mike8472 said:
Actually i think that was me and yeah i balls'd up Africa pretty badly, left it way to late and gave my Planes next to no time to ORG up. But i never professed to be an experts with zee Germans, so ya live and ya learn
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Actually i think that was me and yeah i balls'd up Africa pretty badly, left it way to late and gave my Planes next to no time to ORG up. But i never professed to be an experts with zee Germans, so ya live and ya learn
I agree with this, leave trades open its fair for all sides.Nolan said:The Axis powers are as free to trade as are the Allies. If Germany wants to send supplies ect. to her future Allies then she can too. Nothing unfair there. (I know that the opposite applies to Mike when as Germany as he bleeds all his minors (human or ai) dry
We dont need trade restriction rules. A currant game prooves this where a UK player is refusing any assistance from a US player as opposed to another game when an almost exclusive Axis player who was playing UK a few games ago was the worst offender in demanding sups and resourses for the UK. ( no names mentioned
___________________
When you have a tight $%% hungary (aka Nolan) bleeding Germany dry for resources. Was good he went UK, less of a handicap for the Axis
Mighty G said:Actually i think that was me and yeah i balls'd up Africa pretty badly, left it way to late and gave my Planes next to no time to ORG up. But i never professed to be an experts with zee Germans, so ya live and ya learn
Well I didnt want to mention you by name, but yes it was you. There were huge air battles over Malta between Uk and German planes, at one stage there were numerious battles between UK vs Italian/German airforces to about 150 sqdrons. Was mamoth battle. No one really won them, but I did enough to deny the axis the ability to cross the ocean with out huge risk. This was in 1940 as well, at the same time those battles were fought I hit Germany with strat bombers and lots of fighter cover. I had a massive airforce.
mike8472 said:
A loss is nothing to be ashamed of, if it was at the hands of a worthy opponant. I have nothing to hide on my many defeats. A Lesson earnt is alesson learnt.
Well we have a decision to make. Some here want less rules some more.
Do we all think open trading of units, resources and supplies is fair for all. Or does it need to be restricted.
From my point of view I think you only need to pay for units you buy.
All other resources and supplies I think is fine. What resources the US gives or Italy will weaken them and mean less produced by them.
What does everyone else think?
Do we all think open trading of units, resources and supplies is fair for all. Or does it need to be restricted.
From my point of view I think you only need to pay for units you buy.
All other resources and supplies I think is fine. What resources the US gives or Italy will weaken them and mean less produced by them.
What does everyone else think?
My view is that resources and supps are fine but unit giving or buying should be banned altogether or restricted to only those units with which you begin the game.
mike8472 said:
Too hard to monitor who pays what without looking at saves. I say no pre war trading of units or supplies until Danzig. Supplies for resources are ok but bulk supplies for nothing should be banned until the world is at war. After Danzig I say anything goes apart from giving away the french fleet.
major ball said:
Well I think your going over board here major, not in the rules but in the people you play with. If you cant trust the group to play by sets rules then those people should not be playing.
At some point you have to trust people to do the right thing. There dosnt need to be any monitoring as people should follow the rules.
I can agree with no supplies or units pre war . Resources for supplies or vis versa is fine.
Once war happens I would agree any trades can happen as long as parties pay for any units they buy in IC in the form of supplies.
Then ya right back at ground zero.....
What about Italys & Japans starting Interceptors, USA's starting interceptors CV's etc...
All useless to the host nations best to throw them off to Britain and Germany.
Also i just want to add my 2c that im not against any trading of any kind. In reality foreign nations do buy shit off each other.... ie Aussie Leopard Tanks, now we got Abrams blah blah etc....
Saying USA is going to give Supplies to UK only if UK is going to give USA some materials is just a funny joke IMHO.
I KNOW Major has massively miscalculated the perceived advantage that Axis have........ Perhaps what is really the problem here is that USA is very reluctant to part with anything?
As USA in Tuesday Game i have managed to supply Australia Britain and Russia with in excess of 180supps a day for about 2 years. Not to mention i sold Aussies a large (shit) but large fleet. One capable of pluggingg the gaps between Singapore and Timor. I also subsidised and sold the USSR 24 Fighters....
Sit back and think about those numbers, does AXIS really have a massive advantage? NO...... All depends on how interventionistic USA has been.
If USA refuses to help Great Britain in this Game then i think that USSR needs to be yelling at USA not Axis im afraid.
What about Italys & Japans starting Interceptors, USA's starting interceptors CV's etc...
All useless to the host nations best to throw them off to Britain and Germany.
Also i just want to add my 2c that im not against any trading of any kind. In reality foreign nations do buy shit off each other.... ie Aussie Leopard Tanks, now we got Abrams blah blah etc....
Saying USA is going to give Supplies to UK only if UK is going to give USA some materials is just a funny joke IMHO.
I KNOW Major has massively miscalculated the perceived advantage that Axis have........ Perhaps what is really the problem here is that USA is very reluctant to part with anything?
As USA in Tuesday Game i have managed to supply Australia Britain and Russia with in excess of 180supps a day for about 2 years. Not to mention i sold Aussies a large (shit) but large fleet. One capable of pluggingg the gaps between Singapore and Timor. I also subsidised and sold the USSR 24 Fighters....
Sit back and think about those numbers, does AXIS really have a massive advantage? NO...... All depends on how interventionistic USA has been.
If USA refuses to help Great Britain in this Game then i think that USSR needs to be yelling at USA not Axis im afraid.
Mighty G said:
All valide points.
I think everyone has good points from there point of view.
I think what major is trying to do is stop people exploiting massive trades.
I think all trades are fine as long as people pay for the trades with supplies at the cost it takes the seller to make.
If Russia wants to buy 24 planes and the US can build them, fine as long as they pay for them.
As long as countries have to pay for them, there will be no all of the french fleet to the UK, or the US building 24 CV's for the UK. As it will be very expensive to do so.
mike8472 said:
Planes are not financially viable to purchase...It takes a lot of IC to fill them up. Even tanks and infantry not worth it. Ships are the freebie units. You can gve lots of ships and they come full strength. If USA gives Russia 24 planes its a lose lose situation. The USA loses and the Russians lose trying to fill them up.
major ball said:
Yeap so units trades are limited. Ships are also expensive and take along time, so there is only a certain number you can build and afford to sell without affecting your own production big time. You could only build with your supply costs really if the purchaser pays for it all as this would be your only free IC to do anything with.
perhaps the game can be adjusted and we can use the game to ensure that mega exploits do not occur.....
say with regards to SR, can we mod the game to increase the TC load when SR occurs, therefore any SR of 80 divisions means significant TC load, perhaps double
and in terms of trading, perhaps add 50% for services rendered, a battleship built for another nations costs 150% of what it actually cost that nation, after all, nothing is free, sure we are allies, but i need profit, isn't that what democracy and free trade includes, normal profits?
say with regards to SR, can we mod the game to increase the TC load when SR occurs, therefore any SR of 80 divisions means significant TC load, perhaps double
and in terms of trading, perhaps add 50% for services rendered, a battleship built for another nations costs 150% of what it actually cost that nation, after all, nothing is free, sure we are allies, but i need profit, isn't that what democracy and free trade includes, normal profits?
mike8472 said:
Yes but you can prop up a country 2 or 3 years before you enter the war(Japan 5-6 years) and the damage done with all those freebies is so great that by the time they do attack you they are so weakened that they cant scratch you. In effect you have shifted the balance of power to 1939 by lots of Freebies. By the time you enter the war in 1941 all the damage has been done with your freebies. So from 1936-1939 the Japans could supply the total requirements of the German army. Thereby freeing up Germany economy to concentrate on Planes and ships. From there they raped the UK so much that they can hardly field or supply an army.
Do you think someone who is going to war in 1941 cares if they give 300 supplies a day to Germany for 4 years from 1936-1939??? Thats a lot of IC the Germans can spend on planes, tanks and armour. With those amount of supplies they could take every island in the Atlantic and by the time the USA is in the war they must run the Guantlet of German ships and airpower from every base in the Atlantic. The 300 suppleis the japs paid for 4 years was well invested.
How about, and yes this is radical, we have NO unit trading. Will perhaps serve to stop our games taking on a Greek flavour............
Major looking at saves
I have a big issue here.
Major continues to look at German saves when he is my enemy. I thought our rules said no looking at saves.
There has been no reason for major to continuly look at German saves, he is my enemy. He has addmitted to it now a few times.
I want this to stop now, or a punishment has to be imposed on major. you cannot get away with looking at saves, seeing all my long term builds, techs, trades and so on.
In my books this is blantant cheating and it is to stop now. If this continues an major refuses to stop. I quit the group. I wont play with people contantly looking at saves.
You can look at the saves all you like when the game is over. While the game is running you cannot look at a single save, unless the group decides it is warrented by some one breaking our rules or cheating.
So far major is the only one here breaking our rules, it is to stop now.
I have a big issue here.
Major continues to look at German saves when he is my enemy. I thought our rules said no looking at saves.
There has been no reason for major to continuly look at German saves, he is my enemy. He has addmitted to it now a few times.
I want this to stop now, or a punishment has to be imposed on major. you cannot get away with looking at saves, seeing all my long term builds, techs, trades and so on.
In my books this is blantant cheating and it is to stop now. If this continues an major refuses to stop. I quit the group. I wont play with people contantly looking at saves.
You can look at the saves all you like when the game is over. While the game is running you cannot look at a single save, unless the group decides it is warrented by some one breaking our rules or cheating.
So far major is the only one here breaking our rules, it is to stop now.
mike8472 said:
Well it is on the table now...now it has been started I am sure others will find ways to gain an advantage within the rules.