What if I dont want to do it larrys way?

Well then as the topic states you don’t have to do it Larry’s way

@WILD:

quote from Larry
Hey Emperor_Taiki, East Africa – how will this be represented in AAE40?
Well I think so. I mean the French, the Italians and the British are all represented down there. I mean there’s Kenya, Tanganyika Territory, Rhodesia, Union of South Africa, South West Africa, British Somaliland, Anglo-Egyptian Sudan and an administered from London - Belgian Congo, and that’s just the British stuff… Hope this answers your question.

Sounds like Africa will be a cesspool, with a lot of fighting.

If they place units there.  Just because a power controls territories in Africa doesn’t mean that the setup will give them any units…  and let’s hope we don’t just end up with a bunch of opposing infantry all over the continent… yesh…

@idk_iam_swiss:

Italy really depends on north africa. There cant be to many forces there right? there never are in my other games.

in previous incarations, the Italians were represented by German units, so most of the stuff in Italy, Balkans, NAfrica & the Med would be Italian.  Even in the old AAE, if you change that stuff to Italian, you end up with a decent force.  maybe better than AA50…  :roll:

a simple role for each ‘french vichy’ territory to go axis or allied would be easy enough to house rule, could be helpful.

Yeah but we shouldn’t have to go house rules.

@WILD:

Like I said its going to take like 5 rounds or more to get to Moscow. By then the French & English will be power houses on your back door. They will also be able to kick the Italians out of Africa by then. The only problem the allies will have is should I take Rome 1st or Berlin.

I agree 100%

I do like the Idea of politics between the powers becoming an option now. THe EurAsian Tripact sounds like a possible reality now.  Maybe I will rename Washington New Berlin. :evil:

@WILD:

I would think it would also be 6 tt between Berlin and Moscow. So it could take up to 6 rounds to get there. Germany will most likely start with some forces already in between however (Poland etc). Italy should also be able to can opener a few countries allowing Germany to blitz with its tanks/mech inf. So it could be like the 4th round or so for a full assault on Moscow.

Hopefully the distance between between Berlin and Moscow will only be 4 tt. Stalingrad was much further away than Moscow and the game should refleect that. The germans got to Moscow in just a few months, they where not near the volga until mid 1942.

I also like this idea of additonal diplomatic and politcal options. It wasnt clear until Italy invaded France(June 20) that Italy would be on the same side as Germany and Germany and the Soveits had signed a a decaded long truce. Although many thought France and England would be allies, France surrendered and practicaly switched sides, while it was quite possible England too would have made a truce with Germany. Of course thats not going to be what happens in this addition since it will be a straight up fight between Axis&Allies, but their will be some politcal rules like their are in AAP40.

As an allied player, Italy is a scary thought.

I’m sure they will start off with a naval advantage in the Med. The will surly focus on attacking Aferica, because they will probley have 1 NO for domation of the Med (owning all the islands, Giburtla, and no allied surface ships), and 1 for the Suez or Cairo. Possible 10+the territory of northen aferica (5?) and then they will open up the Middle East Oil Fields (12!!) which will be undefended after the fall of aferica. Already up to over 25IPCs + mabey 10 for NOs.

Then they can do 1 of 2 things. Go for the windfall of IPCs in Southen Aferica (some restanace from SA intslef) or attack the underbelly of Russia (and another oil field, the Cacacus-6 IPCs).

Unless their is a big Brittish effort to stop, Italy will take down the allies.

I wonder if their will be a minor IC in Cairo (probley), and mabey even Tripoli, and defintally one in SA.

Beware of the Italian monster.

And about the thread topic, I don’t see what harm it could do Germany to capture Paris (its worth 4 IPCs, I think). Though I think I will be leaving Italy to Vichy. Normandy we can decide on the day.

And if Germnay go stright out for an attack on Russia, Russia should fall back and protect important things (NOs, ICs, and high income territories) and just buy infantry for about 3 rounds and hold Germany out, because if Germany does not have a quick win, England and France along with US planes will be right on their doorsteps. :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops:

RACE, this will be the biggest race in the history of the world.

If Germnay leaves France, they HAVE to get to and capture Moscow in 3 turns. They will need to go for TOTAL warfare. Everything into Russia. SBRing them to nothing, and using all of you aircarft to rapid blitz across Russia, with Italy helping in the south with their navy.

Once the capture Moscow, they pump units out of Germany to kick the UK out of Franance, while cpaturing the high income Cacauus oil fields, then the middle east, and kick the UK out of Aferica from behind them.

IF GERMANY LEAVES FRANCE, GET READY OF THE BIGGEST ******* RACE IN AXIS AND ALLIES HISTORY. 3 Turns and Russia MUST FALL.

This is SOOO EPIC

I think, now on second thoughs, a cupple of things.

A-Berlin will be in Eastern Germany (an extra territory for the UK to capture).
B-France is its own power, so Engalnd cannot produce from it (everythings will have to come from transports, execpt about 10 french IPCs)
C-Larry said something about their only been a cupple of infantry on the Russian frount. (Mabey G1 attack not possible).
D-We will not have to worry about the USA. Japan will do a J3 attack, meaning the USA carnt land in France by until US 4, and by then it is too late.

So our MOST EPIC RUSSIAN FROUNT has got about 2 turns less epic. :cry: :cry: :cry:

i think that if germany attack russia, the russian IPC goes from small token (let’s say 10 IPC) to double of germany, so you need to prepare and have allot of money (france, and possible UK) to invade USSR. with invasion of USSR US will probably jump in too

I wonder how long US will have to wait in Europe game.

@Brain:

I wonder how long US will have to wait in Europe game.

I would think the US political stuff would be similar. US 3rd round Dec Of War (leading to a large IPC bonus), then able to attack on US 4th turn. Germany/Italy will be able to attack the US at any time (same as Jap) to trigger the US war time economy. The only difference is that UK/France will be at war with Germany/Italy. There won’t be any if G/I attacks UK/F first then that brings US in, because they’re already at war at the start of the game.
I don’t think that an axis assault on Russia will bring about any US involvement.
I could see if Germany attempts a sea lion, then the US is automatically in the war however, or maybe only if its a successful sea lion (SBR not included). I would like to think the US would have come to its parents aid (we were already aiding and a bedding). I would think that it would be the 3rd round before Germany could attempt such a feat though, so the US would be declaring war any way. The only dif would be they could attack in the 3rd rd instead of just declaring war at the end of their turn.

@SgtBlitz:

Hmmm, historically, Germany had just signed a non-aggression treaty with the Soviet Union in Aug 1939, in which they partitioned Poland.  The West viewed this as a stab-in-the-back since Hitler’s Germany was supposed to be a bulwark of Western civilization against the Communists in Russia.  A lot of Western politicians (Neville Chamberlain, specifically) had also been willing to back Hitler through his aggressive tactics in acquiring the Rhineland, Austria and Czechoslovakia from 1936-1938 since he had been such a loud and fierce opponent of the Communists.   A lot of the decision to declare war by the Western Powers on Germany if it invaded Poland was based on the weariness of playing the back and forth both sides game between the East and West.  Plus obviously Hitler could not be trusted.

Though, Germany DID backstab the Reds in Jun 1941, only 2 years after signing the non-aggression pact, so invading in 1940 probably wouldn’t be that much different…  Wonder how Larry is going to put in the peace treaty between the Reds and Germany at game start?  Or if its possible to reswitch alliances between the East to West again and be at peace with France and UK at beginning?

With the Soviet militarization and industrialization (begun in the late '20s), and Germany’s militarization (begun in the early '30s), many felt conflict between the two sides was inevitable. But it was far from clear that the Western democracies would take the German side. Motivated by some combination of pro-communism and anti-Germanism, the French government signed a defensive alliance with the Soviet Union in 1935. The Czech government did the same thing that same year. Many felt that if or when war came, it would be Germany on one side and the Western democracies plus the Soviets on the other. The Germans would stand no chance in such a war, which is why many nations chose pro-communist/democratic foreign policies in the late '30s.

The fact that things didn’t turn out that way was not due to any lack of eagerness on the Western democracies’ part. The plan failed because of Joseph Stalin, who regarded both the Nazis and the Western democracies as enemies. Knowing that Germany would be roughly equally matched in a war against Britain and France, Stalin hoped for a long, grinding, devastating war between the two sides; similar to WWI. A war which did not involve the Soviet Union. After the Nazis and the Western democracies had been bled white fighting each other, the Red Army would move into the heart of Europe to fill the resulting power vacuum.

In 1939, France and Britain made two specific promises to Poland:
1. If Poland was invaded by Germany, the British and French would declare war on Germany. This promise did not apply to a Soviet invasion.
2. France would launch a full-scale invasion of Germany within 15 days of the start of the war.

While the first promise was kept, the second was ignored. Poland, having relied on false promises from the French government, was put in a terrible position. The Polish government had opted against reconciliation with Germany (which would have required the return of Polish-occupied German territory) or a reconciliation with the Soviet Union (which would have required a significant westward adjustment of the Polish-Soviet border). The Polish foreign policy would have represented a serious calculated risk even if its Western democratic allies had kept their promises. The fact that they didn’t turned Poland’s foreign policy into sheer suicide.

The next question is why the French government chose to mislead the Polish government both before and during the invasion of Poland. While there are many possible explanations for that, I feel the below is the most likely.
1. The French government had decided it was time to go to war against Germany. By the spring of 1940, Allied military strength in France–in terms of men and tanks–was equivalent or superior to its German counterpart. Plus Britain and France, combined, had significantly more military production capacity than the Germans.
2. To persuade the French and British people to go along with that war, some trigger was needed. A German invasion of Poland was one potential trigger.
3. The French wanted a defensive war, especially after their experience in WWI. French military doctrine of 1939 was based on fighting on defense, a fact reflected in the French military’s construction of the Maginot Line.

The deliberate sacrifice of Poland would have represented a way for the French government to get the defensive war against Germany it thought it wanted. While other possible explanations of the French foreign policy of 1939 could perhaps be devised, the idea that the French government was somehow trying to help Poland is not supported by the evidence.

Couldn’t you attack Russia with Germany and let Italy tackle the french?  Perhaps with a little hit from germany using there inf and planes on the border, sending all there mech/arms directly toward russia turn 1 for a turn 2 assault?

Sounds like a good idea to me  :-D

Italy only went to war when Mussolini saw that France was defeated, and wanted to get in on the act before the surrender.

In fact, Hitler was worried about Italy joining in earlier, as this would’ve diverted some of the French air force south when Hitler wanted to destroy it completely in the north.

Mussolini’s later decision to attack Greece rather than press towards Egypt was provoked by Hitler stationing troops in Romania without telling the Italians; this was fatal to the African campaign, and Hitler had wanted the Balkans “quiet” before Barbarossa.

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.

Until this it sold arms to Britain, and eventually sent some obsolete destroyers to Canada, most of which were never used.  More important were supplies of American armour to the north African campaign.

@Flashman:

America should only ever go to war if attacked….

Sadly, I think one of the safest bets to be made about AAE40 is that that won’t be in the rules.

American neutrality will no doubt vanish magically after three turns.

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.