Tobruk 3.7: Good House Rules

[RhinoBones]

I’ve been playing a game of McBrides Tobruk ver 3.7 using the suggested “House Rules” of:
1) no use of the e-mail game playback feature and,
2) no use of the “Hex Ownership” option, i.e. no looking at boarders, flags or supply per hex to identify the movement and location of the enemy.

Must say, this really puts a new and exciting twist on “Fog of War”. Playing by these rules requires the player to protect both flanks and rear and, hopefully, gives you an equal opportunity to play the same game of doubt on the enemy.

The use of these house rules are certainly not appropriate for all scenarios, but I can see them being used for pre-modern era scenarios where Theater Recon is outside reality. Not having the ability to see either the opponent’s movement or hex ownership really seems to make this class of scenario come alive.

Has anyone else used the same house rules with the Tobruk, or any other scenario? Think these house rules would be good for the Burma, Nam and Luzon scenarios.

Regards, RhinoBones

[nemo]

I have just started a Tobruk 41 game and I must admit the house rules do have an effect on gameplay, as enemy positions can only be guessed from the flag on the objectives hexes. You are thereby forced to use recon assets for what they were made in the first place. Movement planning is also affected. All this combined will probabaly make the scenario all the more interesting.
And the replay being forcefully ignored is a blessing...http://www.warfarehq.com/forums/images/smilies/cool.gif

Most pre-WWII scenarios should use these kind of house rules to a certain extent : war accounts are choke-full of encounter battles were opponents stumbled in relative darkness and fell upon each other more or less by chance. Theatre reconnaissance level, albeit low, could (and maybe should) represent intelligence gathered through aerial reconnaissance for instance.