How much should be forgiven?

[Young Grasshopper]

Wow, such different views, I should have attached a poll to this thread.

[suprise attack]

Some of our players will ask the question “is there any way for you to hit this spot with your Boats,Planes,Tanks,etc.” or we’ll ask are you sure you want to do that? Then there are times when you gather up your teammate’s and have a conference in the other room.
   One reason why I like at least 2 on 2 is that you have someone who might notice something that you may have overlooked.
   One of the best way’s to learn is by loosing  like our first or second Global ALPHA+2 games and Russia bought a small Navy that had a Transport in it and Germany wasn’t paying attention and we had a reset pretty quick that night, and ya know what nobody on our board has ever made that mistake since that night
  I’ve noticed on our boards that if you have a win steak going (at least 4 games in a row) sometimes your teammate will point out where to attack you or try to convince them that your a better target than they are.
     Good luck and find the hot dice

[Young Grasshopper]

@suprise:

Some of our players will ask the question “is there any way for you to hit this spot with your Boats,Planes,Tanks,etc.”

When one team asks this question, is it expected that the other team participate fully in the answer every time it is asked?

[cts17]

It can’t be used as a crutch. You need to be aware of the board. My group will never point out mistakes as they’re being made, especially if it’s a juicy mistake like a lone strategic bomber that can be nailed, or can openers that can be hit.

We generally make our opponents think about their moves, especially in these cases, when we ask them if they’re sure if that’s a good move. We also think aloud about the consequences, and if he’s thinking that nothing can hit his unit when there is, we will ‘straighten’ out their thoughts.

But if they’re not thinking about it, it is a logistical game that encompasses the entire world, so our “intelligence reports” are only given when they’re being brought up by the opponent.

[JamesAleman]

I ask the player, if they want me to help them.
If they say yes, I’ll say: “you better look at the board closer, you may have missed something important.”
If its a convoluted detailed plan that creates opportunities for disaster that was turns in the making, I’ll stop at that. Otherwise, in a friendly game, I’ll say, better look at your German fleet, or some other clue.

If they still can not figure it out, I’ll happily show them on my next combat move.  :evil: :mrgreen:

[suprise attack]

Yes

[Stalingradski]

I think it also depends how often you get a chance to play.

Living in a small population area (central Maine), I have one friend I play face to face. Just getting a weekend now and then to play takes a good deal of effort - between kids and work it is a challenge to carve out the time. So, when we play, we both hate to have a 13 turn game end on one stupid mistake… it took us two months to get a chance to play in the first place…

Generally, our rule of thumb in any situation is… have dice been rolled yet? Would it have affected anything going on in the current turn? Typically, if it has little effect on the game, it’s a “no problem, just remember me when I need a break” and then take a drink, or two, or three of beer.

But if dice have already been rolled, or it’s right on the front and will strongly affect the current turn (“oh shoot, by the way I forgot to leave that infantry blocker in front of your mech and armor stack…”), forget about it.

Sometimes seeing your opponent’s mistake becomes a great reason to hurry up with your own purchase, and combat movement, and start rolling the dice… by then, it’s too late…

And after all, war is often about taking advantage of mistakes.

[Young Grasshopper]

So from what I gather, there are many factors (number of players, player skill level, tabletop or online, which player is winning or losing, how often you play ect……) that will determine if it’s going to be a gentelman’s game or a scoundrel’s war.

[Andi]

@Young:

So from what I gather, there are many factors (number of players, player skill level, tabletop or online, which player is winning or losing, how often you play ect……) that will determine if it’s going to be a gentelman’s game or a scoundrel’s war.

Totally agree to that. Nice Thread!

[FieldMarshalGames]

It all depends for me on the level of players I am playing with.  If they are new, I point out critical errors.  If I am plying against a nemesis player…  he is toast!

With a game like 1940 etc, so much time is invested.  You don’t really want to get a “cheap” win because of a simple error…  especially if there are drinks involved!

[Andi]

@FieldMarshalGames:

especially if there are drinks involved!

E S P E C I A L L Y when drinks are involved :-D

[billinjackson]

@JimmyHat:

I guess it depends on what your goal is in playing the game.  Is it to win?  Or is it to get better?  I play to improve my game, so I appreciate when my opponent points out my mistakes and I try to do the same.

I really appreciate this sentiment. I also like to think I play just to get better but my competitive side seems to always trump the gentleman in me especially when playing with experienced players… :wink:

[Young Grasshopper]

@FieldMarshalGames:

It all depends for me on the level of players I am playing with.  If they are new, I point out critical errors.  If I am plying against a nemesis player…  he is toast!

With a game like 1940 etc, so much time is invested.  You don’t really want to get a “cheap” win because of a simple error…  especially if there are drinks involved!

This statement sums up why my group doesn’t feel obligated to make each other aware of their mistakes, because were all pretty much on the same skill level and don’t feel like we owe anyone any favors. Thats not to say that we are not respectful gentleman or have a lot of fun playing, because we are and we do.

[Andi]

@Young:

Thats not to say that we are not respectful gentleman or have a lot of fun playing, because we are and we do.

Never doubted that :)

[Young Grasshopper]

@Andi:

@Young:

Thats not to say that we are not respectful gentleman or have a lot of fun playing, because we are and we do.

Never doubted that :)

I am very interested to see a very heated and competitive game, to see just how bad it gets between players. Last week I raised my voice at my buddy because I got frustrated about the fact that he can’t get the sub rules. Every game he says " I didn’t know subs could do that" no matter how many times I explain it or tell him to read the rules. But that’s about all that happens between us.

[Dylan the Canadian]

@Young:

@Andi:

@Young:

Thats not to say that we are not respectful gentleman or have a lot of fun playing, because we are and we do.

Never doubted that :)

I am very interested to see a very heated and competitive game, to see just how bad it gets between players. Last week I raised my voice at my buddy because I got frustrated about the fact that he can’t get the sub rules. Every game he says " I didn’t know subs could do that" no matter how many times I explain it or tell him to read the rules. But that’s about all that happens between us.

Just drop those rules that. For example, when I play with my friends, we don’t use convoies or kamakazies.

[Young Grasshopper]

He gets really confused about the old sneak attacks and the new surprise strikes, and I keep telling him “THEY ARE THE SAME THING!!!”. When we are listening to the Matthew Good band he will say “I really like the Dave Matthews band”. I think he spends too much time with Mary Jane.

[knp7765]

My gaming group usually has 6 players – 3 Axis and 3 Allies.  As far as we are concerned, it’s up to each player and their allies to catch any mistakes, small or large.  Now, we often ask each other about rules clarifications and everyone helps out even if it’s to our own detriment.  Also, there are times that even though the next player is starting their turn, the previous player will notice a glaring error and we will let them re-do their NCM.  That’s just friendly gaming.  However, if they don’t notice it, and neither do their allies, then so be it.
By the way, even what looks like a terrible blunder can still work out in your favor.  In one game, Germany (me) was actually preparing for Barbarossa and had decided against Sealion.  The UK player, even after losing all the fleet around Britain, did not properly set up defense for London and was trying to rebuild the fleet and place stuff in South Africa to fight the Italians.  As I was not preparing for Sealion, I only had 3 transports and my battleship, the cruiser had been sunk against the Brit and French cruisers.  I looked at UK and there was only 4 infantry, 1 artillery, 1 fighter, 1 French inf and 1 French fighter with NO ships in SZ 110.  I figured UK was asking for it so I gave it a try.  I hit UK with 3 loaded transports (3 inf, 3 art), 2 fighters, 3 Stukas and 1 bomber.  LONDON WAS MINE!! Right?  WRONG!!  Here’s what happened.  UK didn’t scramble so I had the BB shot, which missed.  Then UK AA Gun opened up and killed 1 fighter, 2 Stukas AND my bomber.  My inf/art rolled and got SQUAT.  UK inf/art rolled and got 4 hits!  My fighter and Stuka got hits but so did both UK and French fighters.  Result:  German land force wiped out and 2/3 Luftwaffe shot down for a loss of 1 Brit inf and 1 French inf.  Remaining fighter and Stuka retreated to Holland.  THEN, remember that UK was trying to rebuild it’s fleet?  Those ships were sitting in SZ 109 and on the UK turn, they came around with the Brit fighter and killed my battleship and transports.
Granted, this may be a “freak” occurance, but I have seen it happen in other situations in other games as well.  A player seems to make a colossal blunder leaving something woefully underprotected then when the enemy tries to take advantage, they get smacked down.
Oh yeah, one other thing.  Sometimes a player will deliberately leave what appears to be a mistake (high IPC territory underdefended, expensive units unprotected, etc.) yet it will be a trap.  The enemy player will swoop in to take that territory or destroy those units and they themselves get pounced on.  Maybe even lose their capital.  So “mistakes” aren’t always what they seem.

[Young Grasshopper]

@knp7765:

Oh yeah, one other thing.  Sometimes a player will deliberately leave what appears to be a mistake (high IPC territory underdefended, expensive units unprotected, etc.) yet it will be a trap.  The enemy player will swoop in to take that territory or destroy those units and they themselves get pounced on.  Maybe even lose their capital.  So “mistakes” aren’t always what they seem.

Your entire post is the way our group plays 100%. even the trapping element which I quoted, is considered to be strategic play rather than unethical (especially when playing with 6 players.)

[knp7765]

I remember another “trap” situation our US player played on Japan.  It was late in the game and the Japanese navy was down to 1 carrier, 1 battleship, 2 cruisers and 3 destroyers.  The US had been trying to get at them but couldn’t seem to get enough ships together in one place to really hit them.  Every time they got close to the Jap fleet, it was either with a small force that got wiped out or the Jap fleet would sort of disperse and the US couldn’t get to all the ships.
Well, the US deliberately left a stack of 5-6 loaded transports up in the middle of the North Pacific guarded by 2 cruisers and 2 destroyers.  The transports had mostly infantry with I think a couple of tanks.  Japan couldn’t resist and brought their entire fleet after this force with the exception of 1 cruiser that couldn’t reach.  Even the carrier had to come to provide a landing spot for it’s planes.  They sank them all with a loss of 1 destroyer and a hit to the battleship.
Now the good part.  The US had 3 subs up by Alaska, some warships off the West Coast, some more warships around Hawaii and about 5 fighters and 2 Tacs on Hawaii that could fly out to the Jap fleet then land back on Midway.  That’s just what they did.  All this US hardware converged on the Jap fleet and smashed it to pieces.  The funny part was the force on those transports wasn’t really enough to take the Japan homeland so there was no real threat to Japan.  Also, US had already started building more transports with men and equipment for a REAL invasion of Japan, which took place a couple of rounds later.