Oak

Here is the text of a 3rd email sent out to everyone on the PBEM list: "Based on some initial feedback and comments, I wanted to pass along the following comments: - flexibility is the watchword for these games. Feel free to use any house rules or campaign that you would like ... as long as your opponent agrees. Variety is the spice of life, so feel free to add a little spice to these games. - you should also feel free to move at your own pace with these games. Some of you are busy with other games and some are just plain busy. Start your games when you can and move forward with them at whatever pace you prefer. - don't cheat! This is an honor system, and your opponents will be trusting you to play fair and square. For those new to PBEM, please note that when you select a PBEM file to open it will indicate the number of reloads. This indicates how many times a move has been replayed by your opponent. The number should be zero. If it is more than that, then you are encouraged to get clarify from your opponent as to why a move was replayed. Also remember that you should play a move only once. If it doesn't go as you would have liked or if there are some unpleasant surprises DON'T play the move over again. Instead, accept that it is all part of the game and do what you can to overcome the challenges. Reid (a.k.a. Oak)"

JerseyJohn, Thanks for the offer of help. Right now I'm trying to keep it simple and easy to manage. If it gets to be more than I can handle I'll be sure to let you know. Oak

Here is a second email that went out shortly after the first one: "Well, matching up people for your initial game assignments went faster than I thought. Here it is (given below). Those on the left are Axis and those on the right are Allies. I've given assignments based on user names. You can get the email addresses to go with each user name from my previous email. My suggestion is that the person who is Axis set up the game, make their first move and then send the file to their opponent. If the opponent, upon receiving the file, doesn't like the set-up or the campaign chosen then there can be some discussion that, hopefully, leads to agreement between the two players. Let the games begin! JerseyJohn vs Panzer39 KDG vs disorder Reepicheep vs Hueristic Shaka of Carthage vs kenfedoroff xediel vs Rol Oak vs Edwin P. Wan vs Dragonflame Bill101 vs Tigleth Pilisar Iron Ranger vs Paqman Curry vs SeaMonkey Thoranaga vs mpacc Agamemnon vs Jollyguy Kuniworth vs TheBlackDouglas Archibald vs Tolwin xwormwood vs Rannug disorder vs JerseyJohn Panzer39 vs KDG Hueristic vs Shaka of Carthage kenfedoroff vs Reepicheep Edwin P. vs xediel Dragonflame vs Oak Rol vs Wan Tigleth Pilisar vs Iron Ranger Paqman vs Bill101 mpacc vs Curry Jollyguy vs Thoranaga SeaMonkey vs Agamemnon Rannug vs Kuniworth TheBlackDouglas vs Archibald Tolwin vs Archibald"

I sent the following email to everyone on the PBEM list, except those that have still not given me their email. I'm posting it here for the reference of others. "I will be communicating with you primarily by email from now on rather than through the Forum. Attached is a text file with the list of 34 people that have asked to be part of the PBEM list, giving their Forum user name and email address. Some still have not given me their email addresses and those are noted. If I don't hear from them soon they will be taken off the list. You now have a list of lots of people that you can contact to set up games. Some are brand new to the game, while others are very experienced. A nice variety! I will try to have your initial game assignments to you within the next few days. You will each be given two people to play against -- one as Axis and one as Allies. When you finish a game, let me know the results and I'll give you a new assignment. The initial goal will be for each person to play one game against everyone on the list. I will thinking about developing a database that would help me to systematically keep track of assignments, etc. But, it's too much work so I'm just going to randomly make assignments. If I make a mistake (like assigning you someone that you've played already) then let me know. The focus will be on fun, and keeping things flexible. The de facto campaign used will be the standard Fall Weiss, but if the two opponents agree to use a variation of that campaign or another campaign that is fine. We will be keeping track of wins/losses. My view is that the primary purpose of that record is to help people on the list identify others to play with. For example, if you want to play against someone at a similar level to you then you can arrange a game with someone with a similar win/lose record. While the goal will be for everyone to play everyone else at least once, if you want to go ahead and set up games on your own ... go ahead. Enjoy! Have fun! Reid (a.k.a. Oak)"

On the first move you operate the northern German tank and the Runstedt HQ to the west, and move 2 of the air so they can all attack Brussels. Then, in turn 2, the air and tank knock out Brussels and you move a corp into Brussels. So, you only take the air and tank out of the battle against Poland ... with the air helping against Poland in moves 3 & 4.

Kuniworth, Here's my 2 cents worth regarding Poland and the Dutch Gambit: I think the Dutch Gambit is definitely something to be feared. It means that Axis loses time and plunder, both of which it can ill afford to lose. The best way, I think, to counter the Dutch Gambit is for Germany to declare war on the Low Countries in turn 2 and take it that turn. The key is for Axis to take out Poland, Denmark and the Low Countries in 4 moves. If Germany takes the Low Countries in turn 2 and Poland in turn 4 (while preventing the Dutch Gambit in the process) that is just as good in my opinion as taking Poland in turn 2 and the Low Countries in turn 4. Oak

You expressed an interest in being part of the PBEM list. But, I need your email addresses. Please post them here or send an email to me at: reid@pacific.net.sg

First, I'm still waiting on the following for email addresses. If I don't hear from them soon we will start without them. - JerseyJohn - Hueristic - xediel - Leopard - Rol - Thales - Blakey - Bill101 Second, my current thinking is that the initial focus will be on having everyone on the list play at least one game with everone else on the list. That will provide a chance for all those on the list to get a feel for others on the list and to build up win/loss records. Later we can look at setting up tournaments, rating levels, etc. I see the biggest benefit of this simply having a list of other players that want to play PBEM that you can turn to when you want a game. My thinking is also that I will assign two games to everyone at the start. One will be as Allies and one as Axis. Once you finish a game, you let me know and I'll assign a new opponent to you. If you finish a game as Axis then you start a new game as Axis, and visa versa. You can either play the games concurrently (both games being played at the same time) or sequentially (play one first, finish and then play the next one). It looks like we will end up with over 30 people on the list, so you are encouraged to move the games along as quickly as possible. Again, keep in mind that the focus of the games will be on having fun. Things will be kept informal. You can, for example, go with different campaigns or house rules if both of you agree.

Here is the current PBEM list. Right now, we are waiting for 15 of the 25 people on the list to provide me with their email addresses so we can move forward. Those that have not given me their email address are noted. Please send an email to me at 'reid@pacific.net.sg' with your user name as soon as possible so we can get moving. PBEM List Panzer39 KDG (email needed) disorder (email needed) Reepicheep (email needed) Hueristic (email needed) Shaka of Carthage (email needed) kenfedoroff (email needed) xediel (email needed) Leopard (email needed) Oak Rol (email needed) Wan Edwin P. (email needed) Thales (email needed) Blakey (email needed) Dragonflame Bill101 (email needed) Tigleth Pilisar (email needed) Iron Ranger Paqman Curry SeaMonkey Thoranaga mpacc Agamemnon (email needed)

From what I've seen, the 'standard' Fall Weiss seems to be the standard campaign scenario. However, the name of the game with this PBEM league is to keep things informal and flexible. So, if players want to agree to use a different campaign scenario feel free to do so.

I think the general agreement is that we keep this informal. So, players can discuss and agree on any house rules between themselves. Fall Weiss seems to be the accepted standard in campaigns, so we will use that. As for choosing sides, we can either have a fixed system where people alternate between Allies and Axis, or use a bidding system to decide. We can set up small tournaments, etc. and an ad hoc basis. I suggest that we wait awhile so we can get a feel for the level that everyone on this list is at. Then, for example, we can have a tournament for the top 10 and bottom 10 players. Again, the key benefit in all this is a list of players that want to play PBEM that other PBEM players can turn to in order to find opponents and challenging games.

Sorry, I forgot to post the list of 19 players. Here they are: JerseyJohn Panzer39 KDG disorder Reepicheep Hueristic Shaka of Carthage kenfedoroff xediel Leopard Oak Rol Wan Edwin P. Thales Blakey Dragonflame Bill101 Tigleth Pilisar

First, following is a list of players (19 altogether) that have expressed interest in SC PBEM. If there is anyone on the list that doesn't want to be on it or that isn't on the list and wants to be ... let me know. Second, the focus of this group will be on playing SC for fun. The plan will be for everyone on the list to play everyone else on the list once. We will keep a win/loss record, which will become a de facto ladder. The purpose of the record/ladder will be so that players can more knowledgably select others to play against (ie. if someone wants to play a better player they can play someone who has a good win/loss record and if someone wants to play a not-so-better player they can play someone who has a poor win/loss record) We'll play on getting this all going within the next few days. One thing I need from those on the list is their email addresses. I can then send the list together with email addresses to everyone on the list. So, can you let me have your email address by sending an email to: reid@pacific.net.sg with your Forum user name in the subject line? Oak

JerseyJohn, I agree with you, and your name remains on the list. I did a poor job of expressing myself, so let me try again: First, if the focus is on having fun and playing a friendly game, then cheating should be less of a problem or issue. Second, I think that trying to cheat by replaying a move until you get the results you want involves a lot of work. So, that in itself helps to discourage the practice. Third, even if one does cheat it is only going to provide a minor advantage and is unlikely to change the overall results. Fourth, we are talking about a relatively small group of people playing together. Over time, I believe that someone who habitually cheats will be found out. And, someone who is found to habitually cheat will be shunned by the others. In short, let's keep it informal and have fun ... and any issue of cheating will sort itself out.

Wan, Send me an email. My email address is: reid@pacific.net.sg Oak

Wan, Fall Weiss is the standard campaign. Under "Rules/Variations" everything checked except "War in Siberia". Under "Politics" everything on "Random". Oak

So far, we have 13 (including myself) that have expressed interest. I expect that we will be able to get that up to 20. I know that some are very experienced while others (like myself) are fairly new. My suggestion is that we do this somewhat informally, with a schedule where each person on the list plays everyone else on the list once. That would involve 19 games, if we end up with 20 people. We can keep track of wins/losses to creat an informal ranking. We can then look at something more formal, like a ladder or tournament. How does that sound? As for cheating ... my suggestion is that we make it clear that cheating won't be tolerated. If a player is caught cheating (or accused of cheating) then they are off the list. Hopefully, the potential consequences of cheating will outweigh any perceived benefits of cheating. From my limited experience in PBEM, someone would really have to spend a lot of time and effort on cheating for it to have any significant impact to the game's outcome.

I would like to find out how many people play or would like to play PBEM games. If you are one of those, please post a reply.

I agree that the focus of PBEM play should be on fun. In fact, the focus of ANY game should be on fun. What about a tournament focused on fun and playing lots of games? In the first round, all the participants play each other. So, if there are 30 participants then there are 29 games in the first round. The tournament would take a very long time to finish, but it would provide a chance to play a lot of games and a lot of other different players.

We need to look at getting a PBEM ladder, league or something of the sort going for those players that need to -- or prefer to -- play by email instead of TCP/IP. Any thoughts on how to get that going?

Hubert: The graphics package from the retail release is not yet available for download via Battlefront but should be ready sometime in the near future. Oak: Can you qualify "near future"? Days? Weeks? Months?

How were the Allies able to afford the cost of all those airbattles, armies, etc?

I was very lucky (the USA joined immediately) and my opponent was unlucky (he controlled Canada for 3 moves until the USA invaded and retook control.

Being able to send transports from the Suez back to the Atlantic would definitely be nice, and is also something that one would be expected to be able to do.

In a recent game, Canada was empty with its corp and army in Iraq. Germany snuck a corp into Canada and took the capital, city and mine. However, Canada did not surrender because its land forces were intact in Iraq. Does this mean the Allied player can leave Canada empty and send the Canadian forces to England, Iraq, etc. knowing that a sneak move into Canada will only result in the US joining without Canada surrendering?