A lot of posters seemed stunned at this scenario, never scene it ever happen or even could happen. Now that I mulled it over last night and looked at the rules and so forth it is very obvious to me why no one has ever scene this scenario. Because the scenario makes no logical sense.
Italy DOW on Russia and moves in 2 tanks into Eastern Poland.
Russia is now at war with Italy and can DOW on Germany at the start of their next turn, turn 3.
Germany on Turn 3 does not DOW on Russia and just non combats into Eastern Poland.
Russia at the start of Turn 3 DOW on Germany and off we go.There is no logical reason why Russia would not DOW on Germany at the start of Turn 3, none.
Heck you could argue that it makes no logical sense that Germany did not DOW on Russia at the start of G3 since Italy brought Russia into the war and Russia WILL DOW on Germany on R3.
Hi PainState,
From my perspective, if I was planning on doing a G3 Barbarossa AND I wanted to drive towards the south, then yes, it makes sense to not DOW. My stack will be together except for the minimum required mobile units and maybe 1 AAA in Poland so Russia doesn’t attack Poland to get their NO for occupying an Axis territory. But E. Poland will be real strong because the German air will be there and maybe bombers will also be in range of a raid on the Moscow factory. Also, 5 IPCs is more income than I’d probably get as Germany on the 1st turn.
There are a few disadvantages of course. 1, Russian blockers can’t be attacked. 2, the Scandinavian units are behind. But for me that’s ok, I just use them to lay siege anyways. I never expect to get Moscow on turn 6 anymore. I assume that the UK/Anzac and that lone French fighter are going to get to Moscow.Â
Minor Threat's NO Cards COMPLETE!
-
UPDATE! Alpha 3.9 NOs complete
These have been Completed! download them from the link below:http://www.mediafire.com/?nk6c9uzvdbyn5
Printer Settings:
Printer Color settings: I did these with RGB color setting, so they should print out slightly different with CMYK
Paper to Print these on: Photo Glossy, or Photo Paper. (if done with regular paper, or cardstock the results won’t be as great)
Paper Size: Letter 8.5 x 11These are National Objective cards, they are acquired by a player when the NO is met. This would make tracking the NOs a lot easier, because the player holds onto these cards indicating which NOs they have already met. Each of these cards has a number on the top that corresponds to the very same NO listed on my setup charts.
let me know what you guys think. -
Awesome!, however I don’t care for the numbered tabs on the tops, as their not really necessary and could easily bend or tear off. Regardless, I will be printing them and using them every global game I play. Can’t wait.
-
I forgot to mention, when a group of NO cards belonging to the same country are stacked, the numbered tabs align neatly from 1-(x),
for example:
Germany - would look something like this when stacked:
__ __ __ __ __ __
/ 1. / 2. / 3. / 4. / 5. / 6.
|Germany… |
| |
| |
| |
| |
|_________________________|this is will make it ideal for a “quick grab” instead of going through them one by one trying to figure out which is the NO. I will also be making sleeves for them with a killer cover on the sleeve. >=)
-
I saw that, and although it’s a nice novelty, it’s not very practical. I mean if Germany has the Ore NO card, and the Lenningrad NO card in it possession, does it really matter which number they are on Larry’s list? especially if the NO discription is printed right on the card. Don’t get me wrong, these cards are amazing and you do fantastic work, but sometimes you’re to much by the book. For example: your setup cards are listed in Larry’s order, but I would encourage you to make them more user friendly. Have players set up Russia from top to bottom, and Japan, Korea, Manchuria, Jehol ect… instead of jumping from mainland to island, mainland to island… It just takes the board longer to setup in my opinion. My thought is, who cares if the cards are numbered, however, I know that when I have an idea I believe in, nobody can talk me out of it. Again… Great work and I will be using all your materials weather you change anything or not.
-
these are freaking AWSOME! its what i was hoping someone would make but i didnt want ot ask anyone with the skills to do it!
i too dont see the need for the # tabs, but i run a game group, i will print them up as is and in a few weeks (mid june) i can give you some feed back on how they got recieved and if players went for or dind tevn notice the tabs. we ussully have 10 to 12 of us playing so i can see how they get used on 3 baords in one night.
GREAT JOB!
thanks!
-
National Objectives have been completed. please revise these for any errors that i may have missed before printing.
Also i didn’t get a chance to create any sleeves for these but it will be something i will develop in the future along with other projects. -
Thanks for all your hard work!
-
In Soviet NO 2 and 3, “Prestige” is spelled wrong. Â These are great charts! Thanks for your effort.
-
How about using those tabs for the amount of IPc’s that the particular goal gives? That would make it easy to sum them up. The other numbers aren’t really that important during play.
-
Just do you know China’s NO is worth 6 not 5 and you have to of the same one with Japan (the one with Borno, and you forgot the word and is one of those cards also)
-
The China NO should be $6, and yes…. There are doubles for the Japan NO, I was hopeing that MT would have fixed that.
-
hi try to print minor theat in media fire sai is damage why thank :? sorry for my englich is not perfect
-
noboby can help me?
-
The China NO for owning the Burma road is 6 IPCs, I’ve been waiting to re-print my deck, but I can’t believe this hasn’t been fixed yet on your cards.
-
Question for the newbie. The UK’s one and only national objective, hold on to all their territories in their European economy (and West India has been traded for British Columbia.) What if (by chance) Italy captures Gibraltar? That isn’t worth anything (economically) in the European theater. But if valueless territory (and that one alone) is in the hands of Italy, that voids the UK’s one and only national objective, correct?
-
Question for the newbie. The UK’s one and only national objective, hold on to all their territories in their European economy (and West India has been traded for British Columbia.) What if (by chance) Italy captures Gibraltar? That isn’t worth anything (economically) in the European theater. But if valueless territory (and that one alone) is in the hands of Italy, that voids the UK’s one and only national objective, correct?
Yes, UK must hold all its Europe territories, including ones without income.