• Customizer

    Usually, if you make a mistake and lose your captial early in the game, don’t you generally have enough forces close by to take it back?  I can see where this could happen with Japan, UK and Australia, but with Germany, Russia, US and even Italy, there should be sufficient forces close enough to take the capital back. 
    Also, doesn’t something like this usually happen with a small attacking force?  I mean, you would pretty much notice a large buildup within range of your capital, right?  eg.  Japan leaves Japan totally undefended not noticing an American transport with men on the Marianas.  Result:  US moves transport to SZ 6 and takes Japan.  In this case, I could see the possibility that all Japanese transports are out of range of Japan and thus Japan is pretty much taken out of the war.
    Another example:  Moscow is left undefended as Russian forces are moved up to block German tanks.  Meanwhile, a Japanese tank manages to sneak up to Kazakhstan and Samara is unoccupied.  Result:  Japan takes Moscow with a single tank.  In this case, don’t you think there would be enough Russian forces to come back and retake Moscow?  Granted, the loss of cash to Japan and losing the Major IC would be a large setback to Russia, plus all the forces pulled back to retake Moscow would enable the Germans to push forward faster so it will probably be game over for Russia in another couple of rounds.  Or maybe not if the German advance isn’t fast enough and there are no other Axis forces to keep up the pressure.  I’m just saying that losing one’s capital doesn’t always mean game over.
    This is something I like about the captured Major IC rule.  Since it drops to a Minor IC upon capture and the invading force can not upgrade to a Major, it at least gives the owner of that capital a chance at retaking their capital by not allowing the invader to suddenly plop 10 guys there for defense.  Assuming the battle for your capital was tough, there probably isn’t a heavy surviving invasion force so with them and maybe 3 new guys, at least you have a chance.  With 10 new guys, forget it.  Unless you just happen to have a stack of 20 tanks (plus 20 transports for Japan & UK) that were sitting around outside the capital.


  • I’ve brought the Bell-Fey expression into my gaming group. Soon the Midwest will know the term and you can look for it on local news channels…for instance, weathermen might say, I guess that it is not going to snow after all, I guess I Bell-Feyed that forecast. :)


  • We call this “blooping” based on the high pitched sound we make in our game group, (bloop) when a single infantry takes an important but empty territory during combat movement because of carelessness or because there were other more important territories to defend. It rarely happens to capitals but has occurred a few times in the past. Usually this happens at the end of the game when both sides are getting tired and careless mistakes are bound to happen.


  • @bellefeuille:

    Having read many of the comments, I conclude that allowing one’s team mate to “bell fey” is nearly as culpable as “bell feying” one’s self.

    Based on this observation I want to point out a couple things:

    1. The Bell Fey only applies to island nations (Japan and UK).
    2. In our group we only permit a maneouver to be given a name when repeated (must happen twice).
    3. A certain party in our group (who seems fond of broadcasting the Bell-fey) far and wide has managed to Lose Germany under similar circumstances: leaving skeleton forces in UK’s way and then not being able to retake Denmark to close the straits because of the interceding French Cruiser.  And in a subsequent game letting his partner lose Germany to the Russian Transport.

    My questions are:

    1. Does letting your partner “Pooch” Germany and “pooching” Germany yourself meet our group’s criteria that you must “Pooch twice” to have a move named for you?
    2. I propose that the appropriate name for this German form of the “Bell-Fey” would be the “Robbie”?

    Comprising 1/2 of the Axis and Allies National Nomenclature Committee (Mr. Bunnell being the other half), I can say that the “Belfay” entered the lexicon in 2004 with the Revised ed.  It is defined as: The leaving open of one’s capital such that one ground unit takes it uncontested.

    While Japan was most often on the receiving end of the “Belfay” move due to missing transport movements, it is clearly not a move restricted to islands just because Japan is an island.

    I hope this helps to clear up any confusion on what exactly constitutes “pulling a Belfay”.

    Thank you,
    Dave
    1/2 of the Axis and Allies National Nomenclature Committee


  • @JamesAleman:

    I’ve brought the Bell-Fey expression into my gaming group. Soon the Midwest will know the term and you can look for it on local news channels…for instance, weathermen might say, I guess that it is not going to snow after all, I guess I Bell-Feyed that forecast. :)

    Excellent expansion of the word.  I can see powerful forces are already at working taking this expression (a “Belfay”) and expanding it to other fields.

    I would propose that it could be used in sports also.  Such as the Chicago Bears pulling a “Belfay” in the NFC Championship game by not really showing up to play Green Bay.

    We’ve done weather and sports, who else can help to embed the term “pulled a Belfay” into pop culture?  Anyone have ins with Lady Gaga?

    Dave

Suggested Topics

  • 14
  • 60
  • 321
  • 5
  • 5
  • 5
  • 16
  • 53
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

29

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts