[WarInEur] strategic surprise rule.

Chuck Sutherland csutherland at gamewoodinc.com
Fri Nov 9 10:36:21 EST 2007


Somewhat, except its a single stack like used in overruns in WIE except 
4 units can attack instead of the 3. Costs are 2mp for the attack plus 
COT, and ZOC if no other AOMs are done with that stack. So a 8mp stack 
could attack 2 times in each movement phase along with normal combat.

However to do this would require a total rework of the Russian OOB and 
production abilities, assuming OOS attacks were also altered to do away 
with the AEX auto results.

The Russians are going to need about 3 to 4 times their current infantry 
production to compensate for needing to give up troops as speed bump.

Don Lazov wrote:
> Chuck,
>  
> Are your combat on the move ideas similar to OCS during movement overruns?
>  
> For those not in the know, in OCS during your movement phase (or the 
> enemy's reaction movement phase) you may overrun units, in this sense 
> overrun is just like combat but you do it in the movement phase by 
> expending MP to overrun a hex, you may not even take the hex, but 
> cause losses (to both your self and his forces).
>  
> Again in OCS the only units that have a ZOC are units in Combat mode.
>  
>  
> --
> Don Lazov
> ~Best Regards
>  
>
>     -------------- Original message --------------
>     From: Chuck Sutherland <csutherland at gamewoodinc.com>
>
>     > The Strategic suprise thread is just another sign to me that
>     allowing
>     > combat during movement is still the real way to solve all if the
>     combat
>     > issues! Its just to radical an idea for now, so I will wait it
>     out! ;)
>     >
>     > Wardall Clark wrote:
>     > > The KC addendums offer a very clunky and very drastic rule,
>     that I
>     > > have never heard anyone playing
>     > > in CWIE; The rule addressed the fact that a certain times during
>     > > WWII, events developed
>     > > so fast that operational initiative passed so completely to
>     one side
>     > > that the other side's high command
>     > > was reduced temporarily to the role of observer for roughly a
>     week.
>     > >
>     > > The rule was simplicity itself . At the start of the initial
>     movement
>     > > phase a player can declares that he
>     > > will utilize one of his Strategic surprise options that turn.
>     At the
>     > > conclusion of his mechanized phase,
>     > > the phasing player restarts his turn. The Axis may do this six
>     times
>     > > throughout the game. The Russians
>     > > have three such opportunities and the Allies have three. Only one
>     > > option may be used per cycle,and
>     > > the option applies only units within the designated Air Front.
>     > >
>     > >
>     > > This nicely simulates the major strategic surprises of the war by
>     > > making possible tearing of enormous
>     > > holes in the opponent's defensive lines. Unfortunately, it
>     > > also allowed violations of national capacity
>     > > rules such as railroad and sea transport limits. It has always
>     seemed
>     > > to me that this aspect of the
>     > > double turn would have to be clarified/proscribed in some way.
>     > >
>     > > I note that players of WIE keep complaining that echeloned
>     defenses
>     > > keep frustrating their blitzkrieg
>     > > efforts and making the game look like WWI. In the RW, such
>     > > deployments nearly always succeeded,
>     > > when ample forces were available and the defenders high
>     command was
>     > > able to discern the point of
>     > > attack. It failed when either (1) the defender had insufficient
>     > > reserves or (2) the high command was
>     > > unable to figure out quickly enough which rear area units to
>     reinforce.
>     > >
>     > > The strategic surprise rule speaks to the second of these. By
>     letting
>     > > one side move&attack&mech move
>     > > and then do this a second time before the other side moves
>     again, The
>     > > classic double combat line can be
>     > > breached and penetrated in a single week. Great encirclements
>     become
>     > > possible again, and for weeks
>     > > and possibly even months afterwards the user of the option
>     will be
>     > > able to dictate the action as his
>     > > opponent scrambles to reconstruct his defenses well behind the
>     > > original position.
>     > >
>     > > BOB
>     > >
>     > >
>     > >
>     > >
>     > >
>     > >
>     > >
>     > >
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>     > >
>     > > > Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2007 08:42:30 -0500
>     > > > From: warineur-request at mailman.halisp.net
>     > > > Subject: WarInEur Digest, Vol 40, Issue 7
>     > > > To: warineur at mailman.halisp.net
>     > > >
>     > > > Send WarInEur mailing list submissions to
>     > > > warineur at mailman.halisp.net
>     > > >
>     > > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, vi sit
>     > > > http://mailman.halisp.net/mailman/listinfo/warineur
>     > > > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>     > > > warineur-request at mailman.halisp.net
>     > > >
>     > > > You can reach the person managing the list at
>     > > > warineur-owner at mailman.halisp.net
>     > > >
>     > > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more
>     specific
>     > > > than "Re: Contents of WarInEur digest..."
>     > > >
>     > > >
>     > > > Today's Topics:
>     > > >
>     > > > 1. Re: The Sergio option (game-beating up on Nazis
>     issalubrious)
>     > > > (Kent & Sue Haunschild)
>     > > > 2. Lets stop the Political spinning before it goes any further!
>     > > > (Chuck Sutherland)
>     > > > 3. Re: ZOCs (Kent & Sue Haunschild)
>     > > >
>     > > >
>     > > > ----------------------
>     ------------------------------------------------
>     > > >
>     > > > Message: 1
>     > > > Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2007 07:26:00 -0600
>     > > > From: "Kent & Sue Haunschild"
>     > > > Subject: Re: [WarInEur] The Sergio option (game-beating up
>     on Nazis
>     > > > issalubrious)
>     > > > To: "srm" ,
>     > > > Message-ID: <000901c82078$92a17bc0$6401a8c0 at kent839ba1def4>
>     > > > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
>     > > > reply-type=original
>     > > >
>     > > > Gosh and Golly! I would never have guessed that you were a
>     historical
>     > > > revisionist and brought your political philosophy into rules
>     > > > interpretations. I bet your students receive a daily dose of
>     your
>     > > > political views carefully inserted into the official
>     curriculum also.
>     &g t; > >
>     > > > You have obviously come away with a different lesson learned
>     from
>     > > WWII than
>     > > > I did. I see it as the folly of appeasement. You see it as
>     evidence
>     > > of a
>     > > > plot by the rich capitalists to get still richer.
>     > > >
>     > > > By the way, if this activity is unhealthy, why do you
>     participate?
>     > > >
>     > > > Kent
>     > > >
>     > > > ----- Original Message -----
>     > > > From: "srm"
>     > > > To:
>     > > > Sent: Monday, November 05, 2007 11:17 PM
>     > > > Subject: Re: [WarInEur] The Sergio option (game-beating up
>     on Nazis
>     > > > issalubrious)
>     > > >
>     > > >
>     > > > > Hansen, the youth of today are being educated
>     > > > > regardless of what i say or do. After all, many of
>     > > > & gt; their parents voted for Bush. Twice.
>     > > > >
>     > > > > And please recall that apostrophes indicate
>     > > > > possession, not plural. Nazis. Not " Nazi's" for
>     > > > > plural.
>     > > > >
>     > > > >
>     > > > > As for this goodness thing? The US Empire (and
>     > > > > Argentina, Switzerland,and Sweden-- all for less than
>     > > > > "noble" reasons) made scads of money off the death and
>     > > > > mayhem of WWII (a world record!) if you want to make a
>     > > > > point about "goodness" in war.
>     > > > >
>     > > > > So, all war sucks. Hitler was not "mad", either. He
>     > > > > was an angry hateful man who took advantage of a
>     > > > > corrupt geopolitical situation.
>     > > > >
>     > > > > WWII is thankfully over. Revisiting the worst of a bad
>     > > &g t; > war fighting lot (the Nazis, as opposed to the other
>     > > > > "noble" warriors) is not psychologically healthy, in
>     > > > > my opinion.
>     > > > >
>     > > > > --- Hansen wrote:
>     > > > >
>     > > > >> Sergio writes:
>     > > > >>
>     > > > >> ...
>     > > > >>
>     > > > >> today's kids aren't interested in WWII "Give the
>     > > > >> Whermacht a break" revisionism because what they do
>     > > > >> glean out of WWII --however unfair that may sound--
>     > > > >> is
>     > > > >> that the Axis were bad and deserved to lose, period.
>     > > > >>
>     > > > >>
>     > > > >> ...
>     > > > >>
>     > > > >> A strategic wargame has a definite built-in
>     > > > >> favo ritism, and kids today just do not favor the
>     > > > >> nazi/fascists in WWII.
>     > > > >>
>     > > > >> ...
>     > > > >>
>     > > > >> I respond:
>     > > > >>
>     > > > >> It's a fair cop. The Nazi's were evil and it's a
>     > > > >> good thing they lost. So I
>     > > > >> propose a Sergio option for CWIE2.
>     > > > >>
>     > > > >> 1) All allies strength is increased by a factor of
>     > > > >> 10. Because their hearts
>     > > > >> are pure and they fight with the strength of 10.
>     > > > >>
>     > > > >> 2) The axis can only lose political points, not gain
>     > > > >> them. To let the axis
>     > > > >> gain political points is to imply that there was
>     > > > >> some good in them.
>     > > > >> *> > > >> 3) Partisans can now be placed up to the limit of
>     > > > >> available units every
>     > > > >> turn, regardless of garrisons. Partisans will
>     > > > >> initially be placed as a
>     > > > >> cadre. A roll of 1 changes them to a (1)-1 unit. A
>     > > > >> subsequent roll of 1
>     > > > >> changes them to a unit from the nation's army.
>     > > > >> Because we know that all
>     > > > >> people resisted the Nazi's in all occupied
>     > > > >> territories to the fullest extend
>     > > > >> humanly possible all the time.
>     > > > >>
>     > > > >> 4) The Hitler was a mad man rule implies that he
>     > > > >> must interfere with troop
>     > > > >> movements periodically. '39-'40 - No rolls, '41 roll
>     > > > >> of 1, '42 roll of 1 or
>     > > > >> 2, '43 roll of 1, 2 or 3, '44 roll of 1,2,3 or 4,
>     > > > >> '45 any roll but 6. Every
>     > > > >> turn the dice is rolled. If the number comes up, the
>     > > > >> all German troops in
>     > > > >> enemy ZOC can not retreat or move except into hexes
>     > > > >> controlled by the enemy.
>     > > > >> This is the stand or die rule.
>     > > > >>
>     > > > >> 5) If the German player uses loot production points,
>     > > > >> then random German
>     > > > >> units will disappear as the heroic slave labor will
>     > > > >> sabotage the weapons
>     > > > >> produced, rendering the Nazi's helpless.
>     > > > >>
>     > > > >> 6) Allied production is doubled as the allies deploy
>     > > > >> their secret weapon,
>     > > > >> 'Rosie the riveter' who is able to turn out ships
>     > > > >> planes and tanks 24/7
>     > > > >> while leaving her children in the government
>     > > > >> supplied day care.
>     > > > >>
>     > > > >>
>     > > > >> With the Sergio option, it may not be a balanced
>     > > > >> game, but we will pull in
>     > > > >> the youth crowd. No more will their minds be tempted
>     > > > >> to think about how
>     > > > >> close things could have been to the allies losing,
>     > > > >> they will be secure in
>     > > > >> knowing that the Nazi's are bad and thus deserved to
>     > > > >> lose. And I am sure you
>     > > > >> will see that with this option, what the Nazi's
>     > > > >> deserve will be what they
>     > > > >> get.
>     > > > >>
>     > > > >> Isn't it nice to know that the youth of today are
>     > > > >> receiving such a fine
>     > > > >> education that they do not question the linking of
>     > > > >> 'badness' and 'deserving
>     > > > >> to lose'? That should set them up for anything in
>     > > > >> the future.
>     > > > >>
>     > > > >> _______________________________________________
>     > > > >> WarInEur mailing list
>     > > > >> WarInEur at mailman.halisp.net
>     > > > >> http://mailman.halisp.net/mailman/listinfo/warineur
>     > > > >>
>     > > > >
>     > > > >
>     > > > > __________________________________________________
>     > > > > Do You Yahoo!?
>     > > > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection
>     around
>     > > > > http://mail.yahoo.com
>     > > > > _______________________________________________
>     > > > > WarInEur mailing list
>     > > > > WarInEur at mailman.halisp.net
>     > > > > http://mailman.halisp.net/mailman/listinfo/warineur
>     > > > >
>     > > >
>     > > >
>     > > >
>     > > > ------------------------------
>     > > >
>     > > > Message: 2
>     > > > Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2007 08:34:30 -0500
>     > > > From: Chuck Sutherland
>     > > > Subject: [WarInEur] Lets stop the Political spinning before
>     it goes
>     > > > any further!
>     > > > To: Kent & Sue Haunschild
>     > > > Cc: warineur at mailman.halisp.net
>     > > > Message-ID: <47306D66.9010703 at gamewoodinc.com>
>     > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>     > > >
>     > > > Anyone who wants to talk politics e tc lets take it to
>     private emails,
>     > > > PLEASE!!!! I did!!
>     > > >
>     > > >
>     > > > Kent & Sue Haunschild wrote:
>     > > > > Gosh and Golly! I would never have guessed that you were a
>     historical
>     > > > > revisionist and brought your political philosophy into rules
>     > > > > interpretations. I bet your students receive a daily dose
>     of your
>     > > > > political views carefully inserted into the official
>     curriculum also.
>     > > > >
>     > > > > You have obviously come away with a different lesson
>     learned from
>     > > WWII
>     > > > > than I did. I see it as the folly of appeasement. You see
>     it as
>     > > > > evidence of a plot by the rich capitalists to get still
>     richer.
>     > > > >
>     > > > > By the way, if this activity is unhealthy, why do you
>     participate?
>     > > > >
>     > > > > ; Kent
>     > > > >
>     > > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "srm"
>     > > > > To:
>     > > > > Sent: Monday, November 05, 2007 11:17 PM
>     > > > > Subject: Re: [WarInEur] The Sergio option (game-beating up
>     on Nazis
>     > > > > issalubrious)
>     > > > >
>     > > > >
>     > > > >> Hansen, the youth of today are being educated
>     > > > >> regardless of what i say or do. After all, many of
>     > > > >> their parents voted for Bush. Twice.
>     > > > >>
>     > > > >> And please recall that apostrophes indicate
>     > > > >> possession, not plural. Nazis. Not " Nazi's" for
>     > > > >> plural.
>     > > > >>
>     > > > >>
>     > > > >> As for this goodness thing? The US Empire (and
>     > > > & gt;> Argentina, Switzerland,and Sweden-- all for less than
>     > > > >> "noble" reasons) made scads of money off the death and
>     > > > >> mayhem of WWII (a world record!) if you want to make a
>     > > > >> point about "goodness" in war.
>     > > > >>
>     > > > >> So, all war sucks. Hitler was not "mad", either. He
>     > > > >> was an angry hateful man who took advantage of a
>     > > > >> corrupt geopolitical situation.
>     > > > >>
>     > > > >> WWII is thankfully over. Revisiting the worst of a bad
>     > > > >> war fighting lot (the Nazis, as opposed to the other
>     > > > >> "noble" warriors) is not psychologically healthy, in
>     > > > >> my opinion.
>     > > > >>
>     > > > >> --- Hansen wrote:
>     > > > >>
>     > > > ; >>> Sergio writes:
>     > > > >>>
>     > > > >>> ...
>     > > > >>>
>     > > > >>> today's kids aren't interested in WWII "Give the
>     > > > >>> Whermacht a break" revisionism because what they do
>     > > > >>> glean out of WWII --however unfair that may sound--
>     > > > >>> is
>     > > > >>> that the Axis were bad and deserved to lose, period.
>     > > > >>>
>     > > > >>>
>     > > > >>> ...
>     > > > >>>
>     > > > >>> A strategic wargame has a definite built-in
>     > > > >>> favoritism, and kids today just do not favor the
>     > > > >>> nazi/fascists in WWII.
>     > > > >>>
>     > > > >>> ...
>     > > > >>>
>     > > > >>> I respond:
>     > & gt; > >>>
>     > > > >>> It's a fair cop. The Nazi's were evil and it's a
>     > > > >>> good thing they lost. So I
>     > > > >>> propose a Sergio option for CWIE2.
>     > > > >>>
>     > > > >>> 1) All allies strength is increased by a factor of
>     > > > >>> 10. Because their hearts
>     > > > >>> are pure and they fight with the strength of 10.
>     > > > >>>
>     > > > >>> 2) The axis can only lose political points, not gain
>     > > > >>> them. To let the axis
>     > > > >>> gain political points is to imply that there was
>     > > > >>> some good in them.
>     > > > >>>
>     > > > >>> 3) Partisans can now be placed up to the limit of
>     > > > >>> available units every
>     > > > >>> turn, regar dless of garrisons. Partisans will
>     > > > >>> initially be placed as a
>     > > > >>> cadre. A roll of 1 changes them to a (1)-1 unit. A
>     > > > >>> subsequent roll of 1
>     > > > >>> changes them to a unit from the nation's army.
>     > > > >>> Because we know that all
>     > > > >>> people resisted the Nazi's in all occupied
>     > > > >>> territories to the fullest extend
>     > > > >>> humanly possible all the time.
>     > > > >>>
>     > > > >>> 4) The Hitler was a mad man rule implies that he
>     > > > >>> must interfere with troop
>     > > > >>> movements periodically. '39-'40 - No rolls, '41 roll
>     > > > >>> of 1, '42 roll of 1 or
>     > > > >>> 2, '43 roll of 1, 2 or 3, '44 roll of 1,2,3 or 4,
>     > > > >>> '45 any roll but 6. Every
>     > > > >>> turn the dice is rolled. If the number comes up, the
>     > > > >>> all German troops in
>     > > > >>> enemy ZOC can not retreat or move except into hexes
>     > > > >>> controlled by the enemy.
>     > > > >>> This is the stand or die rule.
>     > > > >>>
>     > > > >>> 5) If the German player uses loot production points,
>     > > > >>> then random German
>     > > > >>> units will disappear as the heroic slave labor will
>     > > > >>> sabotage the weapons
>     > > > >>> produced, rendering the Nazi's helpless.
>     > > > >>>
>     > > > >>> 6) Allied production is doubled as the allies deploy
>     > > > >>> their secret weapon,
>     > > > >>> 'Rosie the riveter' who is able to turn out ships < BR>>
>     > > >>> planes and tanks 24/7
>     > > > >>> while leaving her children in the government
>     > > > >>> supplied day care.
>     > > > >>>
>     > > > >>>
>     > > > >>> With the Sergio option, it may not be a balanced
>     > > > >>> game, but we will pull in
>     > > > >>> the youth crowd. No more will their minds be tempted
>     > > > >>> to think about how
>     > > > >>> close things could have been to the allies losing,
>     > > > >>> they will be secure in
>     > > > >>> knowing that the Nazi's are bad and thus deserved to
>     > > > >>> lose. And I am sure you
>     > > > >>> will see that with this option, what the Nazi's
>     > > > >>> deserve will be what they
>     > > > >>> get.
>     > > > > ;>>
>     > > > >>> Isn't it nice to know that the youth of today are
>     > > > >>> receiving such a fine
>     > > > >>> education that they do not question the linking of
>     > > > >>> 'badness' and 'deserving
>     > > > >>> to lose'? That should set them up for anything in
>     > > > >>> the future.
>     > > > >>>
>     > > > >>> _______________________________________________
>     > > > >>> WarInEur mailing list
>     > > > >>> WarInEur at mailman.halisp.net
>     > > > >>> http://mailman.halisp.net/mailman/listinfo/warineur
>     > > > >>>
>     > > > >>
>     > > > >>
>     > > > >> __________________________________________________
>     > > > >> Do You Yahoo!?
>     > > > >> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the b est spam protection
>     around
>     > > > >> http://mail.yahoo.com
>     > > > >> _______________________________________________
>     > > > >> WarInEur mailing list
>     > > > >> WarInEur at mailman.halisp.net
>     > > > >> http://mailman.halisp.net/mailman/listinfo/warineur
>     > > > >>
>     > > > >
>     > > > > _______________________________________________
>     > > > > WarInEur mailing list
>     > > > > WarInEur at mailman.halisp.net
>     > > > > http://mailman.halisp.net/mailman/listinfo/warineur
>     > > >
>     > > >
>     > > > --
>     > > > Chuck Sutherland
>     > > > Technology Specialist
>     > > > Gamewood, Inc.
>     > > > 116 South Ridge Street
>     > > > Danville, VA 24541
>     > > > (434) 799-8407 x218
>     > > >
>     > > >
>     > > >
>     > > ; > ------------------------------
>     > > >
>     > > > Message: 3
>     > > > Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2007 07:42:26 -0600
>     > > > From: "Kent & Sue Haunschild"
>     > > > Subject: [WarInEur] Re: ZOCs
>     > > > To: "Lawrence Duffield" ,
>     > > >
>     > > > Message-ID: <001301c8207a$de314910$6401a8c0 at kent839ba1def4>
>     > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>     > > >
>     > > > Lawrence,
>     > > >
>     > > > I guess I need to quote the rule one again because you seem
>     to be
>     > > missing the point.
>     > > >
>     > > > "Allied ZOC do not extend across borders during this
>     movement phase."
>     > > >
>     > > > Notice that the rule does not say "extend into enemy controlled
>     > > hexes" and that the word "borders" is pluralized. Meaning that
>     t here
>     > > is more than one border to consider.
>     > > >
>     > > > So the rule, as written means exactly what you are try to
>     say it
>     > > doesn't mean.
>     > > >
>     > > > During the initial movement phase during the of the
>     lowlands: The
>     > > French and CW units on the French border do not project a ZOC
>     into
>     > > Belgium. Belgian units do not project a ZOC into France, the
>     > > Netherlands,Luxembourg, or Germany. Dutch units do not project
>     a ZOC
>     > > into Belgium or Germany.
>     > > >
>     > > > You may never have played this way, but this is what the
>     rules says.
>     > > >
>     > > > Kent
>     > > >
>     > > > PS
>     > > > As far as following history is concerned I assume that you
>     always
>     > > voluntarially follow the Dyle Plan even if not required to do
>     so by
>     > > your opponent because that is what the Allies did. Well no,
>     that would
>     > > be pro-axis and make it too easy for the Germans to knock
>     France out
>     > > of the War and decimate the BEF in the process.
>     > > >
>     > > > ----- Original Message -----
>     > > > From: Lawrence Duffield
>     > > > To: warineur at mailman.halisp.net
>     > > > Cc: Kent & Sue Haunschild
>     > > > Sent: Monday, November 05, 2007 9:54 PM
>     > > > Subject: Re: ZOCs
>     > > >
>     > > >
>     > > >
>     > > >
>     > > >
>     > > >
>     > > > On Nov 5, 2007, at 4:39 PM, Kent & Sue Haunschild wrote:
>     > > >
>     > > >
>     > > > Proposal already ammended to read during the initial
>     movement phase.
>     > > >
>     > > > SPI rules quoted in another email.
>     > > >
>     > > > While you might be correct in regard to units retain full
>     abilities
>     > > unless rules oth ewise direct. This beggers the questions: Are
>     the
>     > > rules complete and do they cover every situation? SPI designers
>     > > answered these by saying no and that common sense must guide
>     the players.
>     > > >
>     > > >
>     > > > Agree
>     > > >
>     > > >
>     > > >
>     > > > Applying the common sense rule, it seems to me that if the
>     designers
>     > > took the time to write rules specifically curtailing the
>     abilities of
>     > > the major combatants, then these rules should apply equally to
>     the
>     > > minor combatants who were much less prepared and would be more
>     > > restrained in their response than the major participants.
>     > > >
>     > > >
>     > > > I see no reason why the designers mightn't have noticed that
>     > > construing the rule to apply to each combatant in sequence
>     within a
>     > > turn would make invading Holland, then Belgi um or Holland, then
>     > > Belgium, then France unreasonably easy and declined to do so.
>     > > >
>     > > >
>     > > >
>     > > > What we have entered is the classic argument of "Original
>     Intent"
>     > > versus "Strict Construction." I am trying to develope
>     universal rules
>     > > applicable across the board that seem to be in accordance with
>     the
>     > > designers intentions and which guide the game into a historic
>     pattern.
>     > > I also think that the fewer special rules the better.
>     > > >
>     > > >
>     > > > I'm not seeing an argument FOR original intent. I see one
>     > > interpretation that is not privileged against any other
>     > > interpretation, and prefer the original rule as written.
>     > > >
>     > > >
>     > > >
>     > > > I think you are arguing that the rules have a existance
>     outside the
>     > > game, and that game play m ust conform to the rules even when
>     this
>     > > results in non-historical outcomes.
>     > > >
>     > > >
>     > > > No, I'm arguing that RAW has had the benefit of consistency
>     within
>     > > the game's history and that experience has shown that
>     deviations from
>     > > RAW (i.e. Kansas City amendments) have hurt more often than
>     helped.
>     > > >
>     > > >
>     > > >
>     > > > I think this prevents us from learning anything about the
>     historical
>     > > dynamics of the situation. When we discuss the rules openly
>     and are
>     > > willing to try to write ones that better model history then I
>     think we
>     > > all learn something in the process.
>     > > >
>     > > >
>     > > > Try away. I don't think this one succeeds.
>     > > >
>     > > >
>     > > >
>     > > > When we fail to discuss the suggestions to see if the enhance
>     > > hi storical play or detract from it and instead immediately label
>     > > something as Pro-Axis, or Pro-Soviet, or Pro-Allied then we let
>     > > emotions rule our intellect and the whole process suffers.
>     > > >
>     > > >
>     > > > I didn't "immediately" label it anything. That was done
>     after mature
>     > > consideration that the proposed change adds nothing to
>     historicity and
>     > > changes the balance without benefit. And that if a change must
>     be made
>     > > for the sake of consistency the one I proposed is better in
>     every way.
>     > > >
>     > > >
>     > > >
>     > > > Every board gamer has his list of house rules that he
>     insists that
>     > > the other player abide by. This is next to impossible to code.
>     > > >
>     > > > Fully agree, which is why I prefer the game be playable by
>     RAW to
>     > > the utmost extent possible, even when this violates somebody
>     EL SE's
>     > > idea of historicity.
>     > > >
>     > > > -------------- next part --------------
>     > > > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>     > > > URL:
>     > >
>     >
>     http://mailman.halisp.net/pipermail/warineur/attachments/20071106/eba28197/attac
>
>     > hment.html
>     > > >
>     > > > ------------------------------
>     > > >
>     > > > _______________________________________________
>     > > > WarInEur mailing list
>     > > > WarInEur at mailman.halisp.net
>     > > > http://mailman.halisp.net/mailman/listinfo/warineur
>     > > >
>     > > >
>     > > > End of WarInEur Digest, Vol 40, Issue 7
>     > > > ***************************************
>     > >
>     > >
>     > >
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>     > > Peek-a-boo FREE Tricks & Treats for You! Get 'em!
>     > >
>     > >
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>     > >
>     > > _______________________________________________
>     > > WarInEur mailing list
>     > > WarInEur at mailman.halisp.net
>     > > http://mailman.halisp.net/mailman/listinfo/warineur
>     > >
>     >
>     >
>     > --
>     > Chuck Sutherland
>     > Technology Specialist
>     > Gamewood, Inc.
>     > 116 South Ridge Street
>     > Danville, VA 24541
>     > (434) 799-8407 x218
>     >
>     > _______________________________________________
>     > WarInEur mailing list
>     > WarInEur at mailman.halisp.net
>     > http://mailman.halisp.net/mailman/listinfo/warineur *
>


-- 
Chuck Sutherland
Technology Specialist
Gamewood, Inc.
116 South Ridge Street
Danville, VA 24541
(434) 799-8407 x218



More information about the WarInEur mailing list