Like many Europa players, I know only a few other people who play the Europa series. I find that the games we play tend to follow the same general path each time, especially the larger games such as FitE/SE/Urals. This tends to limit the exposure to new strategies. This year I was able to attend EuropaFest at Origins '95. 1 was hoping to play against new opponents and see how I could do against them.

I played the Northern Front Soviet commander in a Scorched Earth game. It was even more interesting because there were two similar games, Fire in the East and Sudden Storm (no ants) going at the same time. All three games started in Jun II 41 and comparing them was instructive.

The Scorched Earth game I played had a one-hour movement time limit. After the hour, everyone would be present for the air, combat and exploitation phases. The Fire in the East and Sudden Storm games did not have time limits for their turns, so our game ended up being the fastest. We finished Dec II 41 before the end of the convention. If we had played later into the night (we typically quit about 8:00 or 9:00 p.m.) and had not had some people (myself included) leaving for other events, we could have played further.

One thing I hoped to see was the Non-Overrunnable Double Line or NODL, a frequent topic of the Europa magazine. My normal playing buddies and I have always favored a strong front line, with several stacks in reserve locations ready to counterattack any lone German panzer division after a breakthrough. The strong reserves force the Axis player to keep his panzer forces stacked or risk the loss of one or two c/m divisions per turn. This concentration limits the German ability to isolate large pockets of Soviet forces. The Soviet player is able to counterattack easily with the stronger reserves and front line. This strategy is less passive for the Soviets and causes more casualties for the Axis player, who must attack the front line at lower odds and then endure Soviet counterattacks.

As a subordinate Soviet commander at EuropaFest, I was ordered to perform two strategies I've never explored before: the "Runaway Defense' and the building of NODLs. The key to the Runaway Defense is to slow the Axis advance long enough to build a fortification line. The Central Soviet commander did not attempt to do this. He ran back to where his fortification line was to be built and set up a NODL there. By the time he was building his forts, Axis panzer forces were already beginning to slog through his NODL and he had to build his fortifications further to the rear than originally planned.

I was able to build my fortification line where I planned it, and slowed the Axis forces sufficiently so that they were unable to do more than advance to within a hex of Leningrad by the Dec II 41 turn. I am not sure, but I think the Axis plan was to try and capture Leningrad or at least break the rail link to Moskva.

Defending in the north with the Runaway Defense and NODLs was not very different from the way I usually play, but this could just be due to the way I handled the defense.

The Southern Soviet player was aided by the Axis Army Group South commander being changed on a regular basis, and was able to hold Kiev until after the mud weather had passed. The Soviet winter offensive was in full bloom in the south as the Rumanian army was being severely punished for attacking into Russia. I think that the poor Axis performance in the south greatly aided the Soviet cause and was primarily due to the frequent change of commanders there.

I did learn a lot about NODLs while observing the Central Soviet commander. I can see why Axis players can quickly get frustrated with the defense. They can only break through the NODL by causing more casualties than the Soviet player can replace each turn. This makes for a slow grinding game of attrition.

The only problem from the Soviet view is that the Axis does not suffer any casualties so long as they are cautious. My view is that losses of some Soviet forces in pockets are worth increased losses to Axis combat units, especially the panzer forces. If the Axis player only advances to within eight hexes of Moskva, but he has very few losses, what is going to happen in 1942? I am going to have to play several more games from 1941 to 1943 to find out whether my traditional defense strategy or the NODL strategy is the better choice.

The comparison of game play among the three Eastern Front games was also very educational. In the FitE and Sudden Storm games, the Axis performances were proceeding in a fairly historical manner. The differences between the two games were primarily based on the experience levels of the different commanders. The games were close in terms of overall strategies and the general territorial position of both the Soviet and Axis forces. This shows that Sudden Storm's lack of ants does not seem to change the flow of the game significantly.

It was interesting that our SE game moved faster than the Sudden Storm game; the presence of the turn limit really helped move the game along. The one-hour movement limit did not overly hurry anyone except the Axis players in their normal Jun II 41 turn. It was a workable limit for the 1941 scenario, although once the armies grow to larger sizes in 1942 and 1943 it may be too short. Once again, this is something to determine by more testing under actual game conditions.

I had a great time at EuropaFest and will attend again next year. I strongly recommend it to anyone interested in the Europa series. The ability to meet people I had heard of was interesting and I can now put faces to the names. Meeting and playing with new players with new strategies and outlooks on the games was fascinating and refreshed the games. No longer will it be the typical Axis advance into Russia with the same major emphasis on the same territorial objectives.

I can now look forward to trying new strategies for both the Soviets and the Axis to determine how they will change the balance of forces in 1942 and 1943. This gives more incentive to play the game longer and not say "If the Axis player cannot take X city by 'Y' time, then the game is over already." My new emphasis is how the strategies taken in 1941 can change the strategies taken in 1942 and later.