Silly would indeed be the correct word for any India/ANZAC player doing such a thing…
Anyway, wasn’t this about Egypt?
Silly would indeed be the correct word for any India/ANZAC player doing such a thing…
Anyway, wasn’t this about Egypt?
I don’t see Italy ever in the position, to can open for Germany. There is quite a large British fleet floating in the Mediterran sea. Depending on what i have read on sea-lion in alpha+3, i don’ think the Italian fleet will ever leave the mediterran sea.
To set up a good sea-lion, most people are sugesting to leave sz110 (Battleship and crusier). These ships will most likely move into the mediterran sea and combine with the rest of the fleet next to Gibraltar. On turn 2, Germany sets up the real sea-lion thread. Most probably, Germany can not take Gibraltar without major losses (at least 2 transports, if UK put a tank, a Infantry and a fighter on Gibraltar).
Germany will have to fight its way through the british Navy (or Italy, but they won’t win this fight), leaving them with not enough ships to break through any decent US Navy.I don’t think this is ever doable, except against an very, very unexperienced player.
And if Germany doesn’t attack SZ110, those UK ships might just stay there (backed up by scramblers), which would block the whole German sea-route.
@Herr:
Let’s hope for a better future for the North Korean people. I’m not optimistic though, with the “Great Successor” coming up.
Exactly.
Atomic bomb won’t destroy the entire army of a territory.
They were used for different reasons (ultimate civilian bombing to force the country into a surrender for the safety of the civilians).
So as a house rule an atom bomb could for example destroy an IC (actually remove it from the board)
@Cmdr:
@special:
Canadian shield?
Classic game.
You set up to take E. Canada with Germany and W. Canada with Japan thus allowing Alaska to fall and not be liberated right away then sweep down and take out America. It’s a Caspian Sub paper - really easy to block if you see it coming.
Ahhh, ok.
@Cmdr:
I never did it for a few reasons:
1) England can build units in Canada to at least help.
2) What is China, India, Australia and Russia doing to Japan while you are sending 3 rounds of income to America?
3) Felt cheesy, like Canadian Shield to me.
As for 1 and especially 2: indeed something for Axis to worry about.
Yeah, i guess those rule changes kinda closed that issue.
Still, even with the previous rules, i would feel confident as USA (maybe wrongfully, it is possible).
With so many things that can go wrong, possible moves of (all of) the Allies that can screw things up, a few turns of buys of the USA (even with limited IC’s and income), that are a lot of factors that influence the already small odds for succes.
But i would applaud the ballsy plan if it ever happened against me, and it will sure be a short but interesting game!
@Cmdr:
@special:
@Cmdr:
Yea, the original premise assumed you had your warships adjacent to SZ 10, so America could not block you.
How about the Japanese transports? (in that original case)
Edit: i mean, where are they? ;)
They are with the surface ships next to SZ 10 (south and west split) so that nothing can be blocked. Your last round of surface ships are to hit Hawaii with (or Alaska - odds are one is not blocked).
Remember, I am only reporting from what I remember, I never actually did this myself!
Okay that’s what i wanted to check (because if they were next to Hawaii they could indeed still be blocked).
But… when a japanese fleet WITH loaded transports is one sea-zone away from the USA, i hope the US player will start to suspect something and buy defensively :)
Also, won’t USA already be in the war by that time? (hence big bucks)
I find that strong German and Italian naval/air play make any US move into the Med a struggle in the first place. A UK IC in Egypt can quickly become hard to fill with a good German stranglehold on British convoy zones and a bombing campaign.
I’d love to play against an Axis player who let me walk into the Med… :) I ain’t that lucky.
Just for the record, i don’t claim that clearing the Med is a walk-over ;)
(and i am not that lucky as well)
For me clearing the Med and liberating Egypt is always top priority. Italy has to keep units in Italy anyway, since it always has to consifer the possibility of an attack on Rome. So ‘feinting’ isn’t really the case here, i think.
An early attack on Italy sounds not so smart (unless it is badly defended)
After Egypt is secured, a UK IC there is a logical, good choice (building up a front in case Germany breaks through in Russia), and all of South Europe can become the next target.
As for bombing Rome… i prefer sending subs to do convoy raids (much safer).
(the combination of both is of course also an option)
@Cmdr:
Yea, the original premise assumed you had your warships adjacent to SZ 10, so America could not block you.
How about the Japanese transports? (in that original case)
Edit: i mean, where are they? ;)
I think it could work if A> Japan, Germany and Italy all have to work together toward this goal, B> the US player doesn’t see it coming until too late and C> something odd doesn’t happen to screw it up.
B and C are out of Axis’ control, and B shouldn’t happen (if you don’t notice a large enemy force moving within reach of one of your capitols, and your Allied friends don’t notice either, then you have a problem)
On the Pacific side, by the time Japan takes Hawaii (or the SZ around it), USA should at least have 3 surface warships present on their Pacific coast. Which is enough to block any Japanese attack route to USA for 1 turn (for ex. SZ’s 13, 12 and 27). Enough to place enough reinforcements in W.USA.
Their Atlantic side could be abit trickier if Italy has moved fleet to SZ92 (which could become naval can openers the next turn)
Without those, again, about 3 surface warships should be enough to block Germany’s route for a turn (enough to build up sufficient defence in E-USA).
Everything is possible so i give a USA attack 1% chance, or 10% against a complete rookie. 60% against a monkey :D
It will keep USA busy, yes. So if Axis is doing important stuff in the meantime (which i doubt since all Axis are investing in a US attack), i suppose it keeps USA away for a while.
On the other hand, as USA (being rich but faraway from the war) i can only wish that the enemy spends money bringing it closer by.
Drink lots of beer. Then his bragging will just be a drone.
Good advice, very very good advice :)
(except, yes, you may lose when drunk)
Edit: come to think of it, i have always found my opponents to be very generous with beer,
Funny how that drone looks like it is a flat burka :D
@special:
Should always be USA that takes Spain, not UK. The advantages for them are much much higher than for the Brits. (same for Saoudi Arabia, btw)
I think, in official rules, that attacking Mongolia is about the worst reason for Axis to break neutrality…
Yeah, you are right that it would be better for USA to have Spain. That would be best when the Allied players are really playing as a team. In some of our games, particularly if the Allies get the upper hand, the players start to kind of compete with each other. While the MAIN goal is to defeat the Axis, sometimes they also try to out-do each other, like trying to see who can grab the more expensive territories first. Also, this sometimes will screw up their plans against the Axis. For example: ANZAC, India or Russia takes Korea instead of USA. This ends up making it harder for USA to invade Japan while ANZAC, India or Russia don’t have the means to take Japan so it ends up being a kind of useless territory grab.
Those ‘Allies’ forgot the meaning of the word ;)
If we’d use music in our games, and if i had my way, some of my choices would be:
(as opener)
Laibach - Drzava
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRADA7fLVpQ
Front 242 - Commando Remix
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12aKfNsUdQY&feature=related
(USA entering the war full of hope)
Wumpscutt - Total Recall
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOSvSVMvwMI
(which is indeed a cover of the Total Recall theme song)
(drama rising - big battle ahead)
Turbund Sturmwerk - Kainsmal
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4fu4hbnK4A
(getting aggressive)
NON - Total War
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3aeWHz6Zok
…and concluding the game:
The Klinik - World Domination
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTD6Mot7v1g
It depends on whether or not you use “Neutral Blocks”. My group does and Mongolia is basically in it’s own block. So, if Japan attacked Mongolia, it would only turn the other territories of Mongolia to Pro-Allied.
Your scenario is interesting. If Japan attacked Mongolia and Russia at the same time, would Mongolia turn Pro-Allied or simply turn Soviet? Of course, JimmyHat and Gargantua are right, if you don’t use blocks, then all other strict neutrals would become Pro-Allied and the Allies would get a big boost in men and IPCs.
Russia would probably get Turkey for 2 IPCs + 8 more men. Maybe even Sweeden for 3 IPCs + 6 men if they could get through the Germans in Finland.
England would get those two small territories in Southern Africa for 2 IPCs + 4 men, Saudi Arabia for 2 IPCs + 2 men and Afghanistan for 4 men.
USA would probably scoop up all of South America for an extra 8 IPCs + 11 men.
Spain and Portugal could go to either USA or England, depending on who has transports and land units at the time.
Should always be USA that takes Spain, not UK. The advantages for them are much much higher than for the Brits. (same for Saoudi Arabia, btw)
I think, in official rules, that attacking Mongolia is about the worst reason for Axis to break neutrality…
Instead of letting US spend IPC’s in China, i think letting USA and China play together (and allow joined attacks) could work.
Yea… I Just wanted to talk some smack. HOWEVER there is a Singular truth.
This only applies to GLOBAL in Europe you lose the -2 for France… This is what spawned my original thought - as my last game I only scavenged 17 from France!
But… if France conquers North Italy, their income goes up with 4, no? That would make 21 IPC! Et voila!