Are fortified hexside counters on their way out?

Yes, for two reasons. First, the counters are troublesome to use, as they almost always get knocked out of alignment -- showing which hexsides are fortified -- during play. You then have to waste time looking up their exact placement. Second, these fortifications are substantial. In Grand Europa, you should be able to rebuild them after capturing them, it you want to. (In most Europa games, the campaign is too short to bother with rebuilding fortifications .) Both these points mean that fortified hexsides should be printed directly on the map, just like all other prewar "permanent" features.

Then, why can't I rebuild the fortresses I capture when playing Scorched Earth? Surely that campaign is long enough!

While there's enough time to rebuild fortresses in Scorched Earth, I think a rule on this simply doesn't add enough to the game to warrant it. It seems very unlikely that the Soviets will recapture a fortress they once lost and still have a need for it. Conceivably the Germans would find it more useful, but it's hardly significant for them, either. Kronshtadt and Sevastopol are very poorly sited for German defensive needs. Brest Litvosk (aka Brzesc nad Bugiem) is in a good place, but a single fortress on the edge of Pripet Marshes won't stop the Soviets from pouring into Poland. 

Gotcha! The air rules allow a 0-attack-strength air unit to attack. For example, if a 5F5 attacks a 0T2, the transport can fire back at -5. Aren't these 0-attack air units unarmed?

Yes. A 0-attack-strength air unit shouldn't be able to fire in air combat.

Gotcha again! In Scorched Earth, if you stick a 2-0-6 siege artillery unit alone in a hex, it gets a " 1 defense strength according to Rule 14B. Is this the way it's supposed to work?

No. Such a unit or stack of such units should have a "0" defense strength.

By the way, the question brings up a topic that's been bothering me: the zero defense strength of siege and railroad artillery. While their general abilities aren't high for general defense, they do have some defensive value -- and, not surprisingly, the Germans used them in defensive situations when necessary. I'm currently considering giving all these units a minimum 1 defense strength.

Some German players use their siege artillery to give support to police regiments chasing the partisans. Since siege artillery has no defense strength, it's not needed at the front when you're on the defense, while the higher-defense-strength field artillery regiments are needed there. Isn't siege artillery too cumbersome to go after partisans?

Don't let it worry you. Technically, most siege artillery wouldn't be very useful against partisans -- light, mobile artillery would be best against these elusive foes. However, think of it as an Europa "convenience" factor. If Europa were a battalion-level game, you'd be able to break down your artillery regiments and send the light artillery assets against the partisans whenever you wanted. Since you can't, then the siege artillery "stands in" for the light artillery in this instance.

It's not like you don't have the artillery assets you need, it's just that the game has organized them more for conventional war than anti-partisan operations.

You've given breakdowns for most Italian divisions in War in the Desert. How about the infantry divisions?

Allowing the Italian infantry divisions to break down in the game looks like it gives them more flexibility than they historically deserve. This is NOT RECOMMENDED If you still want to try it, see table one below.

Why is motorized infantry halved when attacking some terrain types, such as swamps and forest, when regular infantry isn't? I can see why other combat/motorized types are halved, because the AFVs don't work in the terrain. Motorized infantry, I believe, simply used trucks for transport and went into battle on foot like other infantry.

This is true at the tactical level, but Europa isn't a tactical-level game. At the operational level, the large number of motor vehicles in a motorized infantry unit restricts its abilities in unsuitable terrain just like other c/m units. If you want the benefits of being combat/motorized, you've got to take the penalties, too.

Well, even if you don't want the benefits of c/m, you're still stuck with the penalties, as the rules don't give you any way around it. I've tooled around with a "demotorization" option off and on, but it never seemed worthwhile making it a rule. If you want to fool around with, too, here's my UNOFFICIAL option:

In your initial phase, you may demotorize motorized infantry units and remotorize those that you've previously demotorized. To demotorize a unit, during your initial phase simply place a marker on it to show that it's demotorized. While demotorized, it has 6 MPs and functions exactly the same as a non-motorized infantry unit. It remains demotorized until remotorized. To remotorize a unit, during your initial phase simply remove the demotorized marker from it. It again functions as a combat/ motorized unit.

Note: This rule has a few holes in it, and filling them increases its complexity quickly. For example, what if a demotorized unit crossed terrain prohibited to c/m units? Should you be able to remotorize it -- how do its trucks get there? I believe this rule would be used but little in any event, and the complexity needed to solve its problems makes it hard to use.

In War in the Desert, divisions have their actual RE size, such as 2 or 3 REs. In Scorched Earth, however, all divisions are 3 REs even though some German divisions had only two regiments and some Soviet corps had four brigades. Why is this?

Partly for a matter of convenience. War in the Desert has such a limited number of divisions that it's practical to distinguish their RE size. Also, their limited numbers means the particular size of any one could have some influence on play. Neither condition is true for Scorched Earth. There are very many divisions -- including many different kinds -- in Scorched Earth, so keeping track of thoir differing sizes becomes a chore. And, whether a particular division is 2 or 3 REs can have only the most fleeting impact on play. Adding this to Scorched Earth would only give you something extra to remember, without affecting the course of play at all.

If you're not satisfied with this, then look at it this way: the RE size of a unit is an abstraction that counts only its "maneuver" elements, and its main effect is to show that a division is much bigger than a regiment. The difference between a 2-RE division and a 3-RE division is much smaller than the difference between any division and a 1-RE unit.

To illustrate, let's take a look at a set of German units: an infantry regiment, a jager division, and an infantry division. The infantry regiment is a regiment, hence 1 RE. It actually contains three infantry battalions, for a battalion count (BC) of 3. A jager division has two infantry regiments, hence it would be 2 REs if we distinguished between divisions. Each of these regiments has three battalions, but before we give it a BC of 6, we should look at its combat support elements: four artillery battalions (organized in an artillery regiment), one recon battalion, one antitank battalion, and one engineer battalion. This gives it a BC of 13.

An infantry division has three infantry regiments (hence 3 RES), each of which has three battalions (base BC of 9). Add to this four artillery battalions (again in an artillery regiment), one recon battalion, one antitank battalion, and one engineer battalion, giving it a BC of 16. In terms of BCs, both types of divisions are roughly the same size, both being much larger than a single regiment.

In your Europa OB on German Railroad Engineers (TEN 8) your notes for the "19" and "20" battalions indicate they spent most of the war as the "11 zbV" and "10 zbV" battalions, respectively. Shouldn't their game IDS reflect the IDS they spent most of the war under?

I agree. The 19th seems best as the 11 zbV , and the 20th as the 10 zbV.

More Inside Europa

More WWII Americans
Questions and Answers