"House Rules" - do you use them in your PBEMs?

[Apollo11]

Hi all,

Although UV in its current v2.30 is very very very good for PBEM playing
(great fun!) some issues/cheats/exploits still exist...


Do you guys use the "House Rules" to rectify them?


If yes what are your "House Rules"?



Here is list of "House Rules" Oleg and I use in our current PBEM:
==================================================

"House Rules" for UV PBEM (Scen #19 - Leo "Japanese" vs. Oleg Allies")


#1
Maximum allowed altitude for all aircraft in UV is 20000 ft (approx. 6500 m).

This is becuase, historically, aircraft in South Pacific in 1942/1943 (UV
timeframe) didn't fly in stratosphere due to lack of proper gear/facilities
(not to mention time and loss of range because of very very hard climbing
in humid atmosphere).


#2
Fighter-Bomber strafe attacks (i.e. "Sweep" at 100 ft) against enemy ground
units are not allowed.

This is because there still appears to be bug in current UV v2.30 regarding
this (hundreds and even thousands of troops can be killed that way which is
totally unrealistic).


#3
"Commando" style attacks with very small number of troops (i.e. troops that
can be loaded on single/few submarines and/or ships) against populated
enemy bases are not allowed.

If such attack is wanted whole unit must be used.

This is because with such "commando" style attack you can learn 100% true
composition of troops in enemy base (i.e. it's cheat/exploit).


#4
"Commando" style attacks with very small number of troops (i.e. troops that
can be loaded on single/few submarines and/or ships) against HEX that is
possible enemy retreat path are not allowed.

If such attack is wanted whole unit must be used.

This is because with such "commando" style attack you can effectively block
path of enemy retreat with very small number of troops (Example: As Japanese
you invaded Port Moresby. If your ground troops are stronger enemy can be
driven out. The near by, 1 HEX away, allied base is Lea Lea. If you take Lea
Lea loosing enemy troops from Port Moresby will be destroyed instead of just
retreating there).


#5
Barges (and US PT/LCx boats) can not be used in open seas.

This is because such small craft can only be used on coastal routes.

ALLOWED: Gili - Port Moresby, Lae - Gili Gili, "The Slot" ...
DISALLOWED: Rabaul - Gili Gili, Cairns - Port Moresby, Luganville - Lunga...


#6
Only one submarine can be placed in submarine Task Force.

This is to simulate that automatic "Wolf Packs" were not historically used
in South Pacific in 1942/1943 (UV timeframe).


#7
Japanese Sub Doctrine OFF
Fog of War ON
Allied Damage Control ON
Advanced Weather ON
Allied/IJN Reinforcements VERY VARIABLE
Allied Ship Commitment 100%
IJN Ship Commitment 140%

==================================================



Leo "Apollo11"

[Drex]

I tend to stay away from house rules but yours aren't too onerous. I have only done #5 and have found that long range barge supply is slow and ineffective anyway. I may group my subs into a pack on the way to any area, but I always break them up into single TFs when they get there.

[Sonny]

Didn't 2.30 change so that only one sub in a hex is worth anything?

[mariovalleemtl]

In my games with Spooky, we cut the night bombing on port and airfield. Only day bombinig is allow.

[Drex]

Originally posted by Mario Vallée
In my games with Spooky, we cut the night bombing on port and airfield. Only day bombinig is allow.

But didn't night attacks occur historically? Are they that effective?

[Full Moon]

Originally posted by Mario Vallée
In my games with Spooky, we cut the night bombing on port and airfield. Only day bombinig is allow.

Betty and Nell are too fragile, so I rarely do day bombing with them except naval attack. Whenever I use them for day bombing they get slaughtered by CAP.

[Spooky]

Originally posted by Drex
But didn't night attacks occur historically? Are they that effective?

Port Night bombings (by bombers of course) are really very effective and you cannot do anything against them before the arrival of the night fighter squadrons ... so it is now forbidden in our PBEM games

[crsutton]

In general, I avoid house rules as they tend to create more argument than they prevent, and in the end kill friendships. However, if an opponent points out an obvious bug or cheat, or makes a good case against a particular tactic, I will gladly go along.

I pretty much use common sense and try to keep within the bounds of historical reality as much as possible and hope my opponent will as well.

[mariovalleemtl]

I think if night bombings was really effective, Nagumo would have pic that to attack Pearl Harbour.

[Fred98]

I am not a fan of house rules.

Nor am I a fan of "gamey" ploys.

I prefer to play as intended by the programmers and by the commanders of that time.

Unfortunately, I am occasionally a victim of gamey ploys.

[JohnK]

Originally posted by Joe 98
I am not a fan of house rules.

Nor am I a fan of "gamey" ploys.

I prefer to play as intended by the programmers and by the commanders of that time.

Unfortunately, I am occasionally a victim of gamey ploys.

I think the translation of "gamey ploys" sometimes is "anything bad that happens to me or any move by my opponent that deviates in any way from what that side did historically."

You can't both dislike house rules AND dislike gamey ploys.

You have to agree on house rules BEFORE a game to eliminate the gamey ploys you dislike. And then after that, anything goes.

A vague sort of "don't do anything unhistorical" is a recipe for disaster and unbelievable arguments.

The only house rule we have in the PBEM we're playing right now is no Argonaut minelaying. (Argonaut laying mines is what the programmers intended but not the commanders of the time

[denisonh]

The Argonaut is an interesting house rule.

Yes, in August of 1942, the Argonaut had all her minelaying equipment ripped out at Mare Island in preparation for the Makin raid. Since mine warfare was mainly defensive by doctrine, and mines could be deployed via torpedo tubes of any sub, they ripped (not removed) her minelaying capability to meet the requiremnt for putting a bunch of Marine Raiders on Makin.

But.

In a scenario #17, without a Midway and possibly without the subsequent Makin Raid, does the Argonaut get gutted?

Add in variable/very variable reinforcement, and the Argonaut could be in theater prior to the historic equiment removal date.

Hard to associate specific actions associated with specific histiorical events that take place after Midway in a scenario that presupposes Midway didn't happen.

[Luskan]

Sorry to nit pick but I don't like house rules at all - as long as situations are POSSIBLE they should be in the game - just as they are now.
The way I read your rules is that if a situation is unlikely or unplausable, there shuold be a house rule to prevent it from occuring. I think that if it was physically possible to do, then the commander should have the option of trying it in the game etc.

Originally posted by Apollo11


#1
Maximum allowed altitude for all aircraft in UV is 20000 ft (approx. 6500 m).
--------------------------
I really don't care if my opponents want to fly above 20,000ft - they are not going to be able to bother me up there (bombing inaccurate, CAP also inaccurate considering the altitudes I set my planes to etc. Why bother to make a house rule against it if he's only damaging himself. Sure, Raver has got some exp for his b17s by flying them at 35,000, but he didn't hit anything. It was possible, so why not?


#2
Fighter-Bomber strafe attacks (i.e. "Sweep" at 100 ft) against enemy ground units are not allowed.
------------------------------
Afraid that at 100ft, fighter bombers would be practically on top of any army barracks/billets before anyone saw or heard them. Lets imagine some Me109s that slip into allied controlled Greece early in the way at 100 ft. They round a mountain and below them is an army encampment. There are: hundreds of completely non-bullet proof tents, filled with troops, all lined up in nice regular rows, large stockpiles of ammunition, and vehicles full of fuel. Fighter bombers aren't like level bombers in that they only make one pass - these guy would probably keep strafing up and down until they were out of ammo.

Result? Nowhere to hide on some of those Greek plains . . . Twenty 109s with cannon ripping up an army encampment? I can imagine a thousand casualties (maybe unlikely, but not impossible).

Hell, a column of troops moving along a road can loose a hundred troops with just one strafing pass from an unspotted, well flown fighter. I agree - if the base is something like a fort the losses should be lower, but a bunch of Aussie soldiers out in the middle of a field playing AFL? A zero pilot should be able to do some serious damage.

A p-38 that catches an enemy airbase unawares by flying in low and fast - and then puts 500 rounds through a mess hall filled with IJN base force troops eating or lined up for their rice and sushi in a big, but hollow wooden building???? Hundreds of casualties (wounded or killed) right there.


#3
"Commando" style attacks with very small number of troops (i.e. troops that can be loaded on single/few submarines and/or ships) against populated enemy bases are not allowed.
-------------------------
Can't work loading the whole unit onto a sub or subs (especially if you won't allow more than one sub in a sub task force?). I agree it is a cheat, but if my opponent (read: Raver ) does this, it is just going to cost him troops and a bunch of sys damage to a sub. By the time he gets his recon info (easier to recon from the air anyway) I can have pushed more troops in, pulled troops out, etc. etc. Commando raids were meant to be a nuisance. Every time I leave an empty base and Raver scoops it up with 12 men, 2 rifles, a donkey and a broomstick, well that is my stupidity at fault.


#4
"Commando" style attacks with very small number of troops (i.e. troops that can be loaded on single/few submarines and/or ships) against HEX that is possible enemy retreat path are not allowed.
-------------------------
Possibly agree with this one, although twenty IJN troops with a machine gun could probably hold some spots of the kokoda trail against a disorganised retreating enemy. Again - if this happens to me it is because I didn't have troops at Lae Lae to prevent it.

#5
Barges (and US PT/LCx boats) can not be used in open seas.
---------------------
Again - doesn't seem to have any point. Barges and PT boats may possibly have attempted the open seas. I don't have a problem with people trying it in the game because it would never, ever work unless they had a "mothership" in the tf, in which case that is entirely realistic and plausible.

#6
Only one submarine can be placed in submarine Task Force.
---------------------
More than one sub in a sub patrol tf is inefficient etc. More than one sub in a sub transport tf is very necessary.

Leo "Apollo11"