Working on my first playtest notes as you read this. Will have them up shortly. :-)
Rob.
Yea add the trucks your gonna get in the new bulge game. The new german fighter would be of use as well.
Okay, sorry for the delay guys.
We played about four rounds, and we discovered a few problems which we have hopefully found working
solutions for. But first:
First impressions:
1. The Italian units, while cheap, are somewhat of a hindrance. Their tanks in particular
certainly look impressive in a big ol’ stack, but one certainly needs to keep in mind that they attack
on a two, not a three. Both myself and my buddy paid a small price for forgetting this. Their infantry
works well enough on attack so long as you send artillery with them, since they get that +1 artillery
modifier. However, as they defend at a 1, their defensive value lies more in soaking up hits to
protect more valuable units as opposed to dishing out hits of their own, which in our game were few in
number. The good thing is that they are cheap, so if one plays the game as I had intended, one will
quickly learn to spend a decent sum on Italian infantry to take the brunt of punishment from the
inevitable counter-attacks. I’m pleased to say that all of this does work well although it does take
some getting used to. And the loss rate can be horrific depending how you play. My buddy and I pretty
much tried to explore all the nuances of the game, and more often than not we threw all the forces we
could get at each other and the losses were pretty staggering in Italian manpower.
2. The Anti-tank element is awesome. It really can act as a deterrent to large tank formations
being used as battering rams because a sizable number of Italian guns can shred a tank formation and
is cheaper to build a force out of than German artillery. Both my buddy and I really had to switch
gears out of our normal strategies and try to find ways to manouver our tanks around large AT gun
formations. This produced alot of casualties at first, and then we really started working on our
outflanking skills. This, I believe, is the key to defeating a massed-gun strategy. Going at your
opponent with a large tank formation is a recipe for trouble if he’s got a sizable AT stack awaiting
you.
3. The Axis needs to be combined into one homogenous force, not two autonomous entities. The Axis
player will be using them together both on attack and defense, and both the Italians and the Germans
draw from the same pool of IPCs, so it makes sense to reduce the order of turns from the original
three to two.
4. In hindsight, I have erred a bit on the turn order. Historically, the British struck first in
Africa, raiding across the border to capture two Italian forts on the Libyan side and striking at
other pbjectives which caught the Italians somewhat unprepared. As such, I’ve amended the turn order
so that the Allies move first, then the Axis.
5. To keep to a more historically accurate timeline which represents the relatively late arrival of
the Germans, I’ve also decided to “freeze” them in ALL phases during the first turn only. This is
intended to keep them from arring on the scene of battle too soon into the game. The reason for this
is that we laid the pcs out in our initial setup and while we had the German units held back a few
spaces from the front lines, we didn’t want to mess with the first setup until we knew if it worked or
not. I wasn’t sure how much strength to give any of the three forces, and while I did have a good idea
where to place the units I wasn’t sure how it would work……one side might have had too big an
advantage in initial placement, so rather than adjust them we decided to play it out and see if we
liked it. As such, we needed to “freeze” the Germans the first turn to keep things balanced and
accurate. This may be thrown out at a a later time once we see how this first game goes. There may be
no need to freeze them if we feel that simply moving the German units a couple more spaces back will
take care of timing issues.
6. There are some small issues with the board itself, mainly in that a couple of the spaces need to be
altered to make the game flow better. This has to do with the Coastal road and two of the impassable
zones. This latter issue stems from the fact that I originally stated that the impenetrable spaces
could be flown over, but we discovered that they were too big for one space (they’d allow airplanes to
move WAY too far if one chose to move into and then out of those spaces. The easy solution was to
divide those two spaces up so that they couldn’t be abused in this manner.
7. The El Alamein area was historically a bottleneck which the Axis simply HAD to defeat in order to
move on to Cairo, and we know they did not succeed in this. IN designing my board, I had this right in
the front of my mind, and knowing that due to the Qattara Depression the Axis had not way of
outflanking the 8th Army, I drew the board accordingly with only one route to Cairo. After having
played a bit, though, we decided it might be necessary to make a path around the southern side of the
QD in order to make the game more playable. The obvious solution is to create a path around it, but
make it longer than the direct route through El Alamein so as to simulate a longer, more difficult
trex across the deeps pf the deseert wastes. This is admittedly NOT historically accurate, but might
improve the gameplay. This one is still just an idea, and I might shelve it. Not sure yet.
Now for some problems and kinks we had to find and then solve:
8.) For one thing, let’s look at Antitank guns. According to the rules as I drew them up, once
they got their shots in on any attacking tanks, they were then withdrawn from that combat. This was
intended to force the defender to choose between taking out tanks and worrying about the rest of the
attacker’s force. The defender would have to decide if, after removing his AT from combat, he still
had enough defensive power to successfuly hold the enemy off. It’s important for the defender to
balance how much AT firepower he needed to take tanks out with the amount of firepower he needed to
fight off the attackers other units. This is very important, as in one case one of us virtually
depleted our defensve strength in order to smash the attacker’s tank force and we lost that space as a
result of this. One must consider whether it is more important to take out his tanks or hold the
space. Who knows, you might want all of his tanks killed, so you might be willing to trade a space of
empty desert for the elimination of his armor.
But here’s the problem we discovered:
After you declare your AT guns and they get their shots
in, they are supposed to play no further part in that combat. Well……then what? What if you lose the
space? What happened to those guns?
We decided to give the defender a choice:
A. Retreat the guns 1 space, thereby saving them for the next turn. This simulates a defensive
“shoot-n-scoot” strategy. This may save your guns to fight another day, but it may hurt your next-turn
counter-attack plans.
B. NO retreat for the guns, and if you lose that space they are captured and can then be used by
the enemy. This works from a historical POV, because there certainly was some amount of re-use of
enemy equipment by both sides. the key here is to correctly ascertain whether or not you think you can
hold the attacker off and retain control of that space. If you got some nasty rolls on defense and
just decimated the attacker, you may not want to retreat your guns out of that space. It’s all up to
the particulars of that situation. Counterattack strategy plays heavily into this.
9.) Those extra move spaces really add a powerful new element to Axis and Allies. Now you have
to consider not only if you can win this battle, but also if you can survive the enemy’s
counterattack. Now it can come from further away, which means you must think ahead several moves at
times as in chess.
Again, there is a problem with the original rules:
If one moves his unit the extra space, it suffers a penalty unless it moves the extra space on a road. BUT……there are two
possibilities here that I am embarrased to say that I didn’t originally consider:.
A. The unit moves it’s extra space from a desert space to a road, or…
B. …it moves from the road to a desert space.
We thought that there must be some kind of provision for this, and the answer was simple enough. If a
unit moves it’s extra space and finishes movement on a road space, it should not be penalized because
the road is the supply lifeline and units that move extra spaces on roads aren’t penalized normally as
per the original rules (unless there is an enemy unit on the road in it’s rear, as originally stated).
Conversly, if the unit moves from the road to the desert and finishes in a desert space, then it
shall be considered penalized because moving away from the road moves it away from supply. Once again,
this produces some interesting results. Flanking again becomes very useful here, as does some
well-thought-out movement strategy.
More coming…
Rob.
So, in summary (so far)…
The Italians are indeed weak, but if used correctly can be very useful; just don’t rely too heavily on them for offensive punch unless you’ve got alot of them.
The Anti-tank element is a great addition which really makes you think a little bit harder about what you want to do and when to do it.
The roads are indeed valuable real-estate, as their no-penalty status can really make the difference in launching crushing counterattacks.
The extra-space movement also works great, but it must be used wisely or you’ll leave yourself hanging. Isolated units are ripe targets for slaughter which can thwart your plans in a brutal fashion.
Long-range strategy is REALLY important, as you will want to plan your moves a couple turns in advance (at least).
Proper planning re: moving and positioning your reinforcements is crucial. Do it right, and you will have a powerful wave of attacks which can really smash your enemy, and your losses on defense won’t be so debilitating because your counterattacks will really clean up.
The Minefields worked exactly as anticipated. Quite useful in deterrence.
I do believe that it might be necessary to adjust the IPC levels of both sides up somewhat, like maybe 2 or 3 apiece, but no more than that, I think. Our first game turned into a real meat grinder along the Libyan/Egyptian border as we both sought to first smash the other’s defenses, and then to outthink/outflank them. The extra space move really helps with this, but again, you’ve gotta be wise about it. I discovered that it was all too easy for my buddy to drive a wedge right through my forces as I tried to sneak a tank detachment around his southern flank. Lucky for me that I was able to get out of that trap, but had my units be under a penalty, I would’ve been carved up in detail.
As for initial unit dispositions, the one we started with may work just fine, but that remains to be determined. We probably won’t know for sure until this first game has been decided. One thing that is certain, however, is that airpower didn’t play as much of a deciding role as I thought it would, so I might add more airpower to the initial deployment, as I was a bit conservative this first time. (two fighters, one bomber apiece.)
Anyway, so far, so good. There were some bugs to address, but I think we got those taken care of. This really looks like it works well, and I think we had fun trying it out. It was relatively fast paced….well, it didn’t drag on, anyway. As for the comments above on the BOTB pcs, We’ll have to look at those when they become available, but for right now I think the original concept works well. I think the supply trucks might be useful, but they might upset the balance so we’ll have to see how they could fit in.
Thanks so much for the interest and the insights, guys. It’s really appreciated and gives me much food for thought. I’ll keep updating s we go along.
Rob.
I would also like to say that I’m a fan of the Africa A&A idea and the concept that you have created.
Thank you sir. :-)
I hope you are not annoyed with my suggestions.
Rhineland
No, not at all. The continued input and support you guys provide is very rewarding.
Rob.
This will take time to sort out. looks interesting
After looking over some of the rules changes outlined on angelfire.com i wonder if Mauser and i didn’t possibly reinvent the wheel, admittedly with Mauser’s unique spin on it.
Particularly in regards to the use of artillery and tanks.
i have no time to embellish Mauser’s very comprehensive notes at this time but let me toss this little grenade as i dart back to the front,
The narrow playing field is horrific. Do not empathize with your little plastic men. You won’t know them long.
@Imperious:
This will take time to sort out. looks interesting
Yeah, it’s a bit jumbled. I will revise the original rules post on page 1 to incorporate all of the recent developments. I’ll get it sorted out so that it’s much easier to read.
Rob.
After looking over some of the rules changes outlined on angelfire.com i wonder if Mauser and i didn’t possibly reinvent the wheel, admittedly with Mauser’s unique spin on it.
Particularly in regards to the use of artillery and tanks.
i have no time to embellish Mauser’s very comprehensive notes at this time but let me toss this little grenade as i dart back to the front,
The narrow playing field is horrific. Do not empathize with your little plastic men. You won’t know them long.
You should know, as you so rudely killed at least half of them. :-D
Rob.
I have thouhgt of an idea for adding in the maltia varient.
You can have a seasonal element to the shiping so like in Winter the fighters shoot lower and in summer they do better. So along with this there is a deck of card that determine how successful the axis shipping has gone without being discovered. So with these elements waiting when to ship is very important.
As for the cards I would liek to see
Undiscovered
Late detection
Early detection
Leaked intelligence
You could have this as a random pill or you could have the british player play these cards as they see fit.
Tell me what you think??
Mechanized Infantry & Self-propelled/Towed artillery:
Either player may choose any number of infantry and/or artillery pcs and move them one additional
space on either his combat- or non-combat move, in any direction of movement, for a total of 2 spaces.
However, in doing so, they have outrun their supply lines and must suffer a penalty of no combat- or
non-combat movement during their controller’s next turn. They may still attack when they get to their
2nd space, they may still defend while serving their penalty, and they may even retreat if the attack
goes bad, but only one space back, at which time they are still out of gas and must still serve the
next turn penalty. To simulate this status, they must be placed on their sides or upside down to
portray their status. So basically, if you choose to move some units in this fashion, they are
incapable of any movement (except retreat from the initial attack move) for their controller’s next
turn. After that they are considered to be refueled and can be turned upright to resume normal
operations.
++++ This is a good idea only the system of accounting of this is not aesthetic ( upside down rule). Perhaps to make things easier you should allow a mechanized movement phase whereby tanks and self propelled artillery can make a limited movement in addition to regular combat movement. This would bring value to more expensive units because your trading the extra cost for some additional mobility. The movement should be as follows based on the number of spaces:
infantry and artillery moves 2
tanks move 4
mech infantry, tanks and self -propelled again move 2 in mech movement phase.
Tanks:
May move an additional space too, for a maximum of 3 spaces, at which point the same
conditions/limitations apply.
However, there is an exception to this penalty rule, and an exception to that exception. On my map
(which I will post pictures of as soon as I’m done painting it) I have drawn the Via Balbia, aka the
coastal road. All 3 units may move their additional space on the coastal road without penalty, which
simulates two things: first, it reflects the relative ease of resupply over a road as opposed to open
desert, and second, it boosts the value of the coastal cities along the road, which is important as
there aren’t a plethora of IPCs available for easy capture. This makes flanking and leapfrogging
operations more important, thereby increasing movement complexity and ensuring the game won’t be so
linear on a long, relatively narrow battlefield.
++++ the road should count as double the current movement as long as the units dont move off and on the road. All units must stop when they enter any territory adjacent to any enemy piece ( zone of control rules apply)
And as I said, there is an exception to this exception; if the enemy is able to place a unit on the
road within 2 spaces of the advaced unit/units’ rear, then the advanced unit’s supply line is
considered cut and it must then be turned over to simulate this status. It must then serve the normal
penalty the next turn unless the advanced unit’s controller can destroy the interloping enemy unit
during his next attack phase. If he can do so, then the advanced unit may be turned upright and moved
during the non-combat phase if so desired. All of this will hopefully reflect the importance of
protecting one’s flanks and rear area. Don’t want to leave those REMFs twisting in the breeze, you
know. evil
++++ easier if yoyu just install ZOC rules from classic wargames.
Anti-tank Guns:
The 88 earned it’s legendary status on the battlefields of North Africa, so I felt the need to include
some kind of anti-tank capability, but I didn’t want to add more new units than necessary so I’ve
decided to allow the players to designate artillery pcs as AT guns at their discretion. They can be
very powerful when employed properly (wisely), but there must be some balance so there are some
restrictions…
Restrictions:
1. Arty may only be AT guns while on defense.
2. They may only target tanks while in this mode.
3. They are a one-shot deal, meaning they take no further part in combat in that space on that turn.
4. Controlled may designate either some or all of his arty pcs in a space as AT guns.
5. One gun to one tank.
6. They fire before all other combat in that space.
7. They hit on a 3 or less.
8. Any enemy tank thus hit is removed immediately without firing a shot.
+++ this is sopt on except it should be a 2 or less, also consider the following:
Special combat rules:
self-propelled Artillery should be replaced with the AA unit and artillery now have additional powers as AA guns as follows:
Anti- Aircraft Defense
If any attacking planes are involved the defender can roll one Anti- Aircraft roll (AA) for each defending artillery unit present roll one D6 results of 2-6 have not effect. If you roll a one re-roll another D6 if you get a 1 the attacking planes is destroyed, 2-3 and the plane must return to base and cannot participate in combat. Results 4-6 have no effect.
Which brings me to what I think is the coolest part of my variant, the new unit…
MINEFIELDS!
Minefields are a fundamental tool of desert warfare and can be very effective when
properly employed. They may be purchased and positioned like any other unit, but they are not revealed
to the enemy until he stumbles into the space containing it. The purchaser may hold his chip off to
the side of the board until such time that it’s presence is discovered. In addition, there are
some important rules to observe:
1. They cost 8 IPCs and are represented on the game board by a chip with an “M” on one side.
2. They are like AA guns in that they cannot be fired upon by an attacker.
3. Only 1 minefield per space, like AA guns.
4. Mines cannot be placed in an enemy controlled space.
4. They cannot be placed on city or road spaces.
5. Enemy units cannot occupy or control a space with an enemy minefield still inside it.
6. Defending units may occupy or move through a minefield without damage.
7. The controller must declare a minefield immediately upon entry by the enemy, or forfeit the
minefield back to the bank.
8. Once declared, all invading units which move into a minefield space must stop to receive damage.
Minefield Combat:
When an enemy moves into a minefield, the mine controller declares the minefield and places his “M”
chip upon the space for the first time. The enemy’s forces stop all movement. The mine controller gets
a one-shot roll of 1 die for each enemy land unit in the field, and hits on a roll of 3 or less during
this first roll only. This simulates the surprise and chaos of an initial minefield encounter. All
land units hit by mine rolls are removed immediately. At this point, the minefield has done it’s job
and ground combat can take place as normal. If the attacking force is able to clear the space of
defending units, then the attacker can roll 1 die in an attempt to “sweep” the minefield needing a
roll of 2 or less to sweep successfully. If he gets his roll he may then remove the chip and take
control of the space, and if not then he must retreat.
On each subsequent enemy incursion into the minefield, it’s no longer a secret that it’s there, so
while it’s still dangerous I believe it’s effectiveness should be reduced somewhat. Subsequently,
every time thereafter when a minefield roll is required (for that particular minefield), it only hits
at a 2 or less for each invading unit. And conversely, as it’s effectiveness has gone down, the
invader’s ability to sweep it should be slightly improved, and he can now sweep it on a roll of 3 or
less. This status stays in effect until the minefield is swept clear.
++++ these rules are fine for now. good work.
Landmines idea #2
Each player also have a number of secret landmine positions that are recorded before the game begins. Each land mine is allocated to one specific territory and every enemy ground units that attack or move into this hex each roll one D6 hitting the unit on a one. These hits are preemptive and every unit that moves into the minefield hex has to roll a die. The British have a total of 20 land mine points at the start of the game. The Germans have 10 points. Simply record the hexes where they are placed and announce their location at the moment the enemy moves or attacks the hex. Additional points can be purchased for 3 IPC each.
AA guns (Flak)
Flak may be mechanized as per the conditions of infantry and artillery, max move 2 spaces with the resulting penalty.
May be purchased as per normal rules, 5 IPC.
Always fire first against attacking aircraft, rolling 1 die per plane and hitting on a roll of 1.
Also fire first against Tactical Bombing Raids with same conditions.
Only fire once in the combat cycle.
Cannot be destroyed. If the space they occupy falls to the enemy, that player gains control of any AA units within.
Flak idea #2 ( use artillery units for this the German army did not have specific flak units they were attacked to tank / infantry divisions
Anti- Aircraft Defense
If any attacking planes are involved the defender can roll one Anti- Aircraft roll (AA) for each defending artillery unit present roll one D6 results of 2-6 have not effect. If you roll a one re-roll another D6 if you get a 1 the attacking planes is destroyed, 2-3 and the plane must return to base and cannot participate in combat. Results 4-6 have no effect.
Other thoughts:
1. Artillery still modifies accompanying infantry attack strength to 2 as normal.
2. Aircraft still move, attack, and defend as normal (see Italian exceptions).
3. There are a couple large spaces on the map which are considered impassable terrain, such as the Qattara Depression and the Jebel Akhdar.
4. Land units may not pass through these, but aircraft may fly over them.
5. There are also a couple of huge spaces of impassable terrain,the Great Sand Sea and the Dehan Ubari.
6. These may not be moved through NOR flown over.
Aircraft:
May land in any space owned or controlled by the plane’s controller.
Cannot land in enemy territory.
Cannot land in a space captured during that turn.
Cannot fly over water.
++++ this is all good…
Tactical Bombing Raids: (TBR)
Since there are no factories to bomb, bombers may instead attack units in any enemy RZ on a tactical bombing raid . Bombers in a TBR must survive the defender’s flak getting it’s normal preemptive roll . In this case, bombers hit on a roll of 1, like normal, but the defender chooses which units in that RZ are lost to hits. No fighter escort.
++++ idea #2
Air Missions
The availability air units depend upon the weather conditions for each turn. You may perform one of 6 missions for each air unit during each turn. Some missions such as Air Interception and Defensive Air Support (DAS) can be played during your opponents turn. In any case you may only perform one type of mission summarized as follows:
1) Close Combat Ground Support Mission: Each fighter can use its attack factor to attack any group of enemy ground forces. Any hits that result are removed from play (defenders choice) and don’t get an opportunity to fire back.
2) Defensive Air Support (DAS) Mission: Air units allocated for DAS missions cannot be stationed farther than 1/2 foight range from the targeted territory. If the enemy performs the above attack you as the defender can call up your own fighters and a round of aerial combat occurs. All plane hits are resolved and only allocated to participating involved air units. Additional hits can go against ground units.
Air Interdiction Mission: Move any Bomber over any enemy occupied hex. The Bomber and any escorts (for protection from air interception) stay in the territory until the following turn. Any time any enemy unit decides to move outside this territory each has to suffer one D6 roll. A result of 1 causes a step loss while a result of 2-3 results in “shock†which prevents the unit from moving until the following movement phase. Example: a Tank that was “shocked†in the mechanized movement phase cannot move again until the following regular movement phase which falls on their next turn.
Carpet Bombing: Each Bomber moves on any enemy territory and rolls to attack. Any hits taken preemptively are removed (defenders choice) and the defending enemy ground units cannot fire on the Bomber.
Yikes. :-o Too many more rules variants and i’ll have to downgrade to checkers.
I would like to play this game
Mauser bob I sent you an email with my email
please could you email me the rules
When my firends and I play A&AR we use a house rule for anti-tank guns like yours, except we use AA guns.
At the beginning of a combat in a territory with an AA gun, instead of using it to fire at aircraft, you can instead chose to fire it against tanks
Roll one dice for every tank and on a 1 there hit.
You may want to take your original AT gun rules out to replace with this one, because it is more realistic,
The 88 was not deisigned as an artillery piece, but as a anti-aircraft gun, but later it was discovered that it was a good AT gun too.
so it is only logical that in an A&A Africa game, AA guns can also be used as AT guns.
Your minefields seem to overpowerd compared to their historical couterpart, but if it adds to the game play
Also, why not add fuel rules in, Rommel was always running out of fuel for his tanks and having to steal from the Brits.
It may overcomplicate the game, but it could be interesting.
Not sure I can buy this concept. The most important factor in this battle was that of supplying the two armies by sea. Malta was crucial as a base for the Allies to sink Axis convoys, and the same applied to Axis air bases in Italy.
Even this assumes that the campaign was effectively over before Operation Torch brought in the Americans by amphibious assault, and the stiff Axis resistance in Tunisia suggests otherwise.
I think A&A Mediterranean would be more viable, but that’s clearly beyond the scope of your concept.
I have a similar rule, but instead of opening fire the AT guns fight in every round and can be taken as casualties. They still only hit on 1, but each hit can be applied to an enemy tank.
When my firends and I play A&AR we use a house rule for anti-tank guns like yours, except we use AA guns.
At the beginning of a combat in a territory with an AA gun, instead of using it to fire at aircraft, you can instead chose to fire it against tanks
Roll one dice for every tank and on a 1 there hit.You may want to take your original AT gun rules out to replace with this one, because it is more realistic,
The 88 was not deisigned as an artillery piece, but as a anti-aircraft gun, but later it was discovered that it was a good AT gun too.
so it is only logical that in an A&A Africa game, AA guns can also be used as AT guns.
