RE: Manipulating US Entry

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: Manipulating US Entry

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: Manipulating US Entry

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Manipulating US Entry - 7/29/2011 4:52:07 PM

composer99

Posts: 2923
Joined: 6/6/2005
From: Ottawa, Canada
Status: offline

brian brian, what I have often found for the US is that it is usually easier for the US to either declare war on Japan once it has passed the War Appropriations Act, or arrange for Japan to declare war on the US, than it is for the same set of actions to occur with Germany. My experience is that, whatever strategic focus the US has, it goes to war with Japan 1-2 turns ahead of going to war with Germany & Italy (or at the very least, going to war with Japan is what allows the US to declare war on Germany & Italy if this can be arranged on the same turn).

Given the fragility of the Japanese unit force pools compared to the Allies and at the same time the robustness of the German land & air force pools, I think the US is correct in emphasizing Germany in its overall strategy; for the purposes of getting into the war however, after the top priority of getting the gear-ups the US is best served, I think, by goading Japan.

Extraneous, in your post #28, I believe you are missing a section of the scenario rules citations for the 1939-1945 Europe-only scenario (Fascist Tide) and have inadvertently elided it with the citation from the 1941-1945 Asia-Pacific-only scenario.

_____________________________

~ Composer99

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 31

RE: Manipulating US Entry - 7/29/2011 5:22:58 PM

brian brian

Posts: 3191
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline

Oh, I agree completely. Using the goal of getting to CW Reinforce Pacific as an example however, though a fun one with the USE system, made me think new players should simply be reminded that their US Entry choices should also be done in conjunction with what is actually happening in the game as it goes along, rather than through a rigid pre-arranged goal or plan. I find Option 31: Lend-Lease to Russia can be nearly as critical as Option 34: Pass War Appropriations; ditto Option 16: Resources to Western Allies, generally one of my prime early choices that I "save up" for on the first few turns.

(in reply to composer99)

Post #: 32

RE: Manipulating US Entry - 7/29/2011 6:19:54 PM

micheljq

Posts: 791
Joined: 3/31/2008
From: Quebec
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

While what you say is (probably?) true, new players want to know 'why' as well as 'what'. And then there are the inevitable exceptions to the basic plan that always arise because of 'events'. That makes me uncomfortable providing a summary of this multi-pronged beast of a rule that is capable of sticking an appendage into many aspects of a game.

It's my rule of thumb when playing USA for the rest I see and adapt as the game advances. I want to gearup and enter the fray as fast as possible. There are always exceptions that can arise.

_____________________________

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 Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 33