@Brain:
America should only ever go to war if attacked; FDR didn’t dare send American boys to fight overseas otherwise, even after getting re-elected in November.
Well then nobody would ever attack the US in the game.
If the UK player could draw on a “neutral” US economy… tan ships appearing in New England, that might be a stimulus to attack.
I don’t think they(WOTC) want to make the game that complicated.
@Brain:
I don’t think they(WOTC) want to make the game that complicated.
Probably not. Although, in general, I suspect the global game - being optional - will be more complicated than the average WOTC work.
@Brain:
I don’t think they(WOTC) want to make the game that complicated.
Probably not. Although, in general, I suspect the global game - being optional - will be more complicated than the average WOTC work.
Let us hope so.
America should only ever go to war if attacked; FDR didn’t dare send American boys to fight overseas otherwise, even after getting re-elected in November.
@Brain:
Well then nobody would ever attack the US in the game.
Both of you have good points. I’m tempted to address this issue in my rules set. The below text is an idea I’ve recently come up with, and which I haven’t yet posted to that rules set.
While the U.S. is neutral, it can do the following:
1. Collect and spend IPCs.
2. Load up to 24 IPCs onto its transports each turn. (A transport can hold 6 IPCs, so we’re talking four transports total.) These IPCs can be shipped and unloaded into friendly factories, and become the property of whichever nation owns the factories.
3. Build and move units. But it pays double the price for any units it builds.
4. It can move tanks, artillery, and planes onto the soil of other Allied players. At the end of each Ally’s turn, whatever American units happen to be on that player’s soil become the property of that player. (Does not apply to American units on Canadian soil.)
5. It can conduct research. However, the U.S. is limited to only one research center while neutral.
6. It can initiate attacks against German naval forces in the Atlantic, just as it did in 1940 while still technically neutral.
After the U.S. is attacked, the following happens:
1. All the IPCs and MPs it may have stored are returned to the bank. Immediately after the attacker has concluded his attacks, the U.S. performs a one-time collect income action to make up for this. (This is to prevent the U.S. player from stockpiling IPCs while waiting for unit prices to fall.)
2. The U.S. player can now only load 12 IPCs onto transports each turn.
3. American units on non-American Allied soil no longer become the property of other Allies.
4. The U.S. is allowed to build additional research centers.
5. The U.S. can attack Axis players without restrictions.
24 IPCs of lend-lease may seem like a lot. But bear in mind that the U.S.'s starting income is 71 IPCs, and will grow to 126 IPCs over the course of the game through industrializations.
Under this rules set, would it be worthwhile for the Axis to attack the U.S.? Possibly. The U.S. is required to have a lot of transports in various places to collect its full income; with each missing transport associated with a 3 IPC economic penalty. Taking a bite out of that transport fleet would create a temporary income penalty for the U.S. Then the U.S. would have to build replacement transports, plus the military ships with which to defend them. It would likely be four or more rounds before the U.S. had fully recovered from the initial Axis naval attacks. Plus, there’s something to be said for forcing the U.S. to attack separately from other Allies, rather than merging its units with those of the British, or, worse, the Soviets! Under these circumstances, I think that in some games, the optimal strategy would be to attack the U.S.; and in other games the Axis players would be better off leaving it alone.
This would require some serious play-testing.
America should only ever go to war if attacked; FDR didn’t dare send American boys to fight overseas otherwise, even after getting re-elected in November.
@Brain:
Well then nobody would ever attack the US in the game.
Both of you have good points. I’m tempted to address this issue in my rules set. The below text is an idea I’ve recently come up with, and which I haven’t yet posted to that rules set.
While the U.S. is neutral, it can do the following:
1. Collect and spend IPCs.
2. Load up to 24 IPCs onto its transports each turn. (A transport can hold 6 IPCs, so we’re talking four transports total.) These IPCs can be shipped and unloaded into friendly factories, and become the property of whichever nation owns the factories.
3. Build and move units. But it pays double the price for any units it builds.
4. It can move tanks, artillery, and planes onto the soil of other Allied players. At the end of each Ally’s turn, whatever American units happen to be on that player’s soil become the property of that player. (Does not apply to American units on Canadian soil.)
5. It can conduct research. However, the U.S. is limited to only one research center while neutral.
6. It can initiate attacks against German naval forces in the Atlantic, just as it did in 1940 while still technically neutral.After the U.S. is attacked, the following happens:
1. All the IPCs and MPs it may have stored are returned to the bank. Immediately after the attacker has concluded his attacks, the U.S. performs a one-time collect income action to make up for this. (This is to prevent the U.S. player from stockpiling IPCs while waiting for unit prices to fall.)
2. The U.S. player can now only load 12 IPCs onto transports each turn.
3. American units on non-American Allied soil no longer become the property of other Allies.
4. The U.S. is allowed to build additional research centers.
5. The U.S. can attack Axis players without restrictions.24 IPCs of lend-lease may seem like a lot. But bear in mind that the U.S.'s starting income is 71 IPCs, and will grow to 126 IPCs over the course of the game through industrializations.
Under this rules set, would it be worthwhile for the Axis to attack the U.S.? Possibly. The U.S. is required to have a lot of transports in various places to collect its full income; with each missing transport associated with a 3 IPC economic penalty. Taking a bite out of that transport fleet would create a temporary income penalty for the U.S. Then the U.S. would have to build replacement transports, plus the military ships with which to defend them. It would likely be four or more rounds before the U.S. had fully recovered from the initial Axis naval attacks. Plus, there’s something to be said for forcing the U.S. to attack separately from other Allies, rather than merging its units with those of the British, or, worse, the Soviets! Under these circumstances, I think that in some games, the optimal strategy would be to attack the U.S.; and in other games the Axis players would be better off leaving it alone.
Yeargh!!! Complicated!!!11!1 Axis and allies realism only goes so far; at some point one has to draw the line. Convoy zones are enough abstraction as is. This just sounds like way too many rules to add to the already convoluted 1940 rulebook.
The suggested ending US income of 126 IPCs proves a point about the lopsidedness of the Axis predicament, however. I just don’t see how its feasible for Axis victory when the Allies have such a huge base defended by several turns of SZs with insane purchasing capacity. With the Axis powers on opposite sides of the map, there’s no way either side can hold a 125 IPC juggernaut off for long. At least one front is going to have to cave; guess this will be Larry’s approximation of “balance”.
The Axis needs to shift the balance early in the game before the US gets involved.
@Brain:
The Axis needs to shift the balance early in the game before the US gets involved.
Agreed.
You have to analyse and recreate the reasons why Germany and Japan decided to go to war with the USA.
In the case of Japan, it was being squeezed economically by the West, and decided to take control of things. It needed the oil of the DEI with it’s large supply of ORANGE TRIANGLES, and considered that the USN was the only force capable of stopping it getting what it wanted. So: wipe out this force with a surprise attack, in the knowledge that Germany and Italy were committed to joining in the battle, and that Russia was powerless to intervene.
The navy had been nagging Hitler to let the U boats loose on American shipping for months, so declaring war freed them to get on with a war they knew would come eventually BEFORE the Americans were fully mobilised, and were in any case now engaged in the Pacific, which Hitler wrongly assumed the US would give priority to.
I think the key is to place enough convoy zones in the Atlantic representing US aid to Britain that Germany simply HAS to intervene to stop these supplying the UK with income/units.
Although the Tripartite Pact was not signed until August, assume that the general principle stands: if one of the 3 main Axis powers becomes at war with the USA, they all declare war automatically.
Incidentally, the USA should in no way supply aid to the USSR until it is at war with Germany!
I don’t like the idea of American units “converting” to Soviet pieces; otherwise the game will just become another race to pile the largest stack of units into Russia.
The Tripartite Pact between Japan, Germany, and Italy, 1940
The Governments of Japan, Germany, and Italy consider it the prerequisite of a lasting peace that every nation in the world shall receive the space to which it is entitled. They have, therefore, decided to stand by and cooperate with one another in their efforts in the regions of Europe and Greater East Asia respectively. In doing this it is their prime purpose to establish and maintain a new order of things, calculated to promote the mutual prosperity and welfare of the peoples concerned. It is, furthermore, the desire of the three Governments to extend cooperation to nations in other spheres of the world that are inclined to direct their efforts along lines similar to their own for the purpose of realizing their ultimate object, world peace. Accordingly, the Governments of Japan, Germany and Italy have agreed as follows:
ARTICLE 1. Japan recognizes and respects the leadership of Germany and Italy in the establishment of a new order in Europe.
ARTICLE 2. Germany and Italy recognize and respect the leadership of Japan in the establishment of a new order in Greater East Asia.
ARTICLE 3. Japan, Germany, and Italy agree to cooperate in their efforts on aforesaid lines. They further undertake to assist one another with all political, economic and military means if one of the Contracting Powers is attacked by a Power at present not involved in the European War or in the Japanese-Chinese conflict.
ARTICLE 4. With a view to implementing the present pact, joint technical commissions, to be appointed by the respective Governments of Japan, Germany and Italy, will meet without delay.
ARTICLE 5. Japan, Germany and Italy affirm that the above agreement affects in no way the political status existing at present between each of the three Contracting Powers and Soviet Russia.
ARTICLE 6. The present pact shall become valid immediately upon signature and shall remain in force ten years from the date on which it becomes effective. In due time, before the expiration of said term, the High Contracting Parties shall, at the request of any one of them, enter into negotiations for its renewal.
I agree because of the Tripartite Pact (Sep 27th 1940) that the axis would be all for one, and one for all w/US, if brought into the war. In my mind by time the Pacific side rolls around it would be entering the fall anyway. If we are working on aprox 6 month windows (per rd), any thing that happened in that time could be reflected in the game even in a slightly different order.
As you Flash, I think Hitler grossly under estimated the fact that we would commit more resources to the Euro side, then the Pacific. Its also worth noting that Japan thought that by destroying the bulk of the US fleet, that it could push the US out of the Pacific, maybe forcing an armistices of some kind. They also grossly under estimated our resolve (and the fact we could read their codes didn’t hurt). The comment about Japan knowing Stalin would not attack, in fear of a German reprisal is a good point, but at that time Stalin thought he was going to be part of the Tripartite pact. The fact that Japan also sought a NAP w/Russia shows how fearful they were, or they had a feeling Germany would turn on Russia at some point, or vise/versa.
I think its nearly comical that neither Germany or Japan got what they expected from the Tripartite Pact. Hitler wanted Japan to engage Russia from Manchuria (didn’t happen Japan signed NAP 6 months later). He also had a plan for a German/Japanese attack on India (bringing both power together), w/both taking tt along the way (both faltered on this plan). Much of India was was anti British, parts of its armed forces defected to the axis in N Africa. Axis control of the Indian ocean and the Suez would have cut off the Med from the east. Would have meant no aid to Russia through Persia. It would have also given Hitler a southern attack route on the Caucasus, as well as the oil that both nations desperately needed. Instead Japan chose to go after DEI and invite the US into the war, much earlier then Hitler would have wanted IMO, although as said before he thought the US focal point would be Japan. He did however fulfill his obligations and declare war on the US.
There was also a joint adventure planned later for the Vichy French Madagascar, to again gain control of the Indian ocean. The Japanese army actually sent an invasion force that it recalled because of infighting between its army/navy and a different use for those forces. The Germans I believe had sent subs to the area to aid in the takeover and was pressuring the VF government. Germany also sent a lot of tech, many of the Jap planes had German engineered engines and so on. IMO, Japan time after time fell a little short with its axis commitments, somewhat like Italy. There were talks and plans involving the original members of the Tripartite Pact, they just kept screwing each other. :-D
TL;DR…Just roll the dice have fun. maybe take england and ignore russia till turn 3
TL;DR…Just roll the dice have fun. maybe take england and ignore russia till turn 3
When you started this thread you wanted to attack Russia and not France. And now you want to attack England and not Russia?
well now that i think about it england is smaller…its only two territories. With the bottom half containing most of the military. Russia is HUGE in this game I mean its going to be at least 20 territories…Yes i thought hitting russia first would be smarter…but its six territores from berlin to moscow. Even if you win EVERY battle its going to take 3 turns minimum to get to russias capitol.
I believe we already have an Operation Sea Lion thread somewhere. Let me see if I can dig it up.
LOL, now you’re wanting to go attack England now instead of Russia (before or after finishing off France?). There was some other thread about dividing up England during Sealion since it will be two territories now:
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=16471.0
I still think Sealion is an utter waste of time most games, but if you can catch unexperienced Allied players off guard it can be successful (i.e., this only works ONCE on the beginning players, I’m sure an exp. UK player can see it coming a mile away). Perhaps if Russia is prevented from invading Germany till Round 3, (with a reduced income rule like the US as a neutral before entering the war) could this be possible, and it would still be incredibly risky so early in the game. You would probably only get one shot at it by building all trans and a carrier in the Baltic round 1, with the invasion on round 2 before England can really build enough land units to make it completely improbable (also before the US enters the war/has reinforcements in range). I’m guessing 3 loaded transports, with 4 planes and a bomber as air cover would be all Germany would be capable of Round 2, IF Britain hasn’t already damaged/sunk the Baltic fleet and/or blocked the Channel with a sizeable navy stack. Even if Britain went 100% ground defense instead (4-5 inf, 3 arm, 1 fig build on round 1), I’m sure the defending army will be at least equal in number to the invading units Germany has, with odds AND AA gun hits in its favor.
Bah, forget it, you will see the same dillema the OKW came to when Sealion became a possibility after the Fall of France, its just not worth risking all the war material when there are easier fish to fry in Europe. Better to isolate and destroy British holdings elsewhere to weaken it to a surrender-able level.
@i:
i agree normally in aar its impossible like one time germany had 15tanks and15 inf 10ftr and 10 bombers
but i had 4x as many inf tank and ftr then germany i won evan after 25 attacks still had all my tts!!!but in e40 i say turn 1 attacks posible. you will have a huge nave to start with and to show the brit retret they should have 4 inf on transports in the chanel 1 on england and scotland and thats it german will have a nouf to take that!!!
Heh, that’d be awesome, the Brits start will all their infantry loaded onto the starting transports… that’d be perfect in representing the evacuation at Dunkirk. Goering can have another shot at preventing their getaway round 1!
I keep coming back to the problem of land movement. If Germany commits to Sealion, how can it possibly guard against a Soviet attack?
It takes far too long for the infantry to yomp over to the Eastern front from Western Europe (8 turns?), when in reality it would take just one turn by train.
Only if the Soviets are “frozen” and unable to build or move anything until officially at war could they be held in check. Or are they simply not allowed to attack Germany until Hitler is good and ready for them?
Heh, that’d be awesome, the Brits start will all their infantry loaded onto the starting transports… that’d be perfect in representing the evacuation at Dunkirk. Goering can have another shot at preventing their getaway round 1!
It should be a duck shoot.
The boats should have some escort, so Germ has to choose between using the airpower on the transports or on crushing the hell out of France.
