|
Capt. Pixel -> Not that I'd disagree with a COLONEL (11/18/2002 4:12:44 AM)
|
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Colonel von Blitz
[B]Ok, here are some "rules of honor" that I've created and honed while playing A LOT of PBEM games. These were created to counter some SP:WaW 'flaws' :
Colonel von Blitz [/B][/QUOTE]
Permission to speak freely! Sir! :D
* 1) Reinforcements are allowed if both players agree.
I think that's as far as that rule needs to go, with a slight modification. 'Reinforcements are allowed [U]unless one[/U] player disagrees.'
* 2) Paradrops and infiltrations are forbidden in ME and Advance battles.
It's not hard to justify SO Partisans appearing in either of these situations. A meeting engagement doesn't necessarily mean that neither side is supported by other elements. That ground force rushing towards the objective may be doing so to support a paradrop that was planned days before. But look! there's an enemy formation. Also, paradrops could (and did) occur concurrently (eg. A Meeting of Devils).
* 3) In Meeting Engagements only engineers are allowed to place mines.
I kind of like this. Although I sometimes do it to protect myself, I find slathering your rear area VHs and map edge flanks with mines a particularly gamey thing to do. Why, for instance, would you even know where your opponent's objectives are? Or the 'edge of the map' for that matter. In Advance or Assault battles, I'd just expect there to be stiff defenses. ( I see little difference in the two, in terms of PBEM generated battles).
* 4) Rocket launchers ...
I think these are already pretty self-limiting. Fully reloading a Nebelwerefer with one ammo truck is going to take 6 turns, anyway. I think the time scale estimate is ~2 minutes per turn, so this would fit in your time estimate. And ammo trucks cost more than most tanks. I do agree that there ought to be an outgoing ammo limit on the trucks/dumps themselves, but that's a game engine issue.
* 5) The deliberate usage of FlaK-weaponry to counter armor is forbidden.
Umm, why? I gather by this that you mean using AA exclusively in the AT role because that countries AT capability is so pathetic? (early war British 2 pdr, for instance). Unless we had agreed to play an historically probable, or re-enactment battle of a particular theatre situation, I wouldn't even bother mentioning #5.
* 6) To counter enemy On-Board artillery, it is forbidden to use only smoke puffs as guidance.
This is certainly reasonable in some types of terrain, but given open, 'flat' ground, it's not hard to see smoke plumes at 2-3 km. With any kind of altitude advantage, you could see twice that range. Spotting smoke rounds ( a device not even modelled in SPW@W) were used to bring in barrages on target.
Besides, each side's artillery assets are executing their battle at a whole different level. Strategic employment of smoke around batteries, the 'Shoot-and-Scoot' tactics are all elements of this game-within-a-game. Shoot at my smoke puffs - chances are usually better than 50% that there's nothing even there. :p
(and how could your side know there's "1 Casualty" from your bombardment?)
* 7) Calling Off-Board artillery is allowed only by using Forward Observers or HQ.
I generally do this because it's prudent. With C&C on, however, I use [I]any[/I] unit that has excess orders to call in continuing fire plots. I then use the more precise FOs to call in new plots and adjust existing ones. If my opponent isn't using these guys for his arty plots, woe to him. I'll just skip underneath his slowly adjusting barrages. (That's not very realistic either, is it?)
* 8) It is forbidden to use 0-units of On-Board artillery batteries to direct their own fire.
I agree, this is kind of cheesy. But if you're down to using the battery's 0-unit, you may already be in pretty bad shape. You could also 'game' this one and justify that the battery has an built-in FO (guy with radio).
* 9) Players are allowed to use 10% (15% in Assault/Defend battles) of their points for artillery.
This is generally the limits I would request. 10% makes you think pretty hard about what you're going to use. 15% is just enough to pound the pee-waddin' out of your opponent. 20% is just obnoxious. I consider those limits to apply the amount of points on the map. That is, 10% of the initial buy plus 10% of any reinforcements purchase later. Limits on calibre and number of batteries should be discussed at the outset, but otherwise assumed to be whatever is available to that country at that time.
* 10) Reconnoitering is allowed but it is forbidden to drive around within the vicinity of enemy units with empty trucks, motorcycles etc. with the sole purpose of drawing fire.
Well, I agree, but how does one adjudicate this? Trucks might be pushing the issue, but they're already modelled to retreat automatically in certain situations. As far as MCs and jeeps and kubelwagens, I use these as reconn and they get shot at sometimes. Who's to say if that was 'baiting the Tiger' or not?
There are tactics one can use to reduce the effect of this 'abuse', like setting your Opp Fire range to shorter distances. Place less critical units forward to deliver Opp Fire first, etc.
Historically 'accurate' battles might be more enlightening, but I think they tended to be rather one-sided affairs. Many were won or lost due to conditions [I]behind[/I] the front lines. (logistic collapse, equipment breakdowns, sabotage).
I think SPW@W's features of Availability, Rarity and Reduced squads do a fine job in keeping things 'real'.
It's the 5,342,126,785 possible 'What Ifs' that keeps this game so interesting. I think you could 'eliminate' 3,756,483,011 through rules and still have great game to play for entertainment. :cool:
|
|
|
|
