(Reprinted from Breakout Magazine with their permission. - WH)

Like 'General Stein' writing in ETO #30, I dream of Grand Europa and look forward to basic game rules that are consistent from Murmansk to Morocco and from Southampton to Saratov. Europa is a game system intended to recreate World War II in Europe and North Africa at the division/ regiment/battalion level and 16 miles to the hex. Each Europa game typically covers only one campaign and has its share of special rules to enhance historicity or playability.

Additionally the basic system continues to evolve from game to game, representing some 15 or so years of playtest feedback. However Grand Europa to be playable will need a set of standard rules which can be applied everywhere. In this article I want to look at how Zones of Control (ZOCs) could be handled in Grand Europa.

ZOCs in Europa are non-rigid, that is units may enter, move through or leave enemy ZOCs, but must pay a movement point penalty to do so. Attacks are always voluntary, but ZOCs do impede units retreating after combat and the tracing of supply lines.

As Stein pointed out, which units have ZOCs is variously treated in different parts of Europe and North Africa. In all theatres, divisional units have ZOCs and battalions never have ZOCs. On the East front all brigades, regiments and cadres also have ZOCs in weather zone A (the Arctic) and weather zone G (the desert area around Astrakhan). In North Africa, all brigades, regiments and cadres (except antiaircraft, arlillery and construction engineer) can exert ZOCs. To compile a list of non-divisional units which may exert ZOCs whilst in the desert or weather zones A or G, as suggested by Stein, will not remove that 'gamey' feel.

According to the Europa rules a ZOC "represents the control a unit exerts over surrounding terrain". Under these ciurcurnstances, it is difficult to see why, for example, an Axis motorised regiment in the desert should have a ZOC, but that same unit should not have a ZOC on the Russian steppes. Arguments about open, flat or gently rolling terrain seem equally applicable in both cases.

As a Soviet player in Scorched Earth (SE) it is particularly irritating to see your stack of 8 brigades (3 Infantry, 3 Tank and 2 Artillery- say 18 Attack Factors, 14 Defence Factors, one half Armour Effects Capable , one half Anti-Tank Effects Capable) bypassed as though it wasn't there. In contrast it is very difficult for Soviet mechanized corps to bypass a paltry Italian Infantry division (say 4 Combat Factors, no AEC or ATEC).

If non-divisional units always had ZOCs, the Soviet Corps could be frustrated by a single regiment or battalion. It non-divisional units never had ZOCs, then in low unit density theatres it would be difficult to ever hold a front line. Units could simply move between enemy units and subsequently trace supply with impunity through the gaps. It seems the existing rules are an attempt (albeit incomplete) to solve this problem by giving non-divisional units ZOCs only where historical unit density was low.

Unfortunately, even with the restrictions on AA, artillery and construction units added for War in the Desert (WinD) the rules on non-divisional ZOCs are easy to abuse. For example, an Allied stack of 4RT and 7RT Tank Bins, 65 AT Bn, Cz Inf Bn, M Mot Inf Bn, W Arty Bde and 7 SG Bde will not have a ZOC despite its 11 Attack Factors, 10 Defense Factors, 1/7 AEC and 112 ATEC. In contrast the Italian GAF/300 unsupported Border Guard Regiment (0 AF, 1 DF, no AEC, no ATEC) has a ZOC!

I believe we should consider ZOCs to be a property of a stack rather than a unit, as it is the total force in an area which determines the influence on surrounding terrain. We can then extend the concept of reduced ZOCs (RZOCs) introduced in SE, to develop a straightforward solution to the problems outlined above. I believe the special cases (desert, zone A and zone G) should be dropped, and the rules modified as follows:

(SE) Rule 31 Basic Game Concepts Ownership Replace second paragraph beginning 'By itself' with:

"A stack of units which is not capable of exerting a ZOC cannot gain permanent ownership of an enemy hex. When in a (previously) enemy-owned hex, such a stack owns the hex only so long as it occupies the hex~ when the hex is vacated, ownership reverts to the other player."

(SE) Rule 5 - Zones of Control Replace entirely with: "The zone of control (ZOC) of a stack of one or more units represents the control the unit(s) exert over surrounding terrain. The effects of ZOCs are referred to throughout the rules.

"A ZOC is exerted through the six hexsides of the hex the stack occupies into the six surrounding, adjacent hexes. A unit prohibited from entering a specific terrain type or crossing a specific type of hexside cannot contribute to exertion of a ZOC into that hex or through that hexside. For example, a ZOC cannot be exerted through an all-sea hexside, as all land units are prohibited from moving through such a hexside.

"The REs of units with 0 attack factors or zero movement factors do not contribute to exerting a ZOC through any hexside. The REs of artillery units do not contribute to exerting a ZOC unless the number of non-artillery REs in the hex at least equals the number of artillery FlEs. All REs of artillery units in excess of this number are ignored.

"A stack of less than one RE has no ZOC. A stack containing at least one RE, but less than three FlEs, of units that are supplied or in their first turn out of supply, has a reduced ZOC (RZOC). A stack of three or more REs has a standard ZOC (SZOC) providing it contains at least three REs of units that are supplied or in their first turn out of supply, and a reduced ZOC otherwise.

"Reduced ZOCs are the same as standard ZOCs, except for their effects on the movement of enemy units (Rule 6A).

"Under certain conditions, stacks which would normally exert a standard ZOC will have a reduced ZOC (see Rule 31.G - Soviet Unpreparedness)."

(SE) Rule 12D - Supply Effects In the third paragraph replace the sentence "A unit with a ZOC has a reduced ZOC." with:

"A stack of units which would normally have a standard ZOC has a reduced ZOC; and a stack which would normally have a reduced ZOC, has no ZOC. (for details see Rule 5 - Zones of Control) "

(SE) Rule 25.13 - Airborne Operations - ZOCS Replace entirely with:

"An airborne unit does not contribute towards exerting a ZOC during the player turn in which it performs an air drop."

(SE) Rule 31.G - Soviet Unpreparedness: Replace first sentence of third paragraph with:

"On the Jun II 41, Jul I 41, and Jul II 41 turns, the following rules are in effect: All Soviet stacks which qualify for standard ZOCs (SZOCs) only have reduced ZOCs (RZOCs). All Soviet stacks which qualify for RZOCs still retain RZOCs."

In various other places in the rules, reference to "units with ZOCs" should be read as "stacks with ZOCs". The special references to headquarters

(14.D), trucks (14.1) and German intrinsic defences (31.J) not having ZOCs are consistent with the suggested approach of excluding 0 Attack Factor units.

The restrictions on artillery units are modelled on the existing rules for restrictions on artillery unit combat strengths. A stack consisting entirely of artillery units should not have a great influence on surrounding terrain, but surely artillery units could help infantry and armour exert such influence! Together with the restriction on zero factor units, this restriction on artillery units means a list of which units can contribute to ZOCs is probably not needed, as the worst abuses will have been prevented.

What would be the effect of all this on our earlier examples? The Axis Motorised Regiment, if alone in a hex, will exert a RZOC in the desert or in the steppes. The Soviet stack of eight brigades would have a standard ZOC, but an Italian division (two REs in WinD, and two REs in SE also if Stein's suggestion is adopted) would only have a reduced ZOC. Similarly the Allied stack would have a ZOC (4 and 1/2 REs), but the Italian border guard would not (zero Attack Factor).

As an example of how supply status would affect ZOCs under the proposed rules, take the case of a Soviet invasion of Odessa in SE. Each turn for four turns, the Soviet player has transported a 2-6 Marine Bde to Odessa, but not landed any supply. The resulting stack has one RE at U3, one RE at U-2, one RE at U-1 and one RE in supply. As only two REs are at U-1 or better, there is no SZOC, but there are enough REs of all supply statuses for a RZOC. If the Soviet player had brought in supply as well, the stack would have had a SZOC.

Matching the ability of a stack to permanently change the ownership of a hex to its ability to exert a ZOC was intended to limit abuses like two artillery or AA Bns being able to 'occupy' hundreds of square kilometres of territory. It incidentally creates additional 'slime barriers': a brigade size unit wandering in the enemy rear area can only permanently change ownership of territory if supplied or U-1.

The accompanying tables summarise the proposed ZOC rule.

Event	German c/m	Other
Leave RZOC	-	-
RZOC-RZOC	1	1
Leave SZOC	1	2
SZOC-RZOC RZOC-SZOC SZOC- SZOC	2	3

Supply Status	Less Than 1 RE	More Than or Equal to 1 RE but Less Than 3 REs	More Than or Equal to 3 REs
Supplied or U-1	-	RZOC	SZOC
Any other supply status	-	-	RZOC
Note: REs of 0 AF units, and excess Arty REs do not count.