Hi, I am new to this mailing list, so I'll try to get something started here. How about a simple poll? The subject is very controversial, but the question is simple. (Usually people are adamant about their opinions on this one.) How do you rate the play balance of FITE/Scorched Earth? a) The Germans have an overwhelming advantage. b) The Germans have a small advantage. c) It is balanced evenly. d) The Soviets have a small advantage. e) The Soviets have an overwhelming advantage. I'll vote first. I vote e. Jim Pritchett UUCP: rwsys.lonestar.org!caleb!europapoll or utacfd.uta.edu!rwsys!caleb!europapoll >From matpe@se.liu.lysator Wed Apr 28 16:20:18 1993 Return-Path: Received: from lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <05274-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Wed, 28 Apr 1993 16:20:00 +0100 Received: from ua.d.umn.edu (131.212.32.12) by lysator.liu.se (ALPHA-6.36/6.16) id AA05674; Wed, 28 Apr 1993 17:15:52 +0200 Received: by ua.d.umn.edu id AA18374 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for europa@lysator.liu.se); Wed, 28 Apr 1993 10:15:31 -0500 From: Kurt Schroeder Message-Id: <199304281515.AA18374@ua.d.umn.edu> Subject: no subject (file transmission) To: europa@lysator.liu.se (Europa mailing list) Date: Wed, 28 Apr 93 10:15:31 CDT X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Status: RO ^ How do you rate the play balance of FITE/Scorched Earth? ^ ^ a) The Germans have an overwhelming advantage. ^ b) The Germans have a small advantage. ^ c) It is balanced evenly. ^ d) The Soviets have a small advantage. ^ e) The Soviets have an overwhelming advantage. ^ ^ I'll vote first. I vote e. ^ Jim Pritchett ^ UUCP: rwsys.lonestar.org!caleb!europapoll ^ or utacfd.uta.edu!rwsys!caleb!europapoll I'd vote somewhere between d and e. Of course, the next question to be asked, assuming agreement on this first one, is: Is this lack of balance a problem? Several issues enter in here. 1. The Soviets won the real war by a long shot. This would argue that the game should be unbalanced, at least in the long run. Of course, should the Germans (or, more accurately, the Axis :-) have a chance in the 'short run', e.g. through Fall 1942, and do they in the game? 2. This assumes that people who play a game as complicated as FITE/SE/U are interested primarily in simulation of historical events, rather than in game-ability or play value. Is this true of the people reading this mail list? What is the desired balance between historicity and playability. My own feeling is that the game system (Europa) and scenarios (FITE/SE/U) should be able to accurately portray the choices available at the operational/strategic level while allowing the players (who take the roles of theatre commanders) to make operational and strategic choices different than those chosen by the historical characters. On our own operational level, I am unsure as to how to submit something to this mail list. I am simply responding to the above message by Jim P. Is that the procedure to be followed, or should I be mailing this message back to lysator, or what? Jim, if this message reaches only you, could you forward it to the right place? I have never used one of these mailing lists before, and some instructions (perhaps posted to rec.board.games also) would probably increase participation on the part of neophytes such as myself. Thnx. Kurt Schroeder kschroe2@ua.d.umn.edu >From matpe@se.liu.lysator Wed Apr 28 16:54:17 1993 Return-Path: Received: from lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <09525-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Wed, 28 Apr 1993 16:53:55 +0100 Received: from ida.liu.se (130.236.139.139; curofix.ida.liu.se) by lysator.liu.se (ALPHA-6.36/6.16) id AA07819; Wed, 28 Apr 1993 17:51:10 +0200 Received: from diagnostix by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA15145; Wed, 28 Apr 93 17:51:08 +0200 From: Mats Persson Received: from diag19 by diagnostix (5.65b/ida.slave-V1.0b3) id AA25875; Wed, 28 Apr 93 17:51:07 +0200 Received: by diag19 (5.65b/ida.slave-V1.0b3) id AA05195; Wed, 28 Apr 93 17:51:06 +0200 Date: Wed, 28 Apr 93 17:51:06 +0200 Message-Id: <9304281551.AA05195@diag19> To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: no subject (file transmission) Status: RO >On our own operational level, I am unsure as to how to submit something to >this mail list. I am simply responding to the above message by Jim P. Is >that the procedure to be followed, or should I be mailing this message back >to lysator, or what? Jim, if this message reaches only you, could you >forward it to the right place? I have never used one of these mailing lists >before, and some instructions (perhaps posted to rec.board.games also) would >probably increase participation on the part of neophytes such as myself. You did it correctly. Be sure that the To: field in your message contains europa@lysator.liu.se. In the Sun version of Mail this is done by using R and then ~h to delete the senders mailaddress. In mailtool choose button 'Reply (all)'. Other mail programs use other methods. /Mats Persson >From matpe@se.liu.lysator Fri Apr 30 06:59:09 1993 Return-Path: Received: from lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <00919-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Fri, 30 Apr 1993 06:59:04 +0100 Received: from mcsun.EU.net (192.16.202.1) by lysator.liu.se (ALPHA-6.36/6.16) id AA01934; Fri, 30 Apr 1993 07:54:40 +0200 Received: by mcsun.EU.net via EUnet id AA26774 (5.65b/CWI-2.217); Fri, 30 Apr 1993 07:54:38 +0200 Received: from utacfd.uta.edu (via [129.107.2.131]) by relay1.UU.NET with SMTP (5.61/UUNET-internet-primary) id AA21493; Fri, 30 Apr 93 01:47:15 -0400 Received: by utacfd.uta.edu (/\==/\ Smail3.1.25.1 #25.1) id ; Thu, 29 Apr 93 22:08 CDT Received: from caleb by rwsys.lonestar.org with uucp (Smail3.1.27.1 #1) id m0nolJc-0000a8C; Thu, 29 Apr 93 21:59 CDT Received: by caleb.UUCP (V1.15/Amiga) id AA005wn; Thu, 29 Apr 93 20:52:04 CST Date: Thu, 29 Apr 93 20:52:04 CST Message-Id: <9304300252.AA005wn@caleb.UUCP> From: caleb!jdp@relay.EU.net (Jim Pritchett) To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: Hello and FITE question Status: RO Note: I sent this reply direct, but I later decided that the list might be interested, so I am sending it there also. Graham_Arts@mindlink.bc.ca wrote: > 1. The Soviets won the real war by a long shot. This would argue that the > game should be unbalanced, at least in the long run. Of course, should the > Germans (or, more accurately, the Axis :-) have a chance in the 'short run', > e.g. through Fall 1942, and do they in the game? The Soviet victory implies that the Germans need to win before the Soviet war machine can get significant amounts of materiel into the conflict. Alternatively, the Germans need to reach the end of the vast Soviet supply of potential soldiers (note: they came a lot closer to this point than they ever admitted. The Soviets lied about the population of their cities for decades after the war.) > > 2. This assumes that people who play a game as complicated as FITE/SE/U are > interested primarily in simulation of historical events, rather than in > game-ability or play value. Is this true of the people reading this mail > list? What is the desired balance between historicity and playability. My > own feeling is that the game system (Europa) and scenarios (FITE/SE/U) should > be able to accurately portray the choices available at the > operational/strategic level while allowing the players (who take the roles of > theatre commanders) to make operational and strategic choices different than > those chosen by the historical characters. This varies according to the players. > > On our own operational level, I am unsure as to how to submit something to > this mail list. I am simply responding to the above message by Jim P. Is > that the procedure to be followed, or should I be mailing this message back > to lysator, or what? Jim, if this message reaches only you, could you > forward it to the right place? I have never used one of these mailing lists > before, and some instructions (perhaps posted to rec.board.games also) would > probably increase participation on the part of neophytes such as myself. You should post directly to the mailing list address (i.e. europa@lysator.liu.se) I'm not sure where replies to the list go. That should work, but it may not. If it goes to the mailing list, you should see it. If not, post it to the ml yourself, or drop me a note and I can forward it for you. Jim Pritchett UUCP: rwsys.lonestar.org!caleb!jdp or utacfd.uta.edu!rwsys!caleb!jdp >From matpe@se.liu.lysator Fri Apr 30 17:58:43 1993 Return-Path: Received: from lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <03435-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Fri, 30 Apr 1993 17:43:00 +0100 Received: from ida.liu.se (130.236.139.139; curofix.ida.liu.se) by lysator.liu.se (ALPHA-6.36/6.16) id AA08640; Fri, 30 Apr 1993 18:40:05 +0200 Received: from diagnostix by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA25722; Fri, 30 Apr 93 18:40:02 +0200 From: Mats Persson Received: from diag19 by diagnostix (5.65b/ida.slave-V1.0b3) id AA03668; Fri, 30 Apr 93 18:40:01 +0200 Received: by diag19 (5.65b/ida.slave-V1.0b3) id AA06148; Fri, 30 Apr 93 18:39:59 +0200 Date: Fri, 30 Apr 93 18:39:59 +0200 Message-Id: <9304301639.AA06148@diag19> To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: FITE question Status: RO > How do you rate the play balance of FITE/Scorched Earth? Between c and d in 1941/42. The whole game is probably e, but I have never played it to the end. I think there should be better victory conditions. My suggestion is: count the number of cities/city hexes owned each year, in both Oct I and Oct II, and Apr I and Apr II. Then compare this number to some average number. The Germans get the +/- difference as victory points. With these victory conditions the Soviets must choose between saving his army or try to hold cities. /Mats >From matpe@se.liu.lysator Fri Apr 30 18:00:02 1993 Return-Path: Received: from lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <03619-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Fri, 30 Apr 1993 17:44:54 +0100 Received: from ida.liu.se (130.236.139.139; curofix.ida.liu.se) by lysator.liu.se (ALPHA-6.36/6.16) id AA08764; Fri, 30 Apr 1993 18:42:16 +0200 Received: from diagnostix by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA25738; Fri, 30 Apr 93 18:42:15 +0200 From: Mats Persson Received: from diag19 by diagnostix (5.65b/ida.slave-V1.0b3) id AA03674; Fri, 30 Apr 93 18:42:14 +0200 Received: by diag19 (5.65b/ida.slave-V1.0b3) id AA06153; Fri, 30 Apr 93 18:42:12 +0200 Date: Fri, 30 Apr 93 18:42:12 +0200 Message-Id: <9304301642.AA06153@diag19> To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: TEM 6 Status: RO Does anybody have issue number 6 of The Europa Magazine? I need the OB for the British Pioneers. /Mats >From matpe@se.liu.lysator Fri Apr 30 19:19:09 1993 Return-Path: Received: from lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <13148-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Fri, 30 Apr 1993 19:18:35 +0100 Received: from june.cs.washington.edu (128.95.1.4) by lysator.liu.se (ALPHA-6.36/6.16) id AA14030; Fri, 30 Apr 1993 20:15:58 +0200 Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.65b/7.1ju) id AA28598; Fri, 30 Apr 93 11:16:00 -0700 Date: Fri, 30 Apr 93 11:16:00 -0700 From: graham@cs.washington.edu (Stephen Graham) Return-Path: Message-Id: <9304301816.AA28598@june.cs.washington.edu> To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: FITE question Status: RO >I think there should be better victory conditions. >My suggestion is: count the number of cities/city hexes owned >each year, in both Oct I and Oct II, and Apr I and Apr II. >Then compare this number to some average number. The Germans >get the +/- difference as victory points. > >With these victory conditions the Soviets must choose between >saving his army or try to hold cities. Better would be to show why the Soviets need to hold certain areas. There should be some importance to holding cities, but most Soviet industry is missing from the game. For instance, there's the entire Donbass industrial region, including most of the iron ore & smelting available as well as additional factories not shown. The southern runaway defense might change if losing the area meant sharply reduced armor, artillery and air production. Overall, though, I don't particularly care for victory points. Most games of FiTE/SE end in one side or the other quitting, effectively surrendering. The other games end under similar conditions, it becomes clear to the players who has won and by what margin. In the case of First to Fight or Balkan front, where the loser is guaranteed, the Poles and the Allies should be able to judge for themselves how well they played. How much did the Germans pay for their victory? Since we know when the campaigns ended historically, VPs for time are somewhat useful, but a Greek player still holding out at the beginning of June knows that he's won. >From matpe@se.liu.lysator Tue May 4 03:18:56 1993 Return-Path: Received: from lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <29611-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Tue, 4 May 1993 03:18:42 +0100 Received: from CU.NIH.GOV (128.231.64.7) by lysator.liu.se (ALPHA-6.36/6.16) id AA22094; Tue, 4 May 1993 04:15:29 +0200 Message-Id: <199305040215.AA22094@lysator.liu.se> To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: Spider Date: Mon, 03 May 1993 22:11:04 EDT Subject: Europa Status: RO == Forwarded Mail == MAIL FROM AKG MONDAY 05/03/93 10:10:21 P.M. To: AKG From: "Spider" Date: Mon, 03 May 1993 22:10:17 EDT Subject: Europa I was the Polish player in the game of First to Fight that Viktor mentioned. Certainly it was not Viktor's fault (well, maybe a little) that the German's lost in victory points. I've always liked the maxim "The best defense is a good offense." The player playing the Southern forces for the Germans was not aware of my inclination, and proceeded in a rather lax manner. His strategy was to build as powerful a stack as possible, and attack with multiples of these stacks against the strongest points in my line, in the hopes of destroying my powerful units early in the game. This would be a good point to mention my setup. The Polish have many of their good units either cut off or simply destroyed in the first moments of the invasion. The Northern Germans, however, are rather weak; and the Polish have a good line of forts facing them. So rather than try to defend a line, I used weak divisions in the forts and the intervening swamps to bring the Northern advance to a mind-numbing crawl. (The North has about as much armour as the Polish.) In the South, however, I stacked my most mobile cavalry and armour (what little I had) into mid-size stacks. To solidify my line, I brought up the units from the North to bolster any weak spots and roads. The Germans, in their carelessness and confidence in the Polish's lack of any choice other than to stand there and take it, left gaps in his line. As a result, two of these stacks of mine shot through his line, destroyed an air unit, and attacked two of his stacks of 'leftovers'. The German, in making ultra-powerful stacks, was left with stacks of five or six 1-10 mobile units. So a stack of say, two 5-6 cav divisions, a 1-8 artillery, a 3-5 armour division, and a 1-8 armour regement was enough to demolish such a stack. And whammo, I've got some 15-18 victory points. with the air thrown in, and the other stack, that was like 58 vp's in one turn. Vik made a similar mistake in the North. He left a gap so that, during my mechanized movement phase, I sent a 1-8 armour through onto an airfield with three Ju-88's. One escaped, that's another 50 vp's. It was these mistakes that cost them the game. Sure, I lost alot of units and ended up losing Warsaw early, but even that was bad luck on my part. When Polish units are cut off, they roll to see if they surrender. Of nine stacks of units which I rolled for, only one survived, and it was a weak stack. In addition, the Souther player managed to get his armour, three corps worth, cut off by my Polish zoc's. I had better than 50% chance on three attacks to destroy a stack of 6re's of armour, and got none of 'em. Then my units got cut off by the Northern player, who finally drudged through my line of forts and zoc's and cut off most of my units, which conveniently, and promptly, died. When all was said and done (the Germans decided to get those horror-bombing vp's rather than take a virtually defenseless Warsaw), the only reason I really got the Strategic victory was because I got lucky with one last attack, which allowed one of my border units to escape into Lithuania. All in all, it's a good game. Even though it seems hopeless with the Polish, and a keen eyed German would never have allowed what happened to occur (Viktor tried not to interfere with the Southern player's moves, he'd never screw up that badly. In fact, he found it rather amusing.) it is still fun to try nifty things with the Polish. (I've yet to try the Germans.) Arius V. Kaufmann AKG@NIHCU I'm not politically incorrect, AKG@CU.NIH.GOV I'm politically challenged. >From matpe@se.liu.lysator Wed May 12 13:19:14 1993 Return-Path: Received: from lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <15389-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Wed, 12 May 1993 13:19:01 +0100 Received: from ntcusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil (ntcusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil [131.158.4.7]) by lysator.liu.se (ALPHA-6.56/6.27) id OAA12268; Wed, 12 May 1993 14:14:57 +0200 Received: from mgr.hjf.org by ntcusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil (5.59/25-eef) id AA21255; Wed, 12 May 93 07:19:14 EDT Received: by mgr.hjf.org (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA27283; Wed, 12 May 93 07:58:56 EDT Date: Wed, 12 May 93 07:58:56 EDT From: viktor@mgr.hjf.org (Viktor Kaufmann) Message-Id: <9305121158.AA27283@mgr.hjf.org> To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: FITE Player Aid Kit Status: RO Does anyone have a copy of the Fire in the East Player Aid Kit which they would be willing to sell? One other thing, does anyone who is subscribed to this list also have access to the Europa forum on GENIE? It would be interesting to see some of the things they talk about there posted to this list. Viktor >From matpe@se.liu.lysator Fri May 14 12:24:29 1993 Return-Path: Received: from lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <12527-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Fri, 14 May 1993 12:24:15 +0100 Received: from vanuata.dcs.gla.ac.uk (vanuata.dcs.gla.ac.uk [130.209.240.50]) by lysator.liu.se (ALPHA-6.56/6.27) id NAA28592; Fri, 14 May 1993 13:17:26 +0200 Received: from tuvula.dcs.gla.ac.uk by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with LOCAL SMTP (PP) id <11979-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Fri, 14 May 1993 12:15:19 +0100 Received: by tuvula.dcs.gla.ac.uk (4.1/Dumb) id AA12161; Fri, 14 May 93 12:14:51 BST Date: Fri, 14 May 93 12:14:51 BST From: kh Message-Id: <9305141114.AA12161@tuvula.dcs.gla.ac.uk> To: gwsteff@pbhya.pacbell.com, johhe@ida.liu.se Subject: Re: Europa game titles Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se Status: RO > I hope this list is complete (it is all from memory). > By GDW: Their Finest Hour Operation Sealion Hypothetical 1940 German Invasion of Britain Jul-Nov 1940(?) The Urals Eastern Front FiTE/SE Expansion I've also seen "Africa Orientale" mentioned (Italian West African campaigns presumably), but it doesn't seem to be a boxed game. Maybe it was a "roll-your-own" mini in The Europa Magazine? > By GRD (to appear "soon"): Second Front Allied Western Campaigns Jul 1943- May 1945? Is there any news of this yet?! Kevin >From matpe@se.liu.lysator Fri May 14 11:34:10 1993 Return-Path: Received: from lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <08903-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Fri, 14 May 1993 11:33:59 +0100 Received: from ida.liu.se (curofix.ida.liu.se [130.236.139.139]) by lysator.liu.se (ALPHA-6.56/6.27) id MAA24385; Fri, 14 May 1993 12:21:12 +0200 Received: from senilix by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA25563; Fri, 14 May 93 12:21:00 +0200 From: Johan Herber Received: from sen3 by senilix (5.65b/ida.slave-V1.0b3) id AA02004; Fri, 14 May 93 12:20:58 +0200 Received: by sen3 (5.65b/ida.slave-V1.0b3) id AA00705; Fri, 14 May 93 12:20:51 +0200 Date: Fri, 14 May 93 12:20:51 +0200 Message-Id: <9305141020.AA00705@sen3> To: gwsteff@pbhya.PacBell.COM Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: Gerald Steffler's message of Thu, 13 May 93 13:21:07 PDT <9305132021.AA02070@ns.PacBell.COM> Subject: Europa game titles Status: RO By GDW: Case White Polish Campaign Sep 1939 (Nonstandard time scale) Narvik Norwegian Campaign Apr 1940 (Nonstandard unit and time scale) Fall of France Western Campaign May 1940- Marita-Merkur Balkan Campaign Dec 1940-Jun 41 Western Desert Desert War Nov 1940- Torch French North Africa Nov 1942-Jun 43 (Continuation of WD) Near East Iraq and Persia Nov 1940- (Add on to WD, no Soviets)* Fire in the East Eastern Front Jun 1941-Mar 42 (Older title: Drang nach Osten) Scorched Earth Eastern Front Apr 1942-Dec 44 (Continuation of FitE, Older title: Unentschieden)** Spain and Portugal Hypothetical German or Allied invasions.*** * Cannot be played by itself, WD needed. ** Cannot be played by itself, FitE needed. *** Cannot be played by itself, FoF or Torch needed. By GRD: First to Fight Polish Campaign Rework of Case White. Balkan Front Balkan Campaign Rework of Marita-Merkur A Winter War Russo-Finnish War 39-40 I hope this list is complete (it is all from memory). /Johan >From @uk.ac.nsfnet-relay:thornley@edu.umn.cs Fri May 14 15:43:46 1993 Return-Path: <@uk.ac.nsfnet-relay:thornley@edu.umn.cs> Received: from nsfnet-relay.ac.uk by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk via JANET with NIFTP (PP) id <29324-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Fri, 14 May 1993 15:43:32 +0100 Received: from mail.cs.umn.edu by sun3.nsfnet-relay.ac.uk with Internet SMTP id ; Fri, 14 May 1993 15:42:23 +0100 Received: from milli.cs.umn.edu by mail.cs.umn.edu (5.65c/) id AA00107; Fri, 14 May 1993 09:40:39 -0500 From: "David H. Thornley" Received: by milli.cs.umn.edu id AA01724; 4.1/; Fri, 14 May 93 09:40:39 CDT Message-Id: <9305141440.AA01724@milli.cs.umn.edu> Subject: Re: Europa game titles To: kh@uk.ac.glasgow.dcs (kh) Date: Fri, 14 May 93 9:40:38 CDT In-Reply-To: <9305141114.AA12161@tuvula.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; from "kh" at May 14, 93 12:14 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Status: RO > > > I hope this list is complete (it is all from memory). > > I've also seen "Africa Orientale" mentioned (Italian West African > campaigns presumably), but it doesn't seem to be a boxed game. > Maybe it was a "roll-your-own" mini in The Europa Magazine? > Africa Orientale was done by the Wargamer. It used Europa rules and was intended to be Europa-compatible, but it was done by different people. BTW, there's no reason why you couldn't tack The Near East onto a Fire in the East game, but I don't see what it will buy you; invading the Soviet Union through the Caucasus seems like a major logistic and terrain nightmare (it takes *lots* of resource points to get a rail connection). > > By GRD (to appear "soon"): > > Second Front Allied Western Campaigns Jul 1943- May 1945? > > Is there any news of this yet?! > As always, it is slated for release later this year. Seriously, GR/D is putting in a major effort, and has sworn off working on other projects until Second Front is out the door. I really do expect it home by Christmas this year. (My home, that is.) DHT >From @uk.ac.nsfnet-relay:matpe@se.liu.lysator Fri May 14 19:53:59 1993 Return-Path: <@uk.ac.nsfnet-relay:matpe@se.liu.lysator> Received: from nsfnet-relay.ac.uk by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk via JANET with NIFTP (PP) id <22051-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Fri, 14 May 1993 19:53:53 +0100 Received: from lysator.liu.se by sun3.nsfnet-relay.ac.uk with Internet SMTP id ; Fri, 14 May 1993 19:53:40 +0100 Received: from elrond.ida.liu.se (elrond.ida.liu.se [130.236.30.12]) by lysator.liu.se (ALPHA-6.56/6.27) id UAA02514; Fri, 14 May 1993 20:41:12 +0200 Received: from june.cs.washington.edu by elrond.ida.liu.se with SMTP (5.61-bind 1.5X+ida/IDA-1.2.8-mc2.5-2) id AA16731; Fri, 14 May 93 17:05:32 +0200 Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.65b/7.1ju) id AA10535; Fri, 14 May 93 08:02:46 -0700 Date: Fri, 14 May 93 08:02:46 -0700 From: graham@edu.washington.cs (Stephen Graham) Message-Id: <9305141502.AA10535@june.cs.washington.edu> To: europa@se.liu.lysator Subject: Re: Europa game titles Sender: matpe@se.liu.lysator Status: RO >> By GRD (to appear "soon"): > >Second Front Allied Western Campaigns Jul 1943- May 1945? > >Is there any news of this yet?! Second round of playtesting should commence later this month. We've received black&white maps and the OB in the past week. All we need are the rules and we can get underway. Projected release at Christmas 93. Steve Graham graham@cs.washington.edu >From matpe@se.liu.lysator Fri May 14 20:15:14 1993 Return-Path: Received: from lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <23581-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Fri, 14 May 1993 20:15:04 +0100 Received: from elrond.ida.liu.se (elrond.ida.liu.se [130.236.30.12]) by lysator.liu.se (ALPHA-6.56/6.27) id VAA04905; Fri, 14 May 1993 21:07:43 +0200 Received: from curofix.ida.liu.se by elrond.ida.liu.se with SMTP (5.61-bind 1.5X+ida/IDA-1.2.8-mc2.5-2) id AA16402; Fri, 14 May 93 14:30:31 +0200 Received: from diagnostix by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA27543; Fri, 14 May 93 14:27:47 +0200 From: Mats Persson Received: from diag6 by diagnostix (5.65b/ida.slave-V1.0b3) id AA04306; Fri, 14 May 93 14:27:46 +0200 Received: by diag6 (5.65b/ida.slave-V1.0b3) id AA09550; Fri, 14 May 93 14:27:44 +0200 Date: Fri, 14 May 93 14:27:44 +0200 Message-Id: <9305141227.AA09550@diag6> To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: Europa game titles Status: RO >Second Front Allied Western Campaigns Jul 1943- May 1945? >Is there any news of this yet?! In the Europa Magazine #30, Rick Gayler says that the maps are printed very soon, and the counters and rules are being worked on. The OB is almost finished. /Mats >From matpe@se.liu.lysator Thu May 13 21:25:01 1993 Return-Path: Received: from lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <03578-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Thu, 13 May 1993 21:24:53 +0100 Received: from ns.PacBell.COM (ns.PacBell.COM [192.150.170.2]) by lysator.liu.se (ALPHA-6.56/6.27) id WAA00867; Thu, 13 May 1993 22:21:47 +0200 Received: from pbhya.UUCP by ns.PacBell.COM (4.1/PacBell-05/11/93) id AA02070; Thu, 13 May 93 13:21:41 PDT Message-Id: <9305132021.AA02070@ns.PacBell.COM> Subject: Europa game titles To: europa@lysator.liu.se Date: Thu, 13 May 93 13:21:07 PDT From: Gerald Steffler X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.2 PL16] Status: RO I'm looking for a concise list of all Europa games published by GDW and GRD(?). Is there a FAQ for Europa? I believe that the game system could benefit from one. I've no idea which vendors system to purchase and play. I understand GRD is re-issuing/re-working the GDW games. Are the game names the same? Thanks in advance. Merciless1 >From matpe@se.liu.lysator Wed Jun 9 17:17:30 1993 Return-Path: Received: from lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <20374-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Wed, 9 Jun 1993 17:17:05 +0100 Received: from ida.liu.se (curofix.ida.liu.se [130.236.139.139]) by lysator.liu.se (ALPHA-6.56/6.27) id SAA09715; Wed, 9 Jun 1993 18:14:02 +0200 Received: from diagnostix by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA22192; Wed, 9 Jun 93 18:14:00 +0200 From: Mats Persson Received: from diag19 by diagnostix (5.65b/ida.slave-V1.0b3) id AA09272; Wed, 9 Jun 93 18:13:59 +0200 Received: by diag19 (5.65b/ida.slave-V1.0b3) id AA01520; Wed, 9 Jun 93 18:13:57 +0200 Date: Wed, 9 Jun 93 18:13:57 +0200 Message-Id: <9306091613.AA01520@diag19> To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Archives Status: RO The mails in this mailinglist have been archived on ftp.lysator.liu.se in directory pub/europa in file d-1993-May /Mats >From matpe@se.liu.lysator Sat Jun 19 20:16:53 1993 Return-Path: Received: from lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <20115-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Sat, 19 Jun 1993 20:16:51 +0100 Received: from ida.liu.se (curofix.ida.liu.se [130.236.139.139]) by lysator.liu.se (8.1B/8.1) with SMTP id VAA11423; Sat, 19 Jun 1993 21:14:45 +0200 Received: from diagnostix by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA10681; Sat, 19 Jun 93 21:14:43 +0200 From: Mats Persson Received: from diag19 by diagnostix (5.65b/ida.slave-V1.0b3) id AA10229; Sat, 19 Jun 93 21:14:42 +0200 Received: by diag19 (5.65b/ida.slave-V1.0b3) id AA06909; Sat, 19 Jun 93 21:14:40 +0200 Date: Sat, 19 Jun 93 21:14:40 +0200 Message-Id: <9306191914.AA06909@diag19> To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Europa List Status: RO Keith Rogers wrote: >I submitted a request to be put on the Europa mailing list. I sent it >to europa-request@lysator.liu.se a few days ago after I discovered its >existence from this group's FAQ. Is the list operator on holiday? >Does the list still live? Does anybody on the Net play Europa? Yes, the list still lives, but has been a little quiet the last weeks. >I'm starting my first game in it, Scorched Earth as the Germans, and >am groping for any info which might help me out since I'm a rank >novice at war games while my oponant has played several of the Europa >modules plus lots of SL and ASL. I feel like a sheep going to the >slaughter house... My advice to you for the Germans is: 1. Kill as many Russians as you can. 2. If the Russians are in low density in an area, FORWARD! 3. Beware of counterattacks in areas with lots of Russians. And an additional advice for the novice German is: put at least one division in every stack. This will save your trucks, engineers, Me 109s, and other small regiments and battalions. I started a new Scorched Earth game with some friends two weeks ago. Currently in the Aug I turn the Germans have one panzer corps in the replacement pool, due to my counterattacks as the Russian. The Germans have already lost 42 armor replacement points, but the Russian have also taken heavy losses. /Mats Persson >From @se.liu.mailgw,@mil.navy.nnmc.ntcusuhs:viktor@org.hjf.mgr Mon Jul 5 17:33:56 1993 Return-Path: <@se.liu.mailgw,@mil.navy.nnmc.ntcusuhs:viktor@org.hjf.mgr> Received: from lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <17013-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Mon, 5 Jul 1993 17:33:47 +0100 Received: from maxwell by lysator (5.0/SMI-4.1) id AA04037; Mon, 5 Jul 93 18:25:35 +0200 Received: from mailgw.liu.se ([130.236.1.10]) by maxwell (4.12/1.34/Lysator-3.1) id AA08425; Wed, 30 Jun 93 11:52:17 -0200 (unknown) Received: from ntcusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil by mailgw.liu.se with SMTP (5.61-bind 1.2+ida/IDA-1.2.8.2/LTH) id AA10398; Tue, 29 Jun 93 17:59:19 +0200 Received: from mgr.hjf.org by ntcusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil (5.59/25-eef) id AA13555; Tue, 29 Jun 93 10:43:43 EDT Received: by mgr.hjf.org (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA03913; Tue, 29 Jun 93 11:24:54 EDT Date: Tue, 29 Jun 93 11:24:54 EDT From: viktor@mgr.hjf.org (Viktor Kaufmann) Message-Id: <9306291524.AA03913@mgr.hjf.org> To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Leningrad Scenario content-length: 878 Status: RO Yes, this is the scenario which was to be used for the Europa tournament at Origins (but which, according to a postcard I received yesterday, is now cancelled). My brother and I played it for the first time last week, and we replayed it twice. The first time, Riga fell on July 1, and Talinn held out until August 1. Leningrad was never threatened, as the advancing Axis forces couldn't break out into the Leningrad MD. The second time, Riga fell on June II, but Talinn would have held until about September I (the German infantry was seriously bogged down trying to eliminate encircled and bypassed units, and the armor got itself into serious trouble). My question is, does the Axis have a chance here? What am I missing? Can they get anywhere near Leningrad by the September II turn? As far as I can tell, the Axis will never reach Leningrad in 1941. Thanks Viktor >From matpe@se.liu.lysator Wed Jul 7 13:50:53 1993 Return-Path: Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <24784-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Wed, 7 Jul 1993 13:50:46 +0100 Received: from elrond.ida.liu.se (elrond.ida.liu.se [130.236.30.12]) by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.1C/8.1B) with SMTP id OAA08839; Wed, 7 Jul 1993 14:46:41 +0200 Received: from ntcusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil by elrond.ida.liu.se with SMTP (5.61-bind 1.5X+ida/IDA-1.2.8-mc2.5-2) id AA06151; Tue, 6 Jul 93 16:03:29 +0200 Received: from mgr.hjf.org by ntcusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil (5.59/25-eef) id AA20861; Tue, 6 Jul 93 08:22:06 EDT Received: by mgr.hjf.org (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA13427; Tue, 6 Jul 93 09:03:28 EDT Date: Tue, 6 Jul 93 09:03:28 EDT From: viktor@mgr.hjf.org (Viktor Kaufmann) Message-Id: <9307061303.AA13427@mgr.hjf.org> To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Leningrad Scenario Status: RO Hmmm. Apparently, I made the mistaken assumption that everyone subscribes to Europa magazine, so when I talked about the Leningrad scenario, I confused a couple of people, who had no way of knowing what it is. I will send out a summary of that scenario in the next couple of days, when I have more time. But, to answer my own question, apparently the Leningrad scenario is stacked against the Germans. When I played Scorched Earth at Origins, there was lots of room to flank the defenses, and none exists in the scenario. But, for all of you who have been waiting for Second Front, at Origins they announced that it will be out in 3 months. Winston said, "I wouldn't have printed the maps if Second Front wasn't nearly complete." Winter War was nominated for Best Game of '93 (lost to Hacker, by Steve Jackson Games). Victor Hauser and Arthur (forgot his last name, but he did the maps) were playing a Second Front demo at the convention. They were using some new air rules which look very nice, but which aren't certain to be included in the final version. (I don't know most of the air rules they were using, but they certainly simplified the air phase. Things seem to be more points-based (offense, defense), and not unit-based). In our game of Scorched Earth, I discovered, as commander of the Moscow and Western MDs, that it is a Bad Thing to stay in one place too long. At one point, around Minsk, I decided that I couldn't retreat far enough, so I would stick around one more turn (I hadn't lost many units the prior turn). Big mistake. My whole line was wiped off the map and/or surrounded. Now there were only 20 divisions keeping the Germans from the Moscow defenses. They held (fortunately), and we threw our tanks into the Valdai hills Northwest of Moscow to hold that part of the line. We then successfully rebuilt most of our central front losses, and prepared to wipe out the advancing motorized units of Army Group Center. We ended the game there, after the September I German turn, since all (except the AGC commander) agreed that the Russian counter-attack would have stopped AGC to freeze outside Moscow in December. A quick note: The auction at Origins this year was a buyers' market. Wacht am Rhein could be obtained for under $100 (punched), War in the Pacific for $135 (punched). These games normally sell for around $200 (punched). Scorched Earth (mint, _not_ the 1.5 edition) $30. Crimea went for $26 Operation Typhoon went for $120 Gettysburg (AH, 1958 (square grid)) went for $30 There was no bottom to this market. Viktoras Kaufmann >From matpe@se.liu.lysator Wed Jul 7 14:59:36 1993 Return-Path: Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <29917-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Wed, 7 Jul 1993 14:59:31 +0100 Received: from unpsun1.cc.unp.ac.za (Unpsun1.cc.unp.ac.za [143.128.64.2]) by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.1C/8.1B) with SMTP id PAA10044; Wed, 7 Jul 1993 15:56:47 +0200 Received: from [143.128.63.43] by unpsun1.cc.unp.ac.za with smtp (Smail3.1.28.1 #3) id m0oDZyy-0000MvC; Wed, 7 Jul 93 15:56 EET X-NUPop-Charset: British Date: Wed, 7 Jul 93 15:56:14 +0200 From: (Chris Scogings) cscoging Sender: cscoging@unpcs1.cs.unp.ac.za Reply-To: cscoging@unpcs1.cs.unp.ac.za Message-Id: <57374.cscoging@unpcs1.cs.unp.ac.za> To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: New guy seeks help Status: RO Hello I am new to Europa (I only have Fire in the East). Could some kind old-timer tell me how I subscribe to Europa magazine, where to buy games, any other useful/interesting information? Thanks Chris ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Chris Scogings Voice: (27) 331 955645 Computer Science Dept Fax: (27) 331 955599 University of Natal Pietermaritzburg E-Mail:cscoging@unpcs1.cs.unp.ac.za ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >From matpe@se.liu.lysator Wed Jul 7 18:11:09 1993 Return-Path: Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <17145-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Wed, 7 Jul 1993 18:11:02 +0100 Received: from DHVX10.CSUDH.EDU (dhvx10.csudh.EDU [155.135.1.5]) by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.1C/8.1B) with SMTP id TAA11110; Wed, 7 Jul 1993 19:08:43 +0200 Received: by DHVX10.CSUDH.EDU (5.65/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA05916; Wed, 7 Jul 1993 10:09:21 -0700 Message-Id: <9307071709.AA05916@DHVX10.CSUDH.EDU> To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Italian OB Date: Wed, 07 Jul 93 10:09:20 -0700 From: Dupsyob X-Mts: smtp Status: RO Howdy, I was wondering if GDW or GRD has published an order of battle for the Italians during the early war period, say up to 1943 or so. Thanks for the help. Rod Holmes | Once you pull the pin from mister rholmes@dhvx10.csudh.edu | Grenade he is no longer your friend. >From matpe@se.liu.lysator Wed Jul 7 22:04:35 1993 Return-Path: Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <01671-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Wed, 7 Jul 1993 22:04:31 +0100 Received: from orca.es.com (ES.COM [130.187.1.1]) by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.1C/8.1B) with SMTP id WAA13770; Wed, 7 Jul 1993 22:55:04 +0200 Received: from moons ([130.187.201.14]) by orca.es.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA18994; Wed, 7 Jul 93 12:14:22 MDT Received: by moons (4.1/E&S_client-ver1.5/SMI-4.1) id AA10648; Wed, 7 Jul 93 12:13:51 MDT From: krogers@moons.sim.es.com (Keith Rogers) Message-Id: <9307071813.AA10648@moons> Subject: Leningrad Scenario To: europa@lysator.liu.se Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1993 12:13:51 -0600 (MDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 3424 Status: RO Viktor Kaufmann writes: > The second time, Riga fell on June II, but Talinn >would have held until about September I (the German infantry was seriously >bogged down trying to eliminate encircled and bypassed units, and the armor >got itself into serious trouble). Let me guess, they ran around lots of Soviet units to "bag" them only to find out they were out of supply next turn and running for their lives (at half MPs) to get back into supply. >My question is, does the Axis have a chance here? What am I missing? >Can they get anywhere near Leningrad by the September II turn? As far as >I can tell, the Axis will never reach Leningrad in 1941. I'm not even close to a good source on your question as I'm just starting my first game of SE but I have skimmed many years of ETO issues. I can only recall one case, the Origins game of, umm forgot the year, in which the Axis ever actually took Leningrad. In that case the German side was demonically possessed and hell bent on taking it and threw everything available at it. Most of Army Group Center went up there as did 95% (!) of the Luftwaffe and all reserves. All other fronts engaged in holding actions for the most part. The result of that game was that the Axis did indeed take Leningrad in (Nov, I think) '41 but was so weakened in doing so that they were going to get swept out again after a time. Of course the game was never finished, as the Origins ones never are due to mosterous amounts of time is takes to play SE, but it was generally conceeded the Axis would never be able to hold the city for very long, much less until '44. The comments also showed that the Soviets were taken by complete surprise that this would be the Axis's strategy and were thrown off balance for a few turns by the complete dedication right from the start of the Axis to take Leningrad. They thought it might be a feint for a while. I doubt you could take LG in 41, if ever, given a Soviet player who expects that push; the terrain is just too defender friendly and AEC is virtually always nullified. Perhaps some others have personal experience here. I toyed with the idea of a "go for Leningrad" strategy for this game I'm setting up but decided not to in the end. I'm usinging the more standard "go for the Valdai hills, then to Moskva in '42" plan instead. One interesting difference between my readings and what my opponent is doing is that it is (or at least was) fashionable for the Soviets to use the "Run Away" defense in which he trades space for unit survival and falls back a long ways into the interior before making a serious stand. My opponent has deployed his defenses as far forward as possible and appears to be making Minsk and Kiev as unassailable as possible. I have no experience to rely upon as to how sound this defense is. I do know that I'll have most of his best armor stacks U-2 by his Jun II turn but I'm going to be taking until at least Jul II to mop things up right on the very front lines before I can even start pushing further without seriously jepordizing my c/m units' supply lines. He really has made a very forward defense. I'm hoping it'll prove to be brittle and give me liscense to roam behind it almost at will assuming I can shatter it and eliminate the massive amounts of units I'm going against in the process. Any comments on how I should/could procede are welcome. Keith Rogers krogers@moons.sim.es.com >From matpe@se.liu.lysator Thu Jul 8 02:33:29 1993 Return-Path: Received: from 130.236.253.6 by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <24754-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Thu, 8 Jul 1993 02:33:15 +0100 Received: from orca.es.com (ES.COM [130.187.1.1]) by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.1C/8.1B) with SMTP id DAA18798; Thu, 8 Jul 1993 03:30:26 +0200 Received: from moons ([130.187.201.14]) by orca.es.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA21036; Wed, 7 Jul 93 15:57:33 MDT Received: by moons (4.1/E&S_client-ver1.5/SMI-4.1) id AA15965; Wed, 7 Jul 93 15:57:02 MDT From: krogers@moons.sim.es.com (Keith Rogers) Message-Id: <9307072157.AA15965@moons> Subject: Leningrad Scenario To: europa@lysator.liu.se Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1993 15:57:01 -0600 (MDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 2553 Status: RO Viktor Kaufmann writes: >Hmmm. Apparently, I made the mistaken assumption that everyone subscribes >to Europa magazine, so when I talked about the Leningrad scenario, I >confused a couple of people, who had no way of knowing what it is. I will >send out a summary of that scenario in the next couple of days, when I have >more time. Oops, looks like I shot my mouth (or fingers) off too soon again. I thought you were playing SE and going for Leningrad. I wasn't aware that there's a Leningrad scenario. >But, to answer my own question, apparently the Leningrad scenario is stacked >against the Germans. When I played Scorched Earth at Origins, there was lots >of room to flank the defenses, and none exists in the scenario. This wouldn't surprise me since SE in general seems rather stacked in favor of the Soviets; things like it being impossible to take Minsk in the historical amount of time (6 days), c/m units can't match how far they penetrated in reality without being out of supply, etc. >In our game of Scorched Earth, I discovered, as commander of the Moscow and >Western MDs, that it is a Bad Thing to stay in one place too long. At one >point, around Minsk, I decided that I couldn't retreat far enough, so I would >stick around one more turn (I hadn't lost many units the prior turn). Big >mistake. My whole line was wiped off the map and/or surrounded. Very interesting given my opponent is making a big stand at Minsk. I'll have to see if I can duplicate your bad experience for him :-) > Now there >were only 20 divisions keeping the Germans from the Moscow defenses. They >held (fortunately), and we threw our tanks into the Valdai hills >Northwest of Moscow to hold that part of the line. How? That was an amazing piece of defense on your part and/or a poor piece of offense on AGC's part. Was AGC too preoccupied with mopping up the units at Minsk that they couldn't smash through those 20 divs? The Valdai hills don't give you all that much advantage with only a -1 die mod for rough terrain. > We then successfully rebuilt most of >our central front losses, and prepared to wipe out the advancing motorized >units of Army Group Center. We ended the game there, after the September I >German turn, since all (except the AGC commander) agreed that the Russian >counter-attack would have stopped AGC to freeze outside Moscow in December. Looks like your game was pretty reminescent of reality with the huge bag at Minsk but failing to gain Moscow before winter set in. Keith Rogers krogers@moons.sim.es.com >From @uk.ac.nsfnet-relay:matpe@se.liu.lysator Thu Jul 8 13:25:59 1993 Return-Path: <@uk.ac.nsfnet-relay:matpe@se.liu.lysator> Received: from nsfnet-relay.ac.uk by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk via JANET with NIFTP (PP) id <15605-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Thu, 8 Jul 1993 13:25:57 +0100 Received: from 130.236.253.6 by sun3.nsfnet-relay.ac.uk with Internet SMTP id ; Thu, 8 Jul 1993 13:25:09 +0100 Received: from ntcusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil (ntcusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil [131.158.4.7]) by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.1C/8.1B) with SMTP id OAA20936; Thu, 8 Jul 1993 14:21:51 +0200 Received: from [131.158.26.52] by ntcusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil (5.59/25-eef) id AA00936; Thu, 8 Jul 93 07:06:26 EDT Received: by mgr.hjf.org (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA16761; Thu, 8 Jul 93 07:47:23 EDT Date: Thu, 8 Jul 93 07:47:23 EDT From: viktor@org.hjf.mgr (Viktor Kaufmann) Message-Id: <9307081147.AA16761@mgr.hjf.org> To: europa@se.liu.lysator Subject: Origins SE Sender: matpe@se.liu.lysator Status: R Well, after losing all my Russian units except 20 divisions, I just staggered them to create non-overrunnable islands exerting zones of control to slow the Germans down. I guess I should mention that in those 20 divisions, I did _not_ include about 10 divisions of armor. However, those 10 were _all_ thrown into the Valdai Hills, as I hadn't fortified them (I was playing SE for the first time, although I have played other Europa games). Further, the AGC commander, after watching AGN get its motorized non-armor units get crushed by the Northern Front commander in a viscious counter-attack, was rather gun-shy about extending his armor too far out in front of his infantry, so, as a result, Moscow held. In our second game (we quit the first one after one day, having gotten to the Russian part of the the Sept I turn), the Northern Soviet commander built his defense by putting all his Russian divisions in swamp, wood, or forest hexes, and non in clear terrain. The AGN commander promptly threw his armor down the road, stacked with trucks, and caused the immediate activation of the Leningrad reserves on the June II Soviet turn. This game ended on Aug I, with AGN 3 hexes outside Leningrad to the south of the city, AGC well beyond Minsk, and AGS stalled at the front, although the Russians were just beginning their retreat to the river line. There was no doubt that Leningrad would have fallen in this game, and that it would have been very hard to retake, possibly crippling the Soviet war machine (there are many RPs which are generated by Leningrad). I don't know if I mentioned, but GR/D was selling "War Bonds" for Second Front. Basically, these are pre-release coupons which you can exchange for a copy of Second Front upon its release. They were available at Origins only, and cost $85, so we now know what a minimum price for SF will be. Look for it in about 3 months. Viktor Kaufmann viktor@mgr.hjf.org >From matpe@se.liu.lysator Thu Jul 8 16:07:23 1993 Return-Path: Received: from 130.236.253.6 by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <28770-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Thu, 8 Jul 1993 16:07:18 +0100 Received: from june.cs.washington.edu (june.cs.washington.edu [128.95.1.4]) by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.1C/8.1B) with SMTP id QAA21912; Thu, 8 Jul 1993 16:58:08 +0200 Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.65b/7.1ju) id AA21791; Thu, 8 Jul 93 07:58:13 -0700 Date: Thu, 8 Jul 93 07:58:13 -0700 From: graham@cs.washington.edu (Stephen Graham) Message-Id: <9307081458.AA21791@june.cs.washington.edu> To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: E-mail for GR/D Status: R Anyone have the GEnie address for GR/D? Given that, it should be possible to get e-mail to them from the Internet by using address@genie.geis.com Steve Graham graham@cs.washington.edu >From matpe@se.liu.lysator Wed Aug 18 16:00:15 1993 Return-Path: Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <14335-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Wed, 18 Aug 1993 16:00:11 +0100 Received: from ida.liu.se (curofix.ida.liu.se [130.236.139.139]) by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.5/8.5) with SMTP id QAA17603; Wed, 18 Aug 1993 16:58:31 +0200 Received: from diagnostix by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA20836; Wed, 18 Aug 93 16:58:27 +0200 From: Mats Persson Received: from diag19 by diagnostix (5.65b/ida.slave-V1.0b3) id AA10238; Wed, 18 Aug 93 16:58:26 +0200 Received: by diag19 (5.65b/ida.slave-V1.0b3) id AA13206; Wed, 18 Aug 93 16:58:24 +0200 Date: Wed, 18 Aug 93 16:58:24 +0200 Message-Id: <9308181458.AA13206@diag19> To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Soviet tips Status: RO After four games of playing Soviet in FitE/SE I think I should give you some of my own strategial tips. Let's begin in the south.. 1. The Soviet forces in the south are the strongest, but that does'nt mean that they should defend their territory. There are no important strategic objectives on the Ukrainian steppes. Slow retreat? No, the Soviets should run to Kiev, then run to Odessa, run to Kharkov, and so on. The infantry division who can't run should defend their motherland and become Heroes of the Soviet Union. This means you should put stacks of 5 or 6 points in front of the panzers or even better; put them out of supply. The german infantry divisions should march through Ukraina without seeing any russians. If all this fails, give up Ukraina completely and build a new defense line around Stalino/Voronezh. 2. Defend every major city hex with a full stack including a NKVD unit, a fort, and some points of AA. This is important for Kiev, because it's a major railway junction. Unless the german cannot reach the city. In that case garrison the city with a 3-6 and you avoid unpleasant surprises. 3. Break every rail line and bridge you can, and destroy every airfield. Except behind your own lines of course. 4. Any panzerdivision venturing too far into russia should be attacked, captured, beaten up and sent to the coal mines in Siberia. 5. Run around in the Pripet marshes with some infantry divisions. This is very annoying for the german. Soviet 3-6 in marsh hexes is always annoying. Sooner or later he drives his panzers into the marsh and gets a HX. The german becomes frustrated, angry and makes even more mistakes. 6. On the other hand, if you really don't want any panzer too far behind you lines, you should put 6 point stacks _between_ the marsh and forest hexes. 7. Defend Minsk and Smolensk lightly. Concentrate on building up a fort line about 7 hexes from Moscow. 8. Moscow, Valdai hills and Leningrad are the major strategic objectives. Defend these and send most of you troops to these places. It is better to have a 12 point stack in marsh outside Leningrad than two 6 point stacks in the clear outside Kharkov. The german get EX result versus big stack more easily, which he can't afford. Lets call 6 point stacks "Stop", 12 point "Defend", 20 point "Hold" and 20 plus NkVD "No way!". 9. The Finns likes to make trouble. Show him your new tanks. Helsinki is nice during the spring break. 10. The Arctic theater is fun. Either you should try to hold Murmansk or you should'nt. If the german send lots of units and some finns, he will probably succeed. There is no use in defending a couple of armour points received by lend lease. It could cost more than it gives. 11. The german is very fond of bombing your raillines. Put engineers on the lines and your planes near the raillines and in the cities. 12. You have lots of armor. You can afford to lose it on counterattacks. 13. Move your factories to the Urals and keep one or two on the map depending on the situation. It is very expensive to lose these. 14. Two Mig-3 and one I-16 versus two Me109E is not advisable. You will lose one Mig-3. Hunt bombers and Me110 with your fighters or gang up with three fighters for every Me109. 15. NODDL means Non Overrunable Double Defense Line which means putting a double line of 6 point stacks. This tactic avoid panzers exploiting behind your lines. That's all for this time. Maybe I add some tips later or maybe you share your tips with us. Next time I'll make a detailed setup for the russian borderline. /Mats Persson >From matpe@se.liu.lysator Tue Aug 17 17:01:14 1993 Return-Path: Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <11963-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Tue, 17 Aug 1993 17:01:00 +0100 Received: from email (email.meto.govt.uk [151.170.240.2]) by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.5/8.5) with ESMTP id RAA13198; Tue, 17 Aug 1993 17:52:26 +0200 From: "HADL50::\"hadst\""@email.met-office.govt.uk Received: from email.meto.govt.uk (HADST@HADL50) by email.meto.govt.uk (PMDF V4.2-11 #3313) id <01H1UVNY888G0003RH@email.meto.govt.uk>; Tue, 17 Aug 1993 15:50:59 GMT Date: Tue, 17 Aug 1993 15:50:59 +0000 (GMT) Subject: From sfbtett@email.meto.govt.uk To: europa@lysator.liu.se Message-id: <01H1UVNY9U3M0003RH@email.meto.govt.uk> X-VMS-To: EMAIL::in%"europa@lysator.liu.se" MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Status: RO Having just joined the list I thought I might ask what the situation in Europa is: I.E. when is second front coming -- what stage is it at ? The last time I managed to play one of these games was a large game of FITE/SE played over several weekend with about 6 people ( roughly 3 a side though numbers varied from weekend to weekend) about two yeasr ago. Enormous troop losses occured on both sides with the Axes forces getting smashed in the south (Esentially failing to penetrate the Dnepier) but doing well In the North -- capturing Leningrad in early '42. The German offensive ins Summer 42 get thumped somewhat in the south but did nasties to the Soviets in the clear region to the North of Moscow and managed to blow the soviets apart with a thrust into Moscow from the North and EAST. Things were fairly desperate to the west of Moscow, but the line held... Simon P.S any Europa players in the South-west London Area ============================================================ Reply address: sfbtett@email.meto.govt.uk Tel : +[44]-344-856886 >From matpe@se.liu.lysator Tue Aug 17 17:06:29 1993 Return-Path: Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <12619-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Tue, 17 Aug 1993 17:06:16 +0100 Received: from mcsun.EU.net (mcsun.EU.net [192.16.202.1]) by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.5/8.5) with SMTP id SAA13242; Tue, 17 Aug 1993 18:04:56 +0200 From: ross@informix.com Received: from uunet!pyramid!infmx!informix.com by mcsun.EU.net with UUCP id AA07199 (5.65b/CWI-2.229); Tue, 17 Aug 1993 18:04:54 +0200 Received: from spool.uu.net (via LOCALHOST) by relay1.UU.NET with SMTP (5.61/UUNET-internet-primary) id AA28779; Tue, 17 Aug 93 12:02:03 -0400 Received: from pyramid.UUCP by uucp4.uu.net with UUCP/RMAIL (queueing-rmail) id 120102.25668; Tue, 17 Aug 1993 12:01:02 EDT Received: by pyramid.pyramid.com (5.61/OSx5.1) id AA08937; Tue, 17 Aug 93 08:49:37 -0700 Received: from maple.portland.informix.com by informix.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA28203; Tue, 17 Aug 93 08:34:15 PDT Received: from larch.portland.informix.com by maple.portland.informix.com (4.1/SMI-4.0) id AA22470; Tue, 17 Aug 93 08:34:52 PDT Received: from localhost by larch.portland.informix.com (4.1/SMI-4.0) id AA27501; Tue, 17 Aug 93 08:34:50 PDT Message-Id: <9308171534.AA27501@larch.portland.informix.com> To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: Still working? In-Reply-To: Your message of Tue, 17 Aug 93 17:05:08 +0200. <9308171505.AA12772@diag19> Date: Tue, 17 Aug 93 08:34:49 PDT Status: RO I recently took out Africa Oriental (Italia) and played it. I found it very interesting being the Italians. I was only given two (weak) infantry divisions and a horde of various brigades and regiments. Though I often had more firepower (offensive strength points) I had a problem with being able to concentrate my forces for combat. Does anyone have any useful hints on how the Italians should operate their defense? The historical sit and take it defense seems to work historically (which is to say, it doesn't work). Ross //////////////// ////////// // Ross Hagglund ////// / /// Database Kernel Engineer ///// // //// Informix Software //// // ///// /// // ////// 921 SW Washington Suite 670 // // /////// Portland, Oregon, USA, 97205 / /////////// Tel.:(503)221-2605, Fax.:(503)221-2633 //////////////// e-mail: ross@informix.com >From matpe@se.liu.lysator Tue Aug 17 17:17:19 1993 Return-Path: Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <13415-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Tue, 17 Aug 1993 17:17:11 +0100 Received: from june.cs.washington.edu (june.cs.washington.edu [128.95.1.4]) by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.5/8.5) with SMTP id SAA13285; Tue, 17 Aug 1993 18:14:33 +0200 Received: by june.cs.washington.edu (5.65b/7.1ju) id AA03236; Tue, 17 Aug 93 09:14:30 -0700 Date: Tue, 17 Aug 93 09:14:30 -0700 From: graham@cs.washington.edu (Stephen Graham) Message-Id: <9308171614.AA03236@june.cs.washington.edu> To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Status of Second Front Status: RO Playtest groups have been told to submit final reports by 21 September. _Europa_ 31 gave a release date of 1 November 1993. Since Victor showed part of the new air system in the magazine, I can probably comment on parts of it. The new replacement system works well, though the Allies rarely run out of points. I've managed to get the Americans down to 4 rps by attacking into 17 points of flak with the objective of killing the Axis anti-shipping bombers. It also cuts down on the number of aircraft counters needed and reduces in part the problem of choosing the only the best type of aircraft. (In the first playtest, my American airforces tended to have only P-38s, P-47s, and an assortment of bombers. Not terribly realistic, but the best mix of planes.) There are several new types of planes: LB, which do not get the bomber bonus for flak but are penalized for air-combat; HF, fighters optimized for bomber-intercept which are penalized versus regular fighters; SB, maritime strike aircraft which gain bonuses against naval units. So far, my group (and most others) are very happy with the new system. Better coverage of naval invasions and maritime strike works better than the old air-naval interdiction mission. Victor has done a good job in simplifying the system overall, while adding more detail where appropriate. -- Stephen Graham graham@cs.washington.edu >From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Tue Jan 18 15:14:01 1994 Return-Path: Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <24231-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Tue, 18 Jan 1994 15:13:41 +0000 Received: from ntcusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil (ntcusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil [131.158.4.7]) by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.5/8.6.5) with SMTP id QAA02048 for ; Tue, 18 Jan 1994 16:08:40 +0100 Received: from mgr.hjf.org by ntcusuhs.nnmc.navy.mil (5.59/25-eef) id AA29189; Tue, 18 Jan 94 09:14:49 EST Received: by mgr.hjf.org (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA12059; Tue, 18 Jan 94 10:02:40 EST From: viktor@mgr.hjf.org (Viktor Kaufmann) Message-Id: <9401181502.AA12059@mgr.hjf.org> Subject: Second Front To: europa@lysator.liu.se (Europa ) Date: Tue, 18 Jan 1994 10:02:39 -0500 (EST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 508 Status: RO I just called GR/D yesterday to re-up my subscription to Europa magazine, and asked them a few questions about SF. What I was told was that the counter sheets are at the die-cutters, and are expected back in two to three weeks. Once they get the counter sheets, they will begin packing and mailing them. Looks like Second Front is going to be out next month! And, for those who bought the War Bonds, the game will be sent to you, without needing to redeem the coupon. Viktor Kaufmann viktor@mgr.hjf.org >From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Mon Jan 24 15:16:09 1994 Return-Path: Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <01848-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Mon, 24 Jan 1994 15:15:53 +0000 Received: from sage.cc.purdue.edu (sage.cc.purdue.edu [128.210.10.6]) by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.5/8.6.5) with SMTP id QAA11297 for ; Mon, 24 Jan 1994 16:11:14 +0100 Received: by sage.cc.purdue.edu (5.61/Purdue_CC) id AA14189; Mon, 24 Jan 94 10:11:21 -0500 From: fite@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Rickster) Message-Id: <9401241511.AA14189@sage.cc.purdue.edu> Subject: Combined Arms To: europa@lysator.liu.se Date: Mon, 24 Jan 94 10:11:19 EST Status: R Thois message concerns the new Europa newsletter, "Combined Arms" published by Flavio Carrillo. I would like to recommend this newlettr to all who play Europa because of the articles it contains. The articles were written by Flavoi , Charles Sharp, and Jason Long. I miust say that they were excellent in that it appears that thrse articles are pet projects ogf the authors and were written with great zest. I won't discuss what they were about because in order to support the newsletter, flavio needs to sell issues. For subscription information see Europa magzine #32. Perhaps not much of a plug, But who has time when playing SE? Rick Fite >From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Sat Apr 23 15:10:50 1994 Return-Path: Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <05476-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Sat, 23 Apr 1994 15:10:47 +0100 Received: from ida.liu.se (curofix.ida.liu.se [130.236.139.139]) by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id QAA20380 for ; Sat, 23 Apr 1994 16:05:25 +0200 Received: from medix.ida.liu.se by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA10227; Sat, 23 Apr 94 16:05:01 +0200 From: Mats Persson Received: from med3 by medix.ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.slave(P)-V1.0a18+) id AA02481; Sat, 23 Apr 94 16:05:00 +0200 Received: by med3 (5.65b/ida.slave-V1.0b3) id AA07472; Sat, 23 Apr 94 16:04:58 +0200 Date: Sat, 23 Apr 94 16:04:58 +0200 Message-Id: <9404231404.AA07472@med3> To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Second Front News Status: R Hello list members, Here are some news from GR/D. Second Front has been delayed another three weeks because of delays in the printing of the last countersheet. /Mats P >From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Sat Apr 23 18:02:53 1994 Return-Path: Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <15053-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Sat, 23 Apr 1994 18:02:38 +0100 Received: from DHVX20.CSUDH.EDU (dhvx20.csudh.EDU [155.135.1.1]) by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id TAA21145 for ; Sat, 23 Apr 1994 19:01:23 +0200 From: rholmes@dhvx20.csudh.edu Received: by dhvx20.csudh.edu (MX V3.3 VAX) id 24291; Sat, 23 Apr 1994 10:02:09 PST Date: Sat, 23 Apr 1994 10:02:07 PST To: europa@lysator.liu.se Message-ID: <0097D618.492C2CA0.24291@dhvx20.csudh.edu> Subject: Spainish Torch Status: R Hello Everyone, I just got a copy of Spain and Portugal and was wondering where I could get a copy of the Spainish Torch scenario? Rod Holmes rholmes@dhvx20.csudh.edu >From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Tue Apr 26 20:18:55 1994 Return-Path: Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <28513-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Tue, 26 Apr 1994 20:18:49 +0100 Received: from clark.net (stephen@clark.net [198.17.243.7]) by godot (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with ESMTP id VAA17228 for ; Tue, 26 Apr 1994 21:16:53 +0200 Received: (from stephen@localhost) by clark.net (8.6.8/8.6.7) id PAA11680; Tue, 26 Apr 1994 15:17:00 -0400 Date: Tue, 26 Apr 1994 15:16:59 -0400 (EDT) From: Stephen Balbach Subject: Re: Torch To: John Kula cc: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: <199404261855.UAA17052@godot> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: R Thats illegal - I dont mean to be annal, but so many gamers copy rules and charts rather than buying the game it results in less revenue and thus fewer games to buy. Support GDW and buy a second copy - sheesh they sell so few anyway you probably really would be making a diffrence. Stephen Balbach On Tue, 26 Apr 1994, John Kula wrote: > To: EUROPA --INTERNET europa@lysator.liu > > > I need to get a copy of the rules and charts for Torch. The version I have is > GDW's last boxed version. I'd be prepared to pay for photocopying, etc. > > John Kula jakula@bcsc02.gov.bc.ca Commando 930 (MacBeth) > _____________________________________________________________________________ Stephen Balbach Clark Internet Services stephen@clark.net (410) 995-0691 [v] FAX (410) 730-9765 Support free software all-info@clark.net Internet for the 90's >From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Tue Apr 26 19:59:57 1994 Return-Path: Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <26379-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Tue, 26 Apr 1994 19:59:35 +0100 Received: from BCSC02.GOV.BC.CA (BCSC02.GOV.BC.CA [142.32.7.49]) by godot (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id UAA17052 for ; Tue, 26 Apr 1994 20:55:26 +0200 Message-Id: <199404261855.UAA17052@godot> Received: from BCSC02.GOV.BC.CA by BCSC02.GOV.BC.CA (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 7785; Tue, 26 Apr 94 11:55:32 PDT Date: Tue, 26 Apr 94 11:55:32 PDT From: John Kula To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Torch Status: R To: EUROPA --INTERNET europa@lysator.liu I need to get a copy of the rules and charts for Torch. The version I have is GDW's last boxed version. I'd be prepared to pay for photocopying, etc. John Kula jakula@bcsc02.gov.bc.ca Commando 930 (MacBeth) >From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Wed Apr 27 17:29:48 1994 Return-Path: Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <14395-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Wed, 27 Apr 1994 17:29:41 +0100 Received: from ida.liu.se (curofix.ida.liu.se [130.236.139.139]) by godot (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id SAA24695 for ; Wed, 27 Apr 1994 18:24:53 +0200 Received: from medix.ida.liu.se by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA11284; Wed, 27 Apr 94 18:24:47 +0200 From: Mats Persson Received: from med3 by medix.ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.slave(P)-V1.0a18+) id AA08654; Wed, 27 Apr 94 18:24:44 +0200 Received: by med3 (5.65b/ida.slave-V1.0b3) id AA01929; Wed, 27 Apr 94 18:24:43 +0200 Date: Wed, 27 Apr 94 18:24:43 +0200 Message-Id: <9404271624.AA01929@med3> To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: Torch Status: R Use the mail adress europa@lysator.liu.se when sending mails to the Europa list. Forwarded mail: >From unisql!bh@cs.utexas.edu Wed Apr 27 16:11:53 1994 >From: unisql!bh@cs.utexas.edu (Brian Heard) >Subject: Re: Torch >To: lysator.liu.se!europa-request@cs.utexas.edu >Date: Wed, 27 Apr 94 8:48:47 CDT > >Since you can't buy Torch from GDW/GRD, how are you supposed to get a copy?? >I have called both GDW and GRD at one time trying to buy a copy, but >they don't have any. Except for paying big $$$ for some collector's version >what are going to do if you want to play the game? > > >Brian >From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Tue May 17 20:15:05 1994 Return-Path: Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <02281-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Tue, 17 May 1994 20:15:01 +0100 Received: from panix.com (panix.com [198.7.0.2]) by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id VAA11050 for ; Tue, 17 May 1994 21:09:32 +0200 Received: by panix.com id AA01628 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for europa@lysator.liu.se); Tue, 17 May 1994 15:08:56 -0400 From: Kevin Maroney Message-Id: <199405171908.AA01628@panix.com> Subject: Second Front! To: europa@lysator.liu.se Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 15:08:55 -0400 (EDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 366 Status: R Not five minutes ago, John Astell handed me copies of the OB and the all-but-one-small-rule-finished rulebook. The counters, maps, charts, and box are all done. SF should be shipping in about ten days. Huzzah! -- Kevin J. Maroney|kjm@panix.com|Proud to be a Maroney|Proud to be a Yonker Never send money to someone who has the language skills of a rutabaga. >From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Fri May 27 20:41:55 1994 Return-Path: Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <05995-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Fri, 27 May 1994 20:41:50 +0100 Received: from panix.com (panix.com [198.7.0.2]) by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id VAA24495 for ; Fri, 27 May 1994 21:37:40 +0200 Received: by panix.com id AA13004 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for europa@lysator.liu.se); Fri, 27 May 1994 15:37:38 -0400 From: Kevin Maroney Message-Id: <199405271937.AA13004@panix.com> Subject: Re: Second Coming - A New (Slightly) Question To: jtl@goldberry.uchicago.edu (Jim Lauroesch) Date: Fri, 27 May 1994 15:37:37 -0400 (EDT) Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: <9405271850.AA12035@goldberry.uchicago.edu> from "Jim Lauroesch" at May 27, 94 01:50:32 pm Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 510 Status: R > Well unless GR/D gets their behinds in high gear that Second Front > will not make it out by D-Day :-(. I think that this is a *MAJOR* > mistake on their part, does anyone know if they are pushing to get > it out somehow/someway before June 6th. Second Front should be out by the end of next week, unless you've heard otherwise in the last three days. -- Kevin J. Maroney|kjm@panix.com|Proud to be a Maroney|Proud to be a Yonker Never send money to someone who has the language skills of a rutabaga. >From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Fri May 27 19:55:09 1994 Return-Path: Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <02686-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Fri, 27 May 1994 19:55:01 +0100 Received: from midway.uchicago.edu (midway.uchicago.edu [128.135.12.73]) by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id UAA24048 for ; Fri, 27 May 1994 20:52:15 +0200 Original-Received: from goldberry.uchicago.edu by midway.uchicago.edu for europa@lysator.liu.se Fri, 27 May 94 13:52:21 CDT PP-warning: Illegal Received field on preceding line Received: by goldberry.uchicago.edu (4.1/UofC3.1) id AA12035; Fri, 27 May 94 13:50:32 CDT Date: Fri, 27 May 94 13:50:32 CDT From: Jim Lauroesch Message-Id: <9405271850.AA12035@goldberry.uchicago.edu> To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Second Coming - A New (Slightly) Question Status: R Well unless GR/D gets their behinds in high gear that Second Front will not make it out by D-Day :-(. I think that this is a *MAJOR* mistake on their part, does anyone know if they are pushing to get it out somehow/someway before June 6th. It seems incredible with the 50th anniversary of D-Day being this year that GR/D didn't do more to be sure of having the game on the shelf by June 6th, this makes me wonder what they were thinking letting a counter sheet hold them back for so long. I think that they will be loosing quite a few sales due to this and that is very important with a $99 game! Anyone else care to comment? Anyone have inside info about what has been happening? Jim >From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Thu Jun 23 20:21:27 1994 Return-Path: Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <02332-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Thu, 23 Jun 1994 20:21:06 +0100 Received: from midway.uchicago.edu (midway.uchicago.edu [128.135.12.73]) by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id VAA12006 for ; Thu, 23 Jun 1994 21:18:30 +0200 Original-Received: from goldberry.uchicago.edu by midway.uchicago.edu for europa@lysator.liu.se Thu, 23 Jun 94 14:18:26 CDT PP-warning: Illegal Received field on preceding line Received: by goldberry.uchicago.edu (4.1/UofC3.1) id AA17381; Thu, 23 Jun 94 14:16:21 CDT Date: Thu, 23 Jun 94 14:16:21 CDT From: Jim Lauroesch Message-Id: <9406231916.AA17381@goldberry.uchicago.edu> To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Any news on the Beast? Status: R Any news/rumors on the arrival of Second Coming? What is the problem now, having trouble packing the full sized inflatable T-34 into the box :-) ? Well as I noted before, GR/D missed a *BIG* opportunity with the recent D-day hype, anyone want to place bets on whether they will get it out by the Bulge anniversary? Jim >From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Fri Jun 24 04:49:59 1994 Return-Path: Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <17530-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Fri, 24 Jun 1994 04:49:54 +0100 Received: from clark.net (stephen@clark.net [168.143.0.7]) by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with ESMTP id FAA01132 for ; Fri, 24 Jun 1994 05:48:41 +0200 Received: (from stephen@localhost) by clark.net (8.6.9/8.6.9) id XAA08067; Thu, 23 Jun 1994 23:48:52 -0400 Date: Thu, 23 Jun 1994 23:48:51 -0400 (EDT) From: Stephen Balbach Subject: Re: Any news on the Beast? To: Jim Lauroesch cc: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: <9406231916.AA17381@goldberry.uchicago.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: R I wonder though regarding the D-Day oppertunity, and maybe I'm just in a flaming-liberal frame of mind, maybe they were worried about capatilizing on D-Day and trivilizing it into a mere game. AT&T had a couple commercials regarding it and a lot of people were saying how gross that was to make money and capitalize off D-Day. But upon further reflection, D-Day was fought to preserve the right of a free market economy, so given that, I dont think that can be the excuse for 2nd Front being late ;) Stephen Balbach On Thu, 23 Jun 1994, Jim Lauroesch wrote: > > Any news/rumors on the arrival of Second Coming? What is the > problem now, having trouble packing the full sized inflatable > T-34 into the box :-) ? > > Well as I noted before, GR/D missed a *BIG* opportunity with the > recent D-day hype, anyone want to place bets on whether they will > get it out by the Bulge anniversary? > > > Jim > _____________________________________________________________________________ Stephen Balbach Clark Internet Services stephen@clark.net (410) 995-0691 [v] FAX (410) 730-9765 Support free software all-info@clark.net Internet for the 90's >From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Tue Jun 28 18:47:01 1994 Return-Path: Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <23964-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Tue, 28 Jun 1994 18:46:17 +0100 Received: from panix2.panix.com (panix2.panix.com [198.7.0.3]) by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id TAA00842 for ; Tue, 28 Jun 1994 19:39:20 +0200 Received: by panix2.panix.com id AA23165 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for europa@lysator.liu.se); Tue, 28 Jun 1994 13:39:10 -0400 From: Kevin Maroney Message-Id: <199406281739.AA23165@panix2.panix.com> Subject: Second Front shipping? To: europa@lysator.liu.se Date: Tue, 28 Jun 1994 13:39:10 -0400 (EDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 379 Status: RO According to John Astell, it is now shipping. No inflatable T-34, though. (Actually, according to John, the box is so tightly packed that it might be difficult to get the components back in the box after it's been opened!) -- Kevin J. Maroney|kjm@panix.com|Proud to be a Maroney|Proud to be a Yonker Never send money to someone who has the language skills of a rutabaga. >From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Wed Jul 6 23:04:39 1994 Return-Path: Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <28192-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Wed, 6 Jul 1994 23:04:33 +0100 Received: from mail.cs.umn.edu (mail.cs.umn.edu [128.101.149.1]) by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id AAA06344 for ; Thu, 7 Jul 1994 00:01:00 +0200 Received: from milli.cs.umn.edu by mail.cs.umn.edu (5.65c/) id AA21752; Wed, 6 Jul 1994 17:00:11 -0500 From: "David H. Thornley" Received: by milli.cs.umn.edu id RAA01678; 8.6.8.1/; Wed, 6 Jul 1994 17:00:38 -0500 Message-Id: <199407062200.RAA01678@milli.cs.umn.edu> Subject: Second Front opened in Minnesota To: europa@lysator.liu.se (Europa mailing list) Date: Wed, 6 Jul 1994 17:00:36 -0500 (CDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 1207 Status: R The Second Front has been opened here in Southeast Minneapolis, by a guy who figures he's been waiting for it a lot longer than Uncle Joe did. The first impression is that the box is packed. Notice how the counter sheets are packed into it if you want to get everything back in the box. (If you have some sort of counter storage system that will fit all the counters back in the box when punched out, please share. Heh heh heh.) Maps look about like you'd expect. Italy has an awful lot of brown on it. The rules are thick. Scenarios are starting in '43 and '44, for both ETO and MTO, and two more scenarios, one MTO only and one ETO only. Soviets are not included, and the provision for them seems to be that the Germans lose ground and have some additional restrictions. Strategic bombing is abstracted into its effects on the ground war, and the Allies (and, to a lesser extent, the Germans) can pull units out to use on the map. The strategic bombers are abstracted; I did not see any B-17 or B-24 counters. I found no Europa-scale naval units, although there are some charts marked for Grand Europa use. Haven't had time to look at it more, so somebody else can comment in more detail. DHT >From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Thu Jul 7 22:41:55 1994 Return-Path: Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <03816-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Thu, 7 Jul 1994 22:41:50 +0100 Received: from midway.uchicago.edu (midway.uchicago.edu [128.135.12.73]) by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id XAA02942 for ; Thu, 7 Jul 1994 23:36:18 +0200 Original-Received: from goldberry.uchicago.edu by midway.uchicago.edu for europa@lysator.liu.se Thu, 7 Jul 94 16:36:08 CDT PP-warning: Illegal Received field on preceding line Received: by goldberry.uchicago.edu (4.1/UofC3.1) id AA07623; Thu, 7 Jul 94 16:33:54 CDT Date: Thu, 7 Jul 94 16:33:54 CDT From: Jim Lauroesch Message-Id: <9407072133.AA07623@goldberry.uchicago.edu> To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Second Front First Impressions Status: R It has crawled from it lair and arrived UPS at my home yesterday (despite GR/D promising that they would send it to my office address where UPS actually delivers), fortunately my wife got off work early and was home. First thing you notice is the weight, it feels like it has a REAL T-34 inside, nice looking box although the back of the box is not easy to read. Off comes the shrink-wrap and the box opens and there are all the counter sheets, about 1/3rd of which have been cut in half so they fit in the box.... Counters look good, but whats this...where the %$$%## is the rest of the French army? Got a bum box, only half the French army is there...guess someone missed packing that second piece of 1/2 counter sheet...... Some of the British counters look like the ink had air bubbles in it, and the US air force has a faint ink streak over one side.... Other than that the counters look good, except telling the CCNN and Hitler Youth apart is a bit hard, fortunately the HY units don't seem to vary in strength (unless there are more on the missing counter sheet). The counters look GOOD, I like the new RSI counters, lots of fun new unit types......air units are in the new style with an inoperative side on the back....includes corp and air wing markers, naval forces are not individual ships but task forces (see below). The strategic air forces are also divided out from the TAC air.... Maps are nice, I really like the new style..... A ton of charts are jammed in, garrison displays and the new style aircharts look loike they may get a bit crowded at times....looks like you need 2 tables, one for the maps and one for the displays..... 2 OB booklets, LONG OB booklets...I think I liked the ones in FITE/SE better as far as layout/fonts, the AXIS OB includes a number of units not in SF that get transferred to the East after formation and the Axis Balkan OB. The rules, thick rules, very thick rules.....the big changes are an on demand air system (my friends and I have been doing an on demand type system for years, nice to see the official rules). No B-17s, Lancs, etc. as the strate3gic air war has been handled via wings, need to see how this plays, looks a LOT easier than trying to move 1000 plane raids to Berlin and do all the patrol attacks :-) The naval war is also abstracted, includes (as you would expect) a good deal of rules for handling invasions.....V-weapons rules as well to handle blitz of London and port attacks. I am going to give the game a solo try tonight and if there is any interest I can post more impressions later. >> I am thinking that we may want to try and create a few scenarios using the net man-power, if your are interested let me know.... << Jim >From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Fri Sep 23 17:04:47 1994 Return-Path: Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <25769-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Fri, 23 Sep 1994 17:04:38 +0100 Received: from ida.liu.se (curofix.ida.liu.se [130.236.139.139]) by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id SAA25228 for ; Fri, 23 Sep 1994 18:01:05 +0200 Received: from medix by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA29631; Fri, 23 Sep 94 18:00:57 +0200 From: Mats Persson Received: from med3 by medix (4.1/ida.slave-V1.0b6d6) id AA15334; Fri, 23 Sep 94 18:00:56 +0200 Received: by med3 (4.1/ida.slave-V1.0b6d6) id AA22770; Fri, 23 Sep 94 18:00:53 +0200 Date: Fri, 23 Sep 94 18:00:53 +0200 Message-Id: <9409231600.AA22770@med3> To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Second Front amphibious landings Status: RO It seems that this is the most debated rule in SF. But according to both John Astell and Winston Hamilton c/m can land on enemy beaches if carried solely on LC from port to beach. Mats Persson >From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Fri Sep 23 17:36:12 1994 Return-Path: Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <28750-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Fri, 23 Sep 1994 17:36:08 +0100 Received: from maxwell.ee.washington.edu (maxwell.ee.washington.edu [128.95.42.3]) by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id SAA25526 for ; Fri, 23 Sep 1994 18:34:25 +0200 Received: from karen-mac.ee.washington.edu by maxwell.ee.washington.edu (1.37.109.4/UW-NDC Revision: 2.26 ) id AA07192; Fri, 23 Sep 94 09:34:15 -0700 Message-Id: <9409231634.AA07192@maxwell.ee.washington.edu> X-Sender: graham@maxwell.ee.washington.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 23 Sep 1994 09:33:54 -0800 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: graham@ee.washington.edu (Stephen Graham) Subject: Re: Second Front amphibious landings Status: RO >It seems that this is the most debated rule in SF. >But according to both John Astell and Winston Hamilton >c/m can land on enemy beaches if carried solely on LC >from port to beach. I was hoping Europa 36 would contain errata on this. But it appears to have been written prior to Origins. By inference, anything with heavy equipment can be landed on beaches, if solely transported by LCs. This will cut down on the assault wave size. All divisional HQ's and AT will have to sail on LCs. With only 20 LCs, it's going to be hard to do some invasions. IN particular, you couldn't recreate Sicily. Stephen Graham graham@ee.washington.edu graham@cs.washington.edu >From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Fri Sep 23 18:03:44 1994 Return-Path: Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <01831-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Fri, 23 Sep 1994 18:03:24 +0100 Received: from ida.liu.se (curofix.ida.liu.se [130.236.139.139]) by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id TAA25768 for ; Fri, 23 Sep 1994 19:00:30 +0200 Received: from sen3.ida (sen3.ida.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA01356; Fri, 23 Sep 94 19:00:25 +0200 From: Johan Herber Received: by sen3.ida (5.0/SMI-SVR4) id AA24881; Fri, 23 Sep 1994 19:00:20 +0200 Date: Fri, 23 Sep 1994 19:00:20 +0200 Message-Id: <9409231700.AA24881@sen3.ida> Cc: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: <9409231634.AA07192@maxwell.ee.washington.edu> (graham@ee.washington.edu) Subject: Re: Second Front amphibious landings Content-Length: 1905 Status: RO >It seems that this is the most debated rule in SF. >But according to both John Astell and Winston Hamilton >c/m can land on enemy beaches if carried solely on LC >from port to beach. If all C/M units can make amphibious landings, what's the use for amphibious tank/armoured units? They still have to use LC and there is a risk that they sink. Ok, they are only halved and not quartered in any combat, but the main contribution in combat strength to any amphibious assault is bound to come from aircraft/naval units so that is a minor benefit far outweighed by the risk of sinking (reducing the number of air units that can support the attack if it sinks). My personal opinion is that (non-amphibious) C/M units not should be able to make an amphibious landings, but that they should be able to land on friendly beaches using LC. I was hoping Europa 36 would contain errata on this. But it appears to have been written prior to Origins. It should be in Europa 37 according to GR/D. By inference, anything with heavy equipment can be landed on beaches, if solely transported by LCs. This will cut down on the assault wave size. All divisional HQ's and AT will have to sail on LCs. With only 20 LCs, it's going to be hard to do some invasions. IN particular, you couldn't recreate Sicily. How will you manage the Normandy landings then? There is just over 20 LC available for those landings as well. The follow-up wave (including HE) will have to be transported on NTs, later to be transferred at sea to surviving LCs and landed on the newly captured beaches. /Johan Johan Herber | Email: johhe@ida.liu.se Programming Environments Laboratory | Phone: +46 13282869 Department of Computer and Information Science | Fax : +46 13282666 Linkoping University, S-581 83 LINKOPING, SWEDEN | Telex: 50966 UNILIN S >From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Fri Sep 23 19:03:50 1994 Return-Path: Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <06192-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Fri, 23 Sep 1994 19:03:28 +0100 Received: from maxwell.ee.washington.edu (maxwell.ee.washington.edu [128.95.42.3]) by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id UAA26342 for ; Fri, 23 Sep 1994 20:01:11 +0200 Received: from karen-mac.ee.washington.edu by maxwell.ee.washington.edu (1.37.109.4/UW-NDC Revision: 2.26 ) id AA18195; Fri, 23 Sep 94 11:01:05 -0700 Message-Id: <9409231801.AA18195@maxwell.ee.washington.edu> X-Sender: graham@maxwell.ee.washington.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 23 Sep 1994 11:00:46 -0800 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: graham@ee.washington.edu (Stephen Graham) Subject: Re: Second Front amphibious landings Status: RO >My personal opinion is that (non-amphibious) C/M units not should be >able to make an amphibious landings, but that they should be able to >land on friendly beaches using LC. I think that's the intent of the Hamilton/Astell ruling. You still have the difference between amphibious landings and amphibious assault. For amphibious assault, you're still limited to non-c/m, non-HE units or the intrinsically amphibious. > I was hoping Europa 36 would contain errata on this. But it > appears to have been written prior to Origins. > >It should be in Europa 37 according to GR/D. > > By inference, anything with heavy equipment can be landed on > beaches, if solely transported by LCs. This will cut down on > the assault wave size. All divisional HQ's and AT will have to > sail on LCs. With only 20 LCs, it's going to be hard to do some > invasions. IN particular, you couldn't recreate Sicily. > >How will you manage the Normandy landings then? There is just over 20 >LC available for those landings as well. The follow-up wave (including >HE) will have to be transported on NTs, later to be transferred at sea >to surviving LCs and landed on the newly captured beaches. The Normandy assault wave isn't as large as the Sicilian. Isn't it two regiments/brigades of the 4th US, 1st US, 3d British, 15th British, and 3d Canadian, and a regiment of the 29th US. That's 11 LCs, leaving 9 for divisional HQs, armor and artillery in the follow-up wave. Sicily, in contrast, had 14 assault regiments/brigades plus the three combat commands of the 2d Armored Division, the Canadian Tank Brigade, and seven divisional HQ's plus artillery to land. That's at least 28 LCs required. Stephen Graham graham@ee.washington.edu graham@cs.washington.edu >From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Fri Sep 23 21:21:48 1994 Return-Path: Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <16298-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Fri, 23 Sep 1994 21:21:39 +0100 Received: from theory.tc.cornell.edu (THEORY.TC.CORNELL.EDU [132.236.98.174]) by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with ESMTP id WAA00573 for ; Fri, 23 Sep 1994 22:16:18 +0200 Received: (from ualchemy@localhost) by theory.tc.cornell.edu (8.6.9/8.6.6) id QAA43286; Fri, 23 Sep 1994 16:16:06 -0400 Received: by alchemy id AA12354 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4); Fri, 23 Sep 1994 16:10:48 -0400 Date: Fri, 23 Sep 1994 16:10:48 -0400 From: Courtenay Footman Message-Id: <199409232010.AA12354@alchemy> To: europa@lysator.liu.se, graham@ee.washington.edu Subject: Re: Second Front amphibious landings Status: RO >The Normandy assault wave isn't as large as the Sicilian. Isn't it two >regiments/brigades of the 4th US, 1st US, 3d British, 15th British, and 3d >Canadian, and a regiment of the 29th US. That's 11 LCs, leaving 9 for >divisional HQs, armor and artillery in the follow-up wave. You left out >Sicily, in contrast, had 14 assault regiments/brigades plus the three combat >commands of the 2d Armored Division, the Canadian Tank Brigade, and seven >divisional HQ's plus artillery to land. That's at least 28 LCs required. But considering the scale of Second Front, shouldn't the first wave be everything that was landed the fist day? With the following wave be everything that arrived the remaining fortnight? According to Max Hasting's _Overlord_, the first assault waves at Normandy were: Utah: three RCT's of the 4th. Omaha: four RCT's of the 1st and 29th, Gold: three bde's of the 50th, the 56th independent Bde, and the 8th Armd Bde Juno: three brigades of the Canadian 3rd, and the Can 2nd Armd Bde Sword: three brigades of the 3rd, and the 27th Armd Bde In addition, there where three commando battalions and a ranger battalion landed. This does not count non-infantry units other than the British Armored Brigades. These include, but are not limited to: the 65th Armd Field Artillery, the 743rd Tank Battalion, the 922 Aviation Engineer Regiment(!!) When I plan my invasions (so far I have not executed one), I simply allow the Allies to land HE. There is no way I will require them to land in brigade size units -- the stacking limitations alone are decisive. It is hard enough invading when the German armor is hopping around the various possible invasion beaches, preventing any detailed advance planning. >From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Sat Sep 24 01:07:06 1994 Return-Path: Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <03142-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Sat, 24 Sep 1994 01:06:49 +0100 Received: from maxwell.ee.washington.edu (maxwell.ee.washington.edu [128.95.42.3]) by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id CAA03168 for ; Sat, 24 Sep 1994 02:05:22 +0200 Received: from karen-mac.ee.washington.edu by maxwell.ee.washington.edu (1.37.109.4/UW-NDC Revision: 2.26 ) id AA03640; Fri, 23 Sep 94 17:05:16 -0700 Message-Id: <9409240005.AA03640@maxwell.ee.washington.edu> X-Sender: graham@maxwell.ee.washington.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 23 Sep 1994 17:04:57 -0800 To: europa@lysator.liu.se From: graham@ee.washington.edu (Stephen Graham) Subject: Re: Second Front amphibious landings Status: RO >But considering the scale of Second Front, shouldn't the first wave >be everything that was landed the fist day? With the following wave >be everything that arrived the remaining fortnight? Given all the restrictions on the assault wave, I'd say it's exactly that: the initial assault waves. Say the first three waves landed on each beach at Normandy. It's a bit odd considering the time scale, but then amphibious assault works oddly at this time scale. >In addition, there where three commando battalions and a ranger battalion >landed. These, along with the armored units you listed, are all amphibious-capable units in Second Front, so they don't require LCs. >When I plan my invasions (so far I have not executed one), I simply allow >the Allies to land HE. There is no way I will require them to land >in brigade size units -- the stacking limitations alone are decisive. >It is hard enough invading when the German armor is hopping around >the various possible invasion beaches, preventing any detailed advance >planning. This is too great a benefit for the Allies. They don't need any breaks, given their abilities. (nb., the victory conditions do balance the game.) I've done approximately twenty amphibious assaults during playtest and since release. The bulk of Allied staying power is provided by the double-acting air forces and the naval task forces. It's not unusual for each invasion hex to have a defensive strength of 60. The invasion of France requires a lot of prep work, starting from the first turn of the game. Keeping those German divisions pinned in place is an essential part of this prep. Otherwise, it's a matter of finding odd places to invade. Invasions on the Brittany peninsula are usually pretty good. Few German players are willing stick good divisions out by Brest, in case an invasion at the base of the peninsula cuts them off. Stephen Graham graham@ee.washington.edu graham@cs.washington.edu >From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Sat Sep 24 13:46:00 1994 Return-Path: Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <23303-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Sat, 24 Sep 1994 13:45:56 +0100 Received: from ida.liu.se (curofix.ida.liu.se [130.236.139.139]) by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id OAA06304 for ; Sat, 24 Sep 1994 14:44:48 +0200 Received: from sen3.ida (sen3.ida.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA23917; Sat, 24 Sep 94 14:44:46 +0200 From: Johan Herber Received: by sen3.ida (5.0/SMI-SVR4) id AA02590; Sat, 24 Sep 1994 14:44:40 +0200 Date: Sat, 24 Sep 1994 14:44:40 +0200 Message-Id: <9409241244.AA02590@sen3.ida> To: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: <9409240005.AA03640@maxwell.ee.washington.edu> (graham@ee.washington.edu) Subject: Re: Second Front amphibious landings Content-Length: 499 Status: RO >In addition, there where three commando battalions and a ranger battalion >landed. These, along with the armored units you listed, are all amphibious-capable units in Second Front, so they don't require LCs. If you read the rules on amphibious assaults, you will note that _all_ units making an amphibious assault must disembark from LCs. The only benefit these units have from their amphibous capability is that they are not quartered in attack strenghth, as I read it. /Johan >From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Sat Sep 24 17:51:28 1994 Return-Path: Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <11625-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Sat, 24 Sep 1994 17:51:05 +0100 Received: from asimov.ee.washington.edu (asimov.ee.washington.edu [128.95.42.41]) by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id SAA07683 for ; Sat, 24 Sep 1994 18:49:41 +0200 Received: by asimov.ee.washington.edu (16.6/UW-NDC Revision: 2.26 ) id AA13306; Sat, 24 Sep 94 09:50:01 -0700 Date: Sat, 24 Sep 94 09:50:01 -0700 From: Stephen Graham Message-Id: <9409241650.AA13306@asimov.ee.washington.edu> To: europa@lysator.liu.se Subject: Re: Second Front amphibious landings Status: RO > >In addition, there where three commando battalions and a ranger battalion > >landed. > > These, along with the armored units you listed, are all amphibious-capable > units in Second Front, so they don't require LCs. > >If you read the rules on amphibious assaults, you will note that _all_ >units making an amphibious assault must disembark from LCs. The only >benefit these units have from their amphibous capability is that they >are not quartered in attack strenghth, as I read it. Quite right. One of the dangers of being a playtester is that old versions of the rules get stuck in your head. One of the rules iterations allowed intrinsically amphibious units to land directly from NTs. Steve >From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Mon Sep 26 09:27:43 1994 Return-Path: Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <24400-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Sun, 25 Sep 1994 06:46:48 +0100 Received: from theory.tc.cornell.edu (THEORY.TC.CORNELL.EDU [132.236.98.174]) by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with ESMTP id GAA11509 for ; Sun, 25 Sep 1994 06:43:45 +0100 Received: (from ualchemy@localhost) by theory.tc.cornell.edu (8.6.9/8.6.6) id BAA29012; Sun, 25 Sep 1994 01:43:38 -0400 Received: by alchemy id AA16168 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4); Sun, 25 Sep 1994 01:41:03 -0400 Date: Sun, 25 Sep 1994 01:41:03 -0400 From: Courtenay Footman Message-Id: <199409250541.AA16168@alchemy> To: europa@lysator.liu.se, graham@maxwell.ee.washington.edu Subject: Re: Second Front amphibious landings Status: RO I find it interesting that intrinsically amphibious units could be allowed to land from NT's in the playtest version of the rules. Why was this dropped? As it is, the last units I would want to make an amphibious assault with are the amphibious armor units, because the #!$& things might sink. The fact that they are not quartered is not much of a benifit, because they take up twice as much room. >From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Mon Sep 26 09:32:56 1994 Return-Path: Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <00158-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Sun, 25 Sep 1994 18:15:05 +0100 Received: from bradbury.ee.washington.edu (bradbury.ee.washington.edu [128.95.42.42]) by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id SAA13650 for ; Sun, 25 Sep 1994 18:11:49 +0100 Received: by bradbury.ee.washington.edu (16.6/UW-NDC Revision: 2.26 ) id AA03427; Sun, 25 Sep 94 10:11:41 -0700 Date: Sun, 25 Sep 94 10:11:41 -0700 From: Stephen Graham Message-Id: <9409251711.AA03427@bradbury.ee.washington.edu> To: europa@lysator.liu.se, graham@m Subject: Re: Second Front amphibious landings Status: RO >I find it interesting that intrinsically amphibious units could be allowed >to land from NT's in the playtest version of the rules. Why was this dropped? I don't know. It was present in the last playtest naval rules. I thought the historic utility of amphibious tanks was that they didn't require landing craft. It makes some sense to require LCs for the other amphibious units. Didn't they make most landings from LCs? Their benefits would come from a force structure tailored for landings. >As it is, the last units I would want to make an amphibious assault with >are the amphibious armor units, because the #!$& things might sink. >The fact that they are not quartered is not much of a benifit, because they >take up twice as much room. I've used since they are as effective as the units who would otherwise occupy the space and provide armor and AT benefits. >From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Mon Sep 26 09:42:21 1994 Return-Path: Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <12697-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Mon, 26 Sep 1994 06:43:53 +0100 Received: from theory.tc.cornell.edu (THEORY.TC.CORNELL.EDU [132.236.98.174]) by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with ESMTP id GAA16754 for ; Mon, 26 Sep 1994 06:42:39 +0100 Received: (from ualchemy@localhost) by theory.tc.cornell.edu (8.6.9/8.6.6) id BAA29654; Mon, 26 Sep 1994 01:42:35 -0400 Received: by alchemy id AA17635 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4); Mon, 26 Sep 1994 01:18:36 -0400 Date: Mon, 26 Sep 1994 01:18:36 -0400 From: Courtenay Footman Message-Id: <199409260518.AA17635@alchemy> To: europa@lysator.liu.se, graham@m, graham@maxwell.ee.washington.edu Subject: Re: Second Front amphibious landings Status: RO >>As it is, the last units I would want to make an amphibious assault with >>are the amphibious armor units, because the #!$& things might sink. >>The fact that they are not quartered is not much of a benifit, because they >>take up twice as much room. >I've used since they are as effective as the units who would otherwise >occupy the space and provide armor and AT benefits. Yes, but most of the places you want to invade have a fort (or worse) on them, so you don't get armor benefits on your attack, and for defense you can use whatever you land in the mech movement phase. >From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Mon Sep 26 09:43:31 1994 Return-Path: Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <04318-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Mon, 26 Sep 1994 09:24:36 +0100 Received: from unipalm.co.uk (unipalm.unipalm.co.uk [146.188.3.25]) by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id JAA17591 for ; Mon, 26 Sep 1994 09:23:40 +0100 Received: from brimstone.unipalm.co.uk by unipalm.co.uk (4.1/SMI-4.1 unipalm 1.2) id AA11246; Mon, 26 Sep 94 09:23:43 BST Received: from augite.unipalm.co.uk by brimstone.unipalm.co.uk (4.1/SMI-4.1 brimstone 1.19) id AA01014; Mon, 26 Sep 94 09:23:29 BST Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199409232010.AA12354@alchemy> References: Conversation <199409232010.AA12354@alchemy> with last message <199409232010.AA12354@alchemy> Priority: Normal To: europa@lysator.liu.se Mime-Version: 1.0 From: John Sloan Subject: Re: Second Front amphibious landings Date: Mon, 26 Sep 94 09:21:15 PDT Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; X-MAPIextension=".TXT" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Status: RO I'm not sure I see what all the fuss is about. In the game I'm in, we, the allies, have already landed on Sicily and southern Italy without landing a single HE unit at anything other than ports. Indeed the way we read the rules, HE could _only_ be landed at ports. No problem, really. All our landings have just gone ahead and captured ports with the HE landing in them in the explotation phase. If we could land HE on beaches as well, we wouldn't need to bother with ports, apart for supply, which would make the axis job a lot harder. [As is Italy has just surrendered in Aug II] John >From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Mon Sep 26 12:10:54 1994 Return-Path: Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <20057-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Mon, 26 Sep 1994 12:10:51 +0100 Received: from ida.liu.se (curofix.ida.liu.se [130.236.139.139]) by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id MAA18695 for ; Mon, 26 Sep 1994 12:09:47 +0100 Received: from sen3.ida (sen3.ida.liu.se) by ida.liu.se (5.65b/ida.minimaster-V1.0b6d5) id AA10990; Mon, 26 Sep 94 12:09:44 +0100 From: Johan Herber Received: by sen3.ida (5.0/SMI-SVR4) id AA20493; Mon, 26 Sep 1994 12:09:43 +0100 Date: Mon, 26 Sep 1994 12:09:43 +0100 Message-Id: <9409261109.AA20493@sen3.ida> To: europa@lysator.liu.se In-Reply-To: (message from John Sloan on Mon, 26 Sep 94 09:21:15 PDT) Subject: Re: Second Front amphibious landings Content-Length: 846 Status: RO I'm not sure I see what all the fuss is about. In the game I'm in, we, the allies, have already landed on Sicily and southern Italy without landing a single HE unit at anything other than ports. Indeed the way we read the rules, HE could _only_ be landed at ports. That's ok if you want it that way. No problem, really. All our landings have just gone ahead and captured ports with the HE landing in them in the explotation phase. The problem with this is that you must control a port in the initial phase if you are going to use it during a turn, ie this is against the rules as written. If this is combined with your rule that HE only can be landed at ports it will make an amphibous assault real risky. You will only have unsupported units without cadres on the beachhead during the enemy turn. Ouch! /Johan >From europa-request@lysator.liu.se Mon Sep 26 12:28:55 1994 Return-Path: Received: from godot.lysator.liu.se by goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk with SMTP (PP) id <21319-0@goggins.dcs.gla.ac.uk>; Mon, 26 Sep 1994 12:28:50 +0100 Received: from unipalm.co.uk (unipalm.unipalm.co.uk [146.188.3.25]) by godot.lysator.liu.se (8.6.8.1/8.6.6) with SMTP id MAA18855 for ; Mon, 26 Sep 1994 12:27:51 +0100 Received: from brimstone.unipalm.co.uk by unipalm.co.uk (4.1/SMI-4.1 unipalm 1.2) id AA12132; Mon, 26 Sep 94 12:27:58 BST Received: from augite.unipalm.co.uk by brimstone.unipalm.co.uk (4.1/SMI-4.1 brimstone 1.19) id AA10774; Mon, 26 Sep 94 12:27:45 BST Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <9409261109.AA20493@sen3.ida> References: Conversation with last message <9409261109.AA20493@sen3.ida> Priority: Normal To: europa@lysator.liu.se Mime-Version: 1.0 From: John Sloan Subject: Re: Second Front amphibious landings Date: Mon, 26 Sep 94 12:25:35 PDT Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; X-MAPIextension=".TXT" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Status: RO > > > I'm not sure I see what all the fuss is about. In the game I'm in, = > we, the allies, have already landed on Sicily and southern Italy = > without landing a single HE unit at anything other than ports. > Indeed the way we read the rules, HE could _only_ be landed at ports=