peterx  | 12 Jun 2013 6:03 a.m. PST |
When you play a game that is clearly going downhill and one side is definitely going to lose, do you call the game or do you finish until the last trooper is dead? |
| nazrat | 12 Jun 2013 6:14 a.m. PST |
I will call it if we are out of time, but not in any other case. I've seen too many doomed sides come back and win, or almost win, to let people give up. Seems a bit like bad sportsmanship to cry, "I give up!" when it takes so long to arrange, set up, and play a game. And the guys who are winning rarely want to stop, too. |
 etotheipi  | 12 Jun 2013 6:17 a.m. PST |
Mostly, neither. I generally don't play scenarios where you can definitively tell who is going to win until the last few moves. Preferably the last move. Snatching success from the jaws of Death! Phyrric Victories! Taking down the enemy with his fingers inches from the button! We won … but at what cost?!?! Winning by the skin of your teeth! … that's what games are made of. I will short-circuit card and board games, though. On the odd wargame that ends up in a long, unavoidble death spiral, I play it out. And generally "change the game" to make for a spectacular failure. Ave, Imperator, morituri te salutant! |
| Old Slow Trot | 12 Jun 2013 6:35 a.m. PST |
Sometimes during an Aerodrome game,if there are players still flying but out of ammo,the GM will call it,particularly if everyone's heading back to their home line/base anyway. |
| 79thPA | 12 Jun 2013 6:44 a.m. PST |
We are generally agreeable about calling a game if it ends up being a forgone conclusion. If someone wants to continue, we will continue. Sometimes we will play one more turn to see if a miracle happens. It really depends on the circumstances. |
| BCantwell | 12 Jun 2013 6:51 a.m. PST |
Depends on the circumstances. If there is time to reset the game and play it again or play another one, then we will usually call an end to the game. If not, then we'll usually play it out to the end of our available time to see what happens. In either case, we will open another frosty malted beverage. |
| Jovian1 | 12 Jun 2013 7:11 a.m. PST |
Depends on the opponent. Sometimes the opponent wants to savor the crushing victory. Most of the time, when it is that lop-sided, we call it and concede defeat. |
| richarDISNEY | 12 Jun 2013 7:13 a.m. PST |
If it really is a 'no hope' kinda thing, we will call it.
Unless "The Uno Kid" and "Lord Ought Ought" are playing.
I like to see how those two do soooooo badly.
Right, Skrapwelder? 
 |
| Dynaman8789 | 12 Jun 2013 7:14 a.m. PST |
If it is truly all over but the time has not run out we will stop and call it a day. MAJOR exception – if it is so beyond belief that it has entered the absurd (and everyone is laughing about it) we will play on till the end – or till it is not funny anymore. This is where truly wacko moves and rules lawyerism is not only allowed but encouraged. |
| Abwehrschlacht | 12 Jun 2013 7:30 a.m. PST |
A bit of both really. It depends on how much time there is left and the situation on the board. Sometimes we play till the last man, sometimes it's agreed that the losing side's remaining forces fall back. I find we fight to the last man in smaller games like Wings of War more often than in, say, Rapid Fire. In an effort to stop this, I am going to introduce campaign rules so players hang onto their pilots rather than go down in flames. |
| haywire | 12 Jun 2013 7:33 a.m. PST |
Depends on several things. Could be scenario based, could be time based, etc… For instance playing B5 Wars and Star Wars, I have reached a point of… "yeah, my guys hyperspace out" Real world battles do not always fight to the death. |
| Frederick | 12 Jun 2013 7:36 a.m. PST |
We very rarely play to the last trooper for our Grand Tactical games – usually it is pretty clear what is happening and the losing side will retire with dignity Now,for skirmish and airplane games it is usually last man standing |
| Skrapwelder | 12 Jun 2013 7:54 a.m. PST |
The "No Hope" phase usually starts around turn 3 I think for some of us. We can usually armchair it out to a logical conclusion and if everyone is in agreement, we'll call it. |
| vojvoda | 12 Jun 2013 8:06 a.m. PST |
Never! Let them die a thousand deaths, life is too short not to gloat in victory. But when mom calls us in to dinner all bets are off.
VR
James Mattes
|
| The Monstrous Jake | 12 Jun 2013 8:14 a.m. PST |
It depends on the circumstances. Most of us have probably known players who only wanted to play on the winning-by-a-mile side but wanted to pack it up and quit the minute they were on the losing-badly side. They only wanted to be the hammerer but never the hammeree. Example: the players who want to play the Germans on the Russian Front in WWII but only during the first couple of years. In that sort of case, it isn't fair to the players on the other side to pack it up early. |
combatpainter  | 12 Jun 2013 8:23 a.m. PST |
I try and take steps to balance it in some way like adding some extra infantry in the third round. |
| Ron W DuBray | 12 Jun 2013 8:46 a.m. PST |
If a game does not have the side loosing badly running away, way before the last man standing, something is broken with your rules. |
| darthfozzywig | 12 Jun 2013 9:07 a.m. PST |
Depends on the players, game, and time of day. Most of my friends prefer to fight to the bitter end. Being a fan of hopeless, last stand battles, that sometimes appeals to me anyway. |
| 45thdiv | 12 Jun 2013 9:23 a.m. PST |
I echo Nazrat. It takes me a lot of time and effort to set up a game. I want to see it to the end. I have called a game because my scenario idea was better in my head than in play, but that was just once. Matthew |
| Rrobbyrobot | 12 Jun 2013 10:33 a.m. PST |
If I'm at the game store I'll call it. At home I usually carry on 'till the bitter end. |
| etotheipi | 12 Jun 2013 1:46 p.m. PST |
If a game does not have the side loosing badly running away, way before the last man standing, something is broken with your rules. If the rules, rather than the players decision, determine who runs away when, there is something broken with your rules. |
| Sparker | 12 Jun 2013 2:40 p.m. PST |
I have a lot of experience at this, believe me! Personally I will throw in the towel if its late at night and people are suppressing yawns….But its always good manners to check with your team mates first! |
| The Gray Ghost | 12 Jun 2013 3:11 p.m. PST |
|
| epturner | 12 Jun 2013 5:40 p.m. PST |
Oh, I dunno. Ask The OFM if he threw in the towel when I ran Frenchtown a few weeks back and he was the Michigan Militia… If only his dice rolls were as intrepid as he is on the tabletop… Eric |
| ubercommando | 13 Jun 2013 2:59 a.m. PST |
I've seen games where after six turns both players say "from this point on, side X is going to win. Shall we call it a day?" I feel it's a bit of a cop out and that the battle should be played out until a definite objective is won. |
| Shardik | 13 Jun 2013 3:26 a.m. PST |
If the rules, rather than the players decision, determine who runs away when, there is something broken with your rules. because a general can always force his troops to go on fighting bravely until the last man is dead. oh wait |
| etotheipi | 13 Jun 2013 8:01 a.m. PST |
because a general can always force his troops to go on fighting bravely until the last man is dead. oh wait Ignoring that overwhelmingly in wargames, players aren't taking the role of generals within the force … and that, yes, forces do fight to the last (Sevastopol, Corinth, Thermopylae, Camarón, Masada, etc.) … if the designers don't want a fight to the last to happen in the game, then, yes, I think it is a poor set of rules that forces the behaviour on the troops in the game rather than pressures the players into the decision as a risk trade-off. Also, a break-and-run rule tends to force the same artificial behaviour in players that it seeks to avoid. Instead of "fighting to the last man alive" they are "fighting to the last man that prevents retreat" thus the plaeyer is making the same cut point decision, just at a different point. What is the difference between "these are my last four guys … might as well stupidly feed them to the enemy hoping for a miracle rather than let them get picked off and loose" and "if I loose four more guys, the retreat rule kicks in … might as well stupidly feed someone to the enemy hoping for a miracle rather than let them get picked off and loose"? One evidence of the aberrent behaviour is that most military retreats are just the last "fall back" (in this case "fall waaaaay back") in a series. In games with rules that force retreat, you tend to see players push forward until the point that the rule kicks in. |
| Dasher | 25 Feb 2014 11:13 p.m. PST |
Absolutely call it.
The time wasted crushing the loser's testicles can be better spent setting up to play again. |
| Bashytubits | 26 Feb 2014 11:54 a.m. PST |
When it is no longer fun and people are getting upset it is time to stop. |
| etotheipi | 27 Feb 2014 7:38 a.m. PST |
When it is no longer fun and people are getting upset it is time to stop. This describes the second turn of nearly every convention tournament I've played. I pretty much sit back with casual or walk-ups now… |
