Checklists for Dummies (AARHE 4.0)


  • Checklist for Dummies.

    I didn’t get as far as I wanted to tonight, but here’s my first stab.

    Chicklets for Dummies AARHE Phase 1-3.doc


  • … and the converted Diplomacy checklist as well.

    Chicklets for Dummies AARHE Phase 4-8.doc


  • This is much easier to read and understand. I think you can do the entire ruleset in under 10 pages in this outline mode.

    good job.


  • Here is something I’ve done for the 1939 rule version (Attached).  Not nearly as complex as Bierwagon’s outline but I think I will try to incorporate it with BW’s outline when it’s finished.  Much of the 1939 variences are on this, but not all.  Which is why  our group also needs an outline for the 1939 variences.

    BW, thought our flow diagrams were kick a**!  8-)  Looks like you have the outline well in hand.  Do you need any help?  Glad to do it as our group in similar situation.  I will also start working on a 1939 version.

    I’ve also made a MS Word version of the individual nation’s advantages layed out to print the size of a playing card.

    note:  unfortunately, the background on the attachment makes the file too large so it doesn’t have the shadow graphics of the generals for each nation.

    France master set up.doc


  • Wow!  Sweetness!

    Where did you find all the 1939 rules?  The ones I have doesn’t have all the phases and stages (e.g., defensive ground reinforcement, pre-emptive fire, etc.).  Those look like AARHE 2.0 or so from earlier this year.

    I’m intrigued!

    I agree the flow diagrams are kick butt – and I intend to get back to them.  The outline is more of a stream of consciousness that just flows.

    Until my groups gets a better handle on the basics I need to very detailed flow of the outline.  Hopefully I can pare it down a bit to just a quick reference overview.


  • IL is probably pulling his hair out right about now!  This was for illustrative purposes only  (although is 95% accurate)!

    Like your group, we graduated from AAR and AARe and others.  However, we find the play and map varients of AARHE 1939 to be more realistic, strategic and challenging.  IL and others did a fantastic job with the 1939 map and play rules, although I think it was mostlly IL for this version.

    That said, we had a few rules carried over.  We had too many players wanting too many variences which was becoming way to complicated.  So, I became the marshall (he who ownes the map makes the rules)  8-) Once we digest AARHE (which is a challenge in itself) then we will look at a reasonable number of variences - Pre-emptive artillary and CAP (carried over from AAP).

    What I finally got across to our group was that throwing too many variences into a game that has been play tested by players far more experienced than us, even though they may be fun and worked in other games, will probably upset the balance.  (Of course, more than once I had to threaten to take my map and go home  :-D )  Not really, but I suspect you have similar issues.

    That is why I’m so interested in you outline for AARHE that I can then adjust for 1939 version.


  • IL is probably pulling his hair out right about now!  This was for illustrative purposes only  (although is 95% accurate)!

    Like your group, we graduated from AAR and AARe and others.  However, we find the play and map varients of AARHE 1939 to be more realistic, strategic and challenging.  IL and others did a fantastic job with the 1939 map and play rules, although I think it was mostlly IL for this version.

    That said, we had a few rules carried over.  We had too many players wanting too many variances which was becoming way to complicated.  So, I became the Marshall (he who ownes the map makes the rules)  cool Once we digest AARHE (which is a challenge in itself) then we will look at a reasonable number of variances - Pre-emptive artillary and CAP (carried over from AAP).

    What I finally got across to our group was that throwing too many variances into a game that has been play tested by players far more experienced than us, even though they may be fun and worked in other games, will probably upset the balance.  (Of course, more than once I had to threaten to take my map and go home  grin )  Not really, but I suspect you have similar issues.

    That is why I’m so interested in you outline for AARHE that I can then adjust for 1939 version.

    Yes lets just get the full outline done, then modify a version for 1939 and then at that point we will see if and where we need to draw clarifications to the ruleset. I will do this myself after we decide where the text needs to be modified. all in due time.


  • Gah!

    I’m taking IL at his word.  He told me “ask away… that’s what I’m here for” ;-)

    So, sadly, I have to get ready for today’s game – starts at 1500L and must press out of here.

    IL I’ll send you the checklist via e-mail because it went to 323KB and I can’t upload it anymore.

    Thanks for all the Q&A!

    More to follow.

    • Bierwagen

  • Where did you find all the 1939 rules?  The ones I have doesn’t have all the phases and stages (e.g., defensive ground reinforcement,

    pg 12 Under Non-Combat Move (I think was misplaced as the move is taken after enemy’s combat moves are declared not conducted)

    Reinforcement
    During your enemy’s turn (your passive turn), after all combat moves are declared you may declare Reinforcements.
    This may not be performed during USSR player’s special opening turn.
    Land or naval units may move to adjacent friendly territories or adjacent friendly sea zones. Units that
    conducted combat this turn may not perform this.

    Defensive Air Support
    During your enemies’ turn (your passive turn), after all combat moves are declared you may declare Defensive
    Air Support. This may not be performed during USSR player’s special opening-turn.
    Air units may move to adjacent friendly territories or any adjacent sea zones. DAS are declared after all
    combat moves are declared and before resolving any combats. DAS does not interrupt naval movement.

    Their was a long post discussion that armor and planes could move two spaces but then enter on combat round two, but that was voted down.


  • Yes right. Another idea under considerations was this:

    all land units that move 2 spaces, but only use one movement point to get in combat can do one of two new things:

    1. make a breakthrough attack of one space providing they won the battle, only those land units with leftover MP and un allocated planes can perform this special attack.

    2. make a second move out of the territory they just attacked to protect them from counterattack.


  • [1) make a breakthrough attack of one space providing they won the battle, only those land units with leftover MP and un allocated planes can perform this special attack.

    1. make a second move out of the territory they just attacked to protect them from counterattack.
      /quote]

    I really like this particularly #2.  After a really bad dice roll(s) - depicting a stronger defense than planned or an attack gone bad - player’s are sometimes left with only a few pieces that will be sacrificed.  But doesn’t the current rules allow a retreat which would make #2 mute?


  • My last comments ended up under the quotes, re-posting to avoid confusion:

    [1) make a breakthrough attack of one space providing they won the battle, only those land units with leftover MP and un allocated planes can perform this special attack.

    1. make a second move out of the territory they just attacked to protect them from counterattack.
      /quote]

    I really like this particularly #2.  After a really bad dice roll(s) - depicting a stronger defense than planned or an attack gone bad - player’s are sometimes left with only a few pieces that will be sacrificed.  But doesn’t the current rules allow a retreat which would make #2 mute?


  • Yes the rules actually allow this anyway, but the way they are versed is not clear. I know it says “if the defender retreats in full the attacker must enter the vacated territory with at least 1 unit”…. but me and tekkyy had a long talk about this and i wanted to seek your council on the issue.

    I don’t really like the idea of allocating 20 units to attack a territory over a 4-6 month period…and defeating the defender but the prize is secured by one unit?

    Its not intuitive. I feel the units that expended their effort to move ( and have only one movement point anyway) should occupy the territory, but the units that had 2 movement spaces and only used one are at a loss and considering they are more mobile should elect to move out or gain one additional attack ( their choice).

    I don’t know any aspect where they sent in 30 divisions to take a nation, and immediately pull out 29 divisions within days of conquest knowing very well the enemy is nearby with its own capabilities. It strikes me like a ‘raid’ rather than a campaign of conquest or liberation.

    I prefer your way of explaining it.

    Both of you will go on the document as full contributors for your efforts.

    Id like you to make an outline of the NA’s so people can index the NA quickly and avoid reading the history lesson behind it. One sentence or two should suffice the explanation.

    Im trying to get a hold of Tekkyy… he has been away and has to address some of these issues with us.


  • oh no
    I did very misleading typo

    “after all combat moves are declared”
    should read
    “after all non-combat moves are declared”

    only air units have the mobility to reinforced rapidly (before combat)

    IL, recall land units’ ability to reinforce BEFORE combat led to legendary exploitation and complex rules after rules to fix

    It sounds like tekkyy intended only air to reinforce combat not land or sea units, which are only limited to reinforcement to counter an opposing player’s non-combat move.  Correct?

    Would have liked to seen a land reinforcement during combat, even if on second turn.  It would seam practical if you had just occupied a territory but had only a few units left after a bad roll, that was then exploited by your opponent.

    Id like you to make an outline of the NA’s so people can index the NA quickly and avoid reading the history lesson behind it. One sentence or two should suffice the explanation.

    Actually, this is already completed.  I made up NA cards for each nation for use during our games.  I eliminated the “historical” text so the NA would fit on the card an still be seen “by us older guys”.  No problem putting it in a index format.


  • oh then please post and we will add them to AARHE files section.

    Good job!

    Both of you are on contributors list and that will be updated.

    On the other issue, I think we will have to look into defenders combat reinforcement, because it seems only like a free move to their advantage.

    I prefer the idea on the other thread about units with 2 movement points, because its more realistic.

    Also i like the idea of contested zones where both sides occupy the territory and combat is optional, but infantry cant leave unless a round of combat occurs, while 2 MP units can leave or enter to reinforce and still avoid combat.

    This is a solution to too few territories on the map to maneuver.


  • Here is an example of the National Advantages I made into player cards.  I printed them (front and back) on heavy stock and cut them into player cards size.  You may need to adjust the size of the table to have them print exactly even front and back depending on your computer, printer, etc.  Unfortunately, I had to eliminate alot of the graphics due to upload size restrictions.

    I summarized the history or background of each advantage into one or two sentences to have room on the size card.  I can easily get rid of all history reference and do an index pretty quick.

    Wanted you to see an example of the NA player aide before I started.  If you want all the other national advantage cards as well, let me know.

    Germany 1-9.doc
    Germany 10-18.doc
    Germany Back.doc


  • OMG these are incredible!!!

    I Love them because thats something i wanted to do so each player can have them right in front of him during play, but also draw them randomly.

    Thank you so much for your contribution.

    The only improvement would be to have the national icon larger in the corner or in the background as a watermark. When i get a chance i will use your file to add them so its really easy to know if the card is German or American NA. The German watermark is from WW1 and is kinda small. WE will use the AARHE national icons so everything is consistent.

    If you can finish the fronts of all 6 national advantages, ill get the backs and post.

    Keep up the good work. Eventually this will be perfect.


  • Here is Italy’s NA.  I’ve taken all graphics off.

    Italy 1-9.doc
    Italy 10-18.doc
    Italy back 2.doc


  • Just do what you can a little each day. Also id make the paragraphs so the lines are justified equally rather than left justification.

    so you got this:

    –-----


    try to get this:




    its easier to read and just takes a second to format.


  • Actually, that’s how they are formatted on my end  :?  I’ll see what’s up.

Suggested Topics

  • 2
  • 1
  • 6
  • 19
  • 14
  • 8
  • 54
  • 167
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

40

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts