RE: PBEM 109 (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Napoleonics] >> Crown of Glory: Emperor's Edition >> Opponents Wanted



Message

Matto -> RE: PBEM 109 (8/22/2009 9:44:52 PM)

I will prefere B ... stay where are. People have usually working depot way, so it is less dangerous ...



Mus -> RE: PBEM 109 (8/22/2009 9:54:08 PM)

In the even people want to adopt a blanket B rule we have to have exceptions for what the automove was meant to prevent in the first place, troops stranded in situations with no way to pick them up with a fleet.

That could require redos.



Anthropoid -> RE: PBEM 109 (8/22/2009 11:24:08 PM)

For Russia, I'd say let me manually remove them unless I tell you otherwise. Annoying that this game has so many loose ends for PBEM . . . but ah well, I guess that is part of fun.

BTW, Prussian leader, aprezto: The army that you see on your border is to deal with geurillas. Once the gorillas are driven to extinction, the peaceloving Russian army will be withdrawn back from the border provinces.



Mus -> RE: PBEM 109 (8/23/2009 12:30:00 AM)

The option to not move out was not supposed to be in PBEM, it was supposed to be singeplayer only. Guess they made a mistake.



Mus -> RE: PBEM 109 (8/23/2009 1:29:18 AM)

Brits in.



06 Maestro -> RE: PBEM 109 (8/23/2009 1:44:01 AM)

These are interesting times. Where is 41??



06 Maestro -> RE: PBEM 109 (8/23/2009 1:50:05 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: IronWarrior

Just need France.

By the way, there is something I need everyone's input on. At the conclusion of wars, we need to decide on whether or not to "teleport" our armies or withdraw them manually. I would like to avoid redoing/remerging turns if possible. I propose the following:

(A) We all agree to "teleporting" out at the conclusion of a war.

(B) We all agree to manually withdraw our forces at our own pace.

(C) Each of us decides seperately on A or B.

Whatever way we decide, I would like to have something predetermined for when this comes up. I am really averse to redoing turns. Thoughts? Suggestions?



I wouldn't mind option A, but the location may need to be different every time. Option B seems to be the most realistic.
Lets just imagine a 1/2 million man Austrian/Prussian army at the gates of Moscow. Just because they get whipped, they might surrender escaping the privations of retreat. Let them walk-or run.[;)]



Mus -> RE: PBEM 109 (8/23/2009 2:38:28 AM)

Maestro's point is well taken.

I changed my mind.

I vote for B, that we leave in place.

I do think an exception should be made for any victorious power that ends the war on an island so they don't end up stranded. That is why the automatic strategic move out was invented in the first place. Also, does leaving forces in place effect what happens with POWs at the end of hostilities or are they still moved home automatically?

That could be an issue as well. We might have to get an answer from WCS on that one, or we could just adopt B if enough people vote for it and find out what happens with POWs our first surrender and do a redo and reconsider our House Rule if we end up with a bad result like stranded POWs?

We are proposing a House Rule with this aren't we?



IronWarrior -> RE: PBEM 109 (8/23/2009 5:14:40 AM)

Ok option B sounds good to me. Unless there are any objections we go with that one. The exception will be stranded forces, I just want to avoid redos if possible.



06 Maestro -> RE: PBEM 109 (8/24/2009 7:29:30 AM)

Well, here we go again-its been over 40 hours since the last turn was sent-which was 40 hours after the preceding turn (39). And there is still no clue as how much longer it will be. This does not bode well for our game. At this rate we would be rapping this up in January 2011. I say "would be" because there is very little chance of this game going that long. If there is so little enthusiasm now, what will it be like in another year?






IronWarrior -> RE: PBEM 109 (8/24/2009 7:47:35 AM)

Well I keep checking my email and the forum, my enthusiasm is there. [:D]

I have a feeling Terje hit another tough streak at work as we only need France's turn again.

I hear you though... if you think this is bad you should see the pace of "no frills". We're almost playing that one in real time. [:D]



06 Maestro -> RE: PBEM 109 (8/24/2009 8:29:04 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: IronWarrior
I hear you though... if you think this is bad you should see the pace of "no frills". We're almost playing that one in real time. [:D]


Egads- That would put me over the edge for sure. I used to do a lot of PBEM games, several at once. We would maintain 3 or 4 turns a week. However, those were a different animal-hundreds of units moved multiple times in each turn. Also, the scenarios were not that long-60 to 1 hundred turns. Three or 4 turns a week was understandable and adequate. In fact, to play against the ai would not have sped it up that much-maybe cut the time by 60%.

This game is drastically different. Its much more streamlined in play. The playing time is nothing. I was just thinking about how long it would take to play this scenario against the ai. I think I could easily do it in a week (might piss the wife off though). Two weeks would be a breeze- a month would be a lacksidasical pace.

Now we are heading for a rate that is 16 times longer than that lacksidasical pace. I hope this can be changed.

Actually, I'm thinking of giving this a whirl TCP IP mode. I think I would rather sit at the computer for 6 hours straight one day a week and bang out some turns with good continuity-maybe get ten turns in a row. When time comes for resumption, 15 minutes of going over everything, then do it again. 6 months it would be done. Of course, getting 8 guys from around the world to sit at their machines at the same time would be tricky, but perhaps not more so than PBEM.



Mus -> RE: PBEM 109 (8/24/2009 9:35:31 AM)

I think about what I am going to do in the time between turns. Stuck in traffic, or whatever, I have time to think about my moves.

My actual turn takes about 5 minutes.



06 Maestro -> RE: PBEM 109 (8/24/2009 5:09:37 PM)

5 minutes seems reasonable for some of the turns. Adding another ten minutes to open and close then emailing=15 minutes (2 addtional minutes is about what it takes me.. There were times that I spent 3 times that long, but I was screwing around-and I was not holding the game up.

If someone cannot spare 15 to 30 minutes a day to complete a turn, they sould not have started the game.

Its been over 50 hours since the last turn arrived.



terje439 -> RE: PBEM 109 (8/24/2009 5:59:16 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: IronWarrior

Well I keep checking my email and the forum, my enthusiasm is there. [:D]

I have a feeling Terje hit another tough streak at work as we only need France's turn again.

I hear you though... if you think this is bad you should see the pace of "no frills". We're almost playing that one in real time. [:D]


??? I've replied long ago. Ok, will redo the turn and send it.



terje439 -> RE: PBEM 109 (8/24/2009 6:07:17 PM)

Resent, hope you get it now then.

Terje



06 Maestro -> RE: PBEM 109 (8/24/2009 6:07:33 PM)

Perhaps we should all post here after we send in our turns. If something does get lost, then it will be known right away. I will do start doing that on a regular basis.



Mus -> RE: PBEM 109 (8/24/2009 8:57:10 PM)

Maestro this game is flying compared to the "no frills 1792" game.

We have a guy in "no frills" MIA for 4 days and the group wants to give him another 2 before we look for a replacement.

[>:]



06 Maestro -> RE: PBEM 109 (8/24/2009 9:32:11 PM)

Well, that is sad. Thee might be some emergency of some sort, but I'm more inclined to view it as an example of people not taking any commitment seriously.

Long ago, in another forum, far, far away, there was a place for people to add their preferred rate of play. We could do something like that here in the opponents thread-at least when forming a new game.



Mus -> RE: PBEM 109 (8/24/2009 9:41:35 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: 06 Maestro

...I'm more inclined to view it as an example of people not taking any commitment seriously.


Ditto.



06 Maestro -> RE: PBEM 109 (8/25/2009 12:26:45 AM)

Turkey T41 in. 50 minute ordeal this time.



aprezto -> RE: PBEM 109 (8/25/2009 4:04:14 AM)

50 minutes!!! Oh to have that much to move



06 Maestro -> RE: PBEM 109 (8/25/2009 6:16:48 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: aprezto

50 minutes!!! Oh to have that much to move


I spent some of that time with a magnifying glass observing your agents in Egypt-I think I found a weak spot..



terje439 -> RE: PBEM 109 (8/25/2009 1:12:59 PM)

I have the turn in my inbox, but just off work, so gimme another 5-6 hrs before I reply. I REALLY need some sleep now.



Anthropoid -> RE: PBEM 109 (8/25/2009 3:07:26 PM)

ADDIT: my math was wrong in the original version of this post, and I've edited it substantially [:o]

This thread was started by IronW 6-12-09 at 6:57AM. We had one false-start turn one 6-14-09 9:03PM, then we actually got going (email issues sorted out) 6-16-09. Today is 8-25-09 10AM. That is 70 days time elapsed and we are turn 41? [41/70 = 0.59 turns per day]. Just slightly faster than 2 days per turn, so we are still (on avg) under our 48-hour turn around time target.

Having played about twenty PBEMs over the last five years, including many that went for over 6-months, including at least five with 4 or more players (several of which lasted for 6 months to a year) and one that went for about two years with eight guys . . . I find the pace of this match is indeed on the slow side though not terrible. It would be good to try to get it up around a turn per day if we can, though I tend to think that friendly encouragement is more likely to provoke that than is haranguing [;)]

Honestly there is no way any of us is EVER going to win this one, at 10,000 VP? No way . . . This is a relationship we have started here not really a contest. Sure the little contests along the way will be interesting, and it will be neat to see who can have the highest VP when time runs out, but I do not believe any of us is going to be able to achieve even 5000 VP let alone 10,000.

Looking at it more as group relationship kinda thing than as a PBEM match in the stereotypical sense, I just think a bit less criticism and a bit more friendly cajoling is warranted. In order for this to work, we have to all get along with one another for the next couple years, though obviously having our toy soldiers blow each others brains out in-game is all part of the fun [:'(]



terje439 -> RE: PBEM 109 (8/25/2009 5:48:29 PM)

Replied



IronWarrior -> RE: PBEM 109 (8/25/2009 8:49:34 PM)

10,000 GP??? Get a hold of yourself man! Put. The. Pipe. Down. [:D]

It's highest Glory... high score at the end wins. [;)]

But sure relationships too. I'm just here for the hot chicks and free beer.



Anthropoid -> RE: PBEM 109 (8/25/2009 8:52:57 PM)

Oh? not 10,000?? [&:] I tell ya man, I do not know HOW you guys keep up with all this crap. There are like four pages of discussion with musical chairs membership at the beginning of all these PBEM threads, I'm not even sure who half of the other nations are being played by! [:'(] Confusing . . . Anyway, lets keep going. It'll be fun.



06 Maestro -> RE: PBEM 109 (8/26/2009 1:22:56 AM)

Turkey T42 in.

BTW, the Prussian dogs had their fun in Egypt. Providence works in strange ways.
This will give the Turkish Army some good training. It will come in handy while burning Berlin to the ground.[:@]



terje439 -> RE: PBEM 109 (8/26/2009 8:22:52 PM)

Replied.
Does Austria think France is some minor nation she can ask to dance to her tune? Surely such an outrageous proposal indicates that!



Page: <<   < prev  16 17 [18] 19 20   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.9375