8/13/2019 Ah Gen v14n6

1/40

8/13/2019 Ah Gen v14n6

2/40

PAGE THE GENERA

TheThe Avalortion of autho

. .ri..inn n

F YOU PLAN Io so w~thout~ o t ~ f yur Mrlnd n ew addrf

OR: A. Richarcorrespondentbe marked in

O N MOVINGlsklng our per; Zombro AESS

r+ r r ~ w N ILLEN1 ame Players Magazine

1 Hill GENERAL 1s dedicated to the presenta-ritative articles on the strategy, tactics, and.-..-..-... -~a lon H ill games of strategy. Historical articlesare included on ly insomuch as they provide useful back-ground information on current Avalon Hill titles. THEGENERAL is published by t Company solelyfor the cultural edification 01 ne aficionado, inthe hopes of improving the g oficiency of playand providing services not ot 1e to the AvalonHill game buff .

Publlcat~ons bi-monthly with mailingsmadeclosetothe end of February. Aprll, June. August. October, andDecember. Al l editorla1 and general mallshou ld bese ntt othe Avalon Hill Game Company. 4517 Harford Rd.,Baltimore. MO 21 214 One yearsubscr~ptions re 57.50.T r ~ a lubscr~ptions f 4 issues for 55.00 are available. Atwo year subscription IS only 512.00 Send checks ormoney orders only. Not responsible forcash lost in ransit.All subscrlptions sent vla bulk permit. Airmail and 1stclass dellvery must be prearranged wit h the subsc r~pt ~ondepartment at addltlonal cost. Address changes must besubm~tted o the subscrlpt~on epartment 6 weeks inadvance to guarantee delivery. No pald advert sing of anytype 1s accepted. However. news of importance to thewargamlng community 1s prlnted free of charge and issollc~tedArticles fromsubxribers are considered for publication atthe dixret ion of our editorial staff. Articles should be.typewritten. doubls-spaced, and einbrace the tenets of goodEnglish usage. There is no limi t to w ord length. Accompany-ing examples and diagrams should be neatly done in black orred ink. Photographs should have caption and credit linewritten on back. Rejected articles will be returned wheneverpossible.EDITOR: DonaldJ. Greenwoo,GRAPHICS: Jim Ham~lto n. Gowan, ScottMoores, Steve Oliff, Charles ler. StephanleCzech. Margaret.Le hmanEDITORI AL STAFF: J.Angiolillo. A. Beyma, W. Buchan-an. 0. Burdick. S. Carus, R. Chiang. J. Connolly, J. Davis.R. East0n.A. Gruen, R. Hamblen. R. Harm0n.T. Ha2lett.T.Hllton, J. Jawinen. R. Livermore, R. Medrow, D. Mi1ler.T.

'Oleson, G. Phill~es.L. Pinsky. R. Plock . J. Pournelle, R.Reed. M.Saha. 0. Turnbull. M. Uhl. C. VaPUZZLE EDIT1

To facilitate sto Avalw, Hill sfollows:A.R.E.A. Technlboa,,, null LaPurchases of the GENER AL: ept. GertrudeZombroPurchases of Games, play-by-R me parts : OrderOept. Christy ShawQuestions Concerning Play: Rsrearch & Dniw Department.Note: all questions should be throughly d~agrammed.Noquestions will be answered that are not accompanied by astamped, self-addressed envelope. Only questions regardingrule clarifications lnot h~storicalor design subjects) can beanswered.Articles for Publication, Lette~Brochures, and Readers Respor IOept. - Donald Greenwood.EXCLU SIVE AGENTS : ENGLAND:Avalon Hill(U.K.)Ltd..650 High Rd.. No. Flnchley N. 12 ONL; AUSTRALIA:JEOKO Games. 11 1 Beatrice St., Cheltenham 3192.Vlctor~a;SCANDINAVIA: A.H. SCANDINAVIA, P.O. Box329. 13103 Nacka 3. Sweden; GERMANY: HOBBYCOM-MERZ, FeldbergstraBe 35. 6051 Oudenhofen, W Ger-many; GREECE Amer ican Book & News. 68 SyngrouAve., Athens 408; ITALY: Oott. Alfredo Gentili. Tirrenia(Pisa). Via d el Lecci 1; JAPAN: TaiyoTradlnp Co.. P.O. Box95. Asakusa. Tokyo 111.AREA OM COORDINATOR: (multi-playt, . ,)Steve Helnowsk~,1630 W. 28th St.. Lorain. OH 44052II Id In I

)VALO.\ HII -t h nw thmprrng )

4517 Harford Road,Baltimore, Md. 21214

he Avalon Hillthe serious galme wner's prherwise availab

dRodger MacVeit. Jean Ba

,d Hamblene, we suggest ttthe lower left

rs to the Edito~se age submis

sey. L. Zocchi

bat all envelope.hand corner a

r. Requests fossions: Editorial

srtalnly free tclo ask that youitate your old

Avalon Hill Philosophy Part 66STATIS-PRO

As of March first, our Sports Illustratedgames wil l expand to include the addition of thepopular Statis-Pro series. For those of you whomay not be familiar with the line. Statis-Progames are statistical sports games with a strongdual emphasis on simple mechanics andplayability. In addition, they are designed to beprobably the best sports games for solitair e playon the market.At the present time, there are Statis-Progames for pro basketball, baseball, NHL hockey,pro and college football. Al l except the collegefootball game feature individual player cards.That game employs the team card concept,providing players wi th charts for 1 00 op collegeteams, plus information on how to ra te others.

As an example of ho w Statis-Pro games areplayed, here is a fairly deta ileddescription of thebasketball game. Each game comes with abooklet detailing the results of the previousseason i n the NBA, and including all importantstatistics for the teams and players. Along wit hthe statistics is an explanation of the playerratin g system so you can devise your ow n playercards if you wish. And then, of course, there arethe game rules.An ndividual player card is provided or everyregular and substitute, and there are also about18 0 "Fast Action Cards". Fast Action Cards arethe heart of Statis-Pro games, and they repres-ent an innovation hat is ust beginning to spreadthrough thesportsgame world. lnsteadof rollingdice for every play, the players simply flip overone of these cards, similar to event cards inKINGMAKER and read one of the variousresults on each card, depending upon whichplay they called. For example, there is one resultfor free throws, another saying who rebounded(if a shot was made on the previous play), wh odrew a foul and so forth. Cards are shuffled atthe end of each quarter, and also function as thetiming system. The beauty of this system is thatnot only are the players saved from constantlyreferring to numerous charts and tables, bu tthere are literally thousands of possible combi-nations possible on each succession of plays;many more than w ould be possible with t wo oreven more six-sided dice.The player cards themselves provide thefollowing information: shooting ability, freethrow ability, assist ability (which i s added toother players' shooting abilities when appropri-ated), tendency to draw fouls, rebounding,defense (whi ch affects offensive players' shoot-ing), stealing the ball, and stamina. Stamina isimportant, because it determines how long aplayer can stay i n the game before being takenout to rest. Because of this factor, a strong benchis essential to a good game, as i n the rea l NBA.

In addition to defensive ratings, each team israted overall for its defensive and fast breakstrengths. Tactics such as the fu ll court press,slowdowns, rushing shots, and so forth, can allbe duplicated exactly as in real life.This should give you a general idea of whatthese games are like. They all are updatedannually to reflect the previousseason's results,and in addition, there wi ll be regular additions inthe form of "old-time" teams. All Statis-Progames will eventually be repackaged into thestandarc' 4H bookcase box featuring a Sports

Illustrated logo. For those interested, modetailed information should be appearing future editions of our sports game magazinALL-STAR REPLAY.ORIGINS IV

We've gotten a lot of inquiries about OriginIV, b ut unfortunately (or fortunately, dependinon your point of view), we have nothing to dwith the national convention this year-otherthan attending and looking forward to it. We wbe participating as an exhibitor, of course, anwill be sponsoring about a dozen evenpertaining to AH games, but other than that, awe can do is pass on information as we get Hopefully, a free advertisement from the Detrosponsors will still arrive in time to make thissue, bu t i n case it doesn't, here is all thinformation we've been able togle anso far froexisting progress reports.Origins IV will be held on July 14-1 6 at thUniversity of M ichigan in Ann Arbor. Convetion admission prices will be roughly the samas last year: Sb/weekend if pre-registerebefore June 15, $8 thereafter. Daily tickets(soonly at the door) wi ll cost $4.50. Lodging will available in Bursley Hall, which is also the maconvention center, for up to 120 0 people froughly $7 per night based on double occupacy. A la carte food service will be availabthroughout the convention.In many respects, the site and organizatiappear to be superior to anything ORIGINS hhad previously. The sponsors have asked us tell people not to send them any money withoa proper pre-registration from. We will try obest to include a pre-registration form in eiththis or the next edition of The GENERAL. Pleado NOT send this form or money to Avalon HWe are merely helping the Metro DetroGamers publicize the event w ith free publiciPlease send any money, completed forms, requests for more orms directly to them. Shouthere be no advertisement or insert i n this isswit h another address to write to, you can mainquiries by contacting Metro Detroit Gamerc/oA l Slisinger, 19941 Joan, Detroit, MI 4820

TITLE SURVEYIt has been a long time since we polled threadership in our annual t itle survey to sewhich of our game proposals interest you mosSo long, in fact, that we might as wel l call it oubi-annual survey. Nevertheless, we'd apprecia

your taking the tim e to rate the following gamproposals on a scale of 0 t o 1 0 using thresponse form provided as an insert in thissue. We solicit feedback so rarely that youresponse will bear heavily on our selection ofuture titles.Please rate every game whether you'rinterested in it or not on a 0 to 1 0scale, keepinthe following numerical representations mind: 0 ) will not buy under any circumstance1 bare ly possible I'd buy if it got rave reviews; 2might buy it after seeing it, if it were done exactto my taste; 3) conceivably, but I'm not realinterested; 4) moderate interest-I'd buy it iflived up to its possibilities; 5) interesting, I'd bu

ontinued on Page 30 olumn

8/13/2019 Ah Gen v14n6

3/40

THEGENERAL PAGE

D DAY: TH VOLUTION OF A GAMEbyJoe l S . Davis

D- DA Y-the game-was first released alm os tas long ago as the military operatio n for which it wasnamed preceded it . n 1961, more than seventeenyears ago. Sin ce that time, it has existed with at leastthree different editions of its rules, two differentboards, and two different boxes. I t has also spawneda horde of imitations by an almost equallynumerous horde of competen t and not-so-competent game designers-NORMAND Y944 A T L A N T IC W A L L . P A T T O N .O M A H A B E A C H . . B R E A K O U T & P U R S U I TOVERLORD. Each ti t le has surfaced, somehave enjoyed a moment of popularity , but nearly allhave faded back into the woodwork. D-DA Yremains-a classic.

D-DA YS game system is simple-it was oncereferred to as "STA LINGR AD, with invasions."Am ong its peers, however-games like AF RI KAKORPS, GETTYSBURG. and STALINGRAD-its design stood well in adva nce of them all. With itssimple game system, it not only includedinvasions, but logistics, airborne operations, for-tif ications. More im portant, D-DA Y was and is anenormously enjoyable game often hotlycontested to the bitter end. Spectacularly, thoughthe game could run to an many as 50 turns, i t isusually played to a conclusion, unlike most longgames of the modern era.Nevertheless, the game had some significantproblems. These fall into two main areas-ruleambiguities and play balance. Occasionally a thirdcriticism-lack of realism-was also levelled. T osome extent, this comes into the play balancequestion-which I'll go into shortly-but thegeneral run of such comme nts were more related t o.the old playability vs. realism debate.1 think it 's importan t to realize that manyimportant factors in the 1944 battle for France aretreated quiteabs tractly in D-DA Y This maintains ahigh level of playability, by ignoring many of thedetails associated w ith more elabora te rule schemes.The best s tandard of realism for such a game is notwhether such details have been put in, but how wellthe factors affecting player decisions reflect thefactors reflecting decisions by the High C omm andsinvolved.An excellent example of such a standardsuccessfully implemented is RU SSIA N CAM -PAIGN . The weather rule, for example, is quite

simple-a sho rt table with four kinds of weatherapplied in two-month increments. Each weathertype has a simple, though significant effect. I haveseen far more elab orat e weather rules-often with amultitude of weather zones, many kinds of weather,enormou sly com plicated effects, and fine-grain timeperiods but non o th m has an end result asrea l i s t ic as tha t in RUSSIAN CAMPAIGN. Tomake a long story short, while the weather on anygiven turn will not decide the game, both sidescontinuou sly an d fervently pray for the right kind ofweather when ther e is any possibility of variation. Inany case, by this standard , 1961 D-DA Y wasmoderately realistic 1965 D-DA Y wassomewhat less so and the new 1977 D-DA Yedition is a great deal more realistic, though therestill exists some room , in my view, for improv ement.D-DAY was originally designed by CharlieRoberts-the man who founded the Avalon HillCompa ny an d did the basic design work on m ost ofthe older Avalon Hill wargames. The game went onsale in early 1961.Aside from a lot of rule ambiguities (they hadjust sta rted writing rules for wargames in thosedaysand lacked experience), the game had one majorproblem the German s won too often. Andthou gh a new rule book-clearing up man yambiguities, but opening the do or to m any disputesove r the "official" rules-was issued, it didn't solvethe fundamental problem of play balance. TheAllied offensive had a habit of "running out ofsteam" a bout half way throu gh thegame. While thisdidn't occur all the time, it did happen withdistressing frequency.In my view, the problem resulted primarilybecause the German replacement rate was too high(five attack factors per turn). The Allies couldusually get asho re somewhere-Brittany was afavorite spot-but, somew here east of Paris, thecombina tion of cit ies, r ivers, mou ntains, andfortified lines, along with a steady stream of newGerman units , would prove to be too much of amorass to penetrate. Allied casualties wouldskyrocket in any reasonable offensive and, with noreplacements, the Axis army often ended upsignificantly outnumbering the beleaguered allies.To make matters worse, attacking the moreheavily defended beaches-hoping to reach Ger-many before Axis replacements became a factor

(Tur n 16)-was not merely risky . t wassuicidThe rules were such that supply on the beachcoul d be effectively interdicted-even to units those beaches-if the Germa n was clever and wwilling to lose a few units and most beachcould be "paratroop -proofed" by inter-lockizones of con trol. T he end result was "FestuEuropaW-a carefully worked out defendeveloped at MIT-that had more than an 8chance of crushing any Allied landing in the fifour turns.In any case, an interesting-and very simplevariant on the 1961 version is simply to reduGerman rep lacements f rom 5 / tu r n to 41 tu

Though there's no real increase in "realism," tdoes much to help the play balance problem whiwas, after all, the main complaint.Avalon Hill took an othe r approach in 1965.make a long story short, an attempt was madesolve D-DA Y s problems by bludgeoning themdeath.Th e hardest blow was a rule called "Strategic APower," which had an effect far more lithermon uclear a ttacks Th e Allies got eight strikper game (two per turn maximum-Thank God small favors ) each strike caused an expectGerman loss of two divisions-with Panzers aPanzer Grenadiers going first .Another contender for the hardest blow was

prohibition on replacing static divisions. Statics low grade units (I-2-Ts, compared with typiinfantry formations such as 3-4-3 's and 44-3'However, since reinforcement was by attack favin 1961 D-DA Y statics were favorites fo r replament, yielding twice their replacement value defense factors.By prohibiting their replace ment, however, thbecame favo rite Allied targets (even for strategicattacks), since, without them, there are not enoularger German units in the counter mix to formcontinuous line of any strength. Furthermohistorically, such a prohibition was completunreasonable. Toward the end of the war, Germ ans prolifera ted low grade divisions of varikinds-all well modelle d by "static" divisioSuddenly, this was prohibited.

8/13/2019 Ah Gen v14n6

4/40

As if the above two changes weren't enough toguarantee the Allies a better chance in easternFrance, they were also awarded a 2 /tu rn replace-ment rate, starting on turn #9. While Alliedreplacements are, a priori, a highly reasonab le idea,it was another hard blow at an already battered Axisposition.The Allied player was also allowed to moverelatively freely between Britain, controlled ports,a n d i n v a s i o n b e a c h e s , i n v i r t u a l l y a n ycombination-not just to and from Britain viainvasion beaches and inland ports. Again, a priori,some sea movement like this might be reasonableexcept for the fact that it was virtually neverdone-probably because the trans ports wereneeded for bringing in supplies. In an y case, whilethe rapid movem ent capability it gave the Allies wasfar from decisive it was anoth er blow that hurt.The final major change was tha t Allied supplylines were limited to 17 hexes length. This rarelyaffected Allied play-except tha t end runs acro ssFrance from Brittany and Biscay became moredifficult an d, most important, Sout h France wasn'treally feasible as a first invasion site, unless theGerman virtually ignored it . its beaches andports were too faraw ay from the Rhin e to allow it tobe much of a threat. This did work in the Germansfavor, in that minimal forces could be left there-allowing a somewhat heavier defense of the otherbeaches. This disadvantage hardly mad e up for theother features-German victories became very rare.There was another change . but not in therules. Fo ur hexes, south an d southeast of Rotter-dam, changed from sea to land-though surround-ed by rivers. believe this reflected diffe rentinterpretations abo at what happened when landbelow sea level was flooded but it created anamazing number of Play-By-Mail arguments.Though this board was to be released with the 1965rules, a number of 1965 boards were inserted with1961 rules in the same box . the resulting half-breed is still probably the only D - D A Ygame everseen by som e buyers. In an y case, it's hard to figurewho this change helped. Its main effect was onNpr th Sea invasions-which were never verybrbmising anyway (too many rivers and too li t t les&pply). It blocked som e potential ad van ce routes,but also denied counter-attack positions, whenthese hexes were ocean-when they became land,the situation reversed.All in all, I would have to call 1965 D - D A Y arelative failure. W hat success it did enjoy was almos tentirely to the credit of what i t retained from theoriginal 1961 versi on. haonly rea l improvementin the 1965 version was a somew hat less amb iguo usset of rules.The 1977 edition of D - D A Y just released byAvalon Hill, remedies most of the problems in theearlier versions and , at th e same time, introducessome up-to-date innovations that add to the gamewithout producing a decisive impact on the courseof play. In fact, a major consideration in virtuallyevery change was tha t the general feel of the D - D A Ygame be retained. I was involved in this decision-making process, and-in describing the evolution of. various aspects of the game-will describe some ofthe important considerations that led up to them.There isn't enough space to describe all rulevariations and their evolutions, but just the highpoints make a delightful story of the6'gamedesignerdoldrums."P ARATROOP ERS-BRICK WALLS AN DWELCOME MATSThe use of airborn e units was one of D - D A YSmost interesting features-allowing the AlliedPlayer (according to the rules, GermanParachute Units were parachute in name only. . nreal life, they neither had chutes nor chute

training.") to get better od ds durin g invasions,undouble river lines, surround key units in attacks,and grab important objectives. As originallydefined, each Allied airb orne unit (there ar e six)could jump twice per game, starting anywhere andlanding with in five hexes of any friendly comb atunit t hat was, itself, allowed to move first to allowthe paratroopers maximum range. Only mountainand sea hexes were excluded as destinations. (Infact, the original 1961 rules only specified within fivehexes of the closest combat unit-presumablyallowing the distance to beineasured from an enemyunit. This obviously confused someone t cam eup as a question in T H E G E N E R A L a couple ofyears later-when friendly units were specified.)This was in the first set of D - D A Y rules I havebeen able to locate-which I shall henceforth call1961A. Later th at sa me year, a new set of rules wasproduced-1961B-which cleared up many am -biguities but also changed a num ber of rules,leading to a long series of conflicting rule inter-pretations. 1961 B had all of 1961A's limitations, butalso prohibited landing in Spain and Switzerland,and-most important-prohibited airborne troopsfrom landing adjacent to an enemy unit. This led toa major element of German tactics-"paratroopproofing." In essence, this meant prote cting yourmain line by an interlocking chain of zones ofcontrol behind it, generally maintained by Head-quarters Units (HQs) and other small units , thuspreventing your main line units from beingsurrounded or undoubled on the tu rn o f d rop , andallowing the defenders a turn to react t o the presenceof enemy units behind the lines.Ano ther tactic was possible-this one to theAllies-under bot h sets of 1961 rules . . hat of"leap-frogging." A paratroo per could land muchfurth er than five hexes from the fron t lines if,that same turn, another paratroo per first jumped tosome intermediate point. If two extra airbornedivisions were available, a drop could occur 21hexes away from the nearest ground unit , s ince eachairborne unit , in turn, could jum p five hexes awayfrom the last , and then move three more to gain

maximu m range for the next. I saw one invasion cu toff at Pas de Calais but resupplied when such amaneuver opened up a supply route to the newlycaptu red Marseilles-all the way across FranceBetween som e Question Answer columns inT H E G E N ER A L som e conflicting answers maileddirectly to inquirers by Avalon Hill, and a certaintendency on the p art of players to arrive at ruleswhich do not allow things they consider un-reasonable, other rule variations appeared whichwere assumed to be true. T he most notable in thisarea was a compromise on theenem y units question,to prohibit landing in an enemy zone of control-thus allowing airbo rne units to land across a river orfortress wall from enemy troops. This madepara troo p proofing more difficult but still aviable and important tactic. Another acceptedinterpretation was that th e "within five hexes" ruled id no t app ly t o para t roopers jumping tha t tu rn-thus minimizing the potential for leapfrogging.Both of these compromises were incorporatedinto D - D A Y 1965-one of the few good things I cansay abou t this version. Th e Spain and Sw itzerlandprohibitions disappeare d but only because thehex grid no longer extended into these countries.

Even D - D A Y '96 5 was not without itsargu men ts mostl induced by Avalon Hill itself.In the May-Jun e 196 issue of T H E G E N E R A L a nadditional l imitation was added-paratroopersmay no t jump out of a hex if they are isolated. In theSeptemb er-Octobe r 1969 issue, Avalon Hill tooksides in resolving another old ambiguityairborne units could not land o n the dyke.

D - D A Y 1977 has made some very significachanges to the paratroop rules. First , and vehistorical, parachute jumps must start in BritaiAnd, while there is no limit on the number of t imesunit may jump, a m aximum of three airborne unimay jump each tu rn. T hey ar e slightly limited in ththey may not move after landing but are madvastly more powerful in that they may now land enemy zones of control.This return to the 1961A philosophy (probaban oversight at that t ime) makes an enormoudifference to the Allies. Paratroop proofing is norarely practical, except in the most confined areaTh e only effective means is to physically block threar with friendly units . and the German playjust doesn't have that many .When I first received a copy of the new D-DArules to playtest, my initial reaction was a kind oshock Almost every impo rtan t river position coube undoubled . . ny unit could be surrounded. seemed like another hammer blow-paratroopdrop s, especially combined with the early version the C arpe t Bo mbing rule (q.v.) could easily wipe othe most strongly held hex (i.e., three PanzDivisions) in a fortified zone with ease. and evthe most heavily defended fortresses would fall wirelatively light casualties. Paratr oop s are imp orta. but they shouldn't be that devastatingFortunately, parachute drops and carpet boming attacks ar e now prohibited from occurring othe same turn-this is admittedly artificial, butprevents very ahistorical operations . a i rborunits were just not used in cooperation with carpbombing operations.I sti l l feel the parachute rule makes airborunits too powerful, but will save most of thocomments for my section on proposed OptionRules. I will say here that further consideratioindicates the 1977 Parachute Rules are important-b ut not decisive-change. Para trooused quickly generally die quickly . hey haverelatively short expected lifetime. Furthermorstrong positions will usually weather an airboroperation-th ough generally with greater casualtito the defenders. To use airborne units well, th

should only be used in key positions where they whave max imu m impact-they can't be replaced, they should be treasured. I have to admit th at mstyle of playing is probably mor e heavily affected bthe New rule than m ost, in that my tactics are keyto holding important positions well, rather thanmore even "zone" defense. Airborne units' neflexibili ty makes them that much better assaulting particular positions of importance.DEF END ING RIVERS- ONE STEP OVETHE LINEFew D - D A Y rules have caused as manhassles-and induced a s muc h confusion-as thodealing with defen ding behind a river. The rule in DD A Y 1961A was deceptively simple:. . . The Defense Factor of a Unit. on the river or one squaway. doubles when attacked from across the river.It's impossib le to be "on" a river-unlike moAvalon Hill games, the rivers in D - D A Y run alothe hex edges. Most players correctly assumed th"on" really m eant adjacent. But what does it meto be attacked from across the river when you're ohex away? A sm all yellow card th at came with thorules, labelled "Combat Factors" see Figuregives a hint in example (6). Here we see that, badvancing directly across the river, such that tfirst hex across the river encountered is adjacent the defender doubles the defender. Fine bwhat ab out the situation shown in Figure#2? Is tdefender doubled in either of these situations? BotNeither? This was never made clea r in the rules .and later commentaries by vario us members of tAvalon Hill staff of that era managed to

8/13/2019 Ah Gen v14n6

5/40

THE GENER L P GEsufficiently contradictory that the rule situationnever was resolved.

Fig ure U2T o make mat te rs worse, consider example (6)(3) (lower right of Figure #I) . Here we see, contraryto every other version of D D A Y ever publishedthat if two units of equal strength attack, but onlyone is coming across a river, tha t one is halvedWould this a lso be t rue if the units were not of equa lstrength? W h o knows . . we fought a b o u t it,thoughT h e situation was clarified when 1961Bappeared-to those using 1961B rules, anyway.Defensive doubl ing was limited to units ad jacen t t oriver lines, and only applied when all a t tack ing unitswere attacking across a river hex side. This rule hasbeen in effect ever since, and was incorporated bothinto D D A Y 1965 a n d 1977.An issue related to rivers was that of advanceafter combat . This is a n exception t o normalmovement restrictions. T h e 1961A rules provided:Any Unit that is victorious in battle may:I) move from a sea square onto and stop on a coastal squareafter combat.2) cross a river and stop on the defeated unit's square aftercombat.3) move into and stop on a city, fortified zone. and fortresssquare after combat.4) move onto and stop on the defeated unit's mountain squareafter combat.This also applies in "exchanges." Thesurviving units, if attacker, maymove into the above mentioned areas.

Several questions immediately presentthemselves. Can a victorious defending unitadvance after combat if the result is a n A E L I M o r ABACK ?Also, while (2) a n d (4) specify the defeatedunit's square, a n d this is implied by the invasionrules for ( I ) , can a victorious unit move o n t o anyadjacent city, fortified zone, o r fortress hex,regardless of whether the defeated unit was in tha thex o r not? T h e usual answer to the first questionwas, surprisingly yes-at least a m o n g some of myfriends, who liked the idea of occasional defensivemovement. I never encountered anyone w h o raisedthe latter question but I'm sure it must havecome up somewhere.In 1961B. the rule was left pretty much a s is,except tha t part (3) a n d par t (4) were combined, andthe defeated unit's square was specified.

FIGURE U3It wasn't until D D A Y 1965 tha t attacking unitswere unambiguously specified a s the only oneswhich could advance after combat . One smallambiguity tha t applied t o all three sets of rulesremained-since the advance after combat did nothave t o occur immediately in these versions,conceivably, if two adjacent combats were resolved

successfully, the attacking units would notnecessarily have t o adva nce into the hexes vacatedby their respective defenders. (Figure 3) The factthat zone-of-control re strictions did not apply tosuch advances was also often not madeclea r. In anycase, both of these issues have been resolved in DDA Y 1977. Zones of control d o not inhibit advanceafter combat, and the advance must occurimmediately after each combat is resolved.

One question that occasionally arose wexactly what happened when units attacked acrosriver-specifically, did their zones of control across too ? Nothin g in the rules suggested that thdid-but some players seemed to think so Twould have meant tha t the Germ an unit in Figurewould be surrounded. It took a decision printedT H E G E N E R A L to establish tha t zones of contdid not cross rivers, regardless of what's going o

IGURE #I

ATTACK DEFENSEIF UNIT FACTOR FACTOR DEFENSE ZONE OF CONTROL

1. Is o n a Sea S qua re N O R M A L N O R M A L Coastal Square A rrow points to.1. Is o n Coastal Square N O R M A L N O R M A L Sea Square a r row points f rom, plus 4adjacent land squares3. Is o n N orma l Land Square N O R M A L N O R M A L 6 adjacent open land squares4 Meets enemy o n same sideof river N O R M A L N O R MA L 4 adjacent squares o n same side of river5. Meets enemy o n opposi tes ide of river l ine N O R M A L * D O U B L E S 4 adjacent squares o n s ame side of river6 Is one s qua re away f romriver line N O R M A L D O U BLES * ' 6 adjacent squares7. Is in any City N O R M A L D O U B L E S 6 adjacent squares8 Meets enem; in City o nopposi te side of river N O R M A L * D O U B L E S 4 adjacent squares o n s ame side of river9 Is in Fortified Zone N O R M A L D O U B L E S 6 adjacent squares

10. Is o n Mountain Square N O R M A L D O U B L E S 6 adjacent squares11. Is in a Fortress N O R M A L * " D O U B L E S N O adjacent squares12. Is in a Fortress, o n coas t N O RMA L*" ' T R I P L E S Sea S quare a r row points f rom13. Is in a Fortress,behind river l ine N O RMA L*" ' TRIP LES *" N O adjacent squaresN o unit may increase its defense factor more than triple, regardless of the combinat ion of terrain featurar it is on.

* H a s opt ion to at tack A.CROSS river line. Attacker m u s t bat t le Units in both adjacent squares.* * Defense factor D O U B L E S only if enemy has a t t acked f rom across the river line.H a s opt ion to at tack 6 adjacent squares. Attacker mus t battle all Units in adjacent squares .

* * * * Only when at tacked from across river--other, factor doubles.x a m p l e s o f a b o v e i n n u m e r i c a l o r d e r .

II ) BLUE would attack at 4-2

( 2 ) RED would attack at 1-4( 3 ) BLUEwouldattack at 10-12

RED would attack at 11-10( 4 ) BLUE would attack at 4

RED would attack at 5 4

( 6 ) BLUE may'cross river andattack at 4-4 RED would ;~t tackt 1-7

8 ) BLUE would attack at 4-8 9 ) BLUE would ;~ t t ;~ckt 10-28RED would attack at 4-8 RED\roold ;~tt;lcktt 14-10

( 1 0 ) BLUF wouldattackat 7-8RED would attack at 4-7 I I ) BLUE would attack at15-34RED would ;ittack at16-15

( 4 ) ( 5 ) in combinationa ) If both BLUE'S attack RED. BLUE-B'sattack factor is halved to 2% (round off to3 ). Odds would be 6-6.b ) If RED attacks both BLUE's. BLUE-B'sdefense fietor doubles. Odds would be 6-13.

( 5 ) ( 6 ) in combinationa)Since BLUE ntt;~cks rom across river.both RED'S defense factors double.BLUE attacks at 5-8.b)RED's attack at 2-5.

\( 12) ELL=.W O U ~ Ulllilckill 4RED would iktl;lck ;tt 1-4

( 13 ) BLUE would ;~tt;~cltt 8RED would;~ttack t 1-

( 6 ) ( 3 ) in combination;I BLUE-A, must halve its i~t t ;~ckistoOdds would be 6-4.b ) If RED attacks. odds would be 3-8

8/13/2019 Ah Gen v14n6

6/40

PAGE 6 THE GENERAelimination. and d o not relieve other adjacent unitsof the obligation to make a better a t tack ifthey wishto remain in their positions and attack elsewhere.

F I GURE 4OTHER COMBAT COMBATSThere were only five results on the C o m b a tResults Table-D E L I M , A ELIM, D BACK 2,andEXCHANGE. D E L I M and A E L I M are perfectlystraight forward-respectively, all defending o rattacking units a re destroyed. T h e BACK 2 resultswere virtually always determined by the winner-that is, in a n A BACK 2, the defender chose theretreat route; with D BACK 2, the attacker chosethe route of retreat. This system remains in use.Such confusion a s there was centered o n theE X C H A N G E result. In the 1961A rules, the sidewith fewest combat factors was eliminated; theother side had to lose a s much. Terra in ad jus tmentswere included. Unfortunately, which factor to beused was not specified-attack o r defense?

For example, assume two Axis 3-4-3 infantrydivisions and two 1-2-2 static divisions a t tack asingle Allied 4-4-4 in a city. It's worth eight 4doubled) factors. T h e axis attacks with eight(3+3+1+ ) factors-one t o one odds. An exchange isrolled. Must the Axis player lose all eight a t tackfactors? o r is it enough t o lose eight defensefactors (which would allow one of the 3-4-3's t oremain and advance in). Th is ambiguity a lso existedin the 1961B rules. T h e choices boiled down t o these:a ) Attacker loses attack factors; defender loses defense factors. (Thirwas the generally accepted interpretat~on).b) Both sides lose by attack factor-ala ST A L I N G R A D . This mades ome sense. especially since replacement was by attack factor.Presumably the defender, if in a doubled or tripled position.would count as two or three timesas many attack factorsfor the

purpose of exchange computationsc) Both sides lose by defense factor. This wasargued based on the factthat only defense factors get terrain modifications. and thatdefense factor does, In some sense. measure a unit'scapability toavoid getting destroyed.1965D-DAY eliminated the ambiguity byspecifying opt ion (a)-attack factors vs. defensefactors-but made a disastrous slip. Instead of theside with fewer factors losing everything, thedefender lost everything the attacker had to lose asmany attack factors o r more. Given the problemthat E X C H A N G E occurs a t 1-2 odds, th ismadethe1-2 a particularly devastating a t tack T h e classicexample was a German 5-5-4 Panzergrenadier unitattacking two Allied 5-5-4 armored divisions a t 1-2,and getting a n exchange . killing them a t the rateof two for one.1977 D-DA Yhas, a t last, set the record straight.The attacker loses attack factors; the defender losesterrain-modified defense factors; and the side withfewest factors is eliminated. T h e other side must losea t least as many-exact choice of units is left up t othe one losing them in that combat .

Finally, on the subject of combats, there is thequestion of soaking off. In bo th 1961 D-DA Yversions, any combat unit was sufficient fo r adiversionary attack-in fact, the "Combat Factors"card in Figure #I illustrated a 1-16 attack (13). T h elast vestige of this d inosaur is found inWATERLOO where unlimited soak-off odds a r estill allowed. In the 1965 a n d 1977 versions, themore reasonable 1-6 limitation was implemented.Attacks a t lesser odds can be m a d e . but they d onot count a s soak-offs. result in au tomat ic attacker

FORTRESS: .. A N D THOU SHALT BEPOWERFUL A N D MULTIPLY"Fortresses actually symbolize something inap-propriate to a game of this scale (about 17 miles t othe hex)-a distinct fort o r heavily fortified town.Such a place could be enormously difficult t oassault, yet be so localized that it doesn't reallydeserve a zone of control.In 196IA, no mention of fortresses was made inthe rules, other than a n example in the Zone OfContro l section indicating that a unit in a fortresscontrols no adjacent squares-so enemy units neednot s top for o r a t tack it. It'salso stated that it has theop t ion t o attack units outside, implying that it hasthe choice not to. T h e boost t o defense factors isindicated on the "Combat Factors" card-ifattacked over land, they doubledefenseva lues ff rom the ocean o r across a river, it triples. Of course,the old ambiguity about a combina t ion cross-riverand overland attack gets involved t o o . a re unitscrossing the river multiplied by 113, while thoseoverland are adjusted t o 1 2? In 1961B, 1965, and1977 D-DAY, fortresses uniformly triple thedefenders f rom all kinds of attacks but,interestingly enough, a great many old timers stillcling to the old "triple across water" rule. This isprobably because attacking a fort across a river o rcana l would seem t o pose more problems. In fact,the usual defenses associated with forts were grimenough to make the addi t ion of water relativelyminor-remember, I'm speaking on a divisionallevel-but this a rgument might well apply t ofortified zones (see Opt iona l Rules section).Speaking of fortified zones, though, it was onlyin 1977 tha t a longstanding beef I had with t h e g a m ewas cleared up- fortified zones (i.e., Siegfried Linehexes) now only double German units o n defense.Back o n fortresses, the "Combat Factors" carddoes specify one zone of control hex for forts-outt o sea if it's an invasion beach. More interesting is

the question of what happens if units in a fortressdecide t o a t tack outward . In 1961A, the answer issimple-the units must a t tack every adjacent unitoutside. Presumably, the logic was tha t if it was atight encirclement, all nearby t roops would par-ticipate. In the 1961B rules, there was a completeflip-flop . the interior units could now attackenemy units "in any adjacent square." Now, a singlegroup of defenders could be singled o u t a sallyperhaps? Meanwhile, players themselves workedout a third popula r variation if the units insidea t tack out, they, in effect, temporarily negate thefortress's special zone of control properties. Thismight negate the need for some attacks if there wererivers present, as shown in Figure 475.

I G U R E 5

In 1965, the rule went back to being forcedattack all adjacent units outside. The 1977 rule goback t o the rule used by many players for almostyears-if an a t tack out of a fortress is made, fo r thpurpose. it's considered a s if it were a normal chex.A final question involving fortresses concesupply. No 1961 rule set tha t I've been able t o fimakes supply in fortresses a n y different froelsewhere. It was only in 1965 that the first rule wpromulgated exempting units in fortresses froisolation. In the 1977 version, this was limitedGerman units in fortresses (somewhat mohistorical) but Allied units on the coast wea lso given au tomat ic supply-so it may be an evtrade-off (except dur ing invasions, where it helplot )

REPLACEMENTS: "LO . . .H E HATH RISEFROM THE DEAD."The replacement rules are unique in a peculiway-while they have been changed a lot f roversion t o version of the game, compared to othseemingly lesser changes, the changesreplacements just haven't changed the play of tgame that much.As originally set up, beginning with T u r n #1the German player received up to five attack factoof replacements (units returned from the evefamous "dead pile") each turn. There was originaln o provision for accumulation. In addition, unwere constrained t o start on the starred hex(behind the Rhine) that were under "completeGerman control (Allied units could not be adjcent). Units were placed a t the beginning of tAllied player turn.A real problem left open by the rules was whatd o with Headquar te rs Units (0-1-4's). .could thall be replaced each turn a t no cost?T h e problem was not really resolved in t1961B rules-even though a rule was set forbarring the use of HQ's o ther than S H A E F a n d OWest, few players left ou t the others. Instead,

number of compromises on H Q replacement wedevised-the two most popula r I remember wecount ing them a s 2 factor and as I factor. Laterdecision in THE GENERAL ruled that H Q uncould not be replaced a t a l l . bu t by that time, tmany players already accepted them as para t rooproofing units, a n d the rule prohibiting thereplacement did not find wide acceptance.One thing that was definitely added in 196was accumula t ion of replacements-thus enablithe German t o replace some of the larger panzformations.Then came 1965 W H A M First, the Alliwere given two replacement factors per turstarting with Week #9. This did no t havetremendous effect o n the game, but gave the Alliplayer a chance if there was n o early decision. Iworth noting tha t HQ's and Airborne units counot be replaced. T h e German was dealt a far hardblow through the German replacement rule. Whiappearance requirements were somewhat eased,allow appearance on starred hexes adjacentAllied units a s long a s they were not in Allied zonof con tro l (e.g., across the Rhine), the German wprohibited from replacing HQ's ( t h e primary tofor para t roop proofing) and Sta t ic Divisions (oftthe mainstay-through sheer numbers-of tGerman line). This aside f rom being completelyodds with historical replacement patterns, wasdevastating concept it would have had a majeffect upon the game except fo r the fact that moexperienced garners ( tha t was a majority in thodays) were inclined to ignore such nonsense.

8/13/2019 Ah Gen v14n6

7/40

THEGENER L P GED-DA Y 1977 is a welcome retreat f rom theincredible. Replacement of HQ's is still banned ,but-given the new paratroop rules-HQ's aren'tthat badly needed for para t roop proof ingany more.True enough , historically HQ's could be replaced,

but without much more complicated rules-it's t o oeasy to use them a s front line delaying units . .which is especially impor tan t late in the game. AsRichard Hamblen pointed o u t when 1 raised theobjection, "There a r e too many sins the GermanPlayer can commit if he can replace them." F o r thefanatics among you, check the section o n proposedoptional rules.In t h e original draft of the 1977 rules, J i mStahler would have allowed the replacement ofstatic units . . but was going t o have replacementsset by defensefactors, a s is d o n e in most Avalon Hillgames. At this point, I made a trip t o Baltimore-my first in ten years-and shouted , screamed, flailedmy a r m s a b o u t in general treated the AvalonHill staff t o a scene of wailing a n d gnashing of teethsuch a s they had never imagined. Why?One reason was play balance. T h e G e r m a n is o nthe defensive a replacement rate of five a t tackfactors is, effectively, a rate of a s high a s tendefensefactors, depending o n the kind of units replaced.Changing the rate to five defense factors per tu rnwas a serious blow t o the effective Germanreplacement rate.T h e other major factor was historical realism.With replacement by attack factor, the German isinclined t o build two kinds of units-those whichoffer the best ratio of defense factors to a t tackfactors, such a s statics (1-2-2's) a n d second-lineinfantry (3-4-3's) and the best a rmored units to holdstrongpoints a n d launch counter-attacks (7-7-4's, 6-6-4s . . S S u n i t s a n d Panzer Lehr typically). That 'sexactly what the Germans were doing T h e S S hadpriority o n equipment, a s did Panzer Lehr ( the"Tank Demonstration" division) and Hitler'sdesire for lots of divisions led t o a proliferation oflow grade Volksturm units, Hitler Jugend Units,Home Guard Units, Convict-manned SecurityUnits, a s well as many units that consisted of littlemore than a Headquar te rs Detachment . Few hada n y transport . . even fewer had fuel fo r whattransport did exist. These are all well modelled bythe so called "Static Divisions."With replacement by defense factor, all thischanges. Then the German wants the most in a t tackfactors for each defense factor-simple commonsense. Play with this rule (we've tried ) leads t opreferential replacement of 1st line infantry (4-4-3's)and all kinds of motorized units ( rang ing frombrigades t o 4-4-4 divisions to 7-7-4 divisions).T o make a long story short, replacement is stillfive attack factors per turn, a n d HQ's are the onlyGerman unit tha t cannot be replaced. 1consider thismy major con tr ibu t ion t o the game. One otherchange is that German replacements may appear inAllied zones of control-but must not move if theyd o so (they must attack). They c a n n o t appear inhexes th rough which Allied units were the last topass. They also a p p e a r a t the start of the German'sturn.Allied Replacements work differently too. T h eGerman Player has three "Strategic Installations" inBrest (U-Boat Base), Boulogne (V-1 Bases), andRot te rdam (V-2 Bases). S ta r t ing with Week 9, theAllied player receives one replacement factor fo reach installation he has destroyed ("captured"-byentering o r passing through the hex). In practice,t h i s g e n e r a l l y r e d u c e s a v a i l a b l e A l l i e dreplacements-the Allied player rarely has two ofthese objectives by the 9th week o r even the16th-but the extra factors available for a final pushacross the Rhine can be of help While this is asomewhat abstract treatment of many factorsaffecting the efficiency of the Allied W a r effort, the

intermediate geographic objectives d o add quite alot t o game interest. If the German player, fo rexample, heavily defends Brest, the Allied playerhas a rough decision-trading off a lot of expectedcasualties in return for extra replacements that payoff in re tu rn very slowly especially when thereare more promising attacks a t the frontZ O N E S O F C O N T R O L : "STOP A N D WE'LLFIRE "

The "zone of control" concept dates back t o theearliest Avalon Hill games . . and is still one ofAvalon Hill's most impor tan t contributions t o thear t of game design. In D -DAY this concept haschanged very little f rom game t o g a m e . .except inthe ambiguities sur rounding each set of rules.

FIGURE 6T h e basic zone of control rules have been, inessence, if you enter a n enemy zone of control, youmust s t o p a n d end u p attacking someone. Eachenemy unit exerting a zone of control o n a friendlyunit must be attacked. T h e only real ambiguitieshave arisen over the question of moving o u t of o n ezone of control and into another. In 1961A. themaneuver shown in Figure #6 was possible-therewas n o rule prohibiting o r limiting movement f r o mone zone to another . As shown in the Figure, thisallowed surrounded units t o often execute retreatsunless it was thoroughly surrounded .

FIGURE 7An additional limitation was inserted i n t o19618. You could not . . withdraw from a nenemy unit's zone and then re-enter a n y othersquare in t h a t unit's zone in the same turn." While

it's uncertain whether the move in Figure #6 waslegal o r no t (did the unit ever "withdraw" from thezone?), the move shown in Figure #7 was still quitelegal-and frequently used T h a t shown in Figure#8 was a lso legal, since it only involved movementin to the same hex, no t a n "other" hex (one mightwish t o d o this to establish being the last t o passth rough a hex nearby). T h e movement shown inFigure #9, however, was now illegal thoughprohibiting such a move was s o untraditional tha tthis limitation was generally ignored.O n the other hand , many players developed a neven more stringent interpretation-that often usedin other games. They decided tha t if you left onezone of control hex, the only legal moves o u t of thecontrolled hex were t o hexes uncontrolled by enemyunits. This did allow the move in Figures #8 a n d #9,

bu t prohibited those in # 6 a n d #7. Other players alallowed the movement in Figure #7 by ruling thata unit started in an enemy controlled hex, its onlegal moves ou t of that hex were t o hexes ncontrolled by enemy units controlling the hexorigin.

. IIGURE 119

D -DAY 1965 tried t o solve the problemdecreeing tha t a unit's movement ended whenentered a n enemy zone of control, a n d that ycould not move "through" enemy controlled hexWhat "Through" meant started a n incredibnumber of arguments-mostly a b o u t the moshown in Figure #7.D-DAY 1977 ends the ambiguity, though yomust read the rule carefully. A unit must s top wh

it enters a hex controlled by a n enemy unit. It cmove from one hex in a n enemy zone of contrdirectly to another enemy-controlled hex, if tsecond hex is no t controlled by a n y enemy units alexerting a zone of control in the first hex. The unmay also move t o a n y other enemy controlled heprovided that the first hex of movement andintermediate hexes of movement are uncontrollby enemy units. T h e first condition allows tmovement in Figure #7; the second allows tmovement in Figures #8 and 9. T h e movementFigure #6 is still prohibited, which may be a bit trestrictive, though quite traditional. An opt iongiven later.S U P P L Y A N D ISOLATION:"LET T H E M E A T CAKE."

T h e game virtually demanded some kindsupply r u l e . after all, didn't Pa t ton have t o s twhile Eisenhower sent the available gasolineMontgomery? Supply held u p the Allied advanceleast twice . . better logistics might truly ha"ended the war by Christmas."Basic supply for the German has been premuch the same all along. It was unlimitedquan t i ty (in fact, the Germans were always shorteverything but that's "factored in"). Germunits had t o trace a supply line of a n y length freeAllied units o r zones of control t o somewhbehind the Rhine. In 1961A, it was the Rhine-Ijjitself, a s was the case in 1961B. In 1965, it becathe line of hexes just o n the east side of the RhiIjjsel f rom D-10 ( the ocean) t o AA-16 (SwitzerlanIn 1977, it is the east edge of the board north

8/13/2019 Ah Gen v14n6

8/40

THEGENER Switzerland-thus eliminating the curi ous spectreof surrounded German units adjacent to the Rhinesurviving off the local trout or whatever.For the Allies, though, supply was a maze ofdifficult definitions-being keyed to a large num berof beach hexes and ports, each with its own supplycapacity. In addition to being able to trace a line,there was an overall supply capacity . . . and-in1965-a max imum supply length.1961A ruled, "The Allied Play er may never havemore divisions on land than can be suppliedthrough the beaches and ports he controls." It wasnoted elsewhere that HQ's counted as divisions forthese purposes (High ranking officers were allreputed to be overweight-if a HQ consume s adivision's worth of supplies , I can und erstand why.Maybe they were eating cake ). If German ac t iondrop s the supply level (e.g., by captu ring beaches orports) to less than the total Allied units on thecontinent, the Allied player must evacuate or-atthe end of his turn-eliminate enough units torestore the balance.On th e oth er ha nd, if the overall supply level wasstill ok, but a unit was cur offfrom supply, it had twoweeks to restore supply. It is eliminated "the secondweek after the supply line is cut."There were a lot of questions ab ou t exactly whenthis eliminating occurred. There were fourpossibilities for causing isolation:,German units move or advanceiretreat out ofsupply and isolate themselves.German units are cut off by Allied action.Allied units move o ut of supply a s above.Allied units are cut off by German action.In each case, when is the isolated unit removedfrom the board? One commonly adoptedinterpretation-borne out by some "examples ofplayw-was that a n isolated unit had two turns to re-supply itself . . .and was removed at the end of itssecond turn of isolation. The qu estio nas to whethera unit that moved o ut of supply counted that moveas the first turn of isolation or not was neveruniversally resolved. Other interpreta tions includedelimination at the end of th e second turn following(regardless of which player turn the isolationoccurred in) and the fourth player-turn following.Again, the question of units m oving out of supplywas never really resolved. . . .

. . . until 1977. In the new rules, supply ischecked a t the beginning and end of every turn. If aunit is out of supply at the beginning and end of twoconsecutive player turns, it is eliminated. Transeatin Exemplum.In all the earlier versions, un its were unaffectedby lack of supply (inadequate capacity o n thecontinent) or isolation (no supply line) until themoment of their elimination. D D A Y 1977 hasadded an interesting extra-units that are out ofsupply at the beginning of their player-turn havetheir attack strength halved, and may move amax imu m of one hex. This is probably a reasonableconstraint on unit capabilities. At least it tends tolimit the incentives that would otherwise exist onoccasion to race beyond one's supply capabilities.In 1961 D D A Y (both versions), except foractual blocking of the supply line by enemy units,terrain, etc., a supply line could be of any length.There was never really a problem of outrunningone's sup ply lines. In 1965, a 17-hex supp ly linelimitation was imposed-virtually wiping ou t So uthFrance as a viable first invasion area. The solutionin 1977 is not only more reasonable, but allows alegitimate use for those hordes of Allied Head -quarters . . . by assuming they include the supplytransport. In essence, invaded beach hexes cansupply units tracing a supply line as long as eighthexes. Othe r Allied supply sources (coast hexesa ndports) can only supply the particular supply sourcehex, unless HQ units are present. Up to three HQ's

may exist on a hex (1977 D D A Y slightly changesAllied stacking from two units to two units oneHQ maximum), and each allows an eight hexextension of the supply line from that hex-i.e., aport hex with three HQ'scould supply units up to 24hexes away.The general effect is to make South France aviable invasion area (at least for supply purposes),and to concentrate Allied supply sources in a fewkey ports-which not only plays well, but is highlyhistorical.Ano ther ambiguity tha t plagued earlier versionsof the game was the question of landing troops onthe contin ent in excess of the supply that was there.Given the time it took for such units to beeliminated, they could often accomplish valuableobjectives. When their time was up, they could beevacuated and othe r troops-from Britain and ,hence, supplied-could be land ed in excess ofsupply to contin ue the work. As described earlier,the problem arose from prohibiting the Alliedplayer from "having" more units on the continentthan supply allowed . . and only explaining whathappened when German action reduced supply.Worse yet, it was not enough merely to specify thatunits cou ld n ot be landed in excess of supply-howwsuld invasions happen?The 1977 version seems to solve this problem.Units may not be landed if-ignoring potentialcom bat results-the num ber of unsupplied units onthe continent would increase the following turn.Since any units on the coast are automatically insupply, there is no problem for invasions-all coasthexes have adequate supply to sustain units whichinitially land there. Otherwise, if your supply excessis three (or even if three units happ en to be cut off forsom e reason-1977 D D A Y does not differentiatelack of supply and isolation), then any new unitslanding better have supply waiting, or some unitshad better withdraw the same turn.Speaking of supply on the coast, HallelujahOne of the hairiest problems in D D A Y has alwaysbeen agreeing on what constituted a viable Alliedsupply source. In 1961A. the only viable supplysources fo r Allied units had to be controlled-i.e.,

free of German zones of control. This was grimduri ng invasions-if the Allies could not advanceinland. and German units could manage to stayadjacent, Allied units on the coast would soon die,in that the hexes they held could not provide themwith supply. The then-famous "Festung Europa"defense of the M IT Strategic Games Society waslaregly founded on such tactics. The situation didnot improv e in 1961 B-the only change was that anAllied unit had to be the last to pass through and ithad t o be free of Germ an zones of control for a hexor port (for inland ports, the requirement applied toall initialed hexes) to yield supply. The same ruleapplied in 1965.Fortunately , the players-in their wisdom-were able to come up with some better variations.One was the so-called "bucket brigade" rule-afriendly unit on a hex negates enemy zones ofcontrol there for supply purposes only. Since thisprovided too many ways to resupply cut-off unitsfurther inland, others adopted the rule incorporatedinto D D A Y 1977-that, regardless of whether ornot a Germ an zone of co ntro l is present, if an Alliedunit is on a coast hex o r port witha supply capacity,it can receive supp lies there, thou gh the su pplies willgo no further. In other words, units on beaches areautomatically in supply (assuming the beach hexhas a supply capacity, as most do ).For other purposes, control of supply sources issti ll importan t. W hile 1961A never made the ma ttervery clear, it was implied that "control" meantkeeping Axis zones of contr ol out. In 19618, thiswas made clear for coast hexes and ports, alsospecifying that Allied un its had t o be the last to pass

through. 1965 D D A Y went back to just keepinout zones of control, though it was implied in th"Questions Answers" section that having aAllied unit or zone of control there was at leainvolved somehow.D D A Y 1977 treats the matter fairly explicit. . but not in the clearest possible way. Control separately defined for coast hexes (successfulinvade an d assure that Axis units never re-occupycoastal ports (Allies must oc cupy and keep clear German zones of control), and inland ports (Allimust occupy the port and keep German units out the initialed hexes that typically surround themThis should really, however, be described ascontr ofor the purpose of landing units. The supply rulemake clear that any coastal hex with a supplcapacity can be used for supply purposes and, occupied by a n Allied HQ and kep t free of Germazones of control, can extend a supply line to somdistance. This is one of the few ambiguities 1 havfound in the 1977 rules.

THE SECOND INVASION:"PICK YOURSELF UP,BAT YOURSELF OFF, ANDSTART ALL OVER AGAIN."Exactly when the second invasion could occuhas changed over the years. In the 1961A rules, was never clear whether it had to occur o n Week #ifat all , or whether i t could start on Week# 9 or lateIn 1961B. it was explicitly set forth-9th week olater . and there could only be two invasions pgame.Ah . . . if only the designer had bothered communicate with the editors of T H E G E N E R AOn m y desk, I have tw o issues of T H E G E N E R Athat ca me out wellafter 1961B, but before 19 65. Onexplicitly states that the second invasion may onoccur o n the 9th week, if at all ; the other makesclear that the second invasion can start any turfrom the 9th week on. Avalon Hill has managed teliminate the source of many such controversienowadays by leaving one person in charge odecisions for each game . . . but "those were thgood old days."Th e same rule applied in 1965. In D D A Y 197this is limited in a way suggested by m any players-to weeks 9-1 6. This has s ome historic al basis-Week#16correspo nds to theend of September, and NortAtlantic weather is getting pretty grim by thenHowever, som e kind of effort might have been trie. . . and weather in the Mediterranean is never athat bad. An optional treatment will be offerelater.ALLIED SEA MOVEMENT:" D R A M A M I N E S A V E D T H ED-DAY INVASION "Allied units have always been capable of somkind of sea movem ent . . . if only tog et from Britato the continent. In fact, though, exact Alliecapabilities have fluctuated quite a lot. In 1961Aothe r than invasions, the following movements wepossible:

a ) Britain to captured/controlled inland ports and visa verb) Britain t o controlled beach hexes in an invaded area and vversa.C) Freely between Britain and any coast hexes in invaded beareas. (Note that control was not required )19618 was almost the same, except thcaptured inland ports could not be used fevacuation to Britain unless they were in an invadearea (prim arily a wording prob lem in the rules). 1965, the problem with ports outside the invasioarea remained, but the rule was written moclearly. In essence, Allied units could freely transbetween Britain, coast hexes in invaded areas, ancaptured/controlled inland ports.

8/13/2019 Ah Gen v14n6

9/40

THE GENERAL PAGEThe only problem with all this was tha t it wasn'tvery historical. Units were shipped t o and fromBritain, but-unlike Italy-there was little shuttl-ing by sea of units f rom place t o place in France.Hence, now we see Sea Movement limited t otransport t o a n d from Britain . . . but it can occurf rom any controlled port (inland o r coastal) o rcoastal hex (noting tha t here control implies asuccessful invasion of the hex). I think the rule ishighly reasonable.

THE DIKE:YES, HANS GAVE ITTHE FINGER.Before discussing some of the major innovationsin the 1977 version, one final a rea of dispute shouldbe discussed-the dike. T h e dike has always beendefined on the board itself-"units may cross bu tnot attack." Neither set of 1961 rules provide furtherdefinition. T h e 1965 rules were n o better. One musttu rn to the pages of THE GENERAL t o get furtherclarifications.T h e Sept-Oct 1969 issue provides the informa-tion tha t units may s top o n the dike, but para t roopsmay not land there. T h e Nov-Dec 1972 issueprovides the additional fact tha t the prohibition o nattacks means tha t units o n the d ike may notattack-they can be attacked. T h e ques t ion ofwhether supply could be traced across the dike wasnever answered . . .but most assumed tha t it could.D-DA Y 1977 changes things somewhat. Unitsa re no longer permitted t o s t o p o n the dike. Theystill c a n n o t a t tack from it n o r can they (if airborne)land o n it. Supply can be traced.STRATEGIC MOVEMENT- . . .BUTWHERE ARE THE RAILROADS?Many of the older wargames had a commonproblem-it was impossible t o move f r o m one placet o another a t speeds faster than the basic movementrate-presumably normalized t o a unit movingsomewhat slowly in "battle-ready" status. Thisproblem existed in D-DAY with the fastestmovement being four 17-mile hexes per tu rn (week). . . barely eight miles a day . Static units a r econstrained t o half that, a n d German infantry isbetween the two extremes.T h e movement situation has been alleviatedsomewhat with the in t roduc t ion of StrategicMovement. T h e system was borrowed from ANZIO. . . units tha t a re in supply may move a t doublespeed, provided they never move adjacent t o enemyunits. T h e Germans have additional constraints,limiting strategic movement to Parachute, Panzer,and Panzer Grenadier units, a n d even these unitsmay not use strategic movement if they are being"interdicted" by Allied aircraft .There is a major increase in D-DA Ys realism viathis rule. A t long last, von Rundstedt 's plan for acentral panzer reserve makes a t least some sense. . .as does Rommel's objection-based o n his ex-perience with aircraft. End runs, such a s tha texecuted by Patton, a re now possible, given theright circumstances. All in all, t h e rule is simple,plays well, a n d gives a nice flavor t o the game.Movement is still "too sloww-if you consider howfast a unit might move if it cast cau t ion t o the windsand encountered n o resistance-but probab lyreasonable for units moving under condi t ions ofuncertain safety.Even allowing for the fact tha t German infantryunits had n o motorized transport, it may beunreasonable t o give them n o strategic movement.Similarly, HQ's virtually always had transport.Both unit types should receive some kind of extramovement, in my view(see Opt iona l Rules). Statics,on the o ther hand , had virtually no th ing (often noteven horse-drawn wagons ) a n d deserve little bonus,if any.

T h e other source of rapid movement-railroads-has a lso been left out-both for simplici-ty a n d because of the inconvenience t o past gameowners in modifying the D-DAY map. T h eGermans, however, did make some use of railmovement-the Allies concentrated o n interdictingit before D-Day. A simple suggestion is included inthe Opt iona l Rules section-but, be warned, therule is quite abstract.

TACTICAL AIR POWERT h e major innova t ion of 1977 D-DA Y was thein t roduc t ion of reasonable air power rules. Airpower played a major role in the Allied effort, a n dthe current rule gives something of the feel of how itwas used.T h e Allied Player gets six tactical air points t ouse each week. They a r e deployed over a single hexfor a particular mission type, with a limit of onefactor/ mission type/ hex. T h e missions a r e CloseAttack S u p p o r t (adding one attack factor t o allattacks against the target hex), Close DefensiveS u p p o r t (add ing one defense factor-with n oterrain bonus-to a n y Allied Unit o r Allied Unitcombina t ion being attacked in t h a t hex), RiverInterdiction (German units must s top immediatelyafter crossing a n y river hexside of the target hex),a n d Unit Interdiction (targeted German units-theonly case where a unit ra ther t h a n a hex is targeted,a n d more than one such a t tack per hex isallowed-are prohibited f rom using strategic movement tha tturn).In the original draft , there were only f o u r a i rfactors, bu t it was no t felt tha t tactical air power wasplaying a large enough role. I still d o not feel tha t itdoes, bu t fo r a n o t h e r reason. By assigning a t tackand defense suppor t t o a hex rather than a unit, onefactor may aid several combats o r just one,depending o n the number of units present a n d howthe attacks are divided. More importantly, it doesnot remedy in a n y large way one of the game's moreserious problems-that much of its play centersa r o u n d factor-counting exercises . . .especially inthe case of beach defenses prior to invasion. Thereare a n enormous number of convenient ways for theAxis player to leave t h e Allies two factors short ofthe necessary factors for a given odds level. . .andyou are no t allowed t o concen tra t enough aircraft t oa d d more t h a n one . Figure # I 0 illustrates a classiccase. Two static divisions in a fortress r e p r e s e n t 4 x 312 defense factors. T h e best the Allies can amasso n invasion (without para t roop units) is 10 I a i r11 factors, and 11-12 is still 1-2. Note that the Alliedplayer has doubled the ground commitment f romone division (5 1 = 6; 6-12 is a lso 1-2) with n ochange in odds A similar situation would apply inclear terrain by stacking one static with one infantryunit.

FIGURE #I0Of course, the Allied player need not make asingle 1-2. . . t w o 1-1 a t tackscou ld be m a d e ( o n e a teach static, each a t 5 I 6 factors t o 6, since theT A C factor a d d s t o each attack). This is not muchhelp though , because the Allied player must win all

attacks t o get ashore. A single 1-2 attack has achance of pu t t ing the t roops ashore, while with tattacks, t o get anything ashore, the Allied playmust roll a 1,2,3 followed by a o r 3. ( D ELIE X C H A N G E , o r D BACK 2, followed by aELlM o r D BACK 2). This is still a / 6 chance .bu t only the second unit t o a t tack will be ab leadvance, halving the number of units potentiacapable of making it ashore.N o d o u b t there will be a stinging rebuttalTHE GENERAL when this appears, but I haveown ideas a s to why this situation was not remedi1 discussed several options with Richard Hamba n d J i m Stahler. O n e was assigning air factorsunits ra ther than by h e x e s . . . ano ther wasallowa factor of "naval gunfire" against a n y coastal hego t the feeling tha t Richard would have likedimprove the s i tua t ion . . . but J i m Stahler, inchaof the design, strongly objected. One reason wplay balance-additional stacking of tactiaircraft might make the Allies too powerful in mgame a n d end-game. This was a smoke screenthink-the air rule is particularly easy to "ftunew-just by controlling the number of factoOther solutions a r e discussed later in the OptioRules section.More impor tan t is tha t J i m Stahler seemed vat tached t o some pet beach defenses of his trelied heavily o n factor-counting finesse . . . arather t h a n seeing this a s a problem, gloried in it.is, he can make five of the seven beaches well nimpregnable under the current rules, and the ottwo-Brittany a n d S o u t h France-are very subjt o being bottled up.feel tha t this is inappropriate. T h e Germshould be able, through adequa te concentrationmake three o r four areas nearly impossible, andgiven this-at least one should be fairly easy. Twould be the case-except that against a careful sup, the Allied player may not find his tactiaircraft to be of much help, a t least on attack. Wmakes the beaches s o much harder to attack nowtha t panzer units can swarm t o them quickly-famore s o t h a n in either of the earlier editions. I fthe Allied player needs something on the bookscounter-balance this.CARPET BOMBING-HAVE YOU EVER SEEN AB-17's VERSION OF ACARPET SQUARE?Last of the major innovations is CarBombing. This simulates the occasional diversionstrategic aircraft to massively bombard a small arwhich presumably conta ins enemy troops.As originally written, a carpet bombing attcould be made against a n y hex against whicha t tack had been made the previous turn. There wtwo attacks per game, and each added thcolumns to every attack made against enemy unin tha t hex that turn.

T h e results were devastating. HistoricaCarpe t Bombing raids caused the virtual annihtion of a division-sized unit o n two occasions, aallowed major Allied advances. T h a t happened htoo-but entire Corps in doubled positions wereusual targets . . . generally after being surrounby paratroopers. Via the mails, 1 screamedflailed my arms a b o u t . . . a n d was informed tCarpe t Bombing raids were no longer allowedcoincide with para t roop operations. Though twas a n artificial limitation, it was historicalplayed well.T h e main objection remaining was that carbombing raids were unreliable. Depending on hyou count, the Allies tried carpet bombing a t lfour (Hamblen's count) t o six (my count) timeand there was only a significant effect twice.other times, t roops were committed . . . but inst

8/13/2019 Ah Gen v14n6

10/40

P GE 1 THEGENER of racing into shattered and stunned enemy forces.they met heavy resistance. The rule did not reflectthat-instead it gave two reliable ham mer blows.S o it changed As now written. the Alliesreceive four. They still can't happen in conjunctio nwith airborne operations. and only one may occurper turn. In essence. when a hex is carpet-bombed .and any German unit there is attacked, two die rollsare mad e and the Allied player may choosewhich one applies.

In fact, the typicalarea being carpet bombed wasless than a mile square. and would affect only oneunit (or unit equivalent). The only affect on oth erunits would occur if the attack was successfulagainst th e target unit, and its premature collapseforced a general withdraw al in the area . While thatcan happen in the current rule, the statistics arewrong, or at least irrelevent. It seems to me that abetter rule would have six raids (my count ), each ofwhich would have about 3 chance of making thetarget unit highly vulnerable to a gro und attac k. If aground attack is made and succeeds, then thereshould be an enhanced capabili ty against other unitsin the same hex. A suggestion fo r accomplishing thiswill be provided later.

OPTIONAL RULESOptional Rules come in two flavors-thosethat are invoked primarily for play balance, andthose that areinvoked primarily for realism and /o rhistorical flavor. It's my own rule that tho se adopte dfor the former cause should have minimal impact onrealism and historical flavor. Fo rtun ately , in DDA Y, that's qu ite easy. Several tools are available.GERMAN REPLACEMENTSWhat is the appropriate number of Germanreplacements? On the scale of a simple, division-level wargame, how do you factor in equipme nt.type of personnel and non-combatant supportunits? The answer is, you don't. The 5 factors perturn represents a rough guess at the rate a t whichGermany could replace its military capacity, welltempered by considera tions of play balance. Valuesrunning fr om three t o seven per week could be justas appropriate. If you find one side winning toooften, just change the G erman replacement rate byone or two-you needn't agon ize over realism,because the concept is so abstract that it's onlymeaningful within broad bounds.ALLIED TACTICAL AIRAs I pointed out earlier, as originally proposed,the Allies started o ut with fou r T AC fac tors in earlydesigns-a num ber based simply on the designer's"feel" f or a good nu mbe r. Tha t was later raised tosix-based entirely on a "feel" for how big a roleairpower should play-no really hard numbers . If theAllies seem to win too often, try four or five. Noone's g oing to argu e tha t it's any less realistic.ALLIED REPLACEM ENTSIt does seem a little strange. Conside r just th eUSA-The United States of America. producing213 of the world's stee l. producin g ten to twentytimes as many aircraft as Germany's factorieshaving a population several times the size ofGermany's an d not having massive Russianattacks on the opposite flank (by comparison, theJapanese threat was smal l) . that mighty nation,in combination with the United Kingdom andnumerou s other Allies, can, at best, manage 60 ofthe German West Front Replacement Rate. Ah,come on. Maybe Germany was making moreefficient use of it's manp ower, and w as mobilized ata higher relative level, but even so.

This is not to argue that the Allied R eplacementrate shou ld be changed , but if you would like to forplay balance purposes, it would be the fanaticindeed wh o could argue that almost any change youcared to m ake might not be as realistic. Once again,replacements are something of an abstractiontreat them th at way. If the Axis seems to win toooften, try giving the Allied player a flat rate of one ortwo factors per turn, plus those for what objectivesare cap tured .GERMAN AIR POWERThe Germans had li t t le in the way of groundattack capabili ty in the we st. the game modelsthis as zero, which may be a bit too harsh. If youthink so, allow the German player one T AC factorper turn. I t would functio n exactly as those used bythe Allies, but fo r the Germ an instead.

AND RULES FOR EXTRA REALISMOR MORE FLAVORIn som e cases, these merely represent differencesin opinion between myself and the designers. Inothers, they represent things that were intentionallyleft o ut t o keep the game simple and similar to theolder versions. A r ationale is given with each rule-pick a nd choose as you like to make the game mostenjoyable.LIMITATIONS ON PARATROOPERSIn essence, I feel that paratro opers are toopowerful in D DA Y as currently construed. Troop sthat have just landed ar e not about to startorganizing the wide patrols and interdiction tha t adefending ground unit would have. The mission ofairborne troops is almost invariably to grabsomething and hang o n until support arrives. If theyattac k, it's strictly limited towar d seizing som eobjective. If they block retreat, it's typically in afairly small corridor. I therefore propose thefollowing limitation:Airborne units which airdrop on a given playerturn have no zone of control other than the hexupon which they land throughout th at player turn;i.e., they cannot block retreat through a hexadjacent to themselves during the player rurn inwhich they land. As soon as he other side begins thenext player turn, they function normally.FORTIFIED ZONESMany Siegfried Line fortifications took advan-tage of available rivers and canals. As a crudeabstraction, the following rule is proposed:When a German unit in a fortified zone hex isattacked by Allied units, all of which(ex c1udingair)are attacking across rivers or canals, the Germanunit (or units) islare tripled on defense.H E A D Q U A R T E R SThere is no reason why HQ units should not bereplaced-h istorically they were first to bereplaced-except that, by placing them on the fron tlines, the German player can do some veryahistorical things with them. There is a relativelysimple solution to b oth problems:A. Beginning with Tu rn 2, all HQun its may bereplaced each turn throughout the game, as long asthere is a place they can start and remain within theother limitations (e.g., stacking). Replacement ofHQ's in no way affects or is affected by thereplacement of other units.B. No HQ unit may be moved to or left in aposition w here it could be attacked in the followingplayer turn, except via air strikes, air drops, orinvasions. In certain areas, this restriction isignored:German HQ's east of the RhineGerman HQ's in ParisAllied HQ's fulfilling the supply function

C. For B, adequate distance an d/ or an inteposing barrier of friendly zones of control prevening enemy units exercising normal ground movment from coming adjacent constitutes adequaprotection from attack.D. If fulfilling B is impossible for some HQ'sthan these HQ's are not restricted by B. Nothowever, that the player must make every possibeffort to fulfill B, including the redeployment other com bat units (but not including air dropairstrikes, and/or invasions). Sea movementincluded. The enemy player may offer "helpfusuggestions" in this regard. to helpany HQfulfpart B.E. Even if an Autom atic Victory rule is used, thpossibility of an automatic victory need not bconsidered in determining adequate protection fulfill B.F. HQ units have no zone of control. Strategmovement is sti l l prohibited next to an enemy Hunit.In summ ary, the re will always be HQ uniarou nd but they usually won't be at the fronand won't be much goo d there when they are. Fairhistorical. I thin k.AUTOMATIC VICTORY

Under limited circumstances, some attackinunits may attac k u p to twice in a single player turTo achieve an a utomatic victory against a given hethe following conditions must be fulfilled:a ) All attacking units must have moved one heor less to have reached attack position.b) All defending units in the hex must battacked in a single attack.c ) The attack must be at odd s of 7-1 or betted) Th e defending hex must be clear, though thattack may be across a river or canal. I t may not bfrom the ocean (i.e., an invasion).If an au tom atic victory is achieved, all involveunits having a movement factor of four have rhoption to advan ce and attack again, participate other attacks yet to be resolved, etc., though the

cannot he lp make an o ther a t tack an au tomatvictory. Any, some, or all of the attac king unihaving a movement factor of four may advancemax imu m of tw o hexes, the first hex of which mube the defender's hex. Each unit may onparticipate in one autom atic victory per player turZone of control l imitations apply to additionadvance capabili ty allowed by the AutomatVictory Rule. If a unit uses this advance capabilitit uses it instead of (rather than in addition tnormal adva nce after combat. Each unit maadva nce in either mode , if allowed, or neither, bnot both in any given com bat resolution.ADVANCE AFTER COMBATIt always seemed strange to me that a unit coumove further by attacking tha n it could otherwisEven more fascinating, this applied only to attackin the most difficult terrain. The Strategic Movement rule solves part of this pro ble m. but not aof it. Static s still have the capability t o move threethey attack and two otherwise; for much Germainfantry, the values are four vs. three. Th e proposerule solves half the problem-the Strategic Movment variation (q.v.) speaks to the other half.

Whenever a defendin g hex is vacated as a resuof an attac k, the attack ing units may advance inthe hex, provided that stacking limits are nviolated, regardless of the presence of othe r enemzones of control. This advance must be takimmediately after resolution of the combat. (Tonly change is that all positions ma y be taken-notjust doubled and tripled ones).

8/13/2019 Ah Gen v14n6

11/40

THEGENERAL PAGESTRATEGIC MOVEMENTThis speaks to the other half of the problemdescribed above. All units may exercise strategicmovement, rat her than just Allied Units, Germ anPanzer, Panzer Grenadier, and Paratroopers.However, movement of other German units is onlyenhanced by one-i.e., a static division could movethree instead of two. Axis HQ's, however, get full(double) Strategic Movement.MINIMUM MOVEMENThave always felt that fluidity was helpful to theplay of most game s. . .and tha t D-DA Y had a hairtoo much of theS'set piece-gam e in it. Th e followingrule somewh at alleviates this and makessurrounds a bit more difficult to implement.If a unit is surrounded by enemy units, enemyzones of control, impassible terrain, and /o r neutralterritory, und er certain con ditions, it may still moveone hex to obtain more favorable position and/orescape being surrounded. If another friendlycombat unit can move adjacent to i t , it may move ontop of that combat unit . Of course, since this hexhas an enemy zone of c ontrol there, both units mustend their turn there and attack during the combatsegment. This special movem ent opti on may only beexercised during the movement portion of thefriendly player turn-retreats may not be mad e inthis way.SUPPRESSION O F ALLIED AIRPOWERThis, in an abstract way, simulates a Germ anairoperation that occurred during the Battle of theBulge. It was a massive strike against Allied airfieldsthat was moderately successful. .but cost the Axismost of i ts air attack capabili ty.Once per game, the Axis player may suppressAllied Airpower. The effect is to lower the numberof TAC factors by two for that entire turn, and tototally prohibit the use of T AC factors within fivehexes of any hex the Axis player chooses for thatturn. The decision to employ this option must bemade immediately at the start of the Allied playerturn, except that if the Weather Rule is employed,the Axis player may wait to see the prevailingweather and make the decision immediatelyafterwards.If German TAC Air Power is being used,exercising this option prevents use of German T ACAir for that turn a nd the rest of the game.Even if this opti on is exercised, the Allied P layermay al'ways fly TA C Air missions with in two hexesof the coa st (thoug h the overall total is still reducedby two), weather and available factors permitting.

CARPET BOMBINGI feel that the following rule better reflects theuncertainty associated with Carpet BombingOperations.The Allied Player receives up to six carpet bo mbattacks per game. A maxim um of one per turn maybe made, and a maxim um of two may be made on orlater than the 14th week. No carpet bombing attackmay be m ade within five hexes of a simultaneous.airdrop.Carpet bombing is used strictly in support ofnormal com bat, and m ay only be used against Axisunits in a hex which was adjacent to an Alliedcombat unit at t he beginning of the current Alliedplayer turn. The primary attack must be directedagainst one unit in a hex and, while being carpetbombed , the unit being bombed m ust be attacked byground/TAC units separately from all other unitsand before any other units in the same hex. Prior toresolution of the ground combat against the carpetbombed unit, a carpet bombing effectiveness roll ismade, and the result from the table at r ight isapplied.

NAVAL GUNFIRE SUPPORTThis is probably a reasonable optional rule,regardless of whether you increase the efficacy ofairpower o r not. It solves som e of the nasty onefactor short situations which abound o n the coast.Whenever a coastal hex with one o r moreGerman units in it is attacked by Allied Groundunits, there is always one add itional factor of NavalGunfire Supp ort available to assist the attack. Onlyone factor per hex is available, so if mo re than o neattack is made against the hex, only one of theattacks get the benefit of Naval Gunfire Su ppo rt.TACTICAL AIRRight now , TA C is assigned to a hex, and helpsall attac ks against th at hex or, if in defense, assistsall units defending. Note t hat if two 4-4-4's are ondefense, if attacked together, they're worth 9 Ifattac ked separately, they're worth 5 5 10.Similarly, if three static divisions are being attac kedby three 5-5-4 arm ored units, if one attack, it's 2-1f threeat tack s, it's three3-1's. I think this can beeasily corrected.Close Atta ck Support-T he Allied player mayuse one TA C fac to r to add one a t tack fac to r to anyAllied combat unit for th at player turn. There is amaximum of one TA C fac to r of C lose A ir Suppor tper Allied Unit, but both units in a hex could havean addition by using two TAC Factors.Close Defensive Support-T he Allied playermay use one TAC factor to add one defense factor toany Allied com bat unit for th at playerturn. There isa m aximum of one TAC factor of Close DefensiveSup por t per Allied unit, bu t all Allied units in a hexcould have an addition by using more than one TACfactor.RAILROAD MOVEMENTOnly Germa n units may use rail movement. Railmovement must s tart in a city, fortress, or starredhex, but may terminate anywhere to whichmovement is possible, other than where there areenemy units, enemy zones of control, impassibleterrain, neutral countries, or aerial interdiction.There m ay be up to five German units moving byrail during any player turn. The procedure is asfollows:

I German units in supply in a city, fortress, orstarred hex a re turned over at the beginning of theplayer t urn to signify tha t they are entraining. Thismay no t occu r if the hex is in an allied zone ofcontrol. Entrained units have no existence forcombat purposes, and if an enemy combat unitmoves on top of them, they are eliminated. Theseunits do noth ing more this player turn, and do notcount against the rail movement maximum.Entrained units do not inhibit enemy strategicmovement.2. The player tu rn after loading, these units (upto five) may be moved t o any positon on the boardto which they can trace an unobstructed line ofhexes. Obstruction s include enemy units, enemyzones of control, impassible terrain, the ocean,neutral countries, th e dike, areas of aerial interdic-tion, and any friendly unit being subjected to unitinterdiction. The destination must be closer to anunentrained German combat unit than toa ny Alliedground or parachute unit , unless such Allied unit isat least ten hexes away. Upon arrival, the unitremains entrained.

3. On the following friendly player turn, the unis flipped over at the start of the player turn and mamove normally. Alternately, the unit may remaentrained and/or move again. If it moves by rail,must remain entrained at the end of the turn.4. Areas of aerial interdiction are within thrhexes of any a ir unit assigned to river interdiction o(new task) Rail Road interdiction. Railroainterdiction works just like river interdiction, excetha t the only thing it inhibits is rail movement withthree hexes, and it may be assigned anywhere.5.