Thanks! Aside from being slanted toward the Axis like in Anniversary 1942 it is a great change of pace.
Checklists for Dummies (AARHE 4.0)
-
ok great! im still checking stuff over. lets try to make the colors the same or present a similar presentation so they are uniform in all charts.
-
Will do, I’m in the process of switching over to OldSalty’s format. It’s clean.
-
Also of note in the “Diplomacy” turn, if your capital is under enemy control “Diplomacy” is skipped (pg 3. under “Turn Sequence”). I guess this is really implied in the decision box of “Conduct Diplomacy Rolls” – I can’t think of another reason that I wouldn’t roll.
Just might want to make it “Idiot-Proof” and spell it out.
good idea. I’ll update the chart.
Hrmm. I don’t know how messy this will get, but do we want to provide easy references to page numbers on the charts?
Also like your idea of page numbers. By the time we are done, there is going to be a number of pages that might need an index??? The page numbers should be the same graphic and placement each page. May I suggest that once we are done, one person collects all PPT and uses the master set up for page numbers, any background images, anything else that needs to be consistent.
-
yes lets just get the various categories completed and we will catalog them into the latest manual, and fix some of the text as issues arise.
-
May I suggest that once we are done, one person collects all PPT and uses the master set up for page numbers, any background images, anything else that needs to be consistent.
Absolutely!
I haven’t had much luck trying to integrate rule reference page numbers into the flow diagrams though. Makes it kinda messy. But it would be nice to have a quick reference or index to the rules for further clarification.
-
Combat Movement - Naval (2/2)
…a stab at Naval Movement.
Note: I tried to integrate page references - let me know if this is worth continuing.
-
no i would leave them off, because we may need to add some text for clarifications and this may place new page numbers on individual sections and we don’t need to change your charts when we do this.
-
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.
-
yes thats important point… its a checklist for dummys…so noobs need to have it presented as easy as possible. When they get their feet wet they can use it to train others using these materials.
-
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.
-
Updated flow chart with the statement that diplomacy rolls can not be taken if player’s capital is occupied by unfriendly player
-
Question on the territories. Where does Europe end?
Is Turkey in Europe? Saudi Arabia?
I still consider myself a noob at this game. I haven’t been around listening in on all the discussions for the last two years, so I don’t have much reachback to the touchstone of intent.
I think the specific countries should be spelled out.
Russia can influence:
Afghanistan
Mongolia
TurkeyGermany can influence:
Spain
Sweden
Turkey
SwitzerlandUK can influence:
Afghanistan
Eire
Saudi Arabia
Spain (via Rio De Oro)
TurkeyJapan:
MongoliaUS
Argentina
Mongolia
Peru
VenezuelaPlus, anyone can influence anyone they touch through conquest.
For simplicity, I like the idea of not being able to attack until it is at +3. Once, a country becomes a sympathizer you need to be able to cut that off at the quick.
If we don’t do this, then it will be a mad scramble for Neutrals on T1. As US I’d invade S. America for the extra income. UK Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan, etc. It would just be ugly.
Perhaps something akin to “The War Game” where if you attack before it is at +/-5 they get additional random forces:
d1: INF
d2: 2 * INF
d3: INF + ARM
etc…Grasping at straws. What a quagmire!
-
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”!?!
-
Oh. You’re talking 1939 and I’m talking AARHE 4.0.
Ouch! More confusion.
-
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.
-
I’m sit corrected BW> My last questions were for the 1939 version and needs to be posted for IL. Sorry.
-
Question on the territories. Where does Europe end?
Is Turkey in Europe? Saudi Arabia?
It ends in the middle east…all territories west of India, including Iraq, Iran, Arabia, plus Soviet territories of Moscow and all territories west of it.
I think the specific countries should be spelled out.
Russia can influence:
Afghanistan=y
Mongolia=y
Turkey=yGermany can influence:
Spain=y
Sweden=y
Turkey=y
Switzerland=yUK can influence:
Afghanistan=y
Eire=y
Saudi Arabia=y
Spain (via Rio De Oro)=y
Turkey=nJapan:
Mongolia=yUS
Argentina=y
Mongolia=n
Peru=y
Venezuela=yPlus, anyone can influence anyone they touch through conquest.
yes correct. If you conquer the adjacent territory you can influence the neutral.
For simplicity, I like the idea of not being able to attack until it is at +3. Once, a country becomes a sympathizer you need to be able to cut that off at the quick.
I suppose you can invade it to prevent it falling in enemy hands. That is what happened to Iraq, while it was feared to happen in Levant Sates, and Madagascar ( in both cases UK needed to invade them to prevent them falling to Germany)
If we don’t do this, then it will be a mad scramble for Neutrals on T1. As US I’d invade S. America for the extra income. UK Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan, etc. It would just be ugly.
America is the only player than can influence central and South America ( exception Argentina)…so its not gonna fall in enemy hands, unless Argentina goes axis or Axis invade S America. If America invaded those neutrals it would waste time for them fighting Germany. Secondly it would turn them into pro-German allies, and possibly allow Germans to start landing stuff over there.
Perhaps something akin to “The War Game” where if you attack before it is at +/-5 they get additional random forces:
d1: INF
d2: 2 * INF
d3: INF + ARM
etc…They have their own forces according to historical records extrapolated and abstracted in their AARHE force pool. I suppose it would be an optional rule to include random extra units to stem the tide against neutral aggression.
Once you got a few more games in you will not value neutrals as much to your strategy.
-
@Imperious:
UK can influence:
Afghanistan=y
Eire=y
Saudi Arabia=y
Spain (via Rio De Oro)=y
Turkey=nWow! Even though UK has Trans-Jordan & Persia it isn’t allowed to work on Turkey. that is a surprise for me.
So, Russia is the only person that is left to counter Germany’s influence.
Tough one.
I’ll work with it.
Like I said before, I have yet to see but one country turn in the 10 or so games we’ve played – and that was very late in the game.
Bad rolling, maybe. I don’t count on the Diplomacy to win the game, but it is fun to roll at the end of the turn.
Thanks for the help on this one.
-
During the Income Phase:
Logistics
“Pay 1 IPC for each Transport offloading in Combat Move.”In “Phase 3: Combat Move” it states under “Naval Transport”:
“Units loaded in Combat Move must be offloaded in Combat Move same turn. Besides an amphibious assault you may also offload into friendly territories”
So I began to wonder if there is a distinction and does the player have to pay even if they aren’t attacking with the unit?
I thought the 1 IPC penalty was intended to model the fact that Amphibious Assaults are expensive.
You shouldn’t have to pay it just to move troops to another country – then again you shouldn’t be doing that during Combat Move but rather Non-Combat Move.
Insights?
-
Wow! Even though UK has Trans-Jordan & Persia it isn’t allowed to work on Turkey. that is a surprise for me.
OK wait: I misspoke. UK Can influence Turkey. I forgot they had adjacent territories from it.
So, Russia is the only person that is left to counter Germany’s influence.
UK can do it. Never mind last post on Turkey.
Like I said before, I have yet to see but one country turn in the 10 or so games we’ve played – and that was very late in the game.
Bad rolling, maybe. I don’t count on the Diplomacy to win the game, but it is fun to roll at the end of the turn.
Thanks for the help on this one.
yes like i said you need not worry so much about trying to win the game by converting neutrals. THATS not the way to win. Neutrals will convert if and when you control all the adjacent territories and isolate them with all those +1 rolls.
Stop worrying so much about how to get “spain as German ally on turn 1” its not happening. The best you can hope for is take gibrater and hold france and get +2 on diplomacy and fight allied counter rolls.
Suggested Topics
