Ye owd sniper morality question...

[Martin Mayers]

Had an interesting thought whilst playing a scenario recently.

I'd inadvertently forgotten to rout a broken enemy from an adjacent guy. Sure enough, opponent moves in to despatch them in CC. Fair enough thought I. Should be more careful.

However, got me to thinking.

My view on calling the opponents sniper out is that I will. But I've never been convinced there's a moral obligation on anyone to do so. I appreciate this differs from the majority view.

Do those who believe the opposite of I insofar as the sniper situation, follow through in regards to all comparable situations?

So, for example, should my opponent have stated "you need to rout him". He admitted that he had spotted that I had not routed him. Churlish swine I stated (jokingly) as the situation, as far as I can see, is identical to the sniper situation.

Thoughts?

 

[Rockford]

Obviously we are all ultimately on the honor system, but yes. He should have pointed out the rout. Routing in that situation is a requirement of the rules, it's not optional. The same with snipers. Both players should feel obligated to apply the rules as best they can.

 

[hayesncsu]

I agree that opponent should have pointed it out. If both players miss it that's one thing. If he knew and didn't remind you that seems poor. As stated above routing is not optional. My typical opponent and I go across the board and make sure we help one another catch routs.

 

[Mister T]

For routing, it is mandatory as per the rules, so it is not a question of skills so both players should assist implementing the great-but-pesky routing rules.

For instance, we determine together where the routing target(s) is. Because there is no leeway in the rule (although there may be several alternate routing targets, which is obviously legit).

However, one thing that is sometimes overlooked is that routing is a kind of movement in itself, so if you fail to see that i can interdict you, we are not going back. :readit:

 

[Martin Mayers]

For routing, it is mandatory as per the rules, so it is not a question of skills so both players should assist implementing the great-but-pesky routing rules.

For instance, we determine together where the routing target(s) is. Because there is no leeway in the rule (although there may be several alternate routing targets, which is obviously legit).

However, one thing that is sometimes overlooked is that routing is a kind of movement in itself, so if you fail to see that i can interdict you, we are not going back. :readit:

Case in point....interdiction of a routing unit is also a rule right so surely you're both obliged in the same manner to point it out ?

Another example. Your opponent calls out 12+3. You've noticed that it should be 12+2 because the tank which he thinks is a hindrance isn't. Do you call it out (in a tournament final against your 'nemesis' for the sake of the example) ??

 

[Martin Mayers]

I agree that opponent should have pointed it out. If both players miss it that's one thing. If he knew and didn't remind you that seems poor. As stated above routing is not optional. My typical opponent and I go across the board and make sure we help one another catch routs.

I think I agree. But at the time I just thought "my unit...my problem".

 

[Martin Mayers]

Obviously we are all ultimately on the honor system, but yes. He should have pointed out the rout. Routing in that situation is a requirement of the rules, it's not optional. The same with snipers. Both players should feel obligated to apply the rules as best they can.

I think I agree but I'm wondering how consistent everyone is. Like, your opponent goes for ESB with a German tank with a (t) in the name and applies the +2 and breaks down. Do you tell him "hold on...your tank's Czech...no +2" ??

Is it actually CHEATING not to ?

 

[klasmalmstrom]

Case in point....interdiction of a routing unit is also a rule right so surely you're both obliged in the same manner to point it out ?

Yes, Interdiction is mandatory (unless concealed), but I think Mr T was referring to a situation where an opponent routs through a hex that he does not see can be Interdicted. Same thing during the MPh if one moves into a hex one does not see the enemy has LOS to.

 

[klasmalmstrom]

I think I agree but I'm wondering how consistent everyone is. Like, your opponent goes for ESB with a German tank with a (t) in the name and applies the +2 and breaks down. Do you tell him "hold on...your tank's Czech...no +2" ??

I would tell him, and I might even tell him the DRM before he makes the DR.

 

[volgaG68]

Another example. Your opponent calls out 12+3. You've noticed that it should be 12+2 because the tank which he thinks is a hindrance isn't. Do you call it out (in a tournament final against your 'nemesis' for the sake of the example) ??

Like, your opponent goes for ESB with a German tank with a (t) in the name and applies the +2 and breaks down. Do you tell him "hold on...your tank's Czech...no +2" ??

Whether it is morally or ethically required, I can't say, but yes, I call it out. Whether detrimental to me or not.

 

[volgaG68]

I greatly enjoy the detail of the rules and like to see them applied for the 'cleanest' (rules-wise) game possible. Within reason, of course. I don't like to have back and forth rulebook dives to get every single detail correct, but when I see obvious glitches like you've cited above, I can't 'not' mention them.

 

[Mister T]

I think I agree but I'm wondering how consistent everyone is. Like, your opponent goes for ESB with a German tank with a (t) in the name and applies the +2 and breaks down. Do you tell him "hold on...your tank's Czech...no +2" ??
Is it actually CHEATING not to ?

It is very close to and i would not recommend keeping his mouth shut.

From all of that and not in an offensive way, i would say that you may need a little bit of 'tournament socialisation' because it is not near what you may think.

 

[WuWei]

If something is mandatory, like the routing example or a SAN, you have to call it out. If your opponent makes a rules mistake, and you notice it, you have to call it out. There's no moral question here. Not doing it is cheating.

 

[Jazz]

I think I agree but I'm wondering how consistent everyone is. Like, your opponent goes for ESB with a German tank with a (t) in the name and applies the +2 and breaks down. Do you tell him "hold on...your tank's Czech...no +2" ??

Is it actually CHEATING not to ?

When the rules say that something should happen or that certain DRM apply, knowingly not doing that does become cheating.

I would feel obligated to point these things out as would most of the folks that I play with regularly.

If I played an opponent did not point out something like that even through they were aware of it....not sure I would raise a stink, but I would tend to stay away from playing the opponent in the future. There are more than a few ASL players that I avoid.

Its a gentleman's game and when played against someone who does not have the honor to play it right, it loses much of its charm.

 

[Philippe D.]

To me, pointing out a rules error (not routing a unit that has to rout, not rolling for Sniper activation, not applying a DRM that should be applied) is just a rules requirement. Making honest errors is OK; not applying them because they're detrimental to you is cheating.

What I consider a moral question would be, when the opponent is thinking aloud and trying to count DRMs to decide what to do, not pointing out to him that the DRM is actually this and not that. I would correct any possible mistakes as best I could, but this is not a rules requirement; only when the player has committed to a course of action is there really a rule that should be applied correctly.

 

[clubby]

I try to play it as clean as possible. I always mention my opponent's sniper when I notice. Probably miss as many of mine as theirs. I've gotten really spoiled playing VASL where it just tells you. As for mods, I'll point them out. As for your situation with the rout, I'd go back and let him rout because it's mandatory.

 

[kcole4001]

I've played games against people who cheat, and will not knowingly do so.

As opined already, playing the cleanest game possible, I feel, provides you and your opponent with the best game experience.
Using the rules as they're intended is what it's all about.

Regarding the original post, both players missing something is perfectly legit, it happens.

Knowing your opponent missed something important like a rout or sniper and not bringing it up, while I'd hesitate to call it outright cheating, is not cricket
old boy!
In the spirit of fair play, it just isn't done.

Having your opponent purposely miss something like a unit rout would end my assistance with his sniper rolls, etc.
I'd also seriously reconsider playing that person again, or at least revise how I approach the games from then on: no longer just a friendly game, apply A.2 fully.

 

[Martin Mayers]

It is very close to and i would not recommend keeping his mouth shut.

From all of that and not in an offensive way, i would say that you may need a little bit of 'tournament socialisation' because it is not near what you may think.

WHOA. Steady mate. I'm not saying this is what I do personally. I play as clean a game as anyone on here including you.

 

[Martin Mayers]

For the record, I call snipers, and call out mods before dice rolls and have no problem if my oppo were to change their minds based on this. I'll also discuss an opponents prospective moves before they do it. Part of the joy is discussing and both understanding what will and won't happen. I wasn't asking the question to legitimise MY behaviour, I was asking it to grasp the general feeling of the community on this specific issue.

On the other hand, in a tight tournament game I wouldn't expect ANYTHING from my opponent. I certainly wouldn't expect them to hold my hand through my rout phase for example and don't consider it as strongly as "cheating" when the circumstance I explained arose. "Gaining an advantage" at worst (in my opinion). Nothing in the rules I don't think that states that your a fiddler if you don't do such and such. Strangely a specific rule to say that IF (both players) balls it up then you cannot take it back. Which I've never actually agreed with and rarely follow.....often in games (even tournaments) if my opponent is in reciprocative mood then we'll play this loose and backtrack where necessary and fair.

Thanks again for the opinions.

 

[kcole4001]

Anyone I've played has considered themselves, as I do basically, as really still learning, so we help each other out whenever it comes up.
It breeds a nice feeling of camaraderie.
I don't play at tournaments, I really have no interest in that kind of play.
I have absolutely no idea how many games I've played and how many I've won or lost.
If it becomes less than just fun, I'm going elsewhere to enjoy myself, I don't take any game as seriously as all that.
But that's just me, everyone has different definitions of fun.

Do what you feel is right and enjoy yourself.