Non-scenario specific house rules

[tsimmonds]

16. Only Transport aircraft may perform troop transport missions.

[Lemurs!]

Tokyo is only the city/base of the Tokagawa Shogunate.
The Emperor lives and always did live in Kyoto.

Mike

[eMonticello]

I agree with the rule, with the following exception: Any aircraft that has the capability to perform troop transport missions may evacuate troops.

ORIGINAL: irrelevant

16. Only Transport aircraft may perform troop transport missions.

[Xargun]

ORIGINAL: esteban

Regarding Thailand, should Thailand really start the game as Japanese territory? There were no Japanese troops there, and the Thais did briefly put up a fight.

Now I am not 100% on my memory, but didn't japan threaten to invade Siam/Thailand and therefore the dictator (I want to say King, but I could be wrong on title) agreed to allow Japanese access to all military bases and permission to move through and base units there in return for staying in his position and ruling Thailand ? The Japs didn't care about Thailand, they just wanted easy access to Malaya and Burma... And if you look, there are no japanese troops in Thailand at game start.. The closest troops are in Bangkok - which Japan stole from the French (along with Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos)...

Thats why on turn one a complete division is dropped off in Thailand (at Songkha I think). Both to protect Thailand from Malaya forces and to cut off their retreat up into Burma.

Xargun

[pfnognoff]

I don't have any additions to this nice list, I have some comments/questions, though.

Rules 1,2 and 5 are a must and hopefully they will be addresed in some of the future patches. Numbers 9 and 10 also sound good to have in the game, as they also try to enhance the game mechanics. And maybe a patch will deal with them too, we hope. [&o]

Rule 14 (Kwantung LCUs) is logical - if you pay for AC transfer, why don't you pay for LCUs that walk out.

Rules 8 and 15 sound as they are partially connected. For example if you implement rule 15, you will probably run out of PPs to pay for USAFFE and ABDA withdrawals, because you would try to go for Marines first.

I would also logically connect a part of rule 8 "withdrawal from Malaya" with part of the rule 6 "no Early Burma advance". If you use one you must use both. But I must admit that I'm not familiar with the political implications behind rule 6, so I'm not an expert. What are those?

In any case it's a good thing to have this list compiled, so thanks for your effort.

[tsimmonds]

On the Salween river rule, isn't that a little extreme? It pretty much says that you can't move troops past Bangkok.

No, I believe the Salween is the river that runs between Moulmein and Rangoon. There's lots of ground to cover between Bangkok and Moulmein.

[Halsey]

Some people have complained that the Marine Divs are too readily available. Quoting later arrival dates and deployments. No there won't be enough PP's. That's the point. As a supreme commander in the Pacific a player has to weigh his deployment options. Do you send in fresh troops from the West Coast? Or, do you try to save units cut off in a different area of operations. That's a tough call in any war.

The Salween River proposal will only allow a few weeks for the Allies to set up some kind of defense until Singapore falls. It is a temporary rule.

Pick and choose which rules you like. Discard the ones you don't. This was thread started to help list possible choices.[:)]

[pfnognoff]

I just remembered one that is not yet on the list: "No IJN fleet/ship should be allowed to move through Malaca Strait on the first turn."

I saw this idea in another thread, and since it is not on the list, thought I should mention it. Although I'm axis fanboy deep inside, the idea that British high command would not react somehow to such a move... If allowed it could even be used to step arround the rule 6 which deals with LCUs "moving" over the river, "I didn't move, I've unloaded!" [:D] And Rangoon is in LBA recon range from some of the bases under IJ control.

That brings me to one more question, since I'm not familiar with the original "mogami rule", how do you decide what is in range, and from which bases do you measure?

Thanks

[forranger]

ORIGINAL: Halsey

Does anyone know exactly when the Japanese went into Burma? Did they send forces into Burma before Singapore was taken? I don't have the answer.

One of my sources mentions january 15th '42 as the beginning of the invasion of Burma from Thailand. According to the same source Singapore surrendered one month later (feb 15th).
Interesting site btw: http://www.worldwar-2.net/timelines/asi ... x-1942.htm

And thanks from my side too. I'm happy about this input concerning house rules, as I'm preparing to start my first pbem.

[WhoCares]

According to this map, the invasion of Burma started 15th January: Link: Burma Campaign

PS: Some more nice maps can be found here: Link: Maps of WW II
PPS: Thanks to Tanaka, as I found this links in a link list of a page he recommended previously... [;)]

[tsimmonds]

That brings me to one more question, since I'm not familiar with the original "mogami rule", how do you decide what is in range, and from which bases do you measure?

You could conduct recon missions. That would be definitive. No invasion without a prior recon mission.

[Halsey]

I don't have Mogami's link to his turn 1 rules. Does anyone have it?

For the recon, the use of the Mavis and Emily units would be ideal.
Going to add 1/15/42 as the time limit on the Salween rule. Thanks for the heads up![:)]

[pfnognoff]

ORIGINAL: irrelevant

You could conduct recon missions. That would be definitive. No invasion without a prior recon mission.

I guess it would mean that recon on the same turn as the invasion unloads is enoguh? If not then there is no landings on the first turn?

[Halsey]

This is a way to limit unhistorical and highly improbable invasion sights. Going through the motions on turn one helps to balance invasion possibilities.

The Malacca Strait suggestion could be added to your own game. Make a list of rules that you think need tweaked and send them to your opponent. Let both sides decide which ones to use.

Only use house rules if you think the game needs them. They can always be thrown out or modified later if you see that they are unbalancing the game.

[strawbuk]

I suggest that the keything about house rules is;

1. Simple, so people remember to apply them - NOT 'max number of amphib invasions allowed is two minus the date of first taking the 'Canal divide by number of Australian brigades in desert war..'

Date related ones are are always easy to forget

2. Not too many - so people remember them

3. Clearly divided into 'tech' ones eg when Corsairs on US carriers, number of divs sat on an atoll and 'political' eg no bypassing Philipines

4. Generic where possible ie 'all atolls allowed no more than x div to be parked there all war' NOT all atolls except blah and blah

5. Maybe clearly divided into ones where applicable to AI play (where house rules help a lot) and pbem. AI play probably needs good 'political' house rules to improve playing experience .

6. Agreement when you start playing on how to resolve turns where house rules got broken by accident - may be rerun of saved turn (ouch...)

[Halsey]

Good ideas! Communication and printed rules being used helpful, also.
I also agree with the "oops I forgot rule". Others players might not be so forgiving, but if it would ruin a game in progress, why not?

[Bodhi]

ORIGINAL: Lemurs!

Tokyo is only the city/base of the Tokagawa Shogunate.
The Emperor lives and always did live in Kyoto.

Mike

Incorrect. Meiji upped and went to live in Tokyo after the fall of the Tokugawa shogunate. There's still an Imperial palace (or two) in Kyoto, but the Emperor has lived in Tokyo since Meiji did his bunk. Of course, Kyoto residents refuse to believe he's actually left and expect him back any day. [:D]

[Halsey]

For those getting ready to start "THE BIG ONE". Just thought I'd move this thread up so it doesn't vanish.[:D]

[tsimmonds]

Here's a couple of good house rules from Xargun and rroberson's AAR game:

3. No rearming TFs in ports smaller than 3 without an AE present
4. No refueling of capital ships in ports smaller than 3 without an AO or TK present (Capital ships are cruisers and larger)

Takes a small step towards curbing the unrealistic frenzied pace at which naval operations can proceed in this system.

[Halsey]

These have been added to the list.
My only concern with this is, a player will have to turn off all auto-refueling options from all combat TF's and do them manually each time. So it will also cost an additional day for the manual application.