Matrix Games Forums

Hi,
I’m looking for a fair PBEM opponent. I’ve just finished two games where the opponent quit without warning: one threw in the towel as the Axis in 1942, and the other in 1944 because he was losing despite playing unfairly.
I hope to find better opponents here.
A Grand Campaign in the vanilla version or *Fall Weiss* is fine, and I don't mind which side I play.
I can guarantee two turns per day.
I’ve been playing SC since 2002, though not every title in the series.
I’m not an absolute expert/pro player!

Proposed house rules:
1. Absolutely no kamikaze moves. (Non-negotiable)
2. Air strikes limited to a maximum of two per unit.
This applies only to infantry, tanks, and HQs located OUTSIDE (!) of fortifications or towns/cities.
Airfields and ships are exempt! (Negotiable if necessary)
3. No anti-tank units in the game; I find them unrealistic and overpowered. Existing units must be destroyed by both players at the start and, of course, cannot be rebuilt. (Negotiable)
4. No disbanding one's own units when in a precarious situation. (Non-negotiable)
----------------------------------------------------------------
Open to other suggestions as well.
Regards

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Hallo,
ich suche einen fairen PBEM Gegner. Ich habe gerade zwei Partien ohne Absprache hinter mir.
Der eine hat als Axe schon1942 das Handtuch geschmissen und der andere 1944 da er trotz unfairem Spiel zu unterlegen war.
Ich hoffe hier finde ich besseres Material.
Große Kampagne in Vanille oder auch Fall Weiß ist ok und die Seite ist mir egal.
Zwei Züge am Tag können garantiert werden.
Spiele SC seit 2002, aber nicht alle Teile.
Bin nicht der absolute Überflieger !

Vorschlag Hausregeln:
1. Absolut keine Kamikaze Aktionen. ( unverhandelbar )
2. Luftschläge sind begrenzt auf maximal zwei pro Einheit.
Das betrifft nur Infanterie + Panzer + HQs die sich außerhalb von Befestigungen oder Ortschaften befinden.
Flugplätze und Schiffe haben damit nichts zu tun ! ( verhandelbar wenn es sein muss )
3. Keine Panzerabwehr im Spiel, ich finde diese unrealistisch und überpowert.
Bestehende Einheiten müssen beim Start von beiden Spielern vernichtet werden und dürfen natürlich nicht wieder gebaut werden. ( verhandelbar )
4. Es dürfen keine eigenen Einheiten in prekären Situationen aufgelöst werden. ( unverhandelbar )
----------------------------------------------------------------
Gerne auch weitere Vorschläge.
Gruß

I am on travel until the end of OCt might consider a game then

Can you explain what you mean with 1. (Kamikaze attacks), please? An example or two would help.

That's nice, Nnason; I'll wait.
But hopefully there will still be room for you then

Yes, of course, El Condoro.
For example, here is an experience I had in Africa playing as the Allies in my last Game:
I was advancing with my troops toward Tobruk when my opponent tried to cut off my supply lines, emerging from the desert near Mersa Matruh.
Naturally, his units lacked supplies during this maneuver and were quickly destroyed.
So, his plan was halted—at least for the moment. However, as a last resort, he deployed a strategic bomber into one of his hexes—essentially sacrificing the aircraft.
While the bomber was quickly taken out, it cost me a few valuable units because I was left with zero supplies for the following turn.
These are the kinds of "kamikaze" moves I’m talking about.
In short: anything that, in real life, only a kamikaze pilot would do should be ruled out for both sides.
He staked everything on Africa.
He sent every Luftwaffe asset he possessed in 1942 to Africa.
Naturally, he then lacked those resources on the Eastern Front, and—fortunately—he lost as early as 1944.
That is also a reason for Point 2.

Thanks for the explanation, Packo.

I think that might be difficult to adjudicate in some situations; one man's kamikaze attack might be another man's risky move. My approach is to accept that the game is not realistic and let the chips fall. There are so many dodgy moves that can be made and each has a consequence. In your example, the loss of expensive air units for your opponent and the effects of his strategy for the overall game.

Anyway, thanks again, and I know that nnason is a gentleman, so you will have a good game when he returns.

Well, El Condoro, anyone looking for a realistic experience shouldn't play SC; other games handle that much better.
But realism and fairness are two completely different things! That opponent was weak in terms of skill, and fortunately, he got his just deserts.
Besides, that wasn't the only strange move he made. But if I imagine that same situation against a better or equally matched opponent, the picture changes completely.
Those two unfair moves could decide the entire game because an entire front collapses!
Since the game takes a significant amount of time—spanning over 100 turns—that is frustrating and unacceptable.
I didn't let people cheat me at *Mensch ärgere dich nicht* (Ludo = USA ) when I was a kid, and I'm not about to start now.
It's great that you're speaking positively about Nnason