Another bold concept for AARHE

@WILD:

So as the defender you bring in 2 reinf 2nd wave. The attacker doesn’t like the odds and has no eligible units to reinf so he retreats. The defender would then have to pull his 2 reinf units back and they would be idle for 1 complete round? Sounds like a good bluff and you might hold on to the country. Keeping track of idle units might be hard, because you could end up with several nations with idle units causing some confusion. Don’t get me wrong I like the idea of the defender having options for reinforcements or retreat. I think its silly to think the defender would just sit there and let the enemy dictate the battle with out using all his resources. Maybe someone else will chime in with an idea or two.

yeah hopefuly

@oldsalty:

OK.  Cost of the IC is not an issue.  Understand when IC costs vary between $5 - $15.    Does that also mean than if the factory is in China or Middle East, for example, in a Country with 3 IPC where they can produce 4 x 3 = $12 of units that they could build 1 ftr and 1 tank?

They may have the resources and technology, but I agrue they would not have the skilled labor to do this (then).  I am not aware that either the Allies or Axis built planes or tanks, etc in 3rd world countries.

yes $12 worth of units
but no can’t build 1 ftr ($10) + 1 tank ($5) because thats $15

“4 x IPC  income” is meant to be a simple rule to control both

*what you can build (eg. UK can’t build Carrier at India)
*how much IPC you can build

Or am I getting too anal here and sacrificing game play for realism?  Just looking for a clarification of the intent of the game, not trying to change any rules.

no we love your feedback
we just have to work it out

AARHE wants realism and gameplay
specific listings were avoided if possible

simple number based rules are good structure wise
you set a model and stick to it

unfortunately this requires numbers on the map to be realistic to start with
so some things don’t work out prefectly on some territories of the OOB map

but we are bound to overlook things, over time we discover alternative simple rules that leads to even greater realism

There are a few discrepancies between the 1939 map with set ups and player set up charts in the 1939 rules.

1.  France listed w 6 infantry set up charts:  4 on map
2.  UK shows only Factory in Canada and Australia on 1939 set up charts:  map adds factory in UK and India.

There may be more, this is the most obvious.  I assume the map is correct.  are there updated set ups?  The one I’m refering to is on the download dated 3-08. http://home.exetel.com.au/cometo/aarhe/

Also, on the 1939 map, the UK starts with a factory in India.  This gives UK 4 factories.  Should the UK have a factory in India, particularly in 1939?  Did India have such capability in producting ships, planes, armor etc that early?  I’d rather see UK required to build one.

looking into this now…

unless our German player is being too cautious, France has been very difficult.  At 15 IPC they generate 7 inf in their capital per turn.  I think Germany has too much along the Russian front for the 1st couple turns when Russia has no threat.

We will need to change Germany’s tactic and see what happens.

Germany takes Poland and Norway on turn one
On turn two they take Holland and finish off Norway
On turn three they send all their air force, armor and built up stuff and Frenchies have no answer.

You can even send the Italians in the south to finish the job.

So, DD & SS are separated out from the rest combat and this warfare is accomplished first.  Then Air Combat.  Then fleet warfare.

yes and its on your naval combat sequence player aid.  sub interaction,then survivors allocate air units and they fight concurrently with ongoing naval actions.

ok agreed. make it so.

ok

ok lets talk about it in the setup thread

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=8697.0

so far only change is FTR (fighter) on CV (aircraft carrier) is NAV (naval fighter)