Good pictures Yoper - not sure what to tell you except that you should be on Eric's side next 
and I'm looking forward to playing in April. 
I know I am biased, but you got outplayed in France and delaying the Italian entry as long as you did compounded the defeat in the battle for France.
I got distracted when I was writing my last post. I forgot to put in my statement that you could save any Italian comments.
There was never any good time to bring in the Italians. It wouldn't have saved my bacon and would have created its own set of problems.
I think the Soviet entry works well (the optional rule works even a bit better - though in playtesting we have tweaked the optional rule a bit more).
Actually, if anything, a German disaster in France would probably propel an earlier Soviet entry as Stalin would want a piece of the spoils and not want Central Europe to go entirely capitalist. So, if anything, a real "event driven" Soviet entry would have them declaring war earlier rather than later - so be happy. . .
And my opinion is that the USSR wasn't ready to go anywhere, even in mid 1941. So any openings that came about earlier based on German slip ups wouldn't have been something that they could have seized upon.
We can play around with ideas on a French defeat, but after dozens of games the current system seems to work pretty well. I know there are different ways of doing this - but not sure they would really alter the game that much. If you make France a push-over, you might as well not play the 1939 game and just play the 1941 scenario.
I am not talking about making France a push over. I am talking about building into the system some flexibility for the extended presence of France. If they stay around longer, then there should be a related pushing back of hostilities with others- like the US and the USSR.
Events should be driven by what is happening on the game board, not on the production chart (or the history book).
Anyway, One of the purposes of this forum is to debate the rules and brainstorm improvements. For example, I think you guys really got the ball rolling on optional entry rules for the US and Russia - which we enjoy playing with a lot. Also, I like your revised Italian morale table that you emailed me better than the one that is currently in the optional rules of the rulebook. So, the game will never be perfect and there will always be room for improvements and new ideas. Don't slam the mechanics too much though - they have stood up pretty well over the years.
I don't know how you can say that the mechanics of the early war play out have stood up pretty well. Yes, we have a limited number of games in and our choices have left somethings to be desired, but there is definitely a harsh learning curve that we have come across.
You yourself in your latest game AAR had an early game blow up and had to start over. That is because of the unforgiving nature of the France situation. If they don't fold early, then Germany is never going to make the arbritrary Barbarossa deadline.
I love the game, but that doesn't mean I don't think that there are flaws.
Either your gameplay differs enough from our that the problems don't surface in your games and they do in ours or you accept a certain amount of issues and just deal with them.
Maybe you guys can get in one more 'practice game' before we make it out to play for the trophy
My schedule leading up to the "Weekend of Destruction" is mostly full of other events which means we aren't going to see another game before you show.
I am looking forward to a grand meeting of the minds and seeing if you can somehow assuage my fears.
Craig
