@Imperious:
I think the Zombies should start in Canada since they called Canadians “Zombies” in WW2.
Well obviously not in Ottawa.
Not enough BRAINS!!! :evil:
Problem is how do you capture that feel of the relentless advance of zombies closing in when standard infantry already move at 1?? hmmm
#617
@Dylan:
@Dylan:
Not really historical accurate, but I’ll try it. :mrgreen:
well actually Canada had zombies in WW2
#610
Grr.
Perhaps you should see the vet about that condition.
Or at least wiki before you reply…
… here I’ll give you a hint: NRMA.
#616
@Imperious:
I wish they did an invasion of China game so players can see how impossible it was for Japan to entirely occupy China, let alone drive old school tanks thru rugged terrain without logistics 4,000 miles to attack Moscow from the east…
hmmm somehow they missed that option!
Kinda surprising from the guys that offer you the chance to “command at the worst disaster in British military history!” You’d think that’d be right up their alley
#615
The good news is I win every game. :-) The bad news is I lose every game :-(
:-D And what’s worse is when you catch yourself cheating….
So it’s similar to the Canadian thing. If you want to make France a separate player power, go nuts, it won’t take much tinkering…
…but who would want to play that small of a role? And a role that small, yes it might be manageable for a new player, but it might put them off the game being that minor!
#614
@UN:
When someone like us explain the game….its ok…we resume and we explain well…but when youre new and you read the rulebook…it can be very hard to understand…specialy when you dont speak english :lol:
Il est utile d’avoir une mère américaine et d’un père français :-D
providing you have a mother that will help you and your friends with the rulebook! :lol:
#613
Now having said all that, IMTO, I can’t help but think that IF the Luftwaffe had won the Battle of Britain and then IF they neutralized the RN to the point that the channel was generally under their control… Hitler might well have turned his direct attention to Sealion and ordered a serious effort to get an amphibious capability.
Probably too little, too late… but then again dictators aren’t always easy to say “no” to when they’re bent on delivering comeuppance to other world leaders.
#613
@Dylan:
Anyways what’s wrong with a swordsmen, look they’re in the game, and they are the best for killing calvary.
calvary? Outside Jerusalem?
ahh now I get it. swords into ploughshares and then… cha-ching no hill.
You’re quite right. Couldn’t do that landscaping with muskets.
#611
Will FMG therefore provide this gap in the market and produce Motorised Infantry? :-)
Although I think that the mech inf piece is supposed to also represent motorized inf and any other type of inf not riding the “old black cadillacs” into combat (walking), if memory serves FMG’s sets will include trucks…
#611
@Dylan:
Not really historical accurate, but I’ll try it. :mrgreen:
well actually Canada had zombies in WW2
#610
Which will stir up plenty of complaints I’m sure.
#609
@UN:
I think it’s stupid that the Soviet battleship and cruiser are dedicated, whereas the French will be using all British/American naval sculpts. France had the 4th biggest navy in the world, and whereas the French Army wasn’t top notch, the Navy was in 1940. The Soviet navy was bottled up for the majority of the war, so why do the Soviets get dedicated ships and the French don’t?
Agreed.
But really if you’re going to give France the size of navy it historically had in 1940 then there should be a special Vichy rule as to who controls it once Paris falls.
Otherwise you have the 4th biggest navy swanning around the Med when historically it was on the other side of the surface.
How does WOTC manage that without tipping the balance?
#607
@Dylan:
If the Battle of Britain went well for Germany, do you think the US and USSR could still win against Germany and Italy.
If Britain made peace with Germany in 1940 (on whatever terms take her out of the fight), US wouldn’t have been at war with Germany in 1941.
#607
@Dylan:
Well, in my perfect world the global game would allow for 2 options: 1 game for 5 Players (each playing the “great” powers) and a game that breaks down to allow for more players/options/phases.
So, it would go something like:
U.S. Player
- China
- France
U.K. Player (including the Commonwealth)
- ANZAC
- Canada
Soviet Player
- Tana Tuva (j/k)
- Possibly some role in China
German Player
- Italy
- Minor Euro Axis
Japan Player
- Siam
You do know Siam, Minor Euro Axis, and Canada aren’t powers.
well he did say “in my perfect world”…
#606
I think Stalingrad would be awesome.
However, as the Americans didn’t participate in that battle I don’t think WOTC will bother with it.
#604
OK so aside from genocide, to get back to the thread topic: you chose waiting until 1945 as the option that would’ve helped Germany more in WW2?
#603
IMTO: No I don’t think so.
They still had to gain control of the channel and air… plus the question of how much amphibious lift they could manage.
So, winning the [air] battle of Britain would’ve been more influential as to whether they pursued ops against UK.
#602
And you, sir, may now consider me painted green with envy
Enjoy! :-D
#601
OK, I’ll bite: how do you get 10-15 IPCs?
#600
I wonder if FMG was thinking 1.5"… wouldn’t that be (roughly) 37mm?
Now that would be a candidate for AA.
#599
In terms of giving Canada a role based on its historical contribution, to make matters worse (of course) using it as a fighter factory and then having a huge RCAF wouldn’t be historically correct either.
The T in BCATP stands for Training after all. So maybe half of the air units being “produced” in Canada should actually be UK units.
Couldn’t use the maple syrup-flavoured Cdn pieces at all. Pity.
#598