Flashpoint Middle East

[Emperor_Taiki]

With eigth spaces of range, rockets are going to be able to pick off the most expenisve units. It should be reduced to at least six so their is at least some strategy is deploying them, and that their are battle for terriotroies simply so one side can launch rockets from their.

I steel, dont see the rational for the BB, none of these countries have(I guess Russia might still have a few, but they are not building more of them) or would want this kind of ship. And if the peice is going to be too expensive to b e useful, you should just get rid of that peice.

Here is my prosal for how land combat and production should work

I like the idea of only having production rounds every three turns. I would have everyone buld at the same time(in secret) after three turns.

To make sure that it is possible to predict moves for the next three turns, I propose that all land units can only move one space, except that their is an a second combat round in each turn that only certain units can attack in and particpate in.

Light Infantry C3 A1 D2 M1
Mech Infantry C4 A1 D2 M1, may attack in the second combat phase
Artillery          C4 A2 D2 M1, support
Self-Propelled Artillery C5 A4 D1 M1, may attack in the second combat phase
Armor           C5 A3 D2 M1,may attack in the second combat phase
Main Battle Tank C6 A4 D3 M1,may attack in the second combat phase

I think this allows for the incopoation of the new production rules, while adding increaced diveristy in the land units.
In addition combat could be limited to one or two rounds. After the first or second round, if the attack has not won he must retreat. He may then attack that same terrtory again in the second combat move phase.
Did I explain that clearly?

And yes include a deck of cards. The deck should have at be 50+ cards, with over 10 different types of card.

Also, some stratgic redaployment should be added to the game, each nation should be able to move a certain amount of units with in their owrn terriotry.

For instance
         SR
Russia: 5
Iraq: 4
Tukery: 3
Iran: 3
Egypt: 2
Saudi Arabia:1

Also, how about rule for chemical and nuclear warfare? Missiles should be able to be tipped with a nuclear warhead, and artillery should be able to fire chemical weapons.

[Emperor_Taiki]

I was was thinking about the plot/storyline/reason for the war.

I think the game makes much more sence if it take place somewhere between  1996-2000. The Soveit Union has collapsed but it is before 9/11 so the US does not have huge amounts of forces in the region.
Once the way start it takes 3 months before the US gets involved, so this game will cover the three months before the US involvment in the war.

If a month is reprsented buy a build turn + 3 movement/combat turns, then the game will be three sets of those, and which ever side has accomplished the most objectives my then wins!

[Holden]

Here’s what I’ve been working on. I’ve really been trying to nail down the combat sequence and the units.



Some quick comments on combat that may not be evident at first.
-Units only have one Combat Value (CV). No Attack & Defend rating. However…
-Generally, the defender fires first and the attacker removes his casualties before returning fire. This obviously gives the defender a natural advantage.
-At the start of battle, air units are assigned either Air to Air or Air to Ground.
-Fighters fight at 4 in Air to Air but 1/2 (ie:2) in Air to Ground. Helicopters & Bombers fight at full strength in Air to Ground mode (4 & 2) but fight at 1/2 in Air to Air mode.
-Air to Air hits must be taken by enemy air units (never naval or ground units).
-Air to Ground hits must be taken by Naval or Ground units (never enemy air units).
-At the start of each round of combat, players can move their air units around between Air to Air and Air to Ground modes.
-Defending air units can retreat from battle.
-AA guns are now units that shoot once each prior to battle. In other words you can (and should) buy multiple guns to defend important positions.
-Frigates and Cruisers also act as AA guns.

[Shakespeare]

So assume that the accuracy of the missles in the Middle East is very suspect especially if they are homegrown: ( If US or USSR made there is no accuracy problem they always hit)

So if the range is 8 thay only hit on a 6
If the range is 7 they hit on a 5 or 6
If the range is 6 they hit on a 4 5 or 6
etc etc
if the range is one they automatically hit

or use an 8 sided die instead of a 6 sided die as above

Perhaps use this:

or on a range of ____ throw 2 die if they are both evens they hit
or on a range of ____ throw 3 die if they are all evens they hit.
etc etc however you wish

Just some ideas and thoughts for your consideration

[Emperor_Taiki]

How, that is quite an advantage you are giving the defender, i think i like it.

you should come up with a starting set-up so you can accaully start playtesting.

And what do you think about reducing the movement of tanks to 1 in the combat phase unless they are blitzing? and what about blitzing allowing units to attack an occupied territroy and then another occupied territory?

And what do you think about my idea for the starting date/scenario/background?

I still feel missle ranges are too long.

Also, what are you doing for a tech chart if any?

And what about chemical and nuclear warfare?

[Variable]

I was thinking about your IPC dilemma. What if all nations started with a set IPC income. Then, as territories are captured, the defender losses the income for the territory, but the attacker gains no benefit. This works better for your time scale and “flexible unit pool” ideas. Basically it would work the same as convoy zones in AAP. The motivation is still there for the attacker as you would be harming your opponent’s ability to mobilize new forces against you.

[Variable]

Hey Holden,

Any more work on this project?

[Guest]

I was wondering what happened to this project.

[Holden]

Not much progress on this game (life gets in the way) but I plan on getting back to it soon.

[Bardoly]

I just read this thread for the first time, and this looks good!

A suggestion.  Use either 10-sided dice or 12-sided dice so as to give you greater flexibility in combat values.

@Variable:

I was thinking about your IPC dilemma. What if all nations started with a set IPC income. Then, as territories are captured, the defender losses the income for the territory, but the attacker gains no benefit. This works better for your time scale and “flexible unit pool” ideas. Basically it would work the same as convoy zones in AAP. The motivation is still there for the attacker as you would be harming your opponent’s ability to mobilize new forces against you.

I like this idea.  With some tweaking, this could possibly be a good idea for the regular Axis and Allies games.

[Emperor_Taiki]

I think Israel needs to be included as a power in this game. After the US and Russia they are the greatest military power in the region.

I also think since there are already a lot of countries who would be unlikly allies, that this would make a great three sided-conflict game.

Keep Russia and Iraq as allies, then split the other alliances one side being Turkey-Iran and the other Egypt-Israel-Saudis. Or make it four sided with Israel on its own.

How about also including special WMD factories that allow players to build nuclear and chemical weapons. This part of the world is filled with crazy mass murderes.

[Holden]

I was considering adding railway lines to the map to facilitate strategic movement. What do you guys think of that?

Also, what are your opinions on technology development? I had some plans on the back burner for tech upgrades to the military units in addition to more general tech upgrades.

[Emperor_Taiki]

Railways or major road ways sounds great.

The tech developments should include chemical weapons and nukes. Israel and Russia have nukes and everyone is worried about Iran and other countries getting them. Chemical weapons were used in the Iran-Iraq War and the US was afraid saddam would use them in both gulf wars.

Chemical weapons should allow artillery and aircraft too keep enemy units from moving or attacking since moving through poison gas, even with the right equipment, is a very slow buisness and very dangerous.

Nukes should be able to be loaded into artillery, aircraft, subs and missles. They are expendable and cause a strategic bombing on steriods, they also damage some military units.

UAV?

Stealth aircraft?

Advanced SAM sites?

New oil reserves discovered: Foregin investores send you tons of money and weapons.

[Holden]

Been working more on this game. I finally ordered all the Table Tactics plastic pieces. These will form the backbone of the various units in the game. Together with the old A&A pieces I’ve got pretty much everything I need. The only things really missing are a modern bomber and a modern submarine. I think I’m going to have to order some miniature bombers and subs and paint them.

First the latest map:

-Egypt has now become its own seperate player nation with its own colour.
-A few regions added to Turkey to break up some of the larger regions there.

Other changes:
-Decided to ditch the Battleship unit.
-What I think I’d like to do now is to randomly assign two opposing teams at the beginning of the game. Each team would be composed of three nations. So you take the six player aid cards (one for each nation). You flip them over and randomly deal them out into two stacks of three. Those are the teams for the game. This will make the game really variable and change the entire nature of the gameplay each time. The trick with this approach is to make the game balanced enough so that there are no real killer teams that make the game unplayable. To this end each nation must be roughly the same in terms of power (both military and economic wise).
-I want to reduce the effectiveness of the cruise missiles. I think I’m going to limit their range to 4 spaces. and reduce their combat value to a max of 4 at range 1, 3 at range 2, 2 at range 3 and 1 at range 4.

More to come.

[Emperor_Taiki]

Those changes sound great.

I like the random teams idea.

[Bardoly]

@Emperor_Taiki:

I think Israel needs to be included as a power in this game. After the US and Russia they are the greatest military power in the region.

I agree.

[Holden]

I agree that Israel is a military powerhouse. However, including them as a playable nation presents a few challenges. Adding Israel would force a 7th player nation into the game and I don’t want to lose any of the nations I’ve got now (If I would squeeze one out it would be Russia I guess).

In addition, Israel is merely one region on the map. If they are to compete economically with the other nations Israel must have an IPC value of 30 or so! Either that or Israel starts with a huge military advantage.

For now Israel is going to have to remain a powerful neutral nation. It is the most valuable IPC region on the map and it includes a victory city (Tel Aviv). Accordingly Israel will have a very potent mic of military units should someone invade.

BTW: The armed forces of Turkey are no slouches either (2nd largest in NATO behind the USA). They are armed with modern equipment too.

Latest version of the map. It’s very near completion. IPC values are all assigned. The only thing I need to do now is flesh out the Victory cities.

I’ve tweaked the combat system a little. At the end of every round of combat both the attacker and the defender have the opportunity to attempt to retreat any or all of their units. These retreating units are moved to the “disengaged” portion of the battle board. If these units survive an entire round of combat in the disengaged area (disengaged units may not attack) they withdraw from battle and make a retreat move into an adjacent region. Basically a unit gives up its chance to make an attack roll in order to retreat. Submarines may “Submerge” and immediatly move to the Disengaged area after making an attack roll (getting them out of combat one turn quicker than most).

I was looking at some maps of the Middle East and there are roads, highways and railways threading all over the regions of the map. I think adding strategic highways or rail-lines directly onto the map is out. Instead, in order to keep it simple: if you want to use strategic movement pay 1 IPC to the bank and then you may move that unit up to 4 regions (limit of 4 units per turn). Perhaps a tech could improve this ability (advanced logistics or strategic deployment or something).

Getting close to printing this map out and playing a few games.

[reloader-1]

How much would the map cost to print? (In your opinion)

I would be very interested in purchasing a copy of the map.

[Holden]

@reloader-1:

How much would the map cost to print? (In your opinion)

I have printed and laminated maps for others games for around $20-$60 (as was mentioned the size makes a big difference).

The test map I printed was 25" x 27" and I found that some of the territories were a tad small (but larger than many of the standard A&A Pacific Islands). I’ve gathered all my pieces and soon I’ll host the results of a test game.

[finnman]

Wow cool can you post all the rules together. I would like to see Isreal as a power or just make optional. If need a eigth you could add afganistan or pakistan.