PBEM RULES...?

Major Tom · Post by **Major Tom** » Thu Oct 12, 2000 12:11 am

Hi, I am going to post all tentative rules devised by the Pacwar List a few years ago. This is just to simulate certain things that were not able to be simulated in the old Pacific War. They are always optional, but, both players should agree on which rules to use. I have added a few new ones as well.

Pacwar House Rules version 1.3 10/06/97 (Plus additions)

***for use with reduced ship capacity OB*** All these rules are optional of course.

1.The Japanese may not conduct amphibious landings directly on Singapore or Bataan. Nor can they bombard them with surface forces.

**With the built in reductions in sealift and supply, further restrictions on the Japanese are probably not necessary.

2.Allied LCU's that have suffered a reduction in experience due to hard fighting may regain their former level by a 4 month (16 turn) stay at a major rear area base. These are Calcutta, or Columbo for the British. For American, and Australian troops the following:
Melbourne
Sydney
Brisbane
Auckland
Pearl Harbor
Seattle
Any US West Coast base.

(a) Obviously if the bases above are under attack, they are not rear area, and thus may not rest and refit LCU's

(b) This does not apply to units completely destroyed in combat and reappearing in their home country.

** This rule is an attempt to make good on the heavy losses that may occur to Allied landings on coral atolls**

3. The size of Allied amphibious Landings are limited as follows:
Start thru Dec
1942 one division
1943 two divisions
1944 four divisions
1945 no limit

(a) For the purpose of this rule 2 Brigades or 4 Regiments equal a Division.

** This rule is simply to take into account Allied shortages in landing craft until after June of 44.

4. To simulate the small size and barren condition of coral atolls
(terrain type 1) the follow applies:

(a) Garrisons of coral atolls are limited to one regt, (or 2Bn's).

(b) SBF and engineer units may be added on over the garrrison limit.

(d) Landings on Coral atolls may be made only one division at a time. Example: in 1943 a landing of up to two divisions is possible (see rule 3 above). At a coral atoll however these two divsions must be landed from different TF's. Thus one at a time even though its the same turn.

(e) Divisions used to conquer an Atoll can only remain on the island for approximately 2 turns after all enemy resistance is eliminated.

** I always felt there should be some limitaion on the number of troops a Coral atoll can support, both as garrision and for attack. This rule is an attempt at making those limitations. I don't know if it will work.

(NOTE: I am not entirely sure about this one. Atolls were usually a series of small islands grouped together. Mankin Island on Tarawa Atoll held 1 SNLF Regiment, 1 SBF, plus 2 Engineer Regiments of approximately 2000 Labourers. This was only one island in the chain, albiet the largest one. Possibly an entire division could be stationed on an Atoll, spread out among all of the Island chains in the Atoll? Any thoughts?)

5. Only Japanese LCU's attached to the CEF (China expeditionary force) may fight in China. Only Chinese LCU’s attached to the Nationalist China HQ may fight in China, no other allied formation is allowed past Kunming.

(NOTE: I am not sure about the use of Engineers from other HQ’s)
(NOTE: Some allied forces attached to North CAC may appear at Chunking, they must be immediately sent to Lashio/Kunming)

6. Battleships sunk at Pearl Harbor may be raised by the Allied player at the rate of two for every three sunk. Ships raised are available again in Jan 44.

** This is simply giving the Allied player what the Allies obviously had the ability to do. Old BB's are weaker and air dropped weapons are more powerful in this OB, so more BB's are likely to be sunk at Pearl. Personally I think that any capital ship sunk in a large enough harbor (8 or 9) should have a 75% chance of being raised. This includes Japanese battleships sunk at Kure, etc.. This only happens if the ship is sunk IN PORT. They will reappear in approximately 90-100 turns. This must be done through the editor.

7. The "Get Transport" command may not be used.

8. The "pool" command may only be used between ships in the same port or at Player national bases I.E. Home Island bases for Japan, US West Coast bases, Australia bases, Columbo and Calcutta. The exceptions to this are PT boats and Daihatsu barges.

9. You cannot move the 73rd and 129th IJA Brigades along with the 88th and 89th IJA Divisions until the arrival of the 91st IJA Division. These formations were included in the OBC to stop an early American exploitation of the weak areas of Northern Japan. Historically these units didn’t appear until late 1943 / early 1944.

10. Chinese air force units should not leave Nationalist Chinese territory. They can be based at North CAC bases IN China (not Burma). The Chinese weren’t too big on sending any war material outside China, even Burma was given very low priority.

11. The Japanese MAY NOT leave any US force defending the Philippines from 1942 alive and in control of a base by January 1, 1943. Unless the US makes a determined act to try and liberate/supply the islands the Japanese player cannot let a small garrison go unmolested. If allowed to happen, no matter where the US forces are the Japanese get Kamikaze aircraft in 1944 (due to American units being in the Philippines). It is not a difficult job to dislodge the American forces from Bataan, before mid 1942, just bring in more formations from other fronts if you are having trouble. If they aren’t destroyed by 1943 the Japanese player forfeits the game.

12. NO RAIDING ENEMY HOME BASES. The Allies cannot land any unit on Japan, nor can the Japanese land any unit on the West Coast (not including Alaska), India (the new India base, formerly Calcutta) or Melbourne and Sydney UNLESS it is part of an invasion force to try and capture the base. It would not be fair for the Allies to throw away a regiment of troops in 1942 in an attempt to land in Northern Japan, or any other undefended base for the sole reason to permanently destroy the factories on that base. Nor can the Japanese do the same to the Allies.

(NOTE: I am not sure about this one, possibly one could say that it would be someone’s own fault for leaving these important bases undefended, impressions?)

13. No Allied landings in China (except for a possible British landing in Hong Kong). It would be unfair to allow the Allies to land forces in Japanese controlled China/Manchuria with the new set up of IJA Armies.

14. The two Thailand Armies (1st and 2nd) and the 1st Indian National Army Division may not leave 15th Army Controlled Bases, and/or historical Thailand/Burma (The following Bases... Singora, Bangkok, or any former British base in Burma/India). The Thai and Indian forces were nominal allies of the Japanese, but, were very unwilling to send forces too far from home. They can retreat into Indo-China (Phnom Phen, Saigon, etc...) or into Malaya if the British conquer all of Burma and Thailand.

15. Australian Militia units assigned to SW Pacific may not leave Australian Territory. This includes all of New Guinea, Rabul, Soloman Islands, Gilbert Islands, or basically any base attached to ANZAC at the beginning of the game. These units are...
3rd Infantry Division (Australian, 3rd NZ Division is free to go anywhere)
5th Infantry Division
11th Infantry Division
7th Infantry Brigade
11th Infantry Brigade
23rd Infantry Brigade
30th Infantry Brigade

16. Allied air forces must use the correct type of aircraft. USAAF Groups cannot use British or Australian aircraft, but, the RAF, RAAF, NEIAF and RNZAF may use USAAF aircraft.

Please feel free to make any additions, or, to post questions on the validity of some of the existing rules. After a little debate I think that creating a revised PBEM Rule book should be in order, eh?

Jeremy

mogami · Post by **mogami** » Thu Oct 12, 2000 2:20 am

Hi think any OOB should be historical and not modified to prevent players from doing stuipid things like trying to attack Austraila or northern Japan. Japan must guard her bases and allies must guard theirs with what they have. Thats why they both have navies and airforces. I agree US airunits should fly there own ac (USN wildcat, USMC wildcat (buffalo's haha)and allow every one else to fly US ac too. Please explain logic of not allowing bombardment of Singapore and Bataan? I am against any rule that requires an editor once game has begun (ethier its in the game or its not)3 or 4 more old BB's don't make a diff to me. Funny little raids for blowing up bases I will allow if they are conducted by funny little raiders (USMC raiders & Para's and IJN SNLF's & Para's) Rule 4 b can be compensated for by using eng and sbf's early to take empty islands thus raising exp level's making them good defenders but I agree their engineering skill would allow them to improve base's defence so it all works out. I am not against non China theator engineers from any side being sent there to improve captured bases (for Japan) or those little bases China starts with (but Brits only have 1 eng to start with and Port Blair usally gets mine) Lets say 1 IJA eng per captured base (that way you have a reason to send one) Player needs get transport command to access APA(l) and LST lets say allies can only use at West Coast or India I have no problem with IJN only using on home Islands.

------------------
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a differant direction!

Major Tom · Post by **Major Tom** » Thu Oct 12, 2000 3:53 am

Both Singapore and Corregidor were designed to shrugg off naval assaults. They had multiple 15", 14", 12", etc. Any bombardment force would have to endure a HAIL of fire coming from severely fortified positions built to have immunity from naval attack. Since this cannot be represented in PacWar, we should have some sort of barrier to constant sea bombardments of these bases (as, historically they were out of the question).

You can choose to follow any one of these rules, add your own to the list if you see it necessary. However, you must discuss every rule (that has been finalized) with your PBEM opponent. One might accept one rule, but, it may seem unfair to their opponent. The rules are fairly equal, no side receiving undue hardship.

Jeremy,

mogami · Post by **mogami** » Thu Oct 12, 2000 5:56 am

Hi Yes my brother pointed that out to me, and I concur both Singapore and Bataan can not fairly be bombarded as their guns are not present also making landings impossible.
Also I would allow Japan to use GET Transport command on first turn anywhere they want.

------------------
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a differant direction!

[This message has been edited by Mogami (edited October 11, 2000).]

andrewmv · Post by **andrewmv** » Thu Oct 12, 2000 9:17 am

Rules I would add. One RN/RAN heavy Cruiser may be rebuilt as a USN Baltimore class (the Canberra).

The NZ 1st and 8th Brigades are also milita formations and are restricted to Auckland, Fiji, Samoa, New Caledonia, Espirtu Santo, Efate, Tonga, Rennall Is, Santa Cruz Is, and Nauru Is. The 3rd NZ Division was disbanded during early 1944 due to a severe manpower shortage in NZ. Therefore it should be removed in March 1944.

Shropshire is a RN ship unless the RAN losses at least one Heavy Cruiser. When the RNZN recieves Gambia they have to give up one of their other Cruisers (NZ badly over mobilised early in the war and its manpower was stretched to the limit by 1944).

sulup · Post by **sulup** » Thu Oct 12, 2000 12:12 pm

Another rule might have regarding sending BB to bombard the islands round Guadalcanal and other islands with shallow waters similar to it. The best ships that you should be allowed to send to bombard are CA's.

mogami · Post by **mogami** » Thu Oct 12, 2000 2:12 pm

Hi Sulup and all Hey don't forget one of the only BB vrs BB(well ok BC) fights of the war took place around the Canal The Washington and South Dakota against Hiei and Kirishima.
Someday soon Parrot old friend you too might meet Chin Lee off of Salvo Island (In our PBEM) But first I intend giving the ghosts of Scott and Callaganhan a second chance. Once the Marines are on the Canal and Catus is up and running you might change your mind and want to send some of your BB's down the slot (Yamato and Musashi would make a nice bombardment TF)

------------------
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a differant direction!

[This message has been edited by Mogami (edited October 12, 2000).]

andrewmv · Post by **andrewmv** » Thu Oct 12, 2000 2:49 pm

>>16. Allied air forces must use the correct type of aircraft. USAAF Groups cannot use British or Australian aircraft, but, the RAF, RAAF, NEIAF and RNZAF may use USAAF aircraft.<<

USAAF did use British Aircraft, specifically Spitfire VIII (I kid you not, that specific mark) and Beaufighters (though I think these were confined to Europe). The Marines actively considered adopting the Spitfire (it even recieved a USN code, the FS IIRC). Britian supplied the US with a good deal of equipment in reverse Lend-Lease.

Nikademus · Post by **Nikademus** » Thu Oct 12, 2000 3:14 pm

i'm completely new to the PBEM aspect of PacWar, so i need to ask the dumb question. Where did these 'house rules' come about and could anyone elaborate on some of the logic and history behind it (some of course is evident but any add'l feedback is appreciated)

Major Tom · Post by **Major Tom** » Thu Oct 12, 2000 9:28 pm

The history of PBEM rules goes back to, well, around 1997. Well before the Matrix patch, there was a weboard that dealt solely about Pacific War. Most of these guys have been playing for YEARS. Most of these guys are abid history buffs (Grognards). Some things that Pacific War allowed were not 'possible' or 'feasible' during the historical events.

For example, the ship type AP transports troops accross the sea. However, it makes no determination on where you are landing the troops. There are two choices.

1. A hostile beach
2. A friendly dock

In the game, every AP is both a transport and an amphibous invasion ship when in reality they weren't. You needed special landing craft (which were always in short order) in order to land troops, but, in Pac War you could make as many landings as AP's. You need a lot of AP's because historically you could transfer a large number of LCU's from one friendly base to another. So, the rule about numbers of Amphibious invasions per turn, for certain years was developed to supplement PacWar's inability on addressing this minor aspect.

Basically, none of these rules drastically effects the outcome of the game. They are all relatively small, and including them, or not including them will is just a matter of choice.

Jeremy

Drex · Post by **Drex** » Fri Oct 13, 2000 2:04 am

Thank you Major Tom for posting the Pbem house rules. I had no idea they existed. They definitely make sense and are easily incorporated into game play.

Nikademus · Post by **Nikademus** » Fri Oct 13, 2000 4:13 pm

I'm still wearing my dunce cap this morning so i dont feel bad asking an obvious question.

can the editor modify games in progress? given the 'refit' rule for PBEM.

Doug Olenick · Post by **Doug Olenick** » Fri Oct 13, 2000 6:22 pm

"12. NO RAIDING ENEMY HOME BASES. The Allies cannot land any unit on Japan, nor can the Japanese land any unit on the West Coast (not including Alaska), India (the new India base, formerly Calcutta) or Melbourne and Sydney UNLESS it is part of an invasion force to try and capture the base. It would not be fair for the Allies to throw away a regiment of troops in 1942 in an attempt to land in Northern Japan, or any other undefended base for the sole reason to permanently destroy the factories on that base. Nor can the Japanese do the same to the Allies."

I agree with the idea of landing and LCU on the enemies home turf. The US would not sacrifice men in such a suicidal gesture and to truly destroy a regions industrial capacity would take millions of men with sledgehammers to knock down the factories.

However, a TF strike should be allowed. The US West Coast fully expected to be raided and the IJN could have pulled it off with the proper logistic train.

The US Navy did attack Japan during Doolittle's raid.

Doug O.

Blackhorse · Post by **Blackhorse** » Fri Oct 13, 2000 8:00 pm

Some comments on House Rules . . .

1. Shore Batteries. I agree that house rules should simulate the effect of the shore batteries at Singapore and Corregidor. However, the batteries at Corregidor defended the harbor entrance to Manila, not the coast of Bataan. In fact, the Japanese made several (small-scale) landings in Bataan to flank US positions. I'd suggest that bombardments and amphibious landings be prohibited at Singapore and *Manila*.

2. A human Japanese player can easily capture China with the forces already in place -- which is unrealistic and can drastically affect play balance. In reality, those troops were barely enough to tenuously garrison what Japan already held against disaffected civilians and guerillas. The Japanese should be required to garrison every Chinese (and Indian, if they chose to go that route) city that they hold or capture with at least one division.

3. I'm another one who believes that HRs should not require the use of an editor.

Nikademus · Post by **Nikademus** » Fri Oct 13, 2000 8:27 pm

i'm still shaking the cobwebs off from my PacWar expeiences.

no question that #2 is ahistorical , however how does it affect playbalance? after all the Japanese player is restricted from tapping the Kuangtung army to a great extent

we'rnt most of Corregidor's shore batteries put out by airpower?

whats H.R. stand for

[This message has been edited by Nikademus (edited October 13, 2000).]

mjmooney · Post by **mjmooney** » Fri Oct 13, 2000 9:30 pm

An argument for simplicy,

While striving for realism is a worth while approach it seems to me that haggling over rules that really don't affect game play that much seems a little time consuming.

Take the Singapore Battan no bombardment or amphib rule:If the IJA/N player has a problem taking Singapore without those two options he should go back to playing stratego. Bataan is a very hard nut to Amphib anyway, and come think of it the Japaneese did take Corregidor by sea. And they did make landings on Bataan (which failed-small scale ones). If MaCarthur leaves Bataan empty or only lightly garded he deserves to lose it quickly. It seems to me that the way to take Luzon is the way Homma did it, Starve them out first.

As for airframes, the Brits and the Us shared practically all of their tech data with each other... The reason that raf and usaaf tended to stay with their own designs was more to do with preference-why should the allied player be stuck with the same prejudices..and besides for the first year they are all Zero fodder anyway, and again it really does not make that much difference.

Base raiding..If you leave your base open I think its fair game.Besides the new version has quite a few base troops avaliable.

In defense of the Get transport command--none of us have staffs to set up contingency plans and forward plan...yes it is open to abuse..I promise I won't use it to perform some cheesy evac. Besides if you use your transports in a reckless manner they soon end up at the bottum of the pac.

BB rule---let that one be...there are still a ton of old BB's left after Pearl Harbor--If the Japs sink them they don't need to see them again.

As for Engineers and the wrong HQ, your the commander use the troops as you see fit--don't let historical mistakes be yours.(if that was the case you would not be able, as the IJN to use your subs to attack supply lines and instead use them to supply bases{try simulating that!} or just go after capital ships-how many of us capture a forward base for the sole purpose of parking subs outside San Fran or L.A.)

Which leaves us with the really only rules that SERIOULSLY affects game play...The amphib and atoll rules. There are points to be made either way on that one so agree to It with the person your playing before hand.I would incline toward implementing them. There is simply no way the allied player should have unlimited landing ablility in 1942---but then again if the IJN player is worth his salt 1942 should be a tough year for the allies to mount an offensive even without the rules. Maybe they should be implemented if the Allied player has played the game more than the IJN player has.

Sorry I tend to ramble.

MJMooney
------------------

[This message has been edited by mjmooney (edited October 13, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by mjmooney (edited October 13, 2000).]

Blackjack · Post by **Blackjack** » Sat Oct 14, 2000 3:01 am

Another useful old House Rule for PBEM Games is that the Allied/US Player cannot use the MTB`s or PT`s for Task Force Escorts or as a separate TF in "Blue Water" operations along the same track as a Cargo/Transport TF`s.

Reason being the PT/MTB`s draw all the Naval Interdication air strikes allowing the important TF`s to slip through.

As an aside I think some guys are under valuing the old US BB`s, I make every effort to repair them fast by sending them to the West Coast Ports after Dec 7.

In many ways they are as important as the CV`s and with good leaders ( Scott & Lee )
they can cause heavy damage to LCU`s and wreck Air Groups and help you give your enemy ISO Bases, something you really want to try for against another Human player BTW.

They are essential as Bombardment TF`s in any Landings as well.

In fact, in some PBEM Games, they were the subject of House Rules.

[This message has been edited by Blackjack (edited October 13, 2000).]

mogami · Post by **mogami** » Sat Oct 14, 2000 3:18 am

Hi all! Blackjack I like the old US BB's and I use them alot in my operations. But I am not going to sweat 3 or 4 more or less.

------------------
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a differant direction!