House Rules?

[Rand6897]

I'm not yet convinced WiF is a game I will continue to play. I think that MWiF is a excellent product, it
is more the game mechanics I'm unsure of. I'm not saying they are bad, it is a matter of preference.
Most war gamers come up with house rules to address things that could be improved. Unfortunately,
that is somewhat restricted when playing on a program vs. on a board.

That being said I can certainly see why this game has a huge following. As I'm getting to learn the
system I can easily see that this a game that is difficult to master. I can also see the limitless
strategic options available.

I'm wondering how many of the players on the forum played the board version of WiF and considered
themselves skilled. Or do most of you, like myself, have more experience with other Global War
board games.

I also wonder, for the more experienced WiF boardgame players, did you have house rules and what were they?

[Jagdtiger14]

I've been playing WiF the board game for a long while and have gone to WiFcons in the US and Europe...so I would say I am "skilled". I've played other global war games (most notably A3R/Rising Sun...prior to discovering WiF).

As for house rules, I highly recommend you don't. Unless you see yourself only playing with your local group and never beyond that. A few of our group play at cons, and one of us is and has been involved in development/rules for the board game...so we knew from the start we would never use house rules unless it was to play test for something that might be incorporated into WiF. If you want to play others outside your group, it will be highly unlikely that you will find players out there agreeing to play your version. Because you developed a certain style of play due to your house rules you will be at a major disadvantage.

[brian brian]

I'm trying to remember any House Rules I've used but I'm having trouble with that. Mostly they are things to do with a dice roll only counts if it stays inside the pint glass we roll them in, and other mechanics of a game with thousands of counters spread out across more space than a ping-pong table.

And the idea of picking sides without bidding, which is not the rules of the game.

And probably picking and choosing just certain parts of the expansion kits - parts of Cruisers/Convoys in Flames, but not the whole thing, etc.

Also there are usually "Future Rules" that are known to the WiF Community from the Annual publications that make for common House Rules. Some of those eventually get published as "Official" by ADG, some don't.

[AlbertN]

Me and my friend use some house rules we mutually agree on - and select which optionals not to use.

Some house rules mirror some uncoded optional (ie: we play with a custom version of the En Route interception; but only for strategic bombing) since most of the other situations involve either ports with ships you either cover or not; or frontline forces which as well are either covered or not (yes sometimes you have the bomber slipping through your upfront fighters to hit the local HQ that is somehow behind but that is a rare case).

Other House Rules address the "different map size" that MWiF has and that for which the Force Pools are not able to cover properly (namely the Soviet-Japanese house rule we adopt).

You can find them in the AARs you find by me in these forums.

[Joseignacio]

I consider myself average in skill. Maybe I could have a higher opinion of myself but, having seen the EWC, where people take the game I would say "almost professionally". I don't have that level, I would like to play as well but not pay the price, which is to focus it such a serious way that takes the fun out of it IMO. Of course I was at the "beginners table" (called "intermediate" for diplomatic purposes) at the EWC, which is nothing to be proud or ashamed about.

I almost never use house rules in this game or any game. One or two can be, if the game has a serious "bug", but if you mend the game seriously, then you don't really like the game.

Brian, not only bidding is included in the RAW 7.0 but it seems to be compulsory. The rules make reference to it to adjust the victory points, and refer to rule 23 for more detail. If I am not wrong, rule 23 is in the Scenario Book, maybe that's why you didn't see it in the RAW proper.

[Centuur]

We had a house rule stating that destroyed ships are not available for rebuilding. That's the one we always used. Sometimes we had some other houserules, but usually we found out that they were counterproductive to the game.

And I don't consider myself a skillfull player. I'm probably in the same league as Jose...

[paulderynck]

That is a very good example of a house rule that players could agree to abide by in MWiF - you'd just scrap any sunk ship at the end of the turn.

[Joseignacio]

ORIGINAL: Centuur

We had a house rule stating that destroyed ships are not available for rebuilding. That's the one we always used. Sometimes we had some other houserules, but usually we found out that they were counterproductive to the game.

And I don't consider myself a skillfull player. I'm probably in the same league as Jose...

Well, that looks like bad for the affected player, but in fact it is a profit, you "lose" the obsolete ships, getting more quality in the pool if you want to build some other... and there are more ships of every kind than you will build.

The same would not be acceptable (IMHO) for air or land units. Subs I don't know, there are not so many, so losing some increases quality but decreases greatly their numbers.

[Courtenay]

I hate the multiple-states-of-war rules, so I impose a rule saying that Italy must declare war on France and the CW simultaneously, and France and the CW must both declare war on Italy together.

I think the house rule about ships applies only to named ships, not SUBS, AMPHs, or TRSs.

[Centuur]

ORIGINAL: Courtenay

I hate the multiple-states-of-war rules, so I impose a rule saying that Italy must declare war on France and the CW simultaneously, and France and the CW must both declare war on Italy together.

I think the house rule about ships applies only to named ships, not SUBS, AMPHs, or TRSs.

We used it for named ships only.

[Rand6897]

Been learning the WiF system as many of you've seen in my different threads. For the most part
haven't had to do much in the way of naval combat, partly by design as I've been focusing on
land and air operations. I've made it July/Aug40 and Italy has entered into the conflict and
so the battle for control of the Med has started.

A couple of things have me wondering.
1] Is there a reason to base the Italian fleet stationed in Italy in any hex other than La Spezia
once the threat of an air attack from France is gone. I see no reason to utilize Taranto to improve
combat in the Eastern Med.

2] Apparently because of the sea zone and sea box usage the following is possible. The Italians would
like to keep units in Tunis in supply requiring a convoy point in the Western Med representing the route
from Sicily to Tunisia. A Swordfish with a range of 4 based at the only British base in the zone,
Gibraltar, can attack it. Anybody have any house rules to avoid situations like this other than an
obvious: show the path for supply and if it is out of air range no air combat can occur.

Just wondering.

[Joseignacio]

1 IMO La Spezia is the best, to have all or almost all of the fleet. However you may want to have some units in other ports, in case you want to have ships ready to interdict and in the Western Mediterranean there is a too powerful enemy fleet. I am thinking of having some cruisers in Greece when Yugoslavia (and Greece of course) is conquered, so they are supplied by land but can access directly the Eastern Med and get to the top position.

Another bad point is that they may be subject to CW minisubs, and the more grouped ships the more impact, but anyway I'd keep them there.

2 No simulation is ever perfect. True, some swordfish shouldn't have enough range but the rules are these, if you wanted to change this,...

why not changing that a fleet which is at a certain sea can bomb any shore? Surely it cannot be adjacent to Morocco, Tripoli, Valencia, Gibraltar, and Marseilles. Or a CV plane bomb either Athens or Cairo.

How can some cruisers in Central Atlantic control all the area and intercept on a reasonable probability convoys? Pretty big ain't it?

Yes, the Swordfish can attack but the possibilities are low, plus the convoys may be escorted, and the escort even being cruisers, can have AA.

Anyway, soon in the game the naval operations in the area will make this irrelevant, with the CW and Italian fleet danciang around each other in the Med.

[Jagdtiger14]

I think the way you could rationalize it is that everything is happening in a two month time frame...so how long would it take for ships to make it from say Marseilles to Valencia to Gibraltar to Morocco to Tripoli? CV to be in range from Athens to Cairo?

I don't think I could find a way to rationalize Swordfish to make it to the Italian Med convoy route...but then again, there is a ton of luck involved, which could mean some Italian convoys got lost and made it in range of the Swordfish.

[Centuur]

There is something else to consider too. The aircraft counters represent units which represents a lot of planes, most of those are of the type of plane used. So there could be some long range planes in such a unit too.

[AlbertN]

For the "Swordfish" example - I simply consider that an "airplane unit" is composed of an amount of different airplanes - eventually with the majority of them being of the depicted airplane but not the entirety
I mean - otherwise all the Bf109E should have same stats, and all the Bf109F should have matching stats, etc.

In the airplanes I suspect strongly there is a wrap up of pilot quality by time (Japanese 1942 airplanes inferior to 1941 / 1940 ones?); airplane performances and subsidiary complements to the "core" of the unit which is the depicted airplane model which could provide explaination for that special situations.

[Rand6897]

Some sacrifices must be made when trying a recreate a global war that takes less time
to play than the actual war. All in all I like the WiF system though I wish some sea activities
were more 'port to port' and patrols were handled in current fashion.

Some years ago inspired by my frustration with games not fulfilling my demands, I started to create
my own on the Aide de Camp program (see screenshot). Creating a game is not a weekend project however.

My idea was a game similar to what since came out in the Clash of Arms series "Struggle for Europe".
A corp based two week game. Whether it is WiF, World at War, or ETO/PTO; the (multiple)monthly, army size based
games leave me wanting more operational control.

The game basics were that ground units are produced at the division scale (with a few brigades for theaters such as North
Africa and the Pacific) that are then consolidated into corps. The advantage of corps being they are more
resilient and they increase in strength (three infantry divisions with individual combat rating of say two,
form a corp with a combat rating of say 8-9.) They also have the ability to absorb more step loses. A division has
one step, a corp has steps equal to the divisions included.

There is no distinction between movement and combat phases. Each combat result would include a movement (time)
result. In other words a 6:1 battle would likely require less movement points than a 2:1. Following the initial round
of combat some defending units may react. Then another round of movement/combat occurs with attacking units having
a reduced movement allowance. This would allow the opportunity for units to punch a hole in the lines then combat
motorized forces would be able to exploit it. Difficult to recreate on Aide de Camp but the Vassal program allows for
movement tracks to be recorded.

Both the defender and attacker would have choices. The defender could stand (fight to the last man) or retreat (absorbing
fewer loses). The attacker could prepare attack (using movement points) or assault (resulting in higher casualties and
unfavorable results).

I just wish I was more computer savvy because Vassal is beyond my abilities when it comes to creating a module. I have
purchased Matrix's 'War in the East', War in the West', and 'Pac War'. Have yet to play them and oh how I wish you could
combined them.

[paulderynck]

Vassal is not all that difficult. The best way to learn is to download a module for a game you are very familiar with, then open it with the Editor and see what's under the hood.

The Help screens are very good too. So a basic module is not tough. Getting fancy with global and trigger commands is not for everyone and takes a lot of experimentation, but those skills aren't needed for a basic module.

[brian brian]

The sea zones are a playability trade-off to play WWII with a set of paper maps and cardboard counters. There have been some players that have tweaked the sea-zone drawings to get around the example above of a Swordfish NAV in Gibraltar having a a 40% chance of finding an Italian supply convoy going into Tunis, for example. There are also bad examples on the Pacific Map, where Single Engine fighters flying from Wake can cover an invasion force landing on the Bonins, to name another similar example.

I hope MWiF can someday lead to a new, computerized edition of the game with a re-vamped naval system to get rid of some of those realism holes.

[Joseignacio]

ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14

I think the way you could rationalize it is that everything is happening in a two month time frame...so how long would it take for ships to make it from say Marseilles to Valencia to Gibraltar to Morocco to Tripoli? CV to be in range from Athens to Cairo?

I don't think I could find a way to rationalize Swordfish to make it to the Italian Med convoy route...but then again, there is a ton of luck involved, which could mean some Italian convoys got lost and made it in range of the Swordfish.

I had heard that evaluation. However, I wonder if the real situation in the med allowed for such fluent moves.

Anyway this doesn't explain why in huge areas like the Central Atlantic or most of the Asian Map seas, you can patrol them satisfactory with a Nav or some cruiser groups. This is for the sake of abstraction and playability.