Posts made by KimRYoung

• the French and Italian fleets are now damaged and susceptible to counterattack on A2

By What?

Kim

@Uncrustable:

Don’t be thick  :-P

Your answer is in my post

Not trying to be. my original question was what to do if the Russians DO NOT defend poland and withdraw everthing to the Ukraine. Does Germany move in with everthing? If so what does Austria have left to move into Poland with. I’m not trying to be argumentative, just seeing what is an effective counter and specifics on the troop deployment.

Kim

@Uncrustable:

AH attacking Poland turn 1 would be pretty silly  :|

It would very obviously be AH 2, so that on Russia’s 2nd turn if they wanted to attack Poland it’s defenses would be maximized (germ + AH force)

If Russia stacks Poland turn 1 then Germany attacks followed by an AH attack and russia is now screwed for the rest of the game (and so too are the allies)

So Germany moves into Poland when? Turn 1 attack, followed by Austrian reinforcments? Just want to be clear what your plan is.

Kim

@Aristokles:

I don’t understand, what’s the advantage to having the AH fleet in the Med, but not attacking with it?

Really. France will attack the Austrians on her turn, and the Italians will finish them off on theirs. They can absorb the hits on their BBs, repairing them the next turn. Austria sacrifices her fleet for no reason whatsoever.

Kim

@Uncrustable:

@KimRYoung:

xxstefanx,

The Austrian moves seem resonable, I usually try something similar. What is the German reaction to the Russians moving every unit possible into the Ukraine and buying fighters? In our game, the Germans tried to move into Poland in force and the Russians destroyed them with minimal loss turn two.

Thanks

Kim

.

AH and Germany both have to mass in Poland. Suicide if not

So you suggest Austria attack Poland turn one? or wait and move in behind the Germans on turn two?

Kim

xxstefanx,

The Austrian moves seem resonable, I usually try something similar. What is the German reaction to the Russians moving every unit possible into the Ukraine and buying fighters? In our game, the Germans tried to move into Poland in force and the Russians destroyed them with minimal loss turn two.

Thanks

Kim

Larry posted this on his site yesterday. Latest clarification to the 2 move concept.

How about this…

All land units (infantry, artillery, and tanks) can move up to two territories. They can move into friendly territories to reinforce them, contested territories to battle for them, or hostile or neutral territories to attack them.

Land units that begin their turn in friendly territories can move up to two territories, but they must end their movement if and when they enter a contested territory. However, they may not move into a hostile or neutral territory unless they began the turn already adjacent to such a territory. In other words, they may move only one space to enter hostile or neutral territories. Such land units can also be moved by transport, in which case they may either be transported to any territory within range or remain at sea.

Land units that are moved out of a contested territory can only be moved to an adjacent territory. The adjacent territory being moved into must have been controlled by the moving player at the beginning of his turn or contained units belonging to him. They can also be moved by transport, in which case they may either be transported to a territory within range that meets those same requirements or remain at sea.

(if you think this was well written you can thank Krieghund)

Kim

@Tavenier:

I’m glad the plus one from port is probably going to be standard. Thanks for advocating it, Kim!

Yep, this and the non-combat double move is going to be our standard for now. I hope this makes the game better long term.

Kim

sounds like the long distance move is going to be retired after a short career, 2 moves when through controlled TT’s seem to be the order of the day.

As well as +1 move bonus for naval units when beginning their move from a sea zone with a friendly naval base.

Kim

Perhaps you are correct. But in this scenario Austria does not attack Swiss but Venice instead and Germany takes Swiss. I think this is a big difference.

Possibly. would need to try that. I our game though, the French still had enough reserves to send 6 units to Albania to open a frooont in the Balkens diverting Austrian and Turkish forces that way. These units could just as easily have gone to Piedmont to make it even stronger.

It looks like interesting strategies for sure, but there’s no sure game winner. I think it needs to be played more rather then theroized.

Thanks
Kim

By moving a large force to Swiss on your first turn your army is still flexible to go out all directions. If France aids Piedmont and Italy’s army there doesn’t move then you will be facing max 13 infantry, 4 artillery from Tuscany, Piedmont and Burgundy. France will need to reinforce Burgundy and Marseilles at the same turn. The good thing is that there army is spread among many countries. On the other hand you can attack Piedmont with 18-1 (loss in Swiss battle) infantry 6 artillery and one fighter.

Snackbar,
last game we played the CP tried pretty much this idea. Austria captured Switzerland on her turn, then every German that could get there moved in. It did look impressive and threatened from the central position. The French countered with moving teh army from Burgandy and fighter in to Piedmont, and the Italians reinforced. France then massed everthing else in Burgandy.

The Austrians on there own could not attack either. The Germans tried, but couldn’t make any headway either and could not get enough reinforments to the front to push through either way against a combined Italian-French force. the allies also had air superiority fighting defensivly and German losses mounted quickly.

Of course this was just one game, so another try with some variation could change the outcome, but the inital though was it looked better then it actually turned out.

Kim

What’s your plan for the Germans when the Russians (who go before) Stack everything they can in the Ukraine (abandon Poland) and purchase fighters?

If the Germans move into Poland in force on their turn, the Russians will destroy it completly.

Russia trying to make a stand in Poland turn one is a loser, they can fall back and pick their fights.

Kim

Let us know when you successfully pull this off Tex, we’re all interested if you can do it.

Kim

By the way, does anyone have a strategy for capturing London instead of Atlantis, I mean Paris.

Building a large transport fleet for the Germans while fighting a two front war is cost prohibative. In Global 1940 the Germans can pull off Sea Lion since when France falls, she is only at war with the UK and can build up the transport fleet while still at peace with Russia. In 1914, France and Russia cannot be crushed in a single turn, so the only way to get London is wait until one of these is completly conquered and the other just about to be.

In this game London has little more chance of being captured as Washington in A&A WWII games

Kim

@almashir:

Historically, the French should definitely not have more battleships than the Germans.  If you are only counting Dreadnaught class battleships and battlecruisers, the Germans had about 5 times as many as the French in 1914.  If you are lumping pre-Dreadnaught types in with them, the Germans should still have about twice as many.  Of course, if you are doing that, the British would get even more.  The Germans also had about twice as many cruisers as the French, although the French had about twice as many as anyone else (except the British and Americans - but half the US cruisers would have been in the Pacific).

I’ve been playing with fleets that are closer to historic proportions.  After much discussion on another thread, and a small amount of playtesting (I plan to do more), this is what I’ve come up with:

British:
SZ 2:  1 cruiser, 1 transport
SZ 9:  3 battleships, 4 cruisers, 1 sub, 1 transport
SZ 14:  1 cruiser
SZ 19:  2 cruisers, 1 transport
SZ 29:  1 cruiser, 1 transport
(Note:  The British should actually have more subs, but historically they used most of them defensively, since they were afraid of a German invasion.  So most of the subs are abstracted into the “minefield,” which I consider to actually represent coastal artillery, monitors, torpedo boats, and obsolete ships, as well as mines).

Germans:
SZ 5:  2 subs
SZ 7:  2 subs
SZ 22:  1 cruiser
SZ 10:  2 battleships, 3 cruisers, 1 transport

French:
SZ 15:  1 cruiser, 1 transport
SZ 16:  1 battleship, 1 cruiser, 1 transport

Russians:
SZ 12:  1 battleship
SZ 21:  1 cruiser

Ottomans:
SZ 20:  1 cruiser

Austrians, Italians, and Americans (half the US fleet is assumed to be in the Pacific) are the same as OOB.

So far, I’ve only played one partial game using the new movement of 5 sea zones for ships.  The German cruiser in SZ 22 plus one more cruiser from SZ 10 teamed up with the subs to trash the Canadian fleet in SZ 2 and the French fleet in SZ 15.  They kept everything else in SZ 10 and built 1 sub.  I’m still waiting to see if the British will brave the minefields to attack SZ 10 or go after the raiders.

I like this. The French fleet is WAY too strong compared to the Germans.

Kim

@Chacmool:

Kim,

how about this:

All land units (Infantry, Artillery, Tanks) can move up to two spaces. When moving two spaces the first space must be a friendly territory or a contested territory that already contains units of your power. A Land unit must end its move in a friendly zone or in a territory containing units belonging to your power. However, land units in Africa can just move to an adjacent territory.

That’s goes along with the latest rule clarification from Krieghund concerning moving from contested to contested, so that should work. The movement in Africa makes sense. Thanks

Kim

Chacmool,

In my latest posting I made a slight change to allow land units to end their move in a contested (but NOT hostile) territory. This would allow units to get into an already established ongoing battle which I thought appropriate. I don’t think it’s a big change, but if you see a flaw let me know,

Larry has already stated his SM rule WILL NOT be official in any way, more like HIS house rule. That’s OK, but I really would like to see something that can in fact be a real rule change to the came rather then a house rule. Larry’s rule I think is a bit to much.

As for the naval movement, my ideas or Taveniers idea of +1 move when starting from a naval base I think are both better then Larry’s 5 SZ move. The +1 move from a base may be the best hope for an actual rule change as it is consistent with Global 1940, so I’m good with that.

All the “Rail Move” ideas are fine, but just going with the 2 territory move is less conditional I think.

We’ve been playing OOB rules for now just to see if there is any way the CP can make a go of it based upon strategy, and so far have not seen it. Will probably start using my idea next game. Will let you know.

Kim

@Snackbar:

To balance the game.

Major changes:

1. 4 unit railroad movement in original territories. Example move 4 units from Prussia to Ruhr. I do not like the strategic movement proposal. keep the game easy
2. Russian Revolution change: If Axis control 3 Russian territories the Axis player may throw a dice to start the Russian revolution. Lets say 1 will start the revolution. If the Axis control 4 Russian territories a dice throw of 1-2 will start the Revolution.

1. I to would prefer something like this as opposed to the SM idea. Keeping the movement within the bounds of your own country (and NOT Africa) makes perfect sense. If you do a limit, I would like 8 as that is a standard size army (6 inf, 2 artillery)

2. Not real keen on the revolution occuring on a dice roll, as that puts a significant outcome to chance that really effects the game. Good Luck/Bad Luck on this may decide the outcome, just too much to chance. Historically the Russians bailed out when the body count was more then could be stomached.

Minor changes

1. Remove one unit from the Allies in Africa and/or add one German unit to make conquering Africa slightly more difficult for the Allies
2. Remove one cruiser or battleship from France
3. Add one infantry to Smyrna and one infantry to Trans Jordan

1. Africa is a problem for balance as the Germans are defeated in around 4 turns with nothing they can do about it at all. Giving them some extra troops makes sense, as UK and France can reinforce to deal with it if they choose.       Â

2. Remove the French battleship and give them a cruiser. Give the Germans a 2nd Battleship, and UK one also. These are the historic numbers.

3. Maybe. If you bolster the Germans in Africa, the UK will need to send help there instead of Arabia, so it might be a wash.

Nice ideas

Kim

If the Germans move into Poland in force on turn one, the Russian stack in the Ukraine can attack it and destroy it. If the Germans delay moving into Poland then the Russians can destroy the AH in Romania turn two, Germans move into Poland, Russians back to Ukraine on turn 3 and can reach Moscow before Germany.

Kim

In our latest game the Russians withdrew everything she could into the Ukraine. Bought fighters. The Germans advanced into Poland on their turn. On the next Russian turn, the entire German force in Poland was destroyed (and with less then stellar luck did minimal damage in return). The Austrians tried to side step this stack and got to Moscow first, but with not enough to knock it out in a single round.

The Russian monster stack arrived to lift the siege and destroyed the Austrian army there. While the CP did regroup to move troops back east, by then the Russians had built an impregnable position that could not be overcome, and with air superiority could crush any advancing force.

The CP never put the Russians in any danger despite AH getting to Moscow, even with sending large forces into the east.

Massing the Russians with air superiority is a clear winner, the CP cannot coordinate enough forces from a single power to defeat it unless they send massive numbers of units east, and doing so means failure in the west.

Kim