PBEM opponent wanted.
Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2011 6:19 pm
Due to my defeat against Fingolin, I am looking for a reb opponent (yankee may be good also).
I can send an average of 1 file by day.
I can send an average of 1 file by day.
AGEOD Forums
Discussion forum about the wargames Birth of America, AACW, Ageod games and strategy games in general
http://www.ageod-forum.com/
PBEM opponent wanted.
Page 1 of 1
Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2011 6:50 pm
Hi, i would be interested. It would be my first PBEM. Ive done a fresh install with latest beta. What kind settings and house rules have you in mind?
Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2011 7:41 pm
1861 July w/Kentucky
Standard naval box handling
No redeployments
All in normal/historical.
No house rules unless you've proposals.
Standard naval box handling
No redeployments
All in normal/historical.
No house rules unless you've proposals.
Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2011 11:47 pm
Sounds fine to me.
Only house rules that i was thinking are ones controlling raiding.
People have different approaches to this and here is what ive been thinking.
Raiding involving, pillaging, destruction of railways or structures in opponents home states only by units with a leader.
(Raid like Griersons http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grierson%27s_Raid or Merrits http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Burning_Raid )
Raiding involving, attack, ambush and capture of enemy troops, railways or structures in opponents home states is allowed by units without a leader.
(Raid like Stovepipe Johnsons http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newburgh_Raid or Gilmors http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilmor%27s_Raid )
Raiding involving, pillaging, destruction of railways or structures in players home states can be done by units without a leader.
I think disputed border states W.Virginia, Kentucky, Missouri, Kansas Territory and Indian Territory should be open to both players as home states regarding raiding.
Raiding (and off course all other) river movement in enemy owned territory has to be done with naval units.
What do you think? Did i miss something, i typed this of the top of my head so bare with me.
Only house rules that i was thinking are ones controlling raiding.
People have different approaches to this and here is what ive been thinking.
Raiding involving, pillaging, destruction of railways or structures in opponents home states only by units with a leader.
(Raid like Griersons http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grierson%27s_Raid or Merrits http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Burning_Raid )
Raiding involving, attack, ambush and capture of enemy troops, railways or structures in opponents home states is allowed by units without a leader.
(Raid like Stovepipe Johnsons http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newburgh_Raid or Gilmors http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilmor%27s_Raid )
Raiding involving, pillaging, destruction of railways or structures in players home states can be done by units without a leader.
I think disputed border states W.Virginia, Kentucky, Missouri, Kansas Territory and Indian Territory should be open to both players as home states regarding raiding.
Raiding (and off course all other) river movement in enemy owned territory has to be done with naval units.
What do you think? Did i miss something, i typed this of the top of my head so bare with me.
Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2011 7:09 am
I think this house rules will be hard to control and to organize.
Sorry but, I'd prefer to play without raiding rules.
Sorry but, I'd prefer to play without raiding rules.
Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2011 6:05 pm
Well i can play without them but i think the union is vulnerable if raiding is not restricted.
Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2011 6:17 pm
If you want I can take Union.
My mail adress blutch29 [AT] gmail.com
My mail adress blutch29 [AT] gmail.com
Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2011 6:35 pm
I will start tonight and send the first turn? Hope everything works allright.
Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2011 6:38 pm
All right.
I hope so, I wait your turn.
I hope so, I wait your turn.
Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2011 6:40 pm
Moderators can close this topic, please.
Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2011 7:09 pm
You should be able to do so yourself; if you have tried already, can you try again (I've done a small tweak to the forum settings now that should help) 
Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2011 7:20 pm
Thanks Rafiki, it is good now, I am able to close !
Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2011 7:22 pm
Good to hear, sorry for the inconvenience