Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Bombarding Tank Riders
05-21-2014, 08:13 AM,
#14
RE: Bombarding Tank Riders
(05-21-2014, 07:54 AM)vince hughes Wrote: Peter,

I won't mention my myriad credentials which includes a tale of daring do with me as the hero in that great published work "Deeds That Thrilled The Empire" as well as a lesser known story but in no way something that should be sniffed at titled "Aldershot, Cpl Hughes, 14 pints, 4 Women and a Parrot" .......

Instead, I shall be ever so 'umble guv'nor Big Grin

But just taking up your point re playing Rules As Written or Own Interpretation Rules (hereafter RAW or OIR should either be mentioned again) my mantra on RAW is very simple and I think worth highlighting on the forum. I like ftf/hth play, in other words an opponent. Tried solo many times and can not do it (properly). By sticking with RAW I 'm pretty safe in the belief and actual execution of ......that whether the opponent is English, German, American, Belgian, Canadian or God forbid Scottish !! They will be generally in a position to play the game as we all know it. There are of course rules that are missing (overrruns of pesky mortars holding up tanks), rules that are a bit queer (British formation rules) and so on and they do bug me, but the game is what it is and we must like it to be here presumably. So despite some warts, if we are all singing from the same song-sheet, all the better for ftf/hth gamers.

Once the road is taken of 'adding this' and 'taking that' on a large scale, then each opponent has to be basically logged somewhere in a book or spreadsheet as to how they do or don't play and consequently forces me to remember each opponents quirks and they mine too. "What PG rules apply and what do not" I would have to ask before each game. With my scale of opponent base, I can't afford or be bothered with all that.

Also, I am happy that of the 160 or so results of my dual plays listed, they are all hand in glove in that the same game was played as good as dammit with each opponent. That means when I list losses at the end of each game, they were achieved by using the system as printed and there should be nothing 'funky' found in my results .... results meaning either scenario winners/losers as well as stats for losses.

To varying degrees and varying spheres we are ALL pretty much experts in military matters here whether read, recreated or real. Whether qualified, published or enthusiast. It would be wrong of me to decree my rules and versions as superior or 'righter' than a man's that disagrees with me on a point of opinion. Try discussing the causes of WW1 on CSW if you want to put that to the test and most if not all inputters have read volumes on the subject. Despite that, I know my views on the debate of causation tally with say about 10-20% only.

This is a long, reasoned and hopefully constructive post of laying down the objectives for a RAW point of view. It has nothing to do with an ignorance of the subject matter, in fact, very far from it indeed and hopefully is not something you conflate when looking at RAW v OIR. But instead, it is a deliberate attempt to continue to work towards players at least playing the same game with results that are relative to each other AND by playing the same game, a better chance of inter-player games in the future.

This I believe is why PY answered in the 'fundamentalist' form as you put it upstream so that Fred at least first gets the official ruling rather than an IDEA for a ruling that you unfortunately preceeded with a list of experiences that PY ribbed you about. Having not seen the film Godzilla 2014 I can not confirm whether his quote is either correct, accurate or even remotely exists on celluloid Angel

Talking of experiences I think in my two main jobs (professsions) of Army & Police both careers in their respective training schools would begin lessons or exercises with: (and I'm sure most peoples job training does)

"There are some better,some quicker and also some just plain different ways to achieve this objective you are learning today. But I'm going to show you the CORRECT way first, the way the MANUAL teaches it. Learn that and then afterwards ............................

(and afterwards, there will be the 4th ed. where optionals will need to be agreed.Wink)

Good post Vince.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Bombarding Tank Riders - by Blackcloud6 - 05-20-2014, 10:56 AM
RE: Bombarding Tank Riders - by Poor Yorek - 05-20-2014, 12:25 PM
RE: Bombarding Tank Riders - by tlangston28 - 05-20-2014, 12:29 PM
RE: Bombarding Tank Riders - by vince hughes - 05-20-2014, 03:53 PM
RE: Bombarding Tank Riders - by plloyd1010 - 05-20-2014, 10:33 PM
RE: Bombarding Tank Riders - by plloyd1010 - 05-20-2014, 10:23 PM
RE: Bombarding Tank Riders - by Poor Yorek - 05-20-2014, 11:52 PM
RE: Bombarding Tank Riders - by Poor Yorek - 05-21-2014, 01:06 AM
RE: Bombarding Tank Riders - by plloyd1010 - 05-21-2014, 02:33 AM
RE: Bombarding Tank Riders - by Poor Yorek - 05-21-2014, 05:32 AM
RE: Bombarding Tank Riders - by plloyd1010 - 05-21-2014, 06:40 AM
RE: Bombarding Tank Riders - by vince hughes - 05-21-2014, 07:54 AM
RE: Bombarding Tank Riders - by Blackcloud6 - 05-21-2014, 08:13 AM
RE: Bombarding Tank Riders - by Blackcloud6 - 05-21-2014, 07:16 AM
RE: Bombarding Tank Riders - by plloyd1010 - 05-21-2014, 10:43 PM
RE: Bombarding Tank Riders - by plloyd1010 - 05-21-2014, 11:36 PM
RE: Bombarding Tank Riders - by vince hughes - 05-22-2014, 07:59 AM
RE: Bombarding Tank Riders - by Blackcloud6 - 05-22-2014, 08:30 AM
RE: Bombarding Tank Riders - by plloyd1010 - 05-23-2014, 12:01 AM
RE: Bombarding Tank Riders - by vince hughes - 05-23-2014, 07:32 AM
RE: Bombarding Tank Riders - by plloyd1010 - 05-23-2014, 12:19 AM
RE: Bombarding Tank Riders - by plloyd1010 - 05-23-2014, 01:50 AM
RE: Bombarding Tank Riders - by zaarin7 - 05-23-2014, 07:30 AM
RE: Bombarding Tank Riders - by vince hughes - 05-23-2014, 07:34 AM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)