Messages

1321

Rules questions from first edition / Retreats Revisited

« on: December 21, 2005, 02:16:42 PM »

After some discussion with play testers and folks that helped design the game, the retreat rules needed some adjustment - see below:

Attacking and defending ground units can retreat to any number of friendly owned territories (units do not all have to retreat to the same space) that were friendly owned at the beginning of the combat phase. Defending ground units may also retreat into friendly owned adjacent territories that are being attacked. Combat must be resolved in the embattled territory before the retreat can take place.  If the territory is successfully defended, the defender may retreat into it. If the territory is lost to the attacker, the retreating units are eliminated instead. If no friendly owned adjacent territory exists, ground units cannot retreat from combat.

Now the defender has the option to retreat into friendly territories that are being attacked or into friendly owned territories that are not being attacked.

1322

Rules questions from first edition / Re: Rule Clarifications

« on: December 19, 2005, 03:31:58 AM »

True - Nothing forces defensive air support – even if air units occupy the space being attacked by enemy air or ground units.  Defending aircraft may elect to scramble and move away from the embattled territory rather than fly defensive air support before combat takes place.  The air unit is simply retreated up to 1/2 its movement to another territory.


Air units are very flexible and important in this game.

1323

General Discussion / Re: Game pieces

« on: December 16, 2005, 12:59:40 PM »

Hi Christoph,

I talked to John earlier today and he got your email order.  Now the pressure is on me to make the bunkers!  Give me a little time to create those and we will ship it all off together.

Thanks,
Mark

1324

Rules questions from first edition / Re: Rule Clarifications

« on: December 16, 2005, 09:24:25 AM »

Mostly correct - Air units can only react and fly defensive air support into adjacent territories:

P15. . . Enemy air units that are in or adjacent to a territory or sea zone that is being attacked may fly defensive air support / interception into the battle space if the defending player elects to do so.  They are treated as if they occupy the combat space for combat purposes.

and on returning after flying defensive air support:

P16. . .  After defensive air support, defending air units must return to the territory or carrier that they intercepted from.  If the original territory / carrier is no longer available to return to due to enemy occupation, battle or it is sunk, the intercepting air unit must fly to an alternate territory / aircraft carrier within range of half its movement from the battle territory or sea zone.  If no carrier or territory exists within this range, the air unit is eliminated instead.

1325

Rules questions from first edition / Rule Clarifications: Retreats

« on: December 15, 2005, 06:48:13 AM »

There were some questions about having the option to retreat into territories that are being attacked in the same turn.  From the rules:

Amended- see below

1326

Strategy Tips / Re: Defense of France

« on: December 08, 2005, 08:10:43 AM »

I think the Germans have two options:

One: Aggressive - build 5 tanks and 5 PzGr's out of the gates and just roll over the French and on into Paris in the Spring, losses be damned and put an end to French resistance.

Two: Conservative - build men and anti-tank units and march over the maginot line in the Spring, take a French counterattack and then try to take the French out in the Summer.

I think it is good to at least threaten the French with the Italians.  If the Allies can't really threaten Italy for a turn or two and you can keep the Italian fleet safe - declare war and take them into Provence in the Spring.

1327

General Discussion / Re: Game pieces

« on: December 08, 2005, 07:46:13 AM »

Hi Christoph,

So, all of the naval unit pictures on the website are the Skytrex 1/3000th scale ships - there are some good close-ups of these on the game design page and in the example of naval combat thread in the discussion forum.  You can get a sample of what the tumbling dice miniatures look like in the first picture (top left corner) on the design page.  The picture on the top right has French and British tanks from GHQ.  The German tanks are from Skytrex.  The Summer 1943 screenshot (4th picture down on the left side) illustrates some skytrex Tigers and Panthers.  For a game, I think the skytrex pieces are better because of the bent gun issue that Spitfire discusses.  While the quality does not look quite as good as skytrex, they are miles superior to the plastic molds.

As for planes, you will need pieces to represent the following:
German fighters, Stukas and medium bombers
Italian early war fighters, regular fighters and bombers
Japanese fighters, bombers and Kamikazes
British early war fighters, fighters, bombers and heavy bombers
US fighters, bombers and heavy bombers
French fighters and bombers
Soviet early war fighters, regular fighters, Sturmoviks and bombers

Hope this helps,
thanks,
Mark

1328

WWII discussion forum / Re: How Hitler could have won WWII?

« on: December 05, 2005, 01:35:59 AM »

I wonder. . .
The question is, would have Germany lost the war even if America was not directly involved in the European conflict.
I have gone back and forth on my opinion on this, but I am not entirely sure if it is a foregone conclusion that Germany would have lost and could not have fought the Soviet Union to a standstill.  Its true that the Eastern Front consumed the vast majority of Germany's army, but without US direct involvement it may have been enough to tip the scales. It would have certainly been a closer conflict. It is true that the Soviet Union was outproducing Germany in 1942, but by 1944 Germany was producing many more tanks and planes than the Soviet Union.

Without an invasion of Italy or of France and with no daylight bombing of German industry and the drain that Western airpower had on the Luftwaffe, the Germans may have been able to fight the Soviet Union to a stalemate.  The UK and the Commonwealth, with U.S. lend lease, would have still been a thorn in the side, but would not have poised nearly the same strategic threat than that with the US added to the mix did.  I'm not saying it is a sure thing it would have resulted in some form of armistice, but it would be worth simulating. . .

1329

WWII discussion forum / Greatest Axis Blunder

« on: December 01, 2005, 01:06:59 PM »

which contributed the most to the German defeat?

1330

Game Design / Re: Balance issue

« on: November 28, 2005, 02:17:33 PM »

I have vacillated between thinking the game favors the Axis or favors the Allies for more than a year and have not come to a conclusion yet.  Everytime there appears to be a knock-out strategy for one side, the other side ends up countering it and then they look impossible to beat for a game or two and the cycle repeats. There is not a set strategy to winning which makes things interesting and a lot of fun.

I have seen Allied strategy move from not dumping any British into France to dumping as many units as they can get their hands on into France.  Currently, the line of thinking is that the longer France can stay in the game, the more difficult a German victory. If the Axis can cause France to fall in Winter 39, they have a big leg up in winning the game.  If the Axis take knock France out in the Spring or Summer of 1940 with only light to moderate casualties, the game may be pretty balanced.  If France does not fall until the Autumn or the Germans take a lot of casualties knocking France out in Summer, it is going to be an uphill slog for the Axis.

1331

Strategy Tips / Re: Some Notes and Strategy Tips

« on: November 21, 2005, 09:49:57 AM »

Territories that were out of supply at the beginning of the turn (i.e. the owning player was not able to count their production point value when he counted up production at the end of his turn) do not provide the owning player any production points and therefore can not be bombed to reduce the owning player's production point total.

so, "no" enemy territories that were out of supply would have no effect on the owning player's production point totals.

another exception that is called out in the rules is that you can not industrial bomb a territory that is also being attacked in the same phase.

1332

Strategy Tips / Some Notes and Strategy Tips

« on: November 17, 2005, 02:13:36 AM »

Remember, during the mechanized movement phase, planes can go and land in territories that were taken during the regular movement and combat phases.

The U.S. and Italian players do not have a turn in the Autumn 39 turn.  Their first turn is Winter 39.

Keep some planes next to your ships so they can react in case your fleet gets attacked or keep your ships out of range of enemy aircraft.

Every territory that is worth a production point can be strategically attacked.  Disperse your fighters on your mechanized movement phase so that they can defend multiple territories from enemy strategic bombing.

It is more effective to defend convoy zones against subs than to chase subs around the board trying to attack them (unless your have overwhelming numbers against them).

Remember, the U.S. needs to get 5 factories out on the board before they can declare war and the Soviet Union 4 factories.  Any delay in getting these built permits the Axis more time to put off attacking them and a better chance of winning the game. Note that the Soviet Union starts the 1939 game with factories on their production chart.

Anti-aircraft guns are a combat unit like any other and can be taken as a casualty in combat.  They can defend territories by themselves and are front line defensive units even when there are no planes attacking.

Keep at least one AT gun, tank or 88 in territories that may be attacked by armor – their presence negates the extra bonus that attacking armor has when attacking territories with no AT capability.

Ownership of sea zones is important – it blocks enemy strategic movement and supply.

Remember, there are no mechanized attacks in non-arid territories during Winter turns.

 

1333

Strategy Tips / U.S.

« on: November 10, 2005, 07:12:12 AM »

OK, OK - so I am a converted believer that the U.S. has to start giving the UK between 3-7 production points every turn from the get go (sorry about that last time, James!).  I still think they have to lay down three factories out of the gates though. . .

1334

Game Design / Re: Example of Naval Combat

« on: November 08, 2005, 02:25:01 AM »

Now that all units have fired and casualties have been removed, first the attacker and then the defender decide to retreat.  If neither side retreats, a second round of combat would commence beginning with air-to air combat again and moving all of the planes back to the air-to-air combat chart and reassigning them as fighters or bombers.

After careful consideration, the Japanese decide to withdraw and lick their wounds rather than risk their capital ships.  They will consider this a victory because they sank the U.S. carrier.

The U.S. (relieved by the Japanese withdraw) also consider it a victory.  Beating the odds, they sank a Japanese carrier and forced them to withdraw.  

[attachment deleted by admin]

1335

Game Design / Re: Example of Naval Combat

« on: November 08, 2005, 01:56:03 AM »

After Cruiser casulaties have been inflicted, attackign and defending destroyers fire at each other, needing a "2 or less" to hit.  Both sides hit with one destroyer.  The Allies choose to damage their other cruiser, while the Japanese choose to elliminate a destroyer.

[attachment deleted by admin]