EiA PBEM option?

[Joisey]

Do you think the pc version of EiA will have a play by email option?

Is anyone interested in playing EiA by email while we wait for the computer game to come out?

[Murat]

I think this was answered in another thread with a yes.

[Joisey]

How about a PBEM game now?  Think we can scrape 7 people together?

[delatbabel]

I'll be in a PBEM game.

[Joisey]

Could I join in too? [:D]

[Murat]

What rules are you proposing? Will you have a non-playing GM to resolve the moves or will it be a player? Is there a fee for the GM to run the game (to cover pizza, coke, hair plugs, etc.)?

[Joisey]

You ask good questions.

I figure everyone here has the boardgame.

I wanted to play myself, and was willing to let people do their die rolls on an honor system. I've heard there are also some online die randomizers, but I don't know how they could be used to be a public system.

While it would be great to have an online map to keep track of the game, I have no ability in such matters. I've seen the VASSAL system used with other games. I assumed we would keep track of the game on our own maps. All orders for naval purchases and movement of all on map units would be either put out on an e-mail list to all players or to a thread here, if that's allowed. Economic Steps and the PSA step would have to be confirmed between all players.

Rule disputes: By majority vote of all players or, if deadlocked, by competitive die roll.

Alternatively if you think that wouldn't work, I'd be willing to GM and play all the minor countries. That would be one difference from the regular rules right there. Also, if we go through the trouble of having a GM, then a fog of war variant would be fun (may as well take advantage of the fact you have a GM). Under the Fog of War variant, Infantry Corps only "see" what's in their own province or surrounding provinces. Cavalry Corps (movement of 5) see two provinces away. Forces in your home nation, conquered minors, or free state minors are always known to you, friend or foe (you have built up a network of informants) Forces that blunder into enemy forces during movement (i.e. moved blindly) conduct immediate combats before any other movement is finished. "Blundering Forces" pick chits normally but have -1 to their die rolls (cumulative with other modifiers).

With a GM, all builds and orders (and diplomacy) will go through the GM. The GM would do all the die rolling.

Obviously, under Fog of War, you will have to spread your forces out a bit for reconaissance and the Defender will have a significant advantage over someone invading their home territory (they'll see you but you may not see them).

Proposed Rules:

1805 Grand Campaign game

Standard Rules except:

1) No economic manipulation
2) Optional Rules 11.0 - 11.9.1 in effect (New Political Combinations)
3) Optional Rules 12.1.1 - 12.1.2 in effect (militia conversion & ship building location)
4) Optional Rule 12.2.1.2 in effect ( Danish/Swedish sea crossings)
5) Optional Rule 12.2.5 in effect (Proportional Naval Losses)
6) Optional Rule 12.3.2 in effect (British Training)
7) Optional Rule 12.3.3.1 in effect (cavalry superiority)
8) Optional Rule 12.3.3.2 in effect (cavalry withdrawals)
9) Optional Rule 12.3.4 in effect (Guard commitment)
10) Optional Rule 12.3.5 in effect (artillery)
11) Optional Rule 12.3.6 in effect (Proportional Land losses)
12) Optional Rule 12.3.7 in effect (Army Leader Options)
13) Optional Rule 12.3.8 in effect (detaching minor corps factors)
14) Optional Rule 12.4 in effect ( Peace limited access all subsections)
15) Optional Rule 12.7 in effect (Leader Casualties)

[Joisey]

PS: I think the GM should do it for free, out of love for the game.

[Joisey]

PPS: Under Fog of War variant, while phasing in the movement phase, if you come adjacent (or within range of "seeing") an enemy unit, you will see that it is there in a province and can avoid running into it if you wish, but you will not be told how many corps are in the province or of what types. You have to be adjacent to an enemy unit(s) at the start of your movement phase (or two provinces in the case of cav) to know the composition.

Pure cavalry units using the cavalry withdrawal rule will be very useful for reconaissance, as they were historically.

If your enemy puts out a "picket line" you may not have the ability to go around him. Certain fronts, such as the Austrian front with France, would be easy to block. Cossacks retain their ability to go through enemy units without initiating combat (which is not as powerful as it sounds, since the Cossack can only move by itself within home territory, and you get full info on enemy movements from your informant network on home ground already).

Just thinking out loud on how I'd do a Fog of War variant.

[delatbabel]

ORIGINAL: Joisey

I wanted to play myself, and was willing to let people do their die rolls on an honor system. I've heard there are also some online die randomizers, but I don't know how they could be used to be a public system.

There is a battle simulator, here:

http://eia.xnetz.com/RotE/battle.php

It doesn't work at the moment but if someone can get hold of the source code it shouldn't be hard to fix.

ORIGINAL: Joisey

Proposed Rules:

1805 Grand Campaign game

Standard Rules except:

1) No economic manipulation

Why no economic manipulation? It severely hurts the chances of the smaller nations, e.g. Spain, and also Prussia. Basically makes the game a huge punch-up favouring the French.

[Murat]

ORIGINAL: Joisey

PS: I think the GM should do it for free, out of love for the game.

You are asking someone to set up the map in a room and handle almost all the work, working daily to resolve orders so that you can make a decision in about an hour once a week and you want it all for free? I'm not saying $5 a player or so goes far but it's a nice gesture.

ORIGINAL: Joisey

1805 Grand Campaign game

Standard Rules except:

1) No economic manipulation
2) Optional Rules 11.0 - 11.9.1 in effect (New Political Combinations)
3) Optional Rules 12.1.1 - 12.1.2 in effect (militia conversion & ship building location)
4) Optional Rule 12.2.1.2 in effect ( Danish/Swedish sea crossings)
5) Optional Rule 12.2.5 in effect (Proportional Naval Losses)
6) Optional Rule 12.3.2 in effect (British Training)
7) Optional Rule 12.3.3.1 in effect (cavalry superiority)
8) Optional Rule 12.3.3.2 in effect (cavalry withdrawals)
9) Optional Rule 12.3.4 in effect (Guard commitment)
10) Optional Rule 12.3.5 in effect (artillery)
11) Optional Rule 12.3.6 in effect (Proportional Land losses)
12) Optional Rule 12.3.7 in effect (Army Leader Options)
13) Optional Rule 12.3.8 in effect (detaching minor corps factors)
14) Optional Rule 12.4 in effect ( Peace limited access all subsections)
15) Optional Rule 12.7 in effect (Leader Casualties)

1805 - how are countries decided? I listed our 10 point system in another area basically used under the idea that the scenario victory points were set to be equitable. No limit runs the risk of say a 100 point bid for France, which means they start the game with no way to win but that they just wanted France. Britain can be worse since they win by default, it doesn't matter how high their bid is so long as they are good at keeping other people's down.

1] I like eco man (and I think this hurts France and Russia most. Bad start and they have no way to recover without eco)
2] 11.9.1.1 no way - while this is accurate historically for most nations the players that become obdurate do not face penalties that would have been exacted had nations really behaved this way. The "rump" idea was based on gentlemanly defeat and the lack of it is why Spain lost her King, rest is OK
3] OK
4] Include Channel crossing arrow, Britain can protect it. It was not impossible to cross the Channel if there were no opposing British warships.
5] OK
6] OK
7] OK
8] OK
9] We had a house rule that the guard could not be committed if it was impossible to break the enemy. Even at Waterloo the Guard went in because they believed they could break the British.
10] OK
11] OK
12] OK
13] OK
14] OK
15] OK
I would add in 12.8 and 12.9 (to keep this from being pro-British)

ALSO there are still some resources on the net including a bit map and counters that you can place on the map if you wish to set up a website for the game.

[Joisey]

Do you have a link for those online resources?

I've never played with economic manipulation, but would be willing to go along if a majority preferred it.

I've also never actually used the bidding process before either. I've always been able to agree on who would play which country, and I've been able to eventually play all the countries I wanted to. I'd certainly be willing to listen to your advice on tweaking the bidding process to avoid abuse.

I forgot to add a houserule for outlawing a controlling major power from destroying a minor fleet against port defenses: Only allowed if an enemy fleet is actually in the port, otherwise, it's just another form of scuttling.

If someone else wants to GM and collect money, they are welcome to do so. I prefer not having to chase people for money (although I have my own business and can take a credit card number over the phone, so if you insist [;)]). If successful, everyone can take their turn GMing and we'd all break even in that case.

Other counter-proposals are fine, although I agree they are all anti-British.

[Roads]

ORIGINAL: Murat

9] We had a house rule that the guard could not be committed if it was impossible to break the enemy. Even at Waterloo the Guard went in because they believed they could break the British.

I think a rule like this is probably a good thing. But the Young Guard was committed at Waterloo to simply hold of the Prussians on the right flank. In various other instances (Krasnoi for one) the guard was committed to get the army out of a losign battle.

[Joisey]

Explain to me why someone would commit the Guard when its impossible to break the enemy, since failure to do so automatically means YOU break instead! [&:]

[Joisey]

Try emailing those guys.

We do have their gif version of the map with every province numbered to work with though. That will greatly simply move orders. Anyone interested in doing PBEM should download that mapfile.

[Murat]

Well Nappy told the Guard that the lines on the horizon were French reinforcements from Grouchy instead of Blucher's Prussians so they charged thinking the field was theirs and if the British broke they would have rout, when in fact they broke and Nappy made a tactical maneuver to the rear.

ORIGINAL: Joisey

Explain to me why someone would commit the Guard when its impossible to break the enemy, since failure to do so automatically means YOU break instead! [&:]

Bad chit pick. If you break early you can limit your losses.

This site has much stuff:

http://www.boardgaming.info/EIA-archive/html_index.html

[moosinator2000]

You can count me in.

ORIGINAL: Joisey

Explain to me why someone would commit the Guard when its impossible to break the enemy, since failure to do so automatically means YOU break instead! [&:]

It's the third round of combat and you know you're going to break. You commit your guard to lower the ensuing pursuit. Guards are cheaper to replace than cavalry.

[Joisey]

Very cool stuff at that site. Looks like the entire game is on the web.

The problem is: How can we manipulate these Gif images?

What program opens the unit symbol files on that site? I couldn't get them to open.

If we could insert unit symbols onto one of these maps, we'd be able to host the whole game electronically.

[Joisey]

But wouldn't you also be engineering an even more devasting cavalry pursuit? The fewer the combat rounds, and the less your opponent's morale loss, the worse it will be.

[Joisey]

ORIGINAL: moosinator2000

You can count me in.

ORIGINAL: Joisey

Explain to me why someone would commit the Guard when its impossible to break the enemy, since failure to do so automatically means YOU break instead! [&:]

It's the third round of combat and you know you're going to break. You commit your guard to lower the ensuing pursuit. Guards are cheaper to replace than cavalry.

Okay, this makes sense to me. I don't see why it should be banned.