Rules for linking AA Europe and Pacific

[Imperious Leader]

This is a rule set for linking A&A Europe and Pacific into a single game. It was originally published by Rob Daviau, one of the designers of Pacific. This is reprinted from Harris Game design.

ORDER OF PLAY
1. Germany
2. USSR
3. Japan
4. UK
5. USA

Set-up of pieces is normal. However, the initial IPC placement in Europe is different.
• The Allies get 18 IPCs instead of 12. Germany gets 12.
• The Allies place before Germany.
• Countries may place units into any territory they own, regardless of whether it has units or not (so UK could put units in Gibraltar). This includes convoys but not sea zones, which cannot be owned. Countries may place in sea zones, but only those that contain that country’s units.
• The 4 Russian Interboard spaces that connect Russia to China are considered part of the Europe board and Russia may place units there.
• You can use this initial placement to put a fighter on Combat Air Patrol with your country’s naval units.

INTERBOARD SPACES

The interboard spaces connect the two boards. Unfortunately, I don’t have the actual graphics for these, so I’ll just describe them. You can create them for yourself by using a 3X5 index card for each and writing its name and what it connects to on the card. The reason why I don’t have the graphics is because it was easier (and fit the table better) for me to do it with cards.

Novosibirsk (land), connects to:

Turkestan (Europe board, to the west)
      Evenki Nat’l Okrug (interboard space, to the north)
      Yakut SSR (interboard space, to the northeast)
      Tsinghai (Pacific board, to the east)

Evenki Nat’l Okrug (land), connects to:

Siberia (Europe board, to the west)
      Novosibirsk (interboard space, to the south)
      Yakut SSR (interboard space, to the east)

Yakut SSR (land), connects to:

Evenki Nat’l Okrug (interboard space, to the west)
      Novosibirsk (interboard space, to the southwest)
      Tsinghai (Pacific board, to the south)
      Suiyuan (Pacific board, to the southeast)
      Soviet Far East (interboard space, to the east)

Soviet Far East (land) connects to:

Yakut, SSR (interboard space, to the west)
      Suiyuan (Pacific board, to the southwest)
      Manchuria (Pacific board, to the south)
      Soviet Union (Pacific board, to the southeast)

Red Sea (sea) connects to:

Eastern Mediterranean (Europe board, to the northwest)
      Sea Zone 52 (Pacific board, to the east)

Indian Ocean (sea) connects to:

Really South Atlantic (interboard space, to the south)
      Sea Zone 50 (Pacific board, to the east)

Really South Atlantic (sea) connects to:

Sea Zone 1 (Pacific board, to the west)
      Indian Ocean (interboard space, to the southwest)
      South Atlantic (Europe board, to the east)

Panama Canal (sea) connects to:

Sea Zone 3 (Pacific board, to the west)
      Central Atlantic (Europe board, to the east)

Rocky Mountains (land) connects to:

Canada & USA (Pacific board, to the west)
      Great Plains (interboard space, to the east)

Great Plains (land) connects to:

Rocky Mountains (interboard space, to the west)
      Canada & USA (Europe board, to the east)

This probably doesn’t make a lot of sense written out here, but if you make the cards and write the names of the connecting territories along with arrows on the appropriate edges and corners of the cards, then lay the whole thing out on a (big) table with Europe on the left and Pacific on the right, it’ll make sense. It works best to write most of the cards oriented horizontally, but the last three (Panama Canal, Rocky Mountains and Great Plains) should be oriented vertically for best fit.

OK, here are some notes on the interboard spaces:

There are two types of Inter-board spaces – land (green) and water (blue). Land spaces act like normal land spaces in the game. Water spaces represent much larger areas and may only be entered by naval units. Fighters may be transported through interboard naval spaces on carriers and land units may be loaded on transports. Aircraft may not fly through.

Movement through the Panama canal is for Allied ships only. This passage is blocked if the Panama Convoy is held by the Axis.

Movement between the Red Sea and Eastern Mediterranean is possible only if Egypt is in friendly control. You cannot unload troops from the Red Sea directly into Egypt or Palestine.

The UK and US may land units in the USSR Pacific Space if it is not taken over by Japan.

RULES CHANGES

COMBAT AIR PATROL
Combat Air Patrol (CAP) rule is in effect in both theatres.

SPECIAL POWERS
Each country has a special power in the game. Most of these are rules from the original games or are extended from them. One is new.

USA – The US may build Marines and Factories in both theatres.

USSR – The USSR converts units in its spaces, just like in AAE. It may only convert units it could normally purchase (e.g., it cannot convert marines).

JAPAN – Japan has its destroyer/transports and kamikaze, like AAP.

UK – After the first turn, ALL income from convoys is put into one pool and split amongst the UK’s three economies (England, India, Australia). This is why the convoy marker is on 28.

For the first turn, only the Pacific money is split, (England starts with 25.) The UK may divert money from the Pacific theatre to help in Europe or vice-versa.

Furthermore, the UK gets one free infantry for every Mediterranean home territory under its control (Gibraltar, Malta, Cyprus). These infantry are placed, at the end of the UK turn, in territories within or adjacent to the Mediterranean that were under British control at the start of the UK turn. These infantry cannot be saved or converted into other units. If not used, they are lost.

GERMANY – Germany can place newly-built submarines into Sea Zones adjacent to ANY land territory it controls with an IPC value, regardless of whether there is an IC there or not.

Germany also gets a free submarine every turn that she starts with an income of 40+. Germany must place the sub or it loses it – it can’t hold them up from turn to turn. Also, this free sub is placed at the end of Germany’s turn, along with other German units.

CAPITALS IN EXILE
A country that loses its capital loses all its IPCs to the conqueror. It then names another starting Industrial Complex in the same theatre as its new capital. It may run its country from this new capital normally. If a country loses its capital and has no other starting factory in that theatre, it may move with units on the board, may collect income, and may build at any limited, occupied factories it controls.

VICTORY
Players are trying to force opponents to surrender/sue for peace.

If you surrender, remove all your pieces from the board. You still maintain ownership of all home countries currently in your possession. Any conquered countries belonging to an enemy (still in the game) revert to that enemy. Any enemy countries belonging to a surrendered enemy remain yours.

Enemies may not conquer any more of your territories – they are treated as neutral countries except they may be flown over by aircraft. Allies, once they leave a territory of a surrendered friendly country, may not return to it.

If, at this time, units are completely surrounded by your (now off-limits) territories, the player controlling those units may move any or all of them to territories under their control at this point. Any that choose to remain there are isolated for the rest of the game.

The game is over when one side (either the Axis or the Allies) has completely surrendered.

How Surrendering Works
At the end of your turn, see how many surrender dice you need to roll. Roll them all. On a total roll of 22 or higher, you surrender. These modifiers are country-specific and are found at the end of the rules. Modifiers do stack. Obviously, if you are only rolling 1-3 dice, it is impossible to surrender and there is no need to roll.

UK
Every 10 IPCs of British IPCs lost to Axis (land and convoys combined) 1 (this one is struck through, so it may not apply)
Every 3 UK territories and/or convoys held by Axis 1
UK in Axis control 6
India under Axis control 3
Australia under Axis control 3
Eastern Canada under Axis control 3
Axis is getting 5+ Oil Money 1
US has surrendered 4
Russia has surrendered 2
Every 10 IPCs of SBR suffered this round 1

Germany has surrendered -2
Japan has surrendered -2

US
Each turn taken (TURN# – 2)
US under Axis control 8
Hawaii under Axis control 2
Axis is getting 5+ Oil Money 1
UK has surrendered 3
Russia has surrendered 2
Every 7 IPCs of Convoys in Axis control 1

One Axis power surrendered -3
US was attacked by Axis during Turn 1 -2
Every 5 IPCs of Axis territory controlled -1

USSR
Each Russian factory under Axis control 1
Lost capital this turn 3
Collected fewer than 10 IPCs this turn 1
USSR convoy route under Axis control 1
Axis is getting 5+ Oil Money 1
Each other Ally surrendered 2

Germany surrendered -3
Japan surrendered -1
Every 5 IPCs of Axis territory controlled -1

GERMANY
Northern Italy Under Allied Control 1
Germany Under Allied Control 6
Income 30-39 1
Income between 20-29 2
Income below 20 3
Japan surrendered 1
Every 10 IPCs lost to SBR this round 1

Russia surrendered -2
USA surrendered -2
UK surrendered -2
Each Allied Factory controlled -1
Getting Oil Money of 5+ -1

JAPAN
Japan Under Allied Control 10
Income below 10 8
Income below 10-19 5
Germany surrendered 2
Every 10 IPCs lost to SBR this round 1

Income 30-39 -1
Income 40+ -2
Russia surrendered -1
UK surrendered -2
US surrendered -3
Each Allied Factory controlled -1

[Aretaku]

I had a couple of questions regarding these rules, as I am anxious to try this setup, but a couple things remain unclear.

1. Can Chinese units enter Russian territory? Could a Chinese attack theoretically be made on German assets if the units made it that far? Can Chinese infantry be converted by the Russians??

2. Can Japan and Russia attack each others units or occupy each others territories?

3. Do the new connecting land territories for the US and USSR contain additional income for those nations?

4. There seems to be no effect on surrender dice if the Chinese capital is taken. This is correct?

5. I wanted to verify…all convoy income from the Europe board for the UK must be spent on the European theater on turn 1? Convoy income may then be shared between theatres on each subsequent turn?

6. As I read it, a nation that has it’s capital occupied and has no other IC still collects income??

Answers to any or all of these questions would be greatly appreciated.

[Krieghund]

I’ll try to answer them.

@Aretaku:

1. Can Chinese units enter Russian territory? Could a Chinese attack theoretically be made on German assets if the units made it that far? Can Chinese infantry be converted by the Russians??

I don’t see anything prohibiting Chinese units from moving into Soviet territory or attacking German units, but the USSR cannot convert Chinese units, since there was no Lend-Lease agreement between the two countries.

@Aretaku:

2. Can Japan and Russia attack each others units or occupy each others territories?

Yes.

@Aretaku:

3. Do the new connecting land territories for the US and USSR contain additional income for those nations?

No.

@Aretaku:

4. There seems to be no effect on surrender dice if the Chinese capital is taken. This is correct?

The only effect is the income of the territory and control of its IC.

@Aretaku:

5. I wanted to verify…all convoy income from the Europe board for the UK must be spent on the European theater on turn 1? Convoy income may then be shared between theatres on each subsequent turn?

Yes.

@Aretaku:

6. As I read it, a nation that has it’s capital occupied and has no other IC still collects income??

Yes.

[Aretaku]

@Craig:

Check here for more info:

http://www.harrisgamedesign.com/bb2/viewtopic.php?t=1653&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

Craig

Thanks for the link…some more boards for me to lurk through.  :-)

@Krieghund:

I’ll try to answer them.

@Aretaku:

1. Can Chinese units enter Russian territory? Could a Chinese attack theoretically be made on German assets if the units made it that far? Can Chinese infantry be converted by the Russians??

I don’t see anything prohibiting Chinese units from moving into Soviet territory or attacking German units, but the USSR cannot convert Chinese units, since there was no Lend-Lease agreement between the two countries.

Works for me.

@Aretaku:

2. Can Japan and Russia attack each others units or occupy each others territories?

Yes.

What about that piece of the Sov Union on the Pacific board? Does it remain empty and valueless??

@Aretaku:

3. Do the new connecting land territories for the US and USSR contain additional income for those nations?

No.

Whew…good.

@Aretaku:

4. There seems to be no effect on surrender dice if the Chinese capital is taken. This is correct?

The only effect is the income of the territory and control of its IC.

Would that be considered US income?

@Aretaku:

5. I wanted to verify…all convoy income from the Europe board for the UK must be spent on the European theater on turn 1? Convoy income may then be shared between theatres on each subsequent turn?

Yes.

Does that work both ways? Would that mean that Pacific convoy income is restricted to the Pacific for turn one? Or can it be given to the Europe theatre from the beginning??

@Aretaku:

6. As I read it, a nation that has it’s capital occupied and has no other IC still collects income??

Yes.

God forbid you let an enemy regain a capital then…a nice chunk of saved money might drag you from deaths door.

Still…works for me.  :-)

…one last question.

US
Each turn taken (TURN# – 2)
US under Axis control 8
Hawaii under Axis control 2
Axis is getting 5+ Oil Money 1
UK has surrendered 3
Russia has surrendered 2
Every 7 IPCs of Convoys in Axis control 1

One Axis power surrendered -3
US was attacked by Axis during Turn 1 -2
Every 5 IPCs of Axis territory controlled -1

I’m taking that to mean that the US has to roll 1 surrender die on turn one, 2 dice on turn two, 3 dice on turn three, etc. (provided a negative modifier hasn’t nullified the dice)…

…am I correct there?

[Krieghund]

@Aretaku:

@Krieghund:

@Aretaku:

2. Can Japan and Russia attack each others units or occupy each others territories?

Yes.

What about that piece of the Sov Union on the Pacific board? Does it remain empty and valueless??

Yes.

@Aretaku:

@Krieghund:

@Aretaku:

4. There seems to be no effect on surrender dice if the Chinese capital is taken. This is correct?

The only effect is the income of the territory and control of its IC.

Would that be considered US income?

No.  It only provides income to an Axis power if it’s taken, otherwise it’s Chinese and only provides an infantry unit.

@Aretaku:

@Krieghund:

@Aretaku:

5. I wanted to verify…all convoy income from the Europe board for the UK must be spent on the European theater on turn 1? Convoy income may then be shared between theatres on each subsequent turn?

Yes.

Does that work both ways? Would that mean that Pacific convoy income is restricted to the Pacific for turn one? Or can it be given to the Europe theatre from the beginning??

It works both ways.

@Aretaku:

US
Each turn taken (TURN# – 2)
US under Axis control 8
Hawaii under Axis control 2
Axis is getting 5+ Oil Money 1
UK has surrendered 3
Russia has surrendered 2
Every 7 IPCs of Convoys in Axis control 1

One Axis power surrendered -3
US was attacked by Axis during Turn 1 -2
Every 5 IPCs of Axis territory controlled -1

I’m taking that to mean that the US has to roll 1 surrender die on turn one, 2 dice on turn two, 3 dice on turn three, etc. (provided a negative modifier hasn’t nullified the dice)…

…am I correct there?

No.  It’s turn number minus two.  Zero on turns one and two, one die on turn three, and so on.

[Aretaku]

Thanks again for the info…I’ll be sure to poke my head back in this thread if any new questions come up.  :-)

[Aretaku]

I am under the impression that the UK Mediterranian bonus troops cannot be placed in Egypt/Palestine/Syria as these are not “British” territories, but Middle-Eastern territoies.

Is this correct?

[Krieghund]

That’s a good question.  I’d be inclined to say that they can be placed in Middle East territories, simply because otherwise they’ll do nothing but bulk up Gibraltar, Cyprus and Malta.  That doesn’t give Germany much incentive to take these territories out.  In contrast, it seems that placing them in the Middle East would increase the action in that part of the board.  However, I’m not 100% sure about this.  What do you think?

[Aretaku]

@Krieghund:

That’s a good question.  I’d be inclined to say that they can be placed in Middle East territories, simply because otherwise they’ll do nothing but bulk up Gibraltar, Cyprus and Malta.  That doesn’t give Germany much incentive to take these territories out.  In contrast, it seems that placing them in the Middle East would increase the action in that part of the board.  However, I’m not 100% sure about this.  What do you think?

OK, well my FTF group is still playing our first Europe/Pacific game, and I’m the Axis, so my viewpoint is neither complete, nor unbiased, but…

…the rules allow for placement in territories “under British control”, but the Middle Eastern territories are not under British control. Technically, even if Germany takes them, they are still not under German control, as the IPCs earned come from Allied pools, and not the territories in and of themselves.

The Europe rulebook lists the UK and ME territories seperately, to the point of making the territories different colors. If the only unit in Karelia is a lone British Inf, does that mean Karelia is “under British control”? Why should the ME be different?

There is no need to worry about stacks of useless men on the Med territories, because once Morroco, or Libya, or Vichy, or Italy is taken and held (which is a near certainty after a few rounds unless the Allies are complete fools) the men can be placed there.

British transports could also make use of the stacked men from early rounds for Mediterranian landings once the German threat to Allied ships has been minimized/neutralized. Also, the Fig in Malta must still be dealt with, or it will be sent to help defend African territories where subsequent bonus Inf will be placed. Germany not only has incentive to try and eliminate this bonus, it MUST, or the game is quickly lost. This of course, means that every dollar spent in the Med is a dollar less to press on Moscow or defend Berlin.

That might be a little more historically accurate ( :-P ), but it makes for a game that isn’t much fun to play.

Also…the UK gets three Inf (9 IPCs) per turn for three little territories, the SAME value as UK and Canada combined. Hardly realistic, nor historically accurate.

In my game, with their $18 IPCs, the Allies added a mere two Inf to Malta (spreading the rest of the IPCs as Inf elsewhere). Despite adding a second transport to the Med fleet with my own bonus IPCs, the attack on Malta failed, and my fleet was sunk on the subsequent UK turn by 2 DD, 1 Fig, 1 Bom, 1 Tran.

Now while the Malta battle went terribly for me in terms of dice, the Allies could have easily added more men to Malta without significantly weakening themselves anywhere else. Essentially, this UK special rule ensures Allied dominance of Africa/ME within two rounds, or perhaps three if Germany’s fleet manages to survive the inevitable UK2 attack. Regardless, it eventually leaves Germanys southern income wide open to Allied landings. It also forces Germany to use his bonus IPCs on a second Med transport, effectively ending any threat to Lenningrad on G1.

Also, these bonus Inf eliminate the need for Russia to send troops south to help secure the Middle East, which was an integral part of both stand-alone Europe games our FTF group played. Instead, the Russians get to make their own front stronger while their flank remains secure.

I can’t even get the Japs over to help now, because I have no German troops left in Africa to try and take Egypt and unblock the canal (and this is after only two rounds). I’d have to go the long way around via the Really South Atlantic and run into an Allied fleet before I finished the trip.

As the OOB rules go, Germany could afford to ignore the Med if it really wanted to. Now, with this rule, it is a requirement not only to dedicate significant resources to it, but those resources are almost certain to be a total waste in short order.

I am of the opinion that the UK Med Inf special rule is horribly broken…to the point that it nearly breaks the whole game. It certainly makes the Euopre theatre vastly different from the OOB setup, and not in a good way.

Perhaps the rule could be modified to provide fewer Inf, or eliminate the option to place in other territories, or be dependent upon the presence of UK naval vessels to recieve the bonus, but I think a different rule altogether would be less likely to throw off the game balance.

EDIT: That rant was longer than I anticipated…as you can see, I think the rule sucks.  :lol:

[Krieghund]

You make some good points.  I have no idea how rigorously these rules were playtested, or even if they were playtested at all.  I myself have only played with them once.

Obviously the intent of this particular rule was to allow the Allies to reinforce the Mediterranean Theatre and promote more action there.  Maybe instead allowing the UK to place a limited number of purchased infantry somewhere in the Middle East would help to do that without being overly powerful?

[Aretaku]

@Krieghund:

You make some good points.  I have no idea how rigorously these rules were playtested, or even if they were playtested at all.  I myself have only played with them once.

Obviously the intent of this particular rule was to allow the Allies to reinforce the Mediterranean Theatre and promote more action there.  Maybe instead allowing the UK to place a limited number of purchased infantry somewhere in the Middle East would help to do that without being overly powerful?

My friends and I are thinking that recieving the men ought to be dependent upon having ships in the same sea-zone as the island…after all, how are those men getting from Cyprus to Morroco if there’s an Axis fleet in the way??  :-P

That way Britain is still earning 1-3 Inf, but has to dedicate IPCs to navy to keep the bonus. He also can’t stack all his initial bonus IPCs in Malta, because then Germany can simply ignore Malta and do Cyprus or Gibraltar. UK has to either make do with losing one of the islands early, or spread his bonus IPCs among all three islands and hope the one Germany chooses to attack can hold.

Either way, it would likely put the UK down an island after G1, possibly two, and make him work to earn those free inf back. It would also give Germany incentive to ignore Malta (which has no ship in it’s SZ) in favor of Cyprus or Gibraltar.

That way, even if Britain starts out hot, as he did in my current game, Germany at least has a chance to reduce the bonus (eliminating ships instead of taking islands), and Britain has to somewhat match Germanys investement to keep the bonus.

[Krieghund]

That’s an interesting concept.  Let us know how it works out.

[timerover51]

Hmmm, I am working on a set of rules to combine Pacific and Europe to use with the high school US history classes, and also maybe my summer gaming class.

With respect to additional British troops in the Mediterranean area, since the initial forces deployed in the Mid East by the UK came from India and Australia, if you are going to give the UK additional infantry units, why not have them start out in India and Australia, and require them to be moved to Egypt?  Troops from India could be moved in a single turn but require a transport to move them from the India sea zone to the Red Sea zone.  Troops from Australia would need two turns to get there, again via transport.

[Aretaku]

@timerover51:

Hmmm, I am working on a set of rules to combine Pacific and Europe to use with the high school US history classes, and also maybe my summer gaming class.

With respect to additional British troops in the Mediterranean area, since the initial forces deployed in the Mid East by the UK came from India and Australia, if you are going to give the UK additional infantry units, why not have them start out in India and Australia, and require them to be moved to Egypt?  Troops from India could be moved in a single turn but require a transport to move them from the India sea zone to the Red Sea zone.  Troops from Australia would need two turns to get there, again via transport.

While I like the idea, I don’t think the deployment of the troops should be able to be cut off by Japanese action, unless of course the Japanese get a fleet into the Med.

I’m also thinking that an easy way to leave the British Bonus Infantry rule alone while keeping the game balanced would be to connect Iran to India, and allow for amphib assaults of Egypt via the Red Sea. That way Japan actually has the option of entering the theatre without having to go all the way around the freaking world.  :-P

[Richter von Manthofen]

The solution for helping the Brits is the Med theater would be a starting IC in Egypt (limited Production - Inf, Art, Trp, DD)

Troops from india can be moved in through Iran

I think the idea of free units (if conditions are met is nice - though 1-3 inf for UK is worth more strategically than another Sub for Germany - IMHO)

[Krieghund]

@Aretaku:

I’m also thinking that an easy way to leave the British Bonus Infantry rule alone while keeping the game balanced would be to connect Iran to India, and allow for amphib assaults of Egypt via the Red Sea. That way Japan actually has the option of entering the theatre without having to go all the way around the freaking world.  :-P

Yes, connecting the Red Sea interboard space to Egypt and India to Iran makes sense.