So the most important idea is the calling of planes in adjacent territories to help defend.
Are they allowed to fight more than once?
+++++ yes once when its their own turn and once as the defender. The same planes cannot fight in multiple battles while as attacker or defender.
(UK player attacks Western Europe and Germany.
Germany player DAS some planes from Germany to Western Europe to help.
UK pklayer chooses to resolve Western Europe first.
If that Western Europe attack failed. Germany player movees planes back to where they came from - Germany.
But this happens at the end of the “combat phase” so no problems.
What if that Western Europe attack won, or Germany retreats?
This comes with defender retreat too.
Where can they retreat?)
++++ in the case when the territory that DAS mission was flown from was captured… those planes have to fly to another territory in flight range. Also the same plane can only DAS in one of the attacked territories. so he may want to seperate his force.
Are they allowed to help in friendly territory?
++++ only one
Note: some missions should be allowed in addition to a combat mission like air transport.
@Imperious:
++++ in the case when the territory that DAS mission was flown from was captured… those planes have to fly to another territory in flight range. Also the same plane can only DAS in one of the attacked territories. so he may want to seperate his force.
Its not only captured. Another case is “pending-combat”.
Should retreating forces be allowed to move into “pending-combat” territories?
Because they could end up fighting again.
But if we don’t let retreatment into territories with pending-combat, it gets restrictive.
Ok the plane must make one choice as the defender namely: perform DAS or coastal defense. if he leaves his original territory and fights only to find his originating territory captured… he cannot perform in any other mission and must retreat to yet another friendly territory within 1/2 flight range. Its that simple.
So how about normal retreatments?
Can you retreat into a territory with pending combat?
And how attacker must retreat attacking forces to the territory it came from…
(To stop hopping over the enemy…like in OOB rulebook example.)
it means you gotta keep track of losses according to this? You must declare exactly which unit you are using to take a hit?
Rather than trying to track each casualty, it might be easier to just record what came form where, and at the time of retreat, the person retreating can choose what goes where, with the restriction that you cannot exceed the original deployment levels.
So, if 3 INF are from Norway and 4 INF are from Eastern and forces retreat after 1 round of combat in Karelia taking 3 losses, Germany can withdraw the remainign 4 INF as they choose, but no more than 3 can go to Norway (and had more than 4 survived, no more than 4 could go to Eastern)
This would be easy to track with online play, since the combat movement post would list what units came from where, so that information is already recorded.
RETREATS
Except for strategic air missions, where the defending intercepting units simply return home after one round, after any round of combat, either player may decide to withdraw and retreat. After any combat round, retreating attacking units do not all have to retreat to the same territory, but it must be from original territory where the attack began. Defending units that cannot retreat ground units on an island, or evacuating ground units in excess of transport capability must remain and continue to fight. Note: These ground units that engage in combat which results in automatic retreats simply take no further part in combat. They retreat back to their original territory and do not suffer return fire.
Note: Any defending Infantry that decides to retreat after any combat round is subject to a roll of one D6 and is lost on a roll of one. This is to simulate the ability of the attacker to “envelop†and capture enemy forces that did not escape the retreat.
Air Units
Attacking air units that “withdraw†from combat may now play to any friendly territory not exceeding the balance on unused movement points. They return to land during Returning Air Movement. Defending air units have to retreat to an adjacent friendly territory. If no adjacent friendly territories exist, retreating defending air units fly to the closest friendly territory within their flight range. If there are no friendly territories within their flight then these defending air units cannot retreat.
Naval Units
Naval units retreat by “withdrawing” from the combat sea zone. Retreating transports may not unload their units.
Ground Units
Ground units may retreat to any combination of friendly adjacent territories. Defending ground units must remain in the embattled territory and “fight to the death†only if no other retreat options are available.
Naval Evacuations
Attacking ground units in amphibious assaults may evacuate and retreat to their transports after any combat round. However, each armor and artillery unit must first be converted to a regular infantry unit. Defending ground units have the option of retreating onto friendly transports in adjacent sea zones during regular ground combat. In both cases, the evacuating transports may not move and Ground units in excess of transport capacity may not retreat.
here is a basic outline of retreats… ill come back to these posts from you two latter today.
So I see…
Air and naval units “withdraw” when they “retreat”, hence no return fire or live capture.
We still need to think about whether units can retreat to territories with “pending combat” in the various cases…
With defending strategic air missions I think maybe they should continue to fight from 2nd or 3rd cycle or something.
But some of this stuff may not make sense unless the time aspect is tuned.
Air and naval units “withdraw” when they “retreat”, hence no return fire or live capture.
+++ no return fire… but looking at forcing each defending infantry to roll d6 and a one result = capture… what you think?
We still need to think about whether units can retreat to territories with “pending combat” in the various cases…
With defending strategic air missions I think maybe they should continue to fight from 2nd or 3rd cycle or something.
But some of this stuff may not make sense unless the time aspect is tuned.
+++ok sure. The pending combat thing is not that big a deal. if it is then each territory can be done together round by round so that if any retreating territories are lost then the fight is to the death at least for defender.
@Imperious:
Air and naval units “withdraw” when they “retreat”, hence no return fire or live capture.
+++ no return fire… but looking at forcing each defending infantry to roll d6 and a one result = capture… what you think?
(No return fire for this case or for land/naval/air retreats?)
Yeah we discussed a little about “live capture” before.
As before I think it should depend on relative army sizes.
We don’t want 1 ARM to capture many many INF.
So instead of one roll for each retreating defending INF…it should be each attacking ARM.
And then I think artillery is slow too so should be envelopable too?
But if defender has land units left to fight…would all this still make sense?
Say attacker has 3 ARM left, defender retreats 3 INF and leaves 2 ARM behind…should the 3 attacking ARM be able to envelop the retreating defending INF?
So its quite complex.
+++ok sure. The pending combat thing is not that big a deal. if it is then each territory can be done together round by round so that if any retreating territories are lost then the fight is to the death at least for defender.
Thats what I was thinking too. Very realistic.
But I am scared of having so many “combat boards”?
Pending combat can be a big deal. Defending units can end up fighting in more than one combat while attacking units can’t?
Imagine the powerful FTR piece defending at 4…defending at multiple territories…
Of course we could not let the units participate in more than 1 combat…but gotta think of the rule to deal with that.
Quote from: Imperious Leader on July 09, 2006, 10:59:15 PM
Air and naval units “withdraw” when they “retreat”, hence no return fire or live capture.
+++ no return fire… but looking at forcing each defending infantry to roll d6 and a one result = capture… what you think?
(No return fire for this case or for land/naval/air retreats?)
++++ naw not fair.
Yeah we discussed a little about “live capture” before.
As before I think it should depend on relative army sizes.
We don’t want 1 ARM to capture many many INF.
+++++ very good idea…brilliant actually! for every armor unit the defender rolls one die for each infantry unit and its captured on a six or one.
So instead of one roll for each retreating defending INF…it should be each attacking ARM.
++ yes right
And then I think artillery is slow too so should be envelopable too?
+++= right to slow… they are in fixed positions
But if defender has land units left to fight…would all this still make sense?
+++ of course they can fight… its just some penalty for defender retreat and modelling being surrounded in an abstract game.
Say attacker has 3 ARM left, defender retreats 3 INF and leaves 2 ARM behind…should the 3 attacking ARM be able to envelop the retreating defending INF?
+++ yes two rolls capturing them on a six 1-5 no effect ( they retreat) defending tanks dont “sheild” this. presumably the territory is large and getting surrounded can occur within other parts of the same territory ( look at western europe… its a huge area)… remember that in the stated example tank hits go on enemy tanks before another unit.
So its quite complex.
++++ if you play it its quite easy once you do it… and it seems alot more realistic
Quote
+++ok sure. The pending combat thing is not that big a deal. if it is then each territory can be done together round by round so that if any retreating territories are lost then the fight is to the death at least for defender.
Thats what I was thinking too. Very realistic.
But I am scared of having so many “combat boards”?
++++ you dont need this… this example is quite remote for practical play and at most theirs allways one spot to retreat too because of interior lines. at most one other battle board.
Pending combat can be a big deal. Defending units can end up fighting in more than one combat while attacking units can’t?
Imagine the powerful FTR piece defending at 4…defending at multiple territories…
+++ were not allowing that so defending planes can be involved in more than one DAS mission… of course different planes can be allocated to different missions. only not the same plane twice… remember one mission as attacker and one mission as defender each plane.
Of course we could not let the units participate in more than 1 combat…but gotta think of the rule to deal with that.
++++ huh? its allready stated NOT MORE THAN ONE MISSION AS DEFENDER OR ATTACKER.
exceptions is air transport for bombers.
@Imperious:
(No return fire for this case or for land/naval/air retreats?)
++++ naw not fair.
I used the wrong word. Its “parting shot”.
Now to be clear.
No more “parting shot” for all combats?
Say attacker has 3 ARM left, defender retreats 3 INF and leaves 2 ARM behind…should the 3 attacking ARM be able to envelop the retreating defending INF?
+++ yes two rolls capturing them on a six 1-5 no effect ( they retreat) defending tanks dont “sheild” this. presumably the territory is large and getting surrounded can occur within other parts of the same territory ( look at western europe… its a huge area)… remember that in the stated example tank hits go on enemy tanks before another unit.
Firstly we should make it capture on “1” rather than “6”, to be inline with general axis and allies rolling.
Now, I understand a territory is a large area. But I think its more realistic if only attacking ARM in excess (1-to-1 to defending remaining to fight) should take part in capturing.
I mean consider another example.
Attacker has 3 ARM left. Defender has more…say 5 ARM and 5 INF left.
But defender chooses to retreat the 5 INF anyway…for whatever reason.
++++ you dont need this… this example is quite remote for practical play and at most theirs allways one spot to retreat too because of interior lines. at most one other battle board.
You mean if there is one or more adjacent friendly territories with no “pending combat” then you must choose among those? No option to check two combats cycle by cycle in that case?
++++ huh? its allready stated NOT MORE THAN ONE MISSION AS DEFENDER OR ATTACKER.
exceptions is air transport for bombers.
Firstly, we take “Air Transport” as a special non-combat move, one that is allowed even after taking part in combat?
Now, I was talking about if units that performed a mission can still fight?
Say a FTR performed DAS, can it still combat after it finish the mission?
UK attacks “Western Europe”. A German FTR at “Germany” comes to perform DAS in “Western Europe”.
When finished it retreats to “Germany”.
But “Germany” happens to be under attack too…can it take part in defending “Germany”?
If it can’t, how do we keep track?
I used the wrong word. Its “parting shot”.
Now to be clear.
No more “parting shot” for all combats?
+++++ LOL your using my terminology from along time ago! no no parting shots…
Quote
Say attacker has 3 ARM left, defender retreats 3 INF and leaves 2 ARM behind…should the 3 attacking ARM be able to envelop the retreating defending INF?
+++ yes two rolls capturing them on a six 1-5 no effect ( they retreat) defending tanks dont “sheild” this. presumably the territory is large and getting surrounded can occur within other parts of the same territory ( look at western europe… its a huge area)… remember that in the stated example tank hits go on enemy tanks before another unit.
Firstly we should make it capture on “1” rather than “6”, to be inline with general axis and allies rolling.
+++++ ok thats fine.
Now, I understand a territory is a large area. But I think its more realistic if only attacking ARM in excess (1-to-1 to defending remaining to fight) should take part in capturing.
+++++ ok that probably works out better… so the new rules is only if you have more tanks than the defender each additional tank forces the defender to roll for every retreating infantry or artillery… NOTE I THINK WE SHOULD ADD ARTILLERY… because they move slow like infantry and are situated in fixed positions…so overruns are possible.
I mean consider another example.
Attacker has 3 ARM left. Defender has more…say 5 ARM and 5 INF left.
But defender chooses to retreat the 5 INF anyway…for whatever reason.
Quote
++++ you dont need this… this example is quite remote for practical play and at most theirs allways one spot to retreat too because of interior lines. at most one other battle board.
You mean if there is one or more adjacent friendly territories with no “pending combat” then you must choose among those? No option to check two combats cycle by cycle in that case?
+++++ Yes right you can… thats makes quick work of that “problem”
Quote
++++ huh? its allready stated NOT MORE THAN ONE MISSION AS DEFENDER OR ATTACKER.
exceptions is air transport for bombers.
Firstly, we take “Air Transport” as a special non-combat move, one that is allowed even after taking part in combat?
++++ yes air transport goes on in non combat anyway.
Now, I was talking about if units that performed a mission can still fight?
Say a FTR performed DAS, can it still combat after it finish the mission?
+++++++Again it can do a DAS as the defender and a new mission on its own active turn.
UK attacks “Western Europe”. A German FTR at “Germany” comes to perform DAS in “Western Europe”.
When finished it retreats to “Germany”.
But “Germany” happens to be under attack too…can it take part in defending “Germany”?
++++ no because all defending planes land only after the end of all combat… thus they land in territories within 1/2 flight range. The allies take western and german planes remain untill other combat is resolved in other territories like in OOB
If it can’t, how do we keep track?
++++ you only have to keep track of movement points left over as the attacker like you do in OOB rules.
@Imperious:
NOTE I THINK WE SHOULD ADD ARTILLERY… because they move slow like infantry and are situated in fixed positions…so overruns are possible.
Of course I agree. I suggested it first.
You mean if there is one or more adjacent friendly territories with no “pending combat” then you must choose among those? No option to check two combats cycle by cycle in that case?
+++++ Yes right you can… thats makes quick work of that “problem”
Ok so defender can must retreat to friendly territories with no pending combat if avaliable. If unavailable we do cycle-by-cycle analysis for defending land units, fly 1/2 range for defending air units.
++++ no because all defending planes land only after the end of all combat… thus they land in territories within 1/2 flight range. The allies take western and german planes remain untill other combat is resolved in other territories like in OOB
Ok so air units that performed a DAS mission do not take part in further combat for the rest of the (passive) turn.
Of course I agree. I suggested it first.
++++ yes you did good!
Quote
You mean if there is one or more adjacent friendly territories with no “pending combat” then you must choose among those? No option to check two combats cycle by cycle in that case?
+++++ Yes right you can… thats makes quick work of that “problem”
Ok so defender can must retreat to friendly territories with no pending combat if avaliable. If unavailable we do cycle-by-cycle analysis for defending land units, fly 1/2 range for defending air units.
++++ exactly perfect!
Quote
++++ no because all defending planes land only after the end of all combat… thus they land in territories within 1/2 flight range. The allies take western and german planes remain untill other combat is resolved in other territories like in OOB
Ok so air units that performed a DAS mission do not take part in further combat for the rest of the (passive) turn.
+++++yes exactly you got it perfect!
do you see any other “problems” with the current combat porposal?
@Imperious:
do you see any other “problems” with the current combat porposal?
well, we do have “air interdiction” to talk about if we are having that
also, you haven’t answered whether you ok with not able to have “battle of britain” style attacks?
that is
attacker: air
defender: air + land
current proposal only allows one cycle of combat
just like
attacker: air
defender air + naval
well, we do have “air interdiction” to talk about if we are having that
also, you haven’t answered whether you ok with not able to have “battle of britain” style attacks?
that is
attacker: air
defender: air + land
current proposal only allows one cycle of combat
just like
attacker: air
defender air + naval
+++++++ Ok the air interdiction idea is basically from AH d-day, but with some changes. Its one round because if it wasnt then that mission would never be tried. I playtested it and thats a correct statement. The basic idea is a simple way to demonstrate some influence on moving land units, and secondly to feature some ability to “bomb” rail lines where this type of mission is performed.
Oh I see.
I am unfamiliar with D-Day.
I think the rules are posted at avalon hill.com
BTW i bought this “operation barbarossa” game which is touted as a axis and allies expansion… its very simple and fun to play… i was surprised how fun it is.
24.95
not a bad game really!
oooh in the FAQ I found
Q. If fighters are sent to defend an adjacent area that is being attacked with fighters in the attacking force, can the defending fighters retreat?
A. No. As long as there are attacking fighters, then defending fighters must remain. If the attacking fighters are destroyed, then the defending fighters may retreat before any combat round to any airbase within range (page 7/8). 1 of their 4 movement points is used up if they have moved to defend an adjacent territory. If the fighters do not retreat (i.e. the defenders won the fight), then they must land at the adjacent airbase they came from.
It seems Operation Barbarossa also has this “DAS” rule?
