Posts made by Bigtiti

@Cmdr:

I like to stack Caucasus.  Yes, it is technically true that Italy could suicide against it and Germany could follow up and capture it, but I think that hurts the Axis far worse than the allies.

Since you are building tanks on Round 1 anyway (you are, are you not?) it would be an easy matter to reinforce from Russia and build the tanks in Caucasus.

PS: If Finland is under defended, and the SZ 5 fleet is due to be sunk, why not take Finland and then Norway?  Russia needs it far more than England, and it puts you one gray territory away from a 10 IPC NO!)

wrong game?

@Krieghund:

Far left - Europe
Upper center - D-Day
Lower center - Revised
Upper right - Battle of the Bulge
Lower right - Anniversary

my revised tanks are the same as battle of the bulge and anniversary…

@ABWorsham:

I beleive Caesar may be one of the most underated commanders.

and criminals.

@murraymoto:

that’s a good question, one which I tried as Germany a number of times.

In short they run don’t have the troops to overwhelm Russia like they need.

They try the TP without most of Army Group South and/or give up the territories all the way to Italy before the TP could hit Moscow, which it won’t.

For the TP to work, Germany needs the bulk of the Army Group South (Hungary/ Czech/ Austria and south) to participate in Barbarossa.  There’s no good way though that we’ve found yet for Germany to get enough of it’s troops from the Balkan Peninsula to Moscow by going around the RW to participate in the TP to make it effective.  Hungary can move it’s troops north to Poland, but most of the rest get caught by advancing Russian troops out of Ukraine/Bessarbia.  Russia can pull it’s tanks back to hit EPol without problem and still take the Peninsula with minimal troops supported by air and could feasibly even get some additional help from the British forces in Egypt as by B2-3 the Med DD/Trn is likely still around.

Another option for Russia then is to push north from Rumania and into Poland, cutting off the German supply line and either separating their units (as they’d be building tanks then and their armor would be a turn away to help) or forcing them to turn back and further delay their push.  Russia would still be picking off the Penn. countries and causing Germany to further defend or give up the Italy.

End result is Germany’s offensive being split and not effective.  The TP is like walking a tightrope that’s been set on fire behind you.  You are hoping to get across it before the fire catches you or burns through it behind you.

[edit]
It’s just like the historical result.  Germany tried a Tank Push to Moscow in reality.  BUT, because they diverted troops to Leningrad when less than 200 miles from Moscow and they diverted away from the Oil fields to Stalingrad  Their superior offensive ability was blunted on the numerous Russian targets rather than the prize of Stalin, Oil and Moscow.  Had they just pushed straight at Moscow when they were supposed to they would have leveled it before the Siberian Army and winter arrived.  Then they could have dealt with them and turned en masse at Stalingrad from Moscow and from the captured Oil Fields.

i don’t believe the last thing…
Napoleon took Moscow too, but didn’t conquer Russia
Russians would of typically continue the fight in the Urals, where al their factories were

@U-505:

Russia

I think you’re on the right track with the Russian opening.

I have been thinking about:

Finland-3 inf, 1 arm
Belorussia-4 inf, 1 bmb
East Ukraine-(strafe and retreat to Caucasus)5 inf, 2 art, 1 arm, 1 fig

UK

The UK builds usually depend on what Germany did on G1 but, 1 IC, 1 CV isn’t bad as long as you have a DD left to protect against the remaining German SS. Otherwise, 1 IC, 2 DD is decent.

I don’t know about the IC in Norway. The UK is always committed to navy builds in the Atlantic, might as well just stick to TP’s instead of the Norway IC. If you want the IC, SAF, Australia, or India seem like better choices.

US

The US builds might depend on KJF or KGF but, with both you already start out with 3 fighters so 2 CV, 1 fig can’t hurt. That almost immediately gives you enough protection for sz12 in a KGF or, with KJF, it gets you pretty close to equal footing with the Japanese navy and sets you up to take back the Solomans and the NO on US2.

I agree. You should definitely counterattack sz53.

Personally, I think that with the Japanese starting out with only 1 TP in 42’ that a KJF is a definite possibility. Putting the UK IC in India or Australia is a lot safer in 42’ than in 41’. Plus, Egypt is too strong for Germany to attack on G1, so an Indian IC has a boatload of reinforcements to choose from. And with the Japanese about the same strength as they are 41’ but the US starting out better in the Pacific with an extra bomber to boot, the Allies could be swarming all over Japan from turn 2 onward.

‘strafing’ eastern ukraine isn’t a good idea
i’ve been thinking (know, not a good thing in my case): why not strafe belo with 3 inf from len and airplanes, and all the rest to eastern ukraine?
is Finland worth it?

@Deaths:

I think I would have to say that a Japanese invasion of the Soviet Far East would have more Benificial for the Axis Powers then the Attack on th USA and her possesions.  If Japan timed her invasion of Russia with the Germans Operation Barborossa, I do not think that Russia would Have been Able to Recover from that.  The Problem really lies within Japans Ability to Render China Useless as a War Machine.  IMHO Japan Should have secured Peace on the Chinese front Before attacking anybody else.

Now the reality of it all Lies with Mother Russia.  What ever side she is On, WILL win the War.  History teaches us that the Land mass of that size, is VERY,VERY Difficult to control for any invading Power

But……

The Outcome of WWII in my opinion was/is largly based on Germany’s inability to knock the British out of the war.  Had Germany been able to do that, I don’t think it would really matter what Japan did after that point.

The only problem with Speculating about this is Hind sight is always 20/20.  It is easy to say now, what the Axis Powers did wrong or where they went wrong with their War “Game Plan”.

So i guess that depending on Japans Timing of a russian Invasion really won’t matter unless Japan did not have to fight China also.  Not to mention that Japanes Armour would have been tore apart facing the T-34 or any Russian tank for that Matter.

Germany and Japan should have Been Better friends and Cooperate their Military Might.  What I mean is What if Japan had Never Attacked the US. But instead took that same Pearl Harbour Fleet and a SNLF with them and Instead attacked Egypt and the Suez Canal along with Rommel and his Afrika Corps.  Egypt would surely fall and allow the Axis Powers access to the Suez and Basically the entire Middle East and her Vast oil resources.  Since Pearl Harbour Never took place, Amerika would still only be a Material supplier and not a Man power supplier…

they had plans for invading the middle-east, but they knew they would not have enough forces, they didn’t even come through India
(Japan had great navy, but mediocre landarmy)
so they planned invasion of Australia, but of course, at the battle of the Coral sea…

@Imperious:

Soviet 1942 Strategy:

Build 8 Infantry or 4 Infantry and 1 Bomber

Attack one of the following groups of territories:

1. Ukraine with 3 Inf,1 Art, 1 fighter  9v7
2. E Ukraine with 3 Inf, 3 Tanks, 1 Art  15v12
3. Belorussia 3 Inf,1 Bomber, 1 Tanks  10v6

Or attack:

1. Baltic states with 3 Inf, 1 Fighter, 1 Tank 9v6
2. East Ukraine with 6 Inf, 3 tanks, 1 Art  18v12
3. Belorussia with 3 Inf, 1 Art, 1 Bomber 10vs6

Move the sub to SZ#2

Help UK with 2 Inf to Persia from Kazakh
Help China with 2 Inf to Chinghai from Novo.

Place and center 8 Infantry in Stanovoy and Inf in evenki to Yakut

perhaps take down belorussia with 3 inf, fighter, bomber, send all avaible troops to eastern ukraine?
use kzakh to reinforce caucasus

@Lynxes:

No need to do the Baltic closing, Allies should be invading France or Italy and the Baltic isn’t as good a place as it used to be sail that invasion fleet into.

Maybe we should start playing with the optional rules in League and Tourney games? It might be more balanced, maybe even a 50/50?

lol, i’ve won more games with allies with Britain in baltic and us in france, than both in france or italy

i say russia gets an inf, and has to put it in a territory which used to be russian, but was conquered by germany
The territory may be empty, but may also contain german units
they’re normal infantry
but i doubt if they should be supported by a fighter when they appear or not.

@Emperor_Taiki:

BSG is ok, I hate star wars

maybe we should stick to WW2

defninetly no WW1, that war was boring as $!@%

‘Yawn, another 2 million deads by an insane attack
so, nothing new?’

@Veqryn:

I’d say the only countries worth building Factories are Japan in Manchuria, Burma, and India, and the UK in Egypt only after all german and italian fleet are dead and there is no more axis in africa, and then also sometimes UK/USA factory in France if they definitely can hold it and have money to fund it.

south africa, if you wanna keep it?

@critmonster:

what about subs not being able to stop defenseless transports? Or subs not being allowed to stay on the surface during a battle that does not include enemy destroyers?

second one sucks most

@Funcioneta:

UK, then USSR

China is not a country, is a japanese puppet  :-D

And functionetta? There is no a guy called “functionetta”. Real spanishmen have enough with only one “t”  8-) LOL

there’s also no man in history called fartacus :-)
sorry, typo

@squirecam:

@Frontovik:

yeah, it makes a radical change for axis
see, with NO’s, axis need to kill russia (most of the cases)
without NO’s, axis need to keept russia from killing them :-)

41 is impossible without NO’s, and '42 is not certain.

Is this because of the allied bombing? Or income? Or because Germany lacks the amount of troops it has in 42?

I think its the bombing that unbalances the game. Without that, its much more fair.

well, we don’t use bombing so much
it’s just the troops, and the fact that all 3 allies have each about the same cash as italy and germany. Japan can advance pretty well, but also with 3 tanks less each round

@dabapic:

You people don’t know what the Hell you are talking about, this game is the BEST AA game ever made! there are no flaws in this game only flawed players. I’m sick of reading you crybaby’s complaining because the game didn’t play out like you thought it should. Larry Harris designed this game to be a Game! that’s FUN to play, that takes WWII and turns it into "what if " this happened or what if that happened , it’s not going to be historially accurate because we all know the Axis lost, so the game was made to where either side could win by a bunch of different ways.
    So stop your whinning or go play a different game

i agree!
but still, would of been more fun if asia was bit stronger, to get that ‘world at war’ feeling :-D

@squirecam:

@Funcioneta:

The 2nd never was so. It’s not totally clear, sure, because Manchuria and Kiangsu should have only the chinese symbol and not also the jap one. Manchuria reverts to China, it doesn’t mind who frees it (USA, soviets, british or the very chineses)

Perhaps thats meant for the Axis.

In the admittedly unlikely event Germany liberates Manchuria, it goes to Japan, not Germany.

Or Italy!

so, pick your country!
and don’t forget, in 1939, Belgium had 600.000 soldiers!
that’s triple of the netherlands!
HAHA, in your face, Holland!

@Cmdr:

Problem is, if America abandons the Pacific, there is a great chance that Japan will take W. USA for keeps without a significant (read 2 or 3 rounds of dedicated investment) investment into preventing it.  And with a Japan bored out of their mind from inactivity, they have the time and resources to blow on trying for it, or at the least, threatening it with all their extra equipment.  America just doesn’t have the extra equipment that Japan does. (3 Carriers, Battleship, Cruiser, they probably put some more units in the water as well to prepare for the American attack that never came.)

but i wonder
can’t US just drop 10 inf on west us, problem solved?

@Trisdin:

@Imperious:

A factory is france is worse for Germany, while the others listed are clearly in favor to benefit those players.

Perhaps Romania is best actually. Then Germany can build ships for Medd. Yes i like this better

Romania is a good idea, it gives Germany a second sea zone to build ships in and it allows germany to build land units closer to Russia, but is it historicaly accurate or viable.

yeah, it’s viable: didn’t antonescu aide the germans allot?

@TimTheEnchanter:

@Frontovik:

i prefer 42 for KJF
cause then you can put IC on those 4 IPC islands
and there, japan is actually beateble
Russia is also in offense first round, so germans have to withdraw a bit, which gives russia a bit more breath.

You can’t place US ICs in the pacific (except phi) in '42.  per the official FAQ, the “original controller” of those islands is still UK, even though japan starts the scenario with them.  If us takes them, they are liberated for the british.

sorry, my mistake :-)
but i still prefer '42