Matrix Games Forums

[font="arial"]A tobacconist's shop. [/font] [font="arial"]Text on screen: "In 1970, the British Empire lay in ruins, and foreign nationalists frequented the streets - many of them Hungarian (not the streets - the foreign nationals). Anyway, many of these Hungarians went into tobacconists' shops to buy cigarettes ..." [/font] [font="arial"]A Hungarian tourist (John Cleese) approaches the clerk (Terry Jones). The tourist is reading haltingly from a phrase book. [/font] [font="arial"]Hungarian: "I will not buy this record, it is scratched." [/font] [font="arial"]Clerk: "Sorry?" [/font] [font="arial"]Hungarian: "I will not buy this record, it is scratched." [/font] [font="arial"]Clerk: "Uh, no, no, no. This is a tobacconist's." [/font] [font="arial"]Hungarian: "Ah! I will not buy this *tobacconist's*, it is scratched." [/font] [font="arial"]Clerk: "No, no, no, no. Tobacco ... um ... cigarettes." (holds up a pack) [/font] [font="arial"]Hungarian: "Ya! See-gar-ets! Ya! Uh ... my hovercraft is full of eels." [/font] [font="arial"]Clerk: "Sorry?" [/font] [font="arial"]Hungarian: "My hovercraft ..." (pantomimes puffing a cigarette) "... is full of eels." (pretends to strike a match) [/font] [font="arial"]Clerk: "Ahh, matches!" [/font] [font="arial"]Hungarian: "Ya! Ya! Ya! Ya! Do you waaaaant ... do you waaaaaant ... to come back to my place, bouncy-bouncy?" [/font] [font="arial"]Clerk: "Here, I don't think you're using that thing right." [/font] [font="arial"]Hungarian: "You great poof." [/font] [font="arial"]Clerk: "That'll be six and six, please." [/font] [font="arial"]Hungarian: "If I said you had a beautiful body, would you hold it against me? I ... I am no longer infected." [/font] [font="arial"]Clerk: "Uh, may I, uh ..." (takes phrase book, flips through it) "... Costs six and six ... ah, here we are." (speaks weird Hungarian-sounding words) [/font] [font="arial"]Hungarian punches the clerk. Meanwhile, a policeman (Graham Chapman) on a quiet street cups his ear as if hearing a cry of distress. He sprints for many blocks and finally enters the tobacconist's. [/font] [font="arial"]Cop: "What's going on here then?" [/font] [font="arial"]Hungarian: "Ah. You have beautiful thighs." [/font] [font="arial"]Cop: (looks down at himself) "WHAT?!?" [/font] [font="arial"]Clerk: "He hit me!" [/font] [font="arial"]Hungarian: "Drop your panties, Sir William; I cannot wait 'til lunchtime." (points at clerk) [/font] [font="arial"]Cop: "RIGHT!!!" (drags Hungarian away by the arm) [/font] [font="arial"]Hungarian: (indignantly) "My nipples explode with delight!" [/font] [font="arial"]Scene switches to a courtroom. Characters are all in powdered wigs and judicial robes, except publisher and cop. [/font] [font="arial"]Characters: Judge - Terry Jones; Bailiff - Eric Idle; Lawyer - John Cleese; Cop - Graham Chapman; Publisher - Michael Palin.[/font] [font="arial"]Bailiff: "Call Alexander Yalt!" (voices sing out the name several times) [/font] [font="arial"]Judge: "Oh, shut up!" [/font] [font="arial"]Bailiff: (to publisher) "You are Alexander Yalt?" [/font] [font="arial"]Publisher: (in a sing-songy voice) "Oh, I am." [/font] [font="arial"]Bailiff: "Skip the impersonations. You are Alexander Yalt?" [/font] [font="arial"]Publisher: "I am." [/font] [font="arial"]Bailiff: "You are hereby charged that on the 28th day of May, 1970, you did willfully, unlawfully, and with malice of forethought, publish an alleged English-Hungarian phrase book with intent to cause a breach of the peace. How do you plead?" [/font] [font="arial"]Publisher: "Not guilty." [/font] [font="arial"]Bailiff: "You live at 46 Horton Terrace?" [/font] [font="arial"]Publisher: "I do live at 46 Horton Terrace." [/font] [left][font="arial"]Bailiff: "You are the director of a publishing company?" [/font][/left] [font="arial"]Publisher: "I am the director of a publishing company." [/font] [font="arial"]Bailiff: "Your company publishes phrase books?" [/font] [font="arial"]Publisher: "My company does publish phrase books." [/font] [font="arial"]Bailiff: "You did say 46 Horton Terrace, did you?" [/font] [font="arial"]Publisher: "Yes." [/font] [font="arial"]Bailiff: (strikes a gong) "Ah! Got him!" [/font] [font="arial"]Lawyer and cop applaud, laugh. [/font] [font="arial"]Judge: "Get on with it, get on with it." [/font] [font="arial"]Bailiff: "That's fine. On the 28th of May, you published this phrase book." [/font] [font="arial"]Publisher: "I did." [/font] [font="arial"]Bailiff: "I quote an example. The Hungarian phrase meaning 'Can you direct me to the station?' is translated by the English phrase, 'Please fondle my bum.'" [/font] [font="arial"]Publisher: "I wish to plead incompetence." [/font] [font="arial"]Cop: (stands) "Please may I ask for an adjournment, m'lord?" [/font] [font="arial"]Judge: "An adjournment? Certainly not!" [/font] [font="arial"]The cop sits down again, emitting perhaps the longest and loudest release of bodily gas in the history of the universe. [/font] [font="arial"]Judge: "Why on earth didn't you say WHY you wanted an adjournment?" [/font] [font="arial"]Cop: "I didn't know an acceptable legal phrase, m'lord." [/font] [font="arial"]Cut to ancient footage of old women applauding.[/font] [left][font="arial"]Judge: (banging and swinging gavel) "If there's any more stock film of women applauding, I'll clear the court."[/font][/left]

What's this ? [&:]

That appears to be the complete text of a Monty Python's Flying Circus sketch.

Yes. Surreal 70's English humour.

Cheers, Neilster

ORIGINAL: Ballista

"My hovercraft is full of eels...."

I was providing the full text of Ballista's source material

Is it just me, or does that emoticon have a rather prurient expression on its face? Either that or predatory, I suppose, although the two could be conflated to some extent.

Edit: Prurient emoticons and Monty Python sketch scripts are not being included in MWiF (to my knowledge, anyway). But should they be? [;)]

Is there any provision in this game for major powers to attempt to influence neutral countries to join them in the fight? For example, Hitler tried to convince Franco to join Germany, which would have saved Germany the effort of invading Spain if Hitler chose to do so. Expending political resources or points to influence another country's decision to join a side or stay neutral can have a large effect on the military strategy that you choose. This could be an interesting option for MWIF that can make it more unpredictable and realistic than, for example, just relying on how successful the Axis are in conducting the war or the CW invading neutral countries in influencing the timing of US entry into the war. If there was such an option and a system in place, I can envision the German player or AI trying to expend enough political points to convince Stalin to stay neutral and allow the capitalists to destroy each other or the CW player expending what ever points he or she has to try to increase the chance that the USA would join the war in Europe at a much earlier date.

In addition, if such a political subsystem was in place, then how about allowing the expenditure of enough political points to actually suppress a neutral country's ability to gear up their economy for war? For example, Germany can then keep a neutral Russia from building its military up too rapidly while Germany conquers England or gears up for Barbarossa and thereby achieve some measure of surprise when it actually does invade Russia.

ORIGINAL: rtamesis

In addition, if such a political subsystem was in place, then how about allowing the expenditure of enough political points to actually suppress a neutral country's ability to gear up their economy for war? For example, Germany can then keep a neutral Russia from building its military up too rapidly while Germany conquers England or gears up for Barbarossa and thereby achieve some measure of surprise when it actually does invade Russia.

There is a supplemental game to WIF called Days of Decision. I have never played it, though it is now in its 3rd edition. The intent of the game is to provide alternative histories comparable to what you have suggested - it starts in 1936/7, I believe, and continues through to the war years. Since it uses the WIF system to a large degree (e.g., the same map and units) it has been penciled in as a future MWIF product (2 or 3).

ORIGINAL: rtamesis

Is there any provision in this game for major powers to attempt to influence neutral countries to join them in the fight? For example, Hitler tried to convince Franco to join Germany, which would have saved Germany the effort of invading Spain if Hitler chose to do so. Expending political resources or points to influence another country's decision to join a side or stay neutral can have a large effect on the military strategy that you choose. This could be an interesting option for MWIF that can make it more unpredictable and realistic than, for example, just relying on how successful the Axis are in conducting the war or the CW invading neutral countries in influencing the timing of US entry into the war. If there was such an option and a system in place, I can envision the German player or AI trying to expend enough political points to convince Stalin to stay neutral and allow the capitalists to destroy each other or the CW player expending what ever points he or she has to try to increase the chance that the USA would join the war in Europe at a much earlier date.

You can spend resources to attempt and/or block coups.

Cheers, Neilster

You actually do way more than that ... Influence in all Minors is historically based to a degree at start ..
Majors influence all aspects .. The real objective is to make pacts .. resource and territorial .. political and  military ..
When War breaks out .. thats your OOB ..
IDG

Here is a question I've thought about starting a thread on but I think this is a good place to ask it. Will MWiF support player generated Trade Agreements? The classic example is Japan sending BPs to Russia in exchange for Oil. It's a bit of a grey area in the rules perhaps, and some groups outright disallow this, but when you read the Designer's Notes it seems clear that Harry wants this to be a possible part of the game play. This is probably most likely in a six player game with Japan on its own; also a six player game might see a brief Italian/French deal but that would be far more rare.

ORIGINAL: brian brian

Here is a question I've thought about starting a thread on but I think this is a good place to ask it. Will MWiF support player generated Trade Agreements? The classic example is Japan sending BPs to Russia in exchange for Oil. It's a bit of a grey area in the rules perhaps, and some groups outright disallow this, but when you read the Designer's Notes it seems clear that Harry wants this to be a possible part of the game play. This is probably most likely in a six player game with Japan on its own; also a six player game might see a brief Italian/French deal but that would be far more rare.

Right now the code restricts new trade agreements to players on the same side.

Trade Agreements can be done after Peace is reached, and a neutrality treaty is settled.

*****************************
13.7.3 Mutual peace
Two major powers at war can agree to come to peace on any terms mutually acceptable (except for transferring units). (...). A neutrality pact is then in place between the parties.
*****************************

And also :
9.5 Neutrality pacts
*****************************
Major powers from opposing sides can agree to enter into a neutrality pact during any peace step provided they are not at war with each other.
*****************************


The part that is disputed by some players is that "any terms mutually acceptable" is not very clear that Trade Agreements are authorized, but Harry clarified it that they are.

*****************************
Q180 :
Q180-1 : If Russia and Japan sign a neutrality pact can they negotiate a trade agreement (say Russia gives Japan 2 oil for 1 BP)?
A180-1 : Yes. Date: 16/09/1997

Q180-2 : If the CW and Italy (before they are at war) sign a neutrality pact, that they can also sign a trade agreement along with it?
A180-2 : I don’t see why not. Date: 17/09/1997
*****************************

Does this mean that the only restriction is that the two major powers are not at war?

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

Does this mean that the only restriction is that the two major powers are not at war?

It seems to be.

It should be an easy change to make.

ORIGINAL: Froonp

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

Does this mean that the only restriction is that the two major powers are not at war?

It seems to be.

Not exactly, they must also sign a neutrality pact.

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

ORIGINAL: Froonp

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

Does this mean that the only restriction is that the two major powers are not at war?

It seems to be.

Not exactly, they must also sign a neutrality pact.

If this is true, then that is also an easy check to make.

What is your source in the rules for this requirement?

What is your source in the rules for this requirement?

See post #374, rule 13.7.3.