Messages

1

Rules Questions & Clarifications / Re: Rules Questions - Advanced game v5_2012

« on: December 15, 2012, 05:21:54 PM »

Hi, Mark, we're still playing. it's been Struggles continuously for going on five months now.  And inevitably, some rules come along that need clarification.  Here are two that tied us up in knots:
1.  After a successful ground attack that cleared an area in one round, the attacker wanted not to occupy the area but to retreat to the space he came from.  Is that permissible, and if so are there any circumstances that would limit this ability to retreat with some or all attackers?
2.  A force that was out of supply attacked, and after one round wanted to retreat to a friendly land area that was IN supply, but of course this meant that the force had in effect penetrated the screen around it and moved through the encircling forces.  This seemed a bit unfair, it was suggested that the attacker should have to fight the full four rounds before being permitted to do this.  But this would mean that most out of supply situations would result in destruction of the surrounded force.  What is the rule please?

The game is as intriguing as ever.  We're just starting to explore the nuances of the Pacific.
Thanks,
John

2

Rules Questions & Clarifications / Re: Rules Questions - Advanced game v5_2012

« on: October 27, 2012, 01:05:21 PM »

Hi, Mark, responding to your question as to what is happening in early game to Axis, for our second game the Germans elected to delay the start of war in Russia till Spring42 to see if they could suppress/invade Britain and build up their strength using Spain/Portugal.  By next week we'll see how Britain plays out, one result will be early entry of US, another should be Axis conquest of Mid-East, but we worry that there'll be precious few ground forces available for Russia due to heavy garrison demands in the west (Spain, Portugal, France).
Thanks for your responses on rules.
John

3

Rules Questions & Clarifications / Re: Rules Questions - Advanced game v5_2012

« on: October 22, 2012, 02:42:00 PM »

Hi again, Mark and John,
We came across some more contentious rules, for mech movement/combat.

If a regular combat fails, the leaders and ground units must retreat and cannot move in the mech phase.  The air units remain in the space till the air return phase, correct?  Or do they also retreat?  Then in the mech phase, if different mech units/leaders move in, can those previously used air units assist in that attack?

Also, there may already be a rules clarification on this, do we allow transport planes to make para-drops in the mech phase if they did not move in the regular move phase.  Thoughts?

Observation – we have found the protracted effort needed to conquer some minors is unrealistic and consumes ahistorical resources and time (think Spain, Norway).  Every other game has minors surrender when capital is taken, we’ve switched that to surrender when all factory spaces are taken.  We’re also pondering the vast garrison needs – a whole army to garrison Spain, more than France requires!  No solution there yet, but again would be interested in your thoughts.

John

4

Rules Questions & Clarifications / Re: Rules Questions - Advanced game v5_2012

« on: September 18, 2012, 02:21:48 PM »

Hello again, we've come up with more items (Europe & Pacific) needing clarification:
1.  Naval transports do not need to disembark units after any strat move, correct, whether during combat or non-combat moves?  But, if they make a tactical move, they must disembark all cargo?
2.  If transports disembark after a tactical move, they must all go to one spot, but if they disembark after a strategic move, they could go to any adjacent land area?
3.  Strategic bombing limts - they can cause bomb damage up to x2 if factory is in a home country, is that x2 on the base value or x2 of the base value plus 2 (if it's a +2 space as in Germany), or is it both of those and also x2 of any added factory built there?
4.  Which Russian units are actually winterized, since none have white on them?  It appears it's only the shock infantry.  But, since the Russians actually made winter offensives every year, and in fact that was the time they had the tactical advantage, wouldn't it make sense that ALL Russian units be considered winterized?
5.  We ran into a situation where we needed to know the definition of "enemy occupied territory".  We assume it's not enemy occupied if the owner of the space is friendly.  If the defender is attacked, that power is still the owner till he is forced to withdraw, right, so it's NOT enemy occupied?  Or is the attacker also considered to be occupying the territory pending resolution of the ground combat, so it's both friendly and enemy occupied?  The background to the question comes from the defender moving up naval transports with reinforcing ground units and having to fight a naval combat in the sea area.  Do those ground units disembark immediately because the land area is NOT enemy occupied, or must they wait till the end of combat round 1 to disembark, or till the conclusion of the naval combat - which they must win in order to still be there to disembark?  This kind of sequencing would benefit from having an example in the rules.
6.  We note that air ranges, especially for heavy bombers doing strategic bombing, are far less than was the case historically.  American bombers have no means to attack eastern Germany, Hungary or Ploesti.  Yet in the Pacific part of the game their ranges are much greater (in mileage terms) due to the scale.  Will you be making some provision for added European range, at least for strategic bombing?
Thanks again for your help,
John

5

Reviews / Feedback from New Players

« on: August 24, 2012, 11:56:09 AM »

I haven’t seen much action on these posts, so I thought I’d offer some comments as a new owner of the combined Europe-Pacific game.  Four of us are playing our first game and it has taken a good deal of time to digest and in some cases wrangle over and agree on exactly what some of the rules actually mean.  Mark has been most helpful in providing feedback to our questions.

Since we were printing our own map, instead of 12’ by 4’ we shrank it to fit our tabletop, so it’s 84” by 28” and this is working very well.  The only issues are with some smaller/italicized print in white which we replaced with expanded print.  The full-sized counters fit fine on this.  The graphics on the map and the counters are very pleasing.

For anyone who is looking for a step up from the world of A&A, as we were, this game is ideal, more on the order of at least two steps up.  The variety of units, the economics and production, and the approach used in combat resolution are refreshing and much more involving, but still very intuitive.  A lot of new thinking has been brought in, not altogether new to gaming perhaps but in how the ideas could be adapted to a game of this scale.  I already mentioned combat, which now includes front line units, reserves, leaders, enhanced integration of air with both land and naval combats, and meaningful modifiers for terrain and weather, plus armor effects and more.  Paratroop units have considerable value, partisans are factored in.  The USSR and USA move gradually toward declarations of war, forcing the Axis to initiate hostilities or lose the chance to capture the initiative.  Speaking of “Initiative”, another element new to a game of this scale is having variable initiative on each of three fronts.  Sub warfare, threats to the Atlantic lifeline and the ASW campaign are modeled effectively and interestingly.

While admittedly we’re still only halfway through our first game, as “historical” gamers we’re impressed that the European theater has been able to be played along historical lines, and the Pacific has started out that way too.  China was just too tough a nut to crack, but the Japanese have expanded rapidly once initiating war with the West.  Next time around we may try to stretch the design some, but the first test is whether the game can mirror the historical outcome, and it appears to be successful in that so far..

There’s only one element of the game which has given us fits, and it stems from the fact that this game, like A&A, depends heavily on die rolling to determine combat outcomes.  For whatever reason, there seems to be a high propensity for dice to deliver extreme outcomes.  In a real-world situation, and in games using odds tables, a 4:1 will result in a loss/retreat outcome for the defender and at worst the attacker would lose the same as the defender, though generally losses would be minimal.  With dice, the outcomes are wildly unpredictable, so that in a 4:1-type situation the attacker could lose numerous key units which could blunt an entire offensive.  Since this can ruin a contest that we’ve invested lots of time in, it’s something we’re giving some thought to.

One piece that has yet to be tested is the concept of tying game play to a fixed timeline.  Each turn is intended to represent three months of time, and the game end time is fixed.  We don’t know yet how well this works, it’s a challenge with any game, and we’re not sure that we really like the idea that everyone knows the duration of the war – certainly no one had this foreknowledge in real life.  We’ll keep playing and hold judgment till we get through it.

Anyway, we really are into this game and we thank the designers for putting this together!

6

Rules Questions & Clarifications / Re: Rules Questions - Advanced game v5_2012

« on: August 20, 2012, 03:23:52 PM »

Hi, Mark, our game is moving along and we spent time wrangling over fine points of the rules as we got to the expanded Pacific war.  Perhaps you can clarify:

1.   Air Ranges in the Pacific – We’ve reached the stage in our first game where Japanese island-hopping has begun and we’re not sure if air ranges make sense.  When aircraft are island-based, should they count the move into the immediate sea area as “1”, then into the next sea zone as “2”, then onto the island in that sea zone as “3”? 

2.  That question may only apply when Islands are “within” a sea zone, not if they’re part of the border of a sea zone – in that case, they’re always counted.  Or are they?  We see cases where it works well and others where it doesn’t. 

3.  We assume for a certainty that there’s no question about the count for continental land areas and larger islands (Japan/New Guinea), for air units moving from land to sea or sea to land.  That would always work as it does in Europe.

4.  We also want to confirm how air attacks against a port work.  It appears that the first round of attack includes the -2 modifier for air attack in port, then the defender can withdraw to the sea area the port is in at end of round 1.  Another round of combat would then be fought normally, without the -2 modifier.  At the end of that round, the defender could withdraw to an adjacent sea area, and the air units could not pursue.  For the first round of “surprise”, there’d also be the -1/+1 modifiers.

5.  A comment: We think the supply rules are pretty extreme from an historical perspective.  At the end of the Winter42 turn, there’s a gigantic Japanese fleet “in supply” near Samoa 4000 miles from Tokyo.  The vastly different scale of Pacific operations is tough to reconcile with Europe.

6.  You may already have clarified, we note the Japanese fleet carriers are shown as taking 2 hits but the rules stipulate these take 1 hit.

Thanks for your continuing help, Mark.
John Costello

7

Rules Questions & Clarifications / Re: Rules Questions - Advanced game v5_2012

« on: July 30, 2012, 01:01:15 PM »

Thanks again, Mark, for the response.  As we’ve played, inevitably a few more questions arose.  Also some comments on play so far.
1. It wasn’t entirely clear which of the Powers could utilize their new factories “pre-war”, so we adopted the convention that those that had a “fixed” allotment of PP could not gain from factories (or any PP conquests) while all others (including Italian which is ½, NOT fixed) could.  Italians got ½ value of factories and conquered PP pre-war.  Is that correct?
2. We could not resolve whether the British naval units starting west of India were released from the start in 1939.  It made sense that they should be, since Britain employed its entire fleet in Europe at that time, but in the end we only released the Australian naval units.
3. We note that the small inset map shows the naval move cost from Australia is 3 when playing Europe-only, however it’s longer when playing the combined game.  India can be a much shorter distance away in the combined game by transporting to/from the west coast.
4. We wrangled over the 3:2 lend-lease, when strategic attack occurs what PP count is being attacked?  We settled on having the sender put in 3 (or more) chits, having the combat, then 2/3 of the remaining chips rounded down go to the receiving power.
5. All of the play variants are aimed at the Euro War, will there be a set of Pacific options added?
Are there other restrictions intended on Finnish forces?  Historically they only re-took Vyborg and were more than reluctant to venture further and creat a long-term Russian enemy.
6. There’s no indication as to when the Russian Far East border forces are released.  Would this occur the turn after Japan begins war with the Western Powers?  Or are they and the Manchurian garrison both locked in place till at war with each other?
7. We’ve already seen in our play through early 1941 that it’s possible for the Germans to build a huge u-boat force very early on, much faster than the British can develop counter-measures.  Actually, the British deployed large numbers of small escort vessels (trawlers then low-cost corvettes) in tandem with the German build-up.  While we realize any generic game such as this inevitably results in skewed production, we’d argue it should not permit ahistorical early builds.
8. Another historical observation, the German army of 1941-42 was still largely dependent on horse-drawn transportation as was the Japanese.  German industry simply could not have geared up enough to produce predominantly mechanized formations for 1941 or 1942.  We think the builds allowed for Panzer & PG in early war are too large, and at-start forces (especially PG) should be pared and replaced by infantry.  With massive mech formations, in our (admittedly only) game, the German forces attacking in Summer ’41 quickly overran all mid-USSR factories before any could be railed out and captured Moscow, while annihilating most of the Russian army.  Since Russian factories could not be designated to relocate before Fall (and only most three could be designated), few would ever get away against an aggressive German player.
9. The German attack in Russia might have been slowed due to aircraft range, however by using paratroops to capture territory on the main combat round, the fighters (and Stukas) could relocate forward during the non-combat move to prepare for the next turn’s blitz.
10. With paratroops so cheap and so valuable, they’ve been used everywhere all the time for key attacks, very ahistorical.  We’ve adopted a rule that on the first combat round, they get the loss priority.  Also the Germans should start with none.  Their combat bonus is unneeded, it’s more than enough that they add to the front line count, can break river lines, can negate amph assault penalties and can leap tall buildings, etc.
11. Another area getting a lot of thought is invasions.  A lot of long-range planning is required in the game to amass enough shipping to provide for possible invasion of Britain (also requiring landing craft construction) plus the Japanese expansion to so many places in a very short space of time when they first attack.  We’re addressing the latter by allowing for some SNLF/Z-plan one-time invasion capability and are considering “scratch convoys”, more-expensive one-time one-use builds representing huge economic dislocation to quickly gather small craft, to enable a one-sea crossing (Crete, Sea Lion, perhaps Dunkirk evac).  The latter might carry greater amphib combat penalties.
No need for comment on our ideas, but would appreciate guidance on rules questions.
Thanks,
John Costello

8

Rules Questions & Clarifications / Re: Rules Questions - Advanced game v5_2012

« on: July 19, 2012, 01:38:41 PM »

Thanks again, Mark, we’re getting close to a full understanding of current rules I think.  But questions will likely keep popping up as we play.

 Our latest:

1.        Do pre-war Russians treat Balkan States the same as Bessarabia – they can be occupied at any time without resistance?  That would seem historical.

2.       If any of the occupied areas contain PP, do the Russians count those in their pre-war production total?  Your previous answer suggests not.

3.       I guess the same questions would apply to Persia as well.  The area wasn’t actually occupied by USSR pre-war, but resistance was nil.

4.       Then, if any of these territories were not occupied in pre-war, would their “normal” minor activation process begin once war breaks out?

5.       Airfields upgrades have a +2 – but the example does not mention areas that start with zero PP – does that mean such areas cannot contain airfields?

As you may already have surmised, we’re more “historical” gamers than “competitive” ones.  In any game, we’d like the historical path to be one viable option.

Thank you,

John

 

9

Rules Questions & Clarifications / Re: Rules Questions - Advanced game v5_2012

« on: July 15, 2012, 06:02:17 AM »

Thank you, Mark, for such a prompt and thorough reply.

We do have some follow-up points.

On question 10, the conflict we had seen was between the Leaders Strategic Initiative text on page 4 and the Combat Rules/Combat table.  The latter stipulate that the initial front line maximum is 6 land and 3 naval, plus 1 for superior init+strat rating.  The former says Strat leadership determines the number of initial front line units a leader may command in battle.  We've started play using the 6/3.

Also a follow-up on factories - is any power not yet at war able to use the +2 for factories they build pre-war?  USSR, Italy?

Is USSR/Italy able to benefit from points captured in Pre-War?  Baltic States for instance?

Thanks, we're enjoying this game very much.
John

10

Rules Questions & Clarifications / Rules Questions - Advanced game v5_2012

« on: July 13, 2012, 01:18:22 PM »

We just received the combined Europe-Asia game and have a number of questions as we start play:
1   Rules state that forts which take 1 hit are replaced by front line infantry.  Are these 2/3 or 3/4 infantry?   
2   Rules state that naval units that receive an "R" result due to enemy air attack move to reserve   
      If R result is received from naval attack, units retreat.  Is this disparate treatment intended?
3   For amphibious attacks, there is no attacking leader for the first round.  Which leader's strategic   
      value is used to bring up reserves for round 2 - use the NL column?
      
4   There are no National Rules for Germany or Japan, that seems odd considering all the detail on the others   
5   Example under Convoy Escort ASW on page 21 appears incorrect.  This would apply if the date was   
      Fall, 1941, prior to US entry.  After entry, box has value of 10 British/10 US/5 Lend-Lease
6   Port supply rules seem to be at odds with Italian Med convoy zone rules.  Italians in North Africa are to count   
      "number of port boxes", put that number of chits in the Med strat box, and that's how many units get supplied.
      Tripoli is a 10 port, and per supply rules that means 10 units could trace supply through there.
      Allies may reduce the number of chits by strat attack.
      Benghazi 5, Tobruk 5, Tripoli 10 - Is that 3 chips or 20?
7   We note that Rumania, Bulgaria & Hungary all enter upon fall of France.   
      Historical dates of entry would be
      Bulg 3/1/41, Rum 11/27/40, Hungary 11/20/40
      Triggers would be a good addition
8   What purpose do U-boat pens serve if submarines have unlimited supply?   
      Place to house subs to enable anti-invasion sortie?
9   Shouldn’t Germans be required to keep significant Eastern garrison until at war with Soviets?   
10   Rules say strategic leadership factor determines how many initial front line units the leader may    
      command in a battle.  This is not repeated in the Combat rules, it's fixed at 6 minimum for land, sea 3.
11   Cannot (easily) replicate Baltic States overrun - this actually was done in days with no fighting.   
      It did not occur till 1941.
12   National production charts are missing some lines   
      France has no AT production line
      Chinese no AT/AA lines
13   Once Holland/France conquered, are their units removed from the Pacific too?   
14   There are no white (winterized) Russian units, can we assume all non-2/3s function as winterized?   
15   When do Russ start to count their added +20 factories - at outbreak of war?   
16   If they build more pre-war, assume they start immediately.   
17   Only 8 locations in USSR have a +, where do the other 2 factories start?   
18   There are partisan units and rules for them in version 1_2012, but no mention of them   
      in version 5_2012 rules.    Do we use the counters?
19   Russian attack on Bessarabia - how does this work and how does it end?   
      Can Rumanians elect not to fight and leave vacant?
20   Are all Russian Far East forces locked in place till war breaks out with Japan or Germany?   
If this would be easier to work with as an attachment, let me know.
Thanks,
John