I’m playing an opponent who is preventing Vichy from occurring by having the UK attack Italy’s destroyer and transport in SZ96 from SZ98 with a destroyer, cruiser, tactical from aircraft carrier in SZ98 and a fighter from Malta. Italy’s destroyer is sunk (and transport). Then in the Non-Combat phase, UK loads the transport in SZ98 and lands UK troops in Southern France. Since France is still an ally at this point, this is legal and effectively prevents Vichy mode, since Germany will now have to take Southern France on its next turn. There isn’t any way to prevent this as far as I can tell.
G40 Balance Mod - Feedback Thread
-
You probably posted this while I was editing
If Japan attacked UK forces in SE Asia, the USA oil would definitely stop. Simple as that
Not if UK was the one who declared war on Japan, which is what Karl said.
-
No, the oil would still stop. It was about to stop anyway. If Japan was waging war with European powers or their holdings, the oil would stop no matter who started the war.
-
No, the oil would still stop. It was about to stop anyway. If Japan was waging war with European powers or their holdings, the oil would stop no matter who started the war.
Perhaps, but in the game rules it is assumed that the oil wouldn’t stop if UK declared war first, since Japan still has that NO if it doesn’t attack FIC and takes UK holdings and the DEI.
-
Good point -
I think the game rules are wrong about that
So we’re agreeing it’s a good idea to leave it as is
-
So SUCK IT Karl!! :-D
-
Good point -
I think the game rules are wrong about that
So we’re agreeing it’s a good idea to leave it as is
I don’t think you two are agreeing…
What sense would it be for the US to cut off oil only if Japan attacks FIC, but keeps it flowing if Japan takes the DEI, or India for that matter, if UK DOWs first…?
If FIC goes Vichy, is occupied by UK, UK DOWs on Japan, then Japan should be able to take it without nullifying the NO.
-
We are agreeing that the rules don’t need to be changed (unless someone comes up with a preferable solution)
-
If FIC goes Vichy, is occupied by UK, UK DOWs on Japan, then Japan should be able to take it without nullifying the NO.
Yeah and you totally threw me off with your post at first because you said nothing about Vichy
I suppose you have a point. The FIC rule was made when Vichy was not a thing. You’re just like me, finding problems with the overlay of BM on 2nd edition (allied marines on cruisers)
It’s just so fun to give you a hard time because of your (beautiful and special) personality
-
Well balanced mod guys (Adam)? All you have to do is add a statement to the Vichy rules to fix this. I don’t know if the coding to TripleA is a big deal or not, but there are plenty of things we have to edit for anyway.
-
Cool, fix that, make Sicily adjacent to S. Italy and we are good to go!
Is there a list of proposed fixes?
-
Cool, fix that, make Sicily adjacent to S. Italy and we are good to go!
Is there a list of proposed fixes?
I’m keeping a list.
Is it really worth the added complexity to fix such a small issue though?
-
I would say no FWIW
KISS -
Cool, fix that, make Sicily adjacent to S. Italy and we are good to go!
Is there a list of proposed fixes?
That would make the Axis significantly weaker I would think. Given that Allies are mostly considered to have the edge in BM, I can’t see it.
-
Would be really interesting if you limited the number of ground units that could cross from Italy to Sicily or Sicily to Italy to 2 or 3 per turn (without transports) but that would be a new, unique rule…
You could always house rule it with individual opponents, of course. I mean, you don’t have to change the rules for everyone so that you can enjoy it
-
I joke about Sicily… that would be a game changer requiring other adjustments that I haven’t worked out…
The FIC thing is rare I enough I guess… but it is illogical
-
add it to the long list of illogicals :-)
-
I was thinking that you needed to have uncontested naval control of the sea zone in order to ferry troops between Sicily and S Italy (and vice versa).
-
That’s a good idea, but I would think that should only work for Italy and not for the Allies. That would be interesting.
-
That’s a good idea, but I would think that should only work for Italy and not for the Allies. That would be interesting.
You mean the Allies would not need to have navy in the sea zone to ferry troops?
-
No I meant Italy would not need to have navy in the sea zone to ferry troops, but the Allies should have to have something more as long as Italy controls South Italy
I don’t know how formidable the defensive position of the toe of the boot would be to repelling ferry attempts - I had to look up a map to see how close Sicily and Italy actually are, and I don’t know what the topography is like or how feasible it actually would have been for the Allies to get across to a hostile Italy
But regardless of terrain or geography, obviously, adding a way for the Allies to make landfall directly on the European continent and to be able to attack inward with no restrictions just as they could from South France or Normandy is huge - huger even than South France or Normandy because it is farther away from the Germans.
Obviously it would be a huge game changer if you just say Sicily borders South Italy, with no restrictions on the Allies.
Seems like you’d have to require some kind of naval presence - wait, I know -You could just make it so that Italy can scramble from South Italy to defend against land invasions from Sicily to South Italy. They would scramble against Z95. Do you like that idea?
Suggested Topics
