Where are my Mules? (Muling)
Moderators: Joel Billings, elmo3, Sabre21
Where are my Mules? (Muling)
I keep hearing talk of mules, and muling. I can't find any reference in the rules to mules.
(Subject edited for ease of search).
(Subject edited for ease of search).
BS, MS, PhD, WitP:AE, WitE, WitW
RE: Where are my Mules?
I second this, I have no idea what this is, and am hearing so much about it, I am also curious.
RE: Where are my Mules?
Check the mountain divisions.
RE: Where are my Mules?
ORIGINAL: comsolut
Check the mountain divisions.
I see a picture of a mule--how do we know it's not a donkey?--but no mules in the TOE.
BS, MS, PhD, WitP:AE, WitE, WitW
RE: Where are my Mules?
Muling is a term used to describe the use of empty HQ's (no units attached) which are kept within 20MP's of a RR and are then used to do a HQ builup. This cost only 4AP as no units are attached.
The HQ is then rushed to the front filled with supplies and fuel and combat units are then attached, receiving the supplies and fuel in the logistics phase. If done consistently, you will retain high movement points and thus mobility allowing for a greater uptempo of the game.
At least that's my understanding as I've never done it myself.
The HQ is then rushed to the front filled with supplies and fuel and combat units are then attached, receiving the supplies and fuel in the logistics phase. If done consistently, you will retain high movement points and thus mobility allowing for a greater uptempo of the game.
At least that's my understanding as I've never done it myself.
RE: Where are my Mules?
It is frowned upon, and was not (to my understanding) something the devs had in mind for HQ buildups. But they have not patched it out of the game either.
RE: Where are my Mules?
Shame the Russians have a hard time doing it. Could make use of the six empty HQs I have at the moment.
It's frowned upon. But done by some anyway.
All I can say is either A: Don't play against those who use it, Or B: Don't agree to any house rules that put limits on how you use your units. And only your units.
It's frowned upon. But done by some anyway.
All I can say is either A: Don't play against those who use it, Or B: Don't agree to any house rules that put limits on how you use your units. And only your units.
Watched a documentary on beavers. Best dam documentary I've ever seen.
-
- Posts: 227
- Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2003 12:48 pm
RE: Where are my Mules?
Somewhere in there is Rundstedt. And a Kubelwagen. [:)]
RE: Where are my Mules?
Aurelian- not sure what value your post adds or what your trying to say.
Why is a shame the Russian has a hard time doing it? Seems to me the Russian does not have a hard time doing it, its just not beneficial when you're on defense.
And your conditions (A or B) indicate you are ok if the German side uses it, as long as there are not limits on how you use your units (B)? Does this mean you believe you can negate the benefits of muling with para drops, or is there something else you are getting at?
Why is a shame the Russian has a hard time doing it? Seems to me the Russian does not have a hard time doing it, its just not beneficial when you're on defense.
And your conditions (A or B) indicate you are ok if the German side uses it, as long as there are not limits on how you use your units (B)? Does this mean you believe you can negate the benefits of muling with para drops, or is there something else you are getting at?
RE: Where are my Mules?
ORIGINAL: AFV
Aurelian- not sure what value your post adds or what your trying to say.
Why is a shame the Russian has a hard time doing it? Seems to me the Russian does not have a hard time doing it, its just not beneficial when you're on defense.
And your conditions (A or B) indicate you are ok if the German side uses it, as long as there are not limits on how you use your units (B)? Does this mean you believe you can negate the benefits of muling with para drops, or is there something else you are getting at?
The Russian don't have the trucks to spare to do HQ buildups.
The conditions are self explainatory.
For example, from a seeking Soviet opponent thread:
House Rules:
1. No Para drops beyond 10 hexes from the front line. No Soviet Para drops before the first blizzard.
*Warning* I use HQ Buildup in its various forms.
Don't see any rules that limit the Axis on anything.
So, why would I agree to that? Especially as we know just how well some can exploit HQ buildups/muling. Why limit Soviet players but not Axis?
Want to exploit the supply system as an Axis player? Go ahead. But if you do that, I'll drop paratroopers at the limit of the transport's range and screw with your rail lines.
Watched a documentary on beavers. Best dam documentary I've ever seen.
RE: Where are my Mules?
So, per your B condition, you are ok if your opponent mules as long as you can drop paratroopers? I dont think you can negate the effects of muling even with para drops.
Personally, I dont think muling should be used at all.
btw, I have no idea why you would agree to that, I am not in your head. Of course the thread was not about limiting the Soviets and not the Axis, he was just asking what muling is.
Personally, I dont think muling should be used at all.
btw, I have no idea why you would agree to that, I am not in your head. Of course the thread was not about limiting the Soviets and not the Axis, he was just asking what muling is.
RE: Where are my Mules?
Muling was not intended to be part of HQ buildup. The devs and testers continue to discuss what to do about it.
We don't stop playing because we grow old, we grow old because we stop playing. - George Bernard Shaw
WitE alpha/beta tester
Sanctus Reach beta tester
Desert War 1940-42 beta tester
WitE alpha/beta tester
Sanctus Reach beta tester
Desert War 1940-42 beta tester
RE: Where are my Mules?
ORIGINAL: Aurelian
Shame the Russians have a hard time doing it. Could make use of the six empty HQs I have at the moment.
It's frowned upon. But done by some anyway.
All I can say is either A: Don't play against those who use it, Or B: Don't agree to any house rules that put limits on how you use your units. And only your units.
According to Michaelt, Russians can mule, and he uses them. Probably part of the reason he's never lost as either side.
RE: Where are my Mules?
Quit looking at things from both sides vicberg. This forum is no place for logic and reasoning.
Elmo: I am glad the devs are looking at it.
Elmo: I am glad the devs are looking at it.
RE: Where are my Mules?
ROFL, ok...mules suck, Germans should suck, I'm on board.
-
- Posts: 327
- Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 10:07 pm
RE: Where are my Mules?
ORIGINAL: AFV
Elmo: I am glad the devs are looking at it.
As am I. I would say I'm surprised that such a blatant and cheesy exploit is still in the game, but then every time I try and think of some way that it could be prevented by qualifying rules within the current HQ buildup system without completely destroying the HQ buildup system as it was intended, I come up blank. And the game does need some form of HQ buildup given the other limitations of the supply system, so maybe this gamey loophole is here to stay.
It's probably something that is just necessary to have a gentleman's house rule against in PBEM games. I just don't see any other real way to eliminate the exploit without throwing the baby out with the bath water...
RE: Where are my Mules?
I have no idea what this is, and am hearing so much about it, I am also curious.
RE: Where are my Mules?
Like all inventions 'muling' was born from necessity. Originally HQ BU had no limit in range from railheads. The devs then reduced this range to 20MP from a railhead. Smart Russian players then realized they could simply stay just out of range of the German Panzers (since they could only pursue to a limited range now) and avoid the large loss of units due to encirclement.
Some German players then realized that they could HQ BU corps that had no units attached. This HQ, laden with extra supplies could then be moved up to the distant line next turn and refuel the Panzers (that were attached to it when it reached the front). Thus the term muling was born. The technique helped nullify the Soviet runaway ploy.
Contrary to what you might have read that is written by the uniformed it only mimics the moving forward of supply dumps. The debate is over the distance that these dumps should be allowed to move and their capacity.
The facts are that it is a difficult technique to master. It is limited by AP's (its costs many AP's as you are constantly changing units from one HQ to another). The supplies can only be moved once, as the extra trucks required will return to the pool after one turn. The technique on its own is not enough, it must be used with other fuel saving measures as well.
Mostly all the rhetoric you hear is from Soviet fanboys. More reasonable minds assert that without muling Germany cannot hope to win the game whether you think the technique is gamey or not.
There is nothing wrong with moving supplies from a railhead forward to dumps that can be drawn from. After all this is a logistical reality. The argument is about range and quantity. And to a degree what HQ's represent in the game. I agree that it is not entirely realistic in its current form. But it balanced out other Soviet unrealistic advantages.
The game has a fundamental problem in that the Soviet player is not forced to fight a forward defence as his counter part was historically. So there is nothing to stop him from simply avoiding the German army until late in the summer of 1941, where upon he will have amassed a huge and overwhelming army. By using carpets and checker boards (possible since no over run or realistic zoc's rules exist) and this huge army the game is essentially over. Muling negates this problem as the Soviet cannot out run it.
If the game had a mechanism that forced the Soviet to fight forward (like many other games have), a decent set of zoc rules (like other games) and a over run rule (like other games) then muling would not be necessary.
If the designers remove muling without doing something that prevents the Soviet run away then the game is dead in so much as it modelling a 1941 campaign, unless your Soviet opponent agrees to fight forward.
Pick any popular major title on the same subject and it will have some mechanic that prevents the Soviets simply running away. Either victory penalties, replacement/reinforcement penalties, C&C penalties etc. With a little effort and intelligence a mechanism could be developed. But the devs to date have not acted and probably won't.
Without muling, between two equally skilled players Germany has no chance of winning the *game* within the current rule set.
That of course will be refuted by some. But there are not many German fan boys left around here now. Most gave up. This forum has become a Soviet back slapping centre of excellence. For the record I like playing both sides as long as the game is reasonably balanced. I have taken up the German cause in this issue because I know its important for German players to feel that they have a chance at winning the game. Otherwise people will simply stop playing it. And that will be bad for the hobby and any future games of this genre.
RE: Where are my Mules?
While I disagree on the use of muling, I do agree with your other premises.
There is no reason for the Soviet not to simply run- but there could be
1) Manpower loss- does not matter much- but devs could make it matter
2) Armament loss - super RR capability combined with HI not needing to be moved, so this does not matter
3) Victory points - simplistic VP conditions so this too does not matter but it could if there were VP that could be gained or lost by holding certain cities by a certain date
4) Moral - seems like this could be linked to territory- give up too much, your moral drops, keep more than average, it goes up. But instead moral is on a strict time line with nothing to do with what happens in the game.
Sadly, I have to agree, two evenly matched foes- its a slam dunk as Russian. Just dont fight forward. Easy formula- run like hell, evac arms, factories you need, wait for mud, then regroup and its all downhill for German. By the time clear weather comes again, there should be no chance for breakthroughs, Soviet will lose hexes but the German will grind his army to a nub- and really for no reason as industry is gone and manpower does not have much of an impact.
Michael- you and Pelton are part of the problem (no offense intended, read on). The Soviet fanboys point to your AARs and say "see, the Germans are too powerful as it is". Unfortunately, the other 99% of the games played are not visible, and thusly ignored- which follow the formula above, and end in 42 when the German can muster only gaining a few hexes across the entire front each turn.
There is no reason for the Soviet not to simply run- but there could be
1) Manpower loss- does not matter much- but devs could make it matter
2) Armament loss - super RR capability combined with HI not needing to be moved, so this does not matter
3) Victory points - simplistic VP conditions so this too does not matter but it could if there were VP that could be gained or lost by holding certain cities by a certain date
4) Moral - seems like this could be linked to territory- give up too much, your moral drops, keep more than average, it goes up. But instead moral is on a strict time line with nothing to do with what happens in the game.
Sadly, I have to agree, two evenly matched foes- its a slam dunk as Russian. Just dont fight forward. Easy formula- run like hell, evac arms, factories you need, wait for mud, then regroup and its all downhill for German. By the time clear weather comes again, there should be no chance for breakthroughs, Soviet will lose hexes but the German will grind his army to a nub- and really for no reason as industry is gone and manpower does not have much of an impact.
Michael- you and Pelton are part of the problem (no offense intended, read on). The Soviet fanboys point to your AARs and say "see, the Germans are too powerful as it is". Unfortunately, the other 99% of the games played are not visible, and thusly ignored- which follow the formula above, and end in 42 when the German can muster only gaining a few hexes across the entire front each turn.
RE: Where are my Mules?
ORIGINAL: AFV
While I disagree on the use of muling, I do agree with your other premises.
There is no reason for the Soviet not to simply run- but there could be
1) Manpower loss- does not matter much- but devs could make it matter
2) Armament loss - super RR capability combined with HI not needing to be moved, so this does not matter
3) Victory points - simplistic VP conditions so this too does not matter but it could if there were VP that could be gained or lost by holding certain cities by a certain date
4) Moral - seems like this could be linked to territory- give up too much, your moral drops, keep more than average, it goes up. But instead moral is on a strict time line with nothing to do with what happens in the game.
Yes, I agree with all that.
I'd also add that the rail system is too powerful as it stands.There needs to be a limit on what individual rail lines can carry per turn.
As an added bonus, the high capacity main lines would tend to run through cities which would give another powerful reason for capturing those cities.
If this limitation of rail cap could be applied to supplies as well then we would really be getting somewhere.
All of these things combined with a simulation of the breakdown in the Soviet command structure in 41 would make the game much more interesting and realistic.Muling and possibly even HQ buildup itself could then be done away with.