If I were Larry, I would…

most of the other wars would be a map, a set up, and rules for cavalry, maybe a tech chart, and change the basic inf. into a 1/1/1/3 unit. And maybe one or two rules special for that war.

As understand the reason for the 2 defense and 1 attack is entrenching defensive positions, fox holes trenches stuff like that. American Civil War the soldiers didn’t dig in for the night.

@Yavid:

most of the other wars would be a map, a set up, and rules for cavalry, maybe a tech chart, and change the basic inf. into a 1/1/1/3 unit. And maybe one or two rules special for that war.

As understand the reason for the 2 defense and 1 attack is entrenching defensive positions, fox holes trenches stuff like that. American Civil War the soldiers didn’t dig in for the night.

They utilized terrain to their advantage though - Little Round Top comes to mind.  Fields, Tree/Fence lines, etc.  I’m pretty sure the defender was better off than the attacker as the majority of times the attacker had to advance into an open area and face artillery/cavalry before they even get in range to fire at the defensive lines.

i’m speaking from what i’ve read in one of the A&A rule books. I think it was MB’s Classic.

Sitting still usually gives the defender a huge advantage.
He knows the enemy is coming, and doesn’t need to move his supplies very far once they get to the battlezone.

Traditionally commanders want to attack with 3:1 odds, for a decent chance at victory….probably because a defending soldier is twice as effective as one attacking.

Just saw something on TV about Pickett’s charge, and the South only had a 2:1 manpower advantage.
A VERY risky attack by anyone’s standards.

Even in A&A the axiom holds true.
Making a 3:1 attack should succeed, a 2:1 attack is daring, and a 1:1 attack is suicide.

???

I would bet on 5 inf beating 3 anyday.

Oztea…

When the balance of economics ISN’t behind you, it’s better to face the 1v1 suicide. :)

anyway, I just hope developers play the game before they bust it out. OOB was a little ridiculous, but I am glad we got past it.

jtolsen came up with an interesting idea. put a transport on sz 105. historically there was a normandy retreat. This would ease things up for allies as typically normandy is not attacked on G1 and if it is germany suffers more casualties in france usually (6 tanks left instead of 3 mech, 6 armor, and an artillery or two). If normandy is ignored it eases the defense of london up a bit so uk might not have to suicide a transport getting units from canada to london.

I would like to see french transport on sz 105. historically correct, small game impact.

maybe a british sub if possible somewhere on the map, historically britian had a sub somewhere.

i was thinking the same thing the other day. France needs that transport for Dunkirk and it would be nice for the Brits to have a sub.

Sub in the Mediterranean for both the UK and a 2nd sub for Italy.

…never read forums again, leave WOTC and make a Global 40 “Gold” edition costing $500.

:-D :-D :-D

Hmmmmmm, Good topic

1. Add a bunch of optional rules and units like “Tank Destroyer” and Vichy Rule.
2. Add a tranny near france for dunkirk
3. Remove 3 Russian inf in bury and replace it with 1 arty and 1 mech
4. Rewrite the tech tree, make more stuff like V2, Nukes, Heavys Tanks, ect.
5. Add more sea zones in med
6. Make a diplomacy rule for neutrals

We have D-Day and the Bulge. What happened to Cobra and Goodwood? Seems there is a hole that needs plugging and a use for all the A&A Europe assets.
Transports would be usable for re=enforcement from England while there would be room for a new piece (air transport or rail transport). The one off games tended to have a unique piece (blockhouses for D-day, Motor T for Bulge, and US carrier aircraft for Guadalcanal).

I would love an Iwo Jima game as there were lots of assets used by both sides but it would only be US vs Japan. You could even have what if scenarios involving a major sea battle as at Guadalcanal to add some replay factors.

Semper Fi
Desert Shield, Storm, Calm
Dec 24-May 22 1990-91

They should make a battle for Italy game.

If the Germans/Italians hold out long enough, they win.  If the Allies secure Rome and other goals in time… they win.

Larry should ban all Canadians from playing…since they are not represented well on the map. :-D

@sgtwiltan:

We have D-Day and the Bulge. What happened to Cobra and Goodwood?

The D-Day landings and the Battle of the Bulge have the advantage of being well known.  Quite a few members of the general public (defined here “those uninteresting people who don’t play A&A”) have heard about both engagements, but I doubt that they’d know what Cobra and Goodwood refer to.  D-Day and the BotB have had major movies made about them, so that helps the recognition factor.

An optional “commonwealth” rule.
Where UK gives up canada, and you use ANZAC pieces to represent them

UK gets a new NO to compensate for the loss of 7 IPCs.
Canada and ANZAC work as a split economy on the same turn….just like UK/India (move and attack together, collects different IPCs)

I like it

All fans of Michigan should be banned.  It’s rival to Larry’s home state.