Matrix Games Forums

Characters of World War 1Sign of for the Pike and Shot Beta!More Games are Coming to Steam! Deal of the Week: Combat Command Return to the Moon on October 31st! Commander: The Great War iPad Wallpapers Generals of the Great WarDeal of the Week Panzer CorpsNew Strategy Titles Join the FamilyTablet Version of Qvadriga gets new patch
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

House rules

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Time of Fury >> House rules Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
House rules - 1/3/2012 1:32:10 AM   
rogo727


Posts: 1388
Joined: 7/12/2011
From: Iowa
Status: offline
I like to play with house rules. I Limit the number of panzer corps I can buy.. I set Italy , Romania , Hungary , Bulgaria and Slovakia to hard. Finland I set to easy. I never attempt sea lion. What are your house rules?
Post #: 1
RE: House rules - 1/3/2012 2:52:11 AM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 8513
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline
no Sea lion
no pre 41 attack of Romania by USSR

(in reply to rogo727)
Post #: 2
RE: House rules - 1/3/2012 8:18:22 AM   
Greyshaft


Posts: 2234
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline
every captured city must have a division allocated as a garrison - even after French surrender I still garrison France. It acts as a limiting force on the German ability to conquer everything.

_____________________________

/Greyshaft

(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 3
RE: House rules - 1/3/2012 9:31:35 PM   
gwgardner

 

Posts: 3373
Joined: 4/7/2006
Status: offline
a possible house rule, if someone knows the historical practice:

Limit how far you will extend your armored spearheads, beyond supporting infantry.

My question is, for instance in the historical Barbarossa, was there a specific German doctrine about this? Did Guderian, for instance, limit his advances by any consideration for how far his radio range was, how far a tanker could transport fuel, or how far back the infantry was? Or did he and other commanders just go hell for leather? If they did limit their advances, what is a good approximation in terms of hexes in the game?

(in reply to Greyshaft)
Post #: 4
RE: House rules - 1/4/2012 2:01:01 PM   
gwgardner

 

Posts: 3373
Joined: 4/7/2006
Status: offline
re the current ease in doing Sea Lion:

house rule that any amphibious assault would require that the amphibious transport be present in the sea zone for one complete turn, before doing the landing from that sea zone. This would give the defending navy one inter-turn to attempt an interception and offer battle. (not to mention one turn for the defender to attempt detection and strikes from land-based air)

(in reply to gwgardner)
Post #: 5
RE: House rules - 1/4/2012 5:29:10 PM   
colberki

 

Posts: 153
Joined: 6/16/2007
Status: offline
Presumably the upcoming patch will do away with the need for this house rule? I hope we wont need any house rules!

(in reply to gwgardner)
Post #: 6
RE: House rules - 1/4/2012 11:42:18 PM   
rogo727


Posts: 1388
Joined: 7/12/2011
From: Iowa
Status: offline
I will add this to my house rules thank you
quote:

ORIGINAL: Greyshaft

every captured city must have a division allocated as a garrison - even after French surrender I still garrison France. It acts as a limiting force on the German ability to conquer everything.


(in reply to Greyshaft)
Post #: 7
RE: House rules - 1/5/2012 12:55:47 AM   
aspqrz

 

Posts: 706
Joined: 7/20/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: gwgardner

a possible house rule, if someone knows the historical practice:

Limit how far you will extend your armored spearheads, beyond supporting infantry.

My question is, for instance in the historical Barbarossa, was there a specific German doctrine about this? Did Guderian, for instance, limit his advances by any consideration for how far his radio range was, how far a tanker could transport fuel, or how far back the infantry was? Or did he and other commanders just go hell for leather? If they did limit their advances, what is a good approximation in terms of hexes in the game?


Well, I don't know if there was a specific limit in their operational doctrine ... except, perhaps, "as far as you can" ... but there were practical limits ... the number of trucks available to run supplies, mainly POL, from wherever the supplyheads were to wherever the Panzers were in fact.

There's a whole excellent chapter in Van Creveld's "Supplying War", which should be available on Amazon or through interlibrary loan.

Basically, the Germans had such limited resources at all levels they couldn't produce enough trucks to supply the sort of mobile war they would have no doubt liked to fight ... throughout the war the Wehrmacht never had more than 15% of its total forces that were motorised (including Motorised, Light, Panzer and Panzergrenadier) by actual combat and logistic unit strength (at the end of the war, all the understrength "shadow" divisions raised by Hitler's whim, almost, don't actually change this ... look at the actual strength they fielded rather than the nominal TO&E strength for confirmation).

As a comparison, the British Army was 100% motorised from about 1937, and the US wasn't far behind. The Russians were much like the Germans, about 15% of their forces were actually motorised.

The problem the Germans faced when invading Russia was so severe that they had progressively scavenged trucks from all their conquests to date to scrape up something vaguely resembling "enough" (if you didn't look at the problem too closely, that is) ... so you had several score, over 100 IIRC, different models ... Polish, French, Belgian, Danish, Dutch , British (captured from the BEF), Czech, Yugoslav, Greek ... anywhere they'd holidayed ... being used, which, in and of itself, was a nightmare, logistically.

Then there's the issue that the standard German truck design evidently wasn't all that robust, especially for conditions on the Eastern front, and wore out quicker than US/British/Russian trucks.

All in all, it was a cobbled together shoestring operation that had to win quickly before it all started to fall to pieces.

The idea of "blitzkrieg" was short sharp campaigns, over quickly ... and simply fell apart when thet wasn't possible.

Even the western allies had problems with supplying continual motorised operations (read up on the Red Ball Express ... to keep it running they basically had to strip all the trucks from several divisions that were, consequently, left immobile, to keep the supplies rolling forward).

There's a lot more, like the shortage of POL tankers on the Reichsbahn for starters, but it all boils down to the fact that the Germans were operating on a shoestring ... they could have built more trucks and/or tankers, except that they'd have had to build less tanks, planes and the like ... they were operating that close to the bone the entire war.

Phil

(in reply to gwgardner)
Post #: 8
RE: House rules - 1/5/2012 2:30:59 AM   
gwgardner

 

Posts: 3373
Joined: 4/7/2006
Status: offline
Thanks for the very interesting reply. So how would that translate into a house rule, or even a parameter fix, for German armor advances? Hell for leather, using current AP allowances, or something lesser?

(in reply to aspqrz)
Post #: 9
RE: House rules - 1/5/2012 4:21:03 AM   
Numdydar

 

Posts: 1764
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline
In Russia, advance one turn then completely stop for one turn. Advance one turn then stop one turn. Keep repeating through 1941. After 42, play normally

(in reply to gwgardner)
Post #: 10
RE: House rules - 1/5/2012 4:42:31 AM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 8513
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline
I think the game allows armor to advance .. and do so at its own risk even armor can be surrounded and killed off if it advance too far..

(in reply to Numdydar)
Post #: 11
RE: House rules - 1/5/2012 5:36:07 AM   
Numdydar

 

Posts: 1764
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline
Well I was running my units our pretty far and some of them were totally surrounded and cutoff, but never lost a one due to the strengh differintal between the German armor and Russian troops. So while this does happen if you run out your units like that, the result is that is does not matter . Unless you leave them that way for 3-4 turns. Of course if they are in a city, then you can be cutoff for the rest of the game and it will not matter .

So if you can run ahead and capture/occupy a city then you're golden.

(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 12
RE: House rules - 1/5/2012 5:52:48 AM   
aspqrz

 

Posts: 706
Joined: 7/20/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: gwgardner

Thanks for the very interesting reply. So how would that translate into a house rule, or even a parameter fix, for German armor advances? Hell for leather, using current AP allowances, or something lesser?


I believe the moderators have indicated that there is some limit on mobility if the Germans don't capture/maintain control of specific POL hexes (like Ploesti in Romania), but they are extremely coy about giving details.

Realistically?

I don't think there is a way you can house rule it ... well, maybe.

If you require that a certain percentage of garrisons (at the 1 Division per City rate suggested as a House Rule by others in this thread) has to be Panzer units, then that would probably do it ... the more successful, the fewer Panzers available for the offensive. Which sounds counterintuitive until you consider its meant to represent logistical problems that would have rendered them unable to maneuver anyway.

What sort of percentage? 1:5? Maybe 1:4 ... or maybe starting at none in 1939 and increasing to 1:5 in 1940, 1:4 in 1942, 1:3 in 1943 and so on? You'd have to fiddle with it.

Minimum of 1 per country (and count the Baltic Republics as a "country" each even after liberation from the Soviets, perhaps), regardless of number of cities.

Just some ideas, anyway.

Phil

_____________________________

Author, Space Opera (FGU); RBB #1 (FASA); Road to Armageddon; Farm, Forge and Steam; Orbis Mundi; Displaced (PGD)
----------------------------------------------
Email: aspqrz@tpg.com.au

(in reply to gwgardner)
Post #: 13
RE: House rules - 1/5/2012 9:48:00 AM   
Rasputitsa


Posts: 1678
Joined: 6/30/2001
From: Bedfordshire UK
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: gwgardner

Thanks for the very interesting reply. So how would that translate into a house rule, or even a parameter fix, for German armor advances? Hell for leather, using current AP allowances, or something lesser?


Is the limiting factor rail repair, during a German advance into Russia some of the rail hexes become damaged, but I have been able to strategically move units up to the extended front line too easily, when in reality the Germans did not have the use of Russian rail that quickly. The present rail damage and repair model works reasonably well for the Western campaign (although I have felt able to use rail in France too soon after rail hexes were captured), but in Russia all rail hexes should be damaged when they change ownership, this would set a more realistic supply limitation on advances. You would still be able to make big initial advances, but you would be vulnerable to counter attack, due to low supply.

_____________________________

"We have to go from where we are, not from where we would like to be" - me

(in reply to gwgardner)
Post #: 14
RE: House rules - 1/5/2012 10:02:48 AM   
Rasputitsa


Posts: 1678
Joined: 6/30/2001
From: Bedfordshire UK
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: Numdydar
Well I was running my units our pretty far and some of them were totally surrounded and cutoff, but never lost a one due to the strengh differintal between the German armor and Russian troops. So while this does happen if you run out your units like that, the result is that is does not matter . Unless you leave them that way for 3-4 turns. Of course if they are in a city, then you can be cutoff for the rest of the game and it will not matter .

So if you can run ahead and capture/occupy a city then you're golden.


I have thought that the game could just become a race from city to city and fine strategy did not matter, rail connections and supply should be more relevant. I have had cut-off cities in Russia pumping out supply level 20 for turn after turn, there must be a consideration on play balance (the result of much testing), but I wonder if the supply system is not acting as the regulator that it should be.

The current supply mechanics are allowing cut-off units to regenerate more than they should and for units to advance further than they should.

Capturing a city gives too strong an instant supply bonus, there should be a delay before a captured city starts working as a meaningful supply source and I suppose the same when it is re-captured.

I know that this thread is about house rules and it may be that the AI needs these supply effects to work effectively, such that they may have to stay in the basic game, whilst house rules, mods and scenarios provide any required changes for PBEM.


< Message edited by Rasputitsa -- 1/5/2012 10:22:11 AM >


_____________________________

"We have to go from where we are, not from where we would like to be" - me

(in reply to Numdydar)
Post #: 15
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Time of Fury >> House rules Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.092