Reasons why you shouldn't kill France first

Reading the rules again, I begin to get a bit fussy about the RR rule. We have always run with that Moscow have to be contested in order to RR to occur. I now realize that perhaps thats wrong and that for example  holding Ukraine, Polen, Belarus and Livonia is enough?
IN our games AH have to put enough units in AH% in order for Russia not to be able to kill them all in R5. However if we have been wrong about RR, the 4-7 remaining Germans from G4 is enough since Russia cant advance untill they have been destroyed… And in that scenario AH can have its entire stack moved from Ukraine to Sevastopol in round 5, very much changing Britians advance.

In the west Germany usually have to tactically retreat in r2-r3. However since all buys from G1 and forward will be moved into the west they wont need to retreat further. And even with Belgium and perhaps an orginal German territory gone they will have an income advantage against France alone and therefore push them back r4 and forward.

Same goes for Italy really. AH will use all its income towards Italy (exept 5 planes in r1-3 = 30 IPC). And by r4-5 AH will push Italy out of Trieste/Tyrole for good.

AH softening France’s air force up to open the way for Germany to have air supremacy: this will henceforth be known as the “Happy Artillery” strategy.  Thanks for making my day, WB.

@WILD:

Yep, makes sense for the CP to have Germany go full tilt in one front, and Austria the other. We have seen Germany push France back to the brink, and Austria start off defending against Russia (and those damn Italians) then actually gaining the upper hand on their front as well with an aggressive Russia (they will need some inf from Germany, and the Turks). It is also helpful to have say a 10 unit friendly force with you to take out smaller adversaries, or grab more land so you don’t splinter off your main force. This can also help you to gain air superiority for the larger partner. Like Austria sacrifices a few inf and ftrs into a French stack just to force a dog fight and kill off a couple allied ftrs. Then Germany goes in full force, finishes off the air, and has very happy artillery.

@Frontovik:

India can’t fall… you know the Brits have unlimited production there, right?

You’re right.

That’s exactly right, why should a stupid piece of land come between two best friends who fought each other many times since 1800….previous animosities have no effect on future relationships.

Just like Hitler and Stalin joining together 1939. Neither of them had any suspicion of the other and knew the 10 year pact would be able to be renewed. They must have figured the pact would last into 1979. It was so obvious right?

Remember to have enough infantry saved to allow you to split up your force when you need to.
Or you’re liable to get an army stuck in Moscow…

One could get a rules download, get different colored pieces that look similar from other AAA games and hand them out as tryout games to newbies with excellent map, piece containers, game box and odd looking but functional pieces.  If one is feeling benevolent, throw in some dice. :)

If I were Germany I’d feel completely cheated by the Revolution. UNLESS it created a new Bolshevik power friendly to the Central powers…

@ossel:

I find it interesting that none of the games posted on this forum have ended with the victory conditions that are stated in the rules…which doesn’t really surprise me due to the nature of the war, but I kind of wish there had been more of a design consideration for alternate game endings, besides ‘we don’t feel like playing anymore.’

Flashman, remember what Sun Tzu said:

Supreme excellence consists of breaking the enemy’s resistance without fighting.

I think the Allies are giving up too soon as well, but taking Moscow is a major morale victory for the CP’s, and it seems to be very effective.

[Edit]: I guess revolution was triggered in this game, but the effect is similar.

I like the diddy dice. But there needs to be more of them, and in 4 different colours.