Topics created by Shaniana

If Japan goes J-1 … DOW on W.Allies… be very careful with the baiting part…
  Unless UK and US are played very accurately, should SeaLion be even moderately successful… If Gib bombed successfully and German Navy survives US3 and UK3 counterattacks…
and Japan takes Calcutta on J-3… things go downhill pretty quick for Allies…

not in 183 games, the fall of moscow means the writing is on the wall.  germanys bonuses need to be reduced from 5 to 3 (except norway) imo to prevent an unstoppable income flop, and bm air interception rules can prevent the easy suffocation of russia.  these two changes make the game a bit more fair

@Narvik:

@simon33:

If you use the same logic you should get rid of the Japanese NOs for Calcutta, Hawaii and Sydney. Not sure I like that change.

That would actually help Allies a fair bit and also keep peace between Germany and USSR for longer on the average. Would more peace make the game better? I’m not sure that it would. It would increase the number of Sea Lions though - perhaps that would be good.

Yes and no. It would be crazy if Japan can squeeze 5 more IPC out of a rocky island than the original owner can. But, if we change the words in the rule, and say that anyone who control Hawaii island and the adjacent seazone 26 with its convoy zone, will get a 5 IPC bonus, representing international trade with South America or something. Do the same with Sydney and seazone 62, and now I can endorse it, man. Now it makes sense to me.

About your other topic, the possibility of longer time of peace between Germany and its partner in crime, Russia, who knows man ? The current OOB NOs sure reward aggressive play, since Germanys choice between a 5 IPC peace NO dont catch up with the 15 + wartime NOs. But, the OOB NOs also make it a scripted game, but not a historical correct scripted game, since in the real war Germany first had to try a Sea Lion before it would attack Russia. Now, since the designer obviously want a lot of action, and not a sit and wait game, he trough in a lot of NOs to speed up the pace. And that is why we can see everything that happened from 1939 to 1941 in the first Turn of any A&A game. But if you ask me, I think its too many NOs in play, it should be max 3 to each nation, and they should represent something abstract like international trade, shipping, oil etc that is not already printed on the map. Actually there are no need for NOs, you only need Victory Cities to win. If Germany want to win the game, it should attack Russia because of the VCs there, not some derogatory NOs.

IMHO, NOs only have a meaning in this game if they are a part of some bidding system.

Increasing the peace time economy with russia (10 IPCs for both) while giving the wartime Leningrad +5 bonus NO to Russia, can give a better balance toward allies while giving more incentive to attack UK early and Leningrad later, to block the new russian income.

After my own experiences with the different (surprise) sea lion options GE can conjure out of its hat, I usually do 1 of the following with the UK:

In case of a planned Sea Lion (GE1 you will know). Kill the malta ‘fleet’ with 1ftr+1tac, leave a dd in SZ94 and move the CV(2ftr)+CA to SZ93. Land the tac in Gibraltar if it survives. The TRS can pick up the AAA and INF from Malta and transport them to Gibraltar as well. Together with the UK1 + UK2 buys this will save the allies from a disastrous fall of London. If GE chickens out, all Gibraltar and SZ93 stuff stays/returns into the med to give Italy hell. Saving London may cost you Egypt for a few turns, but as long as you can keep your army alive and reinforce it from India (RAF) and fast units from SA (you can even buy RAF units there), you will take it back. If GE does NOT chicken out you will have a much harder time in Africa but after a long game you should be able to drive the Italians out (again, Indian reinforcements!) and the axis are much more likely to loose the game due to a very strong Russia and (if Japan allows it) USA liberating London

In case of a surprise Sea Lion (GE1 all barbarossa buys and movements). Personally I still play cautious with the UK, in fear of a nasty German surprise. As a result, I keep the STR in London (and buy 2more to destroy any surprise TRS builds), don’t scramble and don’t move a single spitfire out of Britain (with UK2 buying 1 or 2 CVs in the channel, all 4 spitfires can reach any surprise built German fleet). Therefore I cannot do ‘Taranto’ if GE also has scramblers there. Instead, I attack SZ 96 and strafe Tobruk, killing as many Italians without using the TRS. SZ96+99 will be blocked off to protect Egypt while I stack Alexandria to the max. The CV will go into SZ81 to receive an Indian tac+ftr. Persia will be aligned (use the TRS). IF Italy brings more troops into Africa, they are insignificant to what UK has left and their TRS will all be dead (and their protectors, if any). Alternatively, you can just stack Alexandria with the blockers in place. Really, Italy can never win in Africa unless GE is stubborn in executing Sea Lion, which should cost the axis the game in the long run anyway (given LowLuck results, that is).

Shaniana,

––There is a difference between Liberating and Conquering a country.

––Unless a “rolling the dice” combat takes place, it would simply be a re-enforcement of an allied country.

––When combat DOES take place and the Allied player wins,…then:

A. If the French DO control their Capital (Paris), then control of the country would be turned over to France. (Liberating)
B. If the French DO NOT control their Capital (Paris), the victorious nation would now control the territory. (Conquering)

––Basically,…in order for the USA, UK, or USSR to gain control (and income) of a French territory they have to have a COMBAT with an enemy force,….they can’t just “walk in” as that would simply be re-enforcement of a French territory.

“Tall Paul”

@Krieghund:

@Shaniana:

Is the basic rule that every British unit counts as “Europe” as soon as it is on the European board and treated accordingly (may not enter Russia), whereas every UK Unit in Asia is treated as Pacific and may enter Russia, regardless of where it started or was built or anything?

UK units are just UK units, no matter where they are or where they came from.   The distinction here is which map the Soviet territories are on, not the source of the units moving into them.

@Shaniana:

What if my Russian airplane lands on a carrier off the Indian cost, and that carrier then tries to move to Africa?

The carrier may not leave the Pacific map until either the Soviet fighter leaves it or the USSR is at war in Europe.

@Shaniana:

And what about an ANZAC fighter entering the European board? Is it allowed to fly to Russia’s European side?

No.

Thanks alot!

What I meant was that the owner can only use those abilities on their own turn. In contrast to scrambling, which can never occur on the base controller’s turn.

Sorry my wording got jumbled. I just wanted to point out why scrambling is not relevant to the rule Shaniana referenced.