Oh no! This could lead to a Thread War!

[USSAmerica]

ORIGINAL: Mynok

Or how about running a gang of PB/G's into the hex along with the SC TF? Is that more, less or just as gamey?

Seems like it would be to me. I can't imagine a purpose for sending them there, other than to sponge up some shells before the real fighting starts. At least I don't think they would have ever been considered to be used to attack a known enemy SC TF.

[AW1Steve]

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Gentlemen,

Please see the Cap'n Mandrake / Sprior AAR. There are some xAK / PB gameyness issues that we need to have an understanding about moving forward.

I've seen increased use of xAKL, xAK and PBs used as 'picket ships' in the last several months of AARs. I'm not thrilled with this useage. That's one thing-looking out for surprise a/c carriers. Using them as precursors to SCTF arrival-soaking up ammo and torpedoes in order to deplete defenders' stores is quite another.

Are we in agreement that this sort of practice is to be frowned upon in our game?

I've often used the AKL's as Trawlers (since they are the closet things we have) . So what is the difference between a picket line or a sponge? A lone AKL against the KB is going to be a bomb sponge. We have to tighten up our definations on this (or at least use small and simple words so that I understand it). [:(]

[Mynok]

Scenario:

The player attempts to sneak a critical ground unit into a port under the danger of air attack. To reduce risk of casualties, the transports are split into single ships TFs following a PB/G SC TF. A full-fledged SC TF waits at another port in reaction range with react set to on.

It would be just about impossible to distinguish 'gamey' from 'non-gamey' here were an enemy SC TF to show up at the port and fight.

[USSAmerica]

To me, gamey is about intent.  I see no intent to send PB's in to attack a real SC TF, with the intent of using up their ammunition so they can then be pounded by a second SC TF following the PB's.  The scenario Mynok laid out is what I envision PB/G's being designed for, to escort transports and provide some gunfire support for them. 

Steve, in my mind, there's nothing gamey about a lone picket.  Even a string of pickets in a line, with a few hexes between is fine to me.  Filling a group of 4-6 hexes each with a lone picket, on the line of approach for an enemy TF would be gamey. 

[Walloc]

My 2 cents and why.

Rules are of.
1. No resource/factory bombing on either side inside mainland China's borders, as China per map.
No comments needed really.

2. No strategic bombing before 1943. To avoid early oil bombing and more.
Basicly to avoid the sec that oil bases fall u see the B-17D stra bombing those oils resources. Can it be defended against sorta still feels sorta gamey too me. It also stop jap from after PM falls early as it always does, to start bombing australian reocurces for easy VPs. No figthers to stop this and again to me this feels a gamey way to get VPs. So it goes both ways. By 43 both sides should have forces in place to defend against this nulilfying the HR.

3. Must spend FULL PP to move restricted units from China/Manchuria/Korea/India/US. Thai forces can leave Thailand for garrison purposes only to max 4 hexes from the Thai border.
Note the word full PP. avoid any if the 25% work around for getting troops out of US/manchuria/India, while still allowing to use the 25% where appropiate.

4. KB cannot hunt the allied CVs during turn 1, if playing non historic turn.
No comments really.

5. No sub invasions.
I think there is no need for this any more, as far as i hear.

6. Army 4E engine bombers cannot naval attack below 10k ft. Naval 4e not below 7k.
U can always discuss the height here.....'

7. Paratroopers cannot be split to make numerous attacks, one formation for one target.
Hench also gota have gatered unit before new para landing can take place.

It was my experience that when sub invasions became HR restricted ppl started using para for the same. So this rule.
Initially i had a prep point restiction too. Para drops was complicated and toke preperation so i think a certain prep level is historic but some time what the hell. Any how overall idea is force a more combined use of para's and not 1 squad invades all over the map.

9. Cant resize air units other than default changes with the following exceptions. Air units native to carriers can fill up to max of carrier capacity. As long as the combined air units for the carrier never exceds carriers capacity whether or not they are actually on the carrier. (cant unload some and max remaining and so on)
The 3 airplane japanease units can go onto the airgroup less CVEs and resize to fill those, but only for operational purposes. Cant be training and if unloaded most resize back to original size.
Marine corsair squadrons cant operate from allied carriers until the first historical unit does so.

Simply to avoid any sorta use of the resize option to create large training squadrons or operational for that matter.
MichaelM was clear IMHO that the rule was to allow for different make up of teh airgroups on carrier and filling those up to capacity. The jap CVE that are in need of air groups should ofc be allowed to have that and resize to fill. Nada else.

10. No, LCU bombardment other than for recon purposes, that isnt done along side infantry attacks.

This rule is prolly a bit surprising, but IMHO there is sound reasoning behind this.
Design team changed art to work along side infantry attacks and nerfed the LCU only bombardment damage. I agree in that, but it seems to me that it had an unintended effect or at leased an effect in that IMHO can be used gamingly.
The supply used by a defender replying to bombardments the same as pre this rule change. Im old day that wasnt a problem as the attacker toke counter battery casulties so it wasnt free. Now u dont or the are much less so its more or less for free to do.
So u can use this to make bombardments with 1 art unit ur self using very little supply while any unit of the attacker units in combat mode responds automaticly.
BigJ62 confirmed that the supply usage is actually after cleaning the number from eng usage is near 4 times as high as if they attacking units hadnt been attacked with both art and aircrafts, in the example i gave him. While less than what i first thot its still IMHO way to much and can used for that purpose only.
This if used every turn can make siege type situasion go much faster as in 4 times sinc when ur out of supply ur dead.

Now the counter arguement is ok then u should just put ur units on reserve not combat and then they wont respond and supply usage isnt higher.
Ok but what then if the attack attacks when ur units (the max 75%) is on reserve and ur rolls on whether the units will participate in the combat or not are missed. Ehhh, u can have as little as 25% of ur AV and might very well just lose out right.

This means IMHO that landcombat is now a question of playing tic tac toe. Which turns to place units in combat mode to anticipate attacks and which to put on reserve to "counter" bombardments.
That the abstraction level of landcombat is now a question of playing tic tac toe botheres me to say the least.
It leave art only bombardments, since it doesnt do casulties in bombardment with 2 useage. First is recon which is perfectly fine with me as there isnt any other recon options in game really and secondly that is draining defenders supply.
IMHO art shouldnt have that effect and its an oversight back when the art rules was nerfed/changed.

My ehhh ok 4 cents...

Rasmus

[anarchyintheuk]

I think this wins the 'longest aar thread before it actually became an actual aar' award. Having said that I'm looking forward to it.

[USSAmerica]

ORIGINAL: anarchyintheuk

I think this wins the 'longest aar thread before it actually became an actual aar' award. Having said that I'm looking forward to it.

I couldn't find a BAR section to open it in. [:D]

[Chickenboy]

ORIGINAL: USS America

ORIGINAL: anarchyintheuk

I think this wins the 'longest aar thread before it actually became an actual aar' award. Having said that I'm looking forward to it.

I couldn't find a BAR section to open it in. [:D]

[:D]

[AW1Steve]

Are you guys SURE that you are not lawyers? If we get anymore into it . I'm going to expect a demand for alimoony next! [:(]

[USSAmerica]

Rasmus, thanks for the input. I particularly like your reasoning for several of the HR's you used.

I think we have actually covered most of these.

1 + 2 are combined in our rule, that I think we have agreed on.
3. I like the wording of your version better than what we have agreed to. It covers the example of US West Coast LCU's being assigned to an unrestricted air HQ that is also under West Coast command. Would need to pay the full PP cost to transfer the LCU to SW Pac or South Pac for example to ship it out. Gentlemen, shall we adopt this version?
4. Easily included in our RoE for Turns 1+2, but already a defacto standing rule.
5+7. Covered under our "no gamey moves" blanket policy.
6. We don't currently have an equivalent rule, and not sure if we need one. I am fine with one, if desired. Thoughts from the other players on this?
8. Hey! You can't count to 10! You skipped 8. [:'(]
9. Already covered, but good rationale provided by Rasmus here.
10. I understand the intent here. I know I am still naive, but I am not sure we need this rule in our game. Thoughts and comments?

Good stuff, Rasmus!

[USSAmerica]

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

Are you guys SURE that you are not lawyers? If we get anymore into it . I'm going to expect a demand for alimoony next! [:(]

No, Steve, that comes when you and I split up. [:'(]

I understand exactly where you are coming from. Mynok and I had exactly 6 HR's in our CHS game and I don't even know if half of them came into play. [:D] "No gamey moves" covers 75% of most usual HR's. On the other hand, I don't mind playing with some HR's as long as they are explained to me, and I can understand what they mean. What do you think about my "evaluation" of Rasmus' input from his game?

[Onime No Kyo]

Will there be an actual game?

[AW1Steve]

ORIGINAL: USS America

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

Are you guys SURE that you are not lawyers? If we get anymore into it . I'm going to expect a demand for alimoony next! [:(]

No, Steve, that comes when you and I split up. [:'(]

I understand exactly where you are coming from. Mynok and I had exactly 6 HR's in our CHS game and I don't even know if half of them came into play. [:D] "No gamey moves" covers 75% of most usual HR's. On the other hand, I don't mind playing with some HR's as long as they are explained to me, and I can understand what they mean. What do you think about my "evaluation" of Rasmus' input from his game?

It all sounds fine Mike. At this point , I'm at the point , that I really don't have much to say. Do what you all want , then explain it to me when your done. Tell me what you want and I'll do it. But I've got to wonder what it would be like to play monoploy with you guys.Would it have a two volume set of abridgements? [:(]

[AW1Steve]

ORIGINAL: Onime No Kyo

Will there be an actual game?

Yeah, someday. Maybe...

[USSAmerica]

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

ORIGINAL: USS America

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

Are you guys SURE that you are not lawyers? If we get anymore into it . I'm going to expect a demand for alimoony next! [:(]

No, Steve, that comes when you and I split up. [:'(]

I understand exactly where you are coming from. Mynok and I had exactly 6 HR's in our CHS game and I don't even know if half of them came into play. [:D] "No gamey moves" covers 75% of most usual HR's. On the other hand, I don't mind playing with some HR's as long as they are explained to me, and I can understand what they mean. What do you think about my "evaluation" of Rasmus' input from his game?

It all sounds fine Mike. At this point , I'm at the point , that I really don't have much to say. Do what you all want , then explain it to me when your done. Tell me what you want and I'll do it. But I've got to wonder what it would be like to play monoploy with you guys.Would it have a two volume set of abridgements? [:(]

I'm tellin 'ya, I could do without all of these HR's and just play a "no gamey moves" gentlemen's game. I REALLY don't want to put you off and make you feel like you're being roped into something that is not really what you want. [:)]

[USSAmerica]

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

ORIGINAL: Onime No Kyo

Will there be an actual game?

Yeah, someday. Maybe...

Still trying to get an ETA for the hinted at "Dababase patch." If it's going to be more than 2 weeks, we could get underway by the end of this week. You know how those Jap players with their "first turn" are. [:'(][:D]

[Mynok]

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve
alimoony

I have this vision of a copy of the check with a large, hairy butt sitting on it. [:D]

[Onime No Kyo]

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

ORIGINAL: Onime No Kyo

Will there be an actual game?

Yeah, someday. Maybe...

Y'all waiting for me to buy the game or something?

[AW1Steve]

ORIGINAL: USS America

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

ORIGINAL: USS America




No, Steve, that comes when you and I split up. [:'(]

I understand exactly where you are coming from. Mynok and I had exactly 6 HR's in our CHS game and I don't even know if half of them came into play. [:D] "No gamey moves" covers 75% of most usual HR's. On the other hand, I don't mind playing with some HR's as long as they are explained to me, and I can understand what they mean. What do you think about my "evaluation" of Rasmus' input from his game?

It all sounds fine Mike. At this point , I'm at the point , that I really don't have much to say. Do what you all want , then explain it to me when your done. Tell me what you want and I'll do it. But I've got to wonder what it would be like to play monoploy with you guys.Would it have a two volume set of abridgements? [:(]

I'm tellin 'ya, I could do without all of these HR's and just play a "no gamey moves" gentlemen's game. I REALLY don't want to put you off and make you feel like you're being roped into something that is not really what you want. [:)]

That would probably be too simple. I'd understand that. [:D] Like I said, I really don't care any more. I'm sorry I can find it in myself to be enthusiastic about all these changes , but I never wanted to be a game designer. That's why I buy a packaged game instead of building my own. So all I ask is wake me when you guys are done, and tell me what you want me to do. [:D]

[Walloc]

ORIGINAL: USS America
I'm tellin 'ya, I could do without all of these HR's and just play a "no gamey moves" gentlemen's game. I REALLY don't want to put you off and make you feel like you're being roped into something that is not really what you want. [:)]

I understand ya on that point and i agree. Problem is that i found is that what a gentleman's game is, is different to diffent ppl.
Hench i made those HRs to avoid what IMHO is the places where if ppl dont follow same gentleman rules that it isnt necesarry the same playing field you play on. At leased it should be clear then.....

Any how get on with ur game!

Rasmus