Australian Group Core Game

[unmerged(25040)]

game

Okay now we are getting to the core. As Joel has now responded.

It seems the only way Joel would have been 'pre -satisfied' was as if I was to pass to him my Atlantic build up and intentions. Seems strange that I would feel a need to tell Jole all about my plans, but given it has driven him to call me a cheat -on three occasions - The truth is I have committed over 30 naval vessels, 15 Div and 9 air. I have one usn fleet agaisnt 3 germ fleets, plsu a sub stack.

I was also accused of being a cheat when I took the initiative to sea reinforce a lone division to Baker ( I thihk). I had anticipated Joels move in advance and acted. When it arrived he accused me of deploying it there from the production box. Pretty galling really!

I was also acused of some form of air exploit, when my acft retreated to an island - when Jole thought they should die.

SOOOOOO- then he lands with 18 Div and says " after all your deception and maniupulation JH, You need to be taught a lesson. he said "in all the games he played this was a new low be me etc etc.".

But alas - now it seems the american was honorable.


Now on to the CV carrying planes. If Planes can deploy, what was the context of the question about using CV to carry them? This would seem a superflous point then woudnt it? The answer? There was a discussion about Cv and planes. Indeed I asked if fighers could be deplyed from CV - The answer " Only for trasnportation JH." Furthermore we are saying a CV or bomber div can materialise in an island, but inf cant!!

Again the Jh way of thinking is to respect the reality of an inf div 'appearing" with as much reidicule as a battleship!

Anyway after being accused of cheating - wrongfully - three times - why bother!

Ive never cheated i this game!

 

[unmerged(25040)]

Too historical

Now to Mike..

Mike's view is that its a game and we shouldnt take an historical view. Eg Azores, 18 divs in invasion etc, Brazil.

Then PLEASE for Gods sake tell me WHY the block for the USA to enter the war earlier was prevented on the basis that " it would never have happened JH. "The USa would have let the UK fall ... " ( ie an historical approach) blah blah on bermuda and Azores.

To the other listening - get the trend here. History is a stick to use when and if it suits u ( ie Mike). When expansive german actions are desired ( eg France 39m Azores etc) - its a game and not history!.

However

When earlier strategic counter moves are required by the allies, we have to abide by History - get it?

Flip flop, flip Flop.

Straw man logic!

advice - dont go into the law or politics,

Thats my argumenst put:

1. I was commited to Atlantic war - Joel said I cheated.
2. CV were only too transport fighters - why else the discussion? Thus the absence of figters in Pac Major> In any case how could ships or plane invisibly arrive?
3.History is used as a block for the allies, game free play is used as advantage for the axis.

 

[unmerged(5892)]

Well, cant say I agree.

Jh - you admitted to me that you were using MP largely against me, and your only response was 'blame mike for taking Bermuda'. Well, I won't, and as I said, I hold you accountable for how you play.

The end result is that whilst in our last session you finally moved a token portion of your force against the US, you played in a fashion which I found dissapointing, as I've noted at length already.

I am really, really looking forward to playing the USA next game, with the current Allies as the Axis. Then we can see how much of this repetetive drivel about how our rules favour the Axis can be turned on its head.

On the issue of you thinking that I'm calling you a cheat, when I thought you had moved forces to Baker, or wherever it was, Major explained a part of the game mechanics I was unaware of, that showed that you hadn't. I aknowledged I was therefore probably wrong in voicing my concerns. I likewise apologise if you were afk and didn't see me do so. I'll even say it again - I'm sorry I thought you were breaking house rules, as I was wrong.

But what does gall me though is that you always take the moral high ground and state to the world that you play so fairly, and that you would never do anything even vaguely gamey, and yet you still cannot explain away the very simple fact that is the issue here:

You were given Manpower because of a German action. You used this manpower against Japan.

Saves show it, and in game playing and deployments show it.

It's that simple, and I let the matter pass after griping about it to you because it was not a rule, just an expectation of fair play I had. So please, don't complain when I don't buckle to your style of play because of this.

I played by the rules with my invasions, but was not originally planning to use so many units. Of course, if you think it's fair to defend islands with forces that need large enemy forces to dislodge them, then by all means, suggest this as a rule. For my 2 cents, I think it's just a little more fair for me to actually have a chance of beating you. If you want to impose limits on invasions, start by imposing limits on yourself with how you defend your islands.

 

[mike8472]

Now to Mike..

Mike's view is that its a game and we shouldnt take an historical view. Eg Azores, 18 divs in invasion etc, Brazil.

Then PLEASE for Gods sake tell me WHY the block for the USA to enter the war earlier was prevented on the basis that " it would never have happened JH. "The USa would have let the UK fall ... " ( ie an historical approach) blah blah on bermuda and Azores.

To the other listening - get the trend here. History is a stick to use when and if it suits u ( ie Mike). When expansive german actions are desired ( eg France 39m Azores etc) - its a game and not history!.

However

When earlier strategic counter moves are required by the allies, we have to abide by History - get it?

Flip flop, flip Flop.

Straw man logic!

advice - dont go into the law or politics,

Thats my argumenst put:

1. I was commited to Atlantic war - Joel said I cheated.
2. CV were only too transport fighters - why else the discussion? Thus the absence of figters in Pac Major> In any case how could ships or plane invisibly arrive?
3.History is used as a block for the allies, game free play is used as advantage for the axis.

Seems ive been dragged back into this conversation, i was happy to leave it between you and Joel.

1. Your points about germany attacking France early or the low countries or even the UK once war is out. It was agreed along time ago that once at war a country is free to pursue it own war aims. Eg if im at war with France or UK then i am free to attack them when ever. THE main reason though germany needs France early is becasue the USSR is so overpowered, without france early there is no point playing. If you read a few pages back in this thread to balance the game more evenly to help out the allies and UK i suggested the USSR defend and play realisticaly in western russia (eg simply defend all its lands nothing more). This would then not require Germany to attack France until may 1940 (historical date) but this was not acceptable to the others for reasons im a not sure about.

2. In regards to Brazil, well the Uk brought them into the Alliance there for i can attack them. I did not DOW on them. But if you feel Germany can only attack certain countries or certain provinces plz make up a list and give it to me before war as i would like to know what enemies i am not allowed to attack.

3. JH you are so totaly wrong about this CV issue your are starting to look like a real dil. Major had this conversation in regards to the pacfic or the Uk needing to get forces to other theaters when planes cannot fly that far. We stated use CV's. Major then said CV's are only for CAGs, correct. We then agreed CV's can transport other aircraft but if they get involved in a fight they are to retreat or move a the first opportunity. That is it, there was nothing more to this CV issue. Understand, i hope so its pretty simple.

4. Jh i dont recall history being a block when i was the UK, and it was claimed i was far to strong as the UK. This was the game when munster was Germany 2 games back.

We use general historical dates for the start of wars. Eg Sept 39, June 22 1941, Dec 7th 1941. This is so we dont end up with Germany attacking France in 1936, or USSR attack poland in 37, or Japan invading the US in 38. Is that the type of game you want. Once at war each nation is free to pursue its own war aims as long as it is with-in our rules and general spirit of the game. Eg Bermuda was a Uk province, which is my enemy and there for a legit target. You were compensated for this. Having a

Having a large fleet as Germany is historical. Hitler planned to match the Royal navy. Every ship except some of the CV;s and subs as been built with events that germany recieves for ship building, i could have evn built more. And so far that strat has worked by keeping the allies of all of my flanks allowing me maximum forces on the russian front.

In short Jh it is time for you to play an Axis nation next game. Your are speaking through one eye as you have never played an axis nation in our games. How can you give a balanced perspective here when you do not know the strengths an weaknesses of the other side. This is the flaw in your game, until you play axis nations you will never understand this game fully.

P.S Jh you miss so many conversations in our game, we have discussed these things at great length already, you are simply repeating what most of us have already discussed and answered its not our problem if you miss this and are unaware or unsure of something, except the issue with you and joel.
Im sick of this bickering, play the game and next game go axis jh and you will understand alot more.

 

[unmerged(34422)]

Hey, this weird thing happened in a game once.

A German fighter squadron was taken to 0 strength but it stayed on the map? I thought you guys would help me understand why.

Any ideas?

JH is a good fair player, that game against me as Japan was an example of how realistic he is. I think you should all take a lesson from him.

I've played Allies/Axis many times and the Axis is too over-powered, and this is compounded by your house rules.

 

[mike8472]

Ok instead of getting into one of these slanging matches Jh suggest ideas New or adjusted Rules that you think are apporiate. But that are also simple and easy for all players to remeber ad implement.

Take into account though alot of your gripes about the US are fixed in CORE 0.9. We should be able to make US entry to the war based on US WE with CORE 0.9 as its has been fixed.

 

[unmerged(25040)]

game

It would no use suggesting changes to rules - as they are constantly ignored.

I was even heartened to hear someone suggest limitations on Su IC upgrades. Remember when I suggested this a bout a month ago. Ignored..

As a suggestion or example I suggested min garrison on island - remember??? I s'pose u dont.. My bad luck again..

It was ignored. So Im sort of over suggesting Game rule changes.

Look Joels email explains it all - its there to be read. He admitted he made the error. he even admitted to a sense of game vindicivness in having an invasion with 3 x the DDay str!

Maybe Mike should be in politics - as your last msg was portraying that I have a problem with a ambitiuos German Navy I dont. Never have.. I never had a problem with Azores, Brazil, or anything - my probelm was lack of allied flexibility to respond.

But once again Mike will portray it like I am opposed to Germany attacks on certain countries - old tactic > distract, obfuscate, evade...

To justify early axis aggression - yet deny early Allied response is there for all to see. thats the Point.

if I was playing Axis - there is NO way I would or could invade France in 1939. But some guy will pick up some war comic historical source saying it was being considered.

Its the same rule for all in my book - flexibiity on both sides - freedom of action.

 

[unmerged(25040)]

Specifically on joels points

Could say alot - but I am not going to embarrass myself - in say 12-18 mths - by landing anything more than about 9 div ( MAX!) So I am never ever going to dislodge the Japs.

So its stalemate on the russian front, Uk is staying put and stalemate in pac.

Joel has won in the pacific. NO ONE CAN defend against 18 stacks.

Stalemate - why bother.

 

[mike8472]

Allied response or spically US isnt a problem with the new version of CORE. As US WE is fixed and works now so that US WE reaches 100 around mid to late 1942. It is at about 90 in dec 1941 when new events fire called Pearl Harbour diplomatic events which can lead to war between US & Japs. There are also about 5-6 ways the US can enter WAR with the axis prior to this Eg if Axis invade UK succesfully then US gets war events, if axis invade any south american nation, and many more.

This was the main reason for making US entry to war the historic date Dec 7th 1941. If the US entered earlier to fight the Germans or so forth then basicaly the Jap player game is runined and the pacific war for the US as well in terms of fun. So the result is a massive US all prepared for war so the Japs get no advantage. Now you may say tough as axis be over aggressive have earned it, then end result a dud game. Now ill cut of Jh's response befor he rights it. The US was never going to enter the war unless directly attacked or if the UK was actually defeated and then it was a direct threat to the US. FDR wanted to join the war but congress and the people did not want a bar of it. There are now many ways the US can get into the war with an over agressive axis but over running all of mainland europe is not considered over aggressive or a direct threat to the US from an histroical point of view. That was from the lastest comic book by the way.

I only mention by defence of the zores or brazil, or the navy as you keep bringing it up in your posts, read them yourself and it makes it sounds as if you are accusing me, and i wont back away from a good debate.

It comes down to this JH play it like a game do what you have to do in order to defend your nation or attack as long as it is with-in our rules. You have 5 other players doing this except you (well at least 4 nolan not doing much attacking.) You can play historical or very realisticaly if you like but it dosnt work with HOI as the game is not built or programmed that way. If you play very historical and leave your fleet at pearl harbour to be smashed or only leave 400 troops on wake then you will be defeated very easily so no point even playing. Or do you think it should be 4 or 5 other people should change they way they play to suit you?

Instead propose some rules for eg the pacific. The reason i mentioned it last post was because im not playing there and you and joel would be best to recommend changes, since that is where the main issue is. I dont want to hear about things not being changed or you not being listened to, wirte them down or post in our rules forum not here as it will get lost. Let the group comment on them and put it to a vote, if it improves the game im all for it.

Also do you intend to keep playing this game Yes or No?

If no cya when HOI 2 comes out.

 

[unmerged(25040)]

game

Im not walking out - I have had that how many times to me -remember omni when i was SU - thats must have been 3 times. And then USa before this game. The game was stopped then - yes. Oh well - 'bad luck JH, thats the choice you pay for bing USa was your reply Mike'.

So no - I will do what u do which is cease the game when you dont like it - -remember uk Mike?

Im saying Joel has won - he will just hop around the pacific with 18 stack.

And Im saying I will not be so gamey to do the same.

Finally I love the amazing logic of thet last post - which was effectively a defence of the need to not give Japan a disadvantage by ealry USa war entry!

For gods sake HOW in heavens name do you justify this logic with the franco invasion, quick China invasion - ALL of which give disadvantage to allies!

its like talking to a child! Not rationale throught!


I beg of you - please tell me why opportunistic, early and rapid invasions of places like China or France is fair - AND That early and opportunitistic counter moves by aliies is unfair!!??

I think your answe is it ruins the game for the axis player. BUt For heavens sake 0 isnt that the price you pay for suck moves - as reflected in earlier USA preparations.

PS i still the love the one about ships and planes turning up in far off ports and province like the molecular trabsporter in star trek = Sorry I forhet its a game.

 

[mike8472]

Hmm well like me and the others in our group who listen. France is tacken early becuase Germany needs them to fight the USSR which is way overpowered and even then there is little chance of wining. So without france theres no point playing. THIS IS THE THIRD TIME IVED SAID THIS JH SO IM SHOUTING NOW, ive suggested changes to fix all these problems but then you say you dont want changes then complain about the game.

Japan needs China as the US player (eg you) are not going to leave your fleet at Pearl Harbour to be destroyed to at least give japs advantage for 1 year. HOPE YOUR HEARD THAT IM SICK OF REPEATING MYSELF. Also war comes about via events in 37 with china, so now the jap player should stay at war with china when they can conqerer them if they want to. LIKE I SAID US WE HAS BEEN FIXED FOR CORE 0.90 SO THAT A SUCESFULL CONQUEST MAKES BIG IMPROVEMENTS TO US WE.

I recall i wanted to continue the last 2 games when i was UK as they were two of the best games ive had. It was the Ger/USSR front that stuffed the game up again. So stop saying i said things when i did not. This is starting to get personal so i will stop here.

 

[unmerged(25040)]

game

but Mike we are not playing .9MP, we are playing this game. I cant argue for one way or another for future versions. And i appreciate the work u are doing etc.

BUT - tell me why IN THIS game - early startegic moves by the axis, cannot be countered by early strategic ounter moves by allies.

 

[unmerged(5892)]

Ok, well lets try and get things back to being constructive. I'm still yet to get a reply from JH that answers my main questions, but I think going on about this is not going to help.


So, I'd like you (jh) to make some suggestions for rule changes if you think its required. Some ideas I'd like your thoughts on are:

What are maximum limits for invasions? Not 18 clearly. Is 12 ok?

What are maximum limits for defense against Invasions? (I'm thinking that the attacker needs to outnumber the defender to have any chance myself), and bearing in mind 9 brigaded inf of mine lost out to 4 (or was it 5?) inf in Palmyra, even with air and bombardment support, I think this is important to clarify if we want a Pacific campaign of any interest at all.

What realistic way can we determine what US war entry should be?

If manpower is given to a nation for a specific reason a la Bermuda, how should that player use the manpower? As they want, or is it fair to limit this?

I also think if you play Germany for a game, it would probably be benefitial for you to see things from the other side of the fence as well.

Finally, I think I need to state that it's laughable that there are claims of the war being over because of 18 inf invasions. Let me point out to everyone that I made 1 such invasion of wake. The rest were 12 divisions, and then 9 divisions versus Midway, and then Johnston & Palmyra. The reason that the war in the pacific has swung decisively in Japans favour has nothing to do with invasions of a few islands. It has everything to do with the US frittering away its fleet & air units, and several decisive victories I scored. For example, JH sent a CV task force to wake without land based air cover. I sunk it with no losses.

The fact that the US now has 30 surface ships is of far more importance than of the loss of 3 islands. And not 1 naval unit was captured or destroyed in port. Each and every last 1 I destroyed was done by my fleet, or my naval air (Cags and a couple of attacks of land based air). I'm sure JH when he thinks about this, will realise it's true. No matter how many inf you have on an island, the Pacific war is won at sea and air.

 

[unmerged(25040)]

air

my fleet had no air as all avail cv are acting as 'buses' for the fighters to shift figters from US main to islands. I must have said this 4-5 times in above msg.

This is also why fighers arrive in drips nd draps and then get killed.

Jap fighters just hop hop - or maybe they materialise with the star trek molecular transporter!

Please dont tell me that ships and fighers can deploy- but inf cant. that would send me off the edge!

Its too late now to suggest changes to USA WE - the case was made in last game with Spain and defended. SO its no different this game.

As a rule - I would use the game WE to attest to WE.

The sole reason why the USN navy is denuded - aside the CV buses is the fct Im fightimng serios navy warfare in two oceans with land based air disadvantage - also numerical disadvatange. Germany and Japn have about 8 fleets between them =- USa can put to see maybe 5.

You have to fight to win and given stacks are limited to 12. YOU have to fight 12 v 12 stacks. Some u win - some u lose.

I have sunk a lot of german and jap ships, but with a timied RN, it is a lost fight.

Do nothing some suggest - I hardly see the US sending inf across the atlatic when key isalnds are occupied and acting as small "Maltas " in the A.

You have to fight to win - thats what i did. With limited cv.

On rules Im over suggesting them -u just ignore them.

Eg- garrison limits, IC upgrade, fighers on cv...

 

[unmerged(25040)]

rules

sorry

I have one rule suggestion.

Dont be gamey ! - Dont shake u head - I mean it.

Gamey = polish blob = ethipoa puppet = Nat China in jan 36 = Italian balkan empire in 38 = units materialising in far off lands= no allied counter effect allowed for spain, Gibralta ( diff from Spain) = no allied counter effect for azores and Bermuda, no allie counter effect for UK invasion = 12 stack acft = 48 stack inf = 18 inf invasions.

gamey means action and activities that in the course or normal warfare would lead to a significant counter action not allowed within calculations of the software.

 

[gzav]

Chill guys, it's just a game...

 

[unmerged(16810)]

Rule Britania

Dont blame the RN.

The RN has been in constant action against the Italian navy for over two and a half years. This while still maintaining a large force in UK ports to repell any Sealion operation. Unable to replace any losses due to the lack of available manpower, the RN has to fight the war while conserving its large but rather antiquated fleet. New model ships are now available to be built and as older ships are decommissioned, the crews will be posted to their new ships.

The Greatest part of the British army is likewise based in the UK to guard against any landings by Axis forces. More British land forces will be freed up for overseas operations once American army units begin to arrive in UK.

Brazil has been saved for now, thanks mainly to the fighting spirit of the USN and the US Army. Axis ground units in Brazil now find themselves confined to a small area around Rio. Sevral unguarded Luftwaffa bomber squadrans were destroyed by british commando raids along the Brazilian coast.

In a stroke of luck 4 german navy bombers were engaged and forced to ditch in the icy North Atlantic by Canadian strategic bombers on a mission to Burmuda. These same Canadian heros are now based in UK and have already flown bombing missions over Germany and occupied Europe.

Allied units are now on offensive in French West Africa.

The situation in NE Africa is still fragile. The Italian Navy ( whats left of it ) is now confined to the upper reaches of the Red Sea and the Med beyond. The appearance of german air units in this theatre is some cause for concern.

In Burma Allied forces easily beat off the Japanese attacks on Rangoon but Jap units are pushing through the jungles of central Burma.

Hurry up with those Tritium bombs JH





________________________


________________________

 

[mike8472]

Hehe sounds like the Nolan is enjoying himself, as am I in this game. I think this game can go along way yet. The US needs to rebuild, USSR building up to destroy the axis, Japan is expanding maybe the USSR needs to be involved there earlier, will italy hold or continue to expand in africa. This game still has limitless options, will the Germans and Japs invade the US and finish the war off, will the allies muster all there strength and slowly wind the Axis powers back and liberate France befor the reds get there.

Wahahahahahah Germany will dominate this world here and for a 1000 years. With my Italian and Jap friends of course, hehehe they will submit to German leadership as well. Hhaahahah

 

[unmerged(5892)]

Today got us through to July 1942.

Japan slowly battled its way through Burma, winning several battles, but losing others, all the while gradually pushing the Brit's back to India. At sessions end, whilst Rangoon had fallen, parts of western Burma still remained in the hands of the tenacious Allied forces.

In New Guinea, an Australian landing met with greif after occupying some ports, its supporting naval force was destroyed, leaving the combined Australian/New Zealand forces marooned. Likewise, in the Solomons, the entire New Zealand fleet was harried to its destruction.

Japanese marines finally captured Palmyra after several long and bloody battles, leaving only Hawaii and the Aleutians in US hands in the Pacific. Hawaii itself was constantly harried by air and sea, with large numbers of air units based there being shot down. A further US effort to relieve the island saw the sinking of a further US CV task force, all at the cost of 1 CAG to japan.

The US, with no fleet, no airwing, and an isolated army, surrendered at this stage, whilst in Europe the war was still clearly not decided, but looking likely for the Soviets to march into Germany unless new German armour could repel them.

All in all, a game with many differences of opinions, but one that saw the majority of us get in alot of good fighting. Looking forward to playing the new patch when it's out.

 

[mike8472]

I was looking forward to having a good long war with the SU. German airpower would have been decisive in the near future, should have at least had fun for a few more years. But it was a fun game for me.

Look forward to new CORE patch, hopefully later this week or next. Should be the last befor HOI 2 is out.