Posts made by shermantank

@timerover51:

Since I was in the Army during this period, it was not an academic discussion for me.  I did tend to argue that the US and Allies would win, based on the response I would get to the following question.

“Would you as a USSR army commander really launch an attack on West Germany with your principal supply lines running through Poland, and your secondary ones running through Czechoslovakia?”  I got the most interesting looks.

With the uprisings in Eastern Europe in the late 1950’s, I would say, “No.”. Interesting perspective, timerover51. I hadn’t thought about that before. American logistics were superior to Soviet logistics (in Europe, at least.)

@Imperious:

AA has been around for 50years.

what?  its been around since like 1981. I wish it was around for 50. Id like to see the 1950’s version of the game. It probably had the A-bomb for sure.

I wonder why the A-bomb isn’t a technological development. It would be so effective as a defense (Russia could turn the game in one turn if they used it against Germany.). Have any idea why, IL?

If you got the rules for Anniversary, where would you post them (out of curiousity.)?

@HolKann:

Hmm, as far as I can tell, this will be how the game will more or less go:
Ger vs. Rus ofcourse
Ita vs. Brit in Africa and Med
Usa vs. Jap in Pacific

Apart from some India or a few American trannies in the Atlantic, the game seems designed to give every nation a direct opponent. Might get very interesting indeed…

What about Germany vs. Russia (obviously) and UK in Africa (Let Italy pick up territories to increase low income.) and maybe US for Atlantic Ocean
Italy vs. UK in Africa and Russia (would need some transports to get to Caucusus)
Japan vs. US for naval supremacy in the Pacific and UK in India (assuming there is an IC in India).

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/image/362530
This may be it for the -42 scenario, but I’m not sure.

I think that this is a good idea from Larry. It makes the game more realistic and tries to get nations to accomplish traditional objectives that existed during World War 2 (even though it can take some of the fun out of the “what if…” game and some potentially interesting scenarios.)

Unless you’re a submarine…

Okay. I was curious because I was mystified by the name. Thanks for the enlightenment.

@timerover51:

@Romulus:

@timerover51:

…
On a different note, based on the post of Krieghund in the Chinese as a New Player thread, the Chinese player will be a big boost to the US player in the game.  Allied forces can be deployed in China.  The US player will decide which forces, the US or the Chinese in China attack first.  Also, after examining the map, the US can deploy bombers to China with one movement from Alaska, either combat or non-combat, without worrying too much about interception as there is no CAP in the game.  Once there, the US can use the bombers to work over the Japanese first, then send in the Chinese ground troops.  Also, any unescorted transport will be fair game.  From studying the various map images posted, it looks like just about every Pacific sea zone can be hit by bombers operating from the US, Alaska, Australia, and China, taking off from one area and landing in another.  A good first buy for the US should include one or two bombers in the Western US, depending on exactly what the Japanese do, and where they leave transport exposed.

timerover51, what do you mean with “using bombers to work over Japanese first”? Using bombers to attack Japanese land armies?

Basically, yes, use the American aircraft to attack the Japanese first, and then attack with Chinese ground troops.

That makes more sense, timerover51, than what Aldertag is proposing. Only removing one japanese infantry with a US bomber/ Chinese forces doesn’t make much sense. Aldertag, can you enlighten me please?

Thanks to Barney Fife and his overzealous law-enforcement.

That sounds like fun. Imagine how long a game like that would take?

How did it get the name Caspian Sub?

Okay. That makes sense.

Been there, done that.

@Emperor:

An all out war with the West would have presented Russia with a real problem, it’s very likely the Warsaw Pact countries would turn on their Soviet masters.

That’s so true. The Soviets were very brutal towards their satellite nations.

@Imperious:

That’s my home town. Funny, I don’t remember there being so many police officers there.

its a hamlet about 1-2 miles before Gardnerville it cant be more than 8-10 blocks long, but in those 8-10 blocks they got like 6 speed signs, where you speed up,slow down,speed up and slow down, with one lazy cop sitting in his car behind the bush to make sure you miss a sign. speed trap incarnate.

That’s so dumb. I wonder why they do that?

How did you pull this off, IL?

If you play UK in the -41 Scenario, you start off with over 40 IPC. That should allow for a build of a factory in India/ Australia or India/Eastern Canada or Eastern Canada/Australia. I hope the Brits have some more IC’s at the start of their turn (Russia gets 3, get me a break…)

What about the Lend-Lease Act? Was that only for equipment to the Soviets?

That’s my home town. Funny, I don’t remember there being so many police officers there… Of course that was 4 years ago.