ok find something that is somewhere in between our two systems.
possibly your rule but only effecting UK and Japan. Ill leave it up to you, but be fair to both sides.
yeah hybrid is cool and thats what the last step did
sectioning the ocean rather than tracing explicit path of seas, is a point between our systems
to be honest I never really understood your worry about my rule
you says historically Germany, Russia (excluding lend-lease) and US were not really exposed to convoy raiding…so then you want a hard overwrite to 100% disallow convoy raiding against them no matter what
dont have to do that
I still see that it works like history in my system if players follow history
the 3 players have few to zero convoys, they can’t be hit much unless they chooses to expose themselves such as taking overseas territories without securing the relevant sea areas
even then, if the sea is not safe, Germany/US for example could try to spend the money from Africa/Pacific on a local IC/VC
you are not forced to suicide
ok fine…… i don’t wish to go over it again.
carry on soldier!
ok I apply the changes and we’ll leave it at that until new ideas pop up
yes right!
Greetings from San Antonio!
Bottom Line Up Front (BLUF):
I’m really intrigued by AARHE, you all have done a fantastic job of breathing some realism into this game. So, I printed off some maps and rules and committed myself to working through it. However, I ran into some burps today and I’m a bit confused by all the revisions I’ve found: two dated drafts from vers 4.0, and an older 1.3.
I’m using the following source as my touchstone:
http://home.exetel.com.au/cometo/aarhe/
I worked through the AARHE DEMO (e.g., turn 1 through G1 & J1), but it doesn’t cover all the angles required to understand the nuances of combat. Are there other DEMO’s and examples that I’ve missed in the forums that can walk me through some of this?
Thanks in advance,
Enjoy the day!
Yes sir!
I will get the latest files so your not printing all the wrong stuff.
Id favor the 1939 version using the generals, but you can also go with AARHE: Lite and play on your normal map.
here are some files you need.
http://home.exetel.com.au/cometo/aarhe/–-which is where you are. The watermark and clear just means if you want the pretty pictures then DL watermark… otherwise a plain copy is also offered.
but it doesn’t cover all the angles required to understand the nuances of combat. Are there other DEMO’s and examples that I’ve missed in the forums that can walk me through some of this?
note that all the player aids should be downloaded and printed out so your not forgetting some of the rules. These are intuitive in that you get a strong impression of what is going on even if you don’t read the rules.
So i suggest you read AARHE lite and use the formal ruleset to solve any clarifications that arise.
I also suggest you don’t play with the extra units until you have played at least 2 games fully. Probably don’t use the Generals either till then.
You may present your questions here and we will answer them. The demo was just to get the basic idea of the game.
Moin!
O.k. I finally followed this discussion on AARHE: Lite from the beginning, and think I caught a clue.
AARHE: Lite was source of my confusion because I thought it was a short-cut sheet for AARHE. But it appears to be a stand alone upgrade played on the old AAR map vs. AARHE 1.3 or 4.0 which is suppose to be played on the updated maps.
Things that really confused us were Naval Combat, declaring DAS, neutrals, and a Combat Reinforcements (n.b., which seems to have disappeared in the AAHRE 4.0, 10 Apr 08 version).
I’ll keep working my way through the messages in hopes of getting more insights.
I think the main thing that would help those of us trying to integrate this into our gaming groups would be more examples (e.g., particularly with air and naval combat).
Another suggestion would be for version control to be embedded in the headers. While we were playing and I went and printed off another copy so we didn’t have to share – only to get in a good argument over “what in the hell are you smoking!, right here on page, xx…”.
Thanks again,
Yes LITE is a stand alone way of giving an “easy bake” treatment from AARHE for people who don’t like reading.
WE had originally wanted to call it: AARHE: for dummies.
I may have steered you wrong by asking you to read it and then playing with AARHE because the rules are a bit different admittedly.
AARHE: Lite is like a ice cream bar made with “half the fat and zero calories”
Evening!
Based on past development, how long do you expect before you publish a stable version of AARHE 4.0? Where can we follow the discussion on it’s development?
Several of us were ready to jump in and start play testing but got some push back on waiting until it was “stable”.
I noticed that “Combat Reinforcement” got taken out of the mix (e.g., ver 4.0 dated 20080209).
The Naval Combat Sequence (e.g., specifically DAS) seemed to be our biggest hurdle, but it appears to have disappeared as well.
What kind of feedback would you like from us down here in the trenches trying to learn this? It’s a big fire hose at the moment, but looks really promising.
Enjoy the day!
Just play either the 1939 version as it stands right now, or use your original map for revised and use the basic rules.
Play the game with no diplomacy rules until you got every down pat.
I have like 8 games of 1939 in and it plays like a dream.
Thanks IL!
A quick question on the Lite & 4.0 versions.
1) Do transports still have a dog in the fight? There seems to be a conflict with 1 defense listed on the unit tables and “When neither side has units to hit each other (both side has only Submarines or both side has only Transports) both sides must retreat or break-off.”
I always thought it kind of silly that transports get an attack. I don’t remember too many instances of “ramming speed” in WWII. You might be able to stretch an air defense roll out of them.
1939 scares me away – too many pieces to try and collect. I’m limited to basic and revised edition. Not sure how to squeeze a set of French, Chinese, and whoever else I need out of that.
A quick question on the Lite & 4.0 versions.
1) Do transports still have a dog in the fight? There seems to be a conflict with 1 defense listed on the unit tables and “When neither side has units to hit each other (both side has only Submarines or both side has only Transports) both sides must retreat or break-off.”
I always thought it kind of silly that transports get an attack. I don’t remember too many instances of “ramming speed” in WWII. You might be able to stretch an air defense roll out of them.
Transports defend at O, they cannot be used for fodder and are the last units allocated for combat loses. If you bring them to attack they don’t participate. However, the defender can elect to retreat in part of whole his force at any time declared before the attacker declares retreat intentions.
The one defense is in cases where they are alone defending against subs, but as i said after a round they can retreat.
Transports are to be considered like a glass window pane in a mine field
ON 1939 version use American pieces for france because france is toast within 1-3 turns. It has never lasted past 2 turns, but i think its possible mathematically to last 3 turns
For Italy you can use old Milton Bradley pieces for Germany or japan ( yellow)…for poland or neutrals you use the nations pieces that controls the neutral… so you dont need any special pieces.
I really insist you play 1939. you will be hooked big time.
@Imperious:
The one defense is in cases where they are alone defending against subs, but as i said after a round they can retreat.
Actually I don’t recall discussion on reinstating a 1 defense for Transports.
Tracing back the log of files I see this is a typo introduced in August 2007 when we first created the colour rulebook.
If no new arguments I’ll fix that up (back to 0) for both AARHE and AARHE:Lite.
I’m using the following source as my touchstone:
http://home.exetel.com.au/cometo/aarhe/
Yep the latest files are kept there.
I worked through the AARHE DEMO (e.g., turn 1 through G1 & J1), but it doesn’t cover all the angles required to understand the nuances of combat. Are there other DEMO’s and examples that I’ve missed in the forums that can walk me through some of this?
Don’t worry about the demo I took the effort to write…outdated already hehe.
Based on past development, how long do you expect before you publish a stable version of AARHE 4.0? Where can we follow the discussion on it’s development?
Several of us were ready to jump in and start play testing but got some push back on waiting until it was “stable”.
AARHE features like defender retreat is nice but it also means its harder to playtest online since enemy gets to do things during your turn.
We’ve stopped changing things now.
But need more feedback from players like you guys before we could say its “stable”.
Or you and your friends could play AARHE:Lite first.
Actually its probably better to play 2-3 games of Lite first anyway.
What kind of feedback would you like from us down here in the trenches trying to learn this? It’s a big fire hose at the moment, but looks really promising.
Thanks! We think its promising too.
All kinds of feedback are welcomed.
Actually we have no feedback for the late major rule change. The convoy raid system.
Did Germany or Russia get hurt by it in your games?
Morning!
Jumped online this morning to toss out a fist full of questions – only to find a newly published draft of AARHE 4.0 (20080503) in:
http://home.exetel.com.au/cometo/aarhe/maps/
I’m very excited to dive into it, but am a little frustrated with version control atm. Any chance you can make a section of “stuff that was changed since last pub, dated yyy-mmm-dd”. Even if it is just “format changes only”. I see you all bantering back and forth in the forums, but it’s difficult to determine what got implemented and what was just a good idea. Or maybe publish a small readme file in the directory that contains this information like they do with software.
Same with the Lite version. A date stamp or version would be deeply appreciated.
We’ve got 15-18 people here in San Antonio that I’m trying to introduce this to. I hoping we can help wring out the rules – make them Aggie proof. However, it gets really confusing trying to keep everyone on the same sheet of music without version control.
Thanks again for the great effort. I’m really enjoying all the new rules and tactical/strategic implications.
Enjoy the day!
The “Wolf Pack” section in both Lite & 4.0 requires some text to clarify that a minimum of two SS are needed before they get the bonus. See the discussion and answers from IL & Tekkyy in:
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=6902.msg301594#msg301594
Can US/UK ATK former Russian territory (e.g., Persia -> Caucasus) before Russia falls?
If they could and do manage to kill all the Axis in it before Russia falls does “Stalinist Xenophobia” mean they can’t liberate it and return it to Russia – because now it would be Russian again?
Should “Stalinist Xenophobia” be updated to say "Before the axis captures the Soviet capital Moscow, US and UK may not move units into or fly air units over Soviet [or former Soviet] territories.
Does Russia get a free Tech & Diplomacy roll on the Special opening round?
Tech question:
“When only one side has jet air units at the beginning of combat cycle, jet air units have selective attack (except for Bomber). All targets are selected before rolling.”
Does this mean that jets can ignore and bypass air combat in order to roll on ARM – or does the selective targeting refer to attacking BMR vs FTR during air combat?
A bit confusing as to what the intent is. I would have thought jets would still be locked in air combat until a side has achieved air superiority. Jet power would allow me to ignore the FTR and go straight for the BMR if I wanted to.
