Probus' Head-to-Head (H2H) Etiquette to Reduce Problems with PBEM Gameplay

[Probus]

Combat Mission PBEM Etiquette

I've been Playing By E-Mail (PBEM) Combat Mission now for about a year and a 1/2 after rediscovering the Combat Mission Series mid-year 2020.  I have been loving every minute of it and have sometimes had up to 13 games in progress at the same time (when stuck in a hotel room for a month because COVID didn't really let us go out at night).

One of the things that I learned early on is that folks have different pre-game (and even during game) rulesets or etiquettes they play with.  Things like pre-bombardment of setup zones, Mulligans, Area Fire of Contacts and so on.  I wanted to standardize a set of etiquette to help smooth PBEM games, reduce conflicts and hard feelings and make the H2H game experience as fun as we can make it.  I also wanted the community's input as there is probably etiquettes that I am still simply not aware of or have forgotten to add to the list.  So here goes my first pass at a set of generic pre-game rules for PBEM games.

Probus' PBEM Game Etiquette:

1.  No pre planned bombardment of each other's setup zones in Meeting Engagements. [Set to No pre-bombardment]

2.  Bombardment of avenues of approach is not allowed in Meeting Engagements until contact is established. [Set to No pre-bombardment]

3.  Number of Mulligans, or turn do-overs, per game. Mulligans should only be asked for if there was a problem with the Combat Mission Engine/Process.** [Set at 1 if not otherwise specified]

4.  Area fire of suspected enemy positions is permitted. [Set to permitted if not otherwise specified]

5.  No viewing of a scenario's .btt file is permitted under regular gameplay. [Set to not permitted]

6.  When prototyping/testing a new scenario, perusal of the .btt file is permitted but not recommended [Set to permitted but recommend it be discussed prior to start].

7.  If playing a scenario/map you have already played please reveal this fact to your opponent. [Set to TRUE]

8.  Expected turn response rate should be measured in days on weeks. [Default to ~1 turn a day or more, once a week MAX]

9.  Delays due to real life (RL) situations should be conveyed to your opponent. This happens to us all. From a vacation or illness to a death in the family. The courteous player should let their opponent know the turn rate has slowed or paused whenever possible. [Set to 'whenever possible']

10. Offer your capitulation if you are no longer able to continue the game in a timely manner. [Set to 1 turn a week MAX]

 

**Mulligans should only fix the problem that occurred. No other changes to the turn should be implemented.

Example Mulligan:

  Reinforcements enter a map with hedgerows.  Orders are given to the reinforcements to move towards the combat zone.  A platoon of pixeltroopen decide to move towards a gate in the hedgerow that was accidentally placed in an exit space.  The entire platoon walks through the gate and into the twilight zone and are removed from the map.  Ooops! Mulligan - All the players involved agree to roll back the turn so that the movement orders can be update to not walk the platoon so close to gate on the exit row.  With this etiquette players know that the only change made to the turn is the fixing of the movement orders, no other tweaking allowed. If another Ooops occurs then no Mulligan should be expected.

If a listing of PBEM etiquette already exists (and it probably does), please link it below so that it can be discussed and my list updated.  Hard Cat Rules are a great set of etiquette rules for simulating realistic conditions:  

https://community.battlefront.com/topic/135087-hard-cat-rules-v2-simple-to-use-command-control-rules-updated-14apr20/

 

Feel free to ask questions or describe each point further.  If I have missed a point (I'm sure I have), please include it below.

If you disagree with any of the points please discuss below.  I would love to hear differing opinions.

Also, just as a disclaimer, I think I've broken almost all these 'rules of etiquette' at one time or another.  Its been a learning process. My wonderful opponents have let me know what the accepted PBEM etiquette is, continuing the game graciously.

Edited January 19, 2022 by Probus
Clarify the etiquette a bit

[dbsapp]

Does pbem++ (through server) allow viewing .bts file? 

 

[Redwolf]

32 minutes ago, dbsapp said:

Does pbem++ (through server) allow viewing .bts file? 

 

Only if you catch them in flight and copy them yourself.

[Redwolf]

39 minutes ago, Probus said:

 

1. No bombardment of each other's setup zones in Meeting Engagements. [Set to No pre-bombardment]
2. Bombardment of avenues of approach is not allowed in Meeting Engagements until contact is established. [Set to No pre-bombardment]

But in attack/defense surely the attacker should be free to pre-plan bombardment of the defender's zone?

[dbsapp]

5 minutes ago, Redwolf said:

Only if you catch them in flight and copy them yourself.

So there is no need for password?

I feel I should learn more about those things before playing online. 

[KGBoy]

42 minutes ago, dbsapp said:

So there is no need for password?

I feel I should learn more about those things before playing online. 

Tell me about it!

[dbsapp]

Are servers dead? 

I'm getting the message that my game should be updated to 1.03 and I can't log in (I'm playing Steam version that was updated long time ago)

[Probus]

2 hours ago, Redwolf said:

But in attack/defense surely the attacker should be free to pre-plan bombardment of the defender's zone?

Yes. Attack and Assault scenarios should be treated differently than Meeting Engagements.  But for Meeting Engagements the etiquette is a bit different.

[A Canadian Cat]

Too many rules The more rules you have the more likely I'll accidentally violate them because I cannot remember them. LOL says the guy who helped develop the Hard Cat rules. Speaking of which I should really be pitching that to opponents more and try to get some games going using them.

3 hours ago, Probus said:

Probus' PBEM Game Etiquette:

1. No bombardment of each other's setup zones in Meeting Engagements. [Set to No pre-bombardment]

Yeah this is pretty much it for me plus for probe, assault and attack the defenders can get TRPs and the attacker can pre-plan what ever they want. The thing is once the game is going there are no safe zones. Don't expect the setup zone to be some permanent home base that will not get hit by a barrage.

3 hours ago, Probus said:

1. Bombardment of avenues of approach is not allowed in Meeting Engagements until contact is established. [Set to No pre-bombardment]

Why not. I'm approaching a village why wouldn't' I blast the heck out of the enemy approaches or retreat routes.

3 hours ago, Probus said:

1. Number of Mulligans, or turn do-overs, per game. Mulligans should only be asked for if there was a problem with the Combat Mission Engine/Process.** [Set at 1 if not otherwise specified]

Mulligan - what's a mulligan. There are no do overs in life, why would there be in combat mission. I have no idea what you meant by engine process problems though...

3 hours ago, Probus said:

1. Area fire of suspected enemy positions is permitted. [Set to permitted if not otherwise specified]

If you want to have restrictions on this follow the Hard Cat rules - they at least are more realistic than a blanket ban - which I would never want to have.

3 hours ago, Probus said:

1. No viewing of a scenario's .bts file is permitted under regular gameplay. [Set to not permitted]

Huh - what is this. PBEM use password protected .ema files there are no .bts files in PBEM - except any intermediate saves I might make if I have to go to dinner or something. Am I missing something?

3 hours ago, Probus said:

1. When prototyping/testing a new scenario, perusal of the .bts file is permitted but not recommended [Set to permitted but recommend it be discussed prior to start].

Humm I feel like I am missing something here

3 hours ago, Probus said:

1. If playing a scenario/map you have already played please reveal this fact to your opponent. [Set to TRUE]

Yeah, that's not going to happen. I can look up if I played a scenario before but not a map. Heck sometimes I don't realize I've been on a map until deep into the game. As for scenarios if someone specifically wants to play a scenario blind, sure I'm OK with putting the the effort to find one we haven't played but anything else I just asking me to make a mistake that violate your rule.

3 hours ago, Probus said:

1. Expected turn response rate should be measured in days on weeks. [Default to ~1 turn a day or more, once a week MAX]

Sure OK but there are a lot of variables here. So, I'm happy to discuss it but writing it into a rule like this might just mean I cannot play you. Take for example a long running game that just finished I played a turn a day during the week but not the weekends pretty consistently except a few times I managed to put in three or four turns in a day. That would have been in violation of this rule. Better to discuss things with your opponent than a hard rule.

3 hours ago, Probus said:

1. Delays due to real life (RL) situations should be conveyed to your opponent. This happens to us all. From a vacation or illness to a death in the family. The courteous player should let their opponent know the turn rate has slowed or paused whenever possible. [Set to 'whenever possible']

That I agree with.

3 hours ago, Probus said:

1. Offer your capitulation if you are no longer able to continue the game in a timely manner. [Set to 1 turn a week MAX]

For sure if you really are bailing. But see above.

My bottom line is less blanket etiquette rules and more discussion with opponents.

[Grey_Fox]

6 minutes ago, IanL said:

Why not. I'm approaching a village why wouldn't' I blast the heck out of the enemy approaches or retreat routes.

I think it's to simulate that in a meeting engagement you haven't made contact yet and so aren't aware of enemy positions, or if they're even present.

Edited January 19, 2022 by Grey_Fox

[A Canadian Cat]

Just now, Grey_Fox said:

I think it's to simulate that in a meeting engagement you haven't made contact yet and so aren't aware of enemy positions, or if they're even present.

Oh I get what it's for. I just don't agree.

[Redwolf]

I also think that in a ME I should be able to blast the objectives with preplanned fire (not the enemy setup zones).

If the enemy wants to rush the objective and run into 301mm Nebelwerfers on 5 minute delay more power to him.

[KGBoy]

4 hours ago, Probus said:

Probus' PBEM Game Etiquette:

1. No bombardment of each other's setup zones in Meeting Engagements. [Set to No pre-bombardment]

WOuldn't a simpler rule be just to say no TRPs on MEs?

[Grey_Fox]

10 minutes ago, KGBoy said:

WOuldn't a simpler rule be just to say no TRPs on MEs?

What's the rationale behind no TRPs on a route?

[Probus]

59 minutes ago, IanL said:

Oh I get what it's for. I just don't agree.

What's great about these 'rules' is that they have a default setting, they are not carved in stone.  If you don't agree, just say so with your PBEM opponent and set that rule to yes instead of no.  Blast the heck out of the approach zones.

The etiquette is just to make sure you and your opponent are on the same page when you start a game.  So you would just say lets use the 'Probus etiquette' for this game except blasting approach avenues is OK.

I've run into at least 1/2 a dozen games in which we both started with different ideas on what was standard etiquette for the PBEM game.  I don't want to make it complex, just more standard.

Hard Cat rules.  I've gotta find these!

Edited January 19, 2022 by Probus
Hard Cat Rules

[Probus]

Yeah. Thanks @IanL.  I didn't know about the Hard Cat rules.  You and @Bil Hardenberger have already done this.  Here is a link to the Hard Cat Rules:

I like it!

[Probus]

1 hour ago, Redwolf said:

I also think that in a ME I should be able to blast the objectives with preplanned fire (not the enemy setup zones).

If the enemy wants to rush the objective and run into 301mm Nebelwerfers on 5 minute delay more power to him.

I have no problem with this @Redwolf. Reconnaissance by fire and/or denying an objective to the enemy.  Great points and used in combat.

[Probus]

1 hour ago, IanL said:

5 hours ago, Probus said:

1. Area fire of suspected enemy positions is permitted. [Set to permitted if not otherwise specified]

If you want to have restrictions on this follow the Hard Cat rules - they at least are more realistic than a blanket ban - which I would never want to have.

Some folks think this to be 'Gamey'.  Playing the game more like an arcade game than a realistic game.  I personally agree with you Ian and therefore have set the default to permitted.

 

1 hour ago, IanL said:

5 hours ago, Probus said:

1. No viewing of a scenario's .bts file is permitted under regular gameplay. [Set to not permitted]

Huh - what is this. PBEM use password protected .ema files there are no .bts files in PBEM - except any intermediate saves I might make if I have to go to dinner or something. Am I missing something?

You are correct.  I meant .btt file not .bts. I've corrected it in the OP.  The intention was for the players to agree not to peruse the .btt map/scenario in the scenario editor to get information about the game that is above and beyond what the briefing chooses to reveal.

 

1 hour ago, IanL said:

My bottom line is less blanket etiquette rules and more discussion with opponents.

I can see your point about thinking of the above as hard set rules.  They are not.  They are just a list of etiquette that can be referenced (especially for newer players like myself) so that PBEM games flow more smoothly.

[Bulletpoint]

I think it's a very good idea to have a short standardised rule template to agree on, then individual rules can always be tweaked. Actually I tried to make a similar ruleset some time ago, but it never got off the ground.

Lots easier to start up a game and then just say "let's use Probus' rules but allow bombardment of avenues in this meeting engagement", instead of having a long back and forth about what rules to use.

I think there should be a line about air power though. If it's not allowed to bombard approaches in a meeting engagement, is it allowed to strafe?

Also, one could argue that moving towards the objective through mortar fire is exactly what a halftrack is good for, so I would personally probably ask my opponent to skip that rule, and one might say it could be omitted from the ruleset completely. You could always agree to use it anyway, if you wanted...

[Redwolf]

21 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

I think there should be a line about air power though. If it's not allowed to bombard approaches in a meeting engagement, is it allowed to strafe?

Well, that leads to one specific problem. In CMRT you cannot control airplanes anymore. There is nothing you can do about it if they decide to shoot up the other setup zone in turn 1.

[KGBoy]

1 hour ago, Grey_Fox said:

What's the rationale behind no TRPs on a route?

This is for Meeting Engagements only.

My thinking is you don't know the terrain so how can you plan TRPs without coordinates? You don't bomb towns because you don't want to kill town-folk. Both are 'realistic' considerations.  Send in an FO at the start of the game.

Having said that Hard Cat Rules works for me.

[Grey_Fox]

37 minutes ago, KGBoy said:

This is for Meeting Engagements only.

My thinking is you don't know the terrain so how can you plan TRPs without coordinates? You don't bomb towns because you don't want to kill town-folk. Both are 'realistic' considerations.  Send in an FO at the start of the game.

Having said that Hard Cat Rules works for me.

Why wouldn't you know the terrain? Maps have been around for centuries. A basic read of a map would allow one to determine potential defensive positions and chokepoints.

Edited January 19, 2022 by Grey_Fox

[chuckdyke]

1 hour ago, Grey_Fox said:

Why wouldn't you know the terrain?

Exactly one of the reasons the Cold War never turned 'Hot'. Every square meter was referenced and both sides knew it. A Barbarossa type of operation would have been met with at least tactical nuclear artillery and likewise a Bagration type of operation against NATO. You would have had ground forces with about a 48 hour life expectancy or out of action because of radiation sickness. 

[chuckdyke]

Rules demonstrate communication is possible. Vertical or Horizontal between units. HQ's receive contact icons they can order fire missions for their subunits to carry out if they all have their 'Green Radiobuttons'. I enjoy my Hotseat battles as winning or losing is not important finding tactical solutions is the reason we play the game. Important during the set up period make sure the 'Signals' are in order. There should be Signal units like we have Engineers who establish communication between Armored HQ and Infantry HQ for example. Signal unit clicks HQ A and HQ B after some time the Signal unit displays a Radio Icon. 

 

 

Edited January 20, 2022 by chuckdyke

[Simcoe]

Thank you for sharing. I think these are a good baseline for ANY PBEM game and anything extra should be communicated before start.

10 hours ago, Probus said:

Combat Mission PBEM Etiquette

I've been Playing By E-Mail (PBEM) Combat Mission now for about a year and a 1/2 after rediscovering the Combat Mission Series mid-year 2020.  I have been loving every minute of it and have sometimes had up to 13 games in progress at the same time (when stuck in a hotel room for a month because COVID didn't really let us go out at night).

One of the things that I learned early on is that folks have different pre-game (and even during game) rulesets or etiquettes they play with.  Things like pre-bombardment of setup zones, Mulligans, Area Fire of Contacts and so on.  I wanted to standardize a set of etiquette to help smooth PBEM games, reduce conflicts and hard feelings and make the H2H game experience as fun as we can make it.  I also wanted the community's input as there is probably etiquettes that I am still simply not aware of or have forgotten to add to the list.  So here goes my first pass at a set of generic pre-game rules for PBEM games.

Probus' PBEM Game Etiquette:

1.  No pre planned bombardment of each other's setup zones in Meeting Engagements. [Set to No pre-bombardment]

2.  Bombardment of avenues of approach is not allowed in Meeting Engagements until contact is established. [Set to No pre-bombardment]

3.  Number of Mulligans, or turn do-overs, per game. Mulligans should only be asked for if there was a problem with the Combat Mission Engine/Process.** [Set at 1 if not otherwise specified]

4.  Area fire of suspected enemy positions is permitted. [Set to permitted if not otherwise specified]

5.  No viewing of a scenario's .btt file is permitted under regular gameplay. [Set to not permitted]

6.  When prototyping/testing a new scenario, perusal of the .btt file is permitted but not recommended [Set to permitted but recommend it be discussed prior to start].

7.  If playing a scenario/map you have already played please reveal this fact to your opponent. [Set to TRUE]

8.  Expected turn response rate should be measured in days on weeks. [Default to ~1 turn a day or more, once a week MAX]

9.  Delays due to real life (RL) situations should be conveyed to your opponent. This happens to us all. From a vacation or illness to a death in the family. The courteous player should let their opponent know the turn rate has slowed or paused whenever possible. [Set to 'whenever possible']

10. Offer your capitulation if you are no longer able to continue the game in a timely manner. [Set to 1 turn a week MAX]

 

**Mulligans should only fix the problem that occurred. No other changes to the turn should be implemented.

Example Mulligan:

  Reinforcements enter a map with hedgerows.  Orders are given to the reinforcements to move towards the combat zone.  A platoon of pixeltroopen decide to move towards a gate in the hedgerow that was accidentally placed in an exit space.  The entire platoon walks through the gate and into the twilight zone and are removed from the map.  Ooops! Mulligan - All the players involved agree to roll back the turn so that the movement orders can be update to not walk the platoon so close to gate on the exit row.  With this etiquette players know that the only change made to the turn is the fixing of the movement orders, no other tweaking allowed. If another Ooops occurs then no Mulligan should be expected.

If a listing of PBEM etiquette already exists (and it probably does), please link it below so that it can be discussed and my list updated.  Hard Cat Rules are a great set of etiquette rules for simulating realistic conditions:  

https://community.battlefront.com/topic/135087-hard-cat-rules-v2-simple-to-use-command-control-rules-updated-14apr20/

 

Feel free to ask questions or describe each point further.  If I have missed a point (I'm sure I have), please include it below.

If you disagree with any of the points please discuss below.  I would love to hear differing opinions.

Also, just as a disclaimer, I think I've broken almost all these 'rules of etiquette' at one time or another.  Its been a learning process. My wonderful opponents have let me know what the accepted PBEM etiquette is, continuing the game graciously.