Multi-National Question

@panther

Well for starters I’ve totally negated this rule so thanks for confirming with me that this was true

While I’m not the biggest fan of a rule like this, I can understand how it stops player like Germany and the Soviet Union from abusing the fact that they could just move their tanks forward into combat, than move them out of combat to keep them safe.

Hi Pherman. Like The Methuselah said, nothing is official.  That said, not many (no one) here would allow an Anzac Inf on Egypt. The accepted rule is that the territory needs to be owned by the nation placing the bid unit. Ultimately, is between the players to decide.

@IKE:

Another option in a 2v2 live game is to split the Allies up by theater, which we like to do.

Allies player 1: US (Atlantic), UK (London), Russia, France
Allies player 2: US (Pacific), UK (Calcutta), Anzac, China

Ofcourse this involves heavy coordination in strategy of spending US $.  It’s give and take.

We have done this in the past, and it is pretty cool. The 2 US players lobbying for income/units is kinda what happened historically (which theater gets a boost?). Does the Pac player allow the Siberians to march home? Dose India give up some air/fleet to Egypt? This gives the Euro and Pac allied players something to do throughout the game, and coordination is a must. Some of their powers are in the fight from the get go, some are dwindling, and others are ramping up.

On the Pac side, US controlling Anzac seems right because they need to work together once the US gets into the game. As China/India looses ground the US picks up steam so that player is involved throughout.

On the Euro side the UK gets a lot of action as do the French (turn one). The US/Russia comes into play slowly, and you don’t want someone to have only the US/Russia because of that.

In our group Russia is an inept power to play because it can be very boring unless there is a Sea lion. There is nothing good about playing the US/Russia, waiting for 3 rounds to go by, and the game is paused until the next day lol. Even when we split the allies up differently, Russia is a bit of a question. Sometimes we alternate Russia’s turn between both allied players.

cruisers suck.
they are too expensive. i think at 11ipc they would still be purchased infrequently. even at 10ipc they would probably be bought at a 1:1:1 ratio with destroyers and subs.

House rule:  Submarines fire at 2 on defense if there is no enemy destroyer present…?

In AAR and AARe it is perfectly likely that Russia will push into Eastern Europe and the Balkans before Germany falls.  Especially if they go on the offensive very early in the game.

In classic it is also perfectly likely that Russia could take Ukraine and Eastern Europe (or at least trade E. Europe) before Germany falls and Japan gets to Moscow.

In 1940, it is a bit harder, but I have seen some games where  Romania, Bulgaria, Greece, Yugoslavia fall, Hungary, W. Poland and S. Germany are traded with Russia.  In this one, I am not sure if this is “normal” or not, because the game is so new.

However, in each game I have played (Classic, Revised, Anniversary, 1940, etc) it seems plausible that Russia could press on Germany before Germany or Moscow fall.  It really depends on the strategy being used (Turtle in Russia to slow the Germans down, killing them by attrition and stretching their lines vs Attack like mad, ignore Japan, and push as hard on Berlin as possible before losing Moscow to Japan) whether or not Russia can, or does, invade and control significan portions of Europe.

I agree with the thinking here that we should stick to OOB rules for at least a little longer. I don’t mind a few official changes here and there. I always use the errata and FAQ’s that are released after a game comes out due to misprints in the manual or an obvious balance problem (AAP). However, these sweeping changes are too much too fast. Its almost like a few influencial people screamed too early and no one else was able to say, “lets slow down and take a more methodical approach to the changes.”
It seems like we are being caught up in a rushing river and can’t get out. Alpha is evidence that the squeaky wheel gets greased.

I will stick to OOB rules until something official comes out and then evaluate it. If there are a few reasonable changes I will use them, but if it is anything like these Alpha changes, I most likely won’t. I never used LHTR for the same reason.

Thanks Krieghund.

Planing amphibious operations vs. the US-Player at the moment.  :-D