@leemorrison You’re being polite. Yes I got my bomber and some air shot down during the first two turns but I overextended very badly with Japan, mostly because I underestimated the value the tanks would give you in terms of exploiting openings in my positions.
G40 Alpha 2 carry on game for fun
-
You’re so pathetic. Perhaps you’ll believe at some point that I really did tested you… and stop foolishlingly say that I srewed up.
First your acknowledgement of the rules and then officiale ruling from Krieghund.@Cmdr:
I have a question. On the turn that Japan declares war on UK/Anzac, can they move through zones that have UK or Anzac or US destroyers during the combat movement phase, or do those zones turn hostile the moment the DOW occurs and before the combat move phase?
Cheers
You may move out of sea zones that become hostile upon declaring war. You may load transports in said sea zones on the first round in which you have declared war and use them for amphibious assaults elsewhere, you may attack the enemy in the newly minted hostile Sea Zone.
Transports can load in a ennemy sea zone only if they start in that zone and only if the “moving player” declared war in that (his) specific turn. I was surprised, but that was once played against me.
Correct, except this should say “hostile sea zone” rather than “enemy sea zone”. Enemy subs and/or transports don’t make a sea zone hostile.
-
BBB,
You said you specifically left an error on the board. I pointed out that I was, and am, too busy to be bogged down “looking for errors you leave” and that this sort of behavior is not what I expect in a game “for fun.”
I acknowledged the mistakes but also pointed out, that given the errors you left, there is a good argument that I did not actually violate the rules since the units were in the sea zone, thus, must have been on the transports and thus, were allowed to disengage and engage in a combat elsewhere. We both know they were on the island, but that’s not what your map said and I never officially declared them to be there. (Although my map had them physically on the island or at least adjacent to a unit that was physically on the island.)
I then asked you to stop screwing around with the board trying to set up situations in which mistakes could be made, or for that matter legal moves being created that were never intended. You see, since the units WERE IN THE WATER WITH THE TRANSPORTS, they never had to actually LOAD in the sea zone. The way your map had them, they were already ON the transports. So yes, you leaving “errors” on the map to “test me” did make the move legal.
-
YOU ARE SUCH A FREAKING LIAR!!!
You write (or don’t write) things specially to be confusing and leave option out. Now, as tourney ruler, I would be so eager to know your ruling on this…1. You didn’t wrote down your NCM
@Cmdr:USA:
[…]
NCM: Map
[…]2. You never write where units come from, for attacks. Such behavior may cause confusion in many situation (as this one).
3. You say :
@Cmdr:2 Infantry, 2 Artillery could make it from the island group. There were transports there, at least, on the map you gave me.
[…]Which clearly indicates units where on the island, not kept aboard transports.
4. Lookind at the map, how US troops are placed, over the plane on the island, apart from transport shows those units are on the island, not in transports.
5. With a clear threat from Japan (33CV/16HP versus 20CV/7HP for USA), I can’t believe you planned to leave those units in the transports to a sure death at next Japan’s turn.
6. During your whole argument you talk about “transports” only… assuming ground troops are safe on the island.
7. THE BEAUTY NOW :
@Cmdr:[…]
You left the transports, so on my turn, I assumed they were not killed. Since it is legal for you to withdraw attacking forces without killing the transports (that are units that must be hit to be destroyed, they just cannot defend themselves) then I figured you had done that. It certainly would have a strategic purpose, as it moves the units off islands you might want.HAHAHAHA!
See, there’s NOTHING suggesting those units could have been left in the transports… and yet, it’s ONLY AFTER I proved illegal to load in hostile sea zone that you claim there were aboard transports.
Bottom line, your oppinion will flipflop so you have to advantage… and if you get caught (as now) you’ll do any funny explanation to have a way out.
-
I would be surprised a ruling would be any different than this :
1. Troops (2Inf, 2Art) are on Midland.
2. Transports at z25 get leave, empty, to wherever they can.
3. Attack on Aleutian can’t and didn’t happen
4. None of the Allies are allowed to redo anything. It’s Allies responsability to know rules. -
Typo
Midland = Midway -
You are correct, and I did say I did not specifically state where the units were, but the map I left didn’t exactly leave doubts as to my intentions.
I also said, we both KNEW they were supposed to be on the islands, but the official tournament rules stipulate that where you leave your units on the last map you upload, are where they are. You jostled my units around causing a situation in which I, legally, had the right to make the move - then you called me a cheater for doing it. I’ve stated that the move should be reversed, but you seem intent on trying to prove your wild accusations and attempting to spin things in such a way as to make yourself look like a better person. Just stop. No one is buying it.
None of my arguments have anything to do with your “proof” of anything, they are responses to your statements that you were “testing” me to show me a cheater. The entire point of my arguments (which you seem to purposely blind yourself too) is that you shouldn’t be trying to play games screwing around with the board trying to trick people, especially in a “for fun” game. Putting YOUR OWN units in the corner of a territory is one thing, but if you move your opponent’s tiles around, then you run the risk of screwing it up and giving your opponent an unfair advantage. For example, you moved the Infantry and Artillery into the ocean. Perhaps you wanted to see what was there, but you never moved them back, therefore, there is a VALID argument that you loaded them on the transports for me and thus, on my turn, I was legally allowed to move them. Never did I say I was going to do so, I even said on more than one occasion that you were right and the units should be on Midway. That does not invalidate the argument that you are making routine mistakes and attempting to use them to catch your opponent “cheating.” (The fact that you are trying to make your opponent cheat and thus giving them legal moves seems to be beyond your comprehension.)
Let’s rephrase this: You specifically move a French destroyer from SZ 81 to SZ 98 (you being the axis powers.) ON France’s turn they see the destroyer in SZ 98 and use it to hit the Italian transports in SZ 92. France did a legal move. I don’t care if you go back to France’s map and show the destroyer was really in SZ 81, because you, as the axis powers, took a legal move and changed where the piece was, you became liable for all acts that revolved around the unwarranted change.
Of course, you cannot just willy nilly change things to your own advantage, if you screw around with your opponents pieces, then it can only hurt you, it can never hurt your opponent. The rules were explicitly laid out in that manner to prevent opponents from cheating by moving things around, or saying they “forgot to build” their units. You either do your move correctly, or, you take the worst of the scenarios (either correcting it, or leaving it as it stands.) The only exception are if the rules are broken illegally. (You forget to land your planes. Since it is not legal for them to land on newly taken territories, you must move them to a legal spot before proceeding.) (Another example, you build 4 units at a minor complex, because you might have made a mistake, you put a boat out and forgot you were also putting out a boat, so you also put three ground units out or whatever. Or if you buy too many units (as per rules) the extra are refunded too you, they are not lost to the ether.)
As for “specially (sic) to be confusing” yes, if this was still a tournament game, I should detail out each and every placement in writing and on the board. So? No, I don’t always detail where things come from. If I am attacking W. USA and all I have are 2 Infantry, 1 Battleship, 1 Transport, 1 Fighter and 1 Tactical Bomber and I say “2 Inf, Fig, Tac + BB shot to W. USA” then it is pretty darn clear where the units are coming from. By tournament rules, yes, they should be detailed. In a for fun game, they probably do not. Nor should you have to wait to do France when doing a game for fun. (Hence why the rules explicitly stated that the tournament must wait for France before starting Germany again. Many players don’t bother, they just say “did France with Australia” since France rarely, if ever, can do anything except as defense to Germany.)
So, if you had the power to edit your post, or I to do it for you in a game thread, I’d ask you to remove your bold text. I think you are getting heated because I feel, based on what you said, you were trying to create a situation in which I would cheat (knowing how busy I was) and not only did it backfire, the situation you created caused a situation where the “cheat” turned out to be a legal move. Perhaps you need to take a break from the game. Not conceed, just take a day to cool off.
Keep in mind, you are reading a lot more into what I am saying than what is being said. I think you are starting to read what you want into what was being said, probably due to you getting angry. I said “your map moved the units into the Ocean, thus it caused a legal move where none exist.” I did not say I left them in the sea zone. I even said “you and I both know the peices should be on Midway.” I am using the whole thing to demonstrate why it is a BAD idea to try and TRAP someone into a position where they might make an illegal move, just so you can call them a cheater. By doing so, you are, in point of fact, making an illegal move legal. Nevermind that the units are supposed to be on Midway and that the transports should be dead. That’s not what you left and being as busy as I am, I didn’t have time to go micromanage your last turn to see what screwups you left on the map.
-
I would be surprised a ruling would be any different than this :
1. Troops (2Inf, 2Art) are on Midland.
2. Transports at z25 get leave, empty, to wherever they can.
3. Attack on Aleutian can’t and didn’t happen
4. None of the Allies are allowed to redo anything. It’s Allies responsability to know rules.1) Troops and Artillery are on Midway.
2) Actually, the transports should be dead. You attacked with warships, so unless you retreat before the transports die (and nothing in your round shows that they did or you wanted too)
3) The attack cannot happen due to unavailability of the units. (IF this was a tournament game, then the attack would be allowed to happen due to Japan screwing up the map.)
4) The Americans get a chance to replace their units due to a changed situation on the game board. America’s income is adjusted due to new game board situations.
-
Here is the revised map correcting for your map screwups to be in line with how a “for fun” game should be played.
While I have the moral victory (in so much as America can choose to change their Build Placements) due to Japan being without destroyers in range of the submarines and due to my desire for where I wanted the transports, I made no changes to American placement.
The French fighter was returned to London. You will have to wait until I am good and ready to do France’s turn before starting with Germany. This is your own fault. Had you just accepted the move for France instead of quibbling over it, trying to make an issue of something that was harmless, you could have gone from Italy directly into Germany. Now, of course, you have to wait for France AND you cannot cry if France decides to make an attack on their turn.
Go for Italy.
-
@Cmdr:
3) The attack cannot happen due to unavailability of the units. (IF this was a tournament game, then the attack would be allowed to happen due to Japan screwing up the map.)
Would you mind to clarify this? Because transport were left floating, troops are suddenly aboard??
:lol: :lol: :lol:Also, not sure about that word (jostled) as english isn’t my mother tongue… but I take it means to move. Well, your units are at EXACT SAME place in those maps Jenn_v_BBB_04dALL.AAM (when you moved them), Jenn_v_BBB_05cJAP.AAM (end of next Japan’s turn).
When I was saying and if you get caught (as now) you’ll do any funny explanation to have a way out.
And now, what next? Looking forward how deep you’ll trouble yourself…
1. You were saying they where on the island
(see previous post as proof)2. then, when I proved you can’t load in hostile sea zone, you claimed to be on transport
@Cmdr:Actually, where you left the units on your map, the 2 Infantry, 2 Artillery and 2 Transports are in the sea zone. (View > List Units). It is a legal move to disengage loaded and unloaded transports from a hostile sea zone and use those units in an amphibious assault elsewhere.
3. then, when I proved units should be on island, you say “I never said I left them in sz”
4. What we’ll you say next? I’m so eager to prove your such a flipflop and don’t want to admit it, so you dig yourself
I’m so amazed by your empty explanations. You can give yourself whatever moral victory you want… that’s all you can do anyway. I took over this game (from a someone who gave up) and yet your need to do funny things to have a chance (in your mind) to win against me. So funny!
-
@Cmdr:
America’s income is adjusted due to new game board situations.
I deducted 5IPC, you forgot to do… surely not on purpose.
-
-
The troops are on the island. You did move them slightly, since I routinely stack my units in pretty rows and a cursory look at virtually any game in the past would confirm this. They were “jostled” roughly the equivalent as if you were to bump the board and an infantry piece fell over. It’s not huge, but they are moved slightly. Probably what happened is that you moved them around to see what was there. (I find it hard to see what units are where exactly, due to black numbers on black lines. So I sometimes move a stack here and there to see the total number. I never get it back, to the pixel, where it was, and will, as I did in SZ 26 there on the revised map, stack the units of my opponent clearly showing I moved the pieces.)
-
I never really claimed they were not on the island. I said due to where you left them on your Japan map. Hell, if one looks at the Round 4 Allied turn map (conveniently attached below) you will see the units stacked up prettily with the tactical bombers on the island, the artillery directly adjacent to the tactical bombers and the infantry directly adjacent (ie touching in a nice line) to the artillery. The ships are stacked nicely as well in similar fashion. (Planes, Carriers, Battleships, Transports.)
-
You then started to pick a fight. Drawing from this, I pointed out that by the letter of the law, you had de facto (by your actions created a new fact) that the units were on the transports thus your altering of the board created an illegal situation that made my action legal. I agree, in spirit of the law, you cannot move my pieces and they should be on the island. However, by the spirit of the law and the letter of the law, you specifically forgot to remove the destroyers, you cannot move into a naval battle in which defending transports are present, with surface warships and leave your ships in the sea zone without killing all enemy units, including transports with the exception of submarines that submerge. Fighters/Bombers could attack and retreat before killing the transports and then you could NCM surface ships in, but you attacked with the surface ships, so you totally “screwed the pooch” so to speak, when you failed to remove the transports to begin with. This goes counter to your argument that my maps always have mistakes and your maps never do, thus, I have successfully established that we are both humans and thus, we both make mistakes. Therefore, your horse is no taller than mine so you should probably get off it like I have.
-
Correct. I never said they were in the sea zone. I never said the Aleutians attack was supposed to happen. I said if you want to go by the letter of the law, your screwup would have caused the attack on the Aluetians to be deemed legal since you moved the American pieces and you left the transports in SZ 26 and thus, if I was coming into the game without seeing any other action but Japan 5’s last map, I would say the units were on the transports, because the “List Units” command has them in SZ 26. It was in warning that your argument is on very shaky ground and you might want more than a little coincidence here or there before making wild accusations of cheating.
-
To flip flop, one must first flip, then one must flop. You have had more flip flops so far. First you are purposely making mistakes on the maps, then you are saying I am cheating (two mutually exclusive acts) then you are saying I make one argument then you are saying I made the other. My argument has been consistent this whole time:
A) This is a for fun game and you should not be posting maps you KNOW have inaccuracies on them in hopes of tricking your opponent. Especially since you know your opponent is so busy you have to post reminders to get a round.
B) If you want to be a sea lawyer, then your argument is invalid and the act (regardless of the fact we both know couldnt have happened) was legal. It was your map that had the units in the ocean next to the transports. It was your map that failed to follow the rules and remove the transports. My mistake was using your map and assuming you were playing honestly with intent to play a game for fun, not to try and trick your opponent into making an honest mistake. I’m 100% sure Dezrt, DM, IL and Djensen would support me in this. I’d wager most players would say “Dude, you cannot make mistakes on the game board, on purpose, and then complain when your opponent assumes that is an accurate game board.” If we have the game on the table and I leave to use the rest room. Then, while I am gone, you slip a chip under a stack of my units turning it from 5 infantry to 6 infantry, you cannot then complain if I use the six infantry to attack something saying there are really only 5 infantry there. In reality, that is cheating on your part, not your opponents.
C) I have gone back and retroactively made the changes to be legal in the spirit of the game, where we both know the units were supposed to be, even though you purposely misaligned the units in hopes of getting me to cheat. I also went in and changed France back, but this really hurts you a lot more than it hurts me, since now you don’t have a 100% surety of where that fighter will be and now you have to wait until I get around to posting a French move to find out. The longer I wait, the higher the chances of you screwing up Germany because you forgot what you were going to do.
-
-
@Cmdr:
America’s income is adjusted due to new game board situations.
I deducted 5IPC, you forgot to do… surely not on purpose.
Correct. I am making the adjustment to the American NO and uploading a map without it.
I also forgot to increase England to 18 IPC (they have 9 convoy damage, not 10) and India to 21 IPC (up from the 17 they had.) Australia’s income was fine.
-
The map of Allies 4 demonstrating the units being stacked on Midway/SZ 26.
-
England income is 16.
27 from territories minus 11 for convoy :
2 from z119
6 from z109 (2German sub @3 each)
2 from z85
1 from z82Map shows 9 because it doesn’t consider German subs as 3 for convoy, as per tourney rules.
Also, as per tourney rules, since you screwed up with Anzac and collected only 17IPC, it’s your bad.
-
Also, as per tourney rules, since you screwed up with Anzac and collected only 17IPC, it’s your bad.
Rather Calcutta, not Anzac.
-
Also, as per tourney rules, since you screwed up with Anzac and collected only 17IPC, it’s your bad.
Rather Calcutta, not Anzac.
Yes, but we’re fixing Japan’s mistakes anyway, so we’ll fix India’s mistake as well.
You have 6 dmg to England, 2 dmg to Scotland, 2 dmg to Brazil, 1 Dmg to Nigeria = 11 DMG. (I’m sure you can fix it. The map does not auto calculate for Germany’s bonus.)
India has 21 due to territories. (If we can fix Japan’s map, we can fix India’s income. Pick one, either the Aleutians happened because your map was wrong, or India’s income is corrected since we corrected Japan’s turn. You cannot have it both ways.)
Australia, as you pointed out, is correct at 14 IPC.Go with Italy. I’ll assume if the cash board has India at 21 IPC you went with the Corrections to Japan’s map and accordingly corrected India’s income. (I am MUCH nicer than Gargantua, he would have forced you do redo all of Japan and then done all the allies from scratch. It’s my second biggest beef with him, my first is his rolling of my attack dice for me.) If you don’t want to correct India’s income, I will assume you are conceding that the Americans move (while technically illegal due to where we know the units should have been, was done correctly due to where you left the units on Japan’s turn.) Either the map is right and we use it, or the map is wrong and we fix it. I think that’s fair.
-
There’s nothing to fix about Japan. Nothing was changed regarding Japan’s income, units, dice roll. Nothing.
Arguments were ALL ABOUT your turn, as always.
What I claimed is :
1. USA aleutians attack can’t occur, therefore USA income is 67.
2. French Fighter can’t be in Gibraltar before Italy’s turn (which is even worst than before German’s turn…).
3. London income is 16.You did fix USA on your own terms, I didn’t ask the removal of those transports and you can put them back if you want.
You can’t fix your Calcutta income screw up by “not attacking” aleutians as it can’t occur anyway!See, I was sure you would come up with a funny way to give you the advantage, eventho its against your own rules!!!
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: -
I am MUCH nicer than Gargantua, he would have forced you do redo all of Japan and then done all the allies from scratch.
True, you are nicer the way you write your posts… but from what I know about Gargantua, he admits when (and if) he’s wrong. That’s the difference.
And since you call on what he would say… I invite him to answer for himself!!
-
Tournament rules allow a player to make corrections up to when the next player starts his next turn. You have not started Italy, therefore, I can fix India per the tournament rules that govern this game (it is a continuation of a tournament game.)
I am being magnaminous in so much as not holding you accountable for your mistakes with Japan’s board. It was you, not I, who moved the American units into the Ocean. It was you, not I, who forgot to delete the American transports. By all rights, those transports and units were in SZ 26 according to your last map, and thus, available to be used. We all know what you MEANT to have done, and I am being very nice, I think, in rewinding the situation and correcting it without making any other adjustments. For one, you could not legally have your warships in SZ 26 because you would have had to retreat from the undefended transports to have them survive. (So you cheated, my Mantlefan’s absurd definition that no one in the English speaking world actually uses.)
I have attached a final map. Either give up or go with Italy. I’m not discussing this further. I made my ruling and have not altered from it this whole time. I have shown how my ruling is in accordance of the spirit of the rules and how much more of a prick I could be if I went with the letter of the rules. I think you see what I mentioned as the legal course as a flip-flop, despite it only being used to demonstrate how easy I am letting you off on your mistakes regarding the map.
This is your last warning, please stop trying to twist every little situation into some whacked out distortion of what was really said in your effort to one-up me. Was there a mistake? Yes. Japan made HUGE mistakes which in turn lead the Americans to making a mistake. Am I holding you to them? No. Have I ever held you to them? No.
-
I am MUCH nicer than Gargantua, he would have forced you do redo all of Japan and then done all the allies from scratch.
True, you are nicer the way you write your posts… but from what I know about Gargantua, he admits when (and if) he’s wrong. That’s the difference.
And since you call on what he would say… I invite him to answer for himself!!
He can’t. He went and pissed off IL so IL had him banned. I have never banned anyone and hope never too ban anyone.
I also admitted the specific action was wrong, you just chose to ignore it. The closest you have gotten to admitting you were wrong was in stating at the outset of the argument that you purposely made mistakes on the map.
Suggested Topics
