Rule Debate. What is a mule.

matt.buttsworth · Post by **matt.buttsworth** » Sat Apr 26, 2003 5:36 am

Rule Debate

After agreeing not to have mules in our game my opponent Mike and I have come to a disagreement as we do not agree as to what a mule is. He argues a Mule is any double change of HQs done to maximise supply, combat and air combat ability.
Specifically, 2/ Change HQ of combat unit, special supply, change HQ of combat unit, move or plot. <Mike's definition of HQ Mule usage>.

My definition is somewhat stricter and simpler and applies to part 2 of the above, namely any change of HQs after special supply is a mule as the HQ commanding the fighting unit is not the HQ that gave supply and the change was done presumably to maximise air cover, combat potential after special supply was recieved.
Specifically one can imagine a situation where multiple units in forward positions, at worst Panzers, were all give special supply by HQs, maybe railed in, and then placed under one super HQ to give them maximum air cover and the best commander.
That to me is classic mule and can be exploited to maximum effect by the side with air superiority. Namely the Germans.

Mike has done a very thorough job in trying to outline every possibility of what is or is not mule. I have copied it below with my own comments about whether it is or is not a mule added in.

Result summary.

Mike

Only 2 is mule. All else is legal except 15 which is a game expoilt.

Matt

Not Mule. 1, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 18

Mule. 2, 3, 5, 17 and 16 (if change of HQ comes after special supply). 6 not possible but mule. Any change of HQ after special supply is mule.

Not possible. Change of HQ comes after movement. 4, 6, 7

Ethically doubtful. 15. No part of unit should get supply twice.

Mike's outline of possibilities of Mule and Not Mule HQ change.

1/ Change HQ of combat unit, special supply, move or plot.

That is not mule by me.

2/ Change HQ of combat unit, special supply, change HQ of combat unit, move or plot. <Mike's definition of HQ Mule usage>

Definitely Mule. Any change of HQ after special supply is mule.

3/ Special supply, change HQ of combat unit, move or plot.

Definitely Mule. The special supply must have come from another HQ, then change of HQ for combat reasons. Any change of HQ after special supply is mule.

4/ Special supply, move, change HQ of combat unit(plot not possible)...dont think it is possible to change HQ after movement.

Agreed not possible to change HQ after movement. Would be mule if it was possible as HQ change comes after special supply.

5/ Special supply, Change HQ, Change HQ, plot or move.

Definitely Mule. The special supply must have come from another HQ, then change of HQ for combat reasons. Any change of HQ after special supply is mule.

6/ Move(no plotting), special supply, change HQ of combat unit. ...dont think it is possible to change HQ after movement.

Agreed not possible to change HQ after movement. Is mule if possible as HQ change comes after special supply.

7/ Move(no plotting), change HQ of combat unit, special supply. ...dont think it is possible to change HQ after movement.

Agreed not possible to change HQ after movement but not Mule.

8/ Change HQ, change HQ of combat unit, move, special supply.

Not Mule as special supply comes after change HQ.

9/ Change HQ, change HQ of combat unit, plot movement, special supply.

Fine by me. Not Mule. Change of HQ is before special supply.

10/ Change HQ, change HQ of combat unit, special supply, move or plot movement.

Fine by me. Not Mule. Change of HQ is before special supply.

11/ Air supply, change HQ of combat unit, plot or move.

Fine by me. Not Mule. Air supply is not to me linked to supply capability of commanding HQ. Could come from any HQ.

12/ Change HQ of combat unit, Air supply, plot or move.

Fine by me. Not Mule. Air supply is not to me linked to supply capability of commanding HQ. Could come from any HQ.

13/ Move, Air supply, change HQ of combat unit.

Fine by me. Not Mule. Air supply is not to me linked to supply capability of commanding HQ. Could come from any HQ.

14/ Move, Change HQ of combat unit, Air Supply.

Fine by me. Not Mule. Air supply is not to me linked to supply capability of commanding HQ. Could come from any HQ.

15/ Special Supply/Air supply, transfer a component of a Korps/Corps to a different Corps, the new Korps/corp does special supply.

I think that is getting into a game exploit but not a mule as no HQ change but transferred part of unit receives special supply twice. Allows in theory a multiple pass of subunits if its readiness can be kept up high. Solution in game play is simply to do all special supplies at once at end of turn. That is what I am trying to do. Keeps it simple and stops game exploits.
I am interested to hear what you think of ethics of this one.

16/ Special Supply/Air supply of Korps/Corps "A", Special Supply/Air supply of Korps/Corps "B", transfer a component of Korps/Corps "A" to Korps/Corps "B". Either HQ "A" or HQ "B" could change HQ ONCE either before or after the supply.

That is not a game exploit as no transferred part of unit receives special supply, air supply twice. If the HQ change is after special supply has been given then it is a mule.

17/ Special Supply, change HQ of combat unit, change HQ of combat unit, move or plot.

Similar to 7. Definitely Mule. The special supply must have come from another HQ, then change of HQ for combat reasons. Any change of HQ after special supply is mule.

18/ Change HQ of combat unit, move, special supply.

Fine by me. Change of HQ comes after special supply.

MikeB · Post by **MikeB** » Sun Apr 27, 2003 5:02 am

Matt has essentially stated my interpretation.
I note 27 reads...but no replies or other commentary ?
I know it was a hot topic last summer.
I will try to create a post with votes for options 2, 3, 5 17.
<hope i dont have to do separate post for each option to be voted upon.

Mike B of Ottawa Canada.

DiRaC · Post by **DiRaC** » Sun Apr 27, 2003 9:45 am

14/ Move, Change HQ of combat unit, Air Supply.

Fine by me. Not Mule. Air supply is not to me linked to supply capability of commanding HQ. Could come from any HQ.

is it impossible because change HQ is after movement?

And one confusion: I cannot feel real help of Air Supply. It says several tons of supply is lifted to a certain corp. But the readiness, CV, and OP of the corp are not growing. Plus, airlift costs only 1 OP for the HQ.

Ed Cogburn · Post by **Ed Cogburn** » Sun Apr 27, 2003 4:46 pm

Originally posted by matt.buttsworth
Rule Debate

After agreeing not to have mules in our game my opponent Mike and I have come to a disagreement as we do not agree as to what a mule is. He argues a Mule is any double change of HQs done to maximise supply, combat and air combat ability.
Specifically, 2/ Change HQ of combat unit, special supply, change HQ of combat unit, move or plot. <Mike's definition of HQ Mule usage>.

My definition is somewhat stricter and simpler and applies to part 2 of the above, namely any change of HQs after special supply is a mule

Geez, you guys are nitpicking these House Rules to pieces!

Your definition has always been my interpretation. The *intent* of the rule is to stop the abuse of special supply being "transferred" from one HQ to a unit that will eventually move or fight or even do nothing later in the turn under command of another HQ. The reason is SS is not supposed to just represent physical supplies, it also represent intangible things specific to the HQ like C3 and the logisitical system. So even if the unit isn't going to move or attack, giving it SS from another HQ then transferring to an HQ with plenty of OPs, means its better off if attacked, or simply better off for the following turn. If it involves getting SS from one HQ then switching to another HQ, that is a mule, no matter what that unit will or won't do later in the turn.

Now there can be special circumstances where these things might make sense. A corps back home gets SS from a local HQ, then rails itself near the front and transfers to its new HQ. Technically that's a mule too, but I wouldn't get worked up over it.

Just recognize what the *intent* of the rule is, and avoid those situations. The usual example of the exploit is this: 2 HQs are kept nearby. The 1st HQ is used to give SS to nearby units. Usually all the OPs of the 1st HQ are expended giving SS to as many units as possible. The units then transfer to the 2nd HQ which hasn't spent any OPs. That HQ can support all those units during subsequent movement or combat because of its full OPs. Even if the unit doesn't move, its still getting a supply boost that puts it in a better situation on the following turn than it otherwise would have been, so that's still getting an advantage from an illogical action, thus an exploit.

MikeB · Post by **MikeB** » Sun Apr 27, 2003 5:34 pm

Ed...I guess it is kind of obvious that i DO NOT LIKE the house rule of no Mule HQs. Having admitted that i am willing to give it a try though; i am amazed at how EXACT and RESTRICTIVE it can be. Never having played it...and only having maybe 3 games experience of Matrix WIR...i needed to clarify its definition to ensure i understood and lived within its precepts. Sorry if this appears nit-picking.

My read of last summer's emails had led me to see that the "classic/usual" Mule HQ activity ran as you say :

Ed's phrasing :
"The usual example of the exploit is this: 2 HQs are kept nearby. The 1st HQ is used to give SS(special supply) to nearby units. Usually all the OPs of the 1st HQ are expended giving SS to as many units as possible. The units then transfer to the 2nd HQ which hasn't spent any OPs"

The "restrictive" concept that special supply, change hq and move/plot is MULE use of HQ...and should be verbotten, is annoying to me as a gamer...of WIR and other games over the past 20 years.<never did like supply rules, opponent tends to exploit them to my dismemberment>. I NOTE THAT THE HQ THAT IS BEING THE NEW RECIPIENT OF THE COMBAT UNIT - SPENT OP POINTS TO GET THERE...closer/farther away from the enemy. Encouraging the player to take risks and live with the results of those risks is -to me- a major part of war gaming.

You did mention the action of railing a component unit forward and getting supply from the new HQ. This is still technically use of Mule HQ...but perhaps reasonable?

As you say, players need to consider the INTENT...and specific rules tend to be either all one way or all another way. By honour - which can neither be defended nor challenged; one could limit such action to 3 per turn/week. <excluding the obvious "classic/usual" use of MULE HQ>.

Dirac :
yes, after you MOVE, you cannot change HQ.

Mike B

matt.buttsworth · Post by **matt.buttsworth** » Sun Apr 27, 2003 6:53 pm

I am afraid I strongly agree with Ed. That is exactly my understanding of the use of Mule HQs from the extensive debates in past years in Wir, the unfair combat advantage it gives (also including concentration of air) and why I never used it in a game.

alfonso · Post by **alfonso** » Sun Apr 27, 2003 7:45 pm

I was surprised when i realized that for many players the House rule meant that one can change HQ commanding a Korps after receiving special supply. Many german player use this to pack 5 or 6 PanzerDiv in a Korps, which is always fighting in good condition with a CV of 300 thanks to the special supply and then the transference to another HQ (with Manstein probably being also transferred to the new HQ). In my opinion a Korps must fight under the control of the HQ that lost the OPs giving Special Supply.

K62_ · Post by **K62_** » Sun Apr 27, 2003 8:20 pm

Originally posted by alfonso
a Korps must fight under the control of the HQ that lost the OPs giving Special Supply.

This seems to me like a very good and clear rewrite of the house rule! Great job, Alfonso!

In its current format, the rule doesn't only allow a (reduced) form of mules. But if I want to just change the HQ (no special supply involved) and I click on the wrong HQ, I can't fix my mistake!

And do not be surprised, Alfonso. If a rule can be interpreted, the players will tend to choose the interpretation that gives them an advantage. The interdiction rule is another example of this.

The conclusion is that unless you play with very clearly stated (and short, please :rolleyes: ) house rules, you're in for lots of surprises and you shouldn't blame your opponent for that.

Josans · Post by **Josans** » Sun Apr 27, 2003 11:06 pm

Originally posted by K62
This seems to me like a very good and clear rewrite of the house rule! Great job, Alfonso!

Oops I do that , don´t you?:D

A korps can change the HQ once in turn and always must remain under the control of HQ that supplied it SS. So if receives SS with the HQ that begin their turn can not change of HQ.
I would expand this rule including the divisions and sub-units and not only to korps to avoid these units receive SS two times (or more), each time from a different korps.

K62_ · Post by **K62_** » Sun Apr 27, 2003 11:43 pm

Originally posted by Josan
Oops I do that , don´t you?:D

A korps can change the HQ once in turn and always must remain under the control of HQ that supplied it SS. So if receives SS with the HQ that begin their turn can not change of HQ.
I would expand this rule including the divisions and sub-units and not only to korps to avoid these units receive SS two times (or more), each time from a different korps.

Incidentally, yes, I do it too. But just for the fun of it and not because the house rule says so (it doesn't). Kind of the way I also respect in our game the interdiction rule that you set on yourself (no more than 3 air attacks on a single corps). I'd like this stuff to be there in the house rule, so if I have an opponent that:

-hasn't read this thread

-or has read it and doesn't agree to what you say

then I should know that he does also follow the same rules I do and the game is fair. :rolleyes:

The extension to the divisions sounds good. If anybody could find a short and clear way to express that and put it in the 'published' rules - how great it would be.

But I don't agree that a corps should only change HQ once. Why can't I change my mind about that, as long as I don't use special supply? Or even if I use it the corps ends up attached to the HQ that gave it SS?

And here is another weird way of using special supply that's not in the rules: SS a korps, then hit F3 and change its name, then SS it again. I don't use it, but the rules say nothing about this.

alfonso · Post by **alfonso** » Mon Apr 28, 2003 12:19 am

Josan said: "I would expand this rule including the divisions and sub-units and not only to korps to avoid these units receive SS two times (or more), each time from a different korps"

This is not so important to me, because the unit receiving the already-supplied division cannot move that same turn. Therefore the advantages of spending two special-supplies to boost some divisions is probably balanced with the cost in OP points. Besides, it can be an embarrasing rule if one has to remember where the transferred units (to a new Korps, for instance) arrived from. Imagine that some units came from a Korps which was in a non-rail hex and one had to raise the readiness above 50% to begin the transfer, then it is rail-transferred, and finally the receiving Korps is Specialsupplied again. I do not think this would be a cheat (I do not even think it would be very wise....).

Josans · Post by **Josans** » Mon Apr 28, 2003 12:47 am

Originally posted by alfonso
Josan said: "I would expand this rule including the divisions and sub-units and not only to korps to avoid these units receive SS two times (or more), each time from a different korps"

This is not so important to me, because the unit receiving the already-supplied division cannot move that same turn. Therefore the advantages of spending two special-supplies to boost some divisions is probably balanced with the cost in OP points. Besides, it can be an embarrasing rule if one has to remember where the transferred units (to a new Korps, for instance) arrived from. Imagine that some units came from a Korps which was in a non-rail hex and one had to raise the readiness above 50% to begin the transfer, then it is rail-transferred, and finally the receiving Korps is Specialsupplied again. I do not think this would be a cheat (I do not even think it would be very wise....).

No, it is not a great issue but can be useful in defence. The deal is if transferring divisions from korps to korps in order to get extra SS is a valid option. I think no. You can place reserves from France in a key hex with a very high readiness. If is an important hex the Ops expenditure is secondary.

In your exemple, I see your point of view. The SS in rear operations would be allowed. Only for combat the SS is limited. is this Ok?

alfonso · Post by **alfonso** » Mon Apr 28, 2003 9:49 am

I do not exactly know how the low OP penalization works. It seems to me that if OPs are below 50, there is a probability that some divisions inside the Korps see their readiness reduced (halved?), depending perhaps on leader´s rating also. From that point of view, the only devastating and unfair move would be to have high readiness through SS and besides high OP through HQ change. In the case of the crucial hex containing divisions that were supplied twice, the important issue is that it is going to combat the defensive battle under the command of the HQ that gave the second supply, and therefore it probably has few OP points. So this would be OK for me: it seems balanced. Because of the way I think OP penalization works, I seldom use the Special Supply option, and only when i believe that the Korps/Army is not going to fight that same turn. I try to use it to prepare units for the "turn after", but it seems very difficult to me to make a definition of that, or a definition of "rear" operations. Rules must be concise. so I again think that "a Korps must fight under the control of the HQ that lost the OPs giving Special Supply".

matt.buttsworth · Post by **matt.buttsworth** » Mon Apr 28, 2003 11:46 am

My understanding is clear.
No change of HQ after special supply.
No special supply to sub units twice transferred to different HQs.
And preferably no special supply twice although if an HQ can afford it why not? That is a tricky one.
My pet hate though which is the real issue of this debate is change of HQ after special supply to create super combat. No no no no.
If a unit receives special supply from an HQ it must fight with it. Same applies to subunits.

matt.buttsworth · Post by **matt.buttsworth** » Mon Apr 28, 2003 11:52 am

A simple rule would be no transfer from units that have received special supply. What do people think of that? Stops all abuse and is clear cut. Special supply hq and subunits stay as they are.

I am starting a game with no special supply and air supply to units only on zero supply. That is very interesting. Very hard for the Russians to set up their forces. Defence is harder. And harder for Germans to maintain attack. It will be interesting to see how it pans out. Stops all abuse of special supply rule which is a big part of the problem but will make defence and attack harder!!!

CRAZY_HORSE007 · Post by **CRAZY_HORSE007** » Tue Apr 29, 2003 11:12 am

Maybe, to be short, we can imagine a rule like:

"SS is considered the last action you can do before combat"

So first, move, plot, air action,move Hq,...then at last SS before combat.

Marc

loveman2 · Post by **loveman2** » Tue Apr 29, 2003 11:33 pm

mules mules mules .
the only place for them is wearing them on your feet.

i have only one rule regarding these and its very simple . i never use them and i never will . i am afraid the german or russian army in world war 2 could not do this but alas those that play unfairly do .

K62_ · Post by **K62_** » Wed Apr 30, 2003 1:37 am

Mule haters of the world, unite!

:mad:

MikeB · Post by **MikeB** » Wed Apr 30, 2003 3:23 am

It appears the game between I and Matt is a bust. I have never played a board game with such strict supply rules...since 1975? Most computer games or any other games are played with as much tweaking of the rules as imagination allows(or your opponent doesn't know about-meaning your opponent doing to you - as well)

I am prepared to play with an HQ Mule rule defined as the following :
One cannot do the following sequence in one turn with one combat unit(korp or corp):

A) Change HQ, do special supply(other than air), change HQ, do Movement or Plotting.

B) do special supply(other than air), Change HQ, do plotting.
One is allowed to do special supply(including air), Change HQ, and Movement.

C) A component of a korp/corp cannot receive special supply(even by air), move or rail move to a different korp/corp combat unit, be special supplied(even by air) AGAIN.

Other (as well as the above) specific situations of "Mule HQ use" can be discussed and/or approved.

Other personal HOUSE rules apply...but can be subject to negotiation. I am also very negative about the 41/42 Blizzard rule activity against Germans. I propose a fixed known retreat # of hexes to account for such ...as opposed to any defensive combat attempts by Germans.

Please email me should you be interested in a game.
ben6249f@yahoo.com

Mike B

Ed Cogburn · Post by **Ed Cogburn** » Wed Apr 30, 2003 11:50 am

I liked the earlier one,

"Any unit, korps or subunit, which receives special supply from an HQ, must remain attached to that HQ for the remainder of the turn."

I like this because first, its simple, and second, it goes straight to the heart of the matter, since HQ mules are an attempt to give a unit special supply *and* an HQ with full OPs simultaneously. The whole point of the rule is to say you can't have both.

Ed...I guess it is kind of obvious that i DO NOT LIKE the house rule of no Mule HQs.

Fine, you're not the only one, but a majority of players see the exploit as I described it earlier as unrealistic, and have adopted this house rule because of that. You are always free to negotiate a different rule with your opponent.

i am amazed at how EXACT and RESTRICTIVE it can be.

Perhaps the problem is we need the rule expressed in a different way.

Never having played it...and only having maybe 3 games experience of Matrix WIR...i needed to clarify its definition to ensure i understood and lived within its precepts.

If you had been at the receiving end of a non-stop assault on Moscow using HQ mules to fuel the panzers (and to concentrate air power), you would understand why so many think some rule is necessary.

Sorry if this appears nit-picking.

No need to apologize, the nit-picking remark was a joke, that's why it had a smiley.

I NOTE THAT THE HQ THAT IS BEING THE NEW RECIPIENT OF THE COMBAT UNIT - SPENT OP POINTS TO GET THERE

What are you referring to here? In most HQ mule exploits the receiving HQ does NOT move, because to do so would cost it half of its OPs (except when it has to advance to keep up with its troops). Usually its the HQ that expends its OPs on special supply for units that moves afterwards, so the HQs tend to leapfrog each other, with the farthest one from the unit providing SS and the nearest one to the unit actually commanding it for the combat phase. Like I said earlier, if you'd seen a master HQ Mule artist at work you'd realize why there should be a rule!

You did mention the action of railing a component unit forward and getting supply from the new HQ. This is still technically use of Mule HQ...but perhaps reasonable?

As you say, players need to consider the INTENT...and specific rules tend to be either all one way or all another way. By honour - which can neither be defended nor challenged; one could limit such action to 3 per turn/week. <excluding the obvious "classic/usual" use of MULE HQ>.

Mike, what's reasonable is whatever you and your opponent can agree on.

These rules aren't mandatory unless your opponent insists on them. Feel free to come up with an HQ mule rule that you do like, or even find someone willing to play you without such a rule. The house rules are a suggestion not a requirement, nor are they official in any sense of the word. As you point out its all about honor. If you're playing someone without honor, house rules are only meant to be broken anyway. But trust me, there is a good reason to have *some* kind of house rule to cover HQ mules.

Rule Debate. What is a mule.

Rule Debate. What is a mule.

Mule Clarity

Re: Rule Debate. What is a mule.

Mule HQs

Mule Hate

WIR 3.3 anyone?