[WarInEur] Allied Partisans

[Kent & Sue Haunschild]

Not sure what you alternative is.  Are you saying that the players should not be given a choice and forced to play with post SPI game distortions or are you saying that the three big changes cadre per turn, cut rail, and ZOC to ZOC should  be options?
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: sgm 
  To: kentsue at cox.net 
  Cc: Warineur 
  Sent: Friday, August 03, 2007 12:41 PM
  Subject: Re: [WarInEur] Allied Partisans


  I vote for the alternate view.

  Reason?

  A calculating German commander can skimp on garrisons knowing the maximum level of partisan contamination he is going to suffer. In reality (perhaps) the failure to provide an adequate garrison should enable the local underground to develop and expand. Their restriction in recruitment is in no way cramped by this inadequate garrison, so the running sore remains a problem, and will get worse unless a timely effort is made by the occupier. 
  In other words the penalty is there, but it should not be a penalty that the occupying power can afford to ignore for ever, this acts as a further incentive for him to actually do something or the situation continues to get out of hand...it is sufficiently slow that he can take action...but if he leaves it, then the situation only gets worse. I.E. a shortfall of 1 in the garrison is no disincentive, and he has no need to take timely remedial steps, there will only ever be that one extra unit loose. 1 additional partisan per turn, now he really has to think about dealing with it.

  -|steve|-

  kentsue at cox.net wrote: 
    I know this has been argued on the List before but have forgotten the consensus view.

    The rules state that if the Axis fail to garrison a country the Allied player may place Partisan Cadre in number equal to the shortfall between the required garrison and the actual garrison.

    Some players interpret this to mean that if the Axis have 29 divisions in France the Allies may place one Partisan Cadre in France.

    Other players interpret it this to mean one Partisan Cadre per turn as long as the short fall exists.  Players who hold to the first view claim that this interpretation allows the Allied player to place more than the garrison shortfall.

    If I remember correctly, those players who wanted to expand the partisan capabilities I.E. Let them cut rail rather than, merely block rail movement and move from one enemy ZOC to Another so they can't be trapped, wanted to put all 21 Partisans in a country even if the short fall only a single division.

    I have a problem with these enhancements to Partisan capabilities because it distorts the game in which SPI included the Partisans for historical flavor and suggested that the players might want to ignore them in the interest of speed in what was an already long game.  By the time the DG rewrite was complete, rules which were suggested options by different player groups, were no longer options but written into the basic game.

    Anyway, what should the choices be for CWIE2?

    Go with the SPI rules as written and then have Options for Partisans cut rail (already included) , one partisan Cadre Per turn per garrison shortfall, and Partisan Units can move from ZOC to ZOC (When under an Axis unit)?

    This would allow players who believe that the original SPI rules were correct could play that way, while those who believed that Partisan Capabilities should be enhanced could select the Options they want.

    Kent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
WarInEur mailing list
WarInEur at mailman.halisp.net
http://mailman.halisp.net/mailman/listinfo/warineur
  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.halisp.net/pipermail/warineur/attachments/20070803/3b7112d8/attachment.html