Posts made by Obergruppenfuhrer

@Imperious:

Hitler wanted an accommodation with England, he made a number of peace offers following the demise of france with guarantees of protection of British colonial assets. Hitler himself admired them Historically as the bulwark against the people Hitler deemed as less desirable like an enforcer of civilization against barbarism and chaos. He probably envied them.

But Churchill would have none of that and would rather rid the world of the pestilence of both Hitler and Stalin. Their was no way England would “come to her senses” short of total capitulation.

I totally agree with your speculation. However I do think a non aggression pact could have been reached if Hitler would have just swallowed his pride. All his negotiations involved some form of German prescence and the British could see right through his BS promises. They weren’t having Nazis on their island. Period. Hitler admired them very much. He even said he hated to wage war with people that were so similar to his.

@Half-Track:

I love the beatin… looks like a bad football game 42-17

Ohh. Sounds faintly masochistic. I’ve got you on the 8 hour revival program. Just like a morphine drip. Enjoy!

In my opinion, Hitler was an idiot to underestimate the British. He could have easily negotiated terms with them and closed that front before invading Russia. Of course, Stalin would have gotten wind of this and been more prepared when the Germans attacked Russia but at least Germany wouldn’t have been fighting the 2 fronts.

@Motdc:

Here are few other posts that may help clarify (or not):

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=10620.msg250967#msg250967

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=10911.msg264918#msg264918

Mot

Your a good man. Thank you. Oh and yes I’m confused as hell about line of sight but I’ll figure it out.

@Motdc:

Unfortunately, aircraft can target snipers.  Even in cover as long as they are at Short range…

That makes sense. It sucks but it makes sense to me. Hey Motdc, can you field another question pu-lease? How does the fixed howitzer rule work? I don’t quite get it. I know it says you can only shoot units directly in front of you but what if your in a situation where it’s one diagonal angle or the other? (Hex wise) Should you just line up a fixed howitzer tank with one string of hexes and that’s where it can fire? For instance, even if the tank isn’t facing directly one side of a hex? Can it just face whatever direction as long as it lines up a single string of dots? If you can explain, I would greatly apprectiate it.

@Half-Track:

@Obergruppenfuhrer:

@Half-Track:

Karma, the less the better in my books.

Sounds sort of like a confession, half track.  :roll: I just noticed another negative point. I wonder who thought that negative point would “make a point?” Weee!!   :-)

AHHH.  Just gave a possitive to ofset that.

Woops. I did it to you too. You get added to my daily injection list.  :-) I’ll fix you up right proper first thing in the morning. You know, when you wake up and your just hurtin’ for it.  :wink:

:-D That’s hilarious Imperious. True though, he (the Beatles really) did have an incredible impact on MUSIC in this last century. Kind of off the topic, I had the priviledge of talking to a veteran who flew the F4U-3 at the end of WW2 and during Korea. 8 kills and 126 sorties. He had some great stories of dogfighting. I love talking to guys like that. They never talk about their experiences with great emotion. Veteran Pilots have this mannerism of speaking in a (down to business) demeanor, even about intense dogfights. They really are their own breed.

He talked about having a Zero on his 6 and 12 like it was nothing. Banked hard and killed his engine for a moment, (dead duck as he put it) and watched the zero go straight past him. Pulled in and hit him right in his cabin. Then he spoke about his wing man and him taking out the other zero and both getting credited with the kill. Good guy! (He bought a camera from me too!)

@Ducky:

My Russia is always outclassed by Germany. I’ve won with them, but don’t remember the last time. I had an amazing 200 point build, but bit the dust because of an unfavorable side of the map for me, and a very favorable one for him, as well as the fact he fielded almost no armor, which screwed me. Both of us use Russia well (quick and aggressive), but Germany always seems to come out on top. Either because of it hitting harder or just being awesome at playing defensively against Soviet armor. When they are dug in, Russia’s aggression really doesn’t pay off, and it can’t play defensively because of lacking range on attacks. I have a problem of building a Soviet army to take on what I’d personally field as a German player, which I didn’t realize until the last game I played, when I opted to take a KV-1 instead of a Soviet Partisans platoon, and got eaten alive by 5 PAK40s and some MG teams…

My next build is going to be balanced for once… not 90% armor:

Soviet T-34 Platoon - 78
-1x Guards T-34/85
-2x T-34/75
-2x PPSh-41 SMG
Soviet Assault Gun Platoon - 59
-4x SU-76M
Soviet Partisans - 23 (x2)
-1x Cossack Captain
-3x Communist Partisans
-1x Fanatical Sniper
Maxim M1910 MG - 7 (x2)
Mousin-Nagant 1891/30 - 3
Ammo Dump - 10

(the cool thing about the Soviet Partisans platoon is that it doesn’t count against “special unit” limits and all the 6 communist partisans and 2 fanatical snipers within them have a special rule of being deployed on any unoccupied edge hex… 2 snipers with crack shot behind enemy lines!!)

I can’t remember the last time my Germans lost though, which is nice. The only side I have a hard time with is the USA, solely because their infantry is really amazing.

Yeah– I run into the same problem fighting the US. Amazing infantry. I’ve been trying to focus on good German infantry builds and not armor. The german infantry can hold the line like nobodies business with a haupsturmfuhrer present. I’m still waiting on the 2 81mm mortars and spotters I ordered. When the F##k are they going to get here?? My opponent is getting good with Russia and the problem is: they have excellent armor. Almost too good. They have tanks that can do really well against infantry as well so it’s well balanced. I hate those frickin Nagasat men and the snipers. Now I know how my opponent must feel fighting my weirmacht snipers. They are rarely killed and out of the 2 I usually field, it’s rare that one of them dies. In fact, in every game I’ve played, they have been one of the last units standing.

@Half-Track:

Karma, the less the better in my books.

Sounds sort of like a confession, half track.  :roll: I just noticed another negative point. I wonder who thought that negative point would “make a point?” Weee!!  :-)

Yeah thanks! That was very good.

Notice that Karma goin’ up Ducky. Ha haa! I finally have the priviledge to smite and applaude whom I wish. All the power, all the glory!! Ha HAAA!! It’s ALL mine!!!  :evil:

Serioulsy though, I’ve just been getting off on kicking down good Karma. I would love to know the dickless piece of Sh#t that keeps taking my Karma. You wanna step forward coward if your reading this?? Oh! That’s what I thought.

You can always tell who’s a jerk off in these forums when they have thousands of posts and are like Negative HUNDREDS in Karma and plus 5. I know, I know…. It doesn’t really mean anything to stone cold AAM killers like you and I.

I am so biased. I think I played the US maybe once. I don’t even really know. I’m completely dedicated to my German army. I was teaching my opponent today after he conceded in turn 5 about the effective use of Russian armor. They are to engage German tanks to eliminate their superior range advantage. The tanks have superior armor and some can even ignore the first damage counter. Thats freakin insane. I hunted his tanks down one by one and destroyed each one in the game because he refused to engage aggressively. In the end, when he finally did, he blew my Ausf G to kindom come. Of Course my Nashorn was parked on a distant hill and decimated his t-34 the same turn but I think he’s finally learned how to play Russian and win. With more insane tanks in the mail that he ordered, I’m getting nervous that my 6 win streak is about to come to a bloody end.

By the way. Question: Fixted Howitzers. How do they work. Can you just face your tank in any direction, even if it’s not directly facing one hex side? I mean the idea that you can’t shoot a tank because it’s in a hex horizontal to you on the board and there’s no way to face it directly head on confused me. I don’t get it. How does that weapon work and what are the rules?

Just so its said, the deployment of Paratroopers is NOT meant to portray them drifting down from the heavens mid fire-fight.  This has been repeatedly stated by WotC staff.

They are supposed to represent the active behind enemy lines troops.

Given that, I’m OK with Paratroopers.

Well, actually, I’m OK that they deploy behind the lines, but I really think it should be required on turn 1.  Its silly to have paratroopers come charging out of a group of trees that a turn before help enemy troops.  They are not ninjas for cryin’ out load!

Yeah - Now that you bring that into perspective, I can see where it’s value is and where it would be realistic. I do agree with you partially on the turn one thing. It’s just totally wierd to have a paratrooper in turn 3 or 4 magically appear in a clear grass hex in the middle my men (not adjacent, but close enough). Your right, they’re not ninjas. They are also not magical little elves that appear with a poof of pixie dust in the most convenient space available.

Now that I have the German Paratroopers, I’m complaining A LITTLE less. ok, a lot less.

My gripe with the Stuka still stands. It should be an accurate and devistating troop killer with the option (representation would be fine in stats) to bomb or use those 37mm or 55mm’s. They should cost a lot to coincide. Additionally the allies should have their most accurate fighter/bomber represented that is comparable: and what else but the de Havilland Mosquito!

@Ducky:

I think with the volume they had to work with, WotC did a decent job making the units in this game accurate. I just hope the areas, like the Stuka, where they slipped up get fixed. I just hope they do the heavy artillery right in the next expansion.

Yeah I agree. Planes could be very inaccurate trying to shoot at a small division of men or trying to drop a 500 kg bomb near them. However, the Stuka in particular was SO accurate for its time. And those 37 and 55mm guns? Man. Those things would take out a tank about as easy as a nashorn could. Stukas are the ONE aircraft they have where I think they totally missed how effective it was in ground support. They should be WAY better but cost A LOT.

One thing I loved about “Europe” is that instead of an advanced or veteran rule; (ie: A & A) you actually start out with a realistic amount of Atlantic subs to disrupt the shipping lanes like they so effectively did early in the war.

@Ducky:

The tricky thing with this game is that you don’t feel like it’s costing you that much as you buy a few boosters here and there, but it certainly adds up after awhile. One of the best units in terms of cheap but powerful is the PAK40. 14 points, but it dominates tanks.

I agree it’s awesome but I’ve been hesitant to field it because the terrain often prohibits it’s use. I’ve been using the 7.5 for less than half the points. My opponent likes to move his tanks out of harms way. A lot. He doesn’t use his tanks effectively as a result and I literally have to hunt them down with my more mobile units. (Tanks) In an open terrain, the pak 40 is great.

Wouldn’t it be awesome if they made a game called “Contested Skies” that incorporated every fighter and bomber of the time and focused on the air war? Of course they would have to make the European & Pacific theater seperate games.

Perhaps a game focusing on “The Battle of Britain” as well. You would have to incorporate strategic bombing to civilian, military and industrial targets into the game. This would work great in my opinion with the European air war, considering it was stratigic bombing and air supperiority the Allies had to establish before they could successfully invade fortress Europe.

Being an aircraft buff, it would be awesome to see a game like this take form with detalied and painted miniatures to symbolize fighter wings. Small, clear plastic stands would be amazing to symbolize if your fighters were in the air or landed and vulnerable to attack at airfields. I would imagine flak gun rules would have to be thought out as well in great detail. The germans fighter pilots, when desperate would attack, flying through their own flak and even ramming bombers.

Any thoughts, opinions or ideas on a game like this? I think it would be a big hit. Especially if the planes were painted and aesthetically pleasing.

I love Axis and Allies minatures. As much as I love playing “Axis & Allies” (I’m not sure if it’s revised or 2nd; my friend brings it over and I own “Eupope”) I’m in love with playing the miniature game right now. I love how tactical it gets in close proximity. I love the miniatures and the tanks. I’m disappointed with the planes and their rules (especially the JU-87 Suka) which is ridiculous considering it was Germanys most effective infantry support plane.

I love being able to pick out my own army and have the choice from the very beginning of how to approach the field from a strategic standpoint. There are a few rules between the Old rules and the new advanced rules we chose to not to play with becuase they take up time & aren’t incredibly realistic. The miniature are exciting to get, incredibly good looking and fun to have just as a collection.

I will say that I love “Axis & Allies” (the whole world board) because of how realistic every decision you make plays out in the game. For instance, I’ve never seen Germany win but this last game was the first I’ve played in 3 years. I’ve been studying the Luftwaffe avidly for 2 years so I made key decisions in the beginning of the game that Walter Weaver would have made, had he not died in a plane crash during the Reichs rise to power. I initiated a long range bomber plan and addressed the Russian front immediately while building a defensive western front.

Japan while doing incredible damage, was taken by the US. By this time my strategy had paid off and my resources as Germany were vast (highest IPC’s per turn by FAR) After the successful invasion of England and the decimation of Americas atlantic naval fleet, my opponent surrendered because the successful invasion of the US was just writing on the wall.

The game is brilliant. I was able to take key mistakes the Reich had made, specifically concerning the Luftwaffe and fighting a 2 front war, and make alternate decisions that allowed Germany to win.

@Jermofoot:

@ABWorsham:

“And his death really had nothing to do with WW2…”

His death ignited World War One.

If World War One had not been fought then modern Poland does not exist. Danzig and the Polish Corridor were main objectives in Germany’s attack on Poland.

Ferdinand does not belong near the top of this list. However, He is not out of place on this list.

Jermofoot, I wish I had your opinion concerning this poll before I posted. Lennin and Gandhi would have been great additions. I considered Lennin, only to get captured by the thoughts of how Marx changed the world. At that point Lennin never came back in mind.

I do not doubt that his death gave the excuse to mobilize, which then activated alliances, but the underlying reasons for WW1 were more than a simple assassination.  And I fully agree that the result of WW1 lead to an inevitable WW2, but that was even less about one man’s death.

And I really have no idea the ability of Ferdinand, I would rather judge him on his greatness on his actions alone.  I just have nothing to go on.

Oh, and I meant Lennon, as in the Beatle, but if you would suggest Lenin, it wouldn’t seem out of place either.  :-D

See I totally agree here. One mans death, while it may have been the preverbial stray that broke the camels back, was not the cause alone for war. There was much more than that.

The reason I fly the German Battle Standard for WWI as my Icon is out of symbolism for the effect of “The Treaty of Versailles.”

"The French politician Marshal Foch, as the Versailles Treaty was being signed, stated rather prophetically, “This is not peace; it is an armistice for 20 years.” "

Some argue that the treaty was lenient on Germany by its 14 points. I whole heartedly disagree. The allies additionally demanded Germany hand over thousands of men, police and ex soldiers, to be prisoners well after the treaty was signed. The treaty was fuel for the fire of German resentment and nationalistic sympathisers to Hitler; ultimately.

I believe the treaty was the main cause of WWII. I cannot speculate if the SA would have reached the same level of power to ultimately be assimilated into the 3rd Reich. I cannot possibly speculate in good faith, that Hitler wouldn’t have taken power. I can however argue that sympathy for the 3rd Reich would not have been neary as wide spread stemming from the resentments in post war Germany. This wasn’t a treaty to maintain “peace”. It was a treaty to extract satistaction to the European victors & make sure Germany couldn’t go to war again.  I think we all could agree it had a completely adverse affect.

@ABWorsham:

@Jermofoot:

@ABWorsham:

Ferdinand out of place? Some people change the world by simply getting killed. If his assination had not happened would Europe plunge into World War One?

Ferdinand’s death caused the greatest war known to civilization; followed by an even greater destructive conflict. If we look at the aftermath of the World Wars, how can Archduke Ferdinand, by his assination not get placed on such a list.

I do agree with your suggestions concerning Lennin and Gandhi. Those additions would make for great discussion.

AB! There’s far too much free speech going on here. Why do I always have to hear it, through the SD to the Gestapo & finally through the Reichsmrshall in the middle of dinner? I’m dispatching a car to come pick you up. We really need to stop so much thinking. That’s for the Riech to do.  :lol:

There was a bigger part of the conflict than him alone.  And I don’t think getting assassinated is a “great” action, mostly because you don’t do anything but have someone kill you.  Lincoln and JFK should be up there then, and they have their own merits to go on.

And his death really had nothing to do with WW2…

@Obergruppenfuhrer:

I’m fessing up here. I voted for Hitler. “Man of the year.” I’m not quite sure what that means exactly so I took it as the most influential. I believe the atomic technology would have been discovered without Einstein, but perhaps not in the same time frame. There’s no way to know when it would have been available as a weapon without Einstein. His theory of relativity definately puts him in a close tie for me however.

I voted for Hitler because he demonstrated to modern civilization that an empire similar to the Romans, could still rise and pose a threat to the world, collectively. I think Hitler changed the manner in which the world now looks at those that rise to totalitarian power and the actions taken as a result. I believe he showed us that fanatisism with fervent followers can be precise, completely calculated, organized and extremely powerful.

I dont thing the American public has learned its lesson however. They don’t have perspective that history continues to repeat itself. Many people have completely forgotten the impact of 9/11 on our national security. I think the government has taken it as serious possible while the public (and even large divides of the government) has now come to almost a majority gripe against Americas efforts to thwart future attempts.

If anyone thinks that thinks there hasnt been a need for force to secure the safety of our country after 9/11 are still living in a safe little bubble where the twin towers collapsing are nothing more than TV violence they have long been desensitised to.

Yes, I think people have been out of touch with reality, but still are.  But to chastise Hitler for what he did then excuse the US for doing much of the same is quite a stretch.  Remember, Hitler invaded Poland on the excuse of threat to security.  There is no excuse for the most powerful nation in the world strong arming other countries and offering no diplomacy whatsoever.  So I should stop there lest this gets too political.

“And his death really had nothing to do with WW2…”

His death ignited World War One.

If World War One had not been fought then modern Poland does not exist. Danzig and the Polish Corridor were main objectives in Germany’s attack on Poland.

Ferdinand does not belong near the top of this list. However, He is not out of place on this list.

Jermofoot, I wish I had your opinion concerning this poll before I posted. Lennin and Gandhi would have been great additions. I considered Lennin, only to get captured by the thoughts of how Marx changed the world. At that point Lennin never came back in mind.