Win Tally

@AndrewAAGamer

Thank you for clarifying.

@Rocmistro:

One gripe: I almost feel that the bonus income stuff forces you to play the War exactly how it played out in reality. That’s a bit of a bummer, as I would like to see different scenarios play out.  Oh well.

Yeah, the national objectives are based more or less on historical objectives of the actual war. Think about this though; you had Japan capture Alaska, Italy captured Cairo and Germany conquered Russia without having to face an Allied invasion of France. You DID play it differently from reality.
Plus, believe it or not, a lot of Allied strategies end up being vastly different from the real war. Most successful Allied strategies I have seen involve the US taking out Japan first, then dealing with Germany/Italy. In one game, Germany took London then went on to attack Russia. The US managed to take care of Japan then took Rome and liberated Paris. Germany used so much to take London that they didn’t really have enough to take on the Russians and did very poorly in Russia. Berlin fell to the US and London NEVER GOT LIBERATED!

Japan rarely threatens persia anytime before round 6 or 7, plenty of time to make use out of it.  Persia is also in range of landing planes on moscow or india.  It’s too good.  Egypt factory is risky before round 3 because it does not take much for germany to get enough down there to help italy to perform a strong 1-2 punch.

Go back to SCHOOL Degrasse, nobody wants to hear what you have to say.

Oh wait… I guess I was the one who asked… :P

looks around

I bet it’s in the pacific manual too, or the original pacific Alpha.

after leningrad falls, you need to transports, so that whilst you are holding in ukraine, you are REINFORCING the eastern front from Leningrad everyturn.

And on a good day, if the allies aren’t paying attention, sometimes from within the baltic, you get to sack England, and they don’t even see it coming.

Surrender isnt part of our vocabulary,  correct me if I’m wrong in alpha2 when London falls that brings the US into the war,      so why not fight    or just give it away  I game for the battles (Kursk) = big tank battles between Germany and Russia or (truk Lagoon) big naval battles between Japan and USA  or the Battle of Britain/Sealion.    and I like to win , to add or change the rules can be fun but this game was not designed to be redesigned by all of us, It’s a step up from the Anniversary edition.  If because the Axis won the last 4 games means the Allies cant win , then I think you may be missing some thing but I dont think so from what I can tell the people on the forum are skilled, experienced players.    There are a bunch of people who think the game is unbalanced with the Allies being the one with the upper hand. This subject might get ya to think that it is balanced the other way.  In 25+ yrs I’ve seen where one side will get a bunch of wins only to be offset by the other,  overall I would say that the score is about 50/50  we play on average 2 games a weekend.    How did Hitler say it……fight to the last man  I think Stalin said it to… Keep gaming and post the results.

That’s how it is in the Hearts of Iron series, USSR + Mongolia = Comintern. So it would be the Comintern vs. Axis vs. Allies. I like that idea because then you could have a Cold War set up too if USSR takes out Germany and the Allies take out Italy and Japan.

I wonder if anyone has done a cold war situation after an allied(or Axis) win.

Kwangtung has to be better in most games.  Just something about how far forward the Americans were made me want to get away from them so I could keep killing Chinese also.  Malaya is nice and close to Africa and Australia as well