From: Land o' Lakes, FL
You need to aggree on some house rules for...
China. China can be rolled by "simply" stacking all Japanese Divisions into mega-LCU-KB and stomping the Chinese bases in detail. It works, up until Chungking. I've never seen a well-defended Chungking fall. Still, you can clobber china by July. Then all those IJA Divisions are free to invade INdia or Oz (even if all you did was pin-down Chungking). Also, you can speed the process up by bombing the resouces in China (starves their units even faster). But what would have been the historical point of invading China in the first place then (and Allies can't do much to stop it). On the flip side, the allies can (briefly) stack 250+ 4e bombers in Chungking, and blow the snot out of every Japanese strat resource in about 2 weeks (or until the supplies run out, which happens quite quickly).
In my case:
a. We have either agreed to a truce where cities are no longer changing hands. Or we have "militarized zone", where we have agreed that certain can be attacked, and others not.
b. No 4e bombers in China. I realize this isn't historical. But 4e bombers can utterly wipe out japans production in 1942, and this was simply part of our truce terms.
c. No strat bombing from any Chinese city, and no bombing of Chinese resources. Killing chinese resoureces the whole army littearlly starves to death. And no strat bombing from Chinese cities (again, very easily can cripple Japan), just means I need to secure bases in SEAsia or Malaya to reach that far.
Russia. Russian can't even move her units until Japan attacks her. This allows Japan to mass her armies, and attack Russia and destory them in detail. Similar to China, except worse, because Russia can't even move until IJA crosses the border.
a. Some players activiate Russia immediately on war start by sending small bombing mission to activate them. Russian can them move units freely to set up a defense.
b. Give Russia a 30-day "war warning" and then activate them as above, so that opponent can move units into realistic defenses.
4e bombers. I love 'em. But especially because the replacement rates (and with PDUs), seem fairly high, you can get into a situation where all the Allied bombers are converted into LB-30s and B-17s. My personal house rules for 4e bombers in one of my games...
a. Only 16x plane squadrons and 48x plane groups may be converted into 4e bombers. This actually works out to the exact same number of available 4e bombers in stock (altho in different dispositions). Limiting it to 16-48 is simply easier to remember. Limiting only starting 2e bombers to 2e bombers and 4e to 4e (another common rule), actually gives you LESS 4e bombers than stock, but it's also easy to remember.
b. I limit to only 2-48x groups of LB-30s. The LB-30 rate is very high, and before long everything will convertto them if not constrained. In limiting LB-30s, I've got a "reasonable" number of 4e bombers in May. I am just now able to fill out my avaible squadrons (same as stock) with 4e bombers. Otherwise, you could fill everything out in about March by supplimenting with LB-30s.
c. For 1942 at least, I'm limited to no more than 48x plane group, or 3-16x plane squadrons of 4e bombers at a base. This limits the ability to lanch the mega strikes. 2e bombers are no limit tho. 250x 2e bombers will certainly do a job on a base. But 250x 4e bombers will simply vaporize it.
Pilot Pools I'm not sure, but I think some folks are reporting issues with the named pilot pools. I don't use them anyway (you can convert patrol pilots to fighter pilots, rather different skill set). But it's something you'll want to consider.
No invasions except at base or dot hexes. LCUs do not suffer disablements for lack of prep, like they do if they land at a base. Basically, you can land anywhere -BUT- a base hex, without penalty. That rather defeats the intent I believe.
Lots of squawking about PTs I've never seen them all that effective. But I usually only run them in TFs of 4 - 6. Some folks put 25 in a TF, and that tends to be very deadly. Frankly, I don't know if 4x6 is any better or worse than 25. Again, discuss with your opponent.
Cadres Some folks don't like evacing cadres (just a tiny fragment via sub). This means when the parent is destroyed, the fragment -usually- will rebuild to the whole unit. Personally, I don't have a problem with it, since formations were sometimes rebuilt historically, and there are lots of formations missing anyway. It works for both sides.
Cadre #2Also dropping a cadre to block the retreat of a division is a bit gamey (cadre normally equals about 2 - 3 squads), somehow I don't think a real division would care if they were "cut off" by 30 men, but the computer has this habit of forcing a surrender because of "blocked retreat paths".
Dividing/Re-Divinding Divisions in combat When you divide a division, it does NOT carry over the disruption fatigue of the parent, into the regiments. So you have a tired division, and you can divide it into Rgts and they're suddenly rested.
CAP levels Some folks constrain CAP limits to 50%. While I have certainly seen "uber-CAP" slaughter strikes, I personally don't think it's necessary. To each his own.
Probably other stuff.
"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me