Posts made by Micoom

Oh yeah, forgot this;

@deepblue:

Turn Order
A) Axis Aggressors

   1. Germany
   2. Russia
   3. Japan
   4. United Kingdom
   5. Italy
   6. USA

From your list on Turn order this one is definitely the best! Germany before Russia, so Barbarossa will have a go. Japan before the UK  and US, and the UK before Italy, so Italian East Africa could be attacked…

However I still like this one best;

1. Germany/ Italy
2. Soviet Union
3. Japan
4. United Kingdom/ United States

Have it tested. It saves time and more realistic. Also add’s more team play.

On the VC list;  Please change Budapest to Bucharest! Roumania was much more important then Hungary.

China is on the map, and played separate by the US, so replace Panama City with Chungking as a VC. There must be something to gain for the Japanese in their War with China.

On territories; Did you add the name of Corsica??  And maybe you can switch the IPC values of Abyssinia and Italian Somaliland, now that Abyssinia has a VC.

On roads,  Well I’m favouring strategic redeployment! But the roads could be used for Lend Lease rules. So IL’S list is OK.  This could also work great with the convoy boxes. Something like convoy routes.

Vichy France should be “pro-Axis” Neutral. Please not the color of Germany.

Deep blue, mentioned before to update each Friday, so I expect something today  :wink:  I’m curious where this project stands. Which VC’s will be decided? Start date? and Turn Order?

I like IL’s turn order better! The UK and US really planned their actions together for most part of the War, as did the German and Italians. And DH 420, what happens if Germany attacks both the UK and Russia? Which one will go first then? And BTW I think UK should not move before Japan anyway…

Tekkyy, I have read the latest download, and I think you should add Norway and Southern Germany to the mountainous list.

And BTW how did we decide on this;

Build schedule
BB (battleship), CV (aircraft carrier), and CA (cruiser) takes 2 rounds to build. They are mobilised on the turn after the turn you’ve purchases them.

I mean do you pay them full in advance or half each round?

Yeah you’re right, finished, not finalized…

So, this is just about finalized then for the rules right?

I think the FTR of Hawaii should remain a FTR. Axis move first, so the CV will probably sink anyway. Then the US has more value on that FTR then when it would be a NAV.

Again, I would skip all those troubles of who goes first, and just use the proposed simultaneous movement per side.  And Mogadishu should really be replaced by Addis Ababa. See IL’s list, same point system but better historical cities…

You could also go for simultaneous movement.

1. All Axis move
2. All All Allies Move

Japanese may not conduct combat together with Germany and Italy and Russia not with the Western Allies.

@deepblue:

Also, if this rule is in place a player could choose to strategic bomb strat moves instead of IPCs, giving a player more options.

That would be a cool idea, to bomb strategic redeployment. Only decide then, if the dice is rolled for reducing the total, or just for blocking that specific area you’re bombing.

Hey, my reply was on a comment about alternate setup, but i see tekky modified the text… so my reactions seems kind of odd.

First the Germans with Stukas and the then Russians with Sturmaviks, The Japs specialized in torpedo bombers. The UK and US started to turn their FIG in ground attack models form 1942 on… This game is in the early 1942 so the German and Russians have the advantage. Japan could also, if the torpedo bomber is also represented by it.

Just downloaded the Phase 3 map with setup and new territories (Poland etc) again, and noticed that Norway and Switzerland are still missing the “mountainous” command.

OK, now we are going somewhere. I like you diversion between a completely new alternate setup and one for automatic placement when people decide to use the optional units.

Place the Russian FB in the Caucasus.

I see, but will for example Japan use it’s FB against Russia in AARHE? The VC system drives Japan more towards the Pacific then Russia… Maybe we could say that the new unit placements should only be used when the individual winning conditions are used.

IL’s, VC system looks good, Japanese attacking Moscow will be limited. That is a GOOD thing.

Deepblue, I wasn’t offended or anything, we just seemed to  misunderstood eachother… You have the lead, Me and others just try to help, and sometimes try to convince you that things should be done different. We all want the best game!

German Strategy issues. Well with your chosen setup of Dec. 1941 you have the same problem as Revised has in 42. Germans are already at the Moscow gate. So indeed same basic strategies, because of more territories better then revised, but still same restrictions. Therefore change the setup to June 1941. Germany still has to start it’s war against Russia. US player, can only move the Chinese on the first turn. Japan may attack only Chinese on the First turn.  Somewhat like that…

But isn’t that the idea, that we make more strategies possible without effecting the balance to much? If powers receive extra pieces, balance isn’t effected that much if those pieces are placed in the same area on the map. But you do get more strategic options. More diversity in attack and defence…  Conclusion, I don’t think you should worry to much on the balance, as long as we choose good placement territories.

It isn’t necessary to use all cities, but choose the best from all. My understanding was that your list isn’t the final one.  So I made some extra suggestions.

I think this is correct, those fighters are maybe to most important pieces in the game (normal Revised)

@polywog:

Cool. My cousin and I played 4 games of the “pact of steel” setup in tripleA and found through switching sides that defeating the axis was extremely difficult (Axis 4, Allies 0). Italy was simply too powerful & added too many units to the German defense of Europe each turn. It looks like this version with a “weaker” version of Italy may help balance this a bit better.

One thing we both liked about having Italy as a power was that Germany could be a bit more offensively minded without worrying as much about getting stomped by the allies.

I look forward to giving this a try. Thanks!

Yes, this can be a problem. That Italian forces are used for a stronghold of German defense in Europe. Simultaneous play does nearly eliminate this problem, and I don’t think adding a Transport will be forcing the balance… to much… Adding Italy does make the Axis stronger at first, but it could work against them later on.