Joseph Key

Winston went a long way towards easing my worries when he mentioned that the Axis colors in Balkan Front were indeed a production problem - as I suspected and prayed they were and not a fundamental shift in counter policy.

John Astell's designer's notes for Balkan Front were very timely and informative. John's Balkan Chronology reminded me of a favorite feature of the old Nuts & Bolts. The Europa Diary was a listing by Europa turns of the military events that took place in the course of a particular campaign. Two were done, Case White and Western Desert. They were very handy in comparing game progress with historical progress. I'd like to see further installments in TEM.

Sorry to see the lettered units go.

I like Winston's idea of incorporating a Mediterranean module into the new release of Western Desert, etc. You need a June or July 1940 start date to give the Italians full opportunity to exploit or botch (as they did historically) their advantages in the Med.

[The decision to publish "Supermarina" separately may have changed this plan. -RG]

As for transferring Europa to the Pacific, the problems seem so monstrous I don't even want to think about them right now.

Like your idea of Grand Europa in three stages. I hope that doesn't foreclose a future 1944 scenario for the eastern front.

[On the contrary, it may expedite one. You should be able to "cull out" a 1944 East Front scenario from the 1944 Grand Europa scenario by utilizing only the east front OBs and maps.-RG]

Glad to hear that John is finally coming around to the idea that something needs to be done about the ever-burgeoning air system. For a game that is primarily a land combat game, far too much time is devoted to the air game. Particularly in the west where one side or the other has such massive air superiority that a lot of Sturm und Drang, not to mention time, is spent bringing about a preordained result.

One of the advantages of the old ..wave" system was that air combat and AA were carried out by and against stacks of up to three units and one die was rolled for each stack, yielding a result for up to three aircraft units with one die roll as opposed to three. A real time-saver. I'm not advocating a return to the old system, just saying that certain aspects of it could be useful to us today, if a way could be found to utilize it in today's system.

Air corps markers have been a real time saver for me; I just wish there were more of them. I hope you plan to use them in future games.

Like Frank Watson's idea for tracks in WD. His "Enter Rommel" scenario hit the right spot. I made one change. I start the game on Apr I with the Axis player turn coming first in the turn sequence. This is in keeping with the turn sequence for all the other games. Actually, I think WD should have started with the British as the second player.

Mark Pitcavage's article on WD strategy was excellent.

After sending in my vote for the best article in 1990, I wondered whether scenarios were eligible? Next time, how about letting us pick a second and third choice.

Cannot express how strongly I agree with Deen Wood's comments about stripped-down rules to make the system user-friendly for new gamers.

That's all for now, but like Joe Stalin I am anxiously awaiting the Second Front.

Jay Kaufman

Balkan Front looks outstanding. Europa benefits from being in the hands of frothing-at- themouth fanatics for the system.

(You do froth, don't you?) Balkan Front and Europa magazine certainly seem to be evidence of this. Here's some first impressions on BF.

At first sight I rather missed the old GDW "look" of the counters, charts and rules, but I'm getting used to the GIRD versions, and the maps are a great improvement. A second trip through the rule book revealed how much better organized the rules are with the varying sizes of print for section headings and layout.

The rules text is outstanding; I haven't compared BF rules lineby-line with SE, but the wording seems an excellent strippingaway of excess verbiage and legalese without sacrificing airtight rules-writing. Of course, the real test will be the letters you get asking rules questions, but I think clarity has been much improved. I don't suppose many people will comment on the improved use of language, but it struck me while checking the rules for changes in SE- standard, and may constitute a quantum leap on the scale of the map work.

The British seem a little darker than comfortable. I vote for a slightly lighter shade of khaki for the Brits and all Commonwealth color schemes derived from them. I take it the Aussies will NOT get rated 7-8-8 or 8-7-8 or some such! Doesn't bother me; just make sure you run magnets over all parcels arriving from south of the equator. And, of course, the genuine screw-up with the Germans and Italians needs no further comment.

The OOBs are fascinating. The plethora of unusual smaller units is excellent: this is what one intuitively feels must have been in the theater, though they get glossed over in the histories or in shallower OB research. It's too bad you couldn't include Greek and Yugoslav national flags on the capital counters. Hopefully, you can include these in the future as part of counter sheets utilizing the appropriate colors, as the opportunity presents itself.

I never dreamed Hungarian geography could be so much fun! For every Eger, Baja, Mako, Papa and Vac, there's a Bekescsaba, Nyiregyhaza, Szekesfehervar (which can be called Stuhlweissenburg, if you consider that an improvement), and finally: Hodmezovasarhely. Other nations might confound foreign invaders by tearing down road signs in advance of the enemy's approach; only the Hungarians achieve greater effects by nailing a few more up. It's reputed that no one has ever invaded southern Hungary via the Tisza valley. They take one look at the region Szeged-Kisku n ha les-Kecske met -Kiskunfelegyhaza - Hodmezovasarhely and say, forget it, we're hitting Baja and Pecs!

The Hungarian High Command is thus free to strip their defenses in the Tisza valley and concentrate their forces in the Hungarian Rhineland. This brilliant strategy failed only once, in 1945, because the invading Russians couldn't read the signs, and anyway, what terror does a "Nagykanizsa" hold for someone from Rozhdestveno, Shchuchinsk, Krasnoznamenskiy, Yegendybulak, Dneprodzerzhinsk, or the infamous Mga?

My vote for most intriguing hex goes to 14A:0127 and whatever is on the other map-the one we don't have. What the hell is it? An obvious guess is a railway tunnel, but there's no rail line and besides that wouldn't be represented anyway. It might be a pass, but it leads from nowhere and seems to end nowhere except in the midst of the mountains.

I was admiring Yugoslavian island-names when I noticed that the Italian name for the port of Dubrovnik (Ragusa) isn't included. We get the English word "argosy" from that name, from the time when Ragusan ships, "argosies," made that town both famous and the second-largest Slavic town in the world, exceeded, when it was exceeded, only by Krakow.

I see the Albanian national railway was reduced to lowcapacity status. I am shocked, just shocked. I'm sure everyone had a good giggle the first time it was introduced into the Europa system with Marita-Merkur, and I'm sure there was another round of grins when it made the leap to BF, but isn't then including a rule to prohibit its use a bit cruel?

Out of a sense of completeness, I say give it a capacity: 1/2 an RE is plenty. And allowing units to draw an overland supply line back to the rail terminus could almost be meaningful once the system's general supply rules are in place. Perhaps "ants" rules are needed for zero- capacity railways?

Europa's most pathetic river: the creek separating 14A:4710 and 4809.

I'm pleased to see Mount Athos appear on the map (14A:4907). If Gottscheer Hochland is going to get special consideration, then I certainly think that the holiest site in all Eastern Orthodox Christendom deserves special treatment, too.

Did you know that they don't allow women on Mount Athos? They don't even allow female dogs, cats or goats. They even drive away birds since inevitably some of the alighting avians would include a certain percentage of females--have you ever tried to sex whole flocks of swallows?

The USAAF should be prohibited from basing more than two air units on Mount Athos since this would probably entail bringing a few WACs with the staff, and this would be absolutely verboten.

However, I know what I'm gonna do first time I play Grand Europa: First, I'll insist on being part of the Soviet team and then secure the spot as Southwestern Front commander. Secondly, come 1944, '45, '46 or whenever, as soon as the Soviets invade the Balkans I'm gonna occupy Mt. Athos whether this entails kicking out Germans, Greeks, Turks, Brits or what-have-you. I'll then build an airfield in the hex, fly in some YAKs, and announce the unit consists of those famous women fighter pilots! And if those sexist old monks don't like it I'll detail a few of the equally famous women snipers to the hex, striking a blow for socialist egalitarianism and the suppression of Eastern Orthodox mysticism.

The Corinth Canal separating hex 15B:0813 and Korinthos is navigable by larger ships. There's no provision for this possibility in BF, but ought to be kept in mind for Grand Europa purposes.

I'm disappointed with the treatment of low-capacity railroads in BF. I've had some involvement with Jeff Millefoglie's For Whom the Bell Tolls playtest kit and found its more detailed treatment works very well (whether with a 3-RE or 10RE limit). I hope BF's handling of low-capacity rail lines is only a simplification for that game's purposes and that a less abstract treatment will be used in other games, particularly GE itself. It seems a waste of effort differentiating between standard and low capacity rail lines otherwise.

There were a few typos in the rule book; I'm sure you're chagrined at these and know about them without any further mention from me. More importantly: the Italian "Leg" division is named for Legnano, a battle in 1176 when the Italians of the Lombard League defeated Frederick Barbarossa's Germans. Well worth commemorating for all history. Also, "Al" should be "Alessandria," a north Italian city, founded by refugees from Milan after Barbarossa's armies destroyed that city while fighting the Lombard League, and named in honor of the champion of the Italian patriots, Pope Alexander III.

I do hope FWBT makes it into production. I'm a Spanish Civil War fan and have always enjoyed iNP! and FWBT. They're the definitive treatments of that war. I also hope Dennis Dubberley's Asian reconnaissances are followed up with a full-scale assault by Europa.

Marshal Ruhlsmonger wishes to point out that one can not build an airbase, either USAAF or Soviet, in the Mt. Athos hex, as it is a mountain hex, wherein airbases are also verboten. Astute readers will recall that John Astell provided an optional rule for handling the Mt. Athos hex in TEM #17, treating it as an autonomous region-in game terms, a neutral hex. Surely you wouldn't risk evoking a political backlash by invading such a hex with your sidesaddle snipers?

Consulting the Balkan Front Map Legend, one finds that the mysterious map feature in hex 14A:0127 is a mountain pass. Notice that it spans a high mountain hexside. Final details on how this feature will work are still being sorted out, but it is shaping up like this: A mountain pass allows all units to cross the high mountain hexside it spans at a cost of +4 MPs during clear weather. During poor weather the pass is closed, even for mountain units. This information wasn't needed to complete the design of BF since the hexside involved falls outside the area where any action should occur.

A few other alpine asides: GRD likes the contrast of the lighter shade of brown on the high mountain hexsides, as this makes them much easier to discern than the "correct" treatment. Therefore, in future games high mountain hexsides will officially adopt the color scheme used in the northwest comer of mapsheet 14A of Balkan Front.

Also a rules point: Although a mountain division may cross a high mountain hexside in clear weather at a cost of +4 MPs, it may not attack across such a hexside, as this is specifically forbidden by the TEC. It's Z0C, however, does extend across in clear weather since this is a hex to which it may move, and so the presence of a mountain division might affect the retreat routes of enemy units.

Whether units will be able to attack across a mountain pass is one of details yet to be determined, but I suspect attacking across these features will be prohibited.

Mr. Millefoglie's rules for low capacity rail lines are as follows: "Low-capacity rail lines may carry up to 10 REs of freight and up to 10 REs of general supply."

The Balkan Front treatment is: "If a unit uses a low-volume rail line at any time during its rail movement, it counts double its RE size against rail capacity. Note that clm and cavalry units would be doubled twice, once for being c/m or cavalry and once for using a low-volume line." Also, a rail supply element "may be traced through only a maximum of 7 low- volume rail hexes."

Both rules address the same issues, although each uses a different approach. Players will have to decide for themselves which approach they prefer.

Brian Adams

In response to David Shearer's letter in TEM #15, I agree that there's a valid argument to be made for starting Grand Europa in July 1940. Or even in June 1941, for that matter. In fact, I seem to recall that this point has previously been made in various Europa periodicals. Nevertheless, I think that in its final form, Grand Europa should be as flexible as possible and give players a choice of starting dates, going back as far as the beginning of the Spanish Civil War or even the Italian invasion of Ethiopia.

Certainly, GE may in some sense be more historical, whatever that means in this context, when starting in mid-1940 or 1941, and its quite possible that games starting prior to 1939 will either fizzle out pretty quickly or else take some really ahistorical directions. Still, I suspect that at least some of us would like to occasionally look at how things could have been different in Spain or Ethiopia, or perhaps play the Austrians or Czechs in standing up to the Nazi bullies.

While the official Grand Europa line-up seems to be coming together nicely, there are a couple of off-beat projects that have been proposed over the years that I still hope will eventually make it into the Europa canon. As you may have already surmised, I would still like to see an official Europa East Africa game, including the Italian invasion as well as the 1941 campaign. I already have Africa Orientald, but I'd like to see something a little more Grand Europa compatible.

I think that anyone who has seen the material from Mike Bennighof's original design that appeared in ETO a few years back will know what I mean. I think that East Africa deserves official inclusion because, apart from the intrinsic appeal of the subject, a strong Italian position in East Africa could be of major significance in compromising the Allied defence of North Africa and the Middle East in Grand Europa.

My favorite bit of missing Europa, however, remains Arthur Goodwin's Far Eastern Theatre module. Apart from adding an interesting twist to Fire in the East/Scorched EarthlThe Urals,l think that this module, with the inclusion of substantial Russian and Japanese orders of battle, would be the ideal introduction to Pacifica! I certainly hope that Arthur is still working on this project, and GRD will be willing to publish it when finished.

As a parting shot, I'd just like to say how pleased I am with the new Battle Scenarios. Speaking as an exclusively solitaire gamer, I think that this is an idea whose time has come. Although I love the sheer immensity and detail of Europa, I have long felt that the system's greatest deficiency has been the lack of small-scaled, easily-played scenarios suitable for solitaire or for an evening's face-to- face play.

An idea that's occurred to me is an Arctic/Finnish Front Campaign derived from Fire in the East/Scorched Earth and covering June 1941 to December 1944. While perhaps considerably longer than other Battle Scenarios, it would require a relatively limited map area and have a fairly low counter density. Unfortunately, I have neither the time, resources, nor ability to develop this idea. Perhaps someone out there in Europa land might be interested in generating the necessary orders of battle and whatever special rules may be required.

Brian, you will be glad to hear that one of your fellow Canadians, David Hughes, is working on a Battle Scenario treatment of the Arctic campaign, and we hope to publish it sometime this year. Old timers will recall that the very first "Europa Newsletter" published by GDW in 1976 featured a scenario called "Platinum Fox" which covered the Arctic campaign using Drang Nach Osten materials. The creator of this gem? Our own Editor Emeritus Gary Stagliano, who is currently designing the Europa module, A Winter War.

Brent Titus

In an old issue of TEM (#13), I read the EXchange and became interested in learning more about Africa Orientald. Where and how might I purchase this game? I think it would be very good if GRD made a game on East Africa. It would be something to add to the "War in the Desert" series. In a game of "WitD" it is possible that the Italians could change the tide by capturing Sudan. If Europa's goal is to recreate all of World War II in Europe and Africa, making this. game would bring Europa closer to its goal.

Ah, East Africa, the Shangri- La of Europa. If ever an Europa game was shrouded in intrigue and controversy, this is it. This project, initially tagged "British East Africa," was oft-proposed and scrupulously nurtured by fellow Alabamian Mike Bennighof throughout the mid-80s, but always, at the last minute, some twist of fate prevented his brainchild from coming to fruition.

In the final analysis, after further convolutions, the game was ultimately delivered in the form of Africa Orientald, curiously without any mention at all of Mr. Bennighof In a final anomalous quirk, the game credits stated the following: "Africa Orientald is not a product of 3W (the publishers of S&T at that time), nor should it be construed as an official GDW game. " Okay.. welcome to the Europa Twilight Zone.

Strategy and Tactics #128 (including the game, of course) can be purchased from Decision Games (the new owner of S&T) for $30 at the following address: Decision Games, ATTN: Christopher's Corner, PO Box 1289, Salinas CA 93902 or call 408 4439726 from 1 PM to 6 PM, Monday through Friday. Mr. Cummins also has some mint Europa games currently available: Fire in the East (includes play aid kit): $90, Their Finest Hour: $40, Marita-Merkur: $30; Spain and Portugal: $30. RG

James R. Dunnam

I have been playing Europa for some time, as have many others here in Waco, Texas. I just received Issue #17 of the Europa magazine and wanted to briefly make a few comments.

I would like to address the letter from Mike Tonks concerning GRD's handling of Europa.

First, the magazine is excellent and the only such wargame subscription that is both on time and not being bought out every day. It is professionally done and a tremendous asset to both the Europa system and the wargaming industry as a whole.

Second, I cannot see how Mr. Tonks can say you are just out for a quick buck in light of all of the free releases you provide to your members. Basically, I believe that Mr. Tonks has some true grievances in some areas, but his frustration is somewhat misdirected.

Our group also has concerns in the area of modifications to the system, which we realize are necessary, but these can be allayed by some simple understandings, guidelines and commitments.

The first of these understandings would be that Europa will continue to evolve and that such is in the best interest of all involved. However, this evolution should take place within some guidelines that the players can rely upon. For instance, when the components for the air system (i.e., the counters) are purchased, the gamer should be able to rely on the fact that, yes, the system may be modified, but not in such a way that the air counters themselves will be made useless.

This should be a reasonable guideline for the designers and a reasonable commitment for the publishers. In this manner, the player is assured that the bulk of his investment will not be wasted, but that he simply has to learn new rules and perhaps purchase some new charts, etc. This same commitment should apply to all counters and maps in the system. As charts can be cheaply obtained, they are fair game for the designer. Believe it or not, some day someone will have to say "we've tinkered with the system enough, now let's just play with what we have got."

I will admit that I have not purchased Balkan Front yet, either. This is primarily because of the lack of such a commitment. If I were assured that BF contained the final word as far as counters and maps were concerned, I would buy it today. I would readily assume the risk that the rules will change, but not that when they do, I will have to buy new air counters.

I hope that you will accept the above as a suggestion from a concerned player. Please keep up the excellent work.

Victor Hauser

When using the Scorched Earth rules, each German railroad engineer regiment in combination with a construction engineer unit (for quick construction) can regauge 4 hexes in clear weather. Thus, the six German railroad engineer regiments could regauge a theoretical maximum of 24 hexes.

However, with the arrival of TEN #7, the original SE rules were changed and the German OB was modified to incorporate railroad engineer battalions and brigades. Using the new railroad regauging rule in TEN #7 not only adds a bunch of new counters, it gives the Germans an enormous engineering edge as well. In addition to freeing up the six construction units formerly tied to the railroad engineer regiments for other duties, the infusion of all those railroad engineer battalions boosts German regauging capabilities tremendously.

Since each railroad engineer battalion can regauge 2 hexes, by breaking down all six engineer regiments into their 12 component battalions plus the additional 10 battalions supplied by the OB given in TEN V, the Germans can now start Barbarossa with 22 railroad battalions. And 22 battalions at 2 hexes regauging apiece gives a theoretical maximum of 44 regauged hexes per turn in clear weather, in other words nearly double that allowed by the original rules.

My questions are two. First, was it really the intention to give the Germans such a dramatic increase in their engineering capabilities vis-a-vis the original SE rules? Second, John Astell in his commentary on his new rule in TEN #7 stated that he himself was not actually satisfied with the quantity of new counters to be added to the OBs among other things. Is there anything currently in the works that will streamline/ fix what was originally printed in TEN #7?

On another topic, I believe that the "Bombers as Transports" rule is subject to the following "trick." Since the Germans in FE/SE are strapped for group allowance, the rule as written encourages them to profitably scrap all their Ju 52s as soon as possible and replace them with He 111s. The He 111s have a longer range (22 vs. 20) as well as being able to perform bombing missions in addition to their transport duties. Further, the Germans can theoretically call on up to 20 or more He 111s (i.e, up to 4 times the quantity of Ju 52s) for this service. Thus the Ju 52s (or any other German transports for that matter) have no true value in the game other than to provide group allowance slots for He 111s.

I believe that not only is this a sad fate for the workhorse of the Luftwaffe, but is historically unjustifiable as well. I propose the following simple, one-sentence fix: No more bombers can be used as transports than there are transports currently active on the game board. I think that this not only serves to give transports a reason for being, it ensures that they will remain the primary means of air transport since bombers will no longer be able to outnumber them on air transport missions.

As I understand John Astell's current thinking on the subject, the railroad engineer battalions will be eliminated. However, the three railroad engineer brigades will be retained and predated to appear in the initial OB in lieu of the battalions. All the other aspects of the "Rails through the Russias" article will remain unchanged.

Using this approach the maximum number of rail hexes which can be regauged in a clear weather turn is 30, calculated as follows: each regiment can regauge 3 hexes per turn (6 x 3 =18) and each brigade can regauge 4 hexes per turn (4 x 3 = 12). This will give the German team much more flexibility in their regauging (which was the thrust of John's proposed fix) without unduly increasing the amount of track converted to narrow gauge.

Hopefully John may find some time in the near future to officially comment on this in his "Inside Europa" column, or perhaps even revise his "Rails through the Russias" article.

I concur that the present handling of bomber/transports leads to gamey results. When the nasty Nov I 41 Luftwaffe withdrawal rolls around, the Ju 52s always get their walking papers in my game room. Not only can He 111s provide ample transport in their absence, but there is always the option of calling up the Ju 52s in the Luftwaffe school in a real crunch. However, the above cure seems neither artificial. Can anyone out there propose a brilliant fix for this situation? - RG