Posts made by eudemonist

@MEGAEINSTEIN:

1 - what i do not understand is why people who reply are in this poll and in the other poll that was removed against my will where almost all against maintaining sneak attack but the ones who voted in the last poll (77 voters) 80% voted to maintain sneak attack and in this poll 9 voted to maintain and 8 not to.

Can someone explain to me this big difference between voters opinions and replies opinions?

It could easily be confusion of terminology.  You’re still using the term “sneak attack” with reference to free shots against unescorted transports, at least in this sentence.

I personally think a lot of people like the mechanic, but, given the difficulty in defining precisely how it’s supposed to work, understand and accept its removal for the sake of simplicity.

2 - this is not a democratic game. Ok, but people who vote are players of the game that are suposed to have one opinion about it. If the vast majority of players (adding both polls) think sneak attack should not be removed, perhaps the players posting this replies (who knows if it is not the same player using different names) should think that what the majority of players think may be perhaps correct.

Keep in mind that any polls on this site will necessarily be responded to by players who have above-average investment in the game;  that is, they play enough or care enough about play to visit this site.  This is a very small percentage of the overall player base, one more willing to dig through FAQs, etc., to figure out exactly how to use a slightly wonky rule.  This is great, but the designers have to think in terms of the average user…which posters here really aren’t.  It’s great for a house rule–it adds a level of complexity for players that desire it.  It’s not great for general consumption.

Dude, you seem to be laboring under the impression that you somehow have a “right” to post polls here, or to have them stay up, along with the misconception that the design of this game is a democratic process.

Neither of these are true.  “Your will” is in no way relevant to what posts stay and what posts go.  “Your knowledge” is not a prerequiste for action on the part of the moderators of this site.  “Democracy” does not decide the official rules of this game.

If you are uncomfortable with these facts, I can understand and respect that.  However, I don’t think “SOMEONE NOT ALLOW(ing) THIS SITE TO EXIST” is the answer.  Perhaps you could pretend this site doesn’t exist?

@Idi:

How long does it take to play 25 rounds? Do you have a job or a girlfriend?

Well, since the release of A+1, sounds like.  How long has that been?  Couple months?

@TheDefinitiveS:

1 yes so far…i bet that was his.

Nah, mine.  There are arguments for both sides, and, since the poll let me choose two, figgered I might as well.

Iz n ur powlz, meffin up ur stettittitsisitcs.

I like that you can only select two options.  I was having a hard time narrowing it down to that few.

Well, yeah, that works too, I suppose…kinda long to write on the back of my hand, though.

Think of it as “the planes take off from the carrier at the start of combat movement”.  Calc range from there.

Global circumnavigation.

Germany declares all combat movement…puts whatever they want in the sea zone…then Brits decide what, if anything, to scramble.

Yes.

Haven’t played with .2 yet.  I usually leave S. France for the Italians as well, but  a Kraut factory in the Med is pretty big.  Probably a good call.

Are you asking if they can combat move planes into the unoccupied sea zone in expectation of the scramble, even though there aren’t any enemies there until scramble happens?

If so, then yeah, I believe they can.  Could be wrong.

EDIT:  Looking at a different thread with a response from Krieg, yes they can move in.

@Cmdr:

Minor IC goes where, in your mind?

Heck no!  For implanted comlinks, I want MAJOR IC!  I’m talking black like night, chummer.  That thing runs my gun arm and my smartlink–ain’t takin’ no chances.  Minor IC might be suitable for a Rebreather or sumpin’.

Yeah, I think Germany really needs to get those planes down to Italy G1.  If they don’t, then yeah, could be very bad for Italia.

Ah, SHOULD they be responsible.  I see.

Hmm, dunno about that.  I’d have to vote no.  The IPC bonuses are usually described as “National fervor” or “Trade” or something…internal economic boosts.  Direct transfer of money from one government to another only happens when a capital is being looted.

Also, the current “balance” is twelve, whereas taking from Japs to give to Russkies would actually create a 24 ipc swing.  Maybe if you cut it to six, perhaps.  Still, doesn’t seem to make much “in-character” sense.  “Hey, we’re going to be attacking some of your turf, so here, have some cash.”  Nah.

EDIT:  Hey, no fair editing your original to make me look even dumber!  sigh  Fine.

@Daedelus:

It means you can win the Game without having to capture any Russian Cities.

Well, yeah, theoretically.  Just seems like, particularly with new rules bringing in the U.S. if Axis is in Canadia, that’s not a very realistic proposition.  South Africa seems like it would make for more viable strategery options.

I mean, I haven’t ever put a lot of thought into an Ottawa strategy, mostly because, just looking at it, it seems pretty well doomed to fail.  Might as well try to grab New York.

Pretty sure it comes from the bank, but I could be wrong.

Bah.  Out of box is a fine game.  There are a couple strategies that are more effective, but finding those is part of the fun of the game to me.  If you stay off the internet and just play within your play group, you’ll probably play at least a few dozen games  before it starts to get too “dialed in”.  For me and my group, that’s like a couple years, maybe.  It’s only if you get on the internet and research the fruits of the the labor of armchair generals worldwide that it gets really out of whack.  With a game this size and complexity, I think it’s just about impossible to achieve the requisite level of fine-tuning without public examination.  Just too many man hours, and, because people tend to think along similar lines, there isn’t as much divergence.  Dunno, just my thoughts.

tl; dr  Good game.  You’ll be glad you bought it.

I actually wonder about that very decision.  I don’t see why Ottawa would be a victory city unless the game was designed with a strategy for taking it in mind.

Has anybody taken Ottawa?  Used it to win a game?  EVER?

I like the idea of limiting table talk.  We’ve toyed with time limits on turns, as well as stuff like having your purchases ready, but it seems a little unfair to us.  Germany and Japan have a lot more to consider than, say, early-game Italy or U.K., which sucks for time limits, and, with regard to purchases, if the person you’re in conflict with is directly before you in turn order (i.e. Russia after war is declared), it’s a lot tougher to have stuff ready than if the previous turn has limited direct involvement with you (i.e. Japan).