AARHE: Map files

The real question:  Is Turkey now connected to the Balkan’s via that little sliver of land?

We converted the neutrals to German units, but couldn’t figure out if they were allowed to move straight to the Balkan’s or did they have to take a different route.

It was close, but Axis still won.  Russia was overrun by the Japanese and German was still getting 17 IPC even at 50% reduction.

@Imperious:

It was close, but Axis still won.  Russia was overrun by the Japanese and German was still getting 17 IPC even at 50% reduction.

The lend lease was supposed to be 50% more NOT reduction.  If you reduced LL to Russia by 50% no wonder they lost.

Try playing with historical victory conditions ( no japs into Russia unless Moscow falls)

No, you misunderstood.  I was trying to say that Germany had fallen.  Thus, Germany was only getting 50% income, because it’s capital was in enemy hands.

So both Germany and Russia had fallen and it was a race between the 3 remaining powers – and what popped up in Turkey.  That’s why we were so interested in what Turkey was connected to.

I like that rule about no Japn in Russia until Moscow falls.  That should raise some eyebrows.

See ya.

• Bierwagen

Evening IL,

Well the Las Vegas crowd has returned and we’ve got 10-12 of us gathering tomorrow for our monthly “wring out” AARHE Lite+ event.

We have 10 signed up for sure, with 1-2 more in the unknown category.  I’m hoping to incorporate Italy for any stragglers that showed up.  However, in trying to make some overlay templates (e.g., modify Germany, Norway, & Australia) I noticed that the 1942 maps don’t have any of the VCs on them – so I’m not sure what to do.  Should I use the VC values from 1939 (e.g., 5 for Rome and 2 for Poland)?

I also think Southern Germany should have some troop levying capability.  All those brown shirts and Austrians just sitting around drinking bier were easily thrown into uniforms ;-)

Hopefully I can eventually convince them to play 1939, but it has been hard enough to introduce AARHE & Lite.

So, if you have any spare time would you mind updating:

20070401_AARHE_1942_Italy_with_setup_100dpi.png
  -  VC’s, Mobilization Values, Neutral forces, & Canals/Straits

Thanks in advance!

• Bierwagen

Turkey’s Strait (SZ 15-16) needs to be added to the Straits & Waterway table (page 7).  The only place it is referenced is in the Appendix: Neutrals under the table (page 19).

It might be a good idea to reference that moving through a Neutral strait is an act of war in the Straits and Waterway section.  I’ve had the German player do that without us knowing that.

Note:  This is why I’m requesting the numbering of para’s and tables so they are easier to reference than just “page 19”.

Is -1 or -4 diplomacy required to allow use of the waterway?

ok I’ll add Turkey to “Canals and Waterways”

IL

Is this the most recent version of your AARHE map?

http://www.mediafire.com/?lz10ck9dhx5

Thanks

the correct names for the maps are the following as used in the rules file…

_AARHE Standard Map: The map is mostly as the original revised map. Baltic Sea (sea zone 5) is no longer connected to Western Europe. Balkans and Turkey are connected. There are other small changes. Income and unit setup remains the same. Setup icons and AARHE information has been added for your convenience.

AARHE 1939 Map: Game starts in 1939 with France, Italy, and China as separate players. The map contains a large number of changes from the original map adding important sites such as Malta, Tunsia, and Iwo Jima. Territories are also a bit more divided.

AARHE 1942 Italy Map: Game starts in 1942 with Italy as 6th player. This map contains a small number of changes from original map adding territories such as Italy and Finland. Setup remains the same for other territories._

it wouldn’t be correct to put it into that list
that list has maps of scenarios using the base AARHE rules plus a few scenario rules

AA50HE has its own rules
and it has its own list of scenarios
maps of AA50HE would be listed in a list in the AA50HE rules file

@Imperious:

In my opinion Lite was not well received when it should have been a triumph. So we retool and formulate a new ruleset.

some of the more complex rules in AARHE:Lite I did not totally agree in having
but you insist they were important

I am not sure things are going to work this time around neither
you seem to want to simplify some things yet remain firm on having some complex rules
you complaint about air units in land and then air units in naval being a “chore”
meanwhile you add CAP

I think for new players, combat sequence is the scary part
you could write CAP in 3 sentences
but ever item potentially adds sentence to the combat sequence

I just laid out the idea in general.

you mean you are justing laying out ideas rather than forcing the course of the project
then thank god
you can go ahead and release the experimental file (but don’t call it AARHE)

after that we continue the existing system
I update the file and changelog as points are ticked off

@Imperious:

Yes they were for the most part, but the real issue was the Land/naval/air combat and amphibious sequence that became a chore to play in games. Lite didn’t manage to do a thing to abrogate the difficulty.

wait a minute I answered that in another recent post already

AARHE:Lite doesn’t add to Combat Sequences much
only AARHE does
AARHE:Lite merely extends the hit allocation restriction of OOB/LHTR

(eg. OOB submarine hits can’t be allocated on air, AARHE submarines hits can’t be allocated on air/submarine)

the only thing AARHE:Lite adds to the Combat Sequence
*Land Combat: Air units fire preemptively
*Naval COmbat: add preemptive Anti-Air

AARHE:Lite does not even need to list out the Combat Sequence and people would see know what is happening

its there partially to remind players that there is defender retreat
AARHE:Lite 's Combat Sequence is closer to OOB/LHTR than AARHE