AARHE: Rule files

Hawaii….should be an exception, along with gibrater  and suez and dakar.
Perhaps i need to add a few port symbols to the map?
yeah I realise Hawaii has a substantial naval facility
but Gibraltar, Suez, or Dakar…are they on same scale?

Dakar was the french main port, Port Said ( suez was major uk port), Gibralter was less important but a stopover for convoy to and from africa

Quote
The process of performing air missions with the object of pinning down enemy air forces is not artificial, but rather a modeled form of warfare where your shaping the battlefield to conform to ultimate success of the land campaign, much like the allies did just before D-Day by taking out all the German air units before landing troops and saturation bombing etc…
Allies didn’t take out all the German air units right?
They just achieved air superiority so German air attack on Allied troops were insignificant?

They missed two just like 2 me-109, otherwise in the days leading up to the big jumpoff german air cover over france was eradicated to facilitate the invasions. They had to get rid of all areas because if they focused on Normandy it would give away the plot.

In terms of pinning “down enemy air forces”…
AARHE’s dogfight system is just that. Defending air units can’t hit attacking land units until they achieve air superiority.
Meanwhile CA mission on a territory prevents defending air units (1-to-1) from relocating with DAS rule.

yes right. lets just get it clear in the rules.

Ok you came back…whew…

remember how we changed it to defender make retreat decisions first
in naval combat it felt weird
because defender choose to retreat/press-on first hence they get to choose which SZ to run to

Quote
Dakar was the french main port, Port Said ( suez was major uk port), Gibralter was less important but a stopover for convoy to and from africa
well thats no good
they are nothing compared to Hawaii

Quote
They had to get rid of all areas because if they focused on Normandy it would give away the plot.
whether they want to give it away was their decision
we just want to see if air missions should be before, after, or concurrent to [normal] combat

what do you propose? no change?

Can Japan bridge troops over during the reinforment phase of the non-combat move?

e.g., transport moves from sz60 -> sz61 and loads up a tank and troop and drops them into Manchuria during the reinforcement phase?

Seems to be within the scope of a piece only moving to an adjacent zone during this phase.

Thanks in advance!

• Bierwagen

Technology Transfer:

US develops Hv. Bombers & UK finishes ASW on the same turn.

According to the rules, they can each transfer a tech to each other.  Seems a bit much.  I wanted to limit it to one tech transfer each turn.

“One progress box of minor technology (3 or less progress boxes) may be selected for transfer between US/UK and Germany/Italy/Japan per direction per turn”.

Is this just to try and shut the game quicker as it progresses?

Any thoughts?

• Bierwagen

Air attack limitations of 2 out and 2 back really hampers Germany ability to fight in Africa.  You used to be able to attack Anglo-Egypt and land in Lybia.  Removing that option changes the dynamics of that whole theater of war.

Was this done intentionally?

Any insights appreciated.

While Xenophobia is in effect can the Russian sub fight together with the UK/US fleet.  Xenophobia seems to only work one way – STAY OUT OF RUSSIA…

Russia can attack into Persia and India alongside US/UK troops and DAS out there as well – correct?

Our rule lawyers are at it again.

• Bierwagen

O.k. I know I’m mix’ing and matching rules - but after 14 hours of playing over the weekend, we’ve integrated stuff from AARHE  Lite.

So, here’s the next question on Tech Dice.

Do Germany & US have to announce up front what they are rolling for, or can they roll one die and then choose the next roll based off the results of the first.

Rule states:  “Assign free and purchased dice [ on page 6 ] to technologies before rolling.”

Rule lawyers argued they were assigning them before they rolled, just one at a time vs. the opponents who said you have to announce all dice up front independent of the outcome of each other.

• Bierwagen

Xenophobia:

Once Russia has “Liberated” an ally country (e.g., Persia & India) and now controls them can US/UK forces re-enter into those zones?

The argument was made that Xenophobia is only exerted against all the original Russian territories (e.g., Rust Red countries) and not against new acquisitions.

While Xenophobia is in effect can the Russian sub fight together with the UK/US fleet.  Xenophobia seems to only work one way – STAY OUT OF RUSSIA…

Russia can attack into Persia and India alongside US/UK troops and DAS out there as well – correct?

Our rule lawyers are at it again.

Russian and western ally units cannot fight together, but if the Soviet sub is in a sea zone with UK/ USA naval, then it defends like anything else…but not attack.

Xenophobia:

Once Russia has “Liberated” an ally country (e.g., Persia & India) and now controls them can US/UK forces re-enter into those zones?

The argument was made that Xenophobia is only exerted against all the original Russian territories (e.g., Rust Red countries) and not against new acquisitions.

All Soviet “liberations” preclude the allies from entering these for any reason (consider them now soviet territories) unless the axis retake it and drive out all Soviet units, THEN the allies can come back in and take it.

O.k. I know I’m mix’ing and matching rules - but after 14 hours of playing over the weekend, we’ve integrated stuff from AARHE  Lite.

So, here’s the next question on Tech Dice.

Do Germany & US have to announce up front what they are rolling for, or can they roll one die and then choose the next roll based off the results of the first.

Rule states:  “Assign free and purchased dice [ on page 6 ] to technologies before rolling.”

Rule lawyers argued they were assigning them before they rolled, just one at a time vs. the opponents who said you have to announce all dice up front independent of the outcome of each other.

Ok good point. You assign all the dice first: You have a total of say 6 dice (including ones you bought)  then you allocate them to different techs, then you roll. Regardless of what you roll, you do not midstream re-allocate the dice to different techs….thats cheating.

Air attack limitations of 2 out and 2 back really hampers Germany ability to fight in Africa.  You used to be able to attack Anglo-Egypt and land in Lybia.  Removing that option changes the dynamics of that whole theater of war.

Was this done intentionally?

Any insights appreciated.

You have to allocate dedicated air units for the African campaign… they cannot fly from mid Russia, attack Egypt, then fly and defend french coastline all in the same turn. The game promotes independent air forces for each front, just like in the real war and the way we chose to do this was by that rule.  One of the things that bugs us is how you have that bomber sitting in libya which can reach nearly every European territory Germany controls…Instead of that you buy some 8 ipc fighter bombers and stick them in africa to support your efforts.

Technology Transfer:

US develops Hv. Bombers & UK finishes ASW on the same turn.

According to the rules, they can each transfer a tech to each other.  Seems a bit much.  I wanted to limit it to one tech transfer each turn.

“One progress box of minor technology (3 or less progress boxes) may be selected for transfer between US/UK and Germany/Italy/Japan per direction per turn”.

Is this just to try and shut the game quicker as it progresses?

Any thoughts?

Transfer takes place on the turn following acquisition at the rate of one level, one tech per nation…So if USA and UK combined for 4 advances in different techs, the other only benefits by one level each turn so taking 4 turns to “learn” the tech. Also, Soviets don’t share and vice versa. So that is saying ONE TECH TRANSFER BOX PER TURN…when we say “One progress box of minor technology”

AND REMEMBER ITS MINOR.

Can Japan bridge troops over during the reinforcement phase of the non-combat move?

e.g., transport moves from sz60 -> sz61 and loads up a tank and troop and drops them into Manchuria during the reinforcement phase?

Seems to be within the scope of a piece only moving to an adjacent zone during this phase.

Yes as long as they have a unloaded tranny in between Japan and Manchuria, they can allocate ONE SR transfer across the sea zone.

More good insights.  The only thing we really hosed up here was the Tech Xfer.  I thought transferring a whole tech was a bit much.  The voice of reason among us interpreted it as you described - one tech box per turn.

This spawned another discussion of what was meant by “transfer” – does it mean I give one of mine to you thus losing the tech?  … and all kinds of silly discussions after that.  So, thanks for setting us straight.

Enjoy the day!

• Bierwagen

This spawned another discussion of what was meant by “transfer” – does it mean I give one of mine to you thus losing the tech?  … and all kinds of silly discussions after that.  So, thanks for setting us straight.

Your reading too much into this.

Transfer is JUST giving your ally ONE level of some Tech you developed the last turn. You don’t then lose it if you give it away.

After AA acquires air units and sends them retreating on a 2-3 what options do the untis have?

• Do they have to return to where they came from?
      - or -
• Do they get to retreat to a friendly space within 2 spaces?

After AA acquires air units and sends them retreating on a 2-3 what options do the untis have?

• Do they have to return to where they came from?
      - or -
• Do they get to retreat to a friendly space within 2 spaces?

The ID rolls out depending on how many it can. roll one d6 if you roll 1-5 nothing happens. If you roll 6, then roll again, 1 is a hit plane gone, 2-3 plane must fly back to where it came from and does not complete any mission that turn…wasted, but still alive to fight another day.

Tekkyy…

we need to add a line regarding oil rules… in the 1939 game not all nations start with one and the rules clearly say after 3 turns if you lose your controlled oil center your non-infantry units cost +1 and tanks move 1.

Special cases:

Japan has no oil centers but a reserve in the 1939 version that runs out by turn 6 ( American entry) , so on turn 7 if they don’t control an oil center it starts to effect them.

UK is exempted from oil rules, because she imports her oil from many sources and they are not concentrated in any one area.

Italy draws her oil from German sources and would be effected the same way.

Also, to note that Romania is activated as German ally on turn 3 , so Germany and Italy are in the clear.

Also, the 1939 rules should be an appendix in the standard rulebook, because its only a few pages, and the text should be the same font and style you have in the latest draft.

IN the air rules… where does it specifically say what the defender can do?

I think a summary of each air mission 1-5 would prove valuable for the document. especially how many rounds is combat, and can DAS be used etc…

Welcome back Tekkyy!

Glad to see you again – I was worried the AAHRE population was shrinking!

Thanks for the changelogs.txt as well.  Very groovy.

@tekkyy:

IL: Ok you came back…whew…
tekkyy: sorry too busy to be regular these few months, I’ll be in and out…email me for “emergencies”

I still need some clarity and thoughts on these:

Bridging during Reinforcement Phase:
Seems to work out o.k. so far.  Our group isn’t complaining over the last 3-4 games.

• Might be a bit too powerful of a reinforcement move though
• Japan and UK seem to be relying heavily on it.

IL: Yes. 
Tekkyy:  No. 
New Playtesters: Undecided

Xenophobia:
We keep running into issues on this one.  Personally, I don’t see why Russia can’t work in combined assaults with the US/UK as long as it isn’t in Russian territories or the German territories you specified.  AAHRE seems to have a lot of major combat in Sinkiang/India/Persia due to the fact that Japan can build 5 troops a turn on the mainland.  At least in our last 4 games.

In order to keep the Japanese at bay, Russia needs to be allowed to co-mingle with the US/UK in non-Russian controlled (and the specific countries specified) territories and DAS out there as well.

tekkyy: the Xenopho rule’s wording do NOT stop you from attacking a non-Xeno territory together, territories included are listed in the rule wording.

tekkyy: again Xenoph rule’s wording do not say that, I am thinking the Xeno-ness should be about Russia homeland and eastern europe, I mean historically they attacked Germany together and occupied their own areas

IL: No
Tekky:  Yes
New Playtesters:  Yes

Thanks again for all your hard work.

Our group has turns down to ~23 min from “Collect Income” to “Tech Rolls”.  Our games are now very balanced.  True SlobberKnockers.  The last three games have gone many turns… sometimes 20+ for up to 8 hours of play before someone throws in the towel from mental exhaustion.

Japan always seems to be the King Kong.  So, we’ve been working on trying to tear him down.

• Bierwagen

@Imperious:

IN the air rules… where does it specifically say what the defender can do?

I think a summary of each air mission 1-5 would prove valuable for the document. especially how many rounds is combat, and can DAS be used etc…

I think you are onto something here IL.  Perhaps a flowchart of if-then options that show the logical structure and flow behind turns/sequences/cycles.  A “checklist for dummies” basically.  I’ll be the first to sign up and buy a copy!

e.g.,

• Attacker Performs Combat Moves

• Defender allocates FTR assets
    – Scramble in country assets vs. inbound Air Mission
    – Perform DAS to adjacent countries (non Air Mission)
    – Defend territory in combat
  1. Land Combat: Sequence
  A. Air Mission Execution
    – AD fires
        - Remove Casualties
    – Allocated in-country air units perform 1 cycle of air combat
        - Remove Casualties
    – Survivors perform Air Mission
    – Air Missions & defenders return to base
  B. Opening-Fire cycle

• Airsuperiority
    - YES/NO
  …. blah… blah… blah…

• End cycle
    – Return to B. and repeat

Please make sure to use small monosyllabic words in large print.

I think it would help sort out some of the misperceptions we have due to things you assume as known because you’ve been at it so long.

I would kill for one of these for sea combat.

• Bierwagen

(good monkey… check the checklist… takes the banana)

Yes we need this checklist for EVERY concept and use plain language  ( no FTR…but fighter)

we get alot of questions on air missions and naval retreats…

we need clarifications on defender ability to retreat in these situations:

1. with transports alone
2. with subs alone
3. with combination of warships and either 1 and or 2

both defender and attacker.

Also, on the jets and technology units how they change combat/movement in a situation

I know it will make the rules longer, but perhaps they can be 10pt font rather than 12 pt font.