Matrix Games Forums

Come and see us during the Spieltagen in Essen!New Screenshots for Pike & ShotDeal of the Week Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations WOTYCommand: Modern Air/Naval Operations WOTY is now available!Frontline : The Longest Day Announced and in Beta!Command gets Wargame of the Year EditionDeal of the Week: Pandora SeriesPandora: Eclipse of Nashira is now availableDistant Worlds Gets another updateHell is Approaching
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Is there a house rules list anywhere?

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Is there a house rules list anywhere? Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Is there a house rules list anywhere? - 6/22/2013 2:42:34 AM   
DHRedge

 

Posts: 148
Joined: 1/18/2010
Status: offline
I have been looking around the forums for a bit, and have heard a few rules discussed that people use as house rules for PBEM.
It would be interesting to see the list most players have added in to think about them in AI games.




Things like no low level 4 engine bombing on Naval attack.

Or other rules some may have used in PBEM games.


Post #: 1
RE: Is there a house rules list anywhere? - 6/22/2013 3:07:03 AM   
Quixote


Posts: 740
Joined: 8/14/2008
From: Maryland
Status: offline
The answers on this will vary from no HR at all to dozens of rules, depending on the kind of game people are looking for, but here's a link with a number of the more commonly instituted rules. Note that this thread is a bit dated, and that a few of these (OK, many of these) house rule items have been addressed by Michaelm's beta.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2260137

A good way to get a feel for current common house rules is to look at the first post or two of a few AARs - this should give you a decent idea of what's out there now.

(in reply to DHRedge)
Post #: 2
RE: Is there a house rules list anywhere? - 6/22/2013 3:22:29 AM   
topeverest

 

Posts: 2272
Joined: 10/17/2007
From: Houston, TX - USA
Status: offline
let me suggest you play a game or three before adopting any. You may not find the needs for many...or even any - - - depending on your play style.

IMHO, HR's are enacted for two reasons, to cover a player's weakness or to take away a definitive advantage the game design allows. Keep that in mind.

_____________________________

Andy M

(in reply to Quixote)
Post #: 3
RE: Is there a house rules list anywhere? - 6/22/2013 3:48:46 AM   
geofflambert


Posts: 5005
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline
I've never seen a house rule I couldn't live without, but have accepted some at times. I wouldn't initiate any if I were you. Usually the Japanese player comes up with them.

(in reply to topeverest)
Post #: 4
RE: Is there a house rules list anywhere? - 6/22/2013 4:33:55 AM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 5816
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline
My favorites:

No 4E's based outside of ConUSA
P-47's restricted to max alt of 10K
Allied SCTF's must have at least 18 ships in them after 4/42



_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 5
RE: Is there a house rules list anywhere? - 6/22/2013 4:45:43 AM   
geofflambert


Posts: 5005
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

My favorites:

No 4E's based outside of ConUSA
P-47's restricted to max alt of 10K
Allied SCTF's must have at least 18 ships in them after 4/42




I like that one! Let's see the Japanese player figure out how he's going to base his Mavises and Emilys in the continental US. Not.

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 6
RE: Is there a house rules list anywhere? - 6/22/2013 5:17:18 AM   
crsutton


Posts: 7185
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

My favorites:

No 4E's based outside of ConUSA
P-47's restricted to max alt of 10K
Allied SCTF's must have at least 18 ships in them after 4/42




Sounds reasonable...


_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 7
RE: Is there a house rules list anywhere? - 6/22/2013 5:51:19 AM   
DHRedge

 

Posts: 148
Joined: 1/18/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

I've never seen a house rule I couldn't live without, but have accepted some at times. I wouldn't initiate any if I were you. Usually the Japanese player comes up with them.


I play as the Japanese player in all the games I have played in witp, and think I am proficient with most of the rules and such. And have seen the changes in WITP AE around issues of patrols and waypoints and such.


Have they fixed the problem where 'safe route' tasking shows enemy ship locations, and occupied airbases?

If I put a ship on safe routing, it will go around some hexes, or around some air search arcs, and could be used to detect locations.

That is the only house rule I can think of from playing. That would be needed as a rule. I don't use 'safe task force pathing' since it tells me where enemy ships are.
And I don't worry about unrealistic actions, historical modeling is not an issue.

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 8
RE: Is there a house rules list anywhere? - 6/22/2013 5:58:34 AM   
Bullwinkle58


Posts: 8606
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DHRedge


Have they fixed the problem where 'safe route' tasking shows enemy ship locations, and occupied airbases?

Yes. They don't do that now. DL drives most everything in that area. If you know there are bombers on Tarawa by DL the TF will route around if in Safe or Safer. If they're there but you don't know it, the ships drive past and wave. Then sink.




< Message edited by Bullwinkle58 -- 6/22/2013 5:59:17 AM >


_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to DHRedge)
Post #: 9
RE: Is there a house rules list anywhere? - 6/22/2013 5:59:45 AM   
DHRedge

 

Posts: 148
Joined: 1/18/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: DHRedge


Have they fixed the problem where 'safe route' tasking shows enemy ship locations, and occupied airbases?

Yes. They don't do that now. DL drives most everything in that area. If you know there are bombers on Tarawa by DL the TF will route around if in Safe or Safer. If they're there but you don't know it, the ships drive past and wave. Then sink.





Thanks, good they corrected that.

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)
Post #: 10
RE: Is there a house rules list anywhere? - 6/22/2013 4:47:22 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 18173
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: Twin Cities, MN
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DHRedge

I have been looking around the forums for a bit, and have heard a few rules discussed that people use as house rules for PBEM.
It would be interesting to see the list most players have added in to think about them in AI games.




Things like no low level 4 engine bombing on Naval attack.

Or other rules some may have used in PBEM games.





I don't play with many, but am partial to a few that the game developers recommended (or played with themselves) to skirt some known gameplay issues.

To mitigate the 'stratosphere sweep' phenomenon, TheElf thought using 2nd highest maneuver band as a sweep altitude limit would be reasonable. I usually play with rules akin to that one.

Nikademus plays his games with restrictions on night bombing-how many units, when, what type of target, how high, etc. as there is pretty clear evidence that this is not working exactly as designed.

Paying PP to move restricted units from their default HQ is another common one. I recommend that.

Several iterations on limitations for onset (and location) of strategic bombing abound. Do you omit all strategic bombing until "X" date? Restrictions that are specific to bombing inside of China?

The rationale for other long-standing HRs of yore is less clear, IMO. Many of these egregious issues were dealt with long ago with patches. Of course, for players with long-standing games, these may not be applicable, as OOB patches don't 'correct' games already in progress. For a 4 year wargame, this (not having a codefix for years on end by design) is reason enough to consider some HRs to offset these holes in the program.

< Message edited by Chickenboy -- 6/22/2013 4:52:48 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to DHRedge)
Post #: 11
RE: Is there a house rules list anywhere? - 6/22/2013 6:21:20 PM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 5816
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

I don't play with many, but am partial to a few that the game developers recommended (or played with themselves) to skirt some known gameplay issues.

To mitigate the 'stratosphere sweep' phenomenon, TheElf thought using 2nd highest maneuver band as a sweep altitude limit would be reasonable. I usually play with rules akin to that one.

Nikademus plays his games with restrictions on night bombing-how many units, when, what type of target, how high, etc. as there is pretty clear evidence that this is not working exactly as designed.

Paying PP to move restricted units from their default HQ is another common one. I recommend that.

Several iterations on limitations for onset (and location) of strategic bombing abound. Do you omit all strategic bombing until "X" date? Restrictions that are specific to bombing inside of China?

The rationale for other long-standing HRs of yore is less clear, IMO. Many of these egregious issues were dealt with long ago with patches. Of course, for players with long-standing games, these may not be applicable, as OOB patches don't 'correct' games already in progress. For a 4 year wargame, this (not having a codefix for years on end by design) is reason enough to consider some HRs to offset these holes in the program.

When I get to start a PBEM, these would all be ones that I would strongly consider.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 12
RE: Is there a house rules list anywhere? - 6/22/2013 8:42:30 PM   
DHRedge

 

Posts: 148
Joined: 1/18/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

I don't play with many, but am partial to a few that the game developers recommended (or played with themselves) to skirt some known gameplay issues.

To mitigate the 'stratosphere sweep' phenomenon, TheElf thought using 2nd highest maneuver band as a sweep altitude limit would be reasonable. I usually play with rules akin to that one.

Nikademus plays his games with restrictions on night bombing-how many units, when, what type of target, how high, etc. as there is pretty clear evidence that this is not working exactly as designed.

Paying PP to move restricted units from their default HQ is another common one. I recommend that.

Several iterations on limitations for onset (and location) of strategic bombing abound. Do you omit all strategic bombing until "X" date? Restrictions that are specific to bombing inside of China?

The rationale for other long-standing HRs of yore is less clear, IMO. Many of these egregious issues were dealt with long ago with patches. Of course, for players with long-standing games, these may not be applicable, as OOB patches don't 'correct' games already in progress. For a 4 year wargame, this (not having a codefix for years on end by design) is reason enough to consider some HRs to offset these holes in the program.


I presume the stratosphere sweep forces fighters to fight in a band they are way underrated in, so it is gamey.

Is night bombing to effective? I think it was pretty effective as far as safe from AA and Cap, although accuracy should be much less then day bombing.

The PP item, would that mean many play where there is no reassignment of units outside of a restricted area? I don't think I would like that one, since moving some units is already restricted by expense of PP, and there is a decision of 'leader assignments' or use to 'move units', that creates a penalty, or are you speaking of a gamey technique involved in reassignment?

Limit to strategic bombing makes sense, or China could have supply issues early beyond a balanced situation. Is that why, it creates a production loss and supply loss beyond playability?


(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 13
RE: Is there a house rules list anywhere? - 6/22/2013 9:46:48 PM   
Icedawg


Posts: 1576
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: Upstate New York
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: topeverest

let me suggest you play a game or three before adopting any. You may not find the needs for many...or even any - - - depending on your play style.

IMHO, HR's are enacted for two reasons, to cover a player's weakness or to take away a definitive advantage the game design allows. Keep that in mind.


I don't know that this is necessarily true. I play with a fair number of house rules and almost all are neutral or limit what I, as the Japanese player, can do.

On turn one, the Japanese player can do some pretty ridiculous things with his "magic move" TFs. I limit myself to reasonable places they can end their turn one movement and I would suggest if you play as the allies, you limit your opponent in the same way.


(in reply to topeverest)
Post #: 14
RE: Is there a house rules list anywhere? - 6/22/2013 10:12:36 PM   
DHRedge

 

Posts: 148
Joined: 1/18/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Icedawg

On turn one, the Japanese player can do some pretty ridiculous things with his "magic move" TFs. I limit myself to reasonable places they can end their turn one movement and I would suggest if you play as the allies, you limit your opponent in the same way.




Use of the Magic Move in different ways really adds to the game, and it reflects the conditions of a surprise attack.

First turn Historic, is really limiting to the Japanese.

What areas do you think are ridiculous for a japanese first move?


I like to substitute the idea of ridiculous with audacious.

(in reply to Icedawg)
Post #: 15
RE: Is there a house rules list anywhere? - 6/23/2013 12:06:21 AM   
Quixote


Posts: 740
Joined: 8/14/2008
From: Maryland
Status: offline
Landing at Darwin on December 7th? Sailing past the forts at Singapore and landing on the west coast of the Malay peninsula on December 7th? Port Moresby on the 7th? New Caledonia? There's a difference between audacious, and really taking advantage of the system. With the 20X movement bonus at full speed without even a real fuel penalty, you can creatively, audaciously, whatever-ly get away with a lot if you choose to do so. This might be one of those areas worth HR'ing (or at least discussing) with any potential opponent before starting a game. A simultaneous Darwin/Noumea landing on turn one with no prior agreements could lead to a really short PBEM game for some people...

Edit: I say this as someone who enjoys playing as Japan using the non-historical first turn. If you and your opponent agree to a no rules free-for-all (and there have been games like that), then have fun and get creative. If not, I'd still suggest talking about it before just doing it.

< Message edited by Quixote -- 6/23/2013 12:09:10 AM >

(in reply to DHRedge)
Post #: 16
RE: Is there a house rules list anywhere? - 6/23/2013 12:22:59 AM   
topeverest

 

Posts: 2272
Joined: 10/17/2007
From: Houston, TX - USA
Status: offline
The more experience a player has at this set of rules allows him or her to much better leverage the various weapons platforms for better results.

to be clear, I don't think of myself as an experienced player, but I do use a few HR's in our PBEM mod, which is a far cry from a standard scenario. Like RA on steroids.
1. no strat bombing until 1943.
2. no strat bombing in China proper throughout game
3. night attacks limited to 1 per turn, and none until sufficient night fighters are present, usually about 1944.
4. 4e must fly bombing missions from level 9 airbases

We actually love the first turn magic move. The empire needs that IMHO.

really it is what works for you. For the longest time, we didn't put any HR's in, but we both decided these were fair to both sides and facilitate a good game.


_____________________________

Andy M

(in reply to DHRedge)
Post #: 17
RE: Is there a house rules list anywhere? - 6/23/2013 1:34:55 AM   
pompack


Posts: 2520
Joined: 2/8/2004
From: University Park, Texas
Status: offline
one I like is based upon historical practice and period technology

"4E night attacks allowed against city Manpower only"

Highly trained night bombardment units equipped with radar bombing aids could usually (but not always) hit the right city target; unless you are 617 squadron anything else was a matter of sheer luck (and the game code allows for sheer luck taking out point targets within a city with Manpower as a target)

(in reply to topeverest)
Post #: 18
RE: Is there a house rules list anywhere? - 6/23/2013 3:15:50 AM   
DHRedge

 

Posts: 148
Joined: 1/18/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Quixote

Landing at Darwin on December 7th? Sailing past the forts at Singapore and landing on the west coast of the Malay peninsula on December 7th? Port Moresby on the 7th? New Caledonia? There's a difference between audacious, and really taking advantage of the system.



Yea I could see that as a sensible issue, and convoy that would have to pass an area that would create detection, would make sense to have a house rule against that. So someone could hit Rabaul, but not Port Moresby That would make sense.

In some future patch, they could compute the 'disruption' based on time at sea, and that would help effect long range landings.
The issue you mention could probably best be corrected by adding a range based 'disruption' effect to dec 7th surprise forces to represent not having near bases. And compute distance required to nearest friendly port with a disembark capability to determine what would be required as far as time at sea.

Although it is possible for a Dec 7th surprise landing at New Caledonia without detection, although that would be a long time to be at sea, so disruption would be the issue.


And Java or West side of Burma, it would make sense to not allow that, since it would probably be detected by active Common Wealth Troops.

The question is, on Dec 6th, would convoys of invasion forces spotted rounding some place like Singapore have raised an alarm?
It is possible while not on a war footing some observer might think it odd, like they did when seeing a sub at Pearl Harbor. And If sighted off the coast of Singapore, could they do something about it, in the hours it would take to travel the additional 200 to 400 miles before landing.

It would probably get air recon in the air, then someone would call some embassy, and that embassy would ramble on about training missions or something like that, or stall, then some ships would be sent to follow them, by then they would be at the shore.





Although it should be noted, the Scots or the Irish have documented landing as far away as New Caladonia, and many other places

So it might have been possible.



Time for a musical interlude.

Celtic Ladies - New Caladonia
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v28is4jFWeo

Celtic people are everywhere!

Celtic Ladies - Organic Flow
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGpTkv713vQ

To the beaches!


(in reply to Quixote)
Post #: 19
RE: Is there a house rules list anywhere? - 6/23/2013 4:02:00 AM   
geofflambert


Posts: 5005
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: topeverest

The more experience a player has at this set of rules allows him or her to much better leverage the various weapons platforms for better results.

to be clear, I don't think of myself as an experienced player, but I do use a few HR's in our PBEM mod, which is a far cry from a standard scenario. Like RA on steroids.
1. no strat bombing until 1943.
2. no strat bombing in China proper throughout game
3. night attacks limited to 1 per turn, and none until sufficient night fighters are present, usually about 1944.
4. 4e must fly bombing missions from level 9 airbases

We actually love the first turn magic move. The empire needs that IMHO.

really it is what works for you. For the longest time, we didn't put any HR's in, but we both decided these were fair to both sides and facilitate a good game.



I have difficulty knowing what to say about this collection of old rhubarbs, and I am unaware of any justification for them. We know for a fact that all these things were done that are prohibited by your rules. What are these rules for?

(in reply to topeverest)
Post #: 20
RE: Is there a house rules list anywhere? - 6/23/2013 4:34:41 AM   
Quixote


Posts: 740
Joined: 8/14/2008
From: Maryland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert


quote:

ORIGINAL: topeverest

The more experience a player has at this set of rules allows him or her to much better leverage the various weapons platforms for better results.

to be clear, I don't think of myself as an experienced player, but I do use a few HR's in our PBEM mod, which is a far cry from a standard scenario. Like RA on steroids.
1. no strat bombing until 1943.
2. no strat bombing in China proper throughout game
3. night attacks limited to 1 per turn, and none until sufficient night fighters are present, usually about 1944.
4. 4e must fly bombing missions from level 9 airbases

We actually love the first turn magic move. The empire needs that IMHO.

really it is what works for you. For the longest time, we didn't put any HR's in, but we both decided these were fair to both sides and facilitate a good game.


I have difficulty knowing what to say about this collection of old rhubarbs, and I am unaware of any justification for them. We know for a fact that all these things were done that are prohibited by your rules. What are these rules for?


Re-read what he wrote. He's not suggesting that you (or anyone else) adopt these rules, he's only pointing out that they work in his particular mod, with his particular opponent. Calling this a collection of old rhubarbs and asking for justification without really looking at the context could be perceived as somewhat insulting, which (lizard humor aside) is something you usually manage to avoid.

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 21
RE: Is there a house rules list anywhere? - 6/23/2013 4:42:28 AM   
geofflambert


Posts: 5005
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline
You are of course correct, I for instance have no interest in RA and therefor am unqualified to critique such things among those who do. Point taken.

(in reply to Quixote)
Post #: 22
RE: Is there a house rules list anywhere? - 6/23/2013 1:27:21 PM   
topeverest

 

Posts: 2272
Joined: 10/17/2007
From: Houston, TX - USA
Status: offline
No worries guys. I don't want to force anyone into our little world war. We play because it's fun with a capital F,and we hope everyone else does too.

I sincerely value the advice offered and received here, and I greatly appreciate when others come to my aid. I am a much better player as a result.


_____________________________

Andy M

(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 23
RE: Is there a house rules list anywhere? - 6/24/2013 3:47:18 PM   
geofflambert


Posts: 5005
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline
Sorry for being so snarky before, WitPAE is many games rolled into one, I happen to like one of them but each point of view is as legit as another. Sorry topeverest and Numdydar too.

(in reply to topeverest)
Post #: 24
RE: Is there a house rules list anywhere? - 6/24/2013 9:18:21 PM   
geofflambert


Posts: 5005
Joined: 12/23/2010
From: St. Louis
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy


To mitigate the 'stratosphere sweep' phenomenon, TheElf thought using 2nd highest maneuver band as a sweep altitude limit would be reasonable. I usually play with rules akin to that one.


When I agreed to observe a 2nd best maneuver rule in my current PBEM, I assumed it applied to initial CAP altitude as well. Is that how everyone plays it, or not?

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 25
RE: Is there a house rules list anywhere? - 6/24/2013 9:27:00 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 18173
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: Twin Cities, MN
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy


To mitigate the 'stratosphere sweep' phenomenon, TheElf thought using 2nd highest maneuver band as a sweep altitude limit would be reasonable. I usually play with rules akin to that one.


When I agreed to observe a 2nd best maneuver rule in my current PBEM, I assumed it applied to initial CAP altitude as well. Is that how everyone plays it, or not?

geofflambert,

I believe (this is going on my decrepit memory, so buyer beware) that the issues of stratospheric settings for fighter aircraft really only manifested during the sweeps. There are so many other things that mitigated the efficacy of CAP and its ability to get to high altitude that, IIRC, were considered well-modeled.

In reality, I usually stick with the same settings for CAP and sweep altitude limits.

_____________________________


(in reply to geofflambert)
Post #: 26
RE: Is there a house rules list anywhere? - 6/24/2013 9:39:32 PM   
AW1Steve


Posts: 12896
Joined: 3/10/2007
From: ME-FL-DC-GM-WA-NE-IL ?
Status: offline
I have only one house rule. Never play against an opponent that you don't trust. Make sure they are a "reasonable player". Talk to him and get to know them, play them in a couple of short PBEMs. Then trust him.(Or her). Don't insult him . If you have concerns or beliefs as to what's fair, right  or realistic , then discuss them with him before you ever consider playing. The only requirement I have is that my opponent be a good character, suitable of becoming my friend.

I always find it somewhat insulting when players ask me to play , then come forth with a list of legalistic demands that look like something a "Philadelphia lawyer" would come up with. I live with a lawyer (married to one). I don't want to play against one.   I want to play against a friend. Handshakes make good friends. Contracts (which let's be honest , a list of house rules is) don't make good friends. They make potential adversaries.  

_____________________________

"Geezerhood is a state of mind, attained by being largely out of yours". AW1Steve

"Quit whining and play the game. Or go home". My 7th grade baseball coach. It applies well to WITP AE players.

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 27
RE: Is there a house rules list anywhere? - 6/24/2013 10:42:32 PM   
DHRedge

 

Posts: 148
Joined: 1/18/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

I have only one house rule. Never play against an opponent that you don't trust. Make sure they are a "reasonable player". Talk to him and get to know them, play them in a couple of short PBEMs. Then trust him.(Or her). Don't insult him . If you have concerns or beliefs as to what's fair, right  or realistic , then discuss them with him before you ever consider playing. The only requirement I have is that my opponent be a good character, suitable of becoming my friend.

I always find it somewhat insulting when players ask me to play , then come forth with a list of legalistic demands that look like something a "Philadelphia lawyer" would come up with. I live with a lawyer (married to one). I don't want to play against one.   I want to play against a friend. Handshakes make good friends. Contracts (which let's be honest , a list of house rules is) don't make good friends. They make potential adversaries.  


That is an insightful comment.

The idea of business, or ideas of actual adversarial conflicts, are confined by systems of enforcement that monitor agreements by tools like contracts and laws. Get the situation of best outcome by any means that can not be prosecuted.

Actually enjoying being around someone in some interactions is being around those that don't need contracts because the core action is not adversarial but the idea of win win, or enjoying whatever mutual activities occur. And the character of a person does not need a contract if they both can discuss with the same idea of what the spirit of some idea is, and then follow those ideas to compete without adversarial methods needed. I have found the non adversarial form also usually includes much learning and sharing of ideas also.



The question

Are rules ways both players can find what the other deems as acceptable behavior for an enjoyable experience,
or are rules methods to constrain someone that will use unacceptable behavior if allowed.

You once again return to the question from Shutter Island.
Is it better to possible lose as a good man, or to win at all cost including becoming a monster.

Such a deep thought you post there,

A guy celebrating being the winner, and looking around and seeing nobody there anymore.
While the guy that has integrity, starts up another game.


(Although rules can be so that each player knows what the other thinks is a character driven play, and what is an exploit, not for enforcement of some rule, but to add to the enjoyment of both players by understanding the opponents views on the rule sets.)

Part of the reason to post this thread is to understand what the community thinks is cheesy, and what is good play.
And to discuss such topics to think on the possible rule sets, and what people think is good play, and an exploit.


Many years of playing pool added much thought on this very topic, and how different people have different rules of what is cheesy.
Some think a person should be honest about skill level, and call there own fouls.
Some think a person should sandbag to get a later bigger bet.
Some think not seeing an opponent foul and calling them on it is a failure of skill, so they don't call there own fouls.
Some think that if you can bait someone to lose money, that is a skill set.
Some think hustling is a meta part of the pool game itself.
Some think various outer game actions like distraction is part of the game.

And each group feels there approach is 'the way the game' should be played when playing pool, and figures other people think as they do.

Those that find and use every loophole in a system, actually believe that is part of 'how the system is suppose to work'. If the system has a loop hole, and they find it, they deserve the reward for the accomplishment of finding the loophole the system failed to address in the rule set.

Not my view, but that is the ethos of many that think rules are the enemy.

The movie the Matrix has a quote.
"Nobody has ever done this before"
"Thats why it is going to work"
(They found a loop hole that would be closed after there success)

(in reply to AW1Steve)
Post #: 28
RE: Is there a house rules list anywhere? - 6/24/2013 10:53:20 PM   
AW1Steve


Posts: 12896
Joined: 3/10/2007
From: ME-FL-DC-GM-WA-NE-IL ?
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DHRedge


quote:

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

I have only one house rule. Never play against an opponent that you don't trust. Make sure they are a "reasonable player". Talk to him and get to know them, play them in a couple of short PBEMs. Then trust him.(Or her). Don't insult him . If you have concerns or beliefs as to what's fair, right  or realistic , then discuss them with him before you ever consider playing. The only requirement I have is that my opponent be a good character, suitable of becoming my friend.

I always find it somewhat insulting when players ask me to play , then come forth with a list of legalistic demands that look like something a "Philadelphia lawyer" would come up with. I live with a lawyer (married to one). I don't want to play against one.   I want to play against a friend. Handshakes make good friends. Contracts (which let's be honest , a list of house rules is) don't make good friends. They make potential adversaries.  


That is an insightful comment.

The idea of business, or ideas of actual adversarial conflicts, are confined by systems of enforcement that monitor agreements by tools like contracts and laws. Get the situation of best outcome by any means that can not be prosecuted.

Actually enjoying being around someone in some interactions is being around those that don't need contracts because the core action is not adversarial but the idea of win win, or enjoying whatever mutual activities occur. And the character of a person does not need a contract if they both can discuss with the same idea of what the spirit of some idea is, and then follow those ideas to compete without adversarial methods needed. I have found the non adversarial form also usually includes much learning and sharing of ideas also.



The question

Are rules ways both players can find what the other deems as acceptable behavior for an enjoyable experience,
or are rules methods to constrain someone that will use unacceptable behavior if allowed.

You once again return to the question from Shutter Island.
Is it better to possible lose as a good man, or to win at all cost including becoming a monster.

Such a deep thought you post there,

A guy celebrating being the winner, and looking around and seeing nobody there anymore.
While the guy that has integrity, starts up another game.


(Although rules can be so that each player knows what the other thinks is a character driven play, and what is an exploit, not for enforcement of some rule, but to add to the enjoyment of both players by understanding the opponents views on the rule sets.)

Part of the reason to post this thread is to understand what the community thinks is cheesy, and what is good play.
And to discuss such topics to think on the possible rule sets, and what people think is good play, and an exploit.


Many years of playing pool added much thought on this very topic, and how different people have different rules of what is cheesy.
Some think a person should be honest about skill level, and call there own fouls.
Some think a person should sandbag to get a later bigger bet.
Some think not seeing an opponent foul and calling them on it is a failure of skill, so they don't call there own fouls.
Some think that if you can bait someone to lose money, that is a skill set.
Some think hustling is a meta part of the pool game itself.
Some think various outer game actions like distraction is part of the game.

And each group feels there approach is 'the way the game' should be played when playing pool, and figures other people think as they do.

Those that find and use every loophole in a system, actually believe that is part of 'how the system is suppose to work'. If the system has a loop hole, and they find it, they deserve the reward for the accomplishment of finding the loophole the system failed to address in the rule set.

Not my view, but that is the ethos of many that think rules are the enemy.

The movie the Matrix has a quote.
"Nobody has ever done this before"
"Thats why it is going to work"
(They found a loop hole that would be closed after there success)



The problem with house rules , is that they need to change as often as the game does. Every time a patch comes out , some of the problems go away. But house rules never die. They just multiply because someone remembers some time in the past when this was a problem. Taking every house rule , and applying it against every patch , update , and mod would be a more than full time job.

I'm reminded of the old story of a new bridegroom watching his spouse prepare a ham for baking. Just before she popped it in the oven , she cut both ends off. When asked why, she responded "because that's how my mother did it".

At the next family gathering , he asked his mother-in-law why she cut the ends off? She replied "because that's how my mom did it".

Cornering the grand mother , he asked her reason for cutting off the ends. The grandmother looked around, made sure no one was looking or listening , then said in a whisper "my baking dish is too small".

My point is , with every rule suggested , you need to take into account, is it still valid or necessary? Who said it's a problem? And is the complainer correct that his complaint is a historical? Brady is famous for citing examples of weird results in ww2 that actually happened as "this game is so borked...." Imagine a sub using one torpedo to sink the largest CV in the INJ? "That is SOOOOOO BORKED!

But often imposing a rule to fix one all edged problem created an imbalance the other way. So what I'm basically saying is use a very light hand with HR's. Don't come up with a shopping list. Come up with one or two , verifiable (that is , acknowledged by one of the developers) problem , and lightly try to balance the problem, if your opponent agrees. Frankly any opponent who comes up with a laundry list of HR's is likely to either be misinformed, have secret desires to be a game designer (without the ability or talent) or simply be looking for an advantage. Be wary.

< Message edited by AW1Steve -- 6/24/2013 11:01:21 PM >


_____________________________

"Geezerhood is a state of mind, attained by being largely out of yours". AW1Steve

"Quit whining and play the game. Or go home". My 7th grade baseball coach. It applies well to WITP AE players.

(in reply to DHRedge)
Post #: 29
RE: Is there a house rules list anywhere? - 6/25/2013 1:02:38 AM   
DHRedge

 

Posts: 148
Joined: 1/18/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

I'm reminded of the old story of a new bridegroom watching his spouse prepare a ham for baking. Just before she popped it in the oven , she cut both ends off. When asked why, she responded "because that's how my mother did it".

At the next family gathering , he asked his mother-in-law why she cut the ends off? She replied "because that's how my mom did it".

Cornering the grand mother , he asked her reason for cutting off the ends. The grandmother looked around, made sure no one was looking or listening , then said in a whisper "my baking dish is too small".

My point is , with every rule suggested , you need to take into account, is it still valid or necessary? Who said it's a problem? And is the complainer correct that his complaint is a historical? Brady is famous for citing examples of weird results in ww2 that actually happened as "this game is so borked...." Imagine a sub using one torpedo to sink the largest CV in the INJ? "That is SOOOOOO BORKED!

But often imposing a rule to fix one all edged problem created an imbalance the other way. So what I'm basically saying is use a very light hand with HR's. Don't come up with a shopping list. Come up with one or two , verifiable (that is , acknowledged by one of the developers) problem , and lightly try to balance the problem, if your opponent agrees. Frankly any opponent who comes up with a laundry list of HR's is likely to either be misinformed, have secret desires to be a game designer (without the ability or talent) or simply be looking for an advantage. Be wary.


You are quoting an axiom I agree with, understand the reason behind the rule. Most people have some rule as the axiom, unchangeable, assuming because it is a rule is enough, and they never look at changes in society or conditions to look if the rule still applies or is still necessary. However once any rule can change, then all rules must be questioned, since the perception of perfection through all time changes. If anything can change, then everything must be looked at to see if it should change. Hence why many system try to claim perfection, to avoid anything being questioned.

That has been one of the fundamental points of my arguments for years, track back to the reason for rules in society, don't accept some rule without knowing why it exists.

Note the attack on Pearl Harbor was probably that same situation. An attack on the Russian fleet led to success, so they attack the USA fleet but miss the many ways the situation is different.

The best reason to not have many HR's is the designers have put far more hours into balance and accuracy then most people do when making a rule, and the player might not see some action as unbalanced, when it is a technical fact of some capability of some item in the game.

The best reason to have an HR, is to expand the game outside of some of the historical conditions that make some of the encounters a bit rigid with less 'playability'. From what I read, most of the High Altitude sweep is as designed. However it is an advantage weighted to only one factor, and that is not as rock paper scissors that most like in games. Your comment on the one torpedo sinking of a CV, is similar to that, to add to playability and remove from realism.


heh, secret desire to be a game developer, its not a secret for me, I plan on working on games again some day, after some other situations are corrected. Currently I am debugging existence, so completing that before working on creating some games.
And as Steven King wrote, a writer writes, where ever he is, that is what he does. And a programmer programs, in what ever he does, the thought processes in programming can be used in many areas of life, and understanding many ways to view many situations.

It should be noted, your comment also helps when debugging issues, you speak to track back to better understanding of the situation, something that is what debugging is.

I also like how you were also commenting within the context of this song.

Tracing The Lines - Kate Klim
http://www.last.fm/music/Kate+Klim/_/Tracing+the+Lines

A "Trace" Statement
as in output from system from within the code.

Although the real question about that song,
is it a pilot from a Japanese Kate Plane?
Or a pilot from a Hell Cat, Kat E Plane

And would that matter...
And you would have to understand the comment "steal the spotlight", in that context.

The story you mention is also a comment on questioning authority to adjust to new situations.

< Message edited by DHRedge -- 6/25/2013 1:11:19 AM >

(in reply to AW1Steve)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Is there a house rules list anywhere? Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
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

0.117