Posts made by Croesus

Good! push it back until my mother forgets how much I spend on Pacific. Then I can have both!

In previous games of A&A42, My friends have used Brazil as a Nazi Naval base. before attacking the USA. One of the rare occurences when it was a tight game until Washington shipped too many men to war. Britain had France AND Kwangtung

I am proud to say that I have quite a few friends who are willing to play, so much that one has to be left out for now. He gets to play settlers of catan on the other months though. I could muster seven up probably twice or thrice a year, but no more

Oh my goodness. You chaps are complaining about it! Have you seen the board? Have you playtested it? I am convinced that there is a way around J1 attack.

Russia and its allies must stay together! And without the western culture influencing them.

2 players: 1. Axis 2. Allies
3 players: 1. Axis 2. UK, USA, ANZAC, France, Russia 3. Russia and china
4 players: 1 Germany/Italy 2. Japan 3. UK, USA, ANZAC, France 4. Russia and China
5 players: 1. Germany/Italy 2. Japan 3. USA, ANZAC 4. UK, France 5. Russia, China
6 players: 1. Germany 2. Italy 3. Japan 4. USA, ANZAC 5. UK, France 6. Russia, China
7 players: 1. Germany 2. Italy 3. Japan 4. USA 5. UK 6. USSR 7. All Minors
8 players: 1-6. Same as above 7. China, France 8. ANZAC
9 players: Every man for himself

Yes, I understand that china had bits to be for each ally. However in 1940(Now where would I get that time?) Its only really active forces were the communist insurgents

originaly it was russia alone, but that just won’t do, so I added another

The germans saw themselves as superior to the others without a doubt and did seperate a little more
but yes, it would be stupid an corny

I want it politically historical, with Russia/China, and the others

Aha! But would Croatia, Bulgaria, Slovakia, Hungary, and Romania, together form an “Axis Support” power. Geographically it makes sense. You could also have Thailand and finland, and make a super “Axis support team”
They could hold 11 IPC w/o finland or 14 with (just guessing)
Either way, They could put up a fight (with heavy german support)

Eastern allies-Russia, China (as seen here, http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:World_War_II_1940_06.png the chinese had no western components until december 1941

Western- All else

This rule is the first rule i’ve seen that could force allied shipping to be viable if not nessescary. South Africa, ANZAC, and the US need to gain a shipping lane throught the indian and pacifiic oceans. US transports through the south pacific

The British Send South Africa troops-1-2 turns
Anzac sends infantry on American transports-2 turns
US sends tanks to india, dropping off infantry in Queensland-3 to Queensland, five to india

Costs
US-3-5 transports+protection
British-1-2 transports+protection
ANZAC-Extra protection for US transports (Hop on American transports)

This sounds interesting at worst
Awesome at best

My Original Thoughts
1 Player game: I’m the only person who is a big enough loser
2 Player game: Allies v. Axis
3 Player Game: Axis, Eastern Ally, Western Allies
4 Player Game: European Axis, Japan, Russia, Western Allies
5 Player Game: European Axis, Russia, Japan, US/China, UK/ANZAC/France
6 Player Game: Germany, Italy, Russia, Japan, US/China, UK/ANZAC/France
7 Player Game: Germany, Italy, Russia, Japan, US/China, UK, ANZAC/France
8 Player Game: Germany, Italy, Russia, Japan, US, China/France, UK, ANZAC
9 Player Game: Each for himself

This way is most historical
Now I’m with the “7th player gets all minors” Theory, however. I do also think still, that for 8 ANZAC goes free

This is a very sticky situation
On the one hand empty french territory, leaves for Allied Madagascar, Which is just wrong historically.
On the other hand this IS a game and cannot be plagued by political rules, which are going to be a problem no matter what in 1940. The whole game is in quite a fix, but in the end we’ll all buy it and love it.

However I hope Flashman’s idea comes out the winner

I’ve played for a year and I was saying that i need my pepper ground

If only I could give +rep

Three BIG things that you have messed up
1. Finland Fought against Germany AND USSR in WWII
      A.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lapland_War
      B.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War
      C. They were really just out to protect themselves from all invaders, Foreign and Domestic, and kept a democratic constituton.
2. The Northern half of Norway did not surrendur until after Dunkirk
3. Persia and
Iraq were pro-allies

@Flashman:

Treaty ports aren’t treated as separate land territories, so there’s no need to have blow-up boxes, or an absurdly enlarged Gibraltar territory covering half of southern Spain.

If the greater territory is occupied by enemy forces you lose the port.

So, if Spain joins the Axis, Gibraltar is automatically absorbed into Spain.  Even without German help they’d have easily taken over the rock.  The only thing that stopped Franco doing this was that his country was bankrupted by the civil war, and simply couldn’t afford to get involved in another conflict.  He also realised that Spain would become a prime target for American intervention, and was in any case heavily dependent on American imports.  He managed to stall Hitler by demanding the same French North African territory that Hitler had already promised to Mussolini (while secretly promising Petain it wouldn’t be transferred…)
If and when Spain joins the Axis then Spanish and Allied forces in the territory are treated as though a battle has been initiated.  If using ships-in-port rules the UK would have the option of retreating it’s ships to sea.

Similarly, if Japan captures Kwantgtung it’s assumed that it gains the Hong Kong naval base in the process. All UK and Chinese forces in the territory defend together.

We might also have French Pondichery in Coromandel, and Portuguese Goa in Malabar.  Even if not significant militarily, they can become important if using certain Convoy routes, and if using ship re-fueling rules.

This is why:
The territory and guns of gibraltar are mostly on the ISLAND. There for you you need Amphibious equipment to land on gibraltar. No matter your force, sailing transports against anti-sea gun is stupid. then you have a mess. What prevents the spanish is embargo threats, and a war which they are too weak to fight. (By the way, thespanish should NOT have a big army due to the fact that they were low on men spain had about 150,000 men that COULD BE AT ARMS. In Shorth Nothing

@Brain:

@SilverAngelSurfer:

@Brain:

South Africa does not have enough economy to be its own nation in the game.

Precisely.

I believe the last valid candidate to become an independent power in the game would be Canada.

That gives us:
Major:
UK
USA
USSR
Germany
Italy
Japan
Minor:
Canada
ANZAC
France
China
10 Powers, 2 of which are not autonomous

Canada-Can Uk fight on?
I am betting yes
Provinces
I believe
Newfoundland and Labrador (UK-Owned)-1 IPC
Nova Scotia and PEI-1 IPC
New Brunswick-1 IPC
Quebec-2 IPCs
Ontario-3 IPCs
Yukon-0 IPCs
Nunavut and Northern Territory-0 IPCs
British Columbia-1 IPC
Saskatchewan-1 IPC
Alberta-1 IPC
Manitoba-1 IPC
10 territories
All that talk about Russia
This is very off topic but there are ten reasons I think we could have won W/o the rooskies
1. MANHATTAN PROJECT
2. 16 Million men at arms ( then add Britain, China, France, Aussies, South Africa,Dominican Republic, Brazil, Costa Rica, Cuba, El Salvedor, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, India, Zealand, Nicaragua, Panama, Resistance Fighters, and volunteers from around the world)
3.Oil
4.Once our economy got rolling, our Economy
5.The USAAC (US army air corps)
6. The RAF
7. Patton
8. The Marines
9. Montgomery
10. Goering