Recommend
3 
 Thumb up
 Hide
5 Posts

Victory in Europe» Forums » General

Subject: A Specific example of where people are getting confused by the rules rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
ralph kramden
msg tools
Here are a few specific examples to get everyone started (by the way, I played the other day and had fun. Some of my more recent harsh criticisms I have posted have been due the the fact that I "admire the system" so much that I am just frustrated by some of the unresolved issues...apologies to Ron):

(1) Sea invasions and Shore bombardment: I suspect that intuitively borrowing the way that such things work in other WWII games, combined with the fairly brief way naval invasions and shore bombardment are discussed in these rules, is causing more confusion than both Ron and many players realize. I believe the problem is that many players are having difficulty dissociating the forces that occupy the sea zone(s) from which an invasion (or a shore bombardment) originate, and the land area in which a sea invasion is occurring. Realizing (tell me if I misinterpret this Ron) the absolute distinction between these two things, within this game system causes players to fail to see just how vulnerable, for example, England is to sea invasion. What seems like an overly complex set of requirements to invade is actually much more liberal than most, say, Third Reich gamers realize ((1) any and all sea zones through which the invasion comes must be friendly at the start of the turn, (2) at least one friendly ship in each of the required sea zones must not move this turn). Where the confusion arises is that once these conditions are met, you simply move your invasion force (1 infantry unit, one air unit, one leader, 1 airborne, and one naval unit) to the enemy land area, paying 2 CM, and your invasion force is now "on land." The only enemy forces that can now oppose them are the enemy forces in the "land zone itself", any air in range, and any enemy fleet "already" in port. Many players intuitively (and incorrectly )think that subsequent naval actions to the sea area from which the naval invasion took place will affect the invasion itself. They do not. Thus any naval engagements "at sea" that will affect a naval invasion actually occur the "turn before" a naval invasion. Thus a chess-like battle between England and Germany ensues, with the English needing to ensure that no turn ends with the Germans possessing an unbroken chain of sea zones to any area on England. Otherwise the Germans get to walk in. One error that seems to occur, is that while the (1 ship) that can participate in a naval invasion would get to fight, any other naval unit (1 only) would need to pay an additional 1 CM to utilize shore bombardment (or would shore bombardment even be able to affect the invasion battle Ron?) Shore bombardment appears to function much like an air raid in 1.1., requiring an a separate command point. So to summarize, ships in sea zones are in sea zones, and forces from a sea invasion (including the 1 ship that you are allowed to include) are moved to the LAND area. These forces are now separate, and do not interact anymore until combat is over. Indeed, the ship that is included in the invasion, I suspect, cannot participate in any sea combat that might occur in the sea zone from which the invasion came, it can only participate in the land invasion combat. We really need some clarification on sea invasions, bombardment, and how land and sea forces interact or do not interact. P.S. When you say the sea zone must be friendly at the "start of the turn," do you mean the start of the game turn, or the start of the player's turn conducting the invasion? (I had a player recently challenge me on this one).

By the way, as an added comment, perhaps we can fix the following problem:

one Russian tactic that is a bit disruptive is to place cheap Russian air units in crucial front line areas (I also use the cav) and then leave an area between this space and my actual powerful russian reserve forces. This is not always cost effective, but can sometimes be a very unrealistic way of causing an entire arm of the German army to stop and fight a battle when they should be able to move on. No, the air cannot hold the area, but they do cause the army to stop until the combat phase. Since you don't want to wreck fog of war, I "suggest the following:" that when battles are fought, when it is revealed that "only air" (or for that matter only naval) is present in a land hex, the attacking army gets a "free" blitz once the fighter/naval is forced to leave. This free blitz would prevent players from unrealistically halting land movement.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Bluth
msg tools
Ok - I'm not the game designer, and I'm curious as to his input, but I believe that with regards to your question about "start of game turn or player turn" I think the answer is this:

The game is divided up into Game Turns. These turns are divided into phases. There are not "player turns" - each player simply performs each task during the phase as determined by initiative, but it isn't the "German Player Turn Fall 39 Movement" - it is simply "Game Turn Fall 39 Movement - and the Germans are player 1."

That being said, if you are Player 2, it not only has to be a friendly sea zone at the start of the Game turn (as dictated by rule 7.5) but if Player 1 moves a ship into the sea zone during movement, therefore making the sea zone contested, that also stops your Sea Invasion, since in 7.5 it also states that invasions are "made across friendly sea zones."

So, if at the end of Spring 1940, the English Channel has no ships in it, the Germans can't launch an invasion through the Channel at all in Summer 1940, since it wasn't friendly at the start of that Game Turn. In addition, lets say at the end of Spring 1940 the Germans have the Graf Spee in the English Channel. If the Allies played a higher card, and so were Player 1 in Summer 1940, and moved a single ship into the English Channel, that also prevents a Sea Invasion across the Channel because when the German player acts as Player 2, he would no longer be making a sea invasion across a friendly sea zone, as it is now contested.

What stops Sea Lion (at least in our games) is that if the Germans can't guarantee taking London the turn they arrive, it isn't worth it, since they can't control an open supply lane to their forces on England, the Royal Navy is too strong. This just means that whatever gets sent over there just dies from supply loss. If you can take London for the win it is worth it (obviously) but if you can't, then you can't reinforce your units, and all of them lose a step, so they all end up getting wiped out on the following turn.

Edit - if it is possible for you to knock out multiple factories, it may be worth it simply for the delay in the English production, but it is a tricky venture nonetheless

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Willem Boersma
Netherlands
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
ralph123 wrote:
Here are a few specific examples to get everyone started (by the way, I played the other day and had fun. Some of my more recent harsh criticisms I have posted have been due the the fact that I "admire the system" so much that I am just frustrated by some of the unresolved issues...apologies to Ron):

(1) Sea invasions and Shore bombardment: I suspect that intuitively borrowing the way that such things work in other WWII games, combined with the fairly brief way naval invasions and shore bombardment are discussed in these rules, is causing more confusion than both Ron and many players realize. I believe the problem is that many players are having difficulty dissociating the forces that occupy the sea zone(s) from which an invasion (or a shore bombardment) originate, and the land area in which a sea invasion is occurring. Realizing (tell me if I misinterpret this Ron) the absolute distinction between these two things, within this game system causes players to fail to see just how vulnerable, for example, England is to sea invasion. What seems like an overly complex set of requirements to invade is actually much more liberal than most, say, Third Reich gamers realize ((1) any and all sea zones through which the invasion comes must be friendly at the start of the turn, (2) at least one friendly ship in each of the required sea zones must not move this turn). Where the confusion arises is that once these conditions are met, you simply move your invasion force (1 infantry unit, one air unit, one leader, 1 airborne, and one naval unit) to the enemy land area, paying 2 CM, and your invasion force is now "on land." The only enemy forces that can now oppose them are the enemy forces in the "land zone itself", any air in range, and any enemy fleet "already" in port. Many players intuitively (and incorrectly )think that subsequent naval actions to the sea area from which the naval invasion took place will affect the invasion itself. They do not. Thus any naval engagements "at sea" that will affect a naval invasion actually occur the "turn before" a naval invasion. Thus a chess-like battle between England and Germany ensues, with the English needing to ensure that no turn ends with the Germans possessing an unbroken chain of sea zones to any area on England. Otherwise the Germans get to walk in. One error that seems to occur, is that while the (1 ship) that can participate in a naval invasion would get to fight, any other naval unit (1 only) would need to pay an additional 1 CM to utilize shore bombardment (or would shore bombardment even be able to affect the invasion battle Ron?) Shore bombardment appears to function much like an air raid in 1.1., requiring an a separate command point. So to summarize, ships in sea zones are in sea zones, and forces from a sea invasion (including the 1 ship that you are allowed to include) are moved to the LAND area. These forces are now separate, and do not interact anymore until combat is over. Indeed, the ship that is included in the invasion, I suspect, cannot participate in any sea combat that might occur in the sea zone from which the invasion came, it can only participate in the land invasion combat. We really need some clarification on sea invasions, bombardment, and how land and sea forces interact or do not interact. P.S. When you say the sea zone must be friendly at the "start of the turn," do you mean the start of the game turn, or the start of the player's turn conducting the invasion? (I had a player recently challenge me on this one).

By the way, as an added comment, perhaps we can fix the following problem:

one Russian tactic that is a bit disruptive is to place cheap Russian air units in crucial front line areas (I also use the cav) and then leave an area between this space and my actual powerful russian reserve forces. This is not always cost effective, but can sometimes be a very unrealistic way of causing an entire arm of the German army to stop and fight a battle when they should be able to move on. No, the air cannot hold the area, but they do cause the army to stop until the combat phase. Since you don't want to wreck fog of war, I "suggest the following:" that when battles are fought, when it is revealed that "only air" (or for that matter only naval) is present in a land hex, the attacking army gets a "free" blitz once the fighter/naval is forced to leave. This free blitz would prevent players from unrealistically halting land movement.


I actually don't find it that strange that air units would stop enemy army movement. After all, the impact of airpower was huge in WW2. Take Barbarossa or Normandy, for example, where Soviet and German movement were seriously hampered by the opponent's air supremacy!

BTW, aren't any such air units eliminated at the end of the combat phase if they find themselves alone with enemy army units in any given area? Assuming I'm right, this is also a steep price to pay and both reasons above would warrant having enemy army units stop upon entering such an area.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Marten Tjaart Raadsveld
Netherlands
Den Haag
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
The only bit in the rules that really confuses me is Note-1 in paragraph 10.2 Conquest of Minor Powers. After reading this note, I totally do not understand what it says. Let's try to break it down in sentences:

1.Unless already at war with the attacking player, the opposing player is not an ally of the neutral
The text is very abstract as it is written down in general terms. In fact, there is only one neutral power that is allowed to attack a minor power (Russia). The 1st sentence would be much clearer if it reads like: Russia will not be at war with the Axis when it attacks a minor power.

2. but future diplomatic rolls for that neutral are at +2.
I guess what is meant: the opposing side gets a modifier of +2 on future diplomatic rolls for the attacked minor power. E.g. Axis diplomatic rolls for an attacked Finland would become +6 instead of +8.
Question: can the Axis send units to support a neutral Finland (so before a successful diplomatic roll)?

3. If when the neutral becomes an ally, territory of the neutral becomes friendly except that occupied by the enemy player.
Very confusing sentence. Does it mean that territory of the minor power becomes friendly after a successful diplomatic roll?

4. An attack on enemy territory or units is a DoW
That sounds pretty obvious, but what does it mean? After reading this last sentence, I still do not understand what happens after a successful diplomatic roll. E.g Russia has attacked a neutral Finland. Axis diplomacy is successful. What are its implications? There are multiple options:
a. Finland is now part of the Axis side while Russia stays neutral. The Winter War ends.
b. Finland and Germany are allies. Finland is at war with Russia. Therefore Germany is also at war with Russia.
c. The Winter War between Russia and Finland continues. However, Germany and Russia are not at war with each other. Germany can now send units to support Finland. If Russia attacks these German units, it is a DoW.
My educated guess based on actual history, option a is correct.

All-in-all a very confusing note which is open for multiple implications. I hope it will be rewritten in rules version 1.2
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ron Draker
United States
McLean
Virginia
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Yes, the Soviet Union is the only power now where this can happen. At one point Italy could attack minor powers before it entered the war.

The point of the paragraph is that, in your example, the Soviets can continue the war against Finland as long as they are not attacking areas containing German unit/s.

Germany could not send units into Finland until it's an ally.

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.