In regards to my statements that you are quoting mostly out of context (and after removing your personal attacks from your most recent post)
1) Good, don’t converse. Keep losing to everyone and everyone who can think of new, imaginative strategies. You are much like Switch in that regard, unable to adapt. (Or so it appears from your posts.)
2) Yup. German aircraft have nothing better than to sink British ships. This is pretty much a universal rule and has been for a long time. Why should they be based anywhere but W. Germany? You put a boat down, I send the force I feel is necessary to sink it. I get your boat and any aircraft you scramble and you get weaker. This is a no brainer for the rest of the community, why are you having a problem with it? Perhaps you need an economics lesson: If you don’t earn enough to pay for the plane, you cannot print more money, you just cannot buy the plane. See, Germany WILL win out in this regard, Germany can afford new planes, especially if they don’t squander their resources on Sea Lion.
3) Yes, Axis victory is ahistorical. The entire game is ahistorical in a historical fashion. A “what if” situation. Duh. However, there was and is significant discussion about how to make it MORE historical while making it balanced. If you want it to be “historical” then Russia should get 12 free infantry a round and get to auto-kill 1 free German in Novgorod, Volgorod and Muskva each round (Partisan Snipers). That would really unbalance the game, but be MORE historical. However, historical things also make sense, Russia is an ally, why, because history said it was.
4) I don’t really see how England is “stacking” their fleet. They go no more boats than normal, so we are talking about 1 Carrier, 1 Cruiser and 1 Destroyer if they make no attacks on the Italian fleet. Great. Italy sinks the British ships. Game over for the Royal Navy. Oh? Okay, so you leave the destroyer to block and you have a carrier and a cruiser left. Hardly a match against Germany’s carrier, cruiser, 11 aircraft and submarines. Blocking? Sure they are blocking the Germans from sunbathing in the West Indies, that’s about it. More likely, they either get killed in the Med trying to cripple the Italian fleet (and since they ahve to split up to get what they could before, odds of getting cripped are greater) or escape to India as per Alpha 2.
5) The statement about the German naval investment is OBVIOUSLY taken WAY out of context. I mean, context isnt even on the same planet as the quote you grabbed! Naval investment is far less FOR ECONOMIC DAMAGE. Instead of needing 20-30 submarines to cap out damage in the Atlantic you only need 14 submarines to cap out damage. 84 IPC vs 180 IPC is a significant reduction. Percentage wise, this is more than a 50% discount in naval investment by Germany. Significant in virtually everyone’s dictionary, perhaps you are thinking of more than 60% as being significant? I don’t but maybe you do.
- Germany can give itself a 20 IPC shift by taking France. That’s HUGE. Yes that far out weighs Japan needing to grab islands I ALREADY GRAB ROUTINELY. Here, try this:
A) Ignore China mostly. Take Yunnan when you can and any walk ins, but basically ignore it.
B) Take India round 4.
C) Take Australia round 6
D) Take Hawaii round 8 (with minors for your NO around then too.)
Done it this way for a while now. When America is not all invested in the Pacific, it works quite well. With the 10 IPC shift in favor of Japan with America’s NO removed, it should work even better.
Anyway Mantlefan, as I said, lay off the personal attacks or I’ll just delete the entire post. Editing is getting annoying.
And before you go off half cocked, I highly suggest you READ what you are commenting on. You seem to be very good at selective quoting, perhaps you should get a job on the ABC/NBC or CBS news? They’re always looking for spinsters. We would like it if you stuck with a quote in context, however.