8 player multiplayer game - SIGNUP THREAD

[Sardaukar]

OK, I concede to Ewald v. Kleist points. [8D]

[Telemecus]

I have seen some debate on the forums that full blizzard is overblown compared to historical, and some even say the no +1 is ahistorical. With these settings the Soviets can leave the finnish fronts without any Soviet units while Axis will have to defend the Azov and Black sea coasts including Romania, and up to 100km back for paras. That is not historical but you could argue there is balance.

Edit: Just seen the point on garrisoning Svir etc. Reduces my point. May be worth clarifying in advance even if just for etiquette/non-gameyness rather than a rule.

[Sardaukar]

I think we can go with no +1 and Mild Blizzard. Never liked +1 anyways.

[lowsugar]

When you want to start?

[Sardaukar]

Fascist invaders will die!

And can I have Zhukov, Rokossovski and Konev from start...[:'(]

[EwaldvonKleist]

Ok if I get all sappers to build level 3, 4, 5 forts
Start ASAP I think. But lets wait what Hortlund says.

[Sardaukar]

ORIGINAL: EwaldvonKleist

Ok if I get all sappers to build level 3, 4, 5 forts
Start ASAP I think. But lets wait what Hortlund says.

I think I am first to go to Siberia for losing Moscow... [:D] But it'll be fun. [8D]

[Hortlund]

Just a quick post now, more details tomorrow.

Normal blizzard and no +1. This because the +1 screws up the late war and it would be too unbalanced against the soviets to have mild blizzard and no +1.

Good point about no garrison of the finnish front, so a houserule is that the 7th independent army must stay up there and every front-hex must be covered.

FOW on of cource as well as movement.

[Hortlund]

Everyone send me a PM with your dropbox email so I can give you access

[Timmeh]

Doesn't the +1 , if enabled , end Feb/42 ?

[Hortlund]

No?

[Timmeh]

I'd propose we find one more. A referee. Maybe that George Kennedy guy? ( think the war games scene from the Dirty Dozen )
We should give the ref the keys to the game and the power to resolve disputes to ensure continuity.

We should set the project up to live on, if any one player retires a replacement is appointed. One of the 3 Generals could step up and assume supreme command, and I assume a waiting list would fill up to add players when needed, if we are successful.

Any wannabe George Kennedys out there?

[EwaldvonKleist]

I too think that +1 ends in Feb 1942

[EwaldvonKleist]

One more question: Which game version? I suggest to do not use betas.

[lowsugar]

Why not?

[EwaldvonKleist]

I appears a little bit risky to me to use a version still in developement. Would be a shame if we started all this and suddenly there is a bug which ruins the game. Just my two cents, maybe my fear is exaggerated.

[lowsugar]

Last beta mainly changed the way current turn losses are calculated and displayed. Also the feature about bombing was reverted because of reduced bombing efficiency. Maybe there is no need to worry.

[Hortlund]

We cant ask people to keep multiple installations of the game. We run on the latest version, beta or not

[EwaldvonKleist]

Ok I agree with you now.'
It would be good however to have a short talk before any future update if/when we switch to the latest versions.

[Telemecus]

I am ok with whichever version control we go with, is latest version beta or no the final decision?

On the point about manning the Finnish front could we amend the house rule to no Finnish attacks south of the line rather than no moves - it would still mean needing Lgrad to release the Finns, but provide the incentive for Soviet manning of the front.