Operation Sealion a Possibility with AA1940 Europe?

[Guest]

Why not just start the game in 1939 and then you can do whatever you want?

[murraymoto]

@SgtBlitz:

Bleh.  Russia threatening Germany in 1940 Europe as a counter is laughable.  Round 1 Germany builds fleet for Sealion.  Round 1 Russia builds all infantry or builds all armor to take advantage of Ger naval build.  Round 2 Germany builds all inf and armor, takes Britain, knocks UK out of game, ganks capital IPCs.  Ger possibly finishes France but isn’t main objective.  All inf and armor build in Germany.  Round 2 Russia builds all tanks to take advantage of Ger, but offensive is stopped in Poland due to Ger building before Russia’s turn.

I believe LH said USA would need to layover fighters in Iceland on the way to UK, so Ger round 3 be sure and take that out too.

@oztea:

Government in exile rule:

If a power loses its capital, that power surrenders half of its IPCs to the invader, and half are forefit to the bank. From this point forward, the power without a capital no longer collects income normaly, instead any Industrial complexes owned by that player may, during the mobilize units phase, make a special purchase using the IPCs of that territory, as well as the IPCs of any other territory controled by that player within 3 land or water territories. IPCs generated in this way are not saved, they convert directly to units

I like the exile idea, I just don’t get why you hand over all your production capacity to the enemy when you loose your capital, or even half.  Half to the ‘bank’ i can understand, but I like the idea of just letting the other IC’s that the UK might have get to simply reallocate the production to them. Especially with major/minor ICs now…  Maybe half to the bank or the enemy, or the conqueror gets to roll to destroy IPCs in the captured capital’s hands…

Probably because it’s production ability, not just supplies like Bulge.  Maybe the captured player should get to try and scorch it before being captured, that might have legs…  alas…

[Guest]

I like the exile idea, I just don’t get why you hand over all your production capacity to the enemy when you loose your capital, or even half.  Half to the ‘bank’ i can understand, but I like the idea of just letting the other IC’s that the UK might have get to simply reallocate the production to them. Especially with major/minor ICs now…  Maybe half to the bank or the enemy, or the conqueror gets to roll to destroy IPCs in the captured capital’s hands…

I think you should be able to keep all your IPC’s

[oztea]

it throws the game out of whack when you take a capital
you get near doubble IPC income because you get their money and the value of the capital territory. And how do you get of stealing another powers Industrial Pdoduction rpepresented in millions of man hours?

Also the loser cant keep it all with my rule, if Ger takes Moscow, then cacusses and karellia produce 6 tanks that are within range of moscow.

Losing only half, and allowing ICs to draw from other controled territories is a comprimise, in this caccusses factory gets 4 IPCs, + 5 for urals, novisibirisk, and the other SSR one if they are all soviet controled.

[Guest]

I agree that something has to change, but I am not sure what. Keep all your money or only a portion of it.

[WILD BILL]

I like the gov in exile rule. You should be able to continue the fight if you have the capability. I like hand over 1/2 your money, or hand over the ipc level of your capitol tt + $5 whichever is greater. Part of your money going to the enemy makes sense as he will plunder all he can. Think of all the national treasuries (gold) jewels and art that Germany took, and sold via Switzerland. It also shows that the gov made it out with some of its riches, or hid it to smuggle it out later.

Each power is going to have more IC’s at set-up (2-3 on average). So the new game will be screaming for this house rule as I think Larry already said no. There is noway the US would have thrown in the towel if DC fell. It had to many other war making options as did all the allied powers, mainly because of the vast land masses or other holdings.

I would think any of the tt that are lib would stay in your allies hands until your capitol is retaken or you move ground units into those other tt(so you have the chance to get your other tt back along with your IC’s if you want to).

I’ve been in some games that one side or the other did something stupid :? and left his capital wide open and lost it. Like Uk is left week and Germany happens to role paratroopers. Either that or the dice were just evil :evil: and their 3 tanks took out your 10 units. If you had gov in exile you could over come these setbacks and continue on. Of coarse in most cases it will make for a longer game.

[Guest]

Most of the games that I have played in, by the time caitals are falling the outcome of the game is no longer in doubt, but there is the occasional blunder and the question is: How steep of a penalty should you pay for that  blunder?

[WILD BILL]

Yea the blunder thing can really hurt when you have to hand over all your ipc’s. Rarely will you recover from that. We had to make a flip the board house rule. If you flip the board during the game you have to pay everyone at the table $10.00 (and not ipc’s) :x :x :x

I’ve also played where both sides lose a capitol in the same round. So an exile rule would have been good, as the out come wasn’t all that clear.
Lets see how an exile rule would play out for each power not knowing how many IC or where they will be in AA40.
*US- easy just HQ in LA
*UK- easy just HQ in Canada or Anzac(assuming there will be IC there)
*Russia- easy if you still have one of your other IC’s. If you lost Moscow chances are you already lost your other IC’s. Do you hold on to your part of ipc’s until your friends lib one of your IC’s?
*Germany- will most likely have options with its other starting German IC or in France, hmm German HQ in Paris thats just not right :evil: .
*Italy- I would think Italy will have two IC’s 1 major & 1 minor. I would think Rome (major IC and capitol) will be in N Italy as you wouldn’t want the allies to take S. Italy and sack the capital for game play (or maybe I’m wrong on this). So where dose Italy set up its gov in exile if you already lost S Italy. Like Russia hold on to its part of the ipc’s and wait for Germany to bail it out?
*Japan- as we know Japan is one tt, it should get at least 1 other minor IC on Manch. So I guess it could set-up gov in exile in China, that just sounds weird.

It is very possible you won’t have a place to set up a gov in exile so do you just hold on to you ipc’s until the calvary arrive.

If you have no place to set-up your own HQ can you set-up your HQ at an allied capitol (just a holding place for your saved ipc’s, can’t collect any more or spend it). The UK took in many of these gov in exile. What happens if their capitol is also sacked.

What happens if the enemy sacks your temp HQ also, then are you done or do they only get 1/2 your $ again? I would think you hand over everything this time.
I can almost see why Larry didn’t want to include this, he didn’t want to get writers cramp and add more pages to the rule book.

[Guest]

You had to make a flip the board rule? How about you flip the board and we kick 'urass while your picking up all the pieces.And then don’t ever come back. That would be ny flip the board rule. I think we should make a separate post called; What is your flip the board rule? I think it would be humorous.

[Raeder]

When someone flips the board, we simply beat him with a stick. That does the trick.

[Guest]

Beat on the brat, beat on the brat, beat on the brat with a baseball bat.

[WILD BILL]

Ok, lets get past the flip the board thing. There were a lot of other good points involving gov in exile.

[Guest]

@WILD:

Ok, lets get past the flip the board thing. There were a lot of other good points involving gov in exile.

Okay I believe that if you lose your capital you should keep your IPC’s and continue on.

[Imperious Leader]

I think you should lose only the ability to collect income if you lose your LAST factory. If you have 2 factories and the enemy takes one, you can build at the other. The enemy takes only the value of the territory.

So when you lose your capital you lose nothing but a place to build from and the direct IPC from the territory. What is messed up is the enemy takes all your money…even saved up income.

[Guest]

@Imperious:

I think you should lose only the ability to collect income if you lose your LAST factory. If you have 2 factories and the enemy takes one, you can build at the other. The enemy takes only the value of the territory.

So when you lose your capital you lose nothing but a place to build from and the direct IPC from the territory. What is messed up is the enemy takes all your money…even saved up income.

That’s what I am saying but not quite as eloquently put as the way IL worded it.

[SgtBlitz]

@Imperious:

I think you should lose only the ability to collect income if you lose your LAST factory. If you have 2 factories and the enemy takes one, you can build at the other. The enemy takes only the value of the territory.

So when you lose your capital you lose nothing but a place to build from and the direct IPC from the territory. What is messed up is the enemy takes all your money…even saved up income.

NO… just, no…  If Britain fell to the Nazis, that should be at LEAST a whole turns worth of production… There was Buckingham Palace, countless arts and treasures, PLUS England was the industrial heartland of the Empire.  Maybe the turn afterwards the defeated power could collect income on whatever territories remained and build from other factories, but the psychological defeat of losing a capital should last for at least a turn.

Also, if Britain did fall, I don’t see them building battleships and carriers in Canada or India in significant numbers to come back and reclaim the capital… It’d be up to the US player to be responsible for liberating England.

[Funcioneta]

@SgtBlitz:

NO… just, no…  If Britain fell to the Nazis, that should be at LEAST a whole turns worth of production… There was Buckingham Palace, countless arts and treasures, PLUS England was the industrial heartland of the Empire.  Maybe the turn afterwards the defeated power could collect income on whatever territories remained and build from other factories, but the psychological defeat of losing a capital should last for at least a turn.

Also, if Britain did fall, I don’t see them building battleships and carriers in Canada or India in significant numbers to come back and reclaim the capital… It’d be up to the US player to be responsible for liberating England.

UK player represents Commowealth and free frech and belgian forces. London fall should be a hard blow (maybe axis take England income (8 IPCs, not the total), but I doubt Australia would stop to fight the japs only because London is in axis hands. You can say the same with Free France, SAF or Canada

In case of USA, as someone said, if Whashington DC falls, I’m pretty sure yanks would fight from California (and germans should be careful when reach to Texas and fight Chuck Norris  8-) ), and there is still Brazil and Mexico there

Soviets would retreat to Siberia (where most of their industry was moved anyway) in case of Moscow falling. I can easily see them fight from Stalingrad, Leningrad or even Vladivostok if you ask me

I guess you can find similar reasons for axis countries, the total fall of a power after losing a capital was OK in Classic and its small board. But in this HUGE map is a nosense. I want see a successful Sea Lion that not stop aussies and canadians production. Go Canada!

[Twigley]

@SgtBlitz:

Also, if Britain did fall, I don’t see them building battleships and carriers in Canada or India in significant numbers to come back and reclaim the capital… It’d be up to the US player to be responsible for liberating England.

I wonder what would have happened? If Britain fell in 1940 - would the US have gone to war about that? Who knows?

And if the royal navy had escaped - would they have been able to bring troops from around the empire to fight some way or other? It would have been a dramatically different timeline for sure. In WWI the UK was able to import large numbers of troops from around the empire. In WWII her relations with much of it were in doubt due to a growing sense of nationalism throughout it. Would the Indians have fought in 1940 like they did in 1914-1918. Dying on european battlefields far from home?

It’s just too much too imagine.

Also of course; would the US have dared antagonise Japan - Germany’s Ally if the British had fallen and Germany was ‘all powerful on the continent?’ Hadn’t Britain and 1941 already proven that with perserverence the Axis could be beaten? In fact - the clear loss of the Battle of Britain by the Germans (though as said before - it was an impossible task for the Germans to win) was probably as great a propaganda blunder as a military one. The german armed forces - who had triumphed throughout Europe finally were halted. Equally important was they were halted in the most heroic way possible, by a bunch of disarmed islanders with nowt but a few fighter planes. The Battle of Britain gave birth to the myth of the ‘Few’ which alongside ‘A day in Infamy’ became one of the defining speeches of the early war years - the idea of the lhonorable insulted man who would grow in rage and power until those wrongs done him were avenged. Such examples would follow on land outside Moscow and in the Sea at Midway.

Whenever you look at the Minutiae of this stuff you can see the truth.

Battle of Britain:
Appears: Small poorly prepared airforce beats off massive war hardened airfleets 2 & 3 over the rolling green kent countryside.
Reality (in brief): Highly organised, well supplied air force holds its own due to advantages in range, radar direction, and aircraft qualities. Mixed with a heavy dose of attacker error (like attacking in the first place, and unrealistic aims and expectations).

Battle of Moscow:
Appears: After 5 months of blitzkrieg across the Russian hinterland, pulverising all before them, the evil nazis are stopped by the harsh winter, and the bravery of wives and children digging tank traps in the moscow suburbs.
Reality (in brief): Resistance to German forces stiffened markedly as the months wore on, and as soon as armies were destroyed so they were replaced. After German pissing about (thanks Hitler) many of the Panzer divisions were suffering mechanical differences before winter set in. Saving Moscow was an achievment - but with the help of Siberian forces released by Japans southern intent German defeat was guaranteed - even had they entered the city. The Soviets would not have surrendered after the loss of Moscow - they expected it and moved virtually all government out of the city.

Battle of Midway:
Appears: Well placed US bombers/torpedo planes catch Nagumo napping allowing a numerically inferior fleet to inflict the most important naval defeat (arguably) of the Pacific war.
Reality: Americans had been decrypting Japanese codes for ages. They knew about the types and numbers of planes and vessels in the Midway fleet, they also knew about the dramatic feint toward the Aleutians (which the won the Japanese two pointless islands!) If anything - a number of US planes couldn’t find the Japanese that day which is a surprise! The Japanese sailed straight into the trap set for them - but unluckily helped a lot by laying our fuel and explosives all over the decks of their carriers <boom>.

Sorry… got carried away.</boom>

[Twigley]

Maybe rather than take the money - the ally who loses his capital has to skip the purchase units and collect income phase for one turn - if people feel there needs to be an element of shock/punishment to losing your capital.

[WILD BILL]

Personally I like hand over the ipc level of your capital to its new owner (maybe even another 5ipc’s or so-bonus for taking capital). I could live with hand over the rest of your money to the bank. That way you could not purchase new units next round (you would have no $). You can do combat, non-combat and still collect income to buy units the next round. This would show the delay of getting back on your feet and is not that far removed from the original rules. It also helps somewhat with the huge swing in power the enemy would get for game play, and allows you to continue the fight. If you don’t have another IC you should be able to purchase one eventually. You could also increase the cost of units showing your displacement. Where it would get trick is if the enemy took another IC from you, would the process be the same? Its not really your capital. I would think not to confusing.