Real league game situation - dispute going to league admin

[boldfresh]

@Ziggurat:

@Boldfresh:

hmmm interesting thought karl - BUT, wouldn’t that apply only if the player SCRAMBLED?� then to say, hold on i’m gonna change those moves, i want to send more at the zone you are scrambling into….�

now THAT would be dirty.� however, if a player is sending LESS into a zone where the player originally didn’t scramble, how could the move even possibly be dirty?

I’ll only speak in general as I haven’t been involved in the game, but I would be quite peeved if someone removed pieces from a sea battle after I declined a scramble (and as anyone who has played me can vouch for, I am VERY relaxed about edits and changing minds). Knowing a player’s intent to scramble is a glimpse into their overall strategy and risk aversion. After knowing that there is no threat (or no appetite for risk), the piece you moved could now be used to shore up another theater that could previously have been weak as a result of needing to overcompensate because of the unknown of scrambling. You have gained a piece of information that shouldn’t have been available prior to combat moves. Scrambling is the defensive version of threat projection. If you don’t know whether or not I want to scramble, you have to over commit to insure you don’t get diced. I’m sure there was no malice intended here, but this situation gives the impression of trying to game the system.

also there’s nothing to really glimpse into here.  i understand your point, but this is a very extreme case.  i knew very well that there was no way he would scramble in the first case and was so sure he wouldn’t scramble the second time i just said if you wanna go ahead and scramble and run the sea battle before your next turn go ahead.

[boldfresh]

@Boldfresh:

@Ziggurat:

@Boldfresh:

hmmm interesting thought karl - BUT, wouldn’t that apply only if the player SCRAMBLED?� then to say, hold on i’m gonna change those moves, i want to send more at the zone you are scrambling into….�

now THAT would be dirty.� however, if a player is sending LESS into a zone where the player originally didn’t scramble, how could the move even possibly be dirty?

I’ll only speak in general as I haven’t been involved in the game, but I would be quite peeved if someone removed pieces from a sea battle after I declined a scramble (and as anyone who has played me can vouch for, I am VERY relaxed about edits and changing minds). Knowing a player’s intent to scramble is a glimpse into their overall strategy and risk aversion. After knowing that there is no threat (or no appetite for risk), the piece you moved could now be used to shore up another theater that could previously have been weak as a result of needing to overcompensate because of the unknown of scrambling. You have gained a piece of information that shouldn’t have been available prior to combat moves. Scrambling is the defensive version of threat projection. If you don’t know whether or not I want to scramble, you have to over commit to insure you don’t get diced. I’m sure there was no malice intended here, but this situation gives the impression of trying to game the system.

also there’s nothing to really glimpse into here.  i understand your point, but this is a very extreme case.  i knew very well that there was no way he would scramble in the first case and was so sure he wouldn’t scramble the second time i just said if you wanna go ahead and scramble and run the sea battle before your next turn go ahead.

in other words, it could be conceivable one could game the system, especially if the defender scrambles and the attacker wants to ADD to the battle, but this is just about as extreme as you could imagine since it would have been lots of boats against only 2 ftrs max.

[Hank13]

@Infrastructure:

I think the heart of issue should be intent.  If an opponent put me in this scenario, I would probably write something like this: if my scram decision honestly had no effect on your change and you just messed up and are fixing it go ahead,  but ask for the scram again please.   
In that way you can kind of gauge the change and see if it effected it.  And I obviously don’t think you can change anything in the scram battle!

Here’s my understanding of the dispute. You (Bold) asked for a scramble, got an answer then changed your combat moves. If that’s not right please correct me.

If that is what happened, then my opinion is the same as what Infrastructure has already said. If it was simply a mistake and the decision to scramble or not had no impact then there should be no problem (you definitely shouldn’t be able to change that battle though). If this type of thing happened multiple times throughout a game I would call bulls*t and not allow it, but I don’t think that is an issue as Bold isn’t that type of player.

This is a vast game and we all forget little things we intended to do from time to time (as anyone who has played me can attest, I am definitely guilty of this). At the end of the day, your opponent should be offered another chance to scramble as your changes may affect his/her decision, but I don’t really see any issue here. Again, I don’t know the game so please correct me if I am way off.

[Ziggurat]

@Boldfresh:

@Boldfresh:

@Ziggurat:

@Boldfresh:

hmmm interesting thought karl - BUT, wouldn’t that apply only if the player SCRAMBLED?� then to say, hold on i’m gonna change those moves, i want to send more at the zone you are scrambling into….�

now THAT would be dirty.� however, if a player is sending LESS into a zone where the player originally didn’t scramble, how could the move even possibly be dirty?

I’ll only speak in general as I haven’t been involved in the game, but I would be quite peeved if someone removed pieces from a sea battle after I declined a scramble (and as anyone who has played me can vouch for, I am VERY relaxed about edits and changing minds). Knowing a player’s intent to scramble is a glimpse into their overall strategy and risk aversion. After knowing that there is no threat (or no appetite for risk), the piece you moved could now be used to shore up another theater that could previously have been weak as a result of needing to overcompensate because of the unknown of scrambling. You have gained a piece of information that shouldn’t have been available prior to combat moves. Scrambling is the defensive version of threat projection. If you don’t know whether or not I want to scramble, you have to over commit to insure you don’t get diced. I’m sure there was no malice intended here, but this situation gives the impression of trying to game the system.

also there’s nothing to really glimpse into here.  i understand your point, but this is a very extreme case.  i knew very well that there was no way he would scramble in the first case and was so sure he wouldn’t scramble the second time i just said if you wanna go ahead and scramble and run the sea battle before your next turn go ahead.

in other words, it could be conceivable one could game the system, especially if the defender scrambles and the attacker wants to ADD to the battle, but this is just about as extreme as you could imagine since it would have been lots of boats against only 2 ftrs max.

I agree, this is a very extreme case and I would let you change the move (especially since I think your confidence at winning said game is highly irrational :P). However, ME does certainly have the right to not be as flexible. I was answering the question about how removing units from a scramble situation could ever be viewed as dirty. In my mind, changing any part of a scramble situation (after receiving an answer) where the outcome is even the slightest bit in doubt is not right. This does bring up one curiosity to me though. Why bother even asking the first time for scramble orders? If there’s zero chance they’ll scramble, just get on with it and can edit in if they want to suicide. It seems like a little less communication would’ve prevented this from ever being an issue :P.

[seth4god]

Normally I would lean more towards Me’s side in this. However, Bold made it clear that he was going to be bring LESS to the battle and he was also going to change what he was going to land where. He didn’t get into the specifics, but Me knew that change was coming and knew that the sz112 potential battle was changing some. And he had no issue with it.

@Boldfresh:

ok, i put that move together before running into a meeting.  now that i’ve had a little more time to look it over, i think i want to change it a bit.  landing only in norway and taking 1 less ftr into z112.  doubt that will change your scramble but if it does, we can run it.

@Boldfresh:

yeah, gonna just redo the move.  will still have overwhelming force going into z112.

@Me1945:

No problem. Take your time.

The only thing that I see wrong as things stand now is that Me was never asked for a scramble decision the 2nd time around. Bold did cover himself by stating that Me could roll the dice himself if he wanted to scramble. But I doubt very many of us would scramble 2 fighters vs 2 dd, 3 ca, and a bb (100% loss according to triplea calc regardless of whether an allied fighter was in the battle or not). Granted Bold does get diced from time to time . … .  :-P

[seth4god]

Me never indicated that his scramble decision might change. On the flip side, he never actually said that the scramble decision wouldn’t change either.

[boldfresh]

Bump to Jenn

[Stalingradski]

Coming in late to the discussion, and ultimately Jenn has to make the decision. My opinion?

• I think this is a lesson for all of us to set our expectations with each other before the game, and if needed put them in writing (pm or otherwise). I tend to tell anyone I play, via pm, that I believe in playing the game like we’re standing over the board - an expectation of trust, fair play, and good intentions. So I like to be very forgiving of my opponent and hope they do the same with me, as we’re all human  :-)  If a game is to be played in a very strict way, directly by the rules and unforgiving of mistakes, it’s important to communicate this respectfully and honestly before the game.

• We should remember that we’re all sitting behind computer screens here - so sometimes it’s easy to say things we wouldn’t necessarily say face to face. I’ve been guilty of this a few times  :oops: Ultimately, you’re both excellent players, playing a game meant to be fun. Usually it takes one person to back down and say let’s move on from this and realize the bigger picture (the health of the league) is more important than this particular incident. So I think regardless of what Jenn rules, you guys should take the time to be peaceful, behind the scenes through pms, and suss it out there.

[Omega1759]

Me1945 is right that Bold made a technical mistake, but the mistake was a technicality that does not have bearing on the game. Bold could have made in final move (no planes in 112) in the first place and Me1945 would not have scrambled because the odds there are overwhelming (if he wants the right to scramble, then they should go ahead and have him scramble).

In other situations where the scrambling decision is more consequential, then what Bold did is incorrect. You can’t take out units off a scramble zone and proceed without asking for scramble orders again.

In this particular case, Me1945 is mopping up Bold (India, South Africa are falling, the remainder of Russia is falling). It’s very possible that Bold may be able to make the game drag for a few turns as he usually does, but I would personally just make the technical point for future reference and proceed to finish the game.

[boldfresh]

thanks for the thoughts omega.  better keep watching this game a little longer.

[boldfresh]

@Boldfresh:

thanks for the thoughts omega.  better keep watching this game a little longer.

i did tell him i would be taking in less.  since the norway landing was only a walkin, it’s clear that he still has the option to scramble after the fact and prevent the landing if he would so desire to attempt it.  in fact i think i explicitly stated it.

[Omega1759]

@Boldfresh:

thanks for the thoughts omega.  better keep watching this game a little longer.

Don’t worry, I’ll keep watching  :-D

Can you guys resume the game?  :-D

[boldfresh]

@Omega1759:

@Boldfresh:

thanks for the thoughts omega.  better keep watching this game a little longer.

Don’t worry, I’ll keep watching  :-D

Can you guys resume the game?  :-D

i would love to, but apparently Me is digging in his heels on this issue and wants to wait for commander jenn to give an OFFICIAL ruling.  :roll:  i am in stali’s camp, would much rather work it out reasonably between the two of us, but he seems to have little to no interest in doing so.

[boldfresh]

@Ziggurat:

@Boldfresh:

@Boldfresh:

@Ziggurat:

@Boldfresh:

hmmm interesting thought karl - BUT, wouldn’t that apply only if the player SCRAMBLED?� then to say, hold on i’m gonna change those moves, i want to send more at the zone you are scrambling into….�

now THAT would be dirty.� however, if a player is sending LESS into a zone where the player originally didn’t scramble, how could the move even possibly be dirty?

I’ll only speak in general as I haven’t been involved in the game, but I would be quite peeved if someone removed pieces from a sea battle after I declined a scramble (and as anyone who has played me can vouch for, I am VERY relaxed about edits and changing minds). Knowing a player’s intent to scramble is a glimpse into their overall strategy and risk aversion. After knowing that there is no threat (or no appetite for risk), the piece you moved could now be used to shore up another theater that could previously have been weak as a result of needing to overcompensate because of the unknown of scrambling. You have gained a piece of information that shouldn’t have been available prior to combat moves. Scrambling is the defensive version of threat projection. If you don’t know whether or not I want to scramble, you have to over commit to insure you don’t get diced. I’m sure there was no malice intended here, but this situation gives the impression of trying to game the system.

also there’s nothing to really glimpse into here.  i understand your point, but this is a very extreme case.  i knew very well that there was no way he would scramble in the first case and was so sure he wouldn’t scramble the second time i just said if you wanna go ahead and scramble and run the sea battle before your next turn go ahead.

in other words, it could be conceivable one could game the system, especially if the defender scrambles and the attacker wants to ADD to the battle, but this is just about as extreme as you could imagine since it would have been lots of boats against only 2 ftrs max.

I agree, this is a very extreme case and I would let you change the move (especially since I think your confidence at winning said game is highly irrational :P). However, ME does certainly have the right to not be as flexible. I was answering the question about how removing units from a scramble situation could ever be viewed as dirty. In my mind, changing any part of a scramble situation (after receiving an answer) where the outcome is even the slightest bit in doubt is not right. This does bring up one curiosity to me though. Why bother even asking the first time for scramble orders? If there’s zero chance they’ll scramble, just get on with it and can edit in if they want to suicide. It seems like a little less communication would’ve prevented this from ever being an issue :P.

you never know when a guy might make a mistake and do something stupid right?  why not give him the chance to do so, however unlikely you think it might be that he will do it?  :-P

[boldfresh]

@Boldfresh:

I agree, this is a very extreme case and I would let you change the move (especially since I think your confidence at winning said game is highly irrational :P). However, ME does certainly have the right to not be as flexible. I was answering the question about how removing units from a scramble situation could ever be viewed as dirty. In my mind, changing any part of a scramble situation (after receiving an answer) where the outcome is even the slightest bit in doubt is not right. This does bring up one curiosity to me though. Why bother even asking the first time for scramble orders? If there’s zero chance they’ll scramble, just get on with it and can edit in if they want to suicide. It seems like a little less communication would’ve prevented this from ever being an issue :P.

exactly - if he’s so sure he has the game won, i wonder why he is making such a big deal out of it.  hmmmmm

[boldfresh]

@Boldfresh:

@Boldfresh:

I agree, this is a very extreme case and I would let you change the move (especially since I think your confidence at winning said game is highly irrational :P). However, ME does certainly have the right to not be as flexible. I was answering the question about how removing units from a scramble situation could ever be viewed as dirty. In my mind, changing any part of a scramble situation (after receiving an answer) where the outcome is even the slightest bit in doubt is not right. This does bring up one curiosity to me though. Why bother even asking the first time for scramble orders? If there’s zero chance they’ll scramble, just get on with it and can edit in if they want to suicide. It seems like a little less communication would’ve prevented this from ever being an issue :P.

exactly - if he’s so sure he has the game won, i wonder why he is making such a big deal out of it.   hmmmmm

seems, honestly, like a silly and petty thing to do.  my number 1 theory is that he’s just a little in shock and feeling embarrassed by the fact that he didn’t realize he only had 7 victory cities.  i believe that when he comes to his senses and thinks about it a little bit, he’ll realize that insisting on not allowing the changes “because of the given scramble choice” is a very weak position to try to defend.

[boldfresh]

bump again to Jenn.  she hasn’t been on for about a week.

[Jennifer]

@Boldfresh:

bump again to Jenn.  she hasn’t been on for about a week.

Have too.  I’m on once a day except Saturday and Sunday.  I may not POST for a week, but this dispute did start just before the weekend.

Currently you have a ruling in your thread.  Unless there’s further details that either side want to point out that I may have missed to alter the result.

[boldfresh]

breaking news - someone consulted the RULEBOOK!

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=30854.new#new

[miamiumike]

To me, because the decision to scramble or not to scramble can be influenced by not only what is attacking the specific sea zone BUT also a) what a purchase was and b) what other combats were declared, it does not matter if you are attacking with more or less - the decision to scramble needs to be based on a concrete set of combat moves.

If ANY combat changes - if even if it does not involve the sea zone where a scramble could occur, the defender should have the option to reconsider and decide again if they want to scramble and, if so, how many fighters to use.

My humble opinion….

MM