Game: War in Europe

Image

ealdrich — 2008-09-15T04:35:17+00:00

Back of an unauthorized expansion. These are the German counters. I saw multiple copies of this floating around Southern California in the late 1980s.

Image

ealdrich — 2008-09-15T04:33:19+00:00

Unauthorized amateur expansion. Probably from the early 1980s. Had to mount the color sheets to supplied cardboard and cut the counters yourself

Thread: Re: Quick Comments

IanR — 2008-02-02T06:17:00+00:00

chiggy_v wrote:
They are in the process of reworking the game for the PC now, I hope they will have it up and running in a few months. There is a chance they will include attacking on the march, I've tested it in France 1940 and they last 8 turns instead of 5 months!

Charles, if the Anglo/French armies move headlong into Belgium and allow themselves to be surrounded, then France will only last 8 weeks regardless of what rules set you use. If you want the Axis to have the benefit of hindsight as they do in the game you also have to give it to the Allies (which includes the Soviets).

And as to Moscow and Rostov the Axis did not take Moscow, briefly took Rostov in late 41( while out of supply in real terms) and were booted out, and they did not invade the UK either. If anything the game in standard form is biased towards the Axis because they can take Lennigrad with relative ease (which they didn't IRL)using paratroops and amphibious assault, in full supply.

XTR/Command's Proud Monster combines the basic War in Europe map (hex for hex, plus the Minsk-Moscow highway, but simplified in terms of railway lines etc), the PGG/Lennigrad mechanics/riles, and a much simplified supply attenuation rule. It also has 'sudden death' rules like WitE 1, and the fixed starting date like Wite 1. That seems to be the game you want WiE to be.

PM is a great game for about the first 5 turns, it seems to reproduce historical results, but unfortunately after that it falls apart. The Axis have been made too good.

Thread: Re: Board War in Europe rule question

IanR — 2008-02-02T05:43:09+00:00

kbernatz wrote:
(have emailed Doc Cummins, as well)

We're in the middle of a great game of this monster,

So, how did it play out?

Image

Xookliba — 2007-08-31T02:30:49+00:00

Terrain charts, cyberboard example

Image

Xookliba — 2007-08-31T02:29:54+00:00

Cyberboard turn record track, detail

Image

Xookliba — 2007-08-31T02:29:03+00:00

The production "spiral," cyberboard-style

Image

Xookliba — 2007-08-31T02:27:28+00:00

Axis air charts (one of the many charts in cyberboard form)

Image

Xookliba — 2007-08-31T02:25:45+00:00

The western front, 1939 (cyberboard detail)

Image

Xookliba — 2007-08-31T02:24:48+00:00

The huge map, from the excellent cyberboard gamebox by Hiroshi Kasama

Image

Xookliba — 2007-08-31T02:23:16+00:00

Campaign game setup (cyberboard)

Thread: Re: Board War in Europe rule question

IanR — 2007-06-23T12:00:14+00:00

This situation was dealt with in CWIE1.

Once you have no air left to build, the % requirement is dropped. Even if you did build the last few that same production phase.

Unlike the Soviet situation - which applies to new builds only - you do have to build all your ATPs and rebuild any available destroyed aircraft, and they do count.

Ian

Thread: Board War in Europe rule question

kbernatz — 2007-03-23T15:24:41+00:00

(have emailed Doc Cummins, as well)

We're in the middle of a great game of this monster, but reached an unusual situation. Due to a GE decision to not build any Uboats, both the Allied player and the GE player are out of air assets to build. The rules state that at least 30% (for GE) or 40% (for Allies) of spent production must be spent on air assets...but what does one do if there are no air assets to build? The three options we came up with were:

1) per the rule, you need to spend 30% or 40% of all production spent on air assets. If no air assets available, then you can't spend any production points at all and must save them all (since 30% of 0 = 0).

2) follow the corrolary with Soviet mandatory air builds, that if either GE or the Allies build out all their air assets, then they are exempt from being required to build the minimum 30 or 40% from then on (i.e. Soviets must build 2 new AP's/turn, until they run out of APs, at which point the rules explicitly state that the Soviets no longer are required to build 2 AP's/turn).

3) allow the Allies and GE to produce normally, but 40 or 30%, respectively, of their spent production is lost. E.g. if GE has, and wants to spend, 150 production points, they would have to spend 30% on ficticious (sp?) air assets, or 45 production points. However, nothing would be placed on the production spiral for these "spent" 45 points. They could then spend 105 points on other things. They would end the production cycle with 0 saved production points and 105 points worth of stuff on the spiral.

Anyone knowing which way is definitively correct, would be appreciated. Thanks.

-Kevin B.

Thread: Board War in Europe rule question

kbernatz — 2007-03-23T15:24:35+00:00

Image

madmanrick — 2007-02-24T18:22:01+00:00

WiE flat pack front cover

Thread: Re: Quick Comments

chiggy_v — 2005-12-02T01:45:15+00:00

They are in the process of reworking the game for the PC now, I hope they will have it up and running in a few months. There is a chance they will include attacking on the march, I've tested it in France 1940 and they last 8 turns instead of 5 months!

Thread: Re: Quick Comments

Karlsen — 2005-08-16T21:16:53+00:00

chiggy_v wrote:
Let me list the flaws, France can not be taken until late summer, that means no real shot at invasion of england.
[My comments all based on the SPI edition]

Why not? With historical set up and historical moves it flows almost exactly the same as it did in 1940.

If you don't use historical setup you can take France in 1939, sure it costs you a few more casualties than in 1940, but you get all that yummy French production and put the allies on a big back foot.

From memory invading England in War in Europe is tough, much tougher than say World in Flames.

I've also seen Moscow fall, it's not easy, but you can do it. Although in the first year is a big ask, and hardly "non-historical".

I don't even know how much it costs these days, a huge amount I am sure. I am not here to defend War in Europe on price though.

Thread: Quick Comments

chiggy_v — 2005-08-16T12:40:39+00:00

For all its following by the faithful, this game is seriously broken and totally non-historical and a waste of your money!

Let me list the flaws, France can not be taken until late summer, that means no real shot at invasion of england. The english can take Narvik and remove alot of your production or simply crush the itals before you can help them.

Russia, forget about Moscow or Rostov, there is no way you will take either the first year.

If you guy this game you best have your developers hat on to fix the above problems. If ever a game cried out for an attack on the march combat system this one does, without it russia and france are wwi more then wwii!

Don't waste your money!

Thread: Re:I Played This Monster!

Nerb — 2004-12-14T01:00:17+00:00

pfong (#30516),

Hello Albert

Nice article, Decision Games is going to be making War in Europe again and I was wondering if you consider the $240+ price tag worth it? Also do you think the game would be OK as a solitare game? This game just looks soooooo good to me.

Thread: I Played This Monster!

pfong — 2004-03-15T08:32:30+00:00

I played this as a teenager, must be 20 years ago know. A friend set it up in a spare room during the school holidays and we played for days, only breaking for meals. I was playing the Western Allies and sent every unit that was available from French Africa and the the BEF to France to defend against the initial Axis assault. I defended in depth, two hexes deep from the Maginot Line to the coast. I remember that the Germans were not able not able to break through to Paris despite all out assaults and airdrops on the defenders until way past the historical French surrender date. After this less than stellar start the German player offerred a draw, and after days of play, I was quite happy to accept!