| Colonial Campaigns Club (CCC) https://wargame.ch/board/cc/ |
|
| Surrender and Medals https://wargame.ch/board/cc/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=8065 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Stejones82 [ Fri Aug 29, 2008 3:43 am ] |
| Post subject: | Surrender and Medals |
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Tom Wight</i> <br /><i>If the game is getting lopsided, then playing on a few turns more, just so someone can achieve a certain victory level is silly. If that means the victor doesn't get a medal, then perhaps the method used to determine medal qualification should be redone.</i> I agree. In my view, convincing an opponent that resistance is futile within relatively few turns is the mark of great generalship. I know it is revolutionary and it is an established tradition, but I think medals should be awarded for victories alone without having to meet a quotum of turns. The only problem with this, is that it is possible for the losing side to give up too easily because of external factors. It is also silly to award a medal after say three turns because one of the players is fed up with the game. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote"> Started a new thread, and not picking on you Tom, just wanted to start here. Interesting discussions so far. How would we do this without requiring an outside referee to evaluate each battle presented for a medal? I do not feel we abandon the objective standard of 50% completion. I also know that a game can truly be over within a few turns of starting. I remember one battle wherin I emplyed a risky gamble. My opponent also did so, catching all my columned troops by surprise with extended riflemen, inflicting considerable damage! This 24 turn battle really was over within five turns! Now it was not a medal field, but it might have been. If the game is within five turns of awarding the victor a medal, seems like a reasonable request to play on. But I also know that with my recent personal schedule, that could require three to six WEEKS!!! Perhaps if a defeated player does not wish to continue, the victor could submit the game in question to the losing player's Commander in Chief. This CinC could then decide if or if not the medal is warranted. Speaking as a CinC, I would be willing to do this, but do not look forward to the potential haggling. I hate to say it, but if we do not have some objective standard, there will be abuse or perceived abuse, which is often worse [;)] ! Boyz will be boyz and some might, might I say, go in for medal grabbing by beginning and ending games within a few turns solely for the award. Then we would have more fruitless discussion to the tune of: "Well, Jonesy there has a ton of medals, but he did not really E A R N them," and the like. Still, totally artificial barriers to medalry can be too restrictive. To my British officers, I say this. If your medal try is thwarted by a few turns, report the game to me, with the file, and I will attempt to persuade my fellows of the cabinet to apply the reasonable man theory. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|