WinSPMBT "house rules"

[Roman]

I personally prefer more general rules. One might think of points in general. For example:
1) Map (size, terrain, visibility ...)
2) Point of purchase units
3) Restriction of units (size zero, air points, armor .....)
4) Location of VPs

Interestingly suggesting Cross, but it seems very detailed. I think the less rules the imagination flies. I also think that in war there are no rules.
If players want to recreate a special field for battle if it can create more detailed rules.
Greetings

[Lankinen]

CrosS:

Interesting, that you want to limit off map artillery, for me i prefer on map artillery to be more effective.

But this might be different in world at war 2 vs winspmbt ?

[Cross]

Originally Posted by Roman

I personally prefer more general rules. One might think of points in general. For example:
1) Map (size, terrain, visibility ...)
2) Point of purchase units
3) Restriction of units (size zero, air points, armor .....)
4) Location of VPs

Interestingly suggesting Cross, but it seems very detailed. I think the less rules the imagination flies. I also think that in war there are no rules.
If players want to recreate a special field for battle if it can create more detailed rules.
Greetings

My 'preferences' are just that, preferences not rules. It's just a list of things that I may want to think about and discuss with an opponent prior to a battle. It's a reference tool.

And I disagree war does have rules of engagement.

I play battles with almost no rules, and some with detailed agreements.
If I was to play against you, we may agree to have no rules.

Cross

Originally Posted by Lankinen

CrosS:

Interesting, that you want to limit off map artillery, for me i prefer on map artillery to be more effective.

But this might be different in world at war 2 vs winspmbt ?

Lankinen,

It's not that I'm trying to limit off-map artillery, but rather I like that on-map artillery is vulnerable to armoured breakthroughs.

It forces players to protect their front line, or more importantly their rear, to keep their arty units safe. You have think a little more strategically.
If you succeed in getting to your opponents rear area it could be a hollow victory if there's nothing there, but on-map arty provides a prize for successsful breakthroughs.

Cross

[gila]

I go with Cross's preferences pretty much myself,
But now days keeping Arty within 5% and tanks and armour no more than 25% for a single battle.

When playing a campaign,
I am starting with keeping starting pt.s very low "preferably" only a coy of infrantry for each side,, a sniper a a scout and one mmg additonal,regardless of pt.s allowed,and no tanks allowed for the starting core,but can be added later,say a section for 2 coy of infrantry and a platoon for a Bn of infrantry.

All dedicated arty is to be bought from auxillery and always kept within the 5% range,excluding support arty which comes with infrantry,and no other auxillery units ever bought,except trucks.

This keeps the buying of new units from support pts available when the going gets too tough for the core.
Then the campaign should be set at hard or better the hardest levels to reflect the limited ablities to repair or heal units,from one battle to the next.

[Roman]

Originally Posted by Cross

My 'preferences' are just that, preferences not rules. It's just a list of things that I may want to think about and discuss with an opponent prior to a battle. It's a reference tool.

And I disagree war does have rules of engagement.

I play battles with almost no rules, and some with detailed agreements.
If I was to play against you, we may agree to have no rules.

Cross


Cross

I was talking about real war.