Viceroy Posted July 29, 2001 Share Posted July 29, 2001 I've just started a PBEM game based on one of Rune's scenarios, I'm Brit my opponenet's Axis and neither of us has played this scenario before. It looks really cool and as I have some time on my hands tonight, I'm tempted to play the Brits against the AI while waiting for my opponent to send me his moves. Would that be seen as totally unfair and gamey? Or a legitimate thing to do? I'm not trying to gain an edge over my opponent. Comments please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted July 29, 2001 Share Posted July 29, 2001 Talk to your opponent: he might think its a great idea and do the same himself,or he might be really narked. IMHO your opponent is the best person to talk to about it... Regards JonS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
von shrad Posted July 29, 2001 Share Posted July 29, 2001 I would do as our very bright friend JonS has suggested and ask your opponent first. I for one would not like for you to play it out beforehand because it does give away force composition and would eliminate any suprises that are gained from the un-known. von shrad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricochet Posted July 29, 2001 Share Posted July 29, 2001 Yeah, like he said. And if your opponent doesn't play it out against the AI it would give you a distinct advantage. Von Shrad, 7min's left in the NSB and I'm sure it's going the distance. It's been almost a year no? Another game down to wire. It seems like all the games I've played go the distance. The pressure, the pressure, I can'ts takes it no mo'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radar Posted July 29, 2001 Share Posted July 29, 2001 Ya, I agree with Von Shrad in that one. There's nothing like being treated with the unexpected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
von shrad Posted July 29, 2001 Share Posted July 29, 2001 So you and Stukey's game is winding down huh? May the best git win, or lose. Menschy old boy is heading the NSSB 2 (and doing a great job at it) and it is in the second round now with me being a fill-boy. Some tough opponents in this one too. Keep me informed on how it goes as we need a battle between the two winners of the tourneys some time in the future. Note to all: This guy here(T.Ramos aka Ricochet) has killed his competition in all the battles he played save for one. A damn good player. von shraddy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrPeng Posted July 29, 2001 Share Posted July 29, 2001 Quite agree. Don't want to go spoiling the surprises and such. Also, a double blind match is just much more exciting to play. The horrid lush Iskander looked at both sides of a game we were to play, and normally this would have cause me to holler "foul!" or "four!" or something similar, but Icky is a special case so I let him have a bit of slack and then stomped his fetid little guts into the snow. Always, no wait, never, no uh, always talk or write or communicate with your opponent about these sorts of things before you go and do them or you may find that they will not longer play you. or something. Peng Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lcm1947 Posted July 29, 2001 Share Posted July 29, 2001 Well I have to say I disagree. Sorry but I do. I would think that in real life commanders reviewed the terrain, their forces as well as the enemy's he was going to be facing before he went into battle. At least in as much as he could. Now, said that I can see the point that you should ask your opponent or at least tell him that that is what you are going to do. I personally think that it would add to the game if both did it. I mean to me half the fun is planning. And if that prolongs your enjoyment then that's what you should do. If you opponent doesn't have time to do it -well, he's not a very good commander is he. OK, now have at me guys for thinking different. But let me say this first. If in the future I play one of you and we set it up that it would be unfair or cheating then I wouldn't. I just want to express the other side of this idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricochet Posted July 29, 2001 Share Posted July 29, 2001 WHAT ARE YOU NUTS!! Just foolin. I don't believe a commander would know his opposing forces in such detail if you played the AI in advance. Another distinct advantage would be knowing when and where your opponents reinforcements would arrive. I'm sure this would change the balance of a play tested scenario too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Louie the Toad Posted July 29, 2001 Share Posted July 29, 2001 Viceroy, What you propose is cheating. Even if both of you do it. Why not set up your own separate QB vs the AI so you can practice against the units and terrain you will be encountering in the REAL battle. This would be Training. Thoughtful Toad (Sorry ir this is a double post of sorts. My first reply seems to have been lost in cyber space.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark IV Posted July 29, 2001 Share Posted July 29, 2001 To each his own, but I will go out on the limb to say that I would consider this poor PBEM etiquette, a step short of cheating, almost as bad as failing to number turns. I don't know why an opponent would agree to it, but of course if he did it would be OK... Knowing the terrain in advance is better represented in CM than in RL, because you can fly through every square inch of the opponent's territory in the setup phase, and acquire more in-depth knowledge than an RL commander could from maps and aerial photos. Playing the AI would reveal the exact composition of enemy forces (and reinforcements) and RL commanders just about never had this knowledge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rvalle Posted July 29, 2001 Share Posted July 29, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Viceroy: I've just started a PBEM game based on one of Rune's scenarios, I'm Brit my opponenet's Axis and neither of us has played this scenario before. It looks really cool and as I have some time on my hands tonight, I'm tempted to play the Brits against the AI while waiting for my opponent to send me his moves. Would that be seen as totally unfair and gamey? Or a legitimate thing to do? I'm not trying to gain an edge over my opponent. Comments please.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I feel that this would be totaly gamey. You would now know what forces he has and, whiether you try to or not, it will effect your current game with him. There are 100's of other battles out there to do while you wait. You can even start up another rune one if you want to. Or, go to the cm chat room and find someone to play a tcpip game. Have fun, rvalle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BFCElvis Posted July 29, 2001 Share Posted July 29, 2001 Viceroy, you shouldn't do it even with premission. Even with his blessing your are cheating yourself out of one of the most fun aspects of CM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lcm1947 Posted July 29, 2001 Share Posted July 29, 2001 Boy there certainly is two sides to everything isn't there? I am very surprised to see how many people think this would be cheating or not fair. I believe it would be fun even. I haven't tried it yet however and so maybe I'm thinking wrong but seems like it would really add to the game making it be more challeging even, but looks like I'm the only one so, what do I know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BFCElvis Posted July 29, 2001 Share Posted July 29, 2001 lcm1947, I don't know if you were around during the beta demo release but a bunch of us played the same 3 scenarios over and over and over and over (I think you get the idea). Because of that I found nothing is more thrilling than the tension of not knowing what is coming at you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rvalle Posted July 29, 2001 Share Posted July 29, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lcm1947: Boy there certainly is two sides to everything isn't there? I am very surprised to see how many people think this would be cheating or not fair. I believe it would be fun even. I haven't tried it yet however and so maybe I'm thinking wrong but seems like it would really add to the game making it be more challeging even, but looks like I'm the only one so, what do I know. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I can see where playing the other side AFTER the pbem battle would be fun. After all, that battle would have been 'used' and so not as much of an option to play another person again. But, you should wait till the battle is over. Just as a for exapmple... lets say you are playing someone and have blown up 4 of his tanks. Does he have more? Is he hiding one behind that hill or those trees? Until you know you will be reluctant to move your armour out in full view. But, if you are playing that battle at the same time as the other side you KNOW that 4 tanks is all he has. Now you can move your armor around more freely (watching for at guns and teams... but then you know if he has those too...). What is the fun of that? You now have an unfair advantage by knowing EXACTLY what the other guy has. rvalle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark IV Posted July 29, 2001 Share Posted July 29, 2001 Hating to agree with Elvis here, but remember how the whole strategy for the Germans in "Last Defence" hinged on where you were when the Hellkitties showed up? "Chance Encounter", when after you smoked the 1, 2, 3rd StuG you could run those Shermies like a bastard in the open to blow that *&*^$#@ church to smithereens? Or counting burning Shermans to know when it was safe to rush from the big woods to the farm VL in the center? "Riesburg", slinking forward, out of LOS to the 88 you knew would be on the hill in the corner? Or starting out some infantry to that corner through the trees to take the heathen out, long before it had fired a shot? Those were great times, but not what I look for in a PBEM with one of the most versatile games ever made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viceroy Posted July 29, 2001 Author Share Posted July 29, 2001 OK, thanks for your comments. I agree it would a} kill much of the fun give me too much of an edge. Another Question, as I sit here waiting for typhoon Toraji to pass, if you've played a scenario before are you obliged to inform your PBEM challenger? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark IV Posted July 29, 2001 Share Posted July 29, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Viceroy: if you've played a scenario before are you obliged to inform your PBEM challenger?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Babra Posted July 29, 2001 Share Posted July 29, 2001 There are some scenarios which are so enjoyable they can be played with an opponent when one or more have foreknowledge. However, with the vast majority of scenarios if one or both players are aware of what's up the road, then the scenario is not nearly as enjoyable to play. I'd resist the temptation to play it, even if your opponent agrees you can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iskander Posted July 29, 2001 Share Posted July 29, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MrPeng: The horrid lush Iskander looked at both sides of a game we were to play, and normally this would have cause me to holler "foul!" or "four!" or something similar, but Icky is a special case so I let him have a bit of slack and then stomped his fetid little guts into the snow...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You'll also recall that I took the 3:1 outnumbered Amis, thus virtually guaranteeing that "*" next to my name. I was making sure that I chose the side that didnt at all cut into my carefully hoarded drinking time. Even a pod can understand that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrPeng Posted July 29, 2001 Share Posted July 29, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Iskander: You'll also recall that I took the 3:1 outnumbered Amis, thus virtually guaranteeing that "*" next to my name. I was making sure that I chose the side that didnt at all cut into my carefully hoarded drinking time. Even a pod can understand that.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Understand what? You came damn close to winning that one, and I am almost certain that it was the consumption of hooch at the most opportune time that saved me. Now whether it was me consuming the hooch that saved me or you consuming hooch that saved me is debateable. All I know is that during the game there was a lot of alcohol consumed. And it was good. and I won, and what it is too ahem. We now return you to your regularly scheduled thread... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted July 29, 2001 Share Posted July 29, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by von shrad: ... our very bright friend JonS ...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Good grief - a compliment from a denizen of The Pool. How unexpected. I feel all ... dirty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blindseye Posted July 30, 2001 Share Posted July 30, 2001 Hmmmm, I very rarely play the historical scenarios, but always select-your-own, meeting engagement, QB's in PBEM games against opponents. That way neither side knows what the other side has and you can choose your own forces, and their can be no "cheating". However, frequently while waiting for the opponent's move, I will select the same force, let the AI select its own force and play the "same" game against the AI. Obviously, there are differences here. The AI will not pick the same forces as the human player, and the terrain will be different. I just like to practice with the force that I have selected. Is that gamey or bad manners? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rvalle Posted July 30, 2001 Share Posted July 30, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by blindseye: Hmmmm, I very rarely play the historical scenarios, but always select-your-own, meeting engagement, QB's in PBEM games against opponents. That way neither side knows what the other side has and you can choose your own forces, and their can be no "cheating". However, frequently while waiting for the opponent's move, I will select the same force, let the AI select its own force and play the "same" game against the AI. Obviously, there are differences here. The AI will not pick the same forces as the human player, and the terrain will be different. I just like to practice with the force that I have selected. Is that gamey or bad manners?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I think that sounds ok. It would be no different than a commander using his forces on a 'training exercise' to see how they work together. You gain no insight to the opponents forces or the map you will be playing on so all is well. rv Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts