Hiensen's rules adapted for K2 (proposal)

[Cueball]

The following is a rules set I have devised as an adapatation of Hiensen's rules for K2 games.

It became clear to me that there are some holes in the rules, which can be taken advantage of by some players who are intent on breaking the historical spirit of the rules. So seeing the need for eliminating excessive gaminess, I thought it would be good to make some clarifications.

In particular, I wished to elminate the strategy of having Italy rape neutral countries after Danzig, when it is not in the Axis without reprisals from the Allies, while also eliminating another gamey Allied tactic which is having a PA UK or France DOW neutral Italy before it has entered Axis. (These are rules 6.2 and 8.2)

Further, I changed the rule about Japan DOW'ing Allies, so that it is tied into Germany's DOW on SU, so that Japan's strategy can be tied into the German strategy should they attack SU in 1940. (This is rule 7.5).

I have also included explicit prohibitions against certain gamey exploits of the game engine. These are rules 5.3, 8.4 and 10.6.

All in all this is a complilation of my ideas, based on Hiensen's rules, who gets obvious credit for the basic structure, including some other valuable inclusions from the trade rules found on D's IFGS site, and the Spartan rules set, I have tried variously to give credit where credit is due.

Please feel free to comment on them:

Major changes in Yellow and bold.

The following rules are based on creating a balanced game with a historical flavour, and exceptions or exploits not covered by these rules will be decided by the players in game, based on hitorical precedent, obvious "gaminess" is prohibited.


IMPROVEMENTS AND DOCTRINES

0.1 : Coastal/land forts level max is 5
0.2 : It's forbidden to switch to another naval/land doctrines tree except if one of your allies already got the same


SPECIAL RULES

0.3 : no nuclear weapons
0.4 : no rockets or flying bombs till 43

TRADES

1.1 :The 2nd day of the game the Axis are the first to make trades, later come the Allies
1.2 :The first trades already in place before the game starts must be respected until the war within the context of the allowances made in the other rules.
1.3 :The trades between GER/SU and USA/JAP must be free and fair till the war or embargo event (for USA)
1.4 :The Allies/Comintern are able to cancel some trades when their new factories put their resource growth in the red
1.5 :Trades should reflect the diplomatic situation within the game. e.g. free resources may only be given to another nation if it is part of the same military alliance. Otherwise, deals should be conducted at a reasonable rate of exchange.
1.6 The Allies may not trade for rares with AI countries that they are not allied to with the exception of deals suggested by the AI itself.
1.7 Trading units is forbidden, except between allied nations, and then only non-capital class ships (No CV's, CVL, BB's or CA's) except Japan may donate any or all of its Type One ships and subs to Puppet China to give them a fleet.
1.8 No trading, selling or donating VP provinces, unless that province is a core province of the recieving nation.
SPIES

2.1 : Coups or funding partisans (bugged) is not allowed against human players
2.2 : Stealing tech is the only intelligence operation authorised against AI nations (the AI isn't able to kill the spies properly)

UNITS IN THE FRONT

3.1 : Urban Limit for stacking units is 36
3.2 : Amphibious landing is unlimited
3.3 : No SR with units adjacent to enemy units, or when you're bombed from the air
3.4 : Recycling units (disbanding) is allowed only if they aren't already encircled
3.5 : You must supply ALL your OWN divisions, air and fleet in your OWNED provinces
3.6 Expeditionary Force can be given to an ally only when supplying these units is impossible (example Africa Corps in Italian Libya). (Spartan Rule 7.4)

DIPLOMACY

4.1 : No war until Danzig except those wars prompted by events
4.2 : Phoney wars are not allowed - when you are able to take the last victory points or annex, do so quickly
4.3 : You must respect peace treaties and non aggression pacts
4.4 : When you join one Alliance you must stay in it until the end
4.5 : Human players playing minor countries may not join their parent alliance unless they are at +200 relations with the alliance leader, Italy, Japan and USA are exceptions to this rule, as there conditions for joining the alliance is otherwise outlined.
4.5 Influencing of opponent player countries is forbidden. (Spartan Rule 2.5)
4.6 No country may GOI of any other country.

GERMANY RULES

5.1 : Axis alliances allowed :
-Austria, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Italy, Argentina, Nationalist Spain, Finland (after the end of Winter War event), Japan (if Japan may, see Japan 7.9)
5.2 : Germany must accept the DOW on Poland at the Danzig event
5.3 : Germany may not "ride events" to increase IC by deliberately allowing dissent to rise because of consumer goods deficit, which is then fixed by events.
5.4 Anschluss, Munich Treaty, End of Czechoslovakia, Memel, Danzig and Poland join Allies, should go historical. (Spartan rule 3.3)
5.5 No Axis minors when played by Humans (Hungary -- Romania -- Bulgaria) may join Axis until after the fall of Czechoslovakia in March 1939. Human Nationalist Spain and Argentina may join Axis after Danzig. Note: All these Alliances are governed by rule 4.5.

ITALY RULES

6.1 : Italy can join axis at any time after Ethiopia event
6.2 : Non-Axis Italy may DOW other neutral powers after Danzig however in the event of this, Allies may DOW Italy in retaliation ("billigerent Italy condition"), should sliders permit.
6.3 : Italy must NOT accept the surrender event when its homeland is invaded (event bugged)

JAPAN RULES

7.1 : Japan independent alliances :
-Japan cannot ally any Chinese warlord country but alliance with Siam is allowed by event
7.2 : Each side (JAP-SOV) must put one regular unit (not militia) on each province along their entire shared border during peacetime.
7.3 : Japan must DOW Nat China at Marco Polo Bridge event
7.4 : Japan must accept the non aggression pact with SU at Khalkin Ghol event
7.5 : Japan can DOW Allies anytime 6 months after the Axis DOW's USSR, or after May 1941, whichever comes first.
7.6 : Japan can DOW USA anytime after it DOW's Allies, or after December 7th, 1941.
7.7 Japan may not DOW the SU until it has achieved the following strategic objectives: The capture of Guam, the annexation of the Philipines, the captue of Borneo (the entire Island), the annexation of the the Netherlands via the capture of the Dutch East Indies, the capture of Singapore, the capture of Rangoon, the capture of Port Moresby, and the Australian victory point Island posessions (Lae, Rabaul, and Bougainville.) (Nicophorus/Ericus1)
7.8 : Japan MUST accept the surrender event when its homeland is invaded


7.9 Japan may not join Axis until it is at war with the Allies, the USA, and the Comintern

UK/FRANCE RULES

8.1 : Allied alliances allowed :
-All countries the Axis DOW and all countries in the world in 1944
8.2 : Allies may not DOW any non-Axis country with the exception of Italy and only then if "billigerent Italy" condition (see 6.2) is in effect.
8.3 : France must accept the Vichy event
8.4 :France may not have more than three regular army units in the Free French zone of Africa at Vichy.(Spartan Rule 7.9)

USA RULES

9.1 : Under normal circumstances, the USA cannot be played by a human until the Vichy event. Exceptions are if one of the conditions for US entry to the war in 9.2 (below) are satisfied.

9.2 USA may only join the war if :
-The Axis set foot in North or South America
-The UK homeland is 50%+ invaded by the Axis
-3 months after the Japanese DOW the Allies
-at the Pearl Harbour event
-at February 42
-if all land provinces adjacent to any three of the following cities is held by Axis, or the cities are captured outright: Moscow, Leningrad, Stalingrad, Baku or Vladivostock
9.3 : USA must NOT accept Yamamoto assassination if Pearl Harbour is in Japanese hands

USSR RULES

10.1 : Comintern alliances allowed :
-Republican Spain, Brazil or any countries having Marxist/Stalinist ideology
10.2 : Each side (JAP-SOV) must put one regular unit (not militia) per province along their entire shared border during peacetime.
10.3 : SU must accept and honour the MR Pact
10.4 : The MR can be:
a. Historical (full pact): in which case Germany can dow the SU from April 41 or vice versa
or b. Limited: Germany/USSR can dow from April 40
10.5 : Winter War: SU may not accept any peace offer from Finland other than the "End of Winter War" event. SU must accept the End of Winter War event and take its demanded provinces. On the other hand, if SU wants to "Bring Socialism", the NAP (MR pact) with Ger will end immediately.
10.6 Removed
10.7 : USSR must accept Bitter Peace if offered and respect peace time agreed by treaty. When peace treaty has expired, USSR is free to DOW. (spartan rule 3.3)

[Knupp]

Nice rules, but in my opinion they are giving the advantage to allies (in an already allied advantage as this game is designed)

[Cueball]

I was hoping to prove that one way or the other, but then well, you didn't want to play that game out (even though you knew why Germany did not act to defend Italy) and wanted to start another one under your rules system which you prefer.

That is the way it goes, I guess.

[Ericus1]

You should explicitly clarify the trading rates between non-allied human players, like say Japan and Germany. Simply saying a 'reasonable' rate is only going to lead to problems, as I'm sure someone will try to say that 1 supply for 100 energy seems 'reasonable' to them.

I'd probably set the ratio at 12:6:4:3:1.5:1 for energy:metal:oil:rares:supplies:money, straight out of the resource values.txt file. So if you want to buy 24 energy you must pay exactly 3 supplies, and vice versa.

Obviously, this would not apply to trade deals with the AI or with an ally, only for human/human deals. I would probably say make this same clarification for rule 1.3, since 'free and fair' is kind of nebulous.

Also, specificing the 2nd day be reserved for Axis trading is fairly meaningless if you don't also specify that they may pause the game for as long as they like on that day to make all the deals they want. You might also want to set some rules for game speed and pausing.

If you're going to give a special exception to starting trades, you need to disallow trade deal merging, otherwise the argument will occur of whether a merged starting trade still does or does not have it's special status.

Also, I would change it from trading 'divisions' to trading 'all units', as someone may argue that 'divisions' are only land units.

I would change the disbanding of units rule to be identical to the SR rule: no disbanding if adjacent to enemy units, as the exploit behind disbanding them is identical to the only for SR them.

Clarify no nukes. Does that mean NO facilities at all, or just no dropping of nuclear bombs? This is becuase some people may want to build a couple levels of reactors purely for the research bonus. Exact same issue with rocket facilities.

The strategic objectives for Japan should be specificied better. I would say all non core Australian VP's (as Australia itself is an 'island'), or simply specify the additional three provinces besides Port Morseby: Lae, Rabaul, and Bougainville.

Additionally, by including Borneo does that mean ALL the provinces on the island, including the 20 infra mountains, or just British Borneo, or what? Again, specify provinces; I would say Kuching and Balikpapan. Also, since you've specified the annexation of the Phillipeans, the US player is NOT allowed to give them a VP island somewhere, like Samoa.

The 'annexation of the Dutch East Indies' is bad for the same reason. What if the Allies gave the Dutch a VP in Africa or South America?. Either clarify the provinces explicitly, or say Japan must control the Dutch Indonesian VP's.

I would actually say you should add a 'No province trading period' rule as well.

I will again mention that I think all random events should be disabled. In the same vein, I would say the major historical events should be edited so that they always go as historical, i.e. Memel, Munich, Anschluss, Danzig, Poland, Czech.

That seems to cover most of it.

edit: Oh, I would allow Italy to join the Axis at any point after it ends the war with Ethopia. Japan can stand on it's own, but Italy will be very crippled against the Allies without the research boost from Germany, IMO.


I think that you should add Kiev to the list of cities that allow the US to enter the war. It would be very easy for the Axis to leave Baku, Leningrad, and Vladivostok with a single adjacent province while still isolating them and mauling the rest of Russia. Or, possibly instead of saying adjacent land provinces, simply say if any three of the five are cut off in a pocket smaller than four provinces or so, with coastal connections irrelevant.

I also agree with you that the 50% IC loss is too high. Russia starts the game with 171 base IC. I would say if they lose 2/5 of that, 75 base IC, the US should be allowed to join the Allies. Taking out the IC moved to Siberia and assuming that the USSR gets all his M/R cores and builds no additional IC in most of western European Russia, 75 IC is basically everything west of the Urals.

It might even add an aditional strategy. The USSR player can not move his IC or build IC in Europe in the hope of allowing the US player to enter sooner, but risks seriously damaging his economy and stregthening the German player.

[Nicophorus]

A historical pact would mean Japan enters the war even later then current Hiensen rules.

[Cueball]

Ericus1

A lot of good ideas. We should I guess specify the no trading provinces rule, but that seems pretty obvious.

Its true, nailing down the specifics is good, but then on the other hand some things we just have to depend on the players having a certain amount of honour. So, we would never really be able to know if the USSR player did or did not disband the largest part of his army in 1936, we really have to depend on the individual players honour there.

Part of the reason, I explicitly outlined the "spirit" of the rules, was in order to set a guideline for resolving disputes and unforseen exploits. Obviously, if the Allies gave a VP province to Netherlands in order to prevent annexation of Netherlands that would be clearly exploitative, and against the "historical" spirit.

Good suggestions though. Thanks.

ETA: I think you are confusing rules sets here, there was no IC rule regarding USA DOW in regard to the USSR, that is the Spartan rule.

[Cueball]

Originally Posted by Nicophorus

A historical pact would mean Japan enters the war even later then current Hiensen rules.

If Germany Dow's USSR in May 1941, then Japan may DOW October 1941, if they DOW in June then they DOW in November. The Japanese attacked USA and UK in December 1941.

But perhaps we could give them more lattitude.

[Nicophorus]

About trades, coulnt the rules just say that all trades must be "100%" trades?

I mean, that alone would allow most of the other trade rules to be dispensed with? (or am I not really understanding the precentage by the trades in the negotiation window..)

I would say that no units can be traded (even for Japan/china), and that no provinces with VP's can be traded.

I dont know if i'd worry about the the USSR disbanding his whole army. This could be where spys/intelligence could play a role.. if Germany sees that USSR has disbanded most of their army, well.. then its time for limmited pact and an early invasion of Russia.

[Ericus1]

Originally Posted by Cueball

Part of the reason, I explicitly outlined the "spirit" of the rules, was in order to set a guideline for resolving disputes and unforseen exploits. Obviously, if the Allies gave a VP province to Netherlands in order to prevent annexation of Netherlands that would be clearly exploitative, and against the "historical" spirit.

Good suggestions though. Thanks.

No problem. I know it can be a bit of a pain to have it take longer to read through the rules than to actually play the game, but the more specific they are the less opportunity for conflict and disagreements to crop up later. In that Spar/Janis game you saw what can happen when you trust loopholes to player honor.

Originally Posted by Nicophorus

About trades, coulnt the rules just say that all trades must be "100%" trades?

I mean, that alone would allow most of the other trade rules to be dispensed with? (or am I not really understanding the precentage by the trades in the negotiation window..)

That's a good idea actually, as it would give an incentive for human players to actually spend their money improving relations like you would have to with an AI player. It would be much harder to verify, as anyone could check the trade ratios in a save game with set limits, but calculating what they should be if modified by relations would be much harder.

Originally Posted by Nicophorus

I would say that no units can be traded (even for Japan/china), and that no provinces with VP's can be traded.

I dont know if i'd worry about the the USSR disbanding his whole army. This could be where spys/intelligence could play a role.. if Germany sees that USSR has disbanded most of their army, well.. then its time for limmited pact and an early invasion of Russia.

That's an excellent point, but if you still limited Germany the Russians would have already rebuilt most of it by the point the limited pact would expire.

At the scenario start with Germany's 2 spies they estimate Russia has 80 land divisions. What you should do is allow the German player to DoW Poland and Russia at any point if their intelligence screen shows the Russians with less than half that, as that would clearly indicate the Russian player has scrapped most of his army, plus if could easily be confirmed by the Allied players' spies.

[Cueball]

Well, the Allied spies will be no help since, USSR is killing all spies regardless of nationality. It think that is too fluid. The real way to monitor Soviet compliance is to actually monitor Russian IC growth, since the "saved" supplies is inevitably pumped into the IC build.

I am intersted in your proposals regarding the USSR and IC, since I didn't include IC in the formula above. Do you actually think the IC formula is preferable to the cities formula?

edit: Oh, I would allow Italy to join the Axis at any point after it ends the war with Ethopia. Japan can stand on it's own, but Italy will be very crippled against the Allies without the research boost from Germany, IMO.

Yes, and no. You see the point is that Axis can have one of two possible strategies regarding Italy.

The problem is that as it stands if Italy is in Axis at Danzig, the French and English can gear all of their resources, including pulling out all of their colonial units from everywhere, and using a very specific land build order, rape Italy while the Germans are in Poland -- I have seen this done now about 5 times in a row, in various formulations, this is part of the reasons I wanted to restructure the rules. Therefore an alternate strategy is for Italy not to join the Axis until the situation in France is resolved.

This way, the Axis can decide on either option, though you may be right and it might be sensible to make it possible for Italy to join Axis after Ethiopia.

[Ericus1]

Originally Posted by Cueball

I am intersted in your proposals regarding the USSR and IC, since I didn't include IC in the formula above. Do you actually think the IC formula is preferable to the cities formula?

Well, its sort of six of one, half dozen of the other.

However, by limiting it to the specific cities I think there is a lot more room for abuse.

Technically, as long as I didn't take Kirovabad and Baku, Kingisepp and Leningrad, and Spassk-Dalnij and Vladivostok (dontcha love Russia spelling) I could invade Russian in April of '40 and have 21 months to completely overrun them, and the US could never join the Allies as long as Japan stayed neutral.

Any Soviet divisions in those pockets would starve, and its possible Germany could easily take Stalingrad, Moscow, and Sverdlosk, then right at the outset of winter in '41 march unopposed into Leningrad and Baku and trigger the BP, all with the US being unable to lift a finger.

Or, even more likely take Stalingrad and Moscow, then coordinate with Japan to take Vladivostok, Baku, and Leningrad all at the same time, triggering the BP. Japan if well prepared could probably achieve the objectives for DoWing Russian within three months, meaning the BP would be firing right around the time the US would be able to enter the war.

An IC centered approach is less open to exploitation, since the only way for the German player to avoid it would be to not take large amounts of territory, which would complicate thing both tactically and strategically.

Russia has 105 base IC, including the all M/R core areas and Poland at a 1:5 ratio, in the standard BP territories given to Germany after the IC move to Siberia events. If Germany were to take every province up to that line aside from Moscow, Baku, and Armenia (15 IC in Yerevan and Tbilisi) they would have taken 76 base IC from the USSR. If the idea was to allow the US to enter if Germany is about to the point of achieve the BP, this would do it.

We could probably even lower the level more, to maybe 60 base IC. The Russian IC is so spread out it would be very difficult for a Germany player to bypass enough provinces to avoid allowing the US to enter while setting up the BP victory conditions.

For comparision, if you were to overlay the historic max of German expansion in to Russia, it would be 53 IC. If we were to include everyting west of the Volga river, icluding Baku, Stalingrad, and Moscow, it would be 93 IC. So somewhere between the two would probably be a good point for allowing the US entry, and 73 would be right in the middle.

[Ericus1]

Originally Posted by Cueball

Yes, and no. You see the point is that Axis can have one of two possible strategies regarding Italy.

The problem is that as it stands if Italy is in Axis at Danzig, the French and English can gear all of their resources, including pulling out all of their colonial units from everywhere, and using a very specific land build order, rape Italy while the Germans are in Poland -- I have seen this done now about 5 times in a row, in various formulations, this is part of the reasons I wanted to restructure the rules. Therefore an alternate strategy is for Italy not to join the Axis until the situation in France is resolved.

This way, the Axis can decide on either option, though you may be right and it might be sensible to make it possible for Italy to join Axis after Ethiopia.

I'd say just leave it up to the Italian player to decide. Obviously they would have to weigh the risks.

[Cueball]

Originally Posted by Ericus1

Well, its sort of six of one, half dozen of the other.

However, by limiting it to the specific cities I think there is a lot more room for abuse.

Technically, as long as I didn't take Kirovabad and Baku, Kingisepp and Leningrad, and Spassk-Dalnij and Vladivostok (dontcha love Russia spelling) I could invade Russian in April of '40 and have 21 months to completely overrun them, and the US could never join the Allies as long as Japan stayed neutral.

Any Soviet divisions in those pockets would starve, and its possible Germany could easily take Stalingrad, Moscow, and Sverdlosk, then right at the outset of winter in '41 march unopposed into Leningrad and Baku and trigger the BP, all with the US being unable to lift a finger.

Or, even more likely take Stalingrad and Moscow, then coordinate with Japan to take Vladivostok, Baku, and Leningrad all at the same time, triggering the BP. Japan if well prepared could probably achieve the objectives for DoWing Russian within three months, meaning the BP would be firing right around the time the US would be able to enter the war.

An IC centered approach is less open to exploitation, since the only way for the German player to avoid it would be to not take large amounts of territory, which would complicate thing both tactically and strategically.

Russia has 105 base IC, including the all M/R core areas and Poland at a 1:5 ratio, in the standard BP territories given to Germany after the IC move to Siberia events. If Germany were to take every province up to that line aside from Moscow, Baku, and Armenia (15 IC in Yerevan and Tbilisi) they would have taken 76 base IC from the USSR. If the idea was to allow the US to enter if Germany is about to the point of achieve the BP, this would do it.

We could probably even lower the level more, to maybe 60 base IC. The Russian IC is so spread out it would be very difficult for a Germany player to bypass enough provinces to avoid allowing the US to enter while setting up the BP victory conditions.

For comparision, if you were to overlay the historic max of German expansion in to Russia, it would be 53 IC. If we were to include everyting west of the Volga river, icluding Baku, Stalingrad, and Moscow, it would be 93 IC. So somewhere between the two would probably be a good point for allowing the US entry, and 73 would be right in the middle.

Well, I had suggested actually a fromula based entirely on territory taken without regard to cities or IC. Perhaps that would make the most sense.

[Cueball]

Well, the court is out on that one.

I guess, though I can see we could propose and clarify some things (new changes will be added to the OP in lime) based on these comments.

1.8 No trading, selling or donating VP provinces.

I think it is pretty clear that Axis may pause as long as they want on day one in order to make their deals, this is usually handled by the host, and it has never been a problem. People do have some respect, and are not always trying to soak each other for maximum self benefit. But since you have brought up the issue of pausing, I thought I would continue in that vein.

What about putting a limit on pausing, explicitly only allowing people to pause for "techs," "leader organization" and "trading."

I am interested in further comments on the trade issue, and also the Japan DOW issue, should they be given more lattitude to DOW earlier or not?

Anyone have a specific formulation in mind?

[Cueball]

Originally Posted by Nicophorus

I dont know if i'd worry about the the USSR disbanding his whole army. This could be where spys/intelligence could play a role.. if Germany sees that USSR has disbanded most of their army, well.. then its time for limmited pact and an early invasion of Russia.

As Ericus1 says the IC build works both for a 1940, and a 1941 invasion, really. Perhaps the best way to "nerf" the Soviet Union would be to just limit the amount of IC it can build every year. This would be easily obervable to anyone in the game.

Perhaps then:

10.6 : SU may only increase its IC capacity by 30 IC evey year.

This would give the USSR roughly 260 base IC by 1939. It might, under these circumstance even continue to build IC in 1940 and make 290 base IC.

[Edzako]

Originally Posted by Cueball

As Ericus1 says the IC build works both for a 1940, and a 1941 invasion, really. Perhaps the best way to "nerf" the Soviet Union would be to just limit the amount of IC it can build every year. This would be easily obervable to anyone in the game.

Perhaps then:

10.6 : SU may only increase its IC capacity by 30 IC evey year.

This would give the USSR roughly 260 base IC by 1939. It might, under these circumstance even continue to build IC in 1940 and make 290 base IC.

I think that this is too much, rules that restrict what you can't build is not acceptable. All know that USSR is, probably, most powerful country but that isn't reason to restrict them in any way. If we continue this path we can even restrict how many panzers Germany can have or how many figters UK can build. Too many rules ruins joy of the game and, although we can't manage without them, I would be happy to see as few as possible.

About Italy - they can puppet Ethiopia? Also if they join axis in 1936 they can switch to Spearhead doctrine ?

0.2 : It's forbidden to switch to another naval/land doctrines tree except if one of your allies already got the same

[Knupp]

Originally Posted by Cueball

I was hoping to prove that one way or the other, but then well, you didn't want to play that game out (even though you knew why Germany did not act to defend Italy) and wanted to start another one under your rules system which you prefer.

That is the way it goes, I guess.

Whats the problem with you Cueball?
Want answers about our previous games?Ok then here you are:
In previous game axis was really doomed.
-Germany had 150 ic less than russia
-We reached december 1939 and you didnt manage to annex poland
-Uk had 20-25 more tanks than you
-UK had much more airplanes than you
-UK had a much better navy than you
-Italy was almost annexed and u reacted 3 weeks later ,saying you didnt realize that allies invaded Italy(is it possimble for a German player not to realize it?was your mapmode always in focus in?)
-Also with those hiensen rules axis dont have a chance cause japan cant help you early to save the dramatic for axis situation
-Your trades were awful cause you claim its an exploit buying and then selling stuff from same country(ridiculous)

Now tell me 1 reason why should i continue this game,other of wasting time!

Tell me now that we didnt discuss for 1-2 hours after the game the 2 of us about all stuff in ruleset and mistakes of game.We both have a good spirit of playing (different thought),but in HOI games all the lights are over Germany and all it matters is time.Unfortunately for all of us you failed this time as Germany(not a big deal).But why do you want to react like this and critisize me for your faults?I really cant understand it

PS:this is not a personal offence against my friend Cueball.In fact i consider him 1 of the most decent players in HOI community.But his wisdom makes him hard to change opinion about some things that he is wrong (thats what i wanted to point out with this post).

[Knupp]

Originally Posted by Cueball

I was hoping to prove that one way or the other, but then well, you didn't want to play that game out (even though you knew why Germany did not act to defend Italy) and wanted to start another one under your rules system which you prefer.

That is the way it goes, I guess.

I never said that spartan rules are the best.As a matter of fact in every game we play with different team we change some of the rules.Our goal is that:

To give axis a chance for this game.With many of hiensen rules ,axis is restricted furthermore(like the rule about Japan entry or M-R pact etc).Maybe the answer in games that use hiensen rules is full ic in occupied territories? I dont know..

[Cueball]

Originally Posted by Edzako

I think that this is too much, rules that restrict what you can't build is not acceptable. All know that USSR is, probably, most powerful country but that isn't reason to restrict them in any way. If we continue this path we can even restrict how many panzers Germany can have or how many figters UK can build. Too many rules ruins joy of the game and, although we can't manage without them, I would be happy to see as few as possible.

About Italy - they can puppet Ethiopia? Also if they join axis in 1936 they can switch to Spearhead doctrine ?

Well, the point is that the exploit is that USSR disbands all its infantry in 1936, preserving armoured and motorized divisions, and then uses surplus to build industry. So, I thought first we can just make a rule to prevent this -- USSR may not disband 1936 army. But this is very hard to observe without going through saves.

On the other hand if the purpose of disbanding divisions is to save supplies, to make IC, then why not simply limit the IC build directly, which is easy to observe simply in game?

In this way there is no reason for USSR to disband units because there is no advantage, because there IC build is limited.

Do you see the point?

[Edzako]

Originally Posted by Cueball

Maybe the idea, is rather than complaining that Allies are always to strong is then to Nerf USSR?



Well, the point is that the exploit is that USSR disbands all its infantry in 1936, preserving armoured and motorized divisions, and then uses surplus to build industry. So, I thought first we can just make a rule to prevent this. But this is very hard to observe without going through saves.

On the other hand if the purpose of disbanding divisions is to save supplies, to make IC, then why not simply limit the IC build directly, which is easy to observe simply in game.

In this way there is no reason for USSR to disband units because there is no advantage, because there IC build is limited.

Do you see the point?

I see, but still limited IC build because of rules, I don't know it's weird. Also in ARMA is changed upgrading costs, if you have researched 2-3 lvl further than your current units (1918 inf and 1941 research) unit upgrade is very cheap and fast even for country with drafted army/central planning as USSR.