Herr Niemand wrote:
Joe handled the affairs of Army Groups North and Center, while Paul was in charge of Army Group South, the Romanian front (A HQ), and the Supreme HQ OKH, so Joe got more pieces, but Paul got more HQs and overall control.
I've wanted to trying something like this; I'm glad to see it can be done. (We've only tried 3-player once; it was the EuroFront scenario where all three players are competing to take the biggest piece of Germany.)
During play, do you think having 2 players on a side helped or hurt that side? (Either way, it certainly seems more realistic, ha ha.) Did it tend to make the game move faster, or slower? Was it as much fun as 2-player?
You mention them arguing over units; one way to eliminate the who-gets-to-move-what problem (if it was really a problem) might be to put colored sticky dots (or some other mark) to indicate which units go with which HQ's. It seems like this might affect the 2-player side's flexibility, though. (Any idea whether this sort of thing would be ahistorical? Apart from that, historically, did AGN's stuff tend to stay out of the way of Center's, or did they routinely participate in the same engagements?)
Man, now I want to try this 4-player!