Historical vs Ahistorical...

[aphrochine]

I know the debate is as old as sin, but what I'm looking for is more of your definitions of historical vs ahistorical play...?? We've discussed this at great length in our group, but I'm interested in others' opinions of it.


Is historical...

-no wars until danzig (except china and spain)?
-forced historical alliances?
-no doctrine switching?
-comintern and allies working together against axis?
-Axis is THE instigator?
-no government type changes?
-limiting certain nations for players?
-forced Vichy?

...??

Thanks!

 

[aphrochine]

 

[unmerged(46467)]

I would look around the forums to see what's posted, in the meantime I can send you a copy of the Aussie rules, which are the best IMO, they just need to be tweaked a bit.

 

[aphrochine]

Thanks.

 

[unmerged(77132)]

I would like to see a rule allowing Germany to DOW Rep Spain if the Natys hold on until, say, Jan.1, 1939, but that is just my opinion. That is about all the ahistorical wars I could go with though.

 

[unmerged(49695)]

take the spartan rules, they are the best imo