Axis & Allies .org Forums
    • Home
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Register
    • Login
    1. Home
    2. UN Spacy
    3. Topics
    • Profile
    • Following 0
    • Followers 0
    • Topics 19
    • Posts 369
    • Best 2
    • Controversial 0
    • Groups 0

    Topics created by UN Spacy

    • UN SpacyU

      Is there too much contempt for the French from A&A players?

      World War II History
      • • • UN Spacy
      114
      0
      Votes
      114
      Posts
      14.3k
      Views

      Commander JayVonC

      I haven’t had the pleasure of playing Europe 1940 yet, but I have no contempt for the French during the conflict. I would say there were significant reasons to the Third Republic’s ultimate downfall, one of the which was overall poor Allied strategy, which including the misusing of tank divisions and worst of all, not mounting a meaningful offensive into Germany in the opening days of the war.

      As for the Soviet Union, which like the French, I have no contempt for, there were many reasons for its initial failure, the purges are one, whilst devastating they alone were not the cause of Soviet ineffectiveness. The main cause was Stalin himself, who was planning an offensive war sometime in 1942, after he thought Hitler would crush England. He made no preparations for defense, thinking that the Germans would never again fight on two fronts as they did over twenty years ago. Obviously, he was wrong. The man went as far to dismiss intelligence reports, which while varied in dates of attacks, came in like a torrent, from multiple sources.

      The second was the nature of Red Army’s training and discipline coupled with the strategical and logistical support were in shambles during the first opening weeks on the Eastern Front.

    • UN SpacyU

      All these AARs; why don't you mention the French units?

      Axis & Allies Global 1940
      • • • UN Spacy
      42
      0
      Votes
      42
      Posts
      5.6k
      Views

      shintokamikazeS

      cos they robed irelands place in the world cup,by cheating,and got knocked out in the first round,kinda like in ww2,LOL

    • UN SpacyU

      How do you explain the rules of A&A to newbies?

      General Discussion
      • • • UN Spacy
      6
      0
      Votes
      6
      Posts
      1.1k
      Views

      Dylan the CanadianD

      This is how I learned

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNEkzj5Bs80

    • UN SpacyU

      CoolStuffInc ship yet?

      Axis & Allies Europe 1940
      • • • UN Spacy
      39
      0
      Votes
      39
      Posts
      5.2k
      Views

      HBGH

      Received mine today in Tulsa, OK from Coolstuffinc.com

    • UN SpacyU

      What to do with French African infantry?

      Axis & Allies Europe 1940
      • • • UN Spacy
      7
      0
      Votes
      7
      Posts
      1.8k
      Views

      ozteaO

      This game will likeley need a hammer approach to taking france rather than the funnel of transports

      Because of the distance between the US, UK, and Normandy. The US fleet wont run like clockwork back and forth to canada like in other AA games.

      There will be turns not enough transports can be filled because of logistics issues.
      If you have the French INF in UK, and could get maybe 3 more, these units are insulated against combat when/if they land during an NCM move. And could be good fodder for the US/UK units there doing the real fighting.

      im also thinking of the psycological impact on the german player. to add 4 infantry to france, then take paris and add 4 more? humliation combined with a useful stack to protect paris on the road to victory.

    • UN SpacyU

      Alternate setup I used as testing

      Axis & Allies Pacific 1940
      • • • UN Spacy
      2
      0
      Votes
      2
      Posts
      1.1k
      Views

      W

      Sounds like some of the suggestions are working. Thanks for the feed back, next time we play we will try:

      Chinese AA gun, and swap 1 inf for art in Szec. Add NB to NSW, and move 1 ftr from NZ to Queens Swap Brits BB & cruiser, and move back 1 trp to India (maybe both trps)

      I know you planned a J1 attack, but did it seem like there was enough on the table for Jap to warrant it. That’s why I’m thinking about leaving one trpt in Malaya so Jap can still nail some thing w/cruiser. J1 could still remove all but 2 allied tpts that way. What did UK do w/BB, sounds like you didn’t counter Jap at Java UK1 (to risky). Sounds like it was the backbone for the UK/Anz fleet near DEI, which would allow the US to maneuver better. I like giving the Chinese an AA gun. With all that available air power, it just seems right.

      I don’t want to do to much right off the bat. Most of the above changes shouldn’t effect later Jap attacks too much. I’m starting to think that a total Pac reduction in air would be better then just reduce Japs, if you go that route.

    • UN SpacyU

      A Beginner's Guide to Axis and Allies 1940

      Axis & Allies Europe 1940
      • • • UN Spacy
      19
      0
      Votes
      19
      Posts
      23.4k
      Views

      UN SpacyU

      Well I’m not sure if modifications are necessary or not since Alpha +2. But then again, I wasn’t exactly planning on writing a strategy guide, just a beginner’s guide, hence the title.

      But these are just mumblings of mine, thanks for the feedback guys!

      Also: this should have been in Global 1940 :|

    • UN SpacyU

      French strategy

      Axis & Allies Europe 1940
      • • • UN Spacy
      13
      0
      Votes
      13
      Posts
      15.3k
      Views

      T

      But if Spain is captured by the allies that gives turkey to the Axis and 8 inf which if germany takes means it is easier to begin with defending France and attacking the SU

    • UN SpacyU

      Clarification with US Wartime Income

      Axis & Allies Pacific 1940
      • • • UN Spacy
      6
      0
      Votes
      6
      Posts
      1.3k
      Views

      Z

      So true, how often I have gotten so use to collecting 55 IPC’s as the USA player that I forget to collect any additional IPC’s later in the game if I take a DEI country or recapture the Phillipines.

    • UN SpacyU

      Why do people compare Napoleon to Hitler?

      World War II History
      • • • UN Spacy
      89
      0
      Votes
      89
      Posts
      16.0k
      Views

      UN SpacyU

      @13thguardsriflediv:

      @UN:

      I disagree; his flaw was that he was too soft on the conquered. If he had any obsession it was an obsession to have peace in Europe so he could focus on his responsibilities as a statesman.

      He essentially humiliated Prussia by keeping French forces stationed there, at Prussia’s expense (financially). Prussia had ambitions to unite Northern Germany (ie without Austria) under Prussian banner and Napoleon knew it, and wanted to prevent it.

      Perhaps, but Prussia knew very well what it was getting into. Despite Napoleon’s personal plea, Fredrick Wilhelm did nothing to prevent the Prussian court from being dominated by the war party.

      I disagree. Napoleon greatly offended the Russian court (Alexander found himself lambasted when he returned to court in St Petersburg) and his ‘construction’ of the Duchy of Warsaw was seen as the greatest offense, since the Russians feared it would kindle hopes in ‘Russian’ Poland for unification with the Duchy of Warsaw, which Russia was dead set against, because if Polish could harbor hopes of loosening from Russia, so could other nationalities. Furthermore, he greatly underestimated Alexander who started distancing himself from Napoleon not long after Tilsit, mostly under pressure from Russia’s aristocracy, his mother and also the British.

      Which makes me sad that Alexander I came to power, period. His father would have been much more adept at guaranteeing peace in Europe and probably wouldn’t have been so influenced by anti-Napoleonic forces.

      He was in no position to be harsher because he wanted Russian support for the Continental system.

      He wanted Russian support, but again, he still had the power to create a march larger Poland at the expense of Russia, but he didn’t, partly because he was so despertate to forge a lasting peace, and partly because he wanted Russian support in the Continental System.

      And he was poor at diplomacy because he generally imposed many things on the states that he directly or indirectly controlled rather than negotiate as an equal.

      I both agree and disagree. In many instances (prominent among them the formation of the Confederation of the Rhine, which I’ll explain in a moment), Napoleon was very touchy about where he drew borders and was interested in what the heads of state of the vassal and allied states would have to say. On the other hand, he needed to guarantee the security of France, and, again, hated inefficiency and corruption, which often led to him being very imperious, as you said.

      Friedrich Karl of Baden, Ludwig of Hesse-Darmstadt, Friedrich of Württemberg and Maximilian of Bavaria all owed the expansion of their realms to Napoleon.

      That’s true, but none of them were inefficient rulers (with the possible except of Ludwig).

      Friedrich Wilhelm of Prussia had been humiliated at Tilsit and was only kept on by Napoleon because Alexander asked it of him.

      Yeah, Fredrick got off easy. If Napoleon was the “19th century Hitler” that he’s frequently portrayed as I doubt Prussia as a nation would have even existed after Tilsit.

      Napoleon casually moved areas and provinces from one kingdom to another.

      Might you cite specific examples?

      Napoleon imposed French as an official language on several areas of German states.

      That doesn’t necessarily mean he wanted to ban German as a language, unlike the Japanese in Korea, who basically wanted to destroy Korean culture and language.

      The number of people that resented French rule in German areas increased with time.

      This is true; but remember why, in the first place, Napoleon demanded more resources and troops from the German states, because of the irreversible hatred of the European monarchies, Britain especially. If anyone’s at fault it is the British, who financed coalition after coalition to let Continental troops die for British interests, and who would threaten or outright bombard cities that did not abide by what His Britannic Majesety wanted (i.e. Copenhagen, Lisbon).

      No, people like Benjamin Constant and Madame de Stael. The latter wrote a book criticizing the French treatment of Italy. She also wrote a book on German culture which contained so much implicit criticism of Napoleon that he had the book banned.

      Let me show to you a segment from a book that talks about Stael:

      Germaine de Stael, born of Genevan parents and Swedish by marriage, only became French when Geneva was annexed to France in 1791. Intelligent, ambitious and brilliant, this woman was totally lacking in any moral sense, and her love life would make a racy novel. She was a tireless and dazzling writer, but one who often showed poor judgment. Unfortunately lacking in physical charm, with a rather mannish appearance, she initially felt an ardent passion for the young General Bonaparte, the conqueror of Italy, and she wrote that he was “the most intrepid warrior, the most reflective thinker, the most extraordinary genius.” She even took it into her head to become an Egeria to her hero, after having dreamed of playing that role for Mirabeau and then Robespierre.

      Through Talleyrand, Stael finally managed to get herself introduced to Napoleon. Slipping into the circle of people gathered around him, she called out to the First Consul, asking him who was in his eyes “the greatest woman in the world, living or dead”. “The one who has the most children, madame,” he answered. The interloper made a face but was not flustered, and pointed out to her unwilling conversational partner that he had a reputation “of not liking women much”. He replied, “Pardon me, madame, I like my own very much.”

      Stael was unrelenting, and she laid siege to her idol, a siege Napoleon on St. Helena recalled with amusement: “She almost took me by the pants in my little house on rue Chanteraine. She followed me one day as I went into my dressing room. ‘But madame, I’m going into my dressing room,’ I said. ‘It’s all the same to me,’ she answered. ‘I’m an old woman.’ She said the Empress Josephine was a silly woman who was not worthy to be my wife and that only she, Stael, was right for me. She was crazy about me.”

      The crazy woman wept with vexation after the coup d’etat of 18 Brumaire, which gave France a leader but also, through the favor of the First Consul, gave her lover, Benjamin Constant, a position. She pushed Constant to make a speech against the Consulate regime “of servitude and silence”. She was a fierce Calvinist in spite of her life of debauchery, and when the Concordat was signed with the Holy See she went over to the opposition and began dreaming of the overthrow of the regime with all the determination and malice of a wronged woman. As if to open hostilities, she published Delphine, a defense of divorce, Protestantism and England. She chose her time well! “I hope her friends have warned her not to come back to Paris,” exclaimed Bonaparte, “I would have to have her taken back to the border by the police.”

      He did not need to say this twice. She was seen in Germany, spreading invective against the man who was to become Emperor and plotting against him in all the courts, even with the Bourbons. But she continued to reside at Coppet, near Geneva, where the prefect of the Emperor, the “tyrant”, turned a blind eye to her activities. She was even seen in some regions of France, still trying to get close to Paris. She soon published Corinna, a novel in praise of the emancipation of women, in which the French hero is a good-looking fool and the British hero a beautiful, deep, generous spirit. This further enraged Napoleon, and on St. Helena he said, “I cannot forgive Madame de Stael for having made fun of the French in her novel.”

      Fallen under the influence of a German who was carrying on anti-French propaganda in Austria, the novelist finally brought down upon herself the official wrath of the Emperor, who in 1808 wrote to his minister of police: “Madame de Stael has an ongoing correspondence with a certain Gentz and has become involved with the clique of low characters in London…This relationship with this individual can only be to the detriment of France. You will make it known that until now she has been regarded only as a crazy woman, but that today she has begun to get involved in a clique that is contrary to the public peace.”

      The guilty woman returned to Coppet, still without suffering any “persecution” by the authorities of the department, and started to write her major work, Germany, which gave her an excellent opportunity to exercise her bias against French literature, supposedly mired in classicism, and praise German genius in all its forms. She took a notion to have this volume published in France and went there, but the police seized the manuscript and ordered her to leave the territory. The minister Savary sent her a rather stern letter: “It appears the air of this country does not suit you at all. Your last book is not French; I have stopped it from being printed. I regret the loss to the booksellers, but it is not possible for me to allow it to be published.”

      Can Napoleon really be blamed for approving this measure and refusing to permit the publication of a French book that was offensively pro-German, a book that would lead to a reawakening of the desire for dominance in Austria, only a few years after the dominance of the Holy Roman Empire, and cause the greatest damage to a precarious peace?

      At the same time, Stael, who was now taking opium, secretly married a friend of her son 21 years her junior and, fleeing the discreet surveillance that had been established around her chateau in Coppet, set off on the roads of Europe. She was next seen in the Russian court when Napoleon entered Moscow; she pushed the tsar to make an alliance with Sweden, which she took it upon herself to drag into the war by exerting pressure on crown prince Bernadotte, who was her friend. She dared to write, “The good of France required that it suffer a reversal.” Then she was in London, where she was given a triumphal reception, since she was the embodiment of resistance to Napoleon’s “tyranny”. During the Hundred Days in 1815, assuming that Napoleon would relax his surveillance, she rushed to Paris to claim payment of two million francs loaned by her father, Necker, to King Louis XVI. Could it be that she had changed camps?

      One might believe this when reading what she wrote to Joseph Bonaparte: “The return of your brother is extraordinary and surpasses all imagination.” But this was nothing but an act to gain a position for her son and obtain payment of her two million francs, because she maintained contacts with the enemies of the “tyrant”. One can easily get lost trying to follow the intricacies of her schemes.

      Was Napoleon wrong to check the torrent of words from a woman who worked to set Sweden, Prussia and Austria against France? And could Madame de Stael, who hated Napoleon and her adaptive country with equal force, complain because she was not allowed to publish her book in France? This is the objective perspective from which the issue must be looked at.

      He was a great man in history, but one with many flaws.

      True; but then again, no great leader in history has no flaws.

    • UN SpacyU

      USSR and Japan

      Axis & Allies Europe 1940
      • • • UN Spacy
      30
      0
      Votes
      30
      Posts
      4.7k
      Views

      Dylan the CanadianD

      @cminke:

      @LHoffman:

      Okay… I am going to play IL:

      “stay on topic”

      So, how’d I do? Good impression?

      UR ALMOST AS LAME AS HIM TO! opps did I use my out side voice again?

      c;mon man if it becomes a page long than go ahead

      Be nice to your elders.

    • UN SpacyU

      French figures–-less than what a normal power would get?

      Axis & Allies Europe 1940
      • • • UN Spacy
      35
      0
      Votes
      35
      Posts
      5.2k
      Views

      LHoffmanL

      @calvinhobbesliker:

      @LHoffman:

      @squirecam:

      @Razor:

      Easy, the game start after the Dunkirk evacuation and after the French navy was scuttled. There is no other way to do it.

      The game does start after Dunkirk.

      However, whether the French are “well represented” or not….they are finished after 1 round. If Germany doesnt do that, then this would be a QUICK allied victory.

      I did some research last night and found out that the if the French are in control of their country at the start of the game … then the French Navy MUST still be “alive”.

      The game starts befor the fall of France. This still leaves reasonable assumption that Dunkirk has happened (May 24-26 1940). French resistance ended on June 25. The British bombardment of the French Fleet at Mers-el-Kebir  happened on July 4 (70 years ago tomorrow, interstingly enough).

      Based on this information, French ships should still be present at the start of the game. They cannot say the game starts after Dunkirk AND the scuttling of the French Fleet. It is impossible because France is autonomous at the start of the game. I for one hope that France has ships and something can be done with them. Either the French person keeps them, the British can sink them or the Germans can use them, I don’t care. As long as they are there.

      Actually, that was on the 3rd of July

      Oh my mistake… so 70 years ago today. The book I got the information from said July 4.

    • UN SpacyU

      What's the first thing you'll do upon getting Europe 1940?

      Axis & Allies Europe 1940
      • • • UN Spacy
      67
      0
      Votes
      67
      Posts
      10.3k
      Views

      Imperious LeaderI

      Stay on topic. Geez.

    • UN SpacyU

      French units in Indochina?

      Axis & Allies Europe 1940
      • • • UN Spacy
      11
      0
      Votes
      11
      Posts
      2.6k
      Views

      NapoleonN

      Good point…also mine…thats why i ask this question…lets wait…if japan doesn’t attack round 1 in global…maybe it will be the case…then the question is very interesting

    • UN SpacyU

      Most underrated battles/commanders

      World War II History
      • • • UN Spacy
      9
      0
      Votes
      9
      Posts
      2.0k
      Views

      T

      The most underrated naval commander was Raymond Spruance, who assumed command at the Battle of Midway following the damage to the Yorktown, and commanded at the Battle of the Philippine Sea in June of 1944.  Overshadowed by Halsey, he never would have fallen for the Japanese carrier lure at the Battle of Leyte Gulf.

      As for underrated battles, probably the most decisive underrated battle was fought prior to WW2 starting, between the Japanese and the Russians at Nomohan/Khalkin-Gol on the northeastern border of Manchuria.  The Japanese decided after their shattering defeat by the Russians that it would be safer to attack south for resources to sustain the China war than to attack the Soviet Union.

      The other would be the campaign to isolate Rabaul from August of 1942 through February of 1944, which aside from costing the Japanese heavily in irreplaceable warships and transports, also essentially destroyed their carrier air power far more thoroughly than the losses at Midway.

      Lastly for simple unbelievable guts and determination, the low-level attack by B-24 Liberators on the Ploesti oil refineries on August 1, 1943.

    • UN SpacyU

      Need clarification for India/UK IPCs

      Axis & Allies Europe 1940
      • • • UN Spacy
      6
      0
      Votes
      6
      Posts
      1.6k
      Views

      Dylan the CanadianD

      @Funcioneta:

      @UN:

      I’m wondering if someone could clarify this to me.

      I’ve heard that India and Great Britain will have separate IPC incomes. If that’s true, does that mean all British Pacific territories goes to the Indian IPC?

      Does this also mean that there’s a possibility that there can be a houseruled seventh player as British India? Would it work?

      I also heard that the United States has a split income as well between the Atlantic and Pacific. So does that also mean that there could very well be an (again, houseruled) eighth player playing as either the European American forces or the Pacific American forces?

      Higher number of possible players is 10:

      USSR France UK India ANZAC China USA Germany Italy Japan

      You’re not going to have much fun playing one minor allied … just give to one player all the minor allies, so practical max number is 7 players

      Knowing me I will do this, just like AA50 I sometimes broke out China from the US. Believe me I could get 10 people over, (a lot of them suck, but compared to a lot of people on here I guess I suck  :-P ) That will be fun!

    • UN SpacyU

      Rhode IslandAustin, Texas anyone?

      Player Locator
      • • • UN Spacy
      4
      0
      Votes
      4
      Posts
      1.0k
      Views

      H

      Hey, my friends and I were waiting for AAE40 to come out to play the global game, we had such dreams back then…

      I’m in Austin now, looking to play

      so let me know

    • UN SpacyU

      Europe 1940 shows up on Wizards site…with screenshot

      Axis & Allies Europe 1940
      • • • UN Spacy
      250
      0
      Votes
      250
      Posts
      36.7k
      Views

      Army of Northern VirginiaA

      I assume you meant to put “owned” instead of “pwned” when talking about a Barbarossa/Stalingrad game in reference to Battle of the Bulge or Guadalcanal. I agree here too. At least for me, a game such as that would probably have owned the others.

      Nah, I meant “pwn”. I was using netspeak: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pwned

      I think some kind of A&A Russian-front game would be the brilliant, but I don’t hold out much hope of seeing one.

      I won’t continue, since I’ve made my feelings clear and this is just one of those ‘we don’t agree’ type issues. I also don’t want to sound like I wouldn’t be able to enjoy / play the game because of it, which obviously isn’t true.

      However, I will still say this…

      No, they’d probably, like me, not give a damn.

      I think some of them, like some people here, clearly would give a damn. For that reason alone designers should take certain things into account. I don’t hold WotC in particularly high esteem, since they have a habit of short-changing the consumer on many small aspects of games which in reality would take almost no effort or cost to put right. Larry only has input which goes so far, and he has my respect. But Wizards do too many irritating things, and to me, this is just another one of them.

    • UN SpacyU

      How is France going to survive even 1 round?!?

      Axis & Allies Europe 1940
      • • • UN Spacy
      109
      0
      Votes
      109
      Posts
      26.3k
      Views

      idk_iam_swissI

      I typically play with 2-3 people. Too many people makes the game waaaay to slow and too few makes it too boring.

    • 1 / 1