3R-Axis - Avalon Hill 'Third Reich' for TOAW - by sPzAbt653

[sPzAbt653]

There's a Polish bomber unit in Norway, ...

Weird. You may notice that one of the Polish units is a different color from the rest, which throws everything off. I'm sure that was a mistake I somehow made recently, so its fixed for v1.3.

A US Corps lands in Calais in Summer 1942.

*scrathes head*. Not sure if I did that on purpose to keep the player on their toes, or if it was an oversite. Its good to see Elmer do that, but I'd rather he wait until '43 before starting trouble in France.

I can't find my Italian troops anywhere

If the TO to have them join was chosen, the exclusion zone should have dropped and some Italians should have arrived in Milan, Genoa, Rome and in Libya. The rest arrive by Theater Option. Or ... did something else happen ?

[Crossroads]

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

If the TO to have them join was chosen, the exclusion zone should have dropped and some Italians should have arrived in Milan, Genoa, Rome and in Libya. The rest arrive by Theater Option. Or ... did something else happen ?

Exclusion zone was dropped alright, but the only unit in Italy is the reconstructed 1.Fj unit that got destroyed earlier in a sorry episode of mine while taking Denmark...

[Crossroads]

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

There's a Polish bomber unit in Norway, ...

Weird. You may notice that one of the Polish units is a different color from the rest, which throws everything off. I'm sure that was a mistake I somehow made recently, so its fixed for v1.3.

They flew there when Poland fell. And one of the infantry units escaped to Russia, other one to Balkans. That's why I was wondering if it was your intention to have their units removed.

But as we know, lots of Polish soldiers decided to continue the fight from abroad. In this case their pilots decided to do it from Norway instead of UK [:)]

[Crossroads]

Further on, [:D]

I managed to conquer Moscow in Winter 1943 via a concentrated effort there, and having pretty much neglected other areas. USSR remains at war though. Just curious: did you implement a calculation / event whether they should sue for peace. I just checked the 3R rule set, and as it was holding both Leningrad and Moscow is not enough, Soviets must be reduced to < 50 SP, and there must be a 3:2 ratio of German vs Russian SP within their original border.

It is Summer 1944 and US forces are having a field day in Normandy and BeNeLux and Italy, with almost no friendly units there. Would be nice to declare it a job done in the east and to have troops returning to west front.

Rule set required to keep 45 SP in USSR but it would be nice to return the armored units home...

Already with 1.2 this is good fun! Interesting to see how the SW options will play out!

[sPzAbt653]

did you implement a calculation / event whether they should sue for peace.

I think its flat out impossible in TOAW. I was going with the player shutting the USSR out of the map by advancing to the east map edge, then leaving a line of infantry units garrisoning the map edge to prevent USSR units arriving again. This works out to having to leave 45 factors there as garrison (unless you use the cheaper Minor Allies). Once you get past Moscow and Stalingrad it shouldn't be too difficult to get to the map edge. As the briefing says - 'The U.S.S.R. will not surrender'.

Even with 1.2 this is good fun.

Sadly, v1.2 turned out to be quite buggy. I know I'm better than that, but in my defense the more complexities we add the more chance of foul-ups. v1.3 will be posted tomorrow morning. I've run thru two quick tests today to try and make it as bug-free as possible.

the reconstructed 1.Fj

Unlike the original Third Reich, if you lose a Para/FJ unit in TOAW it returns incapable of further paradrops, so they must be used very wisely.

[Crossroads]

Sorry, missed the "USSR will not surrender" part. I agree with your implementation though!

And sorry: even= already! English is not my native language (obviously) [:)]

Yes, it is getting more complex. But not far to go any more, I hope. If the SW thingie manages to make sense it is almost there perhaps.

I put a couple of lines to Blitz TOAW forums to let folks know of your efforts and that we are testing this. Hopefully some one familiarvwith 3R and better with TOAW than me could join in as well.

[sPzAbt653]

v1.3 has been posted. Here are excerpts from the briefing concerning changes/additions:

Leand-Lease:
The USA will open the Lend-Lease route thru Persia in order to aid the U.S.S.R. on turn 12. If the Axis capture Tabriz (62,24) prior to turn 12, Lend-Lease will be canceled permanently. If the Axis capture Tabriz on turn 12 or later, a Theater Option will become available to 'Block Persian Lend-Lease Route'. If this option is chosen the German 4.Korp and 52.Korp will be withrawn permanently from the game and Lend-Lease will be canceled permanently.

Strategic Warfare:
Due to increased Allied Strategic Bombing as the war progresses, Axis Replacement rates will decrease in the Spring turns of 1943, 1944 and 1945. In the Winter turn immediately preceeding each of these turns the Axis player will get a Theater Option to 'Increase Air Defense'. If chosen, these options will reduce the effects of the Allied Bombings while also reducing the number of Fighter and Bomber Replacements available to the Axis Player. The TO's are only available on the Winter turns. The Axis player may chose all, some or none of them.

Some rules from the original concerning Axis Minors:
Bulgarian units may only operate in Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, Greece or Turkey.

Finnish units may operate no further than 6 hexes from Finland.

Hungarian units may only operate in Hungary, Yugoslavia, Poland or the U.S.S.R.

Rumanian units may only operate in Rumania, Yugoslavia or the U.S.S.R.


Also removed the Storm events that I had put in for why I don't know, there was no weather in the original. In this scenario removing them may prevent some of the mud that was messing up movement allowances.

[sPzAbt653]

Still working on Axis Subs/Allied ASW. As I remember, when Hitler ordered more subs he was told that would mean less planes and panzers, so he changed his mind. So for this scenario a choice of more subs would reduce plane and panzer replacements, while affecting Allied Sea Transport Capacity, Murmansk Convoys and Lend-Lease. Maybe the Germans would also receive less Fleet Replacements.

[Crossroads]

Great job, once again! Looking forward to have a go at it over the weekend

Strategic Warfare... I believe we're on right track here

It was quite simple with 3R as you know of course.

- Allied Bomber factors vs Axis interceptor (or given context also possibly air units from map board) factors, surplus factors reducing opposite side's BRPs.

I agree it makes sense to reduce the Axis fighter and bomber replacements with TOAW, to simulate this particular rule.

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

Still working on Axis Subs/Allied ASW. As I remember, when Hitler ordered more subs he was told that would mean less planes and panzers, so he changed his mind. So for this scenario a choice of more subs would reduce plane and panzer replacements, while affecting Allied Sea Transport Capacity, Murmansk Convoys and Lend-Lease. Maybe the Germans would also receive less Fleet Replacements.

- Axis submarine factors vs Allied Anti-Submarine Warfare factors, surplus factors reducing opposite sides BRPs.

Well, at the end of the day, with 3R, building either submarines or interceptors was about allocating BRPs to SW, instead of using them for creating any type of on-map units.

So why not reducing armored units and planes as well.

I sort of like the idea of reducing Fleet replacements particularly, to have these two Navy 'arms' fight each other. I guess deciding to have less Fleet replacements only would be too much of an easy call, though, as German fleet will become vastly outnumbered anyway. So losing armored units too would be a good 'penalty' when using this TO.

Perhaps not touch plane replacements any more though, as they are already reduced when opting for Creating Interceptors TO?

[Crossroads]

Btw, is the scenario description available as a separate document? That would be an easier read than reading it through TOAW window.

[sPzAbt653]

is the scenario description available as a separate document?

It is now -

[Crossroads]

And it already reads like a Third Reich v3 manual [:)]

[sPzAbt653]

I sort of like the idea of reducing Fleet replacements particularly, to have these two Navy 'arms' fight each other. I guess deciding to have less Fleet replacements only would be too much of an easy call, though, as German fleet will become vastly outnumbered anyway. So losing armored units too would be a good 'penalty' when using this TO.

Perhaps not touch plane replacements any more though, as they are already reduced when opting for Creating Interceptors TO?

I didn't like the idea of reducing Axis Fleet replacements because the ships they have are already built, and they didn't sacrifice ships to build subs because Plan Z was already scrapped in order to concentrate on planes and tanks.

In Third Reich, the Axis had an easy advantage in Strategic Warfare and by 1944 would have overwhelming superiority in subs with no adverse effect. I always thought this was a bit unrealistic, so for this scenario I am thinking of focusing a bit more on that aspect. I'm still working on the outline so not really sure what it will look like, but let me put something together and if you don't like it we can change it.

[Crossroads]

Sounds like a plan. And I'm not the ultimate 3R expert, far from it, but happy to chip in if I can!

[sPzAbt653]

Together - we can do it !

[Crossroads]

Yeah, I would have been basically happy if there'd be a conversion with just the scale and map from 3R, but this is turning into something much more than that.

Ûber Kool!

[Rodia]

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

Also removed the Storm events that I had put in for why I don't know, there was no weather in the original. In this scenario removing them may prevent some of the mud that was messing up movement allowances.

That's great to read.

I had mud in Central Europe in my three tests and it was a pain to move troops from front to front in 1941. I know there are railroads, but still...

Question: If there's no weather in the original, how is modelled general Winter?

Question 2: Can you guys point me in boardgamegeek to images of your edition? Specially images of the map. There seems to be different versions. I want to try something.

[sPzAbt653]

If there's no weather in the original, how is modelled general Winter?

In the original, unit combat factors are doubled on defense - except Axis units during the 1st Russian Winter. The Axis also can not take an Offensive Option during the 1st Russian Winter.

So far, no penalties in this version because any effect would not be confined to the East Front. Ideas are welcome [:D]

[sPzAbt653]

I don't know what the geek has, here's a shot of my boardgame. No idea what version, it says 'copyright 1974'. I can get some zoomed in close-ups if you need it.

[Rodia]

That's great, sPzAbt. Thanks.

About winter 41, you should keep weather.

Just make it more moderate, with some variation for winter-spring-summer-fall & occasional mild rain until winter 1941, then you can go wild. [:D]

The only problem to me was to much mud in Central Europe in 39-40.