The ‘ghost experiment’ didn’t work as it deluded the colors… oh well.
AARHE Map:
20080303_AARHE_standard_with_setup.pdf
OMG - Turkey! What the hell does the strait do?
You disconnected sz 14 from sz 16.
The axis converted Turkey to their side with -5 and the Turkish army popped up. Now they want to move the army from Turkey through the Bosporus Strait to the Balkans because it is colored grey on both sides. Germany has fallen to US/UK and this is the closest army they have – so the situation is dire.
Can you clarify the intent of this map modification? It is our first time this has happened and we can’t come to consensus.
I thought this area represented the gun implacements there used for defense, not a land bridge.
Thanks in advance,
AARHE Map:
20080303_AARHE_standard_with_setup.pdf
OMG - Turkey! What the hell does the strait do?
You disconnected sz 14 from sz 16.
The axis converted Turkey to their side with -5 and the Turkish army popped up. Now they want to move the army from Turkey through the Bosporus Strait to the Balkans because it is colored grey on both sides. Germany has fallen to US/UK and this is the closest army they have – so the situation is dire.
Can you clarify the intent of this map modification? It is our first time this has happened and we can’t come to consensus.
I thought this area represented the gun implacements there used for defense, not a land bridge.
The strait does represent control by Turkey against all enemies prohibiting passage of naval into or outside of Black sea, Use strait interdiction rules on this against Soviet ships . Turkey at -5 allows her units to move outside and fight along side German units anywhere in Europe. Also, Turkey can build units up to her income because she has a factory.
I also thought you said that the Axis were always winning the games? So guess the allies are learning a few tricks?
The real question: Is Turkey now connected to the Balkan’s via that little sliver of land?
We converted the neutrals to German units, but couldn’t figure out if they were allowed to move straight to the Balkan’s or did they have to take a different route.
It was close, but Axis still won. Russia was overrun by the Japanese and German was still getting 17 IPC even at 50% reduction.
The real question: Is Turkey now connected to the Balkan’s via that little sliver of land?
The territory of Turkey DOES connect, allowing passage of war material into the south eastern Europe, providing Turkey is at war. So yes.
We converted the neutrals to German units, but couldn’t figure out if they were allowed to move straight to the Balkan’s or did they have to take a different route.
They can thats the point of getting Turkey on your side so Germany can get panzers into Soviet back door or Africa and avoid needing ships to transport that stuff.
It was close, but Axis still won. Russia was overrun by the Japanese and German was still getting 17 IPC even at 50% reduction.
The lend lease was supposed to be 50% more NOT reduction. If you reduced LL to Russia by 50% no wonder they lost.
Try playing with historical victory conditions ( no japs into Russia unless Moscow falls)
@Imperious:
It was close, but Axis still won. Russia was overrun by the Japanese and German was still getting 17 IPC even at 50% reduction.
The lend lease was supposed to be 50% more NOT reduction. If you reduced LL to Russia by 50% no wonder they lost.
Try playing with historical victory conditions ( no japs into Russia unless Moscow falls)
No, you misunderstood. I was trying to say that Germany had fallen. Thus, Germany was only getting 50% income, because it’s capital was in enemy hands.
So both Germany and Russia had fallen and it was a race between the 3 remaining powers – and what popped up in Turkey. That’s why we were so interested in what Turkey was connected to.
I like that rule about no Japn in Russia until Moscow falls. That should raise some eyebrows.
See ya.
No, you misunderstood. I was trying to say that Germany had fallen. Thus, Germany was only getting 50% income, because it’s capital was in enemy hands.
Ok now i understand…
So both Germany and Russia had fallen and it was a race between the 3 remaining powers – and what popped up in Turkey. That’s why we were so interested in what Turkey was connected to.
Well it seems like a very close game. Id like to know what you guys decided to do about the lend lease in that game, relating to our previous discussion about axis victory happening in most of the games…
I like that rule about no Japn in Russia until Moscow falls. That should raise some eyebrows.
The pure way to play is to then play 1939, and keep existing lend lease rules, but use the rules regarding No japan enters Soviet unless moscow falls and no Soviets in Japanese controlled territories until Berlin falls.
Evening IL,
Well the Las Vegas crowd has returned and we’ve got 10-12 of us gathering tomorrow for our monthly “wring out” AARHE Lite+ event.
We have 10 signed up for sure, with 1-2 more in the unknown category. I’m hoping to incorporate Italy for any stragglers that showed up. However, in trying to make some overlay templates (e.g., modify Germany, Norway, & Australia) I noticed that the 1942 maps don’t have any of the VCs on them – so I’m not sure what to do. Should I use the VC values from 1939 (e.g., 5 for Rome and 2 for Poland)?
I also think Southern Germany should have some troop levying capability. All those brown shirts and Austrians just sitting around drinking bier were easily thrown into uniforms ;-)
Hopefully I can eventually convince them to play 1939, but it has been hard enough to introduce AARHE & Lite.
So, if you have any spare time would you mind updating:
20070401_AARHE_1942_Italy_with_setup_100dpi.png
- VC’s, Mobilization Values, Neutral forces, & Canals/Straits
Thanks in advance!
Very nice! 10 people is quite a feat for your group.
I will support anything you need. Ill get the file modified for your special needs.
Just need a few days.
heres your new map. I modified it and made it better. New treatment. Please check as per rules to make sure i didnt miss anything…
http://www.mediafire.com/?lz10ck9dhx5
the above is the original .ai file
here is the PDF:
http://www.mediafire.com/?ijgrmq9tgny
Turkey’s Strait (SZ 15-16) needs to be added to the Straits & Waterway table (page 7). The only place it is referenced is in the Appendix: Neutrals under the table (page 19).
It might be a good idea to reference that moving through a Neutral strait is an act of war in the Straits and Waterway section. I’ve had the German player do that without us knowing that.
Note: This is why I’m requesting the numbering of para’s and tables so they are easier to reference than just “page 19”.
Is -1 or -4 diplomacy required to allow use of the waterway?
Movement thru the straight is the same as movement into the neutral. You need the same level of clearance to pass.
ok I’ll add Turkey to “Canals and Waterways”
Thats the phase 2 map out of 3. Its the most current version of the phase 2 map. Each map is slightly more altered from the phase 1 map which is vanilla Revised AA with added VC. Phase 3 is 1939.
We have that map file without the icons as well if you don’t like to see them.
the correct names for the maps are the following as used in the rules file…
_AARHE Standard Map: The map is mostly as the original revised map. Baltic Sea (sea zone 5) is no longer connected to Western Europe. Balkans and Turkey are connected. There are other small changes. Income and unit setup remains the same. Setup icons and AARHE information has been added for your convenience.
AARHE 1939 Map: Game starts in 1939 with France, Italy, and China as separate players. The map contains a large number of changes from the original map adding important sites such as Malta, Tunsia, and Iwo Jima. Territories are also a bit more divided.
AARHE 1942 Italy Map: Game starts in 1942 with Italy as 6th player. This map contains a small number of changes from original map adding territories such as Italy and Finland. Setup remains the same for other territories._
Well go ahead and add AA50HE as the 4th phase of this process.
it wouldn’t be correct to put it into that list
that list has maps of scenarios using the base AARHE rules plus a few scenario rules
AA50HE has its own rules
and it has its own list of scenarios
maps of AA50HE would be listed in a list in the AA50HE rules file
Yes but you inherit these products as well.
Also, on my proposal for changes… i feel what im doing is support the basis of a new version of Lite… that takes a milked down approach to hardcore AARHE ideas, but what we created before is not playable. Its like taking 5 pages of hardcore rules and leaving out everything else and having the OOB rules cover for us. WE cant support a variant like that. WE must do better.
Lite would now become a AARHE for Dummies, rather than a way to chop a recipe by leaving out key ingredients that can only work if they are together.
In my opinion Lite was not well received when it should have been a triumph. So we retool and formulate a new ruleset. I just laid out the idea in general.
And i still need to load up that file…arrg.
@Imperious:
In my opinion Lite was not well received when it should have been a triumph. So we retool and formulate a new ruleset.
some of the more complex rules in AARHE:Lite I did not totally agree in having
but you insist they were important
I am not sure things are going to work this time around neither
you seem to want to simplify some things yet remain firm on having some complex rules
you complaint about air units in land and then air units in naval being a “chore”
meanwhile you add CAP
I think for new players, combat sequence is the scary part
you could write CAP in 3 sentences
but ever item potentially adds sentence to the combat sequence
I just laid out the idea in general.
you mean you are justing laying out ideas rather than forcing the course of the project
then thank god
you can go ahead and release the experimental file (but don’t call it AARHE)
after that we continue the existing system
I update the file and changelog as points are ticked off
