GLOBAL WAR COUNTER-FACTUAL (W1/Wilhelm vs rkr1958/jp)

[warspite1]

Here is an opener for the Optionals (except extended game length should be off). What are your must haves/likes/don't cares?

[rkr1958]

Warspite1, for me looks good for the most part with only a few items I'd like to discuss:

1. I propose that we manually enforce (i.e., house rule), "USSR-Japan Compulsory peace".

2. 1D10 w/Blitz Bonus vs 2D10. My preference is 2D10, but I'll definitely be willing to go with the majority on this.

3. Cruisers in Flames. I believe this to be highly pro-allied. As part of the allied team I'm certainly ok with using it; but is it too much? As the USSR/Natchi/Comchi I'm really unaffected by it either way so maybe I should leave this to you three to discuss.

4. Chinese Attack Weakness. Definitely pro-axis. I have a feeling as the Chinese player that I'll be directly facing a more experienced and skilled player than myself (i.e., WILHELM_slith as the Japanese), so I'll defer to him on whether or not he believes this optional is necessary. I can go either way ...

5. Variable reorg. I like this optional, but believe it impacts the Euro-Axis and Western Allied players more, so I'm ok with whatever the other (2 or 3) players decide.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

Warspite1, for me looks good for the most part with only a few items I'd like to discuss:

1. I propose that we manually enforce (i.e., house rule), "USSR-Japan Compulsory peace".

Agreed

2. 1D10 w/Blitz Bonus vs 2D10. My preference is 2D10, but I'll definitely be willing to go with the majority on this.

Never used it but its about time I gave it a go so fine with me

3. Cruisers in Flames. I believe this to be highly pro-allied. As part of the allied team I'm certainly ok with using it; but is it too much? As the USSR/Natchi/Comchi I'm really unaffected by it either way so maybe I should leave this to you three to discuss.

As the Japanese I'll let Wilhelm comment. I don't mind because I LOVE ships even though its pro Allied - but whatever the majority go with.

4. Chinese Attack Weakness. Definitely pro-axis. I have a feeling as the Chinese player that I'll be directly facing a more experienced and skilled player than myself (i.e., WILHELM_slith as the Japanese), so I'll defer to him on whether or not he believes this optional is necessary. I can go either way ...

From what I've seen this game needs this

5. Variable reorg. I like this optional, but believe it impacts the Euro-Axis and Western Allied players more, so I'm ok with whatever the other (2 or 3) players decide.

Personally would prefer not.

[jesperpehrson]

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

Warspite1, for me looks good for the most part with only a few items I'd like to discuss:

1. I propose that we manually enforce (i.e., house rule), "USSR-Japan Compulsory peace".

2. 1D10 w/Blitz Bonus vs 2D10. My preference is 2D10, but I'll definitely be willing to go with the majority on this.

3. Cruisers in Flames. I believe this to be highly pro-allied. As part of the allied team I'm certainly ok with using it; but is it too much? As the USSR/Natchi/Comchi I'm really unaffected by it either way so maybe I should leave this to you three to discuss.

4. Chinese Attack Weakness. Definitely pro-axis. I have a feeling as the Chinese player that I'll be directly facing a more experienced and skilled player than myself (i.e., WILHELM_slith as the Japanese), so I'll defer to him on whether or not he believes this optional is necessary. I can go either way ...

5. Variable reorg. I like this optional, but believe it impacts the Euro-Axis and Western Allied players more, so I'm ok with whatever the other (2 or 3) players decide.

What house-rules have you played with in regards to Russo-Japanese war?

I have only played 2d10 landcombat for a long time but I vaguely remember playing with both a D10 and even a D6. I remember thinking that 2 dice are better than 1 but I have no strong opionion on the matter.

I like Cruisers in Flames as it gets more dynamic with more units but that is probably because I am thinking from a CW perspective already!

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: jesperpehrson

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

Warspite1, for me looks good for the most part with only a few items I'd like to discuss:

1. I propose that we manually enforce (i.e., house rule), "USSR-Japan Compulsory peace".

2. 1D10 w/Blitz Bonus vs 2D10. My preference is 2D10, but I'll definitely be willing to go with the majority on this.

3. Cruisers in Flames. I believe this to be highly pro-allied. As part of the allied team I'm certainly ok with using it; but is it too much? As the USSR/Natchi/Comchi I'm really unaffected by it either way so maybe I should leave this to you three to discuss.

4. Chinese Attack Weakness. Definitely pro-axis. I have a feeling as the Chinese player that I'll be directly facing a more experienced and skilled player than myself (i.e., WILHELM_slith as the Japanese), so I'll defer to him on whether or not he believes this optional is necessary. I can go either way ...

5. Variable reorg. I like this optional, but believe it impacts the Euro-Axis and Western Allied players more, so I'm ok with whatever the other (2 or 3) players decide.

What house-rules have you played with in regards to Russo-Japanese war?

I have only played 2d10 landcombat for a long time but I vaguely remember playing with both a D10 and even a D6. I remember thinking that 2 dice are better than 1 but I have no strong opionion on the matter.

I like Cruisers in Flames as it gets more dynamic with more units but that is probably because I am thinking from a CW perspective already!

warspite1

No house rules I don't think - play as per RAC with USSR-Japan Compulsory Peace in play.

[warspite1]

So subject to Wilhem's input am I right in saying we have:

1. Japan-USSR as per RAC with compulsory peace

2. 2D10

3. Cruisers In Flames TBC

4. Chinese attack weakness

5. Variable/non-variable re-org TBC

And Mayhemizer reminded me:

6. Prefer no CAP

7. Always assume subs not included in port attacks on major ports


Are we all on the latest version of the game? 3.1.0.1

[jesperpehrson]

Where do I see latest version? The updater says I am using the latest version.

[warspite1]

I'll leave that for someone knowledgeable to answer - I always have to get a grown up to help with the technical stuff. I seem to recall there was a patch or something after the latest version - but I'm probably talking cobblers [:(]

[WILHELM_slith]

I strongly prefer the 2d10 table.I think cruisers in flames should not be used, but i can live with that.
If the Chinese player is not an expert the Chinese attack weakness is not necessary.
The other rules look good to me.

[warspite1]

So can we settle on:

1. Japan-USSR as per RAC with compulsory peace - ON

2. 2D10 - ON

3. Cruisers In Flames - OFF

4. Chinese attack weakness - OFF

5. Variable re-org - OFF

6. CAP - OFF

House rule
Always assume subs not included in port attacks on major ports


If so and we are all on the latest version of the game? 3.1.0.1 then whoever is the US player can start the game rolling! I'll PM my e-mail address. Can others do the same please?

Here is the link for the die roller

http://www.pbegames.com/roller/

AXIS:
Germany/Italy - warspite1
Japan - WILHELM_Slith

ALLIES:
Please confirm

[rkr1958]

Let's keep Chinese attack weakness. I'm good with everything else.

[WILHELM_slith]

For fair game.Does everyone understand that in a PBEM game players can influence which starting units they get? If you dont like the start army list you get. Restart the save and do it over and over till you get what you like. It works the same when you're building units at end of turn.
If some players dont know how this works they have a big problem. If everybody knows it, its just an advantage all can use. And thats fair.
Willem

[rkr1958]

ORIGINAL: jesperpehrson

Where do I see latest version? The updater says I am using the latest version.

The MWiF version is on the initial splash screen when you first start up MWiF.

ORIGINAL: warspite1

No house rules I don't think - play as per RAC with USSR-Japan Compulsory Peace in play.

Yes.
USSR Japan Compulsory Peace [RAW option 50 section 13.7.3]

This optional rule reflects the willingness of both the USSR and Japan to remain at peace with each other
during WW II. Though they had been fighting a mostly unreported little war along the Manchurian border for
some time prior to Germany's invasion of Poland, they both felt a lot of pressure on other fronts: from Germany
for the USSR and from the USA and the Commonwealth for Japan. Agreeing to peace with each other was in
both of their self-interests.

If Japan controls Vladivostok during the first war between Japan and the USSR, the Japanese player must
agree to a peace if the Soviet player wants one. Similarly, if the USSR controls 3 or more resources that were
Japanese controlled at the start of the war, the Soviet player must agree to a peace if the Japanese player
wants one.

In either case, the new Russo-Japanese border is established by the hexes each controls at the time of the
compulsory peace. Any pocket of non-coastal hexes wholly surrounded by hexes controlled by the other major
power becomes controlled by the major power whose hexes surround them.

[rkr1958]

ORIGINAL: WILHELM_slith

For fair game.Does everyone understand that in a PBEM game players can influence which starting units they get? If you dont like the start army list you get. Restart the save and do it over and over till you get what you like. It works the same when you're building units at end of turn.
If some players dont know how this works they have a big problem. If everybody knows it, its just an advantage all can use. And thats fair.
Willem

Ok ... but I propose we use an honor system where we don't do that. Or at least I plan not to.

[jesperpehrson]

Ronnie is playing Russia, China and C.China
I will be playing USA, CW and France.

As for the version I am on the wrong version. I assume I need to get the Beta-version of the update and then find the hotpatch.

As I am the US-player starting the game I assume I start it as a solitaire game?
I agree with Ronnie about not reloading startingunits, we play with the cards we are dealt!

[rkr1958]

Just sent a PM to all three of you which included my email address.

If we're all set then I guess it's up to my partner, who's the US/France/CW to start the game and begin the setup.

Good luck to you all.

Oh, I guess die (dice) rolling service. Which one and where do I sign up?

ORIGINAL: jesperpehrson

Ronnie is playing Russia, China and C.China
I will be playing USA, CW and France.

As for the version I am on the wrong version. I assume I need to get the Beta-version of the update and then find the hotpatch.

As I am the US-player starting the game I assume I start it as a solitaire game?
I agree with Ronnie about not reloading startingunits, we play with the cards we are dealt!

Yes, solitaire. Also, for the version. Go to https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4736334 to get the latest full public beta 3.01.00.00 (very first post) and to https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4739859 to get the hotpatch 3.01.00.01, which is just an executable that you copy over the one from 3.01.00.00.

[WILHELM_slith]

OK cards we are dealt it is. The USA player starts a solitaire game. When done setup mail the save to the next player.

[rkr1958]

Last thing ... I think we need a snazzier name for our AAR. I've always like the word counter-factual ever since I first heard it, which hasn't been that long ago.

I propose that we name our game, the Global War Counter-Factual AAR.

Or maybe just the Counter-Factual AAR. [8D]

What do you think?

[jesperpehrson]

It sounds perfect!
The game is underway and I am in contact with my ally about lendlease. I will do my set-up of the US and PM you all my e-mail.

[rkr1958]

ORIGINAL: jesperpehrson

It sounds perfect!
The game is underway and I am in contact with my ally about lendlease. I will do my set-up of the US and PM you all my e-mail.

Ok. I'll start a thread then and post your question about lend lease and my response so those at home can follow.