Re: Initiative - was RE: Piquet

In message <415BD27A.16880.55E12B@localhost>, "Allan Goodall" writes:
> On 29 Sep 2004 at 17:09, The GZG Digest wrote:
> 
> > From: "B Lin" <lin@rxkinetix.com>
> >
> > ...in Piquet you have no idea which units you are going to be able
> > to move until you get some initative points to do something.
> 
> You don't know _when_ those units will be able to move, but you do
know 
> that once a "move" card comes up you can move the units you want to
move. 
> The question here is "when".

In war, sometimes troops don't move as fast as they should (too
cautious, didn't receive orders promptly, too busy looting, etc...).
Sometimes, they move faster than they usually do.  Piquet simply models
this without bothering with an explanation.  Many people on the Yahoo
group seem to have as much fun writing battle reports creatively
explaining *why* events happened or didn't happen as they do playing the
game itself.

In message
<F4783C94B5D9F1479D984ABC31C2643554DF5A@rxgen2s1.rxkinetix.com>, "B 
Lin" writes:
> I wasn't criticising Piquet as a whole, just the aspect of the wide
> swings in intiative that the rules have.

As I stated, this is really not a valid criticism as it is so easy to
work around if you don't like it.  You can play where both sides
alternate with equal points, and still have an interesting game due to
the card decks.  If you're going that far, though, you probably have
irreconcilable issues with Piquet's design philosophy and, rather than
trying to make it more deterministic, should just play something more
your tastes.  At a certain point, it just comes down to what you enjoy.