Matrix Games Forums

I am undecided about enforcing WIF FE 'suggestions?' for which major powers each player controls in team games. For example, with two Axis players does one of them have to play Germany while the other one plays Italy and Japan? Or should this is wide open (my choice). If it is going to be wide open, then why impose the restriction on the players at all? Or even mention it when starting a new game? Perhaps it is just a "note to the players" somewhere?

Be careful with this as it may lead to play balance problems if you let the choices wide open.

There is out there a kind of players, that I call the "conventions players", who do not hesitate when given the opportunity to play Italy & Germany, for example, to have a completely ahistorical way of playing the game, only seeking performance & optimization, which can be seen as a spoil of the game to other players (me for example) who prefer the WWII WiF experience & ambiance.

This makes the operational coordination much easier and if you're in different locations it will take long time to discuss which hex of the french front that should be defended by BEF and which by the French.

This problem is taken care of by the loan feature in CWiF, provided the players agree to loan, and to loan the right units.

ORIGINAL: Froonp

I am undecided about enforcing WIF FE 'suggestions?' for which major powers each player controls in team games. For example, with two Axis players does one of them have to play Germany while the other one plays Italy and Japan? Or should this is wide open (my choice). If it is going to be wide open, then why impose the restriction on the players at all? Or even mention it when starting a new game? Perhaps it is just a "note to the players" somewhere?

Be careful with this as it may lead to play balance problems if you let the choices wide open.

There is out there a kind of players, that I call the "conventions players", who do not hesitate when given the opportunity to play Italy & Germany, for example, to have a completely ahistorical way of playing the game, only seeking performance & optimization, which can be seen as a spoil of the game to other players (me for example) who prefer the WWII WiF experience & ambiance.

To each his own. I find that you should certainly let the players decide for themselves how to do this. Any suggestion to force a personally prefered way on others would be a clear mistake as far as I am concerned.

ORIGINAL: Froonp

I am undecided about enforcing WIF FE 'suggestions?' for which major powers each player controls in team games. For example, with two Axis players does one of them have to play Germany while the other one plays Italy and Japan? Or should this is wide open (my choice). If it is going to be wide open, then why impose the restriction on the players at all? Or even mention it when starting a new game? Perhaps it is just a "note to the players" somewhere?

Be careful with this as it may lead to play balance problems if you let the choices wide open.

There is out there a kind of players, that I call the "conventions players", who do not hesitate when given the opportunity to play Italy & Germany, for example, to have a completely ahistorical way of playing the game, only seeking performance & optimization, which can be seen as a spoil of the game to other players (me for example) who prefer the WWII WiF experience & ambiance.

I understand your position but ...

This is really a question of how much parental control I impose. Given that there are 76 options or so, letting the players choose who plays whaich major powers seems a smallish thing.

I mean, the players could always circumvent any restrictive design by signing up 8 or 9 players - one per major power - and then having the different names simply be aliases so they get to control whichever countries they want (I'm both Frederick and Mario, who control Germany and Italy). At some point you just have to send the fledgling out into the world and let the world do with it as it will.