RE: PBEM

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: PBEM

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> Mods and Scenarios >> RE: PBEM

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: PBEM - 7/25/2009 6:27:33 PM

coregames

Posts: 470
Joined: 8/12/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

There is code to convert territories to minor countries. I have looked at it in passing though I have not validated it. I am not sure how you conquer one if these things, since they do not have a capital or factory. Perhaps that is in the code too.

That sounds right... they become like countries... and then you have to capture every port to conquer them. Or, if they have no ports, control every hex is the rule I believe

< Message edited by coregames -- 7/25/2009 6:32:23 PM >

_____________________________

"The creative combination lays bare the presumption of a lie." -- Lasker

Keith Henderson

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 61

RE: PBEM - 7/26/2009 5:15:58 AM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

Page 1 of 2.

Here is what SO4 looks like. I still need to enable placing the units on the insert map - and then recording those placements as Standing Orders.

The left side shows Germany entering where they want their reserve units placed in the second impulse of the first turn.

The right side shows where the Axis wants the Finnish units placed if the Allies decalre war on that minor country.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to coregames)

Post #: 62

RE: PBEM - 7/26/2009 5:17:46 AM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

2nd and last in series.

Note that the Axis and Allies will have separate standing orders for Turkey. [The unit data panel is a lingering effect of having looked at the Finns previously.]

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 63

RE: PBEM - 7/26/2009 8:54:30 AM

Froonp

Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
The right side shows where the Axis wants the Finnish units placed if the Allies decalre war on that minor country.

For Finland, these are the units available for a given year.
Is it possible to see units from year +1 or +2, so that they are set up too, so that if the standing order is used in year+1 or year +2 then the new units are ready too.
Or will the player have to revise their standing orders when they know that there are new units ? Which is acceptable too.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 64

RE: PBEM - 7/26/2009 4:18:57 PM

BallyJ

Posts: 142
Joined: 5/25/2008
Status: offline

As a WIF adict for soooo long I can't wait. roll on christmas release.
Good work Steve

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 65

RE: PBEM - 7/26/2009 6:46:25 PM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
The right side shows where the Axis wants the Finnish units placed if the Allies decalre war on that minor country.

For Finland, these are the units available for a given year.
Is it possible to see units from year +1 or +2, so that they are set up too, so that if the standing order is used in year+1 or year +2 then the new units are ready too.
Or will the player have to revise their standing orders when they know that there are new units ? Which is acceptable too.

I thought about it. I decided that players could/should update their SOs at the beginning of a new year (at least). I'll add a prompt listing the minor countries that have additional units available at that time.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 66

RE: PBEM - 7/26/2009 6:53:28 PM

peskpesk

Posts: 2347
Joined: 7/17/2003
From: Stockholm, Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

2nd and last in series.

Note that the Axis and Allies will have separate standing orders for Turkey. [The unit data panel is a lingering effect of having looked at the Finns previously.]

Will it be possible to have a choice to use the AIO script setup as an option? Ex I let the AIO handle Norway for me when it�s declared war on but I like Netherlands to use my special predefined defence?

_____________________________

"'Malta - The Thorn in Rommel's Side"

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 67

RE: PBEM - 7/26/2009 11:00:05 PM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: peskpesk

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

2nd and last in series.

Note that the Axis and Allies will have separate standing orders for Turkey. [The unit data panel is a lingering effect of having looked at the Finns previously.]

Will it be possible to have a choice to use the AIO script setup as an option? Ex I let the AIO handle Norway for me when it�s declared war on but I like Netherlands to use my special predefined defence?

No.

I remain resolute that the players should play the game and not have the AI makes decisions for them. In that case it would be an AI Assistant. The most I am willing to do is let the players set up their Standing Orders and then have the AIA execute them.

When we get to the later Standing Orders (SO 5+) the players will be able to work with a stripped down version of LAIO (Language for AI Opponent) to control the decision making process. But I do not intend for players to be able to simply say "let the AI decide for me".

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to peskpesk)

Post #: 68

RE: PBEM - 7/27/2009 6:52:33 AM

warspite1

Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: peskpesk

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

2nd and last in series.

Note that the Axis and Allies will have separate standing orders for Turkey. [The unit data panel is a lingering effect of having looked at the Finns previously.]

Will it be possible to have a choice to use the AIO script setup as an option? Ex I let the AIO handle Norway for me when it�s declared war on but I like Netherlands to use my special predefined defence?

No.

I remain resolute that the players should play the game and not have the AI makes decisions for them. In that case it would be an AI Assistant. The most I am willing to do is let the players set up their Standing Orders and then have the AIA execute them.

When we get to the later Standing Orders (SO 5+) the players will be able to work with a stripped down version of LAIO (Language for AI Opponent) to control the decision making process. But I do not intend for players to be able to simply say "let the AI decide for me".

Warspite1

Good!

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 69

RE: PBEM - 7/27/2009 1:29:26 PM

sajbalk

Posts: 264
Joined: 7/11/2005
From: Davenport, Iowa
Status: offline

Regarding the German reserves, is there not 5-3 Slovak Militia in the froce pool? It is part of the Politics in Flames counter set, I think.

_____________________________

Steve Balk
Iowa, USA

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 70

RE: PBEM - 7/27/2009 7:57:12 PM

Froonp

Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sajbalk

Regarding the German reserves, is there not 5-3 Slovak Militia in the froce pool? It is part of the Politics in Flames counter set, I think.

This is because the I Slovak is now considered a city based volunteer linked to Bratislava.

RAW 22.4.8 :
****************************
The Slovak MIL is a city based volunteer based in Bratislava.
****************************

(in reply to sajbalk)

Post #: 71

RE: PBEM - 7/27/2009 8:37:22 PM

micheljq

Posts: 791
Joined: 3/31/2008
From: Quebec
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

Page 1 of 2.

The right side shows where the Axis wants the Finnish units placed if the Allies decalre war on that minor country.

Hi Shannon,

Can you be more specific on this, do you mean that in each game we have to prepare the setup of each minor country for when or in case they will be attacked by the opposing faction?

Thanks,

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 72

RE: PBEM - 7/27/2009 9:26:27 PM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: micheljq

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

Page 1 of 2.

The right side shows where the Axis wants the Finnish units placed if the Allies decalre war on that minor country.

Hi Shannon,

Can you be more specific on this, do you mean that in each game we have to prepare the setup of each minor country for when or in case they will be attacked by the opposing faction?

Thanks,

Yes.

I expect there to be default placements available, so the task is to edit them to suit your preferences.

Once I make some more progress on this form, I'll post what it should look like (i.e., with all the units on the map).

EDIT: I have added two more buttons to the form: Save and Restore SO 4. Those will let you effortless restore any deployments you have saved from previous games.

< Message edited by Shannon V. OKeets -- 7/27/2009 9:27:23 PM >

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to micheljq)

Post #: 73

RE: PBEM - 7/27/2009 10:18:08 PM

Mike Parker

Posts: 583
Joined: 12/30/2008
From: Houston TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

EDIT: I have added two more buttons to the form: Save and Restore SO 4. Those will let you effortless restore any deployments you have saved from previous games.

YAY!

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 74

RE: PBEM - 7/27/2009 10:59:55 PM

Taxman66

Posts: 1665
Joined: 3/19/2008
From: Columbia, MD. USA
Status: offline

My only problem with this is that the set up for some minors (say Iraq) might be drastically different based on which country on the opposing side actually decalred war.

_____________________________

"Part of the $10 million I spent on gambling, part on booze and part on women. The rest I spent foolishly." - George Raft

(in reply to Mike Parker)

Post #: 75

RE: PBEM - 7/27/2009 11:09:04 PM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Taxman66

My only problem with this is that the set up for some minors (say Iraq) might be drastically different based on which country on the opposing side actually decalred war.

Interesting point.

I am not sure building a system for conditional setups for minor countries is warranted by this though.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Taxman66)

Post #: 76

RE: PBEM - 7/27/2009 11:22:51 PM

Taxman66

Posts: 1665
Joined: 3/19/2008
From: Columbia, MD. USA
Status: offline

I hate to say it, but I would prefer a seperate email for setting up minors.

Iraq is certainly not the only country this would apply to. The only other option is players changing set ups for minors on a nearly turn by turn basis. Frex: Do the allies prep. Greece and Yugo based on a possible Italian attack or a German one (or both)? What about the Spain? Is it preped for a GE Vichy France collapse/attack or is it prepared for an Italian invasion? You could loose an awful lot of ground if it is set up wrong. There are lots of others... Netherlands vs. Germany or Japan?

I really think this is too important to leave to standing orders. I believe you could get away with just one extra email for all minors being set up (per impulse)...

< Message edited by Taxman66 -- 7/27/2009 11:27:04 PM >

_____________________________

"Part of the $10 million I spent on gambling, part on booze and part on women. The rest I spent foolishly." - George Raft

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 77

RE: PBEM - 7/28/2009 12:28:07 AM

coregames

Posts: 470
Joined: 8/12/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Taxman66

I hate to say it, but I would prefer a seperate email for setting up minors.

Iraq is certainly not the only country this would apply to. The only other option is players changing set ups for minors on a nearly turn by turn basis. Frex: Do the allies prep. Greece and Yugo based on a possible Italian attack or a German one (or both)? What about the Spain? Is it preped for a GE Vichy France collapse/attack or is it prepared for an Italian invasion? You could loose an awful lot of ground if it is set up wrong. There are lots of others... Netherlands vs. Germany or Japan?

I really think this is too important to leave to standing orders. I believe you could get away with just one extra email for all minors being set up (per impulse)...

I agree with this. It's rare that the maneuvers made in preparation for a DoW on a minor won't have some impact on the setup, so might as well have an email specifically dedicated to it, since more often than not the standing orders for setup will need to be mofified if they are to defend properly.

_____________________________

"The creative combination lays bare the presumption of a lie." -- Lasker

Keith Henderson

(in reply to Taxman66)

Post #: 78

RE: PBEM - 7/28/2009 1:06:04 AM

BallyJ

Posts: 142
Joined: 5/25/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Taxman66

I hate to say it, but I would prefer a seperate email for setting up minors.

Iraq is certainly not the only country this would apply to. The only other option is players changing set ups for minors on a nearly turn by turn basis. Frex: Do the allies prep. Greece and Yugo based on a possible Italian attack or a German one (or both)? What about the Spain? Is it preped for a GE Vichy France collapse/attack or is it prepared for an Italian invasion? You could loose an awful lot of ground if it is set up wrong. There are lots of others... Netherlands vs. Germany or Japan?

I really think this is too important to leave to standing orders. I believe you could get away with just one extra email for all minors being set up (per impulse)...

Me to. Minor set up could make or break some countries. Particularly Spain. But also many others.
For the rest of the project keep up the good work.Can't come soon enough. Love the AAR's

(in reply to Taxman66)

Post #: 79

RE: PBEM - 7/28/2009 1:43:42 AM

Gurggulk

Posts: 41
Joined: 5/28/2009
Status: offline

If i use the Standing Orders for minor setups in the 1st turn of the game. Do every single nation in the world. Its seems to me i can change my Standing Orders for say any nation at any time before war is declared. there is no Fog of War, the player knows where everything is.

Its up to the player to decide if his SO's are up to date depending on the global situation. This is PBEM we are talking about, time is not an issue.

I don't see a problem. The SO's are not written in virtual stone, are they?

(in reply to BallyJ)

Post #: 80

RE: PBEM - 7/28/2009 3:29:49 AM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gurggulk

If i use the Standing Orders for minor setups in the 1st turn of the game. Do every single nation in the world. Its seems to me i can change my Standing Orders for say any nation at any time before war is declared. there is no Fog of War, the player knows where everything is.

Its up to the player to decide if his SO's are up to date depending on the global situation. This is PBEM we are talking about, time is not an issue.

I don't see a problem. The SO's are not written in virtual stone, are they?

Correct, they are not. In fact, the player should check SO #4 (setting up units of attacked minor countries) at the end of each impulse where his was the phasing side. The other side might DOW at the beginning of the next impulse.

The point being made here is that you do not know which major power on the other side might DOW the minor country when you update SO #4. That additional piece of information might affect your deployment. I have trouble accepting this as a major point though since if that were going to make a major difference, I would have multiple major powers DOW simultaneously.

Nonetheless, that is more about me being a player than it is about me being a game designer. My current (partially formed) idea is to add a check field where players could indicate which minor countries they want to set up 'personally', using a separate email. The default would be to set that flag to off, though the players could change the On/Off settings whenever they wanted.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Gurggulk)

Post #: 81

RE: PBEM - 7/28/2009 3:48:39 AM

paulderynck

Posts: 8201
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gurggulk

If i use the Standing Orders for minor setups in the 1st turn of the game. Do every single nation in the world. Its seems to me i can change my Standing Orders for say any nation at any time before war is declared. there is no Fog of War, the player knows where everything is.

Its up to the player to decide if his SO's are up to date depending on the global situation. This is PBEM we are talking about, time is not an issue.

I don't see a problem. The SO's are not written in virtual stone, are they?

Correct, they are not. In fact, the player should check SO #4 (setting up units of attacked minor countries) at the end of each impulse where his was the phasing side. The other side might DOW at the beginning of the next impulse.

The point being made here is that you do not know which major power on the other side might DOW the minor country when you update SO #4. That additional piece of information might affect your deployment. I have trouble accepting this as a major point though since if that were going to make a major difference, I would have multiple major powers DOW simultaneously.

Nonetheless, that is more about me being a player than it is about me being a game designer. My current (partially formed) idea is to add a check field where players could indicate which minor countries they want to set up 'personally', using a separate email. The default would be to set that flag to off, though the players could change the On/Off settings whenever they wanted.

Is Poland one of these, or is there a separate phase for setting up Poland since it must be DOW'ed and the only variable is how the German has set up? The only advantage Poland has is seeing the German set-up.

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 82

RE: PBEM - 7/28/2009 8:39:51 AM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gurggulk

If i use the Standing Orders for minor setups in the 1st turn of the game. Do every single nation in the world. Its seems to me i can change my Standing Orders for say any nation at any time before war is declared. there is no Fog of War, the player knows where everything is.

Its up to the player to decide if his SO's are up to date depending on the global situation. This is PBEM we are talking about, time is not an issue.

I don't see a problem. The SO's are not written in virtual stone, are they?

Correct, they are not. In fact, the player should check SO #4 (setting up units of attacked minor countries) at the end of each impulse where his was the phasing side. The other side might DOW at the beginning of the next impulse.

The point being made here is that you do not know which major power on the other side might DOW the minor country when you update SO #4. That additional piece of information might affect your deployment. I have trouble accepting this as a major point though since if that were going to make a major difference, I would have multiple major powers DOW simultaneously.

Nonetheless, that is more about me being a player than it is about me being a game designer. My current (partially formed) idea is to add a check field where players could indicate which minor countries they want to set up 'personally', using a separate email. The default would be to set that flag to off, though the players could change the On/Off settings whenever they wanted.

Is Poland one of these, or is there a separate phase for setting up Poland since it must be DOW'ed and the only variable is how the German has set up? The only advantage Poland has is seeing the German set-up.

There is a specific email for Poland (W2). I had originally intended W2 to be sent every DOW phase where a DOW occurs. But upon closer examination I decided only Poland really needed it. RIght now W1 and W3 are merged into a single email except during the first impulse of Global War & Fascist Tide (i.e., when Poland needs to be set up).

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to paulderynck)

Post #: 83

RE: PBEM - 7/28/2009 1:43:12 PM

micheljq

Posts: 791
Joined: 3/31/2008
From: Quebec
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: micheljq

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

Page 1 of 2.

The right side shows where the Axis wants the Finnish units placed if the Allies decalre war on that minor country.

Hi Shannon,

Can you be more specific on this, do you mean that in each game we have to prepare the setup of each minor country for when or in case they will be attacked by the opposing faction?

Thanks,

Personally I don't want to think of a setup for each minor country when I begin a PBEM game, I will think of the placement of the units when the minor country is declared war upon only. Why should I think of the placement of the units for Argentina's minor country when it's almost sure nobody will DOW it?

In my opinion it's a waste of time an energy. We should setup the units of a minor country only when someone DOWs it.

Well, that's what I think.

(in reply to micheljq)

Post #: 84

RE: PBEM - 7/28/2009 3:10:16 PM

brian brian

Posts: 3191
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline

setting up a minor would indeed depend on lots of variables, at times even including the weather for that impulse. although I have never played WiF via email, the tension of trying to find ways to speed up the process vs. how much fine control a player will be willing to cede in the interests of saving an email step is interesting; it's like a whole new design element. WiF has always been about choices, as a friend of mine on the rules committee likes to point out. much like the real commanders-in-chief, a player experiences limits on just how much control they can exercise over their military forces simultaneously.

If I understand Steve's goal here, the set-ups for minors are just an element of the Standing Orders you can CHOOSE to use in the interest of speeding up the game in just this one phase. you would not be required to set up Argentina in advance, and at any time you are sending an email you could turn a Standing Order set-up on or off. At other times it is clear an enemy DoW by an an obviously adjacent Major Power is imminent, the weather will be generally very well-known in advance (Jul/Aug), and to help save a step off a cumbersome game-play process, you COULD have the set-up ready to go ahead of time. it's just a player convenience feature, not a mandatory feature.

(in reply to micheljq)

Post #: 85

RE: PBEM - 7/28/2009 4:22:13 PM

micheljq

Posts: 791
Joined: 3/31/2008
From: Quebec
Status: offline

Yeah if you can choose but are not obliged to, than it's fine. But, I mean I hope it is not required. Thanks.

I speak for myself of course, but when I begin a Fascist Tide for example the only minor's setup I think of in 1939 for example, will be Poland. Forgive my bad english.

(in reply to brian brian)

Post #: 86

RE: PBEM - 7/28/2009 4:53:36 PM

praem

Posts: 220
Joined: 12/15/2007
Status: offline

PBEM will be a trade off - if you want full control of every detail in every step, you will be swamped with emails and game would progress very slowly. Each e-mail easely delays a game by one full day in real life if not more. Is the setup of say Belgium important enough to stall the game, just because you dont know if Italy or Germany declares war? I would have thougth no.

(in reply to micheljq)

Post #: 87

RE: PBEM - 7/28/2009 6:40:03 PM

Mike Parker

Posts: 583
Joined: 12/30/2008
From: Houston TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: praem

PBEM will be a trade off - if you want full control of every detail in every step, you will be swamped with emails and game would progress very slowly. Each e-mail easely delays a game by one full day in real life if not more. Is the setup of say Belgium important enough to stall the game, just because you dont know if Italy or Germany declares war? I would have thougth no.

I agree. But the setup of Yugoslavia for example might well depend upon wo makes the DOW and what the weather this impulse might be like.

(in reply to praem)

Post #: 88

RE: PBEM - 7/28/2009 7:05:23 PM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: micheljq

Yeah if you can choose but are not obliged to, than it's fine. But, I mean I hope it is not required. Thanks.

I speak for myself of course, but when I begin a Fascist Tide for example the only minor's setup I think of in 1939 for example, will be Poland. Forgive my bad english.

Then just take the default setups at the start and review/revise them country by country when you believe it is important to do so.

Some players will want to examine all the minor countries and see what each one has in the way of units. For example, as a new player it would be very important to find out what each of the European minor countries has in the way of units.
===
After a full night's sleep, I am coming around to the idea of enabling the player to check-mark each minor country for whether he wants to set it up using an email instead of standing order #4. It's not that hard for me to code and I dislike exerting "parental authority" as the game designer.

However, as Brian said, if you expect to have the same degree of fine control over decision making in a PBEM game as you have in an over-the-board game, then you are going to have hundreds of additional emails and the game will take much longer to play. You also run the risk of your opponent becoming bored/frustrated at the slow pace of play and abandoning the game.

The important thing to remember here is that your opponent is dealing with the same limitations imposed in using standing orders instead of direct control.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to micheljq)

Post #: 89

RE: PBEM - 7/28/2009 7:27:59 PM

micheljq

Posts: 791
Joined: 3/31/2008
From: Quebec
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeet

However, as Brian said, if you expect to have the same degree of fine control over decision making in a PBEM game as you have in an over-the-board game, then you are going to have hundreds of additional emails and the game will take much longer to play. You also run the risk of your opponent becoming bored/frustrated at the slow pace of play and abandoning the game.

The important thing to remember here is that your opponent is dealing with the same limitations imposed in using standing orders instead of direct control.

No, I do not mean to be disrespectful, but I disagree with what Brian says. Waiting for the reply from a player who is doing his setup for a minor country is not a big deal. I play that way already in a Vassal game, what is delaying the game is certainly not the minor's setups when they are DOWed, as if DOWs were happening all the time in a game. That event is not happening often, maybe on the beginning of a campaign but after it happens rarely.

If a player is bored/frustrated at the slow pace of a PBEM just because I am doing a minor's setup, maybe he is not ready to play a PBEM game. When port attacks, ground strikes, strategic bombardments, land attacks with their air to air combats will come, the game will really be delayed. That's what is delaying a game, and it is quite normal. And personally I live with that and like it that way.

Just my 2 cents, you are the boss, you do what you think is right.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 90