Grudge Rules as Tournament Rules

[Pitman]

What makes you think that haven't considered their tournament rules with balance in mind? -- jim

Because they are applied to every scenario, not a particular scenario with a known balance problem. I mean, come on, Jim.

 

[Sparafucil3]

Because they are applied to every scenario, not a particular scenario with a known balance problem. I mean, come on, Jim.

Trezza (and Pleva after him) play tested EVERY scenario for Albany. I know every scenario was play tested with these rules. I give them the benefit of the doubt. If it helps, think of them as MASSR (Multi-Applicable). -- jim

 

[MajorDomo]

There are progress deniers who still play SL.

Our current ASL rules "purists" are mild by comparison to flat earthers...

Luckily, they are a small minority who may well fondly remember:

A. The platoon vanishing from plain sight sleaze
B. The Berserker, not good order thus not stripping its target's concealment
C. The extra -1 on bridge for shots down the road
D. The self break, route forward with no enemy in sight sleaze
E. The halftrack ESB to immobilize in a tiger's hex sleaze


MMP's Perry has changed the above as ASL evolves.

Hopefully he will also address the FT to kill, attack of the killer trucks overrun, pyromania defense, tiger crews as shock troops.

That should help shield TDs from the slings and arrows of the purists and luddites.

 

[Sparafucil3]

B. The Berserker, not good order thus not stripping its target's concealment

Only Good Order units can strip Concealment. Unbroken units can deny Concealment gain. -- jim

 

[footsteps]

There are progress deniers who still play SL.

Our current ASL rules "purists" are mild by comparison to flat earthers...

Luckily, they are a small minority who may well fondly remember:

I still have the original OBA rules pages.

 

[MajorDomo]

Only Good Order units can strip Concealment. Unbroken units can deny Concealment gain. -- jim

A15.431: ..Similarly, if it moves into a concealed enemy's Location and reveals it (12.15) while charging another unit, the berserker must remain in this hex and attempt to eliminate all enemy units therein instead..

I believe the formerly concealed unit must also fire, even possbly FPF at a non SMC Berserker that enters its location.

 

[Toby Pilling]

The term 'Grudge rules' is an interesting one, isn't it? It's rather pejorative in itself and helps frame the debate in a way that puts their advocate on the defensive.

Agreeing as I do with all the amendments I've seen laid out in this thread on the Arnhem tournament, I think I'd prefer an alternative - 'Refined rules', perhaps, or 'Mended rules'. My personal favourite though would simply be 'Better rules'.

 

[asloser]

Because they are applied to every scenario, not a particular scenario with a known balance problem. I mean, come on, Jim.

There also is a bidding system (at least in Denmark and sweden- I think they use it in Albany as well) so players can adjust if needed. And scenarios are not played straight up as published in any case.

 

[Blaze]

The term 'Grudge rules' is an interesting one, isn't it? It's rather pejorative in itself and helps frame the debate in a way that puts their advocate on the defensive.

It gets even more interesting when you have a "grudge" against "Grudge Rues"

 

[fenyan]

Plusgood Rules

 

[Pitman]

The term 'Grudge rules' is an interesting one, isn't it? It's rather pejorative in itself and helps frame the debate in a way that puts their advocate on the defensive.

Agreeing as I do with all the amendments I've seen laid out in this thread on the Arnhem tournament, I think I'd prefer an alternative - 'Refined rules', perhaps, or 'Mended rules'. My personal favourite though would simply be 'Better rules'.

It's an old term.

 

[Pitman]

There also is a bidding system (at least in Denmark and sweden- I think they use it in Albany as well) so players can adjust if needed. And scenarios are not played straight up as published in any case.

I don't like bidding systems, but I don't think it is unreasonable if a tournament director wants to have rules for the determination of sides, so I have no opinions on the matter other than personal taste. But I don't think the presence of a bidding system somehow provides a justification for the inclusion of grudge rules.

 

[PresterJohn]

It's an old term.

I have read people describe rules from the current rule book as "grudge rules".

 

[Ric of The LBC]

TDs should mandate only the official AH/MMP dice that come with Beyond Valor may be used. Heads will explode.

 

[bendizoid]

The term 'Grudge rules' is an interesting one, isn't it? It's rather pejorative in itself and helps frame the debate in a way that puts their advocate on the defensive

Ye

TDs should mandate only the official AH/MMP dice that come with Beyond Valor may be used. Heads will explode.

I think that was Fish’s rule.

 

[wrongway149]

There are progress deniers who still play SL.

That should help shield TDs from the slings and arrows of the purists and luddites.

As well as help scenario designers so we don't have to worry about which ones to have as SSRs- and thus we can concentrate on accurate research and creativity.

 

[Pitman]

I have read people describe rules from the current rule book as "grudge rules".

I doubt it.

 

[PresterJohn]

I doubt it.

It's certainly your right to call somebody a liar. No question.
Perhaps the person who did it recently will make his claim again, just for your benefit.

 

[Michael Dorosh]

Thanks to Mark I finally know what a grudge rule is.

I described it in my scenario design book, which is where Mark learned the term. Right Markie?

 

[bprobst]

What makes you think that haven't considered their tournament rules with balance in mind?

Because they're objectively stupid rules?

No, really, they are. They have NOTHING to do with "balance". It's all about "I don't like that, I'm in charge, so screw what anyone else might think, I'm enforcing this so ha ha ha you suck I'm the best."