Mark Stevens
Europe Aflame Forum Moderator
Last call for submarine U-257 leaving from Hamburg for Argentina.
March 1945
- Thread starter Mark Stevens
- Start date
Veers
Member
...by the looksof it, you;ve...lost Hamburg...:laugh:
Looks like you've already pulled most of the units, that you can, out of the line in the east.
Are the units fighting in Romania and southern Germany worth their salt, or have those fronts been stripped, as well?
Veers
Member
This goes to show that holding onto Berlin is possible. Perhaps victory should be determined by who holds Berlin by turn 305 (or whatever turn actually coincides with the actual end of the war)?
The rest of the post-305 game could be left in, but only to be played 'for fun'.
Raver
TOAW Ironman
lol! I misread this and thought you were saying that the first 304 turns could be left in and played just for fun, but the real excitement would just be who could take berlin on turn 305.
Its an interesting concept for determining the winner, but I think that victory points is better in a scenario like this, because of the possibility for unhistoric things to happen - eg have you lost if you lose Berlin by turn 305 but Italy is untouched and you own most of russia still?
Veers
Member
I agreee, but the problem with the current VP system is that for the German player to retain enough territory to keep even a draw is nearly impossible.
If the win/loss condition is Berlin, and not the VPs, it gives the Axis player a reason to continue past his failing to take out the USSR, as he can cling onto the hope of holding onto Berlin past the historical date.
Currently the game begins with a draw, with the Axis controling Germany, Italy, Spain, Sweden, Finland, the Balts, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Iran, and Libya. This means that even if the German player played well enough to retain all of Italy and Germany, by the end, he would still loose.
Raver
TOAW Ironman
I wonder if its possible to increase the VPs for key home german and italian cities to the point where you can cling to a draw by holding enough of the fatherland by the end of the game?
Veers
Member
That's the other option, and one which I'm willing to entertain.
The ony question is where to draw the line. Does the Axis player win if he keeps all of Germany and Italy.
Does he only get a draw, etc, etc.
Raver
TOAW Ironman
Yeah I think its worth thinking about too. I imagine that if someone held all of Germany and Italy they should do a bit better than a draw - ie a MV? So maybe that would be a starting point. And I guess you should probably have to lose pretty much everything to get on overwhelming defeat.
Of course the other thing is what should the end date is. Holding Germany to the historic end of the war is a far cry different to holding it into July of the same year.
Of course the other thing is what should the end date is. Holding Germany to the historic end of the war is a far cry different to holding it into July of the same year.
Veers
Member
Are you seeing most games end with the Allies getting to Berlin and very few with the Axis winning? I know for Matrix's War in the Pacific the Japanese player "wins" if he loses in 1946 instead of 1945, or has so blunted the Allies early in the game that the USA gives up by 1943-44... Have many Axis players completely dominated the map?
In my game against Serge he overexpanded as the Axis into Turkey, Iraq and missed the Barbarossa option. So now in early 1943 the Russians have overrun Scandinavia and are moving into Poland. My opponent has played well against the western Allies but without a Barbarossa attack has had to face an intact and ever increasing Red Army. But to actually stave off the Allies till after May 1945 is all but impossible.... of course, now watch me bungle my offensive and he wins
In my game against Serge he overexpanded as the Axis into Turkey, Iraq and missed the Barbarossa option. So now in early 1943 the Russians have overrun Scandinavia and are moving into Poland. My opponent has played well against the western Allies but without a Barbarossa attack has had to face an intact and ever increasing Red Army. But to actually stave off the Allies till after May 1945 is all but impossible.... of course, now watch me bungle my offensive and he wins
Last edited:
Veers
Member
We used to see the Axis win more often than the Allies, with 'winning' constituting the Axis capture of the Soviet Union. Since then the balance has improved such that the Allies and Axis 'win' more equally.Are you seeing most games end with the Allies getting to Berlin and very few with the Axis winning? I know for Matrix's War in the Pacific the Japanese player "wins" if he loses in 1946 instead of 1945, or has so blunted the Allies early in the game that the USA gives up by 1943-44... Have many Axis players completely dominated the map?
In my game against Serge he overexpanded as the Axis into Turkey, Iraq and missed the Barbarossa option. So now in early 1943 the Russians have overrun Scandinavia and are moving into Poland. My opponent has played well against the western Allies but without a Barbarossa attack has had to face an intact and ever increasing Red Army. But to actually stave off the Allies till after May 1945 is all but impossible.... of course, now watch me bungle my offensive and he wins
I think I have only heard of an Axis player holding onto Berlin past the histoirc end date once. Of course others-Mark, Shane, Raver-have been around longer and may have heard of more.
Raver
TOAW Ironman
Thats a fair assessment I think. I would also add that often when playing germany for the first time, people get beaten quite badly and conclude that the allies have a big advantage. But that definately evens out once you have a bit of experience under your belt.
That makes sense Raver. I think Serge and I will play Aflame again after this current round and play the same sides rather than switch. It will probably be a much more grueling fight with the Axis not suffering the greater consequences of rookie mistakes. My rookie mistakes as the Allies were mainly getting mauled in Finland and losing Gibralter and the Med. Both mistakes easy to recover from. Not having a Barbarossa for the Axis player seems EXTREMELY difficult to recover from.
Glad the game balance is getting better, i'm really enjoying the incredible replayability and depth of this scenario!
Glad the game balance is getting better, i'm really enjoying the incredible replayability and depth of this scenario!
Panzerpelle
Member
loooooong game...
My longest game ever...353 turns against Mark! enjoyed every year of it... start was 2002 september 21st and end was 2004 june 18th. I post a end game pic...
My longest game ever...353 turns against Mark! enjoyed every year of it...
start was 2002 september 21st and end was 2004 june 18th. I post a end game pic...
Veers
Member
That's amazing...I'm shocked that the Axis player (which one of you was Axis) was able to hold onto that much territory after failing to take out the Soviet Union.My longest game ever...353 turns against Mark! enjoyed every year of it...
Panzerpelle
Member
My humbleness forbids me to say who played the axis...
Veers
Member
:laugh: :laugh:
How did you not capture Moscow and Stalingrad, then?
Veers
Member
Yeah, with the old flanking rules its hard to hold anything but a straight line. It will be nice to see Ralph's 'new' flanking rules.
Great job to the Axis player!!! I'm impressed. I always feel like when the axis stops attacking they lose but not the case here!
What are the new flanking rules? To reduce the flanking bonus or increase it? It is tricky keeping the straight lines going...
What are the new flanking rules? To reduce the flanking bonus or increase it? It is tricky keeping the straight lines going...