sveint (Axis) vs Villain (Allies)

[sveint]

This won't be a traditional AAR. I'll post tidbits, summaries and interesting things happening.

Sadly Villain has been around the block and knows all the tricks. I was going to take Scapa Flow on turn two, but... no.

[sveint]

Poland uses a new strategy of garrisoning its units. Early game seems slightly harder for Germany now. Wonder what the French will do.

[Harrybanana]

ORIGINAL: sveint

This won't be a traditional AAR. I'll post tidbits, summaries and interesting things happening.

Sadly Villain has been around the block and knows all the tricks. I was going to take Scapa Flow on turn two, but... no.

Actually, if you are using 1.00.12, there is a new rule:

Added raider retreat rule. If a fleet at sea in raider mode is in a non-ocean hex it will retreat from the hex if next to an enemy fleet.

So if the sub is in raider mode you can bounce it out of the hex by moving a fleet adjacent to it. If it is not in raider mode you can move your German fleet adjacent to it in Fleet mode and hope that it intercepts your fleet and is sunk.

I like this Rule, even though I learned it the hard way. What I don't like is that it doesn't say if the "enemy fleet" has to be in Fleet mode. If a fleet in Fleet mode can bounce a fleet in raider mode that makes sense. But it doesn't make sense to me if a fleet in raider mode can bounce another fleet in raider mode.

[MagicMissile]

I made a quick test seems raider fleets do move raider fleets slightly odd I think [:)].

/MM

[Harrybanana]

ORIGINAL: MagicMissile

I made a quick test seems raider fleets do move raider fleets slightly odd I think [:)].

/MM

I agree. A fleet should have to be in Fleet Mode to bounce a fleet in Raider Mode. Otherwise my 9 unit fleet in Raider mode could be forced to move by an single enemy DD in Raider mode.

[Nirosi]

I believe it is been removed by the hotfix

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=5053192

[ncc1701e]

That's my understanding as well.

[sveint]

Canadians garrison Syria. For some reason I always thought I needed French units in French colonies.

[Harrybanana]

ORIGINAL: sveint

Canadians garrison Syria. For some reason I always thought I needed French units in French colonies.

Maybe because that is the House Rule we played with. My standard House Rules include that the French Colonial units cannot be moved until Italy is an Axis Ally.

[sveint]

The weather clears in early March but we badly botch our attacks on the Benelux. Should perhaps have waited. The war in Belgium is about to get a lot harder.

[sveint]

Garrisoned infantry is going to be a problem. I'm starting to think a later attack with more panzers is better against Belgium, even with clear weather.

[sveint]

I meant to do a historical attack on Norway but the air/neutral bug is literally in my way.
No way to paradrop, no way to bomb an enemy fleet on a neutral coastline.

[sveint]

The new reality in France 40.

[sveint]

End of turn May 24.

[sveint]

Early June, we suffer a Panzer corps overrun by infantry (whatever, shouldn't be possible).

But it may just have all been worth it because the Royal Navy is asleep on the job.

My guess is: very weak British land forces in England, and the BEF is exhausted from the counter-attack.

Edit: I see my panzer corps started at 14 strength, no way it should have been overrun. Shattered, sure.

[ncc1701e]

Is France now too strong from your point of view?

[Villain]

Nice landing Svein!
I gambled you wouldn't want to use 60 Landing Ships on a tank and lost. doh.

This seems like a weird result after only being ground struck once without any damage and having place to retreat/shatter.

[Nirosi]

I agree, the surrender results are sometimes really weird. Not super common, but 2-3 times per game I see something like that.

[stjeand]

Perhaps there is a small chance of a surrender rather than a shatter...and as luck would have it...

Al would have to answer.

[sveint]

An occational infantry surrender is no big issue. But tanks overrun by infantry?