Tracking down the author of Advanced Axis and Allies Europe Version 2.2

Awesome thanks to both of you for the quick replies.

I’ll have to try that too! It would be harder in person, but could probably be done if everyone kept a paper log of what units they have in each territory. Maybe.

@SS-GEN Thanks for the reply!

Yeah, I’ve adopted that Vichy idea in other games in the past, essentially for the 1940 games. It’s simple, but adds some unknowns, and stays true to history. When the Allies landed in Torch, they had no idea what to expect from the French forces. While not much blood was shed against them, there were varying degrees of French resistance to the landings, from surrendering immediately, to straight up changing sides, to fighting back with all they had. So I’ve done a simple rule: once the Allies attack a Vichy territory, you roll a dice for each unit. 1-3 they become Allied, 4-6 they become Axis (were neutral before) and fight back. You do this for each territory as it’s attacked, helping with the uncertainty of what different garrisons might do. If the Axis move into Vichy territories at all, the French forces fight against them immediately.

Anyways, I’m getting off track :)

So yes, the Vichy aspect would be part of this, on top of the rest.

I agree with you, you couldn’t go too far out of Africa. I wouldn’t envision this game going any further North than Rome. Maybe even just to Reggio di Calabria at the tip of the boot even. That was only a thought if the Mediterranean wanted to be used at all. This would still encompass Sicily and Malta, so that would still be interesting. If not, I say just a map of North Africa, stretching from Morocco to Cairo, or Tunisia to Cairo, depending on the time line preferred.

So sounds like, by your omission of mentioning the USA, you’re in favor of an early war scenario?

Given that my thought process here is an A&A official game, I don’t think hexes is envisioned here. I think Battle of the Bulge does that, but again, have not played. I suppose you could, but I’d be in favor of what you say, chopping up territories into multiple smaller ones.

I think a one round of combat situation would work for this game. A lot of North African fights weren’t as drawn out as in other theaters (save some of the more famous ones). To that end, I’d even say one round of combat, then everyone disengages until the next round. The dessert made communications hard, I think this would well simulate that small tactical battles that had to happen.

Again, given the scope of an A&A game, I don’t know well how weather or terrain may fit into the mold. I think you maybe have something done to simulate the dessert. Whether that be no blitzing for combat, affecting free moving, etc., but not sure. But that’s part of why I’ve posted here! To see what others may think! I agree, lost to consider here, though the guys on this forum are usually up for that :)

I think it might make more sense to just return Australia to a single territory rather than two.

I have tried games before testing the idea of splitting islands across sea zones (basically a reverse definition) it has the effect of making bombardments more significant, and fleets less likely to engage on attack (they tend to camp defend  relying instead on amphibious.) Splitting islands also increases fighter movement in a somewhat overpowered way, so you have to be careful. I think with an interesting starting unit placement you can accomplish a lot. Australia as a single territory would have greater reach for any fighters landed there, and the scale of the territory warrants it a bit more then solomons.

I think the best approach is to tilt Japan slightly counter clockwise at the southern tip of the island to make more room for ships. And then put the alignment for the smaller islands based of the relative distance between Australia Hawaii and the three major island territories (East Indies, Borneo, and Philippines). I will play up the focus on the key islands (though some of those chains were involved Palau and the Marianas and such. On the whole though I think the stepping stones out of W. USA would be the most interesting way to change the Pacific dynamic. Force both players to defend their coastlines instead of drop south so easily with everything.

Will redraft it sometime on Tuesday when I get a break from work.

Have a nice memorial day

If any A&A players have Warcraft III: The Frozen Throne, then go onto Azeroth(USA east) add ghr3 to your friends list.  Message me and I can host this exciting variant!

@georgemak1:

A question for the HBG crew. Any idea when the next German set is due?

November

I have a similar rule, but instead of opening fire the AT guns fight in every round and can be taken as casualties.  They still only hit on 1, but each hit can be applied to an enemy tank.

@Emperor_Taiki:

When my firends and I play A&AR we use a house rule for anti-tank guns like yours, except we use AA guns.

At the beginning  of a combat in a territory with an AA gun, instead of using it to fire at aircraft, you can instead chose to fire it against tanks
Roll one dice for every tank and on a 1 there hit.

You may want to take your original AT gun rules out to replace with this one, because it is more realistic,
The 88 was not deisigned as an artillery piece, but as a anti-aircraft gun, but later it was discovered that it was a good AT gun too.
so it is only logical that in an A&A Africa game, AA guns can also be used as AT guns.

@Guerrilla:

heck, I have seen 4 man

What about Star Trek’s 3-D chess?