'36 or '38 best for a MP LAN weekend?

[Thelamon]

Hi there,

me and some friends are planning a 6 player MP LAN weekend.
As neither of us has experience with larger HoI2 MP games (only played 2 or 3 players sofar) we are wondering, which campaign would yield the best results/fun/balance for a three day game?
(I doubt it would ever be continued as the current plan involves quite a bit of travelling for the players and took allmost a year to get scheduled... :wacko: )

1936 - Seems the best way to assure that the axis can prepare properly thus giving the Axis the chance to actually stand a chance..
But it also involves years and years of boredom for Russia, USA etc. and includes the problem that everyone has to suffer through the Japano/Chinese war if Japan wants the game set to "slow" during that war.

1938 - has the adavantage of "getting the action started" earlier...
On the other hand the axis does seem to have a big dissadvantage, as one year of preparation is not nearly enough to compensate for "Mr. AI H's" mistakes in the first two years...

Advice would be apreciated (especially experience with the 1938 campaign)!

Other tips - such as vital house-rules are welcome too...
(If seen that there are some extremely complex rules out on this board - these would certainly go way beyond our purpose)

 

[Invader_Canuck]

Hi there,

me and some friends are planning a 6 player MP LAN weekend.
As neither of us has experience with larger HoI2 MP games (only played 2 or 3 players sofar) we are wondering, which campaign would yield the best results/fun/balance for a three day game?
(I doubt it would ever be continued as the current plan involves quite a bit of travelling for the players and took allmost a year to get scheduled... :wacko: )

1936 - Seems the best way to assure that the axis can prepare properly thus giving the Axis the chance to actually stand a chance..
But it also involves years and years of boredom for Russia, USA etc. and includes the problem that everyone has to suffer through the Japano/Chinese war if Japan wants the game set to "slow" during that war.

1938 - has the adavantage of "getting the action started" earlier...
On the other hand the axis does seem to have a big dissadvantage, as one year of preparation is not nearly enough to compensate for "Mr. AI H's" mistakes in the first two years...

Advice would be apreciated (especially experience with the 1938 campaign)!

Other tips - such as vital house-rules are welcome too...
(If seen that there are some extremely complex rules out on this board - these would certainly go way beyond our purpose)

It shouldnt take Japan long to conquer China. Really the game speed at normal or below normal should be fine while he does that. Other than that, just run the game at a decent clip, finally I would recommend never actually pausing the game. If you need to do fine tuning stuff, just set it to the slowest speed possible.

If you pause the game there can be problems with sync errors, although I am not sure how that would come into play on a LAN.

 

[unmerged(14249)]

36 MP games seem to require lots of restrictive house rules to work at all and I don't like that - it's like you're not allowed to play the game. The 38 scenario seems better in this respect - it doesn't much matter if the players start fighting earlier than history, for example.

There's a good AAR of a current 38 campaign here:

http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?t=235327

This has been an excellent campaign for most of us and had no formal house rules. I am playing Germany in this and think you need quite a confident and experienced player in this position (that's probably required in 36 too). The less experienced players should play SU and US. They will have planty of time to find their feet and it's good for balance if they make mistakes at the start (like Pearl Harbor, Philippines, Winter War, etc).

Andrew

 

[Invader_Canuck]

I've found that the Soviet player needs to be pretty adept, or they simply get overwhelmed by the volume of divisions the Axis throws at them. Consider the fact that the Axis can also have different players controlling specific points of the front and the Axis can be a rough go for a Soviet newbie.

 

[unmerged(43564)]

My opinion is..

No doubdt at all, 1936 for sure.

But you should define rules for it, as Paradox havent done a good job at it comes to balancing factors.

We play eavry saturdays 16-23 GMT, and have Pre Strateagical Meetings at the Fraidais from 24GMT, anyway, with gaming sessions 7 hours long pr session the game shoulöd be done on between 5-8 sessions. So in hours an game then takes arround 50 hours pr game. In addition comes the time you use with your alliense in voice meetings ect.



HC

 

[lordashran]

i would also go for 36 as i dont mind having house rules, it just means you probably wont have much action til 39
but it can be very rewarding since you have most control over your war machinery
though starting in 38 is fun too

 

[Gen.Schuermann]

I'd go for '36 as well, including some minor house rules, i.e. like no war before 38/39, but nothing more than that, since Italy and Japan are in a really bad shape at that given time (Italy only 4 techteams), and Germany with initially numerically inferior forces (french/polish alliance can crush them pretty bad).

 

[Invader_Canuck]

Imagine a game where Canada dow's the USA and joins the Axis in the first few months. That'd be pretty comedic ;p

 

[Thelamon]

Thanks for the advice!

I think we will stick with the 1936 scenario then. (My biggest worry was the war in china)

Concerning house rules: They are definitely needed in 1936 - I'll probably use a simplified blend of what is out on this board and the german site run by Tracid and 701.

One thing for sure: each players nation will only be alllowed to use two Navbombers... (Tacs, CAS etc. are fine) otherwise the Naval play is just not worth it.

@High Command
I checked your enourmously detailed Rule set (and like the AAR's of your group a lot) - but whatever went wrong your house rules pretty much ruined the day for the allies in the game where the Axis invaded the US.

Was there no way to have a spontanous vote (of the perticipating players) to unleash the US player as soon as Canada was under attack?

 

[Invader_Canuck]

Yea, the High Command group are a little over the top in regards to rules.

If I had been involved in that game, it would have been the last time I would have participated.

The inability to ratify their ruleset on the fly when the obvious and glaring issues with them were exposed cost everyone involved countless hours and im sure for most of the allies quite a bit of frustration.

Too many rules too many limits to how people can play. Stop people from doing gamey things, not from having fun.

If I am understanding correctly, they have a group of people who are making the rules up. I can tell you exactly why they have gone so overboard. Group polarization and group thinking.

Only logical explaination in my opinion for such a complex set of rules that tell people how to play their country and even what divisions they can build or how they can spend their IC.

Im sure it is in the name of balance but through group polarization and group thinking, they become more extreme in their pursuit of "making the game enjoyable" ultimately they suspend critical thinking and its a big lynch mob. Either you think like us, or you shut up and enjoy the ride.

There is my psychological analysis on that ruleset ;p

 

[Roffelito]

Usainvasion

The game where usa was invaded was extreme in many ways. Uk had managed to lose almost all its navy and usa had barely raised an army by mid 1940, probably because of lack of flexibility. This is why the allies where defeated so fast.. Making up rules in the middle of a game to balance it up when one side plays poor, would have been catastrophic for the axis in this case, and its not my idea of a fun game to play it like that. However now the rules have been changed to a more realistic interventionist doctrine for the USA.

R2-D2

 

[Brasidas]

My opinion is..

No doubdt at all, 1936 for sure.

But you should define rules for it, as Paradox havent done a good job at it comes to balancing factors.

We play eavry saturdays 16-23 GMT, and have Pre Strateagical Meetings at the Fraidais from 24GMT, anyway, with gaming sessions 7 hours long pr session the game shoulöd be done on between 5-8 sessions. So in hours an game then takes arround 50 hours pr game. In addition comes the time you use with your alliense in voice meetings ect.

By your reasoning, it would seem that the appropriate response would be "no doubt at all, 1938 for sure." At 50 hours per game, that's a bit tight be fit into a single LAN weekend, which would presumably be closer to 50 hours (including sleep) than 72.

I find that a 36GC fits into a long weekend, starting on friday night and extending through monday afternoon. There's time for breaks for food/drinking/socializing/sleeping. I'd go with a 38 for a friday afternoon to sunday afternoon game.