Message 306 Fri Mar 24,1995 M.ROYER3 [Mark]

I think GE needs to be developed in stages. The first stage should be a highly historical account of WWII, complete with mandated invasions and offensives, strict historical OBs, and so on. We need this straitjacket just to get GE off the ground. All of the existing Europa research and playing can provide a solid foundation upon which to build this first version of GE.

Once the first stage works, more complexity and player freedom can be introduced. For example, flexible OBs and some economic strategy can be introduced. When each stage works, the next can be started. Ultimately, a political system can be overlaid onto the game.

I believe that jumping directly to the final stage will court disaster. The sheer complexity of the political-economic aspects, in addition to the behemoth military game, will be impossible to playtest in one leap. Look at how long it took to get SF in print. Multiply that complexity level tenfold for GE.

Therefore, I think that if we ever want to see a working GE, it needs to be developed in steps.

P.S. This is not to suggest that we shouldn't discuss GE politics here on GEnie. Quite the contrary, I find the topic fascinating. Doesn't GEnie stand for Grand Europa?

Message 308 Sat Mar 25,1995 A.TIBBETTSI [Alan]

Mark R: I quite agree. We can't go straight to full-fledged GE. But we also don't want to lose sight of the final goal. The combined 1943 scenario will give us "Greater Europa" for the final stage of WWII. TEM #24's "Great Western War" scenario was a good first effort at an early-war "Greater Europa," but needs more work. Between these two scenarios most of the war

in Europe could be covered.

So, what do we need to create a playable historical 1939-41 Greater Europa?

a. In September, 1939, Germany, France, Britain and Poland are at war. Germany is poised to fight a campaign in Poland (at FtF time scale) while the Western Allies mobilize and possibly attempt an offensive at standard Europa time scale.

b. Sitzkrieg and very limited aerial action prevails in the west until May 1940 (with rules preventing both sides from actually using their plentiful air and ground units or building large numbers of fortifications). Simply skipping the December-April turns would be practical unless we allow for Hitler's intended start date of the western campaign (late autumn 1939).

c. A Norwegian campaign starts in April 1940, using the very out-of-date Narvik rules, counters and time scale. Maybe this should be left out until such time as we have the Collector Series edition?

d. The French campaign of 1940 is initiated, using revised FoF rules, complete with Western Allied idiot rules. Using optional setups and allowing Germany to choose which neutrals to invade would greatly add to player interest.

e. An aerial campaign against Britain is launched in mid-late 1940. Possibly Germany invades Britain. (The chance of a successful SEA LION is so small I would suggest we just play out the aerial campaign. This would keep the naval rules simple and reduce counters/time.)

f. An Italian campaign in the Balkans against Greece (or Yugoslavia?) begins in November 1940. The British can send a very small force from Egypt.

g. A strategic aerial bombing campaign is waged by the RAF from May 1940 to June 1941.

I would not include North Africa in the first stage of GE. Why? Because there are far too many political what-if's associated with that region. Spain could also be left out due to its historical neutrality. It would be nice to include some political/Grand Strategic options, such as:

• limited control over whether to invade/not invade neutrals (Switzerland, Belgium, Holland, Norway, Yugoslavia and Greece).
• some flexibility in choosing the exact timing of invasions

Looks like we've got a LOT of work ahead of us before a historical GE goes to the printer. Specifically: Collector Series Narvik, FoF and TFH, linking rules, victory conditions, minimal political rules, a naval system (?) and revised air unit ratings.

Message 309 Sat Mar 25,1995 M.MARTINO [JAY]

Further to Alan Tibbetts' comments, I'd say that Narvik may be a good game to introduce system-wide naval rules. The naval aspect of the campaign is vital, and should have the benefit of whatever naval rules GE may end up using. An added bonus is that the naval rules would be published as part of an existing game, rather than a later module.

Message 310 Sun Mar 26,1995 M.ROYER3 [Mark]

Alan: Sounds like you're simply stringing various Europa games together to form a first-cut historical Grand Europa. There needs to be more integration than that. For example, I don't want to switch time scales to fight in Poland or Norway. My "WESERUBUNG" in TEM #30 shows that Norway can work at two-week scale and I've played FtF at that scale-with a German surprise turn it also works.

I agree that we may be forced into some idiocy rules. I hope that we can make most of these relatively generic. I tried to address some of this with my surprise turn article in issue #9 of Combined Arms.

In general, I believe your thinking is in line with mine. "Greater Europa" scenarios are a good way to piece together the 1939-41 GE scenario.

Jay, I've long advocated that the 1940 Norwegian campaign is an excellent place to test/introduce the Europa naval system. The ground campaign at Europa scale is so small that one can really focus on the naval aspects. Further, there's a little bit of everything going on, from capital ship engagements to carrier actions to coastal artillery to amphibious assaults by both sides.

Granted, all at relatively small scales, but enough to get the flavor of the naval system. And, when playtesting, small can be good. You're not overwhelmed by sheer mass. 

Message 311 Sun Mar 26, 1"5 A.TIBBETTS1 [Alan]

Re: "Greater Europa" 1939-41 Mark, if the first pass is crafted within the constraints of a historical straitjacket, it WILL be a replay of the original campaigns. Nothing will happen in between campaigns, and each side will start each campaign with almost exactly the same OB as the current titles.

My ideas on idiot rules would include those shown in "Fortress Holland" from TEM #27. During the Sitzkrieg both sides would be restricted to something like:

a. May not send more than 6 air units per turn into enemy airspace.

b. May not attack across national boundaries, but may overrun, if possible.

c. Must make deployments per OB. May not send more, or less, or different units than specified (to France, North Africa, or elsewhere).

d. Germany MUST attack France on first clear weather turn. e. Players may not build more than one fort or airfield (not one of each) every even-numbered turn.

f. Once a British unit enters France (per the OB) it may not leave until an evacuation is declared, except to enter Luxembourg, Belgium or The Netherlands after Germany has declared war on those countries.

With rules like that, players might as well skip the Sitzkrieg turns and have the Allies, then Germans, set up their forces as per the FoF setup.

I've never played "WESEROBUNG" and will have to try it. At the time I was quite involved with Leningrad: 1941 2nd Edition from that issue.

How did your FtF at Europa standard time scale come out?

Message 312 Mon Mar 27, 1"S M.ROYER3 [Mark]

Regarding FtF at standard Europa scale:

I played two solitaire games several years ago. Both matched historical performance fairly closely. My memory has faded and unfortunately I have no notes, but here's the basic gist:

I used a Balkan Front style surprise turn (i.e., German invasion of Yugoslavia). By the end of the surprise turn the Polish army had been penetrated in many places and by the end of the German regular Sep 139 turn large portions including Warsaw were isolated. I allowed Soviet intervention on any German turn which started with Warsaw isolated, so they came in Sep II 39. Warsaw fell on Sep 11 39 and the final demarcation line meandered within a couple of hexes of historical. It wasn't much of a game (especially from the Polish point of view), but as part of GE, I think it will stand as a valid simulation.

Alan, I agree that the historical version of GE will, of course, recreate the conflicts in the order that they occurred and with the general OBs used. When I referred to stringing together existing Europa games, I was referring to the changing of time and unit strength scales to match existing Europa games.

Regarding idiot rules, I believe that a number of them will be required. Hopefully some slight latitude of mild ahistorical player decision-making can be allowed. For example, while Germany might be required to attack France, the German player may be allowed to choose the exact date from a window of several possible dates.

Message 313 Mon Mar 27,1995 L.HANNA [Gen.Lee]

I'll have to ditto most of the above: GE in chewable lumps. As far as naval systems go, I'm growing to like the SF rules, except I wanna break down the TFs like the NTs.

Message 314 Tue Mar 28,1995 S.DAHMAN [Sam]

I recently sorted out the various 1939 armies according to OBs found in various TEMs. I then devised predetermined political alignments and began play. Following are the results:

Aug II 39

Axis/Germany: The Nazi-Soviet Pact is signed. In this playtest, Germany successfully entices and pressures both Slovakia and Hungary to be pro-Axis. Further, Lithuania is also pressured into becoming a passive partner. However, Romania remains strictly neutral. (In reality, Germany did attempt to bring Hungary, Rumania and Lithuania in against Poland.)

Allies/Poland: Poland decides against early mobilization. However, they do implement secret mobilization and adopt the defense-in-depth plan, forming along a Narew-Vistula-San line.

Sep I 39

Axis/Germany: Germany declares war on Poland and deploys according to FtF with 3rd Army also allowed to deploy in Lithuania. No surprise turn is used in this game. The approaches to Warsaw are cleared and a bridgehead across the Vistula is gained near Lublin. 3rd Army, reinforced with some panzers, clears Wilno so the Lithuanians can enter the old capital and cut Poland off from Latvia.

Allies/Poland: France and Britain declare war on Germany and begin general mobilization. French forces move towards the Saar region getting in position for a possible offensive. The Poles reinforce Warsaw and plug the Vistula gap. Luftwaffe harassment prevents any meaningful counterattacks.

Sep II 39

Axis/Germany: Germans clear the west hex of Warsaw, but the government evades capture. (It would have been moved if rules existed for this). Attacks towards Lwow do not achieve a breakthrough.

Allies/Poland: With Warsaw and the Narew line cut off, the Polish government abandons the country and uses all available rail to evacuate units through Rumania. (Wouldn't some rail capacity, if not most, be lost due to cities captured and the government in chaos?) The French decide against an offensive as the Germans deploy in strength along the border.

Oct I 39

Axis/Germany: German and Soviet forces surround and destroy the remaining Polish units. Germany doesn't bargain further with the Soviets, keeping the original Pact demarcation line intact This means Germany is closer to Leningrad, but the USSR is closer to Berlin.

Allies/Poland: Poland is finished. The defense-in-depth option allowed the Poles to form a redoubt in the Lwow area, which in turn allowed many units to escape when the government fled. A stronger rear guard might have prevented the Germans from clearing the Warsaw area on the first turn (and therefore a surprise turn may be needed). However, when the French enter the war, their lack of offensive capability means any help for Poland will likely be limited.