12L, AA50-41, Ol' Blood&Guts (Axis) vs. Boldfresh (Allies+7), no tech, + NOs

[boldfresh]

I disagree.  the map showed an infantry in euk obviously to block.  that infantry can get there in noncombat from Russia so either way it is there.  if you want to enforce that the infantry from euk went to Ukraine that fine but then I noncombat the infantry to euk.

[boldfresh]

here’s the map i want to proceed with (inf from rus noncombats to euk).  i will wait to hear from you in case you disagree - in which case, we can get a ruling from the moderators.  it would be one thing if the infantry were unable to get there from russia in noncombat.  but still, the simple fact that there was a discrepancy between the map and the typing, in my opinion you should have stopped and asked if i intended to not have the inf from euk go to cau in combat or if i wanted to send an inf from rus to euk in noncombat.  i guess i’m ok with you enforcing strict combat move typing (even though dice weren’t thrown) but you cannot in my opinion not allow me to noncombat the inf to euk as the map showed it there (obviously to block).  by walkins needing to be posted in the combat move, it avoids the outcome of the dice to be known before choosing to do a walkin (ie, all my dice went great so i will now say i intended to do a walkin, etc).

it’s really not worth fighting over imho - hopefully you agree and we can keep moving.

thanks

OBG_vs_Bold_02cJ.AAM

[boldfresh]

let me explain my policy on the strick enforcement of combat move typing just so it can be completely clear tha I am not being a hypocrite here.

for me, it’s all about eliminating the possiblity that one can see the results of rolls and THEN add or remove combat moves.  in the case i was referring to, where on your G1 you asked to send 2 more arm to bst, you had already seen results of several rolls before doing so.  i’m not saying you would cheat in any way, but a person could roll some rolls and keept a couple of tanks free in order to noncom then to reinforce certain positions, etc, so after seeing some rolls to say, wait i had two more tanks going to X territory should be off limits.  same thing with walkins and autokills of transports because if some battles went well, then sending a plane to kill a tranny or sending a tank through a couple of territories might be more attractive.

now, if a person had only posted their combat moves but had not rolled dice, to me it is perfectly fine if they add or remove combat moves, as long as no dice have been thrown.  in this case, i posted combat and noncombat/placement in a single post.  the map contradicted the typing.  in that case, i believe it should be addressed by asking the person what they intended to do.  i do not think i should have to move the infantry from euk into ukr on combat since the map shows otherwise clearly.  in addition, it is different to say i want to send more or less to a territory in combat move when it is just a walkin vs. saying oops, i meant to send this inf on a walkin to X territory, especially when no dice have been thrown.

regardless, i am willing to go ahead and put the additional infantry in ukr, but then i will noncom an inf from rus to euk to block, as i obviously intended.  i would PREFER to leave the map exactly as i posted since no dice were thrown and there were no missed walkins, it was just an issue of how many infantry went to ukr.

let me know what you want to do.  i don’t want to get crossways here, this seems very straightforward to me.  but if you want to involve a moderator that is fine with me.

thanks,

[Guest]

Leaving Euk open is a strategical error and I should not have to allow you to change your move because you meant something else. If it is posted, it is official. Like you stated, it takes out any ambiguity and removes all issues. You cannot say the map is what you meant when things like removing the Japanese flag from Kia on the US map occur. I will ask a moderator to look at it.

[Guest]

I have reported our game to the moderators and asked for a review and ruling.

[boldfresh]

uh, euk was NOT left open OBG.  there was an infantry on the map in euk CLEARLY.  when there is a discrepancy between the map and the typing, you bring it up to the opponent.  since i would have been able to noncom an infantry to euk, it is NOT AN ISSUE if you wanted to ENFORCE the strict typing of combat movements - and i WELCOME the moderator ruling.  this one is as plain and simple as possible, and i have little to no doubt how the moderators will rule.

[boldfresh]

i have to be honest, this seems like either a dirty move by you, or you are just pissed that i didn’t allow you to take your tanks into bst, which you requested AFTER dice had been thrown.  and IN ADDITION, you came out smelling like a rose on the battle ANYWAY.  :lol:

but if you want to waste our time AND moderator time on something as obvious as this be my guest.

[Guest]

@Boldfresh:

i have to be honest, this seems like either a dirty move by you, or you are just pissed that i didn’t allow you to take your tanks into bst, which you requested AFTER dice had been thrown.  and IN ADDITION, you came out smelling like a rose on the battle ANYWAY.   :lol:

but if you want to waste our time AND moderator time on something as obvious as this be my guest.

I should have learned my lesson last year. How about we just wait for the moderator ruling and keep comments to our selves?

[boldfresh]

if the map did not have an infantry in euk or any other material discrepancy, you would have had the full right to continue with japan and yes that would have been tough luck on my part (whether it was a strategic error or just a coincidence).  but the map could not have more clearly shown an infantry in euk. Â

since i was doing combat and noncombat moves together, when i decided not to send the infantry from euk to bul in combat, i just moved it on the map and forgot to erase it from the combat typing.  since there was already an infantry in euk, i did not NEED to noncombat an infantry from russia to euk.  if you could make the argument that there was no other russian infantry that could have noncombat moved to euk you would have something to go on, but otherwise, this just looks like a reach and an attempt to unjustly profit from a simple typing error. Â

bottom line, when the map and typing do not match up, you bring it up to your opponent before continuing.  anything else can be seen as underhanded.  
  Â

[boldfresh]

now you are just being petty.  yes we can wait for the ruling.  either way you lose this game so i don’t really care - was just trying to avoid a needless delay.

[Guest]

@Boldfresh:

now you are just being petty.  yes we can wait for the ruling.  either way you lose this game so i don’t really care - was just trying to avoid a needless delay.

I guess not  :|

The map did not show an infantry from Russia as a noncom. It showed a failure to move it in an attack that was posted. IF Russia had been short one infantry this would be a different story. They were not.

[boldfresh]

by the way, since the misunderstanding we had last year i thought we made peace and have some really good games, of which i think this has been another one.  as i said, i really don’t think this is worth fighting over or even holding up the game for, but yes, we can wait for the ruling. Â

i just hope you are not doing this because of the thing of tanks going to bst - that was a completely different scenario than this.

here’s hoping we can put this behind us quickly and continue as we have been.

thanks,

[boldfresh]

i think you are not quite understanding my point.  the posted map showed 6 inf in ukr and 1 inf in euk, right?

what i’m saying is, i did not need to type a noncom move of inf to euk because i left an inf there on the map (i moved him back there from ukr but forgot to delete the typing in the combat move lines).  do you see what i mean?

[Guest]

@Boldfresh:

here’s hoping we can put this behind us quickly and continue as we have been.

I agree

[boldfresh]

it’s just a discepancy between the typing and the map.  when that happens, you bring it up, which you did, but you did not ask me to confirm, you continued with the japan turn.  if you thought i had actually made a strategic error and had said to me that the map was in discrepancy with the typing, please confirm that this is what you want and posted the map.  if i confirm yes, then you are free to continue.  but at that point, i would have said, no i intended to take one less inf to ukr in combat.  then you could have said, no all combat moves must stand as typed, thus there must be 7 inf in ukr, i would have responded ok, then i will noncombat an infantry from russia to euk and posted the map.

i don’t think we need to get upset over this.  whenever possible i try to reason things like this out rather than delay a game and take up moderator time - it’s always best if it can be worked out between the players directly.  if you still disagree, we can either continue a civil discussion in the hopes of continuing this fast and furious game, or we can wait for a formal ruling.

thanks,

[Gargantua]

Ladies… please.

In the name of Axis and Allies!?!?!

I’mma going to review this independantly!

[Gargantua]

Well…

This quote kind of says it all.

I know that may seem to contradict what I said about typing of combat moves but for me that only applies after a dice has been rolled.

“for me”, “only applies” Are the key words/themes that are really the primary causes of this situation.

In many ways you are BOTH right, and both suffering from the same error, a unit appearing on the map, that contradicts with the typed posting.

---

What’s difficult here, is IN FAIRNESS if a piece has been altered “post” move, because of an error, any player in my opinion, and in the interest of best gaming practice -be allowed- to adjust his pieces (In this case moving an inf from Russia), because the map reflection at the end of his turn was incorrect.

However, because of Your policies about the written text superceding the map, and your clarity on the issue, BF,  Ol Guts has every right to hold you to your own standard.

---

My Reccomended ruling: (Not that I’m anybody)

BF, the mistake happend on your turn, and as you said, you think regardless you are going to win this game.  Even if you think this move could upset this plan/game, because of the -typical- standard you’ve always represented in your gaming, I think you’ve got to eat some humble pie here, and in the interest of good gaming suck it up, and Give ol guts the benefit of the doubt.

That Said,

Ol Guts, I’m sure you could benefit from the open EUK Corridor, and in my opinion you have the right to,  but even when all is fair in love and war…  an error was made here, and you know, that in any game - you always want to play your opponent at his best, because that’s what brings out your best.  If I was you personally, I would allow him to move the infantry from RUS to EUK - Unless I thought it would cost me the game.

That’s an independent two cents.  I’ll let you two finish it off - or hopefully a mod comments soon!

[Gargantua]

Oh, and Being fair is a door that swings BOTH ways…

[cts17]

My 2 cents…. I think that mistakes in typing happen all the time. I personally always review my map before posting, but in a line of typing, somethings just get missed.

But. Boldfresh started this game saying that the written code is the law, denying BG the opportunity with his armor…
So stick to your code, Boldfresh!

[gamerman01]

Since all these non-mods are throwing in their 2 cents, here are mine

This is an open and shut case.

The German/Russian front is unaffected by Japan anyway.  Clearly Bold changed his mind about the combat movement and forgot to correct the typing (he does this very frequently).

OBG noted the difference between map and typing.  Instead of making a decision about what Bold meant to do, obviously he should let Bold clarify the difference.  Doing Japan is irrelevant because the EUk question is completely independent of Japan.

There is a huge difference between BSt and EUk.  You can’t change combat moves after throwing dice, obviously.  Clarifying a difference between typing and map when no dice or movements have been made subsequent to the discrepancy is no problem.  Find out what the intent was, and make the reconciling move.  Bold says 6 infantry in Ukr and 1 in EUk.  So put it where he intended.  Nothing has happened in the game since the Russian move (dice or moves) that should preclude this clarification.  Any reasonable moderator would say the same.

That said, I don’t see what the big deal is.  EUk open does not give OBG any great options that I can see.  If you’re worried about a double attack on Cau, Bold, then move UK in to Cau before Italy can go or something.

Jeez, from the discussion I thought Russia was going to imminently fall over this or something.  Then I looked at the map.

Happy gaming, dudes.