Sevastpol controlled by the Central Powers?

From a simple math min/max perspective which some are intersested in, a naval strat is extremly unwise. Simple plus/minus math will tell you you need to add appr. 81 IPC worth of naval as CP in total accross the board (using the starting naval as ref) to even break even which means if you wanna “controll” something you will need to add more than the competition.
As CP you cant ever get into a building race with the allies as your starting income is so much less, but rather you need to as fast as possible close the incomecap.

Consider sz17. (I will assume the ottoman and russian navy cancel each out). Allies can after turn1 have 2 BS (France+Italy)+3Cruisers(UK+Italy+France which means AH wont be able to break even, even if the go all out navy. After turn2 the allies will have additional 1BS+Crusie (UK) in the zone and again AH wont be able to break even, even if they spent all during 2 turns. After this france plus Italy can with great ease together spend equal to AH for each turn.
So I have to ask how in hell are AH suppose to get controll over sz17?=)

I suppose you can counter and say “the allies dont counter my moves in my games” but then what is the point of argue the value of strats. I can  ask what do you think about my “attack-AH-first-as-Italy strat”, assuming AH dont defend their borders?=)

It gets pretty chaotic, Russian bear gets real, Ottos are in a stalemate, AH is backed up to his capital, I like to take Italy at the same time… USA can liberate Italy and that makes me a sad panda sometimes. AH is where things get wonky. It is primarily Germany that had to leave what is east of germany, east of germany and everything west of germany west of germany machine gunning their way  to france. It is kind of cray. The starting stuff east of Germany is generally enough to keep Russian bear enough spaces away from you long enough for you to deal with it later.

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.

The ones with two flags stand up troops.  For example, Portugal has a French and Portuguese flag.  For the true neutrals, only the ones with larger flags, for example Ethiopia will stand up troops, Sp. Morocco will not.

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?

@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.

Here’s an idea Shakespeare; stop stealing the Admin’s show and actually ASK him if you can post such information.

You know, he runs this site, puts in the effort to show us everything, and then someone comes along and spoils his work. Not very nice.

TVW, also dealing with a similar issue on another forum.