Setup changes

I’m not sure why some of my posts get flagged as spam… anyways…

Don’t change the DD for a Cru in SZ106.  Instead move the Cru from SZ91 to SZ106.

Makes Germany decide to either cut the supply lines for the UK from Canada or take out the fleets in SZ110 and SZ111.

Oh, and if Germany goes after SZ’s 110 and 111 with the subs, it doesn’t change much as Germany can still protect its air power and take out the Allied fleets there by taking subs and the Cru/DD as casualties before losing any air power.

I think removing 1 Ftr 1 TacB from W. Germany is the fix instead of relocating the Allied fleets.

@knp7765:

For one thing, this actually opens up the possibility, however slight, of a G1 Sealion – which was prevented by the Allied ships in SZ 112.  Theoretically, Germany could load up that 1 transport they start with, send their BB, CA and as many subs that can reach SZ 110, plus some of the Luftwaffe to fight UK’s BB & CA and the French CA plus any fighters UK/France might scramble.

ALL other German planes along with the inf/art on the transport attack London., which starts out with 2 UK inf, 1 French inf, 2 UK fightrs, 1 French fighter and 4 AA Guns.  Against this would be 1 inf, 1 art, 4 fighters, 4 tacs and 2 strat bombers.  I’m not saying that it WOULD work, I’m just saying it’s a possibility now where before a G1 Sealion wasn’t even possible.  There should probably be Allied ships in SZ 112.

Also, changing the DD in SZ 106 to a CA might make it a little easier for Germany.  Subs can “surprise strike” cruisers where they can’t destroyers.

But this will have serious repercussions beign that UK can easily counter atack, russia and US in the war, and germany losing alot of planes in the rush battle.

FYI - Krieghund has already moved the German TRN to SZ114 so a G1 sealion is now out.

Didn’t see much of a difference for the G3 Sealion other than possibly being short the German BB and Cru due to a UK counter on UK1

That doesn’t change much for G3 sealion as the Trn and AC are still under cover of a scramble.

Only real thing I see is a bit more potential for the combined allied strikes post Sealion to have a better chance of taking out the Trn in SZ110.

It’s a fine line between sealion becoming more difficult, and impossible. I think a sea lion option promotes fun instead of always running for Moscow. My opinion is, leave everything as it is, and just put back the Alpha+2 UK units in the French territories, but it seems that stranger tides are looming.

At this point will they ever get it right or just new gobly guk the +2 is a good challenge

@Spendo02:

I’m not sure why some of my posts get flagged as spam… anyways…

I don’t know, I’ve had the same ANNOYING problem.  There is some way over active bot/filter in these forums.  Gives some BS message about how it will have to be cleared by a moderator, but never is.  However, I’ve discovered you can see the missing posts if you reply to something in the thread–they show up in the topic summary.

It would be nice if they are going to call someone a spammer if they explained why so that we could alter the posting style.  Calling someone a spammer is fighting words…just pisses us off for no reason.

My thought was to take the UK cruiser from SZ112 and put it in SZ110, move the transport from SZ109 to SZ91, and add 1 inf to Gibraltar or move the Algerian french unit over 1.

It forces the Germans to attack SZ110 on G1 or this happens.

The Brits move Egypt navy with inf and arm to SZ92, SZ110 goes to SZ104 to block.

It forces te Germans to attack SZ104 on G2 or this happens.

UK moves SZ91 and SZ92 to SZ109 (a German block on G2 in SZ104 would be taken out by RAF and everything NCMs) adding 3 inf and an armor to the UK on UK2.

If the Germans take their subs from SZ109 to attack the block in SZ104 on G2 that adds more ipcs for the UK to spend.

It also leaves the uK navy to worry about after the Germans take London. It makes it easier for te allies to kill the German fleet after the fall of London.

It still leaves German the option for sealion but reduces the odds slightly.
It doesn’t pose any real threat to Italy.
It gives the UK some more options of play

The UK could take brazil, Persia, and Iraq to gain more ipcs to put in London too.

All said above can be stopped by Germany but at the loss of a few planes which also lowers the % of taking London. So I don’t see it making London too strong too early

sea lion is just a little too overwhelming right now. I still believe adding a tank to UK is going to have to happen. Is london still going to fall? yeah, but that is a few more losses for germany.

Pushing a cruiser back to 109 and leaving the french cruiser as is, causes some problems, but nothing too drastic.

You guys should go with my version, because it is only 2 changes to achieve the same results. A few more losses taking london.

Now if you want to make germany taking london more of a 50/50 kind of deal we’re looking at adding 2 inf and an armor to UK on top of proposed changes. I feel that in the big picture. +12 uk is better for axis than -12 or even -10 germany because if Germany does not pursue london the +12 from UK takes a long time to mobilize and get off the island and german air has a double threat (sink naval or take back territories). So UK is going to have to no matter what invest in a cruiser to deal with the strong luffwaffe.

With that being said. listen. if you don’t give allies a bid- you should. If you don’t like the system and want something static.

do the proposed changes but add +2 inf and 1 tank to london. your sh*t will still get conquered, but you will waste a ton of germans in the process. Which honestly lets russia trade blows with germany and makes the game pretty close and even.

Hey Vance,

Your maps still contains a number of other errors (mostly carried over from the original A3 module which TMTM has since updated).

Errors:
Japanese starting IPC should be 26 not 30
missing airbase and naval base on SITA
missing mech on EGY
1 extra Soviet infantry on NOV, 1 Soviet infantry missing from ARCH
1 ANZAC fig on NSW instead of QUE
1 neutral infantry on Chile instead of 2
2 neutral infantry on Argentina instead of 4
1 neutral infantry on Angola instead of 2
1 neutral infantry on Mozambique instead of 2
1 neutral infantry on Peru instead of 0
6 pro-allied neutral infantry on YUGO instead of 5

Your maps still contains a number of other errors (mostly carried over from the original A3 module which TMTM has since updated).

SLAP IN THE FACE!!!

It’s OK ol boy, that’s what happens when you carry a plastic gun, it comes with a plastic brain…. Lol cheers.

should still play with an armor in UK. Like for real, UK didn’t have a tank in 1939? I call bullshit

“Come and face the strange Ch-Changes”

what is your take gargantua? you are one of the more experienced players on the forum.