1 v 1 games: Should players agree how long to play, before starting?

[ElvisJJonesRambo]

There seems to be three camps in regards to the 'early surrender' issue. I would like to make this part of pre-game discussion/conditions.

Camp #1, The Fundamentalist --- The game itself decides who won/lost and to what level. Players go all the way, until the game stops.

Camp #2, Player Control --- Surrender anytime for whatever reason. No reason even necessary. Just resign, message opponent.

Camp #3, Ask Opponent --- Hey, I'm getting my ass kicked. Actually, the other way around ticks me off more. Listen, you really wanna continue? You are wiped out, in 1944. There's no way to turn the tide. Want to surrender and have rematch?

Which one are you?

[Jackmck]

The game is well designed to adjudicate player vs computer, but for PBEM I think there should be an intermediary victory condition, say around turn 70- approaching Summer 1942. By this time it should be apparent if the game will be close or not. If the Axis have botched Barbarossa or the Japanese opening offensive, the Axis may resign. On the other hand, if by this time China and Russia are obviously going to surrender then it is pointless for the Allies to continue. Maybe there can be "intermediate" victory conditions based on number of objective hexes controlled- if triggered, an game prompt occurs bestowing a victory unless both players agree to continue.

I find this game truly marvelous and fascinating but less so when it becomes lopsided. A more or less evenly matched game is ideal, and if it "goes the distance" to 1947 when the game adjudicates- that would be awesome. I don't enjoy playing games that aren't close either when winning or losing.

As an aside, if going to 1947 the game could be designed to give the Allies more of a chance to play past a Russian and Chinese surrender by changing some of the partisan conditions (especially in USSR) and giving the U.S. the option to employ atomic weapons other than in Japan. Otherwise, there is little incentive to continue unless Japan is about to surrender.

[Marcinos1985]

For me it's 2. 3 is probably preferable, but some players are new to the game and often they don't exactly understand it's GG. And they can still learn a lot by watching mopup operation.

I agree that 1942 is often decisive and pretty binary. Either Russia goes down quickly or it keeps Germany at bay, giving US a possibility of a decisive counterattack in 1942. Unless there is a skill disparity, Germany will not defend 2 big fronts - not enough cash, not enough units. As in real life.

[ThunderLizard11]

Two is fine. One is preferred. What I can't stand is 4) player quits with no explanation and 5) player ghosts you.

Hope new PBEM will track these so you can avoid players who exercise options 4 and 5.

[ElvisJJonesRambo]

I'm rather indifferent on this issue. Long as my opponents declare something upfront, I'm cool with it.

It's kind of like gambling on round of Golf. Are we playing Match Play, Skins, Best Ball, Scramble or Medalist. Playing Medalist is best for your game.

Remember Goldfinger and James Bond?

"Strict Rules of Golf" (Goldfinger)