Matrix Games Forums

Pieter, how about Pompack's proposed code change? I think this would please all parties.

I've posted it on the suggestion part of the tester forum, I've added a note that possibly the no movement requirement could be dropped as that would possibly penalize unready/depleted divisions that are moving up to the front too much. THOSE divisions should be refitting to get up to strength, at least as I see it, so they should get a morale boost from getting up to strength, which is how I interpret the morale benefit. Enemy unit could also possibly be changed to enemy hex.

I'd go more than one hex away for Refit. Only 10 miles? I'd say more like 5 hexes (isn't that what construction bn's are limited to?). OR, give them a very substantial handicap if they get into combat, like a 75% morale & CV reduction and let the player take his chances. To me, "Refit" means not deployed, weapons/ammo stored, equipment in the shop, troops on leave or in training, etc.

I agree. If the Soviets decide to pull their whole air force out of combat, that's a reasonable decision and could have happened in reality.

I have no problem with how the rules work as written including refit, airborne drops, amphibs...or even bombing Ploesti on turn 1. The only real gamey thing that I am concerned with are the border areas is in the smaller scenarios. Take Case Blue for instance. In the game I am running with Stuart, as part of that AAR posted on Wargamer, it would be very easy for me to break thru his line north of Stalingrad across the Don where I currently have a large bridgehead, and cut north to the map edge cutting supply for every unit of his west of there.
 
I can make it wide enough that he would be unable to regain supply and fortify that line with up to 5 full panzer corps. He would lose half of his onboard units as a result. This to me is about as cheesy as it gets and I told Stuart I wouldn't try that (unless all else fails..haha..just joking Stuart). So there is one house rule that probably should be considered. The first few turns isn't a big issue with short envelopments being ok figuring you would have had other units in the non-map areas. But once the front is set, being able to cut behind 15 or 20 hexes deep is a bit too much.
 
Andy

Again, I agree. The idea of House Rules is to have a simple set of high-level guidelines for streamlined fair play. Not a complex monster list and not a list that prevents flexibility and realistic strategic/operational choices. (IMHO)

And noob replacements coming in without ever having fired a rifle...

ORIGINAL: BigAnorak

I think time will tell whether House rules are needed. I know Andy (Sabre21)tried to "Break" the game doing lots of cheesy stuff like Bombing Ploesti(sp?) on every turn with the long range bombers, for example, but I don't think the game broke, and he lost a ton of bombers.

I had a customer who bombed Ploesti (a judge and a not very nice person, altough he got better as I knew him. He is passed away now).

He said, "They gave us medals and it was a GD bloodbath!"

Well I may be going on a limb on this statement. Its really hard to say this even as good as it is now. It was rushed into production even after 28 months of strait testing because of public demand. Its really bug free, some small quirks are there, but fun and very playable. So now, everyone has a voice who has the game. Joel is the best at listening. We don't need house rules. We need good arguements for change! There is a suggestion area, use it.

I agree with Jon, if we're going to change the game let's do it officially and not mess around with house rules nonsense. Make a case for a code change and we will consider it, and in fact I've see some pretty good suggestions in this thread and elsewhere already.

I'm ultimately interested primarily in PBEM, and strongly dislike the idea of having the WitE PBEM community balkanized by house rules. Which, to my mind, is really about people lobbying to handicap the game in their favor. (Cynical, I know.) Far better to work with a unified set of official rules and code, peer reviewed by the entire community, which can reach some sort of consensus on these matters working with the developers. The game hasn't stopped evolving, but it needs to evolve in a single direction.

Same here. NONE

ORIGINAL: 76mm

I haven't played any PBEM games yet, but given the massive scope and complexity of the game, I would be disinclined to use any house rules which make things even more complicated...

For example, I just don't see German amphibious landings as being that big of a threat...

Opp's we have a suggestion box on our testers forum not here...Joel or Erik, it might be good to add one here also...

This is not WITP, so we don't need house rules! [:D]

Joking aside, I guess it's too early to tell.  But it seems that WITE would need less house rules, or none at all. WITP is more flexible as a lot of factors are left for the player to manipulate which results into gamey stuff. I think WITE is more controled.

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

I agree with Jon, if we're going to change the game let's do it officially and not mess around with house rules nonsense. Make a case for a code change and we will consider it, and in fact I've see some pretty good suggestions in this thread and elsewhere already.

I'm ultimately interested primarily in PBEM, and strongly dislike the idea of having the WitE PBEM community balkanized by house rules. Which, to my mind, is really about people lobbying to handicap the game in their favor. (Cynical, I know.) Far better to work with a unified set of official rules and code, peer reviewed by the entire community, which can reach some sort of consensus on these matters working with the developers. The game hasn't stopped evolving, but it needs to evolve in a single direction.

I agree with Flaviusk. This seems like the best decision.

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

I agree with Jon, if we're going to change the game let's do it officially and not mess around with house rules nonsense. Make a case for a code change and we will consider it, and in fact I've see some pretty good suggestions in this thread and elsewhere already.

I'm ultimately interested primarily in PBEM, and strongly dislike the idea of having the WitE PBEM community balkanized by house rules. Which, to my mind, is really about people lobbying to handicap the game in their favor. (Cynical, I know.) Far better to work with a unified set of official rules and code, peer reviewed by the entire community, which can reach some sort of consensus on these matters working with the developers. The game hasn't stopped evolving, but it needs to evolve in a single direction.

Well, "nonsense" it may be, but at least the discussion produced some useful outputs and an agreement that improvements are needed. That's a step in the right direction.

First time I paid for something and was then told my comments are nonsense, by the way. The moderator here needs to sort out the way the virtual Matrix team communicates with customers, IMO.

ORIGINAL: redmarkus4
First time I paid for something and was then told my comments are nonsense, by the way. The moderator here needs to sort out the way the virtual Matrix team communicates with customers, IMO.

IMO you're being a bit thin-skinned, I personally prefer some give and take on these game forums, as long as everyone behaves like adults, as everyone on this thread (so far!) has done. Any game developer that always agrees with their customers is basically doomed...
[8D]

House rules? House Rules? We don't need no stinkin' house rules.

Surprises usually don't work in my favour, so I'd rather have some fixed house rules for the really game stuff than be the victim of them. You can all say no house rules are needed, but I'm 99% sure a player will complain if someone pulls a really gamey move on you that could easily have been prevented by a house rule. It happened for WitP:AE, and it will happen here too.

What the hell was the name of that movie anyway, in which John Belushi said that "Badges, we don't need no stinking badges"...He was the Mexican in that one.

ORIGINAL: ComradeP
You can all say no house rules are needed, but I'm 99% sure a player will complain if someone pulls a really gamey move on you that could easily have been prevented by a house rule.

I'm sure it would be very irritating and make the game less fun, but how many gamey tactics have the potential to be game-winners? Because I think having to keep track of a plethora of house rules would also make the game much less fun...