Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: 'stuffing' the border

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> RE: 'stuffing' the border Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: 'stuffing' the border - 10/23/2009 7:21:48 PM   
lavisj

 

Posts: 89
Joined: 10/17/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cheesehead
Jerome, could you explain how that works, as far as helping GE break the pact in '41? Also, is IT DOWing Lithuania still an option? I thought that it was decided that IT cannot cross the GE/USSR border until GE and USSR are at war. Therefore, IT cannot put USSR units in enemy ZOC unless they are adjacent to Lithuanian border.
Thanks
John


John,

DoW Lithuania or Hungary serves the sole purpose. Now here is the reasoning.
Unless the chit differential is huge one way or another, the ability of Germany to break the stuff is played on 10 points or less. Therefore the reasoning is to remove around 5 points worth of garrisoning Russians.
To do this the only way is to ZOC them, or flip them. The Italians can accomplish both.
Now the limitations on the Italians is that once at war with the USSR they can not be within the common border area, and so can not be in german hexes within 3 hexes of the Russo-German border. Of course they could still use long range nav and bombers to fly over the baltic, but they loose the benefit of surprise and their targets are very limited.

So really, Italy needs a common border with the USSR.
Now IT is further limited that they can not cross the East Poland partition line, even if they own Poland, making an Italian conquest of POland useless.
That leaves only Lithuania, Hungary and Rumania as a possibility. Rumania is too usefull, therefore Lithuania or Hungary seems best.

Basically, have IT DoW Hugary (or Lithhuania), have germans kill the units and then have the Italians conquer it. Now Italians land units and planes can base in Hungary or Lithuania can:
1. Have a surprise Ground Strike on the Russians.
2. Advance land troops into East Poland and ZOC some russias.

This should be enough to allow Germany to break the pact during the subsequent impulse.

More than likely though, once your intention becomes clear, it is very likely that the Russian player will abandon the stuff (I know I would).

Hungary seems better than Lithuanis for the reason that it is harder for the Russians to be away from Hungary than Lithuanis.... and Russia could always preemptively DoW Italy and liberate Lithuania. While doing so in Hungary is much harder.

One should also consider that German troops can advance into Russia on the wake of Italian units (although they would not count as garrisons anymore).

I hope that clears it up.

Jerome

(in reply to Cheesehead)
Post #: 121
RE: 'stuffing' the border - 10/24/2009 12:40:01 AM   
paulderynck


Posts: 8201
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cheesehead

quote:

Agreed, if both sides did not house rule the stuff, then it is only fair for the USSR to use the stuffing option as a strategy.
Then you would have no issue with IT DoW Hungary in order to make sure that Germany can break the pact in 41.


Jerome, could you explain how that works, as far as helping GE break the pact in '41? Also, is IT DOWing Lithuania still an option? I thought that it was decided that IT cannot cross the GE/USSR border until GE and USSR are at war. Therefore, IT cannot put USSR units in enemy ZOC unless they are adjacent to Lithuanian border.

Thanks

John

Italian units can't cross the partition line in Poland, so Italy taking out Poland is useless. They can cross the Hungary-USSR and Lithuania-USSR borders if at war with Russia.

I suppose a question to ADG about where the partition line begins and ends might impact that view. AFAIK it has not been asked. Popular opinion is that it only applies to where Germany and Russia decided they would slice up Poland.

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to Cheesehead)
Post #: 122
RE: 'stuffing' the border - 10/24/2009 7:17:40 AM   
Skanvak

 

Posts: 577
Joined: 4/3/2005
Status: offline
Could have the old rules as an option? Or even a free diplomacy option :p

_____________________________


Best regards

Skanvak

(in reply to paulderynck)
Post #: 123
RE: 'stuffing' the border - 10/25/2009 3:51:44 PM   
ItBurns

 

Posts: 85
Joined: 1/3/2009
Status: offline
In context of MWiF my main question is:  will the AI stuff?

(in reply to Skanvak)
Post #: 124
RE: 'stuffing' the border - 10/25/2009 8:13:37 PM   
Extraneous

 

Posts: 1810
Joined: 6/14/2008
Status: offline

I am going to assume the German/Soviet partition line in Poland would be the border of Eastern Poland and Germany (but a question on the actual partition line would be a good idea).


If the German/Soviet partition line in Poland is the border of Eastern Poland and Germany:

Kaunas the capitol of Lithuania and most of the rest of Lithuania would be under the 3 hex/3 hexdot common border rule when the USSR occupies Eastern Poland.

Riga the capitol of Latvia on the other hand would be beyond the 3 hex/3 hexdot common border rule. Latvia can be quickly invaded and conquered at the end of the turn.


Impulse 1: Italy rails an infantry corps to a port on the Baltic Sea to a waiting German AMPH.

The Italian infantry corps has to be reorganized at the end of this impulse.

Impulse 2: Italy has DoWs LATVIA. The USSR has occupies Eastern Poland.

The German navy sails to land the Italian land unit to capture Riga.

Now Italy can DoW the USSR.

Even if the USSR occupies the other Baltic States the Italians are behind the German/USSR common border and the partition line.


_____________________________

University of Science Music and Culture (USMC) class of 71 and 72 ~ Extraneous (AKA Mziln)

(in reply to ItBurns)
Post #: 125
RE: 'stuffing' the border - 10/25/2009 8:19:40 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Skanvak

Could have the old rules as an option? Or even a free diplomacy option :p

There are 80 optional rules already. And I am having trouble coding all of those for the initial release. More options are unlikely (to say the least).

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Skanvak)
Post #: 126
RE: 'stuffing' the border - 10/25/2009 8:25:33 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ItBurns

In context of MWiF my main question is:  will the AI stuff?

Yes, but not as fervently as some (most?) USSR players.

The purpose of the neutrality pact chits is to make it difficult for Germany to break the pact. The AI Opponent will choose whether to augment those chits with a strong front line at the border, depending on a host of other considerations. If Germany neglects the border and makes it easy for the USSR to 'stuff' the border - well, then the AIO will do so. But there is a risk of having all those units right on the border, so the decision will be made on a risk/reward trade-off.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to ItBurns)
Post #: 127
RE: 'stuffing' the border - 10/25/2009 8:58:35 PM   
Skanvak

 

Posts: 577
Joined: 4/3/2005
Status: offline
quote:

There are 80 optional rules already. And I am having trouble coding all of those for the initial release. More options are unlikely (to say the least).


I understand your point of view. But when reading the developpement here (I played an older version it seems), I really wish to have more freedom on declaration of war for Germany. I don't see which is the rational that would prevent the 3rd Reich to attack the Soviet (but everything has been said I think, I just would like to add that according to Skorzeny, the German underestimated the strength of the red army which mean that they did not count all the red army counter to check if they can Dow or not ;) ).

In the tool box at least a free declaration of war should be avialable (I think that it should be easier to code a no restriction at all option than to code an alternative restriction, I might be wrong).

Anyway thaks for the answer.

< Message edited by Skanvak -- 10/25/2009 9:42:21 PM >


_____________________________


Best regards

Skanvak

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 128
RE: 'stuffing' the border - 10/25/2009 11:13:41 PM   
paulderynck


Posts: 8201
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous


I am going to assume the German/Soviet partition line in Poland would be the border of Eastern Poland and Germany (but a question on the actual partition line would be a good idea).


If the German/Soviet partition line in Poland is the border of Eastern Poland and Germany:

Kaunas the capitol of Lithuania and most of the rest of Lithuania would be under the 3 hex/3 hexdot common border rule when the USSR occupies Eastern Poland.

Riga the capitol of Latvia on the other hand would be beyond the 3 hex/3 hexdot common border rule. Latvia can be quickly invaded and conquered at the end of the turn.


Impulse 1: Italy rails an infantry corps to a port on the Baltic Sea to a waiting German AMPH.

The Italian infantry corps has to be reorganized at the end of this impulse.

Impulse 2: Italy has DoWs LATVIA. The USSR has occupies Eastern Poland.

The German navy sails to land the Italian land unit to capture Riga.

Now Italy can DoW the USSR.

Even if the USSR occupies the other Baltic States the Italians are behind the German/USSR common border and the partition line.


There are several problems with that.
First, Russia can claim the Baltic States after she claims East Poland but is allowed to do that even in the same impulse (per the FAQ Q19.5-2). A Russian who is stuffing will likely do that on Impulse 2 of SO39. Both E. Poland and the Baltic States do not require a DoW, but no other DoWs are allowed until Impulse 3, so Italy could be pre-empted from making a DoW at all.

Second, the Italian corps that rails would be flipped and would need to be re-organized somehow before going out to sea in the Baltic.

Third, a direct invasion of Riga would be an "iffey" attack. The best Italian corps at this time is a '5' and would be halved. Riga would be worth 1 for the notional plus one for the city, minus one for being surprised.

At any rate the Partition Line is only in Poland and unless clarified differently, the German border with Lithuania is separate. So the Itlalians can set up in East Prussia and march into Lithuania anytime as long as they are not at war with the USSR and the Baltic States are unclaimed.

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to Skanvak)
Post #: 129
RE: 'stuffing' the border - 10/26/2009 3:21:32 AM   
morgil


Posts: 114
Joined: 5/9/2008
From: Bergen, Norway
Status: offline
And, Italy is neutral, and don't cooperate with Germany, so their units can't stack. Also Italy is subject to Foreign troop commitment rule, so they would have to send in a HQ as well. But since Balbo is restricted to be set up in Europe, he could probably set up in East Prussia, and take care of Lithuania all by his lonesome.

But this can ofcourse only be done in Impulse 3 of the turn and USSR can bag the Baltics in Impulse 2.

And Germany and USSR does not have a common border until the fall of Poland, as western Poland is Polish until its conquered. Also make a note that the common border zone, does not go into neighbouring countries unless these are aligned or conquered.


< Message edited by morgil -- 10/26/2009 3:31:28 AM >


_____________________________

Gott weiss ich will kein Engel sein.

(in reply to paulderynck)
Post #: 130
RE: 'stuffing' the border - 10/26/2009 5:57:46 AM   
lavisj

 

Posts: 89
Joined: 10/17/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: morgil

And, Italy is neutral, and don't cooperate with Germany, so their units can't stack. Also Italy is subject to Foreign troop commitment rule, so they would have to send in a HQ as well. But since Balbo is restricted to be set up in Europe, he could probably set up in East Prussia, and take care of Lithuania all by his lonesome.

But this can ofcourse only be done in Impulse 3 of the turn and USSR can bag the Baltics in Impulse 2.

And Germany and USSR does not have a common border until the fall of Poland, as western Poland is Polish until its conquered. Also make a note that the common border zone, does not go into neighbouring countries unless these are aligned or conquered.



As long as IT is neutral its units can only enter italian hexes or hexes of minors it is at war with. So, in order for IT to be able to send units into Germany, it needs to be active. Before that, it is impossible.

(in reply to morgil)
Post #: 131
RE: 'stuffing' the border - 10/26/2009 8:07:28 PM   
Extraneous

 

Posts: 1810
Joined: 6/14/2008
Status: offline



quote:

ORIGINAL:  paulderynck


quote:

ORIGINAL:  Extraneous

I am going to assume the German/Soviet partition line in Poland would be the border of Eastern Poland and Germany (but a question on the actual partition line would be a good idea).


If the German/Soviet partition line in Poland is the border of Eastern Poland and Germany:

Kaunas the capitol of Lithuania and most of the rest of Lithuania would be under the 3 hex/3 hexdot common border rule when the USSR occupies Eastern Poland.

Riga the capitol of Latvia on the other hand would be beyond the 3 hex/3 hexdot common border rule. Latvia can be quickly invaded and conquered at the end of the turn.


Action Stage 1 ~ Impulse 1: Italy rails an infantry corps to a port on the Baltic Sea to a waiting German AMPH. Impulse 2: The USSR occupies Eastern Poland.

The Italian infantry corps has to be reorganized at the end of this impulse.

Action Stage 2 ~ Impulse 1: Italy has DoWs LATVIA

The German navy sails to land the Italian land unit to capture Riga.

Now Italy can DoW the USSR.

Even if the USSR occupies the other Baltic States the Italians are behind the German/USSR common border and the partition line.


There are several problems with that.
(1) First, Russia can claim the Baltic States after she claims East Poland but is allowed to do that even in the same impulse (per the FAQ Q19.5-2). A Russian who is stuffing will likely do that on Impulse 2 of SO39. Both E. (2) Poland and the Baltic States do not require a DoW, but no other DoWs are allowed until Impulse 3, so Italy could be pre-empted from making a DoW at all.

(3) Second, the Italian corps that rails would be flipped and would need to be re-organized somehow before going out to sea in the Baltic.

(4) Third, a direct invasion of Riga would be an "iffy" attack. The best Italian corps at this time is a '5' and would be halved. Riga would be worth 1 for the notional plus one for the city, minus one for being surprised.

(5) At any rate the Partition Line is only in Poland and unless clarified differently, the German border with Lithuania is separate. So the Italians can set up in East Prussia and march into Lithuania anytime as long as they are not at war with the USSR and the Baltic States are unclaimed.



I see I have made myself unclear I think of Impulses as pairs as in rule 8.Weather. I have corrected this in this post. There is no such thing as an Impulse 3.

(1) If the Axis side has the initiative on Action Stage 2 ~ Impulse 1 Italy can DoW before the USSR can claim Eastern Poland and/or the Baltic States.


(2) I have no problems with FAQ Q19.5-2.

If the USSR claims Eastern Poland and the Baltic States in the same Action Stage DoWing Lithuania becomes a moot point. The 3 hex/3 hexdot common border rule will move any Italians back where they cannot enter Lithuania by a land move.

If the USSR only claims Eastern Poland and the Italians are in East Prussia the 3 hex/3 hexdot common border rule will move any Italians back where they cannot enter Lithuania by a land move.

Or if Axis units are in Eastern Poland and behind the 3 hex/3 hexdot common border “Move any Axis units there to the nearest Axis controlled hex they can stack in”. The USSR has conquered Eastern Poland and controls all the hexes there.


(3) As noted in my post: The Italian infantry corps has to be reorganized at the end of this impulse. There are several ways of doing this.


(4) I didn’t say this was a good plan but it is better than Italy DoWing Lithuania for no good reason.

Chances for success (2.5 to 1 rounded up 3 to 1):

Not using the “2 DIE 10 LAND COMBAT RESULTS TABLE” ~ 30%

Using the “2 DIE 10 LAND COMBAT RESULTS TABLE” ~ None


(5) As noted in my post: Kaunas the capitol of Lithuania and most of the rest of Lithuania would be under the 3 hex/3 hexdot common border rule just by the USSR claiming Eastern Poland.

 
 
13.3.3 US ENTRY ACTIONS
 
13. Germany or Italy or both declare war on USSR (Ge/It) 80% chance of a chit
 
21. Allies support attacked minor (Ge/It) 70% chance of a chit

26. USSR controls East Poland (Ge/It) 70% chance to remove a chit

27. USSR controls Nazi-Soviet Pact areas (Ge/It) 40% chance to remove a chit

_____________________________

University of Science Music and Culture (USMC) class of 71 and 72 ~ Extraneous (AKA Mziln)

(in reply to lavisj)
Post #: 132
RE: 'stuffing' the border - 10/26/2009 8:47:59 PM   
micheljq


Posts: 791
Joined: 3/31/2008
From: Quebec
Status: offline
(1) If the Axis side has the initiative on Action Stage 2 ~ Impulse 1 Italy can DoW before the USSR can claim Eastern Poland and/or the Baltic States.

No on impulse 1 Germany makes a mandatory DOW on Poland and no other DOW are permitted on first impulse of SO39 from any Axis power.



_____________________________

Michel Desjardins,
"Patriotism is a virtue of the vicious" - Oscar Wilde
"History is a set of lies agreed upon" - Napoleon Bonaparte after the battle of Waterloo, june 18th, 1815

(in reply to Extraneous)
Post #: 133
RE: 'stuffing' the border - 10/26/2009 9:27:37 PM   
composer99


Posts: 2923
Joined: 6/6/2005
From: Ottawa, Canada
Status: offline
The partition line in Poland is the one shown on the map.

The relevant rule (19.5.1) on the partition line is:
quote:

Axis units may not cross the partition line after the USSR exercises its rights unless Germany and the USSR are at war.


As this concept is not expanded in the FAQ/rules clarifications I would expect that the prohibition to crossing the partition line applies only to the Polish partition line and not to any other part of the USSR border with other political entities.

Further, the prohibition regarding units in the Ge/USSR common border area applies only to units at war with either power.

Relevant quote:
quote:

After you enter into a neutrality pact with a major power, units controlled by other major powers on your side cannot enter hexes that are part of your common border with that major power if they are at war with that other major power. If they are in the common border already, move them immediately to the nearest friendly hex not in the common border in which they can legally stack.
(Emphasis mine.)

So:
- Italian units may freely base in East Prussia to attack Lithuania so long as Italy is not at war with the USSR.
- Italian units based in Lithuania or Hungary may enter the USSR or attack Soviet units so long as they do not attempt to cross the Polish partition line (that is, moving from a hex in Poland to E. Poland) if Italy is at war with USSR separately from Germany.

I hope this clears things up? Clear as mud, perhaps?

_____________________________

~ Composer99

(in reply to micheljq)
Post #: 134
RE: 'stuffing' the border - 10/27/2009 4:24:16 AM   
paulderynck


Posts: 8201
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous




quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck

There are several problems with that.
(1) First, Russia can claim the Baltic States after she claims East Poland but is allowed to do that even in the same impulse (per the FAQ Q19.5-2). A Russian who is stuffing will likely do that on Impulse 2 of SO39. Both E. (2) Poland and the Baltic States do not require a DoW, but no other DoWs are allowed until Impulse 3, so Italy could be pre-empted from making a DoW at all.

(3) Second, the Italian corps that rails would be flipped and would need to be re-organized somehow before going out to sea in the Baltic.

(4) Third, a direct invasion of Riga would be an "iffy" attack. The best Italian corps at this time is a '5' and would be halved. Riga would be worth 1 for the notional plus one for the city, minus one for being surprised.

(5) At any rate the Partition Line is only in Poland and unless clarified differently, the German border with Lithuania is separate. So the Italians can set up in East Prussia and march into Lithuania anytime as long as they are not at war with the USSR and the Baltic States are unclaimed.


I see I have made myself unclear I think of Impulses as pairs as in rule 8.Weather. I have corrected this in this post. There is no such thing as an Impulse 3.

(1) If the Axis side has the initiative on Action Stage 2 ~ Impulse 1 Italy can DoW before the USSR can claim Eastern Poland and/or the Baltic States.

Italy cannot DoW before Impulse 3 (the 2nd Axis impulse).

quote:


(2) I have no problems with FAQ Q19.5-2.

If the USSR claims Eastern Poland and the Baltic States in the same Action Stage DoWing Lithuania becomes a moot point. The 3 hex/3 hexdot common border rule will move any Italians back where they cannot enter Lithuania by a land move.

No. Italy is only subject to that if they DoW USSR.

quote:


If the USSR only claims Eastern Poland and the Italians are in East Prussia the 3 hex/3 hexdot common border rule will move any Italians back where they cannot enter Lithuania by a land move.

No. Italy is only subject to that if they DoW USSR.

quote:



Or if Axis units are in Eastern Poland and behind the 3 hex/3 hexdot common border “Move any Axis units there to the nearest Axis controlled hex they can stack in”. The USSR has conquered Eastern Poland and controls all the hexes there.

No. Italy is only subject to that if they DoW USSR. Furthermore, that citation only applies to Axis units on the wrong side of the common border in Poland when it gets established.


quote:



(3) As noted in my post: The Italian infantry corps has to be reorganized at the end of this impulse. There are several ways of doing this.

Right – I missed that. Don't forget though, that Italy can’t even rail there until it is active.

quote:


(4) I didn’t say this was a good plan but it is better than Italy DoWing Lithuania for no good reason.

Chances for success (2.5 to 1 rounded up 3 to 1):

Not using the “2 DIE 10 LAND COMBAT RESULTS TABLE” ~ 30%

Using the “2 DIE 10 LAND COMBAT RESULTS TABLE” ~ None

As I and several others have posted, Lithuania is a better choice with a walk-in 100% chance, providing the Baltic States are unclaimed.

quote:


(5) As noted in my post: Kaunas the capitol of Lithuania and most of the rest of Lithuania would be under the 3 hex/3 hexdot common border rule just by the USSR claiming Eastern Poland.


No. Italy is only subject to that if they DoW USSR.

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to Extraneous)
Post #: 135
RE: 'stuffing' the border - 10/27/2009 5:59:54 AM   
lavisj

 

Posts: 89
Joined: 10/17/2006
Status: offline
And furthermore on the common border. The 3 hex/3 hex dot restriction only applies to German controlled hexes. It would not apply to am italian controlled Lithuania.
So there is nothing really stopping IT from entering Lithuania, baring the USSR declaring war on Italy before IT enters Lithuania.

quote:


Your common border with another major power consists of every hex you (or your aligned minor countries) control within 3 hexes and/or hexdots of a hex controlled by the other major power (or its aligned minor countries). Hexes on the American, Asian or Pacific maps, and off-map hexes, still count as only 1 hex for this purpose.

(in reply to paulderynck)
Post #: 136
RE: 'stuffing' the border - 10/27/2009 3:02:38 PM   
morgil


Posts: 114
Joined: 5/9/2008
From: Bergen, Norway
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck


quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous


(3) As noted in my post: The Italian infantry corps has to be reorganized at the end of this impulse. There are several ways of doing this.

Right – I missed that. Don't forget though, that Italy can’t even rail there until it is active.


I believe that as long as a neutral Italy conforms with FTC (Foreign Troop Commitment), they are free to move around in German possessions as they see fit, provided they don't stack with German units.
And also, can not Balbo set up in German possessions ?

Maybe I have missed a rule or two somewhere ?

< Message edited by morgil -- 10/27/2009 3:04:09 PM >


_____________________________

Gott weiss ich will kein Engel sein.

(in reply to paulderynck)
Post #: 137
RE: 'stuffing' the border - 10/27/2009 3:26:57 PM   
composer99


Posts: 2923
Joined: 6/6/2005
From: Ottawa, Canada
Status: offline
Morgil, I'm afraid you did miss a rule:

The rule for neutral major powers (somewhere in section 9 of RAW):
quote:

Units controlled by a neutral major power can only enter hexes controlled by that major power, by a minor country aligned with it, or by a minor country it is at war with. They can also go to sea.


A netural Italy can't move units into any German hexes, period. Once it is active, it cooperates so of course no FTC or other limits apply.

_____________________________

~ Composer99

(in reply to morgil)
Post #: 138
RE: 'stuffing' the border - 10/27/2009 3:29:50 PM   
Orm


Posts: 22154
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: morgil

I believe that as long as a neutral Italy conforms with FTC (Foreign Troop Commitment), they are free to move around in German possessions as they see fit, provided they don't stack with German units.
And also, can not Balbo set up in German possessions ?

Maybe I have missed a rule or two somewhere ?


You might have missed this rule.

Cut from RaW-7-aug-04:
9.1 Neutral major powers
....
Units controlled by a neutral major power can only enter hexes controlled by that major power, by a minor country aligned with it, or by a minor country it is at war with. They can also go to sea.

Edit: Late and reduntant responce by me as usual.

< Message edited by Orm -- 10/27/2009 3:33:12 PM >


_____________________________

Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb -- they're often students, for heaven's sake. - Terry Pratchett

(in reply to morgil)
Post #: 139
RE: 'stuffing' the border - 11/5/2009 4:23:53 PM   
darune

 

Posts: 15
Joined: 5/25/2009
From: Denmark
Status: offline
In reply to the OP:

Thanks for a thorough analysis on the 'stuff' strat.

Having not seen it in play where it mattered, i have some comments nevertheless.

I would be a bit worried to base it on USSR play since the analysis of the german build plan takes some liberal assumptions i think, namely not boosting the economy and the possible (important in this respect) additions of aligned minors (probably hun,rum,bul). The third assumption about the lowland+france ressources can be obtained faster is ok i think.

Also it is, by my experience, not unlikely that germany can suffer ZERO or very few looses (in regard to garrison) up till 41 (the other scenario is of course also possible however).

Last it is a viable option to mass almost everything to the pact area up till breaking the pact if needed. Apart from italy there are not many areas on the mainland where an allied invasion, while annoying, cannot be "blitzed back into the sea" later or where it matters to a lesser degree (thinking yogoslavia here).

The german player can watch his chits well, and eyeball how much garrison he can afford elsewhere up to the last minute of 41 barbarossa, while the USSR can only estimate what the german player has.

I don't have to go into detail of how badly the USSR can be beaten up if the 'stuff' fails.

< Message edited by darune -- 11/5/2009 4:24:51 PM >

(in reply to Orm)
Post #: 140
RE: 'stuffing' the border - 11/5/2009 5:29:06 PM   
Zorachus99


Posts: 1066
Joined: 9/15/2000
From: Palo Alto, CA
Status: offline
Zero losses for Germany is a rare event. I've seen it happen (close to it) but possible.

Be happy you don't see it as a problem. I've recently quit playing WIF due to the fact that Barb is relatively impossible without super gamey maneuvers. I seem to lack opponents who agree with me.

I conquered France, Yugo, Poland all early, with some moderate losses; mostly unpreventable due to luck.

I found out that every unit on the map was not enough to break the pact. The chit draws were very average for both sides. No ships were built, only air and land units.

Unless you are very lucky with chits, Germany must always go sealion or med strategy. A game that prevents the historical option on average is broken. IMO Barb is broken.

All the talk about Russia being trapped on the border is relatively moot. By declaring war on Japan and building smartly, there is nearly nothing except incredible pact chit luck that will allow a 41 Barb, even historically in Jul/Aug 41.

In this game, Russia *decides* if there will be a 41 Barb and when. It's a very rare game where Russia prefers a 41' barb.

It's ridiculous to be forced into Med or Sealion which are both *not* historical. Some people seem to be happy with the stuff. I say let them play with each other and argue who has to play the axis...

Bluffing isn't a viable strategy if you know you cannot do barb. What you build gives away your strategy.

I haven't quit a WIF game over the rules before, but this one has made me do it pretty much permanantly. The garrison rules were meant to prevent early attack on Russia in '41' , not to prevent '41 barb.

IMO game is broken. I find it distasteful to have to argue over this 'stuff' issue on every game, regarless of what strategy I choose. Game is pretty much ruined for me.

Cheers

_____________________________

Most men can survive adversity, the true test of a man's character is power. -Abraham Lincoln

(in reply to darune)
Post #: 141
RE: 'stuffing' the border - 11/5/2009 6:44:45 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99

Zero losses for Germany is a rare event. I've seen it happen (close to it) but possible.

Be happy you don't see it as a problem. I've recently quit playing WIF due to the fact that Barb is relatively impossible without super gamey maneuvers. I seem to lack opponents who agree with me.

I conquered France, Yugo, Poland all early, with some moderate losses; mostly unpreventable due to luck.

I found out that every unit on the map was not enough to break the pact. The chit draws were very average for both sides. No ships were built, only air and land units.

Unless you are very lucky with chits, Germany must always go sealion or med strategy. A game that prevents the historical option on average is broken. IMO Barb is broken.

All the talk about Russia being trapped on the border is relatively moot. By declaring war on Japan and building smartly, there is nearly nothing except incredible pact chit luck that will allow a 41 Barb, even historically in Jul/Aug 41.

In this game, Russia *decides* if there will be a 41 Barb and when. It's a very rare game where Russia prefers a 41' barb.

It's ridiculous to be forced into Med or Sealion which are both *not* historical. Some people seem to be happy with the stuff. I say let them play with each other and argue who has to play the axis...

Bluffing isn't a viable strategy if you know you cannot do barb. What you build gives away your strategy.

I haven't quit a WIF game over the rules before, but this one has made me do it pretty much permanantly. The garrison rules were meant to prevent early attack on Russia in '41' , not to prevent '41 barb.

IMO game is broken. I find it distasteful to have to argue over this 'stuff' issue on every game, regarless of what strategy I choose. Game is pretty much ruined for me.

Cheers

In your opinion, does the US entry chit draws (a lot versus very few) have a noticable effect on the ability of the USSR to prevent Barbarossa in 1941?

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Zorachus99)
Post #: 142
RE: 'stuffing' the border - 11/5/2009 7:27:39 PM   
lavisj

 

Posts: 89
Joined: 10/17/2006
Status: offline
Intuitively, I do now see how the number of chits the US pulls influences the pact chits. For the pact chits, all that matter is the difference beween the German chits and USSR chits. They both pick from the same pool.... so how many chits are in the pull should not matter.

Jerome

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 143
RE: 'stuffing' the border - 11/5/2009 7:49:28 PM   
Zorachus99


Posts: 1066
Joined: 9/15/2000
From: Palo Alto, CA
Status: offline
Overall the way the chits are drawn with the limited pool in the boardgame do not greatly affect the prevention of Barb in '41. The number of chits is reduced in the board game, but the net effect is close to neutral. With unlimited chits, the distribution will likely be more even.

The way the rules are written, the 2 chits germany gets, vs 1 for Russia, offset for almost every intent and purpose in '41 due to garrison rules. On average the chits will offset, and the actual unit garrison is more relevant. Only with freaky luck will Germany be able to break the pact in 41, and that is with getting great chits, and USSR getting really lousy ones. The 'stuffability' of the border is more dependant on the units built, rather than chits pulled, because in the situation of a stuff, there will be far more unit garrison than chit totals.

Even with good chit luck for Germany, the border is very stuffable, because the calculation has no interest in the type of unit. Those 2-2 Miltia are as effective as a 9-4 Infantry.

Generally, a good build strategy will keep Russia close to a 1:1 ratio of units garrisoning, particularly with the pacific reserves and Mil. When the ratio is so close, not even every German unit on the map can break the stuff before '42.

Several ideas have been floated as 'fixes'.

1) Take no losses in France & Build only garrison efficient units for Germany (Mil, Garr, Mech, Inf, Arm), but not planes because they are extremely garrison inefficient.
2) Have Italy declare war on Hungary so they can DOW russia from Hungary. Very very gamey way to get Barb started.
3) Have Italy give all its resources to Germany.

None of these fixes are palatable to me. They all force very unhistoric activities, just to fix 'the stuff' problem. I haven't even gotten to force pool limitations which effectively prevent Germany from ever getting a 2:1 ratio of units on the border.

This issue has been analysed to death in wifdiscussion, with allied players favoring the rule, and axis players insisting on a house-rule or other agreement. Some people just want to play the game and dont care about the stuff.

On the other hand, I've only had a handful of games where I was ready to attack Russia with 80% of my army starting in May/Jun. The last one was prevented, thus the calculation of every unit on the map would be insufficient to break the pact came up. Allied player saw nothing convincing worth changing the rule, besides, he's winning the game because of it. When you are winning retarded rules somehow seem fair to a good chunk of people.

Many, many fixes have been proposed, but it seems that without agreement at the beginning of the game, there are going to be many rocky games in '41.

I'm not saying I don't like Sealion or Med, but being forced into them... that's another thing. I've been around since 4th edition, I've airlifted HQ's in mud, played on the 1d6 table, etc...

Theres nothing quite like being prevented from doing the largest most interesting battle of the war because the rules say so (even if you built for it from the beginning of the game). This is why I claim the rule is broken.

_____________________________

Most men can survive adversity, the true test of a man's character is power. -Abraham Lincoln

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 144
RE: 'stuffing' the border - 11/5/2009 8:28:48 PM   
hakon

 

Posts: 298
Joined: 4/15/2005
Status: offline
Steve

By US entry chits, I assume the ones pulled by Germany and Russia (since you are using an infinite pool).

IF Germany tries to break the garrison, the chits pulled by Germany, and even more so, Russia, is much more important than losses taken in France, Poland, etc.

The marginal cost of 1 garrison point for Germany is 4 build points. This means that the difference between Russia pulling a 0 or a 6 in J/F 41, is equal to a different amount of losses equal to 2*4*6 = 48 build points for Germany. (The 2 because the attacker needs 2:1). This is about twice the typical german losses prior to Barbarossa.

Before M/J 41, Russia pulls 10 chits and Germany pulls 20. The contribution of the chit difference, can be expressed as the following function:

Chit Difference = CD = Sum(german_chits) - 2*Sum(russian chits)
Note that the value of the russian chits are doubled to account for the attacker needing 2:1 to break the pact.

Assuming infinte pools (which is true for MWIF), and somewhat equal stdv of each chit pull (which is close enough) we get the following expression for the standard deviation:

STDV(CD) = SQRT(20*s^2 + 10*(2s)^2) = SQRT(60s^2) which is almost equal to 7.7*s, where s is the stdv of a single chit.

Given that s=1.3, the standard deviation of the chits difference is 7.7*1.3 = 10.1 , or approx 10, or up to a 80bp loss difference, which completely dwarfs the standard deviation of german losses in France.

Still, if Russia waits until S/O, after pulling chits, to decide to actually stuff the border or not, they can reduce this standard deviation to:
STDV(CD_SO41) = SQRT(20*s^2 + 3*(2s)^2) SQRT(32s^2) = 5.6*s = 7.3.

At this time, German losses in France, german builds etc will all largely be known, making it reasonably easy for Russia to estimate Germany's potential garrison in 1941.

Assuming that Russia has an advantage over Germany in all known variables at this point of about 7 points, this would give them roughly an 80% probability of holding the pact. If the advantage is 15 points, the probability is about 95%.

And Russia always have the opportunity to DOW Italy, if they should pull very poorly after S/O. (The Japan option was taken away) This way they gain 4-5 reserves, which when reorganized and put at the border, are worth 8 or 10 CD points. On top of this, they can build mil, which is easily worth another 10 or so points, for a total of up to 20.

So even if the advantage is zero, Russia can get almost a 100% chance to stuff by DOW-ing Italy, which means that taking that 80% risk is not as dangerous as it sounds, if you are willing to sacrifice those 4 US entry chits if you pull poorly.

And if Russia, after seeing their S/O40 chit, decides that they have too poor chits, they can simply fall back during the next 3 turns, which if properly executed means that they will most likely be able to reach a reasonable line it time. They can even start building non-pact-optimizing units at this time, such as anti-tank units and HQ's, and still have them out before Barbarossa starts.

Russia can (and should) keep several chits face down in early 1940, to put pressure on Germany's ability to hold the pact when they are fighting in France. They can choose to have either high or low chits face down. If they are worried about the pact, they could keep their high chits face up, but if they want to break the garrison themselves, or if they they have so high chits that they feel secure, they can show th e low chits only, and hide the high ones.

All-in-all, this gives Russia all the power to control the development of the game, and to decide which games come down to a stuffing contest and what do not. Germany on the other hand, really need to decide in 1939 or early 40 if he wants to do a MED strategy, sealion or eastern strategy, unless he wants to be at a severe disadvantage from the beginning.

So, basically, Zarachus is quite right in his analysis. When playing against players understanding the above, and that are willing to stuff, the only sane thing to do as Germany, is to go west.

I think that this may be a very real threat to the success of MWiF, since other player may react as Zarachus, and simply stop playing the game after being stuffed a couple of times. (I would react simmilarily to him, though luckily, I've usually been playing with players that agree to house rule that Germany can break the pact in 1941, regardless of garrison.)

While many WiF veterans may be used to this mechanic (the ones that could not stand it, have probably left the wif community already), I think many potential new players will react very negatively when encountering this kind of behaviour.

Indeed, this is somthing I've been saying for years.


Cheers
Hakon

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 145
RE: 'stuffing' the border - 11/5/2009 8:37:26 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99

Overall the way the chits are drawn with the limited pool in the boardgame do not greatly affect the prevention of Barb in '41. The number of chits is reduced in the board game, but the net effect is close to neutral. With unlimited chits, the distribution will likely be more even.

The way the rules are written, the 2 chits germany gets, vs 1 for Russia, offset for almost every intent and purpose in '41 due to garrison rules. On average the chits will offset, and the actual unit garrison is more relevant. Only with freaky luck will Germany be able to break the pact in 41, and that is with getting great chits, and USSR getting really lousy ones. The 'stuffability' of the border is more dependant on the units built, rather than chits pulled, because in the situation of a stuff, there will be far more unit garrison than chit totals.

Even with good chit luck for Germany, the border is very stuffable, because the calculation has no interest in the type of unit. Those 2-2 Miltia are as effective as a 9-4 Infantry.

Generally, a good build strategy will keep Russia close to a 1:1 ratio of units garrisoning, particularly with the pacific reserves and Mil. When the ratio is so close, not even every German unit on the map can break the stuff before '42.

Several ideas have been floated as 'fixes'.

1) Take no losses in France & Build only garrison efficient units for Germany (Mil, Garr, Mech, Inf, Arm), but not planes because they are extremely garrison inefficient.
2) Have Italy declare war on Hungary so they can DOW russia from Hungary. Very very gamey way to get Barb started.
3) Have Italy give all its resources to Germany.

None of these fixes are palatable to me. They all force very unhistoric activities, just to fix 'the stuff' problem. I haven't even gotten to force pool limitations which effectively prevent Germany from ever getting a 2:1 ratio of units on the border.

This issue has been analysed to death in wifdiscussion, with allied players favoring the rule, and axis players insisting on a house-rule or other agreement. Some people just want to play the game and dont care about the stuff.

On the other hand, I've only had a handful of games where I was ready to attack Russia with 80% of my army starting in May/Jun. The last one was prevented, thus the calculation of every unit on the map would be insufficient to break the pact came up. Allied player saw nothing convincing worth changing the rule, besides, he's winning the game because of it. When you are winning retarded rules somehow seem fair to a good chunk of people.

Many, many fixes have been proposed, but it seems that without agreement at the beginning of the game, there are going to be many rocky games in '41.

I'm not saying I don't like Sealion or Med, but being forced into them... that's another thing. I've been around since 4th edition, I've airlifted HQ's in mud, played on the 1d6 table, etc...

Theres nothing quite like being prevented from doing the largest most interesting battle of the war because the rules say so (even if you built for it from the beginning of the game). This is why I claim the rule is broken.

While I agree with the ADG design decision to enable the USSR to discourage an early Barbarossa, letting the USSR achieve absolute prevention regardless of actions taken by Germany seems incorrect to me (many others have made this point).
---
I am willing to entertain ideas for fixing this in MWIF. This will go against WIF FE RAW, so it would have to be (yet another) optional rule.
---
I would prefer the simplest solution possible, not some convoluted process that would be prone to loopholes.
---
Possible solutions:

1 - Change the chit draws so Germany gets 5 every two turns instead of 2 every turn. This could easily be done.

2 - Change the distribution from which Germany draws chits. This could easily be done and provides finer grain control than #1. Someone would have to determine the alternative distribution. If playing over the board, this could easily be implemented by making each of Germany's chits worth 1.2 (or some such) times its face value.

3 - Change the ratio for DOW from 2.0 to 1.8 (or something). This is really trivial to code. But someone would have to decide on the new ratio. As a variation on this, the ratio could change more often than annually, say every turn, every 2 turns, or every 3 turns. This way there would be less of a dramatic change on the anniversary of the Neutrality Pact.

4 - Set a maximum garrison value for the USSR, as a function of the turn. Germany would then know that if it can place a strong enough force on the border at such-and-such a turn, it would be able to declare war on the USSR, regardless of what the USSR does. For example, if the USSR has 50 garrisson points, then Germany needs 100. But if the maximum for the USSR is 45 for that turn, then Germany only needs 90. Note that this could be used with or without drawing chits. However, the USSR chits are used for other purposes, so drawing chits probably has to stay. This is another easy solution to implement. Someone would have to decide what the maxima should be.

5 - Instead of a binary Can/Can't DOW, make the DOW probabilistic, like the US DOW is. There could be a 'penalty' for failure, perhaps decreasing the future probability of a successful DOW. The probability of success would be a distribution that is a function of the garrison ratio. The higher the garrision ratio, the better the chance of success.
================
So, gentle reader, what do you think?



< Message edited by Shannon V. OKeets -- 11/5/2009 8:40:10 PM >


_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Zorachus99)
Post #: 146
RE: 'stuffing' the border - 11/5/2009 8:46:31 PM   
paulderynck


Posts: 8201
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99

Overall the way the chits are drawn with the limited pool in the boardgame do not greatly affect the prevention of Barb in '41. The number of chits is reduced in the board game, but the net effect is close to neutral. With unlimited chits, the distribution will likely be more even.

The way the rules are written, the 2 chits germany gets, vs 1 for Russia, offset for almost every intent and purpose in '41 due to garrison rules. On average the chits will offset, and the actual unit garrison is more relevant. Only with freaky luck will Germany be able to break the pact in 41, and that is with getting great chits, and USSR getting really lousy ones. The 'stuffability' of the border is more dependant on the units built, rather than chits pulled, because in the situation of a stuff, there will be far more unit garrison than chit totals.

Even with good chit luck for Germany, the border is very stuffable, because the calculation has no interest in the type of unit. Those 2-2 Miltia are as effective as a 9-4 Infantry.

Generally, a good build strategy will keep Russia close to a 1:1 ratio of units garrisoning, particularly with the pacific reserves and Mil. When the ratio is so close, not even every German unit on the map can break the stuff before '42.

Several ideas have been floated as 'fixes'.

1) Take no losses in France & Build only garrison efficient units for Germany (Mil, Garr, Mech, Inf, Arm), but not planes because they are extremely garrison inefficient.
2) Have Italy declare war on Hungary so they can DOW russia from Hungary. Very very gamey way to get Barb started.
3) Have Italy give all its resources to Germany.

None of these fixes are palatable to me. They all force very unhistoric activities, just to fix 'the stuff' problem. I haven't even gotten to force pool limitations which effectively prevent Germany from ever getting a 2:1 ratio of units on the border.

This issue has been analysed to death in wifdiscussion, with allied players favoring the rule, and axis players insisting on a house-rule or other agreement. Some people just want to play the game and dont care about the stuff.

On the other hand, I've only had a handful of games where I was ready to attack Russia with 80% of my army starting in May/Jun. The last one was prevented, thus the calculation of every unit on the map would be insufficient to break the pact came up. Allied player saw nothing convincing worth changing the rule, besides, he's winning the game because of it. When you are winning retarded rules somehow seem fair to a good chunk of people.

Many, many fixes have been proposed, but it seems that without agreement at the beginning of the game, there are going to be many rocky games in '41.

I'm not saying I don't like Sealion or Med, but being forced into them... that's another thing. I've been around since 4th edition, I've airlifted HQ's in mud, played on the 1d6 table, etc...

Theres nothing quite like being prevented from doing the largest most interesting battle of the war because the rules say so (even if you built for it from the beginning of the game). This is why I claim the rule is broken.

I agree completely, except I still like playing - either side. IMO the best fix is to get rid of the stuff and find ways to make Russia more viable in a 41 Barb. Because all the 41 Barbs I've seen have been Russian blow-outs. OTOH even if the stuff succeeds, a game with a 42 Barb can be exciting and fun to play for both sides and can be won by either side.

There was a thread on the Yahoo list that discussed ways to give Russia a better fighting chance in a 41 Barb. I know with the current rules Russia is likely gonzo in a 41 Barb, so as the Allies, I DoW Japan, build the Militia, and stuff unashamedly.

Is your disappointment with the state of the game that you can't steamroll the Russians and win with the Axis every time? Or is it that as Germany, you can't DoW Russia when you want? These are two different kettles of fish.

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to Zorachus99)
Post #: 147
RE: 'stuffing' the border - 11/5/2009 9:29:33 PM   
Zorachus99


Posts: 1066
Joined: 9/15/2000
From: Palo Alto, CA
Status: offline
I've only had two ideas that would allow for *historical* Barbarossa, and they both seem rather fair to me... But cause gnashing of teeth among other people.

1) Allow Germany to DOW Russia: By changing the garrison ratio in J/A 41, instead of J/F 42. This will allow 1 turn of gauranteed good weather, and prevents the early attack in M/J or earlier. Many histories point to Yugoslavia and Greece being what delayed the initial start of Barb, which is why it may be too arbitrary.

or:

2) If the Axis controls the following capitals: Paris, Brussels, Amsterdam, Belgrade, Copenhagen, Warsaw, Athens, and Bucharest; immediately reduce the garrison ratio to 1:1. This is a rather large concession, but follows historical logic.

Many other ideas out there though.

_____________________________

Most men can survive adversity, the true test of a man's character is power. -Abraham Lincoln

(in reply to paulderynck)
Post #: 148
RE: 'stuffing' the border - 11/5/2009 9:33:25 PM   
hakon

 

Posts: 298
Joined: 4/15/2005
Status: offline
Steve

The goal of encouraging the Russians to defend at the border, is an almost impossible balancing act, and will not lead to anything good. Most solution will either make it so easy for Germany to break the pact, that Russia will never try to do it, or make it so hard that its almost automatic.

As for your suggestions:
1) Aside from the aesthetics issues of this, giving Germany additional chits risks helping in making it too easy for Germany to stuff the border later on. A fix for this, would be to require the extra chits to be used offensively only.
2) Same issues as 1)
3) Setting the ration to 3:2 could be a good solution, imo. To the allies' advantage, it would increase the number of units needed by germany to hold the garrison vs Russia in 1940. It would also make it easier for Russia to DOW later on. (all good, imo, though some sea lion fans may disagree).
4) This would remove issues like Russia DOW'ing Italy, building MIL, etc, though. But, I think this solution would either let Germany DOW almost every time, or be so hard that they would rarely try.
5) This is a possible solution. I have a bit of trouble seeing the motivaton for such a rule, since Germany didn't really have anything like Congress to stop the DOW. Besides, the final decision to do Barbarossa was done in 1940, not many months ahead of the actual operation. If stopped, it should happen then.

One suggestion, could be to give Germany an extra chit per turn after the conquest or vichification of France, until Germany is at war with the USA. After that, Germany draws no more chits.

This would represent the added confidence enjoyed by the Germans after getting their revenge on the French, while drastically boosting Russian confidence vs Germany after the US joins, since that would make victory virtually certain for the allies.

Cheers
Hakon

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 149
RE: 'stuffing' the border - 11/5/2009 9:48:56 PM   
hakon

 

Posts: 298
Joined: 4/15/2005
Status: offline
quote:

1) Allow Germany to DOW Russia: By changing the garrison ratio in J/A 41, instead of J/F 42. This will allow 1 turn of gauranteed good weather, and prevents the early attack in M/J or earlier. Many histories point to Yugoslavia and Greece being what delayed the initial start of Barb, which is why it may be too arbitrary.

or:

2) If the Axis controls the following capitals: Paris, Brussels, Amsterdam, Belgrade, Copenhagen, Warsaw, Athens, and Bucharest; immediately reduce the garrison ratio to 1:1. This is a rather large concession, but follows historical logic.


Good ideas, Zorachus. I would propose to slightly alter them, though, as following:

1) Make this the general way to handle pact, ie have the ratio change every 6 turns instead of at the start of the year, but have it start at double value for defending garrison units, not at impossible to declare war. Assume that the M-R pact was made in J/A.

2) I would remove Brussels, Amsterdam, Belgrade, and Bucharest from the list, since these were mostly taken to reach the other ones, and don't really represent any achievements in themselves. Having Paris, Warzaw and Athens on the list should be enough.

This way, the axis could be tempted to take Greece from the sea/Albiania, which could, at least on occasion lead to the historical development of Axis slowdown in Greece, followed by the CW sending in 4 corps, and aligning Yugoslavia, followed by Germany marching through the balkans to secure Greece, possibly even sometimes delaying them a bit with regards to Barbarossa.

By doing this, the axis would have the opportunity to align all of the balkans. If they wanted to play safe, they could of course just DOW Yugoslavia instead.

Cheers
Hakon

(in reply to Zorachus99)
Post #: 150
Page:   <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> RE: 'stuffing' the border Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.267