Posts made by Charles de Gaulle

@WILD:

@Charles:

How much is enough punishment? Maybe we should ask Germany. My new setup for Spain is 10 infantry, 1 artillery, 1 AA gun, 1 tank, and 1 fighter.
I revised the setup above after a playtest.

So you dropped an 1 art and 1 mech from the orig Spanish army that you posted.

In your test I’m assuming the US attacked Spain

What did the US take in if so? (was I close on the US attack force)

How’d it go for the Americans afterwords (did UK reinforce)

Were the allies able to hold and advance, or did the axis push them back into the see?

Very few countries were invaded at all so I lowered most of their forces.

My goal here is a good balance of historical accuracy, limited special rules, and playabillity. 
Leaving the armies the size they are is unhistorical and unfair and can be easily fixed without special rules.  Leaving Spain a walk in for the U.S. will upset balance. 
But it all comes down to the fact that we dislike the OOB neutral rules.  If we each make good house rules that we share for certain people that’s great!  :-D.

I am starting to almost always threaten sea lion right off the bat.  It really helps Italy. Then I send my transports against Russia and some times get a few to South Africa and taking Moscow is generally easy with very little pressure on the West.

I was twelve when I got 1941.  I am only 16 still.  My group consists of 11-53 years of age the youngest being my little brother.  Most of us are 15-18.  Three of them are family members and the rest are friends or simply kids from school.  I would recommend that he first ask his family if they are interested.  That is a small chance so he can then go to his friends or people his age he is axquainted with or anyone decent and interested really.  However, I spent my first year just playing solo and occasionally with family and this really helped me get the rules down.  Best of luck to him!

On a serious note, here is one peculiar strategy that has helped me (it doesn’t give you the win) as Germany several times. 
Turn 1 build carrier and 2 transports. Do the standard of hitting France and UK sea units. Italy takes Tunisia
Turn 2 threaten sea lioj with more transports then go to SZ 91 with carrier two planes two cruisers and three loaded transports you already had and take Gibraltar and Morocco.  Let’s hope Italy can get Algeria and Alexandria for a total of ten NO IPCs for Italy.  Note that going to Gibraltar is the trickiest thing here.  You have to be able to hold on which will depend every game.  If Japan did not attack the US and is not going to this turn you are good.  Make sure the UK can’t get your boats either.  If the U.S. is not building enough units on the East or you are playing Europe only, this should be pretty easy otherwise chances of doing this are small.
Turn 3 Surprise! Go to SZ 82 and take the Africa territories in range of amphibious assault being careful you can make them survive.
Turn 4 this is the real deal. Take South Africa.  With the UK spending against Sea lion earlier, the only units in South Africa should be the three they bought last turn if they saw this coming.  If they have any more units coming from the north, you’re sunk and shouldn’t have gone to French Africa.  (If once you are at Gibraltar and see that the UK can easily stop you,just go in the Med and help Italy. )  So why take South Africa? It will cripple the UK especially after the Sea Lion threat.  You can build three units a turn here until the U.S. comes which is great because they have to go three turns and two turns back just to get South Africa for the UK. 
It only works under certain conditions and if your opponent knows it is coming, he may have a chance to stop it.

How much is enough punishment? Maybe we should ask Germany. My new setup for Spain is 10 infantry, 1 artillery, 1 AA gun, 1 tank, and 1 fighter.
I revised the setup above after a playtest.

I would love to have you test it! Once I get a good Global I will give it to you, but I can’t send a PDf as I am working on a tablet notepad software and simply copying it here.

Risk? That’s only for Larry haters.

Operation Failure:

Turn one take France and build navy.
Turn two go to Iceland.
Turn three go to Canada.
Turn four invade U.S.A.

Guarantee you 99.99% odds

After this there is Operation World Menace in which you attack the neutrals and Operation Latino in which you invade South America.

@HeinzGuderian:

This 1942 is pretty well balanced and fun to play.  However, it is historically inaccurate.  The United Kingdom should have control of Iraq and Syria since these two nations were invaded in 1941.  Japan should have control of Burma, the Aleutian Islands, the Gilbert Islands, the Solomon Islands, and Celebes.  I could list more problems with Larry Harris’s G42 scenario but I think these issues will suffice.  It is disappointing to see that Larry Harris didn’t do his homework when creating this setup.

I must agree.  If you want a real deal 1942 try the one by Oztea. Larry’s is really a gem if you want a quick game, but it removes just a little too much in an attempt to make things streamlined and “fair.” Yes, it is balanced as a whole, but the theaters are not balanced.  I still love it :)

You do realize that the U.S. will simply invade Spain nearly every game?

It has been out since Saturday! :-o check here http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=38589.0

Once the setups are perfected, I will make a Global version on a new topic.  I am definitely going to change Europe 1939 a little bit, but I want to finish my current game first to get a good impression.

An IC in Persia or Iraq is better because it is much closer to the action and therefore makes West India a poor choice. If you are playing Global, keep in mind that West India belongs to UK Pacific.

@Carolina:

In general I agree with your list of standing neutral forces.  As to how neutrals react towards aggression, should be a matter of influence.  To represent diplomacy and influence, there should be a mechanism for spending IPCs to influence a country’s alignment (pro-Axis or pro-Allied), but there should be an element of risk when attacking.  So, without any play-testing, and as a starting suggestion I would propose something like comparing the [Side 1 IPC influence + 2d6] minus [Side 2 IPC influence + 2d6] (the 2d6 rolls are the element of risk).  If the result is >= then they are friendly.  The alignment determination would be after the combat move and a friendly result would have the neutral welcome the invaders with no battle, otherwise combat!  Once aligned in this manner - their alignment would never change.

Sure if you want to add that, but I want to keep a general house rule which will appeal to most players.
@WILD:

I think the true neutrals ban is pretty ridiculous, and like the list you have put together for individual standing armies that includes some better units and a bit of navy (might be a bit over zealous though)

I have mixed feeling about countries that had colonies linked to them. My first thought was that if a country like Portugal was invaded that their 3 colonies would be immediately activated (pro axis/allies) against the power that attacked the home country. Then I thought if Portugal was attacked would their colonies actually pick up arms, but for game purposes yea I think you do it. However if Angola was invaded would Portugal go to war against the aggressor?

Do you lump the Iberian peninsula together and their colonies? Portugal feared Spain joining the axis and/or an axis assault through Spain. They also had an Anglo-Portuguese Alliance for over 600 years that Portuguese Government announced was still in tact at the start of the war (The Brits decided to let them stay neutral). So if Spain joined the axis, or Hitler invaded Spain, yea Portugal would join the allies (go pro allies). However if the UK/USA invaded Spain, Portugal certainly wouldn’t join the axis.

I am testing a game right now where I have messed around with the neutrals. I have tweaked the inf and gave some better units (art, tank, ftr) and some navy to the neutrals that matter like Turkey, Spain, Portugal, Sweden, and Argentina. I have even split Turkey (east and west) and Spain (north and south) into 2 territories. What I put down is very similar to what you listed (a bit lighter). The rest of the neutrals like in South America and Africa I  added one inf to all. If they had 0, they get 1 inf; If they had 2 they now have 3 etc….for simplicity.

Was also looking at a broad rule based on IPC value.
0 IPC value get 1 inf unless listed otherwise on the map (most won’t get invaded because they have no value).
1 IPC value they get the inf listed + 1 art
2 IPC or more they would get the inf listed +1 art, 1 tank

Place a dd in countries like Port, Spain, Turkey, Sweden, Argentina

But that doesn’t seem work in some cases?

The problem with your setup is that things like the U.S. invading Spain and the Axis invading Turkey just becomes a no brainer at that point and possibly game breaking.  I have modified South America a bit so they aren’t so ahistorically strong.

Couldn’t have said it better myself.  Now all we need is a new setup for the neutrals……How about…

New neutral rules! Neutral ships don’t affect naval at all unless you are attacking them.  When attacking a neutral, the units written here are immediately placed in the attacked territory as well as any territories alligned to them. The opposing team will pick a player to represent those forces and collect income from any of their territories you failed to take.
The neutrals which have more than one territory are:
Mongolia (use OOB rules for this one)
Portugal: Portugal, Portuguese Giunea, Angola, Mozambique
Spain: Spain, Rio de Oro

The new neutral setup is:

Venezuela: 6 infantry
Colombia: 1 infantry
Ecuador: 1 infantry
Peru: 1 infantry
Bolivia: 1 infantry
Paraguay: 1 infantry
Uraguay: 1 infantry
Argentina: 6 infantry
SZ 66 (alligned with Argentina): 1 cruiser
Chile: 4 infantry
Mozambique: 1 infantry
Angola: 1 infantry
Portugal: 4 infantry, 1 artillery, 1 AA gun
SZ 104 (alligned with Portugal): 1 cruiser, 1 transport
Spain: 10 infantry, 1 artillery, 1 AA gun, 1 tank, 1 fighter
SZ 92 (alligned with Spain): 1 destroyer
SZ 91 (alligned with Spain): 1 destroyer
Switzerland: 6 infantry
Sweden: 6 infantry, 1 artillery, 1 AA gun
SZ 114 (alligned with Sweden): 1 destroyer
Turkey: 8 infantry, 1 artillery, 1 AA gun, 1 fighter
SZ 99 (alligned with Turkey): 1 destroyer
Arabia: 6 infantry
Afghanistan: 4 infantry

My vote is that we give each neutral its own powerful army. Your thoughts?

Yesterday my team (who actually contributed as much to the Europe 1939 as I did) and I played part of a game of Europe 1939. Here’s how it went…
Round 1:
Germany: bought land units.  Took Poland, Denmark, Norway, Holland/Belgium, and moved into pro-Axis Hungary/Slovakia.  Did not attack any British fleet.  Moved whole navy to SZ 112.  Moved barely enough to Western Germany to take France next round (if the Allies put everything there, they may not have gotten Paris).
Soviet Union: built fighter and land units. Took Vyborg, Baltic States, and Bessarabia.  I (Russia) made the misstake of not taking Eastern Poland; when the Germans moved in and had great positioning to attack me, I realized that I should have done the historical thing and taken Eastern Poland.
United States: built navy. 
Italy: built figter.  Consolidated in Ethiopia and Tobruk and transported troops to Tobruk and Albania. Put whole fleet except a transport in 97 and army in Northern Italy.
United Kingdom: built home defense.  No attacks.  Made big fleets in 91 and 98.  Surrounded East Africa and consolidated Egypt. 
France: built fighter and land units.  Combined with British fleets in 91 and 98.  Evacuated air units.  Tried to make a stand In Paris.
Round 2:
Germany: built air and sea to threaten Sea Lion.  Took Paris with all air force yet only lost one plane to AA guns.  Took Eastern Poland.  Moved into Finland and Romania.
Soviet Union: built land units.  Tried to form new counter-attack line since I couldn’t use Western Ukraine and Belarus with my misstake in Poland. 
United States: more navy… good thing we let him play France. 4 turns is a long wait. Btw this was a 5 player game.
Italy: Attacked Southern France, Yugoslavia, and Greece. Blitzed Kenya and took Somaliland and tried to hold East Africa. Naval stand off.
United Kingdom: more home defense.  Took back Kenya, Somaliland, and Alexandria for the NO.  Took Persia. Combined fleets in 91 and 98 into a mega fleet in 92. Sent some of its fleet to different places.
France: Reinforced Egypt and fleet in 92.  Threatened Libya.

We will play more as the week goes on…

@Argothair:

I guess two question that are always worth asking yourself when you tweak the year are:
(1) What do you hope to accomplish, i.e., what thematic or strategic options are you trying to add or change from the original?
(2) How will you keep the game balanced in response to the new strategies?

If you just want to dial the clock back a year to see what happens, I guess that’s fine, and it’s straightforward enough – like you say, there will just be several more pro-Axis or pro-Allied territories. But how does that affect everyone’s options? In the Pacific, if China starts with more troops and more territory, then presumably Japan needs to invest more resources there to get comparable results. Japan’s “compensation” for that disadvantage is that the US has to wait an extra turn before declaring war…but many players feel a J1 or J2 attack is viable or even optimal. So by strengthening China, are you nerfing J1/J2 attacks to the point where they’re not serious strategies? If so, are you giving Japan any new alternatives to replace them? Like, is there some new theater that Japan can attack in, or a key battle that Japan can win on J3 that they normally wouldn’t be able to?

Similarly, in the Atlantic, is France going to be made powerful enough to survive for at least two turns, so that it gets to make a round of purchases and place them in Paris? If so, is the expectation that Britain will have the option to heavily reinforce Paris and make it (prohibitively? very? somewhat?) costly for Germany to take Paris on G2? Or will the players be prodded into using their first turn to essentially recreate the 1940 setup? What about Benelux, Poland, Yugoslavia, Norway, and Greece? Do the Allies have any chance to successfully reinforce some of those regions (i.e., establishing a beachhead that endures for at least a couple of turns) if they’re willing to abandon France? If the Allies have additional options for reinforcing Europe, what (if anything) will the Axis get to compensate? Is a G1 attack on Russia going to be even more of a reckless gambit than in 1940, or will Russia’s forces be thin / awkwardly deployed enough that Germany could reasonably choose to ignore some of the pro-Allied neutrals and blitz for Moscow? What about a Sea Lion? Should it be possible for London to fall before Paris?

I do think this is a worthwhile project, and I encourage you to keep working on it. I’m just asking all these questions to help you think through the issues and make the best variant you can!

Excellent questions. These really helped me think through the Europe side.

Europe 1939 is out!

I have decide that Italy may only attack starting turn two so they couldn’t move into neutrals of any types I1. This means the only pro-axis they should get is maybe Bulgaria which I don’t mind since it did play a very different role than Romanian and Hungary.

The start date here is Spetember 3 or later.  So Germany is already at war with Uk, France, and ANZAC.

yes Germany only gets the three territories that say Germany.  To compensate for the the IPCs loss Germany is going to get a great heap of units in the East to invade France which won’t have so much.

Germany will be able take Holland and Denmark and Norway and Poland and Hungary turn one but I don’t want them in Finland so I decided to make the UK be able to go for Norway plus they will lose their NO for Sweden so the Germans shouldn’t head for Finalnd.

First setup will be complete on Saturday and I’ll give it to you guys by Monday the latest.

I should say that no special rules will be added unless necessary for gameplay.  This means France will be "normal, " Denmark and Norway will simply be pro-allied, and Germany will go first but have very little in Western Germany but a lot of stuff in the East as well as The Baltic Sea (out of range of most Allies).  I will have one necessary rule that allows Russia to attack Vyborg (will be Pro-Axis if they don’t) and Poland (will be pro-allied if they don’t) and simply claim Bessarbia and Baltic States.

Italy will simply have a well -thought setup and they can declare war turn 1 or 2 and if they don’t UK can attack turn 2 or 3.

Allies will get much more Navy than Germany but their land armies will be smaller (especially Britain).

I can’t wait!