Posts made by Elsaß-Lorraine

My group usually uses control markers for 10, especially in stacks that won’t be splitting up anytime soon (like in Moscow)

No, that plane must stop there to conduct combat, where it will automatically kill the undefended transport (or a transport defended only by subs without an attacking destroyer)

Yes, they may

Brian Wassom has posted 12 G40 game reports.  I personally haven’t watched them, so I can’t vouch for quality (although I’ve heard they’re good).  He doesn’t upload very frequently though

Caesar, I’m pretty sure that objective only applies to original Russian territory, but I’m not completely sure.

@Caesar:

I don’t see how diverting critical units when the Red Army is at its very smallest to possibly lose them in Iraq just to get 3 dollars ( I think Iraq is worth 3, not too sure) is going to be worth the diversion when Germany can already beat USSR on its own and even more of a nightmare if Italy and Japan join the invasion.

Iraq itself is worth 2, but to the USSR it is 5 because of the spread of communism objective

@MEANWHILE:

@larrymarx:

5. Russia should always send an expeditionary force to the Middle East and Africa to boost their income.

This is one which I find highly debatable. In my opinion, the ME is much more valuable and practical in British hands. It is a waste of time for Russia to go down there. The juice is not worth the squeeze me thinks. You may gain the units from Persia, but will loose some taking Iraq. Plus your units are now out of position in the event of a Nazi invasion. Giving the extra income to Russia only deprives Britain.

You can’t really argue that taking at least Iraq with fast movers and planes is a suboptimal move for Russia though. It’s 5 IPCs per turn for them bc of the objective and they will only have those planes and units out of position for 2 turns at the most, with proper planning and positioning. Maybe I misunderstood what you meant but I don’t see a reason for Russia to not take Iraq

It’s SZ 16

@larrymarx:

Doesn’t it depend on Germany’s overall strategy?

If Germany is trying to take Moscow as fast as possible, then the starting IC’s are enough.

If something goes wrong or if Germany is just trying to seize and hold income producing territories, they could make use of additional IC’s on the front.

Like if Germany has to dig in and build up for a few turns, an extra factory in Russia would be more efficient and cheaper (unit-wise) because it’s more effective and less costly to build 3 infantry in a factory 1 turn away from your army than it is to build those same infantry, or even mechs, back in Germany or Western Germany.  It lets Germany produce a larger amount of cheap cannon fodder, in the form of infantry, than they would be able to if they only had 1-2 factories producing infantry in Russia and the western factories producing more expensive mechanized units that need to get to the front faster.

@happynewyear1945:

@Requester45:

@happynewyear1945:

the issue I have then, strictly speaking is this;

1. Italy Dow Russia, combat moves into a Russian territory,
2. germany non combats 1 unit into Italy’s occupied space in Russia,
3. Russia attacks the Italian occupied space…
4. Russia has not declared war on Germany,
5. what happens with the German combat unit?

As I previously stated, the rules show that the Soviet Union cannot attack a territory containing a German unit, meaning they wouldn’t be able to attack Italy.

From Page 15,

Combat: A power can�t attack a territory controlled
by or containing units belonging to a power with
which it is not at war

Which i am Aware of;

Page 22

Where Units Can Move
Land Units: A land unit can move into any friendly or
friendly neutral territory, including territories that were
captured in the current turn. It can�t move into or through
a hostile territory (not even one that contains no combat
units but is enemy-controlled) or an unfriendly neutral
or strict neutral territory. If your power isn�t at war, you
can�t move your units into territories belonging to another
friendly power or a friendly neutral.

See above;
It make MORE sense that Germany Cant non combat into Russia when not at war, than for Russia not to be able to attack Italian occupied Territory because Germany has pieces in it.

Germany is at war (with Britain and France) so the rules about Powers not at War don’t apply to them. Also, that territory is Italian so it should be treated just as if Germany wanted to land a fighter in Southern Italy - it’s your ally’s land, so you can move into it freely.
Same situation with USSR in that they can move into neutrals and declare war on Germany now that they are at war in Europe

Those islands are not separate territories, thus you can’t build air bases on them.
Europe rulebook page 8, under the Islands header: “Each territory has a separate name and emblem on it.”

@GeneralHandGrenade:

I think we should get Kreighund to clarify cuz that seems pretty black and white to me.

No kidding. I looked in the Europe rule book but I didn’t see anything in the political situations of Germany, the USSR, or Italy mentioning anything related to moving into originally-controlled Russian territory while not at war with Russia

Could someone tell me what page of the rulebook this is on?

Is it legal? I think the answer to that is yes. Does it make sense? No. Seems like a hole in the rules to me.

@Ichabod:

I did search for this topic first in the search bar and didn’t find this topic.

I can’t ever find anything using the search bar…  :lol:

Loaded carriers (with fighters, preferably) and destroyers, like the previous posts say, are probably the best for defending an invasion force.  You also might want some subs, which are good as cannon fodder and also at taking out blocker ships.

One way you can maximize defense is have one power (like America) build empty carriers, and have one of their allies (like Britain or ANZAC) provide fighters to land on the carriers.  This sacrifices much of the fleet’s offensive capability, but it gives you better defense because the carrier builder doesn’t have to waste money on planes to fill them, and instead can crank out more destroyers or landing forces.

But turn 1 the US (barring any craziness) have no combat to do, and the only interesting thing they can do (if they’re at war) is take Brazil. For the first few turns, all you do is build. But yes, when you get into the thick of things in Europe and against Japan, it is much more fun to play America.

@Fatespinner:

I find it quite difficult to keep China from being killed. How would you suggest doing it?

It’s pretty much impossible to keep China alive if Japan focuses on them.  It’s more about prolonging death and being annoying than not dying.

Out of all the major powers, on turn 1, USA is the worst IMO.  Across the whole game, it would be Italy (assuming that they aren’t running wild in Africa or the Middle East or something crazy) or USSR

I think that will be a bit larger than 165% of the 1940 map…  :-D

@taamvan:

The real billion dollar idea would be to create a pinsetting unit, where you simply dump a huge bucketful of plastic models and mini poker chips into a hopper at the top, the units drop into one of 138 customizable placement baskets, the frame lowers automatically onto the map you’ve chosen, and when you raise it, setup is complete.  MSRP, $314,000.00.

I don’t think YG would be able to crowdfund that project as successfully as his others…  :-D