Re: Opinions requested, please!
"Anthony Cutcliffe" <[email protected]> Wed, 4 Aug 2004 21:30:20 +0100
| Newsgroups | gmane.games.diplomacy.cat23.gm |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <001b01c47a61$dcc79420$6102a8c0@Belkin> |
Hi Peter Thanks for your reply! Yes, sorry, I omitted that one bit - the proxy *does* have to be re-confirmed to the GM every turn. The idea of the proxy rule was to allow players to temporarily transfer control of a limited number of units/dots for a limited time, not to give full control for the rest of the game. But your point is well made and well taken; I hadn't thought of it from the angle you are making. Sharp advocates proxy orders in one of his Chapters - A, G or I, IIRC; and I wanted players to have that kind of flexibility. That's where I'm coming from. Thanks again Tony ----- Original Message ----- From: Peter J Richardson To: [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 2004 9:15 PM Subject: Re: [CAT23-GM] Opinions requested, please! Personally I am not a fan of proxy orders. I think the game is about diplomacy and all players ought to be available to be persuaded by a good bit of diplomacy. I think therefore that if they are to be accepted that the proxying power should be required to send a note to the GM to confirm the proxy each season. After all, if a player does not care enough about the game to send a set of orders to the GM, is he really playing at all? Regards Peter [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar. Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free! http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/7tRolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~->