Topics created by purplebaron

@Koningstiger:

@taishan:

@Col.:

From my initial look at the board, I don’t think Germany should attack until G3.  On G1, Germany can activate Finland with an infantry and artillery on the transport (and the transport will be safe because UK can’t land planes in Russia (from movement rules and major power neutrals) and can’t send ships through the strait, and activate Bulgaria.  Then on G2 the transport returns to 112 (I think) and the Bulgarian infantry move 1 territory into position.  Thus for G3, the transport can be used again to amphibiously assault Russia and the Bulgarian infantry can be used in the first attack.

Rule question:
Is it really possible to make an amphibious assault on Finland on G1, considering you haven’t declared war on Russia yet. Can you share SZ115 with russian BB and T without it being a wardeclaration?

Yes, Finland is a pro-axis minor, so technically it’s not an amphibious assault. Taking over countries that are on your side, happens in the NON-COMBAT phase.

Sharing a sea zone is not a declaration of war. However, if you intend to right away amphibiously assault, say Novgorod, then naval combat would occur as technically you are supposed to declare war BEFORE the biggining of the combat move sequence. If the German vessels are only there to land troops in (pro-Axis) Finland, they can share the sea zone with Russian vessels without any problems (as long as they’re not actually already at war with Russia of course…)

Its no Amphibious assault like Koningstiger made clear,
you simply unload your troops in the non-combat phase
so no conduct combat phase takes place…

From another thread:

@WILD:

Thanks Krieghund, Russia being able to invade neutrals (and how to do it) before its at war w/Euro axis will be a great tool.

One other thing, is Russia (when not at war w/Euro axis) able to pass through Denmark straight?

@Krieghund:

Yes, if Germany gives its permission.

Interesting.  I wonder if the game comes with pre-printed permission slips.  :-D

See thread here: http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=19609.15

I would consider other impassable (to all but infantry) areas:

Amazon Jungle (western Brazil).  This stops whoever controls Brazil from just knocking off any other South American country at will.

Congo Jungle (Belgian Congo minus the coast).  Same effect in South Africa.

Australian desert.  Tanks driving from Northern Territory to Adelaide is the equivalent of crossing the Sahara.

Sounds like a waste. Best to just build when the german fighters are not in range (aka, fighting russia) or even just save for a turn or two.

@Dany:

I think a sea lion would have less than 10 % chance of success against a cautious UK.

The first turn you sink everything in the North Sea and move your fleet to sz 112 (in 111 the UK can will be able to block an invasion as you won’t be able to kill all his ships. With luck you should be able to kill everything that’s can be a problem for you in turn 2 w/o loosing any planes. You also need to kill the fleet of Canada so they can’t bring extra units to England. You land all your planes within reach of the UK. You mop up France and other places with land units. Build is 1 CV (needed to defend your fleet in range of the RAF and the Gibraltar fleet (with is very unlikely one will be able to take out) and 1 TRS (could build a bmb instead but I think the extra hit is usefull and there are already to many planes that can be shoot down by the AA).

The UK places one ship to block ur shore bombard and build 7 inf and 2 art (or 3 inf and 5 art if he is brave). Also lands his TAC in the UK.

Ur turn 3, you attack with 2 tanks, 2 inf and 8 planes. He defends with 9 inf, 2 art, 3 figs 1 tac an 1 aa. The chanse of success is less than 10 %.

Might be better to fake and attack and then not doing it, just building an CV more or less forces the UK to build inf the first turn and allows the german to keep destroying some fleet.

You’re doing this wrong.  Germany can also build 2 transports G1 instead of 1 in addition to the carrier.  Try reading the Sealion invasion thread.

Also something we’re thinking about: attacking Britain G1 to wipe out the poorly protected RAF with 7 air units, building a defensive fleet with a CV and 2 TRNs on SZ 112 G1 (with the 2 fig, 1 bs, 1 cru, and 1 trn already there), then sacrificing the 3 transports G2 to invade Scotland with 6 land units, forcing the Brits to divide their land forces for a G3 naval crush.  G2’s build should be monster if nothing else since it contains French IPCs and Germany’s NO.

@LHoffman:

@purplebaron:

Does anyone here live in Pasadena or the greater Los Angeles area?

Sorry, no dice here. I live in Ohio. But, if you are ever passing through Toledo, or the area, let me know… My brothers and I would love a game with you.

Thanks for the invite, I will definitely take you up on it.

Turn 2:  Italy:  4 INF(plus one more that invads Transjordan)=5 INF, 2 MECH, 1 ARTY, 1 ARM(plus one that invades Transjordan)=2 ARM, 2 FTR’s from Italy.  Thats, IT=1,1,1,1,1,1,2,2,3,3,3,3 vs UK=2,2,2,2,3,4(assuming the FTR stays there).  Thats a win for Italy.  Italy can get 1 TRS to SZ98.

The French INF on Italy’s heel are stopped by the two INF in Libya.  There is no TRS in S. Africa, unless you think buying one there would be a good idea…in which case UK is not building 9 INF in UK for Sea Lion.  Germany should at the very least threaten Sea Lion by BOTH destroying the RAF and with its initial builds to force UK to both try to stop it with its fleet AND prepare for Sea Lion by building 9 INF in UK.

If the UK player does the right thing by using the CV/TAC and DD to try to avert Sea Lion, then Italy can get another INF and ARM, plus shore bombardment.

@cressman8064:

Another idea to add to this tread is to play Pacific1940 with every nation having the “Improved Shipyards” technology. This technology will be included in the global game anyways, but by giving it to every nation in the Pacific only game it turns out to really help the allies. If you havn’t heard, this technology makes all subs, transports and destroyers -1 IPC, and all crusiers, Aircraft carriers and Battelships -2 IPCs. Since the allies generally will be building more ships to counter the Japs, it allows America to build up faster but at the same time also gives the same advantage to Japan if they choose to go for heavy naval builds.
I played a game testing this change and I as Japan still performed a massive Jap1 attack. America built destroyers and crusiers like they were going out of style and while Japan was mopping up the DEI and India America was threating the rest of the Pacific and Japan herself with massive fleets. ANZAC was also able to build 2 subs from turn 1 and they can become a real thorn in the DEI.

I really like this idea Cressman. While the OP’s idea could work if Allies weren’t allowed into the USSR, it’s simply too complicated for me, as I already fail to follow a rule or two. :roll:

However, Cressman’s idea could work, as the Allies have strength in what they BUILD, and Japan has strength in what it already HAS. A bid could work too, though.

@cressman8064:

My hopes jumped for a second when I saw the title of this thread, thanks for the let down lol.

You should know better than that.

@oztea:

@finnman:

Another reason that India will have it easier is because they will have british N.O.s and war bonds to spend.

Wat?

NAs are passe’; and war bonds? Thats a tech.

I meant N.O.s and there will be techs in the global game.

There are only 2 islands that I feel are worth this treatment, Carolines and Pearl.  But, the key is to put a decent amount of men on them, 4-6, and the land planes with the airbase.  This makes it a nightmare to assault.

@Uncle_Joe:

Yes and the scramble ability is one reason I to build the airbase on the Solomons instead of New Guinea.

Wait, you mean the Japanese want to try and build an AF on Guadalcanal and the US want’s to prevent that? Wow, it sounds quite a bit like what really happened. ;)

As I said in another post, I really get the feeling that the designers put a lot of effort into encouraging players to follow at least some parts of the historical goals and strategies actually used in WW2.

Yeah, but building the Solomon airbase is another Japanese historical mistake that I won’t be repeating again ;)

I know, but now it is impossible for the axis to win without taking Cairo (unless they invade UK, US). Also, the middle easts income is now a factor and UK would be limping without Middle East/Africa income. Italy would also be earning 40+.

Yes playing by myself is a real bummer, trying to find people in my area “Nashville”.  Good new is my son and my son-in-law both will be moving here some time this year.  Until then I have no choice but to play myself.  The good news is I win every time.  The bad is news is I loose just as many……

I have a negative comment on your comment about negativity, but this time I will keep my comment to myself. :-D