@SuperbattleshipYamato I like the ideas/rules you mentioned. I will follow through on triple a.
AAE Scenario: Europe 1939 (France, USA, Germany, Britain, USSR, Italy)
-
Well the way I did it was take belgium the first turn, then attkae from there to E France the 2nd…but in my version, france retreated from the magnot line and vichy to paris, making it hard to take and hold it on the next turn.
they consolidated their forces which i pretty sure the french did not do int the real war.
-
The way im doing it, with supply chips and no IPCs, the only supply chip for france is in vichy france, so If they plan to build any units they will definitely want to defend eastern france, and if italy has built up a bit then they might fall back to vichy. Either way, its not good to give up their only way to defend themselves.
-
It seems to me that a “combined arms” rule would work well here. It all depends where Germany strikes first, East or West.
C.I. -
It seems that many of you are held up on the idea of keeping the game turns in line chronologically with the actual events of the war. I would like, therefore, to introduce you to a concept that doesn’t change my game at all, but has helped me accept some of the seemingly more difficult problems revolving around the progression of time. I think of it as “elastic time.” What this means is that basically, a turn might represent a variable span of time, depending on what is accomplished during it. The first turn of my game, for example, might represent nearly a whole year, while the third turn might represent possibly only a month or two. Now you may reject this concept, thinking that if the time span varies, then so would the IPC output. But as we all know, the IPC output of the game is turn-based instead of the continuous stream that it would have been in real life. Therefore, it is only an approximation to begin with, and we may allow ourselves to think of the relatively large outputs during the “short” turns as the result of a buildup of military industry, or the relatively low output during the “long” turns as the result of a somehow sluggish or exhausted economy.
Ultimately, I think of time in Axis and Allies in this way because in my view it is not so important to keep the game’s events running on a strict timeline. Yes, it is important to keep things roughly within a time constraint - I would not brook the idea of thinking of a single turn as only a day or as much as three years - but so long as I can see a progression of events within the gameplay that were either actually done at the time or feasible at the time (to the best of our knowledge), then I am happy.
You might look at it another way - simply put, that it is not so important how much time has elapsed, but whether the order of events has maintained its integrity.
-
What about the idea of turn limit until the SU can attack the Axis? Are you telling me if the Soviet Union would have never attacked the Axis first? I find that unlikely considering the track record of SU. I think if they thought they had a clear advantage to defeat Germany at some point they would.
-
Back in an hour or so…
-
Mid 1944.The war in Europe has been drastically expanded. The Italian Navy was sent up into the cover of the frigid North Atlantic, a scout plane going to and from the Soviet Union and the UK spoted the massive fleet. It was recorded that they had enough transports and men to invade almost any spot on the map. Stalin, feeling desperate to get into the fight, receded his northern flank. Although so tempting, Bendito sailed into the Davis Strait, invading New Foundland, and pushing in all the way to Ontario and beond. The Canadians fell with little resictance. Truman reacted as fast as he could, pushing his industries and reqruitments to the max. Massive asaults have begun on both sides, but neither of them have weekened. With the arival of German infintry and fighters with more to come, it looks like it will not end any time soon. As for the British, there is still no sign of the Royal Navy, however the RAF has started to send Spitfires to DC to aid the US. The mighty country of the United Kingdom has been bombed, sunk, shot down, and demoralized in it’s own blood, how much longer they can last in check is unsure. The German Kriegsmarine has dominated the Oceon with it’s infamous U-Boats.
As for the main land Europe, it is all peacefull and quiet, more and more Faciest supplies are being sent to the Middle East and the Soviet borders. Stalin is getting more and more sucpisous of there actions, and has built up a masive line of defensive fortifacations in the Baltics, Western Ukraine, and the mountains of Iran. Although for some strange reason, there is little troops defending the citys Stalingrad and Mosscow, yet the communists seem confident…
-
Stalin was already studying such a plan as a preemptive attack on the Reich prepared by Zhukov committed to Late July 41. I don’t think he would have pulled that and it was only a possibility to consider. I don’t think however that the Soviets would wait too long and in no event wait longer than early 1942 to launch their own attack. The final straw was the Ribbentrop and Molotov meeting of Dec 1940 where they discussed joint measures for the middle east and Molotov kept harping on Finland with Hitler and the Fuehrer had basically had enough of Soviet aims toward Scandinavia and Romania when they could agree on what to do about the middle east, so Hitler cast the die and Barbarossa was drawn up.
-
I agree IL. In the 1939 scenerio there should be a time limit for Germany. Like the SU can attack in 1942 or 1943.
-
The problem with elastic time is when you get into turn limits, like when the SU can declare war and such, and if you ahve weather effects for winter.
In the supply-token game im playing, the USSR gets a small amount of production before they start the war, which increases a little bit at the start of 41, and in 42 they can roll a die at the start of their turn and on a 1-2 they can declare war on Germany. Same witht he US, except their production only starts in 42 and they roll in 43.
-
Mid 1944.The war in Europe has been drastically expanded. The Italian Navy was sent up into the cover of the frigid North Atlantic, a scout plane going to and from the Soviet Union and the UK spoted the massive fleet. It was recorded that they had enough transports and men to invade almost any spot on the map. Stalin, feeling desperate to get into the fight, receded his northern flank. Although so tempting, Bendito sailed into the Davis Strait, invading New Foundland, and pushing in all the way to Ontario and beond. The Canadians fell with little resictance. Truman reacted as fast as he could, pushing his industries and reqruitments to the max. Massive asaults have begun on both sides, but neither of them have weekened. With the arival of German infintry and fighters with more to come, it looks like it will not end any time soon. As for the British, there is still no sign of the Royal Navy, however the RAF has started to send Spitfires to DC to aid the US. The mighty country of the United Kingdom has been bombed, sunk, shot down, and demoralized in it’s own blood, how much longer they can last in check is unsure. The German Kriegsmarine has dominated the Oceon with it’s infamous U-Boats.
As for the main land Europe, it is all peacefull and quiet, more and more Faciest supplies are being sent to the Middle East and the Soviet borders. Stalin is getting more and more sucpisous of there actions, and has built up a masive line of defensive fortifacations in the Baltics, Western Ukraine, and the mountains of Iran. Although for some strange reason, there is little troops defending the citys Stalingrad and Mosscow, yet the communists seem confident…
I decided to edit my initial reply to this. I have just one question. How many IPCs are you giving the US player?
-
The US has 34 IPC’s. Starts with 40 but the 6 IPC Convoy is captured.
-
The US has 34 IPC’s. Starts with 40 but the 6 IPC Convoy is captured.
Then the game is a farce, and is so stacked against the Allies as to be unplayable.
-
In the supply-token game im playing, the USSR gets a small amount of production before they start the war, which increases a little bit at the start of 41, and in 42 they can roll a die at the start of their turn and on a 1-2 they can declare war on Germany. Same witht he US, except their production only starts in 42 and they roll in 43.
Actually I would like a way for USSR to become a third side.
The dice rolling would be before declarations.
Intentions to declare war are not revealed until it happens. -
Thats a really good idea, but it would be much more profitable to fight germany instead of the allies. The only thing the USSR woud get would be parts of the mideast, as Germany would already dominate europe.
Once the USSR is active, they can invade any neutral though.
-
Before you go saying that my scenario is “a farce,” make sure you play the game a few times to get a feel for it. A lot of things may seem bad on the surface, but actually work out in practice. Please don’t judge a book by its cover, in other words.
That said, I am considering adding in a variable that somehow allows the SU to get involved in the war later on, although certainly cunning soviet troop maneuvers can get the SU into the war easily enough as it is (and so I’m not quite sure what you all are complaining about).
Just test the scenario for yourselves before you go off calling “a farce” and whatnot.
-
If one thinks a game is broken then discuss a game breaking strategy.
Play against the game maker if need be. -
For one thing, what is going on in tekkyy’s game is just plain bad allied gameplay, not bad rules insofar as I can see. for one thing, there is no reason that one should not find a russian bomber in any area that the germans intend on attacking.
I will be happy to play against anyone in order to justify the board’s rules as soon as I can get my hands on the A&A Europe board. It is currently at a friend’s house and needs to be recovered before I can play a game over forums.
Other than that, all I can say is that all is conjecture at this moment, because the potential problems you all have raised were not addressed in my initial round of playtesting, and niether have any of you conducted enough of your own playtesting (IMHO) to discover whether these percieved problems are in fact a reality. If you are truly interested in making this scenario better rather than just sniping at it for spite’s sake, please play about three games as each side AT LEAST before you make any initial judgement calls.
Even if I don’t get to play against one of you online, I assure you all your concerns have led me to request another round of playtesting with my friends, especially revolving around the idea of a permanently peaceful Soviet Union.
As a final note of historical conjecture on my part, I would argue that Stalin had no serious plans whatsoever to attack Germany. His officer corps decimated, his industry still growing, and his outdated equipment and training all left him in a severely inferior position relative to the German Wermacht at the start of the war. There are reports that Stalin was actually quite confident in the cease-fire agreement held by his country with Nazi Germany. In any event, I can see Stalin going to war only as soon as he felt that the Soviet Union was truly prepared. I would guess war no earlier than 1944, and even that would have required some very silly decisions to be made.
-
Disagree. Plans released by the Russian archives show that Hitler only just beat Stalin to the draw in June’42.
Moreover, the entire deployment of the USSR was to fight an attacking war. That’s why their forces were so badly outmanouvered in the early battles; they had no defence in depth so were constantly encircled and destroyed. Their aircraft wee deployed near front lines and therefore sitting ducks for the Luftwaffe. Any A&A player will tell you not to base fighters on the front line.
-
they had no defence in depth
They had no elasticity for defense. Stalin said " we cant just give up our cities" and basically made terrible decisions. After a few mistakes he quickly began to listen to his Generals and allowed them to make most of these decisions, while Hitler did the opposite as time went on which explains the Whermacht success at start and letter failure because of shifting objectives.
Suggested Topics
