Page 8 of 17
RE: Option 47
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2015 7:53 pm
by bo
ORIGINAL: Centuur
The order in which to proceed was decided on by Matrix. That was: supply - naval combat - Netplay. After that, I would first like to see the missing components of the "standard" game as the half map scenario's, search and seizure, neutrality pacts and mutual peace with multiplayer Netplay and a lot of bugs fixed too...
That's a whole different strategy. Optional rules are nice, but they are optional, aren't they...
Yes they are centuur, even optional rule # 47 is optional [:D]
Bo
RE: Option 47
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2015 8:26 pm
by rkr1958
ORIGINAL: bo
ORIGINAL: Centuur
The order in which to proceed was decided on by Matrix. That was: supply - naval combat - Netplay. After that, I would first like to see the missing components of the "standard" game as the half map scenario's, search and seizure, neutrality pacts and mutual peace with multiplayer Netplay and a lot of bugs fixed too...
That's a whole different strategy. Optional rules are nice, but they are optional, aren't they...
Yes they are centuur, even optional rule # 47 is optional [:D]
Bo
Saying that an optional rule is optional would be a Yogi Berra ism. Here's a small sampling of his famous quotes,
"It anit over 'till it's over"
"It's like deja vu all over again."
"Baseball is 90 percent mental. The other half is physical."
"If you can't imitate him, don't copy him."
"80% of putts that are short don't go into the hole."
RE: Option 47
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2015 9:01 pm
by Larry Smith
Hey, hey, hey, Booboo! That's a mighty nice picnic basket you got there!
[Different Yogi, I know]
RE: Option 47
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2015 9:35 pm
by bo
ORIGINAL: Larry Smith
Hey, hey, hey, Booboo! That's a mighty nice picnic basket you got there!
[Different Yogi, I know]
What does this have to do with optional rule 47 [:D] Ok sorry, but those two Yogi's look alike [:(]
Bo
RE: Option 47
Posted: Sat Mar 28, 2015 4:32 am
by Admiral Delabroglio
Hello
When playing, it is possible to at least make an imitation of option 47 :
Even if the unit gets reorganized, just pretend it isn't and don't move it.
If your opponent wants to destroy it, choose the die roll to mimic the result that would have been if the unit(s) had been flipped, including the odds change. Or choose the die roll to make sure a ground strike succeeds.
Sure, it is awkward, but better than nothing. Attach the comment "Option forty-sevened" to the unit(s) in order to remember.
Now I really wish it were possible to destroy your own units in MWiF. For instance to get the repair pool rid of obsolete naval units that you intend to let rust in repair yards, to get rid of outdated planes in the reserve pool, and to avoid turning the game into a "Prisonners in Flames" one.
Best regards
RE: Option 47
Posted: Sat Mar 28, 2015 10:59 am
by Extraneous
ORIGINAL: Admiral Delabroglio
Hello
When playing, it is possible to at least make an imitation of option 47 :
Even if the unit gets reorganized, just pretend it isn't and don't move it.
If your opponent wants to destroy it, choose the die roll to mimic the result that would have been if the unit(s) had been flipped, including the odds change. Or choose the die roll to make sure a ground strike succeeds.
Sure, it is awkward, but better than nothing. Attach the comment "Option forty-sevened" to the unit(s) in order to remember.
Now I really wish it were possible to destroy your own units in MWiF. For instance to get the repair pool rid of obsolete naval units that you intend to let rust in repair yards, to get rid of outdated planes in the reserve pool, and to avoid turning the game into a "Prisonners in Flames" one.
Best regards
Did they get rid of the scrap rule?
RE: Option 47
Posted: Sat Mar 28, 2015 2:00 pm
by Zorachus99
ORIGINAL: paulderynck
ORIGINAL: bo
If you are talking about Matrix's MWIF where does that happen all the time when no one has ever played an actual game with another person as of yet because we have no net play, I am not talking about games that paul plays or e-mail games or vassel, I am talking about MWIF on the computer.
Bo
Well, for me, I am talking about MWiF which I am playing with 4 others right now. And I'm talking about the board game. Please do not create false impressions here for new readers. Many people are playing the game one on one as well, as the AARs demonstrate. Don't turn the discussion of this option into another "Sad, Sad, Sad" thread, please.
One of those is more than enough.
Posts like this aggravate me a bit. Your title should say Beta-Tester. You have the Debug Tool to fix these issues. Therefore, you do not have them. That's disingenuous if you aren't up front about that. Releasing the debug tool to this 'huge' community with a warning that it might screw up the game is not sufficient for some reason.
I bought the game because I'm getting old, and I make far too many simple mistakes on supply, and other complex issues playing the boardgame online with Vassal. I just need something to calculate supply, and prevent illegal moves.
However, if you are any fan of SPI or other old wargames, realize that the most important aspect of this game has 2 serious issues.
1) Isolated units are automatically re-organized regardless of whether they can trace supply. You literally cannot pocket the enemy, wear them down, and kill them. These things traditionally shown by step-losses, were represented by disruption alone, simplifying play from that of Fire in East. I've played it, and found the detail amazing, but game-play a bit funny.
2) The finer points of tracing supply across straights is broken, so I had to abandon the first game I've been able to play past the first turn. Too many turns were ruined by my wondering what was going on.
Paul
FIXED supply problem I come across with a tool he has.
3) Why can't the customers have the same tool? Everyone cannot rely on beta-testers to fix their games to proceed. That is not a functional or realistic process.
4) Implementation of optional 47 consists only of changes to the re-organization phase, and has no impact during the tracing of supply during the turn. Therefore the changes only exist in that location, not everywhere in the game like other things requested.
I would really like to play this game to the end at least once.
Yes Paul, I understand you have no problem with this, but you have the debug tool. [:@]
I promise that if I get that tool, I won't ever report a game bug in a game where the tool has been used. Or maybe stamp the save to indicate the tool has been used. Whatever. The customers of this game need it.
RE: Option 47
Posted: Sat Mar 28, 2015 2:14 pm
by bo
ORIGINAL: Zorachus99
ORIGINAL: paulderynck
ORIGINAL: bo
If you are talking about Matrix's MWIF where does that happen all the time when no one has ever played an actual game with another person as of yet because we have no net play, I am not talking about games that paul plays or e-mail games or vassel, I am talking about MWIF on the computer.
Bo
Well, for me, I am talking about MWiF which I am playing with 4 others right now. And I'm talking about the board game. Please do not create false impressions here for new readers. Many people are playing the game one on one as well, as the AARs demonstrate. Don't turn the discussion of this option into another "Sad, Sad, Sad" thread, please.
One of those is more than enough.
Posts like this aggravate me a bit. Your title should say Beta-Tester. You have the Debug Tool to fix these issues. Therefore, you do not have them. That's disingenuous if you aren't up front about that. Releasing the debug tool to this 'huge' community with a warning that it might screw up the game is not sufficient for some reason.
I bought the game because I'm getting old, and I make far too many simple mistakes on supply, and other complex issues playing the boardgame online with Vassal. I just need something to calculate supply, and prevent illegal moves.
However, if you are any fan of SPI or other old wargames, realize that the most important aspect of this game has 2 serious issues.
1) Isolated units are automatically re-organized regardless of whether they can trace supply. You literally cannot pocket the enemy, wear them down, and kill them. These things traditionally shown by step-losses, were represented by disruption alone, simplifying play from that of Fire in East. I've played it, and found the detail amazing, but game-play a bit funny.
2) The finer points of tracing supply across straights is broken, so I had to abandon the first game I've been able to play past the first turn. Too many turns were ruined by my wondering what was going on.
Paul
FIXED supply problem I come across with a tool he has.
3) Why can't the customers have the same tool? Everyone cannot rely on beta-testers to fix their games to proceed. That is not a functional or realistic process.
4) Implementation of optional 47 consists only of changes to the re-organization phase, and has no impact during the tracing of supply during the turn. Therefore the changes only exist in that location, not everywhere in the game like other things requested.
I would really like to play this game to the end at least once.
Yes Paul, I understand you have no problem with this, but you have the debug tool. [:@]
I promise that if I get that tool, I won't ever report a game bug in a game where the tool has been used. Or maybe stamp the save to indicate the tool has been used. Whatever. The customers of this game need it.
Agreed, that is why I wanted your post # 32 reread. I have the tool. And I thought maybe wrongly so, that if Steve does not put in rule 47 for some reason, then, if you had the debug tool you could disorganized those units turn after turn until Steve does something about that rule.
I do not know enough about players habits as to whether this would be a good idea or not [debug tool] I guess it could lead to a lot of trouble. Of course the perfect solution is to NEVER leave units in your rear [:-]
Bo
RE: Option 47
Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2015 4:26 am
by Joseignacio
ORIGINAL: bo
ORIGINAL: Larry Smith
Hey, hey, hey, Booboo! That's a mighty nice picnic basket you got there!
[Different Yogi, I know]
What does this have to do with optional rule 47 [:D] Ok sorry, but those two Yogi's look alike [:(]
Bo
They are the same, I guess Yogi Berra was intended to be "Yogi Bear" and was misspelled.
RE: Option 47
Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2015 12:35 pm
by Larry Smith
Yogi Berra was a famous football coach, back in the 1960's or 1970's; I can't remember which team.
Yogi Bear was a cartoon character, and rumor has it the character was named after the coach, but I don't know if that is true or not. I've never seen a photo of the coach, so I have no idea what he looks like. Might be why the bear had the fedora, collar and tie all the time.
RE: Option 47
Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2015 12:36 pm
by bo
ORIGINAL: Joseignacio
ORIGINAL: bo
ORIGINAL: Larry Smith
Hey, hey, hey, Booboo! That's a mighty nice picnic basket you got there!
[Different Yogi, I know]
What does this have to do with optional rule 47 [:D] Ok sorry, but those two Yogi's look alike [:(]
Bo
They are the same, I guess Yogi Berra was intended to be "Yogi Bear" and was misspelled.
Would you please just worry about your Oso's and Osa's and optional rule 47 and not our Bear's and Berra's [:D]
Bo
RE: Option 47
Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2015 12:44 pm
by bo
Errrr Larry please stick to your Canadian sports as you know nothing about US sports, this is a picture of Yogi Berra the great catcher for the New York Yankees. [:(]
Bo
RE: Option 47
Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2015 12:50 pm
by bo
And this is a picture of the cartoon character Yogi Bear, so from now on if you want concrete information come to me as I never make a mistake about anything.[:D]
Bo
RE: Option 47
Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2015 12:57 pm
by warspite1
ORIGINAL: bo
And this is a picture of the cartoon image Yogi Bear, so from now on if you want concrete information come to me
as I never make a mistake about anything.[:D]
Bo
warspite1
Indeed, you are certainly smarter than the average bo [;)]
RE: Option 47
Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2015 1:16 pm
by bo
It took you years warspite to come to that conclusion which is very hurtful [:(]
There was no comma after average, so are you referring to a lot of Bo's out there in the world. Good lord that would be a disaster if there were more of me around. [:D]
Bo
RE: Option 47
Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2015 1:20 pm
by warspite1
ORIGINAL: bo
There was no comma after average, so are you referring to a lot of Bo's out there in the world. Good lord that would be a disaster if there were more of me around. [:D]
Bo
warspite1
No it was a play on his catchphrase: Smarter than the average bear.....
RE: Option 47
Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2015 4:06 pm
by bo
ORIGINAL: warspite1
ORIGINAL: bo
There was no comma after average, so are you referring to a lot of Bo's out there in the world. Good lord that would be a disaster if there were more of me around. [:D]
Bo
warspite1
No it was a play on his catchphrase: Smarter than the average bear.....
Which Yogi? [:(]
Bo
RE: Option 47
Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2015 4:18 pm
by warspite1
ORIGINAL: bo
ORIGINAL: warspite1
ORIGINAL: bo
There was no comma after average, so are you referring to a lot of Bo's out there in the world. Good lord that would be a disaster if there were more of me around. [:D]
Bo
warspite1
No it was a play on his catchphrase: Smarter than the average bear.....
Which Yogi? [:(]
Bo
warspite1
There's only one Yogi [&o]
RE: Option 47
Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2015 4:33 pm
by bo
How stupid of me of course there is only one Yogi, thank you warspite for keeping me straight [:(]
Bo
RE: Option 47
Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2015 5:43 pm
by paulderynck
deleted