new G40 game kublakhan Vs. feckingwrecked
Why is surrender not an option in the original game?
-
Out of curiosity, why do you think Larry did not have surrender as an option to lose/win the game? Why didn’t he include it in any of the games considering it’s historically accurate?
-
What would be the point? If either side surrenders, then the other wins. This is a game, no lives are at stake, so nothing is gained by the surrendering side.
-
Well sometimes the game is already so tilted in favour of one side that it’s just a waste of time to get to the victory objectives. I think that’s why The Captain did that in his house rules, so I’m not sure why that wasn’t an option in the out of box rules.
-
@superbattleshipyamato ok maybe I’m not understanding your question. I’m making the assumption anyone can resign/ surrender at anytime like any other game. Chess comes to mind as the prime example. You don’t need a rule for that, right?
Personally, i have rarely played a game where the victory conditions were enforced. Typically, one player resigns when it is apparent that the other will win.
-
I don’t make that assumption. My view is that since surrender wasn’t explicitly mentioned in the rules it’s not allowed.
-
@SuperbattleshipYamato So are you talking about a whole side surrendering,or an individual nation surrendering?Variants like BBR or BalancedMod use Vichy rules for France.1914 has the Russian revolution.Historically Italy surrendered in 1943.Could be house rules for anything.
-
Both.
Yes, some house rules allow it. Yes, some games like 1914 allow it.
However, I’m referring to why the out of box rules for Global 1940 didn’t include it.
-
@SuperbattleshipYamato said in Why is surrender not an option in the original game?:
I don’t make that assumption. My view is that since surrender wasn’t explicitly mentioned in the rules it’s not allowed.
Every game out there basically allows 1 of the players to give up. Its a game if you think you lost you can give up.
What would you do force a player to continue playing?
Its not in the rules because its so obvious it doesnt need to be in the rules. -
I don’t force.
But when playing by myself or if I’m the one losing I always play to the end.
-
@SuperbattleshipYamato said in Why is surrender not an option in the original game?:
I don’t force.
But when playing by myself or if I’m the one losing I always play to the end.
Why? If your axis and its clear you will lose why continue for another 12 hours. Especially if allies are winning things will go slowly downhill for the axis but it takes many rounds before tokyo, berlin and rome are captured. You could stack tokyo with about 50-60 inf and a load of fighters so then good luck invading as the allies. 1 kamikaze a turn means 6 turns without shore bombardment as well.
-
In my view, since it wasn’t explicitly said by the rulebook that you can surrender, I don’t.
-
@SuperbattleshipYamato I’m sorry but this sounds really lame and unfun.
-
@SuperbattleshipYamato you can surrender and you should when you have no hope of victory. I will consider you an ass if you make me play it out to full.
-
Theoretically, at that point I would quit anyway. Leave and never play at your house again. Or do you chain ppl. to the table.
-
@SuperbattleshipYamato said in Why is surrender not an option in the original game?:
In my view, since it wasn’t explicitly said by the rulebook that you can surrender, I don’t.
I dont recall ever seeing the option to give up with any boardgames, its assumed people just know that they can lose a game by giving up.
Im pretty sure that other games, baseball, soccer, basketball, and so on, dont have rules that allow a team to give up but that if a team doesnt continue play they just lose the game. -
@shadowhawk li
Lol… that’s exactly what happens if you surrender- it means you lose the game. -
@Mr-Kell
Never played in person with someone else in one sitting, so neither of us would know.
-
Here’s an example of what I mean:
-
I’ll keep that in mind when I play with you.
-
@SuperbattleshipYamato the game you made TGC play you out to final victory conditions and he ended up building a huge stack of Battleships and took paris and killed your Atlantic fleet because he didn’t actually need to build ground troops anymore? Sounds boring I’m sure the signs were there that you were losing many rounds before the actual end.
Suggested Topics
