I have never played PBEM as Japanese and am ready to give it a go. I am usually good for a turn a day and will stick with it.
I am open to whatever simple houserules. I am definately on the historical play style and am not out to bliz. For myself
I wouldn't invade India beyond Calcutta area
Maybe N. Australia if it was really available, but I just don't see the S. parts of Australia as being very invadable
Non-Historic first turn, but I will only invade probable areas (nothing deep in DEI, nothing W of singapore)
4E planes over 10K
limited ASW groups (6-7)
I don't want to go for the formula rules (x planes per point except with port durning high tide blah blah blah)
I am open to PDU. I would like to rationalize the airforce a bit, but I think some of that is assumed in the mod. I haven't played it more than 3 turns so I don't really know it's ins and outs (I think not many do which is one of the reasons why I am interested).
Mostly I want easy-going fun to explore this mod. NO POWER GAMERS
If you are interested let me know and we can work out the rest of the details
Looking for RHS EoS Allied Opp
Moderators: wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami
-
dpstafford
- Posts: 1329
- Joined: Sun May 26, 2002 5:50 am
- Location: Colbert Nation
RE: Looking for RHS EoS Allied Opp
What the heck is a "power gamer"? I guess if I have to ask, I might just be one......ORIGINAL: darbymcd
NO POWER GAMERS
RE: Looking for RHS EoS Allied Opp
I would say it is someone who is more interested in looking for game exploits to dominate rather than keeping within the spirit of the game. So for instance, japanese players use the first turn teleport to get an invasion fleet to a location which would have ruined the whole surprise attack thing (attacking Java for instance). And the bomb empty bases for exp., recon invasions, all that type of thing. It is great to come up with innovative strategies/tactics but they should be somewhat plausible.
I really would just like to find someone who wouldn't want to use that kind of exploit rather than have to write a laundry list of what is and isn't ok.
Anywho, that is what it means to me.
I really would just like to find someone who wouldn't want to use that kind of exploit rather than have to write a laundry list of what is and isn't ok.
Anywho, that is what it means to me.
-
dpstafford
- Posts: 1329
- Joined: Sun May 26, 2002 5:50 am
- Location: Colbert Nation
RE: Looking for RHS EoS Allied Opp
Now for the big questions:
1) What is the "theme/direction" of the RHS mod? Start with what the acronym stands for.
2) What the heck is "EoS"?
1) What is the "theme/direction" of the RHS mod? Start with what the acronym stands for.
2) What the heck is "EoS"?
RE: Looking for RHS EoS Allied Opp
ORIGINAL: darbymcd
I have never played PBEM as Japanese and am ready to give it a go. I am usually good for a turn a day and will stick with it.
I am open to whatever simple houserules. I am definately on the historical play style and am not out to bliz. For myself
I wouldn't invade India beyond Calcutta area
Maybe N. Australia if it was really available, but I just don't see the S. parts of Australia as being very invadable
Non-Historic first turn, but I will only invade probable areas (nothing deep in DEI, nothing W of singapore)
4E planes over 10K
limited ASW groups (6-7)
I don't want to go for the formula rules (x planes per point except with port durning high tide blah blah blah)
I am open to PDU. I would like to rationalize the airforce a bit, but I think some of that is assumed in the mod. I haven't played it more than 3 turns so I don't really know it's ins and outs (I think not many do which is one of the reasons why I am interested).
Mostly I want easy-going fun to explore this mod. NO POWER GAMERS
If you are interested let me know and we can work out the rest of the details
If you have not yet found an opponent I am available... pm me..
RE: Looking for RHS EoS Allied Opp
Essentially RHS is CHS except that the standard for getting something incorporated into RHS is that it must be better than what was there beforehand AND that as much of the data as possible ( particularly the air model) is now all modelled to an internally consistent standard. So, if there are errors at the very least they will be consistent across all aircraft models, thus maintaining reasonable combat effectiveness of the various airplanes relative to eachother.
EOS is an "Empire Of the Sun" scenario featuring a Japanese army and navy which have co-operated better together in the run-up to the war and been more realistic as to what it will entail. As such the Japanese player has slightly speeded up CVL production and slightly earlier appearance of the Yamato. Army and Navy planes can also be used relatively interchangeably such that Army fighter squadrons can field the A6M2. In addition the Me-109 variant for which jigs had been sent to Japan is available for production in early 1942 ( which gives the Japanese an armoured cannon-armed interceptor ( range sucks so not really useful as a bomber escort) for point defence of their bases). The Japanese also have a much expanded pilot training programme vs the stock game.
On the Allied side in the latter half of the war the Allies get a lot of "goodies" which they didn't, historically, get. In addition, and very importantly, the terrain in India, China and Australia is much more conducive to the defence than in stock and India becomes "uninvadable" about two months earlier than in stock. Australia is also very strong and has the potential to become self-supporting in terms of supply as opposed to stock.
China also now favours the Allies much more than stock with hordes of guerilla regiments breaking Japanese LOCs and a Chinese army which will, when up to full strength, mass over 35,000 AV, a pretty awesome force IF you let them concentrate. So there really should be no more running rampant with a Japanese "stack of death".
Lastly the main change IMO is the air model. I had a turn from mid-December in which about 30 Lillys, Annes and a few Sallys went in unescorted vs about 50 Allied fighters. I lost about a half-dozen bombers but the others either turned back or broke through and I'd say half my bombers actually made bombing runs. Uebercap is, IMO, now a thing of the past. In my whole time playing the game I've only seen 2 or 3 aerial attacks stopped dead in their tracks. The rest of the time at least some of the force breaks through and makes attack runs so the Allied LBA is actually something for KB to fear in 1942 and, similarly, Japanese LBA should be feared in 43 and 44.
So, overall it makes attacks into India less likely to be succesful, prevents the mid-42 destruction of china, prevents Uebercap, weakens KB in 41 and 42 and tends to lessen the strength of the initial Japanese invasions by the simple expedient of roughly halving the Japanese transport force relative to stock. The trade-off for this is that the Japanese forces will by mid-42 be able to field an air force comprising the more capable types of planes available and will have enough pilots that they will be able to engage in some attritional fights without completely screwing their pilot quality for the rest of the war.
The designer said it best himself when he said that while Japan was augmented it meant that instead of the odds being 13 to 1 against come 1944 they might now only be 10 to 1 against
.
EOS is an "Empire Of the Sun" scenario featuring a Japanese army and navy which have co-operated better together in the run-up to the war and been more realistic as to what it will entail. As such the Japanese player has slightly speeded up CVL production and slightly earlier appearance of the Yamato. Army and Navy planes can also be used relatively interchangeably such that Army fighter squadrons can field the A6M2. In addition the Me-109 variant for which jigs had been sent to Japan is available for production in early 1942 ( which gives the Japanese an armoured cannon-armed interceptor ( range sucks so not really useful as a bomber escort) for point defence of their bases). The Japanese also have a much expanded pilot training programme vs the stock game.
On the Allied side in the latter half of the war the Allies get a lot of "goodies" which they didn't, historically, get. In addition, and very importantly, the terrain in India, China and Australia is much more conducive to the defence than in stock and India becomes "uninvadable" about two months earlier than in stock. Australia is also very strong and has the potential to become self-supporting in terms of supply as opposed to stock.
China also now favours the Allies much more than stock with hordes of guerilla regiments breaking Japanese LOCs and a Chinese army which will, when up to full strength, mass over 35,000 AV, a pretty awesome force IF you let them concentrate. So there really should be no more running rampant with a Japanese "stack of death".
Lastly the main change IMO is the air model. I had a turn from mid-December in which about 30 Lillys, Annes and a few Sallys went in unescorted vs about 50 Allied fighters. I lost about a half-dozen bombers but the others either turned back or broke through and I'd say half my bombers actually made bombing runs. Uebercap is, IMO, now a thing of the past. In my whole time playing the game I've only seen 2 or 3 aerial attacks stopped dead in their tracks. The rest of the time at least some of the force breaks through and makes attack runs so the Allied LBA is actually something for KB to fear in 1942 and, similarly, Japanese LBA should be feared in 43 and 44.
So, overall it makes attacks into India less likely to be succesful, prevents the mid-42 destruction of china, prevents Uebercap, weakens KB in 41 and 42 and tends to lessen the strength of the initial Japanese invasions by the simple expedient of roughly halving the Japanese transport force relative to stock. The trade-off for this is that the Japanese forces will by mid-42 be able to field an air force comprising the more capable types of planes available and will have enough pilots that they will be able to engage in some attritional fights without completely screwing their pilot quality for the rest of the war.
The designer said it best himself when he said that while Japan was augmented it meant that instead of the odds being 13 to 1 against come 1944 they might now only be 10 to 1 against
.
John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.
Well, that's that settled then.
RE: Looking for RHS EoS Allied Opp
As to what a power gamer is.... Around here it is defined as anyone who maximises the capabilities of their forces as modelled in the game.
The reality of this seems to be that while, in 1944, the masses of Allied power mean that someone using their forces to 75% capability can still advance more quickly than in real life ( and many allied players can be seen mounting all manner of ahistorical operations) the Japanese player is expected to refrain from operations which are well within their capabilities ( as modelled in the game) because to exceed Japanese wartime performance by more than a given amount seems to be deemed to be "unfair". So, you get players who won't defend Panama with a large air force and garrison claiming that invading Panama is unfair and putting it off-limits... End result this player has, under the guise of being historical, just freed two divisions and upward of half a thousand planes ( which is the sort of garrison required to truly dissuade a serious invasion attempt) for offensive action with nothing more than a stroke of the pen. Obviously when you suggest their need to garrison the place this strongly if they want it to be declared off limits they find such a request unreasonable most of the time...
So, while I have no experience whatsoever with darbymcd my advice is to be very careful in choosing an opponent so that you end up with one who has the same attitude/approach to the game as you. In the same way as I think this "historical" approach is absurd ( and often a cover for players who want to prevent invasions they aren't good enough to actually stop) you'll find many of these more "historical" gamers will find the approach of someone who seeks to operate to the maximal capabilities of their forces as modelled deeply absurd also. So, there's no right or wrong, there's just different approaches.
One thing to beware of though... If starting a game make it clear that the rules once agreed are not subject to change just because someone is doing better than historically occurred. By the same token it serves everyone's interest if every single possible item which comes up is clarified before the game even begins. It is far cheaper to find out you have wildly different views on what is reasonable during pre-game negotiations than after you've sunk 3 or 4 months into the game ( I've had this happen to me also in my 2nd major PBEM and it was a nasty experience all round with lots of hurt feelings on both sides so I've come to the conclusion that boring, time-consuming pre-game negotiation is now the gamer's best friend).
It really is a minefield. Your best bet is just to negotiate every little thing possible and if you find yourselves agreeing on almost everything right from the start then you've probably found someone whose ethos fits yours well and you'll have a good game. If you are having to negotiate the basics even before starting the game then you probably have quite different views and should probably just find a different opponent. Sharing the same ethos is, IMO, the most important determinant in predicting whether or not two players will have an enjoyable game against eachother.
The reality of this seems to be that while, in 1944, the masses of Allied power mean that someone using their forces to 75% capability can still advance more quickly than in real life ( and many allied players can be seen mounting all manner of ahistorical operations) the Japanese player is expected to refrain from operations which are well within their capabilities ( as modelled in the game) because to exceed Japanese wartime performance by more than a given amount seems to be deemed to be "unfair". So, you get players who won't defend Panama with a large air force and garrison claiming that invading Panama is unfair and putting it off-limits... End result this player has, under the guise of being historical, just freed two divisions and upward of half a thousand planes ( which is the sort of garrison required to truly dissuade a serious invasion attempt) for offensive action with nothing more than a stroke of the pen. Obviously when you suggest their need to garrison the place this strongly if they want it to be declared off limits they find such a request unreasonable most of the time...
So, while I have no experience whatsoever with darbymcd my advice is to be very careful in choosing an opponent so that you end up with one who has the same attitude/approach to the game as you. In the same way as I think this "historical" approach is absurd ( and often a cover for players who want to prevent invasions they aren't good enough to actually stop) you'll find many of these more "historical" gamers will find the approach of someone who seeks to operate to the maximal capabilities of their forces as modelled deeply absurd also. So, there's no right or wrong, there's just different approaches.
One thing to beware of though... If starting a game make it clear that the rules once agreed are not subject to change just because someone is doing better than historically occurred. By the same token it serves everyone's interest if every single possible item which comes up is clarified before the game even begins. It is far cheaper to find out you have wildly different views on what is reasonable during pre-game negotiations than after you've sunk 3 or 4 months into the game ( I've had this happen to me also in my 2nd major PBEM and it was a nasty experience all round with lots of hurt feelings on both sides so I've come to the conclusion that boring, time-consuming pre-game negotiation is now the gamer's best friend).
It really is a minefield. Your best bet is just to negotiate every little thing possible and if you find yourselves agreeing on almost everything right from the start then you've probably found someone whose ethos fits yours well and you'll have a good game. If you are having to negotiate the basics even before starting the game then you probably have quite different views and should probably just find a different opponent. Sharing the same ethos is, IMO, the most important determinant in predicting whether or not two players will have an enjoyable game against eachother.
John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.
Well, that's that settled then.
RE: Looking for RHS EoS Allied Opp
I think you scared him away, Nemo. [;)]
Welcome to the forum, darbymcd! I'm sure you'll find a PBEM partner for RHS, but Nemo has a point: better discuss house rules for a couple of days now than argue for weeks with your opponent about "gamey" and "forbidden" moves later.
Welcome to the forum, darbymcd! I'm sure you'll find a PBEM partner for RHS, but Nemo has a point: better discuss house rules for a couple of days now than argue for weeks with your opponent about "gamey" and "forbidden" moves later.
RE: Looking for RHS EoS Allied Opp
Welcome to the boards darbymcd.
Yes, you really need have similar style of a gamer in the other end. I guess most of us prefer to have semi-historical game so I doubt you will have problems finding an opponent.
It is a longterm project to have an PBEM. My first one just turning into August 1944. Other is in June 1943. Both of them have been very enjoyable. I just had to 2 replacement players for the first game though. Now it is running smoothly.
I have just started another PBEM using CHS and will start one more in due course. (Opponent already found) I have 100% certainty that these games will be fun and enjoyable too.
The main thing to remember is that these PBEM's do take a longtime to get completed. That is why I prefer multiday turns.
The only game I had to abandon was againts Nemo. We just had very diffrent views on what is reasonable and what is lunacy. (The game did not end because the losses allied suffered but for huge view diffrences). These things happen and that is why it is important to find an opponent who mirrors your views concerning game style.
Anyway, Good luck with the PBEM and keep us posted.
Yes, you really need have similar style of a gamer in the other end. I guess most of us prefer to have semi-historical game so I doubt you will have problems finding an opponent.
It is a longterm project to have an PBEM. My first one just turning into August 1944. Other is in June 1943. Both of them have been very enjoyable. I just had to 2 replacement players for the first game though. Now it is running smoothly.
I have just started another PBEM using CHS and will start one more in due course. (Opponent already found) I have 100% certainty that these games will be fun and enjoyable too.
The main thing to remember is that these PBEM's do take a longtime to get completed. That is why I prefer multiday turns.
The only game I had to abandon was againts Nemo. We just had very diffrent views on what is reasonable and what is lunacy. (The game did not end because the losses allied suffered but for huge view diffrences). These things happen and that is why it is important to find an opponent who mirrors your views concerning game style.
Anyway, Good luck with the PBEM and keep us posted.
RE: Looking for RHS EoS Allied Opp
Whoa, nothing nothing then a bunch of replies. Nemo, I can see what you are saying, and I think alot of people complaining about power gaming is really sour-grapes (actually there are a huge number of sour grapes type of complaints about this game), but for me it isn't the invasions in and of themselves, but the use of game mechanics rather than strategy to achieve results. A more difficult question is unhistorical but plausible events, mostly because the game is using historical events to determine OB, especially for the allies. So going too far outside this history can be considered a bit gamey. For instance, invading Hawaii is a viable strategy very early for the Japanese. It is a plausible what if. But the entire US OB is set based on that not happening and it following a Europe first strategy. So it may represent an unfair advantage to the Japanese (who get their entire production and can decide where to send it). But I don't know. I agree with you that the Japanese player has to have a chance to win, or at least do much better than history or else why play.
RE: Looking for RHS EoS Allied Opp
Well, I'm playing an RHS EOS scenario as the Japanese and it is only after several very unfortunate false starts that I think I've found an opponent who views things the same as I do. FWIW I amn't mounting an immediate invasion of PH but I am isolating it by taking other Hawaiian islands and will wear it down. I view this as an acceptable what if since the Allies get such a multitude of LCUs before the game is out and, in any case, this game is decided in the air and on the sea where Allied superiority is just massive by late 43 and into 44 and 45.
As to you getting nothing but a bunch of replies... Well I would be more than willing to play a game as the Allies under pretty much the same rules as I've given my Allied opponent in my game BUT some might consider me a power gamer since I view it as the game's job to model historical capabilities and then view it as my job to take the game's models and try to get the utmost out of them. If this means I can invade India or Australia then that's what I'll do and I would consider having them done unto me as quite fair if I was the Allied player. The reason I didn't answer is that this is probably not the sort of game you want and I can respect that...
As to you getting nothing but a bunch of replies... Well I would be more than willing to play a game as the Allies under pretty much the same rules as I've given my Allied opponent in my game BUT some might consider me a power gamer since I view it as the game's job to model historical capabilities and then view it as my job to take the game's models and try to get the utmost out of them. If this means I can invade India or Australia then that's what I'll do and I would consider having them done unto me as quite fair if I was the Allied player. The reason I didn't answer is that this is probably not the sort of game you want and I can respect that...
John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.
Well, that's that settled then.
RE: Looking for RHS EoS Allied Opp
Yeah, its a fine line. I think you're right about the allies position as far as a game goes and I think many of them whine about things going badly for the first couple of years (which is just the way things are). But you brought up and interesting point about modelling capabilities. Do you think the game shows the US capability to respond to the invasion of PH? I think not at all. And if the Japanese invade India and/or Australia, the game doesn't model the capabilities of either of these places to wage insurgent war, to raise emergency formations or impose garrison requirements on the invaders. I get what you are saying but I think it is an incomplete picture.
But I can see the fun in an anything goes game and I think in the end you are right that it will work out fairly historically anyway. By 44 the US should be able to take back most any lost territory anyway so in the end it is probably just whining.
I think our game styles are not so similar, and I have read some of your AARs and you are just way too good for me! I have only played about 100 turns as Allies (the game ended because of the disappearing unit bug) so I would be just a little road-bump for you.
But I can see the fun in an anything goes game and I think in the end you are right that it will work out fairly historically anyway. By 44 the US should be able to take back most any lost territory anyway so in the end it is probably just whining.
I think our game styles are not so similar, and I have read some of your AARs and you are just way too good for me! I have only played about 100 turns as Allies (the game ended because of the disappearing unit bug) so I would be just a little road-bump for you.
RE: Looking for RHS EoS Allied Opp
One more thing about Empire of the Sun scen, both sides get a whole gaggle of political points each turn, so the ability of the allies to reinforce pretty much everywhere is much greater. I think that has a huge impact on the early game and lets players try some different opening game gambits (more running away or more forward defense).
I have zero experience with this scenario or this mod for that matter so it is kind of experimental for me.
I have zero experience with this scenario or this mod for that matter so it is kind of experimental for me.
RE: Looking for RHS EoS Allied Opp
darby,
Agree completely that it is an incomplete picture and am fully in favour of more accurate modelling which is internally consistent within the game. Until then though I amn't in favour of things which exceed the limits already within the game. As I said, different philosophical bents. It should be noted though that I am fully in favour of more accurate modelling irrespective of which side that modelling seems to benefit. If it made an invasion of India impossible then I wouldn't mind at all since it'd be accurate and properly modelled and would make such an invasion impossible for all sorts of political reasons ( and not because it nerfed ship ranges or something to make it impossible when it was actually possible).
As to the buttering me up. No need for that. We have different play styles and the instant I actually begin to believe I am any better than objective evidence suggests I'll begin to rely on mythos to protect my ships instead of cold calculation and I'll make mistakes which will cost me hugely . That's as it should be. I'm only as good as any given set of results and that we have very different styles of play is more than enough reason to turn down a game. That's fine though .
One thing I will suggest though is that, despite what some people may say, I think the Allies in RHS EOS do have the capability to do some serious damage to the Japanese in the early fighting. Under the stock game it is possible to really screw with the Japanese forces and, by the end of the 1st month, in my only Allied game so far I was looking at 150 Allied losses vs 100 Japanese losses ( in shipping) because I operated what some might term a rabid forward defence. Compare this to the losses I routinely see when the Allies conduct a Sir Robin in which I've never failed to exceed 150 Allied ship losses in just the first week vs and average of 9 Japanese ships lost in this same week.
In any case this is a long way of saying that IMO RHS EOS' PP system should greatly reward an Allied player who conducts a forward fight, evacuates that which is non-essential but then stacks that which is, digs in and fights almost ( but not quite) to the death in those hexes. Every day one can delay the Japanese is a day in which an entire DIVISION can be freed up for PM or Noumea, PH, Canton, Baker, Timor, Java etc... That sort of committment to a base the Japanese have to take is, in the limited-shipping environment of RHS, enough to derail Japanese offensive plans very badly indeed. In RHS I prefer to lose a CL rather than 3 or 4 fast APs because, quite honestly, I have far more Cls and DD multiples than I do groups of 3 or 4 fast APs and when push comes to shove few invasions will fail for the lack of a CL while many will fail if I have to leave divisions at home beause I don't have the APs to carry them ( and in RHS the Japanese do NOT have the APs to carry them).
Agree completely that it is an incomplete picture and am fully in favour of more accurate modelling which is internally consistent within the game. Until then though I amn't in favour of things which exceed the limits already within the game. As I said, different philosophical bents. It should be noted though that I am fully in favour of more accurate modelling irrespective of which side that modelling seems to benefit. If it made an invasion of India impossible then I wouldn't mind at all since it'd be accurate and properly modelled and would make such an invasion impossible for all sorts of political reasons ( and not because it nerfed ship ranges or something to make it impossible when it was actually possible).
As to the buttering me up
. No need for that. We have different play styles and the instant I actually begin to believe I am any better than objective evidence suggests I'll begin to rely on mythos to protect my ships instead of cold calculation and I'll make mistakes which will cost me hugely . That's as it should be. I'm only as good as any given set of results and that we have very different styles of play is more than enough reason to turn down a game. That's fine though .
One thing I will suggest though is that, despite what some people may say, I think the Allies in RHS EOS do have the capability to do some serious damage to the Japanese in the early fighting. Under the stock game it is possible to really screw with the Japanese forces and, by the end of the 1st month, in my only Allied game so far I was looking at 150 Allied losses vs 100 Japanese losses ( in shipping) because I operated what some might term a rabid forward defence. Compare this to the losses I routinely see when the Allies conduct a Sir Robin in which I've never failed to exceed 150 Allied ship losses in just the first week vs and average of 9 Japanese ships lost in this same week.
In any case this is a long way of saying that IMO RHS EOS' PP system should greatly reward an Allied player who conducts a forward fight, evacuates that which is non-essential but then stacks that which is, digs in and fights almost ( but not quite) to the death in those hexes. Every day one can delay the Japanese is a day in which an entire DIVISION can be freed up for PM or Noumea, PH, Canton, Baker, Timor, Java etc... That sort of committment to a base the Japanese have to take is, in the limited-shipping environment of RHS, enough to derail Japanese offensive plans very badly indeed. In RHS I prefer to lose a CL rather than 3 or 4 fast APs because, quite honestly, I have far more Cls and DD multiples than I do groups of 3 or 4 fast APs and when push comes to shove few invasions will fail for the lack of a CL while many will fail if I have to leave divisions at home beause I don't have the APs to carry them ( and in RHS the Japanese do NOT have the APs to carry them).
John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.
Well, that's that settled then.
RE: Looking for RHS EoS Allied Opp
bump, still no takers. one nibble but didn't work out. anyone fancy a game?
RE: Looking for RHS EoS Allied Opp
I'd be happy to take up this challenge Darbymcd. Be forewarned though, I have never played a game with RHS (though I have it installed and have been wanting to give it a shot), never played the allies, haven't been in a game that has made it more than a month, and IRL am not a military history major so there is lot of things that I don't know though I continue to learn daily.
If you are still interested send me an e-mail or PM and we can talk about house rules. Most of the rules I'd be interested in are those against exploiting game mechanics or abusing bugs. This is especially true for the EOS campaign since it is not really meant to be that historical.
And dispite my poor record of short campaigns, I am a long-term committer and haven't ever dropped out of a game because of poor results. All ended games have stopped because of bugs.
If you are still interested send me an e-mail or PM and we can talk about house rules. Most of the rules I'd be interested in are those against exploiting game mechanics or abusing bugs. This is especially true for the EOS campaign since it is not really meant to be that historical.
And dispite my poor record of short campaigns, I am a long-term committer and haven't ever dropped out of a game because of poor results. All ended games have stopped because of bugs.