| Author | Topic |
eric

Posts: 3016
Registered: October 2002
|
|
A quick note about the FAQ and our rulings
|
Fri, 11 May 2012 02:36
|
 |
Having just discussed some of the rules questions that crop up with Richard (author of the game) and Jesse (who, among other things, maintains the official M44 FAQ), I wanted to let everyone know that we've made the decision that:
Going forward, we will not officially rule on gameplay issues that haven't presented themselves yet in official scenarios or official game supplements.
This does NOT mean that we will remove prior answers that might have fallen in that category in the past from the FAQ.
Nor does it mean that we won't address some of these issues at some point - we will, but only if/when they appear in officially sanctioned scenarios and rules supplements.
Of course, this doesn't mean that you can't experiment with such things (French Resistance Snipers, anyone? ). What it does mean is that if you do choose to experiment with such game mechanics or rules combinations, you will have to agree with your playing partners on the house rules by which you'll play, if you need to adjudicate any issue that crops up.
We are doing this not as the result of lack of interest on our part, but rather to preserve Richard's and our time, which we'd rather spend designing some great new expansions.
Thank you for your understanding.
Eric
[Updated on: Fri, 11 May 2012 02:36]
|
|
|
Phread

Posts: 1734
Registered: December 2008
|
|
Re:A quick note about the FAQ and our rulings
|
Fri, 11 May 2012 04:42

|
 |
Does this ruling also apply to SFTF scenarios created for Memoir44 online which sometimes highlight gaps in the rules or their online iimplementation
|
|
|
eric

Posts: 3016
Registered: October 2002
|
|
Re:A quick note about the FAQ and our rulings
|
Fri, 11 May 2012 22:46

|
 |
|
Yes (in the sense that we can't promise that SFTF scenarios for M44 Online will behave the same way you might choose to house rule them, when concerning rules interactions that have not yet occurred in official scenarios).
|
|
|
Antoi

Posts: 251
Registered: March 2005
|
|
Re:A quick note about the FAQ and our rulings
|
Fri, 11 May 2012 23:26

|
 |
This topic has a wrong title
Did I hear someone speaking about expensions
|
|
|
rasmussen81

Posts: 6111
Registered: July 2007
|
|
|
JFKoski

Posts: 443
Registered: October 2005
|
|
|
rasmussen81

Posts: 6111
Registered: July 2007
|
|
Re:A quick note about the FAQ and our rulings
|
Sun, 13 May 2012 09:22

|
 |
| JFKoski wrote on Sun, 13 May 2012 08:37 | It wasn't French Snipers that pushed them to exasperation, since Snipers incorporate all the French Resistance rules.
I suspect it was that in the Online game British Snipers get Commonwealth Battle Back, but Japanese Snipers don't get Imperial Japanese Army rules, so one was messed up. (British was wrong.)
|
The main issues that are starting to come up are things where players mix expansions and come across a situation that isn't covered in the rules. Snipers moving into Jungles is one example, French Resistance being used in Pacific Battles to represent rebel fighters is another, and Snipers with different nation rules is a third.
These are the kinds of things that won't get official answers from now on, though the answers already in place will still stand. New questions that come up will be rules we can play however we want (with House Rules) for the tabletop version. For the Online Expert Mode, we'll just have to be satisfied with however the system implements the rules.
| Quote: | I lament the day I took the SFTF feature seriously.
|
I think it can still be taken very seriously...just not as a way to check the rules. But it's a very serious play-testing tool! It's a great way to share scenarios! And it's a powerful creative tool as well. And with the work you've done to inform all of us of which features work and which don't, it makes it even more useful! 
The Normal Mode can still help clarify rules, though.
[Updated on: Sun, 13 May 2012 09:31]
|
|
|
Flemish_Havy

Posts: 443
Registered: October 2011
|
|
Re:A quick note about the FAQ and our rulings
|
Wed, 16 May 2012 07:55
|
 |
... EXPANSIONS ... ... yes yes ... where theres smoke there is fire ! ! !
|
|
|