I’ve said it before, but I really do not like one-turn Atlantic crossings. They really don’t give the U-boats much of a chance, and remember that the Atlantic battle was the closest the Western Allies ever came to defeat.
The rules dont give subs much of a chance, remember aircrafts can sink any subs very easy.
If the map is done I’d still like to see at least some preliminary IPC values before thinking about starting forces. Has the oil field idea been ditched?
I’ve said it before, but I really do not like one-turn Atlantic crossings. They really don’t give the U-boats much of a chance, and remember that the Atlantic battle was the closest the Western Allies ever came to defeat.
Therefore, I’d split SZ 9, and possibly 11:
I have to agree with Flashman on making it take longer to cross oceans. The U-boats do need a chance to stop supplies from going to Europe and transports in general. If more sea zones is not the answer then perhaps a rule to deal with such.
are you guys looking at the map? this is exactly what i did… in every case. the only time the allies can come over in one turn is USA can land in Africa in 1 turn.
i made this thing really nice now take a look.
If the map is done I’d still like to see at least some preliminary IPC values before thinking about starting forces. Has the oil field idea been ditched?
IPC values are already established. why do you say about the oil fields? they have always been on the maps as well as the ipc values. What do you think this is?
Just work on the set up. If you need a icon tray ill establish one for each unit in its own color, with land units in black only. i allready got one but id like to see what the group comes up with. Remember the Soviets are at 17 for the first 3 turns for a total of 51 IPC + any conquests of neutrals, Germany starts at 24 on G1, i think they go to 31 on G2, and 36 on G3. Italy starts at 9 and ill add +1 10 on Italy 2 and +1 for 11 on Italy 3
thus the axis are about 91+30 by the end of turn 3 = 121, the Soviets by the same time are at 51…thus the European axis get 70 more IPC in builds. Now the trick is to calculate the damage to axis forces after taking out Poland, Norway, France, Yugoslavia, and Benelux and giving the Soviets enough starting forces to make it a close fight until the US forces get going or lend lease starts making impact against Germany.
I think Soviets come in on turn 4 and USA comes in on turn 5
I suspect lend lease will be :
Concentrate on Europe first , then we will work on the Pacific equation.
Why is some AARHE threads here on Variants and other threads on House rules ?
I think AARHE is a variant with its specific map, not a house rule.
Will rule discussions be in this thread or in new thread ?
The AARHE aims to not change the map and setup. So you could its house rule.
AARHE 1939 is definitely variant.
I would recommand rules in a new thread. IPC and setup here. Don’t think there’ll be many rules. Just relevent additions on top of AARHE.
The rules dont give subs much of a chance, remember aircrafts can sink any subs very easy.
Actually in AARHE without advanced ASW tech subs are hard to deal with. Subs can hit subs. Planes can’t hit subs until the tech.
2007-09-24 PNG version
http://www.mediafire.com/?66gzjzmz59y
still not sure about the mountainous rule
we already have rules for amphibious assault
There should be some restriction on invasions. They become too frequent and become frivolous and obnoxious. IN the real war in Europe they had about 7 real invasions by sea and some areas were considered but didn’t get the order because of either the tides or ocean was too strong. The other reason was limitations due to terrain. Mountains do not preclude invasion ( 2 units of any type can be landed per sea zone into hostile areas) thus you don’t have to protect some areas with too many forces.
Look at Norway. It always falls in every game ever played…now we model the ‘other’ difficulties in such an attempt. Even the Germans were smart and actually landed airborne troops because it was easier to attack Norway that way. The allies can still invade but if the Germans stick more than a few troops it will hold… just like in real life. The same thing goes for the Balkans which Hitler thought the Brits would invade throughout the war but didn’t … realizing the difficulties in such an operation.
The Pacific does not have really any mountains so its already fixed
Sorry, not everything showed up on my Acrobat downloads, but now have Tekkyy’s version.
Unless you’ve altered transport movement rules the US can load a tranny in Washington, move through SZ 9 to SZ 8 and unload in England.
Of course subs will only ever come into their own when using something like my ships-in-harbour rules, otherwise they’re too vulnerable to aircraft.
Regarding IPC values; how do they relate to oil fields? For example Borneo’s income of 4 would be dependent entirely on it’s oil wells, so does this mean “oil value 4” or are IPCs separate, in which case the island would scarcely be worth 1 IPC.
Oh, and mainland France really should be worth more than 5.
The Marianas needs redrawing as a chain of small islands.
Impassible is spelled Impassable, or do you strange Americans do it differently?
What’s the story with the flags, for example why Finland but not Romania?
I know it isn’t technically important, but many of the VC placements are a long way out:
Singapore
Batavia
Almaty
Teheran
Cape Town
Rio de Janeiro
For invasions I prefer combat modifyers to unit limits:
+1 to defenders in mountains
+1 to defenders against amphibious assault
(cumulative)
This ought to make Norway a tough enough nut to crack even when defended by just infantry. But attack by overwhelming force should be able to carry any invasion through.
Unless you’ve altered transport movement rules the US can load a tranny in Washington, move through SZ 9 to SZ 8 and unload in England.
Of course subs will only ever come into their own when using something like my ships-in-harbour rules, otherwise they’re too vulnerable to aircraft.
++++++I don’t want it to take 2 turns to get to england. Ships can be sunk when they reach England or USA and subs can sit in the middle of this path and engage ships anyway. 2 turns in this game = about 1 year
Regarding IPC values; how do they relate to oil fields? For example Borneo’s income of 4 would be dependent entirely on it’s oil wells, so does this mean “oil value 4” or are IPCs separate, in which case the island would scarcely be worth 1 IPC.
Oh, and mainland France really should be worth more than 5.
IPC are separate but linked resources. I allow some kind of “plunder rules” like we have in AAE, also optional rules will cover using AABOTB supply tokens to ‘cost’ offensive actions so that you cant just attack all over the place every turn and the oil fields will have some impact on your offensive chits ( they can be bombed and this will post a player some offensive action points)
The Marianas needs redrawing as a chain of small islands.
++++ its a marginal idea and its fine. the islands are not anything but a representation of a territory. You should be the last person to bring up how “the aesthetics of the islands is sketched”
Impassible is spelled Impassable, or do you strange Americans do it differently?
++++ it will be fixed.
What’s the story with the flags, for example why Finland but not Romania?
++++ I don’t like Romanians because they failed to hold the line north of Stalingrad.
I know it isn’t technically important, but many of the VC placements are a long way out:
Singapore
Batavia
Almaty
Teheran
Cape Town
Rio de Janeiro
+++++++ This is not really important. They are in the more or less correct spot… again work on the set up!
For invasions I prefer combat modifyers to unit limits:
+1 to defenders in mountains
+1 to defenders against amphibious assault
(cumulative)
++++This is already the case in AARHE
This ought to make Norway a tough enough nut to crack even when defended by just infantry. But attack by overwhelming force should be able to carry any invasion through.
++++ if you add the modifiers and limited invasion possibilities … then this is what you get.
The thing I think would add to the map is if Rio De Ore was actually some sort of area worth something. Be it by being worth some IPC(s) value, giving a base to airplanes to land that allows them to reach a father target, and/or making it a terrority that connects two important zones.
If Rio De Ore connected Algeria and Mauritania then the space may be worth something. As it is, it is worthless other than for looks and to give Spain a spot in Africa.
I understand it, that in yours if I am correct you can pass through desert. However why not make use of Rio De Ore to perhaps spice up game play?
To be honest it should be labeled “desert” but the font would be small and since Spain usually remains neutral its not very important. Spain has formidable forces including a navy.
From AARHE we have these items to consider changes…
Terrain
All land units must stop on entering desert, snowy, or mountainous terrains. ARM (tank) may not blitz through them. Land units may not enter extreme terrains. Balkans and Turkey are adjacent territories. Team control of Turkey is required for sea units to enter or exit of sea zone 16.
3. Desert Tracks (italian NA)
Italian tanks were inferior to German and Allied ones. However, they were lighter and could travel the desert with ease. Italian ARM (tank) may blitz through Sahara.
++++ I don’t see any rules regarding the Sahara Tekkyy. Can you post them?
Heres the current 1942 scenario forces and diplomacy levels… please add the neutrals and assign some forces and diplomatic levels- ( Note: don’t address any of these levels- i posted them as a guideline)
Neutral Income Military Initial Position
Afghanistan 1 IPC 1 INF 0
Angola - - 0
Argentina 2 IPC 2 INF 0
Eire - 1 INF +3
Himalaya - - -
Mongolia 1 IPC 2 INF +1
Mozambique - - +1
Peru 1 IPC 1 INF +1
Rio De Oro - - -
Sahara - - -1
Saudi Arabia 2 IPC - +1
Spain 4 IPC 5 INF + 1 ART + 1 ARM + 1 FTR + 1 DD + 1 AP -2
Sweden 2 IPC 3 INF + 1 ART -2
Switzerland 1 IPC 1 INF -1
Turkey 3 IPC 4 INF + 1 ART + 1 ARM + 1 FTR -1
Venezuela 1 IPC 1 INF +1
here is the current Research tree for 1942. please make adjustments for 1939.
Research Progress
Assign dice to technologies. Roll for one technology as a time. Tick off one progress box for that technology on each roll hitting on 1. Each purchasable die costs 5 IPC.
Technology Progress Boxes
Jet Plane 4, Germany starts at one
Long Range Aircraft 3, US starts at one
Heavy Bomber 3, US starts at one
Rockets 3, Germany starts at one
Heavy Artillery 3, Germany and Soviets start at one
Heavy Tank 4, Germany starts at one
Advanced Submarine 3, Germany starts at one
Advanced ASW 3, UK starts at one
Atomic Weaponry 10, Germany starts at 2, US at 3, USSR at one
Advanced Radar 3, United Kingdom starts at one
Underground Factory 3, Germany starts at one
Advanced Production 4
@Imperious:
Look at Norway. It always falls in every game ever played…now we model the ‘other’ difficulties in such an attempt. Even the Germans were smart and actually landed airborne troops because it was easier to attack Norway that way. The allies can still invade but if the Germans stick more than a few troops it will hold… just like in real life. The same thing goes for the Balkans which Hitler thought the Brits would invade throughout the war but didn’t … realizing the difficulties in such an operation.
I like this. Remember the Gallipoli-landings during WW I, when UK tried to amphibious assault the mountain range around Bosporus-Strait in Turkey. The brits was slaughtered as they tried to climb up the mountains from their boats. In real wars it takes 3 units to successfully attack one defending unit. To attack dug-in units in mountains are even harder. But in A&A an UK BB can shore-bombard one german defender in Norway, and let 4 or more fighters/bombers from UK finish off the rest, and if 6 Germans defend Norway they may not even kill a single brit.
Historical the German landing in Northern Norway, Narvik-area, was only possible because the NS-party cooperated with the Germans and Quisling invited them to come. If the small Norwegian army had made resistance, the German invasion would never succeded. Mountains are very easy to defend.
I like the map as is now. If improvements must be, then there should be a pass through the Pyrenees too, so only 2 units can attack between Spain and France. Only 2 units can attack through Brenner pass, and that is correct. Also the Caucasus shold be split, and have a mountain territory in south called Trans-Caucasus, with a pass into Turkey and another pass into Iran/Persia. Just watch the news today how hard it is for the russian elite units/Spetznas to fight the rebells in the Caucasus mountains.
If improvements must be, then there should be a pass through the Pyrenees too, so only 2 units can attack between Spain and France. Only 2 units can attack through Brenner pass, and that is correct. Also the Caucasus shold be split, and have a mountain territory in south called Trans-Caucasus, with a pass into Turkey and another pass into Iran/Persia.
I was thinking about the southern Cacasus as a seperate territory to help protect the oil at Baku.
I also like the Pyrenees idea but since Spain didn’t go to war it hard to determine how much these mountains would have effected the fighting.
@Imperious:
I also like the Pyrenees idea but since Spain didn’t go to war it hard to determine how much these mountains would have effected the fighting.
The Allies never tried to attack through Brenner Pass neither, so its hard to determine that too.
Its only two Passes through Pyreneeas, and the mountains are as high and wild as the alps, so use the same rule as used Germany/Italy border. Also Spain had a war 1936 to 1938, and even in Napoleon wars the mountains had effect, the guerrilja (little war in Spanish) kicked the French out of the mountains.
And yes, Caucasus mountains with Europes highest mountains (Elbrus 5000 + meters) should make effect to movement.
OK ill make two new passes : Spain and Caucasus. Movement on the Soviet-Turkish border will be restricted to movement and combat as well as french-spainish border
Thus with these two we have also Brenner pass and China (Burma road)
What should the rules be for movement and combat??
i think only 2 land units can attack each round across it and no blitz thru these areas or should it be limited to how many units moving in a turn between these areas?
Agree :-)
@Imperious:
For invasions I prefer combat modifyers to unit limits:
+1 to defenders in mountains
+1 to defenders against amphibious assault
(cumulative)++++This is already the case in AARHE
Exactly. We have AARHE amphibious assault rules. Coastal bombardment effectiveness reduced. Attacking tanks and artillery fight from second combat cycle and only if attacker survives first combat cycle. Defending artillery fires in opening fire on first cycle.
Mountainous/snowy gives +1 defense.
You already need an overwhelming force to invade Norway.
@Imperious:
This ought to make Norway a tough enough nut to crack even when defended by just infantry. But attack by overwhelming force should be able to carry any invasion through.
++++ if you add the modifiers and limited invasion possibilities … then this is what you get.
No if you limit invasion possiblities then overwhelming force can’t happen.
So I am still against limiting mountainous amphibious assault to 2 units per sea zone.
As for the passes, if the geography calls for it that thats fine. Probably between 3-5 units depending on which pass though. IMO an AARHE round is 6 months, turn is 3 months.
@Imperious:
++++ I don’t see any rules regarding the Sahara Tekkyy. Can you post them?
Yeah we didn’t have (and shouldn’t have in the future) special rules for Sahara.
Just rules for desert terrain.
In addition to what you posted, you also pay upkeep for staying in the desert. Combine with the fact you can’t blitz thru it its already costly to invade sahara.
Oh and we now need to modifier it to 1 unit free or something cos China has to defend Inner Mongolia with at least 1 unit I guess.
As for Sahara if you have no rules about it. My suggestion remove it. I always thought it to be silly to have it on the map.
It serves the purpose to depriving conquest to occur unless its along the coast line. In the war nobody went thru it because it turns into that Humphrey Bogart movie called “Sahara” I watch it regularly. A few guys can block a brigade if they control the water holes.
Best line from the movie:
“I’m not risking my men for a big pile of spaghetti”– referring to the Italian prisoner they considered picking up.
@tekkyy <br:< small=“”>> That’s my point. Even with D-Day, only an overwhelming force concentrated on the invasion area managed to gain a foothold. Even then if they’d had the courage to wake Hitler he might have scuppered the invasion by sending in more armour.
So make it difficult for invaders by sea with combat adjustments, not by limiting numbers.</br:<>
