Russia

[fanofbond]

I like the inexpierenced ��� plane idea.

[Lozmoid]

I like that idea too. I am currently working on an advanced Europe game myself, 1941 style. And so I am working on initial placements for the Soviet armies at the moment, based on data taken from my Hearts Of Iron II game. But will it work for A&A? Yes, the Soviets were unprepared, but they still had so many troops... it's giving me headaches at the moment! 

[Flashman]

Stalin wouldn't consider attacking Germany - he'd signed a treaty, hadn't he?

Until Germany attacks, Russia is on a peace footing, i.e. is has a spending limit and maximum establishment.  Of course it can attack small countries assigned to it under the Pact...

[SgtBlitz]

If Russia is eliminated early, then Germany would have only one front to contend with.

Ehhhh... If Germany starts the game with one foot in France it'd kinda be folly to go after Russia at game start, especially if they're at peace.

I'm guessing whatever Germany builds in the first three turns is what she'll have available for Russia when war is imminent.

But, yeah, IF Germany had been able to somehow get around Poland and the French and English guarantees of war dec with the Polish invasion in 1939, THEN she would have had full confidence of the West in invading and conquering Soviet Russia.  I think if Germany had gone after "Anchluss"ing German citizens and German land in Poland FIRST instead of Czechoslovakia she might have gotten away with it under appeasement with Chamberlain.  BAM.  Legal (well almost legal) road to invasion of Russia without promises of Allied war declaration intact.

Of course, Germany would have been short of several tanks and munitions factories she annexed from Czechoslovakia, but at least the road would have been open.

[Brain Damaged]

Don't get all historical on me Mr. Blitz, I am strictly talking game strategy here.

[bennyboyg]

We should make a thread that only includes history discussions so we don't have them going on everywhere

[Brain Damaged]

We should make a thread that only includes history discussions so we don't have them going on everywhere

We do, it's in other forums called, imagine this, World War II History:

 http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?board=57.0

[bennyboyg]

Well then it should be used correctly then!

[Brain Damaged]

Well then it should be used correctly then!

Somehow, history always gets mixed up in most of the discussion here, because A&A is a historical game, or I should say loosely based on a historical event.

[xzorn]

Well, that's because the game is supposed to follow history as closely as possible while also
1) Not forcing the players to make the same decisions (but encouraging them a bit)
and
2) Ensuring balance and fairness, an element not completely in line with history

[idk_iam_swiss]

Thats typically how n00bs think. The axis can win. And they frequently do if Germany builds a navy and keeps Americas  hands out of Europe.

[The Fire Knight]

Well, that's because the game is supposed to follow history as closely as possible while also
1) Not forcing the players to make the same decisions (but encouraging them a bit)
and
2) Ensuring balance and fairness, an element not completely in line with history

I agree completely.

[Brain Damaged]

well if you want to replay the war then axis always lose allies always win.

That is why the game can never be too consumed with being exactly like history. Changes have to be made to give each player a fair chance at winning and the freedom to make different dicisions than what the historical leaders did.