A&A G42 by the Dicetruction Quartet.

@Herr:

@oysteilo:

@Herr:

Isn’t that a bit slow?

I1: take Bulgaria
I2: units move to Romania
I3: can-opening into Bessarabia and/or Eastern Poland

So in that scenario, the German followup will be as late as G4.

I think the important can-opening happens around (I4), I5, I6 in order to break through into volgograd and caucasus and later to threaten middle east by italy taking NW persia

The idea of can-opening is, to take the territory with Italy in order to allow Germany, and especially the German planes, to reinforce it against a Russian counterstrike. So I don’t think that any Italian drive to the south servers the purpose of can-opening because Russia is unlikely to have sufficient forces to strike back at either Volgograd or the Caucasus anyway in case the Germans would have taken it without Italian assistance. Which doesn’t imply that going that way is bad for Italy because there’s a lot of bonus to be had. But if you’re talking can-opening, then I’d say Bryansk on I5 would be the way to go.

@aequitas:

With Bulgaria, Yugo and Greece given to Italy, what punch will Germany have?
Any Allied player will be happy to harvest Italy…

Agreed. I’d much rather give Bulgaria to Germany to assimilate those troops and add some punch to the German drive into Russia.

I might be using it idfferent than you. The other idea of canopening is to force a russian retreat.
let say you stand in rostov with a german and italian stack, with at least 40 german tank+mech and 5-7 italian units., and 7+ italians. Then ussr has to retreat to moscow. if he stacks byransk, you can take tambov with the italians, and moscow falls on the german turn. Since ussr has to retreat, you get to take cauc, stalingrad and begin taking the middle east immediately.

If you can’t find anyone to play with, then go to triplea and start playing online with other folks. Some of the commenters here are on there, but others are only playing triplea through the forum (not live). Not live triplea is more of analysis type play where they have the time to really study their purchase and moves.

Regardless, (not disparaging you), but I think that you’ll find that the purchase order you suggest in your thread won’t get you Moscow. Really, the only to get better is to just play the game. It’s fun for me to play completely new players too as they actually do come up with different ideas that add to my “kit bag.”

Anti-aircraft units are/were embedded with combat commands at varying levels and always go “forward” with the command they fall under during offensive operations.

I think it would have been ok if the rules from the get go permitted an “attack” with AAA.

Going to start a HR rule thread on this.

I’m still not sure that this aspect of the tech discussion belongs here since it is more about a house rule but I mentioned how we have developed a progressive valued chart  for the techs but I didn’t give the limitations of attaining the tech.  A tech die is three (3) IPC’s every tern a player wants to roll for a tech.  A neutral nation can roll one die only per rounf thatthey are neutral.  That is three IPC’s per round.  If a tech has a R&D value of 25, it may take a nation at least 5 rounds to develop that tech.  That is at least 15 IPC’s in order to develop a tech.  A nation that is war may invest in three dice (9IPC’s) per rounf in order to develop three different tech.'s at a time.  They can not be applied to a single tech but must be spread over the three techs to be develpoed.  It can get expensive but the thought process is this; a country will invest in R&D to develop a specific technology.  It will not just through money at a problem and randomly hope to get a good result….governments maybe but not gamers.  If and when we play with technology, I prefer this R&D chart.  The Anniversary/Global chart and dice costs can definately thow the balance of the game off.  Last game I played of global 1940, theAmerican player shelled out alot of IPC’s on tech.  It put his production behind and the other allied player had to really hold on for the US to catch up but the US player was able to develop long range heavy bombers and cheaper ships.  It was devostating to the the axis player (me) because he then went dark skies on the axis and it became a war of attrition that I could not repulse effectively.  I have to take this moment to say I love Narvik.  Direct and to the point.  Tech is fun sometimes but there is alot to just playing the game.

Ugh why not just turn this into a thread where everyone posts their after action reports.

Is there a Pacific map like this?

UK pac is the answer to EURO axis after a KJF… that’s why people do KJF. Japan shutdown… ok uk pacific you make 22-30 right? ok that is what russia was making before he went down… you go hold egypt down till usa supply train shows up. don’t worry anzac got yo back. japan makes 0 from naval bombard… it can be so sick sometimes.

I don’t like the aa gun buy. also I tend to buy strait inf for uk1, because I sink the hell out of italy. I don’t care if I get sea lioned. Gives usa something to do in the atlantic, because I tend to buy some mech for russia anyway. so the turn london is nabbed i got romania hold and can hit the other adjacent to russia spots.

Which is why I never really minded sea lion so much. russians bank hard. i save persia for them to blitz too, I always do that russian income thing in iraq/persia and if i can get the two italy territories in east africa, I do it too. just 3 mech all i need to start banking. get a bomber to bring down there so 2-3 mech inf 1 bomber kills 1 ethiopia guy or w/e unless uk has it.

Hmm, do you know if they sell those pieces seperately?