Yeah, I have had similar early war setbacks, and they are demoralizing. Would it be so bad to fight it out for a session and see how it goes? Give them a bloody nose at least. 
-
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.
well if we do rollback then Italy might be better played too
Well the only thing i care about is that we don't end in 41 or soemthing like that. but if term take over germany will we see and invasion in london by spring 40? if we do that then it will destroy the game too
Well the only thing i care about is that we don't end in 41 or soemthing like that. but if term take over germany will we see and invasion in london by spring 40? if we do that then it will destroy the game too
-Lyko- said:well if we do rollback then Italy might be better played too
I hope so.
-Lyko- said:Well the only thing i care about is that we don't end in 41 or soemthing like that. but if term take over germany will we see and invasion in london by spring 40? if we do that then it will destroy the game too
Even if the Allies lose England mainland, although it's really painfull, they
will still have the vast British colonial empire overseas and USA - the
Arsenal of Democracy so to speak.
That's what the Japanese are for, and in vanilla, India is indefensible. Actually its more or less idefensible in almost any version of the game that allows Japan to puppet China.
True. Solve the whole problem of Axis winning ever, too. Human Nat China rapes Japan, annexes all the little China's becomes a 100 IC plus country, and then kills Japan on the invasion. Though essentially, I agree in principle with the idea, it should be possible. That would be best.
Cueball said:
Not necessarily. It would only depend which of the two is a more
experienced player.
Well, I think determining issues of game balance, should really be considered from the perspective of having a relative balance of player skill. In a balanced game, assuming that the Chinese players knows the system, Japan has no chance of prosecuting a succesful war against China, and even if he does succeed, this impacts the whole game. Say, China survives and you end up with historical parity, and deadlock then Japan is essentially out of the game as an active Axis ally -- because no one is insane enough to both continue the war in China, and start up a front against the Allies. It is basicly just waiting for the US invasion, or the British to attack, or even not attack.
Japan is irrelevant, therefore, and so all forces can be concentrated in the European theater, and the Axis is lost, as long is Russia is semi-competent. Then of course, if China is conquered, we are back to the same system with India being an open book.
Are you saying that you want the whole outcome of the game to be determined on the basis of wether or not China is "new," or not.
Note: If you make it a rule that China may not annex the little China's (must accept peace with Guanxi Clique, basicly), yes China should not survive. You could then have the Chinese player play France, and then USA. This way Japan will surely defeat China, and France will not have the advantage of their gamey builds at Danzig, and USA will not be super strong in 1941 either. That would be an interesting game structure for vanilla.
Japan is irrelevant, therefore, and so all forces can be concentrated in the European theater, and the Axis is lost, as long is Russia is semi-competent. Then of course, if China is conquered, we are back to the same system with India being an open book.
Are you saying that you want the whole outcome of the game to be determined on the basis of wether or not China is "new," or not.
Note: If you make it a rule that China may not annex the little China's (must accept peace with Guanxi Clique, basicly), yes China should not survive. You could then have the Chinese player play France, and then USA. This way Japan will surely defeat China, and France will not have the advantage of their gamey builds at Danzig, and USA will not be super strong in 1941 either. That would be an interesting game structure for vanilla.
Last edited:
Cueball said:
That's a great idea. And the US player doesn't have to essentially waste four sessions of his time making IC. Sounds like a funner, more balanced game for everyone.
Well Gentlemen, post if you can play New Year's Day. I propose a super-session, say 10 hours or so or more, maybe starting New Year's Eve!!
If not, I will just make another thread for the idea, I will have lots of time to play next Monday and Tuesday.
If not, I will just make another thread for the idea, I will have lots of time to play next Monday and Tuesday.
I speak of Monday, the 31st, we can play all the way into the new year if you want!!!
i can't play on the 31st or 1st.. well i probably could play the 1st but i rather not.