poison' - Find players who eat the same meat, lol!

[Herr Straße Laufer]

I think it comes down to a matter of playing for fun !!! who cares what happens, win or lose having fun is the most important thing. And those who play to win, win at all costs and if it wasn't spesficly spelled out its not a rule. I play to have fun look at my record, and to me it really doesn't matter what tatic you use, as long as you have fun. Block hexes use trucks to spot if winning is that important to you then do all that. To me its just not that important, have fun and enjoy the game for what it is A GAME and no more,people are reading a lot more into this than need be. Have fun people, just have fun !!!

Chuck

Good points Chuck. :smoke:

I like when players discuss their desire to play as "realistic" as possible but then fall back on "the game allows it" or "there are no ROE's that were discussed so I can do what I want", and then have a problem with it later. :chin:

It is, after all, a game. An old game. A game that does not cover all aspects of "realistic" battlefield action.
I enjoy the game. I like it as it is.

I also use very simple and limited ROE's that I have often stated:

Empty transports can leave the map and should not be used for spotting, blocking, or in surrounding enemy units that are about to be overrun. Armed half tracks cannot assault tanks alone.

Players should try not over-think things? ;)



HSL

[Kool Kat]

I think it comes down to a matter of playing for fun !!! who cares what happens, win or lose having fun is the most important thing. And those who play to win, win at all costs and if it wasn't spesficly spelled out its not a rule. I play to have fun look at my record, and to me it really doesn't matter what tatic you use, as long as you have fun. Block hexes use trucks to spot if winning is that important to you then do all that. To me its just not that important, have fun and enjoy the game for what it is A GAME and no more,people are reading a lot more into this than need be. Have fun people, just have fun !!!

Chuck

Chuck:

Hopefully, most players do play CS for "fun" and relaxation? :chin:

But at the same time... and I only speak for myself... I like to win! :eek1:

Therefore, when I'm playing against an opponent, I want the match to be as "fair" and "balanced" as possible... both in the scenario design (e.g. between equally skilled players, either side may win)... AND that both players are leveraging the same tactic "kit bag"... and in the same manner.

So... using your example of trucks / transport being utilized as spotters by one player... but your opponent thinks it is "gamey" and refuses to do the same... the player using "transport spotters" now has an advantage in the match.

Just because a specific "tactic" is possible in CS does not make it right, fair, or desirable... even in the name of "fun."

IMO, I'll take my lumps and a defeat when an opponent employs superior tactics... and essentially "out plays" me. But I'll be darned if I'm going to take a defeat because he "games" the system by using "transport spotters / blockers," or halftrack fodder. :smoke:

[Herr Straße Laufer]

IMO, I'll take my lumps and a defeat when an opponent employs superior tactics... and essentially "out plays" me. But I'll be darned if I'm going to take a defeat because he "games" the system by using "transport spotters / blockers," or halftrack fodder. :smoke:

In all the games I have played the ones I remember negatively are those that exemplify the above.
Nothing sucks the fun out of the game than that. :chin:



HSL