PBEM Game Request Form---comments?

[WargamerScott]

Greetings,

In an attempt to make arranging a PBEM game easier, I tried to put together a standard form that could be filled out and posted with ease when looking for a game. Is there anything I should add or change? Comments welcome.

----------------------------------
FORM 294-A

A Request for a SPMBT PBEM Game


1) Type of Game: a) Battle [specify type]:
i) Generated Battle
ii) Pre-made Battle Scenario: [specify here]


b) Campaign [specify type]:
i) Generated Campaign
ii) Pre-made Campaign: [specify here]


2) Will this game be: secure, BASIC secure, or unsecure:

a) If secure, specify available slot numbers:

3) I request the following force: [specify nationality]

4) If playing a generated battle or campaign, list the desired amount of points per side:

5) What is the date (month/year) of this battle/campaign:

6) Numerical Preference settings (enter numerical value or XXX for random factor):
a) visibility:
a) searching:
b) hitting:
c) Rout-Rally:
d) troop quality:
e) tank toughness:
f) infantry toughness:
g) air sorties:
h) artillery effectiveness:
i) map size:


7) On/Off Preference Settings:
a) fast artillery:
b) limited ammo:
c) hidden fire:
d) breakdowns:
e) command:
f) morale:
g) spotters:
h) move and shoot:
i) mines
j) country training:

8) Any special instructions, preferences, notes to prospective opponents:

-----------------------------------

How is that? Once it is done, I will save it as a Word file (or maybe RTF) and post it on my website. Of course, feel free to copy and use it as well once it is edited.

[Mustang]

This form could be simplified, but it does seem helpful.

#6 could be changed to read, "What number preferences should be set above or below 100%?" because almost everyone plays with them at 100%.

#7 should say, "A. Which realism preferences should be off?" and "B. Should fast artillery be off?". Those are the only preferences that matter.

Just my $.02.

[WargamerScott]

Mustang said:
This form could be simplified, but it does seem helpful.

#6 could be changed to read, "What number preferences should be set above or below 100%?" because almost everyone plays with them at 100%.

#7 should say, "A. Which realism preferences should be off?" and "B. Should fast artillery be off?". Those are the only preferences that matter.

Just my $.02.

Good suggestions. I was tempted to streamline it like you suggested, but I figured that it would be better just to spell out all the settings so there is no confusion. Of course, people are free to tailor this list any way they want so that it best suits their PBEM style of gaming. Like you said, if you are playing with the same people time and again, you don't really need to review all the settings.

Thanks!

[WargamerScott]

I edited the form a little. It now has a section for what type of battle (i.e., meeting engagement) as well as the number of turns (if desired):

-=--------------------------------

FORM 294-A

A Request for a SPMBT PBEM Game


1) Type of Game: a) Battle [specify type]:
i) Generated Battle
ii) Pre-made Battle Scenario: [specify here]


b) Campaign [specify type]:
i) Generated Campaign
ii) Pre-made Campaign: [specify here]


2) Will this game be: secure, BASIC secure, or unsecure:
a) If secure, specify available slot numbers:

3) I request the following force: [specify nationality]

4) If playing a generated battle or campaign, list the desired amount of points per side:

5) What is the date (month/year) of this battle/campaign:

6) Numerical Preference settings (enter numerical value or XXX for random factor):
a) visibility:
b) searching:
c) hitting:
d) Rout-Rally:
e) troop quality:
f) tank toughness:
g) infantry toughness:
h) air sorties:
i) artillery effectiveness:
j) map size:
h) number of turns:


7) On/Off Preference Settings:
a) fast artillery:
b) limited ammo:
c) hidden fire:
d) breakdowns:
e) command:
f) morale:
g) spotters:
h) move and shoot:
i) mines:
j) country training:

8) This will be an: assault, attack, or meeting engagement:

9) Any special instructions, preferences, notes to prospective opponents: