While I sympathize with the poster (not just above, but in his whole line of argument--which is that it's too damn hard to play Axis), I disagree with his conclusions. You can certainly win with Axis--including doing Sealion as part of a winning strategy [just look at the Fortress Europa AAR!]--but I think we can all agree that it's trickier, perhaps quite a bit trickier, to play Axis.kaigab73 wrote:i didn't say that the game should end. i just said that as it is now, sealion is useless. by doing sealion against any decent player you are almost sure to lose the game as axis to the russians.Stauffenberg wrote:I don't agree with the last post.
Let's say we have a rule where the Allied powers sue for peace if London falls. What would happen then? Every Axis player would go for broke and invade England. A dedicated Axis attack will prevail for sure. Then the game is over in 1941. Is that what we want? We don't know for sure what would have happened if England fell. With Churchill alive I think they would have fought on from Canada and the colonies. USSR would certainly not do nothing. Hitler really wanted war with USSR and only fought in the west to not fight on two fronts. So with England gone then Germany would engage in war against USSR.
Nobody knows what USA would have done, but I think they would have helped UK as they did in the real war and joined the fight when Japan invaded in December 1941.
So all we talk about is how the minor powers would have reacted. Maybe Spain could have been persuaded to join the Axis. Getting Gibraltar would be tempting for Franco. We have rules allowing Spain to join the Axis so the Germans just need to ensure it happens.
I think the current rules simulate well how the UK would deal with Sealion.
Churchill alive or dead doesn't make a difference, without UK homeland, UK would have done nothing. UK colonies were colonies and problably would have revolted to UK. all industry was in UK.
and without UK, USA would have done nothing, problably just fighting Japan in pacific and trying to organize peace treaty.
this is why i say that even if letting UK and USA keep fighting (even if quite difficult to happen in real life) at least Spain should join the Axis if London is in german hands as all minors in europe (at least this compensate the PP spent by germany). this way at least allies must focus primary on avoiding sealion (which is what UK did after all till germany attacked russia) instead of moving troops to africa.
btw, i don't understand why so many english troops have been put in africa. which is the reason? with supply rule it's already quite difficult (and useless and expensive) for axis to reach suez...with the troops now in africa, is nearly impossible.
As the Allies, I think the game allows you more blunders--especially early on--and in any case you can sit back and be reactive for quite a while, which makes your life much less complicated. Case in point: even the stupid AI is infinitely better at playing Allies than Axis.
On the other hand, if you plan meticulously and combine a well-framed grand strategy with solid tactics, Axis can produce devastating results. This is hard to do. Speaking for myself, I have to supplement my play with all sorts of peripherals--weather charts from the manual, a calendar to plot my builds and moves, tons of forward planning, screen shots to help me between moves, etc., etc. But I relish this challenge. It's like chess on steroids. And I've never lost a game as Axis.
Yes, I groan every time I see the design team introduce another hurdle for Axis, but let's note all the goodies Axis has gotten along the way. The new research rules mean that the Allies have a much harder time specializing and producing that omnipotent air umbrella. The new rail rules actually help Germany in some ways, such as deploying for Barbarossa, and they'll hurt Russia to some degree as well. Etc.