Posts made by UN Spacy

@Frontovik:

haha
even better
Napoleon invaded russia 23th of June, Hitler the 22th XD

Rather it be June than December 23!

384 hours until E-Day

I’m not sure if you managed to catch it, so I’ll ask again: did the Free French units help out the Allies in any way after France fell, or are they just smudges of blue on the map?  :-(

@ABWorsham:

@cts17:

In truth, though, I feel that Napoleon and Alexander the Great are very much underestimated, especially Napoleon.

Read up on Napoleon’s work, especially all that he did for the French people. Imagine the effects he could’ve had if he hadn’t invaded Russia… or if he lived longer…

I think Hannibal and Napoleon, while history gives both credit, are not given the amount of fame and acknowledgement they deserve.

Hannibal fought Rome without his nation’s full support and time after time won.

Napoleon bagged Europe, destroyed the Holy Roman Empire. Should he get discredited for attacking Russia, a country so vast that it lacks any vital objectives. The Russians did not defeat him, Jack Frost did.

Napoleon did more than that. He brought law and order to a France in ruins and on multiple occasions tried to force Britain to the peace table. As I’ve said repeatedly, I’m convinced that the wars he fought were of defensive nature against hostile European monarchs. His personal genius also bears mention: he could dictate to four secretaries on four separate letters without losing track of what he was saying to all four!

Yes, he failed in Russia, but he still won nearly sixty battles! And some of those he won brilliantly even AFTER the invasion of Russia!

If I wasn’t restricted to World War II leaders I would always pick Napoleon, one of the greatest military minds to have ever existed. It’s very fascinating to speculate on what kind of leader he would be in the 20th century. Unfortunately he gets a bad stain in history for the Russian invasion and for his “tyranny” over Europe, but I suppose history is written by the victors.

I think Hannibal and Napoleon, while history gives both credit, are not given the amount of fame and acknowledgement they deserve.

I don’t think so: more books have been written on Napoleon than any other historical figure in history, except for Jesus Christ himself!

@Dylan:

@calvinhobbesliker:

Well, Napoleon threatened to invade Portugal which is arguably just as bad.

Why didn’t he?

France and Spain did invade Portugal, but did not burn and bombard it, as the British navy had threatened to do with Lisbon.

@calvinhobbesliker:

I’m not saying the threat is unjustified. I’m just saying that it is about as justified as the British threat to burn Lisbon.

An invasion of Portugal does not mean that the French will simply pillage and plunder and burn its way through the countryside. Napoleon despised that sort of horrifying way of waging war first off, and when he occupied Portugal he did not threaten to burn a defenseless city. The British directly threatened to burn Lisbon, which is not the same as conducting an invasion. Anything can happen in an “invasion”.

Plus, as I had stated, the Royal Navy’s record wasn’t exactly clean before that, what with bombarding Copenhagen TWICE in 1801 and 1807 and seizing the Danish fleet.

@panzerjager:

Emperor_Taiki,

I’d would be extremely interested to know the political situation between USSR and Japan in the global game.

1.Do they start at war?

2.Can they declare war whenever, or are their turn limitations?

3.Does a Russo-Japanese war affect anyone else’s neutrality?

4.Does a Japanese declaration of war on U.K. and U.S.A. automatically bring Germany into the conflict?

Thanks again for all the info thus far!!!

From what I heard from Larry:

1. No, they do not start at war.

2. Yes, they can. No limits.

3. Nope. It’s a purely Soviet-Japanese war.

4. I’m pretty sure, not sure about this one though.

@calvinhobbesliker:

Well, Napoleon threatened to invade Portugal which is arguably just as bad.

As I said, he might have expressed his intentions somewhat bluntly and tactlessly. After all he had told the Portugese diplomat:

“I will not tolerate a single English representative in Europe. If Portugal does not do as I wish, the house of Braganza will no longer reign in Europe two months hence.”

But again, calvin, this all stems from the inability of the British government to make peace or even negotiate with Napoleonic France in any way. All offers of some sort of compromise and peace offerings were all rejected by the British. Napoleon realized that if he could not exorcise the demon of war in its own cave (i.e. invading Britain), then he should strangle it economically. I’m not saying the Continental System was good. Napoleon was quite aware of its negative effects on his allies and even closed his eyes to certain discrepancies. But if I was him, I would also certainly have a much more determined will to force England to come to terms after multiple rejections of peace, wouldn’t you think?

Not fought, stirred up trouble. Napoleon or more correctly the French gave the Americans the idea that they could invade and annex Canada hence the war of 1812, there by diverting British resources away from campaigns in continental Europe. Also during Napoleon’s rule the French tried to insight revolution in idea with very little success as most Indians realised they would be trading one foreign master for another.

So while not taking any direct military action the French and so therefore Napoleon managed to fight a not so covert war against British dominions.

I’m not really sure if the War of 1812 was really caused by Napoleon directly, or even Imperial France. The forced conscription of American sailors into the Royal Navy had a much bigger part of it, as was the British sending military support to certain Native American tribes.

@calvinhobbesliker:

Also, I LOLed when you said Napoleon III increased French presitige. Franco-Prussian war anyone?

You seem to assume that the Franco-Prussian War happened immediately after Napoleon III took power.  :roll:

You haven’t shown how the Brits were trying to reenter via Spain.

Let’s see. By 1808 Spain was on the brink of civil war, with one side (Charles IV) being nothing but a puppet for the real powers of Spain (Godoy), and with the other one who hated France, Napoleon, and the Revolution (Ferdinand). Do you really think that once Ferdinand was in power the British would not try to get Spain to join the anti-French crusade?

Let me give you an example of the British determination and will to intervene not just in Spanish affairs but in general Iberian affairs. In 1807 Napoleon was determined to close down all trade to Continental Europe from Britain. Since Portugal was still maintaining a lively trade with Britain, Napoleon quite bluntly asked them to join the Continental System or would be considered an enemy of France. Harsh, but remember his iron will to try to destroy Britain economically comes from the fact that Britain rejected multiple offers of peace and negotiation from Napoleon since 1803.

A Franco-Spanish force invaded Portugal once they refused to close down to British trade. When the French were approaching Lisbon the current Portugese regent, John VI, expressed the desire to negotiate with the French commander (Junot), and to possibly negotiate further with Napoleon on the Continental System, but the British commander of the Royal Navy, Admiral Parker, told him that if that was the case, he had orders to seize the Portugese fleet and burn and bombard Lisbon. Basically they had threatened to do the same thing to Lisbon as they did to Cophenhagen, once in 1801 and again in 1807, except on a much larger scale. Thus the Portugese fleet and treasure sailed from Lisbon under Royal Navy escort, with their destination at Brazil.

Clearly the acts of a government that was fighting the “tyranny” of Napoleon and wanting to bring “peace” to Europe: burning or threatning to burn capitals of nations that either would not abide by Britain’s policy or would be willing to abide by Napoleon’s policy. Where do you see Napoleon threatening to burn entire cities? Citing Moscow is a mistake: he never sent the order to burn it, and even if he did that would be completely unlike him: why set fire to a city that could serve as winter quarters for his army?

I don’t deny that the Peninsular War is not Napoleon’s fault. It is, but only partly.

@Octospire:

As far as the British making him fight defensive wars I dont really think that is the case, Napoleon was stirring up trouble all over Britains empire, in India, Canada and the former colony of the United States. Napoleon made the mistake of thinking he could defeat the British in a global war and win the war against the kingdoms of Europe much like Hitler he made the mistake of fighting the war on too many fronts with limited resources.

What? Napoleon never fought Britain in Canada, India, or the United States.

@maverick_76:

Why did I just waste my time reading these posts?

Because you did.

@McMan:

Lichtenstein got downgraded sinced Revised and '42 IMHO, but it’s still fun to play as if you want to steamroll the Germans. Hopefully Larry included the legendary Lichinot Line in this game, FINALLY. Also, I hope Lich’s fighters attack and defend on a 5, seeing as they had jet fighters since 1935.

I agree, I’m not sure why they basically neutered Lichtenstein. Historically, Luxembourg had much more manpower than the Soviet Union, China, and Germany combined, so why is this not represented in-game? Germany isn’t much help and Italy’s too busy in Africa to really help either. Andorra needs to try to get some AA up ASAP due to an early Lich. air spam.

@i:

luxemburg sounds fun to play 95 dollars… thats a tonne of cash!!!

Not really. Andorra is the overpowered power IMHO. You want to play as the most powerful nation in the game, play as Andorra.

Of course, there’s also Lichtenstein…

Did the Free French units help out the Allies in any way?

@Dylan:

@UN:

You forgot Luxembourg’s income

Luxembourg-90 IPCS

What? Luxembourg is German.

And Norway is Indian.

See?

Luxembourg has 90 total IPCs. Confirmed by Larry himself.

You forgot Luxembourg’s income

Luxembourg-90 IPCS

So, seeing the massive “Balancing Pacific 1940” thread in Larry’s site, I decided to incorporate certain ideas from that thread and made the following changes to setup:

-China replaces one of its four infantry in Szechwan with an artillery piece. Add an AA gun to that territory as well.
-Add one Chinese infantry to Hunnan.
-Remove one bomber, tactical bomber, and fighter in Japan.
-Move two New Zealand fighters to Queensland.
-Move British fleet in Malaya to India, swap it with cruiser

Over the past few days I’ve been trying out this setup with the game store I frequently visit for A&A games, and here’s a quick AAR:

Japan tried to attack J1 and took the Philippines, sunk American destroyer, moved into Java and snatched it up. Early on Japan’s lightning blitzkrieg shook the Allies to their foundations but they never took India. China put up stronger resistance when it moved the AA gun to Yunnuan. Japan had to spend quite an amount of resources to stomping China to the ground, but like a cockroach it simply would not die. India was very close of being taken but Japan’s invasion failed (mostly due to the Dice Gods were feeling particularly generous and was giving the Japanese player box cars (6’s). ANZAC and British forces secured Sumatra and eventually drove Japan out of Java. The Americans, meanwhile, closed in from Truk, capturing Iwo Jima and the Philippines, sinking most of the Imperial Navy at a massive showdown near Guam. As soon as Chinese forces began appearing on the Chinese coast by J8 we quit the game.

So, when I went back home I decided to modify the setup again. This time, Japan keeps its bomber, tactical bomber, and fighter in Japan. Went out the day before yesterday, played another game. Another AAR:

Japan, of course, did another J1, and captured all of the DEI but Sumatra, whom had been fortified by ANZAC and Britain. China still proved to be a much bigger threat than it is in normal setup. That AA gun in particular is a nasty weapon to use against the Imperial Air Force. Eventually Japan did begin to overrun China left and right, and the Americans were having a Phoney War with the Imperial Navy near Truk, but the silence was broken when Japan invaded India with everything it could. India was taken, but the Japanese air force never recovered. Why? Well, in its attempt to close the Burma Road for the fourth time at least four fighters and one tactical bomber was shot down in a single round alone. ANZAC managed to take Java but was dislodged until the Americans finally showed up and re-took it. Unfortunately the Japanese got lucky and managed to sneakily invade Australia. The US Navy came bolting in but had its teeth knocked out near New Hebrides. Sydney was taken, and the Japanese won.

CONCLUSION: Well, there really isn’t one. I’m going over later tomorrow to play a game where Japan does J2 and J3 attacks (minus one bomber, tac, and fighter in Japan). Allies won first time, Japan second, so I’m really not sure if this set-up works or not. I do know, however, that giving the Chinese an AA gun will have their survival rate skyrocket.

Thoughts?

Shouldn’t this belong in the WWII forum? :\

Charles de Gaulle, Marie Pierre Koenig, Leclerc or de Lattre.

Got the Axis in. I tried to be as broad and general as I could with them, bear with me hardcore Axis players  :-D

I like this guide a lot, and I’m definitely going to show it to any new players to get them acquainted with the general strategy of the game. I’m looking forward to the Axis guide.

Like your signature…but what about Napoleon?  :-(

@LHoffman:

@UN:

What I’m worried about is the German player instantly quits the game if France has not fallen by G2. It’s not doom and gloom, people. It just means Sealion is no longer an option.  :roll:

If I were Germany, I don’t know if I’d quit… but there would be a dark cloud over me until something wonderful went my way. France not falling after 2 turns is a huge deal. I don’t know how often you play with Germany, but you cannot waste time or units. Unless Germany was only making halfhearted attempts to take France (ie… Infantry ans Artillery), it would worry me a lot that I was wasting so much time and resources on something that shouldn’t be a hard nut to crack. It becomes wasteful on Germany’s part; waste they cannot afford when they will need to move many of those units (esp Air units) East. Germany will need to pay more attention than ever to Russia in this game. I could see Germany not taking France quickly as a sign of failure for the Axis.

But I guess we’ll see how this all works out.

Let me correct myself. I meant that it wouldn’t be right to instantly quit the game if France hasn’t fallen by the BEGINNING of Germany’s second turn. By G2 France probably will have fallen by the end of their turn.