Has anyone tried a multiplayer Team PBEM

[Tom G.]

I was thinking it would be very fun to try a team approach to this game. What I was thinking was that there would be an overall commander of each side whose function was to
A) set overall policy and strategy
B) manage political points
C) Manage assets (ie assign ships to various commands dish out supply as he sees fit)
D) Promote and fire main hq leaders. (maybe even the player commanders)
E)......

Then for the allied side maybe have the following player commands
1) Northpac and Centpac
2) Sopac and New Zealand
3) SWPAC, Australia and Phillipines
4) ABDA, SEasia, china and Russia

So for the allies there would be a total of 5 players (the supreme allied general would control West coast). I am not sure how to divide up the Japanese side. Any ideas? Any interest?

The idea would be to have each General protect his fiefdom and not so eagerly give up assets to another command. And to make due with what his under his direct control.

Also, due to communication during the time institute some controll on collaberating amongst the commands to say one email (of specified length) or so per turn to coordinate.

This would be a long endeavor as it would realistically take three or four real time days for one game turn.

[Tom G.]

There are a few interested people, I am suprised that there is not more interest in something like this. I did a game like this in the old PACWAR and it was fun.

Well, in the mean time, I can't bear to start a game against the AI (though I should as 2ndACR is handing my lunch to me on a platter in a current PBEM game) so I would like to start a new PBEM game. I am looking for a Japanese player in the campaign game. Any takers?

[Matto]

Hi,
I think that mutliplayer pbem battle in WitP is great idea and must be tested in live !!! Maybe will be better do not use too many players for faster playing, I think that 2-3 on the allied side and 1-2 on the Japs side should be the best.
Allied side can be divided to SSSR+China+British+ABDA and US-Forces .... maybe US-Forces divided to two. Japs force can be divided corresponding ...
Matto

[joliverlay]

I think this is a good Idea.

2 Commanders for Japanese Army and Navy

I think the Japanese should have NO supreme commander. Let them control production and political points as follows:

On odd days the Army can change anything, one even days the Navy can.

If they don't get along their production will be really screwed up!

On Allied side you need the following

Brit/ABDA/Australia/NZ

SW Pacific and Phillipines + All Heavy Bombers (McArthur)

Everything Else (The Navy)

OR

Brit/ABDA/Australia

Army/Air

Navy/Marines

[Tom G.]

I am not too worried about the time on this game. I am hoping to get experienced PBEM'ers to play. Like myself, these players will probably have a number of games already in progress so adding just one more game to their inventory will be mitigated by the fact that their responsibility and time involvement will be significantly reduced by virture of a limited command. Should we lose a player on the way I don't see any difficulty in getting replacements.

I have played team PBEM games in the past. ONe with PACWAR that was a blast. (Witp should be a lot easier and smoother.) It truly does simulate the rivalry and competitiveness of the different branches very well.

After further thought. I have thougth about breaking up the allies as such:
overall commander
1) Responsibility for formulating an overall strategy. Implementing that strategy and issuing new strategy.
2) Assigning and changing assets to particular commands (ie spending political points to change commands or telling SOPAC commander he has Carrier TF 1010 for operation watchtower)
3) allocating resources. (the supply chains so in effect he is the WEST COAST commanding officer)
4) firing and hiring (within reason) player commanders. (maybe for not playing in a reasonably timely fashion or not following orders)
5) co-ordinating the commands (unlimited emails from overall command downward and upward but only 1 email laterally amongst the commands to simulate limited use of secure communication)
6) any thoughts out there......

commander of sub forces pacific
1) commander of all US subs

CentPac and NorPac commander

SoPac and New zealand

SWPac and Oz and Phillipines

ABDA SouthEast Asia Brits and Russia

And just for fun maybe a progaganda minister to do monthly AAR's in t the forum.

The frustrations and challenges here are obvious. Phillipines may or may not (up to allied commander) save some very needed base forces or air groups. The SoPac (or SWPac or CentPac) might just try and start island hopping with their in place assets (which is what the US Navy was known for doing any way.) and not wait for the all to important carrier groups. SWPac may not be 100 % supported by Sopac. (either by jealousy, different playing styles, or SoPac interpreting the overall strategy differently). etc etc etc.

I would say that the players on each team specifiy when they could commit to a time to run their turn. For example I can do my turns during the day (nice job). this way we can coordinate the file movement so that perhaps two to three days max per turn.

Maybe this is all to complex [&:] and if so anyone up for a small team PBEM game? [:D]