Need opponent or join a GD1938 game

[ironduke1955]

If it is all about the game play why gift the Chinese a city so they can gain their victory objectives. And End the game play in preference for a Victory. The USA had not joined the Axis they were simply trying to prevent a Chinese victory as the British and Soviets had stated that they were going to give the Chinese victory. You do both know that by giving China victory you yourselves have accepted defeat and are just as beaten as the Germans and Italians. So it was a matter of stopping one player in preference of another. Does any of this sound remotely like the Second World War[&:]

[ernieschwitz]

I see what you are getting at IronDuke, and I will make an attempt to make that kind of situation impossible in the new build.

[Bombur]

ORIGINAL: ironduke1955

If it is all about the game play why gift the Chinese a city so they can gain their victory objectives. And End the game play in preference for a Victory. The USA had not joined the Axis they were simply trying to prevent a Chinese victory as the British and Soviets had stated that they were going to give the Chinese victory. You do both know that by giving China victory you yourselves have accepted defeat and are just as beaten as the Germans and Italians. So it was a matter of stopping one player in preference of another. Does any of this sound remotely like the Second World War[&:]

We lost, true, but we had lots of fun. Victory was too far for us, but it´s better to give it to an ally, anyway, it was only possible because the Soviets and China played well against Japan, the Chinese by fighting an enemy with technological superiority and the Soviets by fighting a two front war. The Soviet player, of course, could haved kept Korea and we could have gave up China´s victory in exchange for USA to entry the war in our side. It would have been probably a better game, but once the USA player was changed, diplomacy became very blurred. I understand your unhapiness because you was very close to victory over USSR and only USA intervention could have saved us. If I was the USA player I would have DOWed the European Axis and remained neutral in Japan, by doing this, I could have won enough time to achieve my objectives (whatever they are). On the other hand, I believe we could (and we will prbably do it) change the victory rules. A possible alternative is to allow the game to run until all the players agree on a winner (or coalition), this would result in very long games, and I should improve the details or early cold war stuff.

[cpdeyoung]

Tom, are you sure you know the circumstances?

It is not too late. China may choose to hold off on taking her victory now.

It probably would be wise to continue the war till it ends!

Did I not get my point across? I personally transferred these cities to China because I had heard nothing from the USA to suggest they would fight the Axis. If the USA had declared war on Germany and Italy the game would not have ended. None of us felt like abandoning the Chinese, the newest player, after they had been a steadfast ally. The USA declared war on all Allied nations. Germany saw this as a ploy to stop a Chinese victory, but it might well have been one to gain an American victory. Japan was wide open, undefended, and the only other need for a United States "Japan First" victory was Chinese territory. I was not about to let the USA take Japan if there was any chance they were going for a fast, and nearly pain free victory.

The USSR, Great Britain, France, and China defeated Japan. We had to take those cities from the Japanese. They were not Soviet cities at start. The perspective you are arguing from is European. You had the advantage of commanding Germany and Italy, which I consider just as valuable as the China/USA combo that Larry is so concerned about. Your forces did well, and you never had to face the USA which, because of technical errors, never entered the conflict against you. From a European perspective the Japanese defeat seems smaller than it was. We all worked hard to defeat Japan. The victory was fought for, not nearly a "lawyers victory".

If the USA had fought with the Allies none of us contemplated ending then with a Chinese victory. I personally made my decision to end because of grave uncertainty over American intentions. These intentions were nowhere near as clear as you think. Does the United States declaring war on the Allies, while giving Germany and Italy a pass, sound

remotely like the Second World War?

It all looks very different when seen outside the German/Italian point of view.

I suspect none of the Allied players see things quite as you do, as is to be expected.

Chuck

[baloo7777]

Hello. I very much enjoyed the game, and would have been fine playing it out. I just would like to point out how weak China was in its southern cities, and how sure I was that the Soviets would have to start sending tanks and troops back to fight the German advance. Japan still looked very strong in that part of China, and before they surrendered, I wasn't too sure I could take those cities from them.

[ironduke1955]

I have said all I can say on Game 22, I am sure the Soviets and British have their own perspective on the game, congratulations to baloo7777 particular praise to the play of cpdeyoung and Bomber thanks to RufusTFirefly (Juergen) thanks to Larry and I apologise to the original US player no offence was intended, just a desire to keep the game ticking over.

[Bombur]

If we had a more experienced USA player....if Japan didn´t surrender....if Rufus was better informed on the diplomatic situation, this game would have been very different. I wouldn´t blame victory conditions, it was an atypical game.

[Bombur]

And what about game 23?To play or not to play???????

[ironduke1955]

And what about game 23?To play or not to play???????

The victory conditions are broke, I will watch future AAR's with interest.

[ernieschwitz]

To be more exact, some of the victory conditions are broke, especially when it comes to transfering control of territory, and some of chinas seem to be too easy. There are several ways to quick fix this, for instance one could make all victory condtions NOT end the game. Or one could remove the ability to transfer hexes to allies...

But I think something bigger needs to be done, and not a quick fix.

[Bombur]

Removing the ability to transfer hexes to allies will cause more harm, it will prevent liberation of formerly occupied territories (like the USA taking Paris and giving it back to France).

[ironduke1955]

Regards giving hexes to other sovereign nation's, I have helped the Chinese in previous games I have held on to key cities to prevent a Chinese victory, they may be allies but they are still competitors. That is a cornerstone or should be anyway, no nation defers its own self interest for the interests of another nation. But as the current victory conditions stand there is motive that allows for this rule to be circumvented, it is the following, I would rather see my friends win rather than my enemies, even if it means I have to accept defeat. Its often the reason very few GD1938 games go beyond 1941/42. And why the victory conditions have to change, victory should be earned not gifted.

[MrLongleg]

@Bombur, do we have enough players? We probably need to establish some house rules. I can also ask a friend to join. Next week I'll be traveling and will be unable to play before the 26th...

[ironduke1955]

We could play this game with one additional ground rule. No hex exchanges between allies if you take it you hold it so players wishing to arrange a victory for the team will have to think very hard about allowing other nations to take their objective hexes, it would create tension among allies and prevent that special relationship becoming to special. And if possible avoid any phoney wars to exchange hexes. We would have to rely on the USA not to use its military power to organize a Chinese victory.

If all six players can live with the above we can proceed with this game.

[Bombur]

I would agree partially with such a house rule. I would propose that only original hexes could be given to allies.
So, if GB can give back Paris to France (or Germany can give Rome back to Italians) it´s ok. If USSR wants to give Korea to China, it´s not ok.
I also think the Russians shouldn´t be forbidden to make alliances with Axis nations.

[MrLongleg]

I agree with Bomburs proposal.

Alternatively I would not mind playing just a random map AT gold game, since we do not have enough players in the first place.

[Bombur]

Maybe a random game of Bombur mod 1.05?

[Twotribes]

Bombur mod is good but be aware in the years before around 1940 except for the Soviets most Countries will be short on tanks Even Germany does not get a real tank until 1939. Well in the new one they get the PZIV in 38.

[ironduke1955]

Sounds fine by me original starting hexes can be returned as you say such as Paris. Victory hexes would be disputed historically anyway and be considered fair game by the player who took them. Something for Allies to fall out over.

For once I would like to get to 1943 and have the ME262 and the Panther tank on the battlefield, sadly I don't get to use them.

[MrLongleg]

Is there a guide for Bombur's mod someplace? How can I learn about it?