And actually, here’s a supplementary idea. Since the I.D. charts contain a silhouette for every nation-specific sculpt, what you could do is produce a nation-specific version of this chart for all of the player powers, with the name and symbol of each power added at the top. The textual data would remain the same in every chart; all you’d need to do is is replace the unit images.

@Cloudesley said in Player Aids for G40 and G42 (Global 2012 Europe +Pacific):

@Cloudesley I don’t like these, they are too low resolutions and grey on grey is hard to read, anyone got a snappier style?!

If you’re looking for high-resolution silhouettes of the units, you could use the ones in my unit identification charts:

https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/21626/a-a-unit-identification-charts

Click on each chart to expand them to full size.

Your four-part table mostly consists of text, plus unit silhouettes, so you could create a higher-resolution new chart by:

• Having one-part large table rather than having four quarter-size tables
• Using images from my ID charts
• Using a larger text font

I don’t know, however, where you could get a larger image of the four grey squares depicting bases and ICs.

Very nice, and I like the added touch of a national identity marker being inserted into the top of the rake. I notice that the map has a few national flags mounted on miniature flagpoles; I’m curious about what the distinction is (if any) between territories marked with these flags and territories having the usual round marker resting on the table.

Hmm. Interesting article, but when I read the line that says “One other grave mistake was not continuing the attack on British airfields after the initial blow on Aug. 13, 1940” my reaction was to wonder why they needed “a computer model using a technique known as weighted bootstrapping” to figure out something that’s been known for decades. To give one example of this point being made long ago, the Battle of Britain episode of the 1970s BBC TV series The World At War says that Fighter Command was almost brought to the breaking point by the phase of the campaign which focussed on the airfields, and that British pilots characterized as “a miracle” the day when the Luftwaffe’s incoming raids went past the airfields and switched to bombing London instead.

@DiegoMaxwell

Congratulations to Mr. Prewitt. It should be noted, however, that France’s highest order of merit is called the Legion of Honour (Légion d’honneur), not the Legion of Armour, and also that France doesn’t actually have knighthoods in the same sense as Britain does. “Chevalier” (knight) is indeed one of the Legion of Honour’s five levels, and the name is a holdover from the days when France still had an aristocracy, but the French nobility system went out the window with the French Revolution. I once saw a series of amusing cartoons depicting what life in France would be like today if the Bourbon monarchy hadn’t fallen, and one of them showed an irate air traveler standing at the ticket counter of “Royal Air France” and telling the ticket agent “But I’m a baron and I have a confirmed reservation!” The agent replies, “I’m sorry, sir, but the Duke of So-and-so has precedence over you, so we gave him your seat.” In fairness, the same sort of thing actually happens in real-life republican France. A few years ago, there was scandal involving one of the major D-Day anniversaries (I think it was the 50th one), when the French government contacted various hotels in Normany and appropriated some of their existing reservations so that various French officials could have rooms for the event. Some of those rooms, however, had been reserved by foreign veterans of the D-Day invasion. When the story broke on the front page of French newspapers (under such headlines as “Our Liberators Insulted!”), public opinion was outraged and the French government beat a hasty retreat. The prevailing editorial opinion over this affair was: Do this to our own citizens if you want, but don’t do this to the heroes who ended the occupation of France.

@Wittmann said in Winter 2019/20 Battle of Britain - 12th January 2020:

@Private-Panic I am not old. Just blind. Is a bitch yo drive up north, with the sun from the right, blinding my one good eye.

This reminds me of an anecdote about Horatio Nelson, who on at least three occasions disobeyed orders from the fleet flagship during battle. At the Battle of Copenhagen in 1801, Admiral Sir Hyde Parker sent Nelson a signal to withdraw. Nelson, upon being informed of this by his signals officer, raised his telescope, held it up to his blind eye, pointed it at the flagship and stated that he did not see the signal. As usual, he got away with it. And once Nelson became Commader-in-Chief, the problem of disobeying orders from the Commander-in-Chief solved itself.

@Midnight_Reaper said in 20 Years of Axis & Allies .org:

@CWO-Marc As for what we did and did not have back in 2000, I made a small chart

Great chart, Midnight Reaper; it brings back lots of memories. A further point to note is that, in Classic, only the infantry sculpt was nation-specific and was based on authentic WWII designs; the equipment sculpts started following the same design principle with Europe / Pacific / Revised, though it took a long while to achieve (by combining E1940.2, P1940.2 and 1941) a full array for everyone except France. We were also treated to some neat special-category sculpts: the German blockhouses in D-Day, the American and German trucks in Bulge, and the entirely-other-war sculpt set of 1914. Another nice development in the official games has been the addition of China, Italy, ANZAC and France to the original five powers (US, UK, USSR, Germany and Japan). And in the early days, people who wanted extra types of units (or extra colours to represent other countries) had to make do with third-party products like the Xeno and Table Tactics ones or the Enemy on the Horizon expansion set, the quality of which was uneven and the availability of which wasn’t always great. Things certainly have changed.

@SS-GEN said in How long is a turn in real life?:

Looks like you got shot down CWO ! LOL So WW 2 started 1939 and when its 1940 its 1971. Fasted game I’ve ever seen.

A fair point. By some benchmarks, however, WWII was shorter than is commonly thought: apparently, there are some Vichy-era commemorative monuments in France which honour the fallen soldiers of the war of “1939-1940.”

I’d make the following two arguments, which don’t rely on any complex technicalities.

1. In order for your friend to buy units to implement his pure-defense strategy, Germany will need income. Income is generated from territories which are controlled and from the bonuses which are granted by attaining certain national national objectives. If your friend never goes on the offensive, it means he won’t be able to conquer new territories beyond the ones he already controls or attain any objectives beyond the ones he’s already fulfilled; therefore, his income will either remain static (if he successfully beats off all enemy attacks) or it will decrease (if he doesn’t successfully beat off all enemy attacks). It will never increase. Theoretically, no matter how powerful his defenses are in the territories he controls, the Allies could counter his unorthodox strategy by taking the equally unorthodox approach of concentrating everything thay have against a single German-held territory, overwhelming it, depriving Germany of the income from that territory, then repeating the process until the Allies win by sheer attrition.

2. Avoiding defeat isn’t the same thing as winning. The best your friend could achieve under his strategy would be a perpetual stalemate, not the fulfilment of the game’s winning conditions.

@CWO-Marc said in How long is a turn in real life?:

@Cpl-Hicks said in How long is a turn in real life?:

It keeps me bothering and busy, questioning the real versus game time.

The first 3 Turns seems tot take about 7 months per turn. From turn 4 and following up turns, these turns can be about 4 months per turn. The so called ‘rubber band’ (effect) from Larry.

An analogy to this rubber band concept would be the method for converting a dog’s age into “people years”, the situation being (or so I’ve heard) that you can’t use a single conversion factor; instead, you not only have to make different computations for different dog breeds, you also apparently need to use different conversion factors at different growth stages.

Strange coincidence: just one month after I used the dog-age concept as an analogy to the A&A time-elasticity concept, I’ve just come across a BBC article which discusses that topic:

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200106-how-to-calculate-your-dogs-real-age