Which counts more ...

[zeiss]

EDIT: Reply to junk2drives post #10. Concerning fleeing off-map with units.

There is no problem with exiting trucks or other useless non-combat units. HQs and leaders who have no subordinates left is another category that I think is ok to exit.

By the way, is there any easy way to see what units have been exited? If it’s not an entire Regiment it’s kinda hard for the casual player to know if anything is missing.

[Panther]

First thank you for your very interesting answers. Some of you think the same, i feel better now. I like to play for winning, i think all of us like it. But i like too playing with realistic rules (Jorge knows that ) and have not the opinion "win for each price".

I remember a rule that doesn´t allows to use a exit hex while a tourney game, but i didn´t know where. I´m sorry.

Maybe it´s one possibility to play a game. But look for one moment at the situation from my side. You play with well led moves and the points change in one round from -125 to +195! What i saw was the exit of Heli´s, Platoons, Officers, ...

Don´t get me wrong. If i had lost the points by a fight ... but at this way in round 8 ... not very lucky.

Ola, maybe we had a misunderstanding. You told me that you played this scenario before and don´t liked it. You didn´t say that it was for a long time ago. So i (must) thought you know about the fixed units.

It´s a game and we should find a solution.

Regards,
Stefan

[zeiss]

Panther: Indeed we should find a solution since endlessly debating the issue isn’t helping. I offer two options to get the game going:

We continue the game and Majog provides you with the NVA Master Battle Plan/reassures you that the game isn’t over. If this is the case that is, I don’t know what you got to work with.

Or I’ll replay my last turn and agree not to gain any exit points until your troops are released (release turn +1). You’ll have to send your last turn again and tell me which turn they are released.

Let’s get it on.

[Hawk Kriegsman]

As I neutral observer I don't understand why this is being at all. The scenario designer has stated that the tactic used by zeiss is PERFECTLY VALID for this scenario. I understand that Panther may not be happy, but take your loss and move on. There is no reason for a solution and no reason for debate. Finish the game and be done with it.

Thanx!

Hawk

[Panther]

Hawk@

I respect your opinion, but the posts from other members shows that a discussion is one way and it´s entitled!

Zeiss@

May we didn´t have the same view about gaming, but we will finish this game. I´ll play my turn tomorrow and tell you wich offer i choose.

Thanks too,
Stefan

[majog]

Just a note to both Zeiss and Panther. Obviously Hawk and others are reading these postings. While everyone has a opinion and is entitled to have rightly have one, what may ultimately result from this debate is not about this game but a perception of you as an opponent and if they might want to continue to play you again in the future. As the tourney host it is within my power to issue a ruling but I feel that since we are all adults here, that disputes are best resolved between the opponents if at all possible. I believe that I gave my opinion as the scn designer of the complexity of this scn and why I designed it the way I did. I also believe the Zeiss was more than fair in offering a compromise. Panther brought this to the forum to hear different perspectives and received numerous opinions. What he works out with Zeiss is a choice between the 2 of them unless they cannot reach agreement then it falls to me as the host. I do not believe it is in their best interest to insert ourselves into that choice but rather just judge their discussion and action and decide from there whether we deem them a worthy opponent in the future.

Just my 2 cents.

[Hawk Kriegsman]

Hawk@
I respect your opinion, but the posts from other members shows that a discussion is one way and it´s entitled!

That's not true at all. We are talking about legitimately using an exit hex. No one has stated that you can't do what zeiss did.

Thanx!

Hawk

[Hawk Kriegsman]

Just a note to both Zeiss and Panther. Obviously Hawk and others are reading these postings. While everyone has a opinion and is entitled to have rightly have one, what may ultimately result from this debate is not about this game but a perception of you as an opponent and if they might want to continue to play you again in the future. As the tourney host it is within my power to issue a ruling but I feel that since we are all adults here, that disputes are best resolved between the opponents if at all possible. I believe that I gave my opinion as the scn designer of the complexity of this scn and why I designed it the way I did. I also believe the Zeiss was more than fair in offering a compromise. Panther brought this to the forum to hear different perspectives and received numerous opinions. What he works out with Zeiss is a choice between the 2 of them unless they cannot reach agreement then it falls to me as the host. I do not believe it is in their best interest to insert ourselves into that choice but rather just judge their discussion and action and decide from there whether we deem them a worthy opponent in the future.

Just my 2 cents.

My point here majog is that Panther is out of line here calling foul. zeiss did a strategy totally in keeping with the rules of the club and within the parameters of the scenario. Why should zeiss even have to be in a position of having to replay a turn when he did nothing wrong?

Also this is in a tourney. Allowing a replay because one player is upset because he was out played sets a bad precedent for future tournament games. It opens a Pandora's Box of trouble in my opinion.

Also if Panther did not want to be judged and the like he should havee handled this off line between himself, zeiss and you.

He put it out in the public eye and the public has every right to comment as they see fit.

Thanx!

Hawk

[majog]

Hawk:

I agree that the public has a right to comment. I will not take a stance at this time as to what if Panther is being fair. The bottom line to me was he asked for opinions and received lots. Ziess was never told he had to replay the turn by either myself or Panther, he volunteered it as a more than fair show of sportsmanship that reflect well of himself and should define him as an exemplary opponent.

On the other hand Panther has still not publicly stated if he will take that option or just continue as is. Panther went to this formum for a public opinion and probably got a bit more than bargained for. As stated I could easily way in and stated the turn must continue as is and not be replayed but to what point. They have reach a comprimise amonst themselves and neither formally complained to me. I think with them both being European and there being possible language issues that a clarification of the rules was asked for and very clearly given. As part of that Zeiss willingly stepped to the plate and stated ok even though I am within the rules I think maybe something was misunderstood by either or both of us and here is what I propose. Again that states more about him than any of us ever could. As the tourney host I chose to let it be at that?

Why was that wrong?

[Hawk Kriegsman]

Ziess was never told he had to replay the turn by either myself or Panther, he volunteered it as a more than fair show of sportsmanship that reflect well of himself and should define him as an exemplary opponent.

I understand that he was not told he had to offer to replay the turn. Yes ziess is a exemplary opponent (he is helping me with learning DGVN) and if this was not a tournament game it would be fine. This whole episode calls into question the lack of sportsmanship by one of the players.

On the other hand Panther has still not publicly stated if he will take that option or just continue as is.

Yes I understand that.

Panther went to this formum for a public opinion and probably got a bit more than bargained for.

Agreed

As stated I could easily way in and stated the turn must continue as is and not be replayed but to what point.

This is what should be done. To allow a replay of a turn when there is not cause or reason other than one person complaining that he didn;t understand the scenario or disapproves of his foes tactics is ludicrous to me.

They have reach a comprimise amonst themselves and neither formally complained to me.

It is a comprimise that should not be allowed.

I think with them both being European and there being possible language issues that a clarification of the rules was asked for and very clearly given.

First off blaming them being European is a cop out.

Second off when is exiting your units off the board through your exit hex need to be clarified??!!

Panther is not a rookie by any means. He has 94 games under his belt. Not knowing that your foe may exit his units through an exit hex is inexcusable.

As part of that Zeiss willingly stepped to the plate and stated ok even though I am within the rules I think maybe something was misunderstood by either or both of us and here is what I propose.

Yes I understand that. But what was misunderstood by Panther is something that he should know! That being your foe can exit his units through his exit hex.

As the tourney host I chose to let it be at that?

You can do what you like but if you look at Panther's comments he is complaining that zeiss exited his units and did not engage in him in combat.

I give you:

He use the exit Hex in round 8 from 18 without any possibilities for defending or secure the Hex (All units in this area are fixed!).

and:

Maybe it´s one possibility to play a game. But look for one moment at the situation from my side. You play with well led moves and the points change in one round from -125 to +195! What i saw was the exit of Heli´s, Platoons, Officers, ...

Don´t get me wrong. If i had lost the points by a fight ... but at this way in round 8 ... not very lucky.

This is in my opinion sour grapes period. He got out maneuvered and no cries foul.

Why was that wrong?

Because it sets a bad example for the next tournament.

What's next?

Claims that some tanks can't cross small bridges?
Someone led an attack with an anti-tank rifle platoon?
Halftracks were used wrecklessly and agressively against me?
My opponent had units that I didn't know their capabilities?
I had no idea that US forces in DGVN are worth way more than the NVA and VC forces?

Sorry one foe is crying foul when nothing wrong was commited and you are facilitating it.

That is what is wrong.

Thanx!

Hawk