Wahhim
Posts: 17
Joined: 12/17/2018 From: Poland Status: offline
|
elxaime - I guess you've summarized our PBEM game at the moment :). But to be honest in another game I've become a victim of the same tactic. I believe that in a game against AI it's not a problem, but while playing against another player, I feel like elxaime's point is valid. I agree that if the Allied player is determined to not let Axis' units land in NA, he will be able to do so, and with additional units that GB gets in Egypt right after Italy's DOW, it's pretty impossible to defend NA. Even though you can send/operate air fleets which, without HQ it's not really worth it. I feel like there are some solutions: 1) If DAK is initially deployed in Europe, why should the British units appear only few hexes away from the frontline in Africa? I realize that, if they do appear in England it could make a possibility of Sea Lion much tougher or even making an "early D-Day" in France a real threat. Maybe if they appear near Cairo only when Axis player advances into Egypt's territory, perhaps 2 hexes away from El-Alamein, would it be better. That way an aggresive Allied player would need to send reinforcements on their own to actually lead a successful campaign, cause as it is right now, it seems to be way too easy. At the same time an Axis player who'd decide to advance would be facing consequences of doing so. 2) Give Axis player a choice between deploying units in Italy quicker (as it is right now) or deploying units in Africa 3-4 turns later for an extra cost (or not). 3) Rommel deploying in NA, while the rest of units deploy in Europe. These are only a few of the possibilites to improve African part of the WWII. As it is now an Axis only choice is to hope that Allied player will drop a ball. If you have to base your strategy not on your own better or worse plan and its execution, but on opponent's huge blunder, then I strongly believe that something needs to be changed.
< Message edited by Wahhim -- 12/31/2018 11:11:44 AM >
|