Comrade Trapp Posted June 8, 2003 Share Posted June 8, 2003 I propose the following house rule: Air Fleet Limits: Germany: 4 airfleets - 1 strategic Great Britian: 3 airfleets - 1 strategic Soviet Union: 2 airfleets - United States: 1 airfleet - 2 strategic Italy: 2 airfleet France: 2 airfleets - 1 strategic Total Allied : 6 airfleets - 3 strategic Total Axis: 6 airfleets - 1 strategic (Not including France in the total because France has no chance of having a significant airforce.) With this house rule, each side could damage the others units but at the same time, airpower alone would not decide the outcome of the war. Without having to dedicate all their mpps to building airfleets and air tech, a player could use the extra mpps for building naval units, strategic bombers, and rockets. More complex and realistic strategies could be used instead of having jet tech decide the war. Airpower would still be a significant factor but it would be toned down a bit. In some cases this would prevent the "cookie-cutter" invasion of neutrals. Not really the case in places like Yugoslavia, but in Spain, Norway, Sweden it would help. This would also help prevent HQs from being destroyed, something that alot of people disagree with. The reason I picked the numbers I did for the max airfleets for each country is so that no side will have a big advantage in airfleets at any given time in the war. As I said up above, the numbers make a good balance between keeping airpower a signicant factor but at the same time making it so it doesn't decide the war. You may also notice I propsed a max for strategic bomber too, this would prevent a player from just investing in strategic bombers and using them like airfleets. (With heavy bomber and long range tech, bombers could be just as potent as airfleets). But at the same time it allowes the ability for each side to initiate a strategic bombing campaign. My vote: House Rule for max airfleets. Comrade Trapp [ June 08, 2003, 02:18 AM: Message edited by: Comrade Trapp ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terif Posted June 8, 2003 Share Posted June 8, 2003 Comrade Trapp (and CvM): This is what Zappsweden was afraid of: When introducing one house rule, then all people come and demand for another house rule to solve their specific problem with the game. In general the League should be with no house rules at all. SC is balanced like it is, i.e. both sides have the same chances to win, if both players are equal. Every house rule shifts the balance to one side, you dont know the total effects in advance. Perhaps this house rule is perfect for your playing style, but thats unfair against all other players, that want to play a normal game. Every house rule limits the possible strategies. The reason for the house rule against the Rome gambit was: it decided the game in 5 turns and there is no real counterstrategy possible. Very experienced Axis players still can win against a successful Rome gambit, but its no fun to play any more for new/average players, if the Rome gambit is used. It shifts the balance heavily towards Allies. Therefore it was necessary to forbid this move. Everything else depends on the strategies both players use and you can develope a counterstrategy to everything so far. I dont know a strategy that is unbeatable after nearly 200 games played. You only need to know the counter . Therefore we dont need additional house rules. If you want a house rule, then not as standard in the League. You can make a house rule with the player you want to play. Nobody has something against, if both players want to play their game this way with a house rule. If he agrees to use it, then its ok. Officially there are no other house rules allowed in the League, but if both players agree to a house rule (or scenario) for their specific game, I think its ok. But you have to say it before the game and if possible remind the opponent after reloading the save some time later (not that he forgot about it). Edit: I just read in CvMs thread from Zapp, that it is even officially allowed to use additional house rules if both players want to. BTW: Your airfleet problem is no real problem. An airfleet costs 400 mpp (Lv0, normally it has Lv3-5= 520-600mpp) and has an attack rating of 2 against land units. An army costs 250 and has an attack rating of 4. Therefore using airfleets to kill ground units is very expensive and ineffective, if they are used in large numbers. An army is (even with the better experience gaining of airfleets) 2-4 times more effective than an airfleet. The main tasks of airfleets are: finishing off damaged units, making breakthroughs together with ground units, airbattles, reconnaissance and protecting the coasts. If a player uses airfleets in large numbers to kill full strength enemy units, then he will surely loose the game if the opponent does it right. Killing enemy Hqs is only possible if the other player moves them into the wrong place and has no air cover. If your Hqs are blown up regularly then you have to rethink/change your tactics and strategies. You dont need a house rule against too many airfleets. Its already implemented in the game with the mpps. If someone buys too much airfleets (lets say much more than 10 as Axis), then he will loose the game, cause he lacks ground units and needs the right mix of units. He needs a certain number for their main tasks, but not too much and not too few airfleets. For each additional airfleet he cant buy a more effective ground unit. If you see, your opponent buys a lot of airfleet, then use it against him and change your strategy accordingly (if you dont want to change your strategy, then you have a problem and need a house rule ). It works, I can assure you... . [ June 08, 2003, 06:25 AM: Message edited by: Terif ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaka of Carthage Posted June 8, 2003 Share Posted June 8, 2003 I'd like to respond to Terif's post about Houserules. In regards to the Air, I agree that no mandatory rule is needed. The game is balanced as it is. I've never wanted to force everyone to play with that restriction, I have just wanted the ability before a game starts, to agree on optional rules with a player, and have it count as a Z-league game. It was my understanding that I didn't have that ability in a Z-league game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts