Posts made by oldsalty

My last comments ended up under the quotes, re-posting to avoid confusion:

[1) make a breakthrough attack of one space providing they won the battle, only those land units with leftover MP and un allocated planes can perform this special attack.

2. make a second move out of the territory they just attacked to protect them from counterattack.
   /quote]

I really like this particularly #2.  After a really bad dice roll(s) - depicting a stronger defense than planned or an attack gone bad - player’s are sometimes left with only a few pieces that will be sacrificed.  But doesn’t the current rules allow a retreat which would make #2 mute?

[1) make a breakthrough attack of one space providing they won the battle, only those land units with leftover MP and un allocated planes can perform this special attack.

2. make a second move out of the territory they just attacked to protect them from counterattack.
   /quote]

I really like this particularly #2.  After a really bad dice roll(s) - depicting a stronger defense than planned or an attack gone bad - player’s are sometimes left with only a few pieces that will be sacrificed.  But doesn’t the current rules allow a retreat which would make #2 mute?

On page 12 under Non-Combat moves, is a subsection of Reinforcement:

Reinforcement
During your enemy’s turn (your passive turn), after all combat moves are declared you may declare Reinforcements.
This may not be performed during USSR player’s special opening turn.
Land or naval units may move to adjacent friendly territories or adjacent friendly sea zones. Units that
conducted combat this turn may not perform this.

Shouldn’t this be next to CAS in the Combat section as its worded?  If this was a regular NCM, it wouldn’t need its own subsection.  If correct, it would make sense that a land or sea reinforcement move can not take place if the territory the reinforcement units are moving from is also under attack.  I can see someone sacrificing a territory by moving all their units under attack to reinforce an adjacent territory.

As the attacker, I see the strategy of attacking a land or sea force that would be reinforcing similar to an air CA move against a DAS.  Maybe we can call it a DLS or DSS  :-)

Where did you find all the 1939 rules?  The ones I have doesn’t have all the phases and stages (e.g., defensive ground reinforcement,

pg 12 Under Non-Combat Move (I think was misplaced as the move is taken after enemy’s combat moves are declared not conducted)

Reinforcement
During your enemy’s turn (your passive turn), after all combat moves are declared you may declare Reinforcements.
This may not be performed during USSR player’s special opening turn.
Land or naval units may move to adjacent friendly territories or adjacent friendly sea zones. Units that
conducted combat this turn may not perform this.

Defensive Air Support
During your enemies’ turn (your passive turn), after all combat moves are declared you may declare Defensive
Air Support. This may not be performed during USSR player’s special opening-turn.
Air units may move to adjacent friendly territories or any adjacent sea zones. DAS are declared after all
combat moves are declared and before resolving any combats. DAS does not interrupt naval movement.

Their was a long post discussion that armor and planes could move two spaces but then enter on combat round two, but that was voted down.

Just curious why “Oil producing Countries” are not brought into play in the 1942 game as they are for 1939.  Makes for a very strategic play.

Now perfectly clear and obvious.  Thanks for your patience and clarification.  BTW, this illustrates the point I was trying to make in the earilier post on why I and I believe Bierwagan are asking so many questions.

these are considered scuttled ( sunk) to resemble actual historical reality ( British attacked french fleet, and french sunk a few ships to prevent the Germans from getting them.

Unless you have the game and history experience you have, this is not always “obvious or intuitive” to a group looking at these rules for the first time and taking each rule by what’s stating in “black and white”

Believe me when I say I’m not trying to be agrumentitve or picky, only a “student of the purity of the game”

another interesting question is if infantry is penalized 1 attacking value due to the hardship of the terrain, than how can armor fight in mountains?

Good point

IL is probably pulling his hair out right about now!  This was for illustrative purposes only  (although is 95% accurate)!

Like your group, we graduated from AAR and AARe and others.  However, we find the play and map varients of AARHE 1939 to be more realistic, strategic and challenging.  IL and others did a fantastic job with the 1939 map and play rules, although I think it was mostlly IL for this version.

That said, we had a few rules carried over.  We had too many players wanting too many variences which was becoming way to complicated.  So, I became the marshall (he who ownes the map makes the rules)  8-) Once we digest AARHE (which is a challenge in itself) then we will look at a reasonable number of variences - Pre-emptive artillary and CAP (carried over from AAP).

What I finally got across to our group was that throwing too many variences into a game that has been play tested by players far more experienced than us, even though they may be fun and worked in other games, will probably upset the balance.  (Of course, more than once I had to threaten to take my map and go home  :-D )  Not really, but I suspect you have similar issues.

That is why I’m so interested in you outline for AARHE that I can then adjust for 1939 version.

Here is something I’ve done for the 1939 rule version (Attached).  Not nearly as complex as Bierwagon’s outline but I think I will try to incorporate it with BW’s outline when it’s finished.  Much of the 1939 variences are on this, but not all.  Which is why  our group also needs an outline for the 1939 variences.

BW, thought our flow diagrams were kick a**!  8-)  Looks like you have the outline well in hand.  Do you need any help?  Glad to do it as our group in similar situation.  I will also start working on a 1939 version.

I’ve also made a MS Word version of the individual nation’s advantages layed out to print the size of a playing card.

note:  unfortunately, the background on the attachment makes the file too large so it doesn’t have the shadow graphics of the generals for each nation.

France master set up.doc

the 1939 rules explicitly spell this out… specific units are allocated as Vichy and others are free French… Its really very simple.

Not trying to ask the same questions over and over, but please understand that “its not always simple” for the newer players to these rules, (regardless of other version experience) even the written rules.  IL,You can sneeze and lose more game knowledge than some us have in total.  A written sentence to you represents paragraphs of written drafts,  and months if not years of discussions and changes, not to mention your actual game time.

Because of the complexity of these rules and strategic play value (which is why our group loves to play this version, especially the 1939 scenerio) it is sometimes difficult to determine the fine points of the rules.

1939 rules:When Paris falls the French player immediately surrenders and the following forces are allocated for Vichy or Free-French control:

Vichy France consisting of (Vichy France, Algeria, Madagascar, Indo-China, and Levant States):
4 Infantry and 1 Artillery (Neutral but placed by the axis player in any manner he chooses)

Free-French consisting of (French West Africa and Equatorial Africa): 2 Infantry, 1 Cruiser, 1 Destroyer (If available and controlled by British player).

This is easy to understand.  But what happens to the Crusier, Destroyer and 2 transports France started the game with?

Obviously they can only build infantry as per rules, unless they make a factory. Also, the Burma road while open allows some minor aid to flow to China.

2 IPC infantry, 3 IPC aid from UK per turn while Burma road is open.

Can infantry units be made in China’s capital without a factory?

IL:

BW brought up a good Q a couple of posts back.  In AARHE can the US or UK attack neutrals that are not under enemy control?  I’m thinking that I read somewhere that they could not (as they were not the aggressors in WWII) but I can’t find the reference.

For example, can the US attack S American countries just to get more IPCs?

1st question:

France starts with 1 cv; 1 ss; 1 trans; and 1 cru.  When Germany takes over Paris, france surrenders and Vichy France and Free French are set up with separate land and naval units .

So, what happens to the original French navy?  Does germany get them as spoils of war?

2nd question:

China starts with 9 IPCs but no factory.  Where/how are their units placed?

“the more I learn of this version, the less I know”!?!

I’m sit corrected BW>  My last questions were for the 1939 version and needs to be posted for IL.  Sorry.

I feel your pain BW.  The more I learn of this version, the less I know!

I like your list and agree.  I would put Turkey and Saudi in Middle east.  I will update the chart to list the neutrals.  See my post and Qs below.

1st question:

France starts with 1 cv; 1 ss; 1 trans; and 1 cru.  When Germany takes over Paris france surrenders and Vichy France and Free French are set up with separate land and naval units .

So, what happens to the original French navy?  Does germany get them as spoils of war?

2nd question:

China starts with 9 IPCs but no factory.  Where/how are their units placed?

“the more I learn of this version, the less I know”!?!

Bierwagan:

Thats something that’s heavily stuck in my mind, but don’t know where it came from  :oops:

I looked through the long edition of AARHE 4.0 2008-02-09 but it wasn’t there either.  I swear I saw it because I was basing the whole concept of the game and diplomacy on it???  And it makes sense as the US or UK were not aggressors in WWII.  They would not have sent troops into S. America and forceably taken them over.  (That is allowed in other versions of AA).  I thought that was part of the reason diplomacy was added.

That’s got to be a question for IL or tekkyy.  Who knows, I’ve been ready so many posts, it could have come from another version.

We are using the map exclusively and find the additional territories and sz’s great for expanded strategies.  Expect a longer game but that’s fine with us.  Not too many games under our belt.  We have converted the map to 1939 (don’t know how to change the colors so we are just using markers- if you tell me what program to use ill convert it to a 1939 map and share).

Only draw back to the map we see is the country size of Europe.  We have blown up the map to 5" X 2.5" and its still tight with 15mm pieces.  We have had to use individually blowen up sections off map to play or use a lot of placement counters.  Would rather see Europe larger and playable than geographicall correct.

Still, best board out their in our groups opinion.

Updated flow chart with the statement that diplomacy rolls can not be taken if player’s capital is occupied by unfriendly player

diplomacy 8-1-08 draft 2.pdf

Pls read entire post as Im trying to clear several points for the charts.

Here is final draft of Section 8.0 Diplomacy.  BW:  I put the LOC chart on page two so there is more room on page one if you want to actually list the neutrals individually under Spere of Influence.

Please check carefully as I’ve interpreted the numerous posts re: LOC (Level of Cooperation) at or above +/- 3 as “neutral is no longer considered neutral” as they are committed to controlling player.  Not much different as UK’s colonys.

Points:

1.  Opposing player can no longer roll counter diplomacy rolls
2.  Controlling player gets IPC and level benefits
3.  Opposing player can now attack nuetral and if succeeds, gets IPC.  If occupied, territory is treated as ony other player’s territory.

question:  if conquered territory is liberated, does it go back to player that originaslly had diplomatic control or liberating player.  If liberating player, is it treated as full territory?

I think this section can be more easily understood and the intent achieved if we treat any +/- 3 or higher as a colony of controlling country.  If they get IPC then then the neutral should no longer be concidered neutral as they have committed to that nation.  If an opposing player conquers and occupys that “colony” then they should get all benefits of a full occupation:

1.  Colony is no longer a colony, as it was militarily captured, but a territory of the conquering nation. 
2.  Conquering nation now gets ipcs and the territory is treated as any other territory.  I can’t logically see an occupied country still sending all their resources to another country that only controlled them diplomatically, or only acting as a +/- 5 neutral as a now militarily occupied country.  (I know the underground was good, but it cant be that good)

3.  This is where I get stuck.  If the country is liberated: say UK had Turkey as a +3 cooperation and were getting benefits and IPC.  Then Germany attacks Turkey, Turkey would go to +5 for UK, UK would get its units and battle Germany.  Germany wins and occupies Turkey.  Turkey is now full territory for germany.

a.  Now, US liberates Turkey from Germany:  who has control or does Turkey go back to neutral?
  b.  UK liberates Turkey from germany.  As turkey was a +5 for UK before German occupation, does it go back to +5 for UK? 
  c.  Based on rules of occupation for US and UK, they can never fully conquer a neutral country.  So, IMO Turkey would convert to a +5 for either US or UK.

Sorry to be so long winded, but this section has become one of the more complicated when we look at all the nuances.

diplomacy 7-31-08.pdf

Then use the section number.  I don’t see that changing without a major rewrite.  BW:  We may need to reference our sections by i.e. 8.0 8.1 8.2 etc.  then reference those.

its going to be very handy for example if i have to reference (in Diplomacy 8.0) the section of attacking neutrals which you are putting in  the combat section.  It will be much much easirer for someone reading the charts to have a reference than trying to find it on their own.

Look at it this way.  If those of you more experienced in the AARHE rules are generating the depates and Qs, think of the complexity a newer player will face.