2 sets of orders?
Moderators: Duke, trewqh, korexus, Egbert
- Egbert
- Commander
- Posts: 658
- Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
- Location: The Scholars' Library (dusty section)
- Contact:
2 sets of orders?
Here is something to chew on.........
This issue came up in a recent game in which I am involved. Should a player be allowed to submit 2 alternative sets of orders --- 1 to be used if a fellow player submits a set of orders, and 1 to be used if a fellow player does not submit a set of orders.
As always, I have a predisposed opinion on this, but I do not feel strongly about it. I would like to hear what other people think.
This issue came up in a recent game in which I am involved. Should a player be allowed to submit 2 alternative sets of orders --- 1 to be used if a fellow player submits a set of orders, and 1 to be used if a fellow player does not submit a set of orders.
As always, I have a predisposed opinion on this, but I do not feel strongly about it. I would like to hear what other people think.
"Fairy tales can come true,
They can happen to you,
If you're young at heart."
They can happen to you,
If you're young at heart."
- Undertaker
- Commander
- Posts: 574
- Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
- Location: The Back Room (behind Sharky's place)
- Contact:
I would think that its up to you, if you don't mind doing it.
Personally, I wouldn't. Too much hassle and if I used the wrong set, forget it.
Personally, I wouldn't. Too much hassle and if I used the wrong set, forget it.
"That's a good question. Let me see...In my case, you know, I hate to advocate drugs or liquor, violence, insanity to anyone. But in my case it's worked." Hunter S. Thompson
- Duke
- Moderator
- Posts: 1699
- Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 7:00 am
- Location: Sweden, Valn Ohtar
I think that it is more a question of if the GM wants to bother with it.
I might have if it were in the mid or end game and around 5-6 players or less but not from the get go with 10 players. The risk of a re-run is obvious unless you are really sharp as a GM.
Dont remind me of all the crap I went through when I screwed up the re-run in my group 03. Dont want to be in that spot again.
D.
I might have if it were in the mid or end game and around 5-6 players or less but not from the get go with 10 players. The risk of a re-run is obvious unless you are really sharp as a GM.
Dont remind me of all the crap I went through when I screwed up the re-run in my group 03. Dont want to be in that spot again.
D.
- Bjorn
- Veteran
- Posts: 412
- Joined: Sun Sep 15, 2002 7:00 am
- Location: Baltimore, Maryland
- Contact:
No way, Jose. It is probably due to my "Diplomacy" background, but I would be opposed to this. Part of writing orders is guessing what your opponents may or may not do. Allowing a player to submit a set of orders only to be used if an opponent misses the deadline confers an unfair advantage to that player. To me, there is little difference between saying "Use these orders if so-and-so submits no orders" or "Use these orders if so-and-so does NOT attack such-and-such province."
"We do not stop playing because we grow old, we grow old because we stop playing" - Oliver Wendell Holmes
- Lord Fredo
- Veteran
- Posts: 377
- Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
- Location: The Brotherhood of Vayuna - Stockholm, Sweden
- Contact:
- trewqh
- Moderator
- Posts: 1877
- Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2002 8:00 am
- Location: Bialystok, Poland clan: The Vulkings
You're right Bjorn, but Egbert did write about fellow players. So, I guess that if it's between clan mates or confirmed allies than it's ok. A GM can always ask the other player if he's ok with that. This gives you some kind of an advantage, but just to protect you if your ally is not very reliable. And on the other hand it's not that big of an advantage because any player can do it, since there are usually a lot of alliances throughout the game. I mean that when a GM agrees to something like that, he'll have to agree to accept any other player's double orders.Bjorn wrote:
No way, Jose. It is probably due to my "Diplomacy" background, but I would be opposed to this. Part of writing orders is guessing what your opponents may or may not do. Allowing a player to submit a set of orders only to be used if an opponent misses the deadline confers an unfair advantage to that player. To me, there is little difference between saying "Use these orders if so-and-so submits no orders" or "Use these orders if so-and-so does NOT attack such-and-such province."
As said Duke,(if it concerns fellow players) it's up to the GM.
trewqh
- Dameon
- Moderator
- Posts: 1056
- Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
- Location: Valn Ohtar Chapterhouse
As a GM I've never actually had a player try and do this. In any case, I don't think I would allow it. From a player's standpoint, I wouldn't write my orders depending on anybody to send in their own unless I trusted them implicitly and they have proved themselves in the past. For orders to be dependent on each other indicates a fairly high degree of cooperation, and if a player chooses to put that much trust in somebody then they are going to have the accept the consequences if that player doesn't send in orders. 99% of the time that happens the player who didn't send orders in is probably at fault, because at the very least if he is having problems meeting the deadline he can take a minute to get an extension.
"A Knight is sworn to valor, his heart knows only virtue, his blade defends the helpless, his might upholds the weak, his word speaks only truth, his wrath outdoes the wicked."
- Strider
- Trooper
- Posts: 172
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 7:00 am
- Location: West Side!
- Raw
- Commander
- Posts: 769
- Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
- Location: Minneapolis, MN USA
- Contact:
- trewqh
- Moderator
- Posts: 1877
- Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2002 8:00 am
- Location: Bialystok, Poland clan: The Vulkings
I want to underline that I'm arguing about double orders when it concerns clan-mates or confirmed allies!
So, how about a situation like this:
There are two clan-mates in a game (lets call them players: A & B) and they've discussed a plan for an upcoming turn.
It's about (lets say) 48 hours until the deadline when player A sends in orders that follow the plan.
Suddenly , player A notices that player B stopped responding to e-mails and statrs worring that the plan might not work out if player B misses the deadline.
So, he cross-posts to both the GM and player B to ask if player be sent in his orders.
I ask: What's wrong with the GM telling player A if player B (his clan-mate) sent in his orders?
If the GM tells player A that player B didn't send in orders then A will send in a new set of orders (which I think most GM's wouldn't have a problem with, thanks BR for reminding this one).
And if the GM says B has sent in orders then nothing happens and everyone's happy.
Some might say that it's different from sending in two sets of orders but actually A could attach the new set of orders to the mail with the question and add:'If the answer is No then please use these new orders'. Also he could send the question with the new orders 5 minutes before the dealine...
trewqh
So, how about a situation like this:
There are two clan-mates in a game (lets call them players: A & B) and they've discussed a plan for an upcoming turn.
It's about (lets say) 48 hours until the deadline when player A sends in orders that follow the plan.
Suddenly , player A notices that player B stopped responding to e-mails and statrs worring that the plan might not work out if player B misses the deadline.
So, he cross-posts to both the GM and player B to ask if player be sent in his orders.
I ask: What's wrong with the GM telling player A if player B (his clan-mate) sent in his orders?
If the GM tells player A that player B didn't send in orders then A will send in a new set of orders (which I think most GM's wouldn't have a problem with, thanks BR for reminding this one).
And if the GM says B has sent in orders then nothing happens and everyone's happy.
Some might say that it's different from sending in two sets of orders but actually A could attach the new set of orders to the mail with the question and add:'If the answer is No then please use these new orders'. Also he could send the question with the new orders 5 minutes before the dealine...
trewqh
- Brykovian
- Moderator
- Posts: 1045
- Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
- Location: Minneapolis, MN USA ... Clan: Scholars
- Contact:
I just wanted to point out that everyone might want to duck & cover. Raw is having ... thoughts.Raw wrote:My thoughts at least.
This hasn't been seen before, so we're just not sure what to expect ...
-Bryk
Matt Worden Games ... Gem Raider, DareBase, Castle Danger, Keeps & Moats Chess
- trewqh
- Moderator
- Posts: 1877
- Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2002 8:00 am
- Location: Bialystok, Poland clan: The Vulkings
That's right Brykovian, you Scholars should better duck & cover because the plan that allowed the Clan Champs to be as they are (3:0 for the BoV after turn 6 ) was greatly influenced by Raw's thoughts.Brykovian wrote:I just wanted to point out that everyone might want to duck & cover. Raw is having ... thoughts.
This hasn't been seen before, so we're just not sure what to expect ...
-Bryk
trewqh
- korexus
- Moderator
- Posts: 2827
- Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 8:00 am
- Location: Reading
- Contact:
trewqh wrote: That's right Brykovian, you Scholars should better duck & cover because the plan that allowed the Clan Champs to be as they are (3:0 for the BoV after turn 6 ) was greatly influenced by Raw's thoughts.
trewqh
Don't we know it.
Raw was a thorn in my side from turn 1.
I've never seen anyone do so well by doing _nothing_ for so long, not in WOK or any other game I've played!
korexus.
With Great Power comes Great Irritability
- Raw
- Commander
- Posts: 769
- Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
- Location: Minneapolis, MN USA
- Contact:
- Underdog
- Commander
- Posts: 525
- Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 7:00 am
- Location: Indiana, USA---Mercenary(for now)
- Contact:
- Raw
- Commander
- Posts: 769
- Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
- Location: Minneapolis, MN USA
- Contact:
- korexus
- Moderator
- Posts: 2827
- Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 8:00 am
- Location: Reading
- Contact:
- Brykovian
- Moderator
- Posts: 1045
- Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
- Location: Minneapolis, MN USA ... Clan: Scholars
- Contact:
dangnabbit -- he beat me to it!! (I *have* seen him at work and all I can say is that he's learned that technique from the best!! )Raw wrote:You should see me at work then !
-Raw
BTW, Trewq ... Raw is a pal of mine -- so my comment was more of taking advantage of an opportunity to pick on him than any comment on how he plays the game. He already knows that I recognize him as a far superior WOKer than I ...
-Bryk
Matt Worden Games ... Gem Raider, DareBase, Castle Danger, Keeps & Moats Chess
- trewqh
- Moderator
- Posts: 1877
- Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2002 8:00 am
- Location: Bialystok, Poland clan: The Vulkings
That's what I thought but I used the opportunity to draw everybodies attention to the clan champs where the Brotherhood kicks the (hmmm...) excrements ( ) out of you, Scholars. (Actually, I haven't issued a single attacking order against anyone excluding neutrals but it still might happen some time soon )Brykovian wrote:Trewq ... Raw is a pal of mine -- so my comment was more of taking advantage of an opportunity to pick on him than any comment on how he plays the game.
trewqh