2014 G40 league rules

[allweneedislove]

@Senor_Ralpa:

yes, the agreement was made by private message.
I’ll tell JuanSpain that confirm this agreement in this forum or send you a personal message.

Don’t worry, I haven’t secrets and I don’t care that “peanut gallery” chiming…… :-D

Thank you very much for the quick answer.

gamerman is right you should send these types of requests in a personal message, otherwise the peanut gallery throws in their opinion.

so i will be one of those nuts.

the base rules should be a map posted is final. i allow my opponent to change noncombat and expect that they do the same for me. i would think less of my opponent for not allowing noncombat edits, but i do think it is their right to do so.

now if you made an agreement saying you would allow noncombat edits then that is different, but the base rules should be up to the opponent if you can edit.

[JuanSpain]

Hi,

I also don´t mind using private messages or opened ones for this discussion with the moderators. Will start opened and will move to private if moderators decide that is the best way to proceed.

Senor_Ralpa contacted me and proposed a game with no tech, low luck and no Edits. I accepted that, and a bid of +11 for allies as Senor_Ralpa is beginner.

It was not explicitly discussed on the agreement, but my understanding with players concerned about the use of Edit, is that they are concerned about:

1. Having to check whether the Edits where legal or not (making validation of the opponent turn complex and time consuming)
2. Not being sure whether the opponent took advantage of knowing combat results, when applying the Edits after them
3. What kind of Edits to accept (Purchase, combat, non combat, place…)

And not just because it allows you to correct a mistake.

I repeated the turn because I was correcting a Non combat mistake after having posted the turn, as I did not see subs in Canada until I reviewed the map afterwards. I recognice it was an easy initial turn (round 2) and played a bit quickly. There was only one combat with no dice involved and it was repeated anyway (fighter attacking transport), and so, no issues related to other Edit function concerns appear in what I did.

Personally, I always accept repeated turns by my opponent if that happened before I downloaded the file and/or posted new movements, because I consider that if the opponent decided a better move on his/her own and with no additional information (spetially not changing combat moves/results), there is no reason for not accepting it.

I have been allowed to do so by the rest of the players until now and allowed them also.

Even when the opponent asks for a completely repeated turn with combat changes included, I may accept it if I did not move yet and I believe the combat results are not part of the decision, but the strategy was changed by a better one. I consider all that, part of a fair play.

It is true that I had never agreed a no Edits game (nobody asked until now), and that I repeated the turn to correct a mistake, but the spirit and implications of Edit is much more than that as I explained above, in fact, I did the change with no Edits. Perhaps we should have agreed also on restricting the possibility to reload a game turn prior to opponent download, where no combat results differ, or even restricting repeating the combat moves, and make the game even more strict, but that was not agreed.

As Senor_Ralpa said, I will also accept moderators decision on how to continue this game.

Both turn files were posted, so Senor_Ralpa can cotinue selecting the one the moderators decide.

Cheers

Juan

[gamerman01]

Juan, I think you should not make the change that you wanted to make.

1. Senor_Ralpa is a beginner
2. You did not clearly communicate what you meant about edits, apparently.  Senor_Ralpa thought it meant you couldn’t go back to a previous phase and change stuff.  You had a different definition in your own mind.
3. You played a bit quickly

I think it would be sporting for you to give Senor_Ralpa what he wants here, and then you guys need to talk about what exactly you mean by “no edits” from here on out so you won’t have this issue again.

[allweneedislove]

gamerman, for future league reference is the rule that the first map posted is the map to play?
and only if your opponent allows you to edit can you do so (or have a pregame agreement to allow it).

i allow noncombat edits for my opponents and have made noncombat edits myself many times.
but is this not just good etiquette and sportsmanship and not part of the rules?

[JuanSpain]

Ok, agreed Gamerman.

Thanks

Juan

[boldfresh]

@JuanSpain:

Ok, agreed Gamerman.

Thanks

Juan

I suggest documentation in your game thread.

[gamerman01]

@allweneedislove:

gamerman, for future league reference is the rule that the first map posted is the map to play?

There is not a league rule about specifically about this, but Jennifer did clarify during the 2013 league year that once a phase is completed the opponent does not have to allow you to go back.  So posting a map would technically be final, and any changes would have to be allowed by the opponent.  It is common courtesy to allow changes to non-combat movement and placement as long as the opponent has not started studying the board and working on their move, because any changes would interfere with this, so this is what I think common practice should be.

and only if your opponent allows you to edit can you do so (or have a pregame agreement to allow it).

i allow noncombat edits for my opponents and have made noncombat edits myself many times.
but is this not just good etiquette and sportsmanship and not part of the rules?

You are correct, this is etiquette, sportsmanship, or common courtesy.
However, strictly speaking and when there is a dispute, you can count on the moderators to rule that in general, moves stand as posted and going back to change things after a phase is complete is at the mercy of your opponent.
It just makes sense that a strict following of the rulebook is the default, and the rulebook gives a specific order of play, and does not say that you can go back to a previous phase or that any phases are played concurrently.

So as Jennifer clarified earlier this year, you cannot count on your opponent to allow you to go back to a previous phase (like after you have posted your map, complete with placement of units, you cannot count on going back and changing noncoms) because he is not obligated by the rule book to do so.

Now of course, common practice is to allow one another to change anything back to the last point at which dice were rolled, and with permission, you can agree to nearly anything (changes going back before dice were rolled).
But it is a good practice to not rely on this common courtesy so much that you take it for granted and expect it all the time.  It is best to follow the rule book as closely as you can, and you will have less opportunity for complaints/disagreements

[Senor_Ralpa]

I prefer to strictly follow the rules and don’t use edit. And rules are very clear about what you can do in every phase.
I think it’s better and avoid possible confusion, discussions and conflict.
Also they are the same rules for everyone.

I’m a beginner, and I make a lot of mistakes, but I try to learn from them and don´t make them again, but I think that human errors are part of the game.
Anyway it’s my choice, I understand some people prefer to play with edit.

I agree in future games, it’s best to agree everything before to start the game.
Thank you all for your time and your help.
See you.

[MrRoboto]

@Senor_Ralpa:

I prefer to strictly follow the rules and don’t use edit. And rules are very clear about what you can do in every phase.

I understand what you mean and I really think that this is a good approach in a live game.

However, most people on this board play multiple games at the same time. It is not unusual for some players to have 10+ simultaneous games.
You can’t spend so much time on each of these games and therefor you do make mistakes.

[variance]

I usually download the file, make my move within 5 or 10 minutes, and post it full of mistakes.  :-P

[Witt]

Vance that is bloody funny.
I am worse than Monty. I take an eternity to post, then worry I did wrong!
I could never play more than one league game at a time.

[Jennifer]

My opinion on edits is this:
_If your opponent as not yet started his turn, and if you have not yet started your next turn (since the allies have nations that go back to back) then you may edit your placements and NCMs.

Otherwise, you are locked in unless your opponent permits you to make the change later._

The idea is that technically nothing really changed as long as your opponent has not yet moved.  Sure it may take him longer to post his turn, so you may not really be able to bump him until 72 hours after your last edit, but I do not see why someone should be penalized if they notice a fleet of 15 undefended transports in range of an enemy bomber immediately after they finish their turn either.

---

As for Christmas week, I do not see a problem suspending the 72 hour posting rule between 22 December, 2013 and 4 January, 2014.

[variance]

Gamerman & Jennifer, would it be acceptable in a league game if both parties agree to play with a nonstandard set of victory conditions?  I like YG’s rule, which is that the first side to hold 12 VCs for a whole round after round 5 wins (ie same victory condition for allies as for the axis).

[Entek]

captain walker (axis) over Entek (allies +9) So close!

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=32510.75

[gamerman01]

Please re-post that in the “2014 league post game results here” thread, thanks

[gamerman01]

@variance:

Gamerman & Jennifer, would it be acceptable in a league game if both parties agree to play with a nonstandard set of victory conditions?  I like YG’s rule, which is that the first side to hold 12 VCs for a whole round after round 5 wins (ie same victory condition for allies as for the axis).

Variance, I must have missed this the other day, due to Entek’s post.

Yes, you can do pretty much whatever you want in league play if both players agree.
Rule #4 states that the 2nd edition G40 rules per the rulebook are the DEFAULT.
What this means is that if the players don’t agree to a different rule, the rule book governs.

You should absolutely post the details of any rule changes from the default rule book that you are playing by, so that others, especially the moderators, can understand how you are playing (in case there is a dispute)
You should post this in the first post of your game thread so that we can easily see it.

[gamerman01]

@Gamerman01:

3 - Scoring/Playoffs
This is the first year that the official league standings will be determined by points per game (PPG) and not straight win percentage.
Each player will belong to 1 of 4 tiers based on their 2014 league year game results and PPG.  Cutoffs for tiers will be at 3.50, 2.50, and 1.50 PPG.  
Players will be awarded points as follows:
Win over tier 1,2,3,4 earn 6,5,4,3 points, respectively
Lose to tier 1,2,3,4 earn 2, 1, 0, 0 points, respectively
Point totals are divided by # of games played to arrive at PPG (which has proven to be a reliable measurement method of the ability of a player)
All opponents with less than 4 games played will be assigned to the default tier 3.

I am amending the last sentence in rule #3
All opponents with less than 4 games played will be assigned their previous tier from the 2013 league IF they have completed 13 or more games in 2013
All other opponents with less than 4 games played will be assigned to the default tier 3.

[gamerman01]

@Gamerman01:

I am amending the last sentence in rule #3
All opponents with less than 4 games played will be assigned their previous tier from the 2013 league IF they have completed 13 or more games in 2013
All other opponents with less than 4 games played will be assigned to the default tier 3.

Eh - make that 6 games, not 13.
6 is enough

[MrRoboto]

@variance:

Gamerman & Jennifer, would it be acceptable in a league game if both parties agree to play with a nonstandard set of victory conditions?  I like YG’s rule, which is that the first side to hold 12 VCs for a whole round after round 5 wins (ie same victory condition for allies as for the axis).

You do realize, that’s extremely easy for the Axis to achieve?

Berlin, Paris, Warsaw, Rome, Novgorod and Volgograd are basically given/very easy to  achieve in Europe (6 cities).
Shanghai, Hongkong, Tokio, Manila are basically given for Japan (4 cities).

So you only need two more cities as the Axis! Cairo+Calcutta or Cairo+Sydney are very easy for example.

I mean, you can agree on whatever you want. Personally, I’d never agree to this, as the Allied player.

[gamerman01]

@MrRoboto:

I mean, you can agree on whatever you want. Personally, I’d never agree to this, as the Allied player.

Right.
World-wide VC conditions isn’t so radical, but 12 is not enough.
The whole premise of 8 cities and 6 cities is that it’s difficult to get the 8th city in Europe or the 6th city in Pacific, but getting 7 and 5 is not particularly hard, and boom you have 12.  :-)

But if you go 13, then you have to have at least 8 in Europe or 6 in Pacific and you’re basically back where you started, so I get why you did 12, but that won’t really work either.
The setup and rules are designed with the 8 city and 6 city rules in tandem.  Not sure I have a constructive suggestion for you other than to not go with world-wide victory conditions unless you go with 13 cities, which would favor the Allies, which is maybe good given that the Allies normally need bids.  But with 13 world-wide VC condition, it might be fair, or the Axis might need a small bid