Harry E. Bryan

I have recently started to read your magazine and I felt a need to put my two cents worth in concerning the Europa system. I have just started playing the system. That's right, fresh meat, so to speak. As a newcomer to the game I would like to ask some questions and pick up some information on the system.

I realize that your magazine is for the dedicated Europa player; however, for us "newbies" it s like listening in on only half of a conversation and trying to figure out what all the fuss is about. To wit:

What is Grand Europa? If it is all of the Europa games together ' why are only Fire in the East and Scorched Earth in print? Doesn't that tend to make it difficult to put together? Have you considered putting one of the more manageable games out so that some poor, unsuspecting slob doesn't have a heart attack when he opens FitE and counts the number of counters? I would suggest a reissue of Western Desert for novices. It only has two maps and a reasonable number of counters. And how do you figure to get someone who is new to the Europa system to play if the only game available costs sixty dollars?

I own both Western Desert and Near East. Now just what am I supposed to do with all of the counters that represent the Turkish armed forces? I didn't see any rules on how they can get involved in the war.

What is the Collector Series? What does For Whom the Bell Tolls cover?

I bought Strategy & Tactics #128 just to get the game Africa Orientale. I found it interesting enough to buy your magazine and learn more about your games. Has anyone looked into redoing the map that was included with that variant? According to the intro it was done at 32 miles per hex instead of the standard 16 miles per hex Europa treatment. Since it's extremely difficult for the Italians to win, this would make a possible starter kit (with the experienced player taking the Italians).

Well, I guess that just about sums everything up. I am looking forward to hearing from you.

Thank you for your letter. You raise issues on two levels that our company is trying to address.

First I want to answer you directly on the questions you raised, although these answers raise more questions and we should dialogue, which would be a far better forum than this exchange of letters. If you show up at Origins or come to Europafest in Dallas we might be able to do just that.

Grand Europa is the final set of rules, charts, and whatever else it takes to merge all the games and modules of the Europa system into one complete and overall strategic game, simulating the entire European and Mediterranean theater of operations. This final chapter of the series has not been written and is undergoing discussion.

When completed, Grand Europa will no doubt utilize materials from all of the games of the series (including the Turkish forces). At this time most outofprint Europa titles are available through the Europa Association. Stocks are limited so we must, unfortunately, restrict their sale to members only. In the general market there are three titles available: Fire In The East, Scorched Earth, and The Urals. Hobby stores may have additional titles, but my guess is that most are gone.

So, it is time to restock the shelves. The opportunity to not simply reprint the existing games, but to update them, opens the door for the series to evolve. These "new" games will constitute the "Collector Series." Since Europa is not a static system and has undergone change throughout its 17 years of existence, we decided, based on new research information and new technology, to make some fixes to the maps, counters, and rules as we reintroduce the series to gamers. I believed that given enough money we could do this right away, silly me. We also need sufficient time, which is much more precious.

Over the next three years we intend to release nine new Europa products to the market. The first of these, Balkan Front, is to be out in June of this year. That game will have one and a half maps and three countersheets, numerous scenarios and options, and should provide everyone with the ability to begin again at a reasonable speed. Following that we will be releasing For Whom The Bell Tolls, an Europa version of the Spanish Civil War; First To Fight, the reissued Case White game; Winter War, the Russo- Finnish war; and so on until we have everything back in print. This schedule (10 x the speed of light by Europa standards) should see the vast majority of the system back on the shelves in three years. That is the plan.

As for an East Africa game, it is under consideration.

Key to all of this is our magazine. We started out as a newsletter and evolved to the current magazine. Within that format we have continued to evolve. The magazine is the keystone to the plan because of exactly what happened in your case. You saw it, you read it, and you wrote to us. We circulate thousands of magazines so we know that there are thousands of people out there who are in touch with us. We have an avid following in Australia, the U.K., Spain, Italy, Japan, Scandinavia, France, Canada, and many other countries of the world. The magazine binds all of us together in that community and provides two-way communication which is the foundation we intend to build the system on.

To that end we continue to evolve. The magazine will feature more game and gamer-related materials for beginners and for veterans. We will offer Europa in other formats, such as the computer. We will not please everyone, but we will do the best possible job trying.

Again, thanks for the letter. It may not seem much to you, but it is exactly the kind of letter we want to get. Suggestions and information. WJH

Dan Kinley

In looking forward to the development of Grand Europa, I hope the naval struggle will be covered in detail. After all, considering the economic advantages of the Allies' massive production capabilities available in the United States, it would seem the only hope the Axis have of victory is to stop, or at least slow the transfer of these resources across the Atlantic.

I guess the other option for the Axis is to destroy the Soviet Union so as to shift their total military resources west, but past debate on this subject leads one to think this option is unlikely. Yet, even if the conquest of Russia is a viable alternative, that still leaves the Axis only two options for victory. It stands to reason that any game portraying World War II in Europe should include a system to play out one of the major campaigns of the war, the Battle of the Atlantic.

The naval rules already created in Their Finest Hour have enough detail, yet are not too complex. These rules just need to be refined and expanded. As examples, allow movement through a number of sea zones each turn, and present opposing surface forces the chance of not finding each other when in the same sea zone. A new map would be needed of the North Atlantic, and maybe the South Atlantic, too. The scale would have to be different of course, but one could make each hex the equivalent of a sea zone. Each sea zone could be several hundred kilometers across.

This expansion of the naval rules would add complexity, but the rewards to the Europa system would be great. The Axis player (or team) receives the excitement of planning and coordinating a naval campaign using U-boats, surface raiders, resupply ships, and long-range Konclor bombers. Then there is the Italian fleet. Think of the nightmares an Axis player could give the Allies with an active Italian fleet. The Allied player (or team) would have to allocate naval and air resources to counter the Axis naval threats. The results of the Allied campaign would dictate whether they could even open the Second Front.

Frank Watson

Congratulations on Europa #11, namely:

The name change - a simple Europa is a lot classier.

The notice about ETO - a welcome piece of info at some extra expense and effort on your part.

And most of all, for the plans to publish Europa mini-games. This has been the one piece missing from most Europa games. It is always a pity to have so many fine Europa games but only have one starting point. There are countless minigames to be designed.

I have experimented with Duane Romfoe's movement rules extensively in the desert, and in a game of Marita-Merkur (a last farewell before Balkan Front?). For me, they worked with hardly a hitch and much better than the original rules. After reading John Astell's comments in Europa #11, I went back and studied Duane's rules some more. I still come out with a solid vote for the unopposed march and infantry exploitation rules. (My own solution to the problem had been three turns per month instead of two.)

I could only find one minor problem with Duane's rules. I think they allow too much flexibility for counterattacks in a static front line. During the movement phase, a player can mass infantry units from several surrounding hexes at one point and attack one defending hex. If he is successful, well, success is success. If the attack fails, however, say an NE or AR result, the attacker merely reshuffles his infantry back into a strong defensive line.

I noticed this on the Greek front in Marita-Merkur and in the siege line around Tobruk while playing Western Desert. I think the rule could make for some particularly nasty local German counterattacks on the Italian front and Siegfried line, for example. My simple solution was to put a disrupted marker on any non-c/m unit which attacks, but does not achieve a DE, DH, HX, EX, or DR result. The disrupted units cannot move in the subsequent exploitation phase.

An idea for your readers for an article: I remember reading on time in TEN a comment about there being no jagged front lines like there were in reality. I see this as a result of two things the very nature of a hex grid system giving advantages to an attack from three or four hexes against one defending hex (not much to do about that) and second, not allowing retreats through ZOCs, even through friendly units. I would be very interested to see people's comments on the retreat rule and any variations they play.

As long as I'm rambling, I found the question about Italian armored divisions interesting in the "You Ask, I Answer" column. I, too, have some problems with the 7-5-8 rating of Italian armored divisions. Although counting battalions and tanks may result in those numbers, I do not feel Italian doctrine and leadership were up to applying them efficiently at a tactical/operational level. Consider two attacks on the British 7th Armoured Division one with a full-strength 21st Panzer, the other from the Ariete (132nd) Division. Who would your money be on? Mine is with the Germans, against the Italians. In Europa, the outcome probabilities are identical.

The Italians often performed well in defense - witness Bir el Gubi during "Crusader" and rearguard actions shortly after, covering Rommel's withdrawal to Gazala. In contrast, they were almost always poor on the attack - take Tobruk (4/41), and Bir Hacheim, for example. I feel a rating more like 4-6-8 or 5-7-8 is more appropriate to their actual performance, whether it was a sound combined arms organization or not.

Jim Burnett

Unless I am badly mistaken, the Ghost of Europa in Issue #12 is Father Charles E. Coughlin. This nominally Catholic priest was actually Canadian. He was first noted on the American scene when, in 1926, the KKK burned down his church in Royal Oak, a Detroit suburb. He went on radio to solicit contributions to rebuild, was a hit, and started the "Golden Hour of the Little Flower." By the early 30's he had built to an audience on CBS, receiving his contributions by the now indispensable method of selling religious 1. artifacts." His take ran upwards of $20,000 in depression money.

As he grew more influential, he organized the National Union for Social Justice. This organization, and Coughlin, took on a more and more strident tone of right-wing philosophy as he hurled invectives at Roosevelt (whom he originally supported) and the New Deal. Other noteworthy targets included the AFL, Judaism, and Fiorello La Guardia. The Union claimed a following of 7,500,000. When dropped by CBS for controversial broadcasting, he started his own network of over 60 stations. Allies accumulated at the time included the Reverend Gerald L.K. Smith, Frances Everett Townsend, William Randolph Hearst, and Huey P. Long.

In the 1936 presidential election, Coughlin and others formed the Union Party. This was in truth a fascist party with the usual nationalistic trappings. The assassination of Long had left the speakers without a leader, however, and the nationwide support for Roosevelt and his policies doomed the party to abject defeat at the polls. Coughlin decided to "retire" from radio and, upon changing his mind, found he was no longer wanted. He surfaced briefly during the Ford strike of 1937.

As the war grew nearer, Coughlin grew more and more fascist and anti-semitic in philosophy; starting the ultra right-wing "Crusaders." The war itself spelled an end to all his power.

Jay Kaufman

In line with Shelby Stanton's article recording the abbreviations which will appear on German units, I think it would be worthwhile to include the nicknames of American divisions on their counters, presumably in abbreviated form. For example, 36th Division could have "Texas" printed on the counter, immediately after the number "36," but 29th Division would only have 'BG" (for "Blue and Gray"). If this is too much clutter, the information could be relegated to the back of the counter. I think this sort of detail would be of interest - a nice piece of chrome - and "E" gamers appreciate having such chrome at their fingertips.

The term "megaport" proposed for the largest sized ports in Europe doesn't ring true. "Mega" is a term which sounds more appropriate to a science fiction milieu or at least something associated with the postatomic age. "Megaport" definitely seems out of place in Europa. I can't imagine FDR or Churchill ever mouthing the word megaport." May I suggest calling such places as Antwerp, Liverpool, Hamburg, et al. "Great Ports?" In an era of "great powers" and the "Great War" think it would be more in keeping with the spirit of the times.

Jay, I think this is a "great" idea. It so happens that John Astell agrees with you that a better name could be found. In his Second Front Newsletter#1 John opines, '7'm not thrilled with the term "mega"... it really is a modern term and wouldn't have been used in WW2... Anyone got any suggestions?" Maybe your idea will fit the bill.