What is the Point of Short Games?

[squirecam]

@Jennifer:

KJF can take 5 rounds to set up properly, meanwhile India and Karelia have already fallen.  However, Japan can be limited to 30-40 IPC income and be out numbered navally and militarily but you lost the game because it’s a mere 8 VCs.

Karelia, yes.

India, no.

If you lose India in 3 rounds, IN A KJF, you are doing something horribly wrong.

[squirecam]

Also, looking back on that “test” game, I saw many errors which would skew the results. But the initial one is most egregious.

You gave the axis a bid ???

The Axis had an advantage in an 8 VC game. Why do they get units too??

An 8 VC game will have an ALLIED bid.

This alone eliminates any “worth” that test game allegedly showed.

[newpaintbrush]

I have the strong impression that some groups of players are not used to encountering effective strategies other than the ones they already employ.

I debate the objective validity of just about EVERY post on this board.

Except MY posts, of course, which as any discriminating poster will know, are the very quintessence of objectivity, wit, brevity, and modesty.

[squirecam]

@newpaintbrush:

I have the strong impression that some groups of players are not used to encountering effective strategies other than the ones they already employ.

I debate the objective validity of just about EVERY post on this board.

Except MY posts, of course, which as any discriminating poster will know, are the very quintessence of objectivity, wit, brevity, and modesty.

Your greatness is already well known. :)

My only point is to prevent people from believing things “cannot be done” just because someone says so, or because a “test game” is used (with flawed bid and strategy) in it.

8VC games, using KJF are not over in 2-3 turns, and are a good learning tool for new players.

[ezto]

yes i agree.

[critmonster]

i would like to see hawaii and australia and caucases having vc’s

i still think hold 'em for a full round eleminates alot of the imbalance of an 8vc game
but i do admit it still tends to force a race to moscow

[cyan]

@critmonster:

i would like to see hawaii and australia and caucases having vc’s

i still think hold 'em for a full round eleminates alot of the imbalance of an 8vc game
but i do admit it still tends to force a race to moscow

then you would have to give the axis 1.5 vcs(each). to keep it balcenced

[Guest]

I do think the shift of two Allied VC’s would make an 8 VC game far more playable…

Move Lenningrad to Stalingrad (Karelia to Caucuses) and Calcutta to Sydney (India to Australia)

I DO like those VT’s that Craig posted though.  I may give those SERIOUS thought for our next Tournament.

[frimmel]

Well to go off on a tangent one thing that makes games shorter is to play faster. Does anyone use some kind of clock to limit “thinking time” before actually moving pieces?

[squirecam]

@frimmel:

Well to go off on a tangent one thing that makes games shorter is to play faster. Does anyone use some kind of clock to limit “thinking time” before actually moving pieces?

The Hasbroken CD used to have this feature. I used it alot back then.

Squirecam

[critmonster]

would you really have to give the axis additional vc’s?  i don’t think so, 3 per country and capture three of the enemies (while holding your own) or i guess eastern europe or ukraine and what, okinawa?

[newpaintbrush]

@Craig:

@ncscswitch:

…I DO like those VT’s that Craig posted though.  I may give those SERIOUS thought for our next Tournament.

You are a man of wisdom! :wink:

I am glad that someone has seen the light. :-D

Craig

Although I sort of like Craig Yoper’s territory idea, I would like it a d*** sight more if it were officially recognized and accepted by Avalon Hill as the tournament standard.

Actually, I would like ANYTHING to be accepted by Avalon Hill as the tournament standard.

As it is, there are different tournaments, but no OFFICIAL tournament standard.  LHTR is close, but it is not the Official Deal.

[Guest]

Avalon Hill MAKES GAMES.  That is all they do, that is what they want to do, and that is what they make money at (keeping their shareholders happy).

Places like DAAK, Flames and here determine what is OFFICIAL in terms of playing a Tournament :-D

[Baghdaddy]

@newpaintbrush:

@Craig:

@ncscswitch:

…I DO like those VT’s that Craig posted though.  I may give those SERIOUS thought for our next Tournament.

You are a man of wisdom! :wink:

I am glad that someone has seen the light. :-D

Craig

Although I sort of like Craig Yoper’s territory idea, I would like it a d*** sight more if it were officially recognized and accepted by Avalon Hill as the tournament standard.

Actually, I would like ANYTHING to be accepted by Avalon Hill as the tournament standard.

As it is, there are different tournaments, but no OFFICIAL tournament standard.  LHTR is close, but it is not the Official Deal.

What you want is this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_General_Magazine

It was the place to get “official” acceptance by Avalon Hill for game standards.  Notice it ceased publication when Hasbro bought AH.

[squirecam]

@newpaintbrush:

@Craig:

@ncscswitch:

…I DO like those VT’s that Craig posted though.  I may give those SERIOUS thought for our next Tournament.

You are a man of wisdom! :wink:

I am glad that someone has seen the light. :-D

Craig

Although I sort of like Craig Yoper’s territory idea, I would like it a d*** sight more if it were officially recognized and accepted by Avalon Hill as the tournament standard.

Actually, I would like ANYTHING to be accepted by Avalon Hill as the tournament standard.

As it is, there are different tournaments, but no OFFICIAL tournament standard.  LHTR is close, but it is not the Official Deal.

WOTC/AH pays for Greg’s FTF tournaments at Origins/GCI. They consulted Larry on “tournament” rules specifically for this purpose. I’d say this makes LHTR the prominent ruleset.

Look here for the best FTF tournaments in the country…

http://www.geocities.com/headlesshorseman2/smoreyswamp.html