Checklists for Dummies (AARHE 4.0)



  • [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?


  • 2017 2016 2015 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    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.


  • 2017 2016 2015 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    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


  • 2017 2016 2015 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    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


  • 2017 2016 2015 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    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.



  • IL: Completed National Advantage Player Card Format - Germany

    Here you go.  The graphics have been removed and text formatted.

    It only allows 3 posts???  Then the NAs will be sent over 6 posts

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



  • Completed National Advantage Player Card Format - Italy

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



  • Completed National Advantage Player Card Format - Russia

    Russia back 2.doc
    Soviet Union 1-9.doc
    Soviet Union 10-18.doc



  • Completed National Advantage Player Card Format - Japan

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



  • Completed National Advantage Player Card Format - UK

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



  • Completed National Advantage Player Card Format - US

    US 1-9.doc
    US10-18.doc
    US back.doc



  • Stuck in Seattle for a couple days, so I didn’t see these until today.  These are really a great addition!  I was using chips with taped on numbers which was a pain – so this will be a serious upgrade, since the players won’t have to look them up.  Very nice.

    Thanks for the effort!



  • Working on the NA Index and need a clarification

    11. Alpen Festung During combat German units can retreat to a virtual territory. All retreating units are converted to Infantry to resemble a true guerrilla campaign fought in the mountains of the Alps.

    virtual territory is confusing, at least to the first time reader.  Is it any German occupied territory or an off board and separate?  Please explain.

    Furthermore the Allies do not gain the income of Germany even if it’s subsequently captured by them.

    “the income of Germany” would indicate German’s capital.  If not, why do they get Germany’s $$ unless its only the IPC of that territory captured.

    To take the income Allies must capture the virtual territory and must score two hits in combat to destroy one land unit.

    the way its worded capturing the virtual territory and scoring two hits are separate activities.  What if you take the territory but don’t score two hits?  Or do you take the territory and any defending units require two hits to destroy?



  • @Imperious:

    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?

    Agreed.  This needs to be rethought out.  It bogs the game down with just 1 infantry patrolling all the borders.  Huge armies are used to crush the country, but then everyone retreats and 1 sacrificial infantry is used as a buffer state to protect your cities and high value assets.

    Need to get some discussion up on this one.  I really have enjoyed the idea of retreating after attacking, but I think it is used too often to avoid conflict and protect pieces.



  • Hehe it wouldn’t have been a long talk between me and IL on “that” issue if we didn’t both have good points.

    Basically I found it unrealistic for defender’s choice in “retreat decision” to enforce attacker’s choices.
    If attacker can retreat, why can’t they retreat just because the defender has retreated? Battles are not always for the capture of the territory, it can be purely for destruction of enemy forces.

    IL found it unrealistic as it doesn’t fit history. Its not usual for an area to be vacated like what is allowed by our rule.

    In the end we just made it you have to leave one unit behind “to capture”.

    To be honest I think the issue is due to another unrealistic aspect of Axis and Allies. You should require a certain number of land units in order to capture a territory. At last talk we decided not to introduce another rule yet.



  • I’m resubmitting this before I get pushed too far down the post ladder.

    Working on the NA Index and need a clarification

    11. Alpen Festung  During combat German units can retreat to a virtual territory. All retreating units are converted to Infantry to resemble a true guerrilla campaign fought in the mountains of the Alps.

    Virtual territory is confusing, at least to the first time reader.  Is it any German occupied territory or off board and separate?  Please explain.

    Furthermore the Allies do not gain the income of Germany even if it’s subsequently captured by them.

    “the income of Germany” would indicate that “it’s subsequently captured by them.” referr’s to German’s capital not the virtual territory.  If so, suggest replacing “its” with “Germany’s capital”.  Ifnot, does the virtual territory represent the capital?  If so, we should call it as such, not a territory.

    To take the income Allies must capture the virtual territory and must score two hits in combat to destroy one land unit.

    the way its worded “capturing the virtual territory and scoring two hits” are separate activities.  Can you take the territory but don’t score two hits?  Or do you take the territory and any defending units require two hits to destroy?  if so, suggest rewording to:

    “To take the income Allies must capture the virtual territory.  Defending land units require two hits to destroy.”

    Trust us, the rule lawyers seeing this for the first time will convert it to their advantage unless its specific.


  • 2017 2016 2015 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    Quote
    11. Alpen Festung  During combat German units can retreat to a virtual territory. All retreating units are converted to Infantry to resemble a true guerrilla campaign fought in the mountains of the Alps.

    Virtual territory is confusing, at least to the first time reader.  Is it any German occupied territory or off board and separate?  Please explain.

    It can be the same territory to physically place the units. Or you can use Switzerland space. Its like that dotted line separating Poland and Germany in 1939 map. Its one territory to the original occupier, but if the enemy enters they are coexisting the territory with you.

    Quote
    Furthermore the Allies do not gain the income of Germany even if it’s subsequently captured by them.

    “the income of Germany” would indicate that “it’s subsequently captured by them.” referr’s to German’s capital not the virtual territory.  If so, suggest replacing “its” with “Germany’s capital”.  Ifnot, does the virtual territory represent the capital?  If so, we should call it as such, not a territory.

    The portion occupied by Germans gets the IPC of the entire territory, So the allies don’t get to build anything in Germany until they remove all the german units. Meanwhile Germany gets the income ( minus SBR, deductions for combat rounds etc)

    Quote
    To take the income Allies must capture the virtual territory and must score two hits in combat to destroy one land unit.

    the way its worded “capturing the virtual territory and scoring two hits” are separate activities.  Can you take the territory but don’t score two hits?  Or do you take the territory and any defending units require two hits to destroy?  if so, suggest rewording to:

    “To take the income Allies must capture the virtual territory.  Defending land units require two hits to destroy.”

    Trust us, the rule lawyers seeing this for the first time will convert it to their advantage unless its specific.

    yes thats fine. Ill ask tekkyy to make that change.



  • “To take the income Allies must capture the virtual territory.  Defending land units require two hits to destroy.”

    ok I put in your rewrite now



  • Here is an example set up chart for eveyone’s preview.  Each nation will have their map section in the background.

    The turn sequence on the left needs to be changed.  I’ll do that as soon a Beirwagan finishes the outline so we are the same.

    View:  http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=e9a26b9e5e821f80d2db6fb9a8902bda


  • 2017 2016 2015 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    WOW! that is very impressive. I will get to work on the background sheets. So just make at a patient pace and we will have the final product that will be even more impressive.

    good job!


Log in to reply
 

Suggested Topics

  • 9
  • 2
  • 23
  • 4
  • 2
  • 212
  • 463
  • 4
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

28
Online

13.7k
Users

34.0k
Topics

1.3m
Posts