<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by CSAML872</i>
<br />General Walter,
I see what you are getting at, but I think perhaps a better solution is for some imaginative type in the club coming to the cabinet and perscribing two or three logical rule combinations. People would be able to deviate, of course, but we could set up matches as--lets play rule combinations (West Point #1, or #2---or perhaps Walter #1 or #2). It would make it easier for novices to have a good idea of what they are picking. And it would give us an opportunity to use the Cabinet to approve such suggestion.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Funny, I had the same idea this night. In the old BG days, people would often simply play "all on". A few alternate sets of recommended rules selections (say one aimed at historical accuracy--oh well, whatever that is!--, one aimed at play balance, one aimed at simplicity--for beginners (leave out things like gun capture etc.) would maybe indeed make agreement easier. At least for those who find it difficult to agree. Of course, if both players are easy, or one extremely easy about such things (as is General Sands in my experience [;)]), then optional rules are not a problem.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
BTW--I believe the multiplayer game is in Union hands--but I could be mistaken, if I am it is my fault. Let me know.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
I'll have to check, but I believe we have had no turn from you since we sent back ours (#71 I think?) about a week ago.
Gen. Walter, USA
<i>The Blue Blitz</i>
3/2/VIII AoS
West Point Class of '01