Aussie Monday game started 16th April 2007

[Majorball]

Good session for Japan. Several new aircraft carriers were added to the Japanese navy this session along with an assortment of other ships. In all our naval, airforce and special armed forces expansion is coming along at an above satisfactory rate. A massive upgrade program has been put in place to modernize our existing armed forces that have become outdated in the last few years of peace. Despite an outcry from the Soviet Union, god knows why because they don't have a fleet to sink anyway. Our last batch of Bismarck class Battleships were completed and handed over to Germany in a deal which was brokered back in early 38. Japan would build a total of 11 Bismarck class battleships for Germany in exchange for food supplies and resources needed to run the ever expanding Japanese industrial base. We also express concern over the increasing number of American spy ships being sighted off the coast of mainland Japan and China. We do not desire war with America but such actions if continued can only lead us to an even more tense relationship with the USA and the west. We humbly request USA to remove her ships from the territorial waters of the Jap-Cino alliance, failure to do so will only, like we said, lead to an eventual breakdown of diplomatic relationships. SE.

Look at the map of Europe and Africa and you will know why. Its the biggest gang bang in the history of all our games. The USA will never be able to take Greenland, Azores, Iceland and many other islands down the coast of Africa. So for a start the USA has no way of getting to Europe. They will be intercepted by Aircraft the Med was closed out in 1940. That's about 200 extra divisions coming to the East against Russia. You guys can man the beaches with boy scout troops for all the threat the Allies will be to you. Why do you think I am not happy?

Ok so the UK didn't build much of a Navy..Christ they start with over a 100 combat ships more than enough to counter the Germans without outside help. How many ships did UK actually add to its fleet in real life. Not many capital ships that's for sure.
On top of this they have to defend UK, Africa and India(I wont mention Gibralter thats a gimme for the Axis).
So they have a choice:

Build ships??
Build planes to protect the ships?
Build an army to defend all their land possessions?
Have the USA player transfer its navy?
Defend Africa?
Defend against Sealion?

Even I playing the UK could never account for that amount of options. You have a choice with the UK. You can not cover every possibility...however they had a half reasonable chance had the Germans built their own ships pre war.

Everything has a negative....If UK build a big navy and you don't they lose control of the skies. If they build lots of land units to defend UK and Africa there is another negative.

In this game here not one piece of assistance in the form of ships or production has been taken by the UK player. This against a human Nationalist Spain, Italy and Germany.

The normal penalty for this type of Axis strategy would be less units for Russia or other areas. However with the assistance received by the German player in the form of supplies and ship building there is no negative for them. Spain and Italy can now defend all the beaches and let a highly upgraded German army steam roll Russia with everything they got. Surely something to look forward to.

So when you guys start to attack Russia from every side don't complain when I have to take extreme measures to defend.

That's all I have to say on the issue everything else has been said so no need to write a novel in reply.

And you guys wonder why I moan....

 

[mike8472]

Look at the map of Europe and Africa and you will know why. Its the biggest gang bang in the history of all our games. The USA will never be able to take Greenland, Azores, Iceland and many other islands down the coast of Africa. So for a start the USA has no way of getting to Europe. They will be intercepted by Aircraft the Med was closed out in 1940. That's about 200 extra divisions coming to the East against Russia. You guys can man the beaches with boy scout troops for all the threat the Allies will be to you. Why do you think I am not happy?

Ok so the UK didn't build much of a Navy..Christ they start with over a 100 combat ships more than enough to counter the Germans without outside help. How many ships did UK actually add to its fleet in real life. Not many capital ships that's for sure.
On top of this they have to defend UK, Africa and India(I wont mention Gibralter thats a gimme for the Axis).
So they have a choice:

Build ships??
Build planes to protect the ships?
Build an army to defend all their land possessions?
Have the USA player transfer its navy?
Defend Africa?
Defend against Sealion?

Even I playing the UK could never account for that amount of options. You have a choice with the UK. You can not cover every possibility...however they had a half reasonable chance had the Germans built their own ships pre war.

Everything has a negative....If UK build a big navy and you don't they lose control of the skies. If they build lots of land units to defend UK and Africa there is another negative.

In this game here not one piece of assistance in the form of ships or production has been taken by the UK player. This against a human Nationalist Spain, Italy and Germany.

The normal penalty for this type of Axis strategy would be less units for Russia or other areas. However with the assistance received by the German player in the form of supplies and ship building there is no negative for them. Spain and Italy can now defend all the beaches and let a highly upgraded German army steam roll Russia with everything they got. Surely something to look forward to.

So when you guys start to attack Russia from every side don't complain when I have to take extreme measures to defend.

That's all I have to say on the issue everything else has been said so no need to write a novel in reply.

And you guys wonder why I moan....

Frist of all it wasnt a gang bang. The game started of as 3 vs 1 Uk/FranceAus vs Germany. Didnt hear me moan about being gang banged. Do you forget the allies defeated germany in france in 1939 with large losses for germany in the air and on land???? What about all the glories cries from the allies now. there was a reason for this meat head.

I spent my Ic elseware, ships. My whole plan this game was to build a fleet capable of stoping the UK and hopefully defeating the US fleet. Im not sure if thats possible but I will try.

Have alook at why all this happened, everything we have tacken is due to one point. We have or at least broke even at sea. Middle east invaded from the sea, outflanking UK positions, all the islands and invasion of africa west coast all by sea, iceland the azores or by sea.

The Uk has choices to make with limited IC, naval and air should be prioities. Gunny built marines and lots of armour, ive seen some motories too these are all expensive units. Plus Uk IC seems larger then normal so factories must have been built unless im wrong, havnt played UK in awhile.

Now I chose to build a big navy, I was going to either build it all myself or buy some as ive done. either way I was still going to do it. Wether you like it or not it is allowed. The allies could have done the same thing and i dont know if they havnt done it, for all i know the UK air and armour was provided by the US, but i dont care as there is on simple fact. He is allowed to do it.

Anyway, this is the first ever game in our history were one player, ME has gone all out battleships. Normaly people would consider this crazy instead of building Cv's. So your are being over the top major, how can you expect some thing which has never been done before for all people to know what will happen. I didnt even know if i would stand a chance against CV's, I took other peoples word for it they would if i was lucky. Gunny in fairness, how could he prepare for something we have never seen before, so it was a suprise and as a result this has happened. Most people call that good planning, although I dont as I lost my fleet

So yes the UK weas caught flat footed by something that has never happened in our games before. I doubt the next player will be.

As for having a fully upgraded German army or airforce, I think you will be pleasantly suprised here. Like you said major for the UK every option has its costs, the same is true of germany. My stratgy has its cost which will become evident later in our war.

Stop jumping to conclussions when you have no Idea of the state of the German army or airforce. Wait and see.

It is true about the US going to have a hard time getting to Europe, but that was always our plan to make it so. Were not playing to make it easy for the US or fair. I doubt the allies would have and have not in the past shown the same mercy to Italy or Germany. This is war and no mercy shall be given unless its a bug.

Also greenland was left umanned from when I annexed denmark to just this last session. So for about 1 year it was left open for the allies to take.

So major please stop second guessing everything. I know you get too wound up over things. Let the allies the US and UK play there war and see how things pan out. Its only early 1941 the war is not even fully on yet, still 3 powers to join in.

 

[Majorball]

You can make any claims you like am I permitted to moan and be unhappy. If you built the ships yourself I would have less to moan about but you are correct in some areas. Building marines is a mistake before you have control of the seas because you cannot use them anyway and building IC is another mistake for the UK player. With all those mistakes the UK made I still cannot see it necessary to buy ships from Japan. I wish you had done it without that assistance because whatever ever you achieve in this game through good play will forever be tarnished by receiving that assistance. That is all I have to say on the matter and I will continue to moan if I so choose. What else am I to do sitting on my ass for 5 years waiting to get in the war :rofl:

 

[mike8472]

You can make any claims you like am I permitted to moan and be unhappy. If you built the ships yourself I would have less to moan about but you are correct in some areas. Building marines is a mistake before you have control of the seas because you cannot use them anyway and building IC is another mistake for the UK player. With all those mistakes the UK made I still cannot see it necessary to buy ships from Japan. I wish you had done it without that assistance because whatever ever you achieve in this game through good play will forever be tarnished by receiving that assistance. That is all I have to say on the matter and I will continue to moan if I so choose. What else am I to do sitting on my ass for 5 years waiting to get in the war :rofl:

Well you are permitted to moan and we would expect nothing less from you, the resident old women. :rofl:

You may consider it tarnished but as long as it is with in our rules it is fine. Its open to all to do, not just reserved for the axis.

Marines are very expensive. Even CV's for germany early on with cags built are about the same cost as 1 marine with artillery. 1 amoured division would be slighlty more then 1 CV. So if the UK did chose to build up its navy it can certainly do so. From what ive seen in marines and about a dozen or so tanks from the UK, thats potentialy 18 CV's without affecting any of the other builds such as his airforce or IC builds or what ever else. With the UK army in Alexandria and that many CV's you are guranteed control of the sea around the UK (no threat of invasion) and in africa no threat of being outflanked.

Thats just my take on it. We all chose our builds andp ay the price, I did with my fleet being sunk but it gave us enough of the initiaive to achieve most of our aims. Damm south africans hung in there

P.S you at work meat head. I sent an email to your work email about this earlier. If not whats you home email ill forward it too you.

 

[Majorball]

Well you are permitted to moan and we would expect nothing less from you, the resident old women. :rofl:

You may consider it tarnished but as long as it is with in our rules it is fine. Its open to all to do, not just reserved for the axis.

Marines are very expensive. Even CV's for germany early on with cags built are about the same cost as 1 marine with artillery. 1 amoured division would be slighlty more then 1 CV. So if the UK did chose to build up its navy it can certainly do so. From what ive seen in marines and about a dozen or so tanks from the UK, thats potentialy 18 CV's without affecting any of the other builds such as his airforce or IC builds or what ever else. With the UK army in Alexandria and that many CV's you are guranteed control of the sea around the UK (no threat of invasion) and in africa no threat of being outflanked.

Thats just my take on it. We all chose our builds andp ay the price, I did with my fleet being sunk but it gave us enough of the initiaive to achieve most of our aims. Damm south africans hung in there

P.S you at work meat head. I sent an email to your work email about this earlier. If not whats you home email ill forward it too you.

Home check your PM

 

[unmerged(59421)]

Major. I'm sure you've heard this before, but there is no 'I' in 'TEAM'. This is something the axis team has been planning for a long time, since the second session if I recall correctly. Like Mike said it has never been done before and it has been a risk for him, me and in general the entire axis team. I honestly don't know wether or not Italy and Spain have been pumping Germany full of supplies and resources that he has been paying me for the ships, all I know is I been getting payed. Not only has it set Germany back in order to aqquire these ships, it has also set my regular build up back by some months also. My Yamoto fleet won't even hit the waters until late 41 because I have spent the time building Bismarcks for Germany. I have only just started my upgrades and it won't be until late 41 until they near completion, instead of the early to mid 41 that I normally prefer. So even though the Bismarcks have given Germany an advantage over the UK early in the game it has put the Axis major powers back in other areas of the game so all in all. Apart from early naval victories over the UK, the axis powers don't have any real major advantage. But like you said feel free to moan, the nigh is still young and there is still much for both sides to do in this game before the fat lady sings. SE.

P.S. This is mainly to Mighty G and anyone else interested. Goto GameSpot.com.au and check out the first officially released trailer for, drumroll.......... STARCRAFT 2. Enjoy. SE.

 

[mike8472]

Home check your PM

I forwarded the email to you.

 

[unmerged(50486)]

Yeah SE, Starcraft 2 is going to fucking rock. See that opening with the Marine Grunt looks like theres goona be some kick ass CGI in it. Just hope they don't gay it up with hocus pocus like they did with Warcraft3.

Also the NEw Rambo Trailer is out now too. Looks pretty cool..

 

[mike8472]

Major. I'm sure you've heard this before, but there is no 'I' in 'TEAM'. This is something the axis team has been planning for a long time, since the second session if I recall correctly. Like Mike said it has never been done before and it has been a risk for him, me and in general the entire axis team. I honestly don't know wether or not Italy and Spain have been pumping Germany full of supplies and resources that he has been paying me for the ships, all I know is I been getting payed. Not only has it set Germany back in order to aqquire these ships, it has also set my regular build up back by some months also. My Yamoto fleet won't even hit the waters until late 41 because I have spent the time building Bismarcks for Germany. I have only just started my upgrades and it won't be until late 41 until they near completion, instead of the early to mid 41 that I normally prefer. So even though the Bismarcks have given Germany an advantage over the UK early in the game it has put the Axis major powers back in other areas of the game so all in all. Apart from early naval victories over the UK, the axis powers don't have any real major advantage. But like you said feel free to moan, the nigh is still young and there is still much for both sides to do in this game before the fat lady sings. SE.

P.S. This is mainly to Mighty G and anyone else interested. Goto GameSpot.com.au and check out the first officially released trailer for, drumroll.......... STARCRAFT 2. Enjoy. SE.

Another reason I went Naval is because G and Boof told me that gunny likes to do hit and run tactics with his navy to harass Germany while there busy in Russia. I can only think he would land with the marines he build run around with some armour then run away and to keep doing that to harras the axis and to help Russia. This is what I was told as to how gunny has played recent games. So I decided on the surface fleet to also negate this threat.

As for supplies Italy has provided Germany with some supplies pre-war for peroids of time. In return Italy got all the resources it needed for its economy, Germany bought most of the resources for Italy and then traded them on to Italy as I can get better deals then Italy in some cases.

With Italy in the alliance, yes Italy has provided Germany with substantial supplies, which I have no issue with, who would your allies and both at war. There is also no rule against sending supplies to other nations such as comonly done by the US player to the UK, axis can play that game too its not a realm just for the allies.

The whole strategy around the Euro Axis is to make Germany strong. If Germany is strong the Euro Axis will be strong enough to hold the allies off for along time. Germany can pump many of the advanced weapons needed later in the game.

We have decided to play to each nations strength. Instead of the Axis all building planes, ships and armies we have divided it up. Germany builds the huge armour and airforces needed and does the techs along with a good fleet. In return the minor axis allies build larger infantry and garrisions forces to hold conquests, freeing up German manpower for actual combat units. This also limits the tech Italy and Spain need to do and can focus on select areas. So Germany provides the minor allies with what ever amour and air they need so I can keep long serial builds on of good units, while they help out with supplies and building manpower intensive units.

Our whole plan was to fight around africa and the south atlantic, where we thought the UK would be weakest or defend with less forces. However the success of certain missions and some failures forced us to try and take Iceland and the azores, Greenland is just a bonus never planned to get it nor keep it, but why not I already took the US gearing for it.

Which brings up another point. Despite the UK losing Iceland/Azores/Greenland the Us got a gearing for each on of those Islands. Giving the US more IC then it would normaly have, ontop of the early 80+ IC from the early Chinese conquests. There are inbult checks and balances for taking these islands and cost for the axis on top of units lost. I see no reason the axis should not try for these every game if it is in there plan, it is up to the UK or allies to try and prevent it.

 

[Majorball]

You guys just dont get it. The argument isnt about your great team work and strategy in regards to having a Naval Fleet. Its how that fleet was aquired. Had it been entirley German built no questions can be asked. The only thing uncertain is how much was actually paid for which no one will ever know except yourselves. You Naval BB strategy is fine I have no problems with that.

Little supplies if any are sent to the UK prior to war. Once at war yes supplies are sent by the USA player to help out. You freely admit you have been subsidised lots of supplies pre war on top of your discount ships. The Allies have not done the same.

On another point the Allies are restricted by big gearing limits pre war. Any cooperation by the Axis pre war in the way of supplies and building units is going to be a massive advantage the Azis and the Allies could never match that until they enter the war. However the damage is already done. So while the UK & USA has low IC any freebie supplies and discount ships given to Germany is always going to advantage the Axis much more then the Allies.

Do you understand gearing limits at all?

I cant imagine the Allies sitting back while the Japanese build a Battleships for the Germans. They could not hide this fact and it should be a trigger for an increase in gearing limits. That is my only concern with pre war trading of units and supplies. It gives too much of advantage to Germany. The Germans could have built their own ships and achieved the same result as UK built no carriers.
You can blame UK incompetence all you like but you must also see my point in regards to gearing limits and the fact the Allies cannot achieve the same advantage form pre war trading. For the USA to build ships for the UK they will take more than 600 days for a Battleship in 1936 not to mention the cost. Where can they find that IC with the Dove setting? They usually have zero supply cost anyway. The Japanese have a bonous in production the Allies could never match pre war so the ships they build can never be out built till much later in the game.

 

[mike8472]

You guys just dont get it. The argument isnt about your great team work and strategy in regards to having a Naval Fleet. Its how that fleet was aquired. Had it been entirley German built no questions can be asked. The only thing uncertain is how much was actually paid for which no one will ever know except yourselves. You Naval BB strategy is fine I have no problems with that.

Little supplies if any are sent to the UK prior to war. Once at war yes supplies are sent by the USA player to help out. You freely admit you have been subsidised lots of supplies pre war on top of your discount ships. The Allies have not done the same.

On another point the Allies are restricted by big gearing limits pre war. Any cooperation by the Axis pre war in the way of supplies and building units is going to be a massive advantage the Azis and the Allies could never match that until they enter the war. However the damage is already done. So while the UK & USA has low IC any freebie supplies and discount ships given to Germany is always going to advantage the Axis much more then the Allies.

Do you understand gearing limits at all?

I cant imagine the Allies sitting back while the Japanese build a Battleships for the Germans. They could not hide this fact and it should be a trigger for an increase in gearing limits. That is my only concern with pre war trading of units and supplies. It gives too much of advantage to Germany. The Germans could have built their own ships and achieved the same result as UK built no carriers.
You can blame UK incompetence all you like but you must also see my point in regards to gearing limits and the fact the Allies cannot achieve the same advantage form pre war trading. For the USA to build ships for the UK they will take more than 600 days for a Battleship in 1936 not to mention the cost. Where can they find that IC with the Dove setting? They usually have zero supply cost anyway. The Japanese have a bonous in production the Allies could never match pre war so the ships they build can never be out built till much later in the game.

I understand all your concerns major.

But we played under the assumption that the UK was getting units and supplies from the US. As it happened in games when we were not here according to G, boof and stalin. So from my point of view we were only doing what everyone else was doing.

I have no idea if gunny and nolan did that or that they didnt do it with australia and france. I do not find this any more of an advanatage then the allies cleaning out france pre war to the extent where germany got like less then 2000 or 1000 of every resource. Had it been AI i would have had massive maounts of resources from france. Do you find that gamey. I do but I didnt complain as its not a rule.

My allies told me in previous games the US built whole fleets including CV fleets for its allies including australia and canida. I was expecting something similar this game and I still dont know that they didnt do this. Like you I only have what you say, the allies are not talking here at all.

Now suddenly becuase I do it and it with battleships its different to the US giving for FREE in previous games CV's to its allies.

Now major I understand your concerns but it is not a rule and the allies are free to trade what ever units they wish. These is not even a rule to say you have to pay for them, although it should be. These are the rules they play by. Just becuase I build battleships and im Germany its suddenly gamey, when its the allies doing it, its not. Had the UK a good fleet and my fleet sunk or crippled early I do not think we would be having this conversation.

It is with in the rules and until the rules are changed, which I doubt as people here seem to what less not more rules unit trading is allowed. Although perhaps all units should be paid for in supplies. And every unit has been paid for this game, if 4 peoples word is not good enough then i dont know what is. We have been honest and truthful and told you far more then what you deserve to hear considering your the enemy. We dont owe any explanation here as we are playing with in the rules set. Relax and let the game play out. If towards the end of the game we think it has been to one sided then lets make some changes.

Now perhaps the rules need slight adjusting like no trading of supplies until your in the alliance and no trading of units unless paid for. Im happy for that as its equal for eveyone.

 

[unmerged(59421)]

Major. Read up on your history mate. American was infact selling more weapons and supplies to both the Axis and Allies then what I and the whole of the Axis could ever produce in this game. Yes it happened in real life. So historically speaking, if USA was doing it then why shouldn't the Japanese. Moral of the story. Don't try to use historical based facts to discredit us for what we have done when you have no idea about what America's policies were before they joined the war. That's why America would not have gotten a so called gearing in history because they themselves were doing it, so why should they get one in this game??? They would have been hipocryts on the international political stage if they had of had a sook about it. Hell where the hell do you think the Germans got massive stockpile of winter clothing from for the invasion of Russia, certainly wasn't German industry as that was too busy making bombs and tanks. Here's another good one which all members of the Aussie group should know. Who was the Prime Minister of Australia during the war. Bob Menzies, or more commonly know as Pig Iron Bob. Ahh how did he get the nick name? When Australia went to war against the Euro-Axis in support of the UK and the Commonwealth we needed a large source of income to fund the nations war effort. Due to the trade sanctions imposed on Japan by the large powers around the world because of they're war in China, Japan found herself short of iron and other metals of the like. Australia having massive stockpiles of iron and other metals of the like, mainly what was know as pigiron. Old Bob Menzies sore a golden oppurtunity to make a quick buck and send a couple hundred thousand equipped and battle ready troops to the European war theater. Everyone told him he was insane for trading pigiron with the Japanese and that the Japs had aggressive intentions. It was later found that the pig iron being traded to Japan was infact being used to make bombs, which inturn was used to bomb Darwin and Townsville. Moral of that story. Like in this game, historically the allies made alot of stupid mistakes. Do you think Old Pig Iron Bob sent Tojo a text message and said 'Hang on matey, you can't bomb us with those bombs because that's our iron'. Certainly not! He hardened the fuck up and kept fighting. Moral of that story, quit ya bitching and play the game. END OF STORY! SE.

 

[Majorball]

Major. Read up on your history mate. American was infact selling more weapons and supplies to both the Axis and Allies then what I and the whole of the Axis could ever produce in this game. Yes it happened in real life. So historically speaking, if USA was doing it then why shouldn't the Japanese. Moral of the story. Don't try to use historical based facts to discredit us for what we have done when you have no idea about what America's policies were before they joined the war. That's why America would not have gotten a so called gearing in history because they themselves were doing it, so why should they get one in this game??? They would have been hipocryts on the international political stage if they had of had a sook about it. Hell where the hell do you think the Germans got massive stockpile of winter clothing from for the invasion of Russia, certainly wasn't German industry as that was too busy making bombs and tanks. Here's another good one which all members of the Aussie group should know. Who was the Prime Minister of Australia during the war. Bob Menzies, or more commonly know as Pig Iron Bob. Ahh how did he get the nick name? When Australia went to war against the Euro-Axis in support of the UK and the Commonwealth we needed a large source of income to fund the nations war effort. Due to the trade sanctions imposed on Japan by the large powers around the world because of they're war in China, Japan found herself short of iron and other metals of the like. Australia having massive stockpiles of iron and other metals of the like, mainly what was know as pigiron. Old Bob Menzies sore a golden oppurtunity to make a quick buck and send a couple hundred thousand equipped and battle ready troops to the European war theater. Everyone told him he was insane for trading pigiron with the Japanese and that the Japs had aggressive intentions. It was later found that the pig iron being traded to Japan was infact being used to make bombs, which inturn was used to bomb Darwin and Townsville. Moral of that story. Like in this game, historically the allies made alot of stupid mistakes. Do you think Old Pig Iron Bob sent Tojo a text message and said 'Hang on matey, you can't bomb us with those bombs because that's our iron'. Certainly not! He hardened the fuck up and kept fighting. Moral of that story, quit ya bitching and play the game. END OF STORY! SE.

No the moral of the story is the game has designed in gearing limits to prevent abuse and the Allies over building pre war. I dont remember the Japanese building any German ships and thats what we are talking about here. I couldnt give a toss about winter clothing or how many hamburgers USA sold to the UK. We are not talking about that here.....Germany got a massive advantage in supplies and IC from having Japan build its ships pre war. Thats a fact you cannot dispute. Next time we have a French player the entire French fleet will be given to the UK. No rules against it. You guys screwed the game up by being artificially too powerful in 1939. Regardless of what the UK build. I do not agree with pre war building of units and freebie supplies and I never will.After the war in Europe starts I say its a free for all but not prior to war. I can see massive exploits of this situation.
Every time you guys try and justify it it just shows how absurd the trading situation is. In this game UK has received no supplies, ships or any other unit from the USA. So that means you guys have a significant advantage over them. Everytime you post back I will post again and again until I get it through your thick skulls. I just fear what is going to happen in future games when the full extent of what can be done is unleashed.

Give you an example....What say Japan gives its entire fleet to germany pre war. This allows germany to build unlimited marines and planes for Sealion. Japan doesnt need its ships until end of 1941 so they can easily build a modern fleet. How can the UK on its own expect to hold the UK? Does the USA give its entire fleet to compensate? So many variables so many possible exploitations. By the time Japan needs a fleet there is no UK as they have been destroyed. End result game screwed, again!!

There are so many possible variations to this.

The fact remains the Axis done it and the Allies didnt...end result huge advantage to the Axis. That you cannot dispute.

I will not play in any future games where trading of free supplies and military units pre Danzig is permitted.

I will play the current games out and find another group to play with where some common sense comes into play.

 

[Majorball]

It is with in the rules and until the rules are changed, which I doubt as people here seem to what less not more rules unit trading is allowed. Although perhaps all units should be paid for in supplies. And every unit has been paid for this game, if 4 peoples word is not good enough then i dont know what is. We have been honest and truthful and told you far more then what you deserve to hear considering your the enemy. We dont owe any explanation here as we are playing with in the rules set. Relax and let the game play out. If towards the end of the game we think it has been to one sided then lets make some changes.
Now perhaps the rules need slight adjusting like no trading of supplies until your in the alliance and no trading of units unless paid for. Im happy for that as its equal for eveyone.

No stupid rules like that..the game has been semi balanced to play as a game. Its designed so the Allies are not too powerful pre war. I dont want to talk about history here. We are playing a game. I do not want to have to monitor players to make sure they paid the right price for units. Thats just a hassle we dont need. I just dont want any trading of units pre Danzig and if others agree pumping up players with free supplies. You might have paid for your ships but only you know exactly how much and I reckon you got a significant discount. How much did you pay for each CVL?
Thats not an argument I want to get into.
You naval strategy is good no dispute here from me...its just how that navy was aquired which permitted its artifically quick construction. Why didnt you just build them your self?????????????????????
Because the savings and speed cost you achieved allowed you to concentrate your builds in other areas PRE WAR. Do you understand PRE WAR?????? You used Japans siginificant advantage in ship building to create a powerful fleet for the Germans.

Now no more arguments how all you guys planned to build a navy etc etd...thats not what we are arguing about here.

 

[mike8472]

No the moral of the story is the game has designed in gearing limits to prevent abuse and the Allies over building pre war. I dont remember the Japanese building any German ships and thats what we are talking about here. I couldnt give a toss about winter clothing or how many hamburgers USA sold to the UK. We are not talking about that here.....Germany got a massive advantage in supplies and IC from having Japan build its ships pre war. Thats a fact you cannot dispute. Next time we have a French player the entire French fleet will be given to the UK. No rules against it. You guys screwed the game up by being artificially too powerful in 1939. Regardless of what the UK build. I do not agree with pre war building of units and freebie supplies and I never will.After the war in Europe starts I say its a free for all but not prior to war. I can see massive exploits of this situation.
Every time you guys try and justify it it just shows how absurd the trading situation is. In this game UK has received no supplies, ships or any other unit from the USA. So that means you guys have a significant advantage over them. Everytime you post back I will post again and again until I get it through your thick skulls. I just fear what is going to happen in future games when the full extent of what can be done is unleashed.

Give you an example....What say Japan gives its entire fleet to germany pre war. This allows germany to build unlimited marines and planes for Sealion. Japan doesnt need its ships until end of 1941 so they can easily build a modern fleet. How can the UK on its own expect to hold the UK? Does the USA give its entire fleet to compensate? So many variables so many possible exploitations. By the time Japan needs a fleet there is no UK as they have been destroyed. End result game screwed, again!!

There are so many possible variations to this.

The fact remains the Axis done it and the Allies didnt...end result huge advantage to the Axis. That you cannot dispute.

I will not play in any future games where trading of free supplies and military units pre Danzig is permitted.

I will play the current games out and find another group to play with where some common sense comes into play.

I agree with most of your points major however your trying to base this game on events that have already occured on new rules.

These games we are currently playing do not have the rules we have suggested in terms of supplies or tradining units.

A simple rule of paying for units you buy with supplies stops all exploits as everything has a value and nothing is for free.

Despite what you say you are wrong, and there is no massive advanatage to the axis. We payed for everything and I have sacrificed many things for it. Your are dead wrong on this. Unless you are constantly look at my saves, you will have no idea of what the actual cost is, so you have no exact information on which to base your arguement on. Until the game is finished you have no information on how it affects the game, you are reacting to much to early. You as russia may yet steam roll me, Japan might get smashed. So sit back and relax and play the game. Once the game is over we can asses it and then decide on the new rules based on the results of a full game.

The total bonus is exactly 0.7 IC for 560 odd days per ship. So the actual amount of IC I saved for my full building cost of those ships is 5.6 IC for 526 days. It is far from the massive advanatage you claim it to be. Either you cant count or you dont now the full details of what is going on and nor should you as you cat view our nations. With 5.6 IC I cant even buy 1 serial build of infantry with artillery. Over that time I could buy 6 plain infantry divisions in that time at about 5 IC. My ships cost 8.4 IC each to build where as Japan can build them for 7.7 IC. Now in the 40 odd days less due to the full build time and all the IC I would have had to spend to complete the ships equals about 2688 IC days. This equals not even 6 infantry divisions or about 1.5 armoured divisions. All up your talking about an entire advanatage of 12 infantry divisions or 2.5 armoured divisions. Weight this up against the cost of not getting france in 1939, all the manpower spent, replacement costs, the now sunk ships. I have paid a steep price indeed for this fleet.
So inconclusion on this sole matter, you are wrong major, you will never be right as you do not have access to the full facts. So drop the issue, you are only looking at the advanages its gives me and not the negatives that I can plainly see.


I agree with no supplies trading until the Dazig event. Only resources for supplies should be allowed.

You have to trust people to play by rules. It is also up to the rest of the group if they want these restrictions. They have been playing like this since we have been gone and its a bit rich first game in to suggest changes, so lets play the game out and see what happens, it may end totaly differently to how you think it will.

 

[mike8472]

No stupid rules like that..the game has been semi balanced to play as a game. Its designed so the Allies are not too powerful pre war. I dont want to talk about history here. We are playing a game. I do not want to have to monitor players to make sure they paid the right price for units. Thats just a hassle we dont need. I just dont want any trading of units pre Danzig and if others agree pumping up players with free supplies. You might have paid for your ships but only you know exactly how much and I reckon you got a significant discount. How much did you pay for each CVL?
Thats not an argument I want to get into.
You naval strategy is good no dispute here from me...its just how that navy was aquired which permitted its artifically quick construction. Why didnt you just build them your self?????????????????????
Because the savings and speed cost you achieved allowed you to concentrate your builds in other areas PRE WAR. Do you understand PRE WAR?????? You used Japans siginificant advantage in ship building to create a powerful fleet for the Germans.

Now no more arguments how all you guys planned to build a navy etc etd...thats not what we are arguing about here.

Of course there is an advanatage in doing it, thats why it is done. The advanatage you claim how ever is not huge or even large, your talking about a total saving of 12 infantry or 2.5 tanks.

You dont have to argue with players, just trust them that they followed the rules. You dont need to know exactly how much. If you cant trust us that we did what we say we did then dont play with us. If some one tells me they did something I believe them until I know 100% then didnt. I know all here well enough to believe what they say is true, I dont need to know anymore then that.

Yes major I did pay for my CVLs I paid the exact cost in terms of IC that it cost Japan to build them. I paid for every single ship. You dont need to know how much for how long becuase were not required to tell you, trust people fro christ sake, stop being so paranoid that everyone is out to get you.

Why do people do trades to get supplies and resources from AI nations and trade back and forth and try to get cheaper deals, to get the most out of there IC. Its the same with buying ships your going to try and things cheaper if you can. It is only a small saving. I get far more advanatage through my trades and having 0 supply cost for the entire pre-war peroid becuase of it, total savings probably 30-50 IC for the entire prewar peroid all up, work that its huge. Is that gamey too???

Ive already said I agree to no units trading pre-war in my previous post. however that wont stop this situation. You need for all parties to pay the cost of supplies. I dont care if france sells ships to UK asl ong as UK pays for it. This way no one gets anything for free. If its a rule I trust al players to follow it, I wouldnt even ask were those ships came from, its allowed end of story.

Im against stoping people trading supplies. Reason is if the US agrees to give the UK supplies its makes the US weaker later on, same with Italy or Japan doing it. You have to leave people free to do some things and leave it up to them if they wish to do it. Most people agree with this from those ive talked too.

So I agree with half your points and a bit diferent on some. But were on the same page just your calculations on advanatages is way off.

 

[Majorball]

Of course there is an advanatage in doing it, thats why it is done. The advanatage you claim how ever is not huge or even large, your talking about a total saving of 12 infantry or 2.5 tanks.

You dont have to argue with players, just trust them that they followed the rules. You dont need to know exactly how much. If you cant trust us that we did what we say we did then dont play with us. If some one tells me they did something I believe them until I know 100% then didnt. I know all here well enough to believe what they say is true, I dont need to know anymore then that.

Yes major I did pay for my CVLs I paid the exact cost in terms of IC that it cost Japan to build them. I paid for every single ship. You dont need to know how much for how long becuase were not required to tell you, trust people fro christ sake, stop being so paranoid that everyone is out to get you.

Why do people do trades to get supplies and resources from AI nations and trade back and forth and try to get cheaper deals, to get the most out of there IC. Its the same with buying ships your going to try and things cheaper if you can. It is only a small saving. I get far more advanatage through my trades and having 0 supply cost for the entire pre-war peroid becuase of it, total savings probably 30-50 IC for the entire prewar peroid all up, work that its huge. Is that gamey too???

Ive already said I agree to no units trading pre-war in my previous post. however that wont stop this situation. You need for all parties to pay the cost of supplies. I dont care if france sells ships to UK asl ong as UK pays for it. This way no one gets anything for free. If its a rule I trust al players to follow it, I wouldnt even ask were those ships came from, its allowed end of story.

Im against stoping people trading supplies. Reason is if the US agrees to give the UK supplies its makes the US weaker later on, same with Italy or Japan doing it. You have to leave people free to do some things and leave it up to them if they wish to do it. Most people agree with this from those ive talked too.

So I agree with half your points and a bit diferent on some. But were on the same page just your calculations on advanatages is way off.

I am only against pre war trading of supplies and units. Not after war has started.

 

[unmerged(59421)]

I am only against pre war trading of supplies and units. Not after war has started.

Is that honestly the case? If so then the ships were traded after war started. The first of the ships never finished until september 29th 1939. Look at our save again if you don't beleive us. Germany was well and truly at war by then so the only issue you really have is trading supplies pre-war... You can only give 5 units at a time so it was mid October by the time all the units had been given to Germany and it normally takes a month or so before traded units can be deployed. So it was infact late 1939 before Germany even had the ability to put a level 4 battleship fleet into the water. So going by what you have just said, you have absolutely no grounds for your argument here apart from the trading of supplies. Even the trading of supplies was in no way really an exploit in any means. Major stop now, the hole you have dug yourself into get's deeper and deeper with every post you make. So as I think it has been said several times already in this thread. Let's drop it and get on with the game. If it proves that what we have done severley unbalances the game then after this game then yes by all means we can reveiw the rules and set in place better more fairer rules. Until then, stop crying like a little school girl. SE.

 

[unmerged(59421)]

Mike read ya PM's please. SE.

 

[Majorball]

Is that honestly the case? If so then the ships were traded after war started. The first of the ships never finished until september 29th 1939. Look at our save again if you don't beleive us. Germany was well and truly at war by then so the only issue you really have is trading supplies pre-war... You can only give 5 units at a time so it was mid October by the time all the units had been given to Germany and it normally takes a month or so before traded units can be deployed. So it was infact late 1939 before Germany even had the ability to put a level 4 battleship fleet into the water. So going by what you have just said, you have absolutely no grounds for your argument here apart from the trading of supplies. Even the trading of supplies was in no way really an exploit in any means. Major stop now, the hole you have dug yourself into get's deeper and deeper with every post you make. So as I think it has been said several times already in this thread. Let's drop it and get on with the game. If it proves that what we have done severley unbalances the game then after this game then yes by all means we can reveiw the rules and set in place better more fairer rules. Until then, stop crying like a little school girl. SE.

The Germans gained an advantage rom their trade deals. I went back at had a look at some old saves and only sometimes were supplies being paid. We had to take your word for it that some were sent as bulk trades. There is no need for this pre war trading. If its open to both sides then we are in for some very lopped sided games.
The only difference this time is the Axis did it and the Allies didnt. Wait until the Allies get on the bandwagon also. Next game I play USA there will be no industry for them it will be BB and Carriers from the start and let the UK concentrate on planes and men, I will build all their transports, destroyers. Thats a lot of IC the UK doesnt have to build. They dont even have to tech any ship techs they can just concentrate on naval doctrines for their nice fleet. I will allocate evey IC the USA has to build ships for the UK player. By the time Japan is in the war the damage to Germany will be so great the game is as good as over for Axis. Japan cannot win on its own. The ships wont go to waste with the UK as they can be used against the Japs also. I will also supply UK with so many supplies they can use all this for production.

Now as it stands now there is no rule against this. It might weaken the USA early but Germany will be screwed for the whole game from the time they DOW. They wont be able to paddle a canoe up the Rhine.

If you guys want it free for all I am happy with that. I have said that many times I just fear our games will be so lop sided that it is a joke if the full extent of trading units(mainly ships) is exploited. I am complaining and no builds have affected me to this stage. It is not about my personal ambition or the fact I am being raped. It is in the interest of fairness for all players who play in our games. Just think of the endless possibilites if we have no restrictions on trading prewar. You guys have only touched the surface and as you say gained minimum benefeit. I will make sure next game the benefeit is in the Allies favour and not by a small amount.

BTW Stalin you can kiss my ass.