Re: [eia] British naval phase, 12/06 (part II)

[Joel Uckelman <uckelman@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thus spake "J.J. Young":
> On at least some of the occasions when I have misunderstood the rules and my
> interests suffered as a result, I have chosen to just take my lumps.  I
> figured that it wasn't the other guy's problem that I had misread the
> situation.

We take a different approach to this, obviously. It's virtually always
the case that I'm willing to accept adjustments for rules misunderstandings.
I think it makes for a better game experience that way, since often 'taking
one's lumps' due to rules misunderstandings can be catastrophic; and in a
seven player game, that affects everyone, not just the player whose lumps
they are. In order to have a good game, we each depend on everyone else to
make reasonable moves. If I'm laboring under a misconception about the rules,
then I'm bound to make moves which aren't reasonable. So if there's an
obvious way to correct the problem once it becomes apparent, I think that
justified.

> Having gotten that off my chest (although I probably shouldn't have said
> it), I don't want to seem unreasonable, so I withdraw my objection.  The
> wind guage and combat rolls for my first two fleets are on their way.

I don't see any reason for you not to have said that. I think we just
disagree on the best way to handle these sorts of situations, and now
it's plain for me that we do in fact disagree.

_______________________________________________
eia mailing list
eia@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/eia