Artillery fire on reinforcement area

[TimoS.]

I was the one he talked about. But the statements he made arent true.

1. I didnt shell the Setup Zone with Preplanned Artillery. Just infront of it to block the advance from there in that Open Field before the Setup Zone. And it
wasnt preplanned.

2. I had some light Mortars with direct Fire shooting on those "?" and "Inf" signs after the Reinforcments had arrived.

Yes i wasnt playing blind and know where it was comming from. We didnt agree with playing blind so i was using that Info but never in the manner cargol described.

[cargol]

I was the one he talked about. But the statements he made arent true.

1. I didnt shell the Setup Zone with Preplanned Artillery. Just infront of it to block the advance from there in that Open Field before the Setup Zone. And it
wasnt preplanned.

2. I had some light Mortars with direct Fire shooting on those "?" and "Inf" signs after the Reinforcments had arrived.

Yes i wasnt playing blind and know where it was comming from. We didnt agree with playing blind so i was using that Info but never in the manner cargol described.

First of all intentionally i didnt mention your name as i didnt want this discussion to be turned into a flame war but also i wanted the situation which i ve described not to happen again in a game of mine.
Second i never claimed that you ve used preplan artillery, i said that you shelled the area in which my reinforcements came(as you knew the exact place by studying the scenario beforehand) and that is what you ve made as the artillery was falling in the exact reinforcement area but also 20 meters in front due to the dispese of the shells.
For me but from the replies of others its clear that using info in that manner is not fair play.
Third let me tell you a piece of advise after 500+ games here.Winning is not everything but finding opponents is and this can only be achieved if you respect them they way you want to respect you.

[Toblakai]

To write it down to our house rules is a good idea. We should also declare that ambushes against reinforcements are also forbidden in reinforcement areas.

[TimoS.]

Second i never claimed that you ve used preplan artillery, i said that you shelled the area in which my reinforcements came(as you knew the exact place by studying the scenario beforehand) and that is what you ve made as the artillery was falling in the exact reinforcement area but also 20 meters in front due to the dispese of the shells.

So i didnt shell your Reinforcment Area? So the Topic isnt right. I didnt. It was infront of your reinforcment Area right?

For me but from the replies of others its clear that using info in that manner is not fair play.
Third let me tell you a piece of advise after 500+ games here.Winning is not everything but finding opponents is and this can only be achieved if you respect them they way you want to respect you.

We didnt agree to play blind. So i used that Info in Line with the Rules. So no unfair play. If i would have shelled your Reinforcment Area (wich i didnt) that would have been a diffrent story. The Statements of others was on shelling the Reinforcment Areas so its not about me.
Other thing on this Map was:
"Where else should i place that Arty Strike?"
Your Place of Reinforcements and my Positions where so close that i couldnt shell anywhere else without hitting my own Positions.

Its not about winning. I know that. Its about having fun with a very tough Opponent and the Game is still tettering on the Edge. You still have all the Chances to win this and it took me lots of efforts to get this far in the Game to make it a Victory. So cudos to you. Well played so far and no matter how this goes (Winning,loosing,draw) it was fun to play anyway.

I dont disrespect you. Just want to tell my Point of View. I told you more than once what a good Opponent you are, that you setup a good defence that i would have setup the same way and its fun to play with you. So respect to you.

Edit: I totally agree with you that there should be no Preplanned Arty Strikes in Reinforcment Areas when they arrive. 5 Minutes later in the Game after they arrive is a diffrent story.

[cargol]

To write it down to our house rules is a good idea. We should also declare that ambushes against reinforcements are also forbidden in reinforcement areas.

I totally agree!

[cargol]

We didnt agree to play blind. So i used that Info in Line with the Rules.

You ve set up an artillery barrage in a place(reinforcement area and a bit beyond ) where you wouldnt if you didnt know that this was the exact place of reinforcement arrival. That for me it's unfair.For you this is sthing acceptable and it's your right to concider it like this.
I ve asked community's feedback in order to deal with similar cases and that's all.
BTW The concept of scenario of the month is to play a given scenario and to rate it in terms of balancing,enjoyment etc.
You are clearly stating that you are using the info gathered by examining the scenario in order to gain an advantage.

[Herr Klopek]

I had a game where my opponent,which had checked the scenario previously,shelled the area where my reinforcements would arrive.
Needdles to say that it caused many casualties and spoiled any chance of a coordinated counterattack.
Do you think that it's normal or we should add this case in Blitz's house rules?

The original thread was asking the community if they thought this kind of situation should be written down in the house rules. It was written in a general way and the opponent was not identified....all good. Let's please keep to the topic. Public debate of the topic is constructive and positive to the community but public arguing is not. It soon becomes a pissing match

My opinion (for what it's worth ) is that this is too specific to put in house rules, we can't write down every situation or else the rules become burdensome. There is a "spirit" to the rules and I think (and other may agree) that placing on board mortars to have direct line of fire to a reinforcement area already pre-known by the opponent would go against the spirit of our house rules.

Let's keep our comments positive and on topic.

[TimoS.]

Just want to make it clear:
1. I didnt shell the Reinforcement Area when they arrived
2. I put a NON Preplanned Strike between the Obj. and the Reinforcment Area on that expected Route of Advance. Wich was obvious because it was almost the only Option to go.

BTT: Think that there should be no Preplanned Arty Strike on Reinforcement Zones at their arrival. Same is for the Defender. No Preplanned Artystrikes for the Defender. So i think thats fair.
Making the whole "Reinforcment Area" a non Hitting Zone you have games like this where you cant use your Mortars when your Opponent is staying in there.

What is a Reinforcement Area? Hard to define. Just the Spot where the spawned? A Demilitary Zone of 100 or more Meter? Not that easy to define because of there are no coloured Zones where the Enemy can deploy his Units.

[cargol]

Let's keep our comments positive and on topic.

I ll keep with that and wont reply to any comment as otherwise we could go on forever.
My point is that reinforcement zone or its immediate zone(in my case it was the next 1-2 action spots) is not to be targeted by an artillery barrage.
Think that in order to plan the shortest barrage you need 4-5 minutes that means that the opponent had checked the exact time of the arrival in the editor, placed its units with LOS to the reinforcement area, and then ordered a barrage in such a time so it will start falling down at the exact time of the reinforcements arrival which clearly states IMO that he uses his knowledge of the scenario to gain an unbalanced advantage and this is what i m trying to say in those posts of mine.
This it has nothing to do with the outcome of the game cause as my opponent said all the results are open. I just dont want in a future game of mine to either negotiate for a couple of hours for things that for me are very clear and straightforward or to find my self in a situaion as the one i ve decribed.

[Toblakai]

Herr Klopek is right. Both sides gave their statements and the rest should be nonpublic.

With our rules we won’t make a constitution. Fun and fair play should be the purpose.

@Timo: Don’t think that you are accuse or something like this