Sevastpol controlled by the Central Powers?

Persia provides a bit of a conundrum

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persian_Campaign

It could be considered anything from a joint UK/Russian colony to a pro-Turkish neutral.

Austria was a little risky and only left 6 inf and 2 art in tyrolia to defend against italy well sending the 6 inf and 2 art in Trieste into serbia. MY first turn buy as Austria was 5 art and one plane. I left one inf in the capital for that.  I as Austria was hopeing that the 6 inf and 2 art sent into serbia would be enough to take it out. I knew that the the Italian player was very conservative. so he would either turn 1 be attacking 6 inf and 2 art vs. the same force in tyrolia or walking into trieste with that force to be counterattacked by Vienna, serbia, and Tyrolia forces. This would buy me the time to get the serb force back to triests turn 2. Thus giveing me parity with the italians again. The problem was going to be I3 because Italy could then get the Rome group to venice. thus on turn 3 Germany and Austria went into Switzerland, flanking ITaly makeing Italy commit to attacking the swiss group I3 and away from Austrian land thus giveing Austria a couple more turns to pump troops into Russia. This game was some what of an outlier because CP got very good dice rolls in Africa and were still walking around it turn 6. Against an italy player that was aggressive this strat may not have worked. I think the CPs would have won this game because even though it may have been hard for Germany to take Paris with Austrias IPCs it was in a position to begin a move on Rome turn 6 and it had such a massive stack the italians probobly would have died next and then brit french U.S. would be in trouble.

unless another ally does it for you let’s say france :p ;) then you can move them in your first turn

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?

And we may also point out that some here are no longer interested in anything more than trolling and hijacking this thread. Arguments could still be brought up with proper links to support this thing about Italy and Austria joining up, but alas we are now dealing with typos and trolling.

@BJCard:

@GoSanchez6:

I don’t know for sure BJ but I do know that these games are coming out faster than they ever had which leads me to believe they are not playtesting them like they used to.

Fair enough.  It seems as though the 1940 games and Spring 1942 were made and then after a couple years of playtesting by the general public, they put out 2nd editions.

Unfortunately BJcard I think this is what we are going to see from now on out with these games. Get it out there,have the community play it,Maybe come out with a Alpha edition and then make a second edition and make even more money on it.

Wove’s rules above are pretty much exactly as I’ve always though rail movement should be.

I might be a little more generous to Turkey and allow it to rail anywhere within its original tt; they did have a railway all the way to Medina, and were building one to Baghdad.

Preventing the CPS moving units from Berlin to Baghdad would be a vital strategic goal for the Allies, definitely spicing up the battles in the Balkans.

Also consider how big some of the SZs are on this map: you can ship from Canada to Marseille in one turn. This is how the Allies can move units, the CPs have to march overland one space at a time, when in reality the trains would get them to just behind any front line in no more than a week or so.

@toblerone77:

Lets play what if and let the US enter early…I’m all abouf that!

Then boy will we have the map for you  :wink:
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=30390.0