Hi, I am new to this mailing list, so I'll try to get something started here.
How about a simple poll? The subject is very controversial, but the question
is simple. (Usually people are adamant about their opinions on this one.)
How do you rate the play balance of FITE/Scorched Earth?
a) The Germans have an overwhelming advantage.
b) The Germans have a small advantage.
c) It is balanced evenly.
d) The Soviets have a small advantage.
e) The Soviets have an overwhelming advantage.
I'll vote first. I vote e.
Jim Pritchett
UUCP: rwsys.lonestar.org!caleb!europapoll
or utacfd.uta.edu!rwsys!caleb!europapoll
>From matpe@se.liu.lysator Wed Apr 28 16:20:18 1993
Return-Path: <matpe@se.liu.lysator>
Received: from lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <05274-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Wed, 28 Apr 1993 16:20:00 +0100
Received: from ua.d.umn.edu (131.212.32.12) by lysator.liu.se (ALPHA-6.36/6.16)
id AA05674; Wed, 28 Apr 1993 17:15:52 +0200
Received: by ua.d.umn.edu id AA18374 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4
for europa@lysator.liu.se); Wed, 28 Apr 1993 10:15:31 -0500
From: Kurt Schroeder <kschroe2@ua.d.umn.edu>
Message-Id: <199304281515.AA18374@ua.d.umn.edu>
Subject: no subject (file transmission)
To: europa@lysator.liu.se (Europa mailing list)
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 93 10:15:31 CDT
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]
Status: RO
^ How do you rate the play balance of FITE/Scorched Earth?
^
^ a) The Germans have an overwhelming advantage.
^ b) The Germans have a small advantage.
^ c) It is balanced evenly.
^ d) The Soviets have a small advantage.
^ e) The Soviets have an overwhelming advantage.
^
^ I'll vote first. I vote e.
^ Jim Pritchett
^ UUCP: rwsys.lonestar.org!caleb!europapoll
^ or utacfd.uta.edu!rwsys!caleb!europapoll
I'd vote somewhere between d and e. Of course, the next question to be
asked, assuming agreement on this first one, is:
Is this lack of balance a problem?
Several issues enter in here.
1. The Soviets won the real war by a long shot. This would argue that the
game should be unbalanced, at least in the long run. Of course, should the
Germans (or, more accurately, the Axis :-) have a chance in the 'short run',
e.g. through Fall 1942, and do they in the game?
2. This assumes that people who play a game as complicated as FITE/SE/U are
interested primarily in simulation of historical events, rather than in
game-ability or play value. Is this true of the people reading this mail
list? What is the desired balance between historicity and playability. My
own feeling is that the game system (Europa) and scenarios (FITE/SE/U) should
be able to accurately portray the choices available at the
operational/strategic level while allowing the players (who take the roles of
theatre commanders) to make operational and strategic choices different than
those chosen by the historical characters.
On our own operational level, I am unsure as to how to submit something to
this mail list. I am simply responding to the above message by Jim P. Is
that the procedure to be followed, or should I be mailing this message back
to lysator, or what? Jim, if this message reaches only you, could you
forward it to the right place? I have never used one of these mailing lists
before, and some instructions (perhaps posted to rec.board.games also) would
probably increase participation on the part of neophytes such as myself.
Thnx.
Kurt Schroeder
kschroe2@ua.d.umn.edu
>From matpe@se.liu.lysator Wed Apr 28 16:54:17 1993
Return-Path: <matpe@se.liu.lysator>
Received: from lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <09525-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Wed, 28 Apr 1993 16:53:55 +0100
Received: from ida.liu.se (130.236.139.139; curofix.ida.liu.se)
by lysator.liu.se (ALPHA-6.36/6.16) id AA07819;
Wed, 28 Apr 1993 17:51:10 +0200
Received: from diagnostix by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5)
id AA15145; Wed, 28 Apr 93 17:51:08 +0200
From: Mats Persson <map@ida.liu.se>
Received: from diag19 by diagnostix (5.65b/ida.slave-V1.0b3) id AA25875;
Wed, 28 Apr 93 17:51:07 +0200
Received: by diag19 (5.65b/ida.slave-V1.0b3) id AA05195;
Wed, 28 Apr 93 17:51:06 +0200
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 93 17:51:06 +0200
Message-Id: <9304281551.AA05195@diag19>
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: no subject (file transmission)
Status: RO
>On our own operational level, I am unsure as to how to submit something to
>this mail list. I am simply responding to the above message by Jim P. Is
>that the procedure to be followed, or should I be mailing this message back
>to lysator, or what? Jim, if this message reaches only you, could you
>forward it to the right place? I have never used one of these mailing lists
>before, and some instructions (perhaps posted to rec.board.games also) would
>probably increase participation on the part of neophytes such as myself.
You did it correctly.
Be sure that the To: field in your message contains europa@lysator.liu.se.
In the Sun version of Mail this is done by using R and then ~h to delete
the senders mailaddress. In mailtool choose button 'Reply (all)'. Other
mail programs use other methods.
/Mats Persson
>From matpe@se.liu.lysator Fri Apr 30 06:59:09 1993
Return-Path: <matpe@se.liu.lysator>
Received: from lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <00919-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Fri, 30 Apr 1993 06:59:04 +0100
Received: from mcsun.EU.net (192.16.202.1) by lysator.liu.se (ALPHA-6.36/6.16)
id AA01934; Fri, 30 Apr 1993 07:54:40 +0200
Received: by mcsun.EU.net via EUnet id AA26774 (5.65b/CWI-2.217);
Fri, 30 Apr 1993 07:54:38 +0200
Received: from utacfd.uta.edu (via [129.107.2.131]) by relay1.UU.NET
with SMTP (5.61/UUNET-internet-primary) id AA21493;
Fri, 30 Apr 93 01:47:15 -0400
Received: by utacfd.uta.edu (/\==/\ Smail3.1.25.1 #25.1)
id <m0nolSt-000JDHC@utacfd.uta.edu>; Thu, 29 Apr 93 22:08 CDT
Received: from caleb by rwsys.lonestar.org with uucp (Smail3.1.27.1 #1)
id m0nolJc-0000a8C; Thu, 29 Apr 93 21:59 CDT
Received: by caleb.UUCP (V1.15/Amiga) id AA005wn; Thu, 29 Apr 93 20:52:04 CST
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 93 20:52:04 CST
Message-Id: <9304300252.AA005wn@caleb.UUCP>
From: caleb!jdp@relay.EU.net (Jim Pritchett)
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: Hello and FITE question
Status: RO
Note: I sent this reply direct, but I later decided that the list might be
interested, so I am sending it there also.
Graham_Arts@mindlink.bc.ca wrote:
> 1. The Soviets won the real war by a long shot. This would argue that the
> game should be unbalanced, at least in the long run. Of course, should the
> Germans (or, more accurately, the Axis :-) have a chance in the 'short run',
> e.g. through Fall 1942, and do they in the game?
The Soviet victory implies that the Germans need to win before the Soviet
war machine can get significant amounts of materiel into the conflict.
Alternatively, the Germans need to reach the end of the vast Soviet supply
of potential soldiers (note: they came a lot closer to this point than they
ever admitted. The Soviets lied about the population of their cities for
decades after the war.)
>
> 2. This assumes that people who play a game as complicated as FITE/SE/U are
> interested primarily in simulation of historical events, rather than in
> game-ability or play value. Is this true of the people reading this mail
> list? What is the desired balance between historicity and playability. My
> own feeling is that the game system (Europa) and scenarios (FITE/SE/U) should
> be able to accurately portray the choices available at the
> operational/strategic level while allowing the players (who take the roles of
> theatre commanders) to make operational and strategic choices different than
> those chosen by the historical characters.
This varies according to the players.
>
> On our own operational level, I am unsure as to how to submit something to
> this mail list. I am simply responding to the above message by Jim P. Is
> that the procedure to be followed, or should I be mailing this message back
> to lysator, or what? Jim, if this message reaches only you, could you
> forward it to the right place? I have never used one of these mailing lists
> before, and some instructions (perhaps posted to rec.board.games also) would
> probably increase participation on the part of neophytes such as myself.
You should post directly to the mailing list address (i.e. europa@lysator.liu.se)
I'm not sure where replies to the list go. That should work, but it may not.
If it goes to the mailing list, you should see it. If not, post it to the ml
yourself, or drop me a note and I can forward it for you.
Jim Pritchett
UUCP: rwsys.lonestar.org!caleb!jdp
or utacfd.uta.edu!rwsys!caleb!jdp
>From matpe@se.liu.lysator Fri Apr 30 17:58:43 1993
Return-Path: <matpe@se.liu.lysator>
Received: from lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <03435-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Fri, 30 Apr 1993 17:43:00 +0100
Received: from ida.liu.se (130.236.139.139; curofix.ida.liu.se)
by lysator.liu.se (ALPHA-6.36/6.16) id AA08640;
Fri, 30 Apr 1993 18:40:05 +0200
Received: from diagnostix by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5)
id AA25722; Fri, 30 Apr 93 18:40:02 +0200
From: Mats Persson <map@ida.liu.se>
Received: from diag19 by diagnostix (5.65b/ida.slave-V1.0b3) id AA03668;
Fri, 30 Apr 93 18:40:01 +0200
Received: by diag19 (5.65b/ida.slave-V1.0b3) id AA06148;
Fri, 30 Apr 93 18:39:59 +0200
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 93 18:39:59 +0200
Message-Id: <9304301639.AA06148@diag19>
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: FITE question
Status: RO
> How do you rate the play balance of FITE/Scorched Earth?
Between c and d in 1941/42. The whole game is probably e,
but I have never played it to the end.
I think there should be better victory conditions.
My suggestion is: count the number of cities/city hexes owned
each year, in both Oct I and Oct II, and Apr I and Apr II.
Then compare this number to some average number. The Germans
get the +/- difference as victory points.
With these victory conditions the Soviets must choose between
saving his army or try to hold cities.
/Mats
>From matpe@se.liu.lysator Fri Apr 30 18:00:02 1993
Return-Path: <matpe@se.liu.lysator>
Received: from lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <03619-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Fri, 30 Apr 1993 17:44:54 +0100
Received: from ida.liu.se (130.236.139.139; curofix.ida.liu.se)
by lysator.liu.se (ALPHA-6.36/6.16) id AA08764;
Fri, 30 Apr 1993 18:42:16 +0200
Received: from diagnostix by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5)
id AA25738; Fri, 30 Apr 93 18:42:15 +0200
From: Mats Persson <map@ida.liu.se>
Received: from diag19 by diagnostix (5.65b/ida.slave-V1.0b3) id AA03674;
Fri, 30 Apr 93 18:42:14 +0200
Received: by diag19 (5.65b/ida.slave-V1.0b3) id AA06153;
Fri, 30 Apr 93 18:42:12 +0200
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 93 18:42:12 +0200
Message-Id: <9304301642.AA06153@diag19>
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
Subject: TEM 6
Status: RO
Does anybody have issue number 6 of The Europa Magazine?
I need the OB for the British Pioneers.
/Mats
>From matpe@se.liu.lysator Fri Apr 30 19:19:09 1993
Return-Path: <matpe@se.liu.lysator>
Received: from lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <13148-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Fri, 30 Apr 1993 19:18:35 +0100
Received: from june.cs.washington.edu (128.95.1.4)
by lysator.liu.se (ALPHA-6.36/6.16) id AA14030;
Fri, 30 Apr 1993 20:15:58 +0200
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.65b/7.1ju) id AA28598;
Fri, 30 Apr 93 11:16:00 -0700
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 93 11:16:00 -0700
From: graham@cs.washington.edu (Stephen Graham)
Return-Path: <graham@cs.washington.edu>
Message-Id: <9304301816.AA28598@june.cs.washington.edu>
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: FITE question
Status: RO
>I think there should be better victory conditions.
>My suggestion is: count the number of cities/city hexes owned
>each year, in both Oct I and Oct II, and Apr I and Apr II.
>Then compare this number to some average number. The Germans
>get the +/- difference as victory points.
>
>With these victory conditions the Soviets must choose between
>saving his army or try to hold cities.
Better would be to show why the Soviets need to hold certain areas.
There should be some importance to holding cities, but most Soviet
industry is missing from the game.
For instance, there's the entire Donbass industrial region, including
most of the iron ore & smelting available as well as additional factories
not shown. The southern runaway defense might change if losing the
area meant sharply reduced armor, artillery and air production.
Overall, though, I don't particularly care for victory points. Most
games of FiTE/SE end in one side or the other quitting, effectively
surrendering. The other games end under similar conditions, it
becomes clear to the players who has won and by what margin. In the
case of First to Fight or Balkan front, where the loser is guaranteed,
the Poles and the Allies should be able to judge for themselves how
well they played. How much did the Germans pay for their victory?
Since we know when the campaigns ended historically, VPs for time
are somewhat useful, but a Greek player still holding out at the
beginning of June knows that he's won.
>From matpe@se.liu.lysator Tue May 4 03:18:56 1993
Return-Path: <matpe@se.liu.lysator>
Received: from lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <29611-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Tue, 4 May 1993 03:18:42 +0100
Received: from CU.NIH.GOV (128.231.64.7) by lysator.liu.se (ALPHA-6.36/6.16)
id AA22094; Tue, 4 May 1993 04:15:29 +0200
Message-Id: <199305040215.AA22094@lysator.liu.se>
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
From: Spider <AKG@CU.NIH.GOV>
Date: Mon, 03 May 1993 22:11:04 EDT
Subject: Europa
Status: RO
== Forwarded Mail ==
MAIL FROM AKG MONDAY 05/03/93 10:10:21 P.M.
To: AKG
From: "Spider" <AKG>
Date: Mon, 03 May 1993 22:10:17 EDT
Subject: Europa
I was the Polish player in the game of First to Fight that Viktor
mentioned. Certainly it was not Viktor's fault (well, maybe a little) that
the German's lost in victory points.
I've always liked the maxim "The best defense is a good offense." The
player playing the Southern forces for the Germans was not aware of my
inclination, and proceeded in a rather lax manner. His strategy was to
build as powerful a stack as possible, and attack with multiples of these
stacks against the strongest points in my line, in the hopes of destroying
my powerful units early in the game.
This would be a good point to mention my setup. The Polish have many
of their good units either cut off or simply destroyed in the first moments
of the invasion. The Northern Germans, however, are rather weak; and the
Polish have a good line of forts facing them. So rather than try to defend
a line, I used weak divisions in the forts and the intervening swamps to
bring the Northern advance to a mind-numbing crawl. (The North has about
as much armour as the Polish.) In the South, however, I stacked my most
mobile cavalry and armour (what little I had) into mid-size stacks. To
solidify my line, I brought up the units from the North to bolster any weak
spots and roads. The Germans, in their carelessness and confidence in the
Polish's lack of any choice other than to stand there and take it, left
gaps in his line. As a result, two of these stacks of mine shot through
his line, destroyed an air unit, and attacked two of his stacks of
'leftovers'.
The German, in making ultra-powerful stacks, was left with stacks of
five or six 1-10 mobile units. So a stack of say, two 5-6 cav divisions, a
1-8 artillery, a 3-5 armour division, and a 1-8 armour regement was enough
to demolish such a stack. And whammo, I've got some 15-18 victory points.
with the air thrown in, and the other stack, that was like 58 vp's in one
turn. Vik made a similar mistake in the North. He left a gap so that,
during my mechanized movement phase, I sent a 1-8 armour through onto an
airfield with three Ju-88's. One escaped, that's another 50 vp's. It was
these mistakes that cost them the game. Sure, I lost alot of units and
ended up losing Warsaw early, but even that was bad luck on my part. When
Polish units are cut off, they roll to see if they surrender. Of nine
stacks of units which I rolled for, only one survived, and it was a weak
stack. In addition, the Souther player managed to get his armour, three
corps worth, cut off by my Polish zoc's. I had better than 50% chance on
three attacks to destroy a stack of 6re's of armour, and got none of 'em.
Then my units got cut off by the Northern player, who finally drudged
through my line of forts and zoc's and cut off most of my units, which
conveniently, and promptly, died.
When all was said and done (the Germans decided to get those
horror-bombing vp's rather than take a virtually defenseless Warsaw), the
only reason I really got the Strategic victory was because I got lucky with
one last attack, which allowed one of my border units to escape into
Lithuania.
All in all, it's a good game. Even though it seems hopeless with the
Polish, and a keen eyed German would never have allowed what happened to
occur (Viktor tried not to interfere with the Southern player's moves, he'd
never screw up that badly. In fact, he found it rather amusing.) it is
still fun to try nifty things with the Polish. (I've yet to try the
Germans.)
Arius V. Kaufmann
AKG@NIHCU I'm not politically incorrect,
AKG@CU.NIH.GOV I'm politically challenged.
>From matpe@se.liu.lysator Wed May 12 13:19:14 1993
Return-Path: <matpe@se.liu.lysator>
Received: from lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <15389-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Wed, 12 May 1993 13:19:01 +0100
Received: from ntcusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil (ntcusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil [131.158.4.7])
by lysator.liu.se (ALPHA-6.56/6.27) id OAA12268;
Wed, 12 May 1993 14:14:57 +0200
Received: from mgr.hjf.org by ntcusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil (5.59/25-eef) id AA21255;
Wed, 12 May 93 07:19:14 EDT
Received: by mgr.hjf.org (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA27283; Wed, 12 May 93 07:58:56 EDT
Date: Wed, 12 May 93 07:58:56 EDT
From: viktor@mgr.hjf.org (Viktor Kaufmann)
Message-Id: <9305121158.AA27283@mgr.hjf.org>
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
Subject: FITE Player Aid Kit
Status: RO
Does anyone have a copy of the Fire in the East Player Aid Kit which
they would be willing to sell?
One other thing, does anyone who is subscribed to this list also have access
to the Europa forum on GENIE? It would be interesting to see some of the
things they talk about there posted to this list.
Viktor
>From matpe@se.liu.lysator Fri May 14 12:24:29 1993
Return-Path: <matpe@se.liu.lysator>
Received: from lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <12527-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Fri, 14 May 1993 12:24:15 +0100
Received: from vanuata.dcs.gla.ac.uk (vanuata.dcs.gla.ac.uk [130.209.240.50])
by lysator.liu.se (ALPHA-6.56/6.27) id NAA28592;
Fri, 14 May 1993 13:17:26 +0200
Received: from tuvula.dcs.gla.ac.uk by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk
with LOCAL SMTP (PP) id <11979-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>;
Fri, 14 May 1993 12:15:19 +0100
Received: by tuvula.dcs.gla.ac.uk (4.1/Dumb) id AA12161;
Fri, 14 May 93 12:14:51 BST
Date: Fri, 14 May 93 12:14:51 BST
From: kh <kh@dcs.gla.ac.uk>
Message-Id: <9305141114.AA12161@tuvula.dcs.gla.ac.uk>
To: gwsteff@pbhya.pacbell.com, johhe@ida.liu.se
Subject: Re: Europa game titles
Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se
Status: RO
> I hope this list is complete (it is all from memory).
> By GDW:
Their Finest Hour Operation Sealion Hypothetical 1940
German Invasion of Britain
Jul-Nov 1940(?)
The Urals Eastern Front FiTE/SE Expansion
I've also seen "Africa Orientale" mentioned (Italian West African
campaigns presumably), but it doesn't seem to be a boxed game.
Maybe it was a "roll-your-own" mini in The Europa Magazine?
> By GRD (to appear "soon"):
Second Front Allied Western Campaigns Jul 1943- May 1945?
Is there any news of this yet?!
Kevin
>From matpe@se.liu.lysator Fri May 14 11:34:10 1993
Return-Path: <matpe@se.liu.lysator>
Received: from lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <08903-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Fri, 14 May 1993 11:33:59 +0100
Received: from ida.liu.se (curofix.ida.liu.se [130.236.139.139])
by lysator.liu.se (ALPHA-6.56/6.27) id MAA24385;
Fri, 14 May 1993 12:21:12 +0200
Received: from senilix by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA25563;
Fri, 14 May 93 12:21:00 +0200
From: Johan Herber <johhe@ida.liu.se>
Received: from sen3 by senilix (5.65b/ida.slave-V1.0b3) id AA02004;
Fri, 14 May 93 12:20:58 +0200
Received: by sen3 (5.65b/ida.slave-V1.0b3) id AA00705;
Fri, 14 May 93 12:20:51 +0200
Date: Fri, 14 May 93 12:20:51 +0200
Message-Id: <9305141020.AA00705@sen3>
To: gwsteff@pbhya.PacBell.COM
Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se
In-Reply-To: Gerald Steffler's message of Thu, 13 May 93 13:21:07 PDT <9305132021.AA02070@ns.PacBell.COM>
Subject: Europa game titles
Status: RO
By GDW:
Case White Polish Campaign Sep 1939 (Nonstandard time scale)
Narvik Norwegian Campaign Apr 1940 (Nonstandard unit and time scale)
Fall of France Western Campaign May 1940-
Marita-Merkur Balkan Campaign Dec 1940-Jun 41
Western Desert Desert War Nov 1940-
Torch French North Africa Nov 1942-Jun 43 (Continuation of WD)
Near East Iraq and Persia Nov 1940- (Add on to WD, no Soviets)*
Fire in the East Eastern Front Jun 1941-Mar 42 (Older title: Drang nach Osten)
Scorched Earth Eastern Front Apr 1942-Dec 44 (Continuation of FitE,
Older title: Unentschieden)**
Spain and Portugal Hypothetical German or Allied invasions.***
* Cannot be played by itself, WD needed.
** Cannot be played by itself, FitE needed.
*** Cannot be played by itself, FoF or Torch needed.
By GRD:
First to Fight Polish Campaign Rework of Case White.
Balkan Front Balkan Campaign Rework of Marita-Merkur
A Winter War Russo-Finnish War 39-40
I hope this list is complete (it is all from memory).
/Johan
>From @uk.ac.nsfnet-relay:thornley@edu.umn.cs Fri May 14 15:43:46 1993
Return-Path: <@uk.ac.nsfnet-relay:thornley@edu.umn.cs>
Received: from nsfnet-relay.ac.uk by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk via JANET with NIFTP (PP) id <29324-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Fri, 14 May 1993 15:43:32 +0100
Received: from mail.cs.umn.edu by sun3.nsfnet-relay.ac.uk with Internet SMTP
id <sg.07256-0@sun3.nsfnet-relay.ac.uk>;
Fri, 14 May 1993 15:42:23 +0100
Received: from milli.cs.umn.edu by mail.cs.umn.edu (5.65c/) id AA00107;
Fri, 14 May 1993 09:40:39 -0500
From: "David H. Thornley" <thornley@edu.umn.cs>
Received: by milli.cs.umn.edu id AA01724; 4.1/; Fri, 14 May 93 09:40:39 CDT
Message-Id: <9305141440.AA01724@milli.cs.umn.edu>
Subject: Re: Europa game titles
To: kh@uk.ac.glasgow.dcs (kh)
Date: Fri, 14 May 93 9:40:38 CDT
In-Reply-To: <9305141114.AA12161@tuvula.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; from "kh" at May 14, 93 12:14 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]
Status: RO
>
> > I hope this list is complete (it is all from memory).
>
> I've also seen "Africa Orientale" mentioned (Italian West African
> campaigns presumably), but it doesn't seem to be a boxed game.
> Maybe it was a "roll-your-own" mini in The Europa Magazine?
>
Africa Orientale was done by the Wargamer. It used Europa rules and
was intended to be Europa-compatible, but it was done by different people.
BTW, there's no reason why you couldn't tack The Near East onto a
Fire in the East game, but I don't see what it will buy you; invading
the Soviet Union through the Caucasus seems like a major logistic
and terrain nightmare (it takes *lots* of resource points to get a
rail connection).
> > By GRD (to appear "soon"):
>
> Second Front Allied Western Campaigns Jul 1943- May 1945?
>
> Is there any news of this yet?!
>
As always, it is slated for release later this year. Seriously, GR/D is
putting in a major effort, and has sworn off working on other projects
until Second Front is out the door. I really do expect it home by Christmas
this year. (My home, that is.)
DHT
>From @uk.ac.nsfnet-relay:matpe@se.liu.lysator Fri May 14 19:53:59 1993
Return-Path: <@uk.ac.nsfnet-relay:matpe@se.liu.lysator>
Received: from nsfnet-relay.ac.uk by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk via JANET with NIFTP (PP) id <22051-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Fri, 14 May 1993 19:53:53 +0100
Received: from lysator.liu.se by sun3.nsfnet-relay.ac.uk with Internet SMTP
id <sg.27652-0@sun3.nsfnet-relay.ac.uk>;
Fri, 14 May 1993 19:53:40 +0100
Received: from elrond.ida.liu.se (elrond.ida.liu.se [130.236.30.12])
by lysator.liu.se (ALPHA-6.56/6.27) id UAA02514;
Fri, 14 May 1993 20:41:12 +0200
Received: from june.cs.washington.edu by elrond.ida.liu.se
with SMTP (5.61-bind 1.5X+ida/IDA-1.2.8-mc2.5-2) id AA16731;
Fri, 14 May 93 17:05:32 +0200
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.65b/7.1ju) id AA10535;
Fri, 14 May 93 08:02:46 -0700
Date: Fri, 14 May 93 08:02:46 -0700
From: graham@edu.washington.cs (Stephen Graham)
Message-Id: <9305141502.AA10535@june.cs.washington.edu>
To: europa@se.liu.lysator
Subject: Re: Europa game titles
Sender: matpe@se.liu.lysator
Status: RO
>> By GRD (to appear "soon"):
>
>Second Front Allied Western Campaigns Jul 1943- May 1945?
>
>Is there any news of this yet?!
Second round of playtesting should commence later this month. We've
received black&white maps and the OB in the past week. All we need
are the rules and we can get underway. Projected release at Christmas 93.
Steve Graham
graham@cs.washington.edu
>From matpe@se.liu.lysator Fri May 14 20:15:14 1993
Return-Path: <matpe@se.liu.lysator>
Received: from lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <23581-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Fri, 14 May 1993 20:15:04 +0100
Received: from elrond.ida.liu.se (elrond.ida.liu.se [130.236.30.12])
by lysator.liu.se (ALPHA-6.56/6.27) id VAA04905;
Fri, 14 May 1993 21:07:43 +0200
Received: from curofix.ida.liu.se by elrond.ida.liu.se
with SMTP (5.61-bind 1.5X+ida/IDA-1.2.8-mc2.5-2) id AA16402;
Fri, 14 May 93 14:30:31 +0200
Received: from diagnostix by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5)
id AA27543; Fri, 14 May 93 14:27:47 +0200
From: Mats Persson <map@IDA.LiU.SE>
Received: from diag6 by diagnostix (5.65b/ida.slave-V1.0b3) id AA04306;
Fri, 14 May 93 14:27:46 +0200
Received: by diag6 (5.65b/ida.slave-V1.0b3) id AA09550;
Fri, 14 May 93 14:27:44 +0200
Date: Fri, 14 May 93 14:27:44 +0200
Message-Id: <9305141227.AA09550@diag6>
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: Europa game titles
Status: RO
>Second Front Allied Western Campaigns Jul 1943- May 1945?
>Is there any news of this yet?!
In the Europa Magazine #30, Rick Gayler says that the maps are printed
very soon, and the counters and rules are being worked on. The OB is
almost finished.
/Mats
>From matpe@se.liu.lysator Thu May 13 21:25:01 1993
Return-Path: <matpe@se.liu.lysator>
Received: from lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <03578-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Thu, 13 May 1993 21:24:53 +0100
Received: from ns.PacBell.COM (ns.PacBell.COM [192.150.170.2])
by lysator.liu.se (ALPHA-6.56/6.27) id WAA00867;
Thu, 13 May 1993 22:21:47 +0200
Received: from pbhya.UUCP by ns.PacBell.COM (4.1/PacBell-05/11/93) id AA02070;
Thu, 13 May 93 13:21:41 PDT
Message-Id: <9305132021.AA02070@ns.PacBell.COM>
Subject: Europa game titles
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
Date: Thu, 13 May 93 13:21:07 PDT
From: Gerald Steffler <gwsteff@pbhya.PacBell.COM>
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.2 PL16]
Status: RO
I'm looking for a concise list of all Europa games published by
GDW and GRD(?).
Is there a FAQ for Europa? I believe that the game system could
benefit from one. I've no idea which vendors system to purchase and
play. I understand GRD is re-issuing/re-working the GDW games. Are
the game names the same?
Thanks in advance.
Merciless1
>From matpe@se.liu.lysator Wed Jun 9 17:17:30 1993
Return-Path: <matpe@se.liu.lysator>
Received: from lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <20374-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Wed, 9 Jun 1993 17:17:05 +0100
Received: from ida.liu.se (curofix.ida.liu.se [130.236.139.139])
by lysator.liu.se (ALPHA-6.56/6.27) id SAA09715;
Wed, 9 Jun 1993 18:14:02 +0200
Received: from diagnostix by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5)
id AA22192; Wed, 9 Jun 93 18:14:00 +0200
From: Mats Persson <map@ida.liu.se>
Received: from diag19 by diagnostix (5.65b/ida.slave-V1.0b3) id AA09272;
Wed, 9 Jun 93 18:13:59 +0200
Received: by diag19 (5.65b/ida.slave-V1.0b3) id AA01520;
Wed, 9 Jun 93 18:13:57 +0200
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 93 18:13:57 +0200
Message-Id: <9306091613.AA01520@diag19>
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Archives
Status: RO
The mails in this mailinglist have been archived on
ftp.lysator.liu.se in directory pub/europa
in file d-1993-May
/Mats
>From matpe@se.liu.lysator Sat Jun 19 20:16:53 1993
Return-Path: <matpe@se.liu.lysator>
Received: from lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <20115-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Sat, 19 Jun 1993 20:16:51 +0100
Received: from ida.liu.se (curofix.ida.liu.se [130.236.139.139])
by lysator.liu.se (8.1B/8.1) with SMTP id VAA11423;
Sat, 19 Jun 1993 21:14:45 +0200
Received: from diagnostix by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5)
id AA10681; Sat, 19 Jun 93 21:14:43 +0200
From: Mats Persson <map@ida.liu.se>
Received: from diag19 by diagnostix (5.65b/ida.slave-V1.0b3) id AA10229;
Sat, 19 Jun 93 21:14:42 +0200
Received: by diag19 (5.65b/ida.slave-V1.0b3) id AA06909;
Sat, 19 Jun 93 21:14:40 +0200
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 93 21:14:40 +0200
Message-Id: <9306191914.AA06909@diag19>
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Europa List
Status: RO
Keith Rogers wrote:
>I submitted a request to be put on the Europa mailing list. I sent it
>to europa-request@lysator.liu.se a few days ago after I discovered its
>existence from this group's FAQ. Is the list operator on holiday?
>Does the list still live? Does anybody on the Net play Europa?
Yes, the list still lives, but has been a little quiet the last weeks.
>I'm starting my first game in it, Scorched Earth as the Germans, and
>am groping for any info which might help me out since I'm a rank
>novice at war games while my oponant has played several of the Europa
>modules plus lots of SL and ASL. I feel like a sheep going to the
>slaughter house...
My advice to you for the Germans is:
1. Kill as many Russians as you can.
2. If the Russians are in low density in an area, FORWARD!
3. Beware of counterattacks in areas with lots of Russians.
And an additional advice for the novice German is: put at least
one division in every stack. This will save your trucks, engineers,
Me 109s, and other small regiments and battalions.
I started a new Scorched Earth game with some friends two weeks ago.
Currently in the Aug I turn the Germans have one panzer corps
in the replacement pool, due to my counterattacks as the Russian.
The Germans have already lost 42 armor replacement points, but
the Russian have also taken heavy losses.
/Mats Persson
>From @se.liu.mailgw,@mil.navy.nnmc.ntcusuhs:viktor@org.hjf.mgr Mon Jul 5 17:33:56 1993
Return-Path: <@se.liu.mailgw,@mil.navy.nnmc.ntcusuhs:viktor@org.hjf.mgr>
Received: from lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <17013-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Mon, 5 Jul 1993 17:33:47 +0100
Received: from maxwell by lysator (5.0/SMI-4.1) id AA04037;
Mon, 5 Jul 93 18:25:35 +0200
Received: from mailgw.liu.se ([130.236.1.10])
by maxwell (4.12/1.34/Lysator-3.1) id AA08425;
Wed, 30 Jun 93 11:52:17 -0200 (unknown)
Received: from ntcusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil by mailgw.liu.se
with SMTP (5.61-bind 1.2+ida/IDA-1.2.8.2/LTH) id AA10398;
Tue, 29 Jun 93 17:59:19 +0200
Received: from mgr.hjf.org by ntcusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil (5.59/25-eef) id AA13555;
Tue, 29 Jun 93 10:43:43 EDT
Received: by mgr.hjf.org (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA03913; Tue, 29 Jun 93 11:24:54 EDT
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 93 11:24:54 EDT
From: viktor@mgr.hjf.org (Viktor Kaufmann)
Message-Id: <9306291524.AA03913@mgr.hjf.org>
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Leningrad Scenario
content-length: 878
Status: RO
Yes, this is the scenario which was to be used for the Europa tournament
at Origins (but which, according to a postcard I received yesterday, is
now cancelled). My brother and I played it for the first time last week,
and we replayed it twice.
The first time, Riga fell on July 1, and Talinn held out until August 1.
Leningrad was never threatened, as the advancing Axis forces couldn't break
out into the Leningrad MD. The second time, Riga fell on June II, but Talinn
would have held until about September I (the German infantry was seriously
bogged down trying to eliminate encircled and bypassed units, and the armor
got itself into serious trouble).
My question is, does the Axis have a chance here? What am I missing?
Can they get anywhere near Leningrad by the September II turn? As far as
I can tell, the Axis will never reach Leningrad in 1941.
Thanks
Viktor
>From matpe@se.liu.lysator Wed Jul 7 13:50:53 1993
Return-Path: <matpe@se.liu.lysator>
Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <24784-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Wed, 7 Jul 1993 13:50:46 +0100
Received: from elrond.ida.liu.se (elrond.ida.liu.se [130.236.30.12])
by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.1C/8.1B) with SMTP id OAA08839;
Wed, 7 Jul 1993 14:46:41 +0200
Received: from ntcusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil by elrond.ida.liu.se
with SMTP (5.61-bind 1.5X+ida/IDA-1.2.8-mc2.5-2) id AA06151;
Tue, 6 Jul 93 16:03:29 +0200
Received: from mgr.hjf.org by ntcusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil (5.59/25-eef) id AA20861;
Tue, 6 Jul 93 08:22:06 EDT
Received: by mgr.hjf.org (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA13427; Tue, 6 Jul 93 09:03:28 EDT
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 93 09:03:28 EDT
From: viktor@mgr.hjf.org (Viktor Kaufmann)
Message-Id: <9307061303.AA13427@mgr.hjf.org>
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Leningrad Scenario
Status: RO
Hmmm. Apparently, I made the mistaken assumption that everyone subscribes
to Europa magazine, so when I talked about the Leningrad scenario, I
confused a couple of people, who had no way of knowing what it is. I will
send out a summary of that scenario in the next couple of days, when I have
more time.
But, to answer my own question, apparently the Leningrad scenario is stacked
against the Germans. When I played Scorched Earth at Origins, there was lots
of room to flank the defenses, and none exists in the scenario.
But, for all of you who have been waiting for Second Front, at Origins they
announced that it will be out in 3 months. Winston said, "I wouldn't have
printed the maps if Second Front wasn't nearly complete."
Winter War was nominated for Best Game of '93 (lost to Hacker, by Steve
Jackson Games). Victor Hauser and Arthur (forgot his last name, but he did
the maps) were playing a Second Front demo at the convention. They were using
some new air rules which look very nice, but which aren't certain to be
included in the final version. (I don't know most of the air rules they were
using, but they certainly simplified the air phase. Things seem to be more
points-based (offense, defense), and not unit-based).
In our game of Scorched Earth, I discovered, as commander of the Moscow and
Western MDs, that it is a Bad Thing to stay in one place too long. At one
point, around Minsk, I decided that I couldn't retreat far enough, so I would
stick around one more turn (I hadn't lost many units the prior turn). Big
mistake. My whole line was wiped off the map and/or surrounded. Now there
were only 20 divisions keeping the Germans from the Moscow defenses. They
held (fortunately), and we threw our tanks into the Valdai hills Northwest of
Moscow to hold that part of the line. We then successfully rebuilt most of
our central front losses, and prepared to wipe out the advancing motorized
units of Army Group Center. We ended the game there, after the September I
German turn, since all (except the AGC commander) agreed that the Russian
counter-attack would have stopped AGC to freeze outside Moscow in December.
A quick note: The auction at Origins this year was a buyers' market.
Wacht am Rhein could be obtained for under $100 (punched), War in the Pacific
for $135 (punched). These games normally sell for around $200 (punched).
Scorched Earth (mint, _not_ the 1.5 edition) $30.
Crimea went for $26
Operation Typhoon went for $120
Gettysburg (AH, 1958 (square grid)) went for $30
There was no bottom to this market.
Viktoras Kaufmann
>From matpe@se.liu.lysator Wed Jul 7 14:59:36 1993
Return-Path: <matpe@se.liu.lysator>
Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <29917-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Wed, 7 Jul 1993 14:59:31 +0100
Received: from unpsun1.cc.unp.ac.za (Unpsun1.cc.unp.ac.za [143.128.64.2])
by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.1C/8.1B) with SMTP id PAA10044;
Wed, 7 Jul 1993 15:56:47 +0200
Received: from [143.128.63.43] by unpsun1.cc.unp.ac.za
with smtp (Smail3.1.28.1 #3) id m0oDZyy-0000MvC;
Wed, 7 Jul 93 15:56 EET
X-NUPop-Charset: British
Date: Wed, 7 Jul 93 15:56:14 +0200
From: (Chris Scogings) cscoging <cscoging@unpcs1.cs.unp.ac.za>
Sender: cscoging@unpcs1.cs.unp.ac.za
Reply-To: cscoging@unpcs1.cs.unp.ac.za
Message-Id: <57374.cscoging@unpcs1.cs.unp.ac.za>
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
Subject: New guy seeks help
Status: RO
Hello
I am new to Europa (I only have Fire in the East).
Could some kind old-timer tell me how I subscribe to Europa magazine, where
to buy games, any other useful/interesting information?
Thanks
Chris
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Chris Scogings Voice: (27) 331 955645
Computer Science Dept Fax: (27) 331 955599
University of Natal
Pietermaritzburg E-Mail:cscoging@unpcs1.cs.unp.ac.za
----------------------------------------------------------------------
>From matpe@se.liu.lysator Wed Jul 7 18:11:09 1993
Return-Path: <matpe@se.liu.lysator>
Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <17145-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Wed, 7 Jul 1993 18:11:02 +0100
Received: from DHVX10.CSUDH.EDU (dhvx10.csudh.EDU [155.135.1.5])
by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.1C/8.1B) with SMTP id TAA11110;
Wed, 7 Jul 1993 19:08:43 +0200
Received: by DHVX10.CSUDH.EDU (5.65/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA05916;
Wed, 7 Jul 1993 10:09:21 -0700
Message-Id: <9307071709.AA05916@DHVX10.CSUDH.EDU>
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Italian OB
Date: Wed, 07 Jul 93 10:09:20 -0700
From: Dupsyob <rholmes@DHVX10.CSUDH.EDU>
X-Mts: smtp
Status: RO
Howdy,
I was wondering if GDW or GRD has published an order of battle
for the Italians during the early war period, say up to 1943 or so.
Thanks for the help.
Rod Holmes | Once you pull the pin from mister
rholmes@dhvx10.csudh.edu | Grenade he is no longer your friend.
>From matpe@se.liu.lysator Wed Jul 7 22:04:35 1993
Return-Path: <matpe@se.liu.lysator>
Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <01671-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Wed, 7 Jul 1993 22:04:31 +0100
Received: from orca.es.com (ES.COM [130.187.1.1])
by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.1C/8.1B) with SMTP id WAA13770;
Wed, 7 Jul 1993 22:55:04 +0200
Received: from moons ([130.187.201.14]) by orca.es.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA18994;
Wed, 7 Jul 93 12:14:22 MDT
Received: by moons (4.1/E&S_client-ver1.5/SMI-4.1) id AA10648;
Wed, 7 Jul 93 12:13:51 MDT
From: krogers@moons.sim.es.com (Keith Rogers)
Message-Id: <9307071813.AA10648@moons>
Subject: Leningrad Scenario
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1993 12:13:51 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 3424
Status: RO
Viktor Kaufmann writes:
> The second time, Riga fell on June II, but Talinn
>would have held until about September I (the German infantry was seriously
>bogged down trying to eliminate encircled and bypassed units, and the armor
>got itself into serious trouble).
Let me guess, they ran around lots of Soviet units to "bag" them only
to find out they were out of supply next turn and running for their
lives (at half MPs) to get back into supply.
>My question is, does the Axis have a chance here? What am I missing?
>Can they get anywhere near Leningrad by the September II turn? As far as
>I can tell, the Axis will never reach Leningrad in 1941.
I'm not even close to a good source on your question as I'm just
starting my first game of SE but I have skimmed many years of ETO
issues. I can only recall one case, the Origins game of, umm forgot
the year, in which the Axis ever actually took Leningrad. In that
case the German side was demonically possessed and hell bent on taking
it and threw everything available at it. Most of Army Group Center
went up there as did 95% (!) of the Luftwaffe and all reserves. All
other fronts engaged in holding actions for the most part.
The result of that game was that the Axis did indeed take Leningrad in
(Nov, I think) '41 but was so weakened in doing so that they were
going to get swept out again after a time. Of course the game was
never finished, as the Origins ones never are due to mosterous amounts
of time is takes to play SE, but it was generally conceeded the Axis
would never be able to hold the city for very long, much less until
'44.
The comments also showed that the Soviets were taken by complete
surprise that this would be the Axis's strategy and were thrown off
balance for a few turns by the complete dedication right from the
start of the Axis to take Leningrad. They thought it might be a feint
for a while. I doubt you could take LG in 41, if ever, given a Soviet
player who expects that push; the terrain is just too defender
friendly and AEC is virtually always nullified.
Perhaps some others have personal experience here. I toyed with the
idea of a "go for Leningrad" strategy for this game I'm setting up but
decided not to in the end. I'm usinging the more standard "go for the
Valdai hills, then to Moskva in '42" plan instead. One interesting
difference between my readings and what my opponent is doing is that
it is (or at least was) fashionable for the Soviets to use the "Run
Away" defense in which he trades space for unit survival and falls
back a long ways into the interior before making a serious stand. My
opponent has deployed his defenses as far forward as possible and
appears to be making Minsk and Kiev as unassailable as possible.
I have no experience to rely upon as to how sound this defense is. I
do know that I'll have most of his best armor stacks U-2 by his Jun II
turn but I'm going to be taking until at least Jul II to mop things up
right on the very front lines before I can even start pushing further
without seriously jepordizing my c/m units' supply lines. He really
has made a very forward defense. I'm hoping it'll prove to be brittle
and give me liscense to roam behind it almost at will assuming I can
shatter it and eliminate the massive amounts of units I'm going
against in the process.
Any comments on how I should/could procede are welcome.
Keith Rogers
krogers@moons.sim.es.com
>From matpe@se.liu.lysator Thu Jul 8 02:33:29 1993
Return-Path: <matpe@se.liu.lysator>
Received: from 130.236.253.6 by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <24754-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Thu, 8 Jul 1993 02:33:15 +0100
Received: from orca.es.com (ES.COM [130.187.1.1])
by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.1C/8.1B) with SMTP id DAA18798;
Thu, 8 Jul 1993 03:30:26 +0200
Received: from moons ([130.187.201.14]) by orca.es.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA21036;
Wed, 7 Jul 93 15:57:33 MDT
Received: by moons (4.1/E&S_client-ver1.5/SMI-4.1) id AA15965;
Wed, 7 Jul 93 15:57:02 MDT
From: krogers@moons.sim.es.com (Keith Rogers)
Message-Id: <9307072157.AA15965@moons>
Subject: Leningrad Scenario
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1993 15:57:01 -0600 (MDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 2553
Status: RO
Viktor Kaufmann writes:
>Hmmm. Apparently, I made the mistaken assumption that everyone subscribes
>to Europa magazine, so when I talked about the Leningrad scenario, I
>confused a couple of people, who had no way of knowing what it is. I will
>send out a summary of that scenario in the next couple of days, when I have
>more time.
Oops, looks like I shot my mouth (or fingers) off too soon again. I
thought you were playing SE and going for Leningrad. I wasn't aware
that there's a Leningrad scenario.
>But, to answer my own question, apparently the Leningrad scenario is stacked
>against the Germans. When I played Scorched Earth at Origins, there was lots
>of room to flank the defenses, and none exists in the scenario.
This wouldn't surprise me since SE in general seems rather stacked in
favor of the Soviets; things like it being impossible to take Minsk in
the historical amount of time (6 days), c/m units can't match how far
they penetrated in reality without being out of supply, etc.
>In our game of Scorched Earth, I discovered, as commander of the Moscow and
>Western MDs, that it is a Bad Thing to stay in one place too long. At one
>point, around Minsk, I decided that I couldn't retreat far enough, so I would
>stick around one more turn (I hadn't lost many units the prior turn). Big
>mistake. My whole line was wiped off the map and/or surrounded.
Very interesting given my opponent is making a big stand at Minsk.
I'll have to see if I can duplicate your bad experience for him :-)
> Now there
>were only 20 divisions keeping the Germans from the Moscow defenses. They
>held (fortunately), and we threw our tanks into the Valdai hills
>Northwest of Moscow to hold that part of the line.
How? That was an amazing piece of defense on your part and/or a poor
piece of offense on AGC's part. Was AGC too preoccupied with mopping
up the units at Minsk that they couldn't smash through those 20 divs?
The Valdai hills don't give you all that much advantage with only a -1
die mod for rough terrain.
> We then successfully rebuilt most of
>our central front losses, and prepared to wipe out the advancing motorized
>units of Army Group Center. We ended the game there, after the September I
>German turn, since all (except the AGC commander) agreed that the Russian
>counter-attack would have stopped AGC to freeze outside Moscow in December.
Looks like your game was pretty reminescent of reality with the huge
bag at Minsk but failing to gain Moscow before winter set in.
Keith Rogers
krogers@moons.sim.es.com
>From @uk.ac.nsfnet-relay:matpe@se.liu.lysator Thu Jul 8 13:25:59 1993
Return-Path: <@uk.ac.nsfnet-relay:matpe@se.liu.lysator>
Received: from nsfnet-relay.ac.uk by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk via JANET with NIFTP (PP) id <15605-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Thu, 8 Jul 1993 13:25:57 +0100
Received: from 130.236.253.6 by sun3.nsfnet-relay.ac.uk with Internet SMTP
id <sg.25586-0@sun3.nsfnet-relay.ac.uk>;
Thu, 8 Jul 1993 13:25:09 +0100
Received: from ntcusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil (ntcusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil [131.158.4.7])
by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.1C/8.1B) with SMTP id OAA20936;
Thu, 8 Jul 1993 14:21:51 +0200
Received: from [131.158.26.52] by ntcusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil (5.59/25-eef)
id AA00936; Thu, 8 Jul 93 07:06:26 EDT
Received: by mgr.hjf.org (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA16761; Thu, 8 Jul 93 07:47:23 EDT
Date: Thu, 8 Jul 93 07:47:23 EDT
From: viktor@org.hjf.mgr (Viktor Kaufmann)
Message-Id: <9307081147.AA16761@mgr.hjf.org>
To: europa@se.liu.lysator
Subject: Origins SE
Sender: matpe@se.liu.lysator
Status: R
Well, after losing all my Russian units except 20 divisions, I just staggered
them to create non-overrunnable islands exerting zones of control to slow
the Germans down. I guess I should mention that in those 20 divisions, I
did _not_ include about 10 divisions of armor. However, those 10 were _all_
thrown into the Valdai Hills, as I hadn't fortified them (I was playing SE
for the first time, although I have played other Europa games). Further,
the AGC commander, after watching AGN get its motorized non-armor units get
crushed by the Northern Front commander in a viscious counter-attack, was
rather gun-shy about extending his armor too far out in front of his infantry,
so, as a result, Moscow held.
In our second game (we quit the first one after one day, having gotten to the
Russian part of the the Sept I turn), the Northern Soviet commander built his
defense by putting all his Russian divisions in swamp, wood, or forest
hexes, and non in clear terrain. The AGN commander promptly threw his armor
down the road, stacked with trucks, and caused the immediate activation of
the Leningrad reserves on the June II Soviet turn. This game ended on Aug I,
with AGN 3 hexes outside Leningrad to the south of the city, AGC well beyond
Minsk, and AGS stalled at the front, although the Russians were just beginning
their retreat to the river line. There was no doubt that Leningrad would
have fallen in this game, and that it would have been very hard to retake,
possibly crippling the Soviet war machine (there are many RPs which are
generated by Leningrad).
I don't know if I mentioned, but GR/D was selling "War Bonds" for Second
Front. Basically, these are pre-release coupons which you can exchange for
a copy of Second Front upon its release. They were available at Origins
only, and cost $85, so we now know what a minimum price for SF will be.
Look for it in about 3 months.
Viktor Kaufmann
viktor@mgr.hjf.org
>From matpe@se.liu.lysator Thu Jul 8 16:07:23 1993
Return-Path: <matpe@se.liu.lysator>
Received: from 130.236.253.6 by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <28770-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Thu, 8 Jul 1993 16:07:18 +0100
Received: from june.cs.washington.edu (june.cs.washington.edu [128.95.1.4])
by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.1C/8.1B) with SMTP id QAA21912;
Thu, 8 Jul 1993 16:58:08 +0200
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.65b/7.1ju) id AA21791;
Thu, 8 Jul 93 07:58:13 -0700
Date: Thu, 8 Jul 93 07:58:13 -0700
From: graham@cs.washington.edu (Stephen Graham)
Message-Id: <9307081458.AA21791@june.cs.washington.edu>
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
Subject: E-mail for GR/D
Status: R
Anyone have the GEnie address for GR/D? Given that, it should be possible
to get e-mail to them from the Internet by using address@genie.geis.com
Steve Graham
graham@cs.washington.edu
>From matpe@se.liu.lysator Wed Aug 18 16:00:15 1993
Return-Path: <matpe@se.liu.lysator>
Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <14335-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Wed, 18 Aug 1993 16:00:11 +0100
Received: from ida.liu.se (curofix.ida.liu.se [130.236.139.139])
by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.5/8.5) with SMTP id QAA17603;
Wed, 18 Aug 1993 16:58:31 +0200
Received: from diagnostix by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5)
id AA20836; Wed, 18 Aug 93 16:58:27 +0200
From: Mats Persson <map@ida.liu.se>
Received: from diag19 by diagnostix (5.65b/ida.slave-V1.0b3) id AA10238;
Wed, 18 Aug 93 16:58:26 +0200
Received: by diag19 (5.65b/ida.slave-V1.0b3) id AA13206;
Wed, 18 Aug 93 16:58:24 +0200
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 93 16:58:24 +0200
Message-Id: <9308181458.AA13206@diag19>
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Soviet tips
Status: RO
After four games of playing Soviet in FitE/SE I think I should
give you some of my own strategial tips. Let's begin in the south..
1. The Soviet forces in the south are the strongest, but that
does'nt mean that they should defend their territory. There are
no important strategic objectives on the Ukrainian steppes.
Slow retreat? No, the Soviets should run to Kiev, then run to
Odessa, run to Kharkov, and so on. The infantry division who
can't run should defend their motherland and become Heroes of
the Soviet Union. This means you should put stacks of 5 or 6
points in front of the panzers or even better; put them out
of supply. The german infantry divisions should march through
Ukraina without seeing any russians.
If all this fails, give up Ukraina completely and build a new
defense line around Stalino/Voronezh.
2. Defend every major city hex with a full stack including
a NKVD unit, a fort, and some points of AA. This is important
for Kiev, because it's a major railway junction.
Unless the german cannot reach the city. In that case garrison
the city with a 3-6 and you avoid unpleasant surprises.
3. Break every rail line and bridge you can, and destroy every
airfield. Except behind your own lines of course.
4. Any panzerdivision venturing too far into russia should be
attacked, captured, beaten up and sent to the coal mines in
Siberia.
5. Run around in the Pripet marshes with some infantry divisions.
This is very annoying for the german. Soviet 3-6 in marsh hexes
is always annoying. Sooner or later he drives his panzers
into the marsh and gets a HX. The german becomes frustrated,
angry and makes even more mistakes.
6. On the other hand, if you really don't want any panzer too
far behind you lines, you should put 6 point stacks _between_
the marsh and forest hexes.
7. Defend Minsk and Smolensk lightly. Concentrate on building
up a fort line about 7 hexes from Moscow.
8. Moscow, Valdai hills and Leningrad are the major strategic
objectives. Defend these and send most of you troops to these
places. It is better to have a 12 point stack in marsh outside
Leningrad than two 6 point stacks in the clear outside Kharkov.
The german get EX result versus big stack more easily, which
he can't afford.
Lets call 6 point stacks "Stop", 12 point "Defend", 20 point
"Hold" and 20 plus NkVD "No way!".
9. The Finns likes to make trouble. Show him your new tanks.
Helsinki is nice during the spring break.
10. The Arctic theater is fun. Either you should try to hold
Murmansk or you should'nt. If the german send lots of
units and some finns, he will probably succeed. There
is no use in defending a couple of armour points received
by lend lease. It could cost more than it gives.
11. The german is very fond of bombing your raillines. Put
engineers on the lines and your planes near the raillines
and in the cities.
12. You have lots of armor. You can afford to lose it on
counterattacks.
13. Move your factories to the Urals and keep one or two on
the map depending on the situation. It is very expensive
to lose these.
14. Two Mig-3 and one I-16 versus two Me109E is not advisable.
You will lose one Mig-3. Hunt bombers and Me110 with your
fighters or gang up with three fighters for every Me109.
15. NODDL means Non Overrunable Double Defense Line which
means putting a double line of 6 point stacks. This tactic
avoid panzers exploiting behind your lines.
That's all for this time. Maybe I add some tips later
or maybe you share your tips with us. Next time I'll
make a detailed setup for the russian borderline.
/Mats Persson
>From matpe@se.liu.lysator Tue Aug 17 17:01:14 1993
Return-Path: <matpe@se.liu.lysator>
Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <11963-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Tue, 17 Aug 1993 17:01:00 +0100
Received: from email (email.meto.govt.uk [151.170.240.2])
by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.5/8.5) with ESMTP id RAA13198;
Tue, 17 Aug 1993 17:52:26 +0200
From: "HADL50::\"hadst\""@email.met-office.govt.uk
Received: from email.meto.govt.uk (HADST@HADL50)
by email.meto.govt.uk (PMDF V4.2-11 #3313)
id <01H1UVNY888G0003RH@email.meto.govt.uk>;
Tue, 17 Aug 1993 15:50:59 GMT
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1993 15:50:59 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: From sfbtett@email.meto.govt.uk
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
Message-id: <01H1UVNY9U3M0003RH@email.meto.govt.uk>
X-VMS-To: EMAIL::in%"europa@lysator.liu.se"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Status: RO
Having just joined the list I thought I might ask what the situation
in Europa is:
I.E. when is second front coming -- what stage is it at ?
The last time I managed to play one of these games was a large game of
FITE/SE played over several weekend with about 6 people ( roughly 3 a
side though numbers varied from weekend to weekend) about two yeasr ago.
Enormous troop losses occured on both sides with the Axes forces
getting smashed in the south (Esentially failing to penetrate the
Dnepier) but doing well In the North -- capturing Leningrad in early
'42. The German offensive ins Summer 42 get thumped somewhat in the
south but did nasties to the Soviets in the clear region to the North
of Moscow and managed to blow the soviets apart with a thrust into
Moscow from the North and EAST. Things were fairly desperate to the
west of Moscow, but the line held...
Simon
P.S any Europa players in the South-west London Area
============================================================
Reply address: sfbtett@email.meto.govt.uk
Tel : +[44]-344-856886
>From matpe@se.liu.lysator Tue Aug 17 17:06:29 1993
Return-Path: <matpe@se.liu.lysator>
Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <12619-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Tue, 17 Aug 1993 17:06:16 +0100
Received: from mcsun.EU.net (mcsun.EU.net [192.16.202.1])
by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.5/8.5) with SMTP id SAA13242;
Tue, 17 Aug 1993 18:04:56 +0200
From: ross@informix.com
Received: from uunet!pyramid!infmx!informix.com by mcsun.EU.net with UUCP
id AA07199 (5.65b/CWI-2.229); Tue, 17 Aug 1993 18:04:54 +0200
Received: from spool.uu.net (via LOCALHOST) by relay1.UU.NET
with SMTP (5.61/UUNET-internet-primary) id AA28779;
Tue, 17 Aug 93 12:02:03 -0400
Received: from pyramid.UUCP by uucp4.uu.net with UUCP/RMAIL (queueing-rmail)
id 120102.25668; Tue, 17 Aug 1993 12:01:02 EDT
Received: by pyramid.pyramid.com (5.61/OSx5.1) id AA08937;
Tue, 17 Aug 93 08:49:37 -0700
Received: from maple.portland.informix.com by informix.com (4.1/SMI-4.1)
id AA28203; Tue, 17 Aug 93 08:34:15 PDT
Received: from larch.portland.informix.com
by maple.portland.informix.com (4.1/SMI-4.0) id AA22470;
Tue, 17 Aug 93 08:34:52 PDT
Received: from localhost by larch.portland.informix.com (4.1/SMI-4.0)
id AA27501; Tue, 17 Aug 93 08:34:50 PDT
Message-Id: <9308171534.AA27501@larch.portland.informix.com>
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: Still working?
In-Reply-To: Your message of Tue, 17 Aug 93 17:05:08 +0200. <9308171505.AA12772@diag19>
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 93 08:34:49 PDT
Status: RO
I recently took out Africa Oriental (Italia) and played it. I found it
very interesting being the Italians. I was only given two (weak) infantry
divisions and a horde of various brigades and regiments. Though I often
had more firepower (offensive strength points) I had a problem with being
able to concentrate my forces for combat.
Does anyone have any useful hints on how the Italians should operate their
defense? The historical sit and take it defense seems to work historically
(which is to say, it doesn't work).
Ross
////////////////
////////// // Ross Hagglund
////// / /// Database Kernel Engineer
///// // //// Informix Software
//// // /////
/// // ////// 921 SW Washington Suite 670
// // /////// Portland, Oregon, USA, 97205
/ /////////// Tel.:(503)221-2605, Fax.:(503)221-2633
//////////////// e-mail: ross@informix.com
>From matpe@se.liu.lysator Tue Aug 17 17:17:19 1993
Return-Path: <matpe@se.liu.lysator>
Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <13415-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Tue, 17 Aug 1993 17:17:11 +0100
Received: from june.cs.washington.edu (june.cs.washington.edu [128.95.1.4])
by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.5/8.5) with SMTP id SAA13285;
Tue, 17 Aug 1993 18:14:33 +0200
Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.65b/7.1ju) id AA03236;
Tue, 17 Aug 93 09:14:30 -0700
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 93 09:14:30 -0700
From: graham@cs.washington.edu (Stephen Graham)
Message-Id: <9308171614.AA03236@june.cs.washington.edu>
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Status of Second Front
Status: RO
Playtest groups have been told to submit final reports by 21 September.
_Europa_ 31 gave a release date of 1 November 1993.
Since Victor showed part of the new air system in the magazine, I can
probably comment on parts of it. The new replacement system works well,
though the Allies rarely run out of points. I've managed to get the
Americans down to 4 rps by attacking into 17 points of flak with the
objective of killing the Axis anti-shipping bombers. It also cuts
down on the number of aircraft counters needed and reduces in part
the problem of choosing the only the best type of aircraft. (In the
first playtest, my American airforces tended to have only P-38s, P-47s,
and an assortment of bombers. Not terribly realistic, but the best
mix of planes.)
There are several new types of planes: LB, which do not get the bomber
bonus for flak but are penalized for air-combat; HF, fighters optimized
for bomber-intercept which are penalized versus regular fighters; SB,
maritime strike aircraft which gain bonuses against naval units.
So far, my group (and most others) are very happy with the new system.
Better coverage of naval invasions and maritime strike works better
than the old air-naval interdiction mission. Victor has done a good
job in simplifying the system overall, while adding more detail where
appropriate.
--
Stephen Graham
graham@cs.washington.edu
>From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Tue Jan 18 15:14:01 1994
Return-Path: <europa-request@lysator.liu.se>
Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <24231-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Tue, 18 Jan 1994 15:13:41 +0000
Received: from ntcusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil (ntcusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil [131.158.4.7])
by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.5/8.6.5) with SMTP id QAA02048
for <europa@lysator.liu.se>; Tue, 18 Jan 1994 16:08:40 +0100
Received: from mgr.hjf.org by ntcusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil (5.59/25-eef) id AA29189;
Tue, 18 Jan 94 09:14:49 EST
Received: by mgr.hjf.org (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA12059; Tue, 18 Jan 94 10:02:40 EST
From: viktor@mgr.hjf.org (Viktor Kaufmann)
Message-Id: <9401181502.AA12059@mgr.hjf.org>
Subject: Second Front
To: europa@lysator.liu.se (Europa )
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 1994 10:02:39 -0500 (EST)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 508
Status: RO
I just called GR/D yesterday to re-up my subscription to Europa
magazine, and asked them a few questions about SF. What I was told was
that the counter sheets are at the die-cutters, and are expected back in
two to three weeks. Once they get the counter sheets, they will begin
packing and mailing them. Looks like Second Front is going to be out
next month!
And, for those who bought the War Bonds, the game will be sent to you,
without needing to redeem the coupon.
Viktor Kaufmann
viktor@mgr.hjf.org
>From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Mon Jan 24 15:16:09 1994
Return-Path: <europa-request@lysator.liu.se>
Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <01848-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Mon, 24 Jan 1994 15:15:53 +0000
Received: from sage.cc.purdue.edu (sage.cc.purdue.edu [128.210.10.6])
by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.5/8.6.5) with SMTP id QAA11297
for <europa@lysator.liu.se>; Mon, 24 Jan 1994 16:11:14 +0100
Received: by sage.cc.purdue.edu (5.61/Purdue_CC) id AA14189;
Mon, 24 Jan 94 10:11:21 -0500
From: fite@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Rickster)
Message-Id: <9401241511.AA14189@sage.cc.purdue.edu>
Subject: Combined Arms
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 94 10:11:19 EST
Status: R
Thois message concerns the new Europa newsletter, "Combined Arms" published
by Flavio Carrillo. I would like to recommend this newlettr to all who
play Europa because of the articles it contains. The articles were written
by Flavoi , Charles Sharp, and Jason Long. I miust say that they were
excellent in that it appears that thrse articles are pet projects ogf the
authors and were written with great zest. I won't discuss what they were
about because in order to support the newsletter, flavio needs to sell
issues. For subscription information see Europa magzine #32.
Perhaps not much of a plug, But who has time when playing SE?
Rick Fite
>From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Sat Apr 23 15:10:50 1994
Return-Path: <europa-request@lysator.liu.se>
Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <05476-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Sat, 23 Apr 1994 15:10:47 +0100
Received: from ida.liu.se (curofix.ida.liu.se [130.236.139.139])
by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id QAA20380
for <europa@lysator.liu.se>; Sat, 23 Apr 1994 16:05:25 +0200
Received: from medix.ida.liu.se by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5)
id AA10227; Sat, 23 Apr 94 16:05:01 +0200
From: Mats Persson <map@ida.liu.se>
Received: from med3 by medix.ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.slave(P)-V1.0a18+)
id AA02481; Sat, 23 Apr 94 16:05:00 +0200
Received: by med3 (5.65b/ida.slave-V1.0b3) id AA07472;
Sat, 23 Apr 94 16:04:58 +0200
Date: Sat, 23 Apr 94 16:04:58 +0200
Message-Id: <9404231404.AA07472@med3>
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Second Front News
Status: R
Hello list members,
Here are some news from GR/D. Second Front has been delayed another
three weeks because of delays in the printing of the last countersheet.
/Mats P
>From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Sat Apr 23 18:02:53 1994
Return-Path: <europa-request@lysator.liu.se>
Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <15053-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Sat, 23 Apr 1994 18:02:38 +0100
Received: from DHVX20.CSUDH.EDU (dhvx20.csudh.EDU [155.135.1.1])
by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id TAA21145
for <europa@lysator.liu.se>; Sat, 23 Apr 1994 19:01:23 +0200
From: rholmes@dhvx20.csudh.edu
Received: by dhvx20.csudh.edu (MX V3.3 VAX) id 24291;
Sat, 23 Apr 1994 10:02:09 PST
Date: Sat, 23 Apr 1994 10:02:07 PST
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
Message-ID: <0097D618.492C2CA0.24291@dhvx20.csudh.edu>
Subject: Spainish Torch
Status: R
Hello Everyone,
I just got a copy of Spain and Portugal and was wondering where I could get
a copy of the Spainish Torch scenario?
Rod Holmes
rholmes@dhvx20.csudh.edu
>From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Tue Apr 26 20:18:55 1994
Return-Path: <europa-request@lysator.liu.se>
Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <28513-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Tue, 26 Apr 1994 20:18:49 +0100
Received: from clark.net (stephen@clark.net [198.17.243.7])
by godot (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with ESMTP id VAA17228
for <europa@lysator.liu.se>; Tue, 26 Apr 1994 21:16:53 +0200
Received: (from stephen@localhost) by clark.net (8.6.8/8.6.7) id PAA11680;
Tue, 26 Apr 1994 15:17:00 -0400
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 1994 15:16:59 -0400 (EDT)
From: Stephen Balbach <stephen@clark.net>
Subject: Re: Torch
To: John Kula <JAKULA@bcsc02.gov.bc.ca>
cc: europa@lysator.liu.se
In-Reply-To: <199404261855.UAA17052@godot>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9404261505.A24573-0100000@explorer>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: R
Thats illegal - I dont mean to be annal, but so many gamers copy rules
and charts rather than buying the game it results in less revenue and
thus fewer games to buy. Support GDW and buy a second copy - sheesh they
sell so few anyway you probably really would be making a diffrence.
Stephen Balbach
On Tue, 26 Apr 1994, John Kula wrote:
> To: EUROPA --INTERNET europa@lysator.liu
>
>
> I need to get a copy of the rules and charts for Torch. The version I have is
> GDW's last boxed version. I'd be prepared to pay for photocopying, etc.
>
> John Kula jakula@bcsc02.gov.bc.ca Commando 930 (MacBeth)
>
_____________________________________________________________________________
Stephen Balbach Clark Internet Services stephen@clark.net
(410) 995-0691 [v] FAX (410) 730-9765
Support free software all-info@clark.net Internet for the 90's
>From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Tue Apr 26 19:59:57 1994
Return-Path: <europa-request@lysator.liu.se>
Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <26379-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Tue, 26 Apr 1994 19:59:35 +0100
Received: from BCSC02.GOV.BC.CA (BCSC02.GOV.BC.CA [142.32.7.49])
by godot (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id UAA17052
for <europa@lysator.liu.se>; Tue, 26 Apr 1994 20:55:26 +0200
Message-Id: <199404261855.UAA17052@godot>
Received: from BCSC02.GOV.BC.CA by BCSC02.GOV.BC.CA (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
with BSMTP id 7785; Tue, 26 Apr 94 11:55:32 PDT
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 94 11:55:32 PDT
From: John Kula <JAKULA@BCSC02.GOV.BC.CA>
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Torch
Status: R
To: EUROPA --INTERNET europa@lysator.liu
I need to get a copy of the rules and charts for Torch. The version I have is
GDW's last boxed version. I'd be prepared to pay for photocopying, etc.
John Kula jakula@bcsc02.gov.bc.ca Commando 930 (MacBeth)
>From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 27 17:29:48 1994
Return-Path: <europa-request@lysator.liu.se>
Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <14395-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Wed, 27 Apr 1994 17:29:41 +0100
Received: from ida.liu.se (curofix.ida.liu.se [130.236.139.139])
by godot (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id SAA24695
for <europa@lysator.liu.se>; Wed, 27 Apr 1994 18:24:53 +0200
Received: from medix.ida.liu.se by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5)
id AA11284; Wed, 27 Apr 94 18:24:47 +0200
From: Mats Persson <map@ida.liu.se>
Received: from med3 by medix.ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.slave(P)-V1.0a18+)
id AA08654; Wed, 27 Apr 94 18:24:44 +0200
Received: by med3 (5.65b/ida.slave-V1.0b3) id AA01929;
Wed, 27 Apr 94 18:24:43 +0200
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 94 18:24:43 +0200
Message-Id: <9404271624.AA01929@med3>
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: Torch
Status: R
Use the mail adress europa@lysator.liu.se when sending mails
to the Europa list.
Forwarded mail:
>From unisql!bh@cs.utexas.edu Wed Apr 27 16:11:53 1994
>From: unisql!bh@cs.utexas.edu (Brian Heard)
>Subject: Re: Torch
>To: lysator.liu.se!europa-request@cs.utexas.edu
>Date: Wed, 27 Apr 94 8:48:47 CDT
>
>Since you can't buy Torch from GDW/GRD, how are you supposed to get a copy??
>I have called both GDW and GRD at one time trying to buy a copy, but
>they don't have any. Except for paying big $$$ for some collector's version
>what are going to do if you want to play the game?
>
>
>Brian
>From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Tue May 17 20:15:05 1994
Return-Path: <europa-request@lysator.liu.se>
Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <02281-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Tue, 17 May 1994 20:15:01 +0100
Received: from panix.com (panix.com [198.7.0.2])
by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id VAA11050
for <europa@lysator.liu.se>; Tue, 17 May 1994 21:09:32 +0200
Received: by panix.com id AA01628 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for europa@lysator.liu.se);
Tue, 17 May 1994 15:08:56 -0400
From: Kevin Maroney <kjm@panix.com>
Message-Id: <199405171908.AA01628@panix.com>
Subject: Second Front!
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 15:08:55 -0400 (EDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 366
Status: R
Not five minutes ago, John Astell handed me copies of the OB and the
all-but-one-small-rule-finished rulebook. The counters, maps, charts, and
box are all done. SF should be shipping in about ten days.
Huzzah!
--
Kevin J. Maroney|kjm@panix.com|Proud to be a Maroney|Proud to be a Yonker
Never send money to someone who has the language skills of a rutabaga.
>From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Fri May 27 20:41:55 1994
Return-Path: <europa-request@lysator.liu.se>
Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <05995-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Fri, 27 May 1994 20:41:50 +0100
Received: from panix.com (panix.com [198.7.0.2])
by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id VAA24495
for <europa@lysator.liu.se>; Fri, 27 May 1994 21:37:40 +0200
Received: by panix.com id AA13004 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for europa@lysator.liu.se);
Fri, 27 May 1994 15:37:38 -0400
From: Kevin Maroney <kjm@panix.com>
Message-Id: <199405271937.AA13004@panix.com>
Subject: Re: Second Coming - A New (Slightly) Question
To: jtl@goldberry.uchicago.edu (Jim Lauroesch)
Date: Fri, 27 May 1994 15:37:37 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se
In-Reply-To: <9405271850.AA12035@goldberry.uchicago.edu> from "Jim Lauroesch" at May 27, 94 01:50:32 pm
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 510
Status: R
> Well unless GR/D gets their behinds in high gear that Second Front
> will not make it out by D-Day :-(. I think that this is a *MAJOR*
> mistake on their part, does anyone know if they are pushing to get
> it out somehow/someway before June 6th.
Second Front should be out by the end of next week, unless you've heard
otherwise in the last three days.
--
Kevin J. Maroney|kjm@panix.com|Proud to be a Maroney|Proud to be a Yonker
Never send money to someone who has the language skills of a rutabaga.
>From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Fri May 27 19:55:09 1994
Return-Path: <europa-request@lysator.liu.se>
Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <02686-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Fri, 27 May 1994 19:55:01 +0100
Received: from midway.uchicago.edu (midway.uchicago.edu [128.135.12.73])
by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id UAA24048
for <europa@lysator.liu.se>; Fri, 27 May 1994 20:52:15 +0200
Original-Received: from
goldberry.uchicago.edu by midway.uchicago.edu for
europa@lysator.liu.se Fri, 27 May 94 13:52:21 CDT
PP-warning: Illegal Received field on preceding line
Received: by goldberry.uchicago.edu (4.1/UofC3.1) id AA12035;
Fri, 27 May 94 13:50:32 CDT
Date: Fri, 27 May 94 13:50:32 CDT
From: Jim Lauroesch <jtl@goldberry.uchicago.edu>
Message-Id: <9405271850.AA12035@goldberry.uchicago.edu>
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Second Coming - A New (Slightly) Question
Status: R
Well unless GR/D gets their behinds in high gear that Second Front
will not make it out by D-Day :-(. I think that this is a *MAJOR*
mistake on their part, does anyone know if they are pushing to get
it out somehow/someway before June 6th.
It seems incredible with the 50th anniversary of D-Day being this
year that GR/D didn't do more to be sure of having the game on the
shelf by June 6th, this makes me wonder what they were thinking
letting a counter sheet hold them back for so long. I think that
they will be loosing quite a few sales due to this and that is very
important with a $99 game!
Anyone else care to comment? Anyone have inside info about what
has been happening?
Jim
>From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Thu Jun 23 20:21:27 1994
Return-Path: <europa-request@lysator.liu.se>
Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <02332-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Thu, 23 Jun 1994 20:21:06 +0100
Received: from midway.uchicago.edu (midway.uchicago.edu [128.135.12.73])
by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id VAA12006
for <europa@lysator.liu.se>; Thu, 23 Jun 1994 21:18:30 +0200
Original-Received: from
goldberry.uchicago.edu by midway.uchicago.edu for
europa@lysator.liu.se Thu, 23 Jun 94 14:18:26 CDT
PP-warning: Illegal Received field on preceding line
Received: by goldberry.uchicago.edu (4.1/UofC3.1) id AA17381;
Thu, 23 Jun 94 14:16:21 CDT
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 94 14:16:21 CDT
From: Jim Lauroesch <jtl@goldberry.uchicago.edu>
Message-Id: <9406231916.AA17381@goldberry.uchicago.edu>
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Any news on the Beast?
Status: R
Any news/rumors on the arrival of Second Coming? What is the
problem now, having trouble packing the full sized inflatable
T-34 into the box :-) ?
Well as I noted before, GR/D missed a *BIG* opportunity with the
recent D-day hype, anyone want to place bets on whether they will
get it out by the Bulge anniversary?
Jim
>From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Fri Jun 24 04:49:59 1994
Return-Path: <europa-request@lysator.liu.se>
Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <17530-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Fri, 24 Jun 1994 04:49:54 +0100
Received: from clark.net (stephen@clark.net [168.143.0.7])
by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with ESMTP id FAA01132
for <europa@lysator.liu.se>; Fri, 24 Jun 1994 05:48:41 +0200
Received: (from stephen@localhost) by clark.net (8.6.9/8.6.9) id XAA08067;
Thu, 23 Jun 1994 23:48:52 -0400
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 1994 23:48:51 -0400 (EDT)
From: Stephen Balbach <stephen@clark.net>
Subject: Re: Any news on the Beast?
To: Jim Lauroesch <jtl@goldberry.uchicago.edu>
cc: europa@lysator.liu.se
In-Reply-To: <9406231916.AA17381@goldberry.uchicago.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9406232308.A7314-0100000@explorer>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: R
I wonder though regarding the D-Day oppertunity, and maybe I'm just in a
flaming-liberal frame of mind, maybe they were worried about capatilizing
on D-Day and trivilizing it into a mere game. AT&T had a couple
commercials regarding it and a lot of people were saying how gross that
was to make money and capitalize off D-Day.
But upon further reflection, D-Day was fought to preserve the right of a
free market economy, so given that, I dont think that can be the excuse
for 2nd Front being late ;)
Stephen Balbach
On Thu, 23 Jun 1994, Jim Lauroesch wrote:
>
> Any news/rumors on the arrival of Second Coming? What is the
> problem now, having trouble packing the full sized inflatable
> T-34 into the box :-) ?
>
> Well as I noted before, GR/D missed a *BIG* opportunity with the
> recent D-day hype, anyone want to place bets on whether they will
> get it out by the Bulge anniversary?
>
>
> Jim
>
_____________________________________________________________________________
Stephen Balbach Clark Internet Services stephen@clark.net
(410) 995-0691 [v] FAX (410) 730-9765
Support free software all-info@clark.net Internet for the 90's
>From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Tue Jun 28 18:47:01 1994
Return-Path: <europa-request@lysator.liu.se>
Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <23964-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Tue, 28 Jun 1994 18:46:17 +0100
Received: from panix2.panix.com (panix2.panix.com [198.7.0.3])
by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id TAA00842
for <europa@lysator.liu.se>; Tue, 28 Jun 1994 19:39:20 +0200
Received: by panix2.panix.com id AA23165 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4
for europa@lysator.liu.se); Tue, 28 Jun 1994 13:39:10 -0400
From: Kevin Maroney <kjm@panix.com>
Message-Id: <199406281739.AA23165@panix2.panix.com>
Subject: Second Front shipping?
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 1994 13:39:10 -0400 (EDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 379
Status: RO
According to John Astell, it is now shipping. No inflatable T-34, though.
(Actually, according to John, the box is so tightly packed that it might
be difficult to get the components back in the box after it's been
opened!)
--
Kevin J. Maroney|kjm@panix.com|Proud to be a Maroney|Proud to be a Yonker
Never send money to someone who has the language skills of a rutabaga.
>From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Wed Jul 6 23:04:39 1994
Return-Path: <europa-request@lysator.liu.se>
Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <28192-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Wed, 6 Jul 1994 23:04:33 +0100
Received: from mail.cs.umn.edu (mail.cs.umn.edu [128.101.149.1])
by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id AAA06344
for <europa@lysator.liu.se>; Thu, 7 Jul 1994 00:01:00 +0200
Received: from milli.cs.umn.edu by mail.cs.umn.edu (5.65c/) id AA21752;
Wed, 6 Jul 1994 17:00:11 -0500
From: "David H. Thornley" <thornley@cs.umn.edu>
Received: by milli.cs.umn.edu id RAA01678; 8.6.8.1/;
Wed, 6 Jul 1994 17:00:38 -0500
Message-Id: <199407062200.RAA01678@milli.cs.umn.edu>
Subject: Second Front opened in Minnesota
To: europa@lysator.liu.se (Europa mailing list)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 1994 17:00:36 -0500 (CDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 1207
Status: R
The Second Front has been opened here in Southeast Minneapolis, by a guy
who figures he's been waiting for it a lot longer than Uncle Joe did.
The first impression is that the box is packed. Notice how the counter
sheets are packed into it if you want to get everything back in the box.
(If you have some sort of counter storage system that will fit all the
counters back in the box when punched out, please share. Heh heh heh.)
Maps look about like you'd expect. Italy has an awful lot of brown on
it.
The rules are thick. Scenarios are starting in '43 and '44, for both
ETO and MTO, and two more scenarios, one MTO only and one ETO only.
Soviets are not included, and the provision for them seems to be that
the Germans lose ground and have some additional restrictions. Strategic
bombing is abstracted into its effects on the ground war, and the Allies
(and, to a lesser extent, the Germans) can pull units out to use on the
map. The strategic bombers are abstracted; I did not see any B-17 or B-24
counters.
I found no Europa-scale naval units, although there are some charts marked
for Grand Europa use.
Haven't had time to look at it more, so somebody else can comment in
more detail.
DHT
>From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Thu Jul 7 22:41:55 1994
Return-Path: <europa-request@lysator.liu.se>
Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <03816-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Thu, 7 Jul 1994 22:41:50 +0100
Received: from midway.uchicago.edu (midway.uchicago.edu [128.135.12.73])
by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id XAA02942
for <europa@lysator.liu.se>; Thu, 7 Jul 1994 23:36:18 +0200
Original-Received: from
goldberry.uchicago.edu by midway.uchicago.edu for
europa@lysator.liu.se Thu, 7 Jul 94 16:36:08 CDT
PP-warning: Illegal Received field on preceding line
Received: by goldberry.uchicago.edu (4.1/UofC3.1) id AA07623;
Thu, 7 Jul 94 16:33:54 CDT
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 94 16:33:54 CDT
From: Jim Lauroesch <jtl@goldberry.uchicago.edu>
Message-Id: <9407072133.AA07623@goldberry.uchicago.edu>
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Second Front First Impressions
Status: R
It has crawled from it lair and arrived UPS at my home yesterday (despite
GR/D promising that they would send it to my office address where UPS
actually delivers), fortunately my wife got off work early and was home.
First thing you notice is the weight, it feels like it has a REAL T-34
inside, nice looking box although the back of the box is not easy to read.
Off comes the shrink-wrap and the box opens and there are all the counter
sheets, about 1/3rd of which have been cut in half so they fit in the box....
Counters look good, but whats this...where the %$$%## is the rest of the French
army? Got a bum box, only half the French army is there...guess someone
missed packing that second piece of 1/2 counter sheet......
Some of the British counters look like the ink had air bubbles in it, and
the US air force has a faint ink streak over one side.... Other than that
the counters look good, except telling the CCNN and Hitler
Youth apart is a bit hard, fortunately the HY units don't seem to vary in
strength (unless there are more on the missing counter sheet).
The counters look GOOD, I like the new RSI counters, lots of fun new
unit types......air units are in the new style with an inoperative
side on the back....includes corp and air wing markers, naval forces
are not individual ships but task forces (see below). The strategic
air forces are also divided out from the TAC air....
Maps are nice, I really like the new style.....
A ton of charts are jammed in, garrison displays and the new style aircharts
look loike they may get a bit crowded at times....looks like you need 2
tables, one for the maps and one for the displays.....
2 OB booklets, LONG OB booklets...I think I liked the ones in FITE/SE
better as far as layout/fonts, the AXIS OB includes a number of
units not in SF that get transferred to the East after formation and
the Axis Balkan OB.
The rules, thick rules, very thick rules.....the big changes are
an on demand air system (my friends and I have been doing an on demand
type system for years, nice to see the official rules). No B-17s, Lancs,
etc. as the strate3gic air war has been handled via wings, need to see
how this plays, looks a LOT easier than trying to move 1000 plane raids
to Berlin and do all the patrol attacks :-) The naval war is also
abstracted, includes (as you would expect) a good deal of rules
for handling invasions.....V-weapons rules as well to handle blitz of London
and port attacks.
I am going to give the game a solo try tonight and if there is any interest
I can post more impressions later.
>> I am thinking that we may want to try and create a few scenarios using
the net man-power, if your are interested let me know.... <<
Jim
>From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Fri Sep 23 17:04:47 1994
Return-Path: <europa-request@lysator.liu.se>
Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <25769-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Fri, 23 Sep 1994 17:04:38 +0100
Received: from ida.liu.se (curofix.ida.liu.se [130.236.139.139])
by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id SAA25228
for <europa@lysator.liu.se>; Fri, 23 Sep 1994 18:01:05 +0200
Received: from medix by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA29631;
Fri, 23 Sep 94 18:00:57 +0200
From: Mats Persson <map@ida.liu.se>
Received: from med3 by medix (4.1/ida.slave-V1.0b6d6) id AA15334;
Fri, 23 Sep 94 18:00:56 +0200
Received: by med3 (4.1/ida.slave-V1.0b6d6) id AA22770;
Fri, 23 Sep 94 18:00:53 +0200
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 94 18:00:53 +0200
Message-Id: <9409231600.AA22770@med3>
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Second Front amphibious landings
Status: RO
It seems that this is the most debated rule in SF.
But according to both John Astell and Winston Hamilton
c/m can land on enemy beaches if carried solely on LC
from port to beach.
Mats Persson
>From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Fri Sep 23 17:36:12 1994
Return-Path: <europa-request@lysator.liu.se>
Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <28750-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Fri, 23 Sep 1994 17:36:08 +0100
Received: from maxwell.ee.washington.edu (maxwell.ee.washington.edu [128.95.42.3])
by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id SAA25526
for <europa@lysator.liu.se>; Fri, 23 Sep 1994 18:34:25 +0200
Received: from karen-mac.ee.washington.edu
by maxwell.ee.washington.edu (1.37.109.4/UW-NDC Revision: 2.26 )
id AA07192; Fri, 23 Sep 94 09:34:15 -0700
Message-Id: <9409231634.AA07192@maxwell.ee.washington.edu>
X-Sender: graham@maxwell.ee.washington.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 1994 09:33:54 -0800
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
From: graham@ee.washington.edu (Stephen Graham)
Subject: Re: Second Front amphibious landings
Status: RO
>It seems that this is the most debated rule in SF.
>But according to both John Astell and Winston Hamilton
>c/m can land on enemy beaches if carried solely on LC
>from port to beach.
I was hoping Europa 36 would contain errata on this. But it
appears to have been written prior to Origins.
By inference, anything with heavy equipment can be landed on
beaches, if solely transported by LCs. This will cut down on
the assault wave size. All divisional HQ's and AT will have to
sail on LCs. With only 20 LCs, it's going to be hard to do some
invasions. IN particular, you couldn't recreate Sicily.
Stephen Graham
graham@ee.washington.edu
graham@cs.washington.edu
>From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Fri Sep 23 18:03:44 1994
Return-Path: <europa-request@lysator.liu.se>
Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <01831-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Fri, 23 Sep 1994 18:03:24 +0100
Received: from ida.liu.se (curofix.ida.liu.se [130.236.139.139])
by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id TAA25768
for <europa@lysator.liu.se>; Fri, 23 Sep 1994 19:00:30 +0200
Received: from sen3.ida (sen3.ida.liu.se)
by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA01356;
Fri, 23 Sep 94 19:00:25 +0200
From: Johan Herber <johhe@ida.liu.se>
Received: by sen3.ida (5.0/SMI-SVR4) id AA24881; Fri, 23 Sep 1994 19:00:20 +0200
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 1994 19:00:20 +0200
Message-Id: <9409231700.AA24881@sen3.ida>
Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se
In-Reply-To: <9409231634.AA07192@maxwell.ee.washington.edu> (graham@ee.washington.edu)
Subject: Re: Second Front amphibious landings
Content-Length: 1905
Status: RO
>It seems that this is the most debated rule in SF.
>But according to both John Astell and Winston Hamilton
>c/m can land on enemy beaches if carried solely on LC
>from port to beach.
If all C/M units can make amphibious landings, what's the use for
amphibious tank/armoured units? They still have to use LC and there is
a risk that they sink. Ok, they are only halved and not quartered in
any combat, but the main contribution in combat strength to any
amphibious assault is bound to come from aircraft/naval units so that
is a minor benefit far outweighed by the risk of sinking (reducing the
number of air units that can support the attack if it sinks).
My personal opinion is that (non-amphibious) C/M units not should be
able to make an amphibious landings, but that they should be able to
land on friendly beaches using LC.
I was hoping Europa 36 would contain errata on this. But it
appears to have been written prior to Origins.
It should be in Europa 37 according to GR/D.
By inference, anything with heavy equipment can be landed on
beaches, if solely transported by LCs. This will cut down on
the assault wave size. All divisional HQ's and AT will have to
sail on LCs. With only 20 LCs, it's going to be hard to do some
invasions. IN particular, you couldn't recreate Sicily.
How will you manage the Normandy landings then? There is just over 20
LC available for those landings as well. The follow-up wave (including
HE) will have to be transported on NTs, later to be transferred at sea
to surviving LCs and landed on the newly captured beaches.
/Johan
Johan Herber | Email: johhe@ida.liu.se
Programming Environments Laboratory | Phone: +46 13282869
Department of Computer and Information Science | Fax : +46 13282666
Linkoping University, S-581 83 LINKOPING, SWEDEN | Telex: 50966 UNILIN S
>From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Fri Sep 23 19:03:50 1994
Return-Path: <europa-request@lysator.liu.se>
Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <06192-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Fri, 23 Sep 1994 19:03:28 +0100
Received: from maxwell.ee.washington.edu (maxwell.ee.washington.edu [128.95.42.3])
by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id UAA26342
for <europa@lysator.liu.se>; Fri, 23 Sep 1994 20:01:11 +0200
Received: from karen-mac.ee.washington.edu
by maxwell.ee.washington.edu (1.37.109.4/UW-NDC Revision: 2.26 )
id AA18195; Fri, 23 Sep 94 11:01:05 -0700
Message-Id: <9409231801.AA18195@maxwell.ee.washington.edu>
X-Sender: graham@maxwell.ee.washington.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 1994 11:00:46 -0800
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
From: graham@ee.washington.edu (Stephen Graham)
Subject: Re: Second Front amphibious landings
Status: RO
>My personal opinion is that (non-amphibious) C/M units not should be
>able to make an amphibious landings, but that they should be able to
>land on friendly beaches using LC.
I think that's the intent of the Hamilton/Astell ruling. You still have
the difference between amphibious landings and amphibious assault.
For amphibious assault, you're still limited to non-c/m, non-HE units or
the intrinsically amphibious.
> I was hoping Europa 36 would contain errata on this. But it
> appears to have been written prior to Origins.
>
>It should be in Europa 37 according to GR/D.
>
> By inference, anything with heavy equipment can be landed on
> beaches, if solely transported by LCs. This will cut down on
> the assault wave size. All divisional HQ's and AT will have to
> sail on LCs. With only 20 LCs, it's going to be hard to do some
> invasions. IN particular, you couldn't recreate Sicily.
>
>How will you manage the Normandy landings then? There is just over 20
>LC available for those landings as well. The follow-up wave (including
>HE) will have to be transported on NTs, later to be transferred at sea
>to surviving LCs and landed on the newly captured beaches.
The Normandy assault wave isn't as large as the Sicilian. Isn't it two
regiments/brigades of the 4th US, 1st US, 3d British, 15th British, and 3d
Canadian, and a regiment of the 29th US. That's 11 LCs, leaving 9 for
divisional HQs, armor and artillery in the follow-up wave.
Sicily, in contrast, had 14 assault regiments/brigades plus the three combat
commands of the 2d Armored Division, the Canadian Tank Brigade, and seven
divisional HQ's plus artillery to land. That's at least 28 LCs required.
Stephen Graham
graham@ee.washington.edu
graham@cs.washington.edu
>From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Fri Sep 23 21:21:48 1994
Return-Path: <europa-request@lysator.liu.se>
Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <16298-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Fri, 23 Sep 1994 21:21:39 +0100
Received: from theory.tc.cornell.edu (THEORY.TC.CORNELL.EDU [132.236.98.174])
by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with ESMTP id WAA00573
for <europa@lysator.liu.se>; Fri, 23 Sep 1994 22:16:18 +0200
Received: (from ualchemy@localhost) by theory.tc.cornell.edu (8.6.9/8.6.6)
id QAA43286; Fri, 23 Sep 1994 16:16:06 -0400
Received: by alchemy id AA12354 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4);
Fri, 23 Sep 1994 16:10:48 -0400
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 1994 16:10:48 -0400
From: Courtenay Footman <cpf@alchemy.ithaca.ny.us>
Message-Id: <199409232010.AA12354@alchemy>
To: europa@lysator.liu.se, graham@ee.washington.edu
Subject: Re: Second Front amphibious landings
Status: RO
>The Normandy assault wave isn't as large as the Sicilian. Isn't it two
>regiments/brigades of the 4th US, 1st US, 3d British, 15th British, and 3d
>Canadian, and a regiment of the 29th US. That's 11 LCs, leaving 9 for
>divisional HQs, armor and artillery in the follow-up wave.
You left out
>Sicily, in contrast, had 14 assault regiments/brigades plus the three combat
>commands of the 2d Armored Division, the Canadian Tank Brigade, and seven
>divisional HQ's plus artillery to land. That's at least 28 LCs required.
But considering the scale of Second Front, shouldn't the first wave
be everything that was landed the fist day? With the following wave
be everything that arrived the remaining fortnight?
According to Max Hasting's _Overlord_, the first assault waves at Normandy
were:
Utah: three RCT's of the 4th.
Omaha: four RCT's of the 1st and 29th,
Gold: three bde's of the 50th, the 56th independent Bde, and the 8th Armd Bde
Juno: three brigades of the Canadian 3rd, and the Can 2nd Armd Bde
Sword: three brigades of the 3rd, and the 27th Armd Bde
In addition, there where three commando battalions and a ranger battalion
landed.
This does not count non-infantry units other than the British Armored
Brigades. These include, but are not limited to: the 65th Armd Field
Artillery, the 743rd Tank Battalion, the 922 Aviation Engineer Regiment(!!)
When I plan my invasions (so far I have not executed one), I simply allow
the Allies to land HE. There is no way I will require them to land
in brigade size units -- the stacking limitations alone are decisive.
It is hard enough invading when the German armor is hopping around
the various possible invasion beaches, preventing any detailed advance
planning.
>From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Sat Sep 24 01:07:06 1994
Return-Path: <europa-request@lysator.liu.se>
Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <03142-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Sat, 24 Sep 1994 01:06:49 +0100
Received: from maxwell.ee.washington.edu (maxwell.ee.washington.edu [128.95.42.3])
by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id CAA03168
for <europa@lysator.liu.se>; Sat, 24 Sep 1994 02:05:22 +0200
Received: from karen-mac.ee.washington.edu
by maxwell.ee.washington.edu (1.37.109.4/UW-NDC Revision: 2.26 )
id AA03640; Fri, 23 Sep 94 17:05:16 -0700
Message-Id: <9409240005.AA03640@maxwell.ee.washington.edu>
X-Sender: graham@maxwell.ee.washington.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 1994 17:04:57 -0800
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
From: graham@ee.washington.edu (Stephen Graham)
Subject: Re: Second Front amphibious landings
Status: RO
>But considering the scale of Second Front, shouldn't the first wave
>be everything that was landed the fist day? With the following wave
>be everything that arrived the remaining fortnight?
Given all the restrictions on the assault wave, I'd say it's exactly that:
the initial assault waves. Say the first three waves landed on each beach
at Normandy. It's a bit odd considering the time scale, but then amphibious
assault works oddly at this time scale.
>In addition, there where three commando battalions and a ranger battalion
>landed.
These, along with the armored units you listed, are all amphibious-capable
units in Second Front, so they don't require LCs.
>When I plan my invasions (so far I have not executed one), I simply allow
>the Allies to land HE. There is no way I will require them to land
>in brigade size units -- the stacking limitations alone are decisive.
>It is hard enough invading when the German armor is hopping around
>the various possible invasion beaches, preventing any detailed advance
>planning.
This is too great a benefit for the Allies. They don't need any breaks,
given their abilities. (nb., the victory conditions do balance the game.)
I've done approximately twenty amphibious assaults during playtest and
since release. The bulk of Allied staying power is provided by the
double-acting air forces and the naval task forces. It's not unusual for
each invasion hex to have a defensive strength of 60.
The invasion of France requires a lot of prep work, starting from the
first turn of the game. Keeping those German divisions pinned in place
is an essential part of this prep.
Otherwise, it's a matter of finding odd places to invade. Invasions on
the Brittany peninsula are usually pretty good. Few German players are
willing stick good divisions out by Brest, in case an invasion at the
base of the peninsula cuts them off.
Stephen Graham
graham@ee.washington.edu
graham@cs.washington.edu
>From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Sat Sep 24 13:46:00 1994
Return-Path: <europa-request@lysator.liu.se>
Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <23303-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Sat, 24 Sep 1994 13:45:56 +0100
Received: from ida.liu.se (curofix.ida.liu.se [130.236.139.139])
by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id OAA06304
for <europa@lysator.liu.se>; Sat, 24 Sep 1994 14:44:48 +0200
Received: from sen3.ida (sen3.ida.liu.se)
by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA23917;
Sat, 24 Sep 94 14:44:46 +0200
From: Johan Herber <johhe@ida.liu.se>
Received: by sen3.ida (5.0/SMI-SVR4) id AA02590; Sat, 24 Sep 1994 14:44:40 +0200
Date: Sat, 24 Sep 1994 14:44:40 +0200
Message-Id: <9409241244.AA02590@sen3.ida>
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
In-Reply-To: <9409240005.AA03640@maxwell.ee.washington.edu> (graham@ee.washington.edu)
Subject: Re: Second Front amphibious landings
Content-Length: 499
Status: RO
>In addition, there where three commando battalions and a ranger battalion
>landed.
These, along with the armored units you listed, are all amphibious-capable
units in Second Front, so they don't require LCs.
If you read the rules on amphibious assaults, you will note that _all_
units making an amphibious assault must disembark from LCs. The only
benefit these units have from their amphibous capability is that they
are not quartered in attack strenghth, as I read it.
/Johan
>From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Sat Sep 24 17:51:28 1994
Return-Path: <europa-request@lysator.liu.se>
Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <11625-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Sat, 24 Sep 1994 17:51:05 +0100
Received: from asimov.ee.washington.edu (asimov.ee.washington.edu [128.95.42.41])
by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id SAA07683
for <europa@lysator.liu.se>; Sat, 24 Sep 1994 18:49:41 +0200
Received: by asimov.ee.washington.edu (16.6/UW-NDC Revision: 2.26 ) id AA13306;
Sat, 24 Sep 94 09:50:01 -0700
Date: Sat, 24 Sep 94 09:50:01 -0700
From: Stephen Graham <graham@maxwell.ee.washington.edu>
Message-Id: <9409241650.AA13306@asimov.ee.washington.edu>
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
Subject: Re: Second Front amphibious landings
Status: RO
> >In addition, there where three commando battalions and a ranger battalion
> >landed.
>
> These, along with the armored units you listed, are all amphibious-capable
> units in Second Front, so they don't require LCs.
>
>If you read the rules on amphibious assaults, you will note that _all_
>units making an amphibious assault must disembark from LCs. The only
>benefit these units have from their amphibous capability is that they
>are not quartered in attack strenghth, as I read it.
Quite right. One of the dangers of being a playtester is that old
versions of the rules get stuck in your head. One of the rules
iterations allowed intrinsically amphibious units to land directly from
NTs.
Steve
>From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Mon Sep 26 09:27:43 1994
Return-Path: <europa-request@lysator.liu.se>
Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <24400-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Sun, 25 Sep 1994 06:46:48 +0100
Received: from theory.tc.cornell.edu (THEORY.TC.CORNELL.EDU [132.236.98.174])
by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with ESMTP id GAA11509
for <europa@lysator.liu.se>; Sun, 25 Sep 1994 06:43:45 +0100
Received: (from ualchemy@localhost) by theory.tc.cornell.edu (8.6.9/8.6.6)
id BAA29012; Sun, 25 Sep 1994 01:43:38 -0400
Received: by alchemy id AA16168 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4);
Sun, 25 Sep 1994 01:41:03 -0400
Date: Sun, 25 Sep 1994 01:41:03 -0400
From: Courtenay Footman <cpf@alchemy.ithaca.ny.us>
Message-Id: <199409250541.AA16168@alchemy>
To: europa@lysator.liu.se, graham@maxwell.ee.washington.edu
Subject: Re: Second Front amphibious landings
Status: RO
I find it interesting that intrinsically amphibious units could be allowed
to land from NT's in the playtest version of the rules. Why was this dropped?
As it is, the last units I would want to make an amphibious assault with
are the amphibious armor units, because the #!$& things might sink.
The fact that they are not quartered is not much of a benifit, because they
take up twice as much room.
>From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Mon Sep 26 09:32:56 1994
Return-Path: <europa-request@lysator.liu.se>
Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <00158-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Sun, 25 Sep 1994 18:15:05 +0100
Received: from bradbury.ee.washington.edu (bradbury.ee.washington.edu [128.95.42.42])
by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id SAA13650
for <europa@lysator.liu.se>; Sun, 25 Sep 1994 18:11:49 +0100
Received: by bradbury.ee.washington.edu (16.6/UW-NDC Revision: 2.26 )
id AA03427; Sun, 25 Sep 94 10:11:41 -0700
Date: Sun, 25 Sep 94 10:11:41 -0700
From: Stephen Graham <graham@maxwell.ee.washington.edu>
Message-Id: <9409251711.AA03427@bradbury.ee.washington.edu>
To: europa@lysator.liu.se, graham@m
Subject: Re: Second Front amphibious landings
Status: RO
>I find it interesting that intrinsically amphibious units could be allowed
>to land from NT's in the playtest version of the rules. Why was this dropped?
I don't know. It was present in the last playtest naval rules. I thought
the historic utility of amphibious tanks was that they didn't require
landing craft. It makes some sense to require LCs for the other
amphibious units. Didn't they make most landings from LCs? Their
benefits would come from a force structure tailored for landings.
>As it is, the last units I would want to make an amphibious assault with
>are the amphibious armor units, because the #!$& things might sink.
>The fact that they are not quartered is not much of a benifit, because they
>take up twice as much room.
I've used since they are as effective as the units who would otherwise
occupy the space and provide armor and AT benefits.
>From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Mon Sep 26 09:42:21 1994
Return-Path: <europa-request@lysator.liu.se>
Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <12697-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Mon, 26 Sep 1994 06:43:53 +0100
Received: from theory.tc.cornell.edu (THEORY.TC.CORNELL.EDU [132.236.98.174])
by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with ESMTP id GAA16754
for <europa@lysator.liu.se>; Mon, 26 Sep 1994 06:42:39 +0100
Received: (from ualchemy@localhost) by theory.tc.cornell.edu (8.6.9/8.6.6)
id BAA29654; Mon, 26 Sep 1994 01:42:35 -0400
Received: by alchemy id AA17635 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4);
Mon, 26 Sep 1994 01:18:36 -0400
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 1994 01:18:36 -0400
From: Courtenay Footman <cpf@alchemy.ithaca.ny.us>
Message-Id: <199409260518.AA17635@alchemy>
To: europa@lysator.liu.se, graham@m, graham@maxwell.ee.washington.edu
Subject: Re: Second Front amphibious landings
Status: RO
>>As it is, the last units I would want to make an amphibious assault with
>>are the amphibious armor units, because the #!$& things might sink.
>>The fact that they are not quartered is not much of a benifit, because they
>>take up twice as much room.
>I've used since they are as effective as the units who would otherwise
>occupy the space and provide armor and AT benefits.
Yes, but most of the places you want to invade have a fort (or worse)
on them, so you don't get armor benefits on your attack, and for defense
you can use whatever you land in the mech movement phase.
>From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Mon Sep 26 09:43:31 1994
Return-Path: <europa-request@lysator.liu.se>
Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <04318-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Mon, 26 Sep 1994 09:24:36 +0100
Received: from unipalm.co.uk (unipalm.unipalm.co.uk [146.188.3.25])
by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id JAA17591
for <europa@lysator.liu.se>; Mon, 26 Sep 1994 09:23:40 +0100
Received: from brimstone.unipalm.co.uk
by unipalm.co.uk (4.1/SMI-4.1 unipalm 1.2) id AA11246;
Mon, 26 Sep 94 09:23:43 BST
Received: from augite.unipalm.co.uk
by brimstone.unipalm.co.uk (4.1/SMI-4.1 brimstone 1.19) id AA01014;
Mon, 26 Sep 94 09:23:29 BST
Message-Id: <MAPI.Id.0016.006f686e732020204632454230303139@MAPI.to.RFC822>
In-Reply-To: <199409232010.AA12354@alchemy>
References: Conversation <199409232010.AA12354@alchemy> with last message <199409232010.AA12354@alchemy>
Priority: Normal
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
Mime-Version: 1.0
From: John Sloan <johns@unipalm.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Second Front amphibious landings
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 94 09:21:15 PDT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; X-MAPIextension=".TXT"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Status: RO
I'm not sure I see what all the fuss is about. In the game I'm in,
we, the allies, have already landed on Sicily and southern Italy
without landing a single HE unit at anything other than ports.
Indeed the way we read the rules, HE could _only_ be landed at ports.
No problem, really. All our landings have just gone ahead and
captured ports with the HE landing in them in the explotation phase.
If we could land HE on beaches as well, we wouldn't need to bother
with ports, apart for supply, which would make the axis job a lot
harder.
[As is Italy has just surrendered in Aug II]
John
>From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Mon Sep 26 12:10:54 1994
Return-Path: <europa-request@lysator.liu.se>
Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <20057-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Mon, 26 Sep 1994 12:10:51 +0100
Received: from ida.liu.se (curofix.ida.liu.se [130.236.139.139])
by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id MAA18695
for <europa@lysator.liu.se>; Mon, 26 Sep 1994 12:09:47 +0100
Received: from sen3.ida (sen3.ida.liu.se)
by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA10990;
Mon, 26 Sep 94 12:09:44 +0100
From: Johan Herber <johhe@ida.liu.se>
Received: by sen3.ida (5.0/SMI-SVR4) id AA20493; Mon, 26 Sep 1994 12:09:43 +0100
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 1994 12:09:43 +0100
Message-Id: <9409261109.AA20493@sen3.ida>
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
In-Reply-To: <MAPI.Id.0016.006f686e732020204632454230303139@MAPI.to.RFC822> (message from John Sloan on Mon, 26 Sep 94 09:21:15 PDT)
Subject: Re: Second Front amphibious landings
Content-Length: 846
Status: RO
I'm not sure I see what all the fuss is about. In the game I'm in,
we, the allies, have already landed on Sicily and southern Italy
without landing a single HE unit at anything other than ports.
Indeed the way we read the rules, HE could _only_ be landed at ports.
That's ok if you want it that way.
No problem, really. All our landings have just gone ahead and
captured ports with the HE landing in them in the explotation phase.
The problem with this is that you must control a port in the initial
phase if you are going to use it during a turn, ie this is against the
rules as written.
If this is combined with your rule that HE only can be landed at ports
it will make an amphibous assault real risky. You will only have
unsupported units without cadres on the beachhead during the enemy
turn. Ouch!
/Johan
>From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Mon Sep 26 12:28:55 1994
Return-Path: <europa-request@lysator.liu.se>
Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP)
id <21319-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Mon, 26 Sep 1994 12:28:50 +0100
Received: from unipalm.co.uk (unipalm.unipalm.co.uk [146.188.3.25])
by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id MAA18855
for <europa@lysator.liu.se>; Mon, 26 Sep 1994 12:27:51 +0100
Received: from brimstone.unipalm.co.uk
by unipalm.co.uk (4.1/SMI-4.1 unipalm 1.2) id AA12132;
Mon, 26 Sep 94 12:27:58 BST
Received: from augite.unipalm.co.uk
by brimstone.unipalm.co.uk (4.1/SMI-4.1 brimstone 1.19) id AA10774;
Mon, 26 Sep 94 12:27:45 BST
Message-Id: <MAPI.Id.0016.006f686e732020203146313030303035@MAPI.to.RFC822>
In-Reply-To: <9409261109.AA20493@sen3.ida>
References: Conversation <MAPI.Id.0016.006f686e732020204632454230303139@MAPI.to.RFC822> with last message <9409261109.AA20493@sen3.ida>
Priority: Normal
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
Mime-Version: 1.0
From: John Sloan <johns@unipalm.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Second Front amphibious landings
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 94 12:25:35 PDT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; X-MAPIextension=".TXT"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Status: RO
>
>
> I'm not sure I see what all the fuss is about. In the game I'm in, =
> we, the allies, have already landed on Sicily and southern Italy =
> without landing a single HE unit at anything other than ports.
> Indeed the way we read the rules, HE could _only_ be landed at ports=