Suggestion for a new house rule, Vote!

[zappsweden]

The new proposal is "Allies may NOT DOW on LC on turn one".

The reason to the rule is that it cannot be avoided (sure, Axis can DOW on LC on turn one and lose big time) and that the turn one gambit produces a lottery where either Allies get great winning chances or they fall way behind.

The rule only restricts turn one gambit. Allies are allowed to DOW on turn 2 if Axis neglects LC and throw everything in Poland. At leist, Axis have a descent choice if they wanna gamble or not, contrary to the turn one gambit.

If u, as Allied, can FORCE the Axis into a Russian roulette game I think it is bad for the competetiveness of the game.

[ July 22, 2003, 02:35 PM: Message edited by: zappsweden ]

[zappsweden]

I vote for the proposal.

[Kuniworth]

I don´t agree, odds are against alies to succeed <anyway.

[Oak]

Here are my thoughts:

The Dutch Gambit gives the Allies a big advantage, but Axis can stop the Dutch Gambit by taking LC in turn 2. It seems like more and more players (including Zappsweden) feel that the game is won or lost in the first few moves.

It seems to me that it should be fairly easy for Axis to develop a strong counter to the turn 1 Dutch Gambit just as a strong counter to the turn 2 Dutch Gambit has already been developed. Once that is widely used, no one will do it any more.

The Dutch Gambit with a DoW in turn 2 is a bit risky for the Allies but can be quite successful. However, the turn 1 Dutch Gambit is extremely risky since it is all but impossible for LC to be taken by the Allies that first move.

So, rather than making a house rule simply stop people from a DoW on LC in the first move as Allies by making an effect counter move that ensures that the Allies will lose big.

Oak

[Comrade Trapp]

I am against the proposal, for the reasons Kuni mentioned.

Comrade Trapp

[ July 22, 2003, 01:35 PM: Message edited by: Comrade Trapp ]

[zappsweden]

Just as you mention, the turn one gambit IS risky. However, who says someone would not be willing to take such risks. I heard rumour that Rambo used the gambit against Terif every time he is allies just to get a big advantage to defeat him. Do we really want a few rolls on turn one tip the favour of the whole war?

The only time you use such high risk gambit is when you are the underdog so every low ranked player will be dangerous now, they just need to attack LC on turn one and have their chances.

If u can force your opponent into a high risk russian roulette game I think it is not good for the competition.

[ July 22, 2003, 01:55 PM: Message edited by: zappsweden ]

[zappsweden]

Originally posted by Oak:

Here are my thoughts:

The Dutch Gambit gives the Allies a big advantage, but Axis can stop the Dutch Gambit by taking LC in turn 2. It seems like more and more players (including Zappsweden) feel that the game is won or lost in the first few moves.

It seems to me that it should be fairly easy for Axis to develop a strong counter to the turn 1 Dutch Gambit just as a strong counter to the turn 2 Dutch Gambit has already been developed. Once that is widely used, no one will do it any more.

The Dutch Gambit with a DoW in turn 2 is a bit risky for the Allies but can be quite successful. However, the turn 1 Dutch Gambit is extremely risky since it is all but impossible for LC to be taken by the Allies that first move.

So, rather than making a house rule simply stop people from a DoW on LC in the first move as Allies by making an effect counter move that ensures that the Allies will lose big.

Oak

If Terif cannot come up with a counter, believe me there is none.

[Archibald]

I vote against it.

[Paqman]

I have not played too much yet, but from the games where I have seen a very early LC gambit, France is forced to leave a hole in the Maginot Line. I just plowed through it on the next turn, causing premature Italian entry.

I vote against the proposal.

[SeaMonkey]

Hey Zapp,

In those Rambo-Terif games where Terif had no counter to the LC early DoW by the Allies, I'm assuming Terif lost?

[Iron Ranger]

However, who says someone would not be willing to take such risks.

If a player contiually makes early high risk moves and conceades early (every time or most of the time) when they fail, tell everyone. He/she will be black balled and no one will play him. Rambo has used this move on me but he continued to play until I beat his arse in Russia because I had such a long time to prepare, he took the risk and kept playing and paid the price latter.

I vote against this house rule.

However in most/all of my game I request several house rules and one does make the LC gambit more risky for latter moves in the game:

HR1) Axis must trigger the ST during or before March 1942, if LC gambit March 1943, if sucessfull Sealion March 1944.

2-3 other house rules are included (for play balance) in IP game unless the other player is a newbie.

[Liam]

I'm against the purposal as well. It's only happened to me once successfully and if the Allies are that lucky it's no different than when the German's are as lucky with taking Poland out in 1 turn. A good German Player should be able to relocate his troops back and still take out France-Britian.. even though it's somewhat of a gambit. You could call many other things a gambit too that are not noteworthy to rule over

in otherwards too many rules makes for a dull game

[jon_j_rambo]

I VOTE NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This House Rule crap is a Witch-Hunt. What is happening to you guys? I take the risks & gamble with my moves, & suddenly it gets banned? I thought bidding took care of all the complaining.

ZappSweden --- I appreciate what you have done with the Ladder(s) & for the game. I also thank you for taking a vote, that is good. But when everytime I introduce a new strategy IT IS NOT LUCK, IT IS A CALCULATED VENTURE! My moves don't defeat the purpose of "Strategic Command". Why are my plays considered for banishment? We are internet friends & competitors, I respect you & ABSOLUTELY LOVE YOU'RE GAME. I have more kudos for you than Terif, that is the truth. Our game play are mirror images...take a deep breath & don't become a Legalist. My friend, please accept my Allied Turn #1 LC-gambit as just that, a gambit.

CardboardRanger --- What happened to you? Have you lost your balls? I miss the old "IRON"-Ranger, now I call you "CARDBOARD"-Ranger. You turned into an absolute pussy. Quiting the Z-League, crying about rules, & becoming a politician. Grab your family jewels & play the game. I don't understand you? YOU'RE AGAINST the HOUSE RULE, yet mention the name Rambo w/ Blackball because of risky play? I've played roughly 100+ games & NEVER had somebody claim I don't report losses. My friend & competitor, please, please, make yourself clear.

Terif --- Where are you? Don't wait for everybody else to post...then you vote. Don't be a quiet champion, be a Trailblazer. You sealed the last 2-house rules. Why was the Rambo-Rome-Invasion rolled into the pork barrel Riga landing? There's more to being a the King than just the game, it's about life.

Archie --- What's up my Limmie contact? Thanks for the clear & intelligent vote. Camp Rambo knows you're out there. Keep working on your strategy, hang tough, & post some victories in Z-League.

Liam --- You're a solid voice. Thanks for sticking with your game. All I can say about you is INTERGITY.

MoreWorth & Comrade Trapp --- Both of you think for yourselves, AND that is why I respect both you. Keep the Faith, work on the basics. I agree with the statistical analysis. Allied Rambo LC-gambit turn #1 is VERY RISKY. Success rate is VERY LOW. There are too many counters available than to make another anti-Rambo house-rules. Welcome to the Party.

Paqman -- Thanks for your take. You'll understand the details as you progress in skill.

SeaMonkeySpank --- I agree with you too. How many games have I won with this risky play? Have I ever had an issue reporting my losses? Has Terif had a problem with my strategy? I've actually NEVER pulled this off against Terif. Against Zapp & a few others, YES, I went Rambo on them...it did pay off. But don't penalize me for creating new strategies. We already went thru this with RRI (RAMBO ROME INVASION).

In conclusion, I'm a Legend. I create new strategies & get attacked for inventing them on the battlefield. You know what? Kiss my ass. I report my losses like everybody else. I'll play any damn way I want. When Rambo introduces a strategy, it's luck? When Terif/Zapp/CodenameClone do their Spain-Cookie-Cutter-Bullcrap, it's gamey?

Rambo says NO for another houserule

Rambo says think for yourself

Ramob says INVENT

For those in Camp Rambo, God Bless & keep the Faith. For my fellow Americans, work on you game & beat the Euros. For those outside my Kingdom, don't keep making new rules everytime I introduce something cool.

I'm ONLY ranked #3 in the World & they are banning my moves. I don't undertand that? It's Commie bull****.

Sincerely,

Rambo-Hollywood-Vegas (now you know what the Vegas is for)

[ July 23, 2003, 02:33 AM: Message edited by: jon_j_rambo ]

[Oak]

- Risk taking and inventing new ideas is all part of the game. We should encourage rather than discourage it. Go for it, Rambo.

- How often have people won/lost with this strategy? Exactly how risky is this risky strategy?

[Terif]

Hi Zapp

We talked about a house rule of no LC gambit in turn 1. But this was in case we would use another bidding system where we would give France additional mpps. There a house rule would be necessary, cause only together with no LC gambit turn 1 it is possible/useful to give France mpps.

But in the current system it is not necessary to make a no LC gambit house rule. As you mentioned some people tried to do LC gambit turn 1. But even when it was taken by Allies they lost in the long run. I never lost a game because of the LC gambit turn 1 (so far I only lost ONE single game at all ). And I have to say: Axis position and chances are better with a LC gambit turn 1. Its the best thing that can happen, if Axis wants to win fast. (But the game doesnt make much fun).

Rambo:

During the week I dont have so much time...(especially not this week, you can check the opponent finder forum/ ZL report section )

The LC gambit turn 1 is a high risk: if it fails Allies usually have lost. If it is successful then new players can be crushed, but its no problem for experienced ones. In contrary its better for Axis than a turn 2 gambit (Allied units are not in the right position, Axis units are or should be .

Therefore I have nothing against the LC gambit turn 1 in terms of winning. If it is done by Allies I can be nearly sure to win. But its not so much fun to fight a short,micromanagement war where the decission falls in France and often Allies surrendered after Paris was captured.

Summary:

I vote against the house rule. Its up to the allied player if he wants to loose fast and without much fun .

[jon_j_rambo]

Terif --- Thanks for your vote, analysis, & explanation. I've tried the Rambo-LC-Gambit-#1 against you about 3-times. It failed everytime & I promptly posted 3 losses. When/If it does every succeed against you, it will provide a very slight edge (maybe none in your opinion).

Keys things about Rambo-LC-Gambit-#1:

1) Only works ~35% of the time. (That is Allied forces take Brussels turn #1)

2) Failure (~65%) results in the Allies being ABSOLUTELY BUMMING. No plunder or none for Germany, the readiness penalty for Allies, gives free corps to Germany, Poland can be headcracked with full force, instant salary for Germans, & a great early stepping stone is in place over the Rhine.

3) Game will be decided very quickly OR...experienced player will micro-manage the Germans out of the situation. (see Terif for explanation or play him a free demonstration...that means you lose)

Zapp --- You had the proud privilege to fully experience the Rambo-LC-Gambit-#1, I'm glad you enjoyed it

CardboardRanger --- Wow! You have a good memory, going back awhile in our history. Yes, I tried my crap on you & it failed. Paris was a free donation. Germans were given the "BIG-MO" (Big Momentum) & you took advantage of it. I do see you have rejoined the fighting men of Z-League, that is good. When are we going to play? I have something new just for you

To all the rookies & weaker players --- If you're playing a tougher opponent, willing to roll the dice, & don't give a rat's ass about another loss, try it. If you happen to get Brussels the first turn, I hope you know what to do with it then.

Bottom Line: I'm "Jonesing" to play some SC. It's too hot to play golf in Boise, Idaho, USA. Temperature is in the 100's. Therefore, I'll be inside playing SC this weekend in the air conditioner, drinking Silverbullets, betting on sports, & looking to play old or new games.

Invent,

Rambo-Hollywood-Vegas

[KDG]

This is old news. One of my current PBEM opponents did this to me way back in Feb. Here is my original post from back then.

Member

Member # 11842

posted February 04, 2003 05:12 PM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What do you do when the French take Belgium on turn one? The city was hit with two airs, then a bomber, then two armies. Med air was operated onto south Magniot line. I had 3 jets and a HQ defending, didn't help. I imagine I'll just keep plugging away.

Is the gambit any different than this?

[jon_j_rambo]

KDG --- Dude, this is Z-League, it's the Big Leagues, TCP/IP world competition at its best. PBEM is crap. Of course he pulled it off in PBEM, I would too, it's an easy loaded save in the arsenal. Try it where you post a LOSS in Z-League & are held accountable with a record.

Remember, PBEM & the A.I. don't count. Since you're so interested in the Feburary history post, lets make new history, lets play. You & me. Then you can look this post in the future & look back on a headcracking.

Back to Basics, calling people out: KDG & all his PBEM buddies I'd like to showcase my game to you.

Rambo-Hollywood-Vegas

[ July 23, 2003, 11:57 AM: Message edited by: jon_j_rambo ]

[imported_Rannug]

So inventing moves only count when you play IP........hum...good to know.

[zappsweden]

Originally posted by Iron Ranger:

If a player contiually makes early high risk moves and conceades early (every time or most of the time) when they fail, tell everyone. He/she will be black balled and no one will play him.

There is a contradiction if u say you will allow something but also say you wont play someone doing the allowed.

[jon_j_rambo]

Ragnuts --- Think before you type. Repeat, think before you type. Did I say you can't invent while playing PBEM? Of course not. You can invent in HotSeat, you can invent driving your car, or even while taking a dump. Making "cool moves" in PBEM is not risky, because of the Reload-Bandits. PBEM commando raids, naval combat, air attacks, spotting, etc. is CRAP. PBEM is CRAP. But that doesn't mean you can't invent while playing. Actually, the Reload-Bandits might stumble onto a strategy after 23-reloads.

THINK BEFORE YOU TYPE.

Doing my job,

Rambo-Hollywood-Vegas

[KDG]

Then again we PBEM's believe in friendship first, we build bonds with the people we play against, and trust that the other person isn't cheating.

We also have lives that only allow us to play an hour or two a day. Even if reloading was allowed, spending all day reloading to get a perfect turn wouldn't be worth the time or effort.

Sorry about your distrust in PBEM, your just hanging with the wrong crowd. Oak has put together a nice list of PBEM's, with quality people throughout.

[Iron Ranger]

First, nice post Teif, good background info to the origianl question. Second I write my post's as I am, an Ind. Engineer. They are short to the point with the assumtion that the readers have a good understanding of the subject and don't need to be treated like fools.

My friend & competitor, please, please, make yourself clear.

OK, here we go.

I vote against this house rule.

In a win/lose league this type of MANDITORY house rule is not needed. I don't feel it helps the game and simply deny's a possiable historical option to the game.

Rambo has used this move on me

My vote come's with experence, I've seen this move from both sides and understand the overall reaction.

but he continued to play

I'm an experenced player and against this move(and the LC gambit) I know the counter and used it. Thier for France fell 'quickly' and I (axis) had alot of time to mop up minors and prep for the invasion of Russia.

until I beat his arse in Russia because I had such a long time to prepare, he took the risk and kept playing and paid the price latter.

I won the game, Rambo was 'behind the 8-ball' from when France fell till early 1943 because I defeated the turn one LC gambit. But he didn't give up (read 'beat his arse in Russia') which means he must have played another 2 years like a real competior rather then concedeing like a wimp (ok, I'l forgive newbies on this as they are learning and should be given alot of 'education')

However in most/all of my game I request several house rules and one does make the LC gambit more risky for latter moves in the game:

But I'm not against using house rules, as a matter of fact I REQUIRE a set of house rules when playing an experenced mate. These are:

1) Axis must trigger the ST during or before March 1942, if LC gambit March 1943, if sucessfull Sealion March 1944.

2) FF option off

3) L2 HT for Russia

4) No seaborn landings on Major Power soil the same turn they activate. (std MANDITORY z-league rule)

But these are not MANDITORY for everyone, only if you wish to play me. If someone does't wish to face the turn one LC gambit simply ask the other player at the start. Zapp was kind enough to give my rules a try no reason why some of us should give his rule a try in a pitcular game with him.

Quiting the Z-League, crying about rules, & becoming a politician. Grab your family jewels & play the game

I read you bitching a lot about differnet subjects also, remember "He who is not guilty should throw the first stone". And its nobody's bussiness how I spend my time during the summer, playing a game or with my Family and friends.

I've played roughly 100+ games & NEVER had somebody claim I don't report losses.

I have no idea what your talking about here. This post is on house rules and the LC gambit. But for the record I have never seen Rambo not post a loss and he does and exellent job of requesting people to post if they forgot.

Wow! You have a good memory, going back awhile in our history.

Yes I have a good memory, I even remember your reply to my very first post (PBEM, reloading and proving who cheats, yes 6 months ago this subject was being debated). You declaced me 'technically incompitant', I challange you to find two other people that have posted more technical details on this game in the last 6 months, and Hubert doen't count.

When are we going to play? I have something new just for you

Yes I would love to play you my friend, but there is only three months of summer in the Northern USA and I'm not going to spend 20 day light hours a week playing SC in IP mode. Perhaps we can set a time some Sat. night.

Now on to Zapps reply.

[ July 24, 2003, 07:57 PM: Message edited by: Iron Ranger ]

[Iron Ranger]

There is a contradiction if u say you will allow something but also say you wont play someone doing the allowed.

What are we debating, war gameing or philosophy? Life is a contradiction, we drink beer that kills brain cells for fun, we eat food (candy) that rots our teath, we have sex .... wait there's lots of good reasons for this one.

Statement being debated:

If a player contiually makes early high risk moves and conceades early (every time or most of the time) when they fail, tell everyone. He/she will be black balled and no one will play him.

With the (sometimes) long search for an opponent the time spent on biding and discussing house rules I find it takes one to two hours before the first turn has been played. So, when an experenced player then makes early high risk moves and they fail AND he conceades quickly every time, I'm not going to waste my time playing him again. If I (and I think most player) wanted the game to be decided quickly we would flip a coin and the winner would be given es L5 jets, game over and quick!

To be honest Zapp I don't know what your asking here, maybe its something lost in the culture exchange or my (poor) writing skills.

[Kuniworth]

Originally posted by Iron Ranger:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> There is a contradiction if u say you will allow something but also say you wont play someone doing the allowed.

What are we debating, war gameing or philosophy? Life is a contradiction, we drink beer that kills brain cells for fun, we eat food (candy) that rots our teath, we have sex .... wait there's lots of good reasons for this one.

</font>