Matrix Games Forums

I bring this to the open to discuss it, to pierce the abcess open.

I really, really don't get the staunch refusal to allow Helpers in PBEM, or to even consider them a cheat or a crotch. To me, I start to believe one of the factors that the PBEM get so one-sided is that players have to play the game with one hand tied behind their back. From a game design standpoint, Helpers are THE big equalizer that helps turn a desperate, no-win situation into something more palatable in a bad spot. They are a fist on the table, extra resources scrambled for a one-time offensive, desperate and frantic searches for more clout both high and low at the expense of my cred, etc.

I get that, people want to play within the framework and the so-called "realistic limitations" of the game. I can see why, to their mind, Helpers are like magic. I just don't agree. Sometimes, the situation gets to a point that, realistically, Stalin or Halder would lose patience and scramble something desperate. Stalin would order a general counter-attack that his commanders knew were plain impossible or suicidal, but would do them nonetheless and die to a man. Halder would hit the table with his fist and say, "I don't care where and how, just find me the fuel/trucks/men to do it and get those Panzers to xyz."

Helpers, to my mind, represent this. And like in real life, shout too much for help and people wonder if you are up to the task.

We have to remember, games in DC:B are won and lost on VPs. You choose an objective, the opponent chooses his, and the one who meets his objective, while making the other forfeit his, wins the game. Use Helpers, and you lose VPs. Use them too much, and you lose too many to stand to win or even draw the game. Use them while the other player doesn't, you get short-term bonus for a long-term deficit. Players can afford to use it once in a desperate situation to at least bring the situation under a bit of control, but at the expense of a possible good result at the end. If they use it too much, well it won't matter what happens, Stalin/Halder loses his cred or cries wolf too much, gets shot/thrown off a cliff, and it is game over.

For example, right now the Soviets are stuck in a game-design mud for at least 3 turns in June-July, since German players can and does use the D+2 Offensive Card without any consequence. That's part of the reality of the game. right now: early Soviet armies simply can't move on their own. Would Stalin would just say "you know, it's okey I understand my command and control is thoroughly being raped by the Luftwaffe, as the Fascists have a right to do"? I don't believe so. He would lose patience and tell Beria "I don't care how, if it's by smoke signals, travelling pidgeons, courriers, or messages telegraphed in the clear, but get these troops moving." Hence, Helpers.

How the situation would be more... nerve-wrecking for the Germans if, expecting the Soviet blocks to be pushed around, he gets instead unexpectedly counter-attacked at the right moment, or the carpet pulled from under his feet? Or if I throw the infamous Mogilev firewall expecting the Germans to have no fuel left... but suddently to my horror they use that moment to scramble the fuel to exploit the chinks in my armor for a breakthrough?

I am with you on this. People played WITE with a ton of house rules that read like a lawyers document at times. So I do not see the difference I'd just discuss in advance what helpers are kosher to use ...

Exactly, each to there own. I won't ever sanction the use of helpers in any game I play. But other people can do as they please.

That's not my point.

My point is, Helpers are as legit as any tool, Card, Focus, etc. available in the game. It is part of the game design to be used at a critical moment to regain a breather or go an extra bit futher, in exchange of VP penalties. I take it as a raise or a 3-bet in Poker.

One might refuse to use it for himself, sure. I don't use it in my games even though I can see where I could. However completely forbidding it is a bit too much, IMHO. I wouldn't be opposed to once a game, per side, max.

I mean we are all gentlemen, here. We shouldn't be afraid of abuses. If a player uses Helpers every turn it shows he doesn't give a rat about winning or losing the game, or respecting his opponent. He will quickly find himself isolated, without opponents to play against.

ORIGINAL: Michael T

I won't ever sanction the use of helpers in any game I play.

This is quite the point Drakken is talking about. Just curious why almost all pbem lfp threads have this caveat. Giving your opponent 10 VP for emergency assistance is no laughing matter in DC. Do most players feel that the penalty of 10 is too cheap? What if it was 20-25 pts? Would it make a difference then?

ORIGINAL: CarnageINC

Giving your opponent 10 VP for emergency assistance is no laughing matter in DC.

The 10 VP only matters if the game result is dependant on VPs. Only when the German Player takes only 1 or 2 objectives do
the VPs matter. 0 or 3 are automatic wins. Potentially you can use a Helper every single turn and have no downside

This is all a matter of personal taste, and personally I find helpers distasteful. They compromise the integrity of a PBEM game and amount to a kind of deus ex machina. In this, I am one with MT.

Conditions should be fixed at the beginning of the game, not midstream, and if one or the other side feels it needs a handicap imo the time to set that is prior to the game beginning. Mileage may vary. Past that, some of these helpers strike me as extremely fishy from a historicity standpoint.

Ultimately the best thing to do here is for like minded players to seek each other out.

I'm in agreement with the OP.

I'm also interested if the more hardcore, MT and Flaviusx I'm looking at you, house-rule any other things out.

High Octane Fuel?

Luftwaffe fuel drop every turn?

Changing PGs to Sustained Offensive "too early"?

There are a lot of things other than "helpers" that are built into the game that could be considered gamey.

What if the helpers were eliminated as buttons, and instead there was a decision available every turn that had options to "Appeal to Hitler for more Fuel" or "Stalin goes for broke"?

Or to put it another way, what is it about the helpers that offends you so much more than any of the other game functions?

MT and I haven't done any house rules as such yet. We're still feeling our way around the game to determine balance. This is all very new still and will take a while to sort out.

ORIGINAL: Falke

ORIGINAL: CarnageINC

Giving your opponent 10 VP for emergency assistance is no laughing matter in DC.

The 10 VP only matters if the game result is dependant on VPs. Only when the German Player takes only 1 or 2 objectives do
the VPs matter. 0 or 3 are automatic wins. Potentially you can use a Helper every single turn and have no downside

Well, if my German opponent uses his Helpers every turn, I'll use mine to fully activate ALL my armies every turn. Good luck to him, he will need it. [:'(]

The fundamental problem with imposing house rules is that it assumes that the person imposing them knows the inner workings of the game better than the developer.

That's true for all games, not just this one.

I'd be very cautious about mandating game-changing effects that haven't been tested and sanctioned by Vic and Cameron, even if you don't happen to agree with all of their decisions.

ORIGINAL: Philippe at bay

The fundamental problem with imposing house rules is that it assumes that the person imposing them knows the inner workings of the game better than the developer.

I'd be very cautious about mandating game-changing effects that haven't been tested and sanctioned by Vic and Cameron, even if you don't happen to agree with all of their decisions.

Agree.

This is so simple that I do not understand why people put so much importance on using or not using helpers.

- two people decide to play a game
- share impressions on the overall game balance
- decide at start what helpers would be useful to rectify that, how many and when to use them, if at all.
- play and have fun
- rinse and repeat.

`Not using helpers' is just *one specific choice* along the scale of helping the Germans and helping the russians. There is nothing `special' to it other than assuming that the game is balanced as is, again a fairly subjective decision.

I am worried of other 'ad hoc' house rules.

Well they are in the game for some reason and you are never forced to use them so I don't see what the issue is. If you want to make a rule not to use them then that's fine but I hope the devs don't remove them from the game altogether. More options almost always make a game better.

There is much wisdom in what Flavius said - find likeminded people to play against...

Another consideration: 90% of the people (as per latest census / metrix readout) play vs the AI....

The thing is, all PBEM players searching for opponents put the caveat "no helpers". It is not up for discussion, ever. Hard to find a like-minded players, when not using helpers become the sine qua non condition to play multi-player.

If you feel Helpers can be used to wage VPs to save yourself in a critical position, you may as well forget to play against the big names here. In blunt words that is what it is said.

I would think the use of the "helpers" could be agreed on beforehand, allowing for a play balancing of two unequal players. That would give some players a chance to seek a game against some of the elite players, without the game being a boring walkover affair for either one. But I agree that it should be agreed on prior to start.