-----
Date: 17 Aug 1995 17:26:57 GMT
From: jfalgueras@servicom.es (Jordi Falgueras Glez,BCN)
Subject: Boot Camp rules "For Whom the Bell Tolls"
Hello , I have "For Whom the Bell Tolls" and I'm interested on the "Boot Camp"
rules for this game . Any notice about their existence ? . (Sorry my English)
-----
Subject: Re: Boot Camp rules "For Whom the Bell Tolls"
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 1995 10:37:39 -0700
From: Ross Hagglund <ross@informix.com>
> Hello , I have "For Whom the Bell Tolls" and I'm interested on the "Boot Camp"
> rules for this game . Any notice about their existence ? . (Sorry my English)
I asked about similar rules for games other than FtF, I never got a
response. I am not aware of any BC rules for games other than FtF (though
I have heard that AWW is going to have some soon)
Ross
(ross@informix.com)
-----
From: Mats Persson <matpe@lysator.liu.se>
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 1995 17:02:11 +0100
Subject: Test
This is a test of the Europa mailing list. I accidentally
removed the file with adresses a week ago. I found a backup
and restored it.
If you want to send an article to this list mail to:
europa@lysator.liu.se
Mats Persson
-----
From: Jeff White <jwhite@naybob.ghq.com>
Subject: Second Front VP's
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 1995 19:12:24 -0600 (CST)
Greets,
Our gaming group has been playing Second Front for close
to a year now. We are up to the October I 1944 turn, and
already the Allies have close to a guaranteed major victory.
We reached a minimal victory by around May of 1994. Has
anyone else had experience with this? The Allied side is
doing above average, but as much as the VP chart would have
you think.
--
Jeff White
ARS N0POY
-----
Date: Thu, 9 Nov 1995 08:15:18 +0100
From: Johan Herber <johe@einlu.ericsson.se>
Subject: Re: Second Front VP's
After Mats and I played the Mediterranean Campaign I did a few
calculations. The allies won even though I (as axis player) held on to
much of mainland Italy (including Rome). Basically the allies would
have a minor victory by capturing Sicily and Sardinia without any
losses... It's an old Europa 'bug', the attacker takes very few
losses.
/Johan
-----
Date: Thu, 09 Nov 1995 16:57:05 -0500
From: Ray Kanarr <RayK@smtp4.aw.com>
Subject: Internet Europa List
Hey there!
How do I subscribe to this List?
Ray Kanarr
Rayk@aw.com
-----
From: rln@bull.se (Roberth Lundin)
Subject: Research on Swedish OB
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 95 9:42:19 MET
Hello everybody,
I have promised to help GRD with research of the Swedish Order of Battle for
the new module of Narvik in the works. I am going to publish the artikles i
am writing in the process to this maling list before i send them to the
magazine. If you have comments and questions please make a comment.
Robbox
-----
From: rln@bull.se (Roberth Lundin)
Subject: Swedish Tank Production
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 95 9:44:08 MET
Forwarded message:
>From rln Wed Nov 8 09:59:16 1995
Subject: Swedish Tank Production
To: europa@lysator.liu.se
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 95 9:59:16 MET
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3a PL11]
Forwarded message:
>From root Wed Nov 8 09:23:09 1995
Message-Id: <m0tD5mj-0002xxC@mb.bull.se>
From: rln@bull.se (Roberth Lundin)
Subject: Swedish Tank Production
To: tro@dialog.se
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 95 9:23:04 MET
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3a PL11]
Swedish Tank Production
At the start of the second world war, Sweden had very few tanks and
the tanks was organized into one tank battalion. The tank battalion
contained tanks of model 37 and model 38. Model 37 was a tank with
only machine guns and the other had a 37mm canon. The model 37 was
designed by Ceskomoravska-Kolben-Danek(CKD) in Prag, and was assembled
at Jungnerverken in Oskarshamn. Engines was designed/produced by Volvo
and the armored plates was produced by Avesta. The model 38 was designed
and produced by Landswerk in Landskrona.
The Swedish general staff did not think tanks to be very efficient in
Swedish terrain and climate. Very few of the military had very high
opinions about tanks and their effeciency. The thought was to use tanks
to attack a coastal invasion and therefore it did not need a heavy canon.
A coastal invasion was not likely to have any tanks at all, and tanks
in support of an strong infantry attack was the thought the best defense.
The tanks main armament was the use of machine guns and not a main gun.
In the spring 1939 there was an attempt from the general staff to buy
more tanks, and a proposition was made to department of defense. The
proposition was based on 80-100 tanks of maximum 8.5 tons weight and
2-3 machine guns or 1 canon with machine guns. Department of defense
reacted quickly but cut down the number of tanks to 50. CKD made an
offer worth 13 mkr with generous conditions. But before deliveries
could start the Polish campaign started and Germany put a halt of all
export of war material from Germany, including the tjeckian protectorate.
At end of September the commander of the army made a proposition to
buy new needed equipment for 36 mkr and it included 104 tanks, 30 armored
cars, ammunition, spare parts, vehicles, 350 anti-tank rifles, engineer
equipment and cycles. The government limited the procurement to 20 tanks,
all the armored cars and half the number of anti-tank rifles. The motive
to only buy 20 tanks was that it would demand changes in the peace time
organization, and the equipment was to strengthen the wartime organization
only. The Swedish parliament (Riksdagen) was criticized by the public for
its decision.
During spring 1940 a new procurement was planned and an offer was made by
CKD of a 10 ton tank, THN, armed with a 37mm canon. The tanks was part of
a much larger deal with Germany and it contained airplanes, artillery
material, ammunition. The delivery was hampered by delivery problems and
disagreement about payment. When Germany attacked Denmark and Norway in
April, the contract was broken and no delivery of tanks or airplanes was
made. Germany used the contract to press Sweden in for political concession.
The defenseplan for 1941 there was a radical rethinking of Sweden's
defense. It acknowledge what had happened in Europe in the last two
years. The war making of the great powers in Europe was characterized
by fast attack operations, performed by air power and armored formation
with strong armament and mobility. The experiences learned was that the
Nordic terrain did not prohibit large formations of armored formations.
As consequence a decision was taken in defense plan 42 that 3 armored
brigades was to be created.
Four regiments was setup to handle the new type of weapon. In Enk|ping a
new regiment was created, to inherit the traditions from the withdrawn
regiment, G|ta livgarde. In H{lsingborg the Sk}nska kavalleri regimente
was renamed to Sk}nska pansar regimentet(P2). In Str{ngn{s and Sk|vde
the both combined regiments, I10 and I9, was redesigned to S|dermanlands
pansar regimente(P3) and Skaraborgs pansar regimente(P4).
A lot of new tanks and vehicles was needed to support these 3 new
brigades, and because of delivery problems from foreign suppliers,
all productions was to be made in Sweden. A license production of a
10-ton light tank TNH was made with CKD in Prag. German authorities
approved the license production in December 1940. The blueprints and
a prototype was sent to Sweden in Spring 1941. The tank was fitted
with Swedish weapons, gun-carridge, electrical and radio equipment.
Orders was made to Scania Vabis for 116 tanks in the autumn of 1941.
This model was named m/40 and had a weight of 10.5 ton and 50mm armor.
The weight of the armor was 3.5 ton, and was 2.8 tons for model 39 and 40.
Later the armor on model 39 and 40 was upgraded with extra armor plates
to the same armor weight as model 41.
At the same time Landswerk had made a prototype "Lago" for Hungary.
It had 16 ton weight and 34 mm armor. After negotiations and modifications
a new model was created with 22 ton weight and 55 mm armor. This model
was named model 42 and 160 was ordered, 100 from Landswerk and 60
license produced by Volvo.
In December 1941 and may 1942 delegations was sent to Germany and tjeckien
protectorate to study a 21 ton German tank and a 20 ton Tjeckien tank.
No positive result was achieved. In the autumn of 1941 an order was placed
to Landswerk on 80 more tanks of model model 40, but the actual production
was made by Karlstads mekaniska verkstad. Scania Vabis got an order of
121 tanks of model 41 and orders was put to on model 42 from Landswerk
for 80 tanks and Volvo for 42 tanks. At the end of the war the following
amount of tanks was produced in Sweden:
Year
Model m/37 m/38 m/39 m/40 m/41 m/42
Who CKD Landw. Landw. Landw. CKD Landw.
Weap. MG 37mm 37mm 37mm 37mm 75mm
Weigth 5t 8.5t 9t 9.5t 10.5t 22t
Ord/Del Ord/Del Ord/Del Ord/Del Ord/Del Ord/Del
1937 48 16
1938
1939 /48 /16 20
1940 /20 100
1941 116 160
1942 84/100 122 122
1943
1944 /80 220 282
1945
Total 48 16 20 180 220 282
To summarise the Swedish tank procurement and production, it is important
to remember that after the war started there were not very many places to
buy tanks from, without a considerable political price. But Sweden had all
the necesarily infrastructure to produce tanks, all the way from Iron ore
to the assembly lines, except for oil and petroleum. Small amount of these
got passed to Sweden by diplomatic efforts. As a consequence Sweden never
had a very large armoured force, but the foundation to a large and very
competetive defense industry was created during the second word war.
<END>
-----
From: rln@bull.se (Roberth Lundin)
Subject: Swedish Tank Forces
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 95 9:44:40 MET
Forwarded message:
>From root Wed Nov 8 09:32:56 1995
Message-Id: <m0tD5w9-0003IBC@mb.bull.se>
From: rln@bull.se (Roberth Lundin)
Subject: Swedish Tank Forces
To: rln@bull.se
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 95 9:32:48 MET
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3a PL11]
Swedish Tank Forces
Sweden started with 1 batalion of light tanks. It contained 48 light tanks
armed with machineguns, and 16 ligth tanks armed with 37mm canons. I have
rated this tank as a "1-10 Lt Tank Bn" because here was all tank expertise
rounded up, and it was well trained.
This tank battalion was disbanded as planed after the Polish campaign, into
2 tank batalions which were available from the two combined regiments I9 and
I10. Combined means that both regiments was responisble for training an
infantry batalion and a tank batalion. Or rather the I9 battalion was a
battlion of 1 tank company and 2 anti-tank companys, and the I10 battalion
was a battalion with 2 tank companys and 1 anti-tank company. Probably these
tanks units should not be rated "1-8 Tank Bn", but it is difficult to
lower it. During the 1940 the arrival of 20 new tanks of model 40 arrived
to replace some of the model 37 who went into depot.
The next change was the creation of the Tank Brigades, and this means that
Sweden never had a Tank Regiment. I dont know where the idea that Sweden
had such in Narvik OB. The organisation for the Brigades was setup in
Defense Plan for 1942 as:
Brigade Staff
Signal company
I. Tank battalion(3 ligth, 1 heavy, 1 support company)
II. Tank battalion(same as I.Bn)
III. Infantry battalion(3 infantry companys, 1 heavy inf. company)
Motorcycle company
Artillery battalion of 10.5 cm howitzers
Pioner company
Logistic and Support battalion
The Brigade will have a size of 6500 men, 105 light tanks, 76 medium
heavy tanks, 6 heavy anti-tank canons and 6 ligth. For anti-air defense 12
20mm automatic canons, and about 1000 vehicles.
In April 1945 a fourth battalion was added to the brigades, a tank battalion.
The tank battalion named P1G is the the P1 regiments detachment to gotland.
Some sources say it was strong company, other say a battalion. More research
is needed at the War Archieves(Krigsarkivet) before full knowledge can be
gained.
All forces listed below is forces available for mobilisation.
INITIAL FORCES, SEP I 39
Stockholm 1-10 Lt Tank II G|ta
REINFORCEMENTS
NOV I 39 Cnv: 1-10 Lt Tank II G|ta
To: 1-8 AT II 9
JAN I 40 1-8 Tank II 10
OCT I 42 Cnv: 1-8 AT II 9
To: 2-1-8 Tank X 9
Cnv: 1-8 AT II 10
To: 2-1-8 Tank X 10
JAN I 43 2-1-8 Tank X 8
JUL I 43 Cnv: 2-1-8 Tank X 9
To: 3-2-8 Tank X 9
OCT I 43 Cnv: 2-1-8 Tank X 10
To: 3-2-8 Tank X 10
JAN I 44 1-8 Tank II P1G
MAY I 44 Cnv: 3-2-8 Tank X 9
To: 4-2-8 Tank X 9
SEP I 44 Cnv: 3-2-8 Tank X 10
To: 4-2-8 Tank X 10
OCT I 44 Cnv: 2-1-8 Tank X 8
To: 3-2-8 Tank X 8
APR I 45 Cnv: 4-2-8 Tank X 9
To: 5-2-8 Tank X 9
Cnv: 4-2-8 Tank X 10
To: 5-2-8 Tank X 10
Cnv: 3-2-8 Tank X 8
To: 4-2-8 Tank X 8
<END>
-----
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 1995 10:02:38 +0100
From: Johan Herber <johe@einlu.ericsson.se>
Subject: Re: Swedish Tank Forces
The 1-8 Tank II 10 should either be an AT II in Jan I 40 or convert
from a Tank II in Oct I 42.
/Johan
> INITIAL FORCES, SEP I 39
>
> Stockholm 1-10 Lt Tank II G|ta
>
> REINFORCEMENTS
>
> NOV I 39 Cnv: 1-10 Lt Tank II G|ta
> To: 1-8 AT II 9
>
> JAN I 40 1-8 Tank II 10
>
> OCT I 42 Cnv: 1-8 AT II 9
> To: 2-1-8 Tank X 9
> Cnv: 1-8 AT II 10
> To: 2-1-8 Tank X 10
-----
From: John Sloan <johns@unipalm.pipex.com>
Subject: Re: Second Front VP's
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 95 17:16:08 GMT
Jeff White wrote on Thu, 09 Nov 95 01:12:24 GMT
> Greets,
> Our gaming group has been playing Second Front for close
> to a year now. We are up to the October I 1944 turn, and
> already the Allies have close to a guaranteed major victory.
> We reached a minimal victory by around May of 1994. Has
> anyone else had experience with this? The Allied side is
> doing above average, but as much as the VP chart would have
> you think.
>
> Jeff White
> ARS N0POY
We had a very similar experience, despite losing over 80 VPs in the
first two phases because of naval losses from the invasion of Italy.
The Axis player surrendered after the October turn because we were so
close to a major, and there was little German army left, and the west
wall and the Rhine were both breached.
I think it suffers from the same problem that FitE/SE suffers [which
is the only other one I've played] in that the attacker is favoured
by the CRT. With the odds the allies can get most of the time, the
worst result they can get is an EX and the Americans in particular
will laugh all the way to the bank if they can exchange off the
German Panzers.
Just my two bits.
John
-----
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 95 21:02 GMT
From: nicklaw@cix.compulink.co.uk (Nicholas Law)
Subject: Newbie-type rules question
I've recently been ploughing through the rules for 'For Whom The
Bell Tolls' -- my first Europa game -- on the train to work every
morning, to the bemusement of my fellow commuters.
In Rule 10.C.3, ATEC, where it says 'ATEC is only used when the
attacking units have (or are capable of) 1/2 or more AECA', and
Rule 10.H, Required Losses, where it says 'If the attacker used
1/2 or more AECA in an attack...' does it mean if the attacking
units' AECA proportion was 1/2 or more, or does it mean if the
attackers had at least one RE of half (or full) AECA capability?
Nick Law
-----
From: caa@wavefront.com (Charles Anderson)
Subject: Re: Newbie-type rules question
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 15:34:27 -0600 (CST)
>
> I've recently been ploughing through the rules for 'For Whom The
> Bell Tolls' -- my first Europa game -- on the train to work every
> morning, to the bemusement of my fellow commuters.
>
> In Rule 10.C.3, ATEC, where it says 'ATEC is only used when the
> attacking units have (or are capable of) 1/2 or more AECA', and
> Rule 10.H, Required Losses, where it says 'If the attacker used
> 1/2 or more AECA in an attack...' does it mean if the attacking
> units' AECA proportion was 1/2 or more, or does it mean if the
> attackers had at least one RE of half (or full) AECA capability?
>
> Nick Law
>
It means you attacked with 1/2 AECA in the attack to get the +2. So your
losses must be 1/2 AECA as well. Same thing with 1/7 for armor and engineer
proportions.
-Charlie
--
Charles Anderson - caa@wavefront.com
Disclaimer: They tell me disclaimers are useless, so here's mine: thhhppt...
-----
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 16:14 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Witham, Tom G." <TGWITH@Inland.com>
Subject: ETA WITD
Does anyone know the ETA of "War In The Desert" and/or what is holding up
its release? Any details about this game would be appreciated. One of the
GRD people said they would not / can not release "March To Victory" (A
Europa scale WWI game) until WITD gets out.
Why do they even bother the public with release dates anyway??
-----
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1995 00:19:00 -0500 (EST)
From: Larry Woloshyn <woloshyn@io.org>
Subject: Re: Newbie-type rules question
On Mon, 13 Nov 1995, Charles Anderson wrote:
> >
> > I've recently been ploughing through the rules for 'For Whom The
> > Bell Tolls' -- my first Europa game -- on the train to work every
> > morning, to the bemusement of my fellow commuters.
> >
> > In Rule 10.C.3, ATEC, where it says 'ATEC is only used when the
[more stuff]
> > Nick Law
> >
> It means you attacked with 1/2 AECA in the attack to get the +2. So your
It means you attacked with units capable of 1/2 or more AECA in _good
weather_.
> losses must be 1/2 AECA as well. Same thing with 1/7 for armor and engineer
> proportions.
> --
> Charles Anderson - caa@wavefront.com
Larry
-----
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 21:50:35 -0800
From: graham@ee.washington.edu (Stephen Graham)
Subject: Re: Newbie-type rules question
>It means you attacked with units capable of 1/2 or more AECA in _good
>weather_.
No. ATEC is used whenever the attacker is capable of AECA effects, regardless
of terrain or weather.
>From Second Front:
10.C.1 ATEC.
ATEC is used only when the attacking units have (or are capable of) 1/2 or
more AECA. Note that ATEC is used if the attacking units do not (or cannot)
use AECA.
If you're attacking with a panzer division, ATEC is used. It's a subtle
effect, but stresses the importance of proper force composition.
Stephen Graham
graham@ee.washington.edu
graham@cs.washington.edu
-----
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1995 08:44:19 +0100
From: Johan Herber <johe@einlu.ericsson.se>
Subject: Re: ETA WITD
The latest (almost a month ago) I heard from Winston was that it was
the usual troubles with sub-contractors, plus they had to add another
countersheet due to some changes. I know no new ETA.
/Johan
Johan Herber | Email: eraherr@lmera.ericsson.se
Rydsvagen 104A | Phone: +46 13173013
S-582 48 LINKOPING | -Work: +46 13284160
SWEDEN |
-----
From: caa@wavefront.com (Charles Anderson)
Subject: Re: Newbie-type rules question
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 1995 09:56:04 -0600 (CST)
>
> >It means you attacked with units capable of 1/2 or more AECA in _good
> >weather_.
>
> No. ATEC is used whenever the attacker is capable of AECA effects, regardless
> of terrain or weather.
Right, I'm bumming because we just got mud in France on the October I 44 turn,
and I've got a line of SS panzers in front of my armor. -6 attacks (in clear)
are not a good formula for success.
--
Charles Anderson - caa@wavefront.com
Disclaimer: They tell me disclaimers are useless, so here's mine: thhhppt...
-----
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 95 17:35 GMT
From: nicklaw@cix.compulink.co.uk (Nicholas Law)
Subject: Re: Newbie-type rules question
Thanks, chaps, for your responses to my question on the rules to
'For Whom the Bell Tolls'. I was pleased to see a general
consensus on the matter.
I've now moved on to actually playing the thing. After the first
few turns fighting is starting to break out, with the Foreign
Legion advancing on Malaga, as the Republicans march through
Toledo. Meanwhile Italian submarines have sunk a Republican
cruiser force as it attempts to interfere with the crossing of
Franco's forces from Morocco.
The start of the war was notable for the inexperience displayed by
the troops involved -- I think I've managed to simulate that quite
well :-)
Nick Law
-----
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 1995 12:37:56 -0500
From: Ray Kanarr <RayK@smtp4.aw.com>
Subject: Re: Newbie-type rules question -Reply
Nick,
One option that you may wish to consider is using Republican naval
gunfire to support the Gobernitos in the first part of the war.
In this way, unless the Franco Fascists are willing to allocate
significant resources to reducing the Gobes early, generally to the
detriment of other operations, the Gobes can become a significant
pain in the Northern flank.
I've successfully done this as the Gobe front commander in two
different FWtBT games, once actually threatening Fascist-held Oviedo.
Ray
-----
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 1995 13:34 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Witham, Tom G." <TGWITH@Inland.com>
Subject: East Front Scenarios
A friend of mine has bought Fire In The East. This is his first experience
on the Eastern front in Europa. We have decided to play 'Lenningrad: 1941'
, from the No. 21 issue of Europa magazine, instead of taking on the whole
monster. I also notice from this magazine that 'The Urals' contains a 1943
scenario on the Russian front.
What other SCENARIOS exist on the Eastern front for Europa?
I was delighted to find Lenningrad: 1941 because it gave the flavor of the
game with few counters and limited map areas (you didn't have to have a ping
pong table to play this scenario). Does/do a scenario(s) exist in Scorched
Earth for other scenarios of the Russian front like Kursk? Stalingrad?
Korsun Pocket etc.? Did 'The Urals' contain other scenarios as well? If
scenarios of this type exist in back issues of the Europa Magazine please
include their issue numbers. Thanks for your help.
Tom
-----
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 95 9:45:01 EST
From: "Frank E. Watson" <FEWatson@LANMAIL.RMC.COM>
Subject: Re: East Front Scenarios
> I was delighted to find Lenningrad: 1941
Glad you are enjoying Leningrad, '41. I'd like to hear how it goes.
> What other SCENARIOS exist on the Eastern front for Europa?
Best I can remember, Europa Magazine has had:
"Battle for Kiev" by Flavio Carillo in #32(?)
"Lunge to Stalingrad" by Jim Arnold in #35(?)
Guessing on issue numbers here, but I can find them if you wish.
I really like Battle for Kiev. I haven't played "Lunge."
If things go as planned, and they never do, there will be a revised
version of Battle for Kiev along about TEM #48 or #49.
There also might be a scenario on the Soviet offensive against Finland in
1944 sometime next year.
But next year doesn't help if you are just opening the box.
Dave Berry (spelling? not the guy from the Miami Herald) also
independently published a couple of scenarios called, I think, Operation
Saturn and Operation Uranus (?) if I remember correctly. These were about
the Soviet Stalingrad offensive. I haven't seen them advertised lately.
They come with extensive rules revisions, especially in the air system.
> Did 'The Urals' contain other scenarios as well?
The Urals just has the one big '43 scenario.
Frank
-----
From: viktor@mgr.hjf.org (Viktor Kaufmann)
Subject: Stupid rules questions
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 1995 10:09:17 -0500 (EST)
Hi, guys. A group of friends and I were playing First to Fight last
night (actually, we've been playing over the last few weeks at a very
leisurely 2-3 hours per night). Other than my brother and myself,
none of the other four have ever played Europa previously. But, my
brother and I haven't played so much Europa that we don't need to
re-learn the rules every time we play (about once per year, at
Origins).
So, the following questions have come up:
Overruns: Can the attacker use air support. The rules don't say no
(as far as we can tell), and only rule out DAS, but the Boot Camp
rules say no to both.
ZOC: Is the movement cost for entering a zone of control based on the
unit which is entering the ZOC (ie, c/m pay +5, others +3), or is it
based on the type of ZOC entered (ie, entering a c/m ZOC is +5,
entering another ZOC is +3)?
This game has really been weird, since my brother and two others split
the Poles (I figured it would be better for the Polish to be more
experienced). My brother tends to enjoy making people pay for
mistakes, and to try to force them to over-react to his daring. This
is a fairly successful strategy, and it resulted in the Polish capture
of Hindenburg, French intervention, and looming German defeat. OTOH,
with average die rolls, the penalty for that should have been Warsaw
being overrun, but the Germans have been very unlucky.
I'll post a summary of the game later. It has been alot of fun,
although it must be emphasized that the Germans had never played
before, which is why they lost (unsupported units, lone artillery
units, etc, all caused problems for them, as did overruns (they didn't
plan well for overruns until after turn 6)). It takes awhile to gain
experience.
One last question (still remember the first two?): any word on when
the re-release of First to Fight is supposed to occur? I have a
shortage of counters (they seem to be MIA), and would rather get the
complete re-release.
Thanks,
Viktor
-----
From: caa@wavefront.com (Charles Anderson)
Subject: Entering ZOC's in First to Fight
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 11:38:58 -0600 (CST)
I talked to the loyal opposition in our Second Front game last night about
the movement costs for entering zocs in First to Fight since he owns the
game and has read the rules. There is a cost for entering zocs which is based
on the unit doing the moving like all other zoc costs. It basically takes
half your movement to enter a zoc +5 for armor +3 for infantry. I guess
this is because they use a different time scale in FtoF than standard
Europa.
On a side note we were discussing ways to model attrition in Second Front.
So far the game is not very accurate in modeling the historical manpower
shortage that the Allies had. I was thinking that maybe every 30 attack
points costing 1 RP would work for modeling attrition. Round to the nearest
tenth or hundredth. What do folks out there think?
-Charlie (BTW 30 is just a number I pulled out of the air, it had a good
feel to it to me. 20 seems too low, and 40 too high)
--
Charles Anderson - caa@wavefront.com
Disclaimer: They tell me disclaimers are useless, so here's mine: thhhppt...
-----
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 95 18:14 GMT
From: nicklaw@cix.compulink.co.uk (Nicholas Law)
Subject: Re: Newbie-type rules question - Reply
Ray K said:
>One option that you may wish to consider
>is using Republican naval
>gunfire to support the Gobernitos
Thanks for that tip, Ray, although my Republican ships are so busy
dodging mines, depth-charging Italian submarines and trying to
keep the supply lines open that I think they would complain that
they are busy enough as it is :-). For a land-war system,
'Europa' certainly gives the sailors some work to do. Has anyone
else got any tactics for 'For Whom The Bell Tolls' that they'd
like to share?
The Republicans have launched a big offensive north along the Ebro
valley that has resulted in desperate battles before Zaragoza. I
like the way 'For Whom the Bell Tolls' starts off as a
low-intensity rebellion -- where if you've got two infantry
regiments in the same hex then you've got yourself a killer stack
-- and then steadily escalates into a serious war. The Attack
Supply rule keeps people from going over the top until they're
properly prepared; I hope this is retained in the forthcoming WW1
games as it would accurately produce the Big Push-lull-Big
Push-lull seen on the Western Front. The German/Italian donations
to the Nationalists of supply steps could prove crucial in later
turns, as it was in reality.
Today's rule musing, still on the subject of supply:
Rule 12.C.1 - Full General Supply Sources include: 'Any three
connected... cities in mainland Spain that are capable of
generating... infantry replacement points'.Can a city be such a
supply source even if it's not connected to two other cities? i.e.
the Republicans are trapped in a big pocket around Madrid and
Albacete; can these two cities serve as Full General Supply
Sources even though they are not connected to a third city? What
do you chaps think?
Nick Law
-----
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 10:44:55 -0700
From: graham@ee.washington.edu (Stephen Graham)
Subject: Re: Newbie-type rules question - Reply
>Today's rule musing, still on the subject of supply:
>Rule 12.C.1 - Full General Supply Sources include: 'Any three
>connected... cities in mainland Spain that are capable of
>generating... infantry replacement points'.Can a city be such a
>supply source even if it's not connected to two other cities? i.e.
>the Republicans are trapped in a big pocket around Madrid and
>Albacete; can these two cities serve as Full General Supply
>Sources even though they are not connected to a third city? What
>do you chaps think?
By the rule you just quoted, clearly not. They are Limited Sources
of Supply per the rules.
---
Stephen Graham
graham@ee.washington.edu
graham@cs.washington.edu
-----
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 13:31 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Witham, Tom G." <TGWITH@Inland.com>
Subject: What do you think?
While I was gazing at the FitE game map last night, while my opponent
was moving his units I wondered if my dream will be coming true. A dream a
lot of us Europa players probably have- playing the grand game (Grand
Europa) with about 20 to 30 other players.
My club couldn't do it. My wargame club only has about a half dozen or
so active players in it and only three of us have any real interest in
Europa to begin with. So the three of us would have to find other Europa
players from around the Chicagoland area. I'm sure they're out there but
I'm also sure that I couldn't find another 17 or so of them and get them to
play on some week night; a night when all of us could get away from our
families, jobs, responsibilities etc. Up till now my experience with Europa
has pretty much been face to face encounters with usually one other
opponent. Fun indeed but always limited to one or two other opponents- not
exactly team play.
But now we have the Net. And the Net has Europa players. And I think
that my day is coming. Playing by EMail is not the answer to all my Europa
problems but it sure can come close. Emailing moves can take time in both
keying in one's own moves and then transferring to the map the moves of
opponent(s) sent over modem. But what if a player was responsible for only
a section of a front? If I were commanding Army Group South I would be
responsible for only my groups' units and I would really only have to update
my map with the moves of opponents' pieces in my immediate area. Army
Groups North and Center would be handling their respective units and those
of their opponents. The strategic air war would be handled by still other
players as would North Africa, France, the convoy battles etc. Finally,
each alliance would by headed by a Churchill, Hitler, Stalin etc. who would
enter into strategy meetings with other allies and make decisions
appropriate to the direction of their forces in the war. These leaders
would probably be gaming clubs who would be willing to lay out the entire
game on their ping pong table(s) and update the game in its entirety on a
turn to turn basis.
If this is all true or possible I don't need Chicagoland's Europa
players any more and I don't need for them to drop what their doing on
Tuesday night so that we can get in a few turns. Now I can get a front or
group commander from Denver or Memphis or back woods Nebraska or Sweden or
England. Shortage of players is no longer a problem.
I don't have Aide de Camp but I believe it to be some kind of computer
aid for this type of endeavor. If the game could be entirely played on the
screen of my computer without me having to move around cardboard counters
then a major obstacle has been overcome. But I don't have Aide de camp and
I don't know what it does.
At any rate I hope to read what you think about this and I hope you
have a happy Thanksgiving.
Tom
-----
From: caa@wavefront.com (Charles Anderson)
Subject: Re: What do you think?
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 14:25:44 -0600 (CST)
> I don't have Aide de Camp but I believe it to be some kind of computer
> aid for this type of endeavor. If the game could be entirely played on the
> screen of my computer without me having to move around cardboard counters
> then a major obstacle has been overcome. But I don't have Aide de camp and
> I don't know what it does.
> At any rate I hope to read what you think about this and I hope you
> have a happy Thanksgiving.
>
> Tom
Take a look at <URL:http://www.cris.com/~Sturmer/> for some info on Aide de
Camp. There are some problems with the links, I sent e-mail to the pages
maintainer about it, but they can be figured out if you look closely enough.
-Charlie
--
Charles Anderson - caa@wavefront.com
Disclaimer: They tell me disclaimers are useless, so here's mine: thhhppt...
-----
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 15:21:18 -0600
From: David.Holmes@dlep1.itg.ti.com (David Holmes)
Subject: Re: What do you think?
>
> While I was gazing at the FitE game map last night, while my opponent
>was moving his units I wondered if my dream will be coming true. A dream a
>lot of us Europa players probably have- playing the grand game (Grand
>Europa) with about 20 to 30 other players.
But what if a player was responsible for only
>a section of a front? If I were commanding Army Group South I would be
>responsible for only my groups' units and I would really only have to update
>my map with the moves of opponents' pieces in my immediate area. Army
>Groups North and Center would be handling their respective units and those
>of their opponents. The strategic air war would be handled by still other
>players as would North Africa, France, the convoy battles etc. Finally,
>each alliance would by headed by a Churchill, Hitler, Stalin etc. who would
>enter into strategy meetings with other allies and make decisions
>appropriate to the direction of their forces in the war. These leaders
>would probably be gaming clubs who would be willing to lay out the entire
>game on their ping pong table(s) and update the game in its entirety on a
>turn to turn basis.
>
>Tom
>
>
My club has talked about this. We don't think even Churchill, Stalin, and
Hitler would need the entire game laid out. Army commanders would send a
general (not hex by hex) list of their positions to the army group
commanders. Similarly the army group commander would send to the front
commander and the front commander would send to the c-in-c. This would
lighten the c-in-c's load and simulate the difficulty headquarters sometimes
had in knowing their units' exact location.
David
-----
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 15:04:39 -0500 (EST)
From: Edward K Nam <ednam@umich.edu>
Subject: FitE/SE questions.
Four of us have just started a 1940 game of FitE/SE.
I have a few rules questions, if someone would be so kind as to help me.
I am using the Rules as Written in the Scorched Earth game.
If there are any "State of the Art" rules which seem to be widely accepted,
I would be happy to hear those responses as well.
1- Can a unit mix Administrative movement with operational (normal)
movement within a movement phase?
2- Are the zero strength Brandenburg commando units useful for anything
besides bridge capture and retreat assists?
3- Are there any recent modified air rules that I can get? I heard that
there are rules to make the system more fluid. As it's written I find the
air rules extremely buggy and unrealistic.
4- Why can't russian rail engineers change from standard to broad gauge?
5- Is there a modified CRT that I can use so that I can use the percentile
dice rule to pick an odds column? I heard that the presnt CRT is too
"bloody". This percentile dice rule of course favors the attacker. I tried
to make my own by making a sight change but I haven't playtested it.
Thank you!
Ed
-----
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 10:10:25 +0100
From: Johan Herber <johe@einlu.ericsson.se>
Subject: Re: FitE/SE questions.
> Four of us have just started a 1940 game of FitE/SE.
> I have a few rules questions, if someone would be so kind as to help me.
> I am using the Rules as Written in the Scorched Earth game.
> If there are any "State of the Art" rules which seem to be widely accepted,
> I would be happy to hear those responses as well.
The latest official rules are the ones in Second Front. I suggest you
pick and choose from them. The rules in FWtBT are later but are not
complete for WWII, are they?
> 1- Can a unit mix Administrative movement with operational (normal)
> movement within a movement phase?
No.
> 2- Are the zero strength Brandenburg commando units useful for anything
> besides bridge capture and retreat assists?
Capturing unguarded ports and airfields (not very likely against an
experienced opponent).
> 3- Are there any recent modified air rules that I can get? I heard that
> there are rules to make the system more fluid. As it's written I find the
> air rules extremely buggy and unrealistic.
The air rules in SF allow for a more flexible use of the airforces,
but the air combat resolution is basically the same.
> 4- Why can't russian rail engineers change from standard to broad gauge?
Can't they?
> 5- Is there a modified CRT that I can use so that I can use the percentile
> dice rule to pick an odds column? I heard that the presnt CRT is too
> "bloody". This percentile dice rule of course favors the attacker. I tried
> to make my own by making a sight change but I haven't playtested it.
It is a well known fact that the attacker takes few casualties and
perhaps even fewer with a percentile throw to determine CRT
column. But speed of play is increased, as you don't have to search
for that extra odd factor to make the next column.
/Johan
-----
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 95 9:57:23 EST
From: "Frank E. Watson" <FEWatson@LANMAIL.RMC.COM>
Subject: Re: FitE/SE questions.
Ed asked:
> 4- Why can't russian rail engineers change from standard to broad
gauge?
They can - says so right in the SE rules.
> 5- Is there a modified CRT that I can use so that I can use the
percentile
> dice rule to pick an odds column? I heard that the presnt CRT is too
> "bloody". This percentile dice rule of course favors the attacker. I
tried
> to make my own by making a sight change but I haven't playtested it.
CRT is bloody for defenders. It better be, given a 2-week turn! If it is
not, the German will end 1941 fighting outside of Riga and Smolensk
instead of Leningrad and Moscow. The usual complaint is that the CRT is
NOT bloody enough for the attacker - there's little attacker attrition at
the high odds attack that typify 1941 Russia. That's a valid complaint,
but simply kludging up a new CRT might just trade one set of problems for
another. My guess is that in the future we will have some kind of new,
"official" CRT - which of course doesn't help today.
Incidentally, IMO, the mathematical bias to the attacker from using
percentile dice is simply not enough to spoil the game. Percentile dice
benfits outweigh the downside by far.
Frank
-----
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 10:21:14 -0700
From: graham@ee.washington.edu (Stephen Graham)
Subject: Re: FitE/SE questions.
> > 3- Are there any recent modified air rules that I can get? I heard that
> > there are rules to make the system more fluid. As it's written I find the
> > air rules extremely buggy and unrealistic.
>
>The air rules in SF allow for a more flexible use of the airforces,
>but the air combat resolution is basically the same.
But note that the air rules for SF assume a different air replacement
system. The information isn't there to adapt this to FitE/SE yet.
---
Stephen Graham
graham@ee.washington.edu
graham@cs.washington.edu
-----
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 95 15:39:56 EST
From: "Frank E. Watson" <FEWatson@LANMAIL.RMC.COM>
Subject: List in TEM
For everybody,
Anybody have any problem with Europa Magazine publishing this list address
in and upcoming issue? I'm going to assume that nobody would mind if I
don't get a barrage of objections.
Frank
-----
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 18:00:27 -0500 (EST)
From: Larry Woloshyn <woloshyn@io.org>
Subject: Re: FitE/SE questions.
On Wed, 29 Nov 1995, Johan Herber wrote:
> > Four of us have just started a 1940 game of FitE/SE.
> > I have a few rules questions, if someone would be so kind as to help me.
> > 2- Are the zero strength Brandenburg commando units useful for anything
> > besides bridge capture and retreat assists?
>
> Capturing unguarded ports and airfields (not very likely against an
> experienced opponent).
Also blocking rail lines esp. into areas where large offensives
are planned. An extra turn without the Soviets able to reinforce the
area can be a big boost. Of course it is a suicide mission...
> > 5- Is there a modified CRT that I can use so that I can use the percentile
> It is a well known fact that the attacker takes few casualties and
> perhaps even fewer with a percentile throw to determine CRT
> column. But speed of play is increased, as you don't have to search
> for that extra odd factor to make the next column.
>
> /Johan
>
I strongly recommend using this simple limited intelligence rule.
Players cannot examine opponent's stacks. Players must put the
largest unit on the top of the stack, ie. if two regiments and a
division are in a stack the division must be on top.
Players may agree that if a Panzer and an infantry division are
stacked the Panzer should be on top. Also artillery divisions would not
be subject to this rule. Use common sense.
Using this system greatly speeds up play and is more realistic.
Players can concentrate on forming sensible stacks which reflect the
resources available. Of course it is more dangerous for the attacker
but on the other hand you get some pleasant suprises too.
I always play DNO/UNT/FITE/SE one on one and arrived at this
rule over many years of play.
Larry
-----
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 1995 18:40:25 -0500 (EST)
From: Larry Woloshyn <woloshyn@io.org>
Subject: Re: List in TEM
On Wed, 29 Nov 1995, Frank E. Watson wrote:
> For everybody,
>
> Anybody have any problem with Europa Magazine publishing this list address
> in and upcoming issue? I'm going to assume that nobody would mind if I
> don't get a barrage of objections.
>
> Frank
>
Please do!!
Larry
-----
From: Roberth Lundin <rln@bull.se>
Subject: RE: List in TEM
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 09:00:48 +-100
> Anybody have any problem with Europa Magazine publishing this list
> address in and upcoming issue? I'm going to assume that nobody
> would mind if I don't get a barrage of objections.
Strange that nobody has already done this. I think it to little trafic in this list,
and it would be very nice to have more scenarios and such ideas.
Robbox
-----
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 1995 07:24:15 -0500
From: progers@africa.ufl.edu (Peter Rogers)
Subject: AWW Fin Setup
Europa People:
First, I'd like to say how happy I am to see this list finally showing some
life over the last few weeks. I am greatly in favor of posting the list
address in TEM as a way of encouraging even more action. I'm not a member
of GENIE and really can't afford yet another OSP on my graduate student
income. As a general matter, I'm all in favor of shifting as much as
possible of the online Europa action away from specific commercial services
such as GENIE and AOL and onto the general Internet by way of mailing lists
such as this and WWWs (note that GRD now has a web site,
www.icomplete.com/grdgames/).
Second, since this sort of list is only as strong as its contributions, I
thought I might throw something out for your consideration. My regular
gaming partner and I are about to start our second game of A Winter War.
Our first game was a little strange in that I rolled for Western
Intervention on the very first turn. I did manage a Finnish victory thanks
to the Canadians chasing all the Soviets out of northern Finnland and some
big Soviet AHs during his last combat phase.
This time, we switching sides. We wll be using the following optional rules:
36A. Advance Game Mechanics
1. Supply Effects
2. Terrain and Supply Lines
I think these rules have a little for each side. Yes, they make it harder
for the Soviets to extend their supply lines and raise the possibility of
units dying from lack of supply, but the initial effects of being out of
supply are less severe.
36B. Armor and Antitank Effects
I know these benefit the Soviets (ie, me), but what's a Europa game without
all those AEC and ATEC calculations.
36D. Airborne Operations
At first glance, this would seem to be all Soviet. However, there are two
important considerations. One, if the Soviets use their 1-2-5 parachute
brigades, then they don't get them as 1-2-8 para-infantry for anti-partisan
purposes. Two, now the Soviets have to roll for scatter when attempting to
air drop supplies. This makes aerial resupply of isolated units much more
difficult.
36F. Accelerated Foreign Aid to Finland
Balance for 36B above.
37A. Designer's Choice Rules - Special Unit Abilities
1. Heavy Tanks
2. Finnish Ski Units
For play balance, as I've been playing Europa games for much longer than my
opponent, and this should help to even things up a bit.
I would now like to offer the Finnish setup I used in our first game for
comments and suggestions. My opponent will probably use a similar setup,
seeing as how I won our first game with this one. He would of course
appreciate any ideas about how to make it better, and I would be thankful
for anything I might be able to use to turn it into swiss cheese.
Kannaksen Army
4717 - 2 x 4-5-6, 0-1-6, 0-1-0 art, 1-2-6 (reserve)
4616 - 4-5-6, 1-2-8 ski, 1-6 art
4615 - 2 x 4-5-6, 2-6*, 1-8 ski
4614 - 2-6*, 1-8 ski, 2-6 art
4613 - 2-6*, 1-6*, 2 x 0-1-6, 4-5-6 (reserve)
4514 - 0-6 arm
4517 - 0-1-5 eng
It's essential that the Finns prevent any first turn 4-1s against the
Mannerheim Line. This setup prevents that even with all the available
Soviet air and naval bombardment against 4717. Unfortunately, it also eats
up most of the High Command Reserve.
4th Army Corps
4110 - 3-4-6*
3910 - 1-2-6 ski
3711 - 3-4-6*
3611 - 1-6* ski
3513 - 0-1-5 eng
3512 - 1-6 ski (reserve)
3412 - 1-6 ski (reserve)
With most of the High Command Reserve off to the southwest, this is probably
the hardest section to setup. I'm still not happy with this and probably
never will be. Since the Soviets generally set up second and move first,
the Finns have to deploy conservatively to prevent any first turn surrounds.
This means setting up as far back from the border as the rules allow.
Also, the deeper the Soviets are in Finnland, the more hexes the Finns have
for deploying their partisans.
Northern Finland Defense Area (all ski)
2912 - 1-2-6
2612 - 1-6*
2011 - 1-6*
1310 - 1-6
Forget Petsamo and the very far north, the Soviets up there can't go very
far and by refusing to fight them you effectively keep them out of the game
at the cost of two towns. The main Soviet push here will be around the
flank of 4th corps and/or toward the Swedish border. With only four units,
the Finns have to wait and see what develops and then respond.
Coastal Defense Command
4517 - all
Since there is no chance of a Soviet amphibious invasion, and the soonest
anybody can arrive at the coast (4521) by island hopping across the ice is
March I, pile everyone in Viipuri to backstop the Mannerheim Line. While
writing this I just realized that according to the rules these units could
be set up in 4717. This would in theory free up the 4-5-6 reserve division
for use elsewhere, most likely in the 4th corps area. Well, I'll leave that
consideration for another time.
Air
4526 - 3 pts. position AA
3825 - D.XXI, 2 pts. position AA
3417 - C.X
Since the Soviets can base fighters in Estonia, I kept the sole Finnish
fighter out of their range. The C.X is waiting to see if it can do any good
if a counterattack becomes necessary (yeah, right!).
Well, that's it. I'm a little chagrined that I just realized about the
Coastal Defense loophole mentioned above, but I'll leave it to my opponent
to work out the implications of that.
Peter Rogers
Center for African Studies
427 Grinter Hall
University of Florida
Gainesville, FL
32611
USA
phone: (904) 392-0262 (UF Political Science)
fax: (904) 392-2435
e-mail: progers@africa.ufl.edu
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 01:17:20 -0500 (EST)
From: Larry Woloshyn <woloshyn@io.org>
Subject: GRD www site
I get a not found error at that URL, I can get to
www.icomplete.com tho'. Please repost.
Agree completely on the need to get Europa off GEnie and onto
the net/web.
Larry
From: Roberth Lundin <rln@bull.se>
Subject: RE: GRD www site
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 1995 12:23:21 +-100
> I get a not found error at that URL, I can get to www.icomplete.com
> tho'. Please repost.
> Agree completely on the need to get Europa off GEnie and onto
> the net/web.
The address http://www.icomplete.com/grdgames/ works fine for me.
A very nice web site. It will be very nice when it is finished.
Robbox