My friends and I are Graduate Students of Military and European History at Purdue University. Most of us have only been playing Europa for about a year and a half, although one of us is a 'veteran' who has been playing Europa games for many years. We have designed several wargames, simulating warfare in both the modern and early-modern periods.

The Europa campaign we play most frequently is Fire in the East/Scorched Earth. The following optional rules have been constructed for use with that game in mind, and have not been properly playtested with the other Europa titles.

I have only read two or three issues of TEM, and thus am not completely aware of all the long-running debates over Europa rules and variants. This can be viewed both as a bad thing-not having insider Europa knowledge, or a good thing-allowing me to suggest variants from a fresh perspective. I believe the ground and air systems generally work very well (especially when using the revised air rules in Second Front). However, the designers of the Europa games have made the system easily amendable, thus allowing the rules to grow (or shrink) with time or to accommodate players' preferences.

My purpose is to suggest possible alternatives for ground warfare in response to the article published in TEM #38/39 by Flavio Carrillo, "Europa: the Next Generation." The following optional rules are designed to address some of the issues brought to light by Mr. Carrillo and to suggest other options that (I believe) enhance the game. The premise behind these optional rules is to keep them simple, add little or no time to play, and to allow them to be easily integrated into the existing rules and charts.

Combat Attrition

Combat in FitE/SE does tend to favor the attacker. Historically, however, neither the Soviets in 1941, nor the Germans in 1944-45 remained exclusively on the defensive. I would urge players that it is an important element of the game to continue local attacks whether they are on the strategic offense or defense.

Nevertheless, I have never suffered the casualties the German army historically did in 1941, nor the casualties the Russians should receive later in the war. Perhaps a better representation of casualties would be the following amendment to the combat results when using the Second Front CRT:

Optional Rule I.

Change the AS result to stand for 'Attrition/Stalemate:' the defender suffers a DH result, but does not retreat. The attacker must then match the defender's casualties. An AR result, in addition to an 'attacker retreat' also inflicts casualties on the attacking force. The attacker (only) must also take losses as if the result were an AS (i.e., lose half of the defending units' combat strength).

This variant generates additional attacker casualties (as well as a few more defender losses), but does not change any major rules, the CRT, or playing time.

Mobile Warfare and the NODL

Optional Rule II.

I suggest that overrun attempts at less than 10: 1 odds be permitted at any odds, to be resolved as combat on the combat result table at a cost of 3 MPs for German c/m units and 4 MPs for other units. During the movement phase mark all attempted overruns with numbered chits representing the number of movement points the overrunning stacks expended prior to the overrun. At the end of the movement phase, execute all attempted overruns. A DE result is a successful overrun and the overrunning stack may continue with the rest of its movement.

Any other result on the CRT is an 'unsuccessful overrun' and is treated as AH; if an attempted overrun is unsuccessful, the attacking stack ends movement and may not attack in the ensuing regular combat phase. With the amendments above, c/m casualties will often occur during unsuccessful overrun attempts. An unsuccessful mobile assault will penalize the attacker severely and limit use of this rule to a few critical situations. But it also makes it possible for a well-planned German assault to take Minsk on the first turn, as well as simulate other historically accurate events.

Logistics

It is difficult to design and implement a playable logistics rule, yet one is needed to slow and stagger the offense. The best and most playable solution that I have come up with follows.

Optional Rule III.

Each year both sides are allotted a specific number of Supply Markers (SMs). Players place these markers on the board on a turn-by-turn basis. A player determines the number of SMs he will use in the turn during his initial phase. During his combat phase, a player places these SMs on the map in any hex in regular supply.

All units able to trace an overland supply line to an SM are considered to be in 'attack supply.' All units not able to trace an overland supply line to an SM are considered to be in 'minimum supply.'

Units in attack supply conduct combat normally. Any attack involving units in minimum supply receives a -1 modifier, and reduced armor effects are used for the attack. In addition, combat/motorized units in minimum supply may spend only half of their printed movement allowance in the ensuing exploitation phase.

During the Jun II, Jul I and Jul II 41 turns all Soviet and German units are automatically in attack supply.

Players must determine the number of SMs available each year according to how drastically they feel attacks should be limited. Supply status could be linked to factories and/or certain geographic locations (such as Baku, Ploesti, and Maikop).

Note: Supply status does not effect the defense in any way, so rules regarding the capture or destruction of enemy supply markers are not needed.

Major Cities

Here is an optional rule concerning battles for major cities, which on the Russian Front sometimes lasted for months and caused thousands of casualties. This rule governs combat between Axis/Soviet units and supercedes the NKVD rules.

Optional Rule IV

When attacking a major city hex containing a fort, modify the combat results as follows. Treat an AR, AS, EX, or HX result as an AS (Attrition/Stalemate) result, as explained above. Treat DR results as EX. Treat DH results as HX. Apply all other results normally. Note: This rule applies only to Axis/Soviet combats.

Conclusion

These four rules address the areas outlined by Flavio Carrillo, and the additional consideration of city fighting. They move us closer to the desired result, though they do not necessarily fix the problem entirely. Each of the optional rules above compliment the others. It would create a certain degree of imbalance to implement one rule, but not the others. They do not slow down play and may actually help the game move faster by limiting the amount of attacks each turn via the use of SMs.

The overrun rule gives armored units much more maneuverability by allowing overruns to occur at any odds, but make such overruns risky against a fortified enemy or units with anti-tank capability. Outcomes such as those of Operation Goodwood or Citadel become a possibility. Players willing to take the 'big risk' too often could suffer terrible results.

The supply rule makes logistics a problem to be dealt with, but does not call for any excess paperwork and works well with the present system. Players will note that 'attack supply' becomes more difficult during poor weather (because of the reduced overland supply length) and that being in 'minimum supply' harms c/m units more that non- c/m units.

Try these rules; they are easily adaptable to the current system. I look forward to a continuing debate regarding these issues and others.