Posts made by PainState

@Herr:

@Krieghund:

There is no repair in the UK Pacific economy if Calcutta is lost and no repair in the UK Europe economy if London is lost.  This is not the same as the Pacific map or the Europe map.  The UK Pacific economy is defined in the rules as “all of the territories controlled by United Kingdom on the Pacific map”, and the UK Europe economy is defined in the rules as “all of the territories controlled by United Kingdom on the Europe map” (italics are mine).  (Of course, there are a few exceptions regarding individual territories, as specified in the rules.)  Territories controlled by other Allied powers are part of neither economy, and that’s why repairs are allowed there if either UK capital is free.

So then it follows that:
(1) A UK ship in a port controlled by UK Europe is in the UK Europe economy;
(2) A UK ship in a port controlled by UK Pacific is in the UK Pacific economy;
(3) A UK ship in a port controlled by another allied nation, is in whatever economy the UK chooses its to be;
(4) A non-UK allied ship in any UK port is always in the economy of the nation it belongs to.

I hope I got that one right!

You did

There should be no confusion on the rules.

1940 was designed as a two map game. The only power that has to deal with it is the UK.

Throw out “reality”, this is just a game.

I still have issues with the Generals you tube video that UK ships can repair on the USA east coast (Europe map) because UK Europe Capital is lost.

UK ships in the case of UK Europe lost (London has fallen) should only be able to repair on the Pacific map board.

The issue is we have 2 rule books covering two individual games and then a few pages mashing them all into one on a few pages at the end of each book as the global rules and calling it 1940 global rules.

** I will admit this scenario we are so hotly debating is such a non factor it is amusing…but, hey, we are gamers and love discussing stupid things.**

all this opening turn “gambits”.

Germany builds to look like they could do Sea Lion, what does UK do? 9 or the 6-1 option?

Why is the USA left out of the gambit equation?

Germany goes Sea Lion feint or go and the UK does it build in kind. Then Germany looks over at USA East coast and realizes based on their builds this Sea Lion bid might just be a waste of time and a one turn bit to get their IPC and then move on, Russia does love a G4 DOW.

what happens if Japan goes J1 and brings the USA into the war?

IMO if the Allies play it right it ends any pretense of Sea Lion and stops it dead in its tracks.

USA can stop Sea Lion and its overall effect on the war. Once Sea Lion is dead in its tracks then the USA and UK can focus on taking out Germany on the Western front and the USA can put pressure on Japan.

WOW…I come back 5 days later and I have a eye opening experience.

It seems based on the feed back that Germany is a take Moscow out by Turn 8 or concede country.

My OP idea was that a major IC in Romania would open up options in the Black Sea to build a quick strike TRS force to take the Caucauss and open up the middle east. Also open the shot to take on a Turkey plan of attack and flood the Germany Money territories.

It adds flexibility to the Germans and allows them a 3 path attack plan of attack.

Well, it is obvious now to me, that Germany does not need a 3 path attack plan and just singular focus on taking out Russia in under 8 turns, which is the Northern attack plan.

I have to say that makes this game seem, I don’t know, one dimensional and lacking.

Maybe that is the fixation on Sea Lion on the Forums. Another path to victory and a challenge instead of the straight line path of Moscow above all else in under 8 turns and then reset the board.

@Baron:

Your logic was good.
But, fortunately for us, it does not become a closed case.
So we get a pretty interesting insight from Krieghund.

  :-)

Yes we are. Krieghund is taking my insight and putting some flowers on top of it to make them look like his!!!

He is saying the exact same thing as Iam.

:-D :-o :-) :wink:

@PainState:

Well lets think about this logically.

USA capital is lost….ALLIES CONCEED
Russian capital is lost…who cares when it comes to ships.
German capital is lost…Axis concede.
Italy capital is lost…who cares, it is Italy.
Japan capital is lost…Axis concede.
ANZAC capital is lost…who?
China is decimated… why do I care?

So all we are left with is the UK.

UK is the only power that by the rules has 2 capitals and two separate economies.

Now lets say that UK Europe falls. UK still has a capital in the far East. At this point is when the debate starts.

Can UK ships only repair on the Pacific map on UK / Allied ports? According to the rules the UK Europe side of the map can only perform Combat moves and non Combat moves BUT the Pacific UK map they can still perform purchase and repair. So, the only free UK repair services can be found on the Pacific map for UK capital ships.

Now lets throw a wrench into this discussion. What happens if a USA capital ship is off the shores of Egypt, UK Europe has fallen BUT Egypt is still in UK hands. Can the USA repair off the UK Egypt port because USA ships can repair in the build and repair phase of their turn? Of course they can because USA ships will pay cold hard cash to the Egyptians to perform the repairs. Plus, by the rules…USA Capital ships can repair on any UK Europe map port as long as the USA capital has not fallen.

SO

IF UK capital ships are on the Pacific map they can be repaired, regardless if the unit was a Europe or Pacific map capital ship. If it is in a Pacific Map Naval port they can be repaired.

Case closed.

:-o

I thought I closed out this discussion with my powers of logic and reading the rule books on page #2?

:-)

:lol: :-D

@Private:

I am sorry hny - but is this a question?

it might just be a PSA to remind us of the rules since there is no question regarding the verbage of the rules.

:-)

@Herr:

Thank you. At first, I was under the impression that the rule would only pertain to British naval bases. So, just to make sure, I suppose that the damaged British battleship could not be repaired at Hawaii or New Zealand (assuming those territories are in Allied hands). And what about Alaska and the Aleutians, in the somewhat unlikely case of a US naval base there?

Well this hits at the heart of A&A1940.

1940 Europe and Pacific where made as stand alone games.

Then they decided to “bridge” the two games / rule sets into a global game and have global rules at the end of each 2ed rule set. For the die hard players found on the forum it would be nice if “they” could come out with the official 1940 Global rules pack and unify everything into one book.

** the reason this discussion is even happening is that the UK is the one unique major power in the game where they have 2 capitals and thus a split empire. For every other Major power if your capital is lost, naval repair is a mute point.

Lets just put a bottom line on this discussion.

IF UK Europe falls and London is on fire AND UK Europe still have capital sips alive on the Europe map. What in the heck is the UK player doing? saving the BB and CV for a rainy day?

It is an interesting rules discussion I quess but in the big picture of the game, it is a non factor.

I think it depends on each country.

The most obvious is Germany/Italy. They cannot ignore the Western Front and must garrison France with a reaction force that is not just INF. They need some firepower in the reserve force to push off any Allied invasion. If the Allies can get into Normandy/Southern Europe/Belgium or god forbid Western Germany and Germans/italy do not have a large enough Reserve to push them off before the Allies can reinforce, well, the war might just be lost.

The France reaction force needs some 2 movers in case the Allies go for Rome, or New York.  :-)

Now lets look at a real world scenario why UK ships cannot be repaired on the USA EAST coast after London falls.

UK Capital ship pulls into the New York ship yards looking for some free repairs.

The ship yard long shoremen union just laughs in their face that they are going to repair the ship for free……fork up some money.

They do not care that London has fallen and we are on the same side…the Union wants their money…NOTHING IS FREE, EVEN IN WAR.

If you are a follower of the Ferngi rules of aquistion this makes perfect sense.

Well lets think about this logically.

USA capital is lost….ALLIES CONCEED
Russian capital is lost…who cares when it comes to ships.
German capital is lost…Axis concede.
Italy capital is lost…who cares, it is Italy.
Japan capital is lost…Axis concede.
ANZAC capital is lost…who?
China is decimated… why do I care?

So all we are left with is the UK.

UK is the only power that by the rules has 2 capitals and two separate economies.

Now lets say that UK Europe falls. UK still has a capital in the far East. At this point is when the debate starts.

Can UK ships only repair on the Pacific map on UK / Allied ports? According to the rules the UK Europe side of the map can only perform Combat moves and non Combat moves BUT the Pacific UK map they can still perform purchase and repair. So, the only free UK repair services can be found on the Pacific map for UK capital ships.

Now lets throw a wrench into this discussion. What happens if a USA capital ship is off the shores of Egypt, UK Europe has fallen BUT Egypt is still in UK hands. Can the USA repair off the UK Egypt port because USA ships can repair in the build and repair phase of their turn? Of course they can because USA ships will pay cold hard cash to the Egyptians to perform the repairs. Plus, by the rules…USA Capital ships can repair on any UK Europe map port as long as the USA capital has not fallen.

SO

IF UK naval units are on the Pacific map they can be repaired, regardless if the unit was a Europe or Pacific map capital ship. If it is in a Pacific Naval port they can be repaired.

Case closed.

:-o

@Karl7:

Ah, the old MIC in Romania…. that used to be an old standby strategy in the early days when G40 first came out…

But the strategy wained with time for all the reasons stated above.�  It’s such a heavy investment depriving Germany of early units and telegraphs pretty loudly Germany’s strategy.�  (screaming actually)

I think the better move is to buy a couple transports and shuck infantry from Berlin to Leningrad.�  You basically get the same result (i.e. infantry 4 moves way from Moscow) and less cost and more benefits:�  4 transports (plus 1 on board) for 28 instead of 30 for a MIC that can’t be redeployed like the transports.

Of course there is the issue the Romanian MIC covers the southern flank of the Eastern front, but usually that resolves itself once Germany can stack Bryansk.

But, hey, sometimes old ideas can make a comeback.�  Maybe there is something there that can be rejuvenated.�  I will think on this…�  :lol:

Well, it seems I stumbled through a bush and stuck my foot into the skeleton of a old, has been, 1940 tactic.

Maybe those old hand, discarded tactics need to make a come back. Instead of the standard opening turn moves that are all the rage or the classic mad man rush to Moscow and if I do not win by the end of Turn 8 I quit plan of attack.  :lol:

:-D :-o

Why not on G1 build a 30IPC Major IC in Romania?

A major IC in Romania offers so many tactical options to Germany. Sure, it delays Germany on their DOW of Russia BUT the ability to build up to 10 units right on the front lines of Russia, build a fleet in the Black sea and maybe threaten Turkey cannot be denied. It offers Germany HUGE flexibility on projecting force.

What do you guys think?

I have been thinking about the USA fleet at the start of the game.

Regardless of what Japan does on Turn 1 the USA sends the entire Pacific fleet over to the East coast.

The theory is that if the USA sends all the Pacific ships to the Europe map then the USA in most cases will have enough surface ships on the Europe map to do what ever they want. The only IPC purchases on the Europe navy will be TRS and maybe just a few other surface combat ships if need be based on later turns and what the Axis navies are doing.

The construction of the Pacific fleet starts from scratch on the West Coast in later turns.

The downfall of this plan is obviously the USA cannot threaten Japan with naval until later turns.

What do you guys think?

The “real” question then becomes in regards to Sea Lion is this. IF Japan goes J1 does that eliminate Germany from performing Sea Lion later than G2? The USA has a lot of options at its disposal at the start of the game + their Turn 1 build to shut down Sea Lion dead in its tracks if the USA wants to. If the USA cannot stop the G2 dice fest in London and Germany takes it the USA will coming storming in on USA3 and just retake it.

Seems like a lot of dead German IPC in units for a one turn sacking of London.

@Requester45:

I have to disagree with the last few posts. Unless Germany is going to take 5 or more IPC’s worth of territories from Russia on turn 3, it makes more sense to not DOW. Germany would get the 5 IPC’s and have a better positioning for a push in any direction in Russia. It’s not just Eastern Poland that they could move into. If Italy wanted, they could move into the Baltic States, followed by Germany, resulting in awesome positioning for Germany on turn 4. They could then expand outwards on turn 4 to grab more IPC’s from Russia effectively making it worth it to DOW if Russia hasn’t. However Russia will inevitably DOW Germany, which is fine because they really couldn’t do anything to Germany, and Germany wouldn’t care because they would be attacking Russia turn 4 anyway. This would also put Italy’s tank in an awesome position on turn 4 because after the German advance (most likely into either the Ukraine or Novgorod) it could move into either Archangel or Rostov. Moving into Archangel would take away 5 IPC bonus from Russia, and moving into Rostov poses a threat to the middle east. Russia could take the Italian tank out the following turn, however this would be detrimental because at that point they would need all of the defensive units they could get. So strategically speaking this new strategy makes sense and I feel as though we will see alot of it.

Requester: I think you are confused on this discussion.

The original question was can Italy DOW on Russia, then have German Units move in to Italian controlled territories which would prevent Russia from attacking the Italians because they have German units (who they are not at war with) stacked with them.

That question was already answered that if Italy DOW’s Russia then that frees up Russia to declare war on Germany on their turn.  So, it is a mute point.

What you described is classic Italy “can opening” for Germany. This concept is not new and is used all the time by the German/Italian player.

@happynewyear1945:

@seancb:

America is immediately able to declare war on Germany after the J1 DOW. America plays after Japan so they can just boogie right over to UK and any other allied areas including ANZAC as well as park next to Japanese islands.

No problems here.

Yes i understand America CAN declare war on Germany. That is not the question.

What happens to American Aircraft on the UK after G3 Sea Lion, while Germany is Not at war with America.

I think the real question is: how did you get USA aircraft to the UK while the USA is still neutral and not at war? Until USA is at war it cannot move units into UK or any territory that is not a USA original territory.

Once again this scenario makes no logical sense. Under what scenario can you conceive that the USA can DOW all the Axis powers and elects not to?

IF Japan goes J1 against the USA the logical course of action for the USA is then to declare war on Germany/Italy on the USA turn. There is no scenario that makes sense for the USA not to declare war on Germany/Italy.

The main draw back for the Axis with a J1 DOW opening move on the USA is that the USA is now at war with everyone and ramps it production up to the 70’s.

A lot of posters seemed stunned at this scenario, never scene it ever happen or even could happen. Now that I mulled it over last night and looked at the rules and so forth it is very obvious to me why no one has ever scene this scenario. Because the scenario makes no logical sense.

Italy DOW on Russia and moves in 2 tanks into Eastern Poland.
Russia is now at war with Italy and can DOW on Germany at the start of their next turn, turn 3.
Germany on Turn 3 does not DOW on Russia and just non combats into Eastern Poland.
Russia at the start of Turn 3 DOW on Germany and off we go.

There is no logical reason why Russia would not DOW on Germany at the start of Turn 3, none.

Heck you could argue that it makes no logical sense that Germany did not DOW on Russia at the start of G3 since Italy brought Russia into the war and Russia WILL DOW on Germany on R3.

Well concerning the rule in question it all seems sound and I agree with it.

That being said. How does it actually effect the game?

By going down this path you have done a few things.

#1 You have forced a G4 attack from Germany into Russia. (Germany is staging their forces in G3 to take advantage of the Italian moves on I2)
#2 You have freed up Russia on R3 to move into the middle East to take Iraq. (They are no longer Neutral)
#3 Before the main attack from Germany comes storming in, Russia has had 3 full build turns. (Tipped your hand to Russia if you stage is Besarabia to go the southern route)

The main advantage of this plan IMO, is that Italy takes Besarabia.  Besarabia is the key Territory to move into Southern Russia. It allows the Germans if they can stage into that territory one step closer with their INF, that is a big deal when looking at the tactical situation in Southern Russia. Most players go the northern route when invading Russia because the INF are one territory closer to Leningrad. Germany though wants to go South because of their NO’s but time and spacing of the board makes it harder to go South.

Obviously you can take both Eastern Poland and Besarabia with Italy and then reinforce Eastern Poland with a few German units to prevent the Russian counterattack in R3 against a Italian held territory with no German back up.

NOW

lets just say that on R1 Russia backs off all three border territories. Italy has it set up so they can take advantage on Italy Turn 1. Russia Turn 2 and they do not cover the 3 border territories. Italy on Turn 2 takes all three of them. Baltic States, Eastern Poland and Besarbia. That opens up a huge can of worms for the Germans to exploit on G3 to set up the G4 attack. (What to do in this case is an entire thread unto it self.) (Just checked the OOB Italy set up and they only have 2 tanks with in range of Russia on I2, so the most they can take is two territories and not all 3)

**Note to all Russian players **

DO NOT allow Italian to just walk into all three border territories. Sacrifice 1 INF in each space, take your lumps and make Italy Attack into them. Letting them “walk” in is to great an advantage for the Axis.

If Germany has tipped their hand that they are going all in on Sea Lion, never abandon the border territories and stage forces in them. Totally shut down any plan from Italian forces of taking one of your border territories.

Now if we look at the IPC impact of this move it is basically a wash.

Germany Gets 15 IPC from Russia on G1-3

Russia gets 10 IPC from Lend lease on R3 -4 because they are now at war.

Russia most likely gets Irag on R4 for 5 IPC. (2 for Iraq and 3 for NO’s)

So at the end of Russia turn 4. Germany and Russia have both gotten 15 IPC on NO’s.

**** THE BOTTOM LINE  *****

IF Russia lets italy take Besarabia on I2 with their 2 tanks the Italians need to take it so Germany can reinforce on G3 OR invade themselves and blitz through. Besarabia is the key to this entire plan.