From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Mar 25 00:37:48 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA20397; Mon, 25 Mar 96 00:37:46 +0100 Received: from mailhost.ksu.ksu.edu (grunt.ksu.ksu.edu [129.130.12.17]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id AAA20406 for ; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 00:36:00 +0100 (MET) Received: from abc.ksu.ksu.edu (danley@abc.ksu.ksu.edu [129.130.12.3]) by mailhost.ksu.ksu.edu (8.6.12) with ESMTP id RAA00735 for ; Sun, 24 Mar 1996 17:35:56 -0600 Received: by abc.ksu.ksu.edu (8.6.12/1.34) id RAA29364; Sun, 24 Mar 1996 17:35:53 -0600 Date: Sun, 24 Mar 1996 17:35:52 -0600 (CST) From: Mark H Danley To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: citations In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-Length: 278 On Wed, 20 Mar 1996, Bill Stone wrote: > > Would also like to see more bibliographic references for some of the > assertions that get thrown out around here. > HEAR HEAR!! You said it, Bill. After all, though the list is about Europa, _Europa_ is about HISTORY... Mark From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Mar 25 04:41:08 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA21571; Mon, 25 Mar 96 04:41:07 +0100 Received: from icebox.iceonline.com (richv@icebox.iceonline.com [204.191.208.20]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id EAA04449 for ; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 04:39:07 +0100 (MET) Received: (from richv@localhost) by icebox.iceonline.com (8.7.3/8.7.3) id TAA05497 for EUROPA@LYSATOR.LIU.SE; Sun, 24 Mar 1996 19:53:40 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603250353.TAA05497@icebox.iceonline.com> Sender: richv@icebox.iceonline.com From: Rich Velay To: EUROPA@lysator.liu.se Subject: Garrisons Date: Sun, 24 Mar 1996 19:53:39 PST Content-Length: 3688 Hi Bobby: You said... <>I confess I'm surprized at this ruling. Look at the <>handful of units -- some of which are withdrawn almost <>immediately -- available to the Germans in the '44 SF <>setup to garrison the coast of Germany, which includes six <> [...] Did the Germans trust their navy, airforce, mines, <>and coastal defenses so much? Sure, the rules will let you <>pull divisions from France to garrison Germany. But if the <>historical OB shows them in France, who was garrisoning <>the German coast, historically? Now I am not too sure just what you are surprised by; the ruling simply restated RAW. If you have nothing in a city, and the Allies occupy that city *before* the garrison is activated, then you can't place garrison forces in what is now an Allied owned city. Seems pretty straight forward to me. The original question concerned the unusual situation of being able to cross through one complete region to get to another region, and enter a city therein which was on the regional boundary. Now, I can't find such a situation on the SF maps, but I haven't "microscoped" it so there may be such a configuration... As to your concerns re WK X, this is different than the situation I was originally responding to. This WK includes a large garrison, with some "real" military muscle, as opposed to the security trash in France and RSI Italy that I was referring to earlier. Each of the ports in WK X has a defense strength of 1 factor, per Optional Rule 44G3, which is sufficient to defeat any airborne/amphibious overrun. This allows garrison placement in Helgoland, Westerland, Brunsbuttel, Wesermunde, Hamburg and Wilhelmshaven. [ I believe that Rule 44G3 should also apply to Improved Fortresses in coastal hexes, this would allow garrison placement in Wangerooge and Borkum, if they had CD generated defense strength. ] This leaves Cuxhaven and Emden as the only coastal ports where no garrison forces can be activated, since they are both only point cities. These two hexes certainly require some on map defense. But lets look at the real situation. Imagine an invasion against Emden. No invasion can come through the mine field; each and every naval unit in the mine belt hex is going to get attacked three times on the one naval gunnery table, a 50% chance for a loss. Next the naval units have to get by Borkum's four levels of CD (three times, as they move adjacent, into the hex or adjacent and adjacent, and Emden's four levels of CD twice (we place a fort there at start), adjacent and in the hex. Then we spend three naval movement steps unloading, being fired upon by Borkum and Emden each step, for six more CD shots. What is left in the fourth naval movement step gets into Emden. And Emden is the best of the lot, since any landing against Cuxhaven has to pass by two Coastal Fortresses. Even if you move at night to avoid the adjacent CD, you still face all the shots while landing. Supressing the CD will be no easy task, requiring that 16 naval or air hits be placed, since each hit against a CD is counted as "half" a hit (you need two hits to reduce the CD by one level). And let's not forget that the whole operation takes place in an Allied Danger Zone, giving the Axis a minimum of four and probably five attempts to deal with the NG that way. And considering that half the fleet will have been sunk by the mines before you get to the CD; well, let's just say I wouldn't worry too much about an invasion of the Bight. late/R RichV@Icebox.Iceonline.com Europa, tomorrow's games about yesterday, TODAY From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Mar 25 06:03:50 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA21884; Mon, 25 Mar 96 06:03:49 +0100 Received: from osf1.gmu.edu (osf1.gmu.edu [129.174.1.13]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA15163 for ; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 06:02:47 +0100 (MET) Received: from osf1.gmu.edu by osf1.gmu.edu; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/07Sep94-1001AM/GMUv3) id AA03240; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 00:02:36 -0500 Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 00:10:35 -0500 From: Nicholas Forte Reply-To: nforte@gmu.edu Subject: Re: Stacking To: Europa LIst In-Reply-To: <960324155558_74133.1765_BHR60-3@CompuServe.COM> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-Length: 1117 I will concede that it is impossible to reach Abbeville on schedule in Europa. This is due to movement limitations, however, NOT stacking. That being said, the 1940 campaign will play out more or less historically if the historical deployment is used along with an attempt to simulate the actual moves of both sides. The timetable may slip a turn here or there, but the general flow of the campaign is correct. In regards the attack on the Meuse, the current stacking limits allows for all of the German units that participated in the attack to be placed in the front line stacks. Any increased stacking would be ahistorical when simulating the 1940 campaign by allowing a higher density of troops than the Germans actually used. The key to the German breakthrough was the knowledge of were best to use the armored divisions not in an abnormally high density of attackers. If super-stacking is adopted by Europa, I would have to second the views of Perry that call for increased casualties for the attacker due to the higher density--and thus the increased vulnerabilty--of the attacking troops. Nick Forte From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Mar 25 10:30:53 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA24929; Mon, 25 Mar 96 10:30:52 +0100 Received: from bang.jmk.su.se (bang.jmk.su.se [130.237.155.254]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id KAA18566 for ; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 10:28:51 +0100 (MET) Received: from [130.237.155.11] (Stora_Red_01 [130.237.155.11]) by bang.jmk.su.se (8.6.12/8.6.6) with SMTP id KAA26570 for ; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 10:28:49 +0100 X-Sender: o-noreli@bang.jmk.su.se Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 10:28:50 +0100 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: o-noreli@jmk.su.se (Elias Nordling) Subject: FWTBT: Re: Spanish Civil War Content-Length: 3203 > I want to ask some advice from those of you who have >played this game. > >(1) Which advanced/optional rules do you think are good? I tend >to go for all "historical" advanced and optional rules. But, >I get the impression that the effect of coastal defense batteries >on ground combat is already taken care of by the various artillery >units in the same hexes as coastal defense with a movement rating >of zero. No, that's different things. I'd use all of the historical rules, including random rebellion (though this has a LARGE effect on the game). >(3) Any advice on strategy for either side? I will share all of this >with my opponent. After setting it up once, the strategic options >weren't clear to me, as they are in most Europa games. The first few turns are critical. For the republicans, major efforts should go to link up with the n-coast gobernitos and reinforce Madrid. Consequently, the Nationalists should try to counteract this. For the Republicans: The first turns the Cataluna gobernito gets lots of troops that can get all the way to Eukazdi. Do the pacification thing in Cataluna as fast as possible, then use these forces agressively. Also, use the Basque gobernito forces to clean out Eukazdi before the Nationalists can consolidate. And try to take Oviedo while you can with the Asturias forces. Use the air force in GS spread out in as many attacks as possible to boost the morale of the unreliable troops. For the Nationalists, cleaning out Andalucia is easiest if you do it early, and it will deprive the Republicans of quite a few units and RPs, but it could hamper your efforts elsewhere. If you play by VPs, note that you get nothing for pursuing the historical strategy of trying to capture Madrid early. If it's not too hard-held, go for it, since the move of the capital causes disruption and the Madrid factory is a great prize. But don't bother with the historical siege. Go for the gobernitos instead. The first few turns will more or less decide who is going to be on the offense and who is defending for the rest of the game. With a lot of luck (it happened to me), the Republicans can gain the upper hand. More likely, the Nationalists will be the ones who attack. Infantry losses are never an issue. You will get lots of Inf RP that will soon start to pile. Otherwise, the Republicans are seriously short on attack supply, while the Nationalists lack artillery and resource points, especially so if they have failed to get a hold of more than one factory. The Nationalists will also be low on rail-cap, which leads to trouble getting attack supply to the front. >(4) Any advice on the logistics of playing the game? There is alot >to keep track of! Always read the reinforcement chart at least one turn ahead! Otherwise, you don't know when to withdraw units for conversions (there's a lot of these going on in this game). Keeping track of the different types of RPs can be messy. Keep a good, clean record. Finally, I'd like to note that all of these suggestions are based on a single, solitaire, playing. I might be entirely off target. But you'd better listen to my advice about the Gobernitos! ;-) Mvh Elias Nordling o-noreli@jmk.su.se From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Mar 25 16:14:43 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA00740; Mon, 25 Mar 96 16:14:42 +0100 Received: from bang.jmk.su.se (bang.jmk.su.se [130.237.155.254]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA16550 for ; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 16:12:01 +0100 (MET) Received: from [130.237.155.11] (Stora_Red_01 [130.237.155.11]) by bang.jmk.su.se (8.6.12/8.6.6) with SMTP id QAA00812 for ; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 16:11:57 +0100 X-Sender: o-noreli@bang.jmk.su.se Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 16:11:58 +0100 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: o-noreli@jmk.su.se (Elias Nordling) Subject: WWII: Narvik & Iron Ore Content-Length: 1020 Some additional info on Narvik and the Swedish ore that I've found out during the weekend: The Bergslagen ore was shipped through Oxelosund and Gothenburg. Oxelosund is ice-free. Lulea is frozen five months of the year. The railway from Stockholm to Lulea wasn't completely electrified until 1943. The ore-trains from Kiruna couldn't have gone south. The Kiruna-Narvik line was a special high-capacity (measured in pressure per wheel axle) railroad, and the wagons were designed especially for them. Not even the Kiruna-Lulea railway had the same capacity, so the wagons had to be loaded lighter when travelling that way. The other railways couldn't have carried these trains. The effect of this is that the occupation of Narvik WOULD have made the Kiruna-ore more expensive. New wagons would have to be purchased. In Europa-terms, the germans would probably have to pay an amount of resource points to Sweden for this. It would hardly lead to any shortage of iron, though. Mvh Elias Nordling o-noreli@jmk.su.se From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Mar 25 16:50:34 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA01293; Mon, 25 Mar 96 16:50:32 +0100 Received: from bang.jmk.su.se (bang.jmk.su.se [130.237.155.254]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA25124 for ; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 16:49:19 +0100 (MET) Received: from [130.237.155.11] (Stora_Red_01 [130.237.155.11]) by bang.jmk.su.se (8.6.12/8.6.6) with SMTP id QAA01305 for ; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 16:49:16 +0100 X-Sender: o-noreli@bang.jmk.su.se Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 16:49:17 +0100 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: o-noreli@jmk.su.se (Elias Nordling) Subject: Narvik: Please read! Content-Length: 2574 In the last issue of TEM there was a set of draft rules for the Collectors edition of Narvik for playtest. The rules were very much the same as the original Narvik rules with the errata incorporated. I wrote this letter to Europaboss@aol.com >And I thought I'd start with playtesting the draft Narvik rules. > >I've only read them halfway through, yet, but I already have some opinions: >You state that changes to the original rules are going to be kept to an >>absolute minimum (perhaps I'm misinterpreting this). I'm really concerned >about >this. In many areas, the Narvik rules are modeled after the Europa >rules as >they were at the time of the original Narvik game. These rules >have since long >been changed and improved. I would really hate to see the >old wave-style air >rules pop up for the first time since Marita-Merkur! >But, as I say, perhaps I'm >misinterpreting your intents: Then I listed some specific areas that should be updated. I got the following reply: >The Narvik rules represent a very tight system. Change a little, change it >all. Not going to change even a little, sorry. There will be the Europa level >game, and it will be as Europa as the current rules. > >wjh I must say that I'm repulsed by this decision! Not only does it seem to be some inaccuracies towards the actual campaign, but we would have to live with a terribly outdated air system. Imagine four squadrons of He111s ganging up on a Hurricane squadron and blast it out of the sky. This is what happens in the Narvik rules, absolutely no need for escort. Safety through numbers. And the AA uses the regular air table, which leads to massacres. I'm not even sure they're going to change the values of the air counters. Anyone who has old games like Marita-Merkur and Narvik knows how much better the rules are nowadays. Not only a better simulation, but better written. The Narvik rules will appear as they were then. This also seems to be contrary to GRD policy so far. When there was a lot of fuss about people having to buy the games all over again with the Collectors edition, they said that since they had to do the game over again anyway, they wouldn't want to do anything that they knew was wrong. This is exactly what they are about to do now! I'm very upset as a customer, and I suspect that a lot of other Europa players will be too. So, if you want to protest against this decision, the time to do it is NOW. Before it's too late! Raise your voices in this list, and send your protest to: Europaboss@aol.com Mvh Elias Nordling o-noreli@jmk.su.se From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Mar 25 18:00:09 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA02230; Mon, 25 Mar 96 18:00:07 +0100 Received: from prague.crossover.com (root@prague.crossover.com [204.217.246.5]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id RAA00940 for ; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 17:57:15 +0100 (MET) Received: from [205.161.32.192] (jastell.tiac.net [205.161.32.192]) by prague.crossover.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA06241 for ; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 10:48:36 -0500 X-Sender: jastell@post.crossover.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 11:55:56 -0400 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) Subject: Re: Stacking Content-Length: 808 On 25 March 96, Nick Forte wrote: >I will concede that it is impossible to reach Abbeville on schedule in Europa. >This is due to movement limitations, however, NOT stacking. That being said, >the 1940 campaign will play out more or less historically if the historical >deployment is used along with an attempt to simulate the actual moves of both >sides. The timetable may slip a turn here or there, but the general flow >of the >campaign is correct. Nick is right. When FoF was developed, we "re-created" the historical campaign, moving units and fighting per their historical moves, up to the limits the rules permitted. As I remember, you can even capture Abbeville on schedule -- you don't occupy it with a unit but you can get an uncontested German ZOC there by the end of exploitation movement. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Mar 25 18:56:34 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA02967; Mon, 25 Mar 96 18:56:33 +0100 Received: from emout08.mail.aol.com (emout08.mx.aol.com [198.81.11.23]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id SAA17245 for ; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 18:53:54 +0100 (MET) From: Europaboss@aol.com Received: by emout08.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id MAA29265 for europa@lysator.liu.se; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 12:53:37 -0500 Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 12:53:37 -0500 Message-Id: <960325125336_255442084@emout08.mail.aol.com> To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Fwd: Narvik: Please read! Content-Length: 3048 --------------------- Forwarded message: From: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) To: europaboss@aol.com Date: 96-03-25 12:31:25 EST FYI - this just hit the Europa e-mail list server: >X-POP3-Rcpt: jastell@prague >X-Sender: o-noreli@bang.jmk.su.se >Mime-Version: 1.0 >Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 16:49:17 +0100 >To: europa@lysator.liu.se >From: o-noreli@jmk.su.se (Elias Nordling) >Subject: Narvik: Please read! > >In the last issue of TEM there was a set of draft rules for the Collectors >edition of Narvik for playtest. The rules were very much the same as the >original Narvik rules with the errata incorporated. I wrote this letter to >Europaboss@aol.com > > >>And I thought I'd start with playtesting the draft Narvik rules. >> >>I've only read them halfway through, yet, but I already have some opinions: >>You state that changes to the original rules are going to be kept to an >>>absolute minimum (perhaps I'm misinterpreting this). I'm really concerned >>about >this. In many areas, the Narvik rules are modeled after the Europa >>rules as >they were at the time of the original Narvik game. These rules >>have since long >been changed and improved. I would really hate to see the >>old wave-style air >rules pop up for the first time since Marita-Merkur! >>But, as I say, perhaps I'm >misinterpreting your intents: > >Then I listed some specific areas that should be updated. I got the >following reply: > >>The Narvik rules represent a very tight system. Change a little, change it >>all. Not going to change even a little, sorry. There will be the Europa level >>game, and it will be as Europa as the current rules. >> >>wjh > >I must say that I'm repulsed by this decision! Not only does it seem to be >some inaccuracies towards the actual campaign, but we would have to live >with a terribly outdated air system. Imagine four squadrons of He111s >ganging up on a Hurricane squadron and blast it out of the sky. This is >what happens in the Narvik rules, absolutely no need for escort. Safety >through numbers. And the AA uses the regular air table, which leads to >massacres. I'm not even sure they're going to change the values of the air >counters. > >Anyone who has old games like Marita-Merkur and Narvik knows how much >better the rules are nowadays. Not only a better simulation, but better >written. The Narvik rules will appear as they were then. > >This also seems to be contrary to GRD policy so far. When there was a lot >of fuss about people having to buy the games all over again with the >Collectors edition, they said that since they had to do the game over again >anyway, they wouldn't want to do anything that they knew was wrong. This is >exactly what they are about to do now! > >I'm very upset as a customer, and I suspect that a lot of other Europa >players will be too. So, if you want to protest against this decision, the >time to do it is NOW. Before it's too late! > >Raise your voices in this list, and send your protest to: >Europaboss@aol.com > >Mvh Elias Nordling >o-noreli@jmk.su.se > From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Mar 25 19:44:14 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA03410; Mon, 25 Mar 96 19:44:13 +0100 Received: from research.inland.com (research.inland.com [156.144.4.7]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id TAA00561 for ; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 19:42:51 +0100 (MET) Received: from msmail.inland.com by research.INLAND.COM (PMDF V5.0-5 #7865) id <01I2R8780X4G8X359D@research.INLAND.COM> for europa@lysator.liu.se; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 12:41:12 -0500 (CDT) Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 12:27 -0500 (CDT) From: "Witham, Tom G." Subject: Europa in NW Indiana To: "Europa Email Group" Message-Id: <01I2R87829CI8X359D@research.INLAND.COM> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Posting-Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 12:27 -0500 (CDT) Content-Length: 408 Hi Everyone, My gaming club and I are interested in contacting anyone and everyone in Northwest Indiana and the Chicagoland area who wants to meet other players for FTF Europa play. If you know of anyone in NW Indiana or the South suburbs of Chicago who would be interested please have them contact me at: Tom Witham 5334 Maplewood Ave Portage, IN 46368 (219) 763-2708 tgwith@inland.com Thanks From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Mar 26 00:34:50 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA05897; Tue, 26 Mar 96 00:34:48 +0100 Received: from iac.iac.org.nz (iac.iac.org.nz [192.124.160.153]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id AAA00685 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 00:33:27 +0100 (MET) Received: from smtpgate.iac.org.nz by iac.iac.org.nz (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA26320; Tue, 26 Mar 96 11:29:20 NZS Message-Id: <9603252329.AA26320@iac.iac.org.nz> From: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (Public Affairs Officer) Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 11:31 GMT To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Sacked officers Content-Length: 3892 Some of the officers that Nigel Bradbury mentions as getting the axe during the 1944 invasion of Europe were victims of Field Marshal Montgomery's swift and certain axe. I can't recall the boss of 51st Highland Division, but that outfit (like 50th Northumbrian and 7th Armoured) had seen a lot of fighting in the war, and morale was low. 7th Armoured had a similar problem of fatigue in its officers and men. Bobby Erskine led the division into Normandy, and he took the heat for the failure at Villers-Bocage, where a single Tiger tank held up the whole 22nd Armoured Brigade. The Desert Rats were a great outfit, but the bocage was very different from the Western Desert, and the Rats couldn't adjust. Erskine's replacement (who also escapes my mind, I must be going senile) didn't do much better. 30 Corps was led into Normandy by Lt. General Bucknall, a tank officer whose photograph with his boss, Sir Miles Dempsey, and 1 Corps' John Crocker shows a bereted general giving the camera an insincere and slightly ignorant smile while Dempsey appears bland and Crocker pugnacious. Bucknall was not Monty's first choice to lead 30 Corps at D-Day, and historian agree he lacked a grip on the battle from the start. I expect that Monty wanted the man who inherited 30 Corps, Sir Brian Horrocks, who was disabled at the time by a shrapnel wound in his lung from Tunisia. He was literally hauled out of his sickbed to take over 30 Corps, and did well with it, despite being racked by pain from the wound, which gave him severe problems (104 temperature) at the Reichswald. 3rd and 4th Canadian Divisions both had leadership problems. 3rd Canadian was led by Keller, and I think Vokes had 4th. From what I've read, neither seem to have been particularly inspirational, but I think that may have reflected the head of 1st Canadian Army, Lt. Gen. Crerar, who did not earn high marks from historians. Crerar's subordinate, Sir Guy Simonds, did far better. However, problems in the British officer corps were a continuous issue, and Montgomery was quite ruthless, from the start in his command in Southeast England. One brigadier in 7th Armoured put a light on over his office when he did not wish to be disturbed. Monty got rid of him. In Italy, Monty's chief engineer ran into trouble when all the bridges over the Sangro were flooded when the river rose 12 inches. Monty called the offender into his trailer, and began by politely inquiring why the bridges were all out. The engineer made excuses, and Monty brutally switched from his politeness to icy fury. "You are useless...quite useless..." he said, "Four days and not a bridge going. I have here a little geography book about Italy. It says it is not unusual for the Sangro to rise 15 inches at this time of year. You are relieved." And with that, the engineer was dismissed. Even such a low military man as comedian Spike Milligan felt the teeth of Monty, in 1941. In his memoir, "Hitler -- My Part In His Downfall," Milligan describes the CO of his artillery outfit as "Leather Suitcase." According to Milligan, Monty ordered all the British units in South England to intensify P.T. "Leather Suitcase" had to run with his men on a three-mile jog. After five minutes, "Leather Suitcase" was ready to collapse, and gasped for his men to take a break. The gunners happily did so. After "Leather Suitcase" regained his breath, he wobbled to his feet to lead the men again. A minute later, "Leather Suitcase" was down on the deck. He was taken away by ambulance, end of run. "Leather Suitcase" was replaced by Maj. Chater Jack, who ran the battery over hills, through swamps, and into Tunisia, Sicily, and Italy. David H. Lippman Public Affairs Officer US Naval Antarctic Support Unit Christchurch, New Zealand From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Mar 26 00:40:31 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA05938; Tue, 26 Mar 96 00:40:31 +0100 Received: from prague.crossover.com (root@prague.crossover.com [204.217.246.5]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id AAA02802 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 00:39:56 +0100 (MET) Received: from [205.161.32.192] (jastell.tiac.net [205.161.32.192]) by prague.crossover.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id RAA07501 for ; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 17:31:20 -0500 X-Sender: jastell@post.crossover.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 18:38:40 -0400 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) Subject: Re: Crated air units Content-Length: 972 >...There should be some provision for shipping air units as sea cargo >from theater to theater.... >...Historically, how long does it take to crate and uncrate aircraft? Maybe a >simple game mechanic requiring the air unit to be inop. for some period before >and/or after the transport could work... I simply ran out of time to nail this down in SF. If anyone wants to research this, the two major considerations to look for is how much shipping space a crated air unit would take (in comparison to, say, a US tank battalion), and how long it takes to assembly a unit after being shipped. Given this, I can hash out a workable shipping rule. If you want a bulls**t (one made up with little backing it), here's a try: a fighter is 2 REs in size in for shipping and takes 1 game turn to crate/uncrate. A bomber or transport is 4 REs in size and takes 2 game turns to crate/uncrate. Double the above sizes (but not crating/uncrating times) for all prefix-H air units. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Mar 26 00:40:49 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA05943; Tue, 26 Mar 96 00:40:48 +0100 Received: from prague.crossover.com (root@prague.crossover.com [204.217.246.5]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id AAA02840 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 00:40:03 +0100 (MET) Received: from [205.161.32.192] (jastell.tiac.net [205.161.32.192]) by prague.crossover.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id RAA07503 for ; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 17:31:25 -0500 X-Sender: jastell@post.crossover.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 18:38:45 -0400 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) Subject: Re: My $0.02 Worth Content-Length: 8571 >... Too many cooks spoilt the pot. Name me another country >where all FOUR armed services had their own, large ground forces: >Army, Air Force (Luftwaffe), Navy (Kriegsmarine coastal defense >forces) and Waffen SS.... Actually, it was even worse than that: 1. German national forces: 1.1 Army (OKH) raised the bulk of the ground forces: hundreds of divisions and other units. The Army's showcase unit was Grossdeutschland, which grew from a regiment into an elite panzer division (and also a GD corps HQ). 1.2 Luftwaffe (OKL) raised ground forces due to 1) Goering's insistance that OKL control everything related to aircraft, including AA defense, and 2) Goering's own empire building. The LW field divisions came about when the Germans shook out excess personnel from the LW to turn into grunts. Goering got to keep the LW personnel in LW divisions, based on the argument that the LW was more Nazi than the Army, so turning over LW personnel to the Army meant their ideological purity would be polluted. Of course, since the LW had little idea on how to train infantry divisions, the resulting units were terrible. They were so bad that they were finally turned over to the Army -- those that managed to survive (mostly by being in theaters out of reach of the Red Army). This debacle didn't keep Goering out of the army business -- the "General Goering" AA unit slowly grew into a massive panzer division (and later 2-div corps), as the LW's showcase unit incompetition with the Army's GD and SS's LSSAH units. Also, the parachute units slowly built up an elite infantry force. (The LW parachute schools did know their stuff, and got to pick the best manpower ahead of the Army.) By the end of the war, the LW had HG div, about a dozen or so para divs, supporting troops, and hundreds of AA units. 1.3 Navy (OKM) really didn't have that many troops. Since they were not a Nazi-heavy branch like the LW, they didn't carry much clout and aside from various coast defense and security troops, they entered the build-your-own-army derby quite late. As Germany crashed to pieces in 1945, non-essential OKM personnel were formed into infantry divisions -- about three or so were formed by the end of the war. Arguably, the men should have gone to the Army, but the Army training establishment is collapsing anyway (the SS took it over in late 1944). No doubt had the war lasted another a year or so, there'd be an OKM "Marine Panzer" division in competition with the showcase units of the other services! 1.4 The Wehrmacht High Command (OKW) was ostensibly over the three services (OKH, OKL, OKM). In actuality, it typically got incomplete and hostile cooperation from its nominal underlings, and it ended up often in competition with OKH. OKW had numerous branches reporting to it directly (and not to the three services), and some of these built up their own ground forces. The most famous of these were the Brandenburgers, controlled by the Abwehr (which reported to OKW, not OKH). Until late 1944, the Brandenburgers were used for special operations and anti-partisan duties, when they were then turned over to the Army and formed into a regular combat division (panzergrenadier only -- no doubt if the Brandenburgers remained in the OKW directly they too would have become a showcase panzer division!). (The SS mostly took over special operations in late 1944 -- Himmler grabbed as much as he could in the wake of the assassination attempt on Hitler.) Various other OKW rear area formations could and occasionally did take the field as low-grade infantry, usually during emergencies. 1.5 The RAD (Reich Labor Service) was temporarily a separate, semi-military service, where young German men served 6-months labor service before being drafted into the Army. In late 1939, the Army gained control of the RAD -- in one of the few organizational moves that made sense, and probably why a RAD panzer division was never formed. 2. Nazi forces: Note: The SS and other Nazi military and paramilitary forces were NEVER under control of the OKW, although troops in the field were placed on OKW/OKH operational command. All those non-Europa games that use "Wehrmacht" to include the SS with the German national forces are in error. (As are those games that use "Wehrmacht" to mean the German Army exclusive of the LW and Navy!) 2.1 The SS: There were several branches of the SS: 2.1.1 The General SS (Algemein (sp?) SS) was the organization "good" Nazi party members could join and thereby increase their political and social importance. It had a paramilitary structure, but had no real field presence. 2.1.2 The Totenkopf SS ("Death's Head" SS) ran the concentration camps, and its military presence consisted of the infamous camp guards, whose sadism and brutality almost surpassed imagination. The TK division was formed in 1939 from TK SS personnel, but the division thereafter was part of the Waffen SS, not TK SS. In Europa, there's is one TK SS cavalry regiment (in FTF), which is part of the TK SS until it too transferred to the Waffen SS (and became the Fegelein cavalry brigade in FITE). 2.1.3 The Waffen SS ("Armed" SS) was the field army of the SS. Originally formed as political troops (Hitler's special bodyguard), Himmler constantly found ways to increase their size and scope. By 1939, there were several field regiments (with the LSSAH the showcase unit), and by 1945 there were nominally three dozen divisions or so, with the LSSAH panzer division remaining the elite. The Waffen SS started off with political fervor but questionable military capability (since the SS disdained the Army and suspected it as being anti-Nazi, Waffen SS recruits did not use the Army training establishment). In place of military proficiency, they substituted men and material -- SS units tended to be large and well equipped, and took heavy casualties in "reckless" (Army assessment) pursuit of objectives. In 1941, the severity of combat on the eastern front forced the Waffen SS to become militarily proficient, and the SS improved its training establishment for its elite units. By no means was every W-SS unit elite: as the war progressed and the need for manpower became acute, the SS raised scores of units filled with foreigners -- Ukrainians, Estonians, Latvians, Scandinavians, Frenchment, etc. -- of widely varying capability. It is ironic that the SS, the organization most dedicated to Nazi ideology and racial purity, became in part Germany's "foreign legion." 2.1.4 The "SS-Police" in Europa represent the German national police forces, national security forces, and SS security forces. Due to the intense interest the Nazis had in domestic security (in order to stay in power), the national police/security forces and the political SS security forces were intertwined, with the SS in control. By mid war, the SS took outright and official control of all these forces. Germany's SS-Pol police regiments were special militarized police regiments used in conquered territories. The Polizei Division was a regular infantry (later panzergrenadier) div recruited from policemen -- it technically was not part of the SS (although intimately connected with it) until the police came under the SS, at which time it became part of the Waffen SS (not SS-Police). The SS-Police organized a motley and horrifying collection of scum SS-Police anti-partisan units (mainly in the USSR) -- some of which were so inhuman that the Germans themselves disbanded them, appalled by their brutality and crimes. 2.2 The Hitler Youth: This was a paramilitary organization that gave preliminary military training (and lots of ideological indoctrination) to German boys. Closely connected to the SS, the cream of the Hitler Youth went into the Waffen SS. By the end of the war, plans were apparently afoot to raise a Hitler Youth military service in parallel to the Waffen SS. 2.3 The SA: The SA was the Nazi party's original storm troopers, until Hitler allowed the SS to suppress them (the Night of the Long Knives). The SA still remained in existence, but it lost almost all of its paramilitary functions. One SA special unit, the Feldherrnhalle, remained in existence until 1939, when it was incorporated into the Army after Poland. Although in the Army, the former FH kept a semblance of connect to the SA, and eventually resurfaced as the Army's two FH divisions. The SA itself remained in the background, and as things collapsed in 1945, Hitler supposedly blamed the SS for "failing" him and was in the process of restoring powers and military function to the SA. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Mar 26 01:08:12 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA06138; Tue, 26 Mar 96 01:08:11 +0100 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id BAA09133 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 01:07:16 +0100 (MET) From: m.royer3@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA245698070; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 23:54:30 GMT Message-Id: <199603252354.AA245698070@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Mon, 25 Mar 96 23:54:29 UTC 0000 ( from inet# ; Mon, 25 Mar 96 23:51:30 UTC 0000) Date: Mon, 25 Mar 96 23:42:00 UTC 0000 To: o-noreli@jmk.su.se Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: M.ROYER3 X-Genie-Qk-Id: 8648900 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 195894 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: Re: Narvik: Please read! Content-Length: 786 Reply: Item #4175646 from O-NORELI@JMK.SU.SE@INET#on 96/03/25 at 10:49 Mvh Elias Nordling, Unfortunately, you've chosen a tough battle regardingWinston and Narvik. I don't have any interest in the non-standard scale Europa games so I don't have a personal opinion on this, but Winston has said to me personally on several occasions that Narvik is the "best wargame ever produced. When you have something that works, you don't mess with it." So I suspect that you're dealing with the personal convictions of one man here, rather than company policy or direction. If Narvik is simply a reprint of the old game with the old rules, then we need to view this as an aberration of the collector's series and not the norm for the future. Good luck in your solicitation. -Mark R. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Mar 26 01:18:38 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA06216; Tue, 26 Mar 96 01:18:37 +0100 Received: from jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (civguy@jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us [192.217.238.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id BAA10532 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 01:17:00 +0100 (MET) Received: (from civguy@localhost) by jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (8.6.10/8.6.9) id TAA09146; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 19:47:36 -0600 Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 19:47:36 -36000 From: Jason Long Subject: Re: GE and Russia Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: <199603200633.AAA19146@smtp.utexas.edu> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-Length: 440 I tend to believe that the Russo-German pact was strictly a device to buy time until either side believed it could defeat the other. IMO 1942 would have been Stalin's year of decision even in the event of a cold war with the West. Actually the a prolonged phony war probably would have prompted Stalin to attack earlier as the German forces facing Russia probably would have been much smaller than any attacking Soviet forces. Jason From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Mar 26 01:25:05 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA06247; Tue, 26 Mar 96 01:25:04 +0100 Received: from jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (civguy@jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us [192.217.238.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id BAA10646 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 01:24:48 +0100 (MET) Received: (from civguy@localhost) by jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (8.6.10/8.6.9) id TAA09177; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 19:55:25 -0600 Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 19:55:24 -36000 From: Jason Long Subject: Re: Narvik (Was: Re: The Fall of France (to be or not to be)) Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-Length: 657 Actually, I feel that the Swedes would have preferred not to have any conflict anywhere near them, like any sensible people, but that they were prepared to sup with the devil himself if it would keep Sweden out of the war. They also weren't prepared to risk much for either side. Sweden was indeed cut-off from most all foreign trade except for a limited number of ships importing essential goods that need the permission of both the Allies and Germany to reach Swedish ports. Petsamo was indeed the route used by the Swedes for their imported P-35 fighters, but that was not a cost-effective route as no rail line linked Petsamo to anything. Jason From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Mar 26 01:45:31 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA06398; Tue, 26 Mar 96 01:45:30 +0100 Received: from jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (civguy@jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us [192.217.238.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id BAA14149 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 01:44:44 +0100 (MET) Received: (from civguy@localhost) by jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (8.6.10/8.6.9) id UAA09234; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 20:15:21 -0600 Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 20:15:21 -36000 From: Jason Long Subject: Re: Peaceful Russia Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: <1501f600@corona.navy.mil> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-Length: 1344 The Soviet production numbers in 1941 before Barbarossa tell their own story that Russia was already on a war footing. Peaceful Soviet Russia under Stalin in an oxymoron during the late '30s and early '40s. Based on my discussions with Charles Sharp, simply flipping over the cadres wouldn't even come close to reproducing the extra year's production of tanks, aircraft and equipment. The Mechanized Corps would ave been fully fleshed out with virtually all T-34/KV-1/2 tanks, averaging about a 12-8, with possibly a lower defense factor if the Soviets failed to realize the necessity for more infantry by analyzing the experiences of the Germans; the motorized divisions would have become mechanized. The frontier rifle divisions would have been given older tanks from the tank divisions to raise their strength to around 6, etc. Plus the Soviets had plans to form more mechanized corps and probably would have enough tanks to at least begin forming them. Plus many more artillery units to include anti-tank brigades armed with 107mm guns! Also the KV-1 would have been superceded by the KV-3 also armed with the 107. The older aircraft would have been almost completely phased out and the LaGG-3 probably would have been superceded by the La-5. I think that this justifies a couple of extra countersheets, at a minimum. Jason From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Mar 26 01:46:58 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA06413; Tue, 26 Mar 96 01:46:57 +0100 Received: from jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (civguy@jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us [192.217.238.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id BAA14709 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 01:46:23 +0100 (MET) Received: (from civguy@localhost) by jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (8.6.10/8.6.9) id UAA09263; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 20:16:59 -0600 Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 20:16:59 -36000 From: Jason Long Subject: Re: Europa unit ratings Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: <15020d40@corona.navy.mil> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-Length: 135 Renaud, That's exactly what I said though I didn't specify that the Americans recieved that bonus, though that's what I meant. Jason From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Mar 26 02:05:01 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA06516; Tue, 26 Mar 96 02:04:59 +0100 Received: from smtp4.aw.com (smtp4.aw.com [192.207.117.64]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id CAA16914 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 02:04:34 +0100 (MET) Received: from East-Message_Server by smtp4.aw.com with Novell_GroupWise; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 20:25:42 -0500 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1 Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 21:10:31 -0500 From: Ray Kanarr To: jastell@crossover.com, europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: My $0.02 Worth Content-Length: 102 John, Another excellent, informative post on the multiplicity of German armed forces. Thanks! Ray From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Mar 26 02:28:41 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA06631; Tue, 26 Mar 96 02:28:40 +0100 Received: from jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (civguy@jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us [192.217.238.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id CAA22703 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 02:27:57 +0100 (MET) Received: (from civguy@localhost) by jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (8.6.10/8.6.9) id UAA09395; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 20:58:33 -0600 Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 20:58:33 -36000 From: Jason Long Subject: Re: Peaceful USSR & Tank XX Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: <199603211714.JAA03315@desiree.teleport.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-Length: 155 Apparently the access gained by Charles to the Soviet archival material recently has changed his mind about the future of an undisturbed Red Army Jason From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Mar 26 03:01:33 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA00274; Tue, 26 Mar 96 03:01:31 +0100 Received: from smtp.utexas.edu (smtp.utexas.edu [128.83.126.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id DAA28532 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 03:00:23 +0100 (MET) Received: from slip-22-15.ots.utexas.edu (slip-22-15.ots.utexas.edu [128.83.128.175]) by smtp.utexas.edu (8.6.7/8.6.6) with SMTP id TAA26662 for ; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 19:54:28 -0600 Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 19:54:28 -0600 Message-Id: <199603260154.TAA26662@smtp.utexas.edu> X-Sender: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu (Bobby D. Bryant) Subject: Re: Stacking Content-Length: 4061 Nick wrote: >This is due to movement limitations, however, NOT stacking. ... You're right: I've scattered from "stacking" to "attacker-not-too-strong" to "attacker-can't-move-fast-enough", and I might well have been invoking "Mussolini's-trains-don't-run-on-time" on my next post, if you hadn't blown the whistle on me! I'll cede you VPs for my last post as a disastrous operation. On the other hand, I'm not ready to cede any VPs for the arguments advanced on your side of the debate. When you say: >In regards the attack on the Meuse, the current stacking limits allows for all >of the German units that participated in the attack to be placed in the front >line stacks. ... I respond that this carries no weight *unless* you demonstrate that the historical "stacking" was dictated by "the rules", rather than (e.g.) lack of additional units on hand to throw in, or a commander's assessment that any additional units to hand were not necessary, and therefore best assigned to other tasks. Thus the following makes no sense to me: > ... Any increased stacking would be ahistorical when simulating the >1940 campaign by allowing a higher density of troops than the Germans actually >used. ... You could as well find an attack historically made by a single division and conclude from it that stacking should be limited to one division. As to the notion that the attack is already too strong: I can only react to Stephen's observations about German successes in Barbarossa with drop-jawed dismay: clearly not everyone gets the same results when they play! My only regret is that we don't all live in the same town, so that we could settle the matter on the map. (I say this not with an arrogant confidence in winning -- I realize that I might take a notable thrashing on the map and then have to eat my words to boot -- but because I'm curious about what's going on, and if some of you guys can kick my Soviets around as advertised, I'd sure like to see how it is done.) Furthermore, regardless of whether the attack is already too strong, higher stacking won't *exclusively* aid the attacker. I suspect it will *primarily* aid the attacker by making the game more fluid (in particular, harder to make those double overrun-proof defensive lines). But it will also make those hero cities all the more heroic: adding another five defense factors will require the attacker to add another *twenty* five attack factors to maintain that classic 5:1@-2 (all else, such as terrain and supply being ignored), and rolling an EX against them certainly won't smart any less. Likewise, the players will get no additional units to go along with the proposed rule, so dense stacking in one area could only be done at the expense of a thinner spread in others. This might allow a side on the strategic defensive to wage a war of nerves by attacking in peripheral areas, where the attacker has spread himself thin, forcing the attacker to make some very human decisions -- perhaps mistakes -- rather than simply conducting a number-crunching grind all along the front. As to the following (back to quoting Nick's same post): >If super-stacking is adopted by Europa, I would have to second the views of >Perry that call for increased casualties for the attacker due to the higher >density--and thus the increased vulnerabilty--of the attacking troops. I have no complaint against this in general, but would point out that stacking already allows a variation in density from 1/2 to 15 REs, without any effect on casualty rates. It is not immediately clear that expanding this range by c. 30% demands that such a rule be added, if not needed before. Also, should density have an effect on the defender's casualty rate? (Newcomers note: we had an extended discussion about the non-representation of attackers' casualties back during the holidays, but I don't think we reached a consensus. We may not all be operating under the same assumptions about how much needs to be explicitly represented in the game.) - Bobby. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Mar 26 03:19:59 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA00443; Tue, 26 Mar 96 03:19:58 +0100 Received: from jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (civguy@jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us [192.217.238.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id DAA28754 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 03:19:33 +0100 (MET) Received: (from civguy@localhost) by jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (8.6.10/8.6.9) id VAA09563; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 21:50:12 -0600 Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 21:50:11 -36000 From: Jason Long Subject: Re: WWII: Narvik & Iron Ore Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-Length: 263 Excellent info on the special railroad between Kiruna and narvik. I'd always wondered about why they didn't ship it through the southern ports and had concluded that they couldn't afford to tie up the railcars for that extra time. Glad to be corrected. Jason From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Mar 26 03:22:28 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA00461; Tue, 26 Mar 96 03:22:27 +0100 Received: from icebox.iceonline.com (richv@icebox.iceonline.com [204.191.208.20]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id CAA27437 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 02:43:14 +0100 (MET) Received: (from richv@localhost) by icebox.iceonline.com (8.7.3/8.7.3) id RAA20207 for EUROPA@LYSATOR.LIU.SE; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 17:58:22 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603260158.RAA20207@icebox.iceonline.com> Sender: richv@icebox.iceonline.com From: Rich Velay To: EUROPA@lysator.liu.se Subject: GURU:Supply Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 17:58:22 PST Content-Length: 1350 > Regarding the recent question about whether >or not reducing a force's rail cap on a particular net >will effect supply, the answer is NO. Much like rail hits >don't affect supply, temporary rail capacity reductions >don't change the fact that the player has X capacity on a >net, they just change his available capacity. > So no putting people out of supply with rail marshalling yard attacks or Strat air war effects... <> This is slightly inconsistant. Since you have to <>build up to 10 to run supply across it, it makes sense you <>have to keep it above 10. Here's a contrived example. Say <>I have 9 capacity on a rail net. I temporarily increase it <>to 10 by spending an extra RP. Can I run supply across <>it? RCV: No, this is a temporary increase, and you need 10 capacity on the rail net to trace supply. The only way you can can affect the 10 REs needed to trace a rail element supply line is to permanently reduce the capacity, not simply reduce it temporarily. Rail Marshalling yard hits and Strat Air War effects are temporary, in that they do not affect the actual Rail capacity present, but simply reduce the amount usable by the owning player. RichV@Icebox.Iceonline.com Europa, tomorrow's games about yesterday, TODAY From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Mar 26 03:25:50 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA00509; Tue, 26 Mar 96 03:25:49 +0100 Received: from icebox.iceonline.com (richv@icebox.iceonline.com [204.191.208.20]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id CAA27115 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 02:42:09 +0100 (MET) Received: (from richv@localhost) by icebox.iceonline.com (8.7.3/8.7.3) id RAA20154 for EUROPA@LYSATOR.LIU.SE; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 17:57:16 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199603260157.RAA20154@icebox.iceonline.com> Sender: richv@icebox.iceonline.com From: Rich Velay To: EUROPA@lysator.liu.se Subject: GURU:FWTBT Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 17:57:15 PST Content-Length: 12827 Hi . Some FWTBT Q&A for you all. All questions are from Europa X, "For Whom the Bell Tolls," and not from the rules for World War II scenarios. 7.A.4.a,c, 40.A.2 and 43.C.2 For the following two questions, assume that rule 43.C.2 is in use. * When the Insurgent player receives increased rail capacity from Portugal, must he assign this capacity to a particular section of the rail net, or to a particular rail depot, or is this capacity available everywhere? RCV: It is available anywhere that could trace a rail element supply line to Portugal (to receive the Rail cap increase), if it sent to a rail net otherwise cut off from another Spanish rail net, then it could only be used on that seperate rail net. * Say that the Insurgent player captures a Rail Depot with a capacity of 2, so that its capacity is reduced to 1. Then, he increases the capacity to 3. If the Loyalist player recaptures this depot, then it seems to me that the capacity is now 1. (The Loyalist player cannot recapture the 1 which he owned originally, but captures half of the remaining 2.) Is this correct? RCV: No. Rail capacity increases are not tied to any particular rail depots. The capacity of a depot can not be increased from what it was worth at start of play. 9.G, 10, 14.A.2, 14.B, 14.F.2 and 22.A.2 * I assume that transport counters and position AA are ignored for AEC/ATEC computations (this is explicitly stated for position AA), for determining combat engineer proportions and for purposes of Rule 14.B. If this is not correct, then how are these units treated in these computations? RCV: Correct, neither of these counters are considered units for the purposes you list. 12.C.3 and 44.D.1 * A sentence in the second paragraph of the first rule reads "using general supply points does not negate or defer the number of turns a unit has been out of general supply." Does "does not defer" mean that if a unit is in general supply, and then uses general supply points for three turns and then is out of supply, that it is considered to be in its fourth turn out of supply? Does this rule apply to airbases if you are using 44.D.1? RCV: No. It means that if the unit was *out* of supply for three turns, but drew supply from general supply points for those three turns, then it would begin its fourth turn marked as U-4 and if unable to draw supply in some manner, would be considered as being in its fourth turn out of supply. "[D]oes not defer" means that the length of time out of supply is not affected by the drawing of special supply; the unit would operate as if in supply while drawing special supply, but this special supply doesn't affect the number of turns the unit is considered to have been out of supply. re Airbases, Yes. 14.A.1 * If a temporary airfield is removed from the map because there is no longer a construction engineer in its hex, then what happens to aircraft at that airfield? RCV: They are eliminated and placed in the eliminated box of the air chart. * The Coast Defence Summary on Game Play Chart (3) suggests that several forts may be built in a hex, which contradicts this rule. Which is correct? RCV: The rules, no more than one fort may be placed/built in a hex. Perhaps "A" would have been better than "Each" or "Every"... 20.F.2 and 24 * These rules appear to contradict each other. Can supplies be airdropped in this game? If so, should I use the rule in the WWII rules booklet, or are supplies automatically dropped successfully? RCV: Supply may be airdropped, per 20F2, use the Airdrop Table from Game Play Chart [1]. 20.G.2.a and 39.C * If I understand these rules correctly, then a Guerilla attack on an airbase can damage the airbase, but does not affect aircraft. Is this correct? RCV: No, 39C specifically says that the effects of this hit on an airbase is the same as those in 20G2, wherein a hit also aborts one air unit. So a Partisan attack, if successful, is handled just like a bombing mission as to results; ie on e hit and one air unit aborted. 20.G.2.h and 28 * If a naval unit is on a river hexside, then can it be attacked from the air in either adjacent hex? RCV: Yes. 21.B.1.a * Say there are more escorts than interceptors. May the escort player allocate some of the excess escorts against the engaging group and some against the bypassing group, or must all of the excess escorts engage one group or the other? RCV: How excess air units are apportioned is up to the owning player. eg if there were two air units engaging the screen and two bypassing, versus six air units escorting. Once the two fighters engaging the screen are accounted for, the owning player may divide up his remaining four air units anyway he wants; all screen, all bypassing or any combination... * If the escort player may allocate some each way, then which of the following procedures is correct? A) He divides the excess escorts as he sees fit and then then allocates those attacking the engaging group as described in the second paragraph of this rule. B) He allocates excess escorts according to the second paragraph of this rule until he no longer wishes to; the remaining unallocated escorts attack the bypass group. RCV: "A" is correct, you choose which are units will engage which group, and *then* random allocation ensues. 29.B.2.a * If one player has more gunnery strength allocated against the enemy TF body, then can he allocate just some of the excess against the bypassing group, keeping some for the engaging group? RCV: Yes. 29.B.2.b,c * In the Engaging Group/Bypass Firing Step, can a TF take more hits than it has allocated to the engaging/bypassing group? RCV: No, for example, if 2 gunnery strength points were engaging and two GSP were bypassing, then neither group can take more than two hits. (Engaging group fire can not affect GSP which are bypassing.) 32 * Most beach hexes are not owned by either player at the beginning of the game. To land at a beach hex which is not owned by either player, must a unit conduct an amphibious landing? RCV: Yes. 34.G * My understanding is that a repair die roll is made for each damaged LC, even if it is at sea or low on fuel. Is this correct? RCV: Yes. 34.I.1, 35.B * If a TF provides NGS, is sunk and then repaired in the same year, then may it provide NGS 6 more times in the year, or only 5? RCV: Only five times, the limitation is upon the naval unit, not the strength points, so the naval unit identity is used to track usage. 37.A.2 * Does an improved fort have a coast defense strength of 1, like an ordinary fort? RCV: Yes. 37.D * The modifiers to the Militia Reliability Table on Game Play Chart (2) list the following two modifiers: +1 To Defender's die roll if he has air support (DAS or GS) -1 To Attacker's die roll if he has air support (DAS or GS). These modifiers don't make any sense to me. Should they read: +1 To die roll if the units have air support (DAS or GS) -1 To die roll if the enemy units have air support (DAS or GS)? RCV: Yes. 38C * The second paragraph begins "Unless otherwise stated, neither side's *forces* may enter or pass through any *hex* of a neutral" while 3A says that "forces refers to ground, naval, and air units collectively." This rule has drastic consequences as Portugal extends all the way to the board edge, preventing naval units from moving between the north and south of Spain! Which is the correct fix? A) Naval and air units may move along the coastlines of neutral countries. B) A special exception is made for hex 2533 on map 23A. C) The map should be extended to include hex 2534 so that naval and air units can move around Portugal. D) The rule is right. Tough luck. RCV: Extend the map westwards to include an unlimited number of all sea hexes which naval units may traverse (but not end a phase in). 38D and 40C * When a Gobernito collapses, then any of its units which remain on the map become "fragile for replacement purposes (per Rule 40C)." (The reference to 40N was corrected to 40C in the errata of 14 May, 1995.) But 40C refers to substitutions for fragile divisions and doesn't say what to do with these Gobernito units. What goes? RCV: Fragile units may not be replaced. You can add this clarification at the end of 40C. 44.B.1 * If a hex which is owned by neither player cannot trace a LOC to a friendly unit, but can trace one to an enemy unit, then does that hex become enemy owned? RCV: Yes. 44.D.1 * Can an airbase be considered out of supply if it has no air units? RCV: Yes. * How many points of general supply are required to supply such an airbase? RCV: It can't be supplied unless air units wish to operate from it. Since lack of supply only affects air units, there will be no game affect from an unsupplied aibase which has no air units based there. You could expend supply there in anticipation of air units landing there this turn, costs as per the normal rules. Insurgent and Loyalist Orders of Battle, Page 1 in each. * Each order of battle has the following entry: INITIAL FORCES Initial Conditions Miscellaneous Amphibious Repair: 1 I cannot find any reference to "Amphibious Repair" in the rules. Does this mean that each side may only attempt to repair one LC each turn? RCV: Rule 34G discusses LC repair, but is in error as far as the die roll needed to repair LCs goes. Use the die roll of 1 only, as listed in the OBs. Game Charts * There is no rule on off-map boxes! Is the following (approximate) rule correct? The Insurgent player may move naval and air units and their cargos to either the Italian Off-Map Ports holding box or to the Canary Islands holding box by moving off the board through the hexes listed in the Off-Map Port Summary on Game Play Chart (3). The distance which they must then move to the off-map box is shown on the same chart. A unit in an off-map box follows the reverse procedure to move to the map. Units in the Italian Off-Map Ports box may start from any of the three locations shown in the Off-Map Port Summary, but if units must be loaded onto naval transports or landing craft at a port. The Loyalist player may never move units off of the map. A naval supply line to Cagliari must be traced through either hex 33:4519 or 33:5125 as shown on the Off-Map Port Summary. RCV: This is fine. Counters Several counters seem to be misprinted, either being printed in the wrong colors or having values which differ from what is written in the OBs. In general, is the OB or the counter considered to be correct when values differ. (I assume that the OB is correct when it comes to the affiliation of the unit.) Is there a list of known counter errors? RCV: An errata is under preperation. The values of the counters are correct, although some colours are wrong. Here are a few final remarks for future errata: (1) Last rule in the first column of page 8. "3. Railbreaks" should be "5. Railbreaks". (2) The last phrase in 44A1, "except that a resource point is never required," may be confusing to the uninitiated. There is no reference to resource point expenditure before that phrase in the rule, since there are no major rivers on the map. (3) The unsupported side of the POUM 29 Lenin division is printed as a cadre rather than as a division. (4) Rule 43C2. The example at the end of the first paragraph is not correct. Although the Loyalist rail net of 2 REs in the north exists, the southern section is broken up into several small pieces by territory controlled by neither player at the beginning of the game. A final "design question": 44F3: This rule was taken from Second Front. But aren't the ground combat effects of coastal artillery already taken into account through artillery units with movement allowences of 0 in the Spanish Civil War? This is what is implied by the Insurgent Jan II 37 reinforcement entry. RCV: 44F3 should not be used with the Spanish Civil war Scenarios. RichV@Icebox.Iceonline.com Europa, tomorrow's games about yesterday, TODAY From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Mar 26 03:26:03 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA00519; Tue, 26 Mar 96 03:26:02 +0100 Received: from smtp4.aw.com (smtp4.aw.com [192.207.117.64]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id DAA28810 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 03:25:48 +0100 (MET) Received: from East-Message_Server by smtp4.aw.com with Novell_GroupWise; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 21:47:19 -0500 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1 Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 22:31:58 -0500 From: Ray Kanarr To: europa@lysator.liu.se, bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu Subject: Europa of the Future [was: Re: Stacking] Content-Length: 723 On 3/25/96, Bobby Bryant said: >My only regret is that we don't all live in the same town, so >that we could settle the matter on the map. Perhaps Winston's next project should be setting up a Europa retirement village out here in sunny CA, with a big community center where we could set up all the maps, with walker access; and all of our significant others will finally have those of like mind to commiserate with; and the young'uns could come out periodically and try to whip our butts and show us how its done. Just a little Europa fantasy humor [or maybe an aging and misfiring synapse]. Seriously, though, I believe that the future of Europa is in a community, and probably the on-line community at that. Ray From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Mar 26 03:33:51 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA00556; Tue, 26 Mar 96 03:33:50 +0100 Received: from jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (civguy@jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us [192.217.238.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id DAA28861 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 03:31:15 +0100 (MET) Received: (from civguy@localhost) by jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (8.6.10/8.6.9) id WAA09596; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 22:01:54 -0600 Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 22:01:53 -36000 From: Jason Long Subject: Re: Crated air units Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-Length: 1354 On Mon, 25 Mar 1996, John M. Astell wrote: > >...There should be some provision for shipping air units as sea cargo > >from theater to theater.... > > >...Historically, how long does it take to crate and uncrate aircraft? Maybe a > >simple game mechanic requiring the air unit to be inop. for some period before > >and/or after the transport could work... > > I simply ran out of time to nail this down in SF. If anyone wants to > research this, the two major considerations to look for is how much > shipping space a crated air unit would take (in comparison to, say, a US > tank battalion), and how long it takes to assembly a unit after being > shipped. Given this, I can hash out a workable shipping rule. > > If you want a bulls**t (one made up with little backing it), here's a try: > a fighter is 2 REs in size in for shipping and takes 1 game turn to > crate/uncrate. A bomber or transport is 4 REs in size and takes 2 game > turns to crate/uncrate. Double the above sizes (but not crating/uncrating > times) for all prefix-H air units. > I was groping towards something like this in Arctic Thunderbolt though I feel that fighters should take up 1 RE of shipping space, except for the HFs, of course. Type A/B should take up 2 REs while HBs should take 4. All assembly times should be 1 turn except for HB/HT which are doubled. Jason From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Mar 26 03:42:32 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA00618; Tue, 26 Mar 96 03:42:31 +0100 Received: from smtp.utexas.edu (smtp.utexas.edu [128.83.126.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id DAA28979 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 03:42:18 +0100 (MET) Received: from slip-22-15.ots.utexas.edu (slip-22-15.ots.utexas.edu [128.83.128.175]) by smtp.utexas.edu (8.6.7/8.6.6) with SMTP id UAA27175 for ; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 20:31:13 -0600 Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 20:31:13 -0600 Message-Id: <199603260231.UAA27175@smtp.utexas.edu> X-Sender: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu (Bobby D. Bryant) Subject: Re: Peaceful Russia Content-Length: 1485 Jason said: >The Soviet production numbers in 1941 before Barbarossa tell their own >story that Russia was already on a war footing. Peaceful Soviet Russia >under Stalin in an oxymoron during the late '30s and early '40s. ... If you refer to my proposal that the phoney war might have degenerated into a cold war, I'm not sure "peaceful" is how I would describe Soviet Russia's role. I suspect Stalin was smart enough to realize that diplomacy is merely the continuation of warfare by other means (to coin a phrase). Also, after the shock of seeing what Germany did to Poland and France in a world expecting a rematch of WWI, I would be on a war footing too, whether I intended to attack anyone or not. (Especially, for the Soviets, after the anti-Communist crusade of c. 20 years before.) >Based on my discussions with Charles Sharp, simply flipping over the >cadres wouldn't even come close to reproducing the extra year's >production of tanks, aircraft and equipment. The Mechanized Corps would >ave been fully fleshed out with virtually all T-34/KV-1/2 tanks, >averaging about a 12-8 ...; the motorized divisions would have become >mechanized. The frontier rifle divisions would have been given older tanks >from the tank divisions to raise their strength to around 6 [etc. ad horrorem] When you say "extra year's", are we to take it literally, i.e. this would be the Soviet army by summer of '42? Great post! - Bobby. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Mar 26 04:19:59 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA00820; Tue, 26 Mar 96 04:19:58 +0100 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id EAA29401 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 04:19:08 +0100 (MET) From: j.broshot@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA200079583; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 03:06:23 GMT Message-Id: <199603260306.AA200079583@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Tue, 26 Mar 96 03:06:23 UTC 0000 ( from INTERNET# ; Tue, 26 Mar 96 03:05:59 UTC 0000) Date: Tue, 26 Mar 96 03:03:00 UTC 0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: J.BROSHOT X-Genie-Qk-Id: 8439996 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 4793 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: My $0.02 Worth (continued) Content-Length: 2053 Gas Warfare: as to my previous "anecdotes" about gas warfare in WW2. I have not yet run down the source of Goring's query as to why the Allies did not use gas at Normandy; but as to Roosevelt's veto of the use of gas at Iwo Jima, see IWO JIMA, by Richard F. Newcomb; Garden City NY: Nelson Doubleday, Inc., 1983 (originally published 1965). In my copy it is at the end of Chapter III of Part Four, "...the plan had been approved at all levels except the White House. It had come back marked: 'All prior endorsements denied-Franklin D. Roosevelt, Commander-in-Chief.'" The Royal Air Force Regiment: in the past I may have unfairly slandered [?] Hermann Goring for creating his own army as part of the Luftwaffe. It should be noted that the Royal Air Force, early in the war, created the Royal Air Force Regiment, ostensibly for airfield defense. It appears to have grown to a considerable size for Winston Churchill was thereafter on the RAF to reduce the size of the Regiment and turn the excess personnel over to the army. THE SECOND WORLD WAR: VOLUME FIVE: CLOSING THE RING, by Winston S. Churchill, "You have been asked to supply twenty-five thousand from the R.A.F. Regiment, which has been built up in quite different circumstances from those which now exist. These men are vitally needed for the support of the Army in the forthcoming battle." [minute of 20 May 1944 to the Secretary of State for Air]. Winston Churchill: whatever you may say or think of him as a leader, he was one heck of an author. I have tried acquired his accounts of both WW1 and WW2. They are a gold mine of trivia about the wars and a source of "what-ifs." What if the Allies had tried, as Churchill proposed, Operation "Caliph?" On D+1 of Overlord, 5,000 British commandos seize Bordeaux by coup de main. After the docks are seized, 1st British, 6th British and 6th South African Armored Divisions land (after being staged through Morocco) followed up by three French divisions and/or U. S. infantry divisions. See pp.692-694, CLOSING THE RING. Jim Broshot, St. James MO From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Mar 26 04:58:40 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA01113; Tue, 26 Mar 96 04:58:39 +0100 Received: from felix.dircon.co.uk (felix.dircon.co.uk [193.128.224.10]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id EAA05264 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 04:57:27 +0100 (MET) Received: from [194.112.35.6] (gw1-006.pool.dircon.co.uk) by felix.dircon.co.uk with SMTP id AA17916 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Tue, 26 Mar 1996 03:57:21 GMT X-Sender: cloister@popmail.dircon.co.uk Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 03:59:52 +0100 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: cloister@dircon.co.uk (Perry de Havilland) Subject: Re: Stacking Content-Length: 2656 Bob Bryant wrote: [mia culpa snipped] >You could as well find an attack historically made by a single >division >and conclude from it that stacking should be limited to >one division. Not a good example of reductio ad absurdum. I think it is fairly clear that is not what Nick suggested. For why, see later in this post. >As to the following (back to quoting Nick's same post): > >>If super-stacking is adopted by Europa, I would have to second >>the >>views of Perry that call for increased casualties for the >>attacker due >>to the higher density--and thus the increased >>vulnerabilty--of the >>attacking troops. > >I have no complaint against this in general, but would point out >that >stacking already allows a variation in density from 1/2 to >15 REs, >without any effect on casualty rates. It is not >immediately clear that >expanding this range by c. 30% demands >that such a rule be added, if not >needed before. Also, should >density have an effect on the defender's >casualty rate? A good question as this cuts to the core issue of this matter. Sorry to keep making refs to Dupuy in so many posts (I DO read other books...Gary Larson, mostly), but I think he (Dupuy, not Gary Larson) has made one of the better studies of the effects on dispersal on casualty rates. What we need to do to resolve is the point at which Dupuy's *typical* dispersal factors are exceeded: it is *that* point at which additional vulnerability is incured. And what stacking level is that? Dunno. I guess we are just going to have to figure it out. We're a bunch of smart, opinionated guys...we can do it (cue Nick Forte, stage left...get them spreadsheets rollin'!). The advantage of this approach is it gives us an objective measure to use as a yard-stick Another important point in this debate is not to confuse dispersal with frontage: the two are (obviously) related but they are *not* the same thing. A single brigade in a clear hex or two division in the same hex probably have essentially identical dispersal factors but clearly not the same frontage. That is why I said your reduction was naff. As for *super* stacks also effecting the defender being attacked by such a stack: yeah...more factors attcking usually has more effect on the defender ;-) But seriously, the defender does not have his dispersal values changed just because the attacker does. Of course, a *defending* superstack has the same problem. More factors = harder nut to crack BUT less dispersal = more casualties at any given level of intensity of combat. It is an interesting subject. More later, it is 4;00 in the morning & I have to water my Hippopotamus From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Mar 26 05:21:18 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA01227; Tue, 26 Mar 96 05:21:17 +0100 Received: from sub.Sonic.NET (root@sub.sonic.net [199.4.118.8]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id FAA05566 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 05:20:18 +0100 (MET) Received: from [199.4.118.161] (pm161 [199.4.118.161]) by sub.Sonic.NET (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id UAA31833 for ; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 20:24:39 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 20:19:13 -0800 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: bstone@sub.sonic.net (Bill Stone) Subject: Re: Sacked officers Content-Length: 3204 Clarifying and expanding what Public Affairs Officer wrote: > > I can't recall the boss of 51st Highland Division, but that outfit...had > seen a lot of fighting in the war, and morale was low. 51st (formerly 9th) Division spent second half of 1940 and all of 1941 in the UK, arrived in Egypt in August 1942 and fought from Alamein to Tunisia, then fought for a month on Sicily. The div did not move to Italy. In August 43 D. N. Wimberley was succeeded by D. C. Bullen-Smith and in November the div sailed back to the UK. Bullen-Smith was replaced by T. G. Rennie in Normandy on 26 July 1944 after the "difficulties" around Caen. ---Joslen, H. F. ORDERS OF BATTLE. London: HMSO, 1960. ---Salmond, J. B. THE HISTORY OF THE 51st HIGHLAND DIVISION. Edinburgh: Pentland, 1953. > 7th Armoured had a similar problem of fatigue in its officers and > men. Bobby Erskine led the division into Normandy, and he took the heat > for the failure at Villers-Bocage.... Erskine's replacement (who also > escapes my mind, I must be going senile) didn't do much better. G. W. E. J. Erskine was replaced in Normandy on 4 August 1944 by G. L. Verney who was himself replaced on 22 November 1944 by L. O. Lyne. ---Joslen, H. F. ORDERS OF BATTLE. London: HMSO, 1960. ---Verney, G. L. THE DESERT RATS: THE 7th ARMOURED DIVISION IN WORLD WAR II. London: Greenhill, 1990. > Bucknall was not Monty's first choice to lead 30 Corps at > D-Day, and historian agree he lacked a grip on the battle from the start. > I expect that Monty wanted the man who inherited 30 Corps, Sir Brian > Horrocks, who was disabled at the time by a shrapnel wound in his lung > from Tunisia. He was literally hauled out of his sickbed to take over 30 > Corps.... Bucknall was appointed by Montgomery despite the misgivings of Alan Brooke. In August he was sacked by the army commander, Dempsey. ---D'Este, Carlo. DECISION IN NORMANDY. New York: Dutton, 1983. "[While Horrocks was in Bizerte watching 46th Division rehearsing their assault]...a German fighter broke through the smoke with its guns blazing. Horrocks was hit in the chest, and the bullet passed through his lungs and intestines and came out by his spine, while another hit his leg. No one else was touched. "Fourteen months later Horrocks was pronounced fit -- or at least he was sufficiently fit to persuade the doctors to mark him fit!" ---Keegan, John (ed). CHURCHILL'S GENERALS. New York: Grove Weidenfeld, 1991. > 3rd and 4th Canadian Divisions both had leadership problems. 3rd > Canadian was led by Keller, and I think Vokes had 4th. 3rd Canadian Infantry Division: R. F. L. Keller-- 8 Sept 42 - 8 Aug 44 D. C. Spry-- 18 Aug 44 - 22 Mar 45 R. H. Keefler-- 23 Mar 45 - 19 Nov 45 4th Canadian Armored Division: G. Kitching-- 1 Mar 44 - 21 Aug 44 H. W. Foster-- 22 Aug 44 - 30 Nov 44 C. Vokes-- 1 Dec 44 - 5 Jun 45 ---Stacey, C. P. THE VICTORY CAMPAIGN. Ottawa: The Queen's Printer, 1960. > ...Spike Milligan... Sorry, no information available on Spike Milligan. ---------------------------- Bill Stone Santa Rosa, CA bstone@sonic.net World War II Web Site: http://www.sonic.net/~bstone ---------------------------- From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Mar 26 05:40:37 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA01306; Tue, 26 Mar 96 05:40:36 +0100 Received: from iac.iac.org.nz (iac.iac.org.nz [192.124.160.153]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id FAA05763 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 05:40:20 +0100 (MET) Received: from smtpgate.iac.org.nz by iac.iac.org.nz (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA27135; Tue, 26 Mar 96 16:36:17 NZS Message-Id: <9603260436.AA27135@iac.iac.org.nz> From: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (Public Affairs Officer) Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 16:37 GMT To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Astell explains it all Content-Length: 7062 Wow! What a post! It certainly describes the entire cornucopia of the German war machine and why the Nazi forces come in so many different colors. Allgemeine is the spelling for the Allgemeine. A lot of important Germans (the "bonze") held ranks in the Allgemeine SS The German Navy built up ground units pretty much like other navies did, to guard ports and naval bases. Some of these forces saw combat in events like the Raid on St. Nazaire. Late in the war, when the Nazis ran short of manpower and their warships had nowhere to operate, Admiral Karl Doenitz released about 25,000 sailors from his ships to be turned into infantry on the Oder front, joining another division of bluejackets and Marines. Most of these Sailors saw little action, but Doenitz flew an officer's training outfit to Berlin to defend the Fuhrerbunker and the rest of the Zitadelle area, a collection of gaudily-dressed but poorly trained midshipmen and radar technicians, a 1945 birthday gift to the Fuhrer. Journalist Joseph O'Donnell, while researching his book The Bunker, on Hitler's last days, found that most of these alleged infantrymen wound up on the operating table of the Army hospital in the Reichschancellery...but none of them survived the war. The Fegelein Cavalry Brigade is commanded by the former jockey Otto Fegelein, who married Eva Braun's sister (Gretl, I think) and became an intimate of the Fuhrer circle. However, when the roof fell in on Berlin in 1945, Fegelein disappeared. With Nazism in a state of collapse, Hitler became greatly concerned with the fate of Fegelein, despatching the Gestapo to bring in the missing general for court-martial. Hitler's concern over Fegelein was over his obsession that someone in his personal entourage was leaking information to the Allies. The key event was the Allied radio announcing Heinrich Himmler's peace overtures to the West. To Hitler, someone had betrayed the Reich besides Himmler, and Fegelein seemed the likely suspect. Fegelein was found in a Berlin apartment with a mysterious woman, believed to be Fegelein's Irish paramour, and the Gestapo men (they had gone without sleep for two days and were exhausted) let her slip away. When Fegelein was brought back to the Fuhrerbunker, Martin Bormann was furious that the lady was not in handcuffs, as well. The weary Gestapo detectives went back to the apartment, but the lady had vanished from history. The Gestapo did find that Fegelein had amassed a pile of Reichmarks, jewelry, and Swiss francs, all useful tools for staging the great escape in the hegira of 1945, so Fegelein stood trial before SS General Wilhelm Mohnke in the bunker for high treason around midnight on April 29th. Fegelein was in no shape to defend himself, as he was completely drunk, but that was hardly the issue in this judicial travesty. The court found Fegelein guilty and sentenced him to death. The former jockey was shot shortly after. Half an hour later, Eva Braun revealed the banality of her evil and her hero-worship of Hitler by marrying Der Fuhrer. A day later, both were dead. The extent to which the Waffen SS reached out for foreign volunteers peaked with the invention of the "British Freikorps," also known as the "Legion of St. George." This ragtag band of British fascists numbered about 50 at most, and was drawn from PoWs. The SS tried hard to enlist British PoWs, sending Lord Haw-Haw (William Joyce) himself to various PoW camps with posters and fliers, to lecture to captured Tommies. The PoWs used the fliers as toilet paper. But here and there, Haw-haw picked up recruits. One of them was Walter Purdy, a Royal Navy engineer captured in Norway. The Germans used Purdy first as a broadcaster behind Joyce. Then, disguised as a British Army officer, Purdy was slipped into PoW camps to spy on the British PoWs. He was found out at various camps, but the Germans kept trying, even sending him to Oflag XXIB, better known to PoW buffs as Colditz Strafelager. There the British Senior Officer, Col. Guy German, put it to the Germans simply, either remove Purdy or we will kill him. Purdy was removed. Captured by the British after the war, Purdy drew a life term in Wandsworth Gaol. The British Free Corps wore SS uniforms with Union Jack badges, but never amounted to much due to small numbers. Its members were visible in the salons and nightclubs of Berlin, for propaganda value, but saw no action as a cohesive unit. One member, defending Berlin in the last days of the war, received the Iron Cross for knocking out some Josef Stalin tanks, then himself was killed. Interestingly enough, a good chunk of the SS units defending the rubble of Berlin in April 1945 were French, Norwegian, and Belgian units, whose members fought with the determination of the damned, knowing their fate was a choice between death in battle or the traitor's rope. The SS Police anti-partisan units WERE a terrifying bunch. The SS Penal Brigade under Oskar Dirlewanger was sent to destroy the Warsaw Rising of 1944. In this outfit's officer's mess, if one officer even remotely challenged Hitler or the Nazi machine ("Since the war started, the butter in the officer's mess has been lousy"), one of the officer's buddies would pull out his pistol and shoot the offender on the spot. After the war, Dirlewanger fled Allied war-crimes retribution and went to Egypt, where he advised Egyptian leaders on how to deal with Israel. The girls' version of the Hitler Youth was the Bund Deutscher Madchen. Various stories have existed about this outfit, including that it encouraged German girls to deliberately get themselves pregnant to increase the Reich's supply of manpower, racial stock, and cannon fodder, but these stories seem to say more about the authors' own sexual interests than about history. However, German girls who wished to marry SS men were required to earn the Reich Sport Medal to show their ability to bear healthy children for the Reich. The SA was originally uniformed in leftover clothing to be sent to the German WW1 army in East Africa, the Schutztruppe, under Col. Paul von Lettow-Vorbeck. However, there was never a way to ship the clothing, so the SA got them. They lost their importance after the Night of the Long Knives in 1934, when their leader, Ernst Rohm, (who described himself as wicked and immature), a flagrant pederast, was shot, along with a horde of other top SA men and a former German chancellor. However, they hung round to provide color at Nazi rallies (carrying those immense banners that resemble Roman ones) and in 1938, were used to carry out most of the depredations of the Night of Broken Glass. Not a likable bunch. Just thought I'd add a few notes to an excellent and informative post. David H. Lippman Public Affairs Officer US Naval Antarctic Support Unit Christchurch, New Zealand From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Mar 26 06:57:46 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA01906; Tue, 26 Mar 96 06:57:45 +0100 Received: from ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (abcclibr@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu [128.174.5.59]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA06459 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 06:54:36 +0100 (MET) Received: by ux1.cso.uiuc.edu id AA12167 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for europa@lysator.liu.se); Mon, 25 Mar 1996 23:54:32 -0600 Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 23:54:31 -0600 From: conrad alan b To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Stacking Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-Length: 5739 I would like to take the stacking issue one step beyond the 3-3-2 vs 4-4-3 or whatever point. There can be considered two mostly separate issues here as some have pointed out. Unit frontages (including overall hex density); and command and control of the units in the hex. For unit frontages I side with the higher stacking crowd. Doctrine for all powers by '43 had division attack frontage of as little as one kilometer. So frontage wise one can fit at least 60 REs in a hex. That the defense never had frontage that dense is something we can try to investigate. Now it is true most attacks were not 20 divisions strong in one hex point, but there were some that were not that far off. All of the divisions and the support units, (eng, AT, etc) could be considered in the line. For the full size of the hex one can place more units. That after all is the justification of the extra artillery units, they are behind the line. One could carry that line of reasoning further. Should not construction units building an airfield behind the line be above stacking limits? How about police units and AA units that may not be part of the line forces although their combat strengths might very well contribute during two weeks of fighting, particularly on defense? What about Command & Control. Any HQ can only keep track of and use a certain number of units. One thing to keep in mind that the Corps markers are just that, markers for ease of play, and have nothing to do with actual corps HQs. Secondly when we look at history it is hard to get a good handle on this since most books (and games too) do not include sub division units so it is hard to know how many of them, were doing what, where, at any time. But certainly in the western armies a corps only contained two to four divisions at any time. And most of the time they were spread over more than one hex, in game terms. But one can guess that mostly this was because there were not enought units in most armies to `stack' to the density that was physically possible. One had to cover the front with something. So we could certainly keep total stackage down from the what it is physically possible to fit in a hex issue to just what was doctrine. But the C&C issue brings up a question to me. What is the logic behind the 3-3-2 stacking rule. It is an elegant rule that is easy to use but is there any justification? Certainly we can see why the three divisions in the line was used, and as explained the artillery behind the line works well. But why the three support REs. Why can one put 3 REs as regiments in the line but not as divisions? I can not see any logical reason with respect to unit frontage. What about C&C? Think of the Russian Army commander ( no real corps structure there) Ask him if it is easier to control one 4-6 division or two 2-6 brigades. I'll bet on the one division. Beyond the total amount of stacking issue, the 3 non-division RE rule has IMO really screwed up the Europa game. What do players do? In Russia, the Germans break up Panzer divisions to get the big regiments to make killer wads. The fighting in France had shown the Germans that the best way to use tanks was not to put all of them in one hex. But then we now know that the Germans were not bright enough to come up with a proper solution to NODLs like we can. And when Stavka tells the Russian field command that it can now convert live 2-6 brigades into rebuilt 4-6 divisions what does he say? No way, I can stack the 2-6s. My line is already full of 4-6 divisions, more are useless. And what about attack tactics. Standard Russian doctrine '43 on, was to have infantry divisions open the attack and have the armor right behind to go through the holes. Now any Europa Russian knows that this doctrine is wrong. With infantry divisions in the line they can not get enough attack factors in a hex to make any kind of attack. The new SF overstack helps some, but only in limited areas. In Clear terrain, a full stack can march through a full stack for the one movement point. But if the second stack is in overstack it cost 2 MPs. Certainly if I can move through a stack it's not going to cost me more if I start ou in the stack. And if the original stack moves, even six months later I have to spend those 2 MPs to get out of overstack. If we keep overstack in GE, IMO it needs tinkering So all of the above, to me, spells - change the stacking rules. The Old DNO, memory tells me, just used a number for REs to a hex. I believe that can be a good starting basis. That also allows different armies at different times to have stacking based on C&C limitations; e.g. in '41 the Germans can stack 15 REs to a hex, the Russians only 10 REs. If we let divisions be more efficient (that's why they used them) we can get out of those breaking up, or keeping small units around just to help stacking. Example: Divisions = 2 stacking points Regiments = 1 " " Artillery and other units `behind the line' can stack for half cost. Other points of stacking `logic' can be thought up and used. One could have special unusual stacking points for big divisions, little divisions, artillery corps etc. Although his is more difficult without being able to put stacking point numbers on the units and GE is beyond that now. Although the old 3-3-2 was elegant and easy to use, it is wrong, IMO, and this proposed fix is not overly difficult for the benefits it brings. That's what I think, What do all you think? Alan Conrad Champaign, Illinois From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Mar 26 16:19:03 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA10128; Tue, 26 Mar 96 16:19:02 +0100 Received: from motgate2.mot.com ([129.188.136.20]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id QAA18816 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 16:16:43 +0100 (MET) Received: from mothost.mot.com (mothost.mot.com [129.188.137.101]) by motgate2.mot.com (8.7.3/8.6.10/MOT-3.8) with ESMTP id PAA29497 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 15:15:32 GMT Received: from fwans12 (fwans12.fwrdc.rtsg.mot.com [160.2.12.7]) by mothost.mot.com (8.7.3/8.6.10/MOT-3.8) with SMTP id JAA20758 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 09:15:52 -0600 (CST) Received: from fwhre14.fwrdc.rtsg.mot.com (fwhre14) by fwans12 (5.67b/FTW-1.62) id AA06868; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 09:12:52 -0600 Received: by fwhre14.fwrdc.rtsg.mot.com (8.6.12/FTW-1.62) id JAA18993; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 09:15:50 -0600 From: psmith@hpmail2.fwrdc.rtsg.mot.com (Paul Smith) Message-Id: <199603261515.JAA18993@fwhre14.fwrdc.rtsg.mot.com> Subject: You people use big words ..... To: europa@lysator.liu.se (Europa maillist) Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 09:15:50 -0600 (CST) Reply-To: psmith@ftw.mot.com *Return-Receipt-To: psmith@ftw.mot.com X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Length: 443 I have to keep a dictionary nearby whenever I read your posts. -- Paul F. Smith Ft. Worth Research Laboratories | Phone: (817) 245-6097 Motorola | Fax : (817) 245-6148 5555 N. Beach St | email: psmith@ftw.mot.com Ft. Worth, Tx 76137 | QPS001@email.mot.com "Good judgement comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgement." -- From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Mar 26 16:55:58 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA10683; Tue, 26 Mar 96 16:55:56 +0100 Received: from tempest.rs.itd.umich.edu (tempest.rs.itd.umich.edu [141.211.63.93]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id QAA25835 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 16:55:07 +0100 (MET) Received: from tempest.rs.itd.umich.edu by tempest.rs.itd.umich.edu (8.7.1/2.2) id KAA28007; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 10:54:56 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 10:54:55 -0500 (EST) From: Edward K Nam X-Sender: ednam@tempest.rs.itd.umich.edu To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: Master Europa In-Reply-To: <9603241805.AA19220@hilda.mast.QueensU.CA> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-Length: 4265 On Sun, 24 Mar 1996, Keith Pardue wrote: > I was just doing some Sunday afternoon web surfing > and ran across "Master Europa" on the GR/D web page. This > seems to be an alternate set of Europa rules put out by > "Task Force Johnson." Has anyone out there tried them? > What do you think? (Please indicate in your response > whether or not you were involved with writing them!) > For those of you who don't know, Master Europa is a GRD approved set of alternative rules for the Europa system designed by Tom Johnson. I have never used Tom Johnson's Master Europa, but I have read and studied the rules planning to use them in our current game. But we voted to play RAW before trying any variants in our FitE/SE game. I have made up a list of diffrerences between Master Europa and the Rules as Written. It's interesting that Master addresses some of the stacking and operational air discussions that have been going on recently. Maybe there's someone else out there that has more to say about how these rules affect balance etc. since I haven't playtested them yet. Nevertheless here are some of the general major differences. Reaction movement After the combat phase, the defender is allowed a reaction movement phase if it is within some distance away (3-7 hexes) from a successfully attacked hex. The Russians can only do this after Oct II '42. Exploitation Movement Cavalry and c/m units can move their full movement in this phase, all other units can move half their movement allowance! Operational movement In addition to tactical and admin movement, operation movement is added. Using this, units can move at 1.5X their movement raiting and can walk adjacent to enemy as long as there is a friendly unit in that hex. Units can use this movement rate in enemy territory. Captured rail networks. It is possible to increase your rail cap by capturing various cities. Stacking. The stacking limit is 12 RE (no more than half being non-division) plus 8RE of artillery. Combat Fog of war: After the combat ratio is computed, fractions are retained and 2D10 are rolled to resolve which column is used for the attack. Mixing nationalities in an attack halves firepower of minorities. Super attacks: attacks > 9:1 add modifiers to die roll. AQ/DQ is added to the CRT. (attacker quartered.) QX and QR is added to the CRT (quarter exchange and retreat) OTherwise, the only other comment I can make about the CRT (without reproducing it here) is that the DE line is about 1 point lower on the chart than on the SE CRT. Support. Cadres provide support for units stacked with them. Artillery can only provide support to a limited number of units. Supply No Trucks! Supply lengths: No Road element! The overland element depends on nationality and date but ranges from 4 to 8 hexes. Supply effect: There are seperate effects for isolated and non- isolated units. U-1 has no effect on units. U-2 attack and movement halved. U-3 reduced ZOC, AEC, and no reaction or exploitation movement. For isolated units the results are harsher than RAW. Airbases are also effected. Special Units Resource points are NOT used in this game. engineers can build airfields and forts without them. Airfields disappear after a while if not in use. There are various levels of fortifications that can be constructed. Air combat: Air combat is done similarly to ground combat. Total attack strengths are ratioed against total defense strengths and rolled on a CRT. losses are taken according to these factors, the rest get through. No patrol rules. German first turn Surprise The Germans get a +3 to their combat dice roles in the first surprise turn. Special Rules Hitler's obsession: All divisions must be built up to cadre strength before any cadres can be built up to full strength. Soviet special replacements: For every 3 non-isolated strength points lost 1 comes back as special replacement! Soviet surrender The government has a chance of collapsing when certain conditions are met (with modifiers). Tom has been helpful to me before in answering email questions. If you have questions for him, perhaps he will do the same (swcectj@rvlink.com) -Ed Nam From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Mar 26 17:49:18 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA11616; Tue, 26 Mar 96 17:49:17 +0100 Received: from hahp9k.harte-lyne.ca (hahp9k.harte-lyne.ca [205.206.207.101]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id RAA08017 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 17:48:27 +0100 (MET) Received: from hal-ham-g01-u01 (i486nt01.harte-lyne.ca) by hahp9k.harte-lyne.ca with SMTP (1.39.111.2/16.2) id AA179548985; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 11:49:45 -0500 Message-Id: <31582113.3DB9@harte-lyne.ca> Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 11:53:39 -0500 From: "James B. Byrne" Organization: Harte & Lyne Limited X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (WinNT; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: psmith@ftw.mot.com Cc: Europa maillist Subject: Re: You people use big words ..... References: <199603261515.JAA18993@fwhre14.fwrdc.rtsg.mot.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 298 Paul Smith wrote: > > I have to keep a dictionary nearby whenever I read your posts. > My spelling is so bad I have to keep a dictionary nearby when I'm writing. -- James B. Byrne mailto:byrnejb@harte-lyne.ca Harte & Lyne Limited http://www.harte-lyne.ca Hamilton, Ontario 905-561-1241 From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Mar 26 22:29:42 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA14768; Tue, 26 Mar 96 22:29:41 +0100 Received: from mail02.mail.aol.com (mail02.mail.aol.com [152.163.172.66]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA13264 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 22:28:20 +0100 (MET) From: Italorican@aol.com Received: by mail02.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id QAA24243; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 16:27:48 -0500 Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 16:27:48 -0500 Message-Id: <960326162747_455434474@mail02.mail.aol.com> To: bstone@sub.sonic.net, europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: Sacked officers Content-Length: 376 Does anyone have any information on the sacking of Brig. E. Dorman-Smith in Italy? Corelli Barnett made a big deal of it in an epilogue or footnote in his Desert Generals, but does not name names and other particulars. I have a vague sense that I may have run across the incident in some history on the British campaign in Italy, but cannot place it. Thanks Antonio Lauria From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Mar 27 01:42:37 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA16270; Wed, 27 Mar 96 01:42:36 +0100 Received: from travel1.travel-net.com (root@travel1.travel-net.com [204.92.71.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id BAA23888 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 01:41:23 +0100 (MET) From: bradbury@travel1.travel-net.com Received: from 204.92.71.2.travel-net.com (tv135.travel-net.com [205.150.57.135]) by travel1.travel-net.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id TAA17965 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 19:46:43 -0500 Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 19:46:43 -0500 Message-Id: <199603270046.TAA17965@travel1.travel-net.com> X-Sender: bradbury@mail.travel-net.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: More on Sacked Officers Content-Length: 1295 More on sacked British officers. I believe Chink Dorman-Smith was sacked shortly after Monty arrived in the desert in Aug '42 - there are many unflattering comments regarding Dorman-Smith in Monty' official biography - one staff officer described him as "He really was as near being a lunatic as you can get". This was particularly in reference to the use of brigade groups in the post Gazala period. The trigger to the sacking of both Bucknall and Erskine was the failure of 7th Armoured to advance as quickly as Dempsey wanted in Operation Bluecoat. The failures of the Canadian senior officers are well documented (there is a quote, whose attribution escapes me, but may have come from as far back as WW1, that went along the lines that the Canadians were grand troops and would be excellent once all the officers had been shot). Many of these problems are rooted in the militia, which, among its virtues, did not do a very good job in preparing battalion officers and higher for the art of war. The militia problems actually go back as far as WW1 and the "legendary" Colonel Sam Hughes, who is worth several paragraphs and perhaps a special rule in the Glory series (e.g, Sam Hughes dies unexpectedly, Canadian division strengths increased by one), but I'll save that for another day. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Mar 27 02:54:04 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA16687; Wed, 27 Mar 96 02:54:03 +0100 Received: from iac.iac.org.nz ([192.124.160.153]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id CAA25358 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 02:53:28 +0100 (MET) Received: from smtpgate.iac.org.nz by iac.iac.org.nz (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA29811; Wed, 27 Mar 96 13:49:26 NZS Message-Id: <9603270149.AA29811@iac.iac.org.nz> From: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (Public Affairs Officer) Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 13:48 GMT To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Sam Hughes and others Content-Length: 2237 The problem with the eminent Sam Hughes (which will effect Glory, I guess) was that he was a big fan of the Ross rifle, and equipped Canadian troops with this weapon. However, Canadian troops found it too heavy, impossible to open to eject cartridges, and used it only as a club. At early battles, Canadian troops exchanged Ross rifles with Lee-Enfields from dead English soldiers (of which there were plenty), to get some firepower. Despite frantic telegrams from the front, Hughes stuck by his rifle, until he was finally fired...and then the Canadian army started to use the reliable .303 Lee-Enfield. It's hard to keep up with some of this Europa scholarship from down here, mostly because my e-mails land at work (to avoid cluttering up my wife's Internet line at home), and my books are either at home in New Zealand or at home in New Jersey, so I have to struggle to remember guys like Chink Dorman-Smith and Douglas Wimberley. Monty DID appoint Bucknall (as mentioned earlier and ecchier) over Alanbrooke's objections, and while he got 30 Corps up on Gold Beach and over on D-Day, he did badly after that. However, the cutting edge of 30 Corps on D-Day was 50th Northumbrian Division, which had already compiled a long record of successful battles. It was the division that wrapped up the race to Messina back in Sicily in 1943, as a matter of fact. The rest of te 8th Army had been pulled out as the campaign's land space narrowed, to prepare for Operation Baytown, the crossing of the Messina Strait. Brian Horrocks' medical condition was very serious, yet he lived on until 1984 or 1985, serving as Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod (director of operations for the Houses of Parliament) and TV presenter on a BBC series on famous battles. He is best remembered as the gung-ho corps commander played by Edward Fox in A Bridge Too Far. The General Rennie who ultimately took over 51st Highland Division led 3rd British Division ashore at Sword Beach. He was wounded in the enusing campaign, sent home, and then returned to take over 51st Highland. David H. Lippman Public Affairs Officer US Naval Antarctic Support Unit Christchurch, New Zealand From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Mar 27 03:13:59 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA16980; Wed, 27 Mar 96 03:13:58 +0100 Received: from medlantic.mhg.edu (medlantic.mhg.edu [198.133.139.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id DAA00180 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 03:13:21 +0100 (MET) Received: by medlantic.mhg.edu id AA01807 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for europa@lysator.liu.se); Tue, 26 Mar 1996 21:13:17 -0500 Message-Id: <199603270213.AA01807@medlantic.mhg.edu> Received: by medlantic.mhg.edu (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Tue, 26 Mar 1996 21:13:17 -0500 From: "Haugh, Patrick J." To: europa Subject: Yes to AO, How about DOA? Date: Tue, 26 Mar 96 18:06:00 EST Encoding: 20 TEXT X-Mailer: Microsoft Mail V3.0 Content-Length: 1071 Let me add my vote for a revision of "Africa Orientale" as a GRD project. I would push the start date back to 1936 and include the invasion of Abyssinia as part of the game, with a link-up to the WitD maps for GE. The number of maps might be a problem at 16 miles/hex, although a linear arrangement following the track of the Nile from Cairo to Khartoum should only require four "linking" quarter maps. It is only when you look at it you realize how big a continent Africa is. On a related note, is there any interest in GRD doing the ultimate sideshow, the 1914-1918 war in East Africa, which has all the chrome that a wargamer could want: killer bees turning back amphibious assaults, cruisers playing hide-and seek in a mangrove swamp, (unsuccessful) aerial resupply by long range zeppelin and a German army so isolated from the rest of the world that they were marching on Northern Rhodesia (as it was then) after Imperial Germany had surrendered. Vote for Deutsch Ost Afrika as the most mobile of all WWI campaigns. Haya Safari, Patrick Haugh From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Mar 27 03:46:48 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA17198; Wed, 27 Mar 96 03:46:47 +0100 Received: from travel1.travel-net.com (root@travel1.travel-net.com [204.92.71.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id DAA07053 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 03:46:02 +0100 (MET) From: bradbury@travel1.travel-net.com Received: from 204.92.71.2.travel-net.com (tv135.travel-net.com [205.150.57.135]) by travel1.travel-net.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id VAA28753; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 21:51:47 -0500 Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 21:51:47 -0500 Message-Id: <199603270251.VAA28753@travel1.travel-net.com> X-Sender: bradbury@mail.travel-net.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (Public Affairs Officer) Subject: Re: Sam Hughes and others Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se Content-Length: 604 Not to clutter up the list with too much Sam Hughes material, but Sam had several other failing including nepotism (his son Garnet was the subject of much intriguing but eventually was not given command one of the Canadian divisions in France) and a seeming incapacity to understand details such wastage and thus the need for replacements to keep divisions up to strength (as late as 1916 he was promising a Canadian contingent of 21 divisions - only 4 ever fought in France). Rennie was later killed in 1945 during Operation Plunder, the 21st Army Group's Rhine crossing. Nigel Bradbury Ottawa, Ont. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Mar 27 04:19:59 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA17399; Wed, 27 Mar 96 04:19:58 +0100 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id EAA12894 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 04:18:00 +0100 (MET) From: j.broshot@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA193405910; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 03:05:10 GMT Message-Id: <199603270305.AA193405910@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Wed, 27 Mar 96 03:05:10 UTC 0000 ( from INTERNET# ; Wed, 27 Mar 96 03:04:51 UTC 0000) Date: Wed, 27 Mar 96 02:45:00 UTC 0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: J.BROSHOT X-Genie-Qk-Id: 8486011 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 13657 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 X-Mscontent-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-Printable Subject: Totenkopf units etc. Content-Length: 4118 I have the temerity to expand a bit on John Astell's comprehensive summary of the military forces of Nazi Germany. -The SS. Actually at the start of WW2 there were three separate armed forces of Himmler's SS: 1. Sepp Dietrich's "Leibstandarte SS Adolf Hitler," Hitler's bodyguard unit, organized as a motorized infantry regiment. 2. Paul Hausser's "Verf=81gungstruppe," composed of three standarten organized as motorized infantry regiments: SS Standarte Deutschland, SS Standarte Germania, and SS Standarte Der F=81hrer; along with an SS Artillery Regiment, reconaissance battalion, anti-tank battalion, light flak battalion and engineer battalion. The Verf=81gungstruppe was the forerunner of the Das Reich division. 3. Theodor Eicke's Totenkopfverb=84nde (death's head units) were concentration camp guards. Eicke, being an empire builder like most of Hitler's minions, had formed four Totenkopf "standarten" or regiments (one for each of the concentration camps): SS Totenkopf Standarte I Oberbayern for Dachau; SS Totenkopf Standarte II Brandenburg for Oranienburg; SS Totenkopf Standarte III Thuringen for Buchenwald; SS Totenkopf Standarte IV Ostmark (in Austria) for Mauthausen. Eicke had also managed to build up a sizeable reserve force and acquire his own depots and factories for supplies and arms (using concentration camp labor). With the outbreak of war, the Totenkopf forces expanded with the calling up of 40,000 SS reservists and the enrolling of new recruits. Eicke soon had under his control no less than fifteen standarten of Totenkopf troops plus, as John mentioned, one "SS- Totenkopf-Reiterstandarte" (cavalry regiment). The first three of the new standarten, built from the best personnel from the four original units and others, formed SS-Totenkopf-Standarten 1, 2, 3 which were the nucleus of Eicke's new Totenkopf-Division. The rest of the units were used as garrison units in occupied Poland and elsewhere. When Himmler managed to get control of his unruly subordinates and combine the three separate forces (plus the SS-Polizei Division) into the "Waffen SS," Eicke's extra units were used as follows: Standarten 8 and 10 went to form SS-Brigade 1; Standarten 4, 5 and 14 to form SS-Brigade 2; Standarten 6 and 7 ended up in Finland and were used to expand SS-Kampfgruppe Nord into a mountain division; Standarte 9 was used to garrison Kirkenes and became the basis for SS-Kampfgruppe Nord (but later was sent to Russia and was ultimately absorbed by the Totenkopf Division); Standart 11 became part of Felix Steiner's Wiking Division; the cavalry regiment was expanded into two regiments and, as John also noted, became SS Cavalry Brigade Fegelein (commanded by Eva Braun's brother-in-law); and Standarten 12, 13, and 15 were disbanded. SE: Jun II 41: 1 x 3-10 Mot XX Nord (SS) Jul I 41, 1 x 3-8* Cav X Fgln (SS), 1 x 3-10 Mot X 1 (SS); Sep I 41, 1 x 3-10 Mot X 2 (SS). [This is mainly based upon information in volumes 2, 3, and 4 of Tessin; and SOLDIERS OF DESTRUCTION THE SS DEATH'S HEAD DIVISION 1933-1945, by Charles W. Sydnor, Jr.] THE WAFFEN SS HITLER'S ELITE GUARD AT WAR 1939-1945, by George H. Stein is good general source covering the Waffen SS in all of its multifarious [?] activities. -For an overview of some of the other assorted para-military units of Nazi Germany, Osprey's Men At Arms Series No. 254, WEHRMACHT AUXILIARY FORCES is very useful. It covers the following: NSKK (the National Socialist Motor Transport Corps) Transport-Korps Speer RAD (Reichsarbeits-Dienst) (as noted by John partially absorbed by the Army in 1939 to form all of those 0-2-5 Cons X and 0-1-5 Cons III) but remained separate throughout the war and was used in 1945 to form some of the alarm divisions for the last ditch. SF, Apr I 45: 3 x 4-6-6 Inf XX Schlg (1. "Schlageter"), FLJahn (2. "Friedrich Ludwig Jahn"), Thkor (3. "Theodor Korner"). Membership in RAD was mandatory and was the immediate step before entry into the Army. Organization Todt Deutscher Volkssturm (the "people's militia" called out late in 1944). Jim Broshot, St. James MO From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Mar 27 04:57:41 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA17635; Wed, 27 Mar 96 04:57:40 +0100 Received: from iac.iac.org.nz (iac.iac.org.nz [192.124.160.153]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id EAA13248 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 04:57:06 +0100 (MET) Received: from smtpgate.iac.org.nz by iac.iac.org.nz (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA00237; Wed, 27 Mar 96 15:53:00 NZS Message-Id: <9603270353.AA00237@iac.iac.org.nz> From: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (Public Affairs Officer) Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 15:53 GMT To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: With Lettow-Vorbeck... Content-Length: 877 The East African sideshow was a pretty fascinating portion of WW1. There are two good books on it, one is The Great War in Africa, which covers all the fighting in that continent, the other being Battle for the Bundu, which is just about the East African campaign. It was indeed a classic of guerilla warfare and it amazes me that Lettow-Vorbeck kept his army in being through four years of war, despite being out of touch with his homeland all that time. He was ultimately brought down not by British advances, but by the 1918 West Front armistice. The game should definitely include Die Wacht Am Rufiji with the cruiser Konigsberg, and the real African Queens, the British torpedo boats on the Lake, which inspired C.S. Forester. David H. Lippman Public Affairs Officer US Naval Antarctic Support Unit Christchurch, New Zealand From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Mar 27 05:00:01 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA17648; Wed, 27 Mar 96 05:00:01 +0100 Received: from mail02.mail.aol.com (mail02.mail.aol.com [152.163.172.66]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id EAA13272 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 04:59:41 +0100 (MET) From: WANDREW@aol.com Received: by mail02.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id WAA12208 for europa@lysator.liu.se; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 22:59:09 -0500 Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 22:59:09 -0500 Message-Id: <960326225907_178922047@mail02.mail.aol.com> To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Submarine Question Content-Length: 653 I was talking to some folks today and mention was made by one of them that the Germans built/transported a submarine to Lake Titicaca (in S America) during WWII. Does anyone have any information or reference to this event? Which brings up something for Grand Europa...will there be any provision for diplomatic or economic influence to influence countries in Central/South America to support the Reich? Thoughts of the Graf Spee dropping anchor in a friendly Montevedia; merchant raiders docking in Buenos Aires, U-boats refueling in Caracas or the Brazilians keeping their troops at home due to threats from Bolivia come to mind. Comments? --Andy From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Mar 27 05:00:22 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA17668; Wed, 27 Mar 96 05:00:21 +0100 Received: from osf1.gmu.edu (osf1.gmu.edu [129.174.1.13]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id FAA13281 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 05:00:09 +0100 (MET) Received: from osf1.gmu.edu by osf1.gmu.edu; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/07Sep94-1001AM/GMUv3) id AA09694; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 23:00:01 -0500 Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 23:08:06 -0500 From: Nicholas Forte Reply-To: nforte@gmu.edu Subject: Re: Stacking To: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: <199603260154.TAA26662@smtp.utexas.edu> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-Length: 1521 Bobby D. Bryant wrote: >>In regards the attack on the Meuse, the current stacking limits allows for all >>of the German units that participated in the attack to be placed in the front >>line stacks. ... > >I respond that this carries no weight *unless* you demonstrate that the >historical "stacking" was dictated by "the rules", rather than (e.g.) lack >of additional units on hand to throw in, or a commander's assessment that >any additional units to hand were not necessary, and therefore best assigned >to other tasks. Thus the following makes no sense to me: My example of the German attack on the Meuse was to show that the ability of a German player to mass the forces needed to replicate the historical attack is not constrained by the stacking limit. I got the impression from your earlier posts that you felt that an inadequate stacking limit prevented you from recreating the German stomp through France. Furthermore, I would argue that may arguement should hold *unless* you can demonstrate that the current stacking limit prevents a player from recreating historical attacks. If you can, then we can have a discussion of how many such examples would be necessary to show the current stacking level in insufficient. An argument that calls for increased stacking because it was technically possible even if it never occured carries little weight since it would be *technically* possible to line up your troops in Napoleonic fashion to achieve a stacking of 10 divisions (or more) per hex. Nick Forte From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Mar 27 07:02:28 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA18481; Wed, 27 Mar 96 07:02:26 +0100 Received: from haven.uniserve.com (haven.uniserve.com [198.53.215.121]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id HAA14909 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 07:01:43 +0100 (MET) Received: from van0321.tvs.net ([204.191.197.91]) by haven.uniserve.com with SMTP id <34855-6654>; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 22:04:41 -0800 X-Sender: davehum@popserver.uniserve.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: Dave Humphreys Subject: Re: With Lettow-Vorbeck... Message-Id: <96Mar26.220441pst.34855-6654+873@haven.uniserve.com> Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 22:04:31 -0800 Content-Length: 1177 At 15:53 03/27/96 GMT, you wrote: > The East African sideshow was a pretty fascinating portion of WW1. >There are two good books on it, one is The Great War in Africa, which >covers all the fighting in that continent, the other being Battle for the >Bundu, which is just about the East African campaign. > It was indeed a classic of guerilla warfare and it amazes me that >Lettow-Vorbeck kept his army in being through four years of war, despite >being out of touch with his homeland all that time. He was ultimately >brought down not by British advances, but by the 1918 West Front >armistice. > The game should definitely include Die Wacht Am Rufiji with the >cruiser Konigsberg, and the real African Queens, the British torpedo >boats on the Lake, which inspired C.S. Forester. > > David H. Lippman > Public Affairs Officer > US Naval Antarctic Support Unit > Christchurch, New Zealand > This talk of WWI in East Africa is diverging a bit from the list's topic. Anyone who is interested in this campaign should obtain S&T #135 which contains the game "Sideshow". I've never played it, but it does have tons of optional "chrome" rules. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Mar 27 08:21:11 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA19107; Wed, 27 Mar 96 08:21:10 +0100 Received: from dub-img-2.compuserve.com (dub-img-2.compuserve.com [198.4.9.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id IAA15651 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 08:20:21 +0100 (MET) Received: by dub-img-2.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id CAA07799; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 02:19:47 -0500 Date: 27 Mar 96 02:19:00 EST From: Jim Arnold <74133.1765@compuserve.com> To: Europa LIst Subject: Re: Stacking Message-Id: <960327071859_74133.1765_BHR41-1@CompuServe.COM> Content-Length: 1594 Nicholas Forte wrote, > I would argue that may arguement should hold *unless* you can demonstrate > that the current stacking limit prevents a player from recreating historical attacks. > If you can, then we can have a discussion of how many such examples would be > necessary to show the current stacking level in insufficient. An argument that > calls for increased stacking because it was technically possible even if it never > occured carries little weight since it would be *technically* possible to line up your > troops in Napoleonic fashion to achieve a stacking of 10 divisions (or more) per > hex. I'm having a difficult time comprehending the persistence of this debate. Sorry to say, I started it with specific examples of the Allies in Diadem. It's not complex, it's not subjective. Just try setting up the Allied (and German) lines in Normandy, the Bulge, Kursk, or Stalingrad. If you're really interested, see for yourself - there are examples aplenty. The seemingly simple points which Bobby and I have tried to make on several occasions are that 1) 3-3-2 stacking is an ahistorical restriction, and 2) in response to objections that increased stacking would favor the attacker, that the Germans can use lots of help in FOF (and elsewhere). Compare your best German results in FOF with a map of the campaign. Just look at it. Sometimes it seems that the real issue is whether The Laws of Europa have some sort of religious significance, or whether as rules for war games they are subject to improvement. To me at least, that's not an interesting question either. Jim From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Mar 27 17:21:59 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA27009; Wed, 27 Mar 96 17:21:57 +0100 Received: from prague.crossover.com (root@prague.crossover.com [204.217.246.5]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id RAA12005 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 17:19:55 +0100 (MET) Received: from [205.161.32.192] (jastell.tiac.net [205.161.32.192]) by prague.crossover.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA10375 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 10:11:19 -0500 X-Sender: jastell@post.crossover.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 11:18:42 -0400 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) Subject: Re: With Lettow-Vorbeck... Status: O Content-Length: 1128 > The East African sideshow was a pretty fascinating portion of WW1. >There are two good books on it, one is The Great War in Africa, which >covers all the fighting in that continent, the other being Battle for the >Bundu, which is just about the East African campaign. > It was indeed a classic of guerilla warfare.... L-V wrote his own account of the Ger. E. Africa campaign: a 64-page pamphlet in German entitled "Was mir die Englaender ueber Ostafrika erzaehlten" (General v. Lettow-Vorbec; K.F. Koehler-Leipzig, 1932). It covers the campaign and includes several maps of his battles. I came across it in the microfilm section of the NY Public Library when I was helping out for the WW1 game. I think reprinting it, translated in English, may have some historical interest, and I plan to look into this sometime. There was at least one game on the Ger. E. Africa campaign, Schutztruppen (or Schutztruppe or something like that -- German for "Rifle Troops"), which appeared in the late 60s or early 70s. It was an OK game -- it had some flavor but was hampered by the clunky game mechanics typical of that time. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Mar 27 17:21:59 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA27008; Wed, 27 Mar 96 17:21:57 +0100 Received: from prague.crossover.com (root@prague.crossover.com [204.217.246.5]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id RAA12035 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 17:20:08 +0100 (MET) Received: from [205.161.32.192] (jastell.tiac.net [205.161.32.192]) by prague.crossover.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA10385 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 10:11:28 -0500 X-Sender: jastell@post.crossover.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 11:18:52 -0400 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) Subject: Re: Stacking Status: O Content-Length: 2002 Nick Forte wrote: >> I would argue that may arguement should hold *unless* you can demonstrate >> that the current stacking limit prevents a player from recreating historical >> attacks. If you can, then we can have a discussion of how many such examples >> would be necessary to show the current stacking level in insufficient.... Jim Arnold wrote: >I'm having a difficult time comprehending the persistence of this debate. Sorry >to say, I started it with specific examples of the Allies in Diadem. It's not >complex, it's not subjective. Just try setting up the Allied (and German) lines >in Normandy, the Bulge, Kursk, or Stalingrad. If you're really interested, see >for yourself - there are examples aplenty.... Nick has a valid point -- if somneone claims something doesn't work, it's up to that person (or like minded individuals) to thoroughly document it. It seems unfair to tell people who may not agree with you to do the checking for you. The current stacking rules cover most stacking/attacking situations. If you want to show the rule is broken, you got to: 1) Show that there are numerous cases when the rule doesn't work. If there's just a handful of exceptional cases, then that's what they are: exceptional cases. 2) Show that the current rules don't accommodate the situation in a slightly different way. I suspect the majority of superstacked cases (e.g., 4 divisions making an attack) will turn out that all attacking units could be legally stacked in adjacent hexes (e.g., 3 in one hex and one in an adjacent hex). 3) Show that super-stacked units are all indeed stacking. Again, I suspect you'll find that some units in super-stacked attacks are just holding the flanks for the attack and not actually attacking. 4) Show that super-stacked attacks are significant over the time frame of an Europa turn. How significant is a 4-div super-stacked attack where one div only participates in the opening hours or day of the attack? Is it significant, or is it ignorable? From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Mar 27 17:22:00 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA27017; Wed, 27 Mar 96 17:21:59 +0100 Received: from prague.crossover.com (root@prague.crossover.com [204.217.246.5]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id RAA12020 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 17:20:00 +0100 (MET) Received: from [205.161.32.192] (jastell.tiac.net [205.161.32.192]) by prague.crossover.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA10382 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 10:11:24 -0500 X-Sender: jastell@post.crossover.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 11:18:46 -0400 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) Subject: Re: Submarine Question Status: O Content-Length: 663 >Which brings up something for Grand Europa...will there be any provision for >diplomatic or economic influence to influence countries in Central/South >America to support the Reich? Thoughts of the Graf Spee dropping anchor in a >friendly Montevedia; merchant raiders docking in Buenos Aires, U-boats >refueling in Caracas or the Brazilians keeping their troops at home due to >threats from Bolivia come to mind. Yes. I envisage eventually having holding boxes and a diplomatic system for most off-map areas. That said, however, it is hard to see how the Axis would make much diplomatic headway in South America unless they outright won the war in Europe.... From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Mar 27 17:58:07 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA27564; Wed, 27 Mar 96 17:58:06 +0100 Received: from maxwell.ee.washington.edu (daemon@maxwell.ee.washington.edu [128.95.42.3]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id RAA00638 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 17:53:05 +0100 (MET) Received: from [128.95.42.157] (graham-mac.ee.washington.edu) by maxwell.ee.washington.edu (1.37.109.16/UW-NDC Revision: 2.26 ) id AA212125613; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 08:53:33 -0800 X-Sender: graham@128.95.42.3 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 08:53:39 -0800 To: Jim Arnold <74133.1765@compuserve.com> From: graham@ee.washington.edu (Stephen Graham) Subject: Re: Stacking Cc: Europa LIst Status: O Content-Length: 1287 At 2:19 AM 27/3/96, Jim Arnold wrote: > 1) 3-3-2 stacking >is an ahistorical restriction, and 2) in response to objections that increased >stacking would favor the attacker, that the Germans can use lots of help in FOF >(and elsewhere). Compare your best German results in FOF with a map of the >campaign. Just look at it. Is changing a system mechanic the best way to solve the problem in FoF? Or would it create problems in other games? It would unbalance Fire in the East in favor of the Germans, simply because more Soviet stacks could be overrun. If the Soviet attrition rate goes up, they bleed out before reinforcements let them build a new and stable defense line. Similarly, the German task in Second Front gets much harder. The problem with FoF is that very few French players will react as badly as the French did historically. The French player knows where all the Germans are, knows what tactics will work to stop a panzer attack, and has complete knowledge of how good his own troops are. Of course, we could fix this by: 1. The French player gets 45 minutes to move all forces. 2. At the start of the French turn, the German player will hit the French player on the head with a baseball bat. --- Stephen Graham graham@ee.washington.edu graham@cs.washington.edu From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Mar 27 18:18:02 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA27902; Wed, 27 Mar 96 18:18:01 +0100 Received: from post.QueensU.CA (root@knot.QueensU.CA [130.15.126.54]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id SAA01562 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 18:16:46 +0100 (MET) Received: from mast.QueensU.CA (MAST.QueensU.CA [130.15.100.1]) by post.QueensU.CA (8.6.12/8.6.10+ASH) with SMTP id MAA18799 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 12:16:30 -0500 Received: from hilda.mast.QueensU.CA by mast.QueensU.CA (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA02461; Wed, 27 Mar 96 12:09:18 EST Received: by hilda.mast.QueensU.CA (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA00790; Wed, 27 Mar 96 12:08:21 EST From: pardue@hilda.mast.QueensU.CA (Keith Pardue) Message-Id: <9603271708.AA00790@hilda.mast.QueensU.CA> Subject: Order Police To: europa@lysator.liu.se Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 12:08:20 -0500 (EST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL13] Content-Type: text Status: O Content-Length: 4976 Hi All, This note is a follow-up to John Astell's lengthy and interesting post on the various German military and paramilitary units during WWII. The main Europa content of what follows has to do with what colour various German units should be printed in. > 2.1.4 The "SS-Police" in Europa represent the German national police > forces, national security forces, and SS security forces. Actually, the German national police forces were not part of the SS. Himmler was chief of German police after 1936, but in a strictly speaking separate capacity from his role as Reichsfuhrer SS. The men in the German police units were not selected for ideological reasons. Many were, well, policemen. Many had been socialists. Many were hoping to avoid military service and stay near their homes; joining the police exempted them from the draft early in the war. (My source for the above and everything else that is not purely opinion on my part is Christoper Browning's excellent monograph "Ordinary Men." This book is probably the best piece of academic writing that I've run across. I highly reccomend it not only to those interested in the moral ramifications of the Second World War, but to those who do any sort of academic writing. The writing is careful, clear, concise, intelligent, and devastating. Chapter 2 is most relevant to this post, with chapters 3,4 and 5 also being slightly relevant. He gives references which seem to have more detailed OB information in the footnotes. All of these sources are in German.) The Order Police numbered 131,000 in September 1939. There was some attempt to absorb them into the Army. The compromise was that the army was allowed to from a division, the Polizei division, out of the best Order Police units. This division was an army division and not with the SS until 1942, when it became the 4th SS-Polizei Grenadier Division. In return for giving up these 16,000 men to the army, the Order Police were allowed to recruit heavily, mostly from those who were not of draft age, and reached a size of 244,500 by mid 1940. The main duties of the Order police were garrison and deportation. When the Holocaust began, their duties included transportation of various victims, mostly Jews, to the death camps and also on-site massacres, mostly in Poland. But, they were also attached to Einsatzgruppen and assisted massacres in the Soviet Union. During military crises, such as during the winter of 1941, Order Police units also fought at the front. I presume that they are represented (slightly inaccurately) as SS police units in Europa. (They are definitely not security units.) >Due to the > intense interest the Nazis had in domestic security (in order to stay in > power), the national police/security forces and the political SS security > forces were intertwined, with the SS in control. By mid war, the SS took > outright and official control of all these forces. Germany's SS-Pol police > regiments were special militarized police regiments used in conquered > territories. The Polizei Division was a regular infantry (later > panzergrenadier) div recruited from policemen -- it technically was not > part of the SS (although intimately connected with it) until the police > came under the SS, at which time it became part of the Waffen SS (not > SS-Police). The SS-Police organized a motley and horrifying collection of > scum SS-Police anti-partisan units (mainly in the USSR) -- some of which > were so inhuman that the Germans themselves disbanded them, appalled by > their brutality and crimes. To the best of my knowledge, the Germans were never appalled by the brutality and crimes of German units, as Germany had a historic mission to carry out these brutal crimes. So, are the units that you are refering to, John, non-German units? There are many references to Germans, including those in involved with mass murder, being appalled by those non-Germans whom they recruited to carry out their dirty deeds. It seems to me that there are two reasons for this. The first is transference of guilt; whereas Germans are carrying out a historic mission, they are not guilty of murder while others murder only for the lowest of reasons. The second is that the Germans felt that those whom they had recruited came from barabaric races, such as Russians, Ukranians and their allies, the Romanians. Thus, these people murder for fun and in a highly non-Germanic fashion, reinforcing their basic barbarism. I reccomend either "Ordinary Men" or Bartov's "Hitler's Army" as an antedote to these Germans noble self-image. In closing, my information is midwar. I don't know what happened to the Order Police administratively after that. John suggests that they came under direct SS control, which is reasonable. But, I'd like to look in Hilberg's "The Destruction of the European Jews," which is the big book on the administrative apparatus of the Holocaust. Do you have any references, John? Best Wishes, Keith Pardue From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Mar 27 18:27:44 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA28046; Wed, 27 Mar 96 18:27:43 +0100 Received: from crash.cts.com (root@crash.cts.com [192.188.72.17]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id SAA01829 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 18:26:57 +0100 (MET) Received: from fhi by crash.cts.com with uucp (Smail3.1.29.1 #5) id m0u1yzk-0000bvC; Wed, 27 Mar 96 09:26 PST Received: from notes.san.fhi.com by fhboot1.san.fhi.com with smtp (Smail3.1.28.1 #4) id m0u1yfc-0000q6C; Wed, 27 Mar 96 09:06 PST Received: by notes.san.fhi.com (IBM OS/2 SENDMAIL VERSION 1.3.2)/1.0) id AA3691; Wed, 27 Mar 96 09:05:49 -0800 Message-Id: <9603271705.AA3691@notes.san.fhi.com> Received: from Forte with "Lotus Notes Mail Gateway for SMTP" id 949B12324461A51E882562FA00578FF7; Wed, 27 Mar 96 09:05:48 To: europa From: Jay Steiger/Forte Date: 27 Mar 96 9:01:43 PS Subject: WWI: The First Afrika Corps Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain Status: O Content-Length: 1912 Patrick Haugh said... >Let me add my vote for a revision of "Africa Orientale" as a GRD >project. I would push the start date back to 1936 and include the invasion of >Abyssinia as part of the game, with a link-up to the WitD maps for GE. Right On!!! Excactly what I have been wanting to hear! Please send endorsments to Winston Hamilton so he knows I am not the only one who wants the 1940-41 campaign and the 1935-36 Ethiopian campaign as one game. also said... >...is there any interest in GRD doing...the 1914-1918 war in East Africa? I have spoken to Eric Pierce who is running the show in the Great War Project along with Arthur Goodwin. Regarding this campaign he said that it is a fascinating one, and he and Arthur have done the ob and map research, however it won't really work as a game. The reason for this is that at Europa scale, you start with a German colonial brigade - unsupported, and by the end of the game you have a commando battalion being chased by several South African and Indian divisions. The amazing ability of von Lettow to slap the British and then dissapear into the jungle would be very hard to simulate through Europa. Even if the game was converted to a Narvik style company/battalion level fight, it is still largely a guerrilla conflict, not one of major set piece battles (Tanga excepted). I can give you a rundown on where the Great War series stands as of now. 1) March to Victory: France and N. Italy Aug 1914 to Oct 1916 2) Over There: France and N. Italy Nov 1916 to ??? (Fuller's plan 1919 will be an option) 3) Bloody Eagles: E. Prussia and Russia from Aug 1914 to the end. 4) Balkan Web: Serbia, Greece, Gallipoli, and Palestine Aug 1914 to the end. 5) River of Death: Mesopotamia, Caucus, and Persia Aug (Nov?)1914 to the end. It will be an excellent series and a great addition to GR/D and Europa. Jay Steiger San Diego, CA From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Mar 27 18:44:04 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA28237; Wed, 27 Mar 96 18:44:03 +0100 Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se (godot.lysator.liu.se [130.236.254.154]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id RAA00391 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 17:46:05 +0100 (MET) From: Italorican@aol.com Received: from emout09.mail.aol.com (emout09.mx.aol.com [198.81.11.24]) by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id RAA09348 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 17:43:40 +0100 (MET) Received: by emout09.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id LAA02161; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 11:40:35 -0500 Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 11:40:35 -0500 Message-Id: <960327114035_363435018@emout09.mail.aol.com> To: bradbury@travel1.travel-net.com, europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: More on Sacked Officers Status: O Content-Length: 825 In a message dated 96-03-26 20:05:04 EST, you write: > >More on sacked British officers. I believe Chink Dorman-Smith was sacked >shortly after Monty arrived in the desert in Aug '42 - there are many >unflattering comments regarding Dorman-Smith in Monty' official biography - >one staff officer described him as "He really was as near being a lunatic as >you can get". This was particularly in reference to the use of brigade >groups in the post Gazala period. > > That was Dorman-Smith's first sacking, part of the so-called Cairo Massacre that brought down Auchinlek and ultimately his staff. But the incident I refer to happened during the Italian campaign, after Dorman-Smith got a brigade again, and then was sacked again. So if any one has details on that second incident, I'd like to see them. Antonio Lauria From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Mar 27 20:23:56 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA29254; Wed, 27 Mar 96 20:23:55 +0100 Received: from smtp4.aw.com (smtp4.aw.com [192.207.117.64]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id UAA05068 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 20:22:29 +0100 (MET) Received: from East-Message_Server by smtp4.aw.com with Novell_GroupWise; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 17:18:15 -0500 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1 Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 18:02:12 -0500 From: Ray Kanarr To: europa@lysator.liu.se, abcclibr@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu Subject: Re: My $.0002 on More Stacking Status: O Content-Length: 3657 On 3/25/96, Alan Conrad stated: >by '43 had division attack frontage of as little as one >kilometer. So frontage wise one can fit at least 60 REs in a >hex. That the defense never had frontage that dense is >something we can try to investigate. Now it is true most >attacks were not 20 divisions strong in one hex point, but >there were some that were not that far off. So the implication is that 5-6 corps [2 armies] attacked on a 16-mile frontage. Please give doctrinal or even anecdotal citations to back this assertion. >Should not construction units building an airfield behind >the line be above stacking limits? How about police units >and AA units. If units are 'behind the lines' then they should be allowed to overstack, but contribute nothing to the offense/ defense, and suffer all negative effects of combat, since such negative effects indicate some enemy units at least marauding into the hex, and these units are not prepared for combat, but doing their other duties. If they do contribute their factors to attack/defense, then they are perforce 'on the line, and count against stacking. Seems simple enough to me. >One thing to keep in mind that the Corps markers are just >that, markers for ease of play, and have nothing to do with >actual corps HQs. Secondly when we look at history it is >hard to get a good handle on this since most books (and >games too) do not include sub division units so it is hard >to know how many of them, were doing what, where, at >any time. Corps markers can represent anything they are said to represent, as long as there are valid rules backing up that representation. Yes, we might not know exactly what subdivisional units XXX corps had on July 15th, 1942, but we know beyond a shadow of a doubt what the TO&E said they should have, which is partially what Europa is based on, not day-to-day OBs for every force for the entire war. >Why can one put 3 REs as regiments in the line but not as >divisions? I can not see any logical reason with respect to >unit frontage. It would seem likely to me that there is some connection here with doctrinal directives about corps TO&Es [3 divs IS the basic textbook definition of a corps] and frontages [as in: was Europa originally developed from information indicating that the 'average' corps frontage was 16 miles, leading to the game hex scale and original stacking?]. >Standard Russian doctrine '43 on, was to have infantry >divisions open the attack and have the armor right behind >to go through the holes. Now any Europa Russian knows >that this doctrine is wrong. With infantry divisions in the >line they can not get enough attack factors in a hex to >make any kind of attack. Standard doctrine for anyone means absolutely nothing unless you make adjustments in order to make an apples to apples comparison. It was not standard doctrine for the Soviets to leave their armor 16 miles behind the front lines for two weeks, so therefore to make an accurate comparison, you need to adjust the concepts in the doctrine to compare with the Europa time/distance scale, which is an objective, rather than subjective, comparison. In these terms, it makes perfect sense that the armor is right up there with the infantry in the attack. And beside which, to cite one example, look at Zhukov's attack on the Oder, 4/16/45. He puts the Tank Armies up on the line, in addition to the infantry, and chaos reigns. >The Old DNO, memory tells me, just used a number for >REs to a hex. If memory serves [and it sometimes doesn't], it also had limitations on how many divisional sized units could be in a hex. Ray From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Mar 27 20:28:29 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA29305; Wed, 27 Mar 96 20:28:28 +0100 Received: from hsrnfs-101.mayo.edu (hsrnfs-101.mayo.edu [129.176.101.4]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id UAA05167 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 20:28:06 +0100 (MET) Received: from tweedy.Mayo.edu (tweedy.mayo.edu [129.176.132.22]) by hsrnfs-101.mayo.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id NAA11615 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 13:27:11 -0600 Received: by tweedy.Mayo.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id NAA26063; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 13:27:11 -0600 Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 13:27:11 -0600 From: barry@Mayo.edu (Jon Barry) Message-Id: <199603271927.NAA26063@tweedy.Mayo.edu> To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: War in the Desert X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 263 Ok, nobody has said any thing for a while and it's late March - is Europa-boss listening and can we get an update on the progress of "War in the Desert" and the "First to Fight" reprint? Not whining or hassling just wondering. :) thanks, jon barry.jon@mayo.edu From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Mar 27 20:58:24 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA29652; Wed, 27 Mar 96 20:58:23 +0100 Received: from crash.cts.com (root@crash.cts.com [192.188.72.17]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id UAA05876 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 20:56:57 +0100 (MET) Received: from fhi by crash.cts.com with uucp (Smail3.1.29.1 #5) id m0u21Ku-0000akC; Wed, 27 Mar 96 11:56 PST Received: from notes.san.fhi.com by fhboot1.san.fhi.com with smtp (Smail3.1.28.1 #4) id m0u217J-0000msC; Wed, 27 Mar 96 11:42 PST Received: by notes.san.fhi.com (IBM OS/2 SENDMAIL VERSION 1.3.2)/1.0) id AA3713; Wed, 27 Mar 96 11:42:35 -0800 Message-Id: <9603271942.AA3713@notes.san.fhi.com> Received: from Forte with "Lotus Notes Mail Gateway for SMTP" id A7C3DD21BEED7131882562FA006A6A5B; Wed, 27 Mar 96 11:42:34 To: europa From: Jay Steiger/Forte Date: 27 Mar 96 11:39:24 PS Subject: Origins Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain Status: O Content-Length: 1512 Greetings all, As you may or may not know, Europa does not seem to ever win CSR awards at Origins. Frank Watson won a few years back for "Enter Rommel" from TEM, otherwise Europa is consistantly ignored. Now, that said, let me remind you all that you have to VOTE for a game for that game to win. I voted for AWW because I thought it was a damn fine game. It didn't win. I also think FWTBT is an excellent game. I plan to vote for it this year, and I urge all of you to do so as well. I have heard that very few votes were recieved last year in any category. I think Europa actually has a fairly substantial membership (as far as the game world goes) and if a mass of Europa players voted, I think this game would win. I also think that John Astell should be nominated for a Clausewitz Award and TEM should win in the best Amature Wargame Magazine category. There are also slots available for best wargme articl if any would care to pick a good one from TEM. Europa is the oldest system still being developed and played. It even outranks the ubiquitous Dungeons and Dragons. It really deserves an award, and so does it's co-founder. I am not sure wether FWTBT should be nominated in best pre WWII or best WWII category, but if you are interested in helping this game win, we should take a vote and go with the decision. Let's show the gaming world and the industry that Europa is not a dinosaur. Let's give Europa a deserved win! My humble opinion, Jay Steiger San Diego, CA From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Mar 27 21:48:57 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA00225; Wed, 27 Mar 96 21:48:56 +0100 Received: from hahp9k.harte-lyne.ca (hahp9k.harte-lyne.ca [205.206.207.101]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id VAA06901 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 21:46:46 +0100 (MET) Received: from hal-ham-g01-u01 (i486nt01.harte-lyne.ca) by hahp9k.harte-lyne.ca with SMTP (1.39.111.2/16.2) id AA299139689; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 15:48:09 -0500 Message-Id: <3159AAF0.7092@harte-lyne.ca> Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 15:54:08 -0500 From: "James B. Byrne" Organization: Harte & Lyne Limited X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (WinNT; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: Ray Kanarr Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se, abcclibr@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu Subject: Re: My $.0002 on More Stacking References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Status: O Content-Length: 3909 Ray Kanarr wrote: On 3/25/96, Alan Conrad stated: >by '43 had division attack frontage of as little as one >kilometer. So frontage wise one can fit at least 60 REs in a >hex. That the defense never had frontage that dense is >something we can try to investigate. Of course, by 1943, depending on whose army we're talking about, a division could be as small as 2000-3000 effectives including support troops. Various sources that I have read over the years have lead me to the conclusion that for an 'average' western style division (which means a total strength of ~12,000 and a rifle strength of 5-6000); an attack frontage of about 3 Km was normal and a defence frontage of 9-10 Km usual. Increasing the density beyound this for offensive operations either manifested itself in greater depth, or terrible traffic control problems, or both. Now as Europa has a nominal hex scale of 1 hex = 16 miles or 25 Km then each edge of a hex size equals 12km. This is about the nominal defence frontage of one full strength western style division. It also equals the attack frontage for four full strength divisions. Now of course, in WWII, a division didn't put everything that it had in the shop window so to speak. A 12,000 man strong division, attacking on a 3 Km front would have an expected depth of deployment of between 7 and 12 Km, with the rear echelon dictated by the state of the road net and the caliber of divisional artillery assets. On the Defensive, it would occupy a about 3/4 of the offensive depth or 6 to 8 Km. Additional divisions would be deployed in depth or held in reserve rather than used to re-inforce the front line. By my way of figuring this means that Europa should allow attacks of up to four 4 divisions across a single hex-side. It should also allow a deployment of up to 3 divisons (defense in depth) defending against an attack across a single hexside with an additional two divisions per additional hexside attacked. The issue of attachments to divisions is a subject for much argument, I personally do not feel comfortable with the idea that a division can adequately control a Regimental or Brigade sized ad hoc attachment on the offence. And while is was standard US policy to cross attach battalion strength augmentations to divisions on the offensive, most other nations did not as a mater of course. Artillery supplementation of the offence was normally provided by corps and army level assets for western divisions. Indeed, sometimes US Inf divisions had control of their divarty placed directly in the hands of the corps HQ. The issue of command control needs to be handled too. My own prefrence based on space and command span is that each hexside attacked would permit the use of one corps sized organization, which would probably consist of 2-4 full sized standard divisions, 1-2 brigade sized attachments, and 4-8 battalion sized assets, mainly arty. The total corps span of command should hover somewhere around seven units with the maximum being 9 and the minimum being 5. Stacking in excess of these limits would be permitted but ignored for all purposes except perhaps movement. My reading is that 3-3-2 is a fair approximation of the real capabilities for the scale of units and hexes that we are using in Europa. But this is only true for organizations which meet the nominal standard of ~12000 total / 6000 infantry. 'Divisional' organizations which had nominal strengths of ~9000/4000 or less should be allowed an additional 1 unit per hexside attacked. Anything less than ~6000 should be treated as a brigade sized unit. So long as we work on an area type (hex based) of combat system instead of a boundry type (hexside) this is probably the best approximation that we can get. -- James B. Byrne mailto:byrnejb@harte-lyne.ca Harte & Lyne Limited http://www.harte-lyne.ca Hamilton, Ontario 905-561-1241 From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Mar 27 22:36:14 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA00672; Wed, 27 Mar 96 22:36:13 +0100 Received: from prague.crossover.com (root@prague.crossover.com [204.217.246.5]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA08047 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 22:32:17 +0100 (MET) Received: from [205.161.32.192] (jastell.tiac.net [205.161.32.192]) by prague.crossover.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id PAA11233 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 15:23:38 -0500 X-Sender: jastell@post.crossover.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 16:31:01 -0400 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) Subject: Re: Order Police Status: O Content-Length: 3846 Keith Pardue wrote: > > This note is a follow-up to John Astell's ... post: >> 2.1.4 The "SS-Police" in Europa represent the German national police >> forces, national security forces, and SS security forces. > > Actually, the German national police forces were not part of >the SS. Himmler was chief of German police after 1936, but in a >strictly speaking separate capacity from his role as Reichsfuhrer SS.... This is, to put it mildly, somewhat misleading. Single-party totalitarian states (be they fascist or communist) almost always have state and party functions intertwined, with the party running everything government-related either directly or behind the scenes. Heinrich Himmler was the head of the SS (Reichsfuehrer-SS), and the SS handle internal security within the Nazi Party. After the Nazis gained control of Germany, Himmler and therefore the SS acquired control of the Gestapo (the Secret State Police, a governmental, not party, organization), thereby intertwining party and state internal security. In 1936, Himmler and therefore the SS acquired control of the entire police forces of Germany. "In his office, which Himmler held from June 1936, the RF-SS succeeded in creating a closely knit national police force in accord with the principles of the SS" (referece #1). At this time, the Nazi Party Security Service and the German national Security Police (which included the Gestapo) were grouped together under the Central Security Department (RSHA). The SS divided Germany into SS districts (have the same borders as, but separate from, the Wehrkreise). Each district has a Higher SS and Police Commander (HSSPF). The HSSPF was the representative of the RF-SS and controlled all SS and police units in the districts, except those which were subordinated to the Army (OKH) or were part of the Waffen-SS. As you can see, the SS and the German police were intertwined at the top (Himmler as Reichsfuehrer-SS, a party post, and as Chief of the German Police, a governmental post), with SS and police elements intertwined at various levels, with the SS in charge (via the HSSPF and RSHA). Again to put it mildly, the SS did not run the police for Germany's benefit, but for the SS's and Nazi Party's benefit. In 1943, Himmler gained further control when he and thus the SS took control of both the German and Prussian Ministries of the Interior. (Prussia was by far the largest "province" in Germany and thus very important in itself.) The Ministries of the Interior controlled the police and other civil services in Germany. (Before 1943, Himmler as Chief of the German Police nominally reported to the Minister of the Interior.) German Order Police (Ordnungspolizei) formed police regiments and battalions for service outside Germany. In 1943 (as Himmler increased his power), these units were redesigned from "Police Regiment" (or btl) to "SS Police Regiment" (or btl) (reference #2). This redesignation did not mean that the units changed their function or who they reported to -- it signifies that Himmler was simply visibly claiming the units he had long controlled. References: #1 "Hitler's Elite Guards: Waffen SS, Parachutists, U-Boats," ed. by W. Victor Madej. Despite its garish title, this is not a pro-Nazi reference but a collected of wartime US intelligence reports (and supposedly other sources) on Germany. The introductory section on the SS is a good overview of the entire SS and not just the Waffen-SS. #2 "Verbaende und Truppen der deutschen Wehrmacht und Waffen-SS im Zweiten Weltkrieg 1939-1945" (Units and Troops of the German Armed Forces and Waffen-SS in the Second World War 1939-1945), vol. 1, Georg Tessin. Volume 1 is the overview volume and includes various supplemental information on the German police units that took the field. (Hint: Look for it in the SS overview.) From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Mar 27 22:41:19 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA00726; Wed, 27 Mar 96 22:41:18 +0100 Received: from prague.crossover.com (root@prague.crossover.com [204.217.246.5]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA08171 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 22:38:49 +0100 (MET) Received: from [205.161.32.192] (jastell.tiac.net [205.161.32.192]) by prague.crossover.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id PAA11246 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 15:30:13 -0500 X-Sender: jastell@post.crossover.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 16:37:38 -0400 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) Subject: Re: War in the Desert Status: O Content-Length: 747 >Ok, nobody has said any thing for a while and it's late March - is >Europa-boss listening and can we get an update on the progress >of "War in the Desert" and the "First to Fight" reprint? Not >whining or hassling just wondering. :) WITD: I'm not sure Europa-boss (Winston) monitors every post here, but I'll give it a try: Maps: Finalized, in art production, some ready for or already at the printers. Counters: Finalized, in production and/or at the printers. OBs: In proof reading (except for 1-2 pages on Spanish Torch, which are being finalized this week). Rules and Charts: Under final development and to go to proofing ASAP. I don't know the turn-around time for the printers, but we're almost there. FTF Reprint: Don't know. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Mar 28 00:07:45 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA01406; Thu, 28 Mar 96 00:07:44 +0100 Received: from iac.iac.org.nz ([192.124.160.153]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id AAA16261 for ; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 00:05:42 +0100 (MET) Received: from smtpgate.iac.org.nz by iac.iac.org.nz (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA02428; Thu, 28 Mar 96 10:31:10 NZS Message-Id: <9603272231.AA02428@iac.iac.org.nz> From: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (Public Affairs Officer) Date: Thu, 28 Mar 1996 10:29 GMT To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: U-Boats south of the border Status: O Content-Length: 935 The story about U-boats to Lake Titiaca sounds like a Robert Ludlum novel to me, you know the one I mean, The Marsupial Knish. He was a double agent for Iceland and Albania. She was Charles De Gaulle's dental hygienist. Together they uncovered a secret formula to turn the entire world into potato knish, hidden in the pouch of a kangaroo at the Berlin Zoo. But seriously, folks, German-South American relations will probably best be covered when GRD creates the counter sheets, maps, and rules for Latin America, to link Europa with the Pacific games. The game package will probably include rules for such events as the Chaco War, and hypothetical conflicts between various local powers, which would probably be good training tools to learn the Europa system, and provide a lot of what-ifs. David H. Lippman Public Affairs Officer US Naval Antarctic Support Unit Christchurch, New Zealand From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Mar 28 00:07:47 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA01411; Thu, 28 Mar 96 00:07:47 +0100 Received: from ns.rmc.com (ns.rmc.com [137.25.23.1]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id AAA16070 for ; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 00:01:32 +0100 (MET) Received: by ns.rmc.com (AIX 4.1/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA31490; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 17:50:30 -0500 Received: from internet.rmc.com(137.25.3.24) by ns.rmc.com via smap (V1.3) id sma014806; Wed Mar 27 17:50:04 1996 Received: from lanmail.rmc.com by internet.rmc.com (AIX 4.1/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA07590; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 18:01:50 -0500 Received: by LANMAIL.RMC.COM; Wed, 27 Mar 96 18:01:21 EST Date: Wed, 27 Mar 96 18:01:41 EST Message-Id: X-Priority: 3 (Normal) To: From: "Frank E. Watson" Subject: re:Re: Stacking Status: O Content-Length: 4011 Well, I guess it's my fault for starting all this in Battle for Rome. I'll limit my pot-stirring to my original problem with DIADEM. The 3-3-2 stacking limits creates a slight problem in recreating the initial DIADEM attacks. What makes it really messy is the 2-2-1 mountain stacking applying for attacks into mountain hexes. That gave the Allies only 6 divisions to legally attack with. They used a lot more than this. Don't get me wrong, the 2-2-1 rule seems to make a lot of sense to me intuitively, but it just didn't seem to apply May I 44. IF I remember correctly, you could almost do DIADEM the "right" way by restricting the attack to 2-2-1 mountain stacking per hexSIDE, allowing the French CEF and the British Corps to both attack out of the same hex. This amounted to 8 XXs attacking. So did forgetting the rule about 2-2-1 stacking attacking into a mountain hex. If you allowed BOTH of these heresies you could pull the thing off "as was." While struggling with the whole thing, I also thought things like "if Arthur had just bent the coast line out into that next hex there I wouldn't have these problems." But I actually like the coastline like it is. It also seemed a little irritating that I could legally stack an 8-7-8 Art [XX] but not fire it into the mountain hex, but that is minor. The thing that repeatedly struck me about the whole thing was that these two super-stack attacks took a LOT of planning and organization to pull off. The traffic jams then occurred in the exploitation of the success, not in the attacks themselves. JMA wrote: > 3) Show that super-stacked units are all indeed > stacking. Again, I suspect you'll find that some > units in super-stacked attacks are just holding the > flanks for the attack and not actually attacking. Good point, John. I suspected so to in DIADEM, but when I looked deep, I couldn't translate it like that. The Polish attack on Cassino fits 2-2-1 very nicely but not the British / French / American attacks along the rest of the line. I think the Canadians, 3rd Alg XX and 78 Br XX were in reserve, everybody else was fighting, taking casualties, causing casualties, and advancing. (From memory, it's been a quite a few months now.) It did strike me that the Polish Corps are the only attacking units IN a mountain hex in this attack. I don't think a unit has to be "actually attacking" historically to contribute its attack strength to a Europa attack. If it is holding the flanks for the units attacking from its hex then it is contributing to the attack - the attacking units don't have to detach units to look after their flanks, they can act more boldly, etc. This logic has to hold to recreate MANY Europa level attacks in a rational manner. Consider the following situation (I can't pin it to a particular attack - I'm still in my office - but I've run across it many times doing EaH's for TEM.): Several units are in a hex, but historically only 1 (or 2) actually attack. The Europa re-creation of this event could either be: A) "Gee, I think I'll attack at 1.5:1 with only 1 XX instead of 4:1 with all of them." B) An attack at 5:1 with all units, historically justifying the contribution of the other units in the hex as "available if needed," "guarding flanks," etc. I think that B is what actually happens in most Europa games, not A. (Granted A does protect against AR results - now there's a cautious player!) Now that I think of it, I think that's the way I worked out a historical version of Surprise turn in WD. 7th Arm XX attacks Italians in camps, even though in reality they were sitting over the horizon and letting the Indians and RTR do the work. In a Europa as History analogy, 7th Armored pretty much has to help nail the poor Libyans. Well, with totally unlimited stacking, totally unlimited movement rates, and a completely random CRT (no odds calculations or drms) I could do Europa as History perfect every time. Just wouldn't make a very fun game. Frank From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Mar 28 00:23:33 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA01498; Thu, 28 Mar 96 00:23:32 +0100 Received: from smtp4.aw.com (smtp4.aw.com [192.207.117.64]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id AAA16612 for ; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 00:20:09 +0100 (MET) Received: from East-Message_Server by smtp4.aw.com with Novell_GroupWise; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 15:40:39 -0500 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1 Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 16:24:35 -0500 From: Ray Kanarr To: pardue@hilda.mast.queensu.ca, europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: Order Police Status: O Content-Length: 2309 To add/amplify to Keith Pardue's post of 3/27/96: The Ordnungspolizei [Order Police, or Orpo], were the uniformed 'cops on the beat', who were used to keep civil order, according to Rupert Butler's *An Illustrated History of the Gestapo*. They also contributed members to the Einsatzgruppen murderers, as did the SS, Gestapo, auxiliary police, Kripo, and SD. The Kriminal Polizei [Criminal Police, or Kripo] were what we would call the detective, or plainclothes, level of police. Germany had a bewildering number of police organizations, including: waterway police, fire police, factory police, railway police, agricultural police, Orpo, Kripo, Sipo [Sicherheits Polizei, or Security Police], counter-espionage police [Abwehrpolizei, separate from the Abwehr, the army counterintelligence corps], the political police [Staatspolizei, or Stapo], the Geheime Staatspolizei [Gestapo, which incorporated some of the earlier-mentioned police arms], the SD [Sicherheitsdienst, or Security Service, the SS/Nazi police, which eventually incorporated the Gestapo in the RSHA, Reichssicherheitshauptamt, the Reich Security Main Office, which also became at least the coordinating organization for most other nonmilitary police and intelligence services], postal police, each of the armed services had their own military police [feldpolizei], and the army, additionally, had the Geheime Feldpolizei [Secret military police]. A lesser-known fact is that it was Goring, not Himmler, who formed the Gestapo. Goring became the Prussian Police President, a fairly prestigious and wide-ranging job on the Nazi assumption of power; Himmler was only the Bavarian Police President, although he used this as a springboard to greater and finally total police control in Germany, and eventual control of the Gestapo. Since Himmler was in control of all police activities by 1939, as well as chief of the SS, and operational control in the field of the SS units came under the jurisdiction of the army anyhow [at least until 7/44], it doesn't seem to make much difference whether the Polizei division is shown in Feldgrau or Black colors in Europa. >So, are the units that you are refering to, John, >non-German units? Oskar Dirlewanger's unit, at least, was comprised of German nationals, many of whom were convicts. Ray From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Mar 28 00:36:07 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA01639; Thu, 28 Mar 96 00:36:06 +0100 Received: from smtp4.aw.com (smtp4.aw.com [192.207.117.64]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id AAA16891 for ; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 00:34:30 +0100 (MET) Received: from East-Message_Server by smtp4.aw.com with Novell_GroupWise; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 15:52:09 -0500 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1 Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 16:36:00 -0500 From: Ray Kanarr To: europa@lysator.liu.se, Jay_Steiger/Forte.FORTE@notes.san.fhi.com Subject: Re: Origins Status: O Content-Length: 117 Great idea Jay! It would be good if you could send out the procedure for voting, and any necessary addresses. Ray From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Mar 28 00:55:00 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA01748; Thu, 28 Mar 96 00:54:59 +0100 Received: from smtp4.aw.com (smtp4.aw.com [192.207.117.64]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id AAA17239 for ; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 00:53:42 +0100 (MET) Received: from East-Message_Server by smtp4.aw.com with Novell_GroupWise; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 16:21:28 -0500 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1 Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 17:05:07 -0500 From: Ray Kanarr To: byrnejb@harte-lyne.ca Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se, abcclibr@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu Subject: Re: My $.0002 on More Stacking Status: O Content-Length: 718 Jim, Much thanks for a well-reasoned and detailed response. Lack of time presently prevents much additional discussion on my part today, but I did want to ask, based on your statement: >But this is only true for organizations which meet the >nominal standard of ~12000 total / 6000 infantry. >'Divisional' organizations which had nominal strengths of >~9000/4000 or less should be allowed an additional 1 unit >per hexside attacked. Didn't armies whose organizations fit this mold generally have this structure because of concomitant command and control concerns [such alliteration!]? Therefore, the issue is raised as to whether or not they SHOULD be allowed to 'control' additional units in the hex. Ray From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Mar 28 01:04:04 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA01825; Thu, 28 Mar 96 01:04:02 +0100 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id BAA17474 for ; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 01:03:19 +0100 (MET) From: m.royer3@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA245600619; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 23:50:20 GMT Message-Id: <199603272350.AA245600619@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Wed, 27 Mar 96 23:50:19 UTC 0000 ( from inet# ; Wed, 27 Mar 96 23:47:53 UTC 0000) Date: Wed, 27 Mar 96 23:52:00 UTC 0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: M.ROYER3 X-Genie-Qk-Id: 4761893 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 236702 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: Sino-Japanese Playtest Status: O Content-Length: 2817 Sino-Japanese Playtest Oct II 37 Japanese Player Turn Having outdistanced their supply wagons in the north, the Japanese North China Area Army pauses for a brief respite to take a needed breather and allow their logistics system to catch up. Only minor attacks are conducted along the southward going rail lines leaving Japanese forces poised along the Hoto and Hwang (Yellow) Rivers facing significant Chinese contingents in the partial hex cities of Shihkiachuang (in Hopei Province) and Tsinan (in Shantung Province). In Shansi province, Japanese brigades of the Kwantung Army move deep into the province, unopposed by Chinese forces since the Communist 115th division evacuated to form a guerilla base. Meanwhile, the Kwantung Army, led by the Senda Mechanized Division, strikes across southern Suiyuan in Inner Mongolia pushing towards the terminus of the Peiping-Suiyuan Railway. In Chahar (also an Inner Mongolian province) the Japanese have formed the Southern Chahar Committee, a puppet government charged with maintaining order in the province. The Mongolian Prince Teh proclaims that soon the state of Mengchukuo can be formed liberating the oppressed Inner Mongolian region from Chinese rule. In Shanghai, Japanese attack supply stockpiles are dwindling. Due to the limited supply situation, Japanese commanders chose to make a single "safe" attack, rather than two risky attacks, thereby capturing the fifth of seven city hexes. The attack resulted in a HX, causing the Japanese to cadre the 3rd division. The naval guns of the Japanese 3rd fleet have thus far been decisive in the Shanghai battle. Oct II 37 Chinese Player Turn The Chinese use the Japanese pause in the north to bolster their defensive lines. Construction on several forts is begun along the Hwang Ho (Yellow River) at the strategic crossing of the PinghanRailway. In Shansi, reinforcements and supplies are shipped by river transport along the Fen Ho to the provincial capitol of Taiyuan in hopes of blocking the Japanese thrust into the region. Things are beginning to become unhinged for the Nationalists in Shanghai. Only two hexes of the city remain Chinese controlled and the Japanese are edging them out of the city. The defensive lines around the city perimiter are bolstered in anticipation of the Japanese breakout towards the Nationalist capital at Nanking. Two guerilla bases have taken form in the north, a communist base in the mountains along the Hopei-Shansi border, and a nationalist base in the central hills of the Shantung peninsula. In both base regions, the number of sabotage attempts has risen dramatically, with Japanese held rail lines being the primary target. Several hits on the railway were scored by the communist base. As yet, no guerilla units have made an appearance. -Mark R. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Mar 28 01:09:58 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA01913; Thu, 28 Mar 96 01:09:57 +0100 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id BAA17577 for ; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 01:08:48 +0100 (MET) From: m.royer3@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA254450953; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 23:55:53 GMT Message-Id: <199603272355.AA254450953@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Wed, 27 Mar 96 23:55:53 UTC 0000 ( from inet00# ; Wed, 27 Mar 96 23:55:46 UTC 0000) Date: Wed, 27 Mar 96 23:52:00 UTC 0000 To: jay=5fsteiger/forte.forte%notes.san.fhi.com%inet#%forwarder@genie.com Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: M.ROYER3 X-Genie-Qk-Id: 9611437 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 824086 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: Origins Status: O Content-Length: 148 Reply: Item #3412173 from JAY_STEIGER/FORTE.FORTE@NOTES.SAN.FHI.COM@INET#on 96/03/27 at 15:20 Jay, How does one vote for CSR awards? -Mark R. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Mar 28 02:04:39 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA02305; Thu, 28 Mar 96 02:04:38 +0100 Received: from iac.iac.org.nz (iac.iac.org.nz [192.124.160.153]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id CAA18678 for ; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 02:03:21 +0100 (MET) Received: from smtpgate.iac.org.nz by iac.iac.org.nz (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA02820; Thu, 28 Mar 96 12:59:21 NZS Message-Id: <9603280059.AA02820@iac.iac.org.nz> From: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (Public Affairs Officer) Date: Thu, 28 Mar 1996 13:02 GMT To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: War in the Desert Status: O Content-Length: 227 Good news on War in the Desert. What's happening on new counters for Second Front? Best, David H. Lippman Public Affairs Officer US Naval Antarctic Support Unit Christchurch, New Zealand From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Mar 28 02:06:05 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA02335; Thu, 28 Mar 96 02:06:04 +0100 Received: from travel1.travel-net.com (root@travel1.travel-net.com [204.92.71.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id CAA18700 for ; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 02:05:17 +0100 (MET) From: bradbury@travel1.travel-net.com Received: from 204.92.71.2.travel-net.com (tv135.travel-net.com [205.150.57.135]) by travel1.travel-net.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id UAA23031 for ; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 20:11:20 -0500 Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 20:11:20 -0500 Message-Id: <199603280111.UAA23031@travel1.travel-net.com> X-Sender: bradbury@mail.travel-net.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Antwerp & SF Supply Status: O Content-Length: 1712 The following is based on my understanding of the SF supply rules - if my interpretation is incorrect, I would appreciate a correction. I understand SF Rule 12B4 to mean that an unlimited number of Allied units can be supplied via a Naval element through a functioning major or great port (given that the other elements of the supply line conform to the balance of Rule 12B). In other words, if the Allied player owns Le Havre as a functioning port, he could supply all land and air forces through this port (given the appropriate rail lines, etc). This to me seems unduly generous to the Allied player. Certainly much of the controversy regarding strategy between the U.S. and Britain in 1944 concerned the need for Anvil, with the Americans pushing and winning the case for the need to open Marseille. In the autumn of 1944, the need to open Antwerp led to the Canadian army being tied down opening the Scheldt. The importance of opening Antwerp is amply demonstrated by the fact that Monty even admitted that he had erred in not providing sufficient forces to open it earlier. I have experimented with restricting the Allies to trace 60 RE through a major port and 120 RE through a great port and further restricted them by reducing the supply capacity of all ports by RE per hit of damage. These changes have certainly focussed the attention of both sides on the ports and do give the Axis an additional incentive to garrison ports, even if they will eventually be cut off. I would like to hear if anyone has done similar experimentation, or can explain how the RAW lead to the historical emphasis placed by the Allies on the availability of both Antwerp and Marseille. Nigel Bradbury Ottawa, Ont. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Mar 28 03:35:02 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA03055; Thu, 28 Mar 96 03:35:01 +0100 Received: from hahp9k.harte-lyne.ca (hahp9k.harte-lyne.ca [205.206.207.101]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id DAA19951 for ; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 03:33:27 +0100 (MET) Received: from ham_hal_g02_u01 ([205.206.207.30]) by hahp9k.harte-lyne.ca with SMTP (1.39.111.2/16.2) id AA024910489; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 21:34:49 -0500 Message-Id: <3159F973.64D6@harte-lyne.ca> Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 21:29:07 -0500 From: "James B. Byrne" Organization: Harte & Lyne Limited X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (WinNT; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: Ray Kanarr Cc: byrnejb@hahp9k.harte-lyne.ca, europa@lysator.liu.se, abcclibr@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu Subject: Re: My $.0002 on More Stacking References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Status: O Content-Length: 1551 Ray Kanarr wrote: > > > >.... only true for organizations which meet the > >nominal standard of ~12000 total / 6000 infantry. > >'Divisional' organizations which had nominal strengths of > >~9000/4000 or less should be allowed an additional 1 unit > >per hexside attacked. > > Didn't armies whose organizations fit this mold generally have this > structure because of concomitant command and control concerns [such > alliteration!]? Therefore, the issue is raised as to whether or not > they SHOULD be allowed to 'control' additional units in the hex. > Generally, the smaller divisions were designed to provide more manoeuver and fire elements from a restricted manpower pool. They generally were defensive organisations which substitued firepower for manpower. Command and control were not really the issue. Because of their smaller size, they tended to be more brittle in combat, even on the defensive. Offensively, they had little weight as their supply of riflemen would be consumed rapidly and they lacked the organic reserves necessary to rotate frontline battalions while maintaining an offensive posture. They could cover the same frontage as a 'standard' division, but at a cost of reduced depth. I feel that the additional 'division' could have been adequately controlled by a corps level organisation and would be able to backstop the first three. -- James B. Byrne mailto:byrnejb@harte-lyne.ca Harte & Lyne Limited http://www.harte-lyne.ca Hamilton, Ontario 905-561-1241 From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Mar 28 04:07:49 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA03296; Thu, 28 Mar 96 04:07:48 +0100 Received: from iac.iac.org.nz (iac.iac.org.nz [192.124.160.153]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id EAA20719 for ; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 04:06:24 +0100 (MET) Received: from smtpgate.iac.org.nz by iac.iac.org.nz (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA03163; Thu, 28 Mar 96 15:02:23 NZS Message-Id: <9603280302.AA03163@iac.iac.org.nz> From: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (Public Affairs Officer) Date: Thu, 28 Mar 1996 15:03 GMT To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: More on Nazi decisions Status: O Content-Length: 6201 David Thornley put out a lot in a recent argument on Nazi leadership, such as it was, so I thought I'd comment. Len Deighton points out in "Blitzkrieg" that Hitler was in many ways the epitome of the common man. Most of Hitler's views as expressed in "Mein Kampf," are fairly common talk in any factory canteen in Europe, and probably some in the United States, particularly after WW1...a hatred of Communism and the Jews...a distrust of big business...whining about the collapse of morality and morals...and a conviction that the old warriors of the last war have been betrayed by present leadership. Nowhere in this or in the Nazi campaign, down to the present-day neo-Nazis, were specific proposals or plans to redress grievances, beyond strengthening the Aryan race, removing racial inferiors, setting up an authoritarian state, and rebuilding pride in Germany. Lacking a clearly defined program, the Nazis had a weak base for making decisions. Hitler himself avoided them, living at Berchtesgaden the life of a man who had won a gigantic lottery...sleeping until noon...enjoying the Alpine vistas...partying late at night with old cronies from the early days, endlessly reminiscing...watching the same movies (Hound of the Baskervilles) and listening to the same operettas (The Merry Widow) over and over again... and, most of all, issuing his ad hominem pronouncements on the world over the teacups to his courtiers and secretaries. The pithier apercus were recorded by Martin Bormann, and a good chunk of them vanished in the crash of a Luftwaffe transport plane in April 1945. Those that survived tell posterity that Red is the best color for political posters...hunting is green Freemasonry...if the Reich doubles the ration in Czechoslovakia, the whole nation will go Nazi...only the Greeks knew how to make a window...the Jews were perverting the culture of Lapland...all great American inventors were descendants of immigrants from Swabia...the father of Jesus was not Joseph but a German legionary in the Roman army...Eleanor Roosevelt was a mulatto...it would not be wise to name a battleship the Adolf Hitler...the future belonged to vegetarians...Napoleon should never have proclaimed himself emperor, as that made Beethoven change the dedication of his Third Symphony...and that Hitler's dearest wish was to wander Italy as an unknown painter. Such was the banality of evil. He repeated this stuff right up to the last day of his life, and eventually the courtiers were so exhausted they devised rotations to provide Hitler with a continuous audience while getting the work of the Reich Chancellor's office done. Nonethless, material like this was the basis of Hitler's decision. Albert Speer told interviewers that Hitler had a considerable "digest" of information, not enough to really know a subject, but enough to be dangerous. One writer, Joseph O'Donnell, has suggested that there was a touch of Walter Mitty about the Fuhrer, in that Hitler, a former lance-corporal, enjoyed pushing around gold-braided generals and admirals like they were lance-corporals, which is highly likely. Sir Hugh Trevor-Roper noted that for the last few years of the war, Hitler's round-the-clock company were military men and their conversation, the tedious trivialities of barracks and mess, "closed off" Hitler's mind. Alan Wykes was grimmer. He argued that the Fuhrer suffered from syphilis. Be that as it may, Hitler's decision-making was decreasingly based on reality as the war ground on, and there wasn't much to start with in the first place. Eliminating the Jews and the Bolsheviks was the be-all and end-all of his philosophy. How he went about it was through opportunism, time and again overriding his commanders on decisions like the attack on France, the declaration of war on the United States, and leaving the 6th Army to perish at Stalingrad. Through it all, he did show a curious consistency. His briefings of generals were always the same...he'd start off with how he formed the Nazi Party, created it into a perfect tool to lead the German people, and that the will would triumph over the brute forces of his enemies. It sometimes amazes me that people followed where he led. But it was vague enough such that the horrifying parts of it...mass murder, aggression, the police state...sounded like idle rhetoric or campaign slogans, not to be taken seriously. Hitler's paranoia was certainly massive. He hated all kinds of people, Jews, Freemasons, Slavs, generals, the German and Austrian monarchy, capitalists, art and architecture teachers, Churchill, Roosevelt, and some of his allies...ordering death sentences for Der Treue Heinrich Himmler and Hermann Goering at the end of the line. After the 1944 Bomb Plot, Hitler had a special hatred for those generals he associated with the Attentat. He delighted in watching the films, over and over again, of the bomb plotters being strangled with piano wire, and showed them to his courtiers, who were appalled. A few years ago, military historian John Keegan analyzed Hitler as one of his four "masks of command," the others being Alexander The Great as a heroic leader, the Duke of Wellington as an anti-hero, Ulysses S. Grant for unheroic leadership, and Adolf Hitler for false heroism. To be sure, Hitler avoided sharing the hardships of his soldiers. He didn't visit bombed areas of Berlin, Goebbels took on that task. Hitler shied from hospitals full of wounded soldiers. When his train was stopped next to another one full of wounded troops, Hitler had the curtain shut so as not to see the face of his war. He demanded an iron will and no retreat from his generals, but directed the war from the Berlin-Rastenburg-Berchtesgaden axis. In the end, he shot himself, but had his propaganda machine announce that he had fallen in battle in Berlin. There was nothing heroic about Hitler's end. It was perfectly squalid, befitting the man. David H. Lippman Public Affairs Officer US Naval Antarctic Support Unit Christchurch, New Zealand From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Mar 28 05:29:03 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA03842; Thu, 28 Mar 96 05:29:02 +0100 Received: from jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (civguy@jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us [192.217.238.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id FAA21793 for ; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 05:27:28 +0100 (MET) Received: (from civguy@localhost) by jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (8.6.10/8.6.9) id XAA06915; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 23:57:56 -0600 Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 23:57:56 -36000 From: Jason Long Subject: Re: Peaceful Russia Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: <199603260231.UAA27175@smtp.utexas.edu> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 119 Yes, all that I mentioned should be available to greater or lesser degrees by late spring '42, say around May. Jason From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Mar 28 05:49:20 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA03921; Thu, 28 Mar 96 05:49:19 +0100 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id FAA22050 for ; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 05:48:30 +0100 (MET) From: j.broshot@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA061387734; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 04:35:34 GMT Message-Id: <199603280435.AA061387734@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Thu, 28 Mar 96 04:35:34 UTC 0000 ( from INTERNET# ; Thu, 28 Mar 96 04:35:01 UTC 0000) Date: Thu, 28 Mar 96 04:42:00 UTC 0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: J.BROSHOT X-Genie-Qk-Id: 5832539 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 24090 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: my $0.02 worth (cont.) Status: O Content-Length: 3352 1. Dorman-Smith: Joslen lists Brig. E. E. Dorman-Smith as commander of 3 Inf Brig/1 Inf Div from 27 Apr 1944 to 14 Aug 1944; Dorman- Smith is NOT otherwise listed in any of indexes of any of the books that I have in my library on the Italian Campaign (of course some don't have indexes and Joslen's index covers only units, not commanders); there was also a brigadier in the Italian Campaign named Graham H.G. SMITH-DORRIEN who commanded 169 (London) Inf Brig/56 (London) Inf Div during the Gothic Line campaign and was killed in action 13 Sep 1944. Sources: Joslen ORDERS OF BATTLE and Orgill THE GOTHIC LINE. 2. The Canadian Army High Command: I believe that the book that covers this topic is THE CANADIAN ARMY AND THE NORMANDY COMMAND A STUDY OF FAILURE IN HIGH COMMAND, by John A. English, New York: Praeger, 1991 (I read this book a few years ago, English is or was an officer in the Canadian Armed Forces) 3. The "Ordnungspolizei" and other nasties: Tessin briefly lists all of the numbered regiments of "SS-Polizei" that appear in Europa [1 to 30 and four from Galacia] but notes that they were raised as Police Regiments and given the title of SS Police Regiments on 24 Feb 1943 and were not part of the Waffen SS. He cites a book that he wrote which I would like to find and seems to have been published in 1957 as part of a larger series, "Schriften des Bundesarchivs." However, I'd like to note that some of these SS- Police regiments were gathered up late in the war and formed into a second Waffen SS "Polizei" division: 35.SS-und-Polizei-Grenadier- Division (formed Feb 1945); along with 1.SS-Polizei-Jager-Brigade (formed Apr 1945). Earlier the four Galacian SS-Polizei regiments had been used to build 14.Waffen-Grenadier-Division der SS (gal.Nr.1) (one of these regiments had served in France). "Galacia," if I have it down correctly was that part of Poland given to Stalin under the Nazi-Soviet Non-Aggression pact and was pre-WW1, the largest province of Austria. It is now part of the Ukraine. From Tessin and from Bender's Waffen SS Series, Volume 4. As noted in my article in TEM#45, the Hermann Goring unit started as a unit of Goring's Prussian police and was used to "put down" Communist resistance and its first commander was executed for war crimes. SOLDIERS OF DESTRUCTION (mentioned in a previous post) has an extensive discussion of the cross-over between the front line soldiers of the Waffen SS and the concentration camp guards and death squads of the SS. It seems that if one failed (or could no longer serve due to wounds or injuries) as a Waffen SS soldier he would be transferred to concentration camp duties. One fellow began as a concentration camp guard, served with the Totenkopf Division in Russia, and was transferred back to camp duties. After being "promoted" to camp commandant, he was found to have authorized "especially brutal treatment" [!] of camp inmates. He was removed from command, court-martialled and sent back to the Totenkopf Division as a private (and was killed in action in 1945). 6. German punctuation: I use Word-Perfect 5.1 for my letters. I finally (after many years) figured out how do umlauts for correct punctuation of German words. Apparently although these are ASCII characters, they come across garbled in some people's messages. I will try to avoid them in the future. Sorry. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Mar 28 06:07:33 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA03986; Thu, 28 Mar 96 06:07:32 +0100 Received: from emout07.mail.aol.com (emout07.mx.aol.com [198.81.11.22]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA22337 for ; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 06:06:16 +0100 (MET) From: Italorican@aol.com Received: by emout07.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id AAA23144 for europa@lysator.liu.se; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 00:05:43 -0500 Date: Thu, 28 Mar 1996 00:05:43 -0500 Message-Id: <960328000542_257933126@emout07.mail.aol.com> To: Europaboss@aol.com Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: AOI Status: O Content-Length: 2965 In a message dated 96-03-27 13:01:00 EST, Jay_Steiger/Forte.FORTE@notes.san.fhi.com (Jay Steiger/Forte) writes: > >>Let me add my vote for a revision of "Africa Orientale" as a GRD >>project. I would push the start date back to 1936 and include the invasion >of >>Abyssinia as part of the game, with a link-up to the WitD maps for GE. > >Right On!!! Excactly what I have been wanting to hear! Please send >endorsments to Winston Hamilton so he knows I am not the only one who wants >the >1940-41 campaign and the 1935-36 Ethiopian campaign as one game. > > I, too, endorse the idea. You could also put in a what-if OB for those of us who like to play with these things, if somone in this community with the requisite knowledge could be persudded to put it together: a what-if OB if the Italians had not re-organized their divisions as binary formations. Antonio Lauria --------------------- Forwarded message: From: Jay_Steiger/Forte.FORTE@notes.san.fhi.com (Jay Steiger/Forte) To: europa@lysator.liu.se (europa) Date: 96-03-27 13:01:00 EST Patrick Haugh said... >Let me add my vote for a revision of "Africa Orientale" as a GRD >project. I would push the start date back to 1936 and include the invasion of >Abyssinia as part of the game, with a link-up to the WitD maps for GE. Right On!!! Excactly what I have been wanting to hear! Please send endorsments to Winston Hamilton so he knows I am not the only one who wants the 1940-41 campaign and the 1935-36 Ethiopian campaign as one game. also said... >...is there any interest in GRD doing...the 1914-1918 war in East Africa? I have spoken to Eric Pierce who is running the show in the Great War Project along with Arthur Goodwin. Regarding this campaign he said that it is a fascinating one, and he and Arthur have done the ob and map research, however it won't really work as a game. The reason for this is that at Europa scale, you start with a German colonial brigade - unsupported, and by the end of the game you have a commando battalion being chased by several South African and Indian divisions. The amazing ability of von Lettow to slap the British and then dissapear into the jungle would be very hard to simulate through Europa. Even if the game was converted to a Narvik style company/battalion level fight, it is still largely a guerrilla conflict, not one of major set piece battles (Tanga excepted). I can give you a rundown on where the Great War series stands as of now. 1) March to Victory: France and N. Italy Aug 1914 to Oct 1916 2) Over There: France and N. Italy Nov 1916 to ??? (Fuller's plan 1919 will be an option) 3) Bloody Eagles: E. Prussia and Russia from Aug 1914 to the end. 4) Balkan Web: Serbia, Greece, Gallipoli, and Palestine Aug 1914 to the end. 5) River of Death: Mesopotamia, Caucus, and Persia Aug (Nov?)1914 to the end. It will be an excellent series and a great addition to GR/D and Europa. Jay Steiger San Diego, CA From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Mar 28 06:29:18 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA04050; Thu, 28 Mar 96 06:29:16 +0100 Received: from jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (civguy@jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us [192.217.238.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA22620 for ; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 06:27:57 +0100 (MET) Received: (from civguy@localhost) by jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (8.6.10/8.6.9) id AAA07064; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 00:58:24 -0600 Date: Thu, 28 Mar 1996 00:58:24 -36000 From: Jason Long Subject: Re: my $0.02 worth (cont.) To: j.broshot@genie.com Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: <199603280435.AA061387734@relay1.geis.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 121 Actually, We have a copy of Tessin Ordungspolizei book here at the U of Chicago. Email me you want further info. Jason From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Mar 28 15:55:56 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA11794; Thu, 28 Mar 96 15:55:56 +0100 Received: from prague.crossover.com (root@prague.crossover.com [204.217.246.5]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id PAA04792 for ; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 15:53:38 +0100 (MET) Received: from [205.161.32.192] (jastell.tiac.net [205.161.32.192]) by prague.crossover.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id IAA12193 for ; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 08:44:58 -0500 X-Sender: jastell@post.crossover.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 28 Mar 1996 09:52:22 -0400 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) Subject: Re: Italian what-if OB Status: O Content-Length: 2856 >...I've always wanted to plah >areojnd with the BF OB, for instance, to see what might have happened if the >Italians had not roeganized their army. But I do not have access to enough >information for do this. Do you have any suggestions as to whom I could >contact? In the meantimem do you have any suggestions as to what kind of >factors I might use to make roungh and ready approximations (like doubling >the BF ingantry divsons aqnd then appplying taking 67% ? 75%?? or whatever?. 1. You can try contacting: Michael Parker RR1 Box 5346 Willow Springs, NC 27592 USA 2. As a quick stab at it, assuming the Italians went with three infantry regiments per division but kept other factors the same (i.e., did not modernize their equipment or improve their training), then try this: Inf Div: 5-8 becomes 6-8 (2-8 cadre; breakdowns 2x 2-8 and 1x 1-8 inf rgts) 4-8 becomes 5-8 (2-8 cadre; breakdowns 1x 2-8 and 2x 1-8 inf rgts) 4-6 becomes 5-6 (2-6 cadre; breakdowns 1x 2-6 and 2x 1-6 inf rgts) 3-4-6 becomes 4-5-6 (1-6 cadre; breakdowns 1x 1-2-6 and 2x 1-6 inf rgts) 3-6 becomes 4-6 (no cadre; breakdowns 3x 1-6 inf rgts) Mot Div: Unchanged (already at 3 rgt org) Cav Div, Mtn Div, Arm Div: Unchanged 3. Now, where would Italy get the extra manpower for adding a third rgt to the divs? Possibilities: A. Disbanding existing formations. Breaking up an inf div would immediately yeild two inf rgts, and probably enough men from the art rgt and other div units to form a third inf rgt. Therefore, for every 3 inf divs you put on a 3-inf-rgt basis, remove one inf div. This seems the MOST LIKELY course Italy would pursue, entirely in keeping with their past practices. B. Expanding the army. Italy would simply draft more men and increase the size of the army. This seems VERY UNLIKELY, as the Italians were reluctant to take too many men out of their economy. Don't forget, Italy fought WW2 at war with France, Britain, the USSR, and the US without ever declaring full mobilization! C. Disbanding the CCNN. The CCNN -- the fascist political troops -- contained enough manpower to give every inf div a third inf rgt. Remove all CCNN units except AA ones. This option is EXTREMELY UNLIKELY to occur, as all major fascist and communist regimes in WW2 used political troops to prop up the party's control of the state. D. Improve the CCNN. Give the portion of the CCNN attached to Army formations better training and better officers, thereby in effect giving each inf div a third rgt. (Many Italian inf divs had an attached CCNN "legion" (regiment) or at least a battalion, but the CCNN was so bad that these rate out at 0.) This option is RATHER UNLIKELY to occur, as political troops typically disdained the Army (as being non-ideological and thus suspect) and resisted the Army having control over training. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Mar 28 15:56:04 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA11803; Thu, 28 Mar 96 15:56:03 +0100 Received: from colossus.barclays.co.uk (colossus.barclays.co.uk [193.128.3.10]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id PAA04798 for ; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 15:53:47 +0100 (MET) Received: from bognor.barclays.co.uk by colossus.barclays.co.uk with local SMTP (PP) id <27746-0@colossus.barclays.co.uk>; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 14:51:08 +0000 Received: from pepsi.gra.barclays.co.uk by bognor.barclays.co.uk with BarclayNet SMTP (PP) id <05129-0@bognor.barclays.co.uk>; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 14:50:53 +0000 Received: by pepsi (1.37.109.14/16.2) id AA006414557; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 14:49:17 GMT From: Stefan Farrelly Message-Id: <9603281449.ZM639@pepsi.gra.barclays.co.uk> Date: Thu, 28 Mar 1996 14:49:15 +0000 X-Mailer: Z-Mail (3.2.1 31aug95) To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: African maps Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Status: O Content-Length: 562 To all those who expressed an interest in maps for Africa - ie. Europa scale Somailiand, the Sudan (for those games where the Axis push the Allies here) Winston has said he can produce the maps as long as someone has them prepared, eg. A Goodwin, and theyll cost $50 bucks ea to make (doing say a run of 50). I for one am a buyer. All we have to do now is find Mr Goodwin on the net and ask him if he has the proofs ready to go. All those who would like these maps, even at $50 ea. please express and opinion and ill chase it up with Winston. Stefan Farrelly From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Mar 28 18:36:02 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA14243; Thu, 28 Mar 96 18:36:01 +0100 Received: from crash.cts.com (root@crash.cts.com [192.188.72.17]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id SAA09355 for ; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 18:35:26 +0100 (MET) Received: from fhi by crash.cts.com with uucp (Smail3.1.29.1 #5) id m0u2LbT-000080C; Thu, 28 Mar 96 09:35 PST Received: from notes.san.fhi.com by fhboot1.san.fhi.com with smtp (Smail3.1.28.1 #4) id m0u2LP1-0000jyC; Thu, 28 Mar 96 09:22 PST Received: by notes.san.fhi.com (IBM OS/2 SENDMAIL VERSION 1.3.2)/1.0) id AA3890; Thu, 28 Mar 96 09:22:10 -0800 Message-Id: <9603281722.AA3890@notes.san.fhi.com> Received: from Forte with "Lotus Notes Mail Gateway for SMTP" id B6F3C164685CF254882562FB005E8CF1; Thu, 28 Mar 96 09:22:09 To: europa From: Jay Steiger/Forte Date: 28 Mar 96 9:20:54 PS Subject: Re: African Maps Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain Status: O Content-Length: 831 Regarding the $50 option for maps of E. Africa, spoke to Winston about this and he said it is an indiviual option. It is a cleaned up AOI map (thank you Arthur), at the 32 mi/hex scale. However, this said, he also confirmed that there will be a game of Ethiopia. It will have both the Italain 1935-36 war and the WWII campaign. He said this game is not an if...it's a when. There will not be linking maps for WitD, it costs too much for too little gain. Additionally, for those who are worried about re-release schedules, this game is not near the top of the priority list. It won't delay Narvik or FiTE, etc. Given that the game will probably be less than $50...and I already have AOI, I think I'd rather just wait for the game to show up in a few years than pay $50 for maps only now. Sincerely, Jay Steiger From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Mar 28 19:47:54 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA15220; Thu, 28 Mar 96 19:47:53 +0100 Received: from naybob.ghq.com (naybob.ghq.com [204.73.247.161]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id TAA11386 for ; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 19:46:23 +0100 (MET) Received: (from jwhite@localhost) by naybob.ghq.com (8.7.1/8.7.1) id MAA27705; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 12:44:44 -0600 From: Jeff White Message-Id: <199603281844.MAA27705@naybob.ghq.com> Subject: Re: Antwerp & SF Supply To: bradbury@travel1.travel-net.com Date: Thu, 28 Mar 1996 12:44:44 -0600 (CST) Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: <199603280111.UAA23031@travel1.travel-net.com> from "bradbury@travel1.travel-net.com" at Mar 27, 96 08:11:20 pm Content-Type: text Status: O Content-Length: 3299 bradbury@travel1.travel-net.com Said: > > The following is based on my understanding of the SF supply rules - if my > interpretation is incorrect, I would appreciate a correction. > > I understand SF Rule 12B4 to mean that an unlimited number of Allied units > can be supplied via a Naval element through a functioning major or great > port (given that the other elements of the supply line conform to the > balance of Rule 12B). In other words, if the Allied player owns Le Havre as > a functioning port, he could supply all land and air forces through this > port (given the appropriate rail lines, etc). > > This to me seems unduly generous to the Allied player. Certainly much of > the controversy regarding strategy between the U.S. and Britain in 1944 > concerned the need for Anvil, with the Americans pushing and winning the > case for the need to open Marseille. In the autumn of 1944, the need to > open Antwerp led to the Canadian army being tied down opening the Scheldt. > The importance of opening Antwerp is amply demonstrated by the fact that > Monty even admitted that he had erred in not providing sufficient forces to > open it earlier. > > I have experimented with restricting the Allies to trace 60 RE through a > major port and 120 RE through a great port and further restricted them by > reducing the supply capacity of all ports by RE per hit of damage. These > changes have certainly focussed the attention of both sides on the ports and > do give the Axis an additional incentive to garrison ports, even if they > will eventually be cut off. I think the game system might already take care of this, in a slightly off kilter way. First off, you need the 10 rail cap on the net to draw supply through the net. Before you can build rail cap, you need two rail marshalling yards. (Here's a rules question, does a German destroyed port count as a RMY, or only until it's undestroyed?) So, if the Allies land in Normandy in June, don't capture two RMY's until July. Then it takes 4 more turns to get above 10 rail cap. Meanwhile, you're only working ports are Mulberries, and the Germans have blown up the rest, or are hold out. So they need Antwerp for supply and to move more troops in. Plus, it is close enough to the real front to bring supplies in via road. I'd be game for the limits, but it soon gets to be real hard to count ALL of those REs at some point. That alone could take 10 minutes. Plus it can get wacky. If I link up France and the Italian front, can I use Palermo to supply units in France? > > I would like to hear if anyone has done similar experimentation, or can > explain how the RAW lead to the historical emphasis placed by the Allies on > the availability of both Antwerp and Marseille. We found minors to be really useful. Mostly because they do not blow up. They eliminate isolation and reduces some of the demand for supply points. We landed in France real early, in the south. It was a big deal to get a major port. It made a bigger deal having time to build up a large Allied rail cap in France. Plus a build up in Winter/Spring for a Summer offensive. > > Nigel Bradbury > Ottawa, Ont. > -- Jeff White, ARS N0POY jwhite@ghq.com "I am Pentium of Borg. Arithmetic is irrelevant. Prepare to be approximated." From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Mar 28 20:40:42 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA15926; Thu, 28 Mar 96 20:40:41 +0100 Received: from motgate2.mot.com (motgate2.mot.com [129.188.136.20]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id UAA12700 for ; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 20:29:35 +0100 (MET) Received: from mothost.mot.com (mothost.mot.com [129.188.137.101]) by motgate2.mot.com (8.7.3/8.6.10/MOT-3.8) with ESMTP id TAA13372 for ; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 19:28:02 GMT Received: from fwans12 (fwans12.fwrdc.rtsg.mot.com [160.2.12.7]) by mothost.mot.com (8.7.3/8.6.10/MOT-3.8) with SMTP id NAA27612 for ; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 13:28:22 -0600 (CST) Received: from fwhre14.fwrdc.rtsg.mot.com (fwhre14) by fwans12 (5.67b/FTW-1.62) id AA20593; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 13:25:57 -0600 Received: by fwhre14.fwrdc.rtsg.mot.com (8.6.12/FTW-1.62) id LAA20860; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 11:00:30 -0600 From: psmith@hpmail2.fwrdc.rtsg.mot.com (Paul Smith) Message-Id: <199603281700.LAA20860@fwhre14.fwrdc.rtsg.mot.com> Subject: Re: Italian what-if OB To: europa@lysator.liu.se (Europa maillist) Date: Thu, 28 Mar 1996 11:00:30 -0600 (CST) In-Reply-To: from "John M. Astell" at Mar 28, 96 09:52:22 am Reply-To: psmith@ftw.mot.com *Return-Receipt-To: psmith@ftw.mot.com X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Status: O Content-Length: 1176 > >Inf Div: >5-8 becomes 6-8 (2-8 cadre; breakdowns 2x 2-8 and 1x 1-8 inf rgts) >4-8 becomes 5-8 (2-8 cadre; breakdowns 1x 2-8 and 2x 1-8 inf rgts) >4-6 becomes 5-6 (2-6 cadre; breakdowns 1x 2-6 and 2x 1-6 inf rgts) >3-4-6 becomes 4-5-6 (1-6 cadre; breakdowns 1x 1-2-6 and 2x 1-6 inf rgts) >3-6 becomes 4-6 (no cadre; breakdowns 3x 1-6 inf rgts) > > >A. Disbanding existing formations. Breaking up an inf div would immediately >yeild two inf rgts, and probably enough men from the art rgt and other div >units to form a third inf rgt. Therefore, for every 3 inf divs you put on a >3-inf-rgt basis, remove one inf div. This seems the MOST LIKELY course >Italy would pursue, entirely in keeping with their past practices. > So, basicly I could exchange 4x 4-8 for 3x 5-8, for example. I may want to do this sometime.... -- Paul F. Smith Ft. Worth Research Laboratories | Phone: (817) 245-6097 Motorola | Fax : (817) 245-6148 5555 N. Beach St | email: psmith@ftw.mot.com Ft. Worth, Tx 76137 | QPS001@email.mot.com "Good judgement comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgement." From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Mar 28 21:10:23 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA16268; Thu, 28 Mar 96 21:10:21 +0100 Received: from ns.rmc.com (ns.rmc.com [137.25.23.1]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id VAA13655 for ; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 21:09:51 +0100 (MET) Received: by ns.rmc.com (AIX 4.1/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA09214; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 14:58:52 -0500 Received: from internet.rmc.com(137.25.3.24) by ns.rmc.com via smap (V1.3) id sma012250; Thu Mar 28 14:58:40 1996 Received: from lanmail.rmc.com by internet.rmc.com (AIX 4.1/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA14322; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 15:07:57 -0500 Received: by LANMAIL.RMC.COM; Thu, 28 Mar 96 15:07:35 EST Date: Thu, 28 Mar 96 15:07:50 EST Message-Id: X-Priority: 3 (Normal) To: From: "Frank E. Watson" Subject: re:Re: African Maps Status: O Content-Length: 511 Waiting sounds like a reasonable course to me. Regarding Sudan, I suppose that at the appropriate time (after or in conjunction with the East Africa game, I guess in a future millenium) we could always put some black and white 11x17 maps in TEM that would fill in the strip up the Nile to Khartoum and along the Red Sea Coast. They wouldn't be very pretty of course, but then you could play a lot of games of WitD / E. Africa and never use them anyway. My Urals Maps have not yet seen any blood. Frank From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Mar 28 21:28:00 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA16456; Thu, 28 Mar 96 21:27:59 +0100 Received: from iac.iac.org.nz (iac.iac.org.nz [192.124.160.153]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id VAA13963 for ; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 21:26:15 +0100 (MET) Received: from smtpgate.iac.org.nz by iac.iac.org.nz (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA05316; Fri, 29 Mar 96 08:22:14 NZS Message-Id: <9603282022.AA05316@iac.iac.org.nz> From: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (Public Affairs Officer) Date: Fri, 29 Mar 1996 08:22 GMT To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: East Africa Status: O Content-Length: 294 I'd like to see an East African game like those described, including the Ethiopian campaign. The latter could have optional rules for League of Nations intervention. David H. Lippman Public Affairs Officer US Naval Antarctic Support Unit Christchurch, New Zealand From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Mar 28 21:37:55 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA16596; Thu, 28 Mar 96 21:37:54 +0100 Received: from ns.corona.navy.mil (ns.corona.navy.mil [137.67.32.12]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id VAA14273 for ; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 21:37:01 +0100 (MET) Received: from ccgate.corona.navy.mil (ccgate.corona.navy.mil [137.67.40.4]) by ns.corona.navy.mil (8.7.1/1.4) with SMTP id MAA05841 for ; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 12:34:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from ccMail by ccgate.corona.navy.mil (IMA Internet Exchange 1.04b) id 15af8dd0; Thu, 28 Mar 96 12:38:53 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Thu, 28 Mar 1996 12:33:27 -0800 Message-Id: <15af8dd0@corona.navy.mil> From: Renaud.Gary@corona.navy.mil (Renaud.Gary) Subject: WITD: still waiting To: europa@lysator.liu.se Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: cc:Mail note part Status: O Content-Length: 1207 I just heard that the company that prints the counters has some MAJOR quality problems with the 2 print runs ahead of the WITD run (front and back misaligned by, oh, about 1/2" I can see that "Hey! My panzer division has a position AA unit as a cadre!"). Needless to say, Mr. Hamilton isn't going to let them go ahead until they have things right. I heard that TEM #46 has shipped, but being on the west coast, I don't have it yet. Maybe Saturday... Supposedly this will not delay the release, as it's not on the Critical Path. As far as I'm concerned, it would be OK if it DID delay the game. I'll take any delay to get better physical quality. Rules revisions are another matter, as everyone always tears them apart ANYWAY. A Renaud.Gary@Corona.Navy.Mil This graphic is |\ CompuServe: 73627,1114 a LOT smaller | \ _,,,---,,__ Genie: G.Renaud1 than a PGP key /,`.-'`' -. ;-;,---__ W: 909-273-5378 block __|,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'==--' H: 714-750-9243 `-----''(_/--' `-'\_) DNRC Holder of Past Knowledge I HATE UNIX I CAN'T speak for this administration; I tell the truth. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Mar 28 22:44:03 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA17226; Thu, 28 Mar 96 22:44:02 +0100 Received: from iac.iac.org.nz (iac.iac.org.nz [192.124.160.153]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA15799 for ; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 22:43:24 +0100 (MET) Received: from smtpgate.iac.org.nz by iac.iac.org.nz (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA05584; Fri, 29 Mar 96 09:39:23 NZS Message-Id: <9603282139.AA05584@iac.iac.org.nz> From: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (Public Affairs Officer) Date: Fri, 29 Mar 1996 09:39 GMT To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: And the wait goes on Status: O Content-Length: 1078 The delays with WitD don't bother me that much, as long as they deal with the quality control issues. My main concern right now is the reprint of counters for SF, which had (as has been beaten to death) serious TQA problems. Having just put out a 20-page newsletter singlehandedly, with only two mistakes (a misspelled word and a by-line in the wrong font), I understand the problems GRD's production people have to go through. Look at the bright side...compare today's production abilities with those of the late 60s and 70s. My copy of SPI's early game Korea has hand-scrawled XX's and III's for divisions and regiments. I think Barbarossa had the same problem. And before that came SPI's Bastogne, with a two-color gameboard of the Ardennes with gray hills and black roads. This was not a fault of the game, it was the handicap of the technology of the times, when linotype was dying, and computer layout did not exist. David H. Lippman Public Affairs Officer US Naval Antarctic Support Unit Christchurch, New Zealand From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Mar 29 01:11:09 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA18737; Fri, 29 Mar 96 01:11:02 +0100 Received: from prague.crossover.com (root@prague.crossover.com [204.217.246.5]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id BAA19561 for ; Fri, 29 Mar 1996 01:10:24 +0100 (MET) Received: from [205.161.32.192] (jastell.tiac.net [205.161.32.192]) by prague.crossover.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id SAA13750 for ; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 18:01:49 -0500 X-Sender: jastell@post.crossover.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 28 Mar 1996 19:09:14 -0400 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) Subject: Re: Italian what-if OB Status: O Content-Length: 771 >>...4-6 becomes 5-6 (2-6 cadre; breakdowns 1x 2-6 and 2x 1-6 inf rgts)... >> >>...for every 3 inf divs you put on a >>3-inf-rgt basis, remove one inf div.... > >So, basicly I could exchange 4x 4-8 for 3x 5-8, for example. I may want to >do this sometime.... Yes. This is best done an option/fantasy assumed to occur before the game starts -- cash in your divs during pre-game. If you want to do it "on the fly" during play, then you'd better build reorganization time for the third regiment to be integrated into the div structure and for the Italian supply services (and other rear area functions) to adjust to handling the structure. As a guess, divisions reorganized in this manner should sit around in training for 2 game turns before they are fully functional. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Mar 29 01:12:07 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA18753; Fri, 29 Mar 96 01:12:06 +0100 Received: from smtp.utexas.edu (smtp.utexas.edu [128.83.126.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id BAA19591 for ; Fri, 29 Mar 1996 01:11:57 +0100 (MET) Received: from slip-14-10.ots.utexas.edu (slip-14-10.ots.utexas.edu [128.83.128.42]) by smtp.utexas.edu (8.6.7/8.6.6) with SMTP id SAA00231 for ; Thu, 28 Mar 1996 18:09:48 -0600 Date: Thu, 28 Mar 1996 18:09:48 -0600 Message-Id: <199603290009.SAA00231@smtp.utexas.edu> X-Sender: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu (Bobby D. Bryant) Subject: Re: WITD: still waiting Status: O Content-Length: 443 >I just heard that the company that prints the counters has some MAJOR >quality problems with the 2 print runs ahead of the WITD run (front and >back misaligned by, oh, about 1/2" I can see that "Hey! My panzer >division has a position AA unit as a cadre!"). Yes, but think what a nice surprize it will be when he eliminates your AA unit and you flip it over to a panzer cadre! - Bobby. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Mar 29 04:56:30 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA20315; Fri, 29 Mar 96 04:56:28 +0100 Received: from ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (abcclibr@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu [128.174.5.59]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id EAA23047 for ; Fri, 29 Mar 1996 04:55:55 +0100 (MET) Received: by ux1.cso.uiuc.edu id AA28382 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for europa@lysator.liu.se); Thu, 28 Mar 1996 21:55:47 -0600 Date: Thu, 28 Mar 1996 21:55:47 -0600 From: conrad alan b To: Jeff White Cc: bradbury@travel1.travel-net.com, europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: Antwerp & SF Supply In-Reply-To: <199603281844.MAA27705@naybob.ghq.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 2852 On Thu, 28 Mar 1996, Jeff White wrote: > bradbury@travel1.travel-net.com Said: > > > > The following is based on my understanding of the SF supply rules > > I understand SF Rule 12B4 to mean that an unlimited number of Allied units > > can be supplied via a Naval element through a functioning major or great > > port (given that the other elements of the supply line conform to the > > balance of Rule 12B). In other words, if the Allied player owns Le Havre as > > a functioning port, he could supply all land and air forces through this > > port (given the appropriate rail lines, etc). > > > > This to me seems unduly generous to the Allied player. Yes I agree. Some limitation on total number of REs through big ports is necessary, either by Numbers of REs, or Length of rail element. > > I think the game system might already take care of this, in a slightly > off kilter way. First off, you need the 10 rail cap on the net to draw > supply through the net. Before you can build rail cap, you need > two mashaling yards > So, if the Allies land in Normandy in June, don't capture two RMY's until > July. Then it takes 4 more turns to get above 10 rail cap. Meanwhile, > you're only working ports are Mulberries, and the Germans have > blown up the rest, or are hold out. So they need Antwerp for > supply and to move more troops in. Plus, it is close enough to the real > front to bring supplies in via road. > You are correct almost to the end. You don't need Antwerp. If you get Cherbourg and Caen you have the two marshalling yards. Then four turns and 30 resource points later you can supply anywhere in Europe without any other port (Caen is a major port). > I'd be game for the limits, but it soon gets to be real hard to count > ALL of those REs at some point. That alone could take 10 minutes. It's not that hard, you just keep a running total as you bring them ashore. > Plus it can get wacky. If I link up France and the Italian front, > can I use Palermo to supply units in France? Not from Palermo. The straits of Messina are not a rail link for the Allies. However, Taranto will do. > > > I would like to hear if anyone has done similar experimentation, or can > > explain how the RAW lead to the historical emphasis placed by the Allies on > > the availability of both Antwerp and Marseille. > > We found minors to be really useful. Mostly because they do not > blow up. They eliminate isolation and reduces some of the demand for > supply points. We landed in France real early, in the south. Question - when you say `real early', how early? '43... winter '44? Did you have the danger zone in place for your southern invasion? If so how many losses did the allied naval forces take? Alan Conrad From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Mar 29 05:34:13 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA20550; Fri, 29 Mar 96 05:34:12 +0100 Received: from ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (abcclibr@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu [128.174.5.59]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id FAA23412 for ; Fri, 29 Mar 1996 05:33:38 +0100 (MET) Received: by ux1.cso.uiuc.edu id AA04576 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for europa@lysator.liu.se); Thu, 28 Mar 1996 22:33:27 -0600 Date: Thu, 28 Mar 1996 22:33:24 -0600 From: conrad alan b To: "James B. Byrne" Cc: Ray Kanarr , byrnejb@hahp9k.harte-lyne.ca, europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: My $.0002 on More Stacking In-Reply-To: <3159F973.64D6@harte-lyne.ca> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 1843 On Wed, 27 Mar 1996, James B. Byrne wrote: > Ray Kanarr wrote: > > > > >.... only true for organizations which meet the > > >nominal standard of ~12000 total / 6000 infantry. > > > > Didn't armies whose organizations fit this mold generally have this > > structure because of concomitant command and control concerns [such > > alliteration!]? Therefore, the issue is raised as to whether or not > > they SHOULD be allowed to 'control' additional units in the hex. > > > > Command and control were not really the issue. > They could cover the same frontage as a 'standard' division, but at a > cost of reduced depth. I feel that the additional 'division' could have > been adequately controlled by a corps level organisation and would be > able to backstop the first three. > Let's not get too hung up on corps control abilities. While a three division to a corps organization may be optimal, corps had huge varieties of what they could or did control. Example: 6th US corps at Anzio, May '44. It had 7 divisions + 3 regiments of the Special Service Force in the front line; + 30 battalions of US artillery + 9 regiments of British artillery in what was essentially a one hex area. (see previous stacking posts; and future post for bib source). Plus 9 REs of support troops (from Frank Watson's Battle for Rome, TEM 45) Now one could argue that those 26 REs were not as efficient has 26 REs under two corps HQs. But in Europa terms does it matter. Although what one can stack in a hex may be a command and control issue, whether a corps can control a one hex stack is moot. We don't have corps units, we don't pay for corps HQs. And western corps HQs would normally command an area of two or more hexes in distance, so length of corps control is not an issue in current Europa terms. Alan Conrad From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Mar 29 05:48:03 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA20631; Fri, 29 Mar 96 05:48:02 +0100 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id FAA23609 for ; Fri, 29 Mar 1996 05:47:37 +0100 (MET) From: j.broshot@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA106704077; Fri, 29 Mar 1996 04:34:37 GMT Message-Id: <199603290434.AA106704077@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Fri, 29 Mar 96 04:34:37 UTC 0000 ( from INTERNET# ; Fri, 29 Mar 96 04:34:16 UTC 0000) Date: Fri, 29 Mar 96 04:31:00 UTC 0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: J.BROSHOT X-Genie-Qk-Id: 6346431 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 33714 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: The Italian Army Status: O Content-Length: 3115 I think that the "fantasy Italian OB" is just that, a fantasy. Based on what I have read (specifically Madej's ITALIAN ARMY ORDER OF BATTLE 1939-1943, a reprint of a wartime Military Intelligence Service publication; and IRON ARM THE MECHANIZATION OF MUSSOLINI'S ARMY, 1920-1940, by John Joseph Timothy Sweet (Westport: Greenwood Press, 1908) I don't think that the Italian High Command ever considered any of the options presented. The decision to reorganize from a triangular infantry division ("divisione ternaria") to a binary infantry division ("divisione binaria") has already been made. My copy of the LEAGUE OF NATIONS ARMAMENTS YEAR-BOOK for 1937 states that Italy has 31 infantry divisions each composed of one infantry brigade of THREE regiments and one field artillery regiment. So when was the reorganization decision made? It is interesting to note that the British Army infantry division, as late as 1938 (?) was composed of three brigades each of four battalions (12 infantry battalions total); and that, although the U.S. Army had experimented with triangular divisions, when the war started, it still retained the old square division TO: two brigade each of two regiments each of three battalions (again, 12 infantry battalions total). All of the National Guard infantry divisions were mobilized in this form. This is discussed by Shelby Staunton in his ORDER OF BATTLE WWII book. Back to the Italians. Most, if not all, of the binary infantry divisions were mobilized with a "third" regiment, a CCNN Legion with two battalions. Some of the infantry divisions that were stationed in the Balkans did form a third infantry regiment, those are the 1 x 1-6 Inf III in the "300" series in the BF and SF OBs. As John Astell noted, due to internal political and economic considerations, full mobilization was never attempted and incorporation of the "Blackshirts" into the army never considered. Sweet's book notes that, despite Mussolini's efforts at "politica automobilistica" policy (announced in Feb 1939) Italy remained a country without enough industry to build enough tanks and trucks to equipt a mechanized army AND a country without enough people familiar with motor vehicles to drive them. Some interesting statistics (offered by Sweet) as to ratio of cars to people of the combatant countries, pre WW2: France (42 million people-1.8 million cars) 1 to 23 Britain (48 million people-1.5 million cars) 1 to 32 Germany (75 million people-2 million cars) 1 to 37 USA (132 million people-30 million cars) 1 to 4.4 Italy (no population or vehicle statistics given), ratio given as 1 to 112 or 1 to 130; Mussolini wanted 1 to 60 or 1 to 80. Jim Broshot, St. James MO P.S. to David H. Lippman "My copy of SPI's early game Korea has hand-scrawled XX's and III's for divisions and regiments. I think Barbarossa had the same problem. And before that came SPI's Bastogne, with a two-color gameboard of the Ardennes with gray hills and black roads." If you owned these games, you're as old as I am!! I recall that SPI also had a game of the Normandy invasion at this time (early 70's). From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Mar 29 06:04:40 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA20782; Fri, 29 Mar 96 06:04:35 +0100 Received: from ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (abcclibr@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu [128.174.5.59]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA24035 for ; Fri, 29 Mar 1996 06:04:08 +0100 (MET) Received: by ux1.cso.uiuc.edu id AA09437 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for Europa LIst ); Thu, 28 Mar 1996 23:04:01 -0600 Date: Thu, 28 Mar 1996 23:04:00 -0600 From: conrad alan b To: Stephen Graham Cc: Jim Arnold <74133.1765@compuserve.com>, Europa LIst Subject: Re: Stacking In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 2723 On Wed, 27 Mar 1996, Stephen Graham wrote: > At 2:19 AM 27/3/96, Jim Arnold wrote: > > 1) 3-3-2 stacking is an ahistorical restriction, > > Is changing a system mechanic the best way to solve the problem in FoF? > Or would it create problems in other games? > Yes it might be trouble in other games. So we must study each change to see what it will do, and then weigh the values of the change vs the result of the change in the way ALL the Europa games then work. > It would unbalance Fire in the East in favor of the Germans, simply because > more Soviet stacks could be overrun. If the Soviet attrition rate goes up, > they bleed out before reinforcements let them build a new and stable defense > line. Similarly, the German task in Second Front gets much harder. > Again correct. But that is the point. To an extent we MUST make the German's attacks in FitE/SE more potent to get rid of the NODLs. I think everyone agrees that the NODL is ahistorical, the question has just been how in the game system do we get rid of it. And yes the Allies would be more potent in SE. But while playing through a game and a half (as both sides) I think it needs to be more potent. But what we have to do if we agreed that higher stacking is both more historically accurate and will solve some Europa game problems, is then come up with some solutions to any problems that the increased stacking will introduce. Higher stacking for defense IS a problem. One would have hero cities stacking full and forcing city battles that did not happen. But if the cost (in game terms or VP terms) of letting a city full of troops get eliminated while surrounded, since you did not have the troop strength to both fill up the city and build a line near it, is high enough, perhaps a commander will only do it with a real decision of costs vs benefits. Not just do it every time since in the game it's a no brainer. And for attacks, many have already argued that it is necessary through logistics or command control, or something, to keep the side with the higher troop strength from attacking turn after turn in a grinding attrition war. That's how most of my Europa games turn out. And that's not the way the war ran. How many of your east fronts had no action through May and June of '42 & '43 as happened for SOME reason. Or many have pointed out that attacking costs troops. And the current CRT provides high odds attacks that cost nothing. So perhaps we need to change the CRT to provide a more realistic decision to the attacker. But I hope we will not just dismiss out of hand the idea of higher stacking because it will cause problems. Alan Conrad From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Mar 29 19:08:59 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA04132; Fri, 29 Mar 96 19:08:58 +0100 Received: from smtp4.aw.com (smtp4.aw.com [192.207.117.64]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id TAA12622 for ; Fri, 29 Mar 1996 19:05:14 +0100 (MET) Received: from East-Message_Server by smtp4.aw.com with Novell_GroupWise; Fri, 29 Mar 1996 13:25:37 -0500 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1 Date: Fri, 29 Mar 1996 14:08:41 -0500 From: Ray Kanarr To: byrnejb@harte-lyne.ca, abcclibr@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu Cc: byrnejb@hahp9k.harte-lyne.ca, europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: My $.0002 on More Stacking Status: O Content-Length: 1068 On 3/28/96, Alan Conrad posted: >Now one could argue that those 26 REs were not as >efficient has 26 REs under two corps HQs. But in Europa >terms does it matter. It should, if Europa is meant to be an operational-level simulation. If its just meant to be a competitive game, with distinct winners and losers, according to a strict set of rules criteria, then no, I guess it doesn't matter. But then let's not kid ourselves about what it is or isn't. >And western corps HQs would normally command an >area of two or more hexes in distance, so length of corps >control is not an issue in current Europa terms. Not just Western, by any means. You are absolutely correct, that currently length of corps control is meaningless in Europa terms. My question is: shouldn't it matter, or are we all willing to agree that, for Europa play, French, Bulgarian, Iraqi, American, British, etc., etc. are all equal? And what does that make Europa, then, other than a two-player GAME not really different from Axis and Allies, just more time-consuming and complex? Ray From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Mar 29 19:30:09 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA04263; Fri, 29 Mar 96 19:30:08 +0100 Received: from naybob.ghq.com (naybob.ghq.com [204.73.247.161]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id TAA13431 for ; Fri, 29 Mar 1996 19:29:20 +0100 (MET) Received: (from jwhite@localhost) by naybob.ghq.com (8.7.1/8.7.1) id MAA31659; Fri, 29 Mar 1996 12:27:36 -0600 From: Jeff White Message-Id: <199603291827.MAA31659@naybob.ghq.com> Subject: Re: Antwerp & SF Supply To: abcclibr@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (conrad alan b) Date: Fri, 29 Mar 1996 12:27:35 -0600 (CST) Cc: bradbury@travel1.travel-net.com, europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: from "conrad alan b" at Mar 28, 96 09:55:47 pm Content-Type: text Status: O Content-Length: 4236 conrad alan b Said: > > > > On Thu, 28 Mar 1996, Jeff White wrote: > > > bradbury@travel1.travel-net.com Said: > > > > > > The following is based on my understanding of the SF supply rules > > > I understand SF Rule 12B4 to mean that an unlimited number of Allied units > > > can be supplied via a Naval element through a functioning major or great > > > port (given that the other elements of the supply line conform to the > > > balance of Rule 12B). In other words, if the Allied player owns Le Havre as > > > a functioning port, he could supply all land and air forces through this > > > port (given the appropriate rail lines, etc). > > > > > > This to me seems unduly generous to the Allied player. > > > Yes I agree. Some limitation on total number of REs through big > ports is necessary, either by Numbers of REs, or Length of rail element. > > > > > I think the game system might already take care of this, in a slightly > > off kilter way. First off, you need the 10 rail cap on the net to draw > > supply through the net. Before you can build rail cap, you need > > two mashaling yards > > So, if the Allies land in Normandy in June, don't capture two RMY's until > > July. Then it takes 4 more turns to get above 10 rail cap. Meanwhile, > > you're only working ports are Mulberries, and the Germans have > > blown up the rest, or are hold out. So they need Antwerp for > > supply and to move more troops in. Plus, it is close enough to the real > > front to bring supplies in via road. > > > You are correct almost to the end. You don't need Antwerp. If you > get Cherbourg and Caen you have the two marshalling yards. Then four > turns and 30 resource points later you can supply anywhere in Europe > without any other port (Caen is a major port). Only if Cherbourg and Caen do not blow, only a 1-in-6 chance. If they blow, you need 2+ turns to get them online. (Minimum two turns for a port cons X to fix it, maybe longer in bad weather and to move cons X into position). Also, I think Caen is an inland port and I recall some rule about not being able to fix it (if blown) in the duration of the game. > > > > I'd be game for the limits, but it soon gets to be real hard to count > > ALL of those REs at some point. That alone could take 10 minutes. > > It's not that hard, you just keep a running total as you bring them > ashore. Planes, losses, new units (French), etc ad nauseum count. If you have capacity on the rail net (10+) and several working major ports, why bother? > > > > Plus it can get wacky. If I link up France and the Italian front, > > can I use Palermo to supply units in France? > > > Not from Palermo. The straits of Messina are not a rail link for > the Allies. However, Taranto will do. I could be wrong here, but I don't recall that the allied side can not use it. > > > > > > I would like to hear if anyone has done similar experimentation, or can > > > explain how the RAW lead to the historical emphasis placed by the Allies on > > > the availability of both Antwerp and Marseille. > > > > We found minors to be really useful. Mostly because they do not > > blow up. They eliminate isolation and reduces some of the demand for > > supply points. We landed in France real early, in the south. > > > Question - when you say `real early', how early? > '43... winter '44? > Did you have the danger zone in place for your southern invasion? > If so how many losses did the allied naval forces take? Feb I 44. None. The rules for danger zones are ambigious. Such as, when do they change hands? We decided they would change ala airfields, when the ownership changed. We used a para drop in Southern France and landed in explotation more troops. It was very very weakly defended. The para boys took a port out. In any respect, I think the danger zone rules are a good idea, but not implemented well. They lead to oxymoronic behavior. Such as the more powerful your force is, the more danger you are in. Same with mines. -- Jeff White, ARS N0POY jwhite@ghq.com "I am Pentium of Borg. Arithmetic is irrelevant. Prepare to be approximated." From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Mar 29 19:56:20 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA04470; Fri, 29 Mar 96 19:56:19 +0100 Received: from ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (abcclibr@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu [128.174.5.59]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id TAA14157 for ; Fri, 29 Mar 1996 19:54:58 +0100 (MET) Received: by ux1.cso.uiuc.edu id AA01255 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for europa@lysator.liu.se); Fri, 29 Mar 1996 12:50:56 -0600 Date: Fri, 29 Mar 1996 12:50:47 -0600 From: conrad alan b To: Ray Kanarr Cc: byrnejb@harte-lyne.ca, byrnejb@hahp9k.harte-lyne.ca, europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: My $.0002 on More Stacking In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 1933 On Fri, 29 Mar 1996, Ray Kanarr wrote: > On 3/28/96, Alan Conrad posted: > > >Now one could argue that those 26 REs were not as > >efficient has 26 REs under two corps HQs. But in Europa > >terms does it matter. > > It should, if Europa is meant to be an operational-level simulation. > If its just meant to be a competitive game, with distinct winners and > losers, according to a strict set of rules criteria, then no, I guess > it doesn't matter. But then let's not kid ourselves about what it is > or isn't. Please don't misunderstand me. Yes these things would matter if we can get to an operational game as close to perfection as we can make it. My only point here was that `at this time' in Europa the term corps is a meaningless one since it does not come into play in any action or number that the players work with. But I certainly would support many concepts that would bring meaningful corps activities into the game. That after all, is one on the reasons I am advocating higher stacking levels, with actual corps units potentially being one of the ways to best incorporate higher stacking. > > >And western corps HQs would normally command an > >area of two or more hexes in distance, so length of corps > >control is not an issue in current Europa terms. > > Not just Western, by any means. You are absolutely correct, that > currently length of corps control is meaningless in Europa terms. My > question is: shouldn't it matter, or are we all willing to agree > that, for Europa play, French, Bulgarian, Iraqi, American, British, > etc., etc. are all equal? And what does that make Europa, then, other > than a two-player GAME not really different from Axis and Allies, just > more time-consuming and complex? > Yes I would be in favor of corps control of units that would have different capabilities for different nationalities AND different times in the war. Alan Conrad From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sat Mar 30 14:00:32 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA09670; Sat, 30 Mar 96 14:00:31 +0100 Received: from tom.compulink.co.uk (tom.compulink.co.uk [194.153.0.51]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id NAA02551 for ; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 13:58:56 +0100 (MET) Received: (from root@localhost) by tom.compulink.co.uk (8.6.9/8.6.9) id MAA05943 for europa@lysator.liu.se; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 12:58:05 GMT Date: Sat, 30 Mar 96 12:55 GMT From: nicklaw@cix.compulink.co.uk (Nicholas Law) Subject: Re: FWTBT To: europa@lysator.liu.se Reply-To: nicklaw@cix.compulink.co.uk Message-Id: Status: O Content-Length: 892 In-Reply-To: Mvh Elias Nordling said: >> For the republicans, major efforts should go to link up with the n-coast gobernitos and reinforce Madrid. Cnsequently, the Nationalists should try to counteract this.<< At the risk of committing a sweeping generalisation, I'd say that this is the whole war. If the Republicans can keep Madrid/Med Coast in contact with the Biscay Coast they will win; otherwise they'll lose. This makes control of the rail hub of Zaragoza (33:2833) very important -- that's one town I wouldn't have wanted to live in from '36-'39. Keith Pardue asked: >>Any advice on the logistics of playing the game?<< My advice is to try not to forget, as I did, halfway through a turn, which supply counters represent resource points and which supply steps. That sort of thing can completely ruin your afternoon... Nick From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sat Mar 30 16:28:37 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA10219; Sat, 30 Mar 96 16:28:35 +0100 Received: from dub-img-5.compuserve.com (dub-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.9.5]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA05056 for ; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 16:27:34 +0100 (MET) Received: by dub-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id KAA13559; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 10:26:46 -0500 Date: 30 Mar 96 10:25:02 EST From: Jim Arnold <74133.1765@compuserve.com> To: Europa LIst Subject: Re: Stacking Message-Id: <960330152501_74133.1765_BHR71-1@CompuServe.COM> Status: O Content-Length: 4054 John Astell writes, > Nick has a valid point -- if somneone claims something doesn't work, it's > up to that person (or like minded individuals) to thoroughly document it. > It seems unfair to tell people who may not agree with you to do the > checking for you. Documentation can be good, although for widely available map data with an abundance of examples to support my claim, and given the limitation of this non-graphical medium, my best advice for a persistent sceptic remains the same. When an email thread starts to sound like Scholastics debating the number of teeth in the head of a horse, it's time to go look for a stable. You may have missed my specific example of stacking in Diadem, examples of what "overstacking" would look like and how it would be described in fact, and the list of cities captured by the Germans in the first 15 days of France '40. I suggested that Nicholas and others look for themselves only after they persisted in saying simply that 3-3-2 stacking and the course of FOF "seem about right" without addressing my specific questions and examples. I don't mind providing more documentation, although I'm not really sure whether for some this is an issue of fact or orthodoxy. In flipping through a few of the official histories (U.S. and British) on France '44 I found the following: The US VII and VIII Corps in a major push down the west side of the Contentin in mid to late July '44: 6-7 divs on a 20 mile front, with more on the left flank (i.e. try to fit them into a two-hex configuration and you have to allow for more divs). Operation Goodwood: 5+ divs on a 10 mile front, with more on each flank. The British 30 and 8 Corps in late July and early August: 6 divs in 20 miles, with more on each flank. The Brit 2nd Army with 8 divs on the north side of the Falaise pocket, with 24 miles of frontage. The US XIII and XIX Corps in late Nov'44, attacking toward the Roer: 5 divs on a 12 mile front, with more on either flank. I can't find anything in the commentaries to suggest that any of the above operations experienced the telltale problems of "overstacking" - traffic jams, difficulties in deploying their full strength. On the other hand, consider the Germans at the start of the Bulge: 5th Panzer Army: 20 miles of front, 7 1/2 divs in the line, inflicting and taking casualties. 6th SS Panzer Army: 20 miles of front, 8 divisions. The "hexes" on either side were well-stacked. With snow and rough terrain, it's not surprising that by historical accounts they were definitely "overstacked" - but this is 15.5 divs in 2.5 hexes. (It's interesting that at least some of the German general staff - no amateurs in planning - thought they could pull it off.) > The current stacking rules cover most stacking/attacking situations. If you > want to show the rule is broken, you got to: > > 1) Show that there are numerous cases when the rule doesn't work. If > there's just a handful of exceptional cases, then that's what they are: > exceptional cases. That "exceptional" clause worries me. If the Allies only used a "4-4-3" five times in France in '44 (not), does that make it "exceptional"? Or do we look at the requirement in mobile warfare for a continuous front, at the availability of forces for minimum coverage, and at the number of times that a concentrated thrust was especially important, compared with how often it was carried out? "Exceptional" is when quadruplets are born to next-door neighbors; "normal" is when troops are concentrated as often as the overall situations allow, and without unusual difficulty. If someone is going to support their assertion that 3-3-2 is "about right" they should 1) stop calling 4-4-3 a "super stack" until they've demonstrated that it's excessive, and 2) document cases where something like 4-4-3 showed signs of being "over-stacked". Ouch. I just re-read this vile and argumentative post. Lest I be misinterpreted, I mean no disrespect to anyone, and I'm pressing the key in the spirit of enjoyable controversy. Go ahead, abuse me. Jim From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sat Mar 30 18:14:53 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA10615; Sat, 30 Mar 96 18:14:52 +0100 Received: from dub-img-5.compuserve.com (dub-img-5.compuserve.com [198.4.9.5]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id SAA06852 for ; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 18:14:04 +0100 (MET) Received: by dub-img-5.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id MAA26557; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 12:13:31 -0500 Date: 30 Mar 96 12:11:25 EST From: Jim Arnold <74133.1765@compuserve.com> To: Europa LIst Subject: Stacking - errata Message-Id: <960330171124_74133.1765_BHR54-1@CompuServe.COM> Status: O Content-Length: 142 I meant to include the Goodwood example with the Bulge as another case where "overstacking" could be detected in the way it transpired. Jim From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sun Mar 31 08:11:50 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA13385; Sun, 31 Mar 96 08:11:49 +0200 Received: from mail.cs.umn.edu (mail.cs.umn.edu [128.101.149.1]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id IAA22852 for ; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 08:09:52 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from deci.cs.umn.edu (thornley@deci.cs.umn.edu [128.101.224.10]) by mail.cs.umn.edu (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id AAA16075 for ; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 00:09:50 -0600 (CST) From: "David H. Thornley" Received: (thornley@localhost) by deci.cs.umn.edu (8.6.11/8.6.12) id AAA25178 for europa@lysator.liu.se; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 00:09:42 -0600 Message-Id: <199603310609.AAA25178@deci.cs.umn.edu> Subject: Re: Stacking To: europa@lysator.liu.se (Europa mailing list) Date: Sun, 31 Mar 1996 00:09:41 -0600 (CST) In-Reply-To: <960327071859_74133.1765_BHR41-1@CompuServe.COM> from "Jim Arnold" at Mar 27, 96 02:19:00 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Status: O Content-Length: 1282 >[Some comments on stacking omitted] > > I'm having a difficult time comprehending the persistence of this debate. Sorry > to say, I started it with specific examples of the Allies in Diadem. It's not > complex, it's not subjective. Just try setting up the Allied (and German) lines > in Normandy, the Bulge, Kursk, or Stalingrad. If you're really interested, see > for yourself - there are examples aplenty. The seemingly simple points which The ones I've been seeing most often in this discussions are set-piece situations. To narrow the debate, would it be acceptable to assume that the Europa stacking limits work in general, but not necessarily in pre- planned operations? > Sometimes it seems that the real issue is whether The Laws of Europa have some > sort of religious significance, or whether as rules for war games they are > subject to improvement. To me at least, that's not an interesting question > either. > Well, they are the status quo, and should not be changed lightly. David H. Thornley, known to the Wise as thornley@cs.umn.edu O- Disclaimer: These are not the opinions of the University of Minnesota, its Regents, faculty, staff, students, or squirrels. Datclaimer: Well, maybe the squirrels. They're pretty smart. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sun Mar 31 16:41:59 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA14857; Sun, 31 Mar 96 16:41:58 +0200 Received: from emout06.mail.aol.com (emout06.mail.aol.com [198.81.10.43]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA28698 for ; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 16:41:20 +0200 (MET DST) From: EuropaStag@aol.com Received: by emout06.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id JAA00292; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 09:40:48 -0500 Date: Sun, 31 Mar 1996 09:40:48 -0500 Message-Id: <960331094047_459044358@emout06.mail.aol.com> To: Stefan.Farrelly@barclays.co.uk Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: African maps Status: O Content-Length: 772 In a message dated 96-03-28 10:22:24 EST, you write: >To all those who expressed an interest in maps for Africa - ie. Europa scale >Somailiand, the Sudan (for those games where the Axis push the Allies here) >Winston has said he can produce the maps as long as someone has them >prepared, >eg. A Goodwin, and theyll cost $50 bucks ea to make (doing say a run of 50). > >I for one am a buyer. All we have to do now is find Mr Goodwin on the net and >ask him if he has the proofs ready to go. Mr Goodwin at last look is not on the net. His color work is good enough to color Xerox. Color Xerox is not too expensive in quantity! >All those who would like these maps, even at $50 ea. please express and >opinion >and ill chase it up with Winston. > >Stefan Farrelly > > > From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 1 01:15:52 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA16983; Mon, 1 Apr 96 01:15:51 +0200 Received: from smtp4.aw.com (smtp4.aw.com [192.207.117.64]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id BAA09564 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 01:14:34 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from East-Message_Server by smtp4.aw.com with Novell_GroupWise; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 18:11:30 -0500 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1 Date: Sun, 31 Mar 1996 19:20:16 -0500 From: Ray Kanarr To: EuropaStag@aol.com, Stefan.Farrelly@barclays.co.uk Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: The world according to Europa [was: Re: African maps] Status: O Content-Length: 496 One question and one statement regarding maps: 1) As the current Europa map set is already pushing the edge of the envelope, in terms of a flat-surface representation of a spherical one, how do any large additionally represented areas [either Africa or the Far East] address this issue? 2) For fifty bucks a pop, through the miracle of NAFTA, we can probably hire a non-American company to render each and every single map by hand. No way is this a cost-effective proposal, as it stands. Ray From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 1 04:10:53 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA00730; Mon, 1 Apr 96 04:10:52 +0200 Received: from ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (abcclibr@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu [128.174.5.59]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id EAA11980 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 04:08:15 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by ux1.cso.uiuc.edu id AA25198 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for europa@lysator.liu.se); Sun, 31 Mar 1996 20:08:09 -0600 Date: Sun, 31 Mar 1996 20:08:08 -0600 From: conrad alan b To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: stacking (evidence) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 9444 Gents, In resent posts and replies, several of you, including Ray Kanarr, have asked for evidence of stacking beyond the Europa rules. I see my ally Jim Arnold has just posted some of this data. However I spent a lot of time digging this stuff up so I'm going to lay it on all of you anyway. What I will try to do is give you the data itself, along with the bib reference it came from. Then I would like to mix that in with how the date relates to Europa. In most of this we have little or no date on support troops, the flak, engineers, AT units in the line, or the artillery behind the line. So in some cases we are looking at the numbers vs the 3 divisions (9 REs) that Europa lets us stack in the line. In other cases we are looking at the total 3-3-2 (14 Res) in direct action. First the West Front. I'll start as Jim did, at the Bulge. From Hitler's Last Gamble, by Trevor Dupuy. A pretty fair book with a good OB, a lot of casualty data I have never seen anywhere else. Maps only fair. Gives a lot of info of how the American doctrine of divisions in the line worked in practice. Very good for Europa kind of discussions. 12-16-44; whole German attack - 61 miles (4 hexes): 11 inf XX, 5 Pz XXs, 1 PZ X, in the line. Plus entering the battle within 3 to 8 days (well within one Europa turn) 3 Pz XXs, 2 Pz Xs, 2 PzG XXs, 1 inf XX , or about 69 REs or 17 REs/hex. More specific - 1st SS Pz Corps, 12 mile front: 5 XXs + 6 art IIs + 5 art Xs + flak III + 2 HvPz IIs on the attack from corps plus whatever Army allocated from it's troops : 5 eng II, 2 flak III, 9 bridging columns. Or by my estimate about 28 REs in a one half hex front. From History of the Second World War United Kingdom Military Series, Victory in the West, Vol I, by L.F. Ellis: British attack at Caumont, 7-29-44, 12 mile front, 6 XXs. Mortain Counter Attack, 8-6-44, 25 mile front (1.6 hex) 6 U.S. XXs were defending; 7 German XXs + 2 kampgruppe on attack. Note that this is not a set piece battle. It is an on the fly attack - counteratttack - response situation. As is the Falaise Pocket: 8-16-44. In an area of 13 by 26 miles were the Germans, less than two total hexes. 7 XXXs, 9 inf XXs + 5 KG + 9 Pz XXs, 1 PzG KG plus all the remnants and support troops. It is hard to gauge in Europa terms what state all these units were in. Many would be cadre, some might not exist at all, so I won't try to estimate RE density in the pocket. However the Allies, on a 70 mile front ( 4.5 hex front, but 6 hex sides) had 7 XXXs of 17 XXs. Normandy bridgehead 7-24-44, 75 mile front (5 hexes), Allies have 8 XXXs of 28 XXs in the line (5+/hex) some on defense, some getting ready for attacks. Plus at least 4 XXs in reserve in those same hexes. Even with overstack, we can not stack that much in Europa. On Defense the Germans had 22 XXs on that 5 hex line, although many might be cadre or elim in Europa terms. From U.S. Army in World War II, European Theater of Operations, Breakout and Pursuit, by Martin Blumenson. Cobra, 7-25-44, 4.5 mile(.3 hex) front. 7th U.S. Corps had 6 XXs + 21 art IIs on attack, showing quite well how while three divisions to a corps might be standard practice, its not how things were always done. Add in all the known attached tank and AT and Eng units the Americans always would have, both in history and in the game, by my estimate it would have been at least 36 REs on the attack. Overall 1st U.S. Army had 7 more divisions in the line on either side of 7 corps, on a total 35 mile or 2.2 hex front. So there was not a lot of give on the edges for those troops, stacking wise. Med Front - from the U.K. series, Mediterranean & Middle East, Vols 5 & 6, by C.S.C. Molony. Anzio is a very good example of what doesn't work in Europa stacking. 2-16-44 German counterattack, on a 19 mile front the Germans had 8 divisions in the line, 5 XXs on a 4 mile point of attack. Again this was not a set piece battle just whatever the Germans could throw together. 5-23-44 Allied breakout. This is an excellent point for discussion. The pocket had a 31 mile frontage, about 110 square miles of beachhead. By my view well under one total hex, but if a hex, it has three hex sides of 27 miles. We had a point made in one of the recent posts about hex sides being more important than hex width. This may show whether that point has any validity. Most of the time in our games we have those (needed or dreaded) points in line where three hexes can attack one. It's part of the system we must live with. In hex side terms that lets an attacker with three full hexes of troops attack one hex of troops even though the actual frontage is exactly the same. Those 27 miles. It would be more accurate if we could have a system that let us stack along the hexside. But I rather doubt any of us are quite that crazy yet. And anyway when I look at the Europa game vs history discussion I see two weeks of combat that goes well within the whole hex. So even if units are not in the line on day one, before day 14 is done they will be in action. Or as Jim put it so well, they will be giving and taking casualties. So I always look at the whole hex and state things from the 16 miles/hex frontage. At Anzio we have the opposite of the norm since one hex is attacking out and it puts a different burden on the defense since they have to defend three hex sides. Back to Anzio. Here we have Frank Watson's Battle for Rome scenario from TEM 45 to guide us in Europa terms. I think he has been very generous to give the beachhead TWO hexes. In the attack the 1st and 5th Br XXs held an 8 mile front and were only going to be making initial attacks since they were down 3,600 men. Frank made the 1st a cadre to show this. On an 11 mile front (.7 hex) there were 5 XXs + 3 IIIs of the 1st Special Service Force. Frank made those 3 IIIs a single brigade in the game. There were 30 battalions of U.S. + 9 regiments of British artillery in the beachhead, Frank valued that at 3 art units. Frank put 9 REs in hex 1825, and 11 REs in hex 1925, and let the players put 10 REs in either. With only 3 artillery units present ( for four stacking slots), we must put 5 units into overstack. Now if one were to evaluate the beachhead as only one hex, then even with overstack one cannot fit that many troops there, and of course one can't get the 15+ REs in the attack. Note lastly that all those troops are in one corps the U.S.6th. Did that hurt the commant control? Also in the Med, right after the Diadem battle we've seen discussed, the British advanced up the Liri-Sacco river valley with 5 XXs on a 5 mile front. With the 6th S.A. Armored XX right behind. This was a fighting advance, 37 mile advance in 11 days. Now on to the East Front. First from the game Stalingrad Pocket from The Gamers I have set up at the moment. 5th Tank Army on a 27 mile front (1.7 hexes) 2 Tank XXXs, 1 Cav XXX, 6 inf XXs or 14 REs/hex. Lastly, from From the Don to the Dnepr by David Glantz. I can not recommend this book too highly. For Europa gamers it is the best. It has a series of daily maps with each division's progress detailed. The maps are hand drawn and hard to read at times, but just great. Add to that a good OB and a good text of what's happening and it is an almost ideal text. Just after Kursk, the Soviet attack towards Belgorod, 8-3-43. The Voronez Front had a 110 mile front (7 hexes) In the line: 28 Rifle XXs, 10 Tank & Mech XXXs, 1 art XXX, 3 art XXs, 41 art IIIs, 5 AA XXs, 4 tank Xs, 6 tank IIIs, 4 AT Xs, 43 AT IIIs, 4 eng Xs. Or about 23 REs/hex. If you think that's not that bad vs Europa's 14 REs/hex, note: 38th, 40th & 27th amies were holding 90 miles (5 hexes) of this front with 16 Rifle XXs and 3 Tank XXXs. Next to them on a 10 mile front was 6th Guards Army, with 6 Rifle XXs and 1 Tank XXX. Then the main attack with the 5th Guards Army on a 10 mile front with 7 Rifle XXs. Right behind them, in that hex was the 1st Tank Army and the 5th Gds Tank Army with 6 Tank & Mech XXXs. These were not in overstack or waiting to advance in exploitation phase. The plan was for 6th Gds Army's infantry to open up the holes so in about day three or four the tank corps could smash through. The infantry did not measure up and the tanks had to go in on day two. But in any case all of this stuff was in the attack in Europa terms. And we would not want to forget that right next to 6th Gds was the Steppe Fronts' 53rd Army with 7 Rifle XXs and a Mech XXX on a 6 mile front. By my rough estimate on the flank the stacks were `filled' with 14 REs/hex. In the attack there were 120 REs in less than a 23 mile front or one & a half hexes. Or about 80 REs/hex. And was there congestion? These armies all advanced 58 to 71 miles in the next 14 days. Fighting, giving and taking casualties all the way. Now I am not advocating a stacking rule of 80 REs to the hex. But I would hope that this data, plus the reasons I gave in a previous post of how the 3-3-2 rule forced players to do wrong things, would let us go forward to see what level of stacking we need to get the game to work `right' Alan Conrad Champaign, Illinois From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 1 04:26:17 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA00854; Mon, 1 Apr 96 04:26:16 +0200 Received: from ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (abcclibr@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu [128.174.5.59]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id EAA12119 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 04:23:53 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by ux1.cso.uiuc.edu id AA27652 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for europa@lysator.liu.se); Sun, 31 Mar 1996 20:23:45 -0600 Date: Sun, 31 Mar 1996 20:23:44 -0600 From: conrad alan b To: Ray Kanarr Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: My $.0002 on More Stacking In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 2605 > > >Should not construction units building an airfield behind > >the line be above stacking limits? How about police units > >and AA units. > > If units are 'behind the lines' then they should be allowed to > overstack, but contribute nothing to the offense/ defense, and suffer > all negative effects of combat, since such negative effects indicate > some enemy units at least marauding into the hex, and these units are > not prepared for combat, but doing their other duties. If they do > contribute their factors to attack/defense, then they are perforce > 'on the line, and count against stacking. Seems simple enough to me. > That's the point. Units in overstack can do nothing, except get out of overstack. They can not build or anything. They are not even sitting on the roads since any other stacks can walk right through them with no penalty. And in two weeks of combat in that hex those backfield units will contribute something to the defense. > > Corps markers can represent anything they are said to represent, as > long as there are valid rules backing up that representation. Yes, we > might not know exactly what subdivisional units XXX corps had on July > 15th, 1942, but we know beyond a shadow of a doubt what the TO&E said > they should have, which is partially what Europa is based on, not > day-to-day OBs for every force for the entire war. > That is what I'm trying to say. Right now they represent nothing. They are just a way to put one counter on the map rather than a stack. Now if you are talking about T.O.& E. and doctrine of corps being what the stacking rules are about then you are making a point. One I disagree with but a point. > > Standard doctrine for anyone means absolutely nothing unless you make > adjustments in order to make an apples to apples comparison. It was > not standard doctrine for the Soviets to leave their armor 16 miles > behind the front lines for two weeks, so therefore to make an > accurate comparison, you need to adjust the concepts in the doctrine > to compare with the Europa time/distance scale, which is an > objective, rather than subjective, comparison. In these terms, it > makes perfect sense that the armor is right up there with the > infantry in the attack. See my last post. Just my point. In Europa the infanty just holds the line where the attack isn't. One can not attack with a few Rifle XXs for a couple days, then hit the line with the Tank XXXs. There is not enough stacking allowed in one hex to do that. You can not get the needed attack points. Alan Conrad From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 1 04:39:28 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA00975; Mon, 1 Apr 96 04:39:27 +0200 Received: from smtp4.aw.com (smtp4.aw.com [192.207.117.64]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id EAA12237 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 04:37:25 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from East-Message_Server by smtp4.aw.com with Novell_GroupWise; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 21:34:53 -0500 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1 Date: Sun, 31 Mar 1996 22:43:37 -0500 From: Ray Kanarr To: abcclibr@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: My $.0002 on More Stacking Status: O Content-Length: 1054 On 3/31/96, Alan Conrad wrote: >And in two weeks of combat in that hex those backfield >units will contribute something to the defense. Yeah, if they are construction units building something, or police units on occupation duty, they'll contribute a mass of corpses for the heroic fighting men to hide behind. Seriously, REMFs contributed suberbly in their own fashion, but they are NOT combat troops. They should be allowed to perform their functions in a hex, but not contribute to defense. Over the course of a two-week turn, their major contribution to the fighting front would be to grease enemy treads. The point that I'm trying to make here is that Europa is a hybrid super-tactical/sub-operational game, precisely because it DOES NOT take corps and doctrinal effects into account. Now, these may not make all that much difference in the individual games [and that's called into question for even a game as 'small' as FoF, let alone the monsters SE and SF], but they sure will affect trying to get GE to resemble anything like WW II. Ray From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 1 04:44:31 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA01001; Mon, 1 Apr 96 04:44:30 +0200 Received: from ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (abcclibr@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu [128.174.5.59]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id EAA12250 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 04:40:06 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by ux1.cso.uiuc.edu id AA00320 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for europa@lysator.liu.se); Sun, 31 Mar 1996 20:38:24 -0600 Date: Sun, 31 Mar 1996 20:38:24 -0600 From: conrad alan b To: Jeff White Cc: bradbury@travel1.travel-net.com, europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: Antwerp & SF Supply In-Reply-To: <199603291827.MAA31659@naybob.ghq.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 1692 Jeff White wrote: > > Only if Cherbourg and Caen do not blow, only a 1-in-6 chance. If > they blow, you need 2+ turns to get them online. (Minimum two turns > for a port cons X to fix it, maybe longer in bad weather and > to move cons X into position). Also, I think Caen is an inland port > and I recall some rule about not being able to fix it (if blown) > in the duration of the game. > Agreed you do have to fix them. That must have been why Mongomery was so keen to capture Caen as soon as possible. He knew the port would blow up and it would take time before it could get fixed. No the rule is an inland port WITH an artificial harbor can not be fixed. Caen is just inland. But this brings to mind a question for all. As my previous post showed, by my estimate there must have been as many as 150 REs in Normandy by the end of July II. A) is it possible in Europa to actually get that many units into that bridgehead? B) how are you going to supply them? Historically there were only the two mulberries, and in game terms was one of them destroyed in the great storm in June? Cherbourg was captured, but I assume did not roll the six to escapt destruction. Caen had not yet been captured. Can one fly in that many supplies? And even if physically possible, I'm pretty sure that flying in supplies was not the way they got things done historically Even if the `Allied' player has playing games with keeping some units in then out of supply, by the Aug I turn it seems they were all able to make the big push. I have not tried to set that up, but my gut feeling is that it is not possible in Europa terms. Alan From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 1 05:51:39 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA01368; Mon, 1 Apr 96 05:51:37 +0200 Received: from smtp.utexas.edu (smtp.utexas.edu [128.83.126.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id FAA12804 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 05:49:17 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from slip-53-11.ots.utexas.edu (slip-53-11.ots.utexas.edu [128.83.251.43]) by smtp.utexas.edu (8.6.7/8.6.6) with SMTP id VAA10179 for ; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 21:47:53 -0600 Date: Sun, 31 Mar 1996 21:47:53 -0600 Message-Id: <199604010347.VAA10179@smtp.utexas.edu> X-Sender: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu (Bobby D. Bryant) Subject: Re: stacking (evidence) Status: O Content-Length: 524 Alan said: >Gents, ... And a whole lot more! Thanks, Alan, for taking the time to research it and write it up; I found it very interesting even without reference to the debate over stacking limits. His post also makes me wonder: what will be the stacking limits for GR/D's WWI games? In particular, will there be an allowance for piles of artillery units in a hex? (I'm aware that WWI praxis won't tell us much about the "shoulds" of representing WWII.) - Bobby. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 1 06:04:29 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA01443; Mon, 1 Apr 96 06:04:28 +0200 Received: from smtp.utexas.edu (smtp.utexas.edu [128.83.126.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA12887 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 06:02:18 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from slip-53-11.ots.utexas.edu (slip-53-11.ots.utexas.edu [128.83.251.43]) by smtp.utexas.edu (8.6.7/8.6.6) with SMTP id WAA10380 for ; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 22:00:42 -0600 Date: Sun, 31 Mar 1996 22:00:42 -0600 Message-Id: <199604010400.WAA10380@smtp.utexas.edu> X-Sender: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu (Bobby D. Bryant) Subject: Re: Antwerp & SF Supply Status: O Content-Length: 391 Alan said: > Historically there were only the two mulberries, and in game terms >was one of them destroyed in the great storm in June? Cherbourg was >captured, but I assume did not roll the six to escapt destruction. Caen >had not yet been captured. I understand that Cherbourg was destroyed with shocking thoroughness. - Bobby. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 1 06:34:19 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA01594; Mon, 1 Apr 96 06:34:17 +0200 Received: from osf1.gmu.edu (osf1.gmu.edu [129.174.1.13]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA13073 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 06:31:46 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by osf1.gmu.edu; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/07Sep94-1001AM/GMUv3) id AB16610; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 23:31:44 -0500 Message-Id: <9604010431.AB16610@osf1.gmu.edu> Subject: stacking To: europa@lysator.liu.se (europa mailing list) Date: Sun, 31 Mar 1996 23:31:44 +4300 (EST) From: "Arius V Kaufmann" X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Status: O Content-Length: 1576 > >And in two weeks of combat in that hex those backfield > >units will contribute something to the defense. > > are NOT combat troops. They should be allowed to perform their > functions in a hex, but not contribute to defense. Over the course of > a two-week turn, their major contribution to the fighting front would > be to grease enemy treads. This is reflected in the fact that the SEC III units have a 1 combat while combat III's have strengths of 2,3, or more. Some construction units are 0-1-5 III's and the rail III's are 0-6's. I think in practice they'll be grease for the tank treads without taking away the defense capability. One must remember that stacking works both ways. Sure, the Germans'll have monster stacks, but at the expense of smaller supporting stacks, which are, in turn, vulnerable to a surprise counter-attack with a Soviet monster stack. The front would probably be more fluid, but a competant Soviet player can stop the Germans at Narva and Luga on the Leningrad front in a 3-3-2 game, and stop them cold. (I did this at last year's Origins.) The Germans then have to slug it out ahistorically to get anywhere near Winter '41 lines, eating up resources needed in the South to get historical results. I won't go into an in-depth analysis of how to play the Soviets, (I'm hardly an expert, I just haven't made massive defensive errors costing me a game), but suffice to say that I think a move to 4-4-3 will make it easier for the Germans to get historical end of summer '41 results. (And I LIKE playing the Soviets.) Arius From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 1 07:23:03 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA02022; Mon, 1 Apr 96 07:23:02 +0200 Received: from ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (abcclibr@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu [128.174.5.59]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id HAA13555 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 07:20:46 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by ux1.cso.uiuc.edu id AA24866 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for europa@lysator.liu.se); Sun, 31 Mar 1996 23:20:40 -0600 Date: Sun, 31 Mar 1996 23:20:40 -0600 From: conrad alan b To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: unit strengths & losses Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 5541 Gents, I would like to take a look at how units are lost and return. With a particular eye as to how this should be thought out advancing towards GE. First a slick trick from SF to show part of the problem. Question - what is one of the best ways to defend long coastal areas, and the best way to have a reserve that the allies can do nothing about as well as not knowing where it is? Answer by example. In a game of mine my allied opponent made an invasion at Ancona and points north in Italy on the Adriatic. I only had the troops to garrison a couple of the ports. But he had foolishly made a mistake and in the last turn destroyed a PzG division. And I had a couple of infantry units in the dead pile also. So since I had enough replacement points these units popped out of thin air and destroyed the 101st a/b. So the answer to the slick trick question is to leave some dead units in the pile with enough points to bring them back. There is nothing the allies can do about it, and they can be everywhere you might need them in a theater. In Russia the ability to bring back dead units anywhere was not much of a problem since there were so few towns around and so few surprise situations. But in SF I think is makes for bad gaming. Let's take a look at units, their strengths, and their replacements. Look at the U.S. 1st Infantry division. It had a TO&E of 14,000. I'd estimate about 6,000 of there are line infantry. Now John Astell was telling us in a post recently about unit strengths. I believe he and most of you would see how if the 1st lost about 4,000 men if could be considered a cadre. In game terms from a 11-8 to a 5-8. If the division losses another couple thousand men it is eliminated in game terms. This then starts the above problem. The loss generated 2.2 Special Replacements, but add 8.8 and the Big Red One is as good as new ANYWHERE in the theater you want it. But actually there were about 8,000 men plus most of the equipment of the division wherever the unit was "lost". And you do not have to transport these guys to wherever the unit is rebuilt. First off, but very difficult to do, looking at GE, is to put losses in `real' terms. In above I lost 6 points of `replacements', but I should have still have those 8 points of guys somewhere. This is real important if a unit is lost surrounded. In the game if I lose the cadre surrounded I just lose the 1 point of Special Replacements not the 10 points of people really lost. Of course in SF you lose VPs as the Americans but the Germans or Russians would not lose in a similar situation. How to figure those point losses and work them into a replacement chart or possibly a production chart is difficult. As many have argued there are a lot of ways to look at what is in a division and how to put it in terms of production. But I feel it is a topic worth discussion. But there is a way to solve part of the problem, i.e. bringing back units anywhere, too quickly. I propose this: if a cadre is destroyed it becomes a remnant. It is not too difficult to do this logistically. Just as we have a breakdown chart, we can have a remnant chart. 1st XX dies it goes on the next open spot, remnant 17. Counter Remnant 17 now goes on the map. It still is a stacking point, it provides no defense, but you do have to get it back to a town (or whatever is declared as legal points for rebuilding). It take one turn to rebuild the cadre, one turn to rebuild the cadre to the unit. That is at least some downtime. And you can only rebuild it where it actually is. Now what that cost is for the remnant to cadre, is part of that cost problem. And it is important too. If that cost is made properly high enough one has to be careful not to lose troops surrounded. On the East Front, the Soviet player will not automatically stack Minsk full of units if losing those units surrounded cost a lost more than the 1/5 replacement point. That's part of the solution I would like all of you to think about and comment on. Here's some more data, about what is a loss? From Stanton, our 1st Infantry division lost a total of 18,800 casualties during the entire war; North Africa, Sicily, Normandy, across France into Germany and the Bulge. In game terms how many times, IF ever, was the 1st flipped to cadre? From Blumenson: in Normandy the German 352nd lost 8,000 men thru turns June I, June II, and July I, Would it still be a cadre? From Dupuy, at the Bulge, the German 5th Parachute started with a strength of 13,500. It lost on Dec II: 6,900, on Jan I a further 1,400 and had a strength of 5,900. Should it be a cadre? It was certainly giving a couple of U.S. divisions problems while trying to reduce the bulge. The poor old U.S. 106th Infantry, right off it lost 8,500 of 13,900. And was mostly surrounded too. Lost in game terms? Yet The regiment that was not lost fought at St. Vith. And was in the line latter in the battle as will. They lost 677 casualties in the Jan I turn. American doctrine was loaning them regiments from other divisions so they could have two in the line and fight on. So are they a cadre? Actually they were fighting with the firepower of a full division. I hope we can come to a concensus that this is a problem that needs a fix. With all of our minds we should be able to come up with a proper fix. Alan Conrad Champaign, Illinois From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 1 07:30:37 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA02075; Mon, 1 Apr 96 07:30:36 +0200 Received: from smtp.utexas.edu (smtp.utexas.edu [128.83.126.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id HAA13702 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 07:29:28 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from slip-56-14.ots.utexas.edu (slip-56-14.ots.utexas.edu [128.83.251.94]) by smtp.utexas.edu (8.6.7/8.6.6) with SMTP id XAA11788 for ; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 23:26:25 -0600 Date: Sun, 31 Mar 1996 23:26:25 -0600 Message-Id: <199604010526.XAA11788@smtp.utexas.edu> X-Sender: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu (Bobby D. Bryant) Subject: Re: stacking Status: O Content-Length: 1502 Arius said: > ... a competant Soviet player >can stop the Germans at Narva and Luga on the Leningrad front in a 3-3-2 >game, and stop them cold. (I did this at last year's Origins.) The Germans >then have to slug it out ahistorically to get anywhere near Winter '41 lines, >eating up resources needed in the South to get historical results. My experience exactly, except that I've never done it at Origins! In hopes of forestalling reiteration of the claim that the Soviets profit from hindsight, I'll mention that the Axis do so as well. In particular, I doubt that many players undertake the Axis side in a game of FE/SE without an operational plan that extends beyond the first 2-1/2 turns, and I'll bet it's something more specific than "We'll sic the Luftwaffe on whatever escapes across the Volga!" You can argue that the imbalance during Barbarossa arises from other causes, such as unit strength and movement ratings, replacement rates, supply, etc., but unless or until such is established and addressed, I think higher stacking will improve the simulation for this part of Europa. (For those of you who don't see such an imbalance, I can't ask you to disbelieve your own observations any more than I am willing to disbelieve mine. I just hope members of both camps can get together at one of the next conventions and see how playing style factors into the balance.) - Bobby. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 1 07:34:25 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA02098; Mon, 1 Apr 96 07:34:24 +0200 Received: from ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (abcclibr@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu [128.174.5.59]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id HAA13761 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 07:33:15 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by ux1.cso.uiuc.edu id AA26569 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for europa@lysator.liu.se); Sun, 31 Mar 1996 23:32:45 -0600 Date: Sun, 31 Mar 1996 23:32:44 -0600 From: conrad alan b To: "John M. Astell" Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: Stacking In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 1312 On Mon, 25 Mar 1996, John M. Astell wrote: > On 25 March 96, Nick Forte wrote: > > >I will concede that it is impossible to reach Abbeville on schedule in Europa. This is due to movement limitations, however, NOT stacking. That being said, The timetable may slip a turn here or there, but the general flow of the campaign is correct. > > Nick is right. When FoF was developed, we "re-created" the historical > campaign, moving units and fighting per their historical moves, up to the > limits the rules permitted. As I remember, you can even capture Abbeville > on schedule -- you don't occupy it with a unit but you can get an > uncontested German ZOC there by the end of exploitation movement. > Without having stacked the counters myself I would agree to point. I do believe the usual game campaign `slips'. Taking France out in under 10 turns may be difficult. But if one just decided the turns were one week rather than two those 10 turns are just off the mark. Since there is no particular rational for the momement rates or CRT being tied to 14 days that is not that bad an idea. After all that is what was done more or less in FtF. That only means we have to look at the two week turn time and see if that is causing of solving more Europa problems. Alan Conrad From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 1 08:36:59 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA02643; Mon, 1 Apr 96 08:36:58 +0200 Received: from desiree.teleport.com (desiree.teleport.com [192.108.254.21]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id IAA14667 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 08:36:16 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [206.163.123.69] (ip-pdx14-05.teleport.com [206.163.123.69]) by desiree.teleport.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA17566 for ; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 22:36:09 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199604010636.WAA17566@desiree.teleport.com> X-Sender: zaius@mail.teleport.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 31 Mar 1996 22:41:28 -0800 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: zaius@teleport.com (Steve) Subject: crated aircraft problems Status: O Content-Length: 953 My understanding about crated aricraft was that it was an extremely expensive and time consuming way to move aircraft. Any aircraft that could possibly be moved by flying itself was flown. Others were moved by aircraft transports (the French carrier Bearn ended up serving as an aircraft transport) in this way, many types of aircraft -especially short ranged fighters- could be transported by sea without having to completely disassemble them. It is interesting to note that huge numbers of American and other aircraft were written off after being flown on arduous shuttle transfers from North American to places like Australia. B17s were flown to England then to North Africa then to Egypt, India and then Australia. Many aircaft simply failed to show up. Most made it of course, but of these many were already experiencing severe wear and tear before ever being used operationally. SP "Freedom is always against the law." -J.R. "Bob" Dobbs From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 1 08:36:59 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA02644; Mon, 1 Apr 96 08:36:58 +0200 Received: from desiree.teleport.com (desiree.teleport.com [192.108.254.21]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id IAA14680 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 08:36:38 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [206.163.123.69] (ip-pdx14-05.teleport.com [206.163.123.69]) by desiree.teleport.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA17709 for ; Sun, 31 Mar 1996 22:36:30 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199604010636.WAA17709@desiree.teleport.com> X-Sender: zaius@mail.teleport.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 31 Mar 1996 22:41:49 -0800 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: zaius@teleport.com (Steve) Subject: Re: (WWII) no neo-nazis! :) Status: O Content-Length: 2804 >Huh? If you mean that I should accept the possibility that Hitler was >a raving looney (rather than a raving megalomaniac, which he was), I >don't see that as a problem. I also don't see it as an argument. >As far as I can tell, Hitler was profoundly evil, possessed of normally >good political instincts, a very bad military strategist, and made >military decisions in a rational manner, considering the previous >caveats. As always and by instinct, I take the most contraversial possible view on anything. I think that cases can be made for Hitler being an intelligent person and for being correct about some things (better to have a hi-velocity 50mm gun or whatever)*. It's an over-generalization to wax poetic about his dilletantish behaviour. I don't think that FDR and Churchill look particularly inspiring when their personal peccadilloes are scrutinized. Stalin's personality flaws are quite as glaring as Hitler's. Was the fact that Hitler's father beat him the reason he was so hateful and selfish? Maybe, but I don't beleive that Germany was doomed to making asinine decisions and losing the war by the hand of fate. Certainly some Generals were able to stand up to Hitler and some of them could even outshout him to his face. So, in real life, it might be that in one or another particular situation, his military commanders might have pushed him back to his original role of observer-which he played in the Polish and Western campaigns. After that he became Alexander the Great in his own mind, although he was crediting himself with other's successful ideas (the Manstein plan that defeated France was Manstein's idea and not Hitler's after all- Hitler only chose the plan as being obviously more imaginative than the stale WW1 rehash that Manstein's rivals were pursuing) Really, though when playing Europa- even Grand Europa, it shouldn't matter what specific political scenario could be used to justify good player decisions resulting in success. What it all comes down to for me is that somebody has to play the "bad guys". Also, although I can't claim to be a Nazi, I do find David Irving's work to be useful. I refuse to not read someone's work because of his noxious political beliefs or because of the smug pontifications of an author's detractors. I have had some personal contact with him and he is *very* creepy. SP *It seems on the evidence that Hitler would have been much better off as a quartermaster sergeant and that in some brighter alternate reality he was promoted to such a position. Also, comes to mind some quote I once heard about how much better the world would be if he would have been accepted into Architect School in Vienna- "Vienna could easily have suffered one more mediocre architect." "Freedom is always against the law." -J.R. "Bob" Dobbs From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 1 13:44:20 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA07650; Mon, 1 Apr 96 13:44:19 +0200 Received: from mailgate.ericsson.se (mailgate.ericsson.se [130.100.2.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id NAA20744 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 13:42:34 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from lmera (lmera.lmera.ericsson.se [147.214.60.16]) by mailgate.ericsson.se (8.6.11/1.0) with SMTP id NAA08216 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 13:42:28 +0200 Received: from y0107 by lmera (5.x/LME-DOM-2.2.3) id AA06350; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 13:41:01 +0200 Received: by y0107 (4.1/client-1.5) id AA16110; Mon, 1 Apr 96 13:40:59 +0200 Date: Mon, 1 Apr 96 13:40:59 +0200 Message-Id: <9604011140.AA16110@y0107> From: Johan Herber Z/XU Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit To: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: (message from conrad alan b on Sun, 31 Mar 1996 23:20:40 -0600) Subject: Re: unit strengths & losses Status: O Content-Length: 868 Concerning rebuilding of lost units. A first step should be to differentiate more between units that are lost isolated and others. My suggestion is that units lost isolated are to be rebuilt using the forming/full system in addition to paying the replacement cost. This should take a standard amount of time from the replacement cost is paid. This should also reduce the amount of special OB events (ie the withdrawals after Stalingrad etc) in GE games. Forcing entirely lost divisions to be rebuilt in two steps reduces the flexibility of the replacement system in providing emergency reserves. /Johan Johan Herber | Email: eraherr@lmera.ericsson.se Rydsvagen 104A | Phone: +46 13173013 S-582 48 LINKOPING | -Work: +46 13284160 SWEDEN | From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 1 17:43:33 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA11330; Mon, 1 Apr 96 17:43:32 +0200 Received: from ns.rmc.com (ns.rmc.com [137.25.23.1]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id RAA02803 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 17:41:37 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by ns.rmc.com (AIX 4.1/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA20448; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 10:30:41 -0500 Received: from internet.rmc.com(137.25.3.24) by ns.rmc.com via smap (V1.3) id sma013740; Mon Apr 1 10:30:25 1996 Received: from lanmail.rmc.com by internet.rmc.com (AIX 4.1/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA12334; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 10:10:16 -0500 Received: by LANMAIL.RMC.COM; Mon, 1 Apr 96 10:10:46 EST Date: Mon, 1 Apr 96 10:11:02 EST Message-Id: X-Priority: 3 (Normal) To: From: "Frank E. Watson" Subject: re:unit strengths & losses Status: O Content-Length: 1675 The remnants category is an interesting idea. "Magic" replacements are a mild irritant in most wargames that use a traditional replacement system I might be tempted to use the remnant concept in the desert or SF, but I balk at tracking remnants for Soviet rifle XXs. Maybe the Soviets rifle XXs would be exempt from remnantizing? (Is a remnantizor a sub-assembly in the Star Trek transporter?) Maybe if you used higher HQs, could some of the remnants be assigned to these "units." That might cut down on some of on-map counters ( a thought that could be considered radical in this game). You could have some of the remnants on the map but far back - the others assigned to various Army HQs closer to the front. Alan, could a remnant be overrun? Should an overrun cadre generate a remnant? And some comments on the specific historical loss instances: > In game terms how many times, IF ever, was the 1st flipped to > cadre? The Sicily EaH (TEM 48) flips it for the attack on Troina. Don't know about NW Europe. 352nd XX Cadre or eliminated by July II? I would say eliminated but with one of your remnant things lying around if they were in use. 5th Parachute Cadre at Bulge? Yes, cadred by Patton's attack to relieve Bastogne Dec II. A cadre can still give problems to an attacker. > The poor old U.S. 106th Infantry. Perhaps it began the battle broken down with two supported regiments in that nasty looking hex jutting into the westwall and one regiment one hex to the west. The two up-front IIIs get waxed Dec II but the other retreats with 7th Arm XX when St. Vith hex falls. The last regiment stays in action stacked with other units. Frank From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 1 19:56:44 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA12750; Mon, 1 Apr 96 19:56:43 +0200 Received: from felix.dircon.co.uk (felix.dircon.co.uk [193.128.224.10]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id TAA10743 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 19:53:55 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [194.112.35.89] (gw1-089.pool.dircon.co.uk) by felix.dircon.co.uk with SMTP id AA00294 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Mon, 1 Apr 1996 18:53:44 +0100 X-Sender: cloister@popmail.dircon.co.uk Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 1 Apr 1996 18:56:02 +0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: cloister@dircon.co.uk (Perry de Havilland) Subject: Stacking & the dismal Mr. Irving Status: O Content-Length: 2736 Re. the on-going stacking debate: I think Alan Conrad's *excellent* evidential post does indeed suggest a change in stacking is in order. I still think it would be interesting to look at the effects of stacking on casualty levels, though. I can not help thinking the well known high level of Soviet casualties/day vs. the experience on the Western Front (Axis & Allied) might have something to do with a lack of dispersal. I am reminded on Zhukov's remark to Eisenhower in 1946 (I think...possibly in Ike's book 'Crusade in Europe'?) that we wished he had had half the amount of artillery but twice the amount of ammunition. Also, using the *Goodwood* example, given the lack of success in this operation, I wonder if a point of diminishing returns does not manifest itself beyond a certain density. This might be worth looking at, i.e. set up the counter a la the historical situation (ignore current Europa stacking rules) and see what the odds would have been...if it looks too good, then this suggests diminishing returns are indeed a factor. Instinctively, it seems to make sense but I hesitate to say this is so without some sort of evidence. Dupuy's equations suggest casualty rates and dispersal are linked, therefore as frontage and dispersal are also linked and casualty rates and combat power are also linked (naturally).... you can see where I am going with this. Although I agree with Alan that stacking needs to be re-jiggered, I still agree with Nick Forte and John Astell that FoF does NOT play out ahistorically due to stacking problems but rather due to the fact Gamelin suffered from rather more cognitive dissonance than all but the most inept Europa player. Re. the dismal David Irving Steve wrote: >Also, although I can't claim to be a Nazi, I do find David >Irving's work >to be useful. I find the paper quality of his books a little harsh on the buttocks >I refuse to not read someone's work because of his noxious >political beliefs or because of the smug pontifications of an >author's >detractors. Nevertheless, certainly I agree with Steve on that point. >I have had some personal contact with him and he is *very* creepy. > This is all a bit off-topic but seeing as it has come up: I too have had the dubious pleasure of meeting Mr. Irving (at a militaria fair in Baltimore, USA, a few years ago). I found him utterly immune to rational discourse and I had the singular pleasure of shoving him on his arse: not I must add, because of his absurd views, which I think MUST be aired in order to be refuted, but over a personal insult (he does like to provoke people & I am certainly not a pacifist). It was not a rational response on my part but damn, it felt good :-P Regards Perry ...- From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 1 20:14:45 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA12928; Mon, 1 Apr 96 20:14:44 +0200 Received: from prague.crossover.com (root@prague.crossover.com [204.217.246.5]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id UAA11344 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 20:14:20 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [205.161.32.192] (jastell.tiac.net [205.161.32.192]) by prague.crossover.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id MAA18229 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 12:05:49 -0500 X-Sender: jastell@post.crossover.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 1 Apr 1996 13:13:22 -0400 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) Subject: Re: stacking (evidence) Status: O Content-Length: 952 > In resent posts and replies, several of you, including Ray Kanarr, >have asked for evidence of stacking beyond the Europa rules. I see my >ally Jim Arnold has just posted some of this data. However I spent a lot >of time digging this stuff up so I'm going to lay it on all of you >anyway. What I will try to do is give you the data itself, along with >the bib reference it came from. Then I would like to mix that in with >how the date relates to Europa. Thank you for your (and Jim's) input. Without being critical, I note that it's exact enough to let you feel you've made your point, while still being vague enough that I'd have to spend many hours re-creating the cases and then determining how valid it is and if it comes under any of the 4 amerliorating cases I outlined in a previous post. I regret that I lack the time to do this at present, and I will your posts in my already-bulging stack of interesting things to do someday. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 1 20:14:49 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA12933; Mon, 1 Apr 96 20:14:48 +0200 Received: from prague.crossover.com (root@prague.crossover.com [204.217.246.5]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id UAA11352 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 20:14:27 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [205.161.32.192] (jastell.tiac.net [205.161.32.192]) by prague.crossover.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id MAA18231 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 12:05:56 -0500 X-Sender: jastell@post.crossover.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 1 Apr 1996 13:13:30 -0400 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) Subject: Re: Antwerp & SF Supply Status: O Content-Length: 608 >> Also, I think Caen is an inland port >> and I recall some rule about not being able to fix it (if blown) >> in the duration of the game. > No the rule is an inland port WITH an artificial harbor can not be >fixed. Caen is just inland. I never noticed it on the printed maps... Caen SHOULD BE an artificial harbor port! It had an extensive lock system that connected it to the sea, a system that, once destroyed, would render the port unusable. The Germans did wreck the locks, and as I remember Caen remained inaccessible to ships until 1946 or 47. If this is not in the SF errata, it should be. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 1 21:16:18 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA13484; Mon, 1 Apr 96 21:16:17 +0200 Received: from psyche.the-wire.com (psyche.the-wire.com [198.53.192.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id VAA13966 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 21:15:42 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from mhughes.the-wire.com (mhughes.the-wire.com [205.206.32.167]) by psyche.the-wire.com (8.6.10/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA02597 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 14:14:53 -0500 Date: Mon, 1 Apr 1996 14:14:53 -0500 Message-Id: <199604011914.OAA02597@psyche.the-wire.com> X-Sender: mhughes@psyche.the-wire.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=====================_828393599==_" To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: mhughes@the-wire.com (Marian Hughes) Subject: RUSSIAN GRAND EUROPA OB X-Attachments: A:\EUROPA\LETTERS\INTERNET.1; Status: O Content-Length: 2588 --=====================_828393599==_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" This is a Word Perfect 5.1 file. If preferance is for Word 6.0 or ASCII let me know. E Mail software is EUDORA. Signed David Hughes --=====================_828393599==_ Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="INTERNET.1"; x-mac-type="42494E41"; x-mac-creator="6D646F73" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="INTERNET.1" /1dQQ1IBAAABCgABAAAAAPv/BQAyAAwBAAAHAA4AAABCAAAADwBWAAAAUAAAAAwAWgAAAKYAAAAD AAwAAAAAAQAAQ291cmllciAxMGNwaQAAAP//iQA/AHgAeAB4AAoAAQAAAABpEvQBeAD+FTYQWAcA AAAEEUDJAJM4AQABAFgCQP////////////////////7//////////////////////////1N0YW5k YXJkIFByaW50ZXIAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABTVEFOUFJJTi5QUlMA2wF4ABQeDBeMCgAA AAQRQMkAh88BAAEAAAAAAAAAAAAYDR9dpFgCQNMRCABVU1VLCAAR0/v/BQAyAAAAAAAJAAIAAAA+ AQAABgAQAAAAQAEAAAgAAgAAAFABAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAUPwAI3wAeAAAAAEAAAAAAAAAAADQC/cA kDPYJwEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACQM9gnAQhTdGFu ZGFyZAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACQM9gnAQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAJAz2CcBAFN0YW5kYXJkALQA//8AAAMAZCBQcmlu dGVyAAD/AAD/BP//AAAkAJ0BAABQ/LAEsASwBLAEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAQAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA9wAL0NMRCABVS1VLCAAR0wpBZnRlciBmaW5pc2hpbmcgdGhlIEJyaXRp c2ggZXRjIERlc2VydCBPQiBmb3IgSm9obiBBc3RlbGwgcGx1bmdlZA1pbnRvIGEgR3JhbmQgRXVy b3BhIGdhbWUuIFdlIGRvIG5vdCBtZXNzIGFyb3VuZCCpIHRoZSBzdGFydCBkYXRlDXdhcyBBcHJp bCAxOTQxLiBOb3cgTm92ZW1iZXIgMTk0MSCpIEhpdGxlciBpZ25vcmVkIFJ1c3NpYSwNcGx1bmdl ZCBzb3V0aC4gUGFuemVycyBub3cgaW4gQWxleGFuZHJpYSwgSGFpZmEgYW5kIFR1bmlzISBNZWFu dA10aGF0IFJ1c3NpYW4gT0IgaGFkIHRvIGJlIHJlY29uZmlndXJlZC4gQSBuaWNlIGNoYWxsZW5n ZSwgYWZ0ZXINYWxsIHRoZSBzdWdnZXN0aW9ucyB0aGF0ICdHcmFuZCBFdXJvcGEnIHZhcmlhYmxl IE9CJ3MgZXRjIGNhbm5vdA1iZSB3b3JrZWQgb3V0LiBQcm9kdWN0IHVzZWQgdHdvIE9CJ3M6IE9u ZSBpcyBkYXRlIGRyaXZlbiAoY29tYmF0DW1vdG9yaXNlZCwgYXJ0aWxsZXJ5IGV0Yyk7IHRoZSBv dGhlciBjb25kaXRpb24gqSBXYXIgb3INSW52YXNpb24gqWRyaXZlbiAoaG9yZGVzIG9mIDOpNiwg Mqk2LCAyqTGpOCBldGMpLiBUaGUgbGF0dGVyDXZhcmllcyBhY2NvcmRpbmcgdG8gVG90YWwgb3Ig TGltaXRlZCBXYXIsIGFuZCBGYXIgRWFzdCBSZXNlcnZlDVJlbGVhc2UuIEl0IHNlZW1zIHRvIHdv cmsgqSBiZWluZyBzZW50IHRvIENoYXJsZXMgU2hhcnBlIGFzIHRoZQ1Ob3J0aCBBbWVyaWNhbiBl eHBlcnQgb24gYWxsIHRoaXMgZm9yIGhpcyBjb21tZW50cy4gT25jZSBoaXMNcmVwbHkgcmVjZWl2 ZWQsIHdlbGNvbWUgdG8gc2hhcmUgdGhpcyBhbmQgb3RoZXIgaW5mbyBvbiBvdXIgZ2FtZS4NQmUg aGFwcHkgqSBHcmFuZCBFdXJvcGEgSVMgcGxheWFibGUgqSB0aG91Z2ggdmVyeSBkaXNjb3VyYWdp bmcgaW4NMTk0MSBmb3IgdGhlIEJyaXRpc2ggaWYgSGl0bGVyIGRvZXMgbm90IEdvIEVhc3QhCgoK SU5URVJORVQuMQ== --=====================_828393599==_-- From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 1 22:04:00 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA13905; Mon, 1 Apr 96 22:03:59 +0200 Received: from smtp4.aw.com (smtp4.aw.com [192.207.117.64]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA15611 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 22:02:59 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from East-Message_Server by smtp4.aw.com with Novell_GroupWise; Mon, 01 Apr 1996 14:59:12 -0500 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1 Date: Mon, 01 Apr 1996 15:05:40 -0500 From: Ray Kanarr To: europa@lysator.liu.se, zaius@teleport.com Subject: Re: crated aircraft problems Status: O Content-Length: 172 I don't recall that anyone addressed Bill Stone's original point asking why, and whether, anyone would take the time and make the effort to crate up "used" aircraft. Ray From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 1 22:47:35 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA14196; Mon, 1 Apr 96 22:47:34 +0200 Received: from smtp4.aw.com (smtp4.aw.com [192.207.117.64]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA16579 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 22:46:39 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from East-Message_Server by smtp4.aw.com with Novell_GroupWise; Mon, 01 Apr 1996 15:33:21 -0500 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1 Date: Mon, 01 Apr 1996 16:16:07 -0500 From: Ray Kanarr To: europa@lysator.liu.se, abcclibr@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu Subject: What is Europa [was: unit strengths & losses] Status: O Content-Length: 4281 On 3/31/96, Alan Conrad wrote: >So since I had enough replacement points these units >popped out of thin air and destroyed the 101st a/b. --snip-- >But in SF I think is makes for bad gaming. Doesn't this rather accurately model what happened to Brit 1st abn at Arnhem, in Europa terms, given 2-week game turns with perfect intelligence? >How to figure those point losses and work them into a >replacement chart or possibly a production chart is >difficult. As many have argued there are a lot of ways to >look at what is in a division and how to put it in terms of >production. But I feel it is a topic worth discussion. I completely agree with you on this! >On the East Front, the Soviet player will not automatically >stack Minsk full of units if losing those units surrounded >cost a lost more than the 1/5 replacement point. I disagree with you here, as Soviet manpower replacements were not the issue that they were for the Western Allies, and German doctrinal requirements [stand fast orders] dictated actions in opposition to your proposal, both for what the respective governments felt were good reasons. >So are they a cadre? Actually they were fighting with the >firepower of a full division. The issue that you raise here goes to the question of how losses are represented. In Europa, losses are represented over a two-week turn, and replaced after that period. So, if a surrounded American division suffers a DE, and is then replaced using RPs in the following turn, does that represent that every men in the division is KIA/WIA? My belief is that it represents the replacements, collection of scattered elements, issue of new equipment, etc. "Encirclements" on the Western front were also never as complete or tight as some of those on the Eastern front. As you noted, one regiment of the 106th did survive essentially intact, but the division was obliterated, including rear-area services, making the DIVISION unable to fight. One of the things that is not currently agreed upon in the Europa community is what units, losses, RPs, SPs, and everything else actually represent [because they are just representations, not the actual units and such]. The founders/designers have one set of conceptuatizations, but different posters have cited all sorts of "problems" with the time scale, distance scale, terrain, stacking, unit factors, losses, air subsystem, naval subsystem, logistics subsystem, is it/is it not a role-playing game, and just about everything else having to do with Europa, and over the years there have been literally hundreds of "fixes" proposed [most having their own sets of unresolved problems, which is why they aren't RAW now]. Do note that the rules set has evolved substantially over the last 22 years, and without the need to rescale maps, reprint all of the counters, or reassess all of the factors, and much of this has been as a result of reasoned discussion to try to make Europa a better SIMULATION of historical events, since it was already a great GAME system. I think that the basis for this is that Europa is many different things to different people, and the true essential beauty of the system is that there is room in it for us to discuss these differences, and make proposals for bettering the simulation aspects of the game. Most other game systems are a LOT more prescriptive in their approach, and not nearly as good, and don't have nearly the following that Europa does. Unless we can reach a consensus on what Europa is [since it is very obvious at this point that we are not likely to accept without discussion the founders/designers vision of Europa], and I don't think that, in the end, there can be a "consensus" on what Europa is, for the reasons above, "Official" Europa will continue to be a basic framework on which everyone hangs their individual superstructure. I think that, at this point, the only arguments for changing Europa RAW that are going to hold any weight with me will be those where the person proposing the changes shows, by creating scenarios and/or playing out existing ones, and with reporting reporting on them from both sides, how the changes are successful in all theatres [ETO, MTO, and Eastern front], without severely unhinging the game historically. Ray From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Apr 2 00:29:23 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA15011; Tue, 2 Apr 96 00:29:22 +0200 Received: from dax.cc.uakron.edu (root@dax.cc.uakron.edu [130.101.5.4]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id AAA19027 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 00:28:41 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from vox15.cc.uakron.edu by dax.cc.uakron.edu (5.65/Ultrix4.3) id AA18846; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 17:29:37 -0500 Date: Mon, 1 Apr 1996 17:29:37 -0500 Message-Id: <9604012229.AA18846@dax.cc.uakron.edu> X-Sender: apanius@uakron.edu X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: Mike Apanius Subject: Europa ground rules Status: O Content-Length: 3400 Everyone is aware that there are quite a few problems with the Europa ground rules. NODL's, non-existant attacker casualties, hit and run c/m tactics, etc., are all problems with the Europa ground rules. My friend, Greg Madey, my brother, and I have devised a completely new ground system. If anyone has the old game, Normandy Campaign, made by GDW, that's where these rules started. The main difference is that combat is now based on step losses, and that there are only 3 phases in a turn. In each 1 week player turn these are the phase in order: initial phase, first action phase, reserve action phase, and second action phase. All movement and combat is done in an action phase. A player gets to spend all his or her MP's for each unit in each action phase. If a unit doesn't move in the second action phase and didn't attack in the first action phase, it is put into reserve status if the player chooses. Units in reserve status may spend 1/2 of their MP's in the following reserve action phase. A step loss constitutes 2 points from a division, a regiment or brigade, or 2 battalions. There are three types of attacks: overruns, preliminary attacks, and assaults. In any type of attack the attacker must spend the MP's to enter the to be attacked hex before rolling the dice. It costs a unit 0 extra MP's to make an overrun. Each player than rolls on the combat chart, defender first, implementing the results immediately after rolling the die. if an overrun fails, defending units are still in the hex, the attacker can't spend any more MP's for the rest of the player turn. A preliminary attack is done as follows: The attacking units, in addition to the MP's to enter the attacked hex must spend 2 MP's for non c/m units and 1 for c/m. A assault is done by units spending 3 MP's for c/m and 4 MP's for non c/m. Also during an assault artillery may fire suppression, which is fire step before the defender gets to fire and causes temporary losses. Right now, Greg and I are playing FoF with our new rules, so far things are going very close to their historical counterparts. I will soon be able to send much more detailed rules. Greg is in high school and I am in junior high, so both of us don't have much Europa experience, so we'll probably need help play testing our new rules. If anyone is interested please contact me at: apanius@uakron.edu. Here is part of the combat chart: Die Roll Attack strength 1 10 30 50 70 -2 0 0 0 2 3 -1 0 0 1 2 4 0 0 0 2 5 7 1 0 0 2 5 8 2 0 0 4 6 8 3 0 1 5 7 9 4 0 1 5 8 11 5 0 2 6 8 11 6 0 2 8 10 13 7 1 3 9 11 14 8 1 3 11 14 17 9 1 4 14 16 18 Each number consists of x step losses, or in suppression the number subtracted from the defenders fire strength. If you wish to use this chart fill in all the numbers in between the ones I have given. I'm still not sure if this is the an accurate chart, but it's a start. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Apr 2 00:48:25 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA15161; Tue, 2 Apr 96 00:48:24 +0200 Received: from relay-2.mail.demon.net (disperse.demon.co.uk [158.152.1.77]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id AAA19461 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 00:47:56 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from post.demon.co.uk ([158.152.1.72]) by relay-2.mail.demon.net id aa22483; 1 Apr 96 23:13 +0100 Received: from consecon.demon.co.uk ([158.152.9.235]) by relay-3.mail.demon.net id ab05184; 1 Apr 96 23:07 +0100 Message-Id: Date: Sun, 31 Mar 1996 17:04:03 +0100 To: Mark H Danley Cc: Steve , m.royer3@genie.com, europa@lysator.liu.se From: Reg Danford-Cordingley Subject: Re: GE politics In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Turnpike Version 1.10 Status: O Content-Length: 970 In message , Mark H Danley writes > > >On Tue, 12 Mar 1996, Steve wrote: > > I'm only 29 and I keep hearing about how the wargame hobby is fading >> away because "kids these days are a bunch of idiots that don't understand >> history" > >YOU SAID IT. I'm only a scawling brat of 26, but I played my first >Europa game (no, it wasn't DNO, it was _Marita Merkur_) at 14. And, >frankly, I enjoy studying history as well, (or I wouldn't be pounding my >brains out in grad school)! > > >Mark I don't think you have to be in your 40s and 50s to be interested in the Second World War, wargaming, military history etc. I am 32, have all the current Europa wargames, collect military history and orders of battle & play both Europa and computer wargames such as the ones by Atomic. My problem is finding the time to play Europa while earning a living etc. Reg DC -- Reg Danford-Cordingley From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Apr 2 01:48:59 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA15482; Tue, 2 Apr 96 01:48:58 +0200 Received: from iac.iac.org.nz (iac.iac.org.nz [192.124.160.153]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id BAA21097 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 01:48:10 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from smtpgate.iac.org.nz by iac.iac.org.nz (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA17224; Tue, 2 Apr 96 11:44:13 NZS Message-Id: <9604012344.AA17224@iac.iac.org.nz> From: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (Public Affairs Officer) Date: Tue, 02 Apr 1996 11:45 GMT To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: The poor old 106th Status: O Content-Length: 1996 That outfit took a beating from both the Germans and the historians, as the surrender of two of its regiments on the Schnee Eifel were the biggest American surrender in WW2 after Bataan. Among the many problems of the 106th was a communications breakdown such that the two regimental commanders up on the Eifel, Descheneaux and Cavender, did not hear orders to pull out of their position. It was also a new outfit of draftees, in their first battle. It wasn't an easy baptism of fire, they faced the teeth of 6th SS Panzer Army and their Nebelwerfer mortars, the famed "Screaming Meemie." After the war, historians debated how well the 106th fought, some writers lambasting it, among them John Toland in Battle: The Story of the Bulge, and Charles Whiting in Death of a Division. A more recent book, A Blood-Dimmed Tide, defends the 106th. I don't know what the answer is, but my father's cousin Stanley Samberg was one of the draftees in that outfit, and the SS captured him and his buddies on a road near Ligneuville and shot him and the other guys. This was one of the subsidiary massacres to the Malmedy Massacre. The didn't shoot Stanley because he was Jewish. Like many American, British, and Canadian soldiers in WW2, when he had his identity discs stamped, he left the religion category a blank. Many Jewish soldiers did so to avoid German retribution if captured. Others threw their dogtags away when in danger of capture. In Hong Kong's Stanley Commonwealth War Cemetery, among the Canadian graves is a Private Stanley Rosenberg, who lacks the Star of David or Cross of other graves. Obviously the unfortunate Pvt. Rosenberg, when he joined the Winnipeg Grenadiers in 1940, expected to be shipped to Europe to fight the Germans. Instead he was sent to Hong Kong, and was killed by the Japanese. Such is war. David H. Lippman Public Affairs Officer US Naval Antarctic Support Unit Christchurch, New Zealand From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Apr 2 01:53:31 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA15503; Tue, 2 Apr 96 01:53:31 +0200 Received: from iac.iac.org.nz (iac.iac.org.nz [192.124.160.153]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id BAA21146 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 01:53:19 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from smtpgate.iac.org.nz by iac.iac.org.nz (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA17240; Tue, 2 Apr 96 11:49:20 NZS Message-Id: <9604012349.AA17240@iac.iac.org.nz> From: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (Public Affairs Officer) Date: Tue, 02 Apr 1996 11:49 GMT To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: A bunch of old fogeys? Status: O Content-Length: 896 I'm 33 years old, and I've been playing wargames since I was 10. Most of the games gathering dust in my bookshelf back in New Jersey are early SPI and AH games like Battle of the Bulge, Blitzkrieg, USN, Kursk, El Alamein, Panzerarmee Afrika, Origins of World War II, France 1940, and other blasts from the past. History never goes away, it's always right there, and just wants to be remembered. All that's required to understand history is to make the effort to do so, to learn from it, and to abe able to think...about what the decision-makers of 1912 or 1940 faced, the world they lived in, who they were, and their backgrounds, so that you can see events straight on. And yeah, it's hard to find the time and space to play Europa. Especially SF. David H. Lippman Public Affairs Officer US Naval Antarctic Support Unit Christchurch, New Zealand From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Apr 2 02:39:46 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA15824; Tue, 2 Apr 96 02:39:45 +0200 Received: from smtp.utexas.edu (smtp.utexas.edu [128.83.126.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id CAA21740 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 02:39:27 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from slip-27-15.ots.utexas.edu (slip-27-15.ots.utexas.edu [128.83.111.79]) by smtp.utexas.edu (8.6.7/8.6.6) with SMTP id SAA27604 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 18:35:29 -0600 Date: Mon, 1 Apr 1996 18:35:29 -0600 Message-Id: <199604020035.SAA27604@smtp.utexas.edu> X-Sender: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu (Bobby D. Bryant) Subject: Re: unit strengths & losses Status: O Content-Length: 4162 Alan said: > I would like to take a look at how units are lost and return. With >a particular eye as to how this should be thought out advancing towards GE. Another great post, Alan. The rules have evolved somewhat over the years. The representation of units is very much a grandfathered heritage from DNO. If I remember correctly, only German C/M units had KGs there, another special ability to go along with ZOC movement and advantageous overrun costs. For everyone else, "elimination" meant exactly that. The introduction of cadres for most other units in the later games effectively changed a unit-elimination system into a limited step-reduction system, but some of the underlying conception of the KG/cadre as a "remnant" seems to remain. (More recently, the special replacements rules were introduced to credit the players for the value of what you are calling a remnant. Note in particular how they don't appear when units are eliminated in isolation, i.e., they can't get back to friendly lines.) Up through FitE or so, a cadre could not move on the turn it was replaced, and so was more or less out of action for two turns (one to move to a town, another for taking the rebuild). But this was rather odd, because it meant a totally eliminated unit could be rebuilt faster than a cadre could. The inactive turn for cadres was eliminated after we mentioned this in the press, which I take as a sign that the designers do have an ear to the ground (although they could have come to the same conclusion independently, or even changed the rule for unrelated reasons). Of course, from your perspective this was a change in the wrong direction, since time should have been added for the eliminated unit rather than reduced for the cadre. This never bothered me much until I saw the long delays for units rebuilt in the OB in SF. I know these are described as "by special mechanisms", but it's not immediately clear why ordinary circumstances should be so much faster. I would be in favor of a more explicit tracking system for where and when rebuilt units appear, but I'm afraid it will lead to a huge bookkeeping problem. (Your suggestion for tracking on-map remnants is both simple and elegant, but would require a mighty lot of remnant markers on the East front! And it still does not address the appearance of rebuilds for totally eliminated units, though it should be pretty easy to place them in homeland recruiting areas, such as WKs or MDs, after a specified delay. But that delay is more bookkeeping.) Also, notice that your scenario for a rifle XX being ground down to a remnant that is essentially equal to a breakdown HQ might be typical for units on a static front with reserves to replace them in the line, but many other circumstances would not leave a remnant at all (e.g. when the enemy perrupts the line and gets into the divisional rear with more mobile units, thus destroying the artillery and services). Thus if the designers do pursue your suggestion, there will need to be rules to specify exactly when a remnant exists and when the unit is *totally* eliminated. As something of an aside, I will mention that some of GDW's non-Europa games made the distinction between "eliminated" and "destroyed" (_Road_to_the_Rhine_ comes to mind), so that one class was more expensive to rebuild than the other. Also, units in the less-dead box could be cannibalized to provide what amounted to special replacements. (The whole thing was reminiscent of the EET/EFT boxes for the old Europa air replacement system.) - Bobby. p.s. -- I can recommend a small patch to the rules that, while it hardly cures the magic transportation problem, is at least *very* easy to implement: when units are eliminated, set them to the side in a "dead pile", but don't move them into the official replacement pool until the *end* of the next friendly initial phase. (This builds in a minimum of one turn's delay, so that e.g. an NKVD III overrun in the exploitation phase of the Axis Aug II turn does not reappear hundreds of miles away in the Soviet Sep I initial phase.) From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Apr 2 02:59:22 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA15934; Tue, 2 Apr 96 02:59:21 +0200 Received: from psyche.the-wire.com (psyche.the-wire.com [198.53.192.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id CAA21916 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 02:58:43 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from mhughes.the-wire.com (mhughes.the-wire.com [205.206.32.167]) by psyche.the-wire.com (8.6.10/8.6.12) with SMTP id TAA11196 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 19:57:52 -0500 Date: Mon, 1 Apr 1996 19:57:52 -0500 Message-Id: <199604020057.TAA11196@psyche.the-wire.com> X-Sender: mhughes@psyche.the-wire.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: mhughes@the-wire.com (Marian Hughes) Subject: Russian Grand Europa OB #2 Status: O Content-Length: 1118 Sorry for the problem, lets try another system. See below for comments in original attachment #1. This is now supposed to be in plain text. After finishing the British etc Desert OB for John Astell plunged into a Grand Europa game. We do not mess around - the start date was April 1941. Now November 1941 - Hitler ignored Russia, plunged south. Panzers now in Alexandria, Haifa and Tunis! Meant that Russian OB had to be reconfigured. A nice challenge, after all the suggestions that 'Grand Europa' variable OB's etc cannot be worked out. Product used two OB's: One is date driven (combat motorised, artillery etc); the other condition - War or Invasion -driven (hordes of 3-6, 2-6, 2-1-8 etc). The latter varies according to Total or Limited War, and Far East Reserve Release. It seems to work - being sent to Charles Sharpe as the North American expert on all this for his comments. Once his reply received, welcome to share this and other info on our game. Be happy - Grand Europa IS playable - though very discouraging in 1941 for the British if Hitler does not Go East! mhughes@the-wire.com Marian Hughes From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Apr 2 03:21:03 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA16080; Tue, 2 Apr 96 03:21:02 +0200 Received: from iac.iac.org.nz (iac.iac.org.nz [192.124.160.153]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id DAA22217 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 03:20:43 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from smtpgate.iac.org.nz by iac.iac.org.nz (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA17490; Tue, 2 Apr 96 13:16:45 NZS Message-Id: <9604020116.AA17490@iac.iac.org.nz> From: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (Public Affairs Officer) Date: Tue, 02 Apr 1996 13:17 GMT To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Adolf, again Status: O Content-Length: 1909 Len Deighton argued that people often miss the point on Adolf Hitler, in that he was the epitome of the common man. He had a variety of hatreds for a number of ethnic groups he never met. So do a lot of other people. He went to fight WW1 in a spirit of great patriotism and some idealism, and came back bitter and disillusioned. As did most of those who fought the war. The opinions he held, a vague dislike of large business, Jews, Freemasons, Bolshevism, banks, the old order, are still to be heard throughout the Western world. He sought both personal power and personal wealth, which many people want, and once he had it, he enjoyed both, ordering around Field Marshals like they were lance-corporals and living a life of ease at the Berghof, endlessly screening Hound of the Baskervilles and listening to The Merry Widow. He was certainly no dummy, as it took brains to lead the Nazi Party to power, and he showed considerable ability keeping his lieutenants divided such that they could not overthrow him. And he used his abilities to grip the German popular mind such that to the last hour of the war, Germans loyal to Hitler, along with Fascistic Frenchmen, Danes, Norwegians, and others, were still killing Allied soldiers, sailors, and airmen. The day before Hitler committed suicide, the defenders of the Reichstag launched a battalion-sized counterattack against Zhukov's troops in the Unter Den Linden that threw the Soviets off-balance momentarily. It takes considerable ability to be able to orchestrate this kind of loyalty and fanaticism. What makes him unique is the depths to which he sank (the sadism of his policies are echoed in his own private conversations, which I've been reading of late) and the butcher's bill he ran up. David H. Lippman Public Affairs Officer US Naval Antarctic Support Unit Christchurch, New Zealand From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Apr 2 19:09:35 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA28239; Tue, 2 Apr 96 19:09:34 +0200 Received: from prague.crossover.com (root@prague.crossover.com [204.217.246.5]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id TAA12475 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 19:05:14 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [205.161.32.192] (jastell.tiac.net [205.161.32.192]) by prague.crossover.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA28503 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 10:56:44 -0500 X-Sender: jastell@post.crossover.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 2 Apr 1996 12:04:18 -0400 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) Subject: Re: The poor old 106th Status: O Content-Length: 1314 > Among the many problems of the 106th was a communications breakdown >such that the two regimental commanders up on the Eifel, Descheneaux and >Cavender, did not hear orders to pull out of their position. It was also >a new outfit of draftees, in their first battle. It wasn't an easy >baptism of fire, they faced the teeth of 6th SS Panzer Army and their >Nebelwerfer mortars, the famed "Screaming Meemie." > > After the war, historians debated how well the 106th fought, some >writers lambasting it, among them John Toland in Battle: The Story of the >Bulge, and Charles Whiting in Death of a Division. A more recent book, A >Blood-Dimmed Tide, defends the 106th.... The 106th dishonored itself because of the rapid surrender of the two regiments. A more veteran outfit would have held out longer, slowing the German advance and possibly finding a way to breakout. When you compare the 106th's performance to that of the many other US units caught in the initial deluge at the Bulge, the 106th's action is little short of disgraceful. Of course, it wasn't supposed to be that way -- the 106th was a green outfit and was sent to a quiet sector, the Ardennes, to come up to speed without facing heavy action. Had the 106th had a few more weeks in the line, it probably would have performed creditably. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Apr 2 19:47:09 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA28628; Tue, 2 Apr 96 19:47:08 +0200 Received: from postbox.acs.ohio-state.edu (postbox.acs.ohio-state.edu [128.146.214.20]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id TAA13398 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 19:46:44 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from BRPC34 by postbox.acs.ohio-state.edu (8.6.9/5.901231) id MAA19145; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 12:46:24 -0500 Date: Tue, 2 Apr 1996 12:46:24 -0500 Message-Id: <199604021746.MAA19145@postbox.acs.ohio-state.edu> X-Sender: mpitcava@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: mpitcava@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Mark Pitcavage) Subject: The 106th and Europa X-Mailer: Status: O Content-Length: 1100 >The 106th dishonored itself because of the rapid surrender of the two >regiments. A more veteran outfit would have held out longer, slowing the >German advance and possibly finding a way to breakout. When you compare the >106th's performance to that of the many other US units caught in the >initial deluge at the Bulge, the 106th's action is little short of >disgraceful. Of course, it wasn't supposed to be that way -- the 106th was >a green outfit and was sent to a quiet sector, the Ardennes, to come up to >speed without facing heavy action. Had the 106th had a few more weeks in >the line, it probably would have performed creditably. This is the sort of thing that I think Europa does not simulate well. Being reduced to essentially three factors--attack, defense and movement--Europa units do not simulate proficiency adequately. The difference between the 106th Infantry Division and the 2nd Infantry Division, for instance, is more than simply an attack factor or two. Dr. Mark Pitcavage mpitcava@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu http://www.greyware.com/authors/pitman From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Apr 2 23:18:46 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA01020; Tue, 2 Apr 96 23:18:45 +0200 Received: from emout07.mail.aol.com (emout07.mx.aol.com [198.81.11.22]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id XAA18873 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 23:17:45 +0200 (MET DST) From: RedDog994@aol.com Received: by emout07.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id QAA22693 for europa@lysator.liu.se; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 16:17:13 -0500 Date: Tue, 2 Apr 1996 16:17:13 -0500 Message-Id: <960402161712_262378103@emout07.mail.aol.com> To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: pet peeves Status: O Content-Length: 5907 Allow me a few minutes to divert from the regular discussion of the past few days to voice my opinion on a subject that is of a great concern to me. The current state of stewardship of the legacy of Europa held by GRD is not what long time consumers of the series expect it should be. The series under GDW's direction was noted for excellent graphics and a system that was capable of rendering a reasonable simulation of WW2 ground combat. The intricate weaving of tactical and strategic decision making made the system challenging and fun to play. The retreat of GDW from active participation in the conflict simulation market left the series incomplete and a source of great concern to all of those who had invested considerable time and money in it. GRD stepped in to rescue the series from the Great Dust Bin of history that has claimed so many of the great wargames of the past. For this they should be commended. I like so many others are grateful to them for their efforts to maintain the continuity of Europa into the nineties. However, with great opportunty comes great responsibilty. The series under GDW's leadership established standards that have not been kept up with in terms of counter design and timely development of games. GRD's decision to redo all the previously released games was one I could live with even though it meant that all of my Europa collection became obsolete in gaming terms if it meant that inconsistances in the system could be cleared up and better OB's maps and counter were made available. The increase in price was acceptable because everyone knows that everything cost more in the nineties than it did when the Europa system first came on the market. What was not acceptable was the shoddy counters of First to Fight that split in half when you punched them out and the hideous shade of orange of the Greek army in Balkan Front. Also the eternal delay in the publishing of Second Front and the subsequent discovery of the great counter snafu that came with it. Add to that the publishing of two secondary games that really don't have that much to do with WW2, Winter War and For Whom the Bell Tolls and I think I have a justitifiable bone to pick with the leadership of GRD. The capper on all of this is their decision to redo the counters of FoF and SF and charge we the Europa consumer for their mismanagment of the quality of their product. The Europa community is a loyal group of folks who have faithfully supported the system for twenty years and should not be taken advantage of like this. Other gaming companies when confronted with teething problems in production of their product have made corrections in counters and rules available to their customers free of charge, even though it meant they lost money doing so. The quality of their product and their desire to keep the good will of their customers was paramount to them. I do not doubt the sincerity of GRD in this regard, but I believe they are guilty of taking the Europa community for granted. A wake up call is needed so they will know that their consumers expect a product done correctly the first time and not oops we messed up again. Once Europa was the class act of the wargame industry in terms of quality and entertainment. Today the system has been overtaken by other companies. The Gamers and Clash of Arms come to mind. They have made mistakes but they have not passed the buck literally to the consumer. Rumors of decisions that are being batted around in Grinnel concerning Grand Europa and upcoming reprints of War in the Desert and Fall of France/Their Finest Hour have me concerned. The Europa system is simple in design but complex in execution on a master level. Therein lies its great beauty as a gaming system. To monkey around with it now to dovetail it into a massive system that few of us have the room or time to play could prove to be suicidal to the system as a whole. To blame the current woes of the wargame industry on card games is simiarly irresponsible. Other companies continue to release games on a regular timely basis, and they operate under the same market conditions as GRD. Perhaps the woeful predictions that constantly are heard from Grinnel are self fullfilling. Rather than attributing it to factors they can control, they palm them off on an outside scapegoat.Then they never confront the real problem. What I want as a consumer is a product that is released when it is supposed to be, that has components that are mistake free as much as humanly possible and when they are not, are corrected without another reach into my wallet. I also expect a gaming system that is the same at the end as it was when I first began to buy it without massive changes in the rules charts and tables. I know this is a longer than average post about a topic that has never been mentioned as long as I have been reading the Europa E-Mail list. If you sat through all of this I appreciate your patience and thank you for allowing me to blow off some steam. If you agree with me, join me in writing GRD and letting them know of our concerns. After all, they can only improve the product if they are made aware of the problem. thank you Michael Funderburke From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Apr 2 23:26:47 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA01097; Tue, 2 Apr 96 23:26:46 +0200 Received: from iac.iac.org.nz (iac.iac.org.nz [192.124.160.153]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id XAA19072 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 23:26:35 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from smtpgate.iac.org.nz by iac.iac.org.nz (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA20085; Wed, 3 Apr 96 09:22:34 NZS Message-Id: <9604022122.AA20085@iac.iac.org.nz> From: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (Public Affairs Officer) Date: Wed, 03 Apr 1996 09:25 GMT To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: The Golden Lions again Status: O Content-Length: 2394 Mark Pitcavage raises a good point...the 106th performed extremely badly, but this isn't in Europa. In other armies, the differences are made clear in strength points. The 44th Hoch und Deutschmeister Division is a powerful outfit (a 10-6 or 8-6) in Second Front, which represents its reputation and fighting abilities (at least as I remember them). On the other hand, the divisions Hitler scraped up from the training schools in 1945, like Theodor Korner, Friedrich Ludwig Jahn, and Potsdam, are, as befitting their deficiencies in manpower, equipment, and training, 4-6-6s. What then, is the case of 106th US Infantry Division, which was the product of the standardized US military training and development system? On paper, it was a carbon copy of the 2nd Infantry, the 1st Infantry, and other veteran outfits. On the snow, it fell apart. Torch had a rule for "American Tactical Problems," which gave the Germans an advantage in a given battle to help them win at Kasserine. One possibility might be to restrict some of the later American divisions and the "ghost divisions" in a similar manner, making them take a die roll modifier in their first offensive or defensive battle. One exception might be the 104th Timberwolf Division, which was a draftee outfit that fought well in Holland as part of 1st Canadian Army. The 104th was formed under Maj. Gen. Terry de la Mesa Allen, a colorful and inspiring leader who had previously led the 1st Infantry Division in North Africa and Sicily. Allen was a controversial figure, but no-one questioned his leadership skills or the esteem with which his men held him. He motivated the Minnesota draftees of this outfit very well. (source: Carlo D'Este's Bitter Victory, on the Sicily campaign, which delves into Terry Allen) I don't like to think too much of the 106th Infantry, because of what happened to Stanley Samberg. He and my father grew up together, spending summer vacations together in Far Rockaway, New York. My dad talked with great enjoyment of those days, but a shadow came over him when Stanley's draft notice and subsequent military service came up at the end of the monologue. And today is the anniversary of my father's death last year. David H. Lippman Public Affairs Officer US Naval Antarctic Support Unit Christchurch, New Zealand From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 3 00:19:36 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA01511; Wed, 3 Apr 96 00:19:35 +0200 Received: from dragon.ti.com (dragon.ti.com [192.94.94.61]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id AAA20600 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 00:18:45 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from dlep1.itg.ti.com ([128.247.123.43]) by dragon.ti.com (8.6.13/ac3i.dseg.ti.com) with ESMTP id QAA09635 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 16:18:50 -0600 Received: from holmes (1236262.dseg.ti.com [128.247.230.151]) by dlep1.itg.ti.com (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA12059; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 16:17:34 -0600 (CST) Date: Tue, 2 Apr 1996 16:17:34 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199604022217.QAA12059@dlep1.itg.ti.com> X-Sender: a0189614@dlep1.itg.ti.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se, europa@lysator.liu.se From: David Holmes Subject: Re: pet peeves Status: O Content-Length: 1619 At 04:17 PM 4/2/96 -0500, RedDog994@aol.com wrote: Description of GRD's assumption of Europa responsibilities deleted Mention of Collector's Series games making older version obsolete deleted. >What >was not acceptable was the shoddy counters of First to Fight that split in >half when you punched them out and the hideous shade of orange of the Greek >army in Balkan Front. Also the eternal delay in the publishing of Second >Front and the subsequent discovery of the great counter snafu that came with >it. I tend to agree. There are far too many counter problems for the price we are paying. Unfortunately, seeing as how the GRD crew is mainly part-time, I think the only option is getting no game whatsoever. I hope that the quality problems can be corrected before the faithful decide they're wasting their money. >Add to that the publishing of two secondary games that really don't have >that much to do with WW2, Winter War and For Whom the Bell Tolls and I think >I have a justitifiable bone to pick with the leadership of GRD. I disagree. I was ecstatic to see those 2 games. I entered the Europa fold late (Balkan Front was my first experience) and was immediately hooked. Unfortunately, I don't own my own football stadium in which to set up FITE or SF. I would urge development of more small-scale games, because those are probably the only ones I'll get to play. Complaints about having to pay for corrected counters deleted I agree with this. I'm fairly PO'ed about having to pay more to get what my games were supposed to contain to begin with. David Holmes >you Michael Funderburke > From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 3 01:02:18 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA01927; Wed, 3 Apr 96 01:02:16 +0200 Received: from post.QueensU.CA (root@knot.QueensU.CA [130.15.126.54]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id BAA21566 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 01:01:57 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from mast.QueensU.CA (MAST.QueensU.CA [130.15.100.1]) by post.QueensU.CA (8.6.12/8.6.10+ASH) with SMTP id SAA23062 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 18:01:46 -0500 Received: from hilda.mast.QueensU.CA by mast.QueensU.CA (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA21391; Tue, 2 Apr 96 17:54:30 EST Received: by hilda.mast.QueensU.CA (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA10654; Tue, 2 Apr 96 17:53:32 EST From: pardue@hilda.mast.QueensU.CA (Keith Pardue) Message-Id: <9604022253.AA10654@hilda.mast.QueensU.CA> Subject: Red Dog's Pet Peeves To: europa@lysator.liu.se Date: Tue, 2 Apr 1996 17:53:31 -0500 (EST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL13] Content-Type: text Status: O Content-Length: 3528 Hi, The pet peeves note does bring up some important points about the current state of Europa. I think that it is certainly true that the reputation of Europa and GR/D has been seriously damaged by the shoddy production work in their early games. (I really don't mind the bright orange Greek units and I think that the SF counters are OK; but the First to Fight counters are unforgivable. I haven't read the editorial which people occasionally bring up about card games destroying the wargaming industry. But, I really don't think that the card games are doing much to Europa; Europa appeals to hard core wargamers, who mostly don't sink too much money into the card games. In the last few years, as I've been moving around, I've had a hard time getting new game parteners, all hard core wargamers, to get that interested in Europa BECAUSE OF PRODUCTION PROBLEMS. When I lived in Boston, I got my game partner to play First to Fight with me. He thought it was a nice game, but he was so unimpressed by the counters falling apart that he certainly wasn't going to sink money into the Europa series; he'd rather spend his money on World in Flames products, which are pretty spiffy, whatever you might think of the simulation value. My current game parter is an old Europa player. He has not spent a single dollar on GR/D products, new or used, because of GR/D's reputation for messing up on production. He does not want a copy of Scorched Earth with updated counters, because he knows that GR/D did them and not GDW. But, he's not sinking his money into card games. I think that production of counters has definitely improved. People complain about the SF counters, but I really think that they're OK, even if their not beautiful. I'm a little upset about the misprints in the FWTBT counters, but they're OK as well. The maps are beautiful. I only wish that I could tell the difference between a standard and a major port in those dark blue sea hexes. My biggest complaint at the moment is the quality of the rules editing. While production has gotten better, the presentation of the rules has gotten noticeably worse in the last two games. Presumably, this is due to a redirection of effort at GR/D. I really don't agree with Red Dog's (I'm sorry; I remember your address, but I've forgotten your name) complaint about A Winter War and FWTBT being peripheral to WWII. The Soviet invasion of Finland happened during WWII and had a noticeable impact on the course of the war. The Spanish Civil War is more peripheral, but you need to get Spain in somewhere and FWTBT seems like such a nice game. I really can't begrudge them that. I also like alot of the new rules systems, although this also has been driving away players. My current partner observed that Case White only had a few pages of rules; you could just set it up and play. For Whom the Bell Tolls has about sixty pages of rules. I'm currently making a great effort to mark them up and make them as easy as possible for him to take in so that we'll play it. (I'm afraid that I've made him seem like somewhat of a dummy; he's not.) I am still a loyal GR/D customer, though not an association member. I'm sad that I've encountered so many wargamers who either are not interested in getting in to Europa, or have abandoned it. They all spend money are wargames. Not one of them spends money on card games. I'll keep buying the games that GR/D puts out. But, it's pretty clear to me why others won't. Best Wishes, Keith Pardue Kingston, Ontario, Canada From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 3 01:06:17 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA02015; Wed, 3 Apr 96 01:06:16 +0200 Received: from post.QueensU.CA (root@knot.QueensU.CA [130.15.126.54]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id BAA21639 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 01:06:03 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from mast.QueensU.CA (MAST.QueensU.CA [130.15.100.1]) by post.QueensU.CA (8.6.12/8.6.10+ASH) with SMTP id SAA23507 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 18:05:53 -0500 Received: from hilda.mast.QueensU.CA by mast.QueensU.CA (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA21403; Tue, 2 Apr 96 17:58:36 EST Received: by hilda.mast.QueensU.CA (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA10663; Tue, 2 Apr 96 17:57:39 EST From: pardue@hilda.mast.QueensU.CA (Keith Pardue) Message-Id: <9604022257.AA10663@hilda.mast.QueensU.CA> Subject: more on pet peeves To: europa@lysator.liu.se Date: Tue, 2 Apr 1996 17:57:39 -0500 (EST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL13] Content-Type: text Status: O Content-Length: 350 And one more thing! I really don't mind the production DELAYS. I would rather have more delays to make sure that everything is right. Also, with delays I only have to put out the big bucks once in a while. It's always hard convincing my wife that it's worth it. It helps if it's been awhile. Best Wishes, Keith Pardue Kingston, Ontario, Canada From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 3 01:14:54 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA02076; Wed, 3 Apr 96 01:14:52 +0200 Received: from iac.iac.org.nz (iac.iac.org.nz [192.124.160.153]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id BAA21806 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 01:14:34 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from smtpgate.iac.org.nz by iac.iac.org.nz (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA20441; Wed, 3 Apr 96 11:10:37 NZS Message-Id: <9604022310.AA20441@iac.iac.org.nz> From: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (Public Affairs Officer) Date: Wed, 03 Apr 1996 11:11 GMT To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: More on pet peeves Status: O Content-Length: 2892 I'm less than thrilled with shoddy counters in Europa myself. I never bought First to Fight, but I don't like counters that fall apart. I was extremely annoyed with the counter quality in Second Front. The copy I purchased lacked symbols for the Jewish Brigade and Newfoundland Artillery outfits. GRD replaced them gratis, but the British air units are badly off-center, the British ground units are extremely splotched, and the US Army comes in several color tones. And we know about the American air units with the position AA on the back and the Position AA with inoperative air units on the back. Given the amount of time and endless delays in producing this game, there should have been stronger QA. I know it's very hard with such a huge game, and that the GRD staff put the games out as a second job, but someone in all organizations, corporate or military, has to be the designated son-of-a-bitch, who whinges and yells at subordinates to quit yapping about NODLs and the "perfect plan" and get things done. In the newspaper business, the chief of the copy desk is the designated son-of-a-bitch. He or she makes sure the wonderful stories the writers create are tight, accurate, punctuated properly, headlined accurately, and conform to the newspaper's style. Writers hate his guts for emasculating their copy, sub-editors hate his guts for kicking back stories for re-editing or a better headline, the paper's readers don't know who he is, but the copy desk chief keeps the newspaper out of all kinds of trouble, ranging from illiteracies in print to libel. GRD may need just such an individual. I saw plenty of the latter at SPI playtesting nights 20 years ago. Teenagers who stood around arguing over the best way to win at Panzergruppe Guderian, but couldn't figure out the best way to ship a game to Duluth. I remember they issued a game in S&T once, called Paratrooper, in which one of the three games of this trilogy did not give movement rates for the various counters. Consumers didn't know how to move their units The teenagers were relieved by a number of highly competent black women who got things moving, but by then SPI was collapsing, anyway. I also enjoy both A Winter War and For Whom the Bell Tolls which are fascinating sidelines to WW2 in Europe. FWTBT taught me a lot about the Spanish Civil War, which I had hitherto ignored. And I agree that loyal consumers of Europa shouldn't have to shell out more bucks on top of $99 for SF and $79 for WitD for counters that should have been QA'd from the start. I'd put up with long gaps between GRD games if the QA problems on counters were sorted out. Maybe GRD should hire a copy editor who'll be out of a job in two years. David H. Lippman Public Affairs Officer US Naval Antarctic Support Unit Christchurch, New Zealand From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 3 01:40:59 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA02278; Wed, 3 Apr 96 01:40:58 +0200 Received: from medlantic.mhg.edu (medlantic.mhg.edu [198.133.139.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id BAA22267 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 01:40:30 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by medlantic.mhg.edu id AA17184 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for europa@lysator.liu.se); Tue, 2 Apr 1996 18:40:27 -0500 Message-Id: <199604022340.AA17184@medlantic.mhg.edu> Received: by medlantic.mhg.edu (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Tue, 2 Apr 1996 18:40:27 -0500 From: "Haugh, Patrick J." To: europa Subject: "Chink" Dorman-Smith Date: Tue, 02 Apr 96 18:32:00 EST Encoding: 42 TEXT X-Mailer: Microsoft Mail V3.0 Status: O Content-Length: 1936 The somewhat chequered career of "Chink" Dorman-Smith (later O'Gowan) is quite fascinating. A deep personal dislike existed between Monty and himself dating back to the inter-war years at staff college, where he described Monty's methodology as like using "a sledgehammer to crack a nut".Bernard Law Montgomery was not amused. Monty hated Ireland and things Irish. Chink prided himself on his Irish heritage. Extraordinarily, for an officer in the crown forces, he appears to have had cordial relations with members of the Irish Free State army and government during the inter-war years. He served as unofficial chief of staff to Auchinleck after Gazala in 1942. The entire issue of who "saved" Egypt and the Delta is too detailed to go into at this time: sufficient to say that there were several nasty lawsuits after the war to attempt to clarify the historical record. Chink was also in action in Italy but was relieved of command in murky circumstances in December 1944. After the war, he became "more Irish than the Irish", eventually advising the old (i.e. pre-provisional IRA) I.R.A. on military operations against the British in Northern Ireland, going so far as to allow training on his extensive Irish estate. The best account of his life is: CHINK: A BIOGRAPHY by Lavinia Greacen. MacMillan London 1989. Correlli Barnett covers him briefly in THE DESERT GENERALS For the "other side's" opinion, check out: MONTY : THE MAKING OF A GENERAL by Nigel Hamilton THE HINGE OF FATE by Winston Churchill My opinion: Probably the most intelligent officer in the British Army, but with a personality garuanteed to alienate almost every officer in that army. Look at the people with whom he had a good rapport: Wavell, O'Connor, Auchinleck, Fuller...(and Hemingway..He served as the inspiration for ACROSS THE RIVER AND INTO THE TREES). Haya Safari, Patrick Haugh, Washington D.C. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 3 01:53:03 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA02341; Wed, 3 Apr 96 01:53:01 +0200 Received: from medlantic.mhg.edu (medlantic.mhg.edu [198.133.139.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id BAA22396 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 01:52:48 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by medlantic.mhg.edu id AA17360 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for europa@lysator.liu.se); Tue, 2 Apr 1996 18:52:45 -0500 Message-Id: <199604022352.AA17360@medlantic.mhg.edu> Received: by medlantic.mhg.edu (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Tue, 2 Apr 1996 18:52:45 -0500 From: "Haugh, Patrick J." To: europa Subject: Little Wars Date: Tue, 02 Apr 96 18:44:00 EST Encoding: 18 TEXT X-Mailer: Microsoft Mail V3.0 Status: O Content-Length: 805 The nice thing about Europa is the inclusivity. In response to Red Dog, I would vote to keep going with the peripheral wars that no-one else is covering, or is likely to cover. AWW and FWTBT are excellent one-of-a-kind simulations which people with actual jobs can play with some hope of either completion or being able to stow away between sessions without having to buy a new house. Sure, I'd like to play Clash of Titans, all I need is the aforementioned new house and six months of vacation. Short of winning the lotto, it ain't gonna happen. I suspect many Europaphiles are, like Churchill, inveterate messers-about at the periphery of the main area of operations. I look foward to the strategic war modules, especially the U-boat war. Haya Safari, Patrick Haugh Washington D.C. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 3 02:53:26 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA02845; Wed, 3 Apr 96 02:53:25 +0200 Received: from naybob.ghq.com (naybob.ghq.com [204.73.247.161]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id CAA23216 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 02:50:12 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from jwhite@localhost) by naybob.ghq.com (8.7.1/8.7.1) id SAA01397; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 18:49:33 -0600 From: Jeff White Message-Id: <199604030049.SAA01397@naybob.ghq.com> Subject: Re: The Golden Lions again To: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (Public Affairs Officer) Date: Tue, 2 Apr 1996 18:49:32 -0600 (CST) Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: <9604022122.AA20085@iac.iac.org.nz> from "Public Affairs Officer" at Apr 3, 96 09:25:00 am Content-Type: text Status: O Content-Length: 2787 Public Affairs Officer Said: > > Mark Pitcavage raises a good point...the 106th performed extremely > badly, but this isn't in Europa. > In other armies, the differences are made clear in strength points. > The 44th Hoch und Deutschmeister Division is a powerful outfit (a 10-6 or > 8-6) in Second Front, which represents its reputation and fighting > abilities (at least as I remember them). We were wondering about that unit. Was it just good, or was it oversized, perhaps square? > On the other hand, the divisions Hitler scraped up from the training > schools in 1945, like Theodor Korner, Friedrich Ludwig Jahn, and Potsdam, > are, as befitting their deficiencies in manpower, equipment, and > training, 4-6-6s. > What then, is the case of 106th US Infantry Division, which was the > product of the standardized US military training and development system? > On paper, it was a carbon copy of the 2nd Infantry, the 1st Infantry, and > other veteran outfits. On the snow, it fell apart. My understanding is that the "early" US Inf divisions tended to aquire "extras" through special odd assignments. For instance, they'd get a few extra 50cal MG's for some odd reason, and never return them. Or like Panzerfausts (none of these silly bazooka's). I would guess that the older divisions were way beyond an official TO&E. A few dozen extra heavy MG's can make a big difference. Also note that the 106th was given a VERY long patch of ground to defend. So long that various platoons could hardly see each other, let alone help each other. It was also brand spanking new. Never seen combat before. It was being put in a part of the line that was to be quiet to get experience. It also had just moved into the line, replacing 2nd Inf division a few days earlier. In fact, pre-arrainged artillery had not been setup. The division was just getting used to the ground. I think more than anything it was just bad luck. The wrong unit at the wrong place at the wrong time defending the wrong piece of ground. The surrender of two of the regiments was due in part to lack of communications. With anyone. Under those circumstances, it is hard to fault the commaders who from their point of view had no hope of being relived or rescued. It was a 7-8 that was overrun by a 70+ point stack. Now if they had just added a 1-2-10 AT II.... Bulge was doomed from the start. It was a case of Dolph trying to WIN the war. Obviously if the Germans lost, he was a dead man, so you can't win the lottery if you don't by a lottery ticket. Here's another question for SF, what victory level did the Allied side get historically? -- Jeff White, ARS N0POY jwhite@ghq.com "I am Pentium of Borg. Arithmetic is irrelevant. Prepare to be approximated." From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 3 03:04:05 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA02911; Wed, 3 Apr 96 03:04:03 +0200 Received: from smtp.utexas.edu (smtp.utexas.edu [128.83.126.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id DAA23454 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 03:03:47 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from slip-11-12.ots.utexas.edu (slip-11-12.ots.utexas.edu [128.83.204.172]) by smtp.utexas.edu (8.6.7/8.6.6) with SMTP id SAA19638 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 18:52:16 -0600 Date: Tue, 2 Apr 1996 18:52:16 -0600 Message-Id: <199604030052.SAA19638@smtp.utexas.edu> X-Sender: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu (Bobby D. Bryant) Subject: Re: pet peeves (fairly long) Status: O Content-Length: 7273 Michael (Red Dog #994) said: > ... However, with great opportunty comes great responsibilty. The >series under GDW's leadership established standards that have not been kept >up with in terms of counter design and timely development of games. ... I'm hardly the one to posture as GR/D's champion, but I should point out that the games weren't exactly pouring out of GDW in a steady stream when GR/D took over the system. In fact, I think GDW handed it over to GR/D because they had flat lost interest in it. Add the fact that GDW was a company with a full-time staff, and GR/D doesn't look quite so bad in the timeliness department -- disappointed though I am about not getting things faster. As to the quality of the productions, I'm disappointed there too, but I also remember DNO wasn't much to look at. And its visual design wasn't nearly so ambitious as even GR/D's earliest releases. I'm just glad to see that things have improved a lot after a few releases. (I may not have all the information needed to respond properly to the complainers. My SF had a couple of half-sheets that looked like a bit of ink had squirted across them, but nothing so bad as some of the posts seem to imply. Overall, the game looked pretty good -- especially in comparison to the earlier GR/D releases. I was more disappointed in quality control for the rules: the amphibious invasion rule is a major, major, major element of SF -- yes folks, a major one! -- and it really shocks me to see that it got into the RAW in the form it did even after the massive playtest effort. Fortunately, rules problems are easier to correct.) [GR/D employees and Chauvinist fans take note! You may want to stop reading here, because I'm *not* rising to your defense in what follows!] > ... GRD's >decision to redo all the previously released games was one I could live with >even though it meant that all of my Europa collection became obsolete in >gaming terms if it meant that inconsistances in the system could be cleared >up and better OB's maps and counter were made available. ... > ... Add to that the publishing of two secondary games that really don't have >that much to do with WW2, Winter War and For Whom the Bell Tolls and I think >I have a justitifiable bone to pick with the leadership of GRD. ... Personally, I would have preferred a finished system in the format GDW was providing before all the retreads started coming out. I wouldn't mind an Europa-II if I had an Europa-I to play with while I waited, but I seriously doubt that I'll ever see either. In all the years since GR/D took over, Second Front has been the only substantial addition to the series. Everything else has been re-re-release version N+1 of the various games, or else (as you mentioned) peripheral games that are nice, but hardly major facets of the system. Or retreads of periphials, to throw two stones at one bird. And so far as the consumer can see, the "grand" aspects of Europa are still just talk. > ... To monkey around >with it now to dovetail it into a massive system that few of us have the room >or time to play could prove to be suicidal to the system as a whole. ... I'm not exactly sure what you refer to, unless it is linking Glory and the WWI series. All the recent clamor for "more maps, more exotic campaigns!" make me think that in many minds, including consumers that post to this list, Europa has ceased to be the Holy Grail of wargaming and become just another module in a game called Terra, that will re-create the military history of our species in two-week turns. And I can't help wondering whether for GR/D Grand Schemes are not just a mechanism for avoiding the completion of the task in hand. Have they come to the same negative conclusions as I have about the feasibility of the whole thing? Personally, I have very strong negative feelings about Glory and Whatever, because they are manifestly diverting resources from Europa. If they flop, those resources are irrecoverable. If they succeed, they will likely divert more resources as GR/D -- using sound military judgement -- reinforces success. > ... To >blame the current woes of the wargame industry on card games is simiarly >irresponsible. ... I do think the wargaming industry has passed its heyday, but long before collectibles came around. I hardly think card-collectors have the wargaming mentality, at least in the typical case. Wargaming took its first/worst hit from RPGs (which also attracted a lot of people without the wargaming mentality), and has been hit more recently by computer games. However, I have recently come to the conclusion that this is not all to be pinned on misguided consumers. There is a clear advantage to a company if it can sell a RPG system for a modest price, then look forward to several years of selling innumerable scenarios and play aids each at about 1/3 the price of the original system. Then a revised rule set, followed by another stream of compatible scenarios. And I can't help but feel (pardon my bluntness, Winston!) that GR/D is using this as their model for producing and marketing the Europa series. > ... I also expect a gaming system that is the same at the end as it was >when I first began to buy it without massive changes in the rules charts and >tables. ... I have to disagree here. The system was state-of-the art 23 years ago, but move-fight-exploit seems rather crude now. While we've had an endless series of changes to the details of the system, John has shown an enormous reluctance to change the core system that he inherited from Frank. Limited change was probably a good idea when we expected to be playing Europa-level scenarios by 1980, but after a quarter of a century and with no end in sight, it's time to upgrade the system to a new state of the art. I refer to rule systems, using the existing counters and maps. But instead, we get minor, sometimes cosmetic changes that require reissues to update the "hardware". If they're going to reissue ever damb thing, let's at least have a system that we'll be proud of in the 21st century. They could ease the burden of upgrades by providing a standard set of system rules in each box, separate from scenario-specific rules. As the rules are upgraded -- usually a stepwise process -- you just learn the new standard and use it when you go back to play the older games. If things don't jibe when you try that, well, that's a problem we're going to have to face sooner or later anyway if we really have an Europa, isn't it! Keith's first reply included: > ... I am still a loyal GR/D customer, though not an association >member. ... I as well. I dropped the association because it was outrageously expensive for what I was getting. I know our society works in such a way that we won't have any Europa at all if Winston can't make a buck at it, but I'm not in a position to support it by buying an endless stream of "stuff" -- especially when the patronage does not result in new releases that hint of an Europa somewhere out there on the horizon. - Bobby. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 3 03:49:53 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA03227; Wed, 3 Apr 96 03:49:52 +0200 Received: from smtp.utexas.edu (smtp.utexas.edu [128.83.126.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id DAA24081 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 03:49:31 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from slip-11-12.ots.utexas.edu (slip-11-12.ots.utexas.edu [128.83.204.172]) by smtp.utexas.edu (8.6.7/8.6.6) with SMTP id TAA20514 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 19:44:45 -0600 Date: Tue, 2 Apr 1996 19:44:45 -0600 Message-Id: <199604030144.TAA20514@smtp.utexas.edu> X-Sender: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu (Bobby D. Bryant) Subject: Re: The Golden Lions again Status: O Content-Length: 2042 After reading: >> The 44th Hoch und Deutschmeister Division is a powerful outfit (a 10-6 or >> 8-6) in Second Front, which represents its reputation and fighting >> abilities (at least as I remember them). Jeff asked: >We were wondering about that unit. Was it just good, or was it >oversized, perhaps square? I think I read in some Europa-related publication (designer's notes? TEM? this list???) that it and the 9-8 (78th?) XX were the only ones left with three battalions in each of their three regiments. The conversion of the 7-6 and 8-6 XXs to 5-7-6 represents (I think) an officialization of what was already mostly a de facto organization into three regiments of two battalions each. So presumably the 10-6 and 9-8 ratings represent the late-war firepower on an early-war organization. (Contrary to the earlier post, I think it was more a matter of manpower than "fighting abilities". The counter ratings seem to focus more on throw weight than on intangibles.) Jeff continued: >I think more than anything it was just bad luck. The wrong unit >at the wrong place at the wrong time defending the wrong >piece of ground. > >The surrender of two of the regiments was due in part to lack of >communications. With anyone. Under those circumstances, it is >hard to fault the commaders who from their point of view had >no hope of being relived or rescued. I agree. Faulting someone for surrendering borders (in my mind) on the Hitler "give no ground" mentality. You can't expect humans to behave as at Thermopylae, the Alamo, or Bagstone in every engagement. Let's face it, "our side" can't always win, but "our side" did pretty damn well overall, and if the success rating was 98% instead of 100% we don't need to find scapegoats for it. - Bobby. p.s. -- I *do* hope it was the 78th division. I dug out FoF to check the rules for the debate that was raging a week or two ago, and after I put it away I found the lone 78th XX on the living room floor. But it's a 7-6 in 1940. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 3 03:53:48 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA03241; Wed, 3 Apr 96 03:53:47 +0200 Received: from smtp4.aw.com (smtp4.aw.com [192.207.117.64]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id DAA24110 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 03:53:21 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from East-Message_Server by smtp4.aw.com with Novell_GroupWise; Tue, 02 Apr 1996 20:51:36 -0500 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1 Date: Tue, 02 Apr 1996 21:59:11 -0500 From: Ray Kanarr To: europa@lysator.liu.se, bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu Subject: Re: Everybody's [?] pet peeves Status: O Content-Length: 1900 On 4/2/96, Bobby Bryant stated a number of things far better than I could. However: >There is a clear advantage to a company if it can sell an >RPG system for a modest price, then look forward to >several years of selling innumerable scenarios and play >aids each at about 1/3 the price of the original system. >Then a revised rule set, followed by another stream of >compatible scenarios. Note that this is EXACTLY how GDW moved from being a small gaming company to a BIG NAME in the industry, with the advent of Traveller/MegaTraveller. It may well have kept Europa alive at GDW by enabling them to pump bucks earned from Traveller into the board games, which were beginning to slide in sales even then. That's my take, any ex-employees of GDW [you know who you are] currently on-line, feel free to agree/disagree. >The system was state-of-the art 23 years ago,... --snip-- >but after a quarter of a century and with no end in sight, it's >time to upgrade the system to a new state of the art. I refer >to rule systems, using the existing counters and maps. Hell, Bobby, if the games are being REDONE anyhow, and delivery is DELAYED anyhow, and counters need to be REDONE anyhow, what game component of package of rules, counters, and maps really HAS to remain static [my vote goes for keeping the maps as is, since redoing the terrain research at another scale would be the seriously biggest bitch of all, for the least amount of payback, the old 80/20 rule]. I think that, under all the other complaints [see my last post for a list], the "hidden", or subconscious, or whatever agenda is that recent or upcoming reissues, in concert with the problems in recent "new" games, are leading us all to wonder if it wouldn't be just as easy to re-examine ALL of our assumptions about Europa, and possibly update/revamp the whole system before we go any further down the present path. Ray From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 3 04:27:49 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA03407; Wed, 3 Apr 96 04:27:47 +0200 Received: from nico.bway.net (root@nico.bway.net [205.198.116.1]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id EAA24520 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 04:27:31 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from nico.bway.net (dial208.bway.net [205.198.116.208]) by nico.bway.net (8.7.1/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA20374 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 21:25:21 -0500 (EST) Received: by nico.bway.net with Microsoft Mail id <01BB087E.C51F87A0@nico.bway.net>; Sat, 2 Mar 1996 21:25:24 -0500 Message-Id: <01BB087E.C51F87A0@nico.bway.net> From: James Kelly To: "europa@lysator.liu.se" Subject: Europa counters Date: Sat, 2 Mar 1996 21:25:15 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Status: O Content-Length: 931 Gentlemen, I think we all agree that GR/D's Europa counters need improving. As I = mentioned in a post about a month ago, my Balkan Front Germans look like = Italians, my BF Italians like Albanians, my AWW Russians like BF Greeks, = my FtF counters are unpunched but they look like shit anyway (and I'm = sure they would start peeling the minute I punched them, etc...) I = think you get the point - and I still have not even mentioned SF. Fortunately, there is a solution. What we need is for GR/D to reprint = ALL the Europa counters (BF, FtF, AWW, and SF) using the same vendor as = the one who did the impressive countersheets for FWTBT. Every one of = these games has countersheets which are deficient in one way or another, = and I for one would like to see ALL of them reprinted properly. E-Mail = Winston Hamilton, E-Mail GR/D, and let's see if we can get it done = before the millenium. =20 Jim Kelly =20 =20 From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 3 07:40:23 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA04469; Wed, 3 Apr 96 07:40:23 +0200 Received: from desiree.teleport.com (desiree.teleport.com [192.108.254.21]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id HAA26715 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 07:38:04 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [206.163.125.162] (ip-pdx23-34.teleport.com [206.163.125.162]) by desiree.teleport.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id VAA26728 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 21:37:52 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199604030537.VAA26728@desiree.teleport.com> X-Sender: zaius@mail.teleport.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 2 Apr 1996 21:43:19 -0800 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: zaius@teleport.com (Steve) Subject: Unit replacement system Status: O Content-Length: 1831 I had never perceived the system for replacement of units lost to be a problem. It seems weird that you can rebuild units at whatever town you want, but I like to think of it this way (to use conrad alan b's example: If an invasion wipes out some units on the coast and plunges inland. Then some units from the dead pile are rebuilt and march into action-defeating the invasion or destroying famous units. To me this simply represents deployment of scratch formations or whatever to react to an emergency- Europa doesn't have a significant 'reaction movement' phase allowing reaction to invasions (especially) or river crossings or airborne attacks, whatever... If I see any problem in the current replacement system, it's that the regions within which dead units are assigned are too broad- >This then starts the above problem. The loss generated 2.2 Special >Replacements, but add 8.8 and the Big Red One is as good as new ANYWHERE >in the theater you want it. But actually there were about 8,000 men plus >most of the equipment of the division wherever the unit was "lost". And >you do not have to transport these guys to wherever the unit is rebuilt. ***How about this: Perhaps if a seperate dead pile was maintained for each military district/zone? Then if the allies invaded Sicily, they wouldn't have to worry unecessarily about German panzer units in a dead pile in (whatever district Milano is in) being replaced and overrunning the invasion units. I think that if there were powerful Axis units in the Sicilian dead pile (in this instance) then the Americans should certainly be aware that there are units being reformed in the area, or depots of equipment/reservists/veteran survivors (all the things a dead pile represents) Rather than come up with "Freedom is always against the law." -J.R. "Bob" Dobbs From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 3 07:48:47 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA04526; Wed, 3 Apr 96 07:48:46 +0200 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id HAA26788 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 07:46:48 +0200 (MET DST) From: j.broshot@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA136859605; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 05:33:25 GMT Message-Id: <199604030533.AA136859605@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Wed, 3 Apr 96 05:33:25 UTC 0000 ( from INTERNET# ; Wed, 3 Apr 96 05:32:59 UTC 0000) Date: Wed, 3 Apr 96 05:39:00 UTC 0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: J.BROSHOT X-Genie-Qk-Id: 6353456 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 74370 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: my $0.02 worth Status: O Content-Length: 2391 1. Old Fogeys: as I mentioned before, I think that I qualify for one (45 going on 46). As noted by others, as you get older you have more $$$ to devote to your obsessions, unfortunately you have less time to play with your toys. 2. The poor 106th: I am privileged to know Dean R. Trosper, retired Circuit Clerk of Caldwell County MO. During WW2 he served in the 27th Armored Infantry Battalion/9th Armored Division. The Bulge was the first battle for this unit and CCB (which included the 27th) backstopped the 106th and suffered heavy casualties. See the official U. S. Army history THE ARDENNES: BATTLE OF THE BULGE, pp. 158-160. The 9th was rebuilt after the battle and the 27th took the Bridge at Remagen in 1945. My impression (and its only an impression) that the combat performance of U. S. divisions in WW2 depended in large part on who their commanding general was. Terry Allen commanded, first, the 1st Infantry Division (North Africa and Tunis) and later the 100th Infantry Division (both good units). The 90th Infantry Division was considered a poor division and went through a number of generals before coming around. I confess this impression may be built on the large number of official histories that I have read (which seem to emphasize the commanders) and Russell Weigley's EISENHOWER'S LIEUTENANTS. With the generic organization and equipment shared by each U. S. division, the only way to account for the difference in value would be the commander. I will say the the personnel making up the divisions might differ but the quality would not remain the same during the course of war. Weigley notes (p. 374) that a lot of high quality personnel were taken out of training programs in the States late in the war and shipped to Europe as infantry replacements. Another anecedote, I also knew a distinguished attorney (now deceased) who was a teenaged aviation ground crewman in the United Kingdom and was sent to the front as an infantry replacement (after he volunteered!) late in the war. Jim Broshot St. James MO P.S. Just a note on the Hoch und Deutschmeister (1 x 10-6 Inf XX 44 HuD) in SF. I will check Tessin but I really don't see how a reformed division of Austrians (the original was lost at Stalingrad) can be justified as a 10-6 Inf XX. As I recall it was reformed in 1943 along the original three regiments with three battalion TO but with nothing else special. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 3 07:53:42 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA04553; Wed, 3 Apr 96 07:53:41 +0200 Received: from jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (civguy@jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us [192.217.238.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id HAA26845 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 07:51:42 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from civguy@localhost) by jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (8.6.10/8.6.9) id BAA16767; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 01:23:40 -0600 Date: Wed, 3 Apr 1996 01:23:40 -36000 From: Jason Long Subject: Re: The Golden Lions again To: Public Affairs Officer Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: <9604022122.AA20085@iac.iac.org.nz> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 845 Frankly I was disappointed to see the great spread between divisions when SF came out. Since they were all organized identically I feel they should have the same rating, with the exceptions of divisions like 1st, 3rd, 9th, 88th, etc. that performed consistently above average. The Americans are just about the only Army in Europa that doesn't treat units with the same equipment levels identically (within a point), and I don't think that that's correct. Sure the 106th was poorly led in the Bulge, but it would have been just fine given a couple of months to shake itself out. A few commanders relieved, a lot of lives lost and it would have improved dramatically. Just like the 90th did after Normandy. It was probably the worst single American division in the beachhead, but it was one of the best in 3rd Army by the fall. Jason From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 3 09:19:36 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA05735; Wed, 3 Apr 96 09:19:35 +0200 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id JAA27887 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 09:16:53 +0200 (MET DST) From: j.broshot@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA214865010; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 07:03:30 GMT Message-Id: <199604030703.AA214865010@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Wed, 3 Apr 96 07:03:30 UTC 0000 ( from INTERNET# ; Wed, 3 Apr 96 07:03:19 UTC 0000) Date: Wed, 3 Apr 96 06:58:00 UTC 0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: J.BROSHOT X-Genie-Qk-Id: 3100507 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 74833 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: Hoch und Deutschmeister etc. Status: O Content-Length: 4138 1. The Hoch und Deutschmeister: from VERBANDE UND TRUPPEN DER DEUTSCHEN WEHRMACHT UND WAFFEN SS 1939-1945 (Volume 5), (44.) Reichsgrenadier-Division-Hoch-und Deutschmeister: destroyed at Stalingrad January 1943, reformed beginning 17 Feb 1943 in Belgium under Fifteenth Army from NCO classes from Wehrkreis XIII and XVII with Reichsgrenadier-Regiment Hoch und Deutschmeister (three bns) [note formerly Grenadier-Regiment 134] Grenadier-Regiment 131 (three battalions) Grenadier-Regiment 132 (three battalions) Artillerie-Regiment 96 (four battalions) Aufklarungs-Abteilung 44 Panzerjager-Abteilung 96 Pionier-Bataillon 80 Reorganized 28 August 1944 as "Division neuer Art 44" with six grenadier battalions. It should be noted that this division, a "Welle 1" regular infantry division starts the war (in FTF) as a 6-6 Inf XX (as opposed to the normal 7-6 Inf XX rating for Welle 1 divisions) and is a 7-6 Inf XX in FOF (as opposed to an 8-6 Inf XX). It is an 8-6 Inf XX in FiE/SE. As shown in SF, most of the recreated "Stalingrad" infantry divisions (113, 297, 305, 371, 376, 384, 389 were formed on the six battalion plus one fusilier battalion organization ("Division nA 44") or 1 x 5-7-6 Inf XX; The 71.Infanterie-Division was reformed, like the 44th, with the old nine battalion TO, but is rated as an 8-6 Inf XX; The 94.Infanterie-Division was reformed, like the 44th, with the old nine battalion TO, but is rated as an 7-6 Inf XX; The 295.Infanterie-Division (originally 1 x 7-6 Inf XX) is reformed in Norway as a fortress division (1 x 5-8-4 Fort XX); The 76.Infanterie-Division was reformed, like the 44, 71, and 94, with the old organization, but is shown for some reason (and perhaps incorrectly) as a static ("bodenstatig") division, 1 x 5-8-4 Static XX. (again from Tessin, especially Volume 1). There is a good discussion on how the "Stalingrad" divisions were reformed in France in SECOND FRONT NOW-1943, by Walter Scott Dunn, Jr., chapter 8, pp. 122-132. I submit that the HuD is overrated in SF. It was given its title by Hitler for morale and propaganda purposes, just like the 60. Panzergrenadier-Division was renamed Panzergrenadier-Division "Feldherrnhalle" with no special organization or extra equipment. The Hoch und Deutschmeister was a famous regiment of the old Imperial Austro-Hungarian Army (and appears in Clash of Arms' "Battles of the Age of Reason" "Kolin" game). Tessin calls it the Vienna "haus-regiment." The 78.Sturm-Division I leave to another post. This division DID get a special organization which included an assault gun battalion, a mortar battalion and an army flak battalion. 2. Pet Peeves: everybody makes good points and I am not going to quibble with them. However, I would like to point out that the Europa system has been around for over 20 years, and I know of no other game system that has lasted and been supported for that long. The fact that this mailing list exists testifies to the system's longevity. I buy products by The Gamers and by Clash of Arms. I'd like to point out that Clash of Arms' Napoleonic battle series (by Ed Wimble) has good graphics and colorful counters and the worst set of rules that I have ever seen in a major game system. There is or was a whole topic on GEnie devoted to rewriting them. Wimble won't change them, and I don't buy them anymore. The Gamers has good graphics and colorful counters and excellent consumer support. I like their TCS series but they have revised the basic rules several times; their OCS series, something of a Europa counterpart, emphasizes command and control and supply. In closing, don't forget Squad Leader, I had a lot $$$ sunk into this series when AH changed the rules and the counters in midstream, making all of my stuff obsolete overnight. I don't buy AH games anymore. Despite all of the changes in Europa, I can still use FOF counters in SF if I want to. The game has evolved and is still evolving. Jim Broshot St. James MO P. S. I note that I screwed up in listing the divisions that Terry Allen commanded. I think (and I will try and check) that Allen and George Patton were at West Point together. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 3 15:57:36 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA11801; Wed, 3 Apr 96 15:57:35 +0200 Received: from ns.rmc.com (ns.rmc.com [137.25.23.1]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id PAA07067 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 15:53:03 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by ns.rmc.com (AIX 4.1/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA21754; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 08:42:08 -0500 Received: from internet.rmc.com(137.25.3.24) by ns.rmc.com via smap (V1.3) id sma023764; Wed Apr 3 08:41:42 1996 Received: from lanmail.rmc.com by internet.rmc.com (AIX 4.1/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA12668; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 08:51:04 -0500 Received: by LANMAIL.RMC.COM; Wed, 3 Apr 96 8:49:55 EST Date: Wed, 3 Apr 96 8:52:11 EST Message-Id: X-Priority: 3 (Normal) To: From: "Frank E. Watson" Subject: re:Re: The Golden Lions again Status: O Content-Length: 832 At Europafest 95, Shelby Stanton gave an interesting talk about the US Army, including the ratings of the US Inf XXs. His main reason for the differences were not due to equipment, organization, or performance, but due to their different origins in the American "mobilization" scheme. This involved the pre-war regular army, different expansion waves, and the National Guard. If I remember correctly, the last units formed had much less training before they were committed, in addition to not getting the creme of American males (apologies to Mr. Broshot's friends - don't show them this, Jim!). I also was surprised to see the spread in US XX ratings (particularly 1st, 3rd, and 9th) but it does give a little bit of flavor in American units for a heavily American audience - and grounds for interesting debate. Frank From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 3 20:53:35 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA15236; Wed, 3 Apr 96 20:53:34 +0200 Received: from mail02.mail.aol.com (mail02.mail.aol.com [152.163.172.66]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id UAA14496 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 20:48:19 +0200 (MET DST) From: EuropaStag@aol.com Received: by mail02.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id NAA03827; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 13:47:47 -0500 Date: Wed, 3 Apr 1996 13:47:47 -0500 Message-Id: <960403134745_183973782@mail02.mail.aol.com> To: raven@bway.net, europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: Europa counters Status: O Content-Length: 598 In a message dated 96-04-02 21:55:50 EST, raven@bway.net (James Kelly) writes: >Fortunately, there is a solution. What we need is for GR/D to reprint ALL >the Europa counters (BF, FtF, AWW, and SF) using the same vendor as the one >who did the impressive countersheets for FWTBT. Every one of these games has >countersheets which are deficient in one way or another, and I for one would >like to see ALL of them reprinted properly. E-Mail Winston Hamilton, E-Mail >GR/D, and let's see if we can get it done before the millenium. Here Here I agree. although my FtF counters were just fine. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 3 20:53:37 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA15241; Wed, 3 Apr 96 20:53:36 +0200 Received: from emout10.mail.aol.com (emout10.mx.aol.com [198.81.11.25]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id UAA14491 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 20:48:08 +0200 (MET DST) From: EuropaStag@aol.com Received: by emout10.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id NAA24873; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 13:47:36 -0500 Date: Wed, 3 Apr 1996 13:47:36 -0500 Message-Id: <960403134733_183973660@emout10.mail.aol.com> To: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz, europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: More on pet peeves Status: O Content-Length: 510 In a message dated 96-04-02 18:36:41 EST, NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (Public Affairs Officer) writes: > I also enjoy both A Winter War and For Whom the Bell Tolls which are >fascinating sidelines to WW2 in Europe. FWTBT taught me a lot about the >Spanish Civil War, which I had hitherto ignored. Thanks for your comments on AWW The counters are well done even tho the Soviets do not match the rest of the series. The problem is with the printer. Now we are using the same printer that does GMT games. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 3 22:28:38 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA16051; Wed, 3 Apr 96 22:28:36 +0200 Received: from iac.iac.org.nz (iac.iac.org.nz [192.124.160.153]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA18506 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 22:27:39 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from smtpgate.iac.org.nz by iac.iac.org.nz (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA23057; Thu, 4 Apr 96 08:03:08 NZS Message-Id: <9604032003.AA23057@iac.iac.org.nz> From: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (Public Affairs Officer) Date: Thu, 04 Apr 1996 08:01 GMT To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Terry Allen's commands Status: O Content-Length: 603 I noted in an earlier post (that may not have been posted, as I think I screwed up the address line again) that he took over the 104th Infantry when it was formed. The "Timberwolf" Division was drawn from Minnesota draftees, and fought in The Netherlands in 1st British Corps of 1st Canadian Army. Under his aggressive and inspired leadership, it did extremely well. The division's official history is called "Timberwolf Tracks," and is fairly interesting reading. David H. Lippman Public Affairs Officer US Naval Antarctic Support Unit Christchurch, New Zealand From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 3 23:35:42 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA16601; Wed, 3 Apr 96 23:35:41 +0200 Received: from iac.iac.org.nz (iac.iac.org.nz [192.124.160.153]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id XAA22816 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 23:34:44 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from smtpgate.iac.org.nz by iac.iac.org.nz (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA23310; Thu, 4 Apr 96 09:30:47 NZS Message-Id: <9604032130.AA23310@iac.iac.org.nz> From: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (Public Affairs Officer) Date: Thu, 04 Apr 1996 09:33 GMT To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: The Golden Lions again Status: O Content-Length: 2618 I meant to send this about the 106th and 1st US Infantry Divisions, but I think it got lost in the shuffle. If I'm repeating myself, my apologies. ************ ORIGINAL MESSAGE FOLLOWS ************ Mark Pitcavage raises a good point...the 106th performed extremely badly, but this isn't in Europa. In other armies, the differences are made clear in strength points. The 44th Hoch und Deutschmeister Division is a powerful outfit (a 10-6 or 8-6) in Second Front, which represents its reputation and fighting abilities (at least as I remember them). On the other hand, the divisions Hitler scraped up from the training schools in 1945, like Theodor Korner, Friedrich Ludwig Jahn, and Potsdam, are, as befitting their deficiencies in manpower, equipment, and training, 4-6-6s. What then, is the case of 106th US Infantry Division, which was the product of the standardized US military training and development system? On paper, it was a carbon copy of the 2nd Infantry, the 1st Infantry, and other veteran outfits. On the snow, it fell apart. Torch had a rule for "American Tactical Problems," which gave the Germans an advantage in a given battle to help them win at Kasserine. One possibility might be to restrict some of the later American divisions and the "ghost divisions" in a similar manner, making them take a die roll modifier in their first offensive or defensive battle. One exception might be the 104th Timberwolf Division, which was a draftee outfit that fought well in Holland as part of 1st Canadian Army. The 104th was formed under Maj. Gen. Terry de la Mesa Allen, a colorful and inspiring leader who had previously led the 1st Infantry Division in North Africa and Sicily. Allen was a controversial figure, but no-one questioned his leadership skills or the esteem with which his men held him. He motivated the Minnesota draftees of this outfit very well. (source: Carlo D'Este's Bitter Victory, on the Sicily campaign, which delves into Terry Allen) I don't like to think too much of the 106th Infantry, because of what happened to Stanley Samberg. He and my father grew up together, spending summer vacations together in Far Rockaway, New York. My dad talked with great enjoyment of those days, but a shadow came over him when Stanley's draft notice and subsequent military service came up at the end of the monologue. And today is the anniversary of my father's death last year. David H. Lippman Public Affairs Officer US Naval Antarctic Support Unit Christchurch, New Zealand From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 3 23:43:13 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA16634; Wed, 3 Apr 96 23:43:12 +0200 Received: from jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (civguy@jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us [192.217.238.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id XAA23023 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 23:42:51 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from civguy@localhost) by jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (8.6.10/8.6.9) id RAA03676; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 17:13:57 -0600 Date: Wed, 3 Apr 1996 17:13:57 -36000 From: Jason Long Subject: Re: Terry Allen's commands Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: <9604032003.AA23057@iac.iac.org.nz> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 647 I have been preparing material from the magazine to be uploaded onto the GR/D website. So far I've been concentrating on finishing the 1st Divisions series and have been preparing the designer's notes from FtF to be uploaded. I'll probably do the designer's notes from BF next, but I'm not sure what to do after that. I've noted that a number of 20xx issues are out of print as well as 1-7. I intend to focus on material from those issues, but I wish to solicit people's preferences for priority and type of the material to make an appearance on the Webpage. Do y'all want to see OB articles, scenarios, battlefield reports, what? Jason From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 3 23:57:38 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA16749; Wed, 3 Apr 96 23:57:37 +0200 Received: from iac.iac.org.nz (iac.iac.org.nz [192.124.160.153]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id XAA23652 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 23:57:05 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from smtpgate.iac.org.nz by iac.iac.org.nz (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA23379; Thu, 4 Apr 96 09:53:09 NZS Message-Id: <9604032153.AA23379@iac.iac.org.nz> From: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (Public Affairs Officer) Date: Thu, 04 Apr 1996 09:56 GMT To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: The U.S. Infantry Status: O Content-Length: 495 There were indeed a fair amount of problems in the later US Army infantry units, not only due to speeded-up training, but because of the Army's classification system, whereby the brightest minds were assigned to specialized units or the ever-expanding Army Air Force. A lot of potentially capable infantrymen joined the OSS, the Marines, or the Navy. Best, David H. Lippman Public Affairs Officer US Naval Antarctic Support Unit Christchurch, New Zealand From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 4 00:07:42 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA16829; Thu, 4 Apr 96 00:07:41 +0200 Received: from motgate2.mot.com (motgate2.mot.com [129.188.136.20]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id AAA23913 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 1996 00:07:19 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from mothost.mot.com (mothost.mot.com [129.188.137.101]) by motgate2.mot.com (8.7.3/8.6.10/MOT-3.8) with ESMTP id WAA05176 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 22:06:07 GMT Received: from fwans12 (fwans12.fwrdc.rtsg.mot.com [160.2.12.7]) by mothost.mot.com (8.7.3/8.6.10/MOT-3.8) with SMTP id QAA23146 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 16:06:37 -0600 (CST) Received: from fwhre14.fwrdc.rtsg.mot.com (fwhre14) by fwans12 (5.67b/FTW-1.62) id AA11510; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 16:03:25 -0600 Received: by fwhre14.fwrdc.rtsg.mot.com (8.6.12/FTW-1.62) id QAA24383; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 16:06:34 -0600 From: psmith@hpmail2.fwrdc.rtsg.mot.com (Paul Smith) Message-Id: <199604032206.QAA24383@fwhre14.fwrdc.rtsg.mot.com> Subject: Magazine articles on WWW To: europa@lysator.liu.se (Europa maillist) Date: Wed, 3 Apr 1996 16:06:34 -0600 (CST) In-Reply-To: from "Jason Long" at Apr 3, 96 05:13:57 pm Reply-To: psmith@ftw.mot.com *Return-Receipt-To: psmith@ftw.mot.com X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Status: O Content-Length: 488 >Do y'all want to see OB articles, scenarios, battlefield reports, what? > >Jason > I vote for scenarios and battlefield reports. -- Paul F. Smith Ft. Worth Research Laboratories | Phone: (817) 245-6097 Motorola | Fax : (817) 245-6148 5555 N. Beach St | email: psmith@ftw.mot.com Ft. Worth, Tx 76137 | QPS001@email.mot.com "Good judgement comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgement." From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 4 00:49:27 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA17270; Thu, 4 Apr 96 00:49:26 +0200 Received: from iac.iac.org.nz (iac.iac.org.nz [192.124.160.153]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id AAA24938 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 1996 00:48:25 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from smtpgate.iac.org.nz by iac.iac.org.nz (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA23519; Thu, 4 Apr 96 10:44:29 NZS Message-Id: <9604032244.AA23519@iac.iac.org.nz> From: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (Public Affairs Officer) Date: Thu, 04 Apr 1996 10:45 GMT To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: What to put on the page Status: O Content-Length: 252 All of the above look snappy, but my personal taste runs to OB reports, which would explain the history behind the counters. David H. Lippman Public Affairs Officer US Naval Antarctic Support Unit Christchurch, New Zealand From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 4 00:58:54 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA17381; Thu, 4 Apr 96 00:58:53 +0200 Received: from mail-e2b-service.gnn.com (mail-e2b-service.gnn.com [204.148.102.170]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id AAA25107 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 1996 00:58:41 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from www-40-229.gnn.com. (www-40-229.gnn.com [205.188.40.229]) by mail-e2b-service.gnn.com (8.7.1/8.6.9) with SMTP id RAA16472 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 17:58:04 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199604032258.RAA16472@mail-e2b-service.gnn.com> X-Mailer: GNNmessenger 1.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 03 Apr 1996 15:54:14 From: NormPratt@gnn.com (Norman Pratt) To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: Terry Allen's commands Status: O Content-Length: 134 >Do y'all want to see OB articles, scenarios, battlefield reports, what? > >Jason I vote for scenarios and battlefield reports. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 4 02:06:07 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA17996; Thu, 4 Apr 96 02:05:51 +0200 Received: from mail-e2b-service.gnn.com (mail-e2b-service.gnn.com [204.148.102.170]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id CAA26329 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 1996 02:04:36 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from www-40-42.gnn.com. (www-40-42.gnn.com [205.188.40.42]) by mail-e2b-service.gnn.com (8.7.1/8.6.9) with SMTP id TAA05241 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 19:03:57 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199604040003.TAA05241@mail-e2b-service.gnn.com> X-Mailer: GNNmessenger 1.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 03 Apr 1996 17:00:09 From: NormPratt@gnn.com (Norman Pratt) To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: The poor old 106th Status: O Content-Length: 3104 >The 106th dishonored itself because of the rapid surrender of the >two regiments. A more veteran outfit would have held out longer, >slowing the German advance and possibly finding a way to breakout. >When you compare the 106th's performance to that of the many other >US units caught in the initial deluge at the Bulge, the 106th's >action is little short of disgraceful. Of course, it wasn't >supposed to be that way -- the 106th was a green outfit and was >sent to a quiet sector, the Ardennes, to come up to speed without >facing heavy action. Had the 106th had a few more weeks in >the line, it probably would have performed creditably. I think I must take exception here with Mr. Astell. I don't think it is fair to attempt a comparison between the fate of the 106th versus that of the 2nd Inf Div or any other veteran outfit in the Bulge. The circumstances surrounding the what befell the 106th indicate that while it may have held out for a short while longer, the end results would have only been more dead Americans without any real change to the outcome. As stated above, the 106th was a green outfit. Look at what happened to the 1st Inf Div at Kasserine in its first real combat. Recall also, that over 60% of the trained men from the 106th were taken from the division and used as replacements during 1944. In return, the division received, only just prior to shipping overseas, 1,200 men from the ATSP, 1,100 from training as air cadets, 1,500 from other divisions not yet scheduled for overseas, and 2,500 from various disbanded small units, mostly service troops. Additionally, when the 106th replaced the 2nd on the Schnee Eifel, there was to be a gun for gun replacement on the line. As the 2nd had accumulated extra weapons in excess of normal issue, when the 106th had no weapon for exchange, the 2nd took their extras with them. While the 2nd also left its telephone system in place when it left, the 106th did not have the large number of sound-powered phones to use it. The 106th also lost most of its artillery support after the first day, either by displacement or capture. The 2nd Div on the other hand, had enormous artillery support during its battle in the twin villages and readily acknowledged that without it, it could not have succeeded in stopping the Germans. The lack of experience, extra weapons, and communications problems experienced by the two regiments on the Schnee Eifel would have made it difficult even for a veteran unit to succeed. This was a green outfit in which the troops still thought one stood guard at right shoulder arms and was stilling wearing neckties only a few days earlier when they entered the lines. I agree that while it was possible for the two regiments to hold out longer (as some smaller units did), the end result would not have significantly changed the end result. I do not necessarily defend the 106th, I only mean to suggest that any comparison between what the 106th accomplished versus what a veteran unit accomplished in the Bulge is not realistic. Norman Pratt From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 4 02:40:41 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA18205; Thu, 4 Apr 96 02:40:26 +0200 Received: from ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (abcclibr@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu [128.174.5.59]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id CAA27006 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 1996 02:40:09 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by ux1.cso.uiuc.edu id AA09126 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for europa@lysator.liu.se); Wed, 3 Apr 1996 18:29:56 -0600 Date: Wed, 3 Apr 1996 18:29:56 -0600 From: conrad alan b To: "Frank E. Watson" Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: re:unit strengths & losses In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 1482 On Mon, 1 Apr 1996, Frank E. Watson wrote: > > I might be tempted to use the remnant concept in the desert or SF, but I > balk at tracking remnants for Soviet rifle XXs. Maybe the Soviets rifle > XXs would be exempt from remnantizing? > > Maybe if you used higher HQs, could some of the remnants be assigned > to these "units." That might cut down on some of on-map counters ( a > thought that could be considered radical in this game). > Certainly the remnant concept needs a lot of thought. One problem is the potential of greater clutter. My original thoughts would have had not only the soviet divisions as remnants but possibly all sub-division units also. That is a huge potential clutter, although in practice one can cut it down. In War in Europe we had some of that. The German infantry divisions flipped from a 6-5 to a 1-5, and had to go back home to be rebuilt. As soon as one could be sure they had escaped any danger we always tossed them in the rebuild hopper. Certainly I have always played Resource Points from a pool and not on the board. Now that is in the rules in SF. An HQ that holds remnants, (and where one might then rebuild them?) is an excellent suggestion. > Alan, could a remnant be overrun? Should an overrun cadre generate a > remnant? > Without having worked it out, I would say yes, a remnant, just like a positional AA unit, can be overrun. And yes an overrun cadre becomes a remnant. Alan From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 4 02:47:34 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA18227; Thu, 4 Apr 96 02:47:19 +0200 Received: from iac.iac.org.nz (iac.iac.org.nz [192.124.160.153]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id CAA27132 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 1996 02:47:07 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from smtpgate.iac.org.nz by iac.iac.org.nz (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA23844; Thu, 4 Apr 96 12:43:01 NZS Message-Id: <9604040043.AA23844@iac.iac.org.nz> From: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (Public Affairs Officer) Date: Thu, 04 Apr 1996 12:43 GMT To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: The 106th, yet again Status: O Content-Length: 351 Norman: Very well-researched post on the 106th Infantry Division. I used to hear people make jokes about it, which bothered me, because, as I've mentioned, I lost a member of my family in that outfit. Sincerely, David H. Lippman Public Affairs Officer US Naval Antarctic Support Unit Christchurch, New Zealand From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 4 03:45:42 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA18637; Thu, 4 Apr 96 03:45:41 +0200 Received: from smtp4.aw.com (smtp4.aw.com [192.207.117.64]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id DAA28104 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 1996 03:45:01 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from East-Message_Server by smtp4.aw.com with Novell_GroupWise; Wed, 03 Apr 1996 20:42:40 -0400 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1 Date: Wed, 03 Apr 1996 22:50:08 -0400 From: Ray Kanarr To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: Everybody's [?] pet peeves Status: O Content-Length: 1617 From: >EXACTLY how GDW moved from a small company to a >big name. Well, that is an >OPINION, isn't it? I have been closely involved with GDW >from 1974 on. That is not my opinion. So, we disagree. >As far as the rest goes, well, we does the best we can, so >you have two options, buy or don't buy. >bye bye winston Actually, a fairly rudimentary accounting procedure comparing GDW's unit sales/revenue/profits for the two years preceding and following the introduction of Traveller, or a comparison of the sales/revenue/profits generated by Traveller and Europa over a span of time equivalvent to both would show EXACTLY whether or not this precipitated GDW's upward mobility, without any ambiguity or subjectivity whatsoever. I'm not at all saying that GDW wasn't a "good" or valuable company before Traveller, but Frank, Mark, and Paul were certainly not being treated as equals by SPI, AH, or TSR before Traveller, nor were they as influential in the gaming community as they later were as a result of Traveller. Also, until the advent of Traveller, there were a number of stores the the New York metropolitan area [probably the largest single concentration of board gamers in the country, if not on the planet!] that didn't carry GDW games because they were "so small". As far as the rest goes, I know that you're doing the best that you can, and that s--t happens, and you've gotta roll with the flow. I wasn't taking issue with that, as had some other posters. I still think that Europa is the best durn gamin system in the known universe, as I've posted numerous times before. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 4 04:32:51 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA18930; Thu, 4 Apr 96 04:32:50 +0200 Received: from smtp.utexas.edu (smtp.utexas.edu [128.83.126.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id EAA28733 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 1996 04:32:27 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from slip-66-11.ots.utexas.edu (slip-66-11.ots.utexas.edu [128.83.253.139]) by smtp.utexas.edu (8.6.7/8.6.6) with SMTP id UAA13373 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 20:29:50 -0600 Date: Wed, 3 Apr 1996 20:29:50 -0600 Message-Id: <199604040229.UAA13373@smtp.utexas.edu> X-Sender: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu (Bobby D. Bryant) Subject: Re: Terry Allen's commands Status: O Content-Length: 590 Jason said: >I intend to focus on material from those issues, but I wish to solicit >people's preferences for priority and type of the material to make an >appearance on the Webpage. Do y'all want to see OB articles, scenarios, >battlefield reports, what? I vote for errata as first priority, though I know it wasn't on your list of offerings. If we have to stick to the list, my preference runs in the order you listed them. (But I wouldn't mind seeing a few more battlefield reports posted here by subscribers to the list.) - Bobby. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 4 04:48:09 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA19012; Thu, 4 Apr 96 04:48:08 +0200 Received: from smtp.utexas.edu (smtp.utexas.edu [128.83.126.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id EAA28953 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 1996 04:47:45 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from slip-66-11.ots.utexas.edu (slip-66-11.ots.utexas.edu [128.83.253.139]) by smtp.utexas.edu (8.6.7/8.6.6) with SMTP id UAA13537 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 1996 20:39:47 -0600 Date: Wed, 3 Apr 1996 20:39:47 -0600 Message-Id: <199604040239.UAA13537@smtp.utexas.edu> X-Sender: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu (Bobby D. Bryant) Subject: Re: The poor old 106th (new twist) Status: O Content-Length: 425 Did the German plans for "the bulge" escape ULTRA? I'm curious whether Allied high command was expecting it and was eager for it, in order to be able thrash the cream of the German army in the countryside rather than having to root them out of the Westwall. - Bobby. p.s. -- I think my evil twin was posting messages under my name last night -- his spelling was horribel! From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 4 05:36:35 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA19272; Thu, 4 Apr 96 05:36:34 +0200 Received: from smtp4.aw.com (smtp4.aw.com [192.207.117.64]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id FAA29624 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 1996 05:36:18 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from East-Message_Server by smtp4.aw.com with Novell_GroupWise; Wed, 03 Apr 1996 22:32:37 -0400 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1 Date: Thu, 04 Apr 1996 00:39:54 -0400 From: Ray Kanarr To: europa@lysator.liu.se, bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu Subject: Bulge Intel: [was: Re: The poor old 106th (new twist)] Status: O Content-Length: 676 On 4/3/96, Bobby Bryant asked: >Did the German plans for "the bulge" escape ULTRA? Hi Bobby! At the risk of getting my tail twisted again, I'll put in my cent and a half on this. My understanding is that Hitler, in one of his few moments of lucidity, commanded a complete electronic communications blackout with regard to the operation, thereby rendering the Ultra avenue useless. Probably a damn good thing it was so near the end anyhow, or the Germans might have been able to catch their breath and pull their thumbs out long enough to put two and two together, and come up with a compromised code system. Well, anyhow, that's the way I read it, so now ya know. Ray From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 4 07:35:19 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA20017; Thu, 4 Apr 96 07:35:18 +0200 Received: from ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (abcclibr@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu [128.174.5.59]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id HAA01185 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 1996 07:34:57 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by ux1.cso.uiuc.edu id AA15575 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for europa@lysator.liu.se); Wed, 3 Apr 1996 23:34:54 -0600 Date: Wed, 3 Apr 1996 23:34:54 -0600 From: conrad alan b To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: unit replacements Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 3818 Thanks to J. Broshot for the fine info on the 44 HuD. It being a 10-6 in a world of 7-6s (or less) is just a larger point to a question I wanted to bring up. I've always wondered about the fact that on the Eastern Front the German army had this mix of 8-6s & 7-6s. Both cadred to the same 3-6, yet they would be rebuilt to the original strength. John has pointed out recently some of the criteria of what goes into unit strengths. And many have heard the story of where the original unit strengths came from; different German divisions came from different waves of call up and had different levels of equipment, training, and best manpower pools to draw from. But by may '41 much of that difference is gone. Most divisions had been through some combat had taken losses, been rebuilt, etc. So at this point what makes a 8-6 not a 7-6. Could be a unit that's closer to proper T.O.& E. By '41 most German units were under strength. Or perhaps a unit had a good record from the previous campaigns so that rated it higher. I asked Frank Chadwick if he remembered what when into those unit decisions back then. It was long ago, so he was not sure except to say he was sure it was a combination of these factors. My point is that when an infantry division is cadred one of two things should happen. If the strength is just a matter of putting the guns and bodies into the unit, then the cadre should be able to be rebuilt to an 8-6 no matter what it started as (or to stretch the point to the 10-6 of the 44 HuD). However if that strength is a matter of the expertise and experience of the unit then it could be considered a fragile unit since just replacing the bodies won't do the trick. Someone will surely make the counter argument that the Germans were very good at rebuilding units to fine fighting form. Even if we grant that, the concept is the same for many nations. Several have brought up the point that many references like to equate the value of American units with the commanders they might have had. And the unit values came along for the ride. Is that the way we want GE to be? One big quantifier will be the counter sets that could reasonably be provided. There are real factors why the Germans can not build an army of only 1st SS panzers. But the ability to build all your units up to the paper value of the T.O.&E. if time allows is not an unreasonable thought. Example: a resent post tells us that John Astell is now playing a Europa game that has the Germans trying the African strategy. Certainly one of the prospects that history has asked about. However what kind of German army is he allowing himself? Army plans as France was falling were to trim back the size of the army, send some needed manpower back to the factories. Then get manpower and equipment levels in the remaining divisions up to proper levels. And try to motorize a bigger chunk of the army. Of course Hitler pulled the rug out from under those plans with the Barbarossa campaign that need more divisions no matter what that might do to the whole army structure. In the game John is playing it would be very reasonable for the German army to give up 20 or 30 divisions, get maybe 5 more motorized divisions, and get a large portion of the rest to proper T.O.&E. (8-6, or maybe even higher?). Any perhaps a bigger Luftwaffe too. Not Me 262s of course, but a few more Ju-88s, and maybe more Fw190s too, as those factories come on line. And the navy could get a bigger slice of the industrial pie too. To get those subs after England, and try to build a little bit of transport to help the Med campaign. I think that is reasonable. What do all of you think? Alan Conrad Champaign, Illinois From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 4 07:47:01 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA20099; Thu, 4 Apr 96 07:47:00 +0200 Received: from mail-e2b-service.gnn.com (mail-e2b-service.gnn.com [204.148.102.170]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id HAA01292 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 1996 07:46:40 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from www-46-42.gnn.com. (www-46-42.gnn.com [205.188.46.42]) by mail-e2b-service.gnn.com (8.7.1/8.6.9) with SMTP id AAA22656 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 1996 00:46:04 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199604040546.AAA22656@mail-e2b-service.gnn.com> X-Mailer: GNNmessenger 1.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 03 Apr 1996 22:42:19 From: NormPratt@gnn.com (Norman Pratt) To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: ULTRA and the Bulge Status: O Content-Length: 1303 >Did the German plans for "the bulge" escape ULTRA? I'm curious whether >Allied high command was expecting it and was eager for it, in order to be >able thrash the cream of the German army in the countryside rather than >having to root them out of the Westwall. > > - Bobby. > It would seem that in one last fit of sanity, Hitler placed a complete black out on transmission of anything having to do with Wacht am Rhein via radio or telephone. Everything had to be carried by officer courier with a Gestapo guard. While ULTRA did reveal a few items which, interpretred correctly, could have given a hint as to German plans, ULTRA really didn't give the Allies anything on the forthcoming counterattack. Allied commanders seem to have grown so confident and dependent on ULTRA providing them everything about the Germans, that when it didn't tell them anything, they accepted that it wasn't going to happen. There is nothing to indicate that Eisenhower or any other Allied commander knew about the attack before hand and let it happen in order to draw out the last vestiges of German strength from the West Wall. Not even the German divisional commanders found out about the forthcoming counterattack until days before it happened. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 4 15:30:10 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA26955; Thu, 4 Apr 96 15:30:09 +0200 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id PAA10773 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 1996 15:29:31 +0200 (MET DST) From: l.hanna@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA047153762; Thu, 4 Apr 1996 13:16:02 GMT Message-Id: <199604041316.AA047153762@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Thu, 4 Apr 96 13:16:02 UTC 0000 ( from inet# ; Thu, 4 Apr 96 13:14:56 UTC 0000) Date: Thu, 4 Apr 96 13:18:00 UTC 0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: L.HANNA X-Genie-Qk-Id: 0426755 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 376229 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: ULTRA and the Bulge Status: O Content-Length: 1241 The German clampdown on electronic communications did indeed keep ULTRA from warning about the December offensive, but not all Allied intel was fooled. US Third Army intelligence had indicator of an attack building, but no specifics on size or strength, I seem to recall. Patton's postwar supporters (not an unbiased group, I know) were careful to point this out. The speed of planning and execution of Third Army's wheeling movement helps to bear this out. As for some other topics floating about, I thought it was a given that divisions (especially the US ones) were rated for leadership and esprit as reflected by performance. Statistical analyses emphasized that only a handful of US divisions could regularly defeat the Germans, and these are the ones that have higher ratings. As for replacing these divisions as fragile, the American practice of adding replacements to the survivors ensures that some unit identity and experience survives, unlike the Soviet prewar fragile divisions, which had _all_ of the trained individuals that could not be replaced once they were wiped out. As for the unlucky 106th ID, can we agree that they got caught in a bad poistion (no retreat routes), and suffered a bad dr? From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 4 16:55:37 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA28319; Thu, 4 Apr 96 16:55:36 +0200 Received: from prague.crossover.com (root@prague.crossover.com [204.217.246.5]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA13153 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 1996 16:54:48 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [205.161.32.192] (jastell.tiac.net [205.161.32.192]) by prague.crossover.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id IAA07077 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 1996 08:46:19 -0500 X-Sender: jastell@post.crossover.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 4 Apr 1996 09:53:58 -0400 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) Subject: Bulge Intel: [was: Re: The poor old 106th (new twist)] Status: O Content-Length: 681 >Did the German plans for "the bulge" escape ULTRA? Yes, to a large degree. Once the Germans in the west were pushed back to Germany, they tended to use their internal phone network rather than radio among the higher command units. Thus there was less radio traffic for Ultra to decode. Ultra caught some of the preparations for the Bulge but not enough for the Allies to figure out what was going on. (Also, Allied regular intelligence lost track of various German panzer divisions in Nov-Dec 44, but this apparently didn't cause the Allies to wonder what the Germans were up to.) As I remember, Eisenhower's Lieutenants summarizes well the intelligence loss before the Bulge. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 4 19:39:21 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA00442; Thu, 4 Apr 96 19:39:19 +0200 Received: from felix.dircon.co.uk (felix.dircon.co.uk [193.128.224.10]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id TAA17347 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 1996 19:36:26 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [194.112.35.39] (gw1-039.pool.dircon.co.uk) by felix.dircon.co.uk with SMTP id AA25580 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Thu, 4 Apr 1996 18:36:11 +0100 X-Sender: cloister@popmail.dircon.co.uk Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 4 Apr 1996 18:38:30 +0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: cloister@dircon.co.uk (Perry de Havilland) Subject: Re: Bulge Intel: [was: Re: The poor old 106th (new twist)] Status: O Content-Length: 1166 Ray wrote: snip >Probably a damn good thing it was so near the end anyhow, or the >Germans might have been able to catch their breath and pull their >thumbs out long enough to put two and two together, and come up with >a compromised code system. I do not think the Germans had much chance of figuring their codes were being decyphered, particularly as after they added the fourth wheel to the Enigma machines, it was felt an already good code machine was now even better (it DID cause panic for a few months at Bletchley Park until they cracked that one too, using the world first computer (in the modern sense of the word)). Suggestions the Brits WERE reading Enigma codes (usually by the Kriegsmarine) were discounted for a variety of reasons. One of the reasons the story of Ultra took so long to come out after the war was that the British sold a large number of 'unbreakable' ex-German enigma machines to various foreign governments after the war and the Enigma system was still in use until the 1960's. When the story of Ultra finally broke, there were some acute 'sense of humour failures' in various government circles =:-O Regards Perry ...- From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 4 19:58:00 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA00665; Thu, 4 Apr 96 19:57:59 +0200 Received: from crash.cts.com (root@crash.cts.com [192.188.72.17]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id TAA17747 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 1996 19:57:37 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from fhi by crash.cts.com with uucp (Smail3.1.29.1 #5) id m0u4tHc-0000VEC; Thu, 4 Apr 96 09:57 PST Received: from notes.san.fhi.com by fhboot1.san.fhi.com with smtp (Smail3.1.28.1 #4) id m0u4szt-0000qxC; Thu, 4 Apr 96 09:39 PST Received: by notes.san.fhi.com (IBM OS/2 SENDMAIL VERSION 1.3.2)/1.0) id AA5078; Thu, 04 Apr 96 09:38:43 -0800 Message-Id: <9604041738.AA5078@notes.san.fhi.com> Received: from Forte with "Lotus Notes Mail Gateway for SMTP" id F5AC039B7A38CDE188256302005A839A; Thu, 4 Apr 96 09:38:42 To: europa From: Jay Steiger/Forte Date: 4 Apr 96 9:37:39 PS Subject: Origins Voting Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain Status: O Content-Length: 906 Hi all, I was glad to see some enthusiasm for trying to get FWTBT, TEM, and John Astell a win at this years Origins. There does seem to be a bit of confusion regarding the voting proceedures though. The voting is done by mail in ballot, due to the judging coordinator by late June. Copies of the ballot are ususally sent in various industry magazines during the spring. I have recieved one in Command and one in Paper Wars. If one of the other on-line members has a fax machine and a scanner, I would be happy to fax my blank copy. This can be scanned into document format and put on-line as a posting. Please post a response or send it to me at: steigerj@notes.san.fhi.com The voting format is write in. You can select up to 3 choices or just list one if you'd like. The address to sent it to is listed on the ballot. That's all... Europa deserves a win! Jay Steiger San Diego, CA From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 4 21:26:03 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA01494; Thu, 4 Apr 96 21:26:02 +0200 Received: from emout04.mail.aol.com (emout04.mail.aol.com [198.81.10.12]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id VAA19557 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 1996 21:24:28 +0200 (MET DST) From: Italorican@aol.com Received: by emout04.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id OAA25359; Thu, 4 Apr 1996 14:23:56 -0500 Date: Thu, 4 Apr 1996 14:23:56 -0500 Message-Id: <960404142353_505685302@emout04.mail.aol.com> To: civguy@dusable.cps.k12.il.us Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: Terry Allen's commands Status: O Content-Length: 355 In a message dated 96-04-03 17:06:41 EST, civguy@dusable.cps.k12.il.us (Jason Long) writes: >Do y'all want to see OB articles, scenarios, >battlefield reports, what? > > I would`like to see errata & rules clarifications, OB articles, scenarios, facts behind the counters (entire series probably bears reprinting), variants, play reports Antonio Lauria From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 4 22:37:49 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA02041; Thu, 4 Apr 96 22:37:48 +0200 Received: from smtp4.aw.com (smtp4.aw.com [192.207.117.64]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA20877 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 1996 22:36:57 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from East-Message_Server by smtp4.aw.com with Novell_GroupWise; Thu, 04 Apr 1996 15:35:56 -0400 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1 Date: Thu, 04 Apr 1996 17:42:27 -0400 From: Ray Kanarr To: europa@lysator.liu.se, abcclibr@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu Subject: Unit factor evaluations [was: Re: unit replacements] [longish] Status: O Content-Length: 5874 On 4/3/96, Alan Conrad noted: >I've always wondered about the fact that on the Eastern >Front the German army had this mix of 8-6s & 7-6s. --snip-- >But by may '41 much of that difference is gone. Most >divisions had been through some combat had taken >losses, been rebuilt, etc. So at this point what makes a >8-6 not a 7-6. --snip-- >By '41 most German units were under strength. As you noted, the earlier 'welle' [wave] units were generally the premier units of their wehrkreis, or had been a part of the professional Weimar army, and so the most likely to be kept up to max TO&E levels, with the best equipment. They were also the least likely to be disbanded in the aftermath of the French campaign, and so had continuity of service. To state that by May '41 significant differences between infantry divs had disappeared, or that by 1941 most German units were understrength [one source states that the German amry was never as close to full strength as it was on 6/21/41 (the day before the invasion of the USSR)] is not borne out by either Mitcham's *Hitler's Legions* or Tessin's overview book. Can you give some references to support these views? Likely, a partial reason for some of the 1-point difference between inf divs is combat experience, and the reason why 7-6s don't become 8-6s after the invasion of the USSR is possibly due to manpower shortages counterbalancing increased combat effectiveness. Also, asking Frank Chadwick about German unit strengths in DNO/Unt at this point in time is a dead end, because [to my knowledge, as a proofreader for the OBs] John Astell re-evaluated all unit strengths for FitE. I'm very willing to argue for or against a lot of things, including stacking, step losses, time scales, inclusion/exclusion of air/sea/logistics/political considerations. HOWEVER, if the relationship [NOT the actual combat factors] between the combat factors of all units is being called into question, then what you are saying is that John didn't do a good research job, and the factors for EVERY SINGLE UNIT need to be re-evaluated. And that's just crazy talk. John is undoubtedly one of the best, if not the best, most detail-oriented researcher I've known. Out of the vast mass of units, to think that, for units that stand out [as much as a 10-6 or 9-8 does] in Europa, John didn't give a bit of extra time and attention to the factors of those units is ludicrous. To argue about the strengths of particular units is patently absurd, as those strengths varied widely, and sometimes daily, over the course of a six-year. A particular unit strength is a REPRESENTATION of the doctrine, time, political considerations, etc., etc., blah, blah behind the historical unit at a particular point in time. It is a snapshot of the unit on a particular date, and Europa history can vary wildly from what then happened historically. Not one SE game in a thousand likely ends up with Hoch und Deutschmeister getting their frozen asses handed to them on a plate at Stalingrad. And NO ONE would suggest that HuD be automatically eliminated on 2/I/43, wherever it happens to be in the USSR just because that was the historical result on that historical date. >Several have brought up the point that many references >like to equate the value of American units with the >commanders they might have had. And the unit values >came along for the ride. Actually, several have SPECULATED that this MAY be the case. This is NOT a proven fact at all. >Army plans as France was falling were to trim back the >size of the army, send some needed manpower back to >the factories. I think [and will hunt up references if asked] that the German army actually scaled back to get the harvest in, freeing up men for agricultural, not industrial, work. Germany, at various times, had absurd plans for both much larger mechanized and air forces [and the slightly less adsurd "Z" naval plan], to the extent where such forces would have required ALL available oil resources to operate. Germany's capability to churn out additional c/m units, above and beyond what they historically did, is extremely questionable, given all of the material constraints on their production/ use of materials: 1) They did not have significantly more POL at any time during the war than what was available in May 1941, and they didn't have enough then for their current c/m and air needs. 2) a variety of strategic materials were in short supply throughout the war, necessitating the melting down of large numbers of church bells, and the eventual production of laquered-steel cartridges which were next to useless. 3) finally, if the Germans could have produced more c/m units, why didn't they? Strategic bombing doesn't start to impede manufacturing at all until 1942, and the Germans couldn't even fully activate the 27th[?] Pz div. German a/c and AFV production continues to increase throughout the war, but they can't even motorize the artillery of many of their inf divs. Why? Germany built what they built because that's what they intended to build. If you say, well, let's delete lots of [and 30 is LOTS of] inf divs, and add c/m divs, you might run the risk of a real, successful army coup in 1940 or 1941. If you say, well, lets scale back the Luftwaffe significantly and allocate those resources to the army, then what you're saying is: Hermann Goring is not head of the Luftwaffe, or doesn't have Hitler's ear, neither of which was true, and both of which have to be taken into account. Europa is meant to be flexible, within fairly realistic limits, which is why you CAN build the 27th [?] Pz div [if you have the resources].But if you want to posit a completely different military-industrial-economic-political context for Germany, that's fine, but now you're well into geopolitical/global economic roleplaying, and way out of Europa. Ray From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 5 01:24:21 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA03428; Fri, 5 Apr 96 01:24:20 +0200 Received: from medlantic.mhg.edu (medlantic.mhg.edu [198.133.139.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id BAA23831 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 1996 01:23:43 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by medlantic.mhg.edu id AA17017 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for europa@lysator.liu.se); Thu, 4 Apr 1996 18:23:40 -0500 Message-Id: <199604042323.AA17017@medlantic.mhg.edu> Received: by medlantic.mhg.edu (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Thu, 4 Apr 1996 18:23:40 -0500 From: "Haugh, Patrick J." To: europa Subject: Or What? my wish list. Luft-peeves Date: Thu, 04 Apr 96 18:15:00 EST Encoding: 44 TEXT X-Mailer: Microsoft Mail V3.0 Status: O Content-Length: 2396 Jason asked what we would like to see posted on the Website. My vote is for Designer's Notes/OoBs and scenarios. I would particularly like to see the rationale for the dizzingly complex new Luftwaffe OoB and hyperspecialization of aircraft types. What is, for instance, the difference between an Fw 190A heavy fighter (HF), regular day fighter (F), and ground attack (A). As far as I've been able to determine, in most cases the units in the field bolted hardware onto the wings to suit the mission at hand using "Rustsautze" conversion kits. The same Fw could go up as a regular fighter one day, have two 30mm cannon attached to it's wing the next day as a bomber killer (with a marked deterioration in performance), and round off the week as a Jagdbomber with a 1,000 kilo bomb carried on the centerline. I'm not sure how to represent this sort of multi-role capability: maybe allow the German player to shift the posture of certain multi-role units during his initial phase. I'm thinking especially of the FW 190 A and F, and the Me 109 G. (The 190 D was a specialized fighter, the 190G a specialized bomber, the 109 F did not seem to have been used in bomber-killer role much, and the 109K carried it's 30mm cannon internally, gaining the best of both worlds.) Similar suggestions might be made for other air forces maids-of-all-work. There are some arguments against this suggestion: 1. Too complex: The air system has so much chrome it will never take off 2. Too many new counters: This is Europa. Counters are our friends. There is no overall increase in counter numbers, and the amount of bimonthly fiddling about looking for that one last type A Fw 190F to switch for a type F Fw 190F goes down dramatically. 3. Lack of cross-training of pilots. Fighter jocks won't do ground attack (all that hostile Flak) and Ground attack pilots can't dogfight. This may be a reasonable point for preventing F-and-HF-to-A conversions on the spur of the moment. In defence of my proposal, however, I believe that the Luftwaffe frequently turned at least part of each JG (fighter group) into a jabo ( fighter-bomber)unit for intruder missions. The training the Luftwaffe was getting in 1943-4-5 was so lousy that most learning was being done on the job, not at flying school. Enough ranting, Haya Safari, Patrick Haugh, Washington D.C. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 5 02:38:47 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA03866; Fri, 5 Apr 96 02:38:46 +0200 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id CAA29821 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 1996 02:37:55 +0200 (MET DST) From: l.hanna@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA247533864; Fri, 5 Apr 1996 00:24:24 GMT Message-Id: <199604050024.AA247533864@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Fri, 5 Apr 96 00:24:24 UTC 0000 ( from inet# ; Fri, 5 Apr 96 00:22:24 UTC 0000) Date: Fri, 5 Apr 96 00:01:00 UTC 0000 To: cloister%dircon.co.uk%inet00#@genie.com Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: L.HANNA X-Genie-Qk-Id: 3486780 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 385975 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: Re: Bulge & Enigma Status: O Content-Length: 515 I'm trying to recall, but somewhere along the line during the war, a neutral diplomat heard that the Allies were reading either the German or the Japanese codes, and warned either a Japanese or German diplomat, whose warning to the other Axis power was ignored, and the warning power then wrote off any possibility of their own codes being broken because of their own superiority, and laughed at their hapless ally. I wish I could remember more details of this story, but I got it from a lecture on WWII. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 5 02:44:33 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA03904; Fri, 5 Apr 96 02:44:31 +0200 Received: from osf1.gmu.edu (osf1.gmu.edu [129.174.1.13]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id CAA29893 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 1996 02:44:19 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from osf1.gmu.edu by osf1.gmu.edu; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/07Sep94-1001AM/GMUv3) id AA22442; Thu, 4 Apr 1996 19:44:14 -0500 Date: Thu, 04 Apr 1996 19:52:57 -0500 From: Nicholas Forte Reply-To: nforte@gmu.edu Subject: Re: Terry Allen's commands To: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 873 On Wed, 3 Apr 1996 17:13:57 -36000 civguy@dusable.cps.k12.il.us (Jason Long) wrote: >I have been preparing material from the magazine to be uploaded onto the >GR/D website. So far I've been concentrating on finishing the 1st >Divisions series and have been preparing the designer's notes from FtF to >be uploaded. I'll probably do the designer's notes from BF next, but I'm >not sure what to do after that. >I've noted that a number of 20xx issues are out of print as well as 1-7. >I intend to focus on material from those issues, but I wish to solicit >people's preferences for priority and type of the material to make an >appearance on the Webpage. Do y'all want to see OB articles, scenarios, >battlefield reports, what? My preference would be for more OBs and what-if scenarios, focusing on operations that may have been planned but not actually carried out. Nick From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 5 04:15:32 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA04459; Fri, 5 Apr 96 04:15:31 +0200 Received: from felix.dircon.co.uk (felix.dircon.co.uk [193.128.224.10]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id EAA00951 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 1996 04:14:41 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [194.112.35.21] (gw1-021.pool.dircon.co.uk) by felix.dircon.co.uk with SMTP id AA11962 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Fri, 5 Apr 1996 03:14:34 +0100 X-Sender: cloister@popmail.dircon.co.uk Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 5 Apr 1996 03:16:57 +0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: cloister@dircon.co.uk (Perry de Havilland) Subject: Multi-role aircraft (was Luft pet-peeves) Status: O Content-Length: 3579 Patrick wrote: (snip) >I would particularly like to see the rationale for the dizzingly >complex >new Luftwaffe OoB and hyperspecialization of aircraft >types. What is, for >instance, the difference between an Fw 190A >heavy fighter (HF), regular >day fighter (F), and ground attack >(A). Sometimes a fair bit, actually >As far as I've been able to determine, in most cases the units >in the >field bolted hardware onto the wings to suit the mission >at hand using >"Rustsautze" conversion kits. >The same Fw could go up as a regular fighter one day, have two >30mm >cannon attached to it's wing the next day as a bomber >killer (with a >marked deterioration in performance), and round >off the week as a >Jagdbomber with a 1,000 kilo bomb carried on >the centerline. Yes and no. *Rustsatz* (e-mail unfriendly umlaut on the *u*) field conversion sets could be (and were) changed, but my understanding is that this was not on a mission by mission basis but rather depended on the squadron's basic role. Within that role, some heavy fighters might be fitted out to (say) Rustsatz 4 (4 x MG 151), others might have variations (extra oblique weapons or delete the ventral tray weapons) etc.. However, some of the more extreme alterations involved adding extra armour and structural reinforcements (The Fw.190 HF counters in question) and I suspect this was not a *Rustsatz* but a *Umrust-Bausatz* (a factory conversion set). This made the Fw.190 double distilled purple poison against a Flying Fortress but also made it dog-meat for a Mustang. In this, I think the Europa team got it spot on! > I'm not sure how to represent this sort of multi-role >capability: maybe >allow the German player to shift the posture >of certain multi-role units >during his initial phase. I'm >thinking especially of the FW 190 A and F, >and the Me 109 G. >(The 190 D was a specialized fighter, the 190G a >specialized >bomber, the 109 F did not seem to have been used in >>bomber-killer role much, and the 109K carried it's 30mm cannon >>internally, gaining the best of both worlds.) Similar >suggestions might >be made for other air forces >maids-of-all-work. This is indeed a problem, but not just for the Germans. For example, RAF No.2 Group flew its Mosquitoes in Nightfighter (Intruder to be precise), Daylight Intruder, Daylight precision attack and Night Attack. These were the same crews flying the same Mosquitoes (mostly FB.VI). Similarly, Coastal Command flew their Mosquitoes in an anti-shipping role, but also a maritime intruders (hunting German coastal reccon aircraft and also attacking escorting fighters trying to protect returning U-boats). The easy solution is to simply rate them (and other aircraft in other airforces which operated in a true dual role) as fighters with a high ground attack value. The 'bomb-load penalty' rule can take care of any resulting anormalities (thought I have never liked the 'Jettison' rule as written). (snip) >3. Lack of cross-training of pilots. Fighter jocks won't do >ground attack >(all that hostile Flak) and Ground attack pilots >can't dogfight. Broadly true but not always the case (units like No.2 Group really were all-singing-all-dancing outfits). >This may be a reasonable point for preventing F-and-HF-to-A >conversions >on the spur of the moment. F to HF is a fairly drastic rebuild rather than a re-role number and so does not make much sense. F to A just needs the counter to be F (or HF, depending) plus a better written rule. >Enough ranting, No, no. Never enough! More! More! Regards Perry ...- From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 5 04:22:00 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA04497; Fri, 5 Apr 96 04:21:59 +0200 Received: from felix.dircon.co.uk (felix.dircon.co.uk [193.128.224.10]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id EAA01037 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 1996 04:21:45 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [194.112.35.21] (gw1-021.pool.dircon.co.uk) by felix.dircon.co.uk with SMTP id AA12093 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Fri, 5 Apr 1996 03:21:42 +0100 X-Sender: cloister@popmail.dircon.co.uk Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 5 Apr 1996 03:24:06 +0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: cloister@dircon.co.uk (Perry de Havilland) Subject: Rock the vote (boat?) Status: O Content-Length: 302 >My preference would be for more OBs and what-if scenarios, focusing on >operations that may have been planned but not actually carried out. > >Nick Yup. Me too. I just love the idea of the Armee d'Air & RAF bombing Baku etc...truth is stranger than fiction (and so am I). Regards Perry ...- From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 5 04:46:05 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA04614; Fri, 5 Apr 96 04:46:04 +0200 Received: from iac.iac.org.nz (iac.iac.org.nz [192.124.160.153]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id EAA01216 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 1996 04:43:15 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from smtpgate.iac.org.nz by iac.iac.org.nz (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA26838; Fri, 5 Apr 96 14:39:19 NZS Message-Id: <9604050239.AA26838@iac.iac.org.nz> From: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (Public Affairs Officer) Date: Fri, 05 Apr 1996 14:37 GMT To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: ULTRA and the Bulge Status: O Content-Length: 355 I have a copy of A Time For Trumpets and Hitler's Last Gamble at home, along with The Bitter Woods, which have a lot of discussion of the Allied intelligence failures just before the Bulge. I'll look at them over the weekend. David H. Lippman Public Affairs Officer US Naval Antarctic Support Unit Christchurch, New Zealand From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 5 04:51:24 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA04637; Fri, 5 Apr 96 04:51:23 +0200 Received: from smtp4.aw.com (smtp4.aw.com [192.207.117.64]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id EAA01301 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 1996 04:50:10 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from East-Message_Server by smtp4.aw.com with Novell_GroupWise; Thu, 04 Apr 1996 21:49:41 -0400 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1 Date: Thu, 04 Apr 1996 23:56:31 -0400 From: Ray Kanarr To: cloister@dircon.co.uk, europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Multi-role aircraft (was Luft pet-peeves) Status: O Content-Length: 76 Perry, Great exact post on German field mods. Keep up the good work! Ray From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 5 05:34:43 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA04845; Fri, 5 Apr 96 05:34:42 +0200 Received: from dax.cc.uakron.edu (root@dax.cc.uakron.edu [130.101.5.4]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id FAA01578 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 1996 05:31:37 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from vox08.cc.uakron.edu by dax.cc.uakron.edu (5.65/Ultrix4.3) id AA14656; Thu, 4 Apr 1996 22:32:37 -0500 Date: Thu, 4 Apr 1996 22:32:37 -0500 Message-Id: <9604050332.AA14656@dax.cc.uakron.edu> X-Sender: apanius@uakron.edu X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: Mike Apanius Subject: Re: Europa ground rules Status: O Content-Length: 819 >Your rules sound OK, but seem like a lot of work. I'm interested in >insanely huge Grand Europa games, so I don't know if I'd be able to track >units in reserve status or whatever. The Europa community has seen >proposals along that line before, but I don't know how sucessful they may >have been in practice. >Good Luck > >"Freedom is always against the law." >-J.R. "Bob" Dobbs I'm not positive yet, but I think these revised rules will not lengthen the playing time by much. One of the most time consuming things in Europa is the calculation of the combat odds, and this is not present in the revised rules. So far in FoF, keeping track of units in reserve status has been an easy thing, because generally entire fronts will be in reserve status with a couple of odd stacks in other places. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 5 06:44:27 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA05226; Fri, 5 Apr 96 06:44:26 +0200 Received: from freenet.hamilton.on.ca (main.freenet.hamilton.on.ca [199.212.94.65]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA02164 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 1996 06:41:37 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from james.freenet.hamilton.on.ca (james.freenet.hamilton.on.ca [199.212.94.66]) by freenet.hamilton.on.ca (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id XAA12102 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 1996 23:41:16 -0500 Received: (af453@localhost) by james.freenet.hamilton.on.ca (8.6.12/8.6.12) id XAA21167; Thu, 4 Apr 1996 23:42:39 -0500 Date: Thu, 4 Apr 1996 23:42:38 -0500 (EST) From: Andrew Lunny To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Hello and a Question Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 754 I have been for the past few weeks reading the posts of this group. I have found your material both informative and entertaining. I have a question for the general group to ponder but more specifically it is addressed to John Astell. Q/ In the winter of 1941 Hilter sent a directive to his generals on the eastern front forbiding them the option of retreat in the face of extreme enemy pressure. From my readings on the outcome of this directive I could only find one instance of non-compliance. Von Rundstedt tried to shorten his line of defense and was relieved of command. This situation would seem appropriate material for an optional or advanced rule much like NKZD troops for the soviets and yet no such rule is in evidence? Andrew From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 5 06:50:22 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA05255; Fri, 5 Apr 96 06:50:21 +0200 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id GAA02241 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 1996 06:49:08 +0200 (MET DST) From: j.broshot@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA002468936; Fri, 5 Apr 1996 04:35:36 GMT Message-Id: <199604050435.AA002468936@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Fri, 5 Apr 96 04:35:36 UTC 0000 ( from INTERNET# ; Fri, 5 Apr 96 04:35:16 UTC 0000) Date: Fri, 5 Apr 96 04:33:00 UTC 0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: J.BROSHOT X-Genie-Qk-Id: 7273927 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 92061 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: My $0.02 worth Status: O Content-Length: 3799 1. Re HITLER'S LEGIONS (by Samuel W. Mitcham Jr.): Sorry, Ray, but in my humble opinion this book is so poorly researched that it is dangerous to rely on. Mitcham is sloppy (and I have noted that in another one of his efforts). 2. Re German unit strengths: a discussion of German infantry division strengths, organizations etc. could go on forever. Actually, the Europa people have hit it right. Except for static units, the basic German infantry division until 1941 was triangular, three regiments each with three rifle battalions and an artillery battalion with four battalions, plus AT, recon and engineer battalions. The distinction came (as noted) in the type of personnel that was used to form the division and its equipment. Some had Czech equipment and what ever else the Germans could lay their hands on. The later waves ("Welle") may have had one less artillery battalion and reduced AT and recce units (later combined into the so-called "Schnelle-Abteilung"). Tessin (in his overview volume) tracks the shrinking of German infantry strengths. By 1943 the Germans, to recognize realities, created the Division nA which had three regiments of two rifle battalions each. The "Schnelle -Abteilung" became the "Fusilier Battalion" (usually on bicycles) and a separate AT battalion again appeared. It was supposed to include a company of SP guns. These are represented by the 5-7-6 Inf XX counter. A chrome rule might require any infantry division reduced to cadre after certain date (say Jul I 43) to be reformed as a 5-7-6 Inf XX. Therefore the 8-6 Inf XX are the divisions of Welle 1 and Welle 2; the 7-6 Inf XX are the other divisions formed up until Barbarossa; and the "emergency" divisions are the 6-6 Inf XX and 5-6 Inf XX of FiE/SE. These had reduced complements and some had two regiments each with three rifle battalions. The Germans began forming nine "Welle 10" infantry divisions in in June 1940 (plus the original 4.Gebirgs-Division). This was cancelled after France surrendered. Many of the Welle 4 (series beginning with 206 and composed of older men, "Landwehr") and Welle 5 (formed from replacement units, "ersatz") divisions were furloughed during 1940-1941. Some of the Welle 4 divisions were actually disbanded or converted into security divisions. There is a good discussion of this in THE GERMAN ARMY 1933-1945, by Albert Seaton, who notes that, "on 15 June [1940] the dictator ordered the immediate reduction of the army to an interim size of thirty motorized and ninety infantry divisions. Industrial and equipment priority was to be given to the Luftwaffe and the navy [!];" and that 17 divisions were disbanded and that the personnel of 18 were sent on leave "provided that they took jobs in industry or agriculture," and cadres were retained so that the divisions could be speedily reformed. Conclusion: the Europa system correctly models the strengths of German infantry divisions. Now can someone explain why American infantry divisions are rated so much higher than even the best British infantry divisions? :) Re Ultra and the Battle of the Bulge: from Dupuy's last book HITLER'S LAST GAMBLE, p. 361, "...at the higher levels of command -where the underestimate of German capabilities was most serious- the intelligence officers had come to rely too much on information from ULTRA. And German security measures denied ULTRA an opportunity to obtain information about the German plans." But see also Chapter 7 in ULTRA IN THE WEST, by Ralph Bennett, "it remains extraordinary that Ultra did not arouse more forbodings." Bennett worked in Hut 3 at Bletchley Park which handled army and luftwaffe Enigma signals. He notes that, by 1944, the Allies had broken the German State Railway's codes which gave information about troop movements. Jim Broshot, St. James MO From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 5 07:34:57 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA05558; Fri, 5 Apr 96 07:34:56 +0200 Received: from smtp.utexas.edu (smtp.utexas.edu [128.83.126.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id HAA02579 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 1996 07:32:31 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from slip-4-5.ots.utexas.edu (slip-4-5.ots.utexas.edu [128.83.204.53]) by smtp.utexas.edu (8.6.7/8.6.6) with SMTP id XAA05922 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 1996 23:31:51 -0600 Date: Thu, 4 Apr 1996 23:31:51 -0600 Message-Id: <199604050531.XAA05922@smtp.utexas.edu> X-Sender: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu (Bobby D. Bryant) Subject: Re: My $0.02 worth Status: O Content-Length: 1250 Jim Broshot said: >Therefore the 8-6 Inf XX are the divisions of Welle 1 and Welle 2; >the 7-6 Inf XX are the other divisions formed up until Barbarossa; Do I vaguely remember discussion that the original 8-6 ratings were based on some of the divisions being beefed up for Barbarossa? DNO included a pretty good number of 1-8 infantry IIs, and I seem to remember someone saying that they and the 8-6's were just different ways of showing the same thing. (But caveat emptor my vague memories: my post on 10-6 and 9-8 XXs was, well, wrong. A recent addition to the "famous firsts" at the GR/D page includes an excerpt from an article in TEM #4, which is probably what I thought I was remembering. The 10-6 was indeed a 9-battalion organization, but it was the 1st XX rather than the 44th. And the article says the 9-8's were reinforced 6-battalion organizations, so ignore my earlier misstatement on that.) And quoted: > "... Industrial >and equipment priority was to be given to the Luftwaffe and >the navy [!];" Seems reasonable to me -- *IF* he had not yet decided to invade the USSR. Thanks, everyone, for responses on Ultra vs. Bulge. - Bobby. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 5 08:58:58 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA05935; Fri, 5 Apr 96 08:58:56 +0200 Received: from arl-img-7.compuserve.com (arl-img-7.compuserve.com [198.4.7.7]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id IAA03653 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 1996 08:56:33 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by arl-img-7.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id BAA06519; Fri, 5 Apr 1996 01:56:01 -0500 Date: 05 Apr 96 01:52:36 EST From: Jim Arnold <74133.1765@compuserve.com> To: Europa LIst Subject: Exciting logistics stuff Message-Id: <960405065235_74133.1765_BHR46-1@CompuServe.COM> Status: O Content-Length: 4922 ...(well, mildly interesting for some, maybe)... There's a nice harmony in the various Europa supply quantities that could provide a good framework for a much-needed logistics system. What I'm going to discuss here might be more involved than most players would like, but it could at least serve as a basis for evaluating a more abstract and playable alternative to the current supply system. It's reasonably accurate to say that a typical WWII division used 300 tons of supply a day while inactive, and another 300 in combat. We can call it roughly 100 tons each for general supply (GS) and combat supply (CS) per RE per day, or 1500 tons of each per RE per turn. [A US div is always described as using more, but that's often a reinforced div, or a "division slice", and besides, US trucking largely compensated by being bigger, better, and using lots of trailers.] If by the above premise, and according to Europa rules, 1/4 RE of supply provides GS and CS for an RE for a turn, an RE of supply would equal 12,000 tons. A minor port, with a 3 RE capacity, would clear 36,000 tons per turn, or 2400 per day, and a great port 19,200 per day. These are good, ballpark historical numbers. If a 1x RE transport counter can lift about 3000 men, at 12 men per truck that's 250 trucks. At 2.5 tons per truck, the same counter could be expected to carry 625 tons. A transport counter in Europa can move up to 40 hexes in a turn; with an adjusted movement factor of 8 to allow for loading and unloading , that would be 16 hexes round trip. The Red Ball Express could move supplies 16 hexes (in a round trip) in 52 hours - for about 7 round trips per turn. ("714 miles in 71.2 hours" - see Logistical Support of the Armies, Vol II, p135.) An average for the war might be 5 such round trips, which would amount to about 3000 tons moved 16 hexes by the equivalent of a transport counter in a turn - just about enough for GS and CS for 1 RE for 1 turn. [There's a discrepancy between an RE of supply being defined as 12,000 tons and a 1 RE xport counter moving only 3000 tons in a turn; much if not all of the difference can be attributed to the greater efficiency of ships and ports at bulk handling, and the relative inefficiency of ships at moving men (they have to provide living space and full support services).] So how can all this get translated into a logistical system? I've been experimenting with using HQ units of variable sizes to handle supply: An HQ is sized by a status marker placed under it: each step allows an HQ to supply 8 REs. (Thus the smallest HQ with a "1" status marker would represent a small independent corps.) For compatibility, a supply counter is defined as 1 RE in size, and to have enough tonnage (12,000) to provide 8 REs with GS _or_ CS for a turn. To be in general supply, and to attack, a 1-step HQ would therefore need 2 supply counters per turn. (BTW, I use "flank markers" placed under units on each flank of an army to keep track of who's being supplied by who.) The last piece of the puzzle is SMPs. An SMP represents trucking enough to move 1 supply counter 1 hex. Given the calculations above, where a 1 RE xport counter (250 trucks) could move enough GS and CS for 1 RE 16 hexes, that would equal GS + CS for 8 REs moved 2 hexes, which is equal to 2 supply counters moved 2 hexes, or 4 SMPs. Xport counters shouldn't be easily used as SMPs - my point is just to show the equivalence. The US averaged about 4500 trucks (about 72 SMPs as defined above) supporting the 1st and 3rd armies' advance in August '44. Let's say the 2 armies had 50 REs between them moving east (probably much less than that actually forward), and a total of 7 HQ steps. If a HQ acts as a supply head within 7 hexes of its units, then by looking at the front on 1 Sept. '44, I'd estimate that in Europa terms the 1st Army HQ would be at 17A:1502, and the 3rd at 16A:1932 - 16 and 19 hexes from Cherbourg (13 and 16 from the beaches). At this point it would take about 16 hexes times 7 hq steps, or 112 SMPs just to keep them in GS. By September they probably had as many as 6000 trucks moving supplies (about 100 SMPs) plus air supply, some rail, and various improvisations. (A Red Ball modifier might be appropriate here.) These are admittedly rough estimates, and lots of factors are ignored, but I think it illustrates the problem the Allies had in game terms, and I hope it shows that something like what I'm proposing is both "do-able" and indispensable to simulating the campaign. How hard is it to use supply counters and SMPs at this level? If you know you've got to move 8 steps of supply from Cherbourg 12 hexes to the Seine, it's as easy as 12x8. If you've got a hq sized at 4 steps, there's no need to count REs - it costs 4 supply counters to attack. And face it, how else are you ever going to be able to test Monty's "rapier-like" angry-as-a-rabbit thrust thru northern Germany? Jim From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 5 16:28:36 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA09045; Fri, 5 Apr 96 16:28:35 +0200 Received: from ns.corona.navy.mil (ns.corona.navy.mil [137.67.32.12]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id QAA08867 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 1996 16:27:30 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from ccgate.corona.navy.mil (ccgate.corona.navy.mil [137.67.40.4]) by ns.corona.navy.mil (8.7.5/1.4) with SMTP id GAA27297 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 1996 06:25:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from ccMail by ccgate.corona.navy.mil (IMA Internet Exchange 1.04b) id 1652e650; Fri, 5 Apr 96 06:29:57 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Fri, 5 Apr 1996 06:17:14 -0800 Message-Id: <1652e650@ccgate.corona.navy.mil> From: renaud.gary@corona.navy.mil (Renaud.Gary) Subject: Web-pages & Multi-purpose airplanes To: europa@lysator.liu.se Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: cc:Mail note part Status: O Content-Length: 2114 "Jason asked what we would like to see posted on the Website. My vote is for Designer's Notes/OoBs and scenarios. " My priorities are: 1. Everything from the TEMs that are out of stock (I don't have #5-7 and guess I never will) or will not be printed because they are too long or complex or whatever. 2. "Database" articles. Those which have tables or lists or OOBs or whatever that could be useful to have in a database or other computer format. As an example, the articles that listed all the airplanes the US flew, with their Europa ratings. (last) Straight text articles. I hate reading long passages of text from the screen. "What is, for instance, the difference between an Fw 190A heavy fighter (HF), regular day fighter (F), and ground attack (A). As far as I've been able to determine, in most cases the units in the field bolted hardware onto the wings to suit the mission at hand using "Rustsautze" conversion kits. The same Fw could go up as a regular fighter one day, have two 30mm cannon attached to it's wing the next day as a bomber killer (with a marked deterioration in performance), and round off the week as a Jagdbomber with a 1,000 kilo bomb carried on the centerline. " I don't know how to represent the HF vs. F mission. On the other hand, don't the rules ALREADY let a fighter with a Tactical Bombing value act as an attack plane, with a penalty on its air-to-air value? Maybe there's some subtle point I'm missing (probably...), but I can already use a P-47 as either a fighter or ground-attack plane from turn-to-turn. A Renaud.Gary@Corona.Navy.Mil This graphic is |\ CompuServe: 73627,1114 a LOT smaller | \ _,,,---,,__ Genie: G.Renaud1 than a PGP key /,`.-'`' -. ;-;,---__ W: 909-273-5378 block __|,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'==--' H: 714-750-9243 `-----''(_/--' `-'\_) DNRC Holder of Past Knowledge I HATE UNIX I CAN'T speak for this administration; I don't lie enough. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 5 18:47:17 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA09893; Fri, 5 Apr 96 18:47:16 +0200 Received: from prague.crossover.com (root@prague.crossover.com [204.217.246.5]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id SAA10963 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 1996 18:46:53 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [205.161.32.192] (jastell.tiac.net [205.161.32.192]) by prague.crossover.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA09878 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 1996 10:38:15 -0500 X-Sender: jastell@post.crossover.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 5 Apr 1996 11:45:59 -0400 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) Subject: Re: Hello and a Question Status: O Content-Length: 1261 >Q/ In the winter of 1941 Hilter sent a directive to his generals on the >eastern front forbiding them the option of retreat in the face of extreme >enemy pressure. . . . This situation would >seem appropriate material for an optional or advanced rule much like NKZD >troops for the soviets and yet no such rule is in evidence? I don't have time at present to dwell on this long, but Hitler's order didn't give the Germans NKVD no-retreat ability. Hitler issued the order not to give up ground uncontested on 18 Dec 41; Rundstedt had already been relieved in November for arguing with Hitler about holding Rostov. (Rundstedt was right, and the Germans had to retreat from Rostov anyway by the end of November.) It was Guderian who got the chop for making a voluntary retreat to better positions on 24 Dec. Note the term "voluntary retreat" above. The Germans by no means stopped retreated on 18 Dec. Instead, Hitler's order required them to contest any Soviet advance, but they could still (and did) withdraw when the Soviets piled on the pressure. The front kept rolling westwards until about late January 1941, when it mostly stablilized and when the Germans could launch some counterattacks. None of this seems to require any special rule in the game. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 5 18:47:17 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA09898; Fri, 5 Apr 96 18:47:16 +0200 Received: from prague.crossover.com (root@prague.crossover.com [204.217.246.5]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id SAA10956 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 1996 18:46:37 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [205.161.32.192] (jastell.tiac.net [205.161.32.192]) by prague.crossover.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA09874 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 1996 10:38:02 -0500 X-Sender: jastell@post.crossover.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 5 Apr 1996 11:45:44 -0400 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) Subject: Re: Multi-role aircraft (was Luft pet-peeves) Status: O Content-Length: 480 >Perry, > >Great exact post on German field mods. Keep up the good work! > >Ray Yes, indeed. Also, for the Fw 190s, the ground attack versions went to the ground attack units (Schlachtgruppen) and to pilots who neither had fighter pilot training nor flew fighter operations. (The Fw 190s replaced the obsolete Ju 87s.) Thus, even though various attack Fw 190s could be configured for fighter operations, this doesn't mean their pilots magically acquired fighter pilot skills. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 5 21:03:43 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA10953; Fri, 5 Apr 96 21:03:42 +0200 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id VAA12865 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 1996 21:02:21 +0200 (MET DST) From: m.royer3@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA080050121; Fri, 5 Apr 1996 18:48:41 GMT Message-Id: <199604051848.AA080050121@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Fri, 5 Apr 96 18:48:41 UTC 0000 ( from inet# ; Fri, 5 Apr 96 18:47:17 UTC 0000) Date: Fri, 5 Apr 96 18:50:00 UTC 0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: M.ROYER3 X-Genie-Qk-Id: 3690666 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 399796 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: The Sino-Japanese Conflict Status: O Content-Length: 4465 The Sino-Japanese Conflict - Massachusetts Playtest Nov I 37 Japanese Player Turn Clear weather holds out over virtually all of China. In an effort to crack the staunch Chinese defense of Shanghai, General Matsui led the newly arrived 18th division on an amphibious assault along the northern shore of Hangchow Bay. The world witnessed the first use of the MLCC (Military Landing Craft Carrier) under combat conditions during the landings. The first wave of the assault, executed by the 23rd and 35th infantry brigades (organic to the 18th division) and the divisional engineers was unopposed and the force turned westward to attack the partial hex city of Hangchow. Massive air battles ensued in the skies over Hangchow, as Chinese bombers attempted to lend defensive air support. However, Chinese Hawk III and Mxd F fighters were ineffective in shielding the bombers from Japanese Naval fighters (A4N1s and A5M2 Claudes). Both the Gamma 2E and the Mxd B Chinese bomber units were eliminated in by the interceptors. Heavily supported by NGS fire from the Imperial Japanese Navy, elements of the 18th division took Hangchow destroying the defending Chinese 48th division thus securing the vital major port intact. The second wave, consisting of the 114th division and the remainder of the 18th division (the HQ and lt. tank company) came ashore leaving the Japanese with two divisions and a major port in a flanking position south of the main Chinese line of resistance in the Shanghai area. In Shanghai proper, the Shanghai Expeditionary Force undertook a risky 2:1 attack (due to lack of attack supply). Japanese combat engineers were employed (allowing a +1) and the attack was successful forcing the Chinese 71st corp to retreat beyond the city limits. The Japanese now control 6 of the 7 Shanghai hexes. The Chinese situation in the region has become tenuous at best. In the north, while continuing to regroup, the North China Area Army managed to assault and capture Tsinan, the Capital of Shantung province, destroying several Shantung provincial divisions in combat. However, the battle resulted in an EX forcing the Japanese to lose the 20th Reserve division. Other minor skirmishes and overruns occured in the north, but the primary focus was to regroup and stockpile supplies for an upcoming thrust southward. The Chinese 46th corp, a continuing thorn in the Japanese side, continue to hold Shihkiachuang blocking the principle rail line southward through Hopei Province from Peiping (Beijing) to Hankow in the heartland of China. Nov I 37Chinese Player Turn With Hangchow lost and the south flank of their defensive line compromised, the Chinese commanders in Central China faced difficult strategic decisions. Hoping to showcase Chinese determination to western observers inthe Shanghai International Concession, Chiang Kai-shek decides to maintain the vigil in Shanghai and its environs as long as humanly possible, thereby risking the bulk of the best Nationalist units to isolation. In an effort to forestall a strike out of Hangchow, the southern flank of the Chinese defense line has swung 90 degrees to a lateral east-west line along the southern shores of Tai Hu (Lake). In the north, the Chinese continued to build a defensive line along the Hwang Ho (Yellow River) in anticipation of the inevitable southward thrust. In the first appearance of guerillas during the conflict, two guerilla regiments sally forth from the Communist Huai-pei Base menacing the Pinghan railway. Occurances of general sabotage are becoming more prevalent throught northern China. While the west has been quick with verbal condemnation of the Japanese assault on China, the Soviet Union has come through with men and materials. The flow of Soviet supplies and resources from Odessa to Canton has begun in earnest. Further, two "volunteer" VVS air units arrive in Central China. The units, composed of I-152s and SB-2s, are manned by Soviet pilots and ground crews. Moreover, enough I-152s were delivered to the Chinese Air Force (CAF) to equip another air unit flown by Chinese pilots. With their new found strength, the CAF immediately runs a bombing operation directly into the heart of the IJN fighter strength overShanghai. The Chinese I-152 escort is downed by Japanese interceptors and the SB-2, running an airbase bombing mission, misses its target. However, the Soviet fighters manage to abort the IJN A2N1 figher unit. -Mark R. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 5 21:12:12 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA10996; Fri, 5 Apr 96 21:12:10 +0200 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id VAA12961 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 1996 21:11:59 +0200 (MET DST) From: m.royer3@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA089940704; Fri, 5 Apr 1996 18:58:24 GMT Message-Id: <199604051858.AA089940704@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Fri, 5 Apr 96 18:58:24 UTC 0000 ( from INET02# ; Fri, 5 Apr 96 18:58:08 UTC 0000) Date: Fri, 5 Apr 96 19:05:00 UTC 0000 To: a.lunny%freenet.hamilton.on.ca%inet#@genie.com Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: M.ROYER3 X-Genie-Qk-Id: 0173912 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 650487 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: Hello and a Question Status: O Content-Length: 901 Reply: Item #1088423 from A.LUNNY@FREENET.HAMILTON.ON.CA@INET#on 96/04/04 at 23:42 > Q/ In the winter of 1941 Hilter sent a directive to his generals on the > eastern front forbiding them the option of retreat in the face of extreme > enemy pressure. From my readings on the outcome of this directive I could > only find one instance of non-compliance. Von Rundstedt tried toshorten > his line of defense and was relieved of command. This situation would > seem appropriate material for an optional or advanced rule much like NKZD > troops for the soviets and yet no such rule is in evidence? > Andrew I suspect the Hitler directive, at Europa's scale, is applicable to a strategic withdrawal which is under the control of the player and not the tactical retreat which is the result of local combat. When you're looking down the barrel of a 76mm gun, you retreat - directive or not. -Mark R. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sat Apr 6 00:58:10 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA12096; Sat, 6 Apr 96 00:58:08 +0200 Received: from prague.crossover.com (root@prague.crossover.com [204.217.246.5]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id AAA16159 for ; Sat, 6 Apr 1996 00:57:04 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [205.161.32.192] (jastell.tiac.net [205.161.32.192]) by prague.crossover.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id QAA10884 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 1996 16:48:38 -0500 X-Sender: jastell@post.crossover.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 5 Apr 1996 17:56:18 -0400 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) Subject: Re: The Sino-Japanese Conflict Status: O Content-Length: 320 >The Sino-Japanese Conflict Great stuff! Sounds like a fun game. I hope M. Royer saves his post and submits them to TEM with a sketch map -- could make an interesting article. If you have the time, what are the ratings of the aircraft you mention in the post. I'm guessing that the best fighter would be about 3F3! From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sat Apr 6 01:23:32 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA12282; Sat, 6 Apr 96 01:23:31 +0200 Received: from medlantic.mhg.edu (medlantic.mhg.edu [198.133.139.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id BAA16472 for ; Sat, 6 Apr 1996 01:23:10 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by medlantic.mhg.edu id AA00110 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for europa@lysator.liu.se); Fri, 5 Apr 1996 18:23:04 -0500 Message-Id: <199604052323.AA00110@medlantic.mhg.edu> Received: by medlantic.mhg.edu (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Fri, 5 Apr 1996 18:23:04 -0500 From: "Haugh, Patrick J." To: europa Subject: Luft-peeves Date: Fri, 05 Apr 96 18:14:00 EST Encoding: 32 TEXT X-Mailer: Microsoft Mail V3.0 Status: O Content-Length: 1813 Thanks for the additional info on rustsautze. I still feel there should be a limtied capability for choosing the profile of your multirole capable aircraft. It is difficult to fit some multipurpose planes wide range of abilities onto one counter. The genesis of my posting was that the level of pseudo-detail creeping into the air system (in the form of multiple sub-type counters for each model of each of the luftwaffe's better known planes) is threatening to swallow up factors that are not covered at all at this time. Pilot quality is vastly more important than aircraft quality, but is covered in a fairly static fashion in Europa. Germans get more bang per pilot as do the US and GB, the Soviets about 50% less. (40 vs 60 a/c per counter). In addition the Germans, Italians and Finns get fighter pilot superiority vs Soviet non-guards. This does not seem to address the drastic fall-off in quality that the Luftwaffe day-fighters experienced in 1944-45 as the infrastrucure for providing combat ready pilots collapsed. Do the numbers of pilots per Luftwaffe counter increase? Should you reach a critical point of Reich-wide fuel shortage at which fighter pilot superiority is lost vs Soviets, and eventually a point at which aliied fighter pilots gain superiority. This would represent the crippling fuel shortage cutting back even further the limited flying time of pilot trainees. Until we address these issues, I vote for a simpler Air OoB. I do not (yet) advocate a "bomber in a plain brown wrapper gets intercepted by a generic fighter" system, but in truth the current system is exaggerating techinical minutiae at the expense of the more important factors of individual training and doctrine. Haya Safari Patrick Haugh Washington D.C. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sat Apr 6 02:02:46 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA12486; Sat, 6 Apr 96 02:02:45 +0200 Received: from smtp4.aw.com (smtp4.aw.com [192.207.117.64]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id CAA16791 for ; Sat, 6 Apr 1996 02:01:58 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from East-Message_Server by smtp4.aw.com with Novell_GroupWise; Fri, 05 Apr 1996 19:00:49 -0400 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1 Date: Fri, 05 Apr 1996 21:06:58 -0400 From: Ray Kanarr To: europa@lysator.liu.se, pjh3@mhg.edu Subject: Re: Luft-peeves Status: O Content-Length: 990 On 4/5/96, Pat Haugh sent in: >This does not seem to address the drastic fall-off in quality >that the Luftwaffe day-fighters experienced in 1944-45 as >the infrastrucure for providing combat ready pilots >collapsed. Do the numbers of pilots per Luftwaffe counter >increase? >Should you reach a critical point of Reich-wide fuel >shortage at which fighter pilot superiority is lost vs Soviets, >and eventually a point at which aliied fighter pilots gain >superiority. This would represent the crippling fuel >shortage cutting back even further the limited flying time of >pilot trainees. It is my understanding, from some long-ago communications about the time that FitE came out, that POL constraints and pilot quality were built into the system in the GA and reinforcement/replacement rates for aircraft, which made sense to me. Now that this system has changed significantly, however, it may be time to call for a re-evaluation of what this all really means. Ray From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sat Apr 6 03:10:50 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA12785; Sat, 6 Apr 96 03:10:48 +0200 Received: from psyche.the-wire.com (psyche.the-wire.com [198.53.192.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id DAA17668 for ; Sat, 6 Apr 1996 03:10:04 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from mhughes.the-wire.com (mhughes.the-wire.com [205.206.32.167]) by psyche.the-wire.com (8.6.10/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA23692 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 1996 20:09:14 -0500 Date: Fri, 5 Apr 1996 20:09:14 -0500 Message-Id: <199604060109.UAA23692@psyche.the-wire.com> X-Sender: mhughes@psyche.the-wire.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: mhughes@the-wire.com (Marian Hughes) Subject: multi-role fighters Status: O Content-Length: 2286 On Aircraft Types:Complexity of system: Matter of opinion - what matters is to balance the level of the ground game with that of the air. Personally I think that showing the difference between F and HF balances making a distinction between Full AEC and Half AEC. How far one goes is a matter of taste - when working on the 'new' system I know that some thought that an H for High Level Fighter should be added - certainly it would show the superiority of aircraft like the Spit XIV better than adding extra factors. I note that the 'younger' members of our Europa group (younger is very relative bearing my age in mind!) are far more interested in the difference in rating between a Spit 9 and an Fw 190A2 than in that between Panzer and Armoured Divisions. On Multi Function use of Fighters: John Astell is quite correct - any high powered single engine plane could be used as a fighter, but the question is were the pilots trained in the function. I have never come across an example of FB versions of the 190A intercepting or even initiating fighter combat against the British in 1942. Granted, they dogfought when intercepted, but that ability is reflected in their A rating. Multi-function fighter action was very rare in the European air forces. The doctrine seems to more common, at least in theory, in the US forces. 9th Air Force fighter groups were supposed to be equally capable of both ground and air combat. In practise, this demand seems to have limited their effectiveness in both roles - at least this was the perception of British squadrons of 2nd TAF. Tempest and Typhoon units in particular became upset at the sloppy quality of 9th AF aircraft identification. Several nasty (and hushed up) dog fights ensued - in one case 9th AF fighters made six successive attacks on innocent C-47's before being (the word used was 'dispersed') by their RAF escorts! The other proponent on multi-use fighters was the US Navy in the latter stages of the Pacific War. But note that by this stage the overwhelming Allied superiority made the issue moot. Interestingly, the British Pacific Fleet retained specialised roles and trained its pilots almost exclusively in the aircrafts major role- its Seafires remained pure fighters - its Corsairs became pure ground attack aircraft. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sat Apr 6 05:03:50 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA13174; Sat, 6 Apr 96 05:03:48 +0200 Received: from smtp.utexas.edu (smtp.utexas.edu [128.83.126.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id FAA18633 for ; Sat, 6 Apr 1996 05:02:49 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from slip-18-4.ots.utexas.edu (slip-18-4.ots.utexas.edu [128.83.128.100]) by smtp.utexas.edu (8.6.7/8.6.6) with SMTP id VAA20856 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 1996 21:00:33 -0600 Date: Fri, 5 Apr 1996 21:00:33 -0600 Message-Id: <199604060300.VAA20856@smtp.utexas.edu> X-Sender: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu (Bobby D. Bryant) Subject: Re: The Sino-Japanese Conflict Status: O Content-Length: 409 >>The Sino-Japanese Conflict > ... > >If you have the time, what are the ratings of the aircraft you mention in >the post. I'm guessing that the best fighter would be about 3F3! I've also been curious about the ratings of ground units. What are ratings of "typical" XXs, and maybe a few elite/exotic units? No need to type up the entire OB! - Bobby. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sat Apr 6 06:02:54 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA13382; Sat, 6 Apr 96 06:02:52 +0200 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id GAA19017 for ; Sat, 6 Apr 1996 06:02:29 +0200 (MET DST) From: m.royer3@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA021452533; Sat, 6 Apr 1996 03:48:53 GMT Message-Id: <199604060348.AA021452533@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Sat, 6 Apr 96 03:48:53 UTC 0000 ( from inet# ; Sat, 6 Apr 96 03:47:20 UTC 0000) Date: Sat, 6 Apr 96 03:50:00 UTC 0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: M.ROYER3 X-Genie-Qk-Id: 2253163 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 407076 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: Re: The Sino-Japanese Conflict Status: O Content-Length: 1198 Reply: Item #5792662 from EUROPA@LYSATOR.LIU.SE@INET#on 96/04/05 at 16:56 > Great stuff! Sounds like a fun game. I hope M. Royer saves his post and > submits them to TEM with a sketch map -- could make an interesting article. Thanks! Actually, Rick Gayler, as one of his last editorial actions, captured the first few turns off of GEnie and says that they will appear in TEM 47 as a Glory teaser. > Ifyou have the time, what are the ratings of the aircraft you mention in > the post. I'm guessing that the best fighter would be about 3F3! Good Guess! These are the ratings currently in use for the aircraft. Most of the ratings come fromArthur Goodwin and Jason Long. However, they are not official as Arthur, etal., has only reviewed a portion of them. Japanese IJA Ki-10 2F3 0/12 K1-3 1A2 1/12 Ki-1 1B1 1-2/12 Ki-2-I 1B1 L 1/16 Japanese IJN A4N1 2F2 C 0/8 A5M2 3F3 C 0/11 D1A1 1D1 C 2/12 G3M2 2B3 2-4/32 B4Y1 1A1 CV 2/17 Chinese Air Force & VVS Curtis Hawk II 1F2 0/6 Curtis Hawk III 2F2 0/6 I-152 3F2 0/6 SB-2 2A2 1-1/16 Northrup Gamma 2E 2A2 1-1/25 Douglas O2MC 1B1 L 1/9 -Mark R. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sat Apr 6 09:56:22 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA14113; Sat, 6 Apr 96 09:56:20 +0200 Received: from jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (civguy@jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us [192.217.238.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id JAA20613 for ; Sat, 6 Apr 1996 09:55:44 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from civguy@localhost) by jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (8.6.10/8.6.9) id DAA15354; Sat, 6 Apr 1996 03:28:10 -0600 Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 03:28:09 -36000 From: Jason Long Subject: Re: Or What? my wish list. Luft-peeves Cc: europa In-Reply-To: <199604042323.AA17017@medlantic.mhg.edu> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 1437 We considered making a number of German fighter units multi-role, but only interms of switching between bomber killer and regular fighter roles as the 190 and 109 could, as you mentioned, bolt on extra guns for the former role. We decided that it was too much trouble and we'd have to provide extra counters when everything possible needed to be done to minimize the number of counters. The HF type 190s in the counter mix represent the rammjaegers; aircraft that were heavily armored and armed to go in close and kill bombers. These units were designated sturm by the Luftwaffe, making our tracking of them much easier. II (Sturm)/JG 4 and IV (Sturm)/JG 3 were the two most prominent such units. All type A 190s were flown by the specialist ground-attack Schlachtgeschwadern, many of which had previously flown Stukas and Hs 129s. Ground attack was a difficult skill to master which is why the ordinary fighter units have much weaker TBFs than the type As despte being able to carry about as much of a bombload. Conversely the type As cannot go out a cruise for enemy aircraft despite the fact that II/SG 2 shot down over 160 aircraft over the Crimea in '44. I'd translate that success into Europa terms as successful rolls against Soviet aircraft trying to intercept them. The jabo staffeln assigned to many fighter units were either added as reinforcements and giving a select few lots of extra training. Jason From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sat Apr 6 10:16:04 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA14167; Sat, 6 Apr 96 10:16:03 +0200 Received: from jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (civguy@jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us [192.217.238.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id KAA20767 for ; Sat, 6 Apr 1996 10:15:46 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from civguy@localhost) by jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (8.6.10/8.6.9) id DAA15412; Sat, 6 Apr 1996 03:48:12 -0600 Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 03:48:11 -36000 From: Jason Long Subject: Re: Luft-peeves Cc: europa In-Reply-To: <199604052323.AA00110@medlantic.mhg.edu> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 597 I've already dealt with a number of the ways in which I dealt with the German pilot degradation, but forgot to mention one more. Most fighter gruppen converted to the 4 staffeln of 16 aircraft apiece during the summer fall of '44. This was mostly ignored when working out the air OBs despite the increase by a factor of 50% in strength, from approx 40 to 68 or so. I don't believe that in most games the Luftwaffe can put up any real resistance to the Allies by summer/fall '44. Seems pretty accurate to me, enough so that additional penalties of DRMs and the like seem unnecessary. Jason From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sat Apr 6 14:00:48 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA14720; Sat, 6 Apr 96 14:00:46 +0200 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id OAA22303 for ; Sat, 6 Apr 1996 14:00:02 +0200 (MET DST) From: m.royer3@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA291541184; Sat, 6 Apr 1996 11:46:25 GMT Message-Id: <199604061146.AA291541184@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Sat, 6 Apr 96 11:46:24 UTC 0000 ( from inet01# ; Sat, 6 Apr 96 11:46:18 UTC 0000) Date: Sat, 6 Apr 96 11:30:00 UTC 0000 To: bdbryant%mail.utexas.edu%inet#@genie.com Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: M.ROYER3 X-Genie-Qk-Id: 0195102 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 119978 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: Re: The Sino-Japanese Conflict Status: O Content-Length: 2318 Reply: Item #7752739 from BDBRYANT@MAIL.UTEXAS.EDU@INET#on 96/04/05 at 22:00 > I've also been curious about the ratings of ground units. What are ratings > of "typical" XXs, and maybe a few elite/exotic units? No need to type up the > entire OB! At the start of the game, most of the Japanese divisions are large (22,000 man) square formations. In game terms, these units have a unique, two-tiered breakdown structure first breaking into two brigades which can then (at the Japanese player's option) immediately break into two regiments each. 10-6 Inf XX 1 x 6 Inf XX HQ 1 x 1-6 Eng III 1 x 1-0-8 Lt. Arm I 2 x 4-6 Inf X 2 x 2-6 Inf III Between 1937 and the start of the Pacific War, the Japanese reorganized their divisions into the more modern triangular form. These units rate 7-6 Inf XX. Many of both the square and triangular divisions are self-supported, representing the shortage of large artillery pieces and the employment of mountain guns in the divisional artillery roll. Japanese cadre's are generally a point or so higher than their European counterparts, reflecting the Japanese Code of Bushido. Chinese forces come in several flavors: Typical provincial division: 1-4 Inf XX (unsupported) "Quality" provincial div: 1-2-5 Inf XX (unsupported) Typical nationalist div: 3-5* Inf XX "Elite" Nationalist div: 4-6 Inf XX Communist div: 7-5 Inf XX (unsupported) The provincial units were essentially armies of self-interested warlords who pledged various degrees of allegiance to the Nationalist government. These units form the bulk of the Chinese army. The "Elite" Generalissimo's-Own were 10 German trained and equipped divisions which formed the backbone of the Central Army. However, most of these unitswere squandered in Shanghai in the first year of the war. Both the 3-5* and 4-6 divs are fragile, being replaced by unsupported 1-4's. The Communists, at this time, were arguably the best trained and disciplined units in the Chinese Army (except for possibly the Generalissimo's Own). At the outset of the conflict, they fielded three 20,000 (or so) man divisions, but were totally lacking in support equipment. Again, all of this is still unofficial, pending detailed review by GR/D. -Mark R. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sat Apr 6 21:17:46 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA16403; Sat, 6 Apr 96 21:17:45 +0200 Received: from relay-2.mail.demon.net (disperse.demon.co.uk [158.152.1.77]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id VAA26790 for ; Sat, 6 Apr 1996 21:16:21 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from post.demon.co.uk ([158.152.1.72]) by relay-2.mail.demon.net id ab12639; 6 Apr 96 20:15 +0100 Received: from consecon.demon.co.uk ([158.152.9.235]) by relay-3.mail.demon.net id aa14169; 6 Apr 96 19:00 +0100 Message-Id: Date: Thu, 4 Apr 1996 23:09:48 +0100 To: Keith Pardue Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se From: Reg Danford-Cordingley Subject: Re: Red Dog's Pet Peeves In-Reply-To: <9604022253.AA10654@hilda.mast.QueensU.CA> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Turnpike Version 1.10 Status: O Content-Length: 2134 In message <9604022253.AA10654@hilda.mast.QueensU.CA>, Keith Pardue writes snip... Dear Keith and all, Balkan Front was the first Europa game I ever bought so didn't notice the counter colour discrepancy until I bought FITE! I though the counters in both FITE & BF were good! The maps in BF were great too. As you say FTF was different story and I did have to glue some of them together again while I was punching them out. I had the same problem with the SE reprint. I haven't punched the SF ones out yet, but the Brits are a bit blotchy which is sad (being a Brit!). The FWTBT & AWW counters seem great! Its very difficult to criticise GRD because they are doing this part- time out of love. People should really appreciate what they have done to keep Europa going. If it wasn't for them, I would never have been able to buy any of the Europa games new. (I have bought some of the old GDW ones second hand). I would agree that the rules books seem to be getting bigger and bigger which is a bit off-putting. I do however love the detail and care that went into the OBs. In fact the OBs are the main reason I buy the games since I play solo when I can find the time and the space. It would be great if GRD could reissue the counters in one job lot, but it would be a lot of work for them and it is a bit unfair to expect them to pay for it all, do we want to put GRD out of business? I don't know what the solution might be, it is very disappointing to pay a lot of money for a game (they are quite pricey over here, SF was about 80 Pounds or so) and find that the counters aren't up to scratch. I remember an issue of Europa in which Winston explained the mechanics of printing a sheet of counters and there are plenty of places where things can go wrong....perhaps the best idea is to use the company that did AWW or FWTBT and appoint a QA person to ensure that everything is top-quality. After all, GRD's reputation is on the line here, there seem to be some unhappy people out there! Finally, I love the smaller games like AWW, BF and FWTBT. Cheers, RDC -- Reg Danford-Cordingley From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sat Apr 6 21:43:17 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA16469; Sat, 6 Apr 96 21:43:16 +0200 Received: from smtp.utexas.edu (smtp.utexas.edu [128.83.126.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id VAA26988 for ; Sat, 6 Apr 1996 21:42:43 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from slip-35-7.ots.utexas.edu (slip-35-7.ots.utexas.edu [128.83.112.23]) by smtp.utexas.edu (8.6.7/8.6.6) with SMTP id NAA25340 for ; Sat, 6 Apr 1996 13:42:07 -0600 Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 13:42:07 -0600 Message-Id: <199604061942.NAA25340@smtp.utexas.edu> X-Sender: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu (Bobby D. Bryant) Subject: Re: Red Dog's Pet Peeves Status: O Content-Length: 337 RDC said: >I had the same problem with the SE reprint. Other than these two recent posts, I was not aware of this reprint. Does it have updated materials, such as 3rd-generation maps, SF-style icons on the units, and back-printed air units, or is it simply a reprint? - Bobby. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sat Apr 6 23:54:08 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA16954; Sat, 6 Apr 96 23:54:07 +0200 Received: from ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (abcclibr@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu [128.174.5.59]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id XAA28065 for ; Sat, 6 Apr 1996 23:53:24 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by ux1.cso.uiuc.edu id AA25670 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for europa@lysator.liu.se); Sat, 6 Apr 1996 15:53:20 -0600 Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 15:53:20 -0600 From: conrad alan b To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Air Counters Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 870 I for one do not have any problem with the different counters and typing for the air units that did different jobs, a la the FW-190 debate that has been going on. My peeve is changing a counter for a one point factor change. As in: P-38g's that replace P-38f's, for one extra hex of range. That extra range is a very arguable point, i.e. effectiveness at max range. I hate to see a counter mix that is limited in numbers be wasted on such. And the time to dig up these counters. Example: we are currently playing SF on a 4 x 7 foot table that holds the maps and most of the corps and breakdown charts. Next to this we have most of an 8 x 8 foot table that hold a few more charts and has all the counters spread out so we can find them quickly. And sometimes we still can't find what we're looking for. Alan Conrad Champaign, Illinois From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sun Apr 7 00:12:15 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA17041; Sun, 7 Apr 96 00:12:14 +0200 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id AAA28211 for ; Sun, 7 Apr 1996 00:11:58 +0200 (MET DST) From: m.royer3@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA139247898; Sat, 6 Apr 1996 21:58:18 GMT Message-Id: <199604062158.AA139247898@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Sat, 6 Apr 96 21:58:18 UTC 0000 ( from INET02# ; Sat, 6 Apr 96 21:58:07 UTC 0000) Date: Sat, 6 Apr 96 22:03:00 UTC 0000 To: bdbryant%mail.utexas.edu%inet#@genie.com Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: M.ROYER3 X-Genie-Qk-Id: 1604913 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 657952 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: Re: Red Dog's Pet Peeves Status: O Content-Length: 362 Reply: Item #3770514 from BDBRYANT@MAIL.UTEXAS.EDU@INET#on 96/04/06 at 14:42 > Other than these two recent posts, I was not aware of this reprint. Does it > have updated materials, such as 3rd-generation maps, SF-style icons on the > units, and back-printed air units, or is it simply a reprint? Its simply a reprint with some errata taken care of. -Mark R. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sun Apr 7 00:25:07 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA17089; Sun, 7 Apr 96 00:25:06 +0200 Received: from ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (abcclibr@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu [128.174.5.59]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id AAA28293 for ; Sun, 7 Apr 1996 00:24:48 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by ux1.cso.uiuc.edu id AA00038 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for europa@lysator.liu.se); Sat, 6 Apr 1996 16:24:44 -0600 Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 16:24:43 -0600 From: conrad alan b To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Reg Dog reply Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 2628 Michael Funderburke (aka Red Dog) really opened a can of worms here! I would like to add my thoughts too. I would agree with all those who have voted their thanks to John, Winston and the crew of GR/D for keeping the system going. Without them none of us would be concerned with anything any of us are saying. To the cost of the games, I do not really complain. $100 for SF divided by the hundreds of hours I will play it is not much of an expense for the entertainment. Although I would see where those who collect the games and never have the chance to play them would look at that differently. I am more concerned when I invest those hundreds of hours to then come up against victory conditions that belittle all that time spent. I do not complain about the physical production problems. I am just disappointed that after the Urals, FtF, BF, aWW, SE reprint, they would still have those problems. How many times have I heard Winston state that `now we've got the suppliers that will do the job', only to find him soon saying that those guys were bums. And lets remember those other companies correctly. My Case White German air counters were mis-cut. I just didn't use them. Who needed air units to overrun the Poles? Yes the Gamers put out fine games. I played Stalingrad Pocket a lot. They did send out, free of charge, correction and expansion counters with the errata. Fine and dandy. But in that errata they decided to change the ZoC movement costs from +2 to leave to +2 to enter a zone. Boy does that make obsolete all your previous playings, and make dicey a game between players with one not having seen that errata. My biggest concern is that the powers that be (basicly John?) are not willing to change the Europa system to make it better. The biggest part of that is that they like the way the games plays now, whereas I for one do not like the way the game plays now. They have often stated that they will only change something if overwhelming evidence proves a change needed. And in some areas where I have seen that evidence provided, the response is still, NO. After all they like the way it plays now. I hope that this mailing list will, among other info providers, give enough constructive criticism, new data and points of change, that we will be able to advance the system as we march towards GE. It will not help any if some try to hurl bad guy labels at GR/D. They are wonderful guys that just don't happen to agree with wonderful guys like me. I hope we can change that. Alan Conrad Champaign, Illinois From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sun Apr 7 01:19:45 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA17220; Sun, 7 Apr 96 01:19:44 +0200 Received: from ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (abcclibr@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu [128.174.5.59]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id BAA28742 for ; Sun, 7 Apr 1996 01:19:10 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by ux1.cso.uiuc.edu id AA06978 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for europa@lysator.liu.se); Sat, 6 Apr 1996 17:19:03 -0600 Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 17:19:03 -0600 From: conrad alan b To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: EuropaFest Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 1108 I have a suggestion for this year's EuropaFest in Columbus at Origins. I felt the EuropaFest at Fort Worth had been a really useful one with some seminars that brought up good topics and had good information. But the Europafests at San Jose and last year at Philadelphia had adequate seminars, but not up to previous standards. Having contacted the Andon people it seems the pre-registration stuff is just about to come out. So any Europafest seminars already are set up presumably. But if they are along the same lines as the last two years, I would suggest that we either set up some additional get togethers, or possibly plan on restructuring seminars already in place. I would like to see some of the topics that have been brought up in this mailing list, brought up at Origins. Some of us will be there, although we do have some regulars posting here from points far away. If we can pre set up agendas and start off points for discussion we may be able to have some very useful and constructive meetings that affect the future of GE. Alan Conrad Champaign, Illinois From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sun Apr 7 01:33:10 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA17249; Sun, 7 Apr 96 01:33:09 +0200 Received: from smtp.utexas.edu (smtp.utexas.edu [128.83.126.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id BAA28820 for ; Sun, 7 Apr 1996 01:32:51 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from slip-25-14.ots.utexas.edu (slip-25-14.ots.utexas.edu [128.83.111.46]) by smtp.utexas.edu (8.6.7/8.6.6) with SMTP id RAA26863 for ; Sat, 6 Apr 1996 17:28:35 -0600 Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 17:28:35 -0600 Message-Id: <199604062328.RAA26863@smtp.utexas.edu> X-Sender: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu (Bobby D. Bryant) Subject: Re: The Sino-Japanese Conflict Status: O Content-Length: 590 Thanks, Mark, for the additional info. Of course, I have another crop of questions. 1) Are the lt. arm. companies treated as 1/2 RE for AEC? (Do the games even use AEC?) 2) Do those large Japanese divisions stack as an ordinary division? Both these questions raise my curiosity about the WWI series of games. Will tank units have AEC? Will the games be in some sense "unit compatible"? (This would mean the air units would have to be *really* weak, if a good fighter was 3/3 in 1937!) Does anyone know the plans on this? - Bobby From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sun Apr 7 01:36:27 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA17266; Sun, 7 Apr 96 01:36:26 +0200 Received: from ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (abcclibr@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu [128.174.5.59]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id BAA28829 for ; Sun, 7 Apr 1996 01:36:17 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by ux1.cso.uiuc.edu id AA09208 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for europa@lysator.liu.se); Sat, 6 Apr 1996 17:35:58 -0600 Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 17:35:58 -0600 From: conrad alan b To: j.broshot@genie.com Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: My $0.02 worth In-Reply-To: <199604050435.AA002468936@relay1.geis.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 1479 On Fri, 5 Apr 1996 j.broshot@genie.com wrote: > 1. Re HITLER'S LEGIONS (by Samuel W. Mitcham Jr.): Sorry, Ray, but > in my humble opinion this book is so poorly researched that it is > dangerous to rely on. Mitcham is sloppy (and I have noted that in > another one of his efforts). > 2. Re German unit strengths: a discussion of German infantry > division strengths, organizations etc. could go on forever. > Actually, the Europa people have hit it right. Good post! A book I have found very useful here is: Forgotten Legions: German Army Infantry Policy 1918-1941, by S.J. Lewis. It has a very good listing of the way the German army raised, equipped and used infantry. He gives a lot of tactical evidence of the way the war affected the infantry. One of Lewis's points is that German infantry divisions did equally as well in many cases as the German armor that is so usually lauded. I have seen, more than once, data and quotes as to the understrength of the German army going into Barbarossa. I could not find such a quote in Lewis, although he did quote Halder saying that on September 1, 1941, "at the front" 142 divisions were "lacking" 700,000 men. Since I do not remember the casualties being that high to that date, and there had been replacements sent to the front (Army Group Center had received 151,000 replacements to offset 219,000 casualties thru 9-26-41), to me that alone shows that the army was understrength. Alan Conrad From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sun Apr 7 01:52:06 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA17306; Sun, 7 Apr 96 01:52:05 +0200 Received: from mailhost.ksu.ksu.edu (grunt.ksu.ksu.edu [129.130.12.17]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id BAA28994 for ; Sun, 7 Apr 1996 01:51:38 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from nbc.ksu.ksu.edu (danley@nbc.ksu.ksu.edu [129.130.12.5]) by mailhost.ksu.ksu.edu (8.6.12) with ESMTP id RAA01158; Sat, 6 Apr 1996 17:51:31 -0600 Received: by nbc.ksu.ksu.edu (8.6.12/1.34) id RAA19795; Sat, 6 Apr 1996 17:51:28 -0600 Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 17:51:27 -0600 (CST) From: Mark H Danley To: m.royer3@genie.com Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: The Sino-Japanese Conflict In-Reply-To: <199604061146.AA291541184@relay1.geis.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 1179 On Sat, 6 Apr 1996 m.royer3@genie.com wrote: > At the start of the game, most of the Japanese divisions are large (22,000 man) > square formations. In game terms, these units have a unique, two-tiered > breakdown structure first breaking into two brigades which can then (at the > Japanese player's option) immediately break into two regiments each. > > 10-6 Inf XX > 1 x 6 Inf XX HQ > 1 x 1-6 Eng III > 1 x 1-0-8 Lt. Arm I > 2 x 4-6 Inf X > 2 x 2-6 Inf III Very interesting! Briefly, what made you decide to include in breakdown components specialized divisional support units like armor and engineers as actual manuever units that make up the division? In European armies as shown in Europa, all you get when you break down the div. is usually the manuever units (brigades or regiments) and the HQ, representing other division assets (art. engineers, antitank I', AA, etc.) I see the a Japanese division has a whole engineer regiment rather than just a battalion - does size has something to do with it? I realize this is a complex question, but I was just curious, since we hardly ever see breakdowns in Europa like that. Mark From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sun Apr 7 02:03:23 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA17358; Sun, 7 Apr 96 02:03:22 +0200 Received: from emout04.mail.aol.com (emout04.mail.aol.com [198.81.10.12]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id CAA29049 for ; Sun, 7 Apr 1996 02:03:05 +0200 (MET DST) From: EuropaStag@aol.com Received: by emout04.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id TAA06906; Sat, 6 Apr 1996 19:02:33 -0500 Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 19:02:33 -0500 Message-Id: <960406190232_186053737@emout04.mail.aol.com> To: abcclibr@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: Air Counters Status: O Content-Length: 562 In a message dated 96-04-06 17:14:06 EST, you write: > I for one do not have any problem with the different counters and >typing for the air units that did different jobs, a la the FW-190 debate >that has been going on. I agree here > My peeve is changing a counter for a one point factor change. As >in: P-38g's that replace P-38f's, for one extra hex of range. I would rather HAVE the counter for the F's If you dislike the detail just put all the P38s in one cup and draw the reinforecements from them. ie: do not keep tract of the subtypes. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sun Apr 7 04:47:28 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA18125; Sun, 7 Apr 96 04:47:27 +0200 Received: from felix.dircon.co.uk (felix.dircon.co.uk [193.128.224.10]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id EAA00805 for ; Sun, 7 Apr 1996 04:46:46 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [194.112.37.46] (gw5-046.pool.dircon.co.uk) by felix.dircon.co.uk with SMTP id AA15015 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Sun, 7 Apr 1996 03:46:40 +0100 X-Sender: cloister@popmail.dircon.co.uk Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Sun, 7 Apr 1996 03:49:04 +0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: cloister@dircon.co.uk (Perry de Havilland) Subject: Peeves about Luft-Peeves Status: O Content-Length: 4468 Patrick wrote: >The genesis of my posting was that the level of pseudo-detail >creeping >into the air system (in the form of multiple sub-type >counters for each >model of each of the luftwaffe's better known >planes) is threatening to >swallow up factors that are not >covered at all at this time. I must disagree. The difference between an Fw.190A2 and an Fw.190A8 is well worth showing as they really were significantly different. My only grouse is the same detail is lacking for the Allies. =46or example: The Spitfire V, one of the more important RAF fighters on the mid-war period, is displayed as a single type. However, the Spit 5 was produced with 14 different engines...so lets have 14 different counter types - Sorry, just joking ;-) In 'Europa' terms, the only important distinction is between the F, LF and HF versions (and that is important). Whereas most Spitfire Vs had the Merlin 45 or 46 engines with float carburettor, later production Spitfire 5B and 5C were produced as the LF 5B or LF 5C, featuring the improved Merlin 50M/56M. The Merlin 50M engines featured a diaphragm type 'negative-G' carburettor plus a re-ratioed supercharger, giving these Spitfire variants the same speed at low altitudes as an early Fw.190A. It also featured clipped wings to improve rate of roll (although most Spitfire LF versions had clipped wings, LF refers to the engine/supercharger combination and not the wing type. This is a common mistake in many books about the Spit, which state that an LF is a clip-winged Spit=8Anot strictly true). Extensive tests at Boscombe Down showed the Spit LF 5 (-B or -C) to be significantly superior to the *normal* Spit 5 in most respects below 12,000 ft. These LF kites should be broken out as they were at measurably less of a disadvantage vs. the Fw.190A, although certainly not their equal (I would suggest 7F7, up from 7F6). The diaphragm carburettor was not a complete solution to the problems of negative-G (that did not happen until the Bendix-Stromberg fuel injector on the Merlin 66/70), as it allowed negative-G only for a short period. However, it was good enough to go into a transitional negative-G manoeuvre without immediately loosing the engine. This matters as most later production Spitfire Vs were LF variants. >Pilot quality is vastly more important than aircraft quality, >but is >covered in a fairly static fashion in Europa. Too sweeping a statement, Patrick. Sure, pilot quality *is* important, but no amount of skill will save you if the other guy has a much better kite. Even a *really* good RAF pilot in a Spitfire V is at a *major* disadvantage against ever an average skill Luftwaffe pilot in an Fw.190A2. Likewise, read Willi Johnen's book 'Duel under the Stars' or Gebhard Aders book 'History of the German Nightfighter Force' to see how even a fabulous pilot like Johnen could not nail a Mosquito. To look at it from your point of view however, at the most **extreme** end of skill levels, Oblt. Welter nailed 35 of the 50 confirmed German nightfighter kills of Mosquitoes. Yet this is freaky stuff (like Rudel, the flying can-opener): the fact is that all the other brilliant German nightfighter pilots did very poorly as Mosquitojagers: no reflection on their skill - the Mossie was just a better aircraft. Don't get me wrong: skill matters, but only to a point. (snip) >Until we address these issues, I vote for a simpler Air OoB. I >do not >(yet) advocate a "bomber in a plain brown wrapper gets >intercepted by a >generic fighter" system =3D:-O Off with his head! ..Okay, I've calmed down now :-) Actually, as I have posted before, I advocate a *broad church* approach with modular rules. As far as I am concerned, you can have your simplified air units (use a rule along the lines of: A USAAF *F* counter has a generic value of x at x date) using any old air counter (ignore the printed factors). For those of us who are aviation/naval oriented, we want more, not less, detail. We want air rules that track altitude into two bands (Hi/Lo), electronic warfare and proper command & control rules. >but in truth the current system is exaggerating techinical >minutiae at >the expense of the more important factors of >individual training and >doctrine. To reiterate, the air war is primarily, not tangentially, a matter of technology. Training certainly matters, but not more than the type of kite being flown. Regards Perry ...- From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sun Apr 7 05:08:15 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA18174; Sun, 7 Apr 96 05:08:14 +0200 Received: from postbox.acs.ohio-state.edu (postbox.acs.ohio-state.edu [128.146.214.20]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id FAA00991 for ; Sun, 7 Apr 1996 05:07:56 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from slip1-47.acs.ohio-state.edu by postbox.acs.ohio-state.edu (8.6.9/5.901231) id WAA00867; Sat, 6 Apr 1996 22:07:52 -0500 Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 22:07:52 -0500 Message-Id: <199604070307.WAA00867@postbox.acs.ohio-state.edu> X-Sender: mpitcava@postbox.acs.ohio-state.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: mpitcava@postbox.acs.ohio-state.edu (Mark Pitcavage) Subject: Re: EuropaFest X-Mailer: Status: O Content-Length: 173 Who is going to be at Origins? I will, of course, since the convention center is only about two miles away... Dr. Mark Pitcavage http://www.greyware.com/authors/pitman From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sun Apr 7 06:03:34 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA18333; Sun, 7 Apr 96 06:03:33 +0200 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id GAA01387 for ; Sun, 7 Apr 1996 06:03:06 +0200 (MET DST) From: m.royer3@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA146348965; Sun, 7 Apr 1996 03:49:25 GMT Message-Id: <199604070349.AA146348965@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Sun, 7 Apr 96 03:49:25 UTC 0000 ( from inet# ; Sun, 7 Apr 96 03:47:08 UTC 0000) Date: Sun, 7 Apr 96 03:53:00 UTC 0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: M.ROYER3 X-Genie-Qk-Id: 5956796 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 420022 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: Re: The Sino-Japanese Conflict Status: O Content-Length: 1357 Reply: Item #4915166 from EUROPA@LYSATOR.LIU.SE@INET#on 96/04/06 at 18:28 > 1) Are the lt. arm. companies treated as 1/2 RE for AEC? (Do the games even > use AEC?) Yes. The lt. armor company is a 1/2 AEC capable, 1/2 RE unit. > 2) Do those large Japanese divisions stack as an ordinary division? They do stack as ordinary divisions. However, they (the 10-6's only) are currently treated as 4 REs in size. > what made you decide to include in breakdown components specialized divisional > support units like armor and engineers as actual manuever units that make up > the division? Historically, the divisions operated broken down as often as not. Much of the mechanized forces available to the Japanese in China were officially organic to the divisions, but often (maybe even usually) operated separately. Thus, to give the Japanese player the historical flexability to reconfigure his forces as the game needs dictate, I divised the two-tiered breakdown system and show the engineer regiment and lt. armor company explicitly. According to Victor Madej's "Japanese Armed Forces Orders of Battle 37-45", the organic engineering regiment typically contained 956 men. BTW, I forgot to point out earlier that the engineers and lt. armor are always unsupported, even if the division breaks into self-supported components (i.e., no HQ). -Mark R. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sun Apr 7 06:08:35 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA18352; Sun, 7 Apr 96 06:08:34 +0200 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id GAA01419 for ; Sun, 7 Apr 1996 06:08:22 +0200 (MET DST) From: m.royer3@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA150469282; Sun, 7 Apr 1996 03:54:42 GMT Message-Id: <199604070354.AA150469282@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Sun, 7 Apr 96 03:54:42 UTC 0000 ( from inet00# ; Sun, 7 Apr 96 03:54:21 UTC 0000) Date: Sun, 7 Apr 96 03:58:00 UTC 0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: M.ROYER3 X-Genie-Qk-Id: 3987011 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 904822 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: Re: EuropaFest Status: O Content-Length: 256 Reply: Item #8906949 from EUROPA@LYSATOR.LIU.SE@INET00#on 96/04/06 at 22:07 I plan to attend E-fest. I'll be looking for hotel room-mates soon if anybody is interested. I'd prefer to stay in which ever hotel is nearest to the convention hall. -Mark R. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sun Apr 7 06:16:45 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA18377; Sun, 7 Apr 96 06:16:44 +0200 Received: from osf1.gmu.edu (osf1.gmu.edu [129.174.1.13]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA01478 for ; Sun, 7 Apr 1996 06:16:32 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by osf1.gmu.edu; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/07Sep94-1001AM/GMUv3) id AA02603; Sat, 6 Apr 1996 23:16:30 -0500 Message-Id: <9604070416.AA02603@osf1.gmu.edu> Subject: Origins To: europa@lysator.liu.se Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 23:16:30 -0500 (EST) From: "Arius V Kaufmann" X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Status: O Content-Length: 210 I shall be attending Origins. I volunteered to help with the Auction, however, I hope to get some Europa game playing in during Europafest. Anyone looking for a Soviet Leningrad-District commander? Arius From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sun Apr 7 06:59:51 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA18442; Sun, 7 Apr 96 06:59:49 +0200 Received: from osf1.gmu.edu (osf1.gmu.edu [129.174.1.13]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA01895 for ; Sun, 7 Apr 1996 06:59:35 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by osf1.gmu.edu; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/07Sep94-1001AM/GMUv3) id AA26790; Sat, 6 Apr 1996 23:59:34 -0500 Message-Id: <9604070459.AA26790@osf1.gmu.edu> Subject: Origins '96 To: europa@lysator.liu.se, consim-l@listserv.uni-c.dk Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 23:59:34 -0500 (EST) From: "Arius V Kaufmann" X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Status: O Content-Length: 735 Here's the hotel info for Origins: Hotel Name Phone # (614)- Blocks $ Hyatt Regency 463-1234 0 90 Crowne Plaza 461-4100 .5 89 Courtyard by Mariott 228-3200 2 74 Great Southern 228-3800 7 92 Doubletree Suites 228-4600 6 95 Holiday Inn City Center 221-3281 7 89 Holiday Inn on the Lane 294-4848 20 69 All prices are single/double per night. The convention is July 4-7, in Columbus, Ohio. For more info, call Andon at (206) 204-5815, fax x5820, email ANDON@AOL.COM. Arius Kaufmann akaufma2@osf1.gmu.edu Ban the bomb. Save the world for conventional warfare. Non-sequitors make me eat lamp-shades. "Power corrupts. Absolute power's kind of neat." --John Lehman, Secretary of the Navy 1981-1987 From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sun Apr 7 07:18:13 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA18505; Sun, 7 Apr 96 07:18:11 +0200 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id HAA02028 for ; Sun, 7 Apr 1996 07:17:44 +0200 (MET DST) From: j.broshot@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA210953442; Sun, 7 Apr 1996 05:04:03 GMT Message-Id: <199604070504.AA210953442@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Sun, 7 Apr 96 05:04:02 UTC 0000 ( from INTERNET# ; Sun, 7 Apr 96 05:03:49 UTC 0000) Date: Sun, 7 Apr 96 04:57:00 UTC 0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: J.BROSHOT X-Genie-Qk-Id: 4640464 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 105955 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: More of My $0.02 Worth Status: O Content-Length: 4009 A brief personal note: this is the 51st anniversary of the death of Flight Lieutenant James Bryan Thompson, RCAF, who died in a night flying accident this date flying a Harvard from No. 11 (P) Advanced Flying Unit at RAF Wrexham North Wales (he was my mother's only brother and, in an ironic twist in light of what happened in this country in the Sixties, went to Canada in 1941 to enlist to be a pilot and is buried near Chester). Re Ultra and the Battle of the Bulge: HITLER'S JAPANESE CONFIDANT (by Carl Boyd) notes that the Allies were reading the messages sent by General Oshima, the Japanese ambassador to Germany, back to Tokyo because the Americans had cracked the Japanese diplomatic code ("Magic"). Oshima's messages contained numerous statements and hints that the Germans were planning a major counter-offensive against the Allies. This point seems to have been ignored by most modern historians of the Bulge, I think. Re the Luftwaffe "Army:" I have been working on the Luftwaffe ground units in Europa with Tessin and other sources and ran across an interesting quote from LUFTWAFFE FIELD DIVISIONS 1941- 1945, Osprey Men-At-Arms Series No. 229, "by 1941 [the Luftwaffe's] strength had grown to nearly 1,700,000 personnel, most of whom served in non-flying capacities. In fact the anti-aircraft artillery branch had 35 per cent (571,000 men) of the Luftwaffe's strength in 1941, while signal troops formed another 18 per cent. The number of men serving in flying units totalled 588,000 in late 1941 (approximately 36 per cent of the Luftwaffe), but most of these men were ground support personnel or paratroopers. Altogether, the Luftwaffe amounted to 20 per cent of Germany's total manpower under arms that year,..." An nit-picky question. Does anybody know why Infanterie-Battalion der Luftwaffe 41, 42, 51, 52 (late war formations) are 4 x 0-1-6 Punitive II 41, 42, 51, 52 (LW) in SF when their Eastern Front counterparts, Infanterie-Battalion der Luftwaffe 81, 82, 85 are 3 x 1-6 Inf II 81, 82, 85 (LW) in FiE/SE? My research leads me to believe all of the units in this series (all formed late in 1944 regular infantry and not penal or "bewahrungs" units. The Luftwaffe penal units were know (after 1943) as "Luftwaffen-Feld-Jager-Battalion zbV" (roughly translated, "Air Force Special Duties Light Infantry Battalion"). These are the 10 x 0-1-6 Punitive II 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 (LW) that appear in FiE/SE and SF. Re "Luft-Peeves:" I like the air unit variety, my only gripe is why they keep changing the values for the Wellington bomber. :) On a more serious note, I'd also like to see something done about taking into account radar and night-fighters. There are negative modifiers for firing at night on the SF AA Fire Tables, but no negative modifier for air combat at night. Is a 1939 German or French night fighter with no airborne radar and a primitive ground control system based on sound and searchlights just as effective as a mid or late war German or British nightfighter with airborne radar and a sophisticated ground control system also based on radar? Just something I'd like to throw out. Re the Japanese Army: I don't mean to poach in Mark Royer's preserves. He has done one heck of a job of researching and recreating a very obscure conflict from meager sources. However, based upon my knowledge of the Japanese Army, a Japanese Army engineer "regiment" or cavalry "regiment" was often the equivalent of an American battalion. From Victor Madej's JAPANESE ARMED FORCES ORDER OF BATTLE, VOLUME 1, an engineer "regiment" in a triangular infantry divisions (two different TOs) had from 900 to 956 men organized into three companies. Likewise, a divisional cavalry regiment had 950 men. I believe that I have my wife talked into letting me and my "Battletech"/"Warhammer 40K" fanatic son going to Columbus this summer (she has an uncle living in Dayton). James A. Broshot, St. James MO P.S. I see that Mark already anticipated my kibitizing on his field. Sorry, Mark. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sun Apr 7 17:41:51 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA20181; Sun, 7 Apr 96 17:41:50 +0200 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id RAA06731 for ; Sun, 7 Apr 1996 17:41:02 +0200 (MET DST) From: m.royer3@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA204090840; Sun, 7 Apr 1996 15:27:20 GMT Message-Id: <199604071527.AA204090840@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Sun, 7 Apr 96 15:27:20 UTC 0000 ( from INET02# ; Sun, 7 Apr 96 15:27:15 UTC 0000) Date: Sun, 7 Apr 96 15:23:00 UTC 0000 To: j.broshot%genie.geis.com%inet#@genie.com Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: M.ROYER3 X-Genie-Qk-Id: 3860378 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 661503 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: More of My $0.02 Worth Status: O Content-Length: 1953 Reply: Item #4626261 from J.BROSHOT@GENIE.GEIS.COM@INET#on 96/04/06 at 23:57 > From Victor Madej's JAPANESE ARMED FORCES > ORDER OF BATTLE, VOLUME 1, an engineer "regiment" in a triangular > infantry divisions (two different TOs) had from 900 to 956 men > organized into three companies. Likewise, a divisional cavalry > regiment had 950 men. > P.S. I see that Mark already anticipated my kibitizing on > his field. Sorry, Mark. Jim Broshot, Please, kibitiz away... I'd rather get it right than preserve my ego. I rated the Japanese divisional engineers at 1-6 to reflect that they only had about 956 men. I made them combat engineers (as opposed to construction eng) based on a number of narrative accounts which describe their use against Chinese fortified positions. However, I am always open to suggested changes/corrections. For comparison, how many men, and what equipment, composed a typical German 2-6 Eng III? A problem with Madej in general, is that his detailed descriptions of the Japanese divisions are after their conversion to triangular. I don't really know what, if any, changes were made to the engineers during this conversion. I'm assuming none. Regarding the cavalry regiment, I showed it as a separate unit altogether with the same unit ID as its parent division. In retrospect, I guess this decision is somewhat arbitrary. As another aside, the Chinese start the game with three lt. armored battalions each rated at 1-0-6 Lt. Arm II. These units contained a variety of light AFV such as the Carden-Lloyd amphibious tankette, the German PzKpfw IA, and Italian L3/35. However, one of the battalions contained a number (perhaps as many as 20) British Vickers 6 ton MkE & MkF medium tanks which supported a 47mm gun. I chose to show all of the battalions as lt. armor, but I could easily be swayed to rate one of them (the one with the 6 ton tanks) as a full armor unit if that makes sense. Thanks, -Mark R. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sun Apr 7 19:05:42 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA20412; Sun, 7 Apr 96 19:05:41 +0200 Received: from dax.cc.uakron.edu (root@dax.cc.uakron.edu [130.101.5.4]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id TAA07432 for ; Sun, 7 Apr 1996 19:05:19 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from akr-dial-6.apk.net by dax.cc.uakron.edu (5.65/Ultrix4.3) id AA15190; Sun, 7 Apr 1996 13:06:23 -0400 Date: Sun, 7 Apr 1996 13:06:23 -0400 Message-Id: <9604071706.AA15190@dax.cc.uakron.edu> X-Sender: apanius@uakron.edu X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: Mike Apanius Subject: E-Fest Status: O Content-Length: 117 I'll be attending the EuropaFest this years in Columbus. I'm also going to take some other people with me. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sun Apr 7 19:50:14 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA20602; Sun, 7 Apr 96 19:50:13 +0200 Received: from emout04.mail.aol.com (emout04.mail.aol.com [198.81.10.12]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id TAA07891 for ; Sun, 7 Apr 1996 19:49:50 +0200 (MET DST) From: NullmVoid@aol.com Received: by emout04.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id NAA06774 for europa@lysator.liu.se; Sun, 7 Apr 1996 13:49:18 -0400 Date: Sun, 7 Apr 1996 13:49:18 -0400 Message-Id: <960407134917_370789577@emout04.mail.aol.com> To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: UNSUBSCRIBE Status: O Content-Length: 12 Unsubscribe From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 8 01:36:42 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA21816; Mon, 8 Apr 96 01:36:42 +0200 Received: from psyche.the-wire.com (psyche.the-wire.com [198.53.192.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id BAA10918 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 1996 01:35:50 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from mhughes.the-wire.com (mhughes.the-wire.com [205.206.32.167]) by psyche.the-wire.com (8.6.10/8.6.12) with SMTP id TAA18979 for ; Sun, 7 Apr 1996 19:35:01 -0400 Date: Sun, 7 Apr 1996 19:35:01 -0400 Message-Id: <199604072335.TAA18979@psyche.the-wire.com> X-Sender: mhughes@psyche.the-wire.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: mhughes@the-wire.com (Marian Hughes) Subject: MULTI-ROLE AIRCRAFT Status: O Content-Length: 2249 Multi-Role Aircraft Whoops: On rereading my last file I can see that some 9th AF supporters would get very upset: What I left out was the telling comment that "compared with the 8th AF units, for which they had the utmost respect, some RAF squadrons found the 9th AF lacking in etc etc" - rate this up to my being a wire neophyte. On Pilot Quality: I agree with Perry de Havilland that this is significant, but less so than technical factors. In reality I suspect that the 'quality' of all the European nations and the US were for practical purposes identical. The belief is that some 10% of fighter pilots scored 80% of the kills - quality translates into seeing how many of the maybe 0.5% of the general population with this 'situational awareness' as Spick calls it, finished up as pilots. Mind you these guys would be equally effective as Tank commanders or submarine captains. The distribution varied between countries - Japan and Germany having extremes of quality due to rotation (or lack of), training time etc; the US and Britain the opposite; France and Italy in between. But it all comes out even in the end. The real problem is that 'quality' is defined in terms of the most glamorous job - the fighter pilot, and counted in terms of 'kill' rates. These fast become myths, and distort the real position: Recently researched 'corrections' to them are: - In World War I the RAF/RFC overclaimed horrendously (Shores) - In the Guadalcanal campaign the US Marines and the Japanese Navy were both overclaiming at the same time - often at rates of 10 to 1 (Lundstrom) - In Korea the famed 11-1 kill rate of Sabres vs Migs has been corrected with the release of Russian loss data. The real rate was some 3 or 4 to 1 - very meritorious, but explicable in terms of technology (radar control), equipment, guns and aircraft, rather than as was originally claimed purely pilot quality. In passing - it was the inability of US pilots in Vietnam to match this imaginary 11-1 rate that led to the 'Top-Gun' programmes (Air Enthusiast) In summary - be careful of pilot quality in simulating WW II. What did matter was experience. It might make sense to give positive modifiers for example to Germans attacking Russians for a few turns. DAVID HUGHES From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 8 01:41:10 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA21828; Mon, 8 Apr 96 01:41:10 +0200 Received: from ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (abcclibr@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu [128.174.5.59]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id BAA10955 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 1996 01:40:59 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by ux1.cso.uiuc.edu id AA23429 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for europa@lysator.liu.se); Sun, 7 Apr 1996 18:40:52 -0500 Date: Sun, 7 Apr 1996 18:40:52 -0500 From: conrad alan b To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: air counters II Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 2074 RE: previous post; yes I still would rather not see the extra, essentially useless counters since that `counter space' could be devoted to other counters with better uses in the Europa system. I still agree with Patrick, that the dicing of the air units is too much. As someone posted a while ago, we don't rate each armored unit depending on what model of tank is in it this month. The altitude point that Perry makes is very true, for a tactical air game. But we don't rate armored divisions depending on whether the terrain is real flat, which is an advantage for some tanks and ATs, or just rolling open, or some woods or, etc. I agree the most important qualifier is pilot quality. But in Europa terms I doubt if much can be done about this. Second IS technology, but on the other hand no matter how one weighs all the tech specs, in reality, most air-to-air kills were against foes who never saw you coming. Since there appears to be no counter = air unit, algorithm used for Europa (just total plane strength divided by a number), and at least to the SF moment the replacement rates are such that one need not care how many counters one loses, an extra defense point (as in the FW-190A2 to the FW190-A8) is such is small statistical blip, I would prefer that designer's energies, and counter mix realities be put to better uses. In fact I wonder what kind of air strength date the designers were able to get. Most of the accurate date I've seen is by air units. Most gross number of aircraft data is very slippery at best. So much depends upon aircraft servicability, unit strength and current doctrine. An example of doctrine and pilot quality. At the Battle of Britain, Galland tells of the stress of having to fly three and four missions per day. The actual sortie flown data shows that if he was flying four missions, then four or five pilots (and their planes) in his unit were not flying at all that day. How would we factor that into the Europa system? Alan Conrad Champaign, Illinois From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 8 01:43:01 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA21834; Mon, 8 Apr 96 01:43:00 +0200 Received: from psyche.the-wire.com (psyche.the-wire.com [198.53.192.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id BAA10976 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 1996 01:42:50 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from mhughes.the-wire.com (mhughes.the-wire.com [205.206.32.167]) by psyche.the-wire.com (8.6.10/8.6.12) with SMTP id TAA19109 for ; Sun, 7 Apr 1996 19:42:01 -0400 Date: Sun, 7 Apr 1996 19:42:01 -0400 Message-Id: <199604072342.TAA19109@psyche.the-wire.com> X-Sender: mhughes@psyche.the-wire.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: mhughes@the-wire.com (Marian Hughes) Subject: Unit Factor Evaluations Status: O Content-Length: 2518 Re Unit Factor Evaluations I came late to this site, so misssed some of the discussion on German unit values. I thought it might help in putting German values into perspective to comment on how the British ones were arrived at. Let's stick to Infantry Divisions. The rating reflects three factors (all operating at the same time). 1) Quality. The best are British Regulars - Divs 1-5, 70, 78, and the Volunteers from Australia, Canada and New Zealand. Next come the Territorial Divisions (the higher rated ones such as the 51st including a Brigade or more of Regulars). Finally the Static and Reserve Divisions, together with the Territorials who were stripped of troops later in the war - such as the 45th. 2) Time period: Divisions increased in size and capability, adding a MG II, SP AT guns etc. Since the same holds true for most Armies, in the case of the British, there is only one upgrade - typically from 8-8 to 9-8 in 1942. 3) Location: This is least understood. The US Army produced units with identical TOE regardless of where they fought (I ignore obvious points like unit transport methods in desert or jungle). The British, however had different unit equipment scales depending on Theatre. In general, the highest was the ETO, then North Africa/Italy, followed in order by Middle East, Near East and India. Note that this had very little to do with the nationality of the unit - after all a General assigning tasks to his divisions in, say, North Africa, wanted to ensure that all were equally capable of the assignments. This led to situations where units became stronger as they moved West! As an example, Gurkha battalions leaving India for Iraq got 3" mortars and 2 lb AT guns. Transferred to the Middle East they turned in the 2 lb guns for 6 lb. Similarly, tank battalions leaving Britain for Egypt gave up about 20% of their tanks. By 1943-44 things had evened out in the Europa area, but Far East establishments were still lower. This is real tricky to show in Europa - who wants to swap counters as an unit shifts from ETO to MTO. By and large it is ignored, except that units are rated according to where they first appear - so that the MTO 70 XX is a 7-8, while the ETO 5 XX is an 8-8. This is the reason why the Canadian Infantry are 10-8 - volunteers in the ETO from 1943 on. Were Australians in the ETO at that time period, they too would be 10-8's. Hope this gives an useful outline of the issues involved in rating units for Europa. David Hughes mhughes@the-wire.com Marian Hughes From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 8 01:45:39 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA21840; Mon, 8 Apr 96 01:45:38 +0200 Received: from ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (abcclibr@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu [128.174.5.59]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id BAA11026 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 1996 01:45:29 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by ux1.cso.uiuc.edu id AA24200 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for europa@lysator.liu.se); Sun, 7 Apr 1996 18:45:26 -0500 Date: Sun, 7 Apr 1996 18:45:26 -0500 From: conrad alan b To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Origins Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 364 I have had the privilege, as well as devoting the time, money and energy, to attend all the Origin game conventions. So I will not be missing this one either. My attentions will be devoted to Europafest, historical seminars, game company seminars, the auction, and the exhibitor area, in more or less that order. Alan Conrad Champaign, Illinois From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 8 01:49:17 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA21851; Mon, 8 Apr 96 01:49:16 +0200 Received: from linux.nildram.co.uk (root@linux.nildram.co.uk [194.164.5.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id BAA11058 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 1996 01:48:58 +0200 (MET DST) From: mulhllnd@gardencitynet.co.uk Received: from mulhllnd.gardencitynet.co.uk (pppg.nildram.co.uk [194.164.5.26]) by linux.nildram.co.uk (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id AAA11989 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 1996 00:49:28 +0100 Message-Id: <3168C43D.7556@gardencitynet.co.uk> Date: Mon, 08 Apr 1996 00:46:05 -0700 X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I; 16bit) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Victory Conditions Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Status: O Content-Length: 590 I discovered this group the other day and have been hooked ever since. One thing Alan Conrad mentioned in passing struck a chord with me - the investment of hundreds of hours in playing a Europa game only to find victory conditions 'that belittle all that time spent'. Having messed about with Europa for nearly twenty years now, this has always been the one area I've had problems with. Narvik in particular, used to cause me great angst - despite being an excellent game overall. Am I alone? Alan - what did you mean exactly? Andy Mulholland, Letchworth, Hertfordshire, England. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 8 05:49:52 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA22533; Mon, 8 Apr 96 05:49:51 +0200 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id FAA13086 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 1996 05:48:58 +0200 (MET DST) From: j.broshot@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA241024513; Mon, 8 Apr 1996 03:35:13 GMT Message-Id: <199604080335.AA241024513@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Mon, 8 Apr 96 03:35:12 UTC 0000 ( from INTERNET# ; Mon, 8 Apr 96 03:34:43 UTC 0000) Date: Mon, 8 Apr 96 03:18:00 UTC 0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: J.BROSHOT X-Genie-Qk-Id: 4979211 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 111343 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: the Japanese Army etc. Status: O Content-Length: 3838 Mark: Always glad to try to be of assistance. You are correct about Madej since it is a reprint of a U. S. intelligence publication from 1945. Do you have HANDBOOK ON JAPANESE MILITARY FORCES, a reprint of a U. S. War Department publication circa October 1944? It goes into a bit more detail about Japanese Army engineer units. I can send the information if you need it, i.e., "division engineers include among their personnel men trained in tank trap construction, demolition work, and small river crossing operations. The 3 companies of the regiment do not specialize in one particular aspect of engineering, but are designed for sub- allotment, one to each infantry regiment, to fulfill their ordinary engineer requirement." In TEM#24, John Astell stated that (in FTF, anyway) each German Army engineer regiment represented an engineer regiment headquarters and contained "the equivalent of 2 to 2 1/2 combat engineer battalions plus two construction battalions (to give the regiments construction capabilities)." Here is the OB of the Japanese 7th Infantry Division in the Nomonhon Incident as distilled from NOMOHON (by Alvin D. Coox). Coox is great on giving the names of all of the commanders, sometimes down to platoon level, but weak on organization details. Note that the engineer regiment is listed with only two companies (one for each brigade?): 7th Infantry Division division headquarters 13th Infantry Brigade brigade headquarters 25th Infantry Regiment regimental gun company (75mm regimental guns) rapid fire gun company (37mm AT guns) three battalions each battalion: three rifle companies one machine gun company battalion gun platoon 26th Infantry Regiment 14th Infantry Brigade brigade headquarters 27th Infantry Regiment 28th Infantry Regiment (later to go into history as the Ichiki Detachment on Guadalcanal) 7th Field Artillery Regiment four battalions (each with two batteries?) (less one battalion) 7th Cavalry Regiment 7th Engineer Regiment (two companies) 7th Transport Regiment (three companies) 7th Signal Unit 7th Division Medical Unit I am curious about the "British Vickers 6 ton MkE & MkF medium tanks which supported a 47mm gun." The semi-famous Vickers Medium Tank which first appeared in 1921 (as a light tank) weighed, depending on the model, between 11.7 tons and 14 tons and was usually armed with a 3pdr (47mm). The final variant, the A6 (and later built as the Vickers Medium III) had the 3pdr and 2-3 mgs. and weighed 16 tons. Armor was about the same as the U. S. M3 Stuart, so personally I'd leave them as light tank battalions. The Vickers Medium was hauled out of retirement early in WW2 and was used briefly by 7th Armored Div in 1940-1941 and by the British Army in the United Kingdom after the loss of most of the modern tanks in France. From AFV#12 "Mediums Marks I-III," and BRITISH AND TANKS OF WORLD WAR II (Peter Chamberlain and Chris Ellis). David: glad to hear from. Thanks for explaining the British infantry division ratings. Would you have to account for the difference between the "first-line" and "second-line" Territorial Army infantry divisions, at least initially? As a minor point can you explain why the 201st Guards Motor Brigade is a 1 x 3-10 Mot X 201 Gds in WiD and a 1 x 2-3-10 mot Inf X 201 G in SF? Is it because there is an error in Joslen (showing 2 bns after mid-1943 instead of 3 bns) and the brigade really did continue to have three battalions of Guards in Italy (before it was rotated back to the United Kingdom)? As I recall the British (and Indian) Infantry Divisions in Burma had a modified TO with a combined LAA/AT regiment and a headquarters infantry battalion (besides the specialized jungle equipment). Jim Broshot St. James MO From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 8 06:49:56 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA22721; Mon, 8 Apr 96 06:49:55 +0200 Received: from ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (abcclibr@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu [128.174.5.59]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA13675 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 1996 06:49:19 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by ux1.cso.uiuc.edu id AA15374 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for europa@lysator.liu.se); Sun, 7 Apr 1996 23:48:58 -0500 Date: Sun, 7 Apr 1996 23:48:58 -0500 From: conrad alan b To: mulhllnd@gardencitynet.co.uk Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: Victory Conditions In-Reply-To: <3168C43D.7556@gardencitynet.co.uk> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 1550 On Mon, 8 Apr 1996 mulhllnd@gardencitynet.co.uk wrote: > I discovered this group the other day and have been hooked ever since. One thing Alan > Conrad mentioned in passing struck a chord with me - the investment of hundreds of hours > in playing a Europa game only to find victory conditions 'that belittle all that time > spent'. > > Having messed about with Europa for nearly twenty years now, this has always been the one > area I've had problems with. Narvik in particular, used to cause me great angst - > despite being an excellent game overall. > > Am I alone? Alan - what did you mean exactly? > In a previous post I told of a recent SF game of mine. I thought I had done very well as the German; Rome falling late '44, Paris April '45, none of Germany falling at all; yet I `lost' the game. With that example I was more concerned with finding out what the designers had figured for the VP count for history. Historically the VPs for geography would have yielded an overwhelming Allied victory. Similarly, two friends played a FitE/SE game, took a year to play it thru '44. The last turn an attack on Odessa decided who won the game, all that time for one die roll. In that case a victory point area with a draw might have been worthwhile. Its been years since I've played them, but my memory says that I was not happy with FoF or Narvik either. But SF I believe is better than the older games so we are heading in the right direction. We only need some more explanation and work. Alan Conrad From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 8 17:12:12 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA25702; Mon, 8 Apr 96 17:12:11 +0200 Received: from post.QueensU.CA (root@knot.QueensU.CA [130.15.126.54]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id RAA20107 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 1996 17:09:22 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from mast.QueensU.CA (MAST.QueensU.CA [130.15.100.1]) by post.QueensU.CA (8.6.12/8.6.10+ASH) with SMTP id LAA08357 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 1996 11:09:00 -0400 Received: from hilda.mast.QueensU.CA by mast.QueensU.CA (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA18648; Mon, 8 Apr 96 11:01:40 EDT Received: by hilda.mast.QueensU.CA (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA17675; Mon, 8 Apr 96 11:00:39 EDT From: pardue@hilda.mast.QueensU.CA (Keith Pardue) Message-Id: <9604081500.AA17675@hilda.mast.QueensU.CA> Subject: Re: Victory Conditions (fwd) To: europa@lysator.liu.se Date: Mon, 8 Apr 1996 11:00:37 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL13] Content-Type: text Status: O Content-Length: 782 Hi, Alan writes: > Similarly, two friends played a FitE/SE game, took a year to play it > thru '44. The last turn an attack on Odessa decided who won the game, > all that time for one die roll. In that case a victory point area with a > draw might have been worthwhile. Nah. It's more fun to win or lose on that die roll than to have a draw. It sounds like a game well played; the sort that ballads are written about. But, Alan's point about the victory conditions for Second Front are well taken. I do remember from his earlier post that it seemed more like the replacement system had problems. This translated into a victory point problem because the Americans and British had sooooo many RPs left over. Best Wishes, Keith Pardue Kingston, Ontario, Canada From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 8 19:05:01 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA26621; Mon, 8 Apr 96 19:05:00 +0200 Received: from jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (civguy@jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us [192.217.238.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id TAA21779 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 1996 19:04:20 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from civguy@localhost) by jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (8.6.10/8.6.9) id EAA03781; Fri, 2 Jan 1970 04:26:11 -0600 Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1970 04:26:11 -36000 From: Jason Long Subject: Re: Peeves about Luft-Peeves Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 679 The Europa Air researchers wanted to divide things into 3 altitude bands, Hi, Med, Lo, to reflect the Me 109s better performance at altitude than the Fw 190A and the Typhoon's best performance at low altitude, etc. My idea was to underline or overscore the aircraft's ratings and have a table of DRMs to covers situations where a Typhoon is attacking a Me 109K at altitude. The only times altutde would be specified were strategic missions were at high, carpet bombing at medium and ground attack at low, etc. Considering that we were lucky to get heavy fighters approved, I have no real beefs as altitude bands are less important than the heavy fighter concept. Jason From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 8 19:16:07 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA26763; Mon, 8 Apr 96 19:16:05 +0200 Received: from haven.uniserve.com (haven.uniserve.com [198.53.215.121]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id TAA22181 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 1996 19:15:42 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from van0312.tvs.net ([204.191.197.82]) by haven.uniserve.com with SMTP id <47179-137>; Mon, 8 Apr 1996 10:18:43 -0800 X-Sender: davehum@popserver.uniserve.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: Dave Humphreys Subject: resources for c/m formations Message-Id: <96Apr8.101843pdt.47179-137+1160@haven.uniserve.com> Date: Mon, 8 Apr 1996 10:18:41 -0800 Status: O Content-Length: 1436 At 17:42 04/04/96 -0400, Ray Kanarr wrote: --snip-- >Germany, at various times, had absurd plans for both much larger >mechanized and air forces [and the slightly less adsurd "Z" naval >plan], to the extent where such forces would have required ALL >available oil resources to operate. Germany's capability to churn out >additional c/m units, above and beyond what they historically did, is >extremely questionable, given all of the material constraints on >their production/ use of materials: --snip-- Availability of resources for production is something we've never had to deal with in our games of Europa, but in our current game of FitE/SE, the Russians are currently building masses of armour in the winter of '42/43. This follows on the heeels of a failed German attempt to isolate the Caucasus. In the Collector's edition of these games, will/should the isolation/capture of the main Soviet oilfields curtail their ability to produce their hordes of tank and mechanized forces? Perhaps 6-6 Rifle XX would have to be substituted for a 11-8 Mech XXX. Would capturing these resources allow the Germans to build/upgrade more armour? (Assuming, of course, that the resources are not destroyed before capture). Also, I think an old suggestion made a few years ago in TEM makes a lot of sense. The Soviets shouldn't be able to stack more than one armoured XXX per hex unless a tank corps marker is present. (Ow, our poor Finns). From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 8 22:19:41 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA28280; Mon, 8 Apr 96 22:19:40 +0200 Received: from smtp4.aw.com (smtp4.aw.com [192.207.117.64]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA25237 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 1996 22:16:38 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from East-Message_Server by smtp4.aw.com with Novell_GroupWise; Mon, 08 Apr 1996 14:48:33 -0400 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1 Date: Mon, 08 Apr 1996 16:52:57 -0400 From: Ray Kanarr To: civguy@dusable.cps.k12.il.us Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: Or What? my wish list. Luft-peeves Status: O Content-Length: 874 On 4/6/96, Jason sent in: >The HF type 190s in the counter mix represent the >rammjaegers; aircraft that were heavily armored and >armed to go in close and kill bombers. These units were >designated sturm by the Luftwaffe This is not actually the case; the rammjaegers were just what the name states, a unit of fliers willing to ram enemy aircraft to bring them down, possibly losing their lives in the process. This technique was first codified [along with training materials for its use] by the Soviets in 1941, and the German unit set up to use this technique, which was used against bomber formations, may have been known as the "Leonidas" staffel [I'll need to confirm this]. The "Sturm" units, as noted in Jason's post, were heavily armed and armored aircraft meant to go in among the bomber formations and mix it up in a high-.50 caliber environment. Ray From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 8 23:26:50 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA28629; Mon, 8 Apr 96 23:26:49 +0200 Received: from felix.dircon.co.uk (felix.dircon.co.uk [193.128.224.10]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id XAA25710 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 1996 23:14:43 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [194.112.35.32] (gw1-032.pool.dircon.co.uk) by felix.dircon.co.uk with SMTP id AA11865 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Mon, 8 Apr 1996 22:14:10 +0100 X-Sender: cloister@popmail.dircon.co.uk Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 8 Apr 1996 22:16:32 +0000 To: Jason Long From: cloister@dircon.co.uk (Perry de Havilland) Subject: Re: Peeves about Luft-Peeves Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se Status: O Content-Length: 2382 Jason wrote: >The Europa Air researchers wanted to divide things into 3 altitude bands, >Hi, Med, Lo, to reflect the Me 109s better performance at altitude than >the Fw 190A and the Typhoon's best performance at low altitude, etc. My >idea was to underline or overscore the aircraft's ratings and have a >table of DRMs to covers situations where a Typhoon is attacking a Me 109K >at altitude. This is *exactly* what I have been looking for. In my eternal quest for modular rules to suit all types of Europa players, this sound very much along the lines I had in mind (Generic air counters for ground-fixated heathen like Patrick and extraaddednewimprovedslicesdices details for lunatics like me who actually WANT to spend longer on air & naval turns than ground movement). It would also allow the real differences in Heavy vs. Light Flak to be demonstrated (i.e. Heavy flak = effective at medium altitude, less effective at high, less effective at low. Light flak = useless at high altitude, almost useless at medium and positively murderous at low altitude). I did up some draft rules myself on the subject of altitude but I would LOVE to see you draft rules and DRM table as I have never been happy with the fruits of my own efforts on this The only times alitutde would be specified were strategic >missions were at high, carpet bombing at medium and ground attack at low, >etc. I would also hope pretty much *any* attack mission would have the option of a low altitude penetration and a change of altitude in the target hex (this is very realistic for certain missions: penetrate low to make it difficult for the air reporting network (i.e. radar), then pull up for the attack to minimise the effects of flak. cf. the first raid on Berlin by Mosquitoes). >Considering that we were lucky to get heavy fighters approved, I have no >real beefs as altitude bands are less important than the heavy fighter >concept. I agree that HF is a very important and long needed concept and takes care of various TFH wierdness. Now all we need are some decent radar/EW/nightfighter/true route interception/air C3I rules blah blah blah :-) ... Lets go modular! Yes, we really can *all* have it all. Without more *detailed* air rules, TFH is really not worth the effort as it unique in the Europa stable for being *primarily* an air game Regards Perry ...- Perry ...- From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Apr 9 00:41:21 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA29329; Tue, 9 Apr 96 00:41:20 +0200 Received: from smtp4.aw.com (smtp4.aw.com [192.207.117.64]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id AAA27214 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 1996 00:40:31 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from East-Message_Server by smtp4.aw.com with Novell_GroupWise; Mon, 08 Apr 1996 15:36:07 -0400 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1 Date: Mon, 08 Apr 1996 17:40:01 -0400 From: Ray Kanarr To: j.broshot@genie.com, abcclibr@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Barbarossa manpower [was: Re: My $0.02 worth] Status: O Content-Length: 1939 On 4/6/96, Alan Conrad stated: >I have seen, more than once, data and quotes as to the >understrength of the German army going into Barbarossa. >I could not find such a quote in Lewis, although he did >quote Halder saying that on September 1, 1941, "at the >front" 142 divisions were "lacking" 700,000 men. Since I >do not remember the casualties being that high to that >date, and there had been replacements sent to the front >(Army Group Center had received 151,000 replacements >to offset 219,000 casualties thru 9-26-41), to me that alone >shows that the army was understrength. Well...In the first place, if we believe Halder's statement, each of the 142 divisions was missing an average of 4,930 men. This essentially means that, on the 9/I/41 turn, Germany has some combination of 142 infantry-type division cadres, or about 70 eliminated divisions, or some combination thereof. Sounds like way more than the historical losses would indicate, unless a substantial number of those 'casualties' were sent back to the front after treatment of relatively minor wounds. This, of course, brings up the endlessly debatable, and totally insoluble, question of what is meant by the word casualty, which I am unwilling to get into unless someone out there has access to the German equivalent of the military surgeon general's [or whatever the position is called] reports breaking down these figures. Same for AGC at the end of September. So they show 219,000 losses and 151,000 replacements. So what. Unless a breakdown shows that that included ALL soldiers returned to duty, including those treated at divisional aid stations, etc., etc., blah, blah, its just another figure taken out of an unknown context, and so without meaning. To think that Germany would have embarked on its greatest [in terms of size and scope, ONLY] campaign without being as close to full strength as possible, is somewhat ludicrous. Ray From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Apr 9 03:09:36 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA00447; Tue, 9 Apr 96 03:09:35 +0200 Received: from smtp4.aw.com (smtp4.aw.com [192.207.117.64]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id DAA28875 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 1996 03:06:02 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from East-Message_Server by smtp4.aw.com with Novell_GroupWise; Mon, 08 Apr 1996 20:06:28 -0400 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1 Date: Mon, 08 Apr 1996 22:10:58 -0400 From: Ray Kanarr To: cloister@dircon.co.uk, civguy@dusable.cps.k12.il.us Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: Peeves about Luft-Peeves Status: O Content-Length: 490 On 4/8/96, Perry wrote in: >I would also hope pretty much *any* attack mission would >have the option of a low altitude penetration and a change >of altitude in the target hex At the VERY least, HB units flying strategic missions would be prohibited from this. >Now all we need are some decent radar/EW/nightfighter/ >true route interception/air C3I rules blah blah blah YES!!! And don't forget ground crew/installations/logistics/ serviceability rates/pilot training.... Ray Ray From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Apr 9 03:23:54 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA00561; Tue, 9 Apr 96 03:23:52 +0200 Received: from smtp.utexas.edu (smtp.utexas.edu [128.83.126.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id DAA29177 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 1996 03:23:25 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from slip-12-15.ots.utexas.edu (slip-12-15.ots.utexas.edu [128.83.128.15]) by smtp.utexas.edu (8.6.7/8.6.6) with SMTP id UAA25403 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 1996 20:21:07 -0500 Date: Mon, 8 Apr 1996 20:21:07 -0500 Message-Id: <199604090121.UAA25403@smtp.utexas.edu> X-Sender: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu (Bobby D. Bryant) Subject: Re: Victory Conditions (fwd) Status: O Content-Length: 907 Keith said: > Alan writes: > >> Similarly, two friends played a FitE/SE game, took a year to play it >> thru '44. The last turn an attack on Odessa decided who won the game, >> all that time for one die roll. In that case a victory point area with a >> draw might have been worthwhile. > > Nah. It's more fun to win or lose on that die roll than to >have a draw. It sounds like a game well played; the sort that ballads >are written about. Though I agree that VPs need to work as well as possible, I personally subscribe to the old school that says "If you have to count VPs to know who won, it was a draw." OTOH, a well-tuned VP system can give a warm fuzzy feeling that you know something about history, which is nice for those of us who get a disproportional amount of our history lesson from games rather than from books. - Bobby. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Apr 9 03:30:41 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA00596; Tue, 9 Apr 96 03:30:40 +0200 Received: from mail.cs.umn.edu (mail.cs.umn.edu [128.101.149.1]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id DAA29226 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 1996 03:30:28 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from deca.cs.umn.edu (thornley@deca.cs.umn.edu [128.101.228.10]) by mail.cs.umn.edu (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id UAA27144 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 1996 20:30:19 -0500 (CDT) From: "David H. Thornley" Received: (thornley@localhost) by deca.cs.umn.edu (8.6.11/8.6.12) id UAA20749 for europa@lysator.liu.se; Mon, 8 Apr 1996 20:30:06 -0500 Message-Id: <199604090130.UAA20749@deca.cs.umn.edu> Subject: Re: Victory Conditions To: europa@lysator.liu.se (Europa mailing list) Date: Mon, 8 Apr 1996 20:30:04 -0500 (CDT) In-Reply-To: <3168C43D.7556@gardencitynet.co.uk> from "mulhllnd@gardencitynet.co.uk" at Apr 8, 96 00:46:05 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Status: O Content-Length: 801 > > I discovered this group the other day and have been hooked ever since. One thing Alan > Conrad mentioned in passing struck a chord with me - the investment of hundreds of hours > in playing a Europa game only to find victory conditions 'that belittle all that time > spent'. > I'm with Jack Radey on this one. At the end of the game, you know what you did and you know what the other guy did. Who needs victory conditions? Of course, this works best for FiTE/SE and SF, and, in general, other large games. David H. Thornley, known to the Wise as thornley@cs.umn.edu O- Disclaimer: These are not the opinions of the University of Minnesota, its Regents, faculty, staff, students, or squirrels. Datclaimer: Well, maybe the squirrels. They're pretty smart. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Apr 9 03:45:00 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA00643; Tue, 9 Apr 96 03:44:59 +0200 Received: from smtp.utexas.edu (smtp.utexas.edu [128.83.126.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id DAA29338 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 1996 03:44:33 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from slip-12-15.ots.utexas.edu (slip-12-15.ots.utexas.edu [128.83.128.15]) by smtp.utexas.edu (8.6.7/8.6.6) with SMTP id UAA25737 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 1996 20:38:33 -0500 Date: Mon, 8 Apr 1996 20:38:33 -0500 Message-Id: <199604090138.UAA25737@smtp.utexas.edu> X-Sender: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu (Bobby D. Bryant) Subject: Re: Barbarossa manpower [was: Re: My $0.02 worth] Status: O Content-Length: 1048 Ray said: > ... Unless a breakdown shows that [such and such] ... its just another >figure taken out of an unknown context, and so without meaning. Good point. Also, generals seem to be as willing to inflate casualty counts as to deflate them, depending on the axe to be ground. ATOSG, "Figures don't lie, but liars figure!" >To think that Germany would have embarked on its greatest [in terms >of size and scope, ONLY] campaign without being as close to full >strength as possible, is somewhat ludicrous. Except that they apparently expected the USSR to show a glass jaw like everyone else had. In hindsight it looks ludicrous for Germany to take on the whole world no matter what their level of motivation, but at least one person didn't seem to think so at the time. (It may be that the General Staff thought exactly what Ray said, but even if so, how much control did they have over it? Not a rhetorical question -- feedback from the historians in the crowd is solicited.) - Bobby. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Apr 9 04:29:59 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA00976; Tue, 9 Apr 96 04:29:58 +0200 Received: from smtp.utexas.edu (smtp.utexas.edu [128.83.126.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id EAA29872 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 1996 04:28:17 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from slip-12-15.ots.utexas.edu (slip-12-15.ots.utexas.edu [128.83.128.15]) by smtp.utexas.edu (8.6.7/8.6.6) with SMTP id VAA26602 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 1996 21:26:45 -0500 Date: Mon, 8 Apr 1996 21:26:45 -0500 Message-Id: <199604090226.VAA26602@smtp.utexas.edu> X-Sender: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu (Bobby D. Bryant) Subject: Re: Barbarossa manpower [correction] Status: O Content-Length: 163 I said: >the whole world no matter what their level of motivation... but should have said "mobilization". - B. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Apr 9 06:31:53 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA01877; Tue, 9 Apr 96 06:31:52 +0200 Received: from ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (abcclibr@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu [128.174.5.59]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA01085 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 1996 06:31:08 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by ux1.cso.uiuc.edu id AA00258 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for europa@lysator.liu.se); Mon, 8 Apr 1996 23:31:04 -0500 Date: Mon, 8 Apr 1996 23:31:03 -0500 From: conrad alan b To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: The Air Game Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 2221 Gents, Much has been posted lately about getting the tech into the air game of Europa. In general, as I have stated before, we are talking about points, that if put in the game correctly, should have no effect on the game, IMO. However one point I did want raised, and seems to have been lost lately, is the basing and using of air units. Example: in my resent SF game after Corsica had fallen, the Allies had several wings of B-25s & B-26s that would fly a mission from England, then stage down to Corsica to fly a turn or two in Italy, then stage back up to England again. Never lossing a bomb run along the way. Now I have seen a few examples of Stat forces flying to other bases (for single raids), and I suppose one can call up examples of tac forces doing that. But in the main air units operated from their own bases. The base had to move if the unit was going to move to a new area. Time in action was lost. I've never liked the Europa staging rule. It makes little sense to me. And players can really run that rule in the ground. A second SF game had the entire German fighter force in Italy staged through one airbase to run a CAP mission over a known battle hex (the fleet was there) so that DAS could then run in. The theoretical drawback of having all those fighters landing at that base were unimportant. Lots of units were lost in combat, AND many of the units were Strat call ups, so they were going to vaporize anyway. Someone asked a bit back about what were the personnel costs in the support structure of the air forces. I haven't found that data yet. I hope someone comes up with it. As someone did state in a post about American divisions, it is a oft stated assumption that the best American personnel went into the Air Corps, not just pilots, but all that ground personnel also. It would be best if either building an airbase had a personnel cost, or better yet that we would have ground air units that were tied to the planes that were flying from them. If those ground support units are overrun by the fighting, as in Barbarossa, it is a further loss than just the loss of the airfield. Alan Conrad Champaign, Illinois From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Apr 9 06:53:41 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA01996; Tue, 9 Apr 96 06:53:40 +0200 Received: from desiree.teleport.com (desiree.teleport.com [192.108.254.21]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id GAA01269 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 1996 06:53:19 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [206.163.122.95] (ip-pdx10-31.teleport.com [206.163.122.95]) by desiree.teleport.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id VAA22100; Mon, 8 Apr 1996 21:53:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199604090453.VAA22100@desiree.teleport.com> X-Sender: zaius@mail.teleport.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 8 Apr 1996 20:58:53 -0800 To: conrad alan b From: zaius@teleport.com (Steve) Subject: Re: unit replacements Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se Status: O Content-Length: 607 Conrad- As to the difference between 7-6 and 8-6 infantry divisions: Maybe that unit that is an 8-6 got an extra artillery battery or something. Or, alternatively why not just allow Germans that want to build a 3-6 cadre up to an 8-6 to do so, even if the original division was a 7-6? I don't see any reason why this shouldn't be done. After all, I've got plenty of 8-6s laying around and in the main, I'm not too worried about historical unit numbers (if there are 4 x 12th infantry divisions running around, I really don't give a monkey's) SP "Freedom is always against the law." -J.R. "Bob" Dobbs From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Apr 9 06:53:43 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA02001; Tue, 9 Apr 96 06:53:43 +0200 Received: from desiree.teleport.com (desiree.teleport.com [192.108.254.21]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id GAA01272 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 1996 06:53:24 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [206.163.122.95] (ip-pdx10-31.teleport.com [206.163.122.95]) by desiree.teleport.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id VAA22134; Mon, 8 Apr 1996 21:53:13 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199604090453.VAA22134@desiree.teleport.com> X-Sender: zaius@mail.teleport.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 8 Apr 1996 20:59:00 -0800 To: Ray Kanarr From: zaius@teleport.com (Steve) Subject: Unit factors-as Ray's reply to unit rep. Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se Status: O Content-Length: 3801 >To state that by May '41 significant differences between infantry >divs had disappeared, or ... is not borne out... That seems true. There were so many units, even static units that had 'personalities' that would show up on Europa's scale. I certainly think they should be modelled as realistically as possible. >I think [and will hunt up references if asked] that the German army >actually scaled back to get the harvest in, freeing up men for >agricultural, not industrial, work. This is the case. The winter of 1939/40 had been very harsh and the effects were exacerbated by the abscence of many citizens who were in the military and unable to get coal dug, the harvest in, or keep industry running. Germany at this time did not have the many guest workers who were shanghaid to keep German industry running later on. At the risk of running off on too much of a tangent, it's worth pointing out that Germany had a LABOUR SHORTAGE throughout the entire war. Germany had to constantly balance military and industry. Thus they resorted to slave labour and impressed 'volunteers' as the war devoured more and more men. >Germany, at various times, had absurd plans for both much larger >mechanized and air forces [and the slightly less adsurd "Z" naval >plan], Actually, the naval plan was far more absurd than their mechanization plans for their army. >Germany built what they built because that's what they intended to >build. It might be more accurate to say that they built what they built because it's what they could afford to build - taking into consideration what they hoped to achieve. You have provided some excellent reasons why they couldn't afford more. If you say, well, let's delete lots of [and 30 is LOTS of] inf >divs, and add c/m divs, you might run the risk of a real, successful >army coup in 1940 or 1941. I'm not sure this follows- the German command in 1940 were congnizant of the problems facing their country. Most of them thought the war was folly to begin with- a shrinking of the armed forces would not have resulted in a coup. *Especially* not in 1940-41. If you say, well, lets scale back the >Luftwaffe significantly and allocate those resources to the army, >then what you're saying is: Hermann Goring is not head of the >Luftwaffe, or doesn't have Hitler's ear, neither of which was true, >and both of which have to be taken into account. I don't think they should be taken into account, except for historical interest. Do we say: Well, the Luftwaffe is not successful the past 4 turns, so the Navy gets a bigger part of the German budget and the Herman Goring division is not formed. I mean- these are the kind of contortions that are going to be necessary to keep Hitler out of the game. Sorry, but I'd rather put on the black hat for a few hours a month and play the damn game. Goring had Hitler's ear at various times and for various reasons. It should not be a given that Goring will always be able to get his way, or that Raeder will not, or whatever. We again start getting into arguments about what decisions players should be allowed to make and on what level. >Europa is meant to be flexible, within fairly realistic limits, which >is why you CAN build the 27th [?] Pz div [if you have the >resources].But if you want to posit a completely different >military-industrial-economic-political context for Germany, that's >fine, but now you're well into geopolitical/global economic >roleplaying, and way out of Europa. Well, I myself would rather play the game in the spirit of WW2 and keep the same overall situation or "military-industrial-economic-political context". Others might not- but then, if they put down the money for the game, then god bless 'em every one. SP "Freedom is always against the law." -J.R. "Bob" Dobbs From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Apr 9 07:43:55 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA02420; Tue, 9 Apr 96 07:43:54 +0200 Received: from smtp.utexas.edu (smtp.utexas.edu [128.83.126.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id HAA01975 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 1996 07:43:03 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from slip-81-12.ots.utexas.edu (slip-81-12.ots.utexas.edu [128.83.219.28]) by smtp.utexas.edu (8.6.7/8.6.6) with SMTP id AAA00209 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 1996 00:35:11 -0500 Date: Tue, 9 Apr 1996 00:35:11 -0500 Message-Id: <199604090535.AAA00209@smtp.utexas.edu> X-Sender: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu (Bobby D. Bryant) Subject: Re: The Air Game Status: O Content-Length: 2954 Alan said: > It would be best if either building an airbase had a personnel cost, >or better yet that we would have ground air units that were tied to the >planes that were flying from them. If those ground support units are >overrun by the fighting, as in Barbarossa, it is a further loss than just >the loss of the airfield. Good post, Alan. I've been curious about all types of transfer (I think bombing and "returning" to a new home base seems the least realistic). Don't the ground crews have tons of equipment, literally, for managing their operations? Much could be abstracted into the supply system, but I assume they carried lots of stuff along when they rebased. I doubt that you could just ring up the nearest quartermaster and request some of the specialized equipment, but then I don't know a lot about air operations. (Wouldn't major bases have things like radar dishes and firetrucks?) Was rebasing of the staff and ground crew and their equipment done by air, or by truck, historically? How effective, historically, were operations from a forward airbase created or captured by vanguard troops, before the air unit's regular ground element was brought up? In line with Alan's final paragraph, quoted above, I would like to see representation of the bases for air units ("base" as opposed to "field", the latter apparently what the games currently represent under a variety of terms). However, as part of my anti-aircraft crusade, I would suggest providing such bases *instead* of the hardware-oriented "units" that now appear in the game. I think a good solution would be to fly actual operations as points [gasp!] from such bases. (Yes, I know that this would make certain things hard to "simulate", but I'm still calling for a c. 90% reduction in the mechanics of the air system, to bring it more in line with the detail offered for the rest of the game.) As to the need for incorporating a personnel cost into creating bases, I think ground elements should appear in the OB as units, but treat them separately from the fields. Airfield + ground element = airbase. (OK, my terminology has drifted a bit since the preceding paragraph!) Airfields to be treated pretty much as are "airfield" and "airbase" under the current rules; ground elements to be represented by counters with historical IDs, subject to on-map losses as suggested by Allan, and requiring "infantry" replacement points to rebuild (and also "equipment" if such a notion ever enters the game). Air operations disallowed (or at least severely restricted) from airfields without a suitable ground element. Treatment of the actual aircraft will need abstraction if reduced to a points-system, or will remain pretty much as now otherwise. - Bobby. BTW, excess ground-element units could be disbanded/converted to form LW field XXs when/if they become more numerous than what the Germans can put to good use. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Apr 9 08:03:38 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA02744; Tue, 9 Apr 96 08:03:36 +0200 Received: from jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (civguy@jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us [192.217.238.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id IAA02220 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 1996 08:03:18 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from civguy@localhost) by jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (8.6.10/8.6.9) id RAA05729; Fri, 2 Jan 1970 17:25:30 -0600 Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1970 17:25:30 -36000 From: Jason Long Subject: Re: More of My $0.02 Worth Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: <199604071527.AA204090840@relay1.geis.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 720 Mark, A German combat eng reg't has about 2 and a 1/3 combat engieer battalions plu a battalion plus of construction types to give them regular construction abilities. A Japanese engineer reg't of less than a thousand men doesn't deserve a separate counter, even when the division is broken down. Don't fixate on the title, but rather on the manpower size. Under 1500 men is still a battalion in my book. the same goes for cavalry "reg't" of many nations where a "reg't" is really a battlion in size. Can you confirm that the Japs operated all the Vickers tanks in one unit or were they distributed out? If the former than give them a 1-6 full armor battalion, but if not than keep them as you have them. Jason From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Apr 9 08:11:47 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA02821; Tue, 9 Apr 96 08:11:46 +0200 Received: from jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (civguy@jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us [192.217.238.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id IAA02301 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 1996 08:11:35 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from civguy@localhost) by jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (8.6.10/8.6.9) id RAA05748; Fri, 2 Jan 1970 17:33:47 -0600 Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1970 17:33:47 -36000 From: Jason Long Subject: Re: air counters II Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 594 Actually, the OBs are entirely unit-driven, since we now have data available to support such a scheme. Not the situation 10 years ago! We didn't worry at all about sortie rates and overall servacibility since those numnbers are not equally available for all airforces. Air replacements handle that sort of thing and I'm not sure that we did a good job with them. The only time I worried about actual strenght as opposed to TOE was when setting up the initial strengths at scenario start dates. That's why you see all those aborted and elimiated planes at the July I start dates. Jason From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Apr 9 08:37:49 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA03132; Tue, 9 Apr 96 08:37:48 +0200 Received: from jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (civguy@jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us [192.217.238.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id IAA02828 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 1996 08:37:28 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from civguy@localhost) by jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (8.6.10/8.6.9) id RAA05844; Fri, 2 Jan 1970 17:59:38 -0600 Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1970 17:59:37 -36000 From: Jason Long Subject: Re: Peeves about Luft-Peeves Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 427 The whole altitude thing never really got off the ground and I, at least never put words to paper. We kicked it around abit ourselves and ran it past John for a reaction which wasn't real enthusiastic. The major problem is that the counters didn't get printed with the altitude indicators and requiring people to memoirize the altitude capabilities seems a bit much. Even for the super-detail nuts like yourselves! Jason From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Apr 9 14:53:55 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA08703; Tue, 9 Apr 96 14:53:53 +0200 Received: from medlantic.mhg.edu (medlantic.mhg.edu [198.133.139.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id OAA09559 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 1996 14:52:13 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by medlantic.mhg.edu id AA25159 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for europa@lysator.liu.se); Tue, 9 Apr 1996 08:52:02 -0400 Message-Id: <199604091252.AA25159@medlantic.mhg.edu> Received: by medlantic.mhg.edu (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Tue, 9 Apr 1996 08:52:02 -0400 From: "Haugh, Patrick J." To: europa Subject: Luft-peeves II: into the breach... Date: Tue, 09 Apr 96 08:45:00 EST Encoding: 82 TEXT X-Mailer: Microsoft Mail V3.0 Status: O Content-Length: 5290 It's refreshing to see a post generate so much interest. (Sacked Anglo-Irish commanders, lunatic or not, seem to pale into insignifigance by comparison). So far the technophiles seem to be in the majority. The level of differentiation that one feels is optimal obviously varies with one's level of interest in the air war proper. My gripe is that there is an overconcentration on the technical factors inherent in each and every plane. We only track armoured upgrades in a cursory fashion; in the desert war from early '41 to may '43 the 15 & 21 panzer are 9-10 arm XX, despite a change-over from a mix of pz-II and short barrelled pz-III with a smattering of short-barrelled pz-IVs to a force of predominantely pz-III and pz-IV "specials" with long barrelled 50mm and 75mm guns, and organizational restructuring in one case from a light division to a panzer division with one arm III and one Mot inf III to (at least on paper) a one arm-one panzer-grenadier-one mot inf III. Yet at the same time the desert air force and USAAF have P-40 Bs, Cs, Ds, Es, Fs, Ks....some of which have the same values for everything! The designer's notes for "Torch" covered why there were no panzer upgrades and where the recce battalions had gone. I think it was probably a valid judgement call to cut down on complexity and mapboard clutter. But I for one would not have minded a tad fewer air counters and a few more low-combat value units to cover those long, exposed flanks. The (Royal?) Egyptian air force is as combat-ready as the battle-hardened veterans of the RAF (don't laugh). They start with a Glad (3F3) and upgrade all things going well, to a Hurri (5F5), kindly transferred from the RAF. Even if the counter represents a rather larger number of planes than a strict 1 for 1 transfer, it probably overstates their true combat-readiness. As good as Soviet Guards? I doubt it. Do not get me wrong... I would love to see a Europa air war module where we could follow the technological race through the various air subtypes to our hearts content. It would, though, have to track pilot quality, tactical doctrine, air defence integrity (so far only covered in TFH), air-to-air radar, intruder missions, wild sow and tame sow units, Window, H2S, pilot training quality, altitude performance and (the whole point of the module!) the strategic air war. But, as a theater commander in a regular Europa game, do I give a tinker's damn what subtype of the P-40 is delivering the air support that I so badly need? The short answer is no, I don't and shouldn't do so, any more than I worry and fret about whether the naval gunfire support is coming from a variety of named warship counters with their own individual, differentiated stats or from a generic TF. The war in the Med was a triphibious matter from the outset, yet Europa deals with the air-ground interaction, largely abstracting the naval element. The generally negative reception of "Supermarina" (TEM 20 I think) shows what the Europa community as a whole thinks of detailed naval rules.(Well OK, very, very detailed rules). I submit that in scenarios where one side has overwhelming air superiority, the air war can be abstracted as neatly as the fleets were in the desert war scenarios(The West from about 3/44 on, Finland in 1939, Poland, The Balkans). In more balanced scenarios, a less hyper-differentiated air OoB would be useful. This is really just a reflection of the detail vs playabilty debate: although in a funny way; perhaps we feel the more differentiation there is in the counters the less complex the rules regarding other intangibles have to be. It is easier to collect technical data than to gauge pilot quality. Perhaps the best of all worlds would reflect pilot training the way we treat the soviets, with Guards-equivalent upgrades for a proportion of each nations pilots: "experten" get bonuses, the rest are flying cannon fodder: a certain # of upgrades are allowed per air cycle. Once you get on the losing end of a war of attrition, your airforce disintegrates unless the pressure lets up... The parlous state of fighter command in late 1940 comes to mind.... as does the collapse in quality of the Tagjager in 1944. I realize that I have just advocated a near doubling of the # of counters, so a culling of non-necessary subtypes is in order. ( Shrieks of "No!, No!!!! counters are our friends", etc...) The other thing one might want to consider is some limits on force-mix. As several posts have noted, different pilots do different things well, yet at the moment there is no limitation on how many of your ARP's must replace certain sorts of a/c: if you want to rebuild nothing but fighters you can, if you lose all your type A planes in one cycle you can replace nothing but type A's in the next cycle. As to quality of pilot vs quality of plane: Who would you rather face: Erich Hartmann (352+ confirmed kills) in an Me 109G2 (7F6) or some fresh faced rookie ( 0 kills, cannot fly in any formation except line abreast) yetin his Fw 190D (10F9) in your spitfire V, (7F6)? Your choice of wingtip, altitude, time of day, patron saint, etc. With malice toward none, Haya Safari, Patrick Haugh. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Apr 9 17:00:42 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA01055; Tue, 9 Apr 96 17:00:40 +0200 Received: from desiree.teleport.com (desiree.teleport.com [192.108.254.21]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id QAA12723 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 1996 16:59:22 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [206.163.121.52] (ip-pdx05-52.teleport.com [206.163.121.52]) by desiree.teleport.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id HAA23392; Tue, 9 Apr 1996 07:59:14 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199604091459.HAA23392@desiree.teleport.com> X-Sender: zaius@mail.teleport.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 9 Apr 1996 08:04:50 -0700 To: Jason Long From: zaius@teleport.com (Steve) Subject: Fractional unit strengths Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se Status: O Content-Length: 317 Has the idea of fractional combat strengths been explored? I always used the fractional dice method of getting combat results, where every little scrap counts. At this point, I'd rather not see any changes, but I wondered if anyone had thought about it. SP "Freedom is always against the law." -J.R. "Bob" Dobbs From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Apr 9 19:08:13 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA02667; Tue, 9 Apr 96 19:08:12 +0200 Received: from prague.crossover.com (root@prague.crossover.com [204.217.246.5]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id TAA15936 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 1996 19:06:11 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [204.217.246.137] (samarkand.crossover.com [204.217.246.137]) by prague.crossover.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id LAA23476 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 1996 11:57:51 -0400 X-Sender: jastell@post.crossover.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 9 Apr 1996 13:05:42 -0500 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) Subject: Re: Fractional unit strengths Status: O Content-Length: 783 >Has the idea of fractional combat strengths been explored?... >At this point, I'd rather not see any changes, but I wondered if anyone had >thought about it. Yes. I explore this back when I was working on Fire in the East/Scorched Earth. Actually, it was decimals, not fractions I examined. (Decimals are easier to add than fractions with varying denominators.) Its main use would have been for a possible guerrilla war system, where various partisan units could weigh in with strengths ranging between 0 and 1. It turned out not to add anything of real significance to the game -- the effort to rate meaningfully units at tenths of a point, and the effort for players to engage in decimal arithmetic all the time by far outweighed any minor advantage in introducing the scheme. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Apr 9 22:41:26 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA04887; Tue, 9 Apr 96 22:41:25 +0200 Received: from iac.iac.org.nz ([192.124.160.153]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA20886 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 1996 22:35:17 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from smtpgate.iac.org.nz by iac.iac.org.nz (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA09554; Wed, 10 Apr 96 08:31:25 NZS Message-Id: <9604092031.AA09554@iac.iac.org.nz> From: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (David H. Lippman) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 08:31 GMT To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Air Ground Support Status: O Content-Length: 1901 If my memory serves, and it generally doesn't, air units tended to have air and ground elements. The pilots would often move their Spitfires or Tomahawks by flying from point A to point B, while the "erks," as the RAF calls its ground crew, would ride troopships or trucks, the two elements meeting up at Point B. Bomber squadrons would move their crews in the planes, on occasion. Usually in today's US Navy, air units pretty much consist of the airmen and their mechanics. Airbase services (weather forecasting, firefighting, personnel services, billeting, messing, radar, ground control, is usually provided by the base itself. In the Air Force, there are air base wings and squadrons, whose purpose is to be the innkeeper for the air units. In the Navy, that function is served by the ship's company of an aircraft carrier or the staff of a given base or naval air station. For example, my unit here in Christchurch, Naval Antarctic Support Unit, does that for the Air Force and Navy squadrons that pass through here enroute to the ice. Their mechanics and aviators come to our disbursing office for their per diem money with which they pay the bill for the hotel that our unit has also billeted them (we don't use our outdated barracks any more). The early AH game France: 1940 and SPI's equally elderly Kursk both had two units for air unit, the aircraft element and the ground support element. The aircraft element flew missions, while the ground support element was the base. It moved like a mechanized unit, going from point A to point B to keep up with the onrushing or fleeing panzers, depending on the situation. A zillion ground support elements would be a monumental hassle in a game already loaded with counters. David H. Lippman Public Affairs Officer US Naval Antarctic Support Unit Christchurch, New Zealand From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Apr 9 23:03:46 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA05079; Tue, 9 Apr 96 23:03:45 +0200 Received: from homer21.u.washington.edu (attila@homer21.u.washington.edu [140.142.77.1]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id XAA21855 for ; Tue, 9 Apr 1996 23:02:50 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from localhost by homer21.u.washington.edu (5.65+UW96.03/UW-NDC Revision: 2.33 ) id AA100890; Tue, 9 Apr 96 14:02:42 -0700 Date: Tue, 9 Apr 1996 14:02:42 -0700 (PDT) From: "J. Nelson" To: Europa Newsgroup Subject: Spanish Torch Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 2235 Since WitD is on the horizon, and my ongoing game of FWTBTs is winding down, I cracked the OB and rules last night for Spanish Torch. I find the scenario interesting, and full of all sorts of interesting potentials, but am not sure if they will be officially be dealt with. For instance, the allies invade Spain instead of N. Africa. What happens to the sizeable Spanish garrison in Sp. Morroco? If Vichy is done away with, would those units then be free to move into French Morroco and Algeria to disarm the Vichy units there? Would Rommel continue his retreat ( which I personally doubt ) through Libya and into Tunisia, or would he turn and fist it out with the pursuing 8th army? Would not more of the occupation forces in France be committed to aiding the Spanish if the allies had indeed amphibed there ( the German reaction forces listed seem pretty minimal, as well as of meager quality )? If the Vichy N. Africa territories are occupied by Spanish ground units, how would that effect the naval situation in the western mediterranean? Would a Spanish fleet based at, say, Mallorca, attempt a link-up with the Regina Marina? How would the supply situation for Malta be effected, if at all? How would the Canary Islands, Ifni, Spanish Sahara and Guinea be treated? Would some of those places be useful as rest-stops/ replenishment facilities for U-Boats? Finally, since sea hexes within 15 ( I think ) hexes of axis-occupied Europe become danger zones for the allied player's naval units, ....How is that effected by Spain joining the axis? Is Spain then part of axis-occupied europe, and the danger zone for allied naval vessels then expanded to cover most of the Spanish Mainland's coast and that of Spanish Morocco? I realize that some of my questions will simply have to await the arrival of GE for answers, .......but c'mon, since we have so many of the pieces of what could be a very interesting and fluid scenario ( Spanish Torch ), it would be fun to take care of at least some of the questions so that linking up ST and WitD would be an option? ( Some of us have space for maps, but can't deal with huge counter densities! ) In advance, Thank you! John Nelson From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 10 00:12:06 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA05879; Wed, 10 Apr 96 00:12:05 +0200 Received: from iac.iac.org.nz ([192.124.160.153]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id AAA23508 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 00:02:35 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from smtpgate.iac.org.nz by iac.iac.org.nz (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA09852; Wed, 10 Apr 96 09:58:44 NZS Message-Id: <9604092158.AA09852@iac.iac.org.nz> From: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (David H. Lippman) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 09:58 GMT To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Spanish Torch and WitD Status: O Content-Length: 665 Good point on the Spanish Torch and WitD combination. Since the tools are in print, or near to, GRD might want to think about creating a package to combine the two games down the road, a la the Clash of Titans rules. Before they do that, though, I would like to see the completion of the reprint of the SF counters to eliminate the problems. Quality should be Job 1. In another note, I just got word that my Europa membership is expiring. But my checkbook says I fired off my $35 on February 20th. What's going on? David H. Lippman Public Affairs Officer US Naval Antarctic Support Unit Christchurch, New Zealand From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 10 01:01:52 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA06376; Wed, 10 Apr 96 01:01:51 +0200 Received: from smtp4.aw.com (smtp4.aw.com [192.207.117.64]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id BAA24601 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 01:01:12 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from East-Message_Server by smtp4.aw.com with Novell_GroupWise; Tue, 09 Apr 1996 17:55:05 -0400 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1 Date: Tue, 09 Apr 1996 20:00:03 -0400 From: Ray Kanarr To: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz, europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re:Spanish Torch and WitD Status: O Content-Length: 563 On 4/10/96, Dave Lippman stated: >I just got word that my Europa membership is expiring. But >my checkbook says I fired off my $35 on February 20th. >What's going on? I think that everyone got the notification of membership expiration; I renewed when I sent in my prepub money for WitD and got the notification also. I was actually surprised to find out how many of you guys out there don't belong to the Association. Of course, if the annual freebie schedule hadn't gone completely to Hell more of you guys would have kept up your memberships, IMHO. Ray From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 10 01:05:14 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA06409; Wed, 10 Apr 96 01:05:13 +0200 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id BAA24745 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 01:05:01 +0200 (MET DST) From: m.royer3@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA038510266; Tue, 9 Apr 1996 22:51:07 GMT Message-Id: <199604092251.AA038510266@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Tue, 9 Apr 96 22:51:06 UTC 0000 ( from inet01# ; Tue, 9 Apr 96 22:50:43 UTC 0000) Date: Tue, 9 Apr 96 22:40:00 UTC 0000 To: zaius%teleport.com%inet#@genie.com Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: M.ROYER3 X-Genie-Qk-Id: 8739324 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 144041 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: Fractional unit strengths Status: O Content-Length: 601 Reply: Item #0379754 from ZAIUS@TELEPORT.COM@INET#on 96/04/09 at 11:04 Fractional combat strengths would have come in very useful in China. In riles my Japanese playtester to no end that he can stack 5 x 1-0-8 Lt. Armor units together and they still have no defensive strength and can be overrun by a lowly 1-4 unsupported provincial division. Totally ahistoric he asserts. However, that having been said, I think I would be against fractional/decimal factors on the counters. I think the granularity of the game needs to be held in check, and integral combat factors is a good limit. -Mark R. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 10 03:34:30 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA07656; Wed, 10 Apr 96 03:34:28 +0200 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id DAA27292 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 03:33:06 +0200 (MET DST) From: l.hanna@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA237499153; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 01:19:13 GMT Message-Id: <199604100119.AA237499153@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Wed, 10 Apr 96 01:19:13 UTC 0000 ( from inet01# ; Wed, 10 Apr 96 01:18:55 UTC 0000) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 96 01:19:00 UTC 0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: L.HANNA X-Genie-Qk-Id: 3662066 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 145078 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: Spanish Torch Status: O Content-Length: 1185 Nice to see that someone else liked that scenario. The question of the Spanish in Morocco disarming Vichy North Africa and meeting Rommel in Tunis is one I had not realy thought through. As for the Spanish fleet attempting to cut off Malta, or assisting in same, I would think the Allies would hav planned ahead for that. The German occupation forces in France would probably be busy in both taking over the newly ex-Vichy area, and building a defense line in the Pyrenees-- they were _not_ expecting this invasion this soon. It certainly makes the Germans _much_ more interested in grabbing the French fleet, though, wouldn't it? In SF, naval danger zones are 5 hexes, and if the Spanish navy were able to sail, they would be set up. But, remember, Allied ports "generate" their own danger zones, which neutralize Axis danger zones. Presumably the Allies would grab a suitable port, as well as put some effort in neutralizing the Spanish fleet. Sure, the Germans could put U-boats in the Canaries, but the Allies could put (Royal) Marines there first. I would be interested in "kitbashing" SF, FWTBT, and the new WinD, once I see what WinD looks like. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 10 06:07:51 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA08671; Wed, 10 Apr 96 06:07:49 +0200 Received: from osf1.gmu.edu (osf1.gmu.edu [129.174.1.13]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA29462 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 06:06:48 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from osf1.gmu.edu by osf1.gmu.edu; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/07Sep94-1001AM/GMUv3) id AA16686; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 00:06:44 -0400 Date: Tue, 09 Apr 1996 23:15:47 -0500 From: Nicholas Forte Reply-To: nforte@gmu.edu Subject: Re: Spanish Torch To: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: <199604100119.AA237499153@relay1.geis.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 1045 I think that any attempt by the Spanish to disarm the French in North Africa would have been resisted and would have resulted in French North Africa going over to the Allies. Furthermore, would Franco have used these troops in such a mission when they would have been desparately needed to defend Spain? A Spanish-occupied Algiers is not a fair trade for an Allied-occupied Madrid. As for the status of German forces disarming Vichy, that would depend on the status of Vichy. The Germans disarmed Vichy because they no longer viewed it as reliable after the Torch landings. I am not so sure that the Germans would have reacted the same way if Torch happened in Spain rather than North Africa. Would the need to secure the Pyrenees may have resulted in the same action or would/could the Germans have forced Vichy to abandon its neutrality and join the Axis? Would Vichy have accepted an ultimatum to join the Axis? (on reflection I think not) I will defer to anyone who is more familiar with Vichy politics and Vichy-German relations. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 10 06:19:30 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA08727; Wed, 10 Apr 96 06:19:28 +0200 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id GAA29601 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 06:19:03 +0200 (MET DST) From: j.broshot@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA153679109; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 04:05:09 GMT Message-Id: <199604100405.AA153679109@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Wed, 10 Apr 96 04:05:09 UTC 0000 ( from INTERNET# ; Wed, 10 Apr 96 04:04:45 UTC 0000) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 96 03:56:00 UTC 0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: J.BROSHOT X-Genie-Qk-Id: 2013109 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 128659 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: Yet more of my $0.02 worth Status: O Content-Length: 5137 1. "As to the difference between 7-6 and 8-6 infantry divisions: Maybe that unit that is an 8-6 got an extra artillery battery or something. Or, alternatively why not just allow Germans that want to build a 3-6 cadre up to an 8-6 to do so, even if the original division was a 7-6? I don't see any reason why this shouldn't be done. After all, I've got plenty of 8-6s laying around and in the main, I'm not too worried about historical unit numbers (if there are 4 x 12th infantry divisions running around, I really don't give a monkey's)" With all due respect go play some generic WW2 game like SPI's War in the East, or something. :) One of the fascinating things about the Europa is the OB variety and accuracy! The difference between an 8-6 Inf XX and 7-6 Inf XX lies in the fact that the 8-6s represent the cream of the German infantry and are the Welle 1 and Welle 2 infantry divisions (plus a few of the early war infantry divisions not assigned to a specific wave: 50, 72 and 60) with the best of the regular personnel and equipment. The 7-6s are the rest of the lot with older and/or less trained personnel and second-line equipment. The first line infantry divisions had a full recon battalion ("Aufklarungs," at least initially) the others only a company. After all of the carnage on the Eastern Front, the differences due begin to even out which is why you get all of those 5-7-6 Inf XX counters for conversions. Many of the old, first line divisions were destroyed or decimated many times over and, in late 1944, bore little or no resemblance to the 1939 version except for the unit designation. Case in point, the 26th Volksgrenadier Division. Every Bulge source and game that I have ever seen states that this unit is an Welle 1 infantry division even in December 1944 and retained the old three regiment/nine battalion organization (even the vaunted Gamers made this mistake). And it is a mistake, "By mid-December the 26th VGD contained nearly 10,600 men in the standard seven infantry battalions of a volksgrenadier division. (It has often been inaccurately reported that the 26th VGD contained 17,000 men and nine infantry battlions)." HITLER'S LAST GAMBLE (Trevor N. Dupuy et al) p.108. Dupuy further claims that the 26th was destroyed and rebuilt no less than six times between June 1941 and early 1944. Maybe so, Tessin (Volume 4) has it as a "Division neuer Art" with seven battalions and a fusiler battatalion by August 1944; absorbing the 174th Reserve Division in July 1944; and being disbanded and its personnel absorbed by the 253rd Infantry Division on 10 September 1944. On 17 September the Welle 30 infantry division, 582nd Volksgrenadier Division, is renamed the 26th Volksgrenadier Division to perpetuate the old unit. These 500 series divisions that appear, in part, in late 1944 in FiE/SE and SF are the first "Volksgrenadier" divisions and have yet another organization which is represented in Europa terms as 1 x 4-6-6 Inf XX. 2. Luft-peeves: my personal "luft-peeve" (based on getting blasted by Alan Tibbets in a PBEM of Frank Watson's upcoming Operation Husky scenario) is the fact that the CAP rule allows one to fly fighters at maximum range which can then intercept incoming missions over a hex which they could not reach if flying the regular 1/2 range interception mission. If one has lots of fighters, like the Allies, then one can fly lots of CAP. 3. U. S. Replacement System: I ran across an interesting (because of the topic) book at the local college library on Monday. THE PERSONNEL REPLACEMENT SYSTEM IN THE UNITED STATES ARMY. A 1954 U. S. Army Center of Military History publication, reprinted in 1982 and 1988. It does cover U. S. Army replacement systems from the Revolutionary War (!) through WW2, and has extensive coverage of the WW2 system. In case that you are interested all those (20 counters, I believe) 1 x 3-5-4* Repl XX Grp and 1 x 4-5-4* Trng XX Grp counters for the U. S. Army in SF represent "replacement depots," permanent units, usually commanded by a Colonel, composed of 4 to 5 replacement battalions (probably 10,000 men or so) and serving as a collection point for replacements from various sources to forward on the front. Some were assigned training duties to retrain service personnel as infantrymen, like the 24th RD in the MTO. Some were assigned to as depot units for a particular army: 2nd RD to Seventh Army; 3rd RD to First Army; 11th RD to Fifteenth Army; 17th RD to Third Army; and 18th RD to Ninth Army. I think that SF tracks these units and their functions very well. 4. "Can you confirm that the Japs operated all the Vickers tanks in one unit or were they distributed out? If the former than give them a 1-6 full armor battalion, but if not than keep them as you have them." According to Osprey Vanguard #35, ARMOUR OF THE PACIFIC WAR, in 1936, the Chinese assigned all of their Vickers tanks to two units: 1st Armored Battalion at Shanghai with Vickers Carden Lloyd light amphbious tanks and "some" Vickers 6-ton E tanks; and 2nd Armored Battalion also at Shanghai with the remainder of the 20 Vickers 6-ton E tanks. Jim Broshot, St. James MO From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 10 11:21:01 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA12715; Wed, 10 Apr 96 11:21:00 +0200 Received: from dub-img-3.compuserve.com (dub-img-3.compuserve.com [198.4.9.3]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA04217 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 11:18:03 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by dub-img-3.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id FAA18414; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 05:17:29 -0400 Date: 10 Apr 96 05:14:25 EDT From: Alan Philson <100626.2267@CompuServe.COM> To: unknown Subject: Re: Spanish Torch Message-Id: <960410091425_100626.2267_BHL140-1@CompuServe.COM> Status: O Content-Length: 3049 J. Nelson raised some interesting points which have been commented on by others. I may have an advantage here because I have read the scenario rules carefully, before I started playing Spanish Torch recently but domestic considerations called an early halt, however here goes >For instance, the allies invade Spain instead of N. Africa. What happens to the sizeable Spanish garrison in Sp. Morroco? If Vichy is done away with, would those units then be free to move into French Morroco and Algeria to disarm the Vichy units there?< In the Spanish Torch scenario French Morocco is neutral territory, end of story. The axis is also assumed to occupy Vichy France In the axis invasion of Spain scenario the allied player determines the status of French Morocco at the start of his turn becase he also occupies Vichy There seems to be a rules conflict here, why does Morroco not undergo a status check in Spanish Torch perhaps the GURU would like to rule on this one. >Would Rommel continue his retreat ( which I personally doubt ) through Libya and into Tunisia, or would he turn and fist it out with the pursuing 8th army? < I think It would suit the 8th Army for Rommel to stand and fight and be destroyed, given the odds I cant see any other outcome. >how would that effect the naval situation in the western mediterranean? Would a Spanish fleet based at, say, Mallorca, attempt a link-up with the Regina Marina? How would the supply situation for Malta be effected, if at all? How would the Canary Islands, Ifni, Spanish Sahara and Guinea be treated? Would some of those places be useful as rest-stops/ replenishment facilities for U-Boats?< I cant see that the addition of the Spanish fleet would make much difference to the situation in the Western Med, the Italian fleet is already a broken reed with neither the fuel nor inclination to mount any serious challenge to events in Spain. Malta can be supplied from the East, with the Axis army destroyed or retreating, air cover can be provided to the convoys over the whole journey. The Canary Isles and the Azores would probably be included in a Spanish Torch for the very reasons you quote, plans for seizing the islands(Operation Puma) had existed since 1941 when Gibralter was under threat from the proposed Operation Felix. I think there were plans at one time to incude maps of these Islands with FWTBT. Spanish Guinea, there are substantial British Colonial forces in West Africa at this time which could be used to occupy it. >Finally, since sea hexes within 15 ( I think ) hexes of axis-occupied Europe become danger zones for the allied player's naval units, ...< I think you need to look up the rules on this one, but from memory the danger zone limits you refer to are 5 hexes in certain areas of SF, in the Spanish Torch scenario danger zones are only one hex adjacent to each naval base. You may be confusing danger zones with axis anti- shipping air forces which get the 15hex range from ports or airfields and use the Torch naval table for results. Alan Philson From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 10 11:31:26 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA12894; Wed, 10 Apr 96 11:31:24 +0200 Received: from mailgw.liu.se (mailgw.liu.se [130.236.1.10]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA04399 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 11:31:01 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from felix.dircon.co.uk (felix.dircon.co.uk [193.128.224.10]) by mailgw.liu.se (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id LAA15982 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 11:35:04 +0200 Received: from [194.112.37.37] (gw5-037.pool.dircon.co.uk) by felix.dircon.co.uk with SMTP id AA19302 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Wed, 10 Apr 1996 10:29:18 +0100 X-Sender: cloister@popmail.dircon.co.uk Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 10:31:43 +0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: cloister@dircon.co.uk (Perry de Havilland) Subject: Yet more Luft-peeves flak Status: O Content-Length: 6248 Patrick wrote: >The (Royal?) Egyptian air force is as combat-ready as the >battle-hardened veterans of the RAF (don't laugh). They start with a Glad >(3F3) and upgrade all things going well, to a Hurri (5F5), kindly transferred >from the RAF. Even if the counter represents a rather larger number of planes >than a strict 1 for 1 transfer, it probably overstates their true >combat-readiness. As good as Soviet Guards? I doubt it. Very good point. I agree that the minor airforces should be rated similar to non-guard Soviet pilots. Iraq, Iran, Egypt come to mind immediately. Possibly Yugoslavia and Bulgaria as well, but certainly not Greece (the Royal Hellenic Airforce was surprisingly effective). This is a very good idea. I still believe quite strongly that it is important to track specific air types, though I do not mind the idea of grouping similar types with no *Europa level* effective differentiation (such as the various P-40's you mentions) into counter which reflect the most significant type. This is clearly what the Fw.190A2 and A8 counter are already: the A2 also obviously includes the A1, A3 and A4 (and maybe the A5?). The Fw.190A8 obviously includes the A6 and A7 (and maybe the A5?). This seems reasonable, whereas lumping the A1 and A8 into a single rating overstates the early variants. Maybe this would also be appropriate for *some* of the P-40s. > Do not get me wrong... I would love to see a Europa air war module where >we could follow the technological race through the various air subtypes to >our hearts content. It would, though, have to track pilot quality, >tactical doctrine, air defence integrity (so far only covered in TFH), >air-to-air radar, intruder missions, wild sow and tame sow units, Window, >H2S, pilot training quality, altitude performance and (the whole point of the >module!) the strategic air war. YEAH! Cancel the previously ordered decapitation. > But, as a theater commander in a regular Europa game, do I give a tinker's >damn what subtype of the P-40 is delivering the air support that I so badly >need? The short answer is no, I don't and shouldn't do so, any more than I >worry and fret about whether the naval gunfire support is coming from a >variety of named warship counters with their own individual, differentiated >stats or from a generic TF. Actually, I DO give a damn (but they you knew I'd say that, didn't you). I would much rather get gunfire support from HMS Warspite & USS Cleveland than TF2. Generic counters? Bleh :-P > The war in the Med was a triphibious matter from the outset, yet Europa > deals with the air-ground interaction, largely abstracting the naval >element. The generally negative reception of "Supermarina" (TEM 20 I think) >shows what the Europa community as a whole thinks of detailed naval >rules.(Well OK, very, very detailed rules). Not me, chaps! I rather like detailed naval stuff. >I submit that in scenarios where >one side has overwhelming air superiority, the air war can be abstracted as >neatly as the fleets were in the desert war scenarios(The West from about >3/44 on, Finland in 1939, Poland, The Balkans) I agree, **if that is what you want**. Repeat after me...Modular Rules. Modular Rules. Modular Rules: Abstracted modules! Compromise modules! Complex-as-hell modules! Yea for Modules! (big snip) >I realize that I have just advocated a near doubling of the # of >counters, so a culling of non-necessary subtypes is in order. ( Shrieks of >"No!, No!!!! counters are our friends", etc...) =:-O No! No! The counters are our friends! > The other thing one might want to consider is some limits on force-mix. As >several posts have noted, different pilots do different things well, yet at >the moment there is no limitation on how many of your ARP's must replace >certain sorts of a/c: if you want to rebuild nothing but fighters you can, if >you lose all your type A planes in one cycle you can replace nothing but type >A's in the next cycle. Excellent! I personally detest the whole air replacement system as it is in SF and would prefer something back along the line of the flipped inoperative counters located at actual airbases and rolling to repair them. This is also the ONLY way to catch fighters on the ground with an air attack. I could tolerate air replacement points if they were type specific: For example - two points of 'Spitfires' to replace an eliminated 'Spitfire' counter (only) ands one point of Spit replacements to make a inoperative counter flip to operative. **Or better still**, make it a two stage process. Spend one Spit point to activate a killed Spit counter from the eliminated pool, having it arrive *inoperative* at an airfield and then NEXT turn, make it operative by spending a second point, rather than SHAZZAM: new air counter. > As to quality of pilot vs quality of plane: Who would you rather face: >Erich Hartmann (352+ confirmed kills) in an Me 109G2 (7F6) or some fresh >faced rookie ( 0 kills, cannot fly in any formation except line abreast) >yetin his Fw 190D (10F9) in your spitfire V, (7F6)? Your choice of >wingtip, altitude, time of day, patron saint, etc. Sure, Hartmann was a great pilot. However, I think averaging quality is a better way to do thing when a counter is the size of a Wing (RAF). The German 'fly-till-you-die policy made for lots of aces but the USAAF/RAF policy of 'x number of missions and you're out' made for a higher level of *average* skills in the air due to superior (or at least more consistent) training programmes. Hell, I would not want to run into Hartmann if he was flying a Ar.68 (1F1 ?) but that is beside the point as it is more important whose *average* pilots were better, because that is who you are going to be flying against.... ....Then again :-) Modules! Modules! Modules! A rule for *experten* counters might be a nice optional rule in a air war module. Wing Cdr 'Bob' Braham's lads & Oblt Schaufer's boys had an interesting night-time shoot 'em up in August 1943... it would be interesting to simulate this, but we also need rule for things like Radar & Serrate etc. He, He. >With malice toward none, You obviously have never met my ex-wife.... Regards Perry ...- From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 10 12:46:36 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA13711; Wed, 10 Apr 96 12:46:35 +0200 Received: from bang.jmk.su.se (bang.jmk.su.se [130.237.155.254]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id MAA05931 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 12:45:47 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [130.237.155.51] (Lilla_Red_01 [130.237.155.51]) by bang.jmk.su.se (8.6.12/8.6.6) with SMTP id MAA13221 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 12:45:44 +0200 X-Sender: o-noreli@bang.jmk.su.se Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 12:45:44 +0200 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: o-noreli@jmk.su.se (Elias Nordling) Subject: SF:CAP (Was: Re: Yet more of my $0.02 worth) Status: O Content-Length: 1037 You really need to come up with a more descriptive headline, don't you? ;-) >2. Luft-peeves: my personal "luft-peeve" (based on getting blasted >by Alan Tibbets in a PBEM of Frank Watson's upcoming Operation >Husky scenario) is the fact that the CAP rule allows one to fly >fighters at maximum range which can then intercept incoming >missions over a hex which they could not reach if flying the >regular 1/2 range interception mission. If one has lots of >fighters, like the Allies, then one can fly lots of CAP. Huh? I thought that was the very point of CAP missions! To extend your interception ranges by having a standing patrol over an area. Of the drawback for this is that you have to place them in advance. This seems accurate enough to me. Perhaps someone else can share some more light on the cap mission? What does it simulate, what problems with the old rules were they supposed to rectify and what are they good for? Any opinions? Comments? Designers notes? I'd like to see them. Mvh Elias Nordling o-noreli@jmk.su.se From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 10 12:51:18 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA13795; Wed, 10 Apr 96 12:51:17 +0200 Received: from bang.jmk.su.se (bang.jmk.su.se [130.237.155.254]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id MAA06060 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 12:51:03 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [130.237.155.51] (Lilla_Red_01 [130.237.155.51]) by bang.jmk.su.se (8.6.12/8.6.6) with SMTP id MAA13284 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 12:51:00 +0200 X-Sender: o-noreli@bang.jmk.su.se Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 12:51:01 +0200 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: o-noreli@jmk.su.se (Elias Nordling) Subject: FWTBT/WITD/SE:Spanish Torch Status: O Content-Length: 357 > I would be interested in "kitbashing" SF, FWTBT, and the new WinD, >once I see what WinD looks like. Yes, a linkup scenario of these three would be great! It feels a bit strange to play the "Spanish Torch" scenario to explore a European landing in 1942, but not be able to pursue this strategy to the end. Mvh Elias Nordling o-noreli@jmk.su.se From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 10 15:19:50 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA16154; Wed, 10 Apr 96 15:19:48 +0200 Received: from ns.rmc.com (ns.rmc.com [137.25.23.1]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id PAA09046 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 15:18:27 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by ns.rmc.com (AIX 4.1/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA11236; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 09:07:26 -0400 Received: from internet.rmc.com(137.25.3.24) by ns.rmc.com via smap (V1.3) id sma020380; Wed Apr 10 09:07:08 1996 Received: from lanmail.rmc.com by internet.rmc.com (AIX 4.1/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA12966; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 09:17:51 -0400 Received: by LANMAIL.RMC.COM; Wed, 10 Apr 96 9:15:52 EDT Date: Wed, 10 Apr 96 9:20:50 EDT Message-Id: X-Priority: 3 (Normal) To: From: "Frank E. Watson" Subject: re:Spanish Torch Status: O Content-Length: 233 Some of you may not have noticed that back on March 27, John Astell posted a WitD update which included the following: > OBs: In proof reading (except for 1-2 pages on Spanish Torch, which are > being finalized this week). Frank From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 10 15:31:18 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA16333; Wed, 10 Apr 96 15:31:17 +0200 Received: from prague.crossover.com (root@prague.crossover.com [204.217.246.5]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id PAA09334 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 15:30:41 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [204.217.246.137] (samarkand.crossover.com [204.217.246.137]) by prague.crossover.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id IAA24968 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 08:22:21 -0400 X-Sender: jastell@post.crossover.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 09:30:11 -0500 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) Subject: Re: Fractional unit strengths Status: O Content-Length: 1086 Mark Royer wrote: >Fractional combat strengths would have come in very useful in China. In riles >my Japanese playtester to no end that he can stack 5 x 1-0-8 Lt. Armor units >together and they still have no defensive strength and can be overrun by a >lowly 1-4 unsupported provincial division.... There are three ways around this without having to resort to fractional strengths: 1. If five lt arm units should have a defense strength of 1, then rate four of them 1-0-8 and one 1-8. 2. If they ever operated historically grouped in a brigade-like headquarters, allow them to assemble to a brigade unit with a defense of 1: e.g., 5x 1-0-8 build 1x 5-1-8. 3. If they NEVER operated historically grouped in a brigade-like headquarters, then they probably had neither training nor experience to operate in a unified armored unit, so their 0 defense strength may be best after all -- that lowly 1-4 unsupported provincial division isn't overruning a coordinated armored unit, it's picking off one after another a bunch of weak units that just happen to be in the same general area. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 10 15:49:17 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA16590; Wed, 10 Apr 96 15:49:16 +0200 Received: from prague.crossover.com (root@prague.crossover.com [204.217.246.5]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id PAA09781 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 15:48:21 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [204.217.246.137] (samarkand.crossover.com [204.217.246.137]) by prague.crossover.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id IAA25010 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 08:40:00 -0400 X-Sender: jastell@post.crossover.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 09:47:50 -0500 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) Subject: Re: Spanish Torch Status: O Content-Length: 1709 > ....The question of >the Spanish in Morocco disarming Vichy North Africa and meeting Rommel in >Tunis is one I had not realy thought through. The Spanish in Sp. Morocco do not have anywhere near overwhelming strength against the French in Fr. North Africa -- I'm not even sure they have superior strength (I'm on a trip and don't have the OBs handy). The French would certainly resist the Spanish, and, given the mountainous terrain the Spanish would face in Fr. Morocco, it sure looks like the Spanish wouldn't get very far. Also, Sp. Morocco has only limited supplies and would soon have to get supplies from elsewhere to sustain an offensive -- which seems unlikely, as the Allies would blockade the place. > ...As for the Spanish fleet >attempting to cut off Malta, or assisting in same, I would think the Allies >would hav planned ahead for that.... 1) The Spanish fleet is really not that big, and the available Allied naval assets can handle any elements rash enough to sortie. 2) It is unclear why the Spanish fleet would cut off Malta anyway, since this would have no direct bearing on the battle for Spain. Certainly the Spanish would tell the much larger Italian Navy to do this if it's such a good idea. 3) It is also unclear what effect any Axis fleet cutting off Malta would have. Malta's effect comes from the submarines and anti-shipping aircraft operating from there, and not from surface forces. A tight blockage would hamper the submarines somewhat, but the subs have to put in to Malta only occasionally (and could replenish elsewhere). For aircraft, a tight blockade would mostly give the a/c more targets to sink. Probably only an outright invasion of Malta would work. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 10 16:12:50 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA17079; Wed, 10 Apr 96 16:12:49 +0200 Received: from prague.crossover.com (root@prague.crossover.com [204.217.246.5]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA10304 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 16:12:06 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [204.217.246.137] (samarkand.crossover.com [204.217.246.137]) by prague.crossover.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id JAA25051 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 09:03:41 -0400 X-Sender: jastell@post.crossover.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 10:11:30 -0500 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) Subject: Re: Yet more Luft-peeves flak Status: O Content-Length: 1620 >>The (Royal?) Egyptian air force is as combat-ready as the >>battle-hardened veterans of the RAF (don't laugh). They start with a Glad >>(3F3) and upgrade all things going well, to a Hurri (5F5), kindly transferred >>from the RAF.... As good as Soviet Guards? I doubt it. > >...I agree that the minor airforces should be rated similar >to non-guard Soviet pilots. Iraq, Iran, Egypt come to mind immediately. >Possibly Yugoslavia and Bulgaria as well, but certainly not Greece (the >Royal Hellenic Airforce was surprisingly effective). This is a very good >idea.... Sure, the Middle Eastern states had crap air forces. For most individual E games, it hardly matters -- the crap air forces are tiny, have low-quality aircraft, and can hardly stand up to Axis or Allied air units anyway. Adding a crap air force rule/modifier just clutters up the game. Where it counts (the Soviets), we have the crap air force mods. For Europa overall, a crap air force rule is appropriate and can be applied to more than just the Soviet regulars. The Egyptian, Iraqi, and Iranian air forces almost certainly qualify. For the European nations, I really don't see many if any nations qualifying as crap other than the Soviet regulars. Perhaps some of the Baltic states, but even there things seem to be up to professional standards. All European nations have a pool of educated, technically-adept people from which they can build a competent air force, even if they can't afford to buy the most-advanced aircraft. Remember, just by varing the number of aircraft per unit, we can go along ways to account for varying pilot quality. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 10 17:13:14 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA18306; Wed, 10 Apr 96 17:13:09 +0200 Received: from desiree.teleport.com (desiree.teleport.com [192.108.254.21]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id RAA11587 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 17:10:14 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [206.163.120.45] (ip-pdx01-45.teleport.com [206.163.120.45]) by desiree.teleport.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id IAA18317 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 08:10:07 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199604101510.IAA18317@desiree.teleport.com> X-Sender: zaius@mail.teleport.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 08:15:47 -0700 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: zaius@teleport.com (Steve) Subject: some questions Status: O Content-Length: 2160 Looking over past correspondence and posts I saved for lack of time to read earlier...some questions occured to me: *Air: It was asked by someone why air units on defensive ground support have to be tied to units where no attack occurs for a whole turn- so I wonder how the current rules were arrived at. Was there any experimentation with something like an "On Call" defensive support? I must say, the system in place is a giant leap over the old inflexible dedicated support rule- at least you can allocate after the enemy moves, having some idea where punches might land. Has any one experimented with any alternatives to this? *Stacking: Someone said that Europa's stacking limits were originally tied to simply a number of REs allowed in various types of terrain- this seems so much better than combinations of divisions, artillery and 'other'. *Soviet (and German) artillery/rocket divisions: In every game I've played, these are abused like crazy ("Oh, that didn't move!"/"Oh yes it did!" controversy notwithstanding) and I'd hope that in Grand Europa scenarios like Clash of Titans, some reins be put on these units-halving them after *any* movement- advance after combat and retreats as well as flat out movement. *Soviet advantages: Similarly , HQ rules or some sort of limits on Soviet Mech XXX would make the CoT scenario take on a more historical flow instead of the Soviets in Berlin by Summer 44. In our CoT game, it was only incredibly cautious Allied (unlike some others, we haven't played SF & SE 55 times already) play that led to a stalemate. *Southeast/Balkans post 41 - Is anybody working on a game involving the partisan war in the Balkans? There was a lot of discussion about Allied invasions here in SF, but I would think a more fun game would involve the partisan/covert war as it was- Axis security forces battling partisans and Allied special units, &c... fertile ground for a TEM scenario? I am hard pressed to find any concrete data on partisan/chetnik forces, but there are plenty of people who seem to have unlimited access to primary sources (how *do* you do it?) "Freedom is always against the law." -J.R. "Bob" Dobbs From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 10 17:25:06 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA18503; Wed, 10 Apr 96 17:25:05 +0200 Received: from post.QueensU.CA (root@knot.QueensU.CA [130.15.126.54]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id RAA12023 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 17:23:20 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from mast.QueensU.CA (MAST.QueensU.CA [130.15.100.1]) by post.QueensU.CA (8.6.12/8.6.10+ASH) with SMTP id LAA27522 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 11:23:10 -0400 Received: from hilda.mast.QueensU.CA by mast.QueensU.CA (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA17377; Wed, 10 Apr 96 11:15:48 EDT Received: by hilda.mast.QueensU.CA (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA20452; Wed, 10 Apr 96 11:14:48 EDT From: pardue@hilda.mast.QueensU.CA (Keith Pardue) Message-Id: <9604101514.AA20452@hilda.mast.QueensU.CA> Subject: Air Ground Support (fwd) To: europa@lysator.liu.se Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 11:14:46 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL13] Content-Type: text Status: O Content-Length: 1091 Hi, Dave writes: > The early AH game France: 1940 and SPI's equally elderly Kursk both > had two units for air unit, the aircraft element and the ground support > element. The aircraft element flew missions, while the ground support > element was the base. It moved like a mechanized unit, going from point A > to point B to keep up with the onrushing or fleeing panzers, depending on > the situation. This was also true of the (in)famous Campaign for North Africa. That game had Squadron Ground Support Units, which moved around as motorized units. A SGSU would support a number of aircraft, front line and reserve, depending on date and nationality. The aircraft were kept track of individually! Each was individually repaired, rearmed and refueled. What's more (boy are you going to like this, Perry), fighter pilots were individually rated. Definitely a game before its time. I wonder if those guys at Atomic Games have had a gander at it. I'm not sure that I want Europa to be a computer game, but CNA should be. Best Wishes, Keith Pardue Kingston, Ontario, Canada From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 10 20:03:09 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA20630; Wed, 10 Apr 96 20:03:08 +0200 Received: from jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (civguy@jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us [192.217.238.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id UAA00924 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 20:00:51 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from civguy@localhost) by jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (8.6.10/8.6.9) id NAA00764; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 13:32:05 -0500 Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 13:32:05 -35900 From: Jason Long Subject: Re: Yet more Luft-peeves flak To: Perry de Havilland Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 710 The on demand air system required a method to show which planes had already flown and the back of teh counter had to be used. I'm not comfortqble about removing aborted aircraft from the map entirely, but that's less important than preventing players from playing planes twice. The ARPs a bit to generic for myown tastes, but it is simple. As an abuse it is far less powerful to replace all fighters one turn than bombers the next than the old way of actually converting a He 111 to a Fw 190. We actually discussed breaking ARPs into F and all others, but decided it was too much trouble. If memory serves the Fw 190A-2 includes everything up to the A-6 with A-8 counter getting everything else. Jason From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 10 20:22:55 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA20928; Wed, 10 Apr 96 20:22:54 +0200 Received: from jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (civguy@jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us [192.217.238.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id UAA01390 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 20:22:30 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from civguy@localhost) by jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (8.6.10/8.6.9) id NAA00934; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 13:54:12 -0500 Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 13:54:12 -35900 From: Jason Long Subject: CoT Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: <199604101510.IAA18317@desiree.teleport.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 140 Steve, did you guys keep any detailed notes? I'd love to run a battlefield report on CoT, even if your game was somewhat anomalous. Jason From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 10 22:42:59 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA22156; Wed, 10 Apr 96 22:42:58 +0200 Received: from iac.iac.org.nz ([192.124.160.153]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA04038 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 22:41:45 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from smtpgate.iac.org.nz by iac.iac.org.nz (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA12824; Thu, 11 Apr 96 08:37:54 NZS Message-Id: <9604102037.AA12824@iac.iac.org.nz> From: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (David H. Lippman) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 08:40 GMT To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Those fightin' Chetniks Status: O Content-Length: 2746 It's very hard to get exact data on any aspect of the Balkans at any time, due to the incredibly complex nature of politics there. However, a good source is Fitzroy MacLean's memoir. He was the British liaison to Tito, and he wrote a book (I think it was Inside Tito's Headquarters, someone else will doubtless correct me) on the subject. The Chetniks are very tricky to pin down. Apparently they were led by a fully-bearded guy named Draza Mikhailovich, and his armies at first made life tough for the Italian, Ustasi, and Serbian puppet forces occupying Yugoslavia. The Ustasi Croatian troops were led by the equally forgettable Ante Pavelich, who ran the puppet state of Croatia for Hitler. Pavelich sent a couple of regiments of troops off to the Ostfront and about seven or so similar sadsack outfits to kill his countrymen. The Croatian troops did so badly the Nazis reorganized them from regiments to brigades, but this paperwork shuffle did not improve troop quality. Not that the Nazis really needed to. Mikhailovich soon found a rival in Josip Broz-Tito, and the two hated each other's guts more than the Nazis. The trouble was, Mikhailovich hated Tito so much, he began to collaborate with Italian and German troops to hunt down partisans. For years, the Allies supported the Chetniks, who in turn supported the Yugoslavian monarchy, to the detriment of Tito and the benefit of the Axis. The support was so great that a 1944 US first day cover honoring Yugoslavia (part of the "Occupied Nations" series) shows a picture of Mikhailovich and bears the words, "Yugoslavia, homeland of the fighting Chetniks and other liberty loving groups." By the time this stamp came out, Chetnik outfits were fighting under German command against Tito. Ultimately, after MacLean flew to Yugoslavia, the Allies got the point, jettisoned Mikhailovich, and backed Tito, who made Yugoslavia a living hell for the Germans. After the war, Mikhailovich was captured by Tito's forces, and received the death penalty in short order. While there's little doubt about Mikhailovich's switching sides, some recent historians have noted that a number of Chetnik guerillas did their job of hounding and harassng the Nazis, and did not collaborate, so it is unfair to paint all Chetniks as pro-Fascist. I know this doesn't address the burning issues, like air replacement, fractional strengths, and NODLs, but I can't add anyway, and I'm more interested in Europa for the historical side, anyway. Without history behind Europa, it's just a math test, and I failed those. David H. Lippman Public Affairs Officer US Naval Antarctic Support Unit Christchurch, New Zealand From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 10 22:47:08 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA22193; Wed, 10 Apr 96 22:47:07 +0200 Received: from iac.iac.org.nz (iac.iac.org.nz [192.124.160.153]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA04134 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 22:46:54 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from smtpgate.iac.org.nz by iac.iac.org.nz (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA12838; Thu, 11 Apr 96 08:43:03 NZS Message-Id: <9604102043.AA12838@iac.iac.org.nz> From: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (David H. Lippman) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 08:45 GMT To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Erich Hartmann, fighter ace Status: O Content-Length: 1214 On Perry De Havilland's long post, and the various points he makes: I was just reading this morning about Erich Hartmann in Martin Caidin's book on the Messerschmidt 109, and he says that Hartmann was a beneficiary of Goebbels' Propaganda Ministry. He apparently claimed kills on days that the RAF reported that no Luftwaffe planes dogfighted with the Allies. That might explain how he allegedly bagged 352 Allied planes, while the top American ace, Richard Bong, had only 80. Doubtless Hartmann was a major fighter pilot and a massive ace, but I doubt he racked up as many as 352 kills. Also, I've said before on the Naval issue that I like direct fire from HMS Warspite and USS Brooklyn, but can understand that a lot of other players don't want to spend time checking fuel and ammo boxes on HMS Enterprise, so let's have both. What the heck, when I play Grand Europa, I'll probably just slap the Spanish TF markers down on the map and leave them there until someone's about to invade Spain...then I'll swap them out for the cruisers Cerveza and Canarias. David H. Lippman Public Affairs Officer US Naval Antarctic Support Unit Christchurch, New Zealand From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 10 22:52:48 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA22255; Wed, 10 Apr 96 22:52:47 +0200 Received: from iac.iac.org.nz (iac.iac.org.nz [192.124.160.153]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA04227 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 22:52:05 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from smtpgate.iac.org.nz by iac.iac.org.nz (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA12849; Thu, 11 Apr 96 08:48:13 NZS Message-Id: <9604102048.AA12849@iac.iac.org.nz> From: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (David H. Lippman) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 08:50 GMT To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: The ultimate monster game Status: O Content-Length: 1508 I have a copy of Campaign for North Africa back home in Hoboken, and every now and then I open it up, scan through the OB and rules, then put it back again, shaking my head. I quite forgot that CNA had individual pilot ratings on top of its other massive rules (the Italian pasta water point, PoW camps, flying dead camels by air, raids on Rommel, and broken-down trucks). I often wondered how anybody was actually supposed to PLAY this game, but it was clearly designed for wargame clubs, which meant that you had 10 guys to a side, so jobs were scattered out. One guy worried about PoWs, one guy worried about air units, one guy worried about the Long Range Desert Group's big raid on the well near Jalo. The depressing idea would be 40 or so CNA players playing the game for a year or so at their club, and fighting the three-year North African war to a draw. The funny thing was, most of the counters of that game weren't combat units, but markers. The entire 5th Light Division could be one counter, which was itself pretty weird, given that a roster sheet on the side would tell me how many vehicles the 5th Light had, and what type. If that game was ever to be re-issued, it would behoove some computer guy to develop a spreadsheet program with which to keep track of how many 2-lbr. anti-tank guns are in the 6th Australian Division. David H. Lippman Public Affairs Officer US Naval Antarctic Support Unit Christchurch, New Zealand From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 10 23:47:32 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA23045; Wed, 10 Apr 96 23:47:31 +0200 Received: from felix.dircon.co.uk (felix.dircon.co.uk [193.128.224.10]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id XAA05762 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 23:46:25 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [194.112.35.35] (gw1-035.pool.dircon.co.uk) by felix.dircon.co.uk with SMTP id AA20855 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Wed, 10 Apr 1996 22:46:20 +0100 X-Sender: cloister@popmail.dircon.co.uk Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 22:48:42 +0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: cloister@dircon.co.uk (Perry de Havilland) Subject: Re: Erich Hartmann, fighter ace Status: O Content-Length: 1511 David wrote: > Also, I've said before on the Naval issue that I like direct fire >from HMS Warspite and USS Brooklyn, but can understand that a lot of >other players don't want to spend time checking fuel and ammo boxes on >HMS Enterprise, so let's have both. What the heck, when I play Grand >Europa, I'll probably just slap the Spanish TF markers down on the map >and leave them there until someone's about to invade Spain...then I'll >swap them out for the cruisers Cerveza and Canarias. I could not have said not better myself. Well written modular rules could indeed allow such swaping around mid-game (with mutual player consent). Writting such rules is no mean feat but it IS possible Also, Keith wrote: > This was also true of the (in)famous Campaign for North >Africa. That game had Squadron Ground Support Units, which moved >around as motorized units. A SGSU would support a number of aircraft, >front line and reserve, depending on date and nationality. The >aircraft were kept track of individually! Each was individually >repaired, rearmed and refueled. What's more (boy are you going >to like this, Perry), fighter pilots were individually rated. I have indeed perused (in awe) the CFNA game: not so much a game as a career, a vocation even! Actually (shock, horror =:-O) this is too much detail even for me. I was told once CFNA was played at Sandhurst by some of the staff as an exercise and it took more than a dozen players to play the damn thing! Regards Perry ...- From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 10 23:47:38 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA23055; Wed, 10 Apr 96 23:47:37 +0200 Received: from ns.corona.navy.mil (ns.corona.navy.mil [137.67.32.12]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id XAA05788 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 23:47:23 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from ccgate.corona.navy.mil (ccgate.corona.navy.mil [137.67.40.4]) by ns.corona.navy.mil (8.7.5/1.4) with SMTP id OAA11066 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 14:45:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ccMail by ccgate.corona.navy.mil (IMA Internet Exchange 1.04b) id 16c2d0c0; Wed, 10 Apr 96 14:50:04 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 14:44:24 -0700 Message-Id: <16c2d0c0@ccgate.corona.navy.mil> From: renaud.gary@corona.navy.mil (Renaud.Gary) Subject: Re: Erich Hartmann, fighter ace To: europa@lysator.liu.se Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: cc:Mail note part Status: O Content-Length: 593 "...the cruisers Cerveza and Canarias." ^^^^^^^ Definite possiblity of a Freudian slip, there. "Cervantes" A Renaud.Gary@Corona.Navy.Mil This graphic is |\ CompuServe: 73627,1114 a LOT smaller | \ _,,,---,,__ Genie: G.Renaud1 than a PGP key /,`.-'`' -. ;-;,---__ W: 909-273-5378 block __|,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'==--' H: 714-750-9243 `-----''(_/--' `-'\_) DNRC Holder of Past Knowledge I HATE UNIX I CAN'T speak for this administration; I don't lie enough. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 11 00:00:55 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA23205; Thu, 11 Apr 96 00:00:54 +0200 Received: from medlantic.mhg.edu (medlantic.mhg.edu [198.133.139.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id AAA06117 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 00:00:23 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by medlantic.mhg.edu id AA21860 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for europa@lysator.liu.se); Wed, 10 Apr 1996 18:00:18 -0400 Message-Id: <199604102200.AA21860@medlantic.mhg.edu> Received: by medlantic.mhg.edu (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Wed, 10 Apr 1996 18:00:18 -0400 From: "Haugh, Patrick J." To: europa Subject: Air-crew Quality & A Cautionary Tale Date: Wed, 10 Apr 96 17:51:00 EST Encoding: 102 TEXT X-Mailer: Microsoft Mail V3.0 Status: O Content-Length: 6091 Ah..... it brings a smile to my face to remember the good ol' Campaign for North Africa. Everyone who demands more and better realism in their board game should be required to play this game to it's conclusion or age 65, whichever comes first ... if I'm not mistaken there was a rule requiring additional water supplies for all Italian units to account for their culinary habits.....pasta takes more water to cook than bratwurst or bully beef.... On the subject of air-crew quality I think national mods may not be a bad idea. Some nations started WW II with a pool of experienced combat pilots from Spain ( Germany, Italy), some had a large pool of experienced civilian pilots from either civil aviation or pre-war aviation societies (Germany, Poland, the UK & Commonwealth). Some of the smaller european nations had excellent, albeit small, air forces.(Finland and Greece spring to mind). Czechoslovakia had excellent pilots, but no country! The attitudes of the warring nations to pilot training varied greatly- The US, with geographic security and effectively limitless supplies of aviation fuel was able to institute an excellent pilot training programme. Britain, after a close run on fighter command in 1940 was able to utilize the geographic security of the commonwealth to ensure adequate pilot training as the war progressed. France appears to have had a sensible programme for pilot training, but was only hitting it's stride when France collapsed around the Armee de l'air. On the other hand, Germany appears to have approached the whole enterprise with it's characteristic lack of planning. The RLM was not prepared for a long war, and organizational chaos precluded any systematic approach to continued pilot training as the war expanded. I think it was Jeschennok (may be mis-spelled) who as inspector-der-Jagdflieger asked, in a bemused fashion, what on earth he would do with 1,500 fighters. This was in early 1941. By late '41, he had commited suicide. Pilot training remained relaxed, with breaks for ski-ing holidays, while simultaneously flying hours were cut back due to fuel shortages. I don't know much about the Red air force either prior to or during the war, but I suspect that the dictum "Quantity has a quality all of it's own" prevailed. How do we model this in Europa? I suggest the following- Each Air force can have pilots that are either seasoned or rookies. the proportion varies with each a/f. The USAAF should be all-seasoned at start (Dec '41) and all ARPs are seasoned. (Barring total catastrophe, I don't see the US on the losing end of a war of attrition). In the unlikely event the US player wants to further increase his ARP rate, he may do so(by say 50%), but at the cost of all newly replaced units carrying a +1 modifier on their air to air combat roll and a -1 DRM on any roll on the bombing table. Each turn, a certain proportion of the rookie units would upgrade to seasoned. Simply by surviving one becomes a better aircrew. This represents one end of the quality spectrum. In truth, any allied player who is losing the 1942-3-4 air war is doing something badly, badly wrong. But, if need be the US could have shaved off hours of flying time from it's training programme at the cost of quality. It does not make sense to do so, but it could be done. At the other end of the spectrum.... Uncle Joe's flying smertinki. The Red Air Force starts off bad and only very slowly gets any better. Use the current Guards upgrade system to represent the very gradual development of a cadre of experienced fliers. I would advocate making an Inexperience penalty apply to the Red bomber force as well.. a -1 DRM on each bombing attempt: a favoured Europa whine is that the Red air force of 1941-2 is too powerful. In the Soviet case other bonuses accrue to Guards units in the way of patrol abilities and repair rolls in FITE/SE. Under the CoT rules some of these differences are smoothed out. I would advocate the expenditure of one additional ARP to replace an eliminated Guard unit. The question should be asked: "Can the Soviets instead go for pilot quality in a Grand Europa setting?" I would say no, that the doctrinal elements of Stalinism would preclude generation of an elite before the outbreak of the Great Patriotic War (he'd just have purged 'em) and the same factors militating against rebuilding Tank XX would prevent it during the war. The Luftwaffe should start out all seasoned, and with an all seasoned ARP pool...BUT at a Very low rate... You can either keep a shrinking, yet pristine air force, or bite the bullet and jack up your ARP rate at the cost of a fall off in quality. In addition, the ARP rate should be tied (in GE) to the Reich-wide fuel status. Poles, Czechs....start off seasoned, no matter where they end up French... seasoned, with seasoned ARPs Assorted ruritanian nations.... Varies by country... Spain, Greece and Finland seasoned.... Egypt, Iraq, Iran, .....very rookie Opponent gets a -1 mod in addition to other rookie penalties The Balkans...I'd say mostly rookie. Italy ......Seasoned at start with seasoned ARPs ...from my reading of the situation Italy's problems were with airworthy, let alone combat worthy planes in 1940-41, and with inadequate numbers of planes in 1942-3. They seem to have had an adequate supply of reasonably good pilots with obsolete planes sans radio/radar/spares etc. One last point (whine?) I preferred the old air replacement system, when pilots and planes were tracked seperately. It served as a better basis for following the long term evolution of air forces.. I believe it was done in on the grounds that Air forces grew ahistorically large by not flying..to which I say great! If your opponent doesn't fly, you have air superiority by default. QED. Any more comments on air crews vs wingtips and carburettors, or should we let this topic die a merciful death? Haya Safari, Patrick Haugh Washington D.C. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 11 00:11:33 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA23289; Thu, 11 Apr 96 00:11:32 +0200 Received: from medlantic.mhg.edu (medlantic.mhg.edu [198.133.139.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id AAA06313 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 00:10:48 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by medlantic.mhg.edu id AA22008 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for europa@lysator.liu.se); Wed, 10 Apr 1996 18:10:43 -0400 Message-Id: <199604102210.AA22008@medlantic.mhg.edu> Received: by medlantic.mhg.edu (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Wed, 10 Apr 1996 18:10:43 -0400 From: "Haugh, Patrick J." To: europa Subject: Hartmann Date: Wed, 10 Apr 96 18:02:00 EST Encoding: 12 TEXT X-Mailer: Microsoft Mail V3.0 Status: O Content-Length: 384 Last post on Hartmann.I thought all his victories were vs the Red air force, as were most of the astronomical Luftwaffe scorers. He was shot down about seven or so times, so his kill ratio could be looked at as more like 50-1 (352-:-7) I never got to the pilot personality profile bit of Campaign for North Africa, thank god. Life is too short. Haya Safari, Patrick Haugh From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 11 00:27:39 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA23574; Thu, 11 Apr 96 00:27:38 +0200 Received: from mailhost.ksu.ksu.edu (grunt.ksu.ksu.edu [129.130.12.17]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id AAA06705 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 00:27:20 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from fox.ksu.ksu.edu (root@fox.ksu.ksu.edu [129.130.12.11]) by mailhost.ksu.ksu.edu (8.6.12) with ESMTP id RAA15264 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 17:27:05 -0500 Received: by fox.ksu.ksu.edu (8.6.12/1.34) id QAA07443; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 16:21:18 -0500 Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 16:21:17 -0500 (CDT) From: Mark H Danley To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: Spanish Torch Politics In-Reply-To: <960410091425_100626.2267_BHL140-1@CompuServe.COM> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 3446 On 10 Apr 1996, Alan Philson wrote: > > In the Spanish Torch scenario French Morocco is neutral territory, end of story. > The axis is also assumed to occupy Vichy France > In the axis invasion of Spain scenario the allied player determines the status > of French Morocco at the start of his turn becase he also occupies Vichy > There seems to be a rules conflict here, why does Morroco not undergo a status > check in Spanish Torch perhaps the GURU would like to rule on this one. > I don't know what the designers had in mind, but there may be historical evidence for this contradiction. Several weeks ago there was a quite lengthy exchange about how the Fall of France and the post-armisitice status of the Empire and the Vichy regime might be handled in Europa. I remember a book, by Robert O. Paxton, _Vichy France: Old Guard and New Order_, mentioning that Petain told Hitler in 1940 that if he promised Franco French Morocco (Franco's stated price for entering the war on the Axis side), Petain's government would repudiate the armistice, and re-enter the war from North Africa, on the Allied side. Of course, that's 1940, and the Spanish Torch scenario is 1942, by which time the Vichy regimes situation has changed considerably. But given Vichy plans in late 1940, as well as the historical actions of the Army of Africa in Nov 1942, it seems reasonable that whoever was in charge at Vichy, be it Darlan or Laval, or the local commander in Morrocco, might resist the Germans, or even join the Allied side in the face of a German take-over of the "Free Zone" Certainly, a German invasion of Spain is an entirely different matter than a German deal with Spain to sell out Vichy's African possessions, but if the war spreads to Spain and Spainish Morocco, the Vichy forces there aren't necessarily going to roll over - at least according to my interpretation of the actual historical evidence. In the case of an Allied invasion of Spain that includes considerable American participation, we have a different story. American strategic planners, unlike the British, were quite careful about antagonizing Vichy up to the point of the actual histoical Torch landings (hence all the political machinations prior to Torch, that are, in my opinion quite elegantly - and accurately - represented in the 85 GDW edition of Torch) So if the Allies have decided to invade Franco's Spain, and the Americans are involved significantly in the strategic planning, they probably won't outright violate the "neutrality" of Vichy North Africa. Rather, they would hope that Allied success against the Axis in Spain would convince the majority of the officers of the Army of Africa that the balance in the conflict had finally swung away from the Axis, and there was no use in staying neutral; they could go ahead and "safely" re-enter the war against Germany (incidentally, Paxton in another book, also mentioned on the list a few weeks ago, _Parades and Politics at Vichy_ argues that historically most Vichy officers in North Africa were waiting for such a moment; i.e. they latently remained anti-German, but would sit the fence until the tide of the war had clearly swung against the Axis, when the time came, they'd bring France back into the war.) In an operational level game like Europa, I think this translates into French Morocco being neutral in an Allied invasion of Spain scenario. Mark From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 11 00:51:27 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA23797; Thu, 11 Apr 96 00:51:25 +0200 Received: from iac.iac.org.nz (iac.iac.org.nz [192.124.160.153]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id AAA07046 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 00:50:43 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from smtpgate.iac.org.nz by iac.iac.org.nz (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA13313; Thu, 11 Apr 96 10:46:52 NZS Message-Id: <9604102246.AA13313@iac.iac.org.nz> From: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (David H. Lippman) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 10:47 GMT To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: The Spanish main Status: O Content-Length: 213 Right, Cervantes, on the Spanish cruiser. I'm not too familiar with the Spanish Navy. David H. Lippman Public Affairs Officer US Naval Antarctic Support Unit Christchurch, New Zealand From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 11 00:56:10 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA23856; Thu, 11 Apr 96 00:56:09 +0200 Received: from iac.iac.org.nz (iac.iac.org.nz [192.124.160.153]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id AAA07157 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 00:55:52 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from smtpgate.iac.org.nz by iac.iac.org.nz (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA13332; Thu, 11 Apr 96 10:52:02 NZS Message-Id: <9604102252.AA13332@iac.iac.org.nz> From: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (David H. Lippman) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 10:52 GMT To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Luftwaffe Aces Status: O Content-Length: 587 The funny thing is, I just bought a copy of "Horrido!" about Luftwaffe aces, and I haven't had a chance to read it yet to see what it has to say about guys like Hartmann, Hans-Joachim Marseille, and others. I did look it up for Josef "Pips" Priller, who is known to movie buffs as the guy who strafed the British beaches on June 6, 1944, the Luftwaffe's big moment. He apparently racked up 101 kills, and died at age 46 in Munich, of a heart problem. David H. Lippman Public Affairs Officer US Naval Antarctic Support Unit Christchurch, New Zealand From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 11 02:37:56 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA24828; Thu, 11 Apr 96 02:37:55 +0200 Received: from hplb.hpl.hp.com (hplb.hpl.hp.com [15.255.59.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id CAA09010 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 02:37:30 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com by hplb.hpl.hp.com; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 01:37:24 +0100 Received: by hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com (1.37.109.8/15.5+ECS 3.3) id AA18190; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 17:33:47 -0700 From: Patrick Tobin Message-Id: <9604110033.AA18190@hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com> Subject: Re: Erich Hartmann, fighter ace To: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (David H. Lippman) (David H. Lippman) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 96 17:33:46 PDT Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: <9604102043.AA12838@iac.iac.org.nz>; from "David H. Lippman" at Apr 11, 96 8:45 am Mailer: Elm [revision: 70.85] Status: O Content-Length: 1915 > > On Perry De Havilland's long post, and the various points he makes: > > I was just reading this morning about Erich Hartmann in Martin > Caidin's book on the Messerschmidt 109, and he says that Hartmann was a > beneficiary of Goebbels' Propaganda Ministry. He apparently claimed kills > on days that the RAF reported that no Luftwaffe planes dogfighted with > the Allies. That might explain how he allegedly bagged 352 Allied planes, > while the top American ace, Richard Bong, had only 80. > > Doubtless Hartmann was a major fighter pilot and a massive ace, but > I doubt he racked up as many as 352 kills. Hartmann only fought on the Eastern Front. With the exception of some Mustangs downed over Hungary, all of his victories were Soviet aircraft. I suspect you're thinking of Marseille who was credited with 158 kills 7 over the channel, and 151 in N.Africa. There are discrepancies in a/c types claimed against RAF losses on certain days. Much has been made of this by some authors, but IMO this isn't noteworthy. Claims were often delayed and incorrect dates entered, aircraft misindentification was very common. The current trend in comparing confirmed kills against post war records also reveals that many pilots were credited with nearly twice as many kills as made, in some cases more. In Hartmann's case his kills were confirmed by the Soviets, who charged him with destroying over 300 Soviet a/c, and therefore sabotaging the Soviet national economy. If Caidin is implying that the LW "cooked the books" on Marseille's victory total, I think he is way off base. The Jagdflieger weren't sent home to sell war bonds,after X amount of missions. Any group of well trained pilots that flies multiple missions daily, for a number of years will have higher scores than those that don't. Bong, by the way, had 40 confirmed kills. P.T. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 11 02:39:34 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA24845; Thu, 11 Apr 96 02:39:33 +0200 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id CAA09024 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 02:39:22 +0200 (MET DST) From: m.royer3@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA183192321; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 00:25:22 GMT Message-Id: <199604110025.AA183192321@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Thu, 11 Apr 96 00:25:21 UTC 0000 ( from inet# ; Thu, 11 Apr 96 00:21:53 UTC 0000) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 96 00:18:00 UTC 0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: M.ROYER3 X-Genie-Qk-Id: 6776353 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 488265 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: Re: Fractional unit strengths Status: O Content-Length: 600 Reply: Item #7772953 from EUROPA@LYSATOR.LIU.SE@INET#on 96/04/10 at 10:30 > 3. If they NEVER operated historically grouped in a brigade-like > headquarters, then they probably had neither training nor experience to > operate in a unified armored unit, so their 0 defense strength may be best > after all -- that lowly 1-4 unsupported provincial division isn't > overruning a coordinated armored unit, it'spicking off one after another a > bunch of weak units that just happen to be in the same general area. Thanks John, I think suggestion three is probably the correct interpretation. -Mark R. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 11 02:48:07 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA24909; Thu, 11 Apr 96 02:48:06 +0200 Received: from mailhost.ksu.ksu.edu (grunt.ksu.ksu.edu [129.130.12.17]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id CAA09162 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 02:47:41 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from fox.ksu.ksu.edu (root@fox.ksu.ksu.edu [129.130.12.11]) by mailhost.ksu.ksu.edu (8.6.12) with ESMTP id TAA12818; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 19:47:37 -0500 Received: by fox.ksu.ksu.edu (8.6.12/1.34) id MAA13585; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 12:06:40 -0500 Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 12:06:39 -0500 (CDT) From: Mark H Danley To: Perry de Havilland Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: Yet more Luft-peeves flak In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 721 On Wed, 10 Apr 1996, Perry de Havilland wrote: > I agree that the minor airforces should be rated similar > to non-guard Soviet pilots. Iraq, Iran, Egypt come to mind immediately. > Possibly Yugoslavia and Bulgaria as well, but certainly not Greece (the > Royal Hellenic Airforce was surprisingly effective). Whaddya mean "SURPRISING!" (excuse me, I'm the grandson on Greek immigrants). Seriously, Greece in the 20th century _is_ an example of a small, poor nation that did a lot (relatively) militarily with very little to work with. And I agree with your assertion that certain well trained lesser nations DON'T qualify for any pilot quality penalities that might appear in the Europa air system Mark From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 11 03:36:27 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA25274; Thu, 11 Apr 96 03:36:26 +0200 Received: from iac.iac.org.nz (iac.iac.org.nz [192.124.160.153]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id DAA09992 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 03:35:19 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from smtpgate.iac.org.nz by iac.iac.org.nz (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA13794; Thu, 11 Apr 96 13:31:29 NZS Message-Id: <9604110131.AA13794@iac.iac.org.nz> From: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (David H. Lippman) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 13:32 GMT To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Answering Patrick's long post Status: O Content-Length: 7785 There was indeed an Italian "pasta point" rule whereby they needed extra water points to cook their pasta-based rations. The German iron ration in the desert, by the way, was similar to bully beef. They called it "A.K." both for Afrika Korps and Alte Kokke, which is German and Yiddish for a variety of things, "old horse," being the most printable. Pre-war pilots were an interesting bunch. The Poles had a highly-trained air force, as did the Italian. What was going on was that air forces, like today, attracted a highly intelligent and motivated person, with their new technology, and their attendant "knights of the air" glamour. The 1930s were big days for aviation, with all kinds of developments. Passenger flights around the world became a reality, and a quick way to travel vice ocean liners. Flights like the Pan Am China Clipper took on romantic overtones with an undying image of a graceful seaplane flying off into the Honolulu sunset, bound for Shanghai's Bund. At the same time, top aviators like Amelia Earhart, Italo Balbo, Jean Batten, and Charles Lindbergh were making news for their ability to generate the maximum publicity for conquering the maximum mileage. Lindbergh added to his luster with a flight to Mexico (during which he was lost for some time) and unintentionally to his fame when his son was kidnapped. Italo Balbo's bomber crews were a whopping good advertisement for Benito Mussolini when they conquered oceans and displayed pinpoint navigational techniques by flying to distant rendezvous with trans-Atlantic liners. Batten became the first woman to conquer the Tasman, while Earhart's round-the-world effort made her the subject of endless speculation and the butt of endless jokes when she vanished over the Pacific Ocean. Back in America, Jimmy Doolittle was setting speed records in his wierd Gee Bee plane at the Cleveland National Air Races, while Howard Hughes gained worldwide attention with aviation feats of his own and a flamboyant public lifestyle, linked to a variety of starlets. Aviation was exciting. It was the future, and the young hotspurs of Germany, Italy, and Russia, eagerly seeking the military glory offered by their leaders, planned to snatch it in the air as opposed to in the predicted replay of 1914 on the ground. Lesser nations like Czechoslovakia and Poland caught the aviation fever, too, as evidenced by their pilots' deeds in exile during WW2. It's really not surprising that there were so many good air forces in 1940. Hans Jeschonnek, Luftwaffe chief of staff, was an interesting character. Not only was he lax about fighter training, but about fighter production, as was Fatso Goering. During the Battle of Britain, one of Goering's fighter aces, invited to Karinhall for the usual huntin' and fishin', told Der Reichsmarshall that the Reich aircraft industry had delivered only 220 Me 109s in July, half the British output. Soon the Luftwaffe figure would drop to 173. Goering, with mock solicitousness, stretched out his hand. "I must take your pulse to see if you are all right physically...it seems you have taken leave of your senses." At that time, the Me 109 plants at Augsburg often worked a six-hour day. During the Blitz, Jeschonnek argued for area bombing of London's residential areas to cause mass panic to lead to the British suing for peace. Jeschonnek got what he wanted, but there was no panic. Instead the worm was turned, as the Royal Air Force paid Jeschonnek back in spades, incinerating Hamburg in July, 1943. A month later, the RAF carried out a precision raid on Peenemunde that had results that are debated to this day. Historian Martin Middlebrook's meticulous book on the subject argues that it slowed the V-2 programme down six months. Nonetheless, Jeschonnek, embarrassed at the Luftwaffe's failure to protect the Reich and Goering's reputation from the RAF, committed suicide the next day. He was not the only top Luftwaffe officer to take his own life. In World War I, the fun-loving, hard-drinking Ernst Udet had been a top pilot in Manfred Von Richtofen's flying circus. Before WW2, Udet, as Goering's old crony, was a big wheel in Luftwaffe development and design. He supported dive-bombing techniques, tested planes himself, went on missions in Spain to photograph results, and drew hilarious and accurate cartoons and caricatures of himself and his colleagues. But the party animal Udet had numerous weaknesses in his character. He didn't think much of four-engined bombers or other technological developments. He didn't even like closed cockpits. When he test-flew the Me 109, he ridiculed the machine in front of Willy Messerschmidt for having a closed cockpit. Udet sneered that Messerschmidt's new machine was just a fancy glider. Udet favored the rival Heinkel 112, which turned out to be a far inferior product. But Udet was very pleased with the Me 110 twin-engined fighter, which as a day fighter, required fighter escort, a novel concept. When the Battle of Britain turned into a debacle for the Luftwaffe, its design, and its planning, Udet took most of the heat from his colleagues and subordinates. Goering took the heat from the Fuhrer. Udet, drinking heavily, dealt with the criticism by shooting himself. The Luftwaffe ran into training troubles as the war drained on. Training squadrons were called up increasingly. Many were sent to the great Stalingrad airlift, which ended in disaster. Others were yanked up as nightfighters or day fighters to fend off round-the-clock bombing. One factor in the Luftwaffe's weakness was pointed out by Middlebrook in his book on the Hamburg battle...the Luftwaffe had no "crew rotation" policy. After 25 flights, RAF and USAAF bomber crews were re-assigned. Luftwaffe fighter pilots stayed with their squadron until death or disablement. While this created unit cohesion, it did little to relieve stress and fatigue. By late war, not only were pilots short, but critical ground crews, as they were called up to fill out the Luftwaffe field divisions, and then the Volks Grenadier Divisions. Ultimately the pilots themselves were called up. Some were placed into facetiously named "Parachute Divisions," like the 9th Parachute Division, ordered to hold the Kustrin Bridge. With some reason...the Germans had run out of oil. Scores of freshly-produced Me 109s, FW 190s, and He 177s lay scattered around Germany, lacking avgas. The only fuel in abundant supply was the kerosene mix for ME 262 jets. But they required longer airfields than the propeller planes, and were thus easy targets for prowling Allied Mosquitos or A-26 Invaders. Some Luftwaffe jet pilots took off and landed on Autobahns. In April, a corps commander in the 3rd Panzer Army, part of Army Group Vistula on the Oder, called up his boss, Lt. Gen. Hasso von Manteuffel to ask, "I have just received 3,000 Luftwaffe pilots, each with a little Knight's Cross around his neck. What do I do with them?" "That would be the 9th Parachute Division," Manteuffel said. "Doubtless the Fuhrer has a wooden block on his map that says that very thing. We have an army of ghosts." The 9th Parachute Division consisted of pilots and ground crews. Goering promised Vistula's commander, Generaloberst Gotthard Heinrici, that it would fight to the last, being the men who fought at Cassino. When it melted in hours, Heinrici phoned Goering, "You know those paratroopers of yours, those Cassino troops? Well, they have all run away." David H. Lippman Public Affairs Officer US Naval Antarctic Support Unit Christchurch, New Zealand From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 11 03:46:03 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA25319; Thu, 11 Apr 96 03:46:02 +0200 Received: from iac.iac.org.nz (iac.iac.org.nz [192.124.160.153]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id DAA10123 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 03:45:37 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from smtpgate.iac.org.nz by iac.iac.org.nz (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA13834; Thu, 11 Apr 96 13:41:47 NZS Message-Id: <9604110141.AA13834@iac.iac.org.nz> From: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (David H. Lippman) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 13:43 GMT To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Greece at war Status: O Content-Length: 1541 The Greeks were remarkably tough. When Mussolini invaded Greece in 1940, the country was run by an unpopular dictator, General Metaxas, who had emulated much of Nazism, down to creating his own Hitler Youth-style paramilitary movement. Yet the Greeks fought the invader with tenacity and ferocity, sending their enemies reeling in defeat into Albania. At one point, Greek mountain troops surrounded whole Italian divisions. But their industrial and financial base was not enough to maintain the pace of their drive north, and the Greek attack stalled. Soon after, the Nazi war machine, which hopelessly outclassed both the Greek and British Commonwealth forces, blasted their way into Athens. Greece, however, fought on. Unarmed or poorly-armed Greek troops battled German paratroopers in Crete. Cretan guerillas harassed the Germans. Partisan warfare went on in Greece and Crete through 1944, exploding into civil war between royalists and Communists. Even so, a Greek mountain brigade served in North Africa and Italy. I once said that it's not good to denigrate any country's military forces. Regardless of the caliber of a nation's weapons, tactics, and leadership, ferocity in battle, the spirit of self-sacrifice and devotion to country, are not attributes restricted solely to great powers. All nations and all peoples have within them the secrets of valour and courage. David H. Lippman Public Affairs Officer US Naval Antarctic Support Unit Christchurch, New Zealand From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 11 06:21:09 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA26382; Thu, 11 Apr 96 06:21:08 +0200 Received: from jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (civguy@jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us [192.217.238.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA11921 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 06:19:49 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from civguy@localhost) by jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (8.6.10/8.6.9) id XAA02562; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 23:51:46 -0500 Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 23:51:46 -35900 From: Jason Long Subject: Re: Erich Hartmann, fighter ace Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: <9604102043.AA12838@iac.iac.org.nz> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 782 Hartman way well not have had 352; it could be more or less. germans had an average system for verifiying losses compared to most other airforces. Hartmann spent most of the war on th Eastern Front where I find his kill tallys entirely credible. Unfortunately the Russians have not yet released detailed data for their air force so we can't confirm things that way. Reading Christopher Shores's books on Malta, the Balkans, and the phony war shows that both sides over-claimed and under claimed, though the Germans seem to be fairly accurate, the Brits slightly less so. Of course all bets are off if bomber gunners are involved; they were notorious for over claiming, but somethimes for valid reasons. Just how many gunners actually hit that Me 109? Nobody knows. Jason From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 11 07:29:35 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA26845; Thu, 11 Apr 96 07:29:34 +0200 Received: from naybob.ghq.com (naybob.ghq.com [204.73.247.161]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id HAA12613 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 07:28:57 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from jwhite@localhost) by naybob.ghq.com (8.7.1/8.7.1) id AAA19884; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 00:22:07 -0500 From: Jeff White Message-Id: <199604110522.AAA19884@naybob.ghq.com> Subject: Re: Erich Hartmann, fighter ace To: ptobin@hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com (Patrick Tobin) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 00:22:07 -0500 (CDT) Cc: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz, europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: <9604110033.AA18190@hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com> from "Patrick Tobin" at Apr 10, 96 05:33:46 pm Content-Type: text Status: O Content-Length: 3086 Patrick Tobin Said: > > > > > On Perry De Havilland's long post, and the various points he makes: > > > > I was just reading this morning about Erich Hartmann in Martin > > Caidin's book on the Messerschmidt 109, and he says that Hartmann was a > > beneficiary of Goebbels' Propaganda Ministry. He apparently claimed kills > > on days that the RAF reported that no Luftwaffe planes dogfighted with > > the Allies. That might explain how he allegedly bagged 352 Allied planes, > > while the top American ace, Richard Bong, had only 80. > > > > Doubtless Hartmann was a major fighter pilot and a massive ace, but > > I doubt he racked up as many as 352 kills. > > Hartmann only fought on the Eastern Front. With the exception of some > Mustangs downed over Hungary, all of his victories were Soviet aircraft. > I suspect you're thinking of Marseille who was credited with 158 kills > 7 over the channel, and 151 in N.Africa. There are discrepancies in a/c > types claimed against RAF losses on certain days. Much has been made of > this by some authors, but IMO this isn't noteworthy. Claims were often > delayed and incorrect dates entered, aircraft misindentification was > very common. The current trend in comparing confirmed kills against post > war records also reveals that many pilots were credited with nearly twice > as many kills as made, in some cases more. In Hartmann's case his > kills were confirmed by the Soviets, who charged him with destroying > over 300 Soviet a/c, and therefore sabotaging the Soviet national economy. > If Caidin is implying that the LW "cooked the books" on Marseille's > victory total, I think he is way off base. The Jagdflieger weren't sent > home to sell war bonds,after X amount of missions. Any group of well > trained pilots that flies multiple missions daily, for a number of years > will have higher scores than those that don't. Bong, by the way, had 40 > confirmed kills. Another off topic story, but somewhat interesting, a friend of my Dad's was a airplane mechanic for the squadron Bong was in. Apparently, Bong was a terrible marksman and scored most of his kills by head on attacks against Jap planes. He counted on the 4 fifties and the cannon to obliterate the enemy plane. Something about his guns were set to converge about 50 yards ahead of his plane. Japanese planes, not being built for ruggedness, tended to blow apart under that sort of firepower. He often returned to base with his plane covered in oil from an enemy plane he blew apart. In fact once he returned with teeth, embeeded in the canopy. The joke was that it was a CONFIRMED kill. Sounds like an urban legend, but truth is stranger than fiction. My Dad's friend also commented on how the pilots were almost insane with competition for the TOP ace position. One would be the new top ace, they'd have a party that night, and the next morning the ex-top ace would be out for blood. -- Jeff White, ARS N0POY jwhite@ghq.com "I am Pentium of Borg. Arithmetic is irrelevant. Prepare to be approximated." From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 11 08:23:58 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA00384; Thu, 11 Apr 96 08:23:57 +0200 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id IAA13267 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 08:23:24 +0200 (MET DST) From: j.broshot@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA085682964; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 06:09:24 GMT Message-Id: <199604110609.AA085682964@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Thu, 11 Apr 96 06:09:24 UTC 0000 ( from INTERNET# ; Thu, 11 Apr 96 06:09:02 UTC 0000) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 96 06:00:00 UTC 0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: J.BROSHOT X-Genie-Qk-Id: 4780344 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 139000 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: Those Fightin' Chetniks Status: O Content-Length: 2500 David Lippman has written here that, "It's very hard to get exact data on any aspect of the Balkans at any time, due to the incredibly complex nature of politics there. However, a good source is Fitzroy MacLean's memoir. He was the British liaison to Tito, and he wrote a book (I think it was Inside Tito's Headquarters, someone else will doubtless correct me) on the subject." Another good source, at least as to the occupation forces, is GERMAN ANTIGUERILLA OPERATIONS IN THE BALKANS (1941-1944), a U. S. Army Center of Military History publication originally printed in 1954 (my copy was acquired at a U. S. Government Printing Office Bookstore in Kansas City MO and is shown as reprinted in 1989). Lots of good OB info for the Germans and their allies, and some details on the partisans. The book is chuckfull of interesting items, like, "In addition to the conflicts between nationalities within the same state and strife between political factions, there was also a determined attempt on the part of the Serb Orthodox adherents of Mihailovitch to destroy the Mohammedan minority in Yugoslavia. The Germans added fuel to the flames of this fire by enlisting numerous Mohammedans in their forces and using them as occupation forces," [NOTE, in SF, 1 x 5-8 Mtn XX 13 Ha (SS) and 1 x 4-8 Mtn XX 23 Kama (SS), SS troops with fezes and regimental Imams!. The former unit, when later stationed in France for training, mutinied in September 1943; the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, then living in Berlin, was called in to calm things down; from Bender, UNIFORMS, ORGANIZATION AND HISTORY OF THE WAFFEN SS, Volume 3]; also, "on the basis of incomplete casualty figures, it can be said with some degree of accuracy that 1 out of 7 soldiers in German uniform, whether German or not, became a casualty by the close of operations." I wonder if anyone in the United States government in Washington ever has read this book (which is an official U. S. government publication)? I highly recommend it (if you can find it) both for its coverage of the topic, WW2 in the Balkans after the surrender of Greece and Yugoslavia, and for an understanding of the events in the "former Yugoslavia" today. For a fictional account of the guerilla war in the Balkans, that I think captures some of its flavor (the shifting alliances and confusing nature of who was on whose side) there is PARTISANS by Alistair MacLean (and his FORCE TEN FROM NAVARONE, the book was OK but the movie was very bad). Jim Broshot, St. James MO From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 11 11:17:32 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA02944; Thu, 11 Apr 96 11:17:31 +0200 Received: from colossus.barclays.co.uk (colossus.barclays.co.uk [193.128.3.10]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA15924 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 11:16:39 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from bognor.barclays.co.uk by colossus.barclays.co.uk with local SMTP (PP) id <01285-0@colossus.barclays.co.uk>; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 10:16:19 +0100 Received: from pepsi.gra.barclays.co.uk by bognor.barclays.co.uk with BarclayNet SMTP (PP) id <29087-0@bognor.barclays.co.uk>; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 10:16:06 +0100 Received: by pepsi (1.37.109.14/16.2) id AA004184010; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 10:13:30 +0100 From: Stefan Farrelly Message-Id: <9604111013.ZM416@pepsi.gra.barclays.co.uk> Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 10:13:29 +0100 X-Mailer: Z-Mail (3.2.1 31aug95) To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: African Maps Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Status: O Content-Length: 2418 To those who expressed an interest in the African maps, the latest info is; 1. Winston says hell do em if someone does the maps. May (underlined) cost approx $50 ea. but not necessarily, depends on how many want to buy them, how many maps done at once etc. USUAL PROPDUCTION RULES/COSTS APPLY 2. Arthur Goodwin has started the maps. Reply from him follows; I have a revised Africa Orientale map (32 miles to hex) completed (actually one full map and one half map needed to show northern Sudan and southern Egypt up to where the Europa maps cut off at present). I have all data and source material on hand to produce the Europa standard maps (16 miles to hex) of the same area (total of 4 are required). I've put off working on these as nobody seemed interested. Winston Hamilton is right that it would cost about $50 to get these done. Just the materials to make a set of full-color mockups, i.e. 4 blank hexsheets, various colored pens and markers and etc. comes to about $30. Once the color mock-ups are done they are used to make flat-sheet (not folded) high-quality black and white photocopies (which cost $2 a sheet); I keep the color mockups as they are what is used to make the final production maps. Add the cost of the mailing tube and postage and we're close to $50. I'd be glad to finish the Europa-standard maps, however, and pass them on to you. But... they're not mine to give out, they're GR/D property, under GR/D copyright. I can only pass them on to you if instructed to do so by Winston Hamilton. So... If you want them, talk to Winston. Good Luck. Winston says he will redo Africa Orientale (at 32mph) sometime in the future and someone said the cost for the entire game maybe only $50 but this may well not be done until next century and the cost is pure speculation (ie. this will have at least 1.5 maps in it also). Winston has aokayed things so Ive asked Arthur to supply the maps to Winston; 1. Africa Oriental maps at 16mph/32mph and lower Egypt/Sudan map at 16mph. 2. Once Winston has them he will spec up exact cost depending on how many people actually want what. So far around 6-10 looks likely unless anymore express an interest. Dont get excited on the apparant high cost UNTL Winston lets us know for sure. 3. Once cost established we can then decide who/what/how many to do. Sounds like a nice logical order to me. Let the wagons roll. Stefan Farrelly From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 11 16:08:30 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA07880; Thu, 11 Apr 96 16:08:29 +0200 Received: from felix.dircon.co.uk (felix.dircon.co.uk [193.128.224.10]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id PAA21391 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 15:46:34 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [194.112.37.22] (gw5-022.pool.dircon.co.uk) by felix.dircon.co.uk with SMTP id AA19716 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Thu, 11 Apr 1996 14:46:29 +0100 X-Sender: cloister@popmail.dircon.co.uk Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 14:48:54 +0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: cloister@dircon.co.uk (Perry de Havilland) Subject: Re: African Maps Status: O Content-Length: 180 >To those who expressed an interest in the African map etc. If you are doing an estimate of the number of interested Grognards, then put me on your list! Regards Perry ...- From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 11 16:47:50 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA08493; Thu, 11 Apr 96 16:47:49 +0200 Received: from post.QueensU.CA (root@knot.QueensU.CA [130.15.126.54]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA22716 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 16:46:37 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from mast.QueensU.CA (MAST.QueensU.CA [130.15.100.1]) by post.QueensU.CA (8.6.12/8.6.10+ASH) with SMTP id KAA10113 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 10:46:34 -0400 Received: from hilda.mast.QueensU.CA by mast.QueensU.CA (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA21384; Thu, 11 Apr 96 10:39:11 EDT Received: by hilda.mast.QueensU.CA (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA22382; Thu, 11 Apr 96 10:38:08 EDT From: pardue@hilda.mast.QueensU.CA (Keith Pardue) Message-Id: <9604111438.AA22382@hilda.mast.QueensU.CA> Subject: The ultimate monster game (fwd) To: europa@lysator.liu.se Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 10:38:07 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL13] Content-Type: text Status: O Content-Length: 717 Hi, David Lippman writes on CNA: > I quite forgot that CNA had individual pilot ratings on top of its > other massive rules (the Italian pasta water point, PoW camps, flying > dead camels by air, raids on Rommel, and broken-down trucks). I do remember the Libyan Camel Cavalry batallion, but I don't remember a rule on transporting dead camels. The one special rule that I remember for this unit is that it can be given two water rations at once. > The depressing idea would be 40 or so CNA players playing the game > for a year or so at their club, and fighting the three-year North African > war to a draw. I'd consider myself a victor even if I were on the losing team. Best Wishes, Keith From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 11 17:30:03 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA09131; Thu, 11 Apr 96 17:30:01 +0200 Received: from ns.corona.navy.mil (ns.corona.navy.mil [137.67.32.12]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id RAA23771 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 17:28:58 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from ccgate.corona.navy.mil (ccgate.corona.navy.mil [137.67.40.4]) by ns.corona.navy.mil (8.7.5/1.4) with SMTP id IAA13113 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 08:27:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ccMail by ccgate.corona.navy.mil (IMA Internet Exchange 1.04b) id 16d25820; Thu, 11 Apr 96 08:30:10 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 06:04:37 -0700 Message-Id: <16d25820@ccgate.corona.navy.mil> From: renaud.gary@corona.navy.mil (Renaud.Gary) Subject: Re: The Spanish main To: europa@lysator.liu.se Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: cc:Mail note part Status: O Content-Length: 111 "Right, Cervantes, on the Spanish cruiser." I hope so. Can you imagine the HMS Stout or the USS Budweiser? From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 11 18:48:59 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA10224; Thu, 11 Apr 96 18:48:58 +0200 Received: from desiree.teleport.com (desiree.teleport.com [192.108.254.21]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id SAA25780 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 18:48:10 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [206.163.120.181] (ip-pdx03-53.teleport.com [206.163.120.181]) by desiree.teleport.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id JAA02153 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 09:48:02 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199604111648.JAA02153@desiree.teleport.com> X-Sender: zaius@mail.teleport.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 09:53:47 -0700 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: zaius@teleport.com (Steve) Subject: Gr. Europa unit reorgs. Status: O Content-Length: 1823 In compiling National Data Sheet/OB for Germany for my own Grand Europa project, I have divided units up into 'force pools' based on the period in which the unit was in use. I'm attempting for the most part to stay within the limits set by the available counters already in print. I did France relatively quickly and of course Germany is much more complicated. Using Germany as an example, the Pz XX are divided up by period and rules govern their conversions and transformations, such as the 1939/40 overhauls and the expansion programme of 40/41. After that, it get easier, as increase in strength corresponds to either addition of improved AFVs or additional AFVs rather than a reorganization. My instinct is to keep the growth of the Waffen SS as historical as possible. I want to allow players to make many 'Hitler' decisions, but not all. It might be argued that a German player should be able to build a LSSAH13-9-10 SS Pz XX to invade France with, but I would argue that factors that would be too hard to represent in a game-even in abstract form-make this kind of unit highly improbable. Alternatively, I am leaving it to the players whether they turn LSSAH or DR into a Pz XX first- or not at all. In other words, the SS cannot expand faster than historically, but may expand slower or not at all. Similarly, the Luftwaffe field divisions may be ignored completely. Some might argue that Germany must be forced to build these units as Goring's empire building should be off-limits to player interference, but I would argue otherwise- it should be left up to the player. I'm sure I'm not the only player to have discovered that, far from being useless, a 2 or 3 point division can often be a very handy tool. Any thoughts, suggestions, flames? SP "Freedom is always against the law." -J.R. "Bob" Dobbs From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 11 18:49:22 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA10234; Thu, 11 Apr 96 18:49:21 +0200 Received: from desiree.teleport.com (desiree.teleport.com [192.108.254.21]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id SAA25776 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 18:48:01 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [206.163.120.181] (ip-pdx03-53.teleport.com [206.163.120.181]) by desiree.teleport.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id JAA02059 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 09:47:54 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199604111647.JAA02059@desiree.teleport.com> X-Sender: zaius@mail.teleport.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 09:53:38 -0700 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: zaius@teleport.com (Steve) Subject: building new units Status: O Content-Length: 1480 Can anyone shed any light on how long it took various countries to raise various types of new units? I'm working on my own Grand Europa game. I'm guessing that the "forming/full" system gives a good indication in general of how long it takes for new units to go through the formation process. I presume also that every country must have realistic limitations on how many of what various types of formations can be raised at once, which leads me to think that RPs and new builds should be tied to the same system and that RPs should be used to 'buy' new units in a game incorporating economic factors. For my own game, I want to concentrate on the aspects of economy that drove the war machine and keep the rest of it as abstract as possible. The number of training units in play for Germany seems to be a good guidepost as to limitations on how many RPs can be generated, but: * most countries don't have their training establishment directly represented *I'm not sure how training establishments should be allowed to be expanded (for example, Germany amazingly only had one fighter pilot training school- I want them to be able to expand their establishment for training fighter pilots should they wish to expend appropriate resources/wait an appropriate amount of time, &c.) Do I need to start from scratch or has anyone any light to shed on these questions (without it turning into a theoretical debate) Thanks, SP "Freedom is always against the law." -J.R. "Bob" Dobbs From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 11 19:13:18 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA10569; Thu, 11 Apr 96 19:13:17 +0200 Received: from mail02.mail.aol.com (mail02.mail.aol.com [152.163.172.66]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id TAA26458 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 19:12:46 +0200 (MET DST) From: Italorican@aol.com Received: by mail02.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id NAA02772; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 13:12:15 -0400 Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 13:12:15 -0400 Message-Id: <960411131213_189141688@mail02.mail.aol.com> To: renaud.gary@corona.navy.mil, europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: Erich Hartmann, fighter ace(now Spanish cruisers) Status: O Content-Length: 454 In a message dated 96-04-10 18:23:09 EDT, renaud.gary@corona.navy.mil (Renaud.Gary) writes: > >"...the cruisers Cerveza and Canarias." > ^^^^^^^ > >Definite possiblity of a Freudian slip, there. very true, even for Europa players who are supposedly NOT "beer & pretzels" types (for the non-spanish-speakers "Cerveza" = "beer") >"Cervantes" > > just to round it out: CL Cervera, CL Cervantes, CA Canarias Antonio Lauria From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 11 19:46:03 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA10923; Thu, 11 Apr 96 19:46:02 +0200 Received: from smtp4.aw.com (smtp4.aw.com [192.207.117.64]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id TAA27224 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 19:44:59 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from East-Message_Server by smtp4.aw.com with Novell_GroupWise; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 12:00:49 -0400 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1 Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 13:54:39 -0400 From: Ray Kanarr To: cloister@dircon.co.uk, europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re:Yet more Luft-peeves flak Status: O Content-Length: 1387 On 4/10/96, Perry de Havilland stated, among the excellent points in his post, this: >A rule for *experten* counters might be a nice optional rule >in a air war module. 1) I have the same objection to this that I have to the Rudel counter, that it is inappropriate in an operational-level game to single out individuals, no matter how "effective"; 2) As far as the 'experten' [including Rudel in his field] go, while these pilots were undoubtedly good, recent scholarship has started to call into question the extent of their claimed victories, noting overall 'kill inflation' among all combatants, and natural propaganda uplifting of 'heros' by all sides during wartime as the bases for this questioning. Taking Rudel as an example, we really only have his word that 519 tanks were destroyed by him. In a battlefield environment, with flak flying around [look at the number of times he was shot down!], and flying at speed, with your other crewmember facing backward, and the smoke, dust, etc., etc., with relatively few of these 'victories' being able to be confirmed, it does seem that an accurate count would be a bit difficult. 3) This is also eventually lead to a call for an Audie Murphy counter, etc., etc., blah, blah. If we're going to discuss counters for individuals, it would be FAR more worthwhile to discuss counters to represent corps commanders and above. Ray From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 11 20:08:12 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA11186; Thu, 11 Apr 96 20:08:11 +0200 Received: from ns.corona.navy.mil (ns.corona.navy.mil [137.67.32.12]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id UAA27728 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 20:06:32 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from ccgate.corona.navy.mil (ccgate.corona.navy.mil [137.67.40.4]) by ns.corona.navy.mil (8.7.5/1.4) with SMTP id LAA14150 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 11:05:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ccMail by ccgate.corona.navy.mil (IMA Internet Exchange 1.04b) id 16d4ad70; Thu, 11 Apr 96 11:09:27 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 11:03:25 -0700 Message-Id: <16d4ad70@ccgate.corona.navy.mil> From: renaud.gary@corona.navy.mil (Renaud.Gary) Subject: GE: Unit (re)building To: europa@lysator.liu.se Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: cc:Mail note part Status: O Content-Length: 5000 "My instinct is to keep the growth of the Waffen SS as historical as possible." I could live with that. "In other words, the SS cannot expand faster than historically, but may expand slower or not at all." Hmm. I think there should be a requirement for SOME growth, as private armies tend to grow in all governments (even in the US recently). Maybe "Hitler" can work to rein in Himmler, but I don't think he can be stopped cold. Even so, if GE ever came out with your proposal, I wouldn't complain. "Similarly, the Luftwaffe field divisions may be ignored completely. " OK. Perhaps you can give the player a choice: 1. Build a bunch of cruddy divisions right now. 2. Add to teh manpower pool which must then go through army training and takes longer, but ends up producing better units. "...which leads me to think that RPs and new builds should be tied to the same system and that RPs should be used to 'buy' new units in a game incorporating economic factors." I started work on a paper on this topic, but events conspired to put it on hold. Maybe I'll work on it some more next month. Anyway, here are some ideas to incorporate. NOTE: these are rather rough and probably need a lot of filing along the edges. ___________________________________________________________________________ You build units the same way you rebuild them, with the common house-rule that you build a Cadre, THEN the full-strength unit. Infantry Replacement Points (IRP) are made by taken Personal Points (PP) (equal to XXX% of the adult population) and sending them through a Training Unit (TU). A TU may train XXX IRPs per RE at any one time. It takes XXX turns to convert a PP into an IRP. Militia-type units may have up to XZX% of their points directly by PPs, in lieu of IRPs. It costs a certain amount of time and ???? points to place a unit from the counter tray into the replacement pool. This represents the officers, infrastructure, and Cadre (of the Cadre). To build a cadre (or a unit that does not have a cadre) requires a TU of the appropirate (Infantry, Mountain, Armor, Engineer, Airborne, etc.) type. A TU can build XXX cadres per RE. The number of turns to make a cadre depends on the unit type. You also have Armor Replacment Points (ARPs) and Artillery Replacment Points (RRPs). They require a much smaller amount of personnel, but require "stuff" to be built by industry. They have to go through a TU. Building a Cadre to full strength just takes dumping the appropriate RPs into the Cadre. ____________________________________________________________________ If you have a bunch of planes shot down, then you can probably cannibalize enough to produce some PPs, which you can either run through the TUs to make IRPs, or use them directly to build 2-6s. "For my own game, I want to concentrate on the aspects of economy that drove the war machine and keep the rest of it as abstract as possible." I use People, Metal, Oil, Cement, and Industry, which produces IRPs, ARPs, RRPs, airplanes, and ships. "The number of training units in play for Germany seems to be a good guidepost as to limitations on how many RPs can be generated, but: * most countries don't have their training establishment directly represented..." Well, the Russians really need to have them added, but since there will be a redesign of FITE/SE, that should be OK. The last I've looked, the Italians and Brits already had SOME training units. Maybe not enough? As for the minor countries, well, most of them won't stand up long enough for it to matter. I suppose Greece and Hungary are exceptions. Since I've heard that some of the Romanians and Bulgarians are "missing" (off watching each other, I suppose), we are going to need some more counters in the Balkans ANYWAY, so we can probably do OK. "*I'm not sure how training establishments should be allowed to be expanded (for example, Germany amazingly only had one fighter pilot training school- I want them to be able to expand their establishment for training fighter pilots should they wish to expend appropriate resources/wait an appropriate amount of time, &c.)" Well, I suppose you could say something like "take 10 air counters off the map to produce a new school." I figure the instructors would be the bottleneck and the big pool of competent fliers would be in combat. If you wish to take any of my suggestions, go right ahead; they're yours. If they are stupid, then ignore them. I'm not proud. A Renaud.Gary@Corona.Navy.Mil This graphic is |\ CompuServe: 73627,1114 a LOT smaller | \ _,,,---,,__ Genie: G.Renaud1 than a PGP key /,`.-'`' -. ;-;,---__ W: 909-273-5378 block __|,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'==--' H: 714-750-9243 `-----''(_/--' `-'\_) DNRC Holder of Past Knowledge I HATE UNIX I CAN'T speak for this administration; I don't lie enough. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 11 20:22:04 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA11300; Thu, 11 Apr 96 20:22:03 +0200 Received: from prague.crossover.com (root@prague.crossover.com [204.217.246.5]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id UAA28197 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 20:21:34 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [205.161.32.192] (jastell.tiac.net [205.161.32.192]) by prague.crossover.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id NAA30424 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 13:13:13 -0400 X-Sender: jastell@post.crossover.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 14:21:01 -0400 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) Subject: Re: Those fightin' Chetniks Status: O Content-Length: 1912 > The Chetniks are very tricky to pin down. Apparently they were led >by a fully-bearded guy named Draza Mikhailovich, and his armies at first >made life tough for the Italian, Ustasi, and Serbian puppet forces >occupying Yugoslavia. There were at least two Chetnik groups: Mikhailovich's "All-Yygoslavia" and a separate group in Macedonia. "Chetnik" was a popular term in Yugoslavia, meaning roughly "freedom fighter" -- a guerrilla or irregular. > ...After the war, Mikhailovich was captured by Tito's forces, and >received the death penalty in short order. While there's little doubt >about Mikhailovich's switching sides, some recent historians have noted >that a number of Chetnik guerillas did their job of hounding and harassng >the Nazis, and did not collaborate, so it is unfair to paint all Chetniks >as pro-Fascist. Not to defend Mikhailovich unduly, but in his terms he did not "switch sides." Mikhailovich and his Chetniks were fighting for the reestablishment of Yugoslavia as an independent monarchy. In their eyes, the communists were as big as threat to a monarchial Yugoslavia as the Germans were. Think of the situation as a three-way war* between the fascists, the communists, and the monarchists, with the monarchists in the weakest position. As one side gets too strong, the monarchists will temporarily cooperate with the other side, all the time trying to stay in the game in the hopes that they can win eventually. One clear indication of this is that Mikhailovich's Chetniks, when the started to cooperated with the Axis, clearly preferred to deal with the Italian, not the Germans -- Italy, although controlled by the Fascist Party, was still a monarchy and thus could be presumed to have some political viewpoints similar to the Yugoslav monarchists. (*Even a three-way war simplifies things greatly. There were numerous ethnic disputes complicating matters, too.) From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 11 20:22:21 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA11306; Thu, 11 Apr 96 20:22:20 +0200 Received: from prague.crossover.com (root@prague.crossover.com [204.217.246.5]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id UAA28206 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 20:21:47 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [205.161.32.192] (jastell.tiac.net [205.161.32.192]) by prague.crossover.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id NAA30429 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 13:13:28 -0400 X-Sender: jastell@post.crossover.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 14:21:16 -0400 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) Subject: Re: Erich Hartmann, fighter ace Status: O Content-Length: 280 >"...the cruisers Cerveza and Canarias." > ^^^^^^^ >Definite possiblity of a Freudian slip, there. The "Beer" cruiser. Love it! Wasn't this cruiser sold to Argentina after the war, where it served as the Chardonnay until sunk by HMS Grog in the Falklands War? From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 11 21:02:49 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA11651; Thu, 11 Apr 96 21:02:48 +0200 Received: from prague.crossover.com (root@prague.crossover.com [204.217.246.5]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id VAA29031 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 21:01:46 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [205.161.32.192] (jastell.tiac.net [205.161.32.192]) by prague.crossover.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id NAA30523 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 13:53:22 -0400 X-Sender: jastell@post.crossover.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 15:01:09 -0400 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) Subject: Re:Yet more Luft-peeves flak Status: O Content-Length: 2153 >>A rule for *experten* counters might be a nice optional rule >>in a air war module. > >I have the same objection to this that I have to the Rudel >counter, that it is inappropriate in an operational-level game to >single out individuals, no matter how "effective".... Yeah, and what about "klutzen" counters? In his inglorious career, Captain Klaus Klutz, flying Ju 87s in Stuka Group I/StG 45, is believe to have bombed German positions at least a dozen times, destroying guns, tanks, and trucks with abandon. During the Barbarosa offensive in 1941, the Germans seized a key bridge across the Luga, opening the way to Leningrad, only to see Klutz bomb out the bridge moments later -- giving the Soviets the chance to shore up their defenses. Klutz was as fearsome a pilot as he was a bombadier, and records indicate he heavily damaged or effectively destroyed at least 17 Ju 87s in accidents during take offs or landings -- a better aircraft "kill" record than most German fighter pilots achieved during the course of the war. Klutz's flying career finally came to an end when he single-handedly attacked what he believed was a Soviet army- or front-level field HQ -- it was the HQ of the Luftwaffe 88th Flak Regiment. Although Klutz achieved surprise in his attack, AA units did hit the Ju 87 as it pulled out of its dive. Klutz bailed out but unfortunately did not live to fight another day, as he had mispacked his parachute. OK, Klutz is fictional, but people like him existed on all sides in the war. People fought the war with all levels of ability -- I'm sure a plot of individual ability would resemble a bell curve, with most people clustered around the average ability, and a few people at both extremes: tremendous ability and incrediable ineptness. If you're going to explicitly represent the people at one extreme (tremendous ability), then why not the ones at the other extreme? (If you assume that unit ratings/representing cover the range of abilities of the people in them, then explicitly adding in the best extreme without downrating the other units means you have boost the overall ability of units above historical levels!) From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 11 21:54:25 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA12128; Thu, 11 Apr 96 21:54:24 +0200 Received: from mail-e2b-service.gnn.com (mail-e2b-service.gnn.com [204.148.102.170]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id VAA00446 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 21:53:14 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from www-30-69.gnn.com. (www-30-69.gnn.com [205.188.30.69]) by mail-e2b-service.gnn.com (8.7.1/8.6.9) with SMTP id PAA26023 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 15:52:40 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199604111952.PAA26023@mail-e2b-service.gnn.com> X-Mailer: GNNmessenger 1.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 12:48:26 From: NormPratt@gnn.com (Norman Pratt) To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: African Maps Status: O Content-Length: 157 >To those who expressed an interest in the African maps, the latest >info is; > I would be interested in copies of the maps or a remake of the module. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 11 22:09:55 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA12253; Thu, 11 Apr 96 22:09:54 +0200 Received: from iac.iac.org.nz (iac.iac.org.nz [192.124.160.153]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA00751 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 22:08:51 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from smtpgate.iac.org.nz by iac.iac.org.nz (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA16010; Fri, 12 Apr 96 08:05:01 NZS Message-Id: <9604112005.AA16010@iac.iac.org.nz> From: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (David H. Lippman) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 08:05 GMT To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Wierdly named ships Status: O Content-Length: 1872 Actually, some guys in the Phillipines marketed a ballcap in the US Navy style that honors Budweiser beer. Oddly-named ships are common enough in warfare, and WW2 was no exception. There were two warships named Enterprise, one a British light cruiser that was on line at Normandy, the other the famed American aircraft carrier. The Germans created a cruiser named Lutzow, sold it to the Soviet Union, then took the pocket battleship Deutschland and renamed THAT Lutzow, confusing intelligence officers everywhere. In the Pacific, the Japanese had an aircraft carrier named Shoho, but, thanks to a similarity in Kanji characters, American historians and writers periodically and mistakenly call this ship the Ryukaku. The actual Shoho was sunk at Coral Sea. Finally, who can forget the USS Shangri-La, the Essex-class carrier that honored a presidential joke. Sorry this has little to do with Europa, but to make up for that, I do want to commend an earlier post adding various sources on the Yugoslavian partisan war, replete with the histories of the SS Yugoslavian divisions. The Germans had some problems with the Muslim divisions, and Haj Amin al-Husseini, the anti-Semitic Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, was sent in to mediate some mutinies. The Mufti was a notorious anti-British and anti-Semitic agitator, and he collaborated with Hitler. He was able to put down these mutinies, but Himmler was forced to disband the divisions. After the war, Amin went on to agitate Palestinian Arabs against the Zionists, which heated up another bloody civil war. Chased out of Jerusalem in 1967, he fled to Beirut, and ended his days living in a vast estate that included an atomic bomb shelter. David H. Lippman Public Affairs Officer US Naval Antarctic Support Unit Christchurch, New Zealand From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 11 22:14:12 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA12311; Thu, 11 Apr 96 22:14:11 +0200 Received: from iac.iac.org.nz (iac.iac.org.nz [192.124.160.153]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA00881 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 22:13:58 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from smtpgate.iac.org.nz by iac.iac.org.nz (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA16021; Fri, 12 Apr 96 08:10:09 NZS Message-Id: <9604112010.AA16021@iac.iac.org.nz> From: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (David H. Lippman) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 08:10 GMT To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: LW Field Divisions Status: O Content-Length: 1138 The best use I can see for LW field divisions is that as three-regiment outfits, they make good garrison fodder, thus saving a German player a 7-6 or 5-7-6 for the front. I think a historical brake should exist on the development of the Waffen-SS, reflecting what was going on with Himmler's empire-building. That supreme filing clerk had to play paper games to create SS Totenkopf Division, for example. He couldn't recruit for his divisions directly, but could for concentration camp guards. Apparently there was no shortage of people who wanted to run and guard Dachau and Buchenwald, which is an interesting and sad commentary on the German people. So Himmler created the division from concentration camp guards, then recruited to replace the losses. These alleged soldiers went on to invade France. They also massacred about 100 British soldiers at Le Paradis in France, witnessed by Pvt Donald Pooley of the Royal Norfolks, who survived to bring the killers to justice in 1945. David H. Lippman Public Affairs Officer US Naval Antarctic Support Unit Christchurch, New Zealand From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 11 22:19:35 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA12386; Thu, 11 Apr 96 22:19:34 +0200 Received: from iac.iac.org.nz (iac.iac.org.nz [192.124.160.153]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA00981 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 22:19:07 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from smtpgate.iac.org.nz by iac.iac.org.nz (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA16038; Fri, 12 Apr 96 08:15:18 NZS Message-Id: <9604112015.AA16038@iac.iac.org.nz> From: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (David H. Lippman) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 08:15 GMT To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Klaus Klutz, Ju 87 jockey Status: O Content-Length: 251 I remember Klaus Klutz...didn't he have a pal named Chicken Teriyaki, who returned from seven successful kamikaze missions? David H. Lippman Public Affairs Officer US Naval Antarctic Support Unit Christchurch, New Zealand From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 11 22:24:56 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA12471; Thu, 11 Apr 96 22:24:56 +0200 Received: from iac.iac.org.nz (iac.iac.org.nz [192.124.160.153]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA01107 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 22:24:25 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from smtpgate.iac.org.nz by iac.iac.org.nz (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA16066; Fri, 12 Apr 96 08:20:35 NZS Message-Id: <9604112020.AA16066@iac.iac.org.nz> From: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (David H. Lippman) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 08:22 GMT To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: CNA, the flying albatross Status: O Content-Length: 275 There was indeed a rule in CNA on transporting camels by air. I think you could move live camels by air, but not dead ones. Scary stuff, neh? David H. Lippman Public Affairs Officer US Naval Antarctic Support Unit Christchurch, New Zealand From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 11 22:28:57 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA12535; Thu, 11 Apr 96 22:28:56 +0200 Received: from jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (civguy@jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us [192.217.238.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA01189 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 22:28:45 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from civguy@localhost) by jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (8.6.10/8.6.9) id QAA05191; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 16:00:52 -0500 Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 16:00:52 -35900 From: Jason Long Subject: Re: building new units Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: <199604111647.JAA02059@desiree.teleport.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 257 Hitler Jugend took about a year to get up to full speed and I think 9 and 10 SS were about the same. The Luftwaffe had more than one fighter pilot school! Don't kid yourself. The Nazis ran an amazingly inefficent war effort, but not one that bad. Jason From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 11 22:35:15 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA12590; Thu, 11 Apr 96 22:35:14 +0200 Received: from jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (civguy@jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us [192.217.238.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA01288 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 22:34:23 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from civguy@localhost) by jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (8.6.10/8.6.9) id QAA05209; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 16:06:40 -0500 Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 16:06:39 -35900 From: Jason Long Subject: Re: Gr. Europa unit reorgs. Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: <199604111648.JAA02153@desiree.teleport.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 747 The force pool idea sounds workable, but I stongly disagree with allowing the player to ignore the LW field divisions. It was political and should not be under the players control! The problem with them is that the manpower that went into them was ratehr large, considering the combat rating. They would cost about 4 or 5 points to build, which is why no rational GE player will ever do that. If that manpower was properly trained and reasonably well led than you have the 4-6-6 divisions in SF which show them after the Army gained authority over them. I'm glad that you're not permitting the SS to grow faster than historical, but they should grow at about the same rate as historical. Political machinations, again, I'm afraid. Jason From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 11 22:40:44 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA12629; Thu, 11 Apr 96 22:40:43 +0200 Received: from iac.iac.org.nz (iac.iac.org.nz [192.124.160.153]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA01383 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 22:39:48 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from smtpgate.iac.org.nz by iac.iac.org.nz (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA16118; Fri, 12 Apr 96 08:35:58 NZS Message-Id: <9604112035.AA16118@iac.iac.org.nz> From: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (David H. Lippman) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 08:34 GMT To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: The African maps Status: O Content-Length: 160 I'd be interested in them myself. David H. Lippman Public Affairs Officer US Naval Antarctic Support Unit Christchurch, New Zealand From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 11 23:20:41 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA12956; Thu, 11 Apr 96 23:20:40 +0200 Received: from smtp4.aw.com (smtp4.aw.com [192.207.117.64]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id XAA02069 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 23:19:27 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from East-Message_Server by smtp4.aw.com with Novell_GroupWise; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 13:45:43 -0400 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1 Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 15:49:43 -0400 From: Ray Kanarr To: ptobin@hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com, NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: Erich Hartmann, fighter ace Status: O Content-Length: 1271 On 4/10/96, Pat Tobin wrote in: >If Caidin is implying that the LW "cooked the books" on >Marseille's victory total, I think he is way off base. The >Jagdflieger weren't sent home to sell war bonds,after X >amount of missions. What Caidin was saying was that the Ministry of Propaganda and Enlightenment, either ordering, or with the collusion of, the Luftwaffe, inflated experten scores. While in some other armed forces this may have occurred unintentionally [in the heat of battle, damaged=destroyed was a very common pilot perception error, as was the pressure of competition noted in an earlier post], given the Nazi propensity for exaggerating, distorting, or outright lying about EVERYTHING else, I think it completely unlikely that they didn't do it here [and, it should be noted, the Luftwaffe WAS the most 'nazi' of the three services]. In point of fact, also, the Jagdflieger [as with the other services, notably the U-waffe] did sign autographs, send out photos to fans, appear on post cards and collectible cards, participate in parades, and generally do the whole public relations routine to assist the war effort on the home front. Just because they went back to the 'front' time after time does not mean that they never went back to Germany. Ray From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Thu Apr 11 23:48:21 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA13123; Thu, 11 Apr 96 23:48:20 +0200 Received: from smtp4.aw.com (smtp4.aw.com [192.207.117.64]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id XAA02603 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 23:47:30 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from East-Message_Server by smtp4.aw.com with Novell_GroupWise; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 16:00:17 -0400 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1 Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 18:04:26 -0400 From: Ray Kanarr To: europa@lysator.liu.se, zaius@teleport.com Subject: Re:Gr. Europa unit reorgs. Status: O Content-Length: 1548 On 4/11/96, Steve P sent in: >In compiling National Data Sheet/OB for Germany for my >own Grand Europa project, --SNIP-- >My instinct is to keep the growth of the Waffen SS as >historical as possible. The reasons for the expansion for the SS lie much more with Himmler than Hitler; Hitler approved the expansions, but Himmler requested and carried them out. In actuality, Hitler was wary of an expanded SS, not wanting to have a reprise of the situation with the SA, which was at least a PERCEIVED threat to the regime. This said, the SS expansions are actually somewhat independent of the actual ground situation, and really more attached to the military/political infighting. Reitlinger's *The SS-Alibi of a Nation 1922-1945*, Stein's *Waffen SS*, or even Williamson's book on the SS all give a pretty good chronology of the growth of the SS. So, unless there is going to be a full-blown set of alternatives for political paths in your GE, the growth of the SS should follow along pretty historical lines. >Similarly, the Luftwaffe field divisions may be ignored >completely. OTOH, if Goring [and the figure of Goring needs to be a presence, immutable and untouchable (by the players) in GE] knew that the Luftwaffe manpower was going to be released to the Army, rather than being allowed to form their own divisions, he probably would have found another way to hold onto them, meaning that they would not be available AT ALL, or only as a thin trickle of RPs. I don't think this should be a player decision without consequences. Ray From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 12 01:14:29 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA13933; Fri, 12 Apr 96 01:14:28 +0200 Received: from felix.dircon.co.uk (felix.dircon.co.uk [193.128.224.10]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id BAA03878 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 01:12:11 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [194.112.37.10] (gw5-010.pool.dircon.co.uk) by felix.dircon.co.uk with SMTP id AA14863 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Fri, 12 Apr 1996 00:12:07 +0100 X-Sender: cloister@popmail.dircon.co.uk Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 00:14:30 +0000 To: Ray Kanarr From: cloister@dircon.co.uk (Perry de Havilland) Subject: Re:Yet more Luft-peeves flak Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se Status: O Content-Length: 3784 >On 4/10/96, Perry de Havilland stated, among the excellent points in >his post, this: > >>A rule for *experten* counters might be a nice optional rule >>in a air war module. > >1) I have the same objection to this that I have to the Rudel >counter, that it is inappropriate in an operational-level game to >single out individuals, no matter how "effective"; Basically, I agree (I think you took me too seriously about wanting to simulate when Bob Brahams's unit beat up on Schnaufer's unit when they mistook Braham's slow cruising gaggle of Beaufighters for straggling Lancasters. Oops). Aces were not organised into 'super units' of counter size but were distributed amongst various units: such folk have more bearing on the *average* level of skill, which for the Western nations and the Axis was much of a muchness. However, the reverse was often not true. For example, the RAF often used OTU assets (operational training units) for low risk missions, such as minelaying and 'spoof' raids. Spoof raids were designed to draw nightfighters away from the main attack and the bombers usually did not press them home but rather returned to base after having tricked the Germans into committing assets against the attack. On a few occasions, the OTU attacks actually did bomb targets (usually coastal ones) and as a result, were sometimes intercepted. When this happened, losses were usually higher than normal. That sounds to me like a 'Poor Air Crew' modifier (they are students, after all). I suspect most major nations should have the option of using training assets operationally, but with a penalty if they actually get into an air-to-air fight. >2) As far as the 'experten' [including Rudel in his field] go, while >these pilots were undoubtedly good, recent scholarship has started to >call into question the extent of their claimed victories, noting >overall 'kill inflation' among all combatants, and natural propaganda >uplifting of 'heros' by all sides during wartime as the bases for this >questioning. Once again, I agree. However, note that many German kills were aircraft destroyed on the ground. Whilst this is quite legitimate, it does tend to paint a misleading picture when other airforces did not count such aircraft as 'kills' in the same sense. Most of the Luftwaffe and RAF *nightfighter* aces seem to be fairly well documented and for some reason their figures seem to be less inflated than their daylight counterparts. I am not certain why this is but I suspect the fact that kills tended to be made not in confusing dogfights but rather in more deliberate one-on-one stalking attacks might have had something to do with it. Night air combat in WWII really did have a very different dynamic to daylight actions. Even so, I would agree that few of these figures will EVER be verified with complete certainty. >Taking Rudel as an example, we really only have his word that 519 >tanks were destroyed by him. In a battlefield environment, with flak >flying around [look at the number of times he was shot down!], and >flying at speed, with your other crewmember facing backward, and the >smoke, dust, etc., etc., with relatively few of these 'victories' >being able to be confirmed, it does seem that an accurate count would >be a bit difficult. >3) This is also eventually lead to a call for an Audie Murphy >counter, etc., etc., blah, blah. If we're going to discuss counters >for individuals, it would be FAR more worthwhile to discuss counters >to represent corps commanders and above. Damn, I WAS rather hoping for an Audie Murphy counter... and a Biggles counter as well! :-) P.S. To clarify my earler post when I said I was told that ten or so staff at Sandhurst played CFNA...that was ten or so ON EACH SIDE!!! Regards Perry ...- From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 12 01:39:40 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA14141; Fri, 12 Apr 96 01:39:39 +0200 Received: from travel1.travel-net.com (root@travel1.travel-net.com [204.92.71.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id BAA04237 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 01:39:05 +0200 (MET DST) From: bradbury@travel1.travel-net.com Received: from 204.92.71.2.travel-net.com (trc135.travel-net.com [205.150.57.135]) by travel1.travel-net.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id TAA11640 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 19:49:45 -0400 Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 19:49:45 -0400 Message-Id: <199604112349.TAA11640@travel1.travel-net.com> X-Sender: bradbury@mail.travel-net.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re:Yet more Luft-peeves flak Status: O Content-Length: 741 On Thursday, April 11th, Ray Kanarr wrote: < Snip > >3) This is also eventually lead to a call for an Audie Murphy >counter, etc., etc., blah, blah. If we're going to discuss counters >for individuals, it would be FAR more worthwhile to discuss counters >to represent corps commanders and above. I agree that there counters for individuals are out of place at Europa's scale. As to corps commander counters etc, I always thought that the game-player was assuming the role of army group / army / corps commander. I mean, don't we all want to play the role of Patton, Zhukov, Manstein etc (and try to do one better ...). If you agree with this, then corps commander counters would not be appropriate. Nigel Bradbury Ottawa, Ontario From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 12 02:04:57 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA14274; Fri, 12 Apr 96 02:04:56 +0200 Received: from iac.iac.org.nz (iac.iac.org.nz [192.124.160.153]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id CAA04522 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 02:04:33 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from smtpgate.iac.org.nz by iac.iac.org.nz (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA16743; Fri, 12 Apr 96 12:00:43 NZS Message-Id: <9604120000.AA16743@iac.iac.org.nz> From: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (David H. Lippman) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 12:03 GMT To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Hans Ulrich-Rudel Status: O Content-Length: 1713 He was a brave pilot -- destroyed a lot of tanks and sank a Russian battleship -- with considerable courage -- surviving the loss of his leg to fly again -- but not an admirable fellow. After the war, he became involved with neo-Nazi organizations in Argentina and Germany, and wrote a book originally titled "In Spite of It All," in which he mixed his wartime exploits with ringing defenses of the Nazi credo. It was published in England and America under the title "Stuka Pilot," and some of the more objectionable sections were excised. Biggles is a fictional character. If we want to have counters for British Commonwealth battlefield heroes, here are some: Johnnie Walker Robert Stanford-Tuck Cobber Kain George "Screwball" Beurling Charles Upham (VC and Bar) Howard Kippenberger Johnny Frost Leslie Morehead Eugene Esmonde "Rammer" Roope Philip Vian J.C. Wanklyn Charles Osborn Orde Wingate Bernard Fergusson Sam Beattie Charles Newman Red Ryder Harold Godfrey-Place Peter Keeble Al Deere Guy Gibson Les Knight Tom Derrick Jessie Vasey Leon Goldsworthy Weary Dunlop Henry Harwood William Tennant John Howard Geoffrey Leonard Cheshire Those are the only ones that spring to mind. If anyone has any more, post 'em. Sorry I don't provide any posts on the technical stuff (building replacements, NODLs, stacking, strengths), but as I often say, I'm lost when it comes to the math side of Europa. David H. Lippman Public Affairs Officer US Naval Antarctic Support Unit Christchurch, New Zealand From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 12 02:08:07 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA14285; Fri, 12 Apr 96 02:08:06 +0200 Received: from desiree.teleport.com (desiree.teleport.com [192.108.254.21]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id CAA04546 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 02:07:56 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [206.163.125.104] (ip-pdx22-40.teleport.com [206.163.125.104]) by desiree.teleport.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id RAA04668; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 17:07:36 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199604120007.RAA04668@desiree.teleport.com> X-Sender: zaius@mail.teleport.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 17:13:29 -0700 To: Jason Long From: zaius@teleport.com (Steve) Subject: Re: Gr. Europa unit reorgs. Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se Status: O Content-Length: 1603 >The force pool idea sounds workable, but I stongly disagree with allowing >the player to ignore the LW field divisions. It was political and should >not be under the players control! I actually intend to give players (which will at least include myself and about 6 others and anyone else who wants to play around with whatever I eventually come up with) a significant degree of control over events which might be described as "political", but I want to stick with events that directly impact strategy and grand strategy, rather than social policy and the like. For this reason, I'm inclined to agree with you that the Luftwaffe field divisions should have to be built-at least initially. I rather like the way that SE handled the question and I'm inclined to leave it at that. >The problem with them is that the manpower that went into them was ratehr >large, considering the combat rating. They would cost about 4 or 5 points >to build, which is why no rational GE player will ever do that. That's a good point- which is why my instinct is to make the Germans build them-then leave it up to them to dismantle them at a certain date. The formation of the LW divisions was part of the Nazi idea of 'checks and balances'. >I'm glad that you're not permitting the SS to grow faster than >historical, but they should grow at about the same rate as historical. >Political machinations, again, I'm afraid. Yes- the growth of the SS was only partly due to the war situation, so I think it should be left to a roughly historical timetable. SP "Freedom is always against the law." -J.R. "Bob" Dobbs From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 12 03:17:42 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA14774; Fri, 12 Apr 96 03:17:41 +0200 Received: from felix.dircon.co.uk (felix.dircon.co.uk [193.128.224.10]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id DAA05284 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 03:17:00 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [194.112.37.2] (gw5-002.pool.dircon.co.uk) by felix.dircon.co.uk with SMTP id AA18420 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Fri, 12 Apr 1996 02:16:50 +0100 X-Sender: cloister@popmail.dircon.co.uk Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 02:19:13 +0000 To: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (David H. Lippman) From: cloister@dircon.co.uk (Perry de Havilland) Subject: Re: Biggles Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se Status: O Content-Length: 206 The evil Lippman wrote: > Biggles is a fictional character. WHAT!?! I suppose next you are going to say there is no Father Christmas (who is, as everyone knows, British). Peevishly Perry ...- From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 12 03:19:41 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA14793; Fri, 12 Apr 96 03:19:40 +0200 Received: from felix.dircon.co.uk (felix.dircon.co.uk [193.128.224.10]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id DAA05323 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 03:19:29 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [194.112.37.2] (gw5-002.pool.dircon.co.uk) by felix.dircon.co.uk with SMTP id AA18487 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Fri, 12 Apr 1996 02:19:19 +0100 X-Sender: cloister@popmail.dircon.co.uk Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 02:21:42 +0000 To: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) From: cloister@dircon.co.uk (Perry de Havilland) Subject: Re: Those fightin' Chetniks Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se Status: O Content-Length: 3373 John Astell wrote: (snipage) >Not to defend Mikhailovich unduly, but in his terms he did not "switch >sides." Mikhailovich and his Chetniks were fighting for the reestablishment >of Yugoslavia as an independent monarchy. In their eyes, the communists >were as big as threat to a monarchial Yugoslavia as the Germans were. Think >of the situation as a three-way war* between the fascists, the communists, >and the monarchists, with the monarchists in the weakest position. As one >side gets too strong, the monarchists will temporarily cooperate with the >other side, all the time trying to stay in the game in the hopes that they >can win eventually. One clear indication of this is that Mikhailovich's >Chetniks, when the started to cooperated with the Axis, clearly preferred >to deal with the Italian, not the Germans -- Italy, although controlled by >the Fascist Party, was still a monarchy and thus could be presumed to have >some political viewpoints similar to the Yugoslav monarchists. This is all very true. However, it is *very* important to realise that Draza Mikhailovic was first and foremost a **Serbian** nationalist and the Karageorgovic dynasty was (is) a *Serbian* dynasty. For Mikhailovic's Chetniks, Yugoslavia & Greater Serbia were synonymous and this is still the view of these people today. I mention this as I feel it is more important than the Monarchist/ Communist/ Fascist dimension (which is nonetheless true). Similarly, the defining element of Ante Pavelic's Ustasa regime was not that it was fascist (which it was in spades) but that it was a Croat *Nationalist* movement. Only Tito (half Slovene/ half Croat himself) could claim to represent a non-ethnic vision for Yugoslavia (note: I said *claim*) and offer an ideological one instead. Of the loathsome options on offer here, it is not surprising so many Croats joined up with Tito. Post-war official histories with ethnic axes to grind not withstanding, Croats, rather than Serbs, actually made up the single largest element of Tito's partisans, though this is not to belittle the large number of Serbs etc. who did likewise. This Croat aspect of Tito's forces is something often not appreciated when contemporary commentators, who for the most part are utterly ignorant of the underlying historical dynamics, make a direct link between the Croat Ustasa regime of the 1940's and the modern Croat Republic of the 1990's. Franjo Tudjman was himself one of Tito's partisans and it pissed me off no end when certain ignorant British journalists said he was an 'inappropriate' guest when he attended the massive VE Day celebrations in London last year. How many other of the national leaders assembled there had *personally* fought against Nazi Germany? I may not be an uncritical fan of Gospodin Tudjman but give the man his due. >(*Even a three-way war simplifies things greatly. There were numerous >ethnic disputes complicating matters, too.) As stated above, I feel this point is not a *by the way* but rather the central fact! Re. nothing in particular: My, my. Today is a heavy e-mail day! I must say that I continue to be greatly impressed by the quality and intelligence of the posts to this forum. It is a real pleasure to read this stuff and I am continually amazed by the depth of the pool of knowledge amongst all you Europa grognards. Regards Perry ...- From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 12 03:56:48 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA14948; Fri, 12 Apr 96 03:56:47 +0200 Received: from io.org (io.org [198.133.36.1]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id DAA05777 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 03:55:58 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from i486 (macdonald.net6b.io.org [204.92.5.57]) by io.org (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA11638 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 21:55:49 -0400 Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 21:55:49 -0400 Message-Id: <199604120155.VAA11638@io.org> X-Sender: woloshyn@io.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: Larry Woloshyn Subject: Re: Hans Ulrich-Rudel Status: O Content-Length: 752 At 12:03 PM 4/12/96 GMT, you wrote: > ... not an admirable fellow. > After the war, he became involved with neo-Nazi organizations in >Argentina and Germany, and wrote a book originally titled "In Spite of It >All," in which he mixed his wartime exploits with ringing defenses of the >Nazi credo. It was published in England and America under the title >"Stuka Pilot," and some of the more objectionable sections were excised. At the end of 'Stuka Pilot' Rudel trumpets his move to South Africa with specific reference to their racial policies. > George "Screwball" Beurling Surely you mean "Buzz" Beurling, many kills in WW2, died while flying to "The Zionist Entity" in '48 to fly against the Arabs. Larry From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 12 04:04:48 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA14984; Fri, 12 Apr 96 04:04:47 +0200 Received: from io.org (io.org [198.133.36.1]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id EAA05901 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 04:04:37 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from i486 (macdonald.net6b.io.org [204.92.5.57]) by io.org (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id WAA12751 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 22:04:27 -0400 Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 22:04:27 -0400 Message-Id: <199604120204.WAA12751@io.org> X-Sender: woloshyn@io.org X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: Larry Woloshyn Subject: Re: Those fightin' Chetniks Status: O Content-Length: 1117 At 02:21 AM 4/12/96 +0000, you wrote: >John Astell wrote: >(snipage) >>Not to defend Mikhailovich unduly, but in his terms he did not "switch >This Croat aspect of Tito's forces is something often not appreciated when >contemporary commentators, who for the most part are utterly ignorant of >the underlying historical dynamics, make a direct link between the Croat >Ustasa regime of the 1940's and the modern Croat Republic of the 1990's. >Franjo Tudjman was himself one of Tito's partisans and it pissed me off no >end when certain ignorant British journalists said he was an >'inappropriate' guest when he attended the massive VE Day celebrations in >London last year. How many other of the national leaders assembled there >had *personally* fought against Nazi Germany? I may not be an uncritical >fan of Gospodin Tudjman but give the man his due. Duh, why is the Tudjman government so anxious to appropriate the trappings of the Ustashe. One of Zagreb's main streets was recently renamed after Ante Pavelic. Are you sure Tudjman didn't do his 'anti-Nazi' fighting on the Ustashe side? Larry From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 12 04:34:57 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA15167; Fri, 12 Apr 96 04:34:56 +0200 Received: from emout09.mail.aol.com (emout09.mx.aol.com [198.81.11.24]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id EAA06420 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 04:34:23 +0200 (MET DST) From: YANAWAY@aol.com Received: by emout09.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id WAA24183 for europa@lysator.liu.se; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 22:33:51 -0400 Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 22:33:51 -0400 Message-Id: <960411223349_189510685@emout09.mail.aol.com> To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Africa Maps Status: O Content-Length: 43 I am interested in Maps of Africa at 16mph From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 12 04:36:04 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA15183; Fri, 12 Apr 96 04:36:03 +0200 Received: from naybob.ghq.com (naybob.ghq.com [204.73.247.161]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id EAA06438 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 04:35:50 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from jwhite@localhost) by naybob.ghq.com (8.7.1/8.7.1) id VAA22969 for europa@lysator.liu.se; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 21:35:48 -0500 From: Jeff White Message-Id: <199604120235.VAA22969@naybob.ghq.com> Subject: Game Envy To: europa@lysator.liu.se (Europa Mailing List) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 21:35:48 -0500 (CDT) Content-Type: text Status: O Content-Length: 1411 I've just started playing World in Flames (as a break between Europa games), and I have to notice that it seems that each game envies the other. WiF wants to be Europa and now Europa wants to be WiF. WiF has produced some of the goofiest things you have ever seen. Like a game where the average unit is a Corp, they have added Brigades. Brigades some stronger than a Corp. Like that makes sense. Or the dumbest thing I've ever seen, allowing the Luftwaffe Para-Panzer Div to actually para drop. This confirms my suspicion that WiF is a game. If you add too much chrome, (as WiF seems to have done), the game suffers. I think Europa is a cardboard simulation that can also as a bonus be played as a game. WiF is a game that can also be a simple simulation. Both have the limitations of cardboard and flesh that they will never be perfect, only a computer game can achieve that. For Grand Europa a decision seems to need to be made if GE is going to be a game or a simulation. If it's a game, great, open the flood gates for letting player build and do as they please, much as in WiF. If it's a simulation, it should follow the basic historical path (with deviations). If GE is going to be both a floor wax and desert topping, I think it's doomed to disaster. Just my two cents. -- Jeff White, ARS N0POY jwhite@ghq.com "I am Pentium of Borg. Arithmetic is irrelevant. Prepare to be approximated." From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 12 04:42:59 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA15221; Fri, 12 Apr 96 04:42:58 +0200 Received: from iac.iac.org.nz (iac.iac.org.nz [192.124.160.153]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id EAA06538 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 04:42:33 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from smtpgate.iac.org.nz by iac.iac.org.nz (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA17128; Fri, 12 Apr 96 14:38:43 NZS Message-Id: <9604120238.AA17128@iac.iac.org.nz> From: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (David H. Lippman) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 14:36 GMT To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Screwball Beurling Status: O Content-Length: 814 Yes indeed, Screwball Beurling did die at the helm of a plane he was flying to Israel to help them fight the '48 war. He gained his nickname in Malta for his goofy behaviour, which included tossing a buttered slice of bread on the floor, then swatting as many flies as possible on it, calling them "Goddamn screwballs." I don't know if Rudel made it to South Africa, but he did go to Argentina for a while. I never actually waded through Stuka Pilot, probably because I was never a big fan of him. I think it's unfair that Rudel lived on to be a leading postwar neo-Nazi while Beurling died in an aircrash. I think it would have been better the other way around. David H. Lippman Public Affairs Officer US Naval Antarctic Support Unit Christchurch, New Zealand From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 12 04:53:54 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA15257; Fri, 12 Apr 96 04:53:53 +0200 Received: from ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (abcclibr@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu [128.174.5.59]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id EAA06678 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 04:53:06 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by ux1.cso.uiuc.edu id AA04485 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for europa@lysator.liu.se); Thu, 11 Apr 1996 21:52:52 -0500 Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 21:52:52 -0500 From: conrad alan b To: Steve Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: Gr. Europa unit reorgs. In-Reply-To: <199604111648.JAA02153@desiree.teleport.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 2551 On Thu, 11 Apr 1996, Steve wrote: > In compiling National Data Sheet/OB for Germany for my own Grand Europa > Using Germany as an example, the Pz XX are divided up by period and rules > govern their conversions and transformations, such as the 1939/40 overhauls > and the expansion programme of 40/41. After that, it get easier, as A very tricky business, doing this kind of thing. For example the Germans were able to basicly double their armored force pool by cutting back on the number of AFVs per division. It worked, but was that because they happened to be fighting '41 British & Russians that did not have that `tank thing' worked out yet? Not that anyone other than the Germans did have it figured out. Europa has made the rating of the division sort of flow from '40 thru '42. Could it be that it might have worked better had they retained the tank heavy divisions (for things like NODL busting) in game terms and that the '40 combat factors are too low? It's very hard to tell. The old SPI line was that heavy tank divisions were bad. It took the British a long time to get it right. The Americans reworked their heavy divisions into a more balanced model. However we retained the 1st, 2nd & 3rd as heavy divisions and Europa does not penalize them. If they are less efficient how does that compute in replacements? And it would seem the Russians never got it right. The tank corps were very tank heavy and they are still rated fairly well. The mech corps should be much better as a balanced unit, yet the game system does not give them very much extra. And looking at the SS divisions is tough too. The old truths were that the SS divisions were very bad since they ate up a lot of manpower and weapons, the `armed mobs' as the army called them. Yet many items brought up lately would seem to indicate that the SS units were able to get manpower from the less traditional sources that the army may never have touched. So how does one rate that? Another point. A couple of sources have told of all the Russian `volunteers' that worked their way into the army units on the eastern front. Many behind the line functions were being carried out more and more by these people as the war went on (to a point). These were bodies, but were they on the T.O. & E. as the units went on? In Europa we have Eastern troop units, but nothing like infantry RPs picked up in Russia to reflect this yet. All this makes unit building a fun activity. Alan Conrad From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 12 05:03:15 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA15303; Fri, 12 Apr 96 05:03:14 +0200 Received: from ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (abcclibr@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu [128.174.5.59]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id FAA06793 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 05:02:50 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by ux1.cso.uiuc.edu id AA06211 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for Europa Mailing List ); Thu, 11 Apr 1996 22:02:42 -0500 Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 22:02:41 -0500 From: conrad alan b To: Jeff White Cc: Europa Mailing List Subject: Re: Game Envy In-Reply-To: <199604120235.VAA22969@naybob.ghq.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 1069 On Thu, 11 Apr 1996, Jeff White wrote: > For Grand Europa a decision seems to need to be made if GE is going > to be a game or a simulation. If it's a game, great, open the > flood gates for letting player build and do as they please, much > as in WiF. If it's a simulation, it should follow the basic > historical path (with deviations). If GE is going to be both > a floor wax and desert topping, I think it's doomed to disaster. Interesting thought. But my thoughts are sort of opposite. If GE is to be a good simulation it must allow new variables to be added, so one can see how that would have changed possible endings. One doesn't care so much if this is hard to game. If GE is to be a good game one must take great care NOT to add in variables since that will screw up the flavor and playing of the game. I hope we're not doomed to disaster. The game players hold the cards at the moment, but cries for simulation are often heard. I still like to hope that with all this talent we can get a good balance that works. Alan Conrad From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 12 05:42:31 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA15497; Fri, 12 Apr 96 05:42:30 +0200 Received: from smtp4.aw.com (smtp4.aw.com [192.207.117.64]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id FAA07279 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 05:41:45 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from East-Message_Server by smtp4.aw.com with Novell_GroupWise; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 20:50:02 -0400 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1 Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 22:54:05 -0400 From: Ray Kanarr To: cloister@dircon.co.uk Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re:Yet more Luft-peeves flak Status: O Content-Length: 792 On 4/11/96, Perry de Havilland sent in: >On a few occasions, the OTU attacks actually did bomb >targets (usually coastal ones) and as a result, were >sometimes intercepted. OTUs participated in the first "1000-plane" raid, also. It was the only way they could scrape together enough planes. I totally agree about being able to 'call up the schools', as long as there are longer-range consequences for doing so beyond a mere negative modifier. When you call up your schools, you're eating your seed corn, both in terms of students and instructors, who both fly. Overall, I think we're much more in agreement than disagreement, its simply a question of separating the wheat from the chaff [another agricultural allusion, and me not even a farmboy!], as it ever is in Europa. Peace, Ray From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 12 06:00:15 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA15621; Fri, 12 Apr 96 06:00:14 +0200 Received: from felix.dircon.co.uk (felix.dircon.co.uk [193.128.224.10]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id FAA07451 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 05:59:51 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [194.112.35.30] (gw1-030.pool.dircon.co.uk) by felix.dircon.co.uk with SMTP id AA21717 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Fri, 12 Apr 1996 04:59:45 +0100 X-Sender: cloister@popmail.dircon.co.uk Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 05:02:12 +0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: cloister@dircon.co.uk (Perry de Havilland) Subject: Re: Those fightin' Chetniks Cc: Larry Woloshyn Status: O Content-Length: 3098 Larry Woloshyn wrote: >Duh, why is the Tudjman government so anxious to appropriate the >>trappings of the Ustashe. One of Zagreb's main streets was >recently >renamed after Ante Pavelic. To which I reply: Thank you for you eloquently and politely expressed remarks. As you are obviously already an expert on this subject, I will try an keep my humble reply simple. The internal complexities of the HDZ (which, as you doubtless know, is the majority ruling party in Croatia) are too involved for me to go into in a Europa related forum. Suffice to say, there is a fairly extreme wing whose political epicentre is in Mostar (that is in Bosnia-Herzegovina, as you doubtless know) and a more 'western' wing, whose power base is in Zagreb (I'm sure you know where that is). The more extreme wing has various wild-eyed chaps who are not fascists but rather have a bizarre air-brushed view of history (for *real* fascists, you need to look at the HSP (which, as you doubtless know, stands for 'Croatian Rights Party')) . Tudjman is much more sophisticated than that (not that I would call him particularly sophisticated) but his party is a weird conglomeration of very disparate views. Some of the things he says are to keep the stranger elements happy. I am quite sure he is well aware that Jacenovac was not a holiday camp (doubtless, you know all about Jacenovac) and his idea to make it a site of national reconciliation was not his most inspired idea. That makes him stupid, not a fascist. Also, the notion that the adoption of the Sahovnica (the red-white checkerboard, but doubtless you know that) is adopting the 'trappings' of the Ustasha ignore the fact it has been the principal symbol of Croatian national identity for *centuries*. Ante Pavelic Street? Yeah. There is also one named after J.F.Kennedy, which only goes to show that there are lots of people on the Zagreb City Council with bizarre tastes in politicians. There are places named after the various genocidal mass murderers who ran the USA during the 'ethnic cleansing' of the American Indians, but that does not make the USA a fascist state (though Steve might disagree with me here). The fact is, Croatia is a true (i.e. typically flawed) democratic state with real opposition parties and a free (even if harassed) press. Nothing widely available in the USA comes even CLOSE to the Split based newspaper *Feral Tribune* in terms of anti-government vitriol. It is not a difficult to find 'alternate' paper as found in the west and published by pimply students, but can be purchased on any news-stand in Zagreb or even Mostar. It is in Croatian, but just look at the cartoons to get an idea (like the 'Greatest Shits' section). Check it out on http://www.webworld.org/feral/ This is not the sign of a resurgent fascist state. Also, read the Croatian constitution on http://www.vlada.hr/dokumenti/ustav.htm Not exactly a fascist constitution. >Are you sure Tudjman didn't do his 'anti-Nazi' fighting on the >Ustashe side? Not even his opponent claim that. Schmuck. Complete lack of regards Perry ...- From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 12 06:16:37 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA15652; Fri, 12 Apr 96 06:16:35 +0200 Received: from ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (abcclibr@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu [128.174.5.59]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA07663 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 06:16:13 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by ux1.cso.uiuc.edu id AA18882 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for europa@lysator.liu.se); Thu, 11 Apr 1996 23:16:07 -0500 Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 23:16:06 -0500 From: conrad alan b To: Jason Long Cc: Perry de Havilland , europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: Yet more Luft-peeves flak In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 1345 On Wed, 10 Apr 1996, Jason Long wrote: > The on demand air system required a method to show which planes had > already flown and the back of teh counter had to be used. I'm not > The ARPs a bit to generic for myown tastes, As an abuse A possible addition to the air replacement system: fragile air units. As many have stated it is bad enough when one can replace FW-190s or JU-88s instantaneously. But the ends of that spectrum is that those ARPs can be wooden gliders or jet Meteors just as easily. An abuse in our games, is that players would throw away one's best units most of all. They had the best chance of doing something (longest range, biggest bombs, whatever), but since the ARPs were an amalgam of the whole force there are plenty to replace all the good units first. Like that Lanc with the 18 strat bomb load. Send it anywhere you want the best chance of a hit. If it gets shot down who cares, there's plenty more where that came from. Pulling rebuilt units from a pool would work except the allied air force is usually at full strength (nasty VP losses). So it sould be possible to make special one of a kind air units, or things like jets, fragile. Perhaps three times the cost to rebuild right away, or when rebuilt they don't actually come back for a couple of turns. Alan Conrad From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 12 07:19:44 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA16002; Fri, 12 Apr 96 07:19:43 +0200 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id HAA08458 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 07:19:05 +0200 (MET DST) From: j.broshot@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA029315501; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 05:05:01 GMT Message-Id: <199604120505.AA029315501@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Fri, 12 Apr 96 05:05:01 UTC 0000 ( from INTERNET# ; Fri, 12 Apr 96 05:04:44 UTC 0000) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 96 04:57:00 UTC 0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: J.BROSHOT X-Genie-Qk-Id: 3826793 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 147892 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: Commonwealth heroes Status: O Content-Length: 599 More British Commonwealth heroes: "Mad" Mike Calvert Vladimir Peniakoff David Stirling Peter Young Keith Mallory John Durnford-Slater John Masters Pierre Clostermann We ought to run a contest, name the unit each served in or commanded, i.e.: 1 x 3-8 Inf X 4 NZ: Charles Upham (VC and Bar); and Howard Kippenberger 1 x 3-5 Para X 1: Johnny Frost 1 x 7-8 Inf XX 9 Aus: Leslie Morehead 1 x Lanc 3HB5 2-18 B 40*: Guy Gibson Les Knight Geoffrey Leonard Cheshire Jim Broshot, St. James MO From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 12 07:19:48 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA16007; Fri, 12 Apr 96 07:19:47 +0200 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id HAA08459 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 07:19:12 +0200 (MET DST) From: j.broshot@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA029625508; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 05:05:08 GMT Message-Id: <199604120505.AA029625508@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Fri, 12 Apr 96 05:05:08 UTC 0000 ( from INTERNET# ; Fri, 12 Apr 96 05:04:50 UTC 0000) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 96 04:59:00 UTC 0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: J.BROSHOT X-Genie-Qk-Id: 8597005 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 147933 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: Gr. Europa Unit reorgs. etc. Status: O Content-Length: 3607 "Similarly, the Luftwaffe field divisions may be ignored completely. Some might argue that Germany must be forced to build these units as Goring's empire building should be off-limits to player interference, but I would argue otherwise- it should be left up to the player. I'm sure I'm not the only player to have discovered that, far from being useless, a 2 or 3 point division can often be a very handy tool." WRONG! The German player is stuck with Goring. Besides, in a revised FiE/SE the first 10 or so Luftwaffen-Felddivision should be 1 x 2-6* Inf XX Grp or 1 x 3-6* Inf XX Grp as they usually had a TO of four infantry battalions, an artillery battalion, a flak battalion and supporting engineer and antitank companies. Later divisions (and those of the first wave that survived) were expanded to two regiments with six battalions and an artillery regiment (like those in SF). DIE DEUTSCHEN LUFTWAFFEN-FELDDIVSIONEN 1941-1945, by Werner Haupt [Yes, John Astell, I know that you can't rely on Haupt. I checked him against Tessin. :)] "That supreme filing clerk had to play paper games to create SS Totenkopf Division, for example. He couldn't recruit for his divisions directly, but could for concentration camp guards. Apparently there was no shortage of people who wanted to run and guard Dachau and Buchenwald, which is an interesting and sad commentary on the German people. So Himmler created the division from concentration camp guards, then recruited to replace the losses." Actually, it was Theodor Eicke, the Totenkopf creator and commander, who was the empire builder often over Himmler's objections. Eicke had amassed so many troops as part of his Totenkopf units that these units, that they served as the foundation for the 1940-1941 expansion of the Waffen SS. From four prewar Totenkopf standarten (one for each concentration camp), some 15 Totenkopf infantry regiments were formed along with a cavalry regiment plus ersatz battlions. The cavalry regiment eventually expanded into the SS Cavalry Division, and the infantry regiments were used to form the SS-Totenkopf Division AND the SS Nord Division AND the 1st and 2nd SS Infantry Brigades. So for Barbarossa: 1 x 9-10 Mot XX Totkpf (SS); 1 x 3-10 Mot XX Nord; 1 x 3-8* Cav X Fgln (SS); 2 x 3-10 Mot X 1, 2 (SS); all came from the Totenkopf units (now absorbed into the Waffen SS). Eicke was killed on the Russian Front in 1943. SS Obersturmfuhrer Fritz Knochlein, the commander of the company that was responsible for the 1940 massacre of the men of 2nd The Norfolk Regiment was executed by hanging after the war for this war crime (thanks mainly to the testimony of Private Pooley and Private O'Callaghan, the two survivors). "I think a historical brake should exist on the development of the Waffen-SS, reflecting what was going on with Himmler's empire-building." True, the Waffen SS didn't really start expanding big time until Himmler starting recruiting (voluntarily or otherwise) anyone who looked, smelled or claimed to be a German or of German ancestry, i.e. "Volksdeutsche" or "Nordic" types. Then he grabbed anybody else, the Army's French and Walloon units, the Cossacks, and assorted Slavic types, like Ukrainians, Latvians, Lithuanians, etc. (which is why the father of the current Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staffs actually ended up serving with the SS in WW2). Stein's book (mentioned by another earlier) THE WAFFEN SS HITLER'S ELITE GUARD AT WAR has a list of all 38 Waffen SS divisions and showing whether they were composed largely or partially of Volksdeutsche or foreigners. Jim Broshot, St. James MO From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 12 07:19:50 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA16012; Fri, 12 Apr 96 07:19:49 +0200 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id HAA08457 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 07:19:03 +0200 (MET DST) From: j.broshot@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA029165498; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 05:04:58 GMT Message-Id: <199604120504.AA029165498@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Fri, 12 Apr 96 05:04:58 UTC 0000 ( from INTERNET# ; Fri, 12 Apr 96 05:04:41 UTC 0000) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 96 04:58:00 UTC 0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: J.BROSHOT X-Genie-Qk-Id: 2957937 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 147877 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: Captain Klutz Status: O Content-Length: 470 A real Hauptmann (Captain) Klaus Klutz. On 15 Aug 1939, Hauptmann Walter Sigel led I./St.G. 76 (1 x Ju87B) on a practice bombing mission and dived through what he thought were clouds. Only it was ground fog. 13 aircraft crashed killing 26 aircrew. Sigel was court-martialled and acquitted. Cajus Bekker, THE LUFTWAFFE WAR DIARIES. Incidently, Adolf Galland flew an Hs123 ground attack plane with II (Sch.)/LG 2 during the Polish Campaign. Jim Broshot, St. James MO From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 12 07:50:29 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA16316; Fri, 12 Apr 96 07:50:27 +0200 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id HAA08819 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 07:49:38 +0200 (MET DST) From: j.broshot@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA058747334; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 05:35:34 GMT Message-Id: <199604120535.AA058747334@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Fri, 12 Apr 96 05:35:34 UTC 0000 ( from INTERNET# ; Fri, 12 Apr 96 05:35:17 UTC 0000) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 96 05:30:00 UTC 0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: J.BROSHOT X-Genie-Qk-Id: 8951346 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 148117 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: "Those fighting Chetniks" Status: O Content-Length: 1134 In about 6 AD, Augustus Caesar planned a massive triple invasion of what is now Bohemia to extend the frontier of the Roman Empire to a line between what are now Hamburg, Leipzig, Prague and Vienna. "However, the entire project had to be called off. This was because of a huge and terrible native rebellion throughout massive areas of Dalmatia and Pannonia, the two sections of the province of Illyricum....The suppression of the rebellion was only achieved by an exceedingly arduous series of operations, which lasted three years and seemed to the Romans the worst military crisis they had experienced since the Second Punic War," from THE ARMY OF THE CAESARS, by Michael Grant. "Occupied for centuries by Romans, Turks, Austrians, and Hungarians, the Balkan peoples were forced to adopt the methods of irregular warfare in the struggle against their oppressors. When not resisting foreign invaders, they battled one another or kept alive their fighting traditions in bitter blood feuds," from GERMAN ANTIGUERILLA OPERATIONS IN THE BALKANS (1941-1944). Or as Yogi Berra once said, "Deja vu all over again." Jim Broshot, St. James MO From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 12 10:11:16 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA17970; Fri, 12 Apr 96 10:11:15 +0200 Received: from uvaix3e1.comp.UVic.CA (root@uvaix3e1.comp.UVic.CA [142.104.5.103]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA11030 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 10:10:25 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from p18-186.dialup.UVic.CA (p18-186.dialup.UVic.CA [142.104.18.186]) by uvaix3e1.comp.UVic.CA (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id BAA34371 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 01:10:21 -0700 Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 01:10:21 -0700 Message-Id: <199604120810.BAA34371@uvaix3e1.comp.UVic.CA> X-Sender: steveh@UVAIX.uvic.ca (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: Steve Huhtala Subject: AWW - Vuoksa River Status: O Content-Length: 475 Hello - I have a quick question that came up during "A Winter War" and we can't figure it out. Rule 29.B.2 states that the Vuoksa River remains open water and thus the two lakes downstream also remain unfrozed. Terrain effects are determined using the "open water effects" The TEC says combat is prohibited across open-water lake/sea hexes. Q: Are we correct to assume that the Soviet Player cannot attack across the lake hexes? Thanks, Steve Huhtala steveh@uvic.ca From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 12 13:29:04 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA20621; Fri, 12 Apr 96 13:29:03 +0200 Received: from bang.jmk.su.se (bang.jmk.su.se [130.237.155.254]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id NAA14811 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 13:27:30 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [130.237.155.51] (Lilla_Red_01 [130.237.155.51]) by bang.jmk.su.se (8.6.12/8.6.6) with SMTP id NAA05834 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 13:27:27 +0200 X-Sender: o-noreli@bang.jmk.su.se Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 13:27:27 +0200 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: o-noreli@jmk.su.se (Elias Nordling) Subject: OFF:Re: "Those fighting Chetniks" Status: O Content-Length: 620 >In about 6 AD, Augustus Caesar planned a massive triple invasion >of what is now Bohemia to extend the frontier of the Roman Empire ... >When not resisting foreign invaders, they battled one another or >kept alive their fighting traditions in bitter blood feuds," from >GERMAN ANTIGUERILLA OPERATIONS IN THE BALKANS (1941-1944). >Or as Yogi Berra once said, "Deja vu all over again." Wow! Right up to the end I thought this was a brilliant sarcasm about this thread roaming free from Europa context. Well, I guess it still could be read that way ;-) Back to Europa, please! Mvh Elias Nordling o-noreli@jmk.su.se From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 12 13:30:59 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA20650; Fri, 12 Apr 96 13:30:58 +0200 Received: from bang.jmk.su.se (bang.jmk.su.se [130.237.155.254]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id NAA14862 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 13:30:37 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [130.237.155.51] (Lilla_Red_01 [130.237.155.51]) by bang.jmk.su.se (8.6.12/8.6.6) with SMTP id NAA05855 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 13:30:33 +0200 X-Sender: o-noreli@bang.jmk.su.se Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 13:30:33 +0200 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: o-noreli@jmk.su.se (Elias Nordling) Subject: SYSTEM: Re: Yet more Luft-peeves flak Status: O Content-Length: 875 > A possible addition to the air replacement system: fragile air >units. As many have stated it is bad enough when one can replace FW-190s >or JU-88s instantaneously. But the ends of that spectrum is that those >ARPs can be wooden gliders or jet Meteors just as easily. > An abuse in our games, is that players would throw away one's best units >most of all. They had the best chance of doing something (longest range, >biggest bombs, whatever), but since the ARPs were an amalgam of the whole >force there are plenty to replace all the good units first. Like that >Lanc with the 18 strat bomb load. Send it anywhere you want the best >chance of a hit. If it gets shot down who cares, there's plenty more where >that came from. Good point, and one simply fixed. Just export the limited replacement system to air units! Mvh Elias Nordling o-noreli@jmk.su.se From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 12 13:33:19 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA20685; Fri, 12 Apr 96 13:33:18 +0200 Received: from bang.jmk.su.se (bang.jmk.su.se [130.237.155.254]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id NAA14896 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 13:33:10 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [130.237.155.51] (Lilla_Red_01 [130.237.155.51]) by bang.jmk.su.se (8.6.12/8.6.6) with SMTP id NAA05896 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 13:33:07 +0200 X-Sender: o-noreli@bang.jmk.su.se Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 13:33:07 +0200 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: o-noreli@jmk.su.se (Elias Nordling) Subject: OFF: Re: Wierdly named ships Status: O Content-Length: 765 > Oddly-named ships are common enough in warfare, and WW2 was no >exception. There were two warships named Enterprise, one a British light >cruiser that was on line at Normandy, the other the famed American >aircraft carrier. > The Germans created a cruiser named Lutzow, sold it to the Soviet >Union, then took the pocket battleship Deutschland and renamed THAT >Lutzow, confusing intelligence officers everywhere. > Finally, who can forget the USS Shangri-La, the Essex-class carrier >that honored a presidential joke. If you go down to transport ships, you'll find lots of weird names. Like the German supply ship Buenos Aires. I've also heard a rumour that there was a Japanese transport ship named Boston! Mvh Elias Nordling o-noreli@jmk.su.se From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 12 13:43:46 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA20833; Fri, 12 Apr 96 13:43:45 +0200 Received: from bang.jmk.su.se (bang.jmk.su.se [130.237.155.254]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id NAA15165 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 13:43:29 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [130.237.155.51] (Lilla_Red_01 [130.237.155.51]) by bang.jmk.su.se (8.6.12/8.6.6) with SMTP id NAA06032 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 13:43:26 +0200 X-Sender: o-noreli@bang.jmk.su.se Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 13:43:26 +0200 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: o-noreli@jmk.su.se (Elias Nordling) Subject: AWW:Supply Status: O Content-Length: 679 Here's a question to Gary Stagliano (I don't have his address, but I know he lurks around on this list.) The Finns have a supply problem that bothers me: They can't supply their units all the way to Salla (which I'm sure they could historically.) The reason is that the road between Rovaniemi and Salla is interrupted by a lake with a narrow strait. Since this isn't a bridged strait, this ends the road element of the supply line. This really irritates me. The lake ice is completely flat and probably a meter thick, probably a better road than the road itself, so why should it be a supply obstacle? What are your thoughts on this? Mvh Elias Nordling o-noreli@jmk.su.se From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 12 13:52:27 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA21005; Fri, 12 Apr 96 13:52:26 +0200 Received: from bang.jmk.su.se (bang.jmk.su.se [130.237.155.254]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id NAA15400 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 13:52:18 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [130.237.155.51] (Lilla_Red_01 [130.237.155.51]) by bang.jmk.su.se (8.6.12/8.6.6) with SMTP id NAA06137 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 13:52:14 +0200 X-Sender: o-noreli@bang.jmk.su.se Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 13:52:14 +0200 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: o-noreli@jmk.su.se (Elias Nordling) Subject: SYSTEM: An air oddity Status: O Content-Length: 775 Here's an air oddity that can occur with the latest version of the air rules. Think of a group of C47s (0T2) flying an unescorted transport mission. Now they're patrol attacked by some crappy fighters (and I mean REALLY crappy fighters with an attack value of 1) The fighters patrol attack on the -1 column, roll bad and are aborted. The unarmed C47s have just shot down a couple of fighters! Now you'll have a hard time finding a situation like this. Maybe if you flew over Iraq? The only air unit I can think of that has a real chance of getting into a situation like this is the unarmed Ar234 jet bomber (0JA9). And then, if the situation should occur, you can always ignore the result. But it sure is fun to nit-pick the rules! Mvh Elias Nordling o-noreli@jmk.su.se From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 12 15:36:52 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA22477; Fri, 12 Apr 96 15:36:51 +0200 Received: from ns.rmc.com (ns.rmc.com [137.25.23.1]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id PAA17585 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 15:35:31 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by ns.rmc.com (AIX 4.1/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA14144; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 09:24:29 -0400 Received: from internet.rmc.com(137.25.3.24) by ns.rmc.com via smap (V1.3) id sma010512; Fri Apr 12 09:24:10 1996 Received: from lanmail.rmc.com by internet.rmc.com (AIX 4.1/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA14624; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 09:34:54 -0400 Received: by LANMAIL.RMC.COM; Fri, 12 Apr 96 9:38:04 EDT Date: Fri, 12 Apr 96 9:38:28 EDT Message-Id: X-Priority: 3 (Normal) To: From: "Frank E. Watson" Subject: re:SYSTEM: An air oddity Status: O Content-Length: 927 > Think of a group of C47s (0T2) flying an unescorted > transport mission. Now > they're patrol attacked > by some crappy fighters (and I mean REALLY crappy > fighters with an attack value of 1) The fighters patrol > attack on the -1> column, roll bad and are aborted. > The unarmed C47s have just shot down a > couple of fighters! In the particular case you cite, the patrolling crappy fighters sighted the lumbering C47s from above, silhouetted against a low cloud bank. The excited fighter pilots, eager at finally having found an opponent they could deal with on equal terms, dove on their unsuspecting prey only to discover that the cloud bank was actually ground fog. 13 of the crappy fighters were destroyed and their commander was court-martialled (although later acquitted). Sorry, can't remember the exact source of this info. Possibly, "The Iraqi Air Force War Diaries" by Klausi Klutsi Husseinni. Frank From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 12 16:04:43 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA22939; Fri, 12 Apr 96 16:04:42 +0200 Received: from ns.rmc.com (ns.rmc.com [137.25.23.1]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA18089 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 16:02:37 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by ns.rmc.com (AIX 4.1/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA14662; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 09:44:04 -0400 Received: from internet.rmc.com(137.25.3.24) by ns.rmc.com via smap (V1.3) id sma010716; Fri Apr 12 09:43:49 1996 Received: from lanmail.rmc.com by internet.rmc.com (AIX 4.1/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA11440; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 09:53:18 -0400 Received: by LANMAIL.RMC.COM; Fri, 12 Apr 96 9:55:53 EDT Date: Fri, 12 Apr 96 9:56:16 EDT Message-Id: X-Priority: 3 (Normal) To: From: "Frank E. Watson" Subject: re: Game Envy Content-Length: 957 Regarding the ongoing debate between the "Wide Open" faction and the "Strict Historical Constraints" faction on Grand Europa I think we should realize that: a) given the "Strict Historical Constraint" version, a group of gamers can easily say "let's dump all these limitations - everything goes into a force pool and product what you want. No predetermined alliances - everybody represents a country - use diplomacy how you want. Italy can align with France? Sure." b) given the Open version, a group of gamers (or simulationists, if you prefer) can NOT say, "We think there should be considerable historical restraints put on the players to reflect pre-existing political and ideological factors and before we begin we are all going to carefully construct those constraints and agree on them." Well, I guess you could SAY it, but you wouldn't start playing until you finished a project that would be as big as playing the game itself. Frank From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 12 16:05:54 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA22981; Fri, 12 Apr 96 16:05:52 +0200 Received: from mailgw.liu.se (mailgw.liu.se [130.236.1.10]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA18200 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 16:05:12 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from prague.crossover.com (prague.crossover.com [204.217.246.5]) by mailgw.liu.se (8.6.9/8.6.9) with ESMTP id QAA07237 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 16:09:25 +0200 Received: from [205.161.32.192] (jastell.tiac.net [205.161.32.192]) by prague.crossover.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id IAA32189 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 08:55:47 -0400 X-Sender: jastell@post.crossover.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 10:03:35 -0400 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) Subject: Re: Game Envy Content-Length: 926 >I've just started playing World in Flames (as a break between Europa >games), and I have to notice that it seems that each game envies >the other. WiF wants to be Europa and now Europa wants to be WiF.... I've got to admit I've never played World in Flames or even read the rules -- so there may not be undue WiF influence at least in one quarter in Europa. (I HAVE seen WiF being played at game conventions -- it looks like great fun, and I have nothing against the game. When it comes down to it, however, I'd rather design and play my own corps level WW2 game, and I hope to some day.) >For Grand Europa a decision seems to need to be made if GE is going >to be a game or a simulation. If it's a game, great, open the >flood gates for letting player build and do as they please, much >as in WiF. If it's a simulation, it should follow the basic >historical path (with deviations).... My vote goes for simulation. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 12 16:24:41 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA23331; Fri, 12 Apr 96 16:24:40 +0200 Received: from felix.dircon.co.uk (felix.dircon.co.uk [193.128.224.10]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA18705 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 16:24:08 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [194.112.37.45] (gw5-045.pool.dircon.co.uk) by felix.dircon.co.uk with SMTP id AA22739 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Fri, 12 Apr 1996 15:22:52 +0100 X-Sender: cloister@popmail.dircon.co.uk Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 15:26:11 +0000 To: j.broshot@genie.com From: cloister@dircon.co.uk (Perry de Havilland) Subject: OFF: Re: Commonwealth heroes Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se Content-Length: 704 My personal favs are: D.C.T. "Pathfinder" Bennett (who made it all finally work) John "Cats Eye" Cunningham (night ace, de Havilland test pilot, gentleman) C.F. Rawnsley (whose "cats eyes" were glued to a radar tube) "Bob" Braham (who hated the nazis with a passion) K. Kuttelwascher (okay, I know he was a Czech not Commonwealth but think he was most a admirable man) Basil Embry (my absolute favourate: not many Group Commanders flew missions (against orders, in fact)) P.C.Pickford (who died at Amiens during Operation Jericho) Lord Lovat (strange guy) Orde Wingate (even stranger guy) Len Cheshire (the strangest and noblest of all of 'em) the list could go on and on... Regards Perry ...- From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 12 16:37:33 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA23539; Fri, 12 Apr 96 16:37:32 +0200 Received: from emout04.mail.aol.com (emout04.mail.aol.com [198.81.10.12]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA18973 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 16:36:10 +0200 (MET DST) From: Italorican@aol.com Received: by emout04.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id KAA02295; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 10:35:37 -0400 Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 10:35:37 -0400 Message-Id: <960412103536_468232224@emout04.mail.aol.com> To: woloshyn@io.org, europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: Those fightin' Chetniks Content-Length: 563 In a message dated 96-04-11 22:20:31 EDT, woloshyn@io.org (Larry Woloshyn) writes: >. > > Duh, why is the Tudjman government so anxious to appropriate the >trappings of the Ustashe. One of Zagreb's main streets was recently renamed >after Ante Pavelic. A I was about to raise the same point -- one of the elements that exacerbated the Yugoslav mess was precisely the fact that the Croatian state took over the Ustache symbology fully and completely. I also second Perry deHavilland, concerning the range and interest of recent posts. Antonio Lauria From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 12 17:16:47 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA24145; Fri, 12 Apr 96 17:16:46 +0200 Received: from prague.crossover.com (root@prague.crossover.com [204.217.246.5]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id RAA19964 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 17:16:27 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [205.161.32.192] (jastell.tiac.net [205.161.32.192]) by prague.crossover.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA32379 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 10:08:06 -0400 X-Sender: jastell@post.crossover.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 11:15:55 -0400 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) Subject: Re: Gr. Europa unit reorgs. Content-Length: 2617 >> In compiling National Data Sheet/OB for Germany for my own Grand Europa... >> Using Germany as an example, the Pz XX are divided up by period and rules >> govern their conversions and transformations, such as the 1939/40 overhauls >> and the expansion programme of 40/41. After that, it get easier, as... > > A very tricky business, doing this kind of thing. For example the >Germans were able to basicly double their armored force pool by cutting >back on the number of AFVs per division. It worked, but was that because >they happened to be fighting '41 British & Russians that did not have >that `tank thing' worked out yet? Although I haven't seen many discussions of this in the history books, it seems likely that one of the reasons a 1941 panzer division, with fewer tanks than an earlier pz div, succeeded is that tank quality had gone up significantly -- the Pz Is were gone, and there were more Pz IIIs and IVs in service. > The old SPI line was that heavy tank divisions were bad. It took >the British a long time to get it right. The Americans reworked their >heavy divisions into a more balanced model. However we retained the 1st, >2nd & 3rd as heavy divisions and Europa does not penalize them. If they >are less efficient how does that compute in replacements? It's not just the SPI line, it's in the history books, too, and I find it accurate in this sense: Heavy tank divisions are not outright inefficient on the battlefield. They are efficient offensive formations, although their relative lack of infantry vis-a-vis tanks makes them less suited for defensive purposes (tanks just can't hold ground the way infantry can). This is shown directly in the unit ratings where this is significant -- Soviet tank corps, 1939-40 German pz divs, etc. Where the actual inefficiency comes in is that tank-heavy formations tend to lose tanks faster than tank-balanced formations. (I suspect you can make a case that a commander will subconsciously decide to expend his most plentiful asset on hand in pursuit of his mission.) Since a tank is one of the most expensive pieces of equipment on the battlefield, taking more tank losses than you need to is an inefficient drain on your economy. Although individual E games don't go much into economics, the replacement rates for units contains part of these considerations. For example, which unit would you prefer to replace in FITE/SE: a 1940-style 13-9-10 Pz XX (1x 5-3-10 Pz lll, 1x 4-2-10 Pz lll, 1x 3-10 mot Inf lll) costing 10 arm and 3 inf RPs, or a 12-10 Pz XX (1x 5-3-10 Pz lll, 2x 3-10 mot Inf lll) costing 7 arm and 5 inf RPs? From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 12 17:17:03 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA24154; Fri, 12 Apr 96 17:17:01 +0200 Received: from prague.crossover.com (root@prague.crossover.com [204.217.246.5]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id RAA19968 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 17:16:37 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [205.161.32.192] (jastell.tiac.net [205.161.32.192]) by prague.crossover.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA32382 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 10:08:15 -0400 X-Sender: jastell@post.crossover.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 11:16:04 -0400 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) Subject: Re: "Those fighting Chetniks" Content-Length: 1156 >In about 6 AD, Augustus Caesar planned a massive triple invasion >of what is now Bohemia... the entire project had to be called off... >because of a huge and terrible native rebellion throughout >massive areas of Dalmatia and Pannonia, the two sections of the >province of Illyricum.... Parts of Illyricum also rose in rebellion at least twice in Augustus's reign, too. The Europa connection? Augustus lead the army in Illyricum the first time, but he was an old, somewhat timid man by the time of the second rebellion, and he sent a Roman army under Tiberius to fight in Illyricum. However, Augustus could not refrain from staying in as constant contact with Tiberius as the times allowed, with the result that Augustus kept directing Tiberius to conduct the campaign as Augustus had year ago, rather than as the situation in the field demanded. Sounds like Hitler directing the eastern front? Human nature changes little -- technology does change, however, so whereas horseback communications only allowed Augustus to pester Tiberius, radio communications allowed Hitler to worry over the placement of individual battalions across the entire front. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 12 19:27:10 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA25927; Fri, 12 Apr 96 19:27:09 +0200 Received: from hplb.hpl.hp.com (hplb.hpl.hp.com [15.255.59.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id TAA22633 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 19:23:31 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com by hplb.hpl.hp.com; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 18:23:24 +0100 Received: by hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com (1.37.109.8/15.5+ECS 3.3) id AA22244; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 10:19:38 -0700 From: Patrick Tobin Message-Id: <9604121719.AA22244@hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com> Subject: Re: Erich Hartmann, fighter ace To: RayK@smtp4.aw.com (Ray Kanarr) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 96 10:19:38 PDT Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: ; from "Ray Kanarr" at Apr 11, 96 3:49 pm Mailer: Elm [revision: 70.85] Content-Length: 2761 > > On 4/10/96, Pat Tobin wrote in: > > >If Caidin is implying that the LW "cooked the books" on > >Marseille's victory total, I think he is way off base. The > >Jagdflieger weren't sent home to sell war bonds,after X > >amount of missions. > > What Caidin was saying was that the Ministry of Propaganda and > Enlightenment, either ordering, or with the collusion of, the > Luftwaffe, inflated experten scores. While in some other armed forces > this may have occurred unintentionally [in the heat of battle, > damaged=destroyed was a very common pilot perception error, as was > the pressure of competition noted in an earlier post], given the Nazi > propensity for exaggerating, distorting, or outright lying about > EVERYTHING else, I think it completely unlikely that they didn't do > it here [and, it should be noted, the Luftwaffe WAS the most 'nazi' > of the three services]. Fighters Over the Desert by Shores & Ring has a tally of daily claims against losses. Anyone interested in the N Afican airwar ought to take a look at it. It pretty well puts Caidin's rumors to rest. It contains factual information and original research, which can be a refreshing change from much of which Caidin has written. Fighters over Tunisia is also well worth reading, if a copy can be found. Regarding the Ministry of Propaganda, I'd simply point out that kills were confirmed by the LW in the field and then reported to Berlin. Did the MoP lie and exaggerate? Hell, yes. The repeated "sinking" of HMS Ark Royal springs to mind. But, then again, does Colin Kelly's "sinking" of the Haruna indicate a conspriacy between the Air Corps and Readers Digest? Hmmm. Marseille was certainly elevated to celebrity status in the press but, because of his accomplishments. Otherwise, he's an unlikely poster boy for the Herrenvolk. Disciplnary problem, long haired, lover of Jazz (which the Nazis regarded as decadent), descendant of French Huguenots, with a black batman. > notably the U-waffe] did sign autographs, send out photos to fans, > appear on post cards and collectible cards, participate in parades, > and generally do the whole public relations routine to assist the war > effort on the home front. Just because they went back to the 'front' > time after time does not mean that they never went back to Germany. > > Yes, every German serviceman was granted leave, but the point I was making, is that they weren't limited by a prescribed # of missions, and, that our pilots would have had higher scores if they'd flown a similar number of combat missions. Patrick Participate in parades? Next, you'll be telling me they marched around like geese! From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Fri Apr 12 23:52:41 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA27291; Fri, 12 Apr 96 23:52:40 +0200 Received: from medlantic.mhg.edu (medlantic.mhg.edu [198.133.139.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id XAA26280 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 23:51:17 +0200 (MET DST) Message-Id: <199604122151.XAA26280@lysander.lysator.liu.se> Received: by medlantic.mhg.edu id (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for europa@lysator.liu.se); Fri, 12 Apr 1996 17:51:11 -0400 Received: by medlantic.mhg.edu (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Fri, 12 Apr 1996 17:51:11 -0400 Received: by medlantic.mhg.edu (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-0); Fri, 12 Apr 1996 17:51:11 -0400 From: "Haugh, Patrick J." To: europa Subject: Africa maps and African rations Date: Fri, 12 Apr 96 17:24:00 EST Encoding: 16 TEXT X-Mailer: Microsoft Mail V3.0 Status: O Content-Length: 611 I am interested in the Africa maps if it looks as if there will be a long lag time before the "Africa Orientale" game gets a retread from GRD. Other names for the Italian rations issued in the desert ( stamped "AM") included "Alte Mann" and "Arabo Morte". Please, no more Balkan current events or classical history. I sweated through Caesar's Gallic Wars in the original Latin. It was no fun at all. I do not wish to see this turn into an SPQR forum. If we wish to discuss our take on the here and now Balkans, why not reply directly to a post? Haya Safari, Patrick Haugh, Washington D.C. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sat Apr 13 00:13:27 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA27655; Sat, 13 Apr 96 00:13:26 +0200 Received: from prague.crossover.com (root@prague.crossover.com [204.217.246.5]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id AAA27180 for ; Sat, 13 Apr 1996 00:12:41 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [205.161.32.192] (jastell.tiac.net [205.161.32.192]) by prague.crossover.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id RAA00650 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 17:04:15 -0400 X-Sender: jastell@post.crossover.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 18:12:06 -0400 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) Subject: Re: Erich Hartmann, Erich Hartmann Status: O Content-Length: 404 >> notably the U-waffe] did sign autographs, send out photos to fans, >> appear on post cards and collectible cards, participate in parades, >> and generally do the whole public relations routine.... > Participate in parades? Next, you'll be telling me they marched around > like geese! That's right -- probably caused by brain damage due to smoke inhalation (all those torch-lit parades in the 30s) From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sat Apr 13 00:37:50 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA27952; Sat, 13 Apr 96 00:37:49 +0200 Received: from server1.inetworld.com ([206.100.204.1]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id AAA27591 for ; Sat, 13 Apr 1996 00:37:30 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from server1.inetworld.com ([206.100.204.229]) by server1.inetworld.com (Netscape Mail Server v1.1) with SMTP id AAA199 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 13:08:54 -0700 Message-Id: <1.5.4b12.16.19960412121124.29ef7eb6@mailhost.inetworld.com> X-Sender: ctenevada@mailhost.inetworld.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4b12 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: ctenevada@inetworld.com (CTE NEVADA INC.) Subject: African Maps Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 13:08:54 -0700 Status: O Content-Length: 632 Calling Arthur Goodwin and Stefen Farrelly! I Have completed 2 maps covering the northern border of Ethiopia to the Nile Delta along with module rules already developed. (See "Rommell Beyond the Pyramids" in a battlefield report in a TEM a few issues back). The Maps are pretty good if I do say so myself. Rick Gayler should have a reduced copy of the north half somewhere in his desk? Im a little new at this e-mail business so please bear with me... Grant Luetkehans 2140 Arcane Ave. Reno, Nevada 89503 From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sat Apr 13 01:59:42 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA28606; Sat, 13 Apr 96 01:59:41 +0200 Received: from desiree.teleport.com (desiree.teleport.com [192.108.254.21]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id BAA29210 for ; Sat, 13 Apr 1996 01:58:51 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [206.163.121.51] (ip-pdx05-51.teleport.com [206.163.121.51]) by desiree.teleport.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA23603 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 16:58:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199604122358.QAA23603@desiree.teleport.com> X-Sender: zaius@mail.teleport.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 17:04:29 -0700 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: zaius@teleport.com (Steve) Subject: Last of the Independents Status: O Content-Length: 1714 > I hope we're not doomed to disaster. The game players hold the cards >at the moment, but cries for simulation are often heard. I still like to >hope that with all this talent we can get a good balance that works. A good balance is exactly what I'm striving for. Claims that anything less than a replay of historical events (with perhaps differences in which battles are fought over which towns) somehow automatically equates to a 'free-for-all' involving Anglo-German alliances are shallow, knee-jerk responses to legitimate calls for maximum player options. It was also suggested that the most restrictive version be adopted, to make the 'simulationists' happy. Then the clowns could ally France and Italy. Being one of the loopy bastards that person was referring to, I again would like to emphasize the point that giving players control over many grand strategic and political level decisions does not equate with creating a farcical situation. My own project is seeking out that middle ground that would create a believable *version* of WWII. Remember the 'simulation' fans are not a unified camp, either: There are many who say that it was flatly impossible for Germany to win WW2, or even beat Russia. Simulationists are wonderful for denouncing any contrary point of view as 'revisionism'. With all this in mind, I'm determined to blaze my own trails. If GRD comes out with GE and I like it, then I'll buy it. I'm not content to wait for five years of wrangling over "big option/little option". I suspect that neither is Mr. Astell, who seems to be playing GE already (didn't he have a mega-Europa underway?-how is that going?) SP "Freedom is always against the law." -J.R. "Bob" Dobbs From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sat Apr 13 02:32:03 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA28751; Sat, 13 Apr 96 02:32:02 +0200 Received: from desiree.teleport.com (desiree.teleport.com [192.108.254.21]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id CAA29700 for ; Sat, 13 Apr 1996 02:31:41 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [206.163.121.51] (ip-pdx05-51.teleport.com [206.163.121.51]) by desiree.teleport.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA23692; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 16:58:50 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199604122358.QAA23692@desiree.teleport.com> X-Sender: zaius@mail.teleport.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 17:04:37 -0700 To: conrad alan b From: zaius@teleport.com (Steve) Subject: Re: Gr. Europa unit reorgs. Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se Status: O Content-Length: 2675 >> Using Germany as an example, the Pz XX are divided up by period and rules >> govern their conversions and transformations, such as the 1939/40 overhauls >> and the expansion programme of 40/41. After that, it get easier, as > > A very tricky business, doing this kind of thing. That's true- which is why, with my limited time and fiscal resources, I'm trying to keep it as roughly historical as possible. The Germans are forced to reorganize their armoured units in 39/40 and 40/41, but I have a proviso that armour RPs can always be used to rebuild cadres or losses first before being used to upgrade existing units, &c...trying to walk the line between allowing flexibility to players and keeping things workable- the easiest way to create an OB for a game like this is to stick as close to history as is possible, and throw in options whenever possible-instead of approaching it from the notion of total flexibility. I'm against Germans building 13-9-10 Pz XX in 1943, just because they have the armour RPs. My desire for player control over policy options is well known by now, but I am not averse to conceding points to the simulation people when they have them: in terms of OBs and builds, I think it's best to stay close to historical precedent whenever possible- obviously game events in many cases might make that unnecessary or undesirable. Still, most reorganizations were based on decisions that were not predicated on the war situation: The Soviets still broke up their tank divisions in November-December 1939-after they just witnessed close hand German success with massed tanks. This is why I think it's dangerous to say the player 'represents' Hitler, or the Eisenhower or whatever- in my introduction to the rules I'm working on, I simply say the player represents the 'military-industrial elite' as a general class/caste of people as opposed to a specific officer or statesman. > Another point. A couple of sources have told of all the Russian >`volunteers' that worked their way into the army units on the eastern >front. Many behind the line functions were being carried out more and >more by these people as the war went on (to a point). > These were bodies, but were they on the T.O. & E. as the units went >on? In Europa we have Eastern troop units, but nothing like infantry RPs >picked up in Russia to reflect this yet. I want to tie builds of Ost Truppen units to ownership of various eastern territories (e.g.: occupy Ukraine and be able to build Ukrainian auxiliaries for the Wehrmacht.) > All this makes unit building a fun activity. That's the idea! SP "Freedom is always against the law." -J.R. "Bob" Dobbs From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sat Apr 13 04:11:25 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA29254; Sat, 13 Apr 96 04:11:24 +0200 Received: from osf1.gmu.edu (osf1.gmu.edu [129.174.1.13]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id EAA00904 for ; Sat, 13 Apr 1996 04:10:28 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from osf1.gmu.edu by osf1.gmu.edu; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/07Sep94-1001AM/GMUv3) id AA23722; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 22:10:05 -0400 Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 22:07:54 -0500 From: Nicholas Forte Reply-To: nforte@gmu.edu Subject: Re: African Maps To: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: <9604111013.ZM416@pepsi.gra.barclays.co.uk> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 55 Put me down for a set of maps. Nick Forte Reston, VA From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sat Apr 13 04:53:44 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA29418; Sat, 13 Apr 96 04:53:42 +0200 Received: from osf1.gmu.edu (osf1.gmu.edu [129.174.1.13]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id EAA01300 for ; Sat, 13 Apr 1996 04:53:17 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from osf1.gmu.edu by osf1.gmu.edu; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/07Sep94-1001AM/GMUv3) id AA29656; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 22:53:11 -0400 Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 22:51:09 -0500 From: Nicholas Forte Reply-To: nforte@gmu.edu Subject: Re: Game Envy To: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 2478 On Fri, 12 Apr 1996 10:03:35 -0400 jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) wrote: >>For Grand Europa a decision seems to need to be made if GE is going >>to be a game or a simulation. If it's a game, great, open the >>flood gates for letting player build and do as they please, much >>as in WiF. If it's a simulation, it should follow the basic >>historical path (with deviations).... > >My vote goes for simulation. I am also in agreement that Europa should be designed as a simulation, but the question is a simulation of what? Those who advocate Europa strictly following the actual campaign may end up with a game that is actually false to the real conditions of WWII. If Europa is designed to force the actual sequence of the war--i.e. the quick fall of France, the attack on Taranto, the failure of the Axis to invade Malta, Rommel's failure to capture Egypt, the battle of Stalingrad, guaranteed success at Normandy, etc.--then I don't know what would be the point of playing Europa. Guaranteed outcomes isolates the players from the pressures and options that actual commanders had. Guranteed outcomes would also hide the reasons of an actual campaign's success or failure from the players. You also loose the ability to "what if" a campaign such as landing at the Pas de Calais instead of at Normandy. Should each players' moves be listed in the rules so as to prevent any deviation from the historical path? A properly designed simulation should include all of the variables that the actual commanders faced. If both sides play exactly the same strategies as historical, then the outcomes should generally follow the historical course. However, the outcomes shouldn't always be the same as historical in as much as luck has an effect on the battlefield (should the storm that hits at Normandy always destroy one Mulburry harbor, not both or none). But if the players are allowed to exercise some command options, then it should be possible to alter the historical outcome. However, once you allow players to alter the outcomes of any particular campaign, then you must recognize that this will have an impact on the overall campaign and must make the system flexible enough to handle the altered conditions. A "simulation" that forces the historical campaign results is not a simulation! It is just history. It can be considered a simulation only if you believe life is pre-ordained and that the actions of men have no impact. Nick Forte Reston, VA From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sat Apr 13 06:51:00 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA00225; Sat, 13 Apr 96 06:50:59 +0200 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id GAA02393 for ; Sat, 13 Apr 1996 06:50:24 +0200 (MET DST) From: j.broshot@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA149840175; Sat, 13 Apr 1996 04:36:15 GMT Message-Id: <199604130436.AA149840175@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Sat, 13 Apr 96 04:36:15 UTC 0000 ( from INTERNET# ; Sat, 13 Apr 96 04:36:05 UTC 0000) Date: Sat, 13 Apr 96 04:42:00 UTC 0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: J.BROSHOT X-Genie-Qk-Id: 7590496 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 155725 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: more Commonwealth heroes Status: O Content-Length: 921 a few more Commonwealth heroes Wing Commander Willie Tait (commander of 617 Squadron for the attacks on the Tirpitz) Dave McIntosh (navigator with 418 Squadron, RCAF, and author of a fascinating book on what it was like to fly with a hero but not claim to be one yourself, TERROR IN THE STARBOARD SEAT); plus serving with 1 x 10-8 1 (Can): Farley Mowat (author, enviromentalist and sometime "undesirable alien" [refused admittance into the U.S.); his AND NO BIRDS SANG gives an infantryman's eye view of the campaigns in Sicily and southern Italy) Jim Broshot, St. James MO and serving with 1 x 9-6 Airbne XX 6: Richard Todd (noted English actor and perhaps the only man to have invaded Normandy twice; he jumped with the 6th Airborne Division (7th Para Bn) on 6 June 1944 and then, portraying Major John Howard in the movie, "The Longest Day," he landed by glider to take the Orne bridges). Jim Broshot, St. James MO From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sat Apr 13 06:51:02 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA00232; Sat, 13 Apr 96 06:51:01 +0200 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id GAA02392 for ; Sat, 13 Apr 1996 06:50:20 +0200 (MET DST) From: j.broshot@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA149700172; Sat, 13 Apr 1996 04:36:12 GMT Message-Id: <199604130436.AA149700172@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Sat, 13 Apr 96 04:36:12 UTC 0000 ( from INTERNET# ; Sat, 13 Apr 96 04:36:01 UTC 0000) Date: Sat, 13 Apr 96 04:44:00 UTC 0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: J.BROSHOT X-Genie-Qk-Id: 4310873 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 155694 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: Gr. Europa reorganizations Status: O Content-Length: 3272 "That's true- which is why, with my limited time and fiscal resources, I'm trying to keep it as roughly historical as possible. The Germans are forced to reorganize their armoured units in 39/40 and 40/41, but I have a proviso that armour RPs can always be used to rebuild cadres or losses first before being used to upgrade existing units, &c...trying to walk the line between allowing flexibility to players and keeping things workable- the easiest way to create an OB for a game like this is to stick as close to history as is possible, and throw in options whenever possible- instead of approaching it from the notion of total flexibility. I'm against Germans building 13-9-10 Pz XX in 1943, just because they have the armour RPs." Very true. FALL BLAU (the German summer offensive in Russia) started in June 1942. The German Army, having only a finite number of tanks and tank units, was forced strip battalions from panzer divisions elsewhere to reinforce the panzer and motorized divisions of Army Group South for the offensive, thus (in Europa terms from SE) Jul I 42: Army Group North: 1 x 11-10 Pz XX 8 (one pz bn) 1 x 11-10 Pz XX 12 (two pz bns) 2 x 6-10 Mot XX 18, 20 Army Group Center: 1 x 9-10 Pz XX 1 (one pz bn) 1 x 11-10 Pz XX 2 (one pz bn) 1 x 10-10 Pz XX 4 (one pz bn) 1 x 10-10 Pz XX 5 (two pz bns) 1 x 13-10 Pz XX 17 (one pz bn) 1 x 13-10 Pz XX 18 (one pz bn) 1 x 12-10 Pz XX 19 (one pz bn) 1 x 12-10 Pz XX 20 (three pz bns) 4 x 6-10 Mot XX 10, 14, 25, 36 Army Group South: 1 x 16-10 Pz XX 3 (three pz bns) 1 x 16-10 Pz XX 9 (three pz bns) 1 x 16-10 Pz XX 11 (three pz bns) 1 x 16-10 Pz XX 13 (three pz bns) 1 x 16-10 Pz XX 14 (three pz bns) 1 x 16-10 Pz XX 16 (three pz bns) 1 x 12-10 Pz XX 22 (three pz bns) 1 x 12-10 Pz XX 22 (three pz bns) 1 x 12-10 Pz XX 24 (three pz bns) 1 x 11-10 PzG XX 3 (one pz bn) 1 x 10-10 PzG XX 16 (one pz bn) 1 x 10-10 PzG XX 29 (one pz bn) 1 x 11-10 PzG XX 60 (one pz bn) 1 x 10-10 PzG XX GD (two pz/aslt gun bns) For completeness sake: Norway: 25 Panzer XX forming with one pz bn France: 1 x 12-10 Pz XX 6 (rebuilding, two pz bns) 1 x 12-10 Pz XX 7 (rebuilding, two pz bns) 1 x 11-10 Pz XX 10 (rebuilding, two pz bns) Africa: 1 x 9-10 Pz XX 15 (two pz bns) 1 x 9-10 Pz XX 21 (two pz bns) 1 x 8-10 Mot XX 90 SE tracks the 1942 panzer reorganization by providing for the upgrades of the Army Group South panzer and panzergrenadier divisions first. However, SE does not show that these upgrades were at the expense of the divisions of Army Group North and Army Group South. The panzer divisions of these army groups would either have to be reduced to cadre or, in SF terms, given a (-4 PzG) marker. This is based upon a hasty review of Tessin. Jim Broshot, St. James MO From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sat Apr 13 18:43:31 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA04081; Sat, 13 Apr 96 18:43:29 +0200 Received: from felix.dircon.co.uk (felix.dircon.co.uk [193.128.224.10]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id SAA12086 for ; Sat, 13 Apr 1996 18:40:27 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [194.112.35.52] (gw1-052.pool.dircon.co.uk) by felix.dircon.co.uk with SMTP id AA01998 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Sat, 13 Apr 1996 17:40:23 +0100 X-Sender: cloister@popmail.dircon.co.uk Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1996 17:42:49 +0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: cloister@dircon.co.uk (Perry de Havilland) Subject: Re:Yet more Luft-peeves flak Status: O Content-Length: 4088 A couple people asked me to repost this one as they wanted to make sense of Ray's reply (original to europa@lysator.liu.se got lost in cyberspace I guess.) Original sent 11/4/96 to & Ray Kanarr. So here it is: -----------------------Copy follows------------------------------ >On 4/10/96, Perry de Havilland stated, among the excellent points in >his post, this: > >>A rule for *experten* counters might be a nice optional rule >>in a air war module. > >1) I have the same objection to this that I have to the Rudel >counter, that it is inappropriate in an operational-level game to >single out individuals, no matter how "effective"; Basically, I agree (I think you took me too seriously about wanting to simulate when Bob Brahams's unit beat up on Schnaufer's unit when they mistook Braham's slow cruising gaggle of Beaufighters for straggling Lancasters. Oops). Aces were not organised into 'super units' of counter size but were distributed amongst various units: such folk have more bearing on the *average* level of skill, which for the Western nations and the Axis was much of a muchness. However, the reverse was often not true. For example, the RAF often used OTU assets (operational training units) for low risk missions, such as minelaying and 'spoof' raids. Spoof raids were designed to draw nightfighters away from the main attack and the bombers usually did not press them home but rather returned to base after having tricked the Germans into committing assets against the attack. On a few occasions, the OTU attacks actually did bomb targets (usually coastal ones) and as a result, were sometimes intercepted. When this happened, losses were usually higher than normal. That sounds to me like a 'Poor Air Crew' modifier (they are students, after all). I suspect most major nations should have the option of using training assets operationally, but with a penalty if they actually get into an air-to-air fight. >2) As far as the 'experten' [including Rudel in his field] go, while >these pilots were undoubtedly good, recent scholarship has started to >call into question the extent of their claimed victories, noting >overall 'kill inflation' among all combatants, and natural propaganda >uplifting of 'heros' by all sides during wartime as the bases for this >questioning. Once again, I agree. However, note that many German kills were aircraft destroyed on the ground. Whilst this is quite legitimate, it does tend to paint a misleading picture when other airforces did not count such aircraft as 'kills' in the same sense. Most of the Luftwaffe and RAF *nightfighter* aces seem to be fairly well documented and for some reason their figures seem to be less inflated than their daylight counterparts. I am not certain why this is but I suspect the fact that kills tended to be made not in confusing dogfights but rather in more deliberate one-on-one stalking attacks might have had something to do with it. Night air combat in WWII really did have a very different dynamic to daylight actions. Even so, I would agree that few of these figures will EVER be verified with complete certainty. >Taking Rudel as an example, we really only have his word that 519 >tanks were destroyed by him. In a battlefield environment, with flak >flying around [look at the number of times he was shot down!], and >flying at speed, with your other crewmember facing backward, and the >smoke, dust, etc., etc., with relatively few of these 'victories' >being able to be confirmed, it does seem that an accurate count would >be a bit difficult. >3) This is also eventually lead to a call for an Audie Murphy >counter, etc., etc., blah, blah. If we're going to discuss counters >for individuals, it would be FAR more worthwhile to discuss counters >to represent corps commanders and above. Damn, I WAS rather hoping for an Audie Murphy counter... and a Biggles counter as well! :-) P.S. To clarify my earler post when I said I was told that ten or so staff at Sandhurst played CFNA...that was ten or so ON EACH SIDE!!! Regards Perry ...- From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sat Apr 13 21:08:57 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA04853; Sat, 13 Apr 96 21:08:56 +0200 Received: from dub-img-1.compuserve.com (dub-img-1.compuserve.com [198.4.9.1]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id VAA14620 for ; Sat, 13 Apr 1996 21:07:48 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by dub-img-1.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id PAA14033; Sat, 13 Apr 1996 15:07:13 -0400 Date: 13 Apr 96 15:06:04 EDT From: Alan Philson <100626.2267@CompuServe.COM> To: unknown Subject: Re: Weird ships Message-Id: <960413190603_100626.2267_BHL85-2@CompuServe.COM> Status: O Content-Length: 379 >If you go down to transport ships, you'll find lots of weird names. Like the German supply ship Buenos Aires. I've also heard a rumour that there was a Japanese transport ship named Boston!< Quite right Elias, she was called the Boston Maru, there were also two other Bostons. An RN minesweeper and USN Cruiser. Now if you want humour what about a 'Smely' torpedo boat Alan From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sat Apr 13 22:06:47 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA05130; Sat, 13 Apr 96 22:06:46 +0200 Received: from post.QueensU.CA (root@knot.QueensU.CA [130.15.126.54]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA15657 for ; Sat, 13 Apr 1996 22:06:14 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from mast.QueensU.CA (MAST.QueensU.CA [130.15.100.1]) by post.QueensU.CA (8.6.12/8.6.10+ASH) with SMTP id QAA25591 for ; Sat, 13 Apr 1996 16:06:02 -0400 Received: from hilda.mast.QueensU.CA by mast.QueensU.CA (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA28872; Sat, 13 Apr 96 15:58:37 EDT Received: by hilda.mast.QueensU.CA (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA25723; Sat, 13 Apr 96 15:57:35 EDT From: pardue@hilda.mast.QueensU.CA (Keith Pardue) Message-Id: <9604131957.AA25723@hilda.mast.QueensU.CA> Subject: SYSTEM: Mountain Artillery To: europa@lysator.liu.se Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1996 15:57:34 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL13] Content-Type: text Status: O Content-Length: 459 Hi, Here's another quirky rule for Elias to add to his file. Perhaps Frank will have a good explanation for this one too! Has anyone else ever noticed what terrain mountain artillery units move through most quickly during the winter? Wooded Rough only costs them 2 movement points! Even a road costs 3! How do they ever do it, Frank? Best Wishes, Keith Pardue Kingston, Ontario, Canada Home of the 123.76 Royal Canadian Mountain Artillery Regiment From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sat Apr 13 22:42:22 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA05295; Sat, 13 Apr 96 22:42:20 +0200 Received: from dub-img-2.compuserve.com (dub-img-2.compuserve.com [198.4.9.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA16277 for ; Sat, 13 Apr 1996 22:41:39 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by dub-img-2.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id QAA23484; Sat, 13 Apr 1996 16:41:02 -0400 Date: 13 Apr 96 16:38:38 EDT From: Alan Philson <100626.2267@CompuServe.COM> To: unknown Subject: Luft peeves and France 40 Message-Id: <960413203838_100626.2267_BHL76-1@CompuServe.COM> Status: O Content-Length: 789 Before the topic of pilot experience and aces and 'experten' runs out of fuel , there have been comments in TEM and in a previous posting about the French Air Force and its pilots. In a recent book by Brian Cull and others (12 days in May) he states that" a considerable number of French fighter pilots had flown in fighter combat in the Great War", I reckon that puts them well into the 40-50 age group, does that make them experienced pilots with the situational awareness and reflexes to qualify them for a plus DRM against the Luftwaffe, or does it make them over the hill and due for a desk job. I think the RAF rules at that time had a cut off age of 38 for active fighter pilots. The breakdown of losses in this book tends to support the second theory. Any comments. Alan Philson From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sat Apr 13 22:42:23 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA05300; Sat, 13 Apr 96 22:42:22 +0200 Received: from dub-img-2.compuserve.com (dub-img-2.compuserve.com [198.4.9.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA16276 for ; Sat, 13 Apr 1996 22:41:38 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by dub-img-2.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id QAA23499; Sat, 13 Apr 1996 16:41:04 -0400 Date: 13 Apr 96 16:38:48 EDT From: Alan Philson <100626.2267@CompuServe.COM> To: unknown Subject: More chrome please Message-Id: <960413203847_100626.2267_BHL76-2@CompuServe.COM> Status: O Content-Length: 183 Why is there no rule for calling up the strategic air force to bomb V- weapons units? This was after all the main target for Bomber Command from June to September 1944 Alan Philson From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sun Apr 14 00:26:46 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA05803; Sun, 14 Apr 96 00:26:45 +0200 Received: from ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (abcclibr@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu [128.174.5.59]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id AAA17766 for ; Sun, 14 Apr 1996 00:25:42 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by ux1.cso.uiuc.edu id AA27391 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for europa@lysator.liu.se); Sat, 13 Apr 1996 17:25:30 -0500 Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1996 17:25:30 -0500 From: conrad alan b To: Elias Nordling Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: SF:CAP (Was: Re: Yet more of my $0.02 worth) In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 1770 On Wed, 10 Apr 1996, Elias Nordling wrote: > >Husky scenario) is the fact that the CAP rule allows one to fly > >fighters at maximum range which can then intercept incoming > >missions over a hex which they could not reach if flying the > >regular 1/2 range interception mission. If one has lots of > >fighters, like the Allies, then one can fly lots of CAP. > > Huh? I thought that was the very point of CAP missions! To extend your > interception ranges by having a standing patrol over an area. Of the Yes and no. The problem is one inherent in the system to some extent. With many types of bombers, normal bomb laods fixed by the bomb bays so whether a unit flies a max range mission will only have potential effect on sortie rate. However with fighters a unit flying half range could stay over target a long time, and hence have more planes over the target at any point over a two week turn. At max range the aircraft could only be over the target a short period. This was why the Allies thought Salerno might be chancy. They were at the limit of what they considered useable air range. Game wise the Allies seem to have greater potential to use the air assets. Not only full range, full use CAP. But extended range missions, which seem to me to give them more ability that air units had. However, is it the game that is wrong, or is it that the real commanders were too limited in the way they used their units? One hope we would have is that the game system would let us play out options to see if the real commanders were wrong. But a tech issue like range and useability is a tricky one that the designers must carefully look at to see if, what the rules make legal, was really working that way. Alan Conrad From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sun Apr 14 01:28:51 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA06051; Sun, 14 Apr 96 01:28:50 +0200 Received: from felix.dircon.co.uk (felix.dircon.co.uk [193.128.224.10]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id BAA18455 for ; Sun, 14 Apr 1996 01:28:08 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [194.112.37.28] (gw5-028.pool.dircon.co.uk) by felix.dircon.co.uk with SMTP id AA21002 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Sun, 14 Apr 1996 00:28:08 +0100 X-Sender: cloister@popmail.dircon.co.uk Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 00:30:32 +0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: cloister@dircon.co.uk (Perry de Havilland) Subject: Help request re. Altitude Air Rules Status: O Content-Length: 2203 I am trying to expand my fairly basic ideas on working Altitude into the Europa air system for some house rules (I have received some interesting feedback from other Europa grognards re. my and other earlier posts on the subject). As a result, I would love to tap into the remarkable knowledge & talent pool that this forum represents. What I need is opinions on which aircraft should be put into which altitude optimised class. I am very au fait with British, US & German kites and have reasonable knowledge of Italian, Polish and French aircraft. I am a relative ignoramus regarding Soviet & Romanian aircraft however. I would even be interested in comments re. Japanese aircraft about which my knowlage is also rather patchy. That said, I would value input on **ALL** nationalities as I would like to hear views on this from other perspectives. The High Bands in my tentative system are: Low = < 15,000 ft Medium = 15,000 - 30,000 ft High = 30,000 ft + (plus an optional Very High Band = 42,000 ft +) These Altitude Bands do *NOT* represent service or zoom ceilings, but rather areas of optimal performance (for example the excellent Fw.190A3 could get to 30,000 ft. but it's performance up there was dreadful. Optimal performance was below 15,000 ft, hence 'Low'). What I want to know is your opinions on what band is 'optimal' for a given aircraft type. For example, here are a few of my estimates: Fw.190A2 = Low He.219A = Medium Bf.109E = Medium Spitfire (any mark) F = Medium Spitfire (any mark) HF = High Spitfire (any mark) LF = Low Mosquito NF.2 = Medium Mosquito FB.6 = Low Mosquito NF.19 = Low Mosquito NF.30 = High Any assistance and input would be very much appreciated. I am *only* interested in fighters at the moment (F & HF). I have already sent out five copies but if anyone else wants to see my rough ideas for an altitude house rule, please e-mail me and I will send it to you. I am adding to it as a result of feedback I have already received (Thanks...you know who you are!). It is only a page and a half of tentative musings and is in *Macintosh MS Word 5.1* format, but can be saved as plain text for you benighted chaps with PCs :-) Regards Perry ...- From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sun Apr 14 04:12:54 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA06934; Sun, 14 Apr 96 04:12:52 +0200 Received: from iac.iac.org.nz ([192.124.160.153]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id EAA20321 for ; Sun, 14 Apr 1996 04:11:39 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from smtpgate.iac.org.nz by iac.iac.org.nz (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA22342; Sun, 14 Apr 96 14:07:51 NZS Message-Id: <9604140207.AA22342@iac.iac.org.nz> From: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (David H. Lippman) Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 14:09 GMT To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: The Boston Maru Status: O Content-Length: 772 There may have been, but the Japanese had a troopship named Argentina Maru. It had been a liner on the Japan-South America run before WW2, as the Japanese were setting up little expatriate colonies all through South America, which gave the Norteamericano yellow press considerable fodder for anti-Japanese rhetoric in the first half of the century. As for the Roman chat: "Be it ever so crumbly, there's no place like Rome. Nero, he was the emperor, and the palace was his home. But he loved to play with matches And for a fire yearned, So he set Rome a-sizzle and he fiddled while it burned." David H. Lippman Public Affairs Officer US Naval Antarctic Support Unit Christchurch, New Zealand From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sun Apr 14 06:28:22 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA07648; Sun, 14 Apr 96 06:28:20 +0200 Received: from medlantic.mhg.edu (medlantic.mhg.edu [198.133.139.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA21464 for ; Sun, 14 Apr 1996 06:27:35 +0200 (MET DST) Message-Id: <199604140427.GAA21464@lysander.lysator.liu.se> Received: by medlantic.mhg.edu id (InterLock SMTP Gateway 3.0 for europa@lysator.liu.se); Sun, 14 Apr 1996 00:27:32 -0400 Received: by medlantic.mhg.edu (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-1); Sun, 14 Apr 1996 00:27:32 -0400 Received: by medlantic.mhg.edu (Protected-side Proxy Mail Agent-0); Sun, 14 Apr 1996 00:27:32 -0400 From: "Haugh, Patrick J." To: europa-request@lysator.liu.se, europa Subject: Commonwealth hero? Mais non! Date: Fri, 12 Apr 96 17:00:00 EST Encoding: 10 TEXT X-Mailer: Microsoft Mail V3.0 Status: O Content-Length: 360 And here was me thinking Pierre Clostermann was French just 'cos he's from France ( or Belgium, I forget which). Not part of the Commonwealth last time I looked. Alanbrooke, Auchinleck, Montgomery, O'Connor and Dorman-Smith were all born in Ireland, which was technically still part of the Commonwealth. Haya Safari, Patrick Haugh, Washington D.C. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sun Apr 14 07:54:31 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA07966; Sun, 14 Apr 96 07:54:30 +0200 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id HAA22119 for ; Sun, 14 Apr 1996 07:46:43 +0200 (MET DST) From: j.broshot@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA049759950; Sun, 14 Apr 1996 05:32:30 GMT Message-Id: <199604140532.AA049759950@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Sun, 14 Apr 96 05:32:30 UTC 0000 ( from INTERNET# ; Sun, 14 Apr 96 05:32:16 UTC 0000) Date: Sun, 14 Apr 96 05:20:00 UTC 0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: J.BROSHOT X-Genie-Qk-Id: 6340093 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 162251 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: Weird ships (Marus etc.) Status: O Content-Length: 496 For the Europa Great War buffs, the Royal Navy had a 12inch gun monitor in WW1 named "Prince Eugene." In WW2, the Italian Navy had a light cruiser, "Eugenio di Savoia," which survived the war and was transferred to Greece More Japanese auxiliary vessel names in WW2: Arizona Maru (transport) Canberra Maru (transport) Ceylon Maru (transport) San Diego Maru (fleet tanker) (from WARSHIPS OF THE IMPERIAL JAPANESE NAVY, 1869-1945, by Hansgeorg Jentschura et al). Jim Broshot, St. James MO From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sun Apr 14 14:33:31 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA09273; Sun, 14 Apr 96 14:33:30 +0200 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id OAA25780 for ; Sun, 14 Apr 1996 14:32:30 +0200 (MET DST) From: j.broshot@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA066951757; Sun, 14 Apr 1996 06:02:37 GMT Message-Id: <199604140602.AA066951757@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Sun, 14 Apr 96 06:02:37 UTC 0000 ( from INTERNET# ; Sun, 14 Apr 96 06:02:22 UTC 0000) Date: Sun, 14 Apr 96 05:54:00 UTC 0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: J.BROSHOT X-Genie-Qk-Id: 4887214 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 162343 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: Clostermann and another hero Status: O Content-Length: 1039 "Commonwealth hero? Mais non!" Ah, but Flight Lieutenant Pierre Clostermann, DSO, DFC, after service with the Free French "Alsace" Squadron, spent the rest of the war flying for the RAF, first with 602 "City of Glasgow" Squadron on Spitfires and then ending as a leading Tempest V ace with 122 Wing in Europe. He was the highest scoring French ace in WW2 with 33 victories and 5 probables. THE BIG SHOW, by Pierre Clostermann A HISTORY OF FRENCH MILITARY AVIATION AIR ENTHUSIAST NO.48 Actually, my personal favorite is: Captain Rodger Winn RNVR, who, although crippled by polio, began as a civilian employee of the Royal Navy and ended up as the officer in charge of the Admiralty's Submarine Tracking Room which kept tabs on all of the German U-Boats which was one the methods that helped lead to the Allied victory in the Battle of the Atlantic (and who was awarded the CB, OBE and U. S. Legion of Merit). VERY SPECIAL INTELLIGENCE, by Patrick Beesly SEIZING THE ENIGMA, by David Kahn Jim Broshot, St. James MO From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sun Apr 14 19:31:42 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA11180; Sun, 14 Apr 96 19:31:40 +0200 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id TAA00346 for ; Sun, 14 Apr 1996 19:30:43 +0200 (MET DST) From: m.royer3@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA129652188; Sun, 14 Apr 1996 17:16:28 GMT Message-Id: <199604141716.AA129652188@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Sun, 14 Apr 96 17:16:28 UTC 0000 ( from inet# ; Sun, 14 Apr 96 17:15:19 UTC 0000) Date: Sun, 14 Apr 96 17:16:00 UTC 0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: M.ROYER3 X-Genie-Qk-Id: 3764598 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 550590 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: Sino-Japanese Conflict Playtes Status: O Content-Length: 3571 Sino-Japanese Conflict Playtest Nov II 37 Japanese Player Turn After two and one-half months of bloody urban combat, the gallent Chinese defense of Shanghai has been cracked. In a strike to the southern entent of the city, the Japanese Shanghai Expeditionary Force routed the last of the defenders out of the city one street-block at a time. General Matsui, in an effort to gain popular and political support in Japan, declared that it will be only a short time before Nanking, the Nationalist's capital, is in Japanese hands and the KMT has collapsed. In the battle for Shanghai, the Chinese have sacrificed much of their precious Central Army forces. Nearly irreplacable artillery and elite forces performed admirably in what ulitmately became a hopeless endevour. However, they gained valueable time for the remainder of the Chinese nation to organize itself for total war. In an assault coordinated with Shanghai, Japanese forces in Hangchow struck out of the city and secured a corridor all the way to Tai Hu (Lake) cutting off any Chinese southern retreat from Shanghai. Meanwhile, the North China Area Army (NCAA) has had a much more difficult time of things in November. The army, which has struck too deep too quickly is now in disarray. Supplies are poorly positioned and forces are inappropriately located. Shihkiachuang is still holding out, preventing the Japanese from securing hold of the entire province of Hopei. In an effort to gain the city, local commanders elect to assault the city at 2:1 (+1 for engineers) and fail, thus consuming all available attack supply in the area. This is a major setback for the NCAA as they have become bogged down and cannot advance further. Nov II 37 Chinese Player Turn With Shanghai lost, the Chinese forces in the region began a general retreat. They have been forced to retreat along a single avenue between Tai Hu and the Yangtze river since the south side of Tai Hu is cordoned off by Japanese units. In an attempt to prevent the retreat from becoming a rout, Chiang Kai-shek elected to hold his government steadfastly in Nanking for another turn. A strong rear guard has been set up along the Tayun Ho (Grand Canal). In north China, things are fairing much better. Due to the stalled Japanese assault, Chinese provincial forces along with a few Central Army units continue to build up defensive lines to the south of the Japanese. Shihkiachuang remains Chinese controlled, but the city is nearly isolated. Only a thread of low quality peace preservation troops maintains contact withthe city. In addition, the Japanese have learned some humility and not to take guerillas lightly, as the Communists swept down out of Wu-tai Shan (Mountains) catching an undefended air unit and two railroad engineers. The air unit was aborted and the two engineers eliminated. This is a further devistating blow to the Japanese and high ranking generals throughout the area committed hari-kari (as does the Japanese player). In Shantung province, the Japanese have again overextended their forces allowing Chinese marines to catch a lone armored company along a remote road and destroy it. It appears evident that a push southward by the Japanese in the north will have to wait for spring. They must use the winter months to stockpile supplies and resources and re-organize their forces. The failures of the Japanese North China Area Army has given Tokyo pause as to the wisdom of committing further forces to the conflict. However, these failures are offset by success in Central China. -Mark R. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sun Apr 14 20:04:22 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA11465; Sun, 14 Apr 96 20:04:21 +0200 Received: from travel1.travel-net.com (root@travel1.travel-net.com [204.92.71.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id UAA00963 for ; Sun, 14 Apr 1996 20:03:32 +0200 (MET DST) From: bradbury@travel1.travel-net.com Received: from 204.92.71.2.travel-net.com (trc135.travel-net.com [205.150.57.135]) by travel1.travel-net.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id OAA17076; Sun, 14 Apr 1996 14:14:58 -0400 Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 14:14:58 -0400 Message-Id: <199604141814.OAA17076@travel1.travel-net.com> X-Sender: bradbury@mail.travel-net.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: "Haugh, Patrick J." Subject: Re: Commonwealth hero? Mais non! Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se Status: O Content-Length: 1161 > And here was me thinking Pierre Clostermann was French just 'cos he's >from France ( or Belgium, I forget which). Not part of the Commonwealth last >time I looked. Alanbrooke, Auchinleck, Montgomery, O'Connor and Dorman-Smith >were all born in Ireland, which was technically still part of the >Commonwealth. > >Haya Safari, >Patrick Haugh, >Washington D.C. I believe both Alanbrooke and Monty would be considered Ulsterman (and given the events of the last 100 years, many people would consider that an important distinction) and Ulster still being part of Gt. Britain, then these gentlemen can be considered Commenwealth "heroes". Monty was actually born in London, where his father was serving as vicar of St Mark's, Kennington. Another person to add to this list is John Dill, who was born in County Armagh, and after being replaced as CIGS by Brooke, went on to serve in Washington and is widely seen as having make an important contribution to the Anglo-American partnership through his excellent relationship with Marshall. Dill is buried at Arlington cemetery, an exceptional honour for an non-American. Nigel Bradbury Ottawa, Ontario From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sun Apr 14 20:24:56 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA11610; Sun, 14 Apr 96 20:24:53 +0200 Received: from smtp4.aw.com (smtp4.aw.com [192.207.117.64]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id UAA01450 for ; Sun, 14 Apr 1996 20:24:36 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from East-Message_Server by smtp4.aw.com with Novell_GroupWise; Sun, 14 Apr 1996 14:28:13 -0400 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1 Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 15:30:37 -0400 From: Ray Kanarr To: cloister@dircon.co.uk, europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: Altitude Air Rules Status: O Content-Length: 430 Perry, Jason Long may want to weigh in on this with more authority than I can muster, but from what little I do know, altitude bands of 0-12,000ft. low 12-24,000ft. medium 24-36,000+ft. high might be more representative of optimal OPERATIONAL performance boundaries, rather than optimal TEST performance boundaries. I'd also like a copy of your materials. Thanks for contributing to the growth of Europa! Ray From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sun Apr 14 21:16:29 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA11991; Sun, 14 Apr 96 21:16:28 +0200 Received: from smtp4.aw.com (smtp4.aw.com [192.207.117.64]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id VAA02406 for ; Sun, 14 Apr 1996 21:15:43 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from East-Message_Server by smtp4.aw.com with Novell_GroupWise; Sun, 14 Apr 1996 15:19:22 -0400 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1 Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 16:20:05 -0400 From: Ray Kanarr To: pardue@hilda.mast.queensu.ca, europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: SYSTEM: Mountain Artillery Status: O Content-Length: 334 On 4/13/96, Keith Pardue sent in: >Has anyone else ever noticed what terrain mountain >artillery units move through most quickly during the winter? >Wooded Rough only costs them 2 movement points! Even >a road costs 3! Its those shaggy little pack mules, Keith, the cold, slippery, frozen road hurt their little hooves! ;-) Ray From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sun Apr 14 21:38:44 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA12158; Sun, 14 Apr 96 21:38:42 +0200 Received: from smtp4.aw.com (smtp4.aw.com [192.207.117.64]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id VAA02843 for ; Sun, 14 Apr 1996 21:38:19 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from East-Message_Server by smtp4.aw.com with Novell_GroupWise; Sun, 14 Apr 1996 15:41:57 -0400 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1 Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 16:44:18 -0400 From: Ray Kanarr To: o-noreli@jmk.su.se, abcclibr@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: SF:CAP Status: O Content-Length: 1403 On 4/13/96, Alan Conrad wrote in: >However, is it the game that is wrong, or is it that the real >commanders were too limited in the way they used their >units? One hope we would have is that the game system >would let us play out options to see if the real >commanders were wrong. But a tech issue like range and >useability is a tricky one that the designers must carefully >look at to see if, what the rules make legal, was really >working that way. Perhaps the issue is that certain decisions which players of the simulation can make, can be made with complete CONFIDENCE, whereas the situation in reality was more in doubt. If so, there should be a change in the rules to reflect this, either: 1) An absolute change, so that units are not as effective at max range as they are at shorter ranges, as in [for a relatively extreme example]: a fighter unit loses 1 AF/DF for every hex flown beyond half range when flying CAP; or 2) A relative change, so that there is some POTENTIAL penalty for flying at ranges longer than half range, as in: a fighter unit flying CAP has to roll for abort on landing for every 2 hexes flown beyond half range, to represent the huge additional amount of wear-and-tear incumbent on having sufficient battlefield coverage for CAP at longer ranges, given that more planes have to fly further and more often to maintain a presence over the hex. Ray From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sun Apr 14 22:08:56 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA12341; Sun, 14 Apr 96 22:08:55 +0200 Received: from smtp4.aw.com (smtp4.aw.com [192.207.117.64]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id WAA03403 for ; Sun, 14 Apr 1996 22:08:24 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from East-Message_Server by smtp4.aw.com with Novell_GroupWise; Sun, 14 Apr 1996 16:12:02 -0400 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1 Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 17:14:22 -0400 From: Ray Kanarr To: j.broshot@genie.com, europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re:Weird ships (Marus etc.) Status: O Content-Length: 473 To add my .0003.5 cents to this topic: I read, a while ago, and only tangentially to what I was researching at the time, that Axis vessels captured and then put into service with the British Merchant Marine were renamed as the Empire ___________ [insert individual ship names here]. If someone can verify or debunk this, I'd appreciate knowing either way, so that I can either shift the info into the deep storage trivia part of my brain, or discard it altogether. Ray From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Sun Apr 14 22:31:39 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA12473; Sun, 14 Apr 96 22:31:38 +0200 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id WAA03801 for ; Sun, 14 Apr 1996 22:30:48 +0200 (MET DST) From: m.royer3@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA284982992; Sun, 14 Apr 1996 20:16:32 GMT Message-Id: <199604142016.AA284982992@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Sun, 14 Apr 96 20:16:32 UTC 0000 ( from inet# ; Sun, 14 Apr 96 20:15:42 UTC 0000) Date: Sun, 14 Apr 96 20:17:00 UTC 0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: M.ROYER3 X-Genie-Qk-Id: 0275698 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 552540 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: SYSTEM: Mountain Artillery Status: O Content-Length: 655 Reply: Item #1493526 from europa@lysator.liu.se@INET#on 96/04/14 at 16:20 >Has anyone else ever noticed what terrain mountain >artillery units move through most quicklyduring the winter? >Wooded Rough only costs them 2 movement points! Even >a road costs 3! Keith, I've noted this. Since the Japanese have a significant amount of mountain artillery it becomes significant in my China game. I'm trying the following rule in playtest: Mountain artillery moves as artillery except in terrain where a mountain unit would gain a benefit. In such terrain, the mountain artillery uses the "other" column on the TEC (i.e., moves as infantry). -Mark R. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 15 02:11:19 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA13734; Mon, 15 Apr 96 02:11:17 +0200 Received: from psyche.the-wire.com (psyche.the-wire.com [198.53.192.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id CAA06857 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 02:09:07 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from mhughes.the-wire.com (mhughes.the-wire.com [205.206.32.167]) by psyche.the-wire.com (8.6.10/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA22108 for ; Sun, 14 Apr 1996 20:08:11 -0400 Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 20:08:11 -0400 Message-Id: <199604150008.UAA22108@psyche.the-wire.com> X-Sender: mhughes@psyche.the-wire.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: mhughes@the-wire.com (Marian Hughes) Subject: Grand Europa Rules Status: O Content-Length: 4261 There has been much discussion about changes needed to the basic game for 'Grand Europa', so I thought I would mention some points and issues we have had to deal with in an actual campaign. For background - we started with April I 1941; it is now Dec I 1941, and panzers are at the outskirts of Alexandria, Haifa and Tunis (Yes - Hitler decided not to invade both Russia and Yugoslavia in 1941!) In this post I will just cover the issue of Replacements and Rebuilds: This is our second stab at Grand Europa - our first, starting in April I 1943 came to an abrupt halt when a rule misread allowed the Allies to cut off half the German panzers in Southern Italy in late 1943! But one of the gripes surfaced then; the rules meant that three Panzer Divisions destroyed at Messina, reappeared the next turn in a town in Central Russia, just in time to attack and destroy Russians that had broken through the line. It became obvious that in Grand Europa, as opposed to a scenario (even one as big as SF), this kind of 'abuse' had to be corrected. It was also clear that the rule we would use should be as broad as possible - lots of nation-specific rules become a real pain when playing Grand Europa. Therefore the following: a. When building from the Replacement Pool, a cadreable division can only be placed on its cadre side. It can be rebuilt to full strength in a following Initial Phase. b. When building from cadre to full strength, one Inf RP can be subtracted from the cost if the unit is in the "Homeland" of the nation involved. Specifics are: British is British Isles and Egypt; Germany includes Bohemia-Moravia and the General Gouvernment. Applying these two rules means that the more obvious abuse of the present system is avoided, and that Players are encouraged to build units in their homeland, without introducing specific and complex rules. The second related issue in Grand Europa relates to the excessive accumulation of RP's and Resource Points. When Germany and Russia are not fighting each other, it is amazing how many RP's etc they have after six months. In our case, the Russian problem was solved by limiting the number and accumulation of these while at peace. The German case was trickier, especially since we wanted to come up with a generic rule, applicable to all countries. In the end, we developed the following tentative suggestions: a. A player may never have, at the end of the Initial Phase, RP's and Resource Points in excess of the number received at the start of the Turn: Except: b. If there are no units left in the Replacement Pool which could be rebuilt with RP's, RP's of that type may accumulate up to twice the number received at the start of the Turn: Example: Germans receive 10 Arm, 18 Inf and 12 Resource Points. At the end of the Phase the player could have a reserve of 10, 18 and 12 Resource Points. Now assume that the only unit left in the Replacement Pool was an Infantry Division. The German could accumulate 20 Arm, 18 Inf and 12 Resource Points. c. In such a situation, that is no units are in the Replacement Pool, and twice the RP's received are left over, then a player may create new units!! The conditions are the following: 1. The unit created costs its full strength RP's plus one-half (rounded up) of those needed to build the cadre. If the unit does not have a cadre, increase the cost by 1/3 rounding up: Example, a 12-10 German Panzer Division would cost an extra 2 Arm and I Inf RP, a 4-3-10 Panzer II 5 Arm RP. 2. The unit created must be identical in combat and movement values to one already in play (no creating 16-10 Panzers when the standard Panzer is an 11-10 or 12-10). 3. The unit is Forming: To become Full: - all combat motorised divisions take 12 months (24 turns) - all non-divisional take 6 months (12 turns) - all others take 9 months (18 turns) I am not sure how all this will work out, however the system is designed to be Europa wide - to be as applicable to Finland or Spain as to Germany or Britain. Hence the deliberate attempt to make the definitions as broad, or bland as possible - no special rules for SS, Australians or whatever. Comments on this would be welcome: Next issue is the dreaded supply interface between Europe and the Med. DAVID HUGHES From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 15 02:11:21 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA13739; Mon, 15 Apr 96 02:11:20 +0200 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id CAA06866 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 02:10:23 +0200 (MET DST) From: l.hanna@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA187506167; Sun, 14 Apr 1996 23:56:07 GMT Message-Id: <199604142356.AA187506167@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Sun, 14 Apr 96 23:56:06 UTC 0000 ( from inet00# ; Sun, 14 Apr 96 23:55:57 UTC 0000) Date: Sun, 14 Apr 96 23:46:00 UTC 0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: L.HANNA X-Genie-Qk-Id: 7525782 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 964786 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: unsubsribe Status: O Content-Length: 33 Please un-subscribe me. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 15 04:21:02 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA14457; Mon, 15 Apr 96 04:21:01 +0200 Received: from smtp.utexas.edu (smtp.utexas.edu [128.83.126.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id EAA08221 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 04:19:27 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from slip-40-1.ots.utexas.edu (slip-40-1.ots.utexas.edu [128.83.112.97]) by smtp.utexas.edu (8.6.7/8.6.6) with SMTP id VAA06182 for ; Sun, 14 Apr 1996 21:17:48 -0500 Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 21:17:48 -0500 Message-Id: <199604150217.VAA06182@smtp.utexas.edu> X-Sender: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu (Bobby D. Bryant) Subject: Re: Grand Europa Rules Status: O Content-Length: 5189 Good post, Marian (David?). I'm glad to see you addressing the problem of scaling the system up to "grand" proportions. >a. When building from the Replacement Pool, a cadreable division can only be >placed on its cadre side. It can be rebuilt to full strength in a following >Initial Phase. >b. When building from cadre to full strength, one Inf RP can be subtracted >from the cost if the unit is in the "Homeland" of the nation involved. >Specifics are: British is British Isles and Egypt; Germany includes >Bohemia-Moravia and the General Gouvernment. I would modify this slightly: define theatres per the SF extended OB, and maintain separate replacement pools for each theatre (for units *and* replacement points). a. When units are eliminated under circumstances that provide special replacements, put both unit and special replacement points in the pool for the theatre where they were eliminated. They may be rebuilt in that theatre thereafter. b. Units eliminated in other circumstances go in the homeland replacement pool (and perhaps require a longer period for rebuilding, e.g. the "forming/full" mechanism). c. Units and/or replacement points in a pool may transfer to another pool freely at the end of any initial phase (i.e., *after* any rebuilding is done). Notes: a. This indicates that some remnant remains in the theatre. Not too much bookwork involved, because you already have to decide whether special replacements are generated. b. This won't be entirely correct, as e.g. the "forming/full" mechanism is used in France in the SF OB. c. I say "freely" to reduce the bookwork. The units, to the extent that they exist at all, are sub-RE sized. Assume the supply system moves these and replacement points, unless this leads to further abuses. Keep your restriction that requires building the cadre as an intermediate step, and add my restriction (earlier post) that requires putting units in the pools at the end of the following friendly initial phase (i.e., no same-turn rebuilds). There is still a logical flaw in allowing special replacements recieved from the destruction of a division to go toward building another unit, and then rebuilding the original division in a later turn. Technically, the special replacements should (usually) go to their original unit unless it is cannibalized. [Handling this goes into a layer of detail beyond what is needed to address what you are trying to address, so I'll drop it for now.] >The second related issue in Grand Europa relates to the excessive >accumulation of RP's and Resource Points. When Germany and Russia are not >fighting each other, it is amazing how many RP's etc they have after six >months. This is really an OB problem; a "grand" OB should make distinctions between peacetime and wartime replacement rates (though perhaps Germany needs a third category, "at war but not with the USSR" !). Also notice that not taking RPs now means that you have more and higher-quality men available to call up later on when you do need them; for the longer scenarios replacements should not simply be lost if not taken during an earlier, quieter phase of the war. [I don't have any immediate suggestions for handling this. I suppose there would be per-turn limitations based on what your infrastructure can train and equip within a given time period, as well as long-term limitations based on population and the need to keep society running, particularly agriculture, industry, and those elements of your war effort that are not explicitly represented.] >c. In such a situation, that is no units are in the Replacement Pool, and >twice the RP's received are left over, then a player may create new units!! >The conditions are the following: >1. The unit created costs its full strength RP's plus one-half (rounded up) >of those needed to build the cadre. If the unit does not have a cadre, >increase the cost by 1/3 rounding up: Example, a 12-10 German Panzer >Division would cost an extra 2 Arm and I Inf RP, a 4-3-10 Panzer II 5 Arm RP. >2. The unit created must be identical in combat and movement values to one >already in play (no creating 16-10 Panzers when the standard Panzer is an >11-10 or 12-10). This is reasonable in general, but it is at least possible that some units would have been upgraded sooner if production allowed it. Unfortunately, this gets us into the realm of speculation. >3. The unit is Forming: To become Full: > - all combat motorised divisions take 12 months (24 turns) > - all non-divisional take 6 months (12 turns) > - all others take 9 months (18 turns) Will a C/M necessarily take longer than non-C/M? I suspect larger will take longer than smaller, because I understand that recruits are put through manoeuvres with progressively larger formations. Otherwise, I would think that availability of equipment would be the only difference between C/M and non-C/M. [Also: are you paying all the replacement points up front, before giving the unit "forming" status?] Again, though I am quibbling over details, I think your ideas are good and I'm glad you're sharing them with us. Bring on the grand campaigns! - Bobby. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 15 05:35:51 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA14753; Mon, 15 Apr 96 05:35:50 +0200 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id FAA09129 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 05:35:08 +0200 (MET DST) From: m.royer3@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA095898450; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 03:20:50 GMT Message-Id: <199604150320.AA095898450@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Mon, 15 Apr 96 03:20:50 UTC 0000 ( from inet# ; Mon, 15 Apr 96 03:19:22 UTC 0000) Date: Mon, 15 Apr 96 03:14:00 UTC 0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: M.ROYER3 X-Genie-Qk-Id: 1582179 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 558241 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: Re: Grand Europa Rules Status: O Content-Length: 370 Reply: Item #9708505 from EUROPA@LYSATOR.LIU.SE@INET#on 96/04/14 at 22:21 David Hughes, In your attempts at GE, are you using the standard CRT combat system or something like your article in Flavio's "Combined Arms" Issue #2? BTW, I found your concept of CRT-less combat very interesting and I've promised myself to set aside some time to try it someday. -Mark R. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 15 06:45:13 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA15083; Mon, 15 Apr 96 06:45:12 +0200 Received: from ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (abcclibr@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu [128.174.5.59]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA09794 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 06:44:58 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by ux1.cso.uiuc.edu id AA28589 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for europa@lysator.liu.se); Sun, 14 Apr 1996 23:44:47 -0500 Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 23:44:46 -0500 From: conrad alan b To: Perry de Havilland Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: Help request re. Altitude Air Rules In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 1738 On Sun, 14 Apr 1996, Perry de Havilland wrote: > I am trying to expand my fairly basic ideas on working Altitude into the > Europa air system for some house rules (I have received some interesting > > The High Bands in my tentative system are: > > Low = < 15,000 ft > Medium = 15,000 - 30,000 ft > High = 30,000 ft + > (plus an optional Very High Band = 42,000 ft +) > I used to know a lot about the WW 2 air war although it has been a few years since I worked with the numbers. I would certainly suggest that you lower your altitudes. The number of aircraft (planes not units) that could actually fly above 35,000 ft was few. Before the strategic war over Germany got going in late '43, very few flew above 28,000 ft. I believe you would be better off with the following bands: Low < 10,000 ft Medium 10,000 - 20,000 ft High > 20,000 ft In all the years of work I had done before, there was not a lot of need to get optimal altitude per aircraft type. It was no so much the optimal altitude for the aircraft as much as the normal altitude that the doctrine of the missions/nations that counted. So we hear a lot about Russian aircraft, best at low altitude, and that they were quite happy to get our P-39s since they were best at low, because that was were they were going to fly them. I do not remember that many aircraft lost performance at lower altitudes. Only that some (like the FW 190) lost a bit higher up. In Europa, until a strategic bombing modual comes, we have little call for much high altitude work. That's one of the reasons that I have not seen the need to go into altitude considerations when many other air system problems are in need of work. Alan Conrad From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 15 06:49:55 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA15113; Mon, 15 Apr 96 06:49:54 +0200 Received: from ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (abcclibr@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu [128.174.5.59]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id GAA09831 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 06:49:26 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by ux1.cso.uiuc.edu id AA29177 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for europa@lysator.liu.se); Sun, 14 Apr 1996 23:49:21 -0500 Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 23:49:20 -0500 From: conrad alan b To: Marian Hughes Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: Grand Europa Rules In-Reply-To: <199604150008.UAA22108@psyche.the-wire.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 689 On Sun, 14 Apr 1996, Marian Hughes wrote: > In this post I will just cover the issue of Replacements and Rebuilds: This > > The second related issue in Grand Europa relates to the excessive > accumulation of RP's and Resource Points. When Germany and Russia are not Excellent suggestions. Particularly since they work within the Europa system. There are points about the excesses that your suggestions do not solve, but any other suggestions to date induce a lot of complex problems as well. Without actually trying them, your points seem to be ones that have NO DRAWBACKS, while they do have positive effects. Lets see if others can add to these ideas. Alan Conrad From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 15 06:53:21 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA15137; Mon, 15 Apr 96 06:53:20 +0200 Received: from hplb.hpl.hp.com (hplb.hpl.hp.com [15.255.59.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id GAA09868 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 06:52:56 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com by hplb.hpl.hp.com; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 05:52:48 +0100 Received: by hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com (1.37.109.8/15.5+ECS 3.3) id AA25784; Sun, 14 Apr 1996 21:49:02 -0700 From: Patrick Tobin Message-Id: <9604150449.AA25784@hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com> Subject: Re: Commonwealth hero? Mais non! To: bradbury@travel1.travel-net.com Date: Sun, 14 Apr 96 21:49:02 PDT Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: <199604141814.OAA17076@travel1.travel-net.com>; from "bradbury@travel1.travel-net.com" at Apr 14, 96 2:14 pm Mailer: Elm [revision: 70.85] Status: O Content-Length: 1396 > > > And here was me thinking Pierre Clostermann was French just 'cos he's > >from France ( or Belgium, I forget which). Not part of the Commonwealth last > >time I looked. Alanbrooke, Auchinleck, Montgomery, O'Connor and Dorman-Smith > >were all born in Ireland, which was technically still part of the > >Commonwealth. > > > >Haya Safari, > >Patrick Haugh, > >Washington D.C. > > I believe both Alanbrooke and Monty would be considered Ulsterman (and given > the events of the last 100 years, many people would consider that an > important distinction) and Ulster still being part of Gt. Britain, then Excuse me if I'm being a bit pedantic here, but ... The province of Ulster consists of 9 counties. Six counties are in N.Ireland, which most N.Irishmen of the protestant tradition refer to as Ulster. The other 3 counties of Ulster are in the Republic of Ireland. Northern Ireland is not in Great Britain. Great Britain consists of England, Scotland, and Wales. N.Ireland is part of the United Kingdom, which consists of Great Britain and N.Ireland. That aside, Alanbrooke and Monty would indeed be considered as Ulstermen, since they were born in N.Ireland (as would anyone born in the the 3 Ulster counties of the RoI. I'm not certain of this, but I thought O'Connor was a New Zealander of Irish descent. Can anyone confirm this? P.T. > From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 15 07:53:13 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA15541; Mon, 15 Apr 96 07:53:11 +0200 Received: from osf1.gmu.edu (osf1.gmu.edu [129.174.1.13]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id HAA10575 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 07:52:50 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by osf1.gmu.edu; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/07Sep94-1001AM/GMUv3) id AA28901; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 01:52:48 -0400 Message-Id: <9604150552.AA28901@osf1.gmu.edu> Subject: Fighter Ceilings To: europa@lysator.liu.se (europa mailing list) Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 01:52:48 -0400 (EDT) From: "Arius V Kaufmann" X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Status: O Content-Length: 377 BF109 37,890 FW190 37,400 ME163 39,500 ME262 36,080 P-47 42,000 P-51 42,000 The FW 190 is actually considered a high-altitude fighter, with a top speed of 453 @ 37,000. Arius Kaufmann akaufma2@osf1.gmu.edu What this world needs is a good five-dollar plasma weapon. "Power corrupts. Absolute power's kind of neat." --John Lehman, Secretary of the Navy 1981-1987 From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 15 09:17:10 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA16952; Mon, 15 Apr 96 09:17:08 +0200 Received: from relay-4.mail.demon.net (relay-4.mail.demon.net [158.152.1.108]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id JAA11618 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 09:16:31 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from post.demon.co.uk ([158.152.1.72]) by relay-4.mail.demon.net id ab26668; 15 Apr 96 7:16 GMT Received: from consecon.demon.co.uk ([158.152.9.235]) by relay-3.mail.demon.net id aa10564; 15 Apr 96 7:30 +0100 Message-Id: <5ZYE5HAI0ecxEw6B@consecon.demon.co.uk> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 07:30:32 +0100 To: bradbury@travel1.travel-net.com Cc: "Haugh, Patrick J." , europa@lysator.liu.se From: Reg Danford-Cordingley Subject: Re: Commonwealth hero? Mais non! In-Reply-To: <199604141814.OAA17076@travel1.travel-net.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Turnpike Version 1.10 Status: O Content-Length: 1503 In message <199604141814.OAA17076@travel1.travel-net.com>, bradbury@travel1.travel-net.com writes snip... >> >>Haya Safari, >>Patrick Haugh, >>Washington D.C. > snip... > >Nigel Bradbury >Ottawa, Ontario > Dear Nigel and Patrick, Patrick is quite right that at that time (until 1948), Ireland (the Irish Free State part or Eire) was part of the Commonwealth. However, since 1922, citizens of the Irish Free State (and its successor the Irish Republic) have had the right of abode and residence in the UK. This includes being able to vote. In fact, recently, there has been talk of Ireland rejoining the Commonwealth; Mary Robinson the President of the Republic visited the Commonwealth Games in Canada in 1994. I should like to point out that the Irish are not really considered 'foreign' by the British, we have a lot in common with them. The English have more in common with the Irish than they do with Americans for instance, culturally and socially. The Irish have been migrating to Britain since the Dark Ages (sometimes violently!) and a large part of the population of mainland Britain have Irish descent. Thousands of citizens of the Irish Republic volunteered to join the Britsih Armed Forces in the Second World War. Their contribution has recently been recognised by a new monument in Dublin. The British Army has regiments that still recruit Irish citizens. So I think that the Irish can be counted as Commonwealth heroes! Yours sincerely... -- Reg Danford-Cordingley, London UK From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 15 09:41:11 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA17383; Mon, 15 Apr 96 09:41:09 +0200 Received: from jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (civguy@jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us [192.217.238.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id JAA11981 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 09:40:55 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from civguy@localhost) by jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (8.6.10/8.6.9) id DAA02298; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 03:13:28 -0500 Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 03:13:27 -35900 From: Jason Long Subject: Re:Yet more Luft-peeves flak Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 78 The Luftwaffe didn't award kills for aircraft destroyed on the ground. Jason From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 15 10:25:50 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA18154; Mon, 15 Apr 96 10:25:49 +0200 Received: from dub-img-1.compuserve.com (dub-img-1.compuserve.com [198.4.9.1]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id KAA12896 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 10:25:10 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by dub-img-1.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id EAA22800; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 04:23:19 -0400 Date: 15 Apr 96 04:21:52 EDT From: Alan Philson <100626.2267@CompuServe.COM> To: unknown Subject: Re:Weird ships (Empires) Message-Id: <960415082151_100626.2267_BHL97-1@CompuServe.COM> Status: O Content-Length: 814 Ray, read the following and file it under trivia As far as I can tell all ships which were operated on behalf of the Ministry of War Transport (MWT) were named Empire--------. This would include axis ships taken as prizes and put into service, i.e. the Empire Trooper was the German Cap Norte a 13000 ton cargo liner, the class also included some ex American flagged ships purchased by Britain, Empire Fulmar was Hawian Shipper. The majority of the Empire series were actually new built and constructed in Britain, USA and Canada. The MWT used existing Canadian yards and built new ones in the USA to produce a standard design of dry cargo ship of 10000tons, the first being Empire Liberty, this design with minor mods formed the basis of the US Ocean class and EC2 "Liberty ships" and Canadian Fort class. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 15 11:05:47 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA18751; Mon, 15 Apr 96 11:05:45 +0200 Received: from colossus.barclays.co.uk (colossus.barclays.co.uk [193.128.3.10]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA13646 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 11:05:12 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from bognor.barclays.co.uk by colossus.barclays.co.uk with local SMTP (PP) id <05430-0@colossus.barclays.co.uk>; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 10:04:59 +0100 Received: from pepsi.gra.barclays.co.uk by bognor.barclays.co.uk with BarclayNet SMTP (PP) id <05791-0@bognor.barclays.co.uk>; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 10:04:56 +0100 Received: by pepsi (1.37.109.14/16.2) id AA034518932; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 10:02:12 +0100 From: Stefan Farrelly Message-Id: <9604151002.ZM3449@pepsi.gra.barclays.co.uk> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 10:02:11 +0100 X-Mailer: Z-Mail (3.2.1 31aug95) To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Civilisation II Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Status: O Content-Length: 1063 Has anyone else seen the game Civilisation II yet ? My brother and I have been playing it for a week now and its got a lot of new features which has turned it into more of a boardgame/Europa game than anything ive seen before. It used to be a simple game with the basic units, eventually leading to; tanks, artillery, riflemen, mechanised inf, fighters, bombers, transports, missiles, ZOC, Nukes, etc. Now it has added a stack of new units/features including; Paras. Engineers. Quick Construction. Airbase contruction. Harbours. Air Transport. Alpine troops. Damage. Marines. Partisans. Freight/Trucks. Helicopters. Cruise missiles. They already have historical maps covering Europe/the Pacific etc. just that the scale is far too big, but this could be easlily modified. In fact you can create your own maps with their map editor. I get the sneaky suspicion someone on the design team for this game has played WWII boardgames before. Now if we could only get hold of the source, a few months work and it could be Europa on a PC! Stefan & Andrew Farrelly From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 15 11:16:40 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA18982; Mon, 15 Apr 96 11:16:38 +0200 Received: from bang.jmk.su.se (bang.jmk.su.se [130.237.155.254]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA13891 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 11:16:15 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [130.237.155.25] (Stora_Red_15 [130.237.155.25]) by bang.jmk.su.se (8.6.12/8.6.6) with SMTP id LAA20819 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 11:16:11 +0200 X-Sender: o-noreli@bang.jmk.su.se Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 11:16:12 +0200 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: o-noreli@jmk.su.se (Elias Nordling) Subject: GE/SF: Free or following history. Status: O Content-Length: 1464 There's been a lot of debate on how "free" GE should be. While some argues that most things that could have happened during WW2 should be able to happen in GE, others argue that this makes a game that has little resemblance with WW2 as we know it, and that it leaves the outcome of the game to a few random political rolls. Personally, I would like to be able to play GE both ways. I would be disappointed if the game didn't allow Turkish intervention or Republican spain allied with France, but I would be equally disappointed if this meant that no game ever lead to the historical chain of events (since we, as players have full forward hindsight, there's a lot of things we would never do that were done historically). BUT, this isn't just a GE problem! The same situation applies to SF! Here you have near complete freedom over the deployment of your forces, and where to invde when. I regard this as a strength of the game that makes it different from most other western front games, but this also means that very few games look very much like history. I really miss being able to fight out the invasion of Normandie. I mean the REAL invasion, with all the right units in the right places. I guess what I'm arguing is: 1: A set of historical setups with preplanned invasions as alternative scenarios for SF would be really nice. 2: There really ought to be two ways of playing GE. A free and a historical variant. Mvh Elias Nordling o-noreli@jmk.su.se From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 15 11:33:58 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA19266; Mon, 15 Apr 96 11:33:57 +0200 Received: from bang.jmk.su.se (bang.jmk.su.se [130.237.155.254]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA14265 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 11:33:28 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [130.237.155.25] (Stora_Red_15 [130.237.155.25]) by bang.jmk.su.se (8.6.12/8.6.6) with SMTP id LAA21004 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 11:33:25 +0200 X-Sender: o-noreli@bang.jmk.su.se Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 11:33:26 +0200 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: o-noreli@jmk.su.se (Elias Nordling) Subject: AO: Errata Status: O Content-Length: 1060 I bought a copy of Africa Oriental=E9 when it first came out, but I haven't really played it. I tried it once or twice, but I had trouble getting used to the scale, and felt bewildered in the weird strategical situation. Now I'm going to give it another try. I've heard that there's quite a lot of errata, however. Since I live in Sweden, ordering it is impractical and very slow. So I was wondering if anybody on this list could help me with it. The best thing would be if it existed electronically (Jason Long (or whoever administrates the GRD homepage), don't just put up errata for the new games please!) and someone sent it to me as an attachment. Or maybe someone in Sweden has the errata and could mail it to me. If not, then could someone write me a summary of the most important changes in the errata. Any changes in maps, OBs or unit ratings would be most important. Minor errors in rules references or wordings can be left out, I know the Europa rules well enough anyway. Thanks in advance for any help! Mvh Elias Nordling o-noreli@jmk.su.se From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 15 11:35:57 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA19287; Mon, 15 Apr 96 11:35:56 +0200 Received: from bang.jmk.su.se (bang.jmk.su.se [130.237.155.254]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA14319 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 11:35:41 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [130.237.155.25] (Stora_Red_15 [130.237.155.25]) by bang.jmk.su.se (8.6.12/8.6.6) with SMTP id LAA21048 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 11:35:37 +0200 X-Sender: o-noreli@bang.jmk.su.se Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 11:35:38 +0200 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: o-noreli@jmk.su.se (Elias Nordling) Subject: SYSTEM: Luft peeves and France 40 Status: O Content-Length: 1409 >Before the topic of pilot experience and aces and 'experten' runs out of fuel , >there have been comments in TEM and in a previous posting about the French Air >Force and its pilots. >In a recent book by Brian Cull and others (12 days in May) he states that" a >considerable number of French fighter pilots had flown in fighter combat in the >Great War", I reckon that puts them well into the 40-50 age group, does that >make them experienced pilots with the situational awareness and reflexes to >qualify them for a plus DRM against the Luftwaffe, or does it make them >over the >hill and due for a desk job. I think the RAF rules at that time had a cut off >age of 38 for active fighter pilots. The breakdown of losses in this book tends >to support the second theory. Any comments. I've read a discussion on this earlier, either on this list or in TEM. The reasoning goes that the French should have a +1 DRM over the German fighter pilots because of their superior training. The high Luftwaffe losses in the campaign was said to support this. However, a friend of mine has studied the air combat over France and belgium in detail, and found that this evidence does not hold. The high Luftwaffe losses was due to the large amount of unescorted bombing missions flown, not superior French skill. (sorry to send you duplets, Alan. I forgot to change the address) Mvh Elias Nordling o-noreli@jmk.su.se From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 15 15:13:02 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA22723; Mon, 15 Apr 96 15:13:00 +0200 Received: from dub-img-2.compuserve.com (dub-img-2.compuserve.com [198.4.9.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id PAA18878 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 15:11:18 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by dub-img-2.compuserve.com (8.6.10/5.950515) id JAA12194; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 09:10:30 -0400 Date: 15 Apr 96 09:08:22 EDT From: Alan Philson <100626.2267@CompuServe.COM> To: unknown Subject: Production Message-Id: <960415130822_100626.2267_BHL116-1@CompuServe.COM> Status: O Content-Length: 4979 I have been toying with a production system, the genesis of this came from an article in TEM by Frank Watson and JMAs comments on same. I have attempted to create a system which is simple to use, takes up minimum space and models the problems of managing a war economy. The system is particularly aimed at Britain since that is what I am more familiar with and have information on but it could be adapted to suit any economy as each has is own choke points before the production phase. This explanation is perhaps a bit long winded the actual charts take up about a third of a map area. Political events and considerations follow a seperate chart. The charts I use are graphics which are not possible to recreate here but I will outline the sequence of events. Quarterly Strategic turn at present but I am considering a monthly varaition Shipping Allocation Phase Available NTPs are allocated a cargo of either Iron Fuel or Food, those not allocated are returned to play as normal NTPs. ASW Phase ASW assets are compared to Uboat strength on a crt which is still under development, mine warfare effects are considered at this time as are German surface ops. The result generates losses to NTPs and Uboats. At the moment I am only looking at operations in the North Atlantic but eventually all sea areas will be involved. Strategic Stocks Phase Arriving cargoes are added to 3 pools, Iron,food, and fuel, domestic production of same is added. Comparison of food stocks with requirements is made if the result is negative the national morale factor is reduced, comparison of iron and fuel is made against basic industry with the same results this factor would feed into the British political chart. Strategic Air War German Strategic air assets are assigned and carry out raids, the effects,if any, are applied to the production capacities of the various industries. Achieving a hit result on a Major city hex would reduce the production capacity of each type of Industry, if its also a port it reduces ship building capacity. Production allocation Phase there are 5 types of Industry, these are Basic Industry, Non C/M Industry, C/M Industry, Air Industry, Ship Building. each has its own capacity, in the case of Basic Industry it also has a limited capacity. Each Industry is allocated Iron and Fuel points from the stocks pool up to the capacity of that Industry. Stock pools are adjusted accordingly. Production Basic Industry is allocated first always up to its capacity or else a national morale factor again comes into play. the limited capacity is used to produce increases in capacity for itself and all the other industries and resource points, this limited capacity will increase as the economy moves to a war footing but there will be an overall limit which is workforce related. There are three tracks for Basic Industry, one for RPs two for factories, only a set number of RP and factory counters can be on the track at any one time, each turn it moves along the track if paid for from that turns capacity. Non C/M Industry Produces non c/m units, Infantry divsions,brigades,battalions and nonc/m equipment points, each with its own track, again the payment is incremental except that here there is an input from the training side Inf RPs are allocated up front based on normal replacement rules. Equipment points I envision as being complimentary to Inf and Arm RPs for rebuilding units and possibly for the concept of maintenance C/M Industry As above, in place of equipment points substute Arm Rps Ship Building Produces NTPs,NRPs and LCs, again a track for each, again incremental Air Industry Left till last because thats causing me a lot of grief, building new units is ok, but the upgrades to newer types and RPs are a problem, new units go on a track like everything else and pay the cost like ground units. Iam thinking of upgrade counters for air units which do not pay for personnel and substituting the completed counter for an existing air unit. Air RPs I am inclined to ignore and instead have air training units which produce three types of RP like HB, HF&B,F&A. Force Pool All units which can be produced will be here, new units are added from a modified OB, dead units are placed here too. Decide what is to be built, take the counter from the pool and pay for its appearance on the appropriate track. Maintenance and Logistics Are both on hold while I sort out some of the other details, but a rough idea for maintenance is to track the number of REs in play and pay a cost in non c/m or c/m points. Logistics, another function of basic industry could be to manufacture Attack supply points which are shipped to the appropriate theatre of ops and provide attack supply for x number of units. Thats It. When all this is up and running a guide to achieve historical production is needed, from there its simple to vary and muck about with. Any comments and suggestions are welcome (except rude ones). From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 15 15:45:40 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA23172; Mon, 15 Apr 96 15:45:39 +0200 Received: from mh004.infi.net (mailhost.infi.net [205.219.238.95]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id PAA19591 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 15:44:51 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from pwcgw.pwc.com by mh004.infi.net with SMTP (Infinet-S-3.3) id JAA23524; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 09:43:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: by pwcgw.pwc.com with Microsoft Mail id <31727D6F@pwcgw.pwc.com>; Mon, 15 Apr 96 09:46:39 PDT From: "Boston, Jim" To: "'Europa'" Subject: Re: Grand Europa Rules Date: Mon, 15 Apr 96 09:45:00 PDT Message-Id: <31727D6F@pwcgw.pwc.com> Encoding: 38 TEXT X-Mailer: Microsoft Mail V3.0 Status: O Content-Length: 1674 The following is some comments on David Hughes posting of 14 April @ 8:08pm. > for background - we started with April I 1941; it is now Dec I 1941, and panzers are at > the outskirts of Alexandria, Haifa, and Tunis (Yes - Hitler decided not to invade both > Russia and Yugoslavia in 1941!) GE should not let the players make political decisions, we are playing a wargame not a political game. All of the nations must be required to following the path that their national leaders set (as far as we can, based on how the game plays). Germany must be required to attack the USSR in 1941 unless it is still fighting in France. > .... It was also clear that the rule we would use should be as broad as possible - lots > of nation-specific rules become a real pain when playing Grand Europa. Nation-specific rules must be done. Each nation had different goals in the war and GE must be played with these deferences in action, otherwise you might as well play Risk. (on creating new units with excessive accumulated RPs - must see his post on what is excessive) > The unit is forming: to become full: > all combat motorize divisions take 12 months (24 turns) > all non-divisional take 6 months (12 turns) > all others take 9 months (18 turns) The time periods seem to long. Are your time periods based on one nations real build rate? two? or what? It is hard to believe that it took the same amount of time for the USSR, Italy, and Germany to create an infantry division. Nation-specific rules should control how long it would take to create a new division using excessive accumulated RPs, i.e. based on each nations historical record. Jim Boston From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 15 15:48:47 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA23218; Mon, 15 Apr 96 15:48:46 +0200 Received: from motgate2.mot.com (motgate2.mot.com [129.188.136.20]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id PAA19663 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 15:48:20 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from pobox.mot.com (pobox.mot.com [129.188.137.100]) by motgate2.mot.com (8.7.3/8.6.10/MOT-3.8) with ESMTP id NAA08923 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 13:47:03 GMT Received: from fwans12 (fwans12.fwrdc.rtsg.mot.com [160.2.12.7]) by pobox.mot.com (8.7.3/8.6.10/MOT-3.8) with SMTP id IAA01069 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 08:47:39 -0500 (CDT) Received: from fwhre14.fwrdc.rtsg.mot.com (fwhre14) by fwans12 (5.67b/FTW-1.65) id AA17430; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 08:44:41 -0500 Received: by fwhre14.fwrdc.rtsg.mot.com (8.6.12/FTW-1.65) id IAA00502; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 08:47:28 -0500 From: psmith@hpmail2.fwrdc.rtsg.mot.com (Paul Smith) Message-Id: <199604151347.IAA00502@fwhre14.fwrdc.rtsg.mot.com> Subject: Africa maps To: europa@lysator.liu.se (Europa maillist) Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 08:47:28 -0500 (CDT) Reply-To: psmith@ftw.mot.com *Return-Receipt-To: psmith@ftw.mot.com X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Status: O Content-Length: 489 No Africa maps at $50 a pop for me. If I get an extra $50 to spend on wargames, I'd rather have it go toward one of the WWI series. -- Paul F. Smith Ft. Worth Research Laboratories | Phone: (817) 245-6097 Motorola | Fax : (817) 245-6148 5555 N. Beach St | email: psmith@ftw.mot.com Ft. Worth, Tx 76137 | QPS001@email.mot.com "Good judgement comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgement." From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 15 16:32:13 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA23840; Mon, 15 Apr 96 16:32:12 +0200 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id QAA20745 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 16:31:09 +0200 (MET DST) From: m.royer3@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA220687806; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 14:16:46 GMT Message-Id: <199604151416.AA220687806@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Mon, 15 Apr 96 14:16:46 UTC 0000 ( from inet# ; Mon, 15 Apr 96 14:15:42 UTC 0000) Date: Mon, 15 Apr 96 14:22:00 UTC 0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: M.ROYER3 X-Genie-Qk-Id: 7593959 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 563958 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: GE/SF: Free or following histo Status: O Content-Length: 2583 Reply: Item #2384687 from EUROPA@LYSATOR.LIU.SE@INET#on 96/04/15 at 05:16 I've long argued that GE should come in stages, starting as a historical simulation and developing into a more "free" game. The project is too large to swallow in one gulp. What follows is a letter of mine which appeared in CA#4. The topic of Grand Europa has been prevalent in recent Europa literature. Many highly entertaining articles have been written, proposing various implementations of the game. Of prime debate is the level of control the players will have over the course of events in the game. Are the players to be "straight-jacketed" by history andorders of battle, or do they have the ability to modify the national objectives of the nations they control? Most of the proposals I have read, while often contradictory to each other, within themselves display a high level of thought and introspective reasoning. After I read each proposal, I find myself saying: "yeah, that's the way it's got to be!", at least until I read the next one. But, each proposal has missed one key element that will be integral to our perception of what Grand Europa should be. So far as I can tell, every one is assuming that GE will be a singularity. When the box arrives on our doorstep, all will be said and done. To the contrary, I fully believe in the multiplicity of GE. The day we set up GE for the first time will not be the end, but the beginning. As Europa has evolved, so will GE. Either officially or unofficially, the Europa intelligencia will continue to develop, correct, improve, reorganize, restructure and otherwise expand the game. They will not suddenly lay down their pencils and lie dormant; instead they will flourish more than ever. As such, I believe that GE will have many incarnations. The first will probably be a very rigid, historical version that relies upon years of Europa OB research and game materials as its foundation. Subsequent expansions and modifications will provide players with increasing levels of freedom from history. Economic, political, and social models, will be added as each level is proven out by the gaming enthusiasts. Only by following a natural progression of complexity can GE be properly developed. Initailly it will use history as a crutch, but as it becomes stronger itwill shed that crutch and evolve into a fully developed, integrated model of human social interaction a the national scale. Let's not sell GE short, let's set it on a slow, methodical course to an ultimate lofty goal. And let's have fun all the way! -Mark R. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 15 16:32:14 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA23841; Mon, 15 Apr 96 16:32:12 +0200 Received: from relay1.geis.com (relay1.geis.com [192.77.188.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id QAA20743 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 16:31:07 +0200 (MET DST) From: m.royer3@genie.com Received: by relay1.geis.com (1.37.109.16/15.6) id AA220747808; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 14:16:48 GMT Message-Id: <199604151416.AA220747808@relay1.geis.com> Received: by (genie.)relay1.geis.com ( 2rem/1.40 ) ; Mon, 15 Apr 96 14:16:48 UTC 0000 ( from inet# ; Mon, 15 Apr 96 14:15:45 UTC 0000) Date: Mon, 15 Apr 96 14:22:00 UTC 0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se X-Genie-Qk-From: M.ROYER3 X-Genie-Qk-Id: 8134054 X-Genie-Gateway-Id: 563968 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 X-Mscontent-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-Printable Subject: GE rules question Status: O Content-Length: 1146 Here's an open question to anybody. I already sent the question go GURU = (Rich Velay): I think that this question is applicable to all Europa games so I address= it to Grand Europa. In general, can a player move a unit a portion of its movement allowance,= then move another unit, and finally return to the first unit and finish its movement? Specifically, I'm thinking of the following case. There are four contiguoushexes (A, B, C, and D) along a rail line. Hex A= is occupied by 2 friendly 5-6 Inf XX=92s. Hexes B and C are each occupied b= y a single unsupported 0-1-5 Const III. Hex D is unoccupied. The first divi= sion overruns the construction unit in hex B spending 4 MP (3 for the 10:1 ove= rrun and 1 to enter the hex). It does not have enough MP to overrun the secon= d construction unit. However, the second division in hex A, moves into hex= B (1 MP) and then overruns the construction unit in hex C (another 4 MP for a = total of 5) and finally moves to hex D. Returning to the first division (which= has two unused MP), the player moves it from hex B to C and then to D thereby rejoining the divisions. -Mark R. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 15 17:06:29 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA24562; Mon, 15 Apr 96 17:06:28 +0200 Received: from ns.rmc.com (ns.rmc.com [137.25.23.1]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id RAA21649 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 17:06:08 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by ns.rmc.com (AIX 4.1/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA08510; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 10:54:59 -0400 Received: from internet.rmc.com(137.25.3.24) by ns.rmc.com via smap (V1.3) id sma011470; Mon Apr 15 10:54:44 1996 Received: from lanmail.rmc.com by internet.rmc.com (AIX 4.1/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA14474; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 10:50:24 -0400 Received: by LANMAIL.RMC.COM; Mon, 15 Apr 96 10:48:48 EDT Date: Mon, 15 Apr 96 10:49:13 EDT Message-Id: X-Priority: 3 (Normal) To: From: "Frank E. Watson" Subject: re: SF:CAP Status: O Content-Length: 1058 For another good example of long range CAP not being completely effective, look at the Dodecanese in '43. Beaufighters and P-38s didn't have enough time over target to matter. Beaufighters flew from Cyprus, P-38s from Gambut, I believe. I haven't checked the hex ranges. On Ray Kanarr's suggestion of penalties per hex over range: Reasonable as simulation but problems for we humans. Consider "Ok What was that range again? 16 no 15. Heck, let's count again. Where was it flying from? Here, no there, or was it here?" There will probably ALWAYS be anomalies in the aircraft ranging system. Strikes me that perhaps full range CAP missions could have a less than 100% chance of intercepting an enemy mission? This would seem to simulate lack of time over the target better than simply a lowered rating. One could argue that this is already inherent in flying CAP to a single hex given in advance, but if you know exactly where the problem is, say Maleme or Salerno or Leros, then you already know exactly where the CAP should go anyway. Frank From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 15 17:15:38 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA24717; Mon, 15 Apr 96 17:15:37 +0200 Received: from prague.crossover.com (root@prague.crossover.com [204.217.246.5]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id RAA21897 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 17:15:06 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [205.161.32.192] (jastell.tiac.net [205.161.32.192]) by prague.crossover.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA03488 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 10:06:47 -0400 X-Sender: jastell@post.crossover.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 11:14:41 -0400 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) Subject: Re: SF:CAP (Was: Re: Yet more of my $0.02 worth) Status: O Content-Length: 2715 > However with fighters a unit flying half range could stay over target >a long time, and hence have more planes over the target at any point over >a two week turn. At max range the aircraft could only be over the target >a short period. > This was why the Allies thought Salerno might be chancy. They were >at the limit of what they considered useable air range. Game wise the >Allies seem to have greater potential to use the air assets. Not only >full range, full use CAP. But extended range missions, which seem to me >to give them more ability that air units had.... Might I suggest things aren't as bad as you see them? 1. Typically, Europa takes the one-way range of a fighter with a combat load and divides it by 3.5: one third of the range to get to target, one third to hang over target, one third to return to base, and that .5 to account for various effects (one or more of which ususally occur: time to form up; diversionary flight courses, below-average flying conditions, outright mistakes by the fliers, etc.). Now, 3.5 is a hell of a divisor, and it accounts for a tremendous amount of what you are taking about. 2. Salerno is 12 hexes from the nearest possible airbases in Sicily. Please check the Allied MTO air OBs: at this time, Salerno is out of regular range for many Allied fighters, including all Spitfires then available -- and it's only the Spitfire VIIIs and IXs than can stand up to the Fw 190As at this time. (At extended range, even these Spitfires fall to the Fw 190s.) What can reach Salerno at regular are the few early P-51s and various models of P-38s, P-39s and P-40s -- not bad but not breathtaking. Actually, the situation is even worse for the Allies. Historically, the Germans hung on to the northeast corner of Sicily the longest: the first hex in 12-hex range of Salerno fell to the Allies on Aug I, and the rest fell on Aug II. This is not much time for the Allies to build airfields for the Sep I invasion at Salerno, so only a few of their 12-range fighters can reach Salerno at regular range. This leaves the handful of longer-ranged fighters (P-51s and P-38s) that can reach Salerno at regular range from the Catania area. I emphasize "at regular range" as extended range simply decreases the effectiveness of the fighters. Effectiveness counts, for as far you know as the Allied player, every Fw 190 in the west (plus tons of Me 109s) may be sent to Italy to attack an Allied invasion of the mainland, and there you are without an aircraft able to face the "Butcher Bird" at near-equal terms. So, under historical conditions there are valid reasons in E to be concerned about projecting fighter cover over Salerno, just as in the actual event. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 15 17:16:01 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA24726; Mon, 15 Apr 96 17:16:00 +0200 Received: from prague.crossover.com (root@prague.crossover.com [204.217.246.5]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id RAA21907 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 17:15:26 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [205.161.32.192] (jastell.tiac.net [205.161.32.192]) by prague.crossover.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA03496 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 10:07:10 -0400 X-Sender: jastell@post.crossover.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 11:15:04 -0400 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) Subject: Re: Last of the Independents Status: O Content-Length: 4628 >Claims that anything less >than a replay of historical events (with perhaps differences in which >battles are fought over which towns) somehow automatically equates to a >'free-for-all' involving Anglo-German alliances are shallow, knee-jerk >responses to legitimate calls for maximum player options.... >Remember the 'simulation' fans are not a unified camp, either: There are >many who say that it was flatly impossible for Germany to win WW2, or even >beat Russia. Simulationists are wonderful for denouncing any contrary >point of view as 'revisionism'.... You can divide simulation into several philosophical phlavors. For want of better terms, they roughly divide into "event" simulation and "process" simulation. Event simulationists in effect take the actual course of events and outcome of events as the ultimate standard by which the game/simulation is measured. Thus, for Barbarossa, you need a siege of Leningrad, a Kiev pocket, the Germans reaching the gates of Moscow before being thrown back, etc., or the game fails as a simulation. Too often, event simulationists will decry a game as simulation failure if the events do not occur -- even if they themselves played the game differently then their historical counterparts did. (I can't tell you the number of times FITE has been criticized for not having a Kiev pocket -- by the vary players who refuse to send a single panzer south from Army Group Center! As you may be aware, the Kiev pocket wasn't created by AG South, but by the panzer corps of AG Center striking south from Smolensk in the summer of 1941. BTW, for those who claim AG Center didn't have the supply reach to get to Moscow in the summer, take a look at the length of the panzer drive south from Smolensk -- it's fully as long as distance to Moscow, it's just going right angles to the city!) More seriously, event simulationists fall into the historical determinism camp -- since an event happened, it is the most probably thing that could have happened. Alas, this is not so -- some widely improbable things could and did occur -- the weight of the German panzer arm bearing down on the one point in the French line least able to stand the assault, the Germans and British deciding on a near-simultaneous invasion of Norway (the Germans got there first), etc. So, if an event was so improbable it had only a 5% chance of occuring, then is the game a failure as a simulation if 95 games out of 100 that famous event does not occur, even if players "played historically"? Process simulationists are less concerned about specific events. Instead, the underlying factors that produced the event are more important. Get these right, and you will have a valid simulation. A German breakthrough across the Meuse may become an improbable event when you let the Allied player deploy his forces as he wishes, but a German victory over France in 1940 may be likely -- Germany had built a better army than France and Britain by 1940, with a much better theory on how to use. As you may suspect by now, I favor process simulation. Simulate the underlying important factors, give players control over those that the historical counterparts had significant control over, and let them go to it. Another camp can be called "hindsight simulation." After all, there's no reason why Germany couldn't have built Panther tanks in 1941 (or snorkel submarines in 1942, or jets in 1943...) -- so a player should have control over things like these and fight the war the way he wants. Alas, this fails to take into account hindsight -- hindsight tells us what didn't work and what could have. A true simulation would have to build in the uncertainty of outcome that surrounded these decisions -- maybe they'll work and maybe not. Pushing for jet fighters in 1943 may yeild you Me 262s early, or maybe engine problems were worse than historical, yeilding no jets in 1943 and no Fw 190s or later-model Me 109s (since your R&D went into jets and not better piston-based aircraft). >With all this in mind, I'm determined to blaze my own trails. If GRD comes >out with GE and I like it, then I'll buy it. I'm not content to wait for >five years of wrangling over "big option/little option". I suspect that >neither is Mr. Astell, who seems to be playing GE already (didn't he have a >mega-Europa underway?-how is that going?) Ah, the post that talked about that was a bit confusing. That's a separate group doing their own home-brew Grand Europa (April 1943 on). The reference to me was that I supplied them with some draft OB material allowing them to start the western front in 4.43 rather than SF's 7.43. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 15 17:16:30 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA24743; Mon, 15 Apr 96 17:16:28 +0200 Received: from prague.crossover.com (root@prague.crossover.com [204.217.246.5]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id RAA21917 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 17:15:38 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [205.161.32.192] (jastell.tiac.net [205.161.32.192]) by prague.crossover.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA03502 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 10:07:23 -0400 X-Sender: jastell@post.crossover.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 11:15:17 -0400 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) Subject: Re: Gr. Europa reorganizations Status: O Content-Length: 666 >SE tracks the 1942 panzer reorganization by providing for the upgrades >of the Army Group South panzer and panzergrenadier divisions first. >However, SE does not show that these upgrades were at the expense >of the divisions of Army Group North and Army Group South. The >panzer divisions of these army groups would either have to be >reduced to cadre or, in SF terms, given a (-4 PzG) marker. The SF panzer detachment rule was created partly to cover the way the Germans handled their Panther battalions in 1944 and partly to cover the 1942 reorganization for the collector's edition of SE. The rule will be retrofitted to SE when the FITE/SE update goes live. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 15 17:25:03 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA24882; Mon, 15 Apr 96 17:25:02 +0200 Received: from desiree.teleport.com (desiree.teleport.com [192.108.254.21]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id RAA22180 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 17:24:36 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [206.163.121.88] (ip-pdx06-24.teleport.com [206.163.121.88]) by desiree.teleport.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id IAA15503 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 08:24:23 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199604151524.IAA15503@desiree.teleport.com> X-Sender: zaius@mail.teleport.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 08:30:20 -0700 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: zaius@teleport.com (Steve) Subject: Re: Grand Europa Rules Status: O Content-Length: 1259 >The following is some comments on David Hughes posting of 14 April @ 8:08pm. > >> for background - we started with April I 1941; it is now Dec I 1941, and >panzers are at > the outskirts of Alexandria, Haifa, and Tunis (Yes - Hitler >decided not to invade both > Russia and Yugoslavia in 1941!) > >GE should not let the players make political decisions, we are playing a >wargame not a political game. All of the nations must be required to >following the path that their national leaders set (as far as we can, based >on how the game plays). Germany must be required to attack the USSR in 1941 >unless it is still fighting in France. What a robotic response: "Repeat after me: Grand Europa must follow history precisely. Players must not be allowed..." There may be a basis in practicality to wanting to stick fairly close to historical precedent, but this incredibly inflexible attitude of what appears to be an extremely vocal minority...? On what logic are these assumptions based? Knee-jerk comparisons to 'World in Flames"? That's very much like telling someone protesting a government policy that "well, if you don't like it, you can go move to *Russia!*" Afraid the Hun might win? SP "Freedom is always against the law." -J.R. "Bob" Dobbs From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 15 19:18:15 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA26485; Mon, 15 Apr 96 19:18:13 +0200 Received: from jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (civguy@jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us [192.217.238.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id TAA24934 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 19:14:21 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from civguy@localhost) by jean.dusable.cps.k12.il.us (8.6.10/8.6.9) id MAA04780; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 12:46:58 -0500 Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 12:46:58 -35900 From: Jason Long Subject: Re: Gr. Europa reorganizations Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: <199604130436.AA149700172@relay1.geis.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 266 In the draft 41-45 East OB given to me by John Astell the Panzer Divs convert/upgrade to 14-10 base, but the ones in AGN/AGC give up panzer battalions to those in AGS, which places a (-2 PzG) marker on them, not a -4. Those are for after Panthers arrive. Jason From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 15 20:02:05 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA26923; Mon, 15 Apr 96 20:02:04 +0200 Received: from prague.crossover.com (root@prague.crossover.com [204.217.246.5]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id UAA26113 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 20:01:41 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [205.161.32.192] (jastell.tiac.net [205.161.32.192]) by prague.crossover.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id MAA03940 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 12:53:25 -0400 X-Sender: jastell@post.crossover.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 14:01:20 -0400 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) Subject: Re: GE/SF: Free or following history. Status: O Content-Length: 475 >...The same situation applies to SF! Here >you have near complete freedom over the deployment of your forces, and >where to invde when. I regard this as a strength of the game that makes it >different from most other western front games, but this also means that >very few games look very much like history. I really miss being able to >fight out the invasion of Normandie. I mean the REAL invasion, with all the >right units in the right places. Play the 1944 scenario! From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 15 20:02:08 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA26932; Mon, 15 Apr 96 20:02:06 +0200 Received: from prague.crossover.com (root@prague.crossover.com [204.217.246.5]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id UAA26109 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 20:01:35 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [205.161.32.192] (jastell.tiac.net [205.161.32.192]) by prague.crossover.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id MAA03937 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 12:53:19 -0400 X-Sender: jastell@post.crossover.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 14:01:13 -0400 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) Subject: Re: Commonwealth hero? Mais non! Status: O Content-Length: 5909 >> > Alanbrooke, Auchinleck, Montgomery, O'Connor and Dorman-Smith >> >were all born in Ireland, which was technically still part of the >> >Commonwealth.... >> >> I believe both Alanbrooke and Monty would be considered Ulsterman and >>Ulster still being part of Gt. Britain.... > > The province of Ulster consists of 9 counties. Six counties are in >N.Ireland, which > most N.Irishmen of the protestant tradition refer to as Ulster. The > other 3 counties of Ulster are in the Republic of Ireland. Northern > Ireland is not in Great Britain. Great Britain consists of England, > Scotland, and Wales. N.Ireland is part of the United Kingdom, which > consists of Great Britain and N.Ireland.... All the generals here were born before 1921 -- before the creation of the Irish Free State, a dominion. Before then, Ireland was part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, so they were born citizens of the UK and no doubt retained UK citizenship even if their birthplace later broke off. Unless they took personal action such as emigrating to Canada, they could not be citizens of any Commonwealth country (other than the UK itself), as the British Commonwealth was not formed until 1926. The whole business of Commonwealth, Dominion, UK, Britain, etc. is interesting, and complicated enough to cause confusion. Briefly: Great Britain/United Kingdom: 1707 The Act of Union creates the Kingdom of Great Britain, uniting the Kingdom of England (which already ruled over Wales and Ireland) with the Kingdom of Scotland. (Previously, Scotland was a nominally independent country whose monarch was also the monarch of England). 1801 The KoGB becomes the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, with colonies and other possessions throughout the world. 1927 The UKoGB&I becomes the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, in recognition that southern Ireland has slipped away (see Ireland below). In practice, the UK is mostly known throughout the world as the Kingdom of Great Britain, and "Great Britain" is used in Europa in preference to "United Kingdom" in keeping with typical usage of the time -- as per National Geographic maps of the period. (One of my researchers claims that "Kingdom of Great Britain" may actually have been the official name until after the war, but I haven't been able to verify this.) It is unclear from my reading what the inhabitants of the UKoGB&NI themselves preferred in WW2 -- "Britain/British" (which ignores the Irish) may be most common, "United Kingdom/British" (but not United Kingdomer!) occasionally crops up, as does "England/English" (which supposedly incenses the Scots in particular). Dominion/British Commonwealth: c. 1860-1914: Various parts of the British Empire -- the parts settled by people from Britain -- became self-governing Dominions within the empire: Canada (excluding Newfoundland, which remain a separate colony under Britain), Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa. (The Union of South Africa was set up a self-governing state -- whether it techically was a Dominion or not would require a trip to the library to find out). India was reorganized as the Empire of India, with the monarch of the UK as the emperor/empress of India -- it was not a Dominion, however, and remained a possession of the UK. Officially, dominion status did not mean actual independence from Britain. In effect, however, the dominions became independent countries with close ties to Britain -- all went to war with the Central Powers when Britain did so in 1914. 1919 The Dominions signed the Versailles Treaty and enter the League of Nations the same as other independent countries. 1926 The British Commonwealth (the "British" part was dropped in 1949 so that India could join without being reminded too much of its colonial past) was created, containing the UK (and its possessions) together with the dominions, which now included the Irish Free State. The Commonwealth charter explicit recognized that its members were separate and equal entities, with no one member (i.e., Britain), have any official primacy or special rights. The monarch of the UK is also individually the monarch of each other Commonwealth nation (again, I'd have to go to the library to check on South Africa), although this is largely ceremonial. Many wargames use "Commonwealth" as a catch-all term for the non-British Commonwealth national forces (and sometimes, confusingly, for the Indian Army forces). I've never found this to be a particularly useful definition for Europa -- Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, and Canada had little in common with one another and typically each coordinated much more closely with Britain that with one another. Ireland 1921 The Irish Free State is created as a Dominion from the 26 mostly Roman Catholic southern counties of Ireland. (The Protestant-majority 6 norther counties remained in the UK.) The agreement creating the IFS grants Britain many rights in the IFS. In practice, anti-British Irish parties run the IFS government and chip away or outright ignore as many of their treay obligations as quick as they can. The IFS in effect becomes a completely independent country, albeit with many economic ties to Britain. 1926 The IFS becomes a member of the British Commonwealth. The next year, Britain amends its name (see GB 1927 above) so that it doesn't imply that rules all of Ireland. 1937 The IFS official declares itself the state of Eire (the Gaelic word from which "Ireland" was devised). (Eire doesn't officially proclaim itself a republic until after the war -- when the Commonwealth is reorganized to let a Republic of India in). 1939-45 Ireland declares neutrality in the war, and in its adherence to neutrality prohibits Britain from exercising its rights in Ireland, thus violating the treaty with Britain. The British government, sensibly, decides not to force the issue. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 15 20:02:05 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA26924; Mon, 15 Apr 96 20:02:04 +0200 Received: from prague.crossover.com (root@prague.crossover.com [204.217.246.5]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id UAA26117 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 20:01:49 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [205.161.32.192] (jastell.tiac.net [205.161.32.192]) by prague.crossover.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id MAA03943 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 12:53:32 -0400 X-Sender: jastell@post.crossover.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 14:01:26 -0400 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) Subject: Re: GE/SF: Free or following histo Status: O Content-Length: 1023 > ...So far as I can tell, every one is assuming that GE will be a >singularity. >To the contrary, I fully believe in the multiplicity of GE.... The first will >probably be a very rigid, historical version that relies upon years of Europa >OB research and game materials as its foundation. Subsequent expansions and >modifications will provide players with increasing levels of freedom from >history. Economic, political, and social models, will be added as each level >is proven out by the gaming enthusiasts. Only by following a natural >progression of complexity can GE be properly developed.... An acute analysis and very close to my thinking. I'd add that the best way to proceed seems to be a series of Grand Europa scenarios that tie all the pieces to together: first a GE 1943-45 campaign, then a GE 1941-45 campaign, and finally a GE 1939-45 campaign. By the time we reach the 1939-45 campaing, we should be able to roll in strong political/diplomatic system rules (necessary to cover the 1939-41 period). From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 15 20:02:12 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA26939; Mon, 15 Apr 96 20:02:11 +0200 Received: from prague.crossover.com (root@prague.crossover.com [204.217.246.5]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id UAA26120 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 20:01:55 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [205.161.32.192] (jastell.tiac.net [205.161.32.192]) by prague.crossover.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id MAA03946; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 12:53:39 -0400 X-Sender: jastell@post.crossover.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 14:01:35 -0400 To: europa@lysator.liu.se, RichV@icebox.iceonline.com From: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) Subject: Re: GE rules question Status: O Content-Length: 832 >In general, can a player move a unit a portion of its movement allowance, then >move another unit, and finally return to the first unit and finish its >movement? Not to upstage Rich Velay, but since I've answered this so many times in the past, I'll give it a shot here too: The answer is YES. A unit's movement allowance (however adjusted for map and rule conditions) gives it the number of MPs it can spend in a movement phase. However you do that (within the rules as written) is up to you -- there's no rule telling you to move all of one unit's MA before you can move another, or that if you do move another than the first unit's remaining MA is lost. (In fact, overruns wouldn't work right with such a restriction!) So, you're not violating any rule by doing this, so go ahead and get maximum mileage out of your units! From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 15 20:34:13 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA27254; Mon, 15 Apr 96 20:34:12 +0200 Received: from post.QueensU.CA (root@knot.QueensU.CA [130.15.126.54]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id UAA26754 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 20:33:27 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from mast.QueensU.CA (MAST.QueensU.CA [130.15.100.1]) by post.QueensU.CA (8.6.12/8.6.10+ASH) with SMTP id OAA09457 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 14:31:30 -0400 Received: from hilda.mast.QueensU.CA by mast.QueensU.CA (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA04830; Mon, 15 Apr 96 14:24:04 EDT Received: by hilda.mast.QueensU.CA (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA28472; Mon, 15 Apr 96 14:21:20 EDT From: pardue@hilda.mast.QueensU.CA (Keith Pardue) Message-Id: <9604151821.AA28472@hilda.mast.QueensU.CA> Subject: Re: SYSTEM: Mountain Artillery (fwd) To: europa@lysator.liu.se Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 14:21:19 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL13] Content-Type: text Status: O Content-Length: 2062 Hi, On mountain artillery: > In a message dated 96-04-13 16:24:08 EDT, pardue@hilda.mast.QueensU.CA (Keith > Pardue) writes: > > > > > Has anyone else ever noticed what terrain mountain > >artillery units move through most quickly during the winter? > >Wooded Rough only costs them 2 movement points! Even a road > >costs 3! > > > > > > I do not own SF and perhaps the identification chart is different. My FWTBT > unit identification chart classifies "mountain artillery" units as > "artillery"; the accompanykng footnote states that "*other* unit types with > the mountain symbol have mountain capability." Thus, I have always > interpreted this to mean that the "mountain" movement or combat modifiers on > the TEC do not apply to the mountain artillery units, which are subject to > the same TEC restrictions as all other artillery-class units. > Ah, but if you look at mountain artillery on the FWTBT unit identification chart you will find that Note 3 applies to them. Thus, Mtn Art pay 3 movement factors moving on roads in winter and only 2 for wooded rough. I suspect that you thought that "other" had some special game-specific technical meaning here, as it probably does in Advanced Squad Leader. Of course, if this were ASL, then every second letter in "other" would be capitalized in order to distinguish this use of "other" from the other use of "other" which would be signified by gothic letters. I am, of course, convinced by the suggestions that the pack mules have trouble with the ice on the roads and can get better traction in wooded rough. Presumably, both the trees and the rough ground are necessary for this traction, as they spend more movement factors to enter woods or to enter rough. But seriously, designer folk. I am not expert enough on what the mountain artillery are supposed to represent to fix this rule. Should they pay 3 (or more) for wooded rough, or should they move as mountain *infantry* units. John? Gary? (I do like Mark's play test rule) Best Wishes, Keith Pardue Kingston, Ontario, Canada From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 15 20:58:14 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA27493; Mon, 15 Apr 96 20:58:13 +0200 Received: from prague.crossover.com (root@prague.crossover.com [204.217.246.5]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id UAA27280 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 20:57:47 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [205.161.32.192] (jastell.tiac.net [205.161.32.192]) by prague.crossover.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id NAA04104; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 13:49:31 -0400 X-Sender: jastell@post.crossover.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 14:57:26 -0400 To: europa@lysator.liu.se, FEWatson@LANMAIL.RMC.COM From: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) Subject: re: SF:CAP Status: O Content-Length: 2240 >On Ray Kanarr's suggestion of penalties per hex over range: >Reasonable as simulation but problems for we humans. Consider "Ok >What was that range again? 16 no 15. Heck, let's count again. Where >was it flying from? Here, no there, or was it here?" Yes, indeed. One alternative system is to lose the numeric range ratings and go with range indicators on the counters: A: Very Short Ranged (for very short-ranged aircraft, e.g. Ar 68) B: Short Ranged (Me 109E, Spitfire I) C: Short-to-Medium Ranged (early P-51) D: Medium Ranged (many type B) E: Long Ranged F: Very Long Ranged Next, you define aircraft abilities in terms of range bands Range Band RI 1 2 3 etc. A x hexes y hexes z hexes etc. full red-1 red-2 etc. B etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. For each RI, each range band defines the number of hexes the aircraft can fly and the effects on its strength for operating in that band (full, reduced-1, reduced-2,etc.). Possible each range band could have the same number of hexes for all BI (with the shorter-ranged aircraft being prohibited from enter the higher bands) -- this would simply things but I'm guess the bands wouldn't be flexible enough to emcompass all RI. To make the system work, you'd need to mark aircraft operating in bands above #1 with markers. I leave the specific values to be plugged in "as an exercise for the student." I guarantee that such a system can work, but I don't guarentee that it will make a significant impact on play -- and it will be somewhat more complicated to use than the current sustem. Also, you lose a lot of the flavor that comes with seeing specific ranges on all the aircraft. >There will probably ALWAYS be anomalies in the aircraft ranging >system. And everywhere else! There's almost always "edge effects" when you approach the limit of something -- Einsteinian relativity came about because Newtonian physics broke down at the speed of light, and they still haven't reconciled Einsteinian gravity with quantum mechanics! The question often becomes, are the anomalies that occur at the limits small enough to be ignored, or do we have to complicate things by introducing rules and special cases to handle them. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 15 20:58:17 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA27501; Mon, 15 Apr 96 20:58:15 +0200 Received: from prague.crossover.com (root@prague.crossover.com [204.217.246.5]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id UAA27287 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 20:57:59 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [205.161.32.192] (jastell.tiac.net [205.161.32.192]) by prague.crossover.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id NAA04106; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 13:49:37 -0400 X-Sender: jastell@post.crossover.com Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 14:57:33 -0400 To: Courtenay Footman , europa@lysator.liu.se From: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) Subject: Re: Gr. Europa reorganizations Status: O Content-Length: 497 >May we please have some details on FITE/SE update? How extensive >will it be (I hope no new counters!) and what the timing will be? >Thank you. We will revise the maps, OBs, and rules; going through everything from top to bottom. Alas, some new counters will be required, although I believe the vast majority of them will remain the same. I hope to start on this project in the autumn of this year. Given my work schedule, I see little chance of producing any material for this before then. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Mon Apr 15 21:16:59 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA27666; Mon, 15 Apr 96 21:16:58 +0200 Received: from felix.dircon.co.uk (felix.dircon.co.uk [193.128.224.10]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id VAA27798 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 21:16:27 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [194.112.35.79] (gw1-079.pool.dircon.co.uk) by felix.dircon.co.uk with SMTP id AA09676 (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for ); Mon, 15 Apr 1996 20:16:24 +0100 X-Sender: cloister@popmail.dircon.co.uk Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 20:18:51 +0000 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: cloister@dircon.co.uk (Perry de Havilland) Subject: Ireland Cc: jastell@crossover.com (John M. Astell) Status: O Content-Length: 795 John Astell wrote: (monster snip) >1939-45 Ireland declares neutrality in the war, and in its adherence to >neutrality prohibits Britain from exercising its rights in Ireland, thus >violating the treaty with Britain. The British government, sensibly, >decides not to force the issue. My understanding was that the British elected to give up their treaty right to basing naval forces in Southern Ireland, rather than the Irish refusing to honour them unilaterally (I am assuming you are referring to the question of basing rights that so irritated Winston). It was this legal point that had the war cabinet stop Winston from forcibly re-asserting these right again against Irish wishes more than anything else. Was it 'sensible' to not force the issue? Opinion vary. Regards Perry ...- From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Apr 16 04:35:12 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA00951; Tue, 16 Apr 96 04:35:10 +0200 Received: from ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (abcclibr@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu [128.174.5.59]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id EAA05193 for ; Tue, 16 Apr 1996 04:33:12 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by ux1.cso.uiuc.edu id AA13135 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for europa@lysator.liu.se); Mon, 15 Apr 1996 21:33:02 -0500 Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 21:33:01 -0500 From: conrad alan b To: m.royer3@genie.com Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: GE rules question In-Reply-To: <199604151416.AA220747808@relay1.geis.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: O Content-Length: 692 On Mon, 15 Apr 1996 m.royer3@genie.com wrote: > Here's an open question to anybody. I already sent the question go GURU (Rich > > In general, can a player move a unit a portion of its movement allowance, then IMO, in RaW this would not be allowed. In general I don't think I would use it as a house rule in any game I would play. But the chances of this particular example coming up would be pretty slim in a game. However the same idea could come up say, move unit A a couple of MPs to block a retreat route for an oncoming overrun; then A moves a little further to block ZoCs for some other overrun or attack. So the idea behind the question is valid. Alan Conrad From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Apr 16 04:35:12 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA00952; Tue, 16 Apr 96 04:35:10 +0200 Received: from smtp.utexas.edu (smtp.utexas.edu [128.83.126.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id EAA05188 for ; Tue, 16 Apr 1996 04:33:00 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from slip-13-7.ots.utexas.edu (slip-13-7.ots.utexas.edu [128.83.128.23]) by smtp.utexas.edu (8.6.7/8.6.6) with SMTP id VAA28056 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 21:26:11 -0500 Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 21:26:11 -0500 Message-Id: <199604160226.VAA28056@smtp.utexas.edu> X-Sender: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu (Bobby D. Bryant) Subject: Re: Last of the Independents Status: O Content-Length: 635 John said: > ... As you may >suspect by now, I favor process simulation. Simulate the underlying >important factors, give players control over those that the historical >counterparts had significant control over, and let them go to it. It would be nice to hear your current thoughts on just who those "historical counterparts" are, too, since we've been having a running debate on it for a couple of months now. Your designer's decision on that will have enormous influence on the range of options available to players. - Bobby. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Apr 16 04:39:06 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA00984; Tue, 16 Apr 96 04:39:05 +0200 Received: from mail.cs.umn.edu (mail.cs.umn.edu [128.101.149.1]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id EAA05269 for ; Tue, 16 Apr 1996 04:38:26 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from deci.cs.umn.edu (thornley@deci.cs.umn.edu [128.101.224.10]) by mail.cs.umn.edu (8.7.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id VAA20135 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 21:38:20 -0500 (CDT) From: "David H. Thornley" Received: (thornley@localhost) by deci.cs.umn.edu (8.6.11/8.6.12) id VAA15421 for europa@lysator.liu.se; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 21:38:13 -0500 Message-Id: <199604160238.VAA15421@deci.cs.umn.edu> Subject: Re: Gr. Europa unit reorgs. To: europa@lysator.liu.se (Europa mailing list) Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 21:38:12 -0500 (CDT) In-Reply-To: from "Jason Long" at Apr 11, 96 04:06:39 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Status: O Content-Length: 1338 > > The force pool idea sounds workable, but I stongly disagree with allowing > the player to ignore the LW field divisions. It was political and should > not be under the players control! Yup. I side partly with the people who want to keep political decisions out of the Grand Europa purview. The Luftwaffe field divisions and SS units were built for purely political reasons, and were not in general worth the resources spent on them. I think that one criterion for calling something political is whether any sensible player would do it, given the choice. (I'd suggest this as the main criterion, but I doubt anybody on this list would set up the French anything like how Gamelin did it.) A sensible German might well do all the German invasions, for various reasons. He would *not* build three separate armies or declare war on the U.S. If we want GE to have a prayer of looking like WWII, we mandate such things. (So, do we mandate French deployment in 1940, or do we have that campaign look completely different from the historical one?) David H. Thornley, known to the Wise as thornley@cs.umn.edu O- Disclaimer: These are not the opinions of the University of Minnesota, its Regents, faculty, staff, students, or squirrels. Datclaimer: Well, maybe the squirrels. They're pretty smart. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Apr 16 04:44:26 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA01015; Tue, 16 Apr 96 04:44:25 +0200 Received: from smtp.utexas.edu (smtp.utexas.edu [128.83.126.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id EAA05377 for ; Tue, 16 Apr 1996 04:44:16 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from slip-13-7.ots.utexas.edu (slip-13-7.ots.utexas.edu [128.83.128.23]) by smtp.utexas.edu (8.6.7/8.6.6) with SMTP id VAA28332 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 21:38:19 -0500 Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 21:38:19 -0500 Message-Id: <199604160238.VAA28332@smtp.utexas.edu> X-Sender: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: bdbryant@mail.utexas.edu (Bobby D. Bryant) Subject: Re: Gr. Europa reorganizations Status: O Content-Length: 629 Jason said: >In the draft 41-45 East OB given to me by John Astell the Panzer Divs >convert/upgrade to 14-10 base, but the ones in AGN/AGC give up panzer >battalions to those in AGS, which places a (-2 PzG) marker on them, not a >-4. Those are for after Panthers arrive. Do [-4] counters enter play after a year or two, when Panthers were in production? Do these 14-10 divisions ever upgrade to c. 16-10? (I know you can get a de facto 16-10 by adding a detachment to a 14-10, but do these divisions remain intrinsically weaker than all those 16-10's in the West?) - Bobby. From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Apr 16 04:46:24 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA01028; Tue, 16 Apr 96 04:46:23 +0200 Received: from iac.iac.org.nz (iac.iac.org.nz [192.124.160.153]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id EAA05406 for ; Tue, 16 Apr 1996 04:46:06 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from smtpgate.iac.org.nz by iac.iac.org.nz (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA28855; Tue, 16 Apr 96 14:42:18 NZS Message-Id: <9604160242.AA28855@iac.iac.org.nz> From: NASU002.USAP@iac.org.nz (David H. Lippman) Date: Tue, 16 Apr 1996 14:43 GMT To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Colin Kelly, the uh...hero Status: O Content-Length: 3033 >does Colin Kelly's "sinking" of the Haruna indicate a conspiracy between the >Air Corps and Readers Digest? Colin Kelly's actual feat was to maintain a determined attack on a Japanese light cruiser off the coast of the Philippines during the Japanese invasion of Luzon. He reported the ship to be the Japanese battlecruiser Haruna, one of four the Japanese operated. On the way back to Clark Field, Kelly's B-17 was jumped by Japanese fighters, and Kelly stayed at the controls while his crewmen parachuted to safety. Somehow this story became transmogrified by American reporters eagerly seeking any sign of counterattack in the post-Pearl Harbor period into Kelly slamming his B-17 into the decks of Haruna, sending it to the bottom. Kelly was posthumously recommended for the Congressional Medal of Honor (he didn't get it), and US President Franklin D. Roosevelt wrote a letter for the record, requesting that Kelly's son, Colin P. Kelly III, be granted appointment to West Point without examination. In 1956, when this letter came up for action, Kelly III declined Roosevelt's munificience, and instead took the exam, and passed. There is a photograph of him chatting with by-now retired Douglas MacArthur. A great to-do was made over Kelly, with many variations on his basic theme (slamming his plane into Haruna's hide), including songs from Tin Pan Alley (which otherwise had a hard war with such ditties as "You're a Sap, Mr. Jap"), and considerable coverage in Francis Trevalyan Miller's adoring 1942 biography of Douglas MacArthur. This tome also told readers that Masaharu Homma had committed suicide when he couldn't conquer the Philippines (fiction) and that MacArthur and FDR saw eye-to-eye (an even greater fiction). In any case, the whole story was irrelevant. Kelly hadn't hit Haruna, or any other ship. Haruna avoided a brush with HMS Prince of Wales during the latter's ill-fated cruise to Kuantan, but saw a great deal of action after that: Midway, Guadalcanal, Philippine Sea, Leyte. She was finally caught and killed by US and Royal Navy Fleet Air Arm torpedo planes and bombers the way much of the Japanese fleet ended the war: trapped at anchor in Hashirajima, due to lack of fuel, and sunk in the harbor. After the war, Haruna's gray corpse, festooned with tree branches and camouflage netting in a vain attempt to ward off TBM Avengers, continued to squat forlornly in the harbor mud. That portion of Japan was run by the Britich Commonwealth Forces, under Australian, British, and New Zealand command, and the Australians entertained bids from local scrap dealers to disassemble the hulk. By 1949 the rusty remains of what had been one of the fastest and most powerful battleships in the Imperial Japanese Navy had been removed from Hashirajima's muddy floor, and both the ship and Kelly were forgotten. David H. Lippman Public Affairs Officer US Naval Antarctic Support Unit Christchurch, New Zealand From europa-request@lysander.lysator.liu.se Tue Apr 16 04:51:45 1996 Received: from lysander.lysator.liu.se (mailhost.lysator.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA01048; Tue, 16 Apr 96 04:51:44 +0200 Received: from smtp.utexas.edu (smtp.utexas.edu [128.83.126.2]) by lysander.lysator.liu.se (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id EAA05485 for ; Tue, 16 Apr 199