Reactivation/ opponents wanted

[Weasel]

Yeah basically, but Jason and I also have an understanding not to abuse it. We play that the unit must have some reason to Z fire, like infantry popping smoke or spotting a unit that disappears. Just firing up the map as z fire to see if you can pin units is considered gamey and we don't play that way. The infantry two hex is also limited to a unit being spotted that disappears.

Basically there has to be some reason to z fire.

We z fire very little in our games.

[oldrocky]

I would hope that with SPWW2 we could represent a WW2 tactical/operational
battle and keep it as close to realistic as possible. This is impossible
with an unrestricted and unlimited Z FIRE rule. Consider that compared to
today's standards the 40s era optics, communications, and command and control system
were primitive and would not enable a commander to coordinate so many widely
dispersed weapons systems to fire on an enemy who is on the move let alone stationary.
Also realize that it was extremely rare that a commander would direct a fire mission into an
adjoining friendly sector. Concerns of fratricide dictated that the commander did not fire
into adjoining sectors.
I enjoy the Z Fire option and feel it is necessary to replicate actual combat situations.
Suppressing fire is an integral part of modern tactical doctrine but unless Z Fire is used realistically
then SPWW2/MBT becomes not a tactical/operational war game of maneuver but rather instead the manipulation of a game engine.

[Weasel]

Exactly. We also agreed that infantry could not shoot at tanks if you know you are going to also attack with tanks unless the infantry has some form of AT that can reach the target. This is to prevent soak off attacks with infantry so your tank can just drive up and shoot with no fear of counter fire. Of course, if there is infantry in the same hex as the tank then you are free to shoot at the infantry and inflict collateral damage.

We are actually writing all our rules down for ourselves, but we could post them here if there is interest. After 71 games against each other we have a fine understanding of what both like.

[Walrus]

Hi Guys

The old Z-fire can really ruin a game eh.
It's interesting to see the ways we create work arounds for it.
I would love to see some controls for Z-fire in the SP system. LIke a tab where you could set a max range for z-fire for PBEM, say where you could restrict unit types from z-fire at all, or limit z-fire from a unit to a specific set of ranges. It would make policing of z-fire so much easier.

Chris and I, as he's said, have cut down z-fire over the years to a manageable level but we've had 71 battles to get that right. When playing someone for the first time,. it can be difficult to get a game up and away without a small document of rules being created.
I think z-fire is important and should be able to be used but it must be controlled.

One thing I find a good rule is to limit z-fire from support weapons to LOS+1. So you cannot fire off flame weapons out into the blue to deny an area, or just spray the general approaches of the enemy...especially in an ME where you are not really supposed to have any intel as yet as to where the enemy might be.

I think that if the enemy advances and pops smoke to cover at the end of their turn, z-fire should be allowed further into the smoke in that situation as you know someone is in there.

Air Master has some good idea that I am finding useful.
Z-fire from support unit must only be in the forward arc, and supporting units from the same units or attached units. So no firing into other sectors where there could be friendly units.
Also we are now going to limit inf z-fire (already at 100m / 2 hex) to one shot per unit per turn. That came about after two battles where I got into a good defensive position and was just smeared away by z-fire (all legal though). It was just too easy.
My gripe is that good troops, in cover, with good morale and unsuppressed were being hit by z-fire and there is just no way of responding. With direct fire at least your guys shoot back! It's just too easy to get close and stun the defenders with z-fire, where direct fire would be far less effective, at least as far as the game mechanics work atm.

Actually that is my main problem. Z-fire is just too effective in general for reducing morale.
How many times have you direct fired at an enemy and managed no suppression at all...then one burst of z-fire = suppressed? I see it all the time. I have to hold myself back after a few ineffective burst at a target in LOS, knowing that one burst of z-fire will get me a better result. But that's gamey play and not fair IMO.

I think they have over done the effectiveness of z-fire - probably due to the game being mainly written for use against the AI rather than PBEM. I can understand that but IMO it is just too effective compared to aimed direct fire.

Air Master made a good point when we decided to limit info to one burst per turn, which was that you would surely be trying to conserve ammo and hosing down the whole map as you move forward is just unrealistic.

Anyway, that's my 2 cents worth. I need coffee.
I wish the SP CAMO guys would ask the PBEM players for more input...and that they were more approachable. I have given up trying to talk to them now as I am sick of getting my head bitten off. I think I pissed them off way back in the day when they made the stupid decision to have armor auto-snap their turrets back to the forward position as soon as they moved one hex. I couldn't believe how stupid that was. but had to argue hard and long (with others) to get it repealed. For smart guys they sometimes get it very wrong...this bug in the op-fire filter is the latest screw up - it's killing me!!!

Anyway - I need coffee.
Happy gaming to all!

[Leo]

Hi guys!
May be, all your special rules of use Z-fire are exellent and very reasonable, but they too numerous.
Using list of rules like:
"1...
2...
3...
...
12...", when you play 3-4 games simultaneously with different opponents, is unrealistic. One opponent love one point, other don't agreed with it... Finally, each case will different list of Z-fire rule. I would be break my mind, trying to remember, break I rule 3 or 5 with current opponent or it doesn't work with him?

Rules must be easer, simpler to remember and play. 1-2 points, not long list "if....". I'm not computer, I don't want afraid every time to break one more point of huge list of difficult rules.

Also several of your rules is simply uncomfortable. For example, rule of Air Master "each turn maximum one Z-fire shoot each unit". 5-7к battle points, 100+ units. I can't remember, shoot I direct fire, Z-fire or simply move. During turn, I can return to unit several times, and I can't set flag "Already do Z-fire". I reality, I can does some my units Z-fire twice. OMG, I becomes a cheater, breaker of rules?

By the way, now I play game with Air Master, and with no any Z-fire rules... All ok.

Or rule of oldrocky - limitation Z-fire in hexes. Count each time, reach 10 hexes or already 11-12? Too tediously.

At long last, every player will play as he wish, with own long or short list of rules. Your fun - your rules.

[july]

I have concluded a mentor game with a new member ( soylent greeen ) and wish to be reinstated on the ladder. Also looking for a couple games so drop me a line if interested.

Still looking for a game, I'm interested in Full Security game