Thank you! I just wanted to let you know of my progress. I certainly tried to do all of that in earlier games, but for one reason or another, it didn’t work well enough to net an Axis win.
Bad News, Good News… How about ANY News!
-
When’s the FMG release date haha?
-
May …. :-o are you kiddin me ?
On Larry’s forum they said juni or july, after the summer holiday, but with all the problems from Pacific it maight be delayed. I guess nobody know, but it sure aint may.
-
May …. :-o are you kiddin me ?
On Larry’s forum they said juni or july, after the summer holiday, but with all the problems from Pacific it maight be delayed. I guess nobody know, but it sure aint may.
May.
Makes me wonder if somebody on that forum is mistaking the start date / D-Day in game time for the release date in real time.#455
-
my guess the only info that we will receive is from Greg Smorey’s annual Spring Gathering in April. Other than that, we may have to wait for DJansen’s review.
-
This is why FMG should make complete games.
-
Larrys site is down, but he gave up some info recently
Finland, Hungary will be axis neutral
Axis neutrals will give you their units if you step into their territory (if you are the axis obviously)Norway starts in german hands
Greece will be allied neutral, it will give its units to any allied power that enters it, and fight any axis power
The middle East will have six territories, 12 total IPCs are up for grabs in there
(I assume, Syria [FR], Palistine [UK], Trans-Jordan [UK], Iraq [Axis Neutral], Saudi Arabia [Neutral]. Oman [Neutral])Cairo is a victory city
-
Thank you! That is great news! And thank you Larry!
-
There were some other tidbits, but as long as his site is down i cant remember
-
Sweet. Free income, free troops?
-
Larrys site is down, but he gave up some info recently
Finland, Hungary will be axis neutral
Axis neutrals will give you their units if you step into their territory (if you are the axis obviously)Norway starts in german hands
Greece will be allied neutral, it will give its units to any allied power that enters it, and fight any axis power
The middle East will have six territories, 12 total IPCs are up for grabs in there
(I assume, Syria [FR], Palistine [UK], Trans-Jordan [UK], Iraq [Axis Neutral], Saudi Arabia [Neutral]. Oman [Neutral])Cairo is a victory city
Thanks Oztea! Not much activity over on HGD but there’s some choice info! :-D
#461
-
May …. :-o are you kiddin me ?
On Larry’s forum they said juni or july, after the summer holiday, but with all the problems from Pacific it maight be delayed. I guess nobody know, but it sure aint may.
Yeah, AA50 was delayed till November or something last year. Sucked, I had a Axis and Allies game day set up for the release. Wouldn’t surprise me none, what can we actually do about it? Boycott the game if it comes out late?
-
Larrys site is down, but he gave up some info recently
Finland, Hungary will be axis neutral
Axis neutrals will give you their units if you step into their territory (if you are the axis obviously)Norway starts in german hands
Greece will be allied neutral, it will give its units to any allied power that enters it, and fight any axis power
The middle East will have six territories, 12 total IPCs are up for grabs in there
(I assume, Syria [FR], Palistine [UK], Trans-Jordan [UK], Iraq [Axis Neutral], Saudi Arabia [Neutral]. Oman [Neutral])Cairo is a victory city
YES!!! Good news indeed, sir! Would be nice to see the Brits actually fight for Egypt for once, AND YOU’RE NOT STUCK INVADING CANADA FOR THE LAST VC!!! Italy may actually have a role to play now!
-
Cairo will probably be tough to take, if no german presence in the med.
But glad its a VC now.
-
Actually, personally I’ve never had a problem with the idea of Ottawa being a VC.
It’s an absolute pain to capture sure but… realistically what else would have made the US throw in the towel?
Cairo?Not to say Cairo shouldn’t be a VC but c’mon comparing the strategic impact… one you’re losing sleep about oil field IPCs and the Suez but the other… man you might as well start checking Amazon.com for discount English-German dictionaries!
#471
-
Actually, personally I’ve never had a problem with the idea of Ottawa being a VC.
It’s an absolute pain to capture sure but… realistically what else would have made the US throw in the towel?
Cairo?Not to say Cairo shouldn’t be a VC but c’mon comparing the strategic impact… one you’re losing sleep about oil field IPCs and the Suez but the other… man you might as well start checking Amazon.com for discount English-German dictionaries!
#471
Meh, gives more reasons for the Allies to put troops in the center of the board rather than exist on the fringes… The US still had awesome production advantages but if you’d have cut the Middle Eastern oil supplies to the Allies it should be reflected somehow in game. Canada? How in hell are the Axis realistically supposed to take and hold that for a turn? You got both Britain and the US right there. Canada should not be the final say on how a game ends… “With the seizure of Ottawa, the Allied powers have conceded to the military superiority of the Axis powers and have declared a ceasefire…” Right.
-
Actually, personally I’ve never had a problem with the idea of Ottawa being a VC.
It’s an absolute pain to capture sure but… realistically what else would have made the US throw in the towel?
Cairo?Not to say Cairo shouldn’t be a VC but c’mon comparing the strategic impact… one you’re losing sleep about oil field IPCs and the Suez but the other… man you might as well start checking Amazon.com for discount English-German dictionaries!
#471
Supply to your troops becomes alot harder when you got to go around the horn rather than the canal.
Cairo is imporant and the new vc reflects that.
And it’s unrealistic to expect Ottawa to be taken. Realistically the game was over long ago if Ottawa provided final victory.
-
Supply to your troops becomes alot harder when you got to go around the horn rather than the canal.
Cairo is imporant and the new vc reflects that.
And it’s unrealistic to expect Ottawa to be taken. Realistically the game was over long ago if Ottawa provided final victory.
Agreed with all your points and - like I said - Cairo should be a VC.
But the question is should Ottawa be a VC or just another territory.
I’d say the former.
Not saying the number of VCs should be so limited that you HAVE to take Ottawa.
Not saying taking it should be easy or frequent.
But IF (and yes, it is a huge IF but we’re only making the map once and for a diverse bunch of gamers) IF the Axis land troops there, gaining a foothold in North America, you can’t tell me it’s of trivial concern.
Something has to reflect that it’s in the heart of the USA’s hemisphere.#472
-
“With the seizure of Ottawa, the Allied powers have conceded to the military superiority of the Axis powers and have declared a ceasefire…” Right.
So, instead it should be:
“Axis powers have seized Ottawa today but no one seemed to care. Onto the important news, the fate of Warsaw has the broken the back of the war effort and the towel is being thrown in…”OK.
Honestly I don’t see making Ottawa an additional VC as either ahistorical or unbalancing game-wise.#473
-
all this news is weeks old and has been located in the Pacific/Europe factsheet in the Pacific page of the forum
-
Supply to your troops becomes alot harder when you got to go around the horn rather than the canal.
Cairo is imporant and the new vc reflects that.
And it’s unrealistic to expect Ottawa to be taken. Realistically the game was over long ago if Ottawa provided final victory.
Agreed with all your points and - like I said - Cairo should be a VC.
But the question is should Ottawa be a VC or just another territory.
I’d say the former.
Not saying the number of VCs should be so limited that you HAVE to take Ottawa.
Not saying taking it should be easy or frequent.
But IF (and yes, it is a huge IF but we’re only making the map once and for a diverse bunch of gamers) IF the Axis land troops there, gaining a foothold in North America, you can’t tell me it’s of trivial concern.
Something has to reflect that it’s in the heart of the USA’s hemisphere.#472
Well, theres a few ways to look at it.
First, lets exclude the “total war” game. One where your opponent wont conceed till the whole map is axis. In such games, taking Ottawa is a necessary pre-condition to holding Washington.
When you are playing for “x” number of VC’s, the axis have few options to win. If its not Ottawa, then it must be London, or some equally difficult place, like Los Angeles. Its why I was always in favor of a 9 VC revised game (the ninth being moved from LA to Hawaii).
If the axis got Lenningrad, India and Hawaii, they were “generally” on their way to a win, but games never took till death or were unrealistic in forcing the axis to get London or LA. It also made sure the USA at least played somewhat in the pacific.
But isnt the North American region already important? I mean, there are two US VC’s there, plus the point of Alaska as a staging area either offensively or defensively. That region already draws attention. Yet you could conquer an entire continent (Africa) and get no VC, despite the huge amount of resources this would have provided.
I agree that Canada/North America is important. But having three VC there and none in another area (where the oil is) doesnt seem to me to be good VC use.
Keep both as VC. Thats fine. But if you’re saying there has to be a choice, then I’m glad is Cairo.
Suggested Topics
