Delta Deck: cards for playing G40 Delta house rules

@Young:

I’m on the hunt for a better “Blitzkrieg Tactics” image of a German truck pulling an artillery unit.

I found an alternate photo (not painting), but it’s only so-so.  On the other hand, I found a potentially better painting for Around the Clock Bombing.

@CWO:

@Young:

I’m on the hunt for a better “Blitzkrieg Tactics” image of a German truck pulling an artillery unit.

I found an alternate photo (not painting), but it’s only so-so.  On the other hand, I found a potentially better painting for Around the Clock Bombing.

I don’t know… I love the image, but I think a night time city-bombing picture like YG has is very good. B-24s bombing Romanian oil fields doesn’t say “around the clock bombing” to me.

@LHoffman:

I don’t know… I love the image, but I think a night time city-bombing picture like YG has is very good. B-24s bombing Romanian oil fields doesn’t say “around the clock bombing” to me.

I was looking at it from the perspective that the strategic bombing campaign against Germany only became an around-the-clock campaign when the original British nighttime bombing was supplemented by American daylight bombing – so a picture of an American daylight bombing raid, to me, depicts the required added element.  But perhaps a daylight raid over a German target would be more appropriate…and perhaps a picture that shows a US bomber in flames isn’t quite the right motivator for picking this advantage.

@Young:

I’m on the hunt for a better “Blitzkrieg Tactics” image of a German truck pulling an artillery unit.

What about re-titling the Advantage as:   “Mechanized Blitzkrieg”

To me that sounds a little more legitimate and descriptive. Particularly since Germany already can blitz with their tanks, so how about make it obviously specific to mechanized infantry or Artillery?

I like the image you have already, but here is one I found. It is a little crowded though.

@CWO:

and perhaps a picture that shows a US bomber in flames isn’t quite the right motivator for picking this advantage.

:lol:  Yeah, my philosophy is that it is best to avoid images showing you Advantage being blown up. A subtle psychological message of doom is not what we are looking for. Relates to my comment about the Trans-Siberian Railway card.

However, I do understand your perspective and I agree with it. I will say that most people will think of nighttime when they hear “around-the-clock”, which is why I suggested that one.

Found this one too. Looks like an actual photo, but it is hard to tell at this size. You might be able to put it through a filter to dirty it up a bit though.

@LHoffman:

@Young:

I’m on the hunt for a better “Blitzkrieg Tactics” image of a German truck pulling an artillery unit.

What about re-titling the Advantage as:   “Mechanized Blitzkrieg”

To me that sounds a little more legitimate and descriptive. Particularly since Germany already can blitz with their tanks, so how about make it obviously specific to mechanized infantry or Artillery?

I like the image you have already, but here is one I found. It is a little crowded though.

I’d argue that “Mechanized Blitzkrieg” is redundant because Blitzkrieg tactics inherently depend on the use of mechanized ground forces: tanks, mechanized/motorized infantry and vehicle-towed or self-propelled artillery.  Blitzkrieg tactics can’t be carried out with foot soldiers and horses because they lack the required speed and punch.  Great picture, however – it conveys better than a single vehicle the massing of forces which Blitzkrieg requires.

@LHoffman:

I will say that most people will think of nighttime when they hear “around-the-clock”, which is why I suggested that one.

This raises an interesting point.  Should the cards be designed on the assumption that A&A enthusiasts are a typical cross-section of the general population when it comes to their familiarity with WWII, or on the assumption that they probably know more about the war than the average person?

@CWO:

I’d argue that “Mechanized Blitzkrieg” is redundant because Blitzkrieg tactics inherently depend on the use of mechanized ground forces: tanks, mechanized/motorized infantry and vehicle-towed or self-propelled artillery.  Blitzkrieg tactics can’t be carried out with foot soldiers and horses because they lack the required speed and punch.  Great picture, however – it conveys better than a single vehicle the massing of forces which Blitzkrieg requires.

I certainly agree, however since we are playing Axis and Allies I was hoping the term “mechanized” would be viewed more as a noun than an adjective… since mobile infantry units in the game are called “mechanized infantry” and denoted by half-tracks. My intent was to form an association between game play terms and those used on the cards. Though, in reality, it is redundant.

Even an experienced player such as myself, (assuming I had never heard of Delta before) would be more comfortable in grasping the point of any Advantage if it related to and used words already in the game. If I read “Mechanized Blitzkrieg” I think, oh, okay like for Mechanized Infantry? If I read “Blitzkrieg Tactics” I think, Well that sounds kind of boring and I can already blitz anyway. Not that I or anyone else would not read the card and figure out what it pertains to, but a quick association through words and images is best whenever possible.

@CWO:

This raises an interesting point.  Should the cards be designed on the assumption that A&A enthusiasts are a typical cross-section of the general population when it comes to their familiarity with WWII, or on the assumption that they probably know more about the war than the average person?

Well, I think that to even be an Axis and Allies player (let alone enthusiast), one is by default more knowledgeable about WWII than the average person. However, that knowledge level varies considerably from person to person in my experience. My feeling is that the use of certain terms should be accurate, but also obvious and consistent; and weighted more towards a layman’s understanding for the purpose of clarity and mental association. (Which is why I suggested “Mechanized Blitzkrieg”)

For example, a boob off the street may not even know the difference between a battleship and an aircraft carrier, but I routinely play A&A with guys who, while somewhat knowledgeable (and very intelligent otherwise), don’t know the difference between a cruiser and a destroyer. Let alone know the names of certain ship classes or aircraft types. Plus, they routinely get rules confused or don’t remember them. In this way, having terms that relate back to specific ones used in the game would be helpful whenever possible.

@LHoffman:

I certainly agree, however since we are playing Axis and Allies I was hoping the term “mechanized” would be viewed more as a noun than an adjective… since mobile infantry units in the game are called “mechanized infantry” and denoted by half-tracks. My intent was to form an association between game play terms and those used on the cards. […]  For example, a boob off the street may not even know the difference between a battleship and an aircraft carrier, but I routinely play A&A with guys who, while somewhat knowledgeable (and very intelligent otherwise), don’t know the difference between a cruiser and a destroyer. Let alone know the names of certain ship classes or aircraft types.

If the aim is to highlight Germany’s mechanized infantry element, the term Panzergrenadiers might work.

I like the part about “a boob off the street may not even know the difference between a battleship and an aircraft carrier” because it reminds me of the Calvin and Hobbes cartoon in which Calvin hold up an alleged dinosaur fossil in class and says “To the untutored eye of the ignorant layman, this may look like a simple piece of driveway gravel….”  And it’s funny to think that Wittman’s little daughter seems to know more than the average adult about what unit types the A&A sculpts represent.  :-D

@CWO:

If the aim is to highlight Germany’s mechanized infantry element, the term Panzergrenadiers might work.

That would certainly be appropriate, and more accurate. I think it becomes an issue of font and space to print such long German words.

But, I am not sure which should be highlighted more, a) the ability for mechs to blitz without a tank, or b) the ability to transport an artillery piece? The way the wording is currently, it seems to be (a) however I personally think (b) is far more valuable. Especially since the use of mechs blitzing alone is relatively limited. Either because there is little opportunity or because you usually have tanks in your forces.

If (b) were the focus, the card should probably say something like “Mobile Artillery”. I do like the use of ‘blitzkrieg’ though. Much more German and much more intimidating.

@CWO:

I like the part about “a boob off the street may not even know the difference between a battleship and an aircraft carrier” because it reminds me of the Calvin and Hobbes cartoon in which Calvin hold up an alleged dinosaur fossil in class and says “To the untutored eye of the ignorant layman, this may look like a simple piece of driveway gravel….”  And it’s funny to think that Wittman’s little daughter seems to know more than the average adult about what unit types the A&A sculpts represent.   :-D

I love Calvin and Hobbes. Nice association there. And as I understand it Wittman’s daughter is pretty sharp.

@LHoffman:

That would certainly be appropriate, and more accurate. I think it becomes an issue of font and space to print such long German words.

Let’s be glad that the cards aren’t being designed for the 1914 game.  In WWI, the German word for tank was, if I remember correctly, Schutzengrabenvernichtungsautomobil.

@CWO:

Let’s be glad that the cards aren’t being designed for the 1914 game.� In WWI, the German word for tank was, if I remember correctly, Schutzengrabenvernichtungsautomobil.

So the abbreviation would be something like:   SzGrVA

That is do-able.   :lol:

@Young:

A little of both, but leaning more toward the general knowledge populus without completely pissing off the historians.

Haha… not possible I suppose. It is a delicate balance.

I do have a Bachelor of Arts in History, so I guess I qualify as one.

Signing off for the weekend! Don’t discuss too much without me.

@LHoffman:

So the abbreviation would be something like:  SzGrVA
That is do-able.

I quite like that abbreviation.  Well done.

I once amused myself by developing the crackpot theory that Germany lost WWI because “Schutzengrabenvernichtungsautomobil” was such an unwieldy term, and that its initial success in WWII can be attributed to its adoption of the much more practical two-syllable term “Panzer”, but that it still ultimately lost WWII because all three of its main antagonists – the US, the UK and the USSR – use the even shorter one-syllable word “tank” for such weapons.  I still need to work out, however, how Germany managed to beat France in 1940 because the French word for tank, “char”, has only one syllable, something which ought to have given France an advantage if my theory were valid.

@Young:

I shared CWO Marc’s wish for a better “around the clock bombing” image, so I searched today and eventualy found this one… PERFECT.

Woo-hoo, very nice find!  A Lancaster if I’m not mistaken – and one that’s flying in daylight, which is something I’ve not seen often because the RAF’s bombers typically flew at night.  Good choice.  And unlike my Liberator picture, it’s not in flames, so that makes the advantage a more attractive pick.  :-)