Topics created by ABWorsham4

so when do we get to find out the results?

I bet, many of you are like me, I grew up reading the Bantam WWII series of books. I starting looking at the number of books produced and realized how many i have not read.

What is your favorite? I love Iron Coffins, Samurai & Company Commander.

@Gargantua:

How is this an Axis and Allies customization?

I know not, friend.

The is always someone who would ‘fall in love’ with the thought of Peyton Manning.

I think if the italians had modern weapons they would of stayed and fought more.

THE PHILLIPINES WAS A MUST!!!

Folks, the war wasn’t like Axis and Allies,  you didn’t know how many aircraft carriers and battleships your opponent had, or what weapons, or what secret technologies,  you fought as best as you knew, and you hit the enemy where you knew you could.

HOWEVER - Like Axis and Allies everything is done in Baby Steps.  Sure - Peleliu didn’t matter by the course to victory the allies took,  but say,  the Japanese invented the Jet in 42?  Or won a series of battles they lost?  Say they turned the American offensive around at Gaudalcanal?

You know, I can stand on a cardboard box and screw in a light bulb, but what if I slip? or the carboard crumples?  I might fall and break the light bulb… or my neck…  Better to get a REAL step ladder, or a cinder block, and place it on the ground - JUST TO MAKE SURE, I have a fail safe point to operate from.

That’s what the Phillipines was all about.  It was also a symbol to the world, of which side was winning… and it removed a POSSIBLE and SIGNIFICANT strategic asset from the enemy.  It had to be done.

There is a reason America didn’t just take the whole fleet to San Diego, load it with Marines, and set sail for Tokyo and for the win.  Everything is done one step at a time.

@CWO:

@Hobbes:

@RedArmySoldier:

So it’s either ‘join together vs Russkieland’, or ‘fall together’.

Isn’t this what happened in real life?

Not really. In the last days of the war in Europe, the Nazis entertained all kinds of fantasies that the Anglo-Americans would come to their senses and would team up with them to fight the barbarous Soviet hordes, but it never happened.  The Soviet/Anglo-American alliance held together until the surrender of Germany, and indeed until the surrender of Japan: Stalin fulfilled his prior commitment to go to war against Japan three months after Germany surrendered (the time which had been allocated for him to shift some of his forces from Europe to the Far East).  Germany surrendered on May 7, and the USSR invaded Manchuria almost exactly on schedule on August 9.  In Europe, the Soviet, American and British armies all settled into the occupation zones which had been defined ahead of time for each power.  The predefined occupation zones were even respected where the fighting had taken the Americans into areas assigned to the Russians (such as Leipzig) and the Russians into areas assigned to the Anglo-Americans (such as parts of Austria, and of course the western half of Berlin).

Yeah, but afterwards the West set up the ‘denazification’ because they needed the former Nazis to run West Germany, while taking a blind eye to both the fascist regimes of Portugal and Spain since they were anti-communist as well, and had no problems in supporting dictatorships everywhere to prevent the communists from taking power.

I actually collect bolt-actions as a hobby. I have in my collection a Canadian made Enfield (Mk III type 4 I think) from 1944, I have a French MAS-36 both of which are in amazing condition (which is suprising and not suprising when you think about it  :lol: ). I own 3 Mosin-Nagant rifles, two are full sized rifles from 1942 and 1936 (the 36 has a hex shaped reciever intrestingly) and one is an M38 Nagant carbine (my pride and joy the first gun I ever bought). I have 2 K98’s from 1941 and 1943 respectively. I also have a Chinese made Mauser copy from 1937(ish) that looks like an intresting hybrid of the Gewher88 of WW1 and the K98, bit of an oddity but a fun gun to have all the same.

@morrel:

russia didn’t border Czechoslovakia so direct support would have been through air power or invasion of someone else most likely         This was prior to the winter war with finland    I wonder how effective russian help would have been?

Russia didn’t border Spain either, but that didn’t stop them from sending a lot of tanks and planes to support the Republicans. But as in Finland, the russian help was not very effective. The russian “political officers” spent more time in purging western commies that had joined the International Brigade, than to fight the fascists. And unlike the Germans, the russian officers never learned any lesson in Spain.

Haha, well China invades Russia to secure the Quarantine Zones and the Ruskies use da nukes.  Needless to say, the world goes boom.  Great game, great story!

Goering’s boost: “everything that fly’s belongs to me” this is the major source of the problem. Inter-service rivalry was catastrophic to getting the needed changes done. Goering would not let his power diminish to booster Karl Donetz.

Here is a story of a mine discovered on the beach in New Zealand from the WWI German Raider Wolf.

http://www.3news.co.nz/Old-mine-discovered-on-West-Coast-beach/tabid/209/articleID/85131/Default.aspx

Well, it’s all here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schlieffen_Plan

The main difference is, that in reality the Germans didn’t make their right wing as strong as it should have been according to the original plan. The plan called for a particularly massive German right flank sweeping through the Low Countries and North West France, and reaching as far as the Channel. The center (Alsace-Lorraine) as well as the Eastern front (against the Russians) would be relatively weak. The idea was, to defeat France before Russia could mobilize in force.

So that entire plan is very different from the 1870 Franco-German war, when Germany first defeated an initial French advance into the Rhineland, and then won a series of victories in Northern France. But I don’t think that the plan as originally conceived, would have met with great success. The main flaws in the original Schlieffen plan were, imho:
(a) It banked on a slow Russian mobilization - in reality, the Russians invaded soon, and while they were soundly defeated, their initial advance required an answer of course.
(b) It called for an invasion of the Netherlands, which would not have contributed much to the main purpose of defeating France and would have consumed valuable additional resources to defeat the Dutch.

I hold it for possible that a different modification of the plan would have been more successful, however. If the right flank had been reinforced at the cost of Alsace-Lorraine, while still meeting the Russians and invading Belgium only, then the Germans might have reached the Channel ports in time, and it could have been more difficult for the British to land in great numbers. But that’s still pretty tough, considering the available roads and means of transportation.
Anyway, that wouldn’t be the original Schlieffen plan, so the answer that most closely resembles my view on the original plan would have been “Germans get slowed down and get defeated near Paris, while the Russian horde takes East Prussia”.

I’m changing mine to Bills and Lions.  :mrgreen:

The Russians (read Staline and his goverment) would have been in great difficulty if Moscow would have fallen in German hands.
Staline knows that fact and it was his more fears…
He knows that’s it’s not necessary to conquer all parts of a country to put down a goverment.
That’s why I think a combined Japan-Geman against Russia would have been the best Axis option.
Allies wins because they joined their forces.

Their was no chance of that in Dec 41. Only until mid August 41 did they have that chance, but they sent all the good units to Kiev and lost the time to take Moscow. That was their only chance.

Japan could not undertake any attack on USSR before it had already crippled the US fleet and they were not prepared to fast track an attack on Hawaii in August, just to play your axis and allies strategies with Germany. At that point they were still negotiating to return the oil shipments with US and the military solution was put on hold until that was resolved.

Razor, you mentioned 10% of lend lease went through Murmansk, was curious about that.  75% of Lend lease went to England and a little less than 25% went to Russia.    I just read that 70% of Russian equipment did go through Persia, I didn’t know that!  The rest was split between the Pacific and Atlantic though they provided no break down in the article I read.  So it looks if an even split between the two its 50% of 30% of 25% roughly 4-5% went via Murmansk is about right?  I had though it a much much larger proportion!

@450thMSAF:

YES! USA ARMY RANGERS beat KOREAN SPECIAL FORCES!

Havn’t watched the episode, the outcome seemed easy to predict.

@Tall-Paul Just how many books?

Change the amounts.
Make the soldiers not just worth one, but like an actual infantry unit
Make the Calvary Calvary that have special rules
Make the Cannon’s cannon that have special rules.

For example keep Risk’s basic rules, but make infantry if they role 1s, 2s, and 3s not high enough to land an attack
Calvary if the get 1’s or 2’s they can’t be hit
Cannons if they get 1 it won’t hit.

Also make Infantry worth 1 money or whatever they’re called in risk
Calvary $3
Cannon $5

This may sound retarded, but it might work.

It’s all about the social club and and teammates with rematches also win streaks and losses
  As an S.C.A. member I like my shield and sword or long sword or two weapons