Combining SPI's ETO with A&A

Makes sense Charles DG.  General HG uses armored cars as artillery scouts.  Could do something similar.

@toblerone77:

One of the biggest problems I have with later iterations of the game is that it seems that the US/UK D-Day scenario is unlikely. The mechanics in this game would allow for some type of “Event/Attack” achieved through meeting objectives or game time to give a special advantage.

Yes, me too got the impression of close cooperation between the Western Allies during the D-day landings and battle of Normandy. This is true to the English language part of the world like USA, Britain, Canada and ANZAC forces, but also French and Polish forces did sail on British ships and got close air support from US aircrafts. If matched with an A&A game it looks like this turn was an All Allied move and attack together turn.

But, if you want to change the game turn system and gather all the western Allies, like USA, UK, ANZAC and France, into one player with separate economies, but let them move and attack as one, not for one special turn only, but during the whole game from turn 1 to the end, then we must either change the combat mechanic or the Western Allies will not benefit from the can opener tactic. Of course we could let Germany and Italy be one player with separate economies too, but that would not be true if we claim a link to the real war, since Germany and Italy never cooperated in the real war. Even the joint amphibious assault on Crete could not be claimed to be a joint operation, since the Italian infantry come in Italian ships that were sunk before the reached the island, while the German paratroopers jumped from German aircrafts.

The allied D-day was different from Crete, since US, Canadian, French and Polish infantry sailed on British ships and got shore bombard support from British ships, while British and Canadian paratroopers jumped from US aircrafts, and all nations got close ground support from US aircrafts. Now that was a true joined operation.

I figure that a better game would have this turn sequence.
1. Euro Axis Germany and Italy
2. Commie world Russia and China
3. Japan
4. Western Allies US, UK, ANZAC, France

The different allies that share turn, have separate economies but move and attack together.
Allies from different Turns can share seazones but not share territories. UK units can liberate Russian territories, but never non-combat move into them. Same with Japan and Euro-Axis.

It could be like this, if not for all the Purist¨s

@Vance:

Thanks YG.  If you don’t mind I think I will post “espionage” as a separate house rule that could work with your tech system, or with just about any tech system for that matter.  You never know someone might use it or get an idea from it.  I love the idea of STEALING the other guy’s tech LOL

Hey man, feel free to use any of my ideas for separate rules, I just ripped off some good ones from Axisplaya and I didn’t feel bad about it one bit 😏 As for espionage, I thought stealing a tech from an enemy might be to powerful for the 10 spot, so I modified it to say develop any tech that an enemy power possesses.

No, your comments are not in red!  You may have run afoul the “LIST” command (I did a lot, that’s why each blue line has it’s own start color and end color command.)

For now, as I mentioned in the Delta thread, if you choose to test technologies, use the aforementioned rule that JimmyHat quoted, except, instead of using the technology descriptions use the following:

TECH1:  Advanced Artillery + Improved Mechanized Infantry
TECH2:  Jet Fighters + Long Range Aircraft
TECH3:  Paratroopers + Heavy Bombers
TECH4:  Improved Industrial Complexes + War Bonds
TECH5:  Improved Shipyards + Super Submarines
TECH6:  Radar + Rockets

Technologies just like Larry’s rules without change.  The reduction to 6 and the combinations of which ones were already voted on.  It could change after we get testing back or have untested discussion, but at least it’s somewhere to start.    Note, IF YOU WANT TO TEST THEM, then you may.

Report games and specific issues and counter strategies seen in the Delta thread (for now, I may move them to their own thread later.)  We’ll reconvene in a few weeks.

Hmmm, an interesting set of ideas.  I am planning to do the same, using the original Pacific and European games for my summer history class and historical gaming class.  I have some home rules for Pacific that I use, where I have increased the game to 6 players: the US, British India, Australia, the Netherlands East Indies, China, and Japan.  For the European Game, I am planning to add Italy, using the pieces from the Anniversary edition.  There will be theater commanders for the US and the UK in Europe and the Pacific, and a separate commander for Australia.

I do have rules for Lend-Lease, and also Lend-Lease certificates that I use.  I have modified the rules a bit for aircraft and shore bombardment, and Japanese Infantry are a bit harder to kill.  When I add Italy, it will have the option of changing sides during the game, or even staying neutral.  It does mean reworking the IPC for the Europe game, but such is life.  Should be interesting when it is finished.  I am also writing a combined rules set for the game.

I am gonna post a new version of mine using KISS. I think it is too complicated.

but i will do that in a new thread :-D

USSR 14:  This one is BRUTAL!  I saw USSR pull this on turn 1, and Germany was hammered.  Love it!

However, the question is how many times can they do it per country?  The first time Germany invades each USSR held territory, or every USSR held country for the rest of the game?

–--------- this is the first time they invade the Soviet territory, not every turn which denies Germany of any money. So its each originally held Soviet territory once per game.

I was limiting each USSR country to 1 time “Slash and Burn”.  Is it really suppose to be every time a country sea-saws back and forth that it is of no use to Germany?

-------- no not the back and forth… just the first time.

What if Moscow has fallen and Stalin is “dead”.  Does the order still stand?

-----------LOL yes the rule is not relative to Stalin in the game because Stalin is not a playing piece in AARHE ( at this point)

@Sergente_nella_neve:

That’s all. What do you think about this?  :-D

its not good if defender chooses, its also not good if attacker chooses
your hybrid system should be fun to play

@Imperious:

which ones are outdated? i was talking about revised specifically and not Milton Bradley.

no.1 and no.5
no.1 - we got rid of the system that separates naval units into classes
no.5 - only targeted attack when undetected and 1st cycle only, replacing the old screening system yeah I know and I agree with you about the transport unit