WEGO games, what happened to them?

[DeepBlack]

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe
Well, the language might be strict and very specific but it has to be for such things.

This short video has many good examples
Grammar Nazis

[RangerJoe]

I really like that ending. I remember reading about a missing comma "," in a list in a state law that cost a company 5,000,000 USD. The law was then changed to include the comma "," before the "and" in a sentence. However, some of those rules are changing so what was unacceptable is now acceptable in some locations.

How a Missing Oxford Comma in Maine Employment Law Cost a Portland Dairy Over $5,000,000 in Overtime

https://laughingsquid.com/missing-oxfor ... 5-million/

.
.
.
So how did it happen?

Well, Maine's law says the following activities do not qualify for overtime pay: "The canning, processing, preserving, freezing, drying, marketing, storing, packing for shipment or distribution of: (1) Agricultural produce; (2) Meat and fish products; and (3) Perishable foods."

The drivers said the lack of a comma between "shipment" and "or distribution" meant the legislation applied only to the single activity of "packing", rather than to "packing" and "distribution" as two separate activities.

And because drivers distribute the goods, but do not pack them, they argued they were therefore eligible for overtime pay - backdated over several years.

A district court had earlier ruled in favour of the dairy firm.

But circuit judge David J Barron overturned that, writing: "We conclude that the exemption's scope is actually not so clear in this regard.

"And because, under Maine law, ambiguities in the state's wage and hour laws must be construed liberally in order to accomplish their remedial purpose, we adopt the drivers' narrower reading of the exemption."
.
.
.

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-39300432

There are more listed in the BBC article.

[z1812]

This thread started out as a reasonable discussion about wego.

It seems to have resolved to Curtis being right and everyone else being wrong.

I will continue to take part...............but I will not be responding to any of his posts.

[z1812]

There is a kind of hybrid move sequence that I have come across. It is a system that breaks down a turn into a number of smaller actions. Each unit on each side alternates and has one action until both sides have used all their actions. This completes the turn sequence. I quite like it. However my preference is still for wego.

[RFalvo69]

ORIGINAL: z1812

There is a kind of hybrid move sequence that I have come across. It is a system that breaks down a turn into a number of smaller actions. Each unit on each side alternates and has one action until both sides have used all their actions. This completes the turn sequence. I quite like it. However my preference is still for wego.

It sounds interesting. Can you point out some game(s) that use it?

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: z1812

This thread started out as a reasonable discussion about wego.

It seems to have resolved to Curtis being right and everyone else being wrong.

I will continue to take part...............but I will not be responding to any of his posts.

unfortunately a regular feature of any thread that Curtis decides needs his particular form of input.

ORIGINAL: RFalvo69

ORIGINAL: z1812

There is a kind of hybrid move sequence that I have come across. It is a system that breaks down a turn into a number of smaller actions. Each unit on each side alternates and has one action until both sides have used all their actions. This completes the turn sequence. I quite like it. However my preference is still for wego.

It sounds interesting. Can you point out some game(s) that use it?

I vaguely recall a few of the post-SPI Victory Games used this sort of impulse system. If I recall properly, their Vietnam War game used an impulse system and it was an effective way of modelling the intersection between irregular and regular warfare.

Not sure its really been used in computer wego games though?

[jmlima]

ORIGINAL: RFalvo69

ORIGINAL: z1812

There is a kind of hybrid move sequence that I have come across. It is a system that breaks down a turn into a number of smaller actions. Each unit on each side alternates and has one action until both sides have used all their actions. This completes the turn sequence. I quite like it. However my preference is still for wego.

It sounds interesting. Can you point out some game(s) that use it?

Alternate activation, for ex, CH's ATS series, Pz Grenadier, etc. usually popular in tactical scales.

[RFalvo69]

ORIGINAL: jmlima

ORIGINAL: RFalvo69

ORIGINAL: z1812

There is a kind of hybrid move sequence that I have come across. It is a system that breaks down a turn into a number of smaller actions. Each unit on each side alternates and has one action until both sides have used all their actions. This completes the turn sequence. I quite like it. However my preference is still for wego.

It sounds interesting. Can you point out some game(s) that use it?

Alternate activation, for ex, CH's ATS series, Pz Grenadier, etc. usually popular in tactical scales.

And this shows how this pandemic is starting to fray my mind [:(] - given that I played and enjoyed a number of Panzer Grenadier titles a few years ago. I really liked that system.

The Operational Combat System by MMP uses a similar approach IIUC.

Speaking of Avalanche Publishing, I also like their WEGO approach for the operational part of "The Great War at Sea" and the interesting IGOUGO asymmetric system for the tactical battles (even if the series suffers from the endemic inability by AP to write understandable manuals...)

[Anonymous]

[Deleted by Admins]

[jmlima]

ORIGINAL: RFalvo69
...
Speaking of Avalanche Publishing, I also like their WEGO approach for the operational part of "The Great War at Sea" and the interesting IGOUGO asymmetric system for the tactical battles (even if the series suffers from the endemic inability by AP to write understandable manuals...)

That and vassal modules. Even if they are moving a bit on that front, certainly for PzG.

BTW, 'second world war at sea' is also supposed to be really good.

[RangerJoe]

ORIGINAL: RFalvo69

ORIGINAL: z1812

There is a kind of hybrid move sequence that I have come across. It is a system that breaks down a turn into a number of smaller actions. Each unit on each side alternates and has one action until both sides have used all their actions. This completes the turn sequence. I quite like it. However my preference is still for wego.

It sounds interesting. Can you point out some game(s) that use it?

Star Fleet Battles. 1 turn with 32 impulses for movement and firing.

edit for a cat stepping on the keyboard . . . [8|]

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: 76mm

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
And, if you had checked the original post, you would know that I posted similarly historical results from Germany 1945 and Soviet Union 1941. And those are just the examples I had movies made of.

So you've cherry-picked the handful of scenario play-throughs that you found closely resembled historical results...so what? Other play throughs have undoubtedly resulted in wildly ahistorical results. You understand that just posting the results that support your argument is completely irrelevant, right? Do you think that's how data analysis works? Before drawing any conclusions you need to look at all the results, which you do not, and cannot possibly, have.

I didn't cherry pick anything. Those are the only playtests that I made. Of course different results could probably be obtained if players make vastly different choices than historical or one player is much better than the other. But neither was the case in those playtests. And the results all clearly had excellent historocity.

Again, where are the results for WEGO? I'm still waiting.

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: RFalvo69

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: RFalvo69

What is "historicity" if not a "scenario" played once - and thus not comparable with anything similar?

We will never know how the Allies' performance in '44-'45 fell on an hypothetical "probability curve". Maybe they rolled two six-sided dice, were unlucky, and got a "3". Maybe had Market-Garden been a bit more lucky they could have been in Berlin for Christmas. Maybe, had the campaign be played ten times, we would have discovered that the Allies won the war earlier eight times out of them. We will never know.

What we do know is that "the historical result was 3". So we build a top-down model that has 3 as the average: two six-sided dice with only 1s and 2s on their faces. This way we concede that the Allies can got a "2" or a "4", with the historical "3" as the most probable result. But we can't refuse the idea that the model is skewed: you can't shop it around as "correct", because we can't compare what it models (i.e. the real campaign) with anything. It was artificially built to get a specific result.

They were rolling a billion dice. That limits the standard deviation a bunch. There's no way anyone can deny that my France 1944 playtest results were spectacular!

Again, no.

Again, yes! The results matched the historical results superbly. And not just the end results - most waypoints inbetween as well. And plenty of other metrics matched well also.

You want to claim that the historical results were an aberation? Good luck. I can't imagine what possible basis could you have for that. Certainly it won't be based upon historical information!!

Clearly, I have multiple examples of IGOUGO producing very historical results.

And still they talked more about the Fulda-Frankfurt corridor than about NATO plans for the siege of Vladivostok. Who knows? Maybe they had faith in their models [;)]

Again, hypotheticals can't be used to test the historocity of playtests, no matter how you try to squirm out of it.

"...they had faith in their models". In other words, a religion!

[RFalvo69]

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: 76mm

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
And, if you had checked the original post, you would know that I posted similarly historical results from Germany 1945 and Soviet Union 1941. And those are just the examples I had movies made of.

So you've cherry-picked the handful of scenario play-throughs that you found closely resembled historical results...so what? Other play throughs have undoubtedly resulted in wildly ahistorical results. You understand that just posting the results that support your argument is completely irrelevant, right? Do you think that's how data analysis works? Before drawing any conclusions you need to look at all the results, which you do not, and cannot possibly, have.

I didn't cherry pick anything. Those are the only playtests that I made. Of course different results could probably be obtained if players make vastly different choices than historical or one player is much better than the other. But neither was the case in those playtests. And the results all clearly had excellent historocity.

Amazing. He nailed the confutation to his own theory without even realising it [&:]

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: RFalvo69

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: 76mm


So you've cherry-picked the handful of scenario play-throughs that you found closely resembled historical results...so what? Other play throughs have undoubtedly resulted in wildly ahistorical results. You understand that just posting the results that support your argument is completely irrelevant, right? Do you think that's how data analysis works? Before drawing any conclusions you need to look at all the results, which you do not, and cannot possibly, have.

I didn't cherry pick anything. Those are the only playtests that I made. Of course different results could probably be obtained if players make vastly different choices than historical or one player is much better than the other. But neither was the case in those playtests. And the results all clearly had excellent historocity.

Amazing. He nailed the confutation to his own theory without even realising it [&:]

aye which is part of the problem. I believe he is too intelligent to make some of his posts in good faith, therefore its all just playing silly games and trolling the forums

[altipueri]

Excellent thread.

About 50 years ago, when a teenager, I gave up playing tabletop wargames at a club because all I saw was old men arguing about what was or wasn't realistic.

As a teenager of course the old men were probably really only 30 or so, but I'm glad the tradition has moved online.

[jmlima]

ORIGINAL: altipueri

...

About 50 years ago, when a teenager, I gave up playing tabletop wargames at a club because all I saw was old men arguing about what was or wasn't realistic.

...

It's a pretty though question. Are 0s and 1s more comparable to war than cardboard? Think we'll need to bring Sartre into that one.

[RFalvo69]

ORIGINAL: jmlima

ORIGINAL: altipueri

...

About 50 years ago, when a teenager, I gave up playing tabletop wargames at a club because all I saw was old men arguing about what was or wasn't realistic.

...

It's a pretty though question. Are 0s and 1s more comparable to war than cardboard?

Are you talking about wargames or where debates about them are held? [;)]

[Anonymous]

[Deleted by Admins]

[DeepBlack]

My faith was so much stronger then
I believed in fellow man
And I was so much older then
When I was young