Detroit Game #3- (1939 Scenario)

[Erc]

Rule Issue that arose last Friday.

The Germans were attacking the Russians in Poland.  The German player sent 3 fighters into the attack while the Russians had one bomber that was adjacent and could respond to defend against the attack.  The Russian player chose not to send the bomber into the battle.

Since only one side had aircraft units present, there was no need to resolve air-to-air combat.  The issue arose at the beginning of land combat resolution.  The Russians had an anti-air unit defending in the territory and the German player did not want his fighters subjected to anti-air fire.  The German player reasoned that if there has been an air-to-air battle the 3 fighters would have served in a fighter role and would not have been fired upon by the anti-air unit.  He argued that his fighters should not have to pursue the attack to the ground and thus risk getting shot down by the anti-air fire.

After a some discussion, we decided to allow the attacker to immediately withdraw those planes from the combat and thus avoid anti-air fire.  The reasoning is that the fighters had achieved their objective of air superiority and deterred the Russians from making a defensive air response.

We could not find this issue specifically spelled out in the rules.

[Yoper]

I agree with the ruling.

I would say that there is no need to resolve air-to-air combat, but there is a need to go through the motions of the attacker declaring he has air units going into the battle and then seeing if the defender is going to respond.

Then there is the need to place the air units upon the air combat chart (in the proper sequence) so that each side's intentions are clear.  This should happen even if one side does not come into battle.

Craig

[Mark]

Eric,

You guys made the right call.  Sorry, I did not think this was a confusing area. 

The German fighters are allocated to the battle - but the first step in combat is aligning your air units on the air battle board.  The German player would have allocated his fighters for air-to-air combat.  Only planes designated as bombers are moved to the ground battleboard and get AA rolled against them.  Just because the defender did not come up to play does not force the German air units to become bombers.

I guess it needs to be made more clear that regardless of whether enemy planes are in the battle or not, you still have to proceed through the combat sequence of play which includes the air-to-air step of designating your planes as either air to air fighters or as bombers.

Hope you had fun last Friday - looks like a good game! 
I think one of the side effects of keeping the Italians out of the game for so long is a relatively unmollested UK - they have a lot of troops in the Pacific that they usually can't afford to build and place there - we'll have to see how the Japanese fare with a little bit tougher Australia and India. . .

Did Nagumo completely wipe out the US fleet at Pearl Harbor - or did I miss something?

cheers,
Mark

[Yoper]

It looks like the Japanese moved out to strike Pearl like we had discussed last week, but then did not.

The US Pearl fleet went south in the turn after war started and then can be seen near New Guinea in one of the last pics.

As for Italy, I was setting them up for an attack on Gibraltar by buying that third transport.  Since that didn't transpire, it now is 5 PPs that could have gone to something else.  Then again, it did force the UK to shift forces to cover that at the time.

I think that the UK is set up well in the Eastern Med and the Pacific because the sub warfare in the Atlantic never really materialized.  Dan (German player) is a really good ground-pounder, but doesn't have as much experience with the sea action.

Craig

[Mark]

On closer analysis (  )  it looks like maybe the Japs got both US battleships at Pearl - I don't see  the Arizona down in the Bismarck Sea. . .

Yeah - the sub war can be tricky, but it is important to keep the Brits down - On the other hand, without investing in Subs (or in the Med) maybe the Germans will be able to overwhelm the Russians on the Eastern Front in 1942 - that theater is shaping up to being quite a slugfest!

[Mark]

Upon studying the last set of pics, I can say this, " the next few turns could be lots of fun on the Russian front  "  But, I will keep my lips sealed   

[Erc]

My 2 cents from the UK/US point of view on this game.

The neutral Italians did tie up a significant number of British units, but I was able to strategically move units through the Med. and onwards to the Indian and Pacific.  I'll admit, and my German adversary would probably agree, that I seemed to roll more than the average amount of 1's against the U-Boats.

The Japanese did indeed strike Pearl Harbor and sank both battleships, but nothing else.  The remaining American and British fleets, along with some infantry, moved to the sea area between New Guinea and the Carolines where they are threatening to invade several Japanese victory point islands.  The American fleet on the East Coast was sent through Panama to protect the West Coast and the convoys.

The Italians must have been talking to the Japanese since they declared war at the same time.  The British replied by attacking across North Africa towards Tobruk and attacking the Italian fleet.  The land attacks went well, but the naval battle was a near disaster.  The much smaller Italian fleet managed to do more damage than it received and the British were forced to withdraw at sea.

On the other hand, the Germans took an all out gamble to capture Lenningrad in the Winter 41/42.  The dice (or the harsh weather) went Russia's way and they held it with one fort while all the attacking front line German units were destroyed.  The Germans also declined to advance into the undefended Minsk area north of the Pripets, perhaps due to the fear of a Russian counter attack in the Winter.  Russia then refortified its positions.

When looking at the forces on the map and how the game has played out to this point, it seems to be a fairly balanced game.  Looking at the victory points tells a different story.

If I remember correctly, the Axis currently holds about 29 victory points and there seems to be limited opportunities for them to gain much more than that.  The Allies are positioned to capture some of those victory points back over the next couple of turns.  At the same time the Axis must hold onto at least 28 victory points into the Spring or Summer of 43 just to prevent an Allied victory.

Does this seem right?  Or is this an example of how important the victory points are versus other factors such as military and economic strength?

[Mark]

Wow - I missed the Leningrad attack from the pics - that must have been fairly dramatic - defended it with only a fort left, huh?  Well, the Order of Lenin for those guys I guess. . .

Victory points are pretty important (they are how you win the game after all    )

In the games I have witnessed, the Axis have actually won more than they have lost.  but the consensus is that the Allies have a slight advantage - but that they are tougher to play because they are more challenging to coordinate and have to react with appropriate force and timing.

Maybe the combination of good strategy and luck have provided the Allies an advantage in your current game - but don't write the Axis off yet - lots can happen in the next 6 turns.  THe Axis may be able to swing things around in Russia and the Pacific and Fortress Europe can be a hard nut to crack.

The European Axis can usually get 19 Victory points by this stage of the game (Norway (1), Berlin (3), Munch (1), Paris (3), Rome (3), Tripoli (1), Tobruk (1), Greece (1), Romania (1), Hungary (1), Warsaw (1), Kiev (1) and Kharkov (1)).  The Axis in your game are off of this total by a few.

In the Pacific, the Japanese can usually get to about 17 VP's pretty quickly.  They start with 10 and they can usually add the Philippines (2), Singapore (1), Burma (1) and a few of the islands (either New Guinea, Rabaul, Guadalcanal, Tarawa, Midway or Dutch Harbor). 

That leaves the Axis with about 36 - roughly in between the 42 to win the game and the 28 to lose it before the victory level start dropping in 1943.  The six additional points to win the game can sometimes be picked up in Russia (taking a couple of the big VP spaces like Leningrad, Moscow or Stalingrad), Cario or in the Pacific with a concerted Japanese effort on either India, Australia or Hawaii.

And that's to win the game early.  I have seen the Axis win in Summer 1945 by hanging onto a handful of VPs in Central Europe too - the game gets really interesting of the Axis can keep it close until the VP level starts to drop and the pressure is on the Allies to advance fast.  See also some of DerDiktator's posts on this subject in the Strategy section of the Forum.

Looks like a great game - hopefully you guys are enjoying yourselves!
Mark
 

[Yoper]

The Japanese did indeed strike Pearl Harbor and sank both battleships, but nothing else.

I am sure Steve whined about this like only he can.

It seems that the paratrooper strategy I suggested worked out well for taking the DEI.  Now he just has to replace the paratroopers with regular infantry when he takes the paratroopers back to the mainland.

Did the Italian fighters in Tobruk help in defending the Italian fleet from the ravages of the Royal Navy?  I only see one remaining fighter.

Craig

[Yoper]

The European Axis can usually get 19 Victory points by this stage of the game (Norway (1), Berlin (3), Munich (1), Paris (3), Rome (3), Tripoli (1), Tobruk (1), Greece (1), Romania (1), Hungary (1), Warsaw (1), Kiev (1) and Kharkov (1)).  The Axis in your game are off of this total by a few.

Well Tobruk is already gone and we never went after Athens (Greece) because we didn't want to give him (UK) an opening to come into in the Balkans.  The Germans are trying to get to Kharkov, but it seems a bit of a stretch to say they should have it.

In the Pacific, the Japanese can usually get to about 17 VP's pretty quickly.  They start with 10 and they can usually add the Philippines (2), Singapore (1), Burma (1) and a few of the islands (either New Guinea, Rabaul, Guadalcanal, Tarawa, Midway or Dutch Harbor).

Our Japanese play has been very Asian mainland centered.  The defense of the islands held by Japan and the threatening of WA island hasn't been there.  Then again we haven't gotten very far in any of our games.  That would talk to the fact that we haven't had to deal with the VPs in the Pacific islands too much up to this time.

Craig

[Yoper]

I have some great pics (depending on your point of view  ) of our action last night.

There will be some intense commentary to follow once I get them posted.

I will also be posting some rules questions and a few game design thoughts too.

Craig

[Mark]

Looking forward to the pics! - and if your game is still on-going - or it came to an early conclusion in 1942. . .from the looks of your smiley it must not have gone well for the Axis

[Yoper]

Axis 1/42



[attachment deleted by admin]

[Yoper]

Axis 1/42

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Yoper]

Axis 1/42

[attachment deleted by admin]