Get the Brit Inf back in Egypt and a Russian Bomber for 2nd Edition

@aequitas-et-veritas said in taking out the Brit destroyers?:

@crockett36 said in taking out the Brit destroyers?:

@superbattleshipyamato try it out. If you get lucky and burn planes as casualties you are immediately convoying England. Usually in both 109 and 106.

Has no upside only downsides to it.
The more Planes Germany looses, the less power of threat it has against Russia and later UK and US Naval assets.
So this is simply a bad idea.

You may try to kill sz 106,109 and 110 and buy an Bmbr w. Subs first round or a CV w. Sub and kill the rest of RN on round two.

But this the maximium of feelings you can get from it.
Usually when some of these battles (sz 106,109,110) went south, you should def. primarily focus on Russia alone.

The reason why we even attack the most of RN first round is to clear and standoff against sz 110.
When th US enters the war and controlls sz 110 along with UK RN,
It is on Germany to defend the Homeland a fight two frontlines.

From 110 you reach everywhere you need as the Allied Player,
wich is:
Gibraltar, sz92,Germany, Western Germany, Norway, Denmark, Normandy, Belgium, Morrocco, Algeria.

This is a lot of Ground to cover for Axis.
Therefore sz 110 is a vital Keypoint!

The idea should be to delay as long as possible the process of Allies controlling sz110!!

I’m not an Axis guy, but I understand what you are saying. You didn’t exactly address the actual ipcs involved. 110 will not be held t1. They will run away or be killed t2. Especially if the g1 purchase is 3 figs.

@freh Ok, I see it now. Pretty sneaky :)

1. Yes, tacs can only bomb airfields and naval bases.
2. Perhaps the CV as a landing site has already had its capacity used up by other moves you have made?

To me the rules are clear, and they prevent any cheese like triggering true neutrals into pro axis neutrals for the sake of claiming 3 IPCs per territory for Russia. However, the rules say nothing that prevents Russia from controlling Itallian Somoliland and claim 3 IPCs for the spread of communism. Therefore, denying this situation just because Italian Somoliland has zero territorial value would be a house rule IMO, and not a loophole in the rules that needs closing. Besides, this game is not in the position to take away advantages the Allies need desperately in order to compete.

If UK attacks and does not finish the standing army off, the standing army stays there.

I generally represent such a scenario with French units atop of chips as the French are the least utilized army.

If the Axis then moves in, you would represent all units there with the Axis nation that claims the remaining standing army.  So in example:

UK attacks Turkey and has to retreat after killing 4 units.
Put 1 French Inf atop of the remaining units (3, I think?)
Italy then moves in and claims Turkey.
Remove the French INF, place an Italian INF atop the chips.  They now move and act as Italian units.

Pretty sure that is how the scenario would work.  Just remember that claiming neutral standing armies is part of the NCM phase, so those units in Turkey can only defend until the subsequent Italian turn.

@CWO:

@Whitshadw:

Again I love the idea but the way they set it up looks like a 8 year old picked the colors and the map needs a incredible update.

I have a copy of Superpowers, and frankly the only thing about it that I really like are the little white missile sculpts, which I use as A&A atomic bombs.  (I put them horizontally in small plastic stands that I pulled from a different game.)  There are just eight of them, and considering that they came as part of a whole game with lots of other sculpts (none of which I use), this reflects nicely the rarity and high cost of WWII atomic weapons.

Back around the 1980s or so, there was a WWIII-themed global game called Supremacy.  It had some cool features, but it eventually faded from the scene, apparently because of two flaws: a simplistic economic model that could easily be manipulated, and a tendency to “go nuclear” that would end the game (the same kind of problem mentioned by rjpeters).

Funny. I too pretty much bought the game for parts originally and I thought of using the map for my own game idea.

@elzario:

You mean ANZAC and UK right?

Whoops, yes.

@oztea:

Dooming moscow is not a gamebreaker in this edition
It opens the possibility of getting france back in the game, if the Allies can push past normandy

At 17 if it controls all but FIC, it is a power that is near Russia’s IPC stockpile when it fell.

This is interesting, trade Russia for France (at some point). The axis strengthen would be way out of range unless most of it was lost in the battle for Moscow (make them pay). The US swoops in to destroy Italy and you now have 3 allies all in western Europe (knocking at Germany’s front door), instead of two coming from the west, and Russia in the east. If Italy does fall the 3 allied powers will have back to back turns (ooch).