gamey use of leaders

[gwgardner]

Another suggestion for a change with the new game: disallow the gamey changing of leaders. Example, in recent games, I have taken to removing some leaders at the end of each turn, thereby keeping a pool of leaders to assign on the next turn. I may use Guderian for a tank assault on one front, then recall to HQ, and assign him to another front the next turn, and so on ad infinitum. Kind of silly.

Recalling to HQ should take that leader out of use for a longer time, perhaps.

[BlueMak]

While I like your idea and agree it would be a nice change, I can't help but asking,
If you know it is gamey, why do you keep doing it?

[gwgardner]

It's the only way I can beat Chuck.

[Mike Parker]

ORIGINAL: BlueMak

While I like your idea and agree it would be a nice change, I can't help but asking,
If you know it is gamey, why do you keep doing it?

*chuckles*

I am chuckling because this is a matter of philosophy. I play a statistical baseball game with some friends of mine that is heavily modified with out own rules for league play. Anyway every off season I argue for rules additions/deletions/changes based upon exploits of the rules in place. One manager keeps saying "if you think its an exploit don't do it" mainly because he would rather not have "complex" rules (I say complete not complex).

I would rather have a rule in place to stop an action not "Well just don't do that" Its rather like Chess, sometimes you find yourself in a position where winning is likely hopeless, so it behooves you to get a draw, One way to make a draw is to make a game that never ends (perpetual check for example). It wouldn't be proper for your opponent to say "stop doing that and play properly"