I started a discussion with another player in a private message (not in a game)

Is it against site policy if I share a link in the communication? Just wanted to be sure before I did. Thanks !

I'm not sure I 100% understand what you are saying, but I don't think it's against policy. I think the main thing you can't do is coordinate before a game starts. i.e. making a treaty in a game based on the circumstances and people is ok, but you can't both join a game with the intention of working together.

Links are fine..

..as long as you aren't cheating. That would exclude something like sharing a link to an image of a live fogged board (or game with the history turned OFF) in just about any circumstance. It's one thing to say that you see so-and-so has x armies on territory A (you could be lying), but entirely another to "prove" it. ..though images can be altered easily enough in this day and age.

Sharing links in private messages is fine.

As for what Ozyman said, it's not allowed to coordinate strategy before a game starts, but it is allowed to coordinate interest, in other words, deciding which board to play and with how many players.

I was referring to a link to an external site. The discussion was about board design and I was going to point them to a similar site to this one which may be looking for designers.

Also how do I find this thread??? I needed to search for ‘link’ in hopes to come across it. No alert was shown that anyone had even replied - which I thank you all for your input.

I don't think it is against site rules to link to other sites as long as you are not spamming.

I usually click on 'recent' along the menu bar when I am participating in forum discussions. I'm not sure how to find older forum discussions. I used to use google search with site:wargear.net or site.wargear.net/forum, but IIRC, that didn't seem to work the last time, and the built-in forum search isn't that great.

I completely agree with M57.

However, when you are the last player in a multiplayer game with fog and no history, you are at an enormous strategic disadvantage. Seeing the starting board set up (what I assume M57 is alluding to) could solve this easily. I've certainly thought that an image of that screen would be fair.

In the history, there's a step called, "Initial board setup complete." It would be very useful for everyone to be able to see this in a multiplayer heavy fog game.

Thanks for all the replies. I might as well post here as well. They are always looking for new board/maps, so if anyone here has some background in that, check them out. http://victorsunited.com

I've been playing there for about a year, but I also love this site. Lots of insight from players which is helpful for me to navigate through some of the tougher designs here.

You know, I just had a feeling with the complaints about this site in the other threads that this is where that was headed. Must be a model for recruitment, smh.

no offense to victorsunited, but look at these things you need to pay for that you get for free on wargear:

• Play real time Lightning games
• Play on any of our 80+ Maps with more on the way each month
• Create games with advanced rules like Fog of War, Flat Rate Cards, etc
• Play in Team Games and have your friends help you attack the enemy
• Play in Tournament Games
• Discounts on all Premium Map Paks
• No ads

Does that mean you have to purchase the maps to play on them? Or maybe just to start games on them?

Also - if they consider fog of war and flat rate cards advanced rules, I'm sure they don't have vision/fortify/attack-only borders, factories, abandon territories, the other card scales... (anything else I'm forgetting)?

Ozyman wrote:no offense to victorsunited, but look at these things you need to pay for that you get for free on wargear:

• Play real time Lightning games
• Play on any of our 80+ Maps with more on the way each month
• Create games with advanced rules like Fog of War, Flat Rate Cards, etc
• Play in Team Games and have your friends help you attack the enemy
• Play in Tournament Games
• Discounts on all Premium Map Paks
• No ads

Does that mean you have to purchase the maps to play on them? Or maybe just to start games on them?

Also - if they consider fog of war and flat rate cards advanced rules, I'm sure they don't have vision/fortify/attack-only borders, factories, abandon territories, the other card scales... (anything else I'm forgetting)?

80+ maps is underselling it, on my count we have 282. Information copied from a few years ago? 

There are more game options here for sure. There are many more maps here too. I believe many of their maps are free and some are paid. I don’t believe there are cash tournaments here, correct?

@Totes: i think they were referring to VU site that had 80+ as a selling point...

weathertop wrote:@Totes: i think they were referring to VU site that had 80+ as a selling point...

Ah, yes, of course. My mistake.

I agree this site is better as well as cheaper.

But it's true we have no cash tournaments.

We did have several cash prizes in, but they were for map makers instead of players. Also, we stopped doing those (or to be honest, I stopped doing it, because I used to organize it, and got too busy). I was thinking of starting the map making contest back up again, but just tying it to a calendar year, instead of a theme with an arbitrary time period. I don't know if Tom wants to give prizes again (I don't think wargear is exactly a big money maker for him) - I always turned my wins into premium membership anyway, so I'd be happy if he just gave some free memberships to winners.

As for as cash prizes for tournaments - in theory someone could organize a tournament where you had to put in a $1 or $2 per player, and the winner got the prize money. I'm not sure how you'd hold it in escrow or anything though... But that would be about the same as paying for premium membership on another site, and winning cash from a tournament.

Also - is "totes" an officially sanctioned nickname for Litotes? I like it!

Totes sort of sends a different message, it's slang for "totally, completely", whereas litotes is understatement by denying the opposite. Not that I mind. If you for some reason think I am the total package you can use totes, if you think I'm understated you can use the full name, and if you think I see things in a clear light you can use lit. Won't mind either way. I realize when I'm being addressed. Just don't use anything closer to a name of someone else.

Litotes wrote:Totes sort of sends a different message, it's slang for "totally, completely", whereas litotes is understatement by denying the opposite. Not that I mind. If you for some reason think I am the total package you can use totes, if you think I'm understated you can use the full name, and if you think I see things in a clear light you can use lit. Won't mind either way. I realize when I'm being addressed. Just don't use anything closer to a name of someone else.

Thanks for the clarification.

So... "Litotes", "Totes", "Lit" are all good, and "anything closer to a name of someone else" is verbotten.

Pretty sure I wouldn't want to type that very often, so will definitely stick with one of the first 3 options :-D

I volunteer as tribute to go by the nickname "Anything Closer to a Name of Someone Else" in Sir Totes' stead.

Also happy to accept the nickname "Verbotten," if that helps.

Litotes wrote:Totes sort of sends a different message, it's slang for "totally, completely", whereas litotes is understatement by denying the opposite. Not that I mind. If you for some reason think I am the total package you can use totes, if you think I'm understated you can use the full name, and if you think I see things in a clear light you can use lit. Won't mind either way. I realize when I'm being addressed. Just don't use anything closer to a name of someone else.

Litotes is . . . not so bad. ;)

MrPlaya wrote:

Is it against site policy if I share a link in the communication? Just wanted to be sure before I did.

This probably goes with the "if you have to ask" sort of thing.

MrPlaya wrote:I might as well post here as well. They are always looking for new board/maps, so if anyone here has some background in that, check them out. http://v************.com

And there we go. Went from can I share a link to can I shill for a "competitor". I use the term competitor here loosely of course. Not a viable alternative. Had someone spamming all over last year for this same place. Doesn't look like it has improved at all since then.