Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
But What If? A Historical Analysis Of A3R’s/ERS’s Optionals by Charles E. Duke The Boardgamer Volume 5, Issue 4 October 2000 THIRD REICH was wonderful. I played it until the German counters were so worn out that they were more white than black. But still, it had some unrealistic quirks, nooks, crannies and dark places which prevented it from being truly great. I witnessed the evolution from second to third to fourth edition rules, with improvements that were mostly cosmetic; many of the basic flaws remained. So when ADVANCEDTHIRD REICH was announced, I was a bit skeptic; in fact, I delayed quite awhile before buying it. Once I did, however, I found a masterpiece. Everything in this game and its sister EMPIRE OF THE RISING SUN seems to fit perfectly, and they work as well oiled machines. For all their abstractness (how much detail can you expect at this level) the A3R/ERS system is very realistic and historically sound; so much, that if players follow more or less the same strategies as their historical counterparts, it is almost a narrative of World War II. All that I have said up to this point applies to the "clean" game, played without variants, Research or Diplomacy. It would appear that most people prefer to play with these, but personally the "clean" version is my favorite; play balance is almost perfect and you can concentrate on the strategic and economic aspects. When other elements are used, a "wild" factor is introduced. This may well be what many players like about the options; that’s O.K., but from a historical point of view how authentic are they? Also, what impact do they have on the beautifully balanced "clean" game? Some time ago, a friend talked me into playing ERS with five! variants per side. This was unusual, as I rarely accept more than two (and, as I just said, I actually prefer none). My opponent got the Japanese and, among other items, he picked "Serious Unrest in India" (variant 2) and "Japan Varies Occupation Policies in China" (variant1). Both give the Japanese player additional troops. I spent most of that game whining about how I had been forced to face these unrealistic armies, how they had unbalanced my whole position in Asia, and so on. Also, the fact that I received some unimpressive Allied variants added insult to injury. The bitter taste of that game lingered. Recently, however, leafing through a WWII Encyclopedia, I came across some sections that described in detail Wang’s collaborationist forces and the Indian National Army (see elsewhere in this article). So they had really existed! They are part of a rather obscure area of WWII which is not covered in most popular history books, or is mentioned only in passing. It dawned upon me that not only were these particular variants based on reality, but also that the normal game was depriving the Japanese player from assets that he should have! This prompted me to investigate how other options fared in the test of history, and that is the purpose of this article. In the discussion below, I sometimes appear to suggest some changes to the normal rules. These are only for argumentative purposes; i.e., to present an idea of what the rules should be to better reflect historical fact. I'm not proposing a game Variant. Of course, you are free to try these variations, but be warned that they could have a dramatic impact on play balance. VARIANTS Just as with alcohol, I'd rather not take any, but I must admit that one makes the party more interesting, and two is my limit. The problem with variants is that while some are very powerful, others are insignificant. If one side gets a strong variant (or combination thereof) and his opponent's pick is weak, play balance suffers. In my very personal view, which the patient reader is entirely free to digress with, too many variants ruin the near-perfect essence of the game. Most variants are covered by Research projects, so I will analyze them under that heading. Others deal with purely hypothetical "what if" situations, which can be very interesting in themselves but it would be pointless to discuss them. They're the kind of stuff that you can spend hours arguing about with fellow amateur historians and get nowhere. If only Hitler hadn't stopped the panzers at Dunkirk; if only Stalin had been purged, etc. There is one variant that merits separate comments, however. Axis Variant 8: The German invasion of France catches Allies by surprise. All Allied and Minor Country infantry and replacements, in all types of hexes, are subject to a -1 DM. This variant is closer to historical fact than the normal game. Although the German offensive was expected to occur sooner or later, the prolonged Phony War had lulled the Allies into what may be described as "All Calm on the Western Front". Many people hoped that perhaps a treaty or truce could be arranged, or that the war could go on indefinitely without changes in the status quo. The Allied High Command was counting on a repetition of World War I with a massive struggle in Belgium and a stabilization of the front. The Germans completely shocked the Allies with paratroopers, armored formations, air superiority, the vonManstein plan, etc. The Minors were taken in a few days, and France fell in less than two months. This variant neatly simulates that shock effect. It could even lead to the fall of France in a single season; good history, but play balance... RESEARCH The research rules are most intriguing, and to play with them is tons of fun, if you don't care too much about realism. It's like a magical fair: What rabbit will the other magician pull out of his hat this turn? Well, wait until he sees the tiger that I'm going to pull out of mine! Some research projects are too easy to achieve; they are virtually guaranteed with a minimum of effort. The question is, was it really that easy to augment the Italian Army; to cause unrest among the Muslims; or to expand the activities of Russian partisans? Shouldn't there be a trade-off; if you gain this you lose that? An average game played with research will end with both sides having achieved ten or more projects, assets that historically the powers never had. This is the equivalent of playing with ten variants per side. If you like plenty of these, you will like playing with research rules; if like me, you prefer clean games, then you might have a problem with Research. The "clean" game is a fine simulation of WWII; with Research or variants, it is anything but. More important for competitive gamers is the issue of lost assets. When you play with Research, a number of items that you take for granted in the normal game are taken away and you must recover them through Research. So far, so good, but are these losses equitative? The number of items that both sides lose in A3R seems balanced, but if we go to ERS, we find that the Japanese loses only two assets: a favorable ASW DRM in 1944 and Fortifications. The Allies lose favorable DRM’s for SAC in 43, 44, 45 and 46; favorable DRM’s for torpedoes in 44 and 45; favorable DRM’s for ASW in 40, 41,42, 43, 44, 45 and 46; an increase in shipbuilding; three artificial ports; a Magic counter; and of course, the A-bomb, which represents at least four different and costly projects and the construction of five bombs by 1946. 20+ items! If we assume that a player will try to recover his lost assets before anything else, and average dice rolls, the Allies must spend the entire war just to achieve this, and will even probably fall short by some items. On the other side, the Japanese can easily recover his two lost assets and then go on to achieve at least half a dozen other projects. This isn't fair! I never accept to play ERS as the Allied player using Research. Back to the purpose of this article, I will now discuss some research projects in the light of history. Air Nationality DRM: During the war no power developed a superiority in training and aircraft quality which would amount to a +1 DRM in the game. What happened was that every power (even Italy) more or less kept up with the technological progress of the others. To get an idea, they began with the P-39 (U.S.), Hurricane I (Britain), Me-109 (Germany), I-16 Rata (Russia) and Cr-42 Biplane (Italy), as their main fighters. They ended with the P-51, Tempest, FW190D, Yak 9 and Macchi 202, respectively. Although they had their crises, as the British during the Battle of Britain, the Germans in 1944-45 and the U.S. after Pearl Harbor, they managed to keep a minimum of pilot quality. Perhaps you have noticed that I haven’t mentioned Japan. This is because it is a notable exception to the statements I made in the preceding paragraph. This country began the war with extraordinary Navy pilots and the superb Zero; certainly the +1 for Japanese elite units of the early war is well justified. However, they stuck to the same aircraft types for virtually the entire war, and the quality of Japanese pilots decreased dramatically over the years. This is not represented in the game, but I think that it would demand that the Japanese Air Nationality DRM be reduced to -1 in1943 (not affecting any surviving elite units). Of course, the -1 could be offset by Research. Force Pool Additions (in general): The Force Pools in A3R/ERS are, of course, abstract representations which the game designers defined to reflect the average forces which the different powers fielded during the war. They do so quite effectively. Expanding a Force Pool is a hypothetical situation which falls into the realm of "what if", and if you add to this the fact that they don't represent historical orders of battle, an analysis seems to be pointless. However, something comes to my mind regarding these additions in the game. Augmenting a Force Pool is not so much a matter of technical research (as the powers already know how to make rifles, trucks, airplanes, ships, etc.) but of expanding the armies at the expense of the Home Front (the laborers, farmers, clerks and defense forces taken away from their normal occupations). Even the decision of making more ships, planes, or tanks than the system is actually producing (including replacements for depleted units) would simply the sacrifice of something else, as the industry would be stretched beyond its natural limits. An idea that I have had for a while about what would be more realistic in this aspect of the game is to use the normal (not Global War) Force Pools as the basis for what the country's infrastructure can handle. Beyond that, you can expand the Force Pool when and as you wish (except that you can’t receive special units before their normal date of availability). No research, but you must decrease your country's Base by the cost of the units added. Further, as usual they are just added to the Pool and must be built. Alternatively, a limit of how much Base you can convert to Force Pool can be imposed. Also, you can remove units from the game (even those from the original Force Pool) and increase your Base by their value. Jets: Although Germany is generally hailed as the country that invented the jet fighter (the Me-262, operational in 1944), few casual students of WWII realize that other powers also developed it. Britain had the Gloster Meteor, which was used primarily to defend against the V-1 Flying Bomb; it also appeared in1944. The USA built the P-80 Shooting Star, but it was a bit late as the first units equipped with it began arriving in Italy a few weeks after the war in Europe had ended. An encounter between enemy jet fighters would have been most interesting, but unfortunately for military history students it never happened. Germany also built other jets, like the Arado 234 bomber and He-162 fighter, and the rocket fighter Me-163. In a historically-minded game, I would give Germany a jet counter in Fall 1944 and Summer 1945; Britain would get one in Winter 1944, and the U.S. one in Fall 1945. Rockets: The V-1 Flying Bomb was a small pilotless aircraft powered by a pulse engine. It was test-launched in December 1942 by Werner von Braun, of NASA fame, and ordered into mass production in 1943. The first bombs were launched against London on June13, 1944. Only about a third of these weapons reached their targets; the rest crashed or were shot down. From October 1944, Belgian cities came under attack, especially Antwerp, the chief supply port for the Allies in Europe. London was resumed with an extended range version fired from launchers in the Netherlands. They were also used tactically, such as in the Battle of the Bulge. Altogether, over 10,000 V-1s were launched against England. The V-2 Rocket Bomb was a parallel development. It was first fired in October 1942, but due to it being complex and expensive, production was delayed until 1944. The first V-2 was launched against London on September 8, 1944. Until March 1945 a total of 1,054 rockets fell on England; of these, 517 reached London. They were also used against Antwerp. In the game, allow the German a 12-13 Rockets result in Summer 1944, 14-15 in Winter 1944, and 16 in Spring 1945, reflecting Flying Bomb improvements. Paradoxically, a 17 result would come into effect in Fall 1944 (before the 14-15 and 16 results!). Remember that the development of these weapons was parallel. An 18 result would be applicable in Spring 1945. Strategic Bombers: As is well known, only the U.S. and Britain developed and used important strategic bombing forces. I won't go into a lengthy discussion of these. The only other power to come anywhere near was Germany. Early in the war, prototypes of two four-engine bombers, the Ju-89 and the Do-19, were presented to Göring, but he turned them down in favor of smaller two-engine types which were already in production. He has been much criticized for the decision, but it was probably correct at the time. Building the large planes would mean much less medium types, and would Germany have achieved what it did without them? Another project was the He-177 Ural bomber, that would have been operational in 1941 except for a silly requisite of the Luftwaffe: It had to be able to dive-bomb! Again, Göring has been blamed for the stupidity, but it seems that he's not guilty of this one. The designers had to couple each pair of engines, a technical nightmare which caused all sorts of trouble like spontaneous fires. Maintenance was very difficult. The final result became operational in late 1942 and looked to the casual observer as a bimotor. 1,146 were built and they were used in many roles (including as transports in the siege of Stalingrad). They could carry 6,000 kg of bombs (the B-17 carried 2,722 kg and the Lancaster 6,350). Incidentally, it was able to dive-bomb. However, Germany never engaged in a serious Strategic Bombing campaign, so I consider that allowing the U.S. and Britain to build strategic bombers and nobody else, as in the normal game, is the more historically accurate option. More practically, Germany resorted to a “poor man's" solution, using medium and light bombers in the Battle of Britain which is appropriately represented in the game by the German Bombing of Britain rules (43). The Western Allies also made extensive and effective use of tactical air forces against strategic targets in Germany towards the end of the war, and carrier-borne aircraft did the same against Japan. This is not simulated in the game. Perhaps a general rule would be more realistic, where any major power can use air factors to bomb an enemy major power’s objective cities (ICs in the case of Russia) in range, while the enemy may defend as per rule 43. Allied bombings would reduce U.S.-Axis tension, just as Axis bombings increase it. The Japanese Bombing rules (ERS 43) would still apply, and carriers on patrol could send their aircraft on these missions. Air Supply: Both sides were able to supply by air small bodies of friendly troops. The Germans had kept several pockets supplied in the infamous Russian winter of 1941-42, which was one of the reasons which made them so confident that they could repeat the trick at Stalingrad. In Burma, the Allies found that aircraft were often the only effective means of keeping the front-line troops supplied, especially during the Chindit expeditions and the battle around Imphal in 1944. But air supply had its limitations. Göring's boast that the Luftwaffe could keep Stalingrad supplied proved to be empty, and the U.S. and Britain failed to keep their high-speed advance across France in late Summer1944 supplied by air. In both cases, transport aircraft proved insufficient to meet the demand. In game terms, I would assign the Germans the ability to supply one unit by air, and the Western Allies two. Airborne: In 1922 Soviet soldiers were dropped successfully by parachute, an event that didn't go unnoticed by German observers attached to the Red Army. However, it wasn't until 1938 that Major-General Student was ordered to create an airborne arm. The world's first airborne combat operation was mounted on April 9, 1940 during the Norwegian campaign; a month later German paratroopers were used in the assault against the Low Countries. On May 20,1941, Student successfully took the island of Crete solely by air assault, a feat demonstrating the strategic potential of these operations. However, dismayed by the heavy losses (a quarter of the forces involved were killed), Hitler decreed that the surprise element of airborne assaults was lost and that large-scale operations would no longer be undertaken. Except for isolated pinprick operations, Student 's fallschirmjägers were used as elite infantry for the rest of the war. The Battle of Crete had an opposite effect on the Western Allies, prompting the U.S. and Britain to develop and expand their airborne forces. British and American parachute detachments were used in the invasion of French North Africa and Sicily. Allied techniques were perfected by D-Day, when the British 6th and the American 82nd and 101st divisions were dropped. In August 1944 all Allied airborne formations were integrated into Lt. General Brereton's Allied Airborne Army, comprising the British 1st Airborne and the U.S. 18th Airborne Corps; these units were not nationality-exclusive, as both included formations from each country. Likewise, the Western Allied airborne units in the game could be considered to be of mixed nationality and usable by either power without need of being lent. In September 1944 the veteran U.S.82nd and 101st and the 1st British airborne divisions, along with the Polish parabrigade, were dropped during operation Market-Garden. It failed to establish a bridgehead across the Rhine, but in March 1945 during operation Varsity the 6th British and 17th U.S. achieved just that. The historical orders of battle and operational effects of both Germany and the U.S. would seem to justify only one airborne unit for each in the game, as it is. The second unit that both can get by Research falls into the category of hypothetical force pool expansions. Although the Soviets had been the pioneers of airborne warfare, it had been neglected after Marshal Tukhachevsky was purged in the thirties. Soviet parachute operations were confined to minor deployments, usually in conjunction with defensive amphibious operations in the Black Sea. I would say that they should have only one airborne unit in their normal force pool. The Japanese were quick to grasp the potential of parachute forces, and 1,800 marines were trained to drop from low altitudes. They captured the airfield of Menado, Celebes in January 1942. Also remarkable was an assault by a small team that captured the oilfields of Palembang, Sumatra. On February 20,1942, the 3rd Yokosuka battalion took part in the first vertical envelopment of an enemy force in history when they dropped behind Allied lines in Timor. The Allies also employed airborne forces in the Pacific, notably the 11 th U.S. division at Luzon in January 1945. Chindits: This was the name given to General Wingate's Long Range Penetration Groups, which fought behind enemy lines in Burma while being supplied by air. The first important, although relatively small, operation was Longcloth, which took part in February 1943 with mixed results. A more ambitious operation, Thursday, occurred in February-March1944 with larger forces. Part of these infiltrated while others airlifted. A road/rail block and two strongholds around airstrips were established, which were successful in drawing Japanese forces from the Imphal offensive. However, after Wingate's death in a plane crash on March 24, the Chindits came under Stilwell’s command and were thereafter used in a conventional role, for which they were ill suited. After suffering great losses the force was withdrawn and eventually dissolved. In the game, to simulate history the Chindit unit should be available as an addition in Winter1942. By the way, although it is not mentioned specifically in the rules, the Chindit should be able to overstack. Human torpedoes: These were used primarily by the Italians, but also by the British, Japanese and Germans. In what was probably their only unqualified success in the war, the Italians crippled the battleships Valiant and Queen Elizabeth in Alexandria harbor using Maiale torpedoes on December 19,1941, and also attacked shipping in Malta, Algiers and Gibraltar. The British used their version of the Maiale, the Chariot, to mount an attack on the Battleship Tirpitz in October 1942, which failed. However, attacks on Italian ships in Palermo and other ports were more successful. The Germans used the Mohr torpedo against shipping in the Anzio landings and later in Normandy, with negligible results. They were also used against Channel shipping (incidentally, the German torpedomen were usually from penal units). Likewise, the Japanese Kaiten (a suicidal weapon) had few successes, except on their first use at Ulithi in November 1944 where they managed to sink an American fleet tanker. In game terms, we would probably have to limit ourselves to the spectacular; I would give the Italians a two-dice-roll attack in 1941 or later, and the Japanese a one-die-roll attack in 1944 or later. Commandos: The first British Special Forces were formed in 1940 for the Norwegian campaign. From them evolved the Commandos when in Summer 1940 Churchill ordered that hit-and-run raids be conducted against occupied Europe. They mounted numerous operations, the most important being those at Lofoten, Dieppe and St. Nazaire. Hitler was so outraged by these tactics that he decreed that captured commandos be treated as spies (i.e., summarily executed) even if fully uniformed. Different but related units were the Royal Marine Commandos, dedicated to supporting major Allied landing operations, and which the game’s Commando units most likely represent. On the other side, the ability of these units to invade ports is historically questionable. More realistic would be to allow them to overstack in invasions. To represent Raiding Forces, allow a non-moving Commando unit in an Allied controlled, fully supplied port in the Atlantic to cause a one-BRP loss to Germany. A similar unit in the Med could cause the loss to either Germany or Italy, while one in the Pacific could inconvenience Japan in the same way. One commando unit should be available in Summer 1940 (so it can begin to annoy Hitler) and the other in Spring1944 representing the Royal Marines prepared for D-Day. Flexible deployment: Did it really take six months to move from the U.S. to the South Pacific? In Magellan's time perhaps. Why is it so slow, and why do you have to research the ability to get there? (Maybe Astronomy needs to be discovered. . . Er, no, that 's in CIVILIZATION). It was a long trip, but the difficulties could better be portrayed by doubling the SR cost. All the above apply to Flexible Deployment in A3R as well. Synthetic oil: The oil output for Germany during WWII was as follows: 1939 2.2 million tons 1940 3.3 million tons 1941 4.1 million tons 1942 4.9 million tons 1943 5.7 million tons 1944 3.8 million tons This production was insufficient to cover all of the Wehrmacht's demands, so Germany continued depending on the Romanian oilfields. When these were gone, oil shortages began (as the game portrays by implementing oil effects). As can be seen, Germany had synthetic oil production even before the war, and it remained relatively constant, so the game's Research results represent an expansion beyond the basic capability and therefore a "what if" situation. The normal game effects are closer to history. Fortifications: Construction of the Siegfried Line began in 1936 and accelerated in 1938, when the Todt Organization employed 500,000 workers and a third of Germany’s annual output of cement to complete it. The Line deterred a French invasion during the phony war and was used again in 1944-45. Therefore, the West wall should be in existence at game start! The fortification abilities of Germany, Russia and Japan are nearly legendary, as seen in Cassino, Stalingrad, the Atlantic Wall, Okinawa, etc. However, I wonder if this ability was really a trait of these nationalities or it stemmed from the fact that all were faced with a protracted defensive war. Anyway, I admit that the Fortification rules applicable to each of these three add a lot of flavor and should be included in any historically-oriented scenario. The Berchtesgaden fortress and the Bavarian Redoubt, of course, were only myths. Atomic research: Serious research into atomic fission began in England in the early forties, conducted mainly by Jewish refugee scientists that had fled Austria and Germany. However, Britain had more urgent technical needs in 1940, so the project was dropped. In Japan, K. Hagiwara foresaw the possibility of an U235 bomb, but no serious effort ensued. Igor Kurchatov in the USSR alerted his government to this, but the idea fell on deaf ears until May 1942, when Georgi Flerov stated that “his country must build a bomb without delay” and an intense espionage effort against the US program began, which bore its fruits in Russia’s post-war developments. In Germany the possibility of a bomb was largely overlooked; it was considered not feasible until the end of the war. However, a “boiler” (a controlled reaction) might be achieved. Heisenberg (famous for his “Uncertainty Principle”) led this effort, but it was seriously handicapped when the heavy water plant in Vemork, Norway, was sabotaged in February 1943. After this, atomic research was dropped entirely. During 1941 American scientists visited the United Kingdom and were very impressed. Until that time not a single member of the American team thought that fission was attainable before the end of WWII. The result was the Manhattan project, where the workers of the existing British effort were transferred. At an estimated cost of two billion dollars and a workforce of 600,000, the first atomic bomb was tested at Alamogordo, July 16, 1945.The Hiroshima bomb of August 6, 1945 was made of uranium, while the August 9 bomb at Nagasaki was made of plutonium. Most historians agree that Germany never had a real chance of developing an atomic bomb. In the game, especially when played with several variants and the Atomic Research Table, it is quite possible. Ethiopia: Italy’s East African operation did occur. Soon after Italy entered the war on June 10, 1940, forces under the Duke of Aosta invaded British border outposts in Sudan and Kenya, and conquered British Somaliland. However, despite overwhelming numerical superiority, the Italians failed to exploit the initiative and fell into a defensive state of mind. The British counteroffensive began in earnest on January 19, 1941 and after a somewhat difficult campaign Aosta surrendered on May 16, 1941. An important aftermath was that Roosevelt declared that the area was no longer a war zone, therefore allowing the still neutral US to send merchant ships to Suez. Chinese occupation policies: Japan’s occupation of China wasn’t nice. However, they did establish puppet governments in the different Army commands; these worked separately and often in rivalry. The Central China Expeditionary Army’s version was “The Reformed Government of the Republic of China”, seated in Nanking under Wang Ching-wei, a well-known politician who had defected to the Japanese out of rivalry with Chiang Kai-shek. Although discredited from the start, it did command certain resources. After 1939, the line between Nationalist and collaborationist forces became blurred. Some local commanders did the bidding of either side depending on their current calculations of survival and self-interest. Nationalist units were extra officially authorized to defect if the alternative was certain destruction, under the notion that they would change sides again in the future. This makes estimating puppet forces difficult, but one estimate places Wang’s forces at 900,000 in 1940; forces in Northern China may have been equally large. They were considered unreliable and viewed with contempt by their Japanese masters. In the game, it would seem that a 9+ effect is appropriate from the start. However, to reflect the lack of effectiveness of Wang’s units, they can’t attack. Also, I would make an exception regarding the Nationalist partisans and allow the existence of at least one. Indian subversion: The Indian Nationalist Army (INA) was formed by Mahan Singh and Major Fujiwara Iwaichi from Indian POWs in February 1942. It was poorly organized and had low morale. Out of 60,000 prisoners 20,000 volunteered. However, in December1942 Singh came under suspicion and was arrested; the INA virtually disbanded. In June 1943 it was reconstituted under the Indian revolutionary Subhas Chandra Bose. INA units were fragmented and attached to Japanese formations, and they had some success in sabotage, propaganda, translation, and as guides. 7,000 INA troops took part in the Imphal offensive, and later the INA participated in the defense of Burma. They continued to be poorly armed, and their morale was suspect. Vast numbers surrendered or deserted. Chandra Bose and the INA are considered patriotic figures in India even today. India suffered extensive but poorly organized subversion in the war’s early years, but it had been suppressed by1943. In game terms, a result of 9+ should come into effect in Summer 1943. Optionally, allow the Japanese to build one Indian partisan from game start. Varied occupation policies (Germany): One of the greatest blunders attributed to Hitler (he seems to have been an expert on such things) is the harsh treatment given to Soviet civilians in accordance to Ostpolitik. Many peoples, especially in the non-Russian Soviet republics, were ready to acclaim the Germans as liberators. Ucrania could well have become an important Axis Minor Ally. Even many ethnic Russians would have welcome the Nazis, considering them preferable to the Communists. Russian General Andrey Vlassov was captured in July 1942 and agreed to form an anti-Stalinist Russian Liberation Movement. Apparently he knew that he could not rejoin the Soviets as he faced severe punishment for losing his army. At first Vlassov was used only for propaganda purposes. Hitler didn’t take his appeals for a Russian Liberation Army seriously because he considered Slavs inferior, and he disapproved of this display of Russian nationalism. In June 1943 he forbade all further attempts. In November 1944 Himmler formed a Committee for the Liberation of the Peoples of Russia (KONR). The committee was allowed to form two divisions in January 1945 under Vlassov. The 2nd KONR never saw action, but 1st KONR did. Later, in May 1945, it fought in Prague against the Germans. The Wehrmacht made extensive use of Soviet POWs and civilians as auxiliaries (“hiwis”). Osttruppen were independent battalions or companies, officered by Germans, which were attached to German formations. Ostlegionen were nonSlav units formed by Armenian, Azerbaijani, Georgian, Caucasian, Turkestani and Tatar troops. Cossacks originated in communities on the frontiers of the Russian Empire, especially the Don, Kuban, Terek and Zaporozhie, considered non-Slav Aryans by the Nazis. A 15th Cossack Cavalry Corps was formed, and used against Tito in Yugoslavia. There were other units, such as the Kaminski brigade, which had 5,000 troops in 1942 and 10,000 in 1943. In1944 Kaminski himself became suspect and was shot, and the brigade was subsequently used by the SS in the suppression of the Warsaw ghetto uprising. Clearly, the research results for “varied policies” are not close to historical occurrence; they are an interesting “what if”. However, I would otherwise add two “Vlasov” 1-3 units to the German Force Pool, rebuildable, to represent the various Russian forces that served in the Wehrmacht. One would appear on the turn after war is on Russia, and the other in Winter 1944 representing the KONR divisions. CONCLUSION Many people approach wargames with a historic mind. They want to relive, or try to change, the events that the game intends to portray. For this purpose, A3R and ERS are very well suited, as long as the basic version is used. In my opinion, Variants, Research and Diplomacy rules alter the authenticity of the system without taking into account the impact those alterations would have had on the course of the war. I’m not saying that these options shouldn’t exist, or that players should confine themselves to the basic game. A German atomic bomb can be a possibility, but if the German player decides to pursue it, he should face some of the real difficulties and pay the penalties that such an effort would bring to his economy and his other needs. However, every work is perfectible, and I would like to see all the historical facts I mentioned in this article integrated into the rules in some manner that would not alter play balance. Also, I would like Research and Diplomacy to more realistically interact and reflect the issues at stake in WWII. Research should be limited to the investigation of technical breakthroughs; Intelligence could be an independent subsystem, with each country receiving “Intel points” each year, unrelated to Research or Diplomacy points. A pet idea that I have had for some time is that the actions of Minors would be better handled by Resistance tables, minimizing the luck factor which has such a heavy influence on Diplomacy as it is. DPs could still be used, but they would apply as modifiers. 2nd Edition Variant/Research/Diplomacy rules? Well, anybody interested?