No, this isn't going to be another high-flown philosophical exposition on what it means to be a Europa player. My concerns are a bit more prosaic; namely, just what is an army? My belief is that a nation's armed forces consist of more than a group of 4-6 divisions and supporting units. Doctrine and character are a big part of the total picture. GR/D has done a beautiful job with colors and graphics to give us the Germans and Poles and Hungarians. In fact, I seem to see blue in the back of my mind any time I read of 1940 France.

Ah, The Fall of France ... it has always been one of my favorite games! I recognize this enthusiasm is not widely shared, and perhaps this is the reason there hasn't been more of an outcry that the 1940 French just don't seem true to form. Remember that striking box art for Europa VIII, with a grim and determined Manstein sharing marquee space with a droopy, nonplussed Gamelin? Well, I'm here to tell you that the French in that game are neither droopy nor very confused, in spite of some rules limitations imposed in the name of doctrine.

Example #1: It is May II 40 (Friday, May 10th to be more precise). Because my opponent and I get a big kick out of free deployments and variable victory conditions (and save about a day's worth of time to boot), we have determined that the French and Germans may set up using completely free deployments. The Belgians can make some changes based on die rolls, and the Dutch and British are stuck in place. By the way, I don't know the results of any of the Allied rolls until after the game or until they become obvious through game play. I have formed Twelfth Army east of Belgium, consisting of two motorized and three infantry corps, and this force is to smash through the southern end of Belgium and cross the Meuse at Sedan, covering an even stronger army's thrust towards the B.E.F. and Lille. Twelfth Army is to follow Manstein's precepts by covering the main attack with an aggressive stance.

The game begins, and with minimal Luftwaffe support, Twelfth Army destroys most of a Belgium corps and takes Sedan, crossing the Meuse with three of its corps. During the French turn a "Tenth Army," concentrated in hexes 16:1028, 1029, and 1030, which I believed for several reasons to be a deception force, turns out to consist of virtually every c/m unit the French k army possesses. This army is under no Corap, instead being commanded by my overly macho opponent, "Mad Dog" Hernandez. He slices E through the line-of-communications troops in southern Belgium, surrounds Twelfth Army, and overruns two forward Luftwaffe airbases. I spend most of May and June recovering, and the game degenerates into a hex-by-hex slugfest. ;

Example #2: It is Jun II 41, and my brother and I are enjoying a fun game of Fire in the East shortly after being introduced to that game (more correctly, Scorched Earth) by Victor Hauser in Austin. Just days before I have to move to El Paso, my brother and I play out the first few turns in western Russia. We, too, roll for various deployment options and the end result is that the Red Army is free to operate without any restriction. My Germans invade boldly, but my brother makes an all-out dash for the Dnepr with everything that he didn't already have deployed there, and I must face the bulk of the initial Soviet forces in an opposed river crossing. Where is the mass confusion and all of the initial suicidal charges by division after uncoordinated division? Where are the waves of Soviet aircraft bombing in parade-like formations, easy prey for flak and Messerschmitts? I took heavy losses crossing the "big D," and the game degenerated into a hex-by-hex slugfest in Byelorussia.

Now, I am going to discuss a "house rule," but I want to make it very clear to all of you who desire complete freedom of action that I am in no way advocating these suggestions as the "only way" to play a game of Europa. John Astell and many others have spent unbelievable amounts of time and loving care giving us the very best picture they can provide of Europe as it existed in that pivotal era. However, I believe my suggestions build upon that spirit of historical representation. 

Each army really is different, and so I have devised a system to build such things as a 1918-style conservatism into the French and a savage determination (mixed with a lot of amateurism) into the Russians. I use chits, so as to avoid a lot of tiresome die-rolling.

For example, the German player in Fall of France has a stack of twenty chits to use on the surprise turn, 20 more for May II, 15 for Jun I, and 5 chits for Jun II 40. For each turn, the mix percentage is the same:

20% are dummies, and have no effect.

40% say "CF" (for "continuous front"); units in an affected stack must move one hex further away from the nearest Axis ground combat unit; one-half (rounding fractions down) of the affected units must then continue moving to any adjacent hex, French player's choice. This represents the French predilection for dispersal and defense. The affected units are allowed no further movement (including exploit) that turn.

20% say "Rout." Units in the affected stack immediately move their full movement allowance away from the nearest Axis ground unit. A unit which has a cadre is reduced to cadre, and all other units are eliminated. A stack is only affected by this chit if it is either adjacent to an Axis ground combat unit or has undergone or will undergo air attack (ground support or harassment) that turn. (The Axis air units must actually be in place at the time the chit is revealed).

The final 20% say "Pin," and the affected stack simply stays in place, and may neither move, attack, nor exploit in the upcoming French turn.

The German player takes his allowance of chits and places them face-down on any hexes occupied by French (and French only) forces, one chit to a hex. The German proceeds with his turn, not knowing the result of any chit until its stack participates in combat or moves. Note that the French player is not allowed to look either, until the moment of combat or the stack actually moves in his turn. He does not need to inform the Axis player of the chit result unless a "rout" is obtained. For instance, the French player may try to disguise withdrawals to confuse the German player. Of course, this places a premium on playing with people who do not find it necessary to cheat (the only kind of opponents worth playing). Remove all undisclosed chits at the end of each Allied turn.

This rule works well in conjunction with variable reinforcement schedules to really give a feeling of the fog of war.

The Russian theater requires a different set of chits, but the idea is the same. The Axis player has a handful of forty chits on the surprise turn, forty more on the Jun II turn of 1941, 20 on Jul I and 20 on Jul II. The percentages for all chit groups are the same: 20% are dummies and have no effect; 20% say "Rout" and require the affected units to move their full movement allowance away from the nearest Axis ground units (but no units are reduced to cadre or eliminated); 40% say "Attk" and require the affected stack to advance due west and attack the first Axis occupied hex to get in the way, regardless of odds; and 20% say "Pin" and allow no movement, but the affected stack is allowed to attack out of its hex, if desired.

I have not playtested the Russian variation of this proposal, but I have played Fall of France and intend to write up the results of my initial playtests. I am also considering Axis "no retreat" and "continuous line" chits for the Eastern Front, and a "Pas De Calais" rule for Second Front .

The whole idea is to explore some real-world operational problems/constraints that the top commands had to deal with. If you don't like this idea., don't use it. But for those of you who proudly look at your maps after four months of FitE and say "See, I really am smarter than STAVKA - I've got more Soviet-held terrain..." all I can say is just try playing the same game with a variable reinforcement schedule and the kind of shock effects that I suggest to simulate warfare in Russia in June 1941. It's bound to make for an interesting experience... after all, imagine if Pearl Harbor, so traumatic yet for so many American sailors, had been repeated on the same scale as the Nazi invasion of a quiet USSR - would we as a people have done any better than the Russians did?

We all accept unit strengths and compositions, and terrain advantages/disadvantages as part of the limitations we must live with. I have simply tried to simulate some of the other heartaches Gamelin, Weygand, and Pavlov had to face - the good news is, I don't get shot!

Editor's Note: A variant reinforcement proposal follows.