Posts made by tekkyy

I’ve placed the player aids in one folder.

Its listed in the 1st post.

@Adlertag:

For tournament purposes, it may be a good idea with 3 allies and 3 axis, and individual victory conditions. Lets say first player to gain 4 victory cities win. Now this force the players to think strategy, and backstabb friends.

and also diplomacy, would be fun

3 allies 3 axis would also makes it easier for team bidding

Ok lets have you finish everything and we will have a look.

http://home.exetel.com.au/cometo/aarhe/20080303_AARHE.pdf

Still open to idea on simplifications. But prefer rules that remains realistic even if players fought differently to history.

For AARHE for dummies, methodology is important.
At this stage my take is that dummies should be both for simpler gameplay as well as potential stepping stone to full AARHE.
That means it should be a subset rather than a modification.

First we decide which phase and victory condition to disable.
Then inside the phases that remains we decide which heading/paragraph to disable.

Make sure to add the 1939 set up

last time we discussed packaging files together we’ve only agreed on
*player aids in 1 file
*all of a particular variant in 1 file

I did not come to agreement with
*putting 1939, 1941, 1942 Italy, and future maps info in the main rules file

the reasoning was…

Earlier I spend some time to achieve your other request of shrinking the document and its now just 30 pages.
(20 pages excluding NA and NVC)
Lets continue to have the 1939 variant rules (and 1942 Italy…and other future maps…) separate from main rules file to not ruin that.

Adding 1939 setups (and 1941 and 1942 Italy and other future maps…) to the main rules file is going to make the document long again.

Also its better to have the 1939 setups next to the 1939 rules isn’t there anyway. So I feel they should be inside the variant’s rules file.

Thats the balanced fix on the setup.

AARHE 1939 discussion back to AARHE 1939 thread.
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=10338.msg284049#msg284049

@Imperious:

Make sure to add the 1939 set up and include one extra UK infantry in India and Transjordan
Also give the US player one destroyer to the south west of Hawaii to block Japanese from going from the south to attack the American carrier group. ( its a block)
Give France 2 extra Infantry in france.
Thats the balanced fix on the setup.

ok I updated the tables
2008-03-03 rules
http://home.exetel.com.au/cometo/aarhe/20080303_AARHE_1939.doc

I took the latest file
(layered, has setup icons, has the changes like Midway)

*added the UK, US and France setup changes
*added the stanardised canal and strait icons as you wanted them explained in the template rules file
*added your new VC icons (the map you uploaded with the new VC icons has no setup icons and was based on an older file that didn’t have changes like Midway)

2008-03-03 AI
http://www.mediafire.com/?fgxdbbvdxxo

2008-03-03 PNG
http://home.exetel.com.au/cometo/aarhe/maps/20080303_AARHE_1939_100dpi.png

2008-03-03 PNG with setup
http://home.exetel.com.au/cometo/aarhe/maps/20080303_AARHE_1939_with_setup_100dpi.png

@axis_roll:

@tekkyy:

so what about Africa?
whats your take on that, axis_roll ?

It seems a VC in SAF would be too much of an allied advantage.  That’s really far away for German/Japan to go, and a lot easier to defend for the allies.

what about North Africa like Egypt?

I am thinking its not an advantage if you give it to Allies and now Allies just need 1 more VC to win

@Cmdr:

Solomons are invaded because it’s a dumping ground for ground forces to get them off transports.  Wake is invaded because it’s the closest landing zone that allows American bombers to hit Japan.

Midway?  There’s nothing at Midway you can’t get at Hawaii and Hawaii is also a good staging ground to stop America from using the Panama Canal.

yeah its a funny contrast between geography and in game

in game…
Wake becomes dumping ground (a 1500 floor high-rise apparently…)
Solomons is not touched
Midway is rarely, but can be, used for SBR

B) is purely about naval
A) has other rules in it

but saying I choose B are you saying you want to get rid of the land restrictions?
business as usual when a territory goes under blockade? I hope not

you’ve voiced concerns about existing system being unrealistic, I’ve answered them and explained to you why what you said can’t happen…because the rule is logical and keeps it real
(eg. US is one lump of territory, so don’t worry! you can’t really hurt them in convoy raiding unless US takes more islands, even then its proportional, you can’t BANKRUPT the US by hitting one small island like Hawaii)

I don’t know what you stopped the discussion
has my last post has addressed all concerns you had and you have no more concerns?

lets be productive

its simple
1. decide on the functionality
2. adjust the wording

if you want
after we decide on the functionality, YOU write the wording ok?

If I saw B) I also would not play the rule

its like OOB German NA
the arbitrary nature of the rule makes this…

*US controls Phillipines and has a fleet at z49, Japan does not have enough force to take it but blockades Phillipines by controling surrounding sea zones…somehow nothing happens, Phillipines IPC unrestrictively goes towards US home

*Japan takes Madagascar, far away from Japanese colonies UK has 5 submarines adjacent to it, they hit Japan for 5 IPC per turn

*5 Germany destroyers at South America (the other sideof the globe) hits UK shipping and lend-lease for 5 IPC per turn

damage should be related to shipping, you can’t just BANKRUPT a player by hitting non-existent shipping

been there, done that
this is why we created the AARHE convoy system (from 2006) in the first place, how can you forget?
it keeps convoy raiding true to actual shipping

its logical+flexible rather than arbitrary+static
so not only is it more realistic, but if the game turns out different to actual WWII…the rule continues on and no funny situations

on a path*

1. what does “on a path mean”

ok instead of “on a path*” I should say “part of a path*”

come on
you saw the *
it is explained at the *, no ?

*A path is a chain of territories your units may go through. It may also consist of sea zones…

Each hostile naval unit (except Transport) destroys 1 IPC.
2) so everybody who has a naval unit can kill one ipc from the enemy. This means that Soviet ship that survives can take one ipc from Germany every turn costing about 13 IPC per game. Thats not historical.

you asked already and I answered already
it doesn’t happen

I self quote

soviets hitting Germany? that would be very late game…Germany is just like US and USSR…the start up situation is one lump of land…hardly any shipping (besides US lend-lease)

maybe you don’t understand this
the rule don’t let you park your naval units at home (eg. Baltic) and start destroying enemy IPCs
you have to be located where you can hit shipping (eg. Altantic) and even then you can’t hit non-existent shipping

Damage is applied to IPC going through the convoy sea zone

3. damage? going thru what now? What does going thru mean?
   damage is referring to the last setence (the 1 IPC)
   instead of “damage is applied” I’ll say “this this applied”

“going thru the convoy sea zone”…I’ll word it differently…“going via the path”
read the * if you haven’t already

4. OMG what is he getting out now? he just said it destroys one ipc, and the next sentence he says it destroys 4 ipc. Which is it?

maybe you didn’t see it but it says Exception applies if its an island sea zone
so its normally 1 IPC
but for islands, isolating them is easier, so its 4 IPC

anyway I’ll make word it as “4 IPC instead”

This is a true attempt to obfuscate the reader and please some idea about ‘rule Lawyers’
This is for normal people, not those types.

its not like that
LHTR increased the level of satisfaction for both normal people and rule lawyers

if rule lawyers find something wrong, it is only a few more games before normal player would complain too

but it seems you dont yet understand the functionalities aspect
after you misunderstand the rule, you’ll be able to sugguest how to change the wording

_Spending or Saving IPC
IPC to be spent must have a path* from the original territory to the destination (Industrial Complex or Victory City). IPC to be saved must have a path* from the original territory to the destination (your capital). This also applies to lend-lease. IPC that are not spent and not saved for any reason is forfeited.
*A path is a chain of territories your units may go through. It may also consist of sea zones, entering the sea from the original territory or adjacent territory and leaving the sea at the destination. It may not go through enemy controlled canals and waterways [] and enemy controlled straits []. Stalinist Xenophobia [] and Rome-Berlin-Tokyo Axis Co-operation [] applies.

Convoy Sea Zone
A sea zone part of a path* [see Spend or Save] is a convoy sea zone. Each hostile naval unit (except Transport) destroys 1 IPC. This is applied to IPC going via the path. Exception applies if it is an island sea zone, then each hostile naval unit (except Transport) destroys 4 IPC instead._

so what about Africa?
whats your take on that, axis_roll ?

your stance was not consistent across the post
which is often what happens with these large posts
even I do it sometimes
anyway my reply…

@Imperious:

PLEASE STOP WITH THIS THING WHERE YOU NEED TO WRITE IN SUCH A GENERIC FASHION AND NOBODY KNOWS THAT IS IS A RULE FOR SPECIAL CASES AND DOES NOT APPLY TO EVERYBODY.

its not just generic, its also about not being arbitrary

I see we have a very different philosphy
to me we don’t want historic replay
if the war went differently, it would be a different situation

but I see I’ve even gotten you to say this:

ok expand then the rule to include German ships in any ocean zone, and expand to include the Japanese can attack and be attacked in Indian ocean.

Its too harsh against Italy in the 1939 scanario, and its too harsh against UK if Italy can do this, and Its too harsh for the Soviet to use their fleet to attack german IPC, Its too harsh for USA and UK to build a fleet and do this against the Japanese.

actually its hardly harsh now, recall I got rid of the tedious “shortest path” rule

harsh again UK:
in 1939 scenario you made it Italy navy can’t leave Med Sea until it satistify the condition…so it won’t be hitting UK shipping anytime soon…

harsh for the Soviet to use their fleet to…:
soviets hitting Germany? that would be very late game…Germany is just like US and USSR…the start up situation is one lump of land…hardly any shipping (besides US lend-lease)

harsh for USA and UK to build a fleet and do this against the Japanese
is this a typo? this is precisely what you wanted in your nation-specific convoy rule

Secondly, where does this 4x thing come from???

4X as in 4 IPC
4 IPC is the value of the largest islands
that way we don’t see a separate isolation rule
I justified it here:
@tekkyy:

yet its realistic (easy to hunt shipping from an island)

@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:

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

1. 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
2. yeah I know and I agree with you about the transport unit

@Heckler409:

What I mean to say, should my buds and I be moving in attack, then wait for non-combat to land?

well aside form rules prespective,
you should wait cos the strategic situation might be different after you see the results of the combat

also, although you are not going to lose control of a territory during your turn, you may lose a carrier and then your fighters won’t be able to land in the sea zone you wanted to

yes air units can move in non-combat with remaining movement points

this is the only case where a unit can move in both combat and non-combat move

eg. fighter at UK can move to attack Norway in Combat Move, and move to Archangel with remaining movement points in Non-combat Move

actually not all of those are in AARHE  :wink:
some of them (particular some naval combat stuff) were removed (by you) so we can have a simpler combat system

ON naval transports cant be soaker’s for attack or defense. Transports are not combat vessels. The idea that a transport is also destroyers and escorts is totally bankrupt thinking. They are only merchant ships.

not totally bakrupt but much less justified since the introduction of destroyer unit in 2004 REVISED EDITION and cruiser unit in many house rules and upcoming 2008 ANNIVERSARY EDITION

I’ve uploaded an update

as you requested it is now only 30 pages (20 pages excluding NA and stuff)

Yes one ship can stop the IPC from flowing from Borneo to japan or another Japanese factory. Japan must protect her shipping lanes with a picket line of warships. Remember they don’t have to attack the Soviets in the 39 version.

though it would make sense the flow is prevent in both directions
hence we can include it under convoy sea zone rule
4X stronger at island sea zones

now its effectively the same
yet don’t need another rule
yet its realistic (easy to hunt shipping from an island)

and you can tune it if you want, to say 3X if you like

Do you think Japanese subs should be able to take off UK income in Indian/ pacific?

indeed
if Allies take Borneo, they too need to protect the Borneo sea zone

you should explain these terms at some level, rather than introducing a new idea…

yeah it feels like a new idea called “IPC Path”
I’ll word it different
IPC Path shouldn’t be a separate heading, it really is only an explaination for the “Spend or Save” heading

I’ll get rid of the shortest path thing
lets just say oil was relatively cheap and costs of diverting to a longer path is insignificant
you want it simpler anyway

I really have no idea why this cant be written. Its totally clear what the hell were talking about.

I’ll word it in a similar fashion, but it will be generic and logical, not specific and not arbitrary
also, the format you wrote it in requires a tedious listing of sea zones to keep the rules lawyer happy

_Economic Attacks
A territory’s income can be reduced due to economic attacks [ on page 14] in enemy’s last turn. No
territory’s income can be reduced below zero.

Production Interruption
A territory’s income is reduced if it was attacked last turn. For every cycle of combat the income is reduced
by 1 IPC. No territory’s income can be reduced below zero.

Logistics
Pay 1 IPC for every unit to be offloaded in amphibious assaut or airborne drop [ on page 6]. Pay 1 IPC for
every land unit to enter desert terrain or remain on a transport at end of the turn. The amount is refunded if
these actions do not happen.

Spend or Save
IPC to be spent must have a path* from the original territory to the destination (Industrial Complex or
Victory City). IPC to be saved must have a path* from the original territory to the destination (your capital).
This also applies to lend-lease. IPC that are not spent and not saved for any reason is forfeited.
*A path is a chain of territories your units may go through. It may also consist of sea zones, entering the sea
from the original territory or adjacent territory and leaving the sea at the destination. It may not go through
enemy controlled canals and waterways [ on page 8] and enemy controlled straits [ on page 7]. Stalinist
Xenophobia [ on page 8] and Rome-Berlin-Tokyo Axis Co-operation [ on page 8] applies.

Convoy Sea Zone
A sea zone on a path* is a convoy sea zone. Each hostile naval unit (except Transport) destroys 1 IPC.
Damage is applied to IPC going through the convoy sea zone. Exception applies if its an island sea zone,
where each hostile naval unit (except Transport) destroys 4 IPC.

Lend-Lease
US may send IPC to Soviet Union and/or UK. A combined total of up to 12 IPC can be sent._

yeah I think Africa should have VC(s)
then Africa becomes more than just merely cash

really?
oh my god so Deluxe is finally coming

If the allies control the sea zone with just one ship ( not tranny) the ipc cannot be collected by say japan.

if UK controls East Indices Sea zone
the 4 IPC in East Indices can still be spent on East Indices itself right?

if yes, then its quite similar to the convoy sea zone rule and we won’t need explicitly say a isolation rule for islands

if not, then I feel its too powerful…one naval unit to stop all 4 IPC from Borneo?

plus each US sub or uk sub in the pacific takes one ipc off japan. So japan needs to protect the sea zones that surround her Japanese holdings.

I guess you are referring to a specific case of convoy sea zone rule
the convoy sea zone rule is generic, logical, and not arbitrary

USSR and US has no islands and won’t be hit at game start, logically

I shall post the actual wording

_Phase 1: Collect Income

Income
Add up values of territories and subtract loses due to economic attacks in enemy’s last turn. No territory’s income can be reduced below zero.

Production Interruption
A territory’s income is reduced if it was attacked last turn. For every cycle of combat the income is reduced by 1 IPC.

Logistics
Pay 1 IPC for every unit to be offloaded in amphibious assaut or airborne drop []. Pay 1 IPC for every land unit to enter desert terrain or remain on a transport at end of the turn. The amount is refunded if these actions do not happen.

Spend or Save
IPC to be spent must have a path from the original territory to the destination territory. IPC to be saved must have a path from the original territory to your capital. IPC that are not spent and not saved is forfeited. This also applies to lend-lease.

Lend-Lease
US player may send up to 12 IPC Allies between Soviet Union and UK.

IPC Path
A path can consist of territories which your land units may go through as well as any sea zones. It can enter the sea from the original or adjacent territory, then uses the shortest path via sea to the destination territory or your capital. A closed canal [] and Strait Interdiction [] prevents the IPC path.

Convoy Sea Zone
Sea zones on an IPC path are convoy sea zones. Each hostile naval unit (except Transport) in a convoy sea zone destroys 1 IPC. Damage is applied to IPC going through the convoy sea zone._

oh yeah we got side tracked
lets get back to it

still got to answer this

@Cmdr:

BTW, please tell us WHERE the power rankings are to compete in.  Not that I’m worthy of the top spot, but I’d like to practice against more opponents.