Witness to World War 2.

[rkr1958]

Turn 30. July/August 1944. Allied #3.

The Western Allies. The Western Front (6/8).

[rkr1958]

Turn 30. July/August 1944. Allied #3.

The Western Allies. The Western Front (7/8).

[rkr1958]

Turn 30. July/August 1944. Allied #3.

The Western Allies. The Western Front (8/8).

[rkr1958]

Turn 30. July/August 1944. Allied #3.

The Western Allies. MTO/Italy. End of Impulse.

[composer99]

Exactly one stack of German units from the armies in western France can actually escape the forming pocket - the rest are blocked by ZoCs. And their supply line is precarious. Looks like disaster is unfolding on the West as in the East.

[rkr1958]

ORIGINAL: composer99

Exactly one stack of German units from the armies in western France can actually escape the forming pocket - the rest are blocked by ZoCs. And their supply line is precarious. Looks like disaster is unfolding on the West as in the East.

I still can't believe I'm seeing Germany collapse like they are. Economically and oil wise they are/were still very strong. I guess the flaw is that their forces are just spread too thin and don't have HQ units where they need them the most. And that's NOT being encircled or trapped behind enemy lines!

[brian brian]

I do think the USA broke the FTC rule when it advanced 3 units into Canton while Nimitz was still in Hainan.

If the Germans had tried to ground-strike the rocket-armed (red ground factor) P-51, I would not intercept with it. I would either intercept with something else, or let the Ground Strike ride. Particularly with the Allied shortage of medium bombers. It is not a hard-fast rule to always use a FTR in a hex being ground struck. Depends.

EDIT: I mistook the Ju-188 and Ju-388. It was a good risky call to try flipping the Russian HQ-A with the rocket Fw190, well worth the chance although it also ultimately cost removing the plane from the board.

I know it is a lot of work to manage 1000+ counters on the board from the middle of the game onwards, and many of my solitaire games fizzle by 1943 or so for that reason. But I notice all of your Major Powers fly some pretty old planes. There is a lot of efficiency to be gained by voluntarily withdrawing Pilots from a plane when it can be done in it's Home Country (Difficult for the USA, for example, and other situations), and putting it in a newer plane, rather than continually using its older, lower factors turn after turn in hopes of it becoming a simple aircraft casualty. Same is true for the limits on Air Missions in general - better to use them on new, high factor planes.

It is nice to see the CW and USA armies working side-by-side, and I know the USA in particular has been scrambling to wave enough red flags at the German bull to draw their reinforcements away from Russia - that is working spectacularly. Still when each of the 2 Western Allies have a land impulse, they should really untangle the 2 armies, particularly in France. They are taking an extra -1 on every land combat they attempt now, and one of the just finished combats resulted in an extra loss and a half-disorganized as a result. Sometimes combining the armies is necessary, but there are advantages to not running them together...

...particularly if one country can Ground Strike in front of the other's land units, which can sometimes help leverage different Impulse Action choices between the 2.

The Allies lack of medium bombers is not only making the German troops more difficult to defeat, but it is also giving the Germans stronger FTR cover on their front lines. This is because the coming-from-behind US economy correctly prioritized land units for Europe making them unable to build some LND4s as they normally would. Meanwhile the CW did invest in their heavy bombers, but are so desperate for tactical ground support they have been using their LND4 that way. The result is no need for the Germans to really hold many FTRs to defend their factories and oil - compounding the air situation on the ground front lines for the Allies yet more.

But now, the Russians will be drawing all German reinforcements away from the West...

[brian brian]

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

I still can't believe I'm seeing Germany collapse like they are. Economically and oil wise they are/were still very strong. I guess the flaw is that their forces are just spread too thin and don't have HQ units where they need them the most. And that's NOT being encircled or trapped behind enemy lines!

Always look at the bright side Mr. Hilter - soon, your troops won't need HQs to trace supply at all - cuz they will be fighting right in front of their depots all over central Europe!

[Courtenay]

I don't think the Germans are in that much danger of being immediately encircled on the Western front-- I think they can get a pretty good attack on the US 8-6 ARM, and if they retake that hex, they have a line again. The problem may be in the north. I don't know what land units are under the Bf-109 west of Paris, but if they aren't good ones, the Germans could have a problem.

Of course, the real question is what the Germans are going to do about the looming disaster in Rumania.

For Japan I have some advice that is a little late: Pay attention to the names of the sea areas. Sea of Japan, China Sea, South China Sea. One of these is much easier for the Japanese to hold than the other two. And so long as the Japanese hold Korea, that will supply much, if not all, of China.

[Centuur]

What kind of defense is there in Japan itself? China should fight for itself and sending US land units into that country is not something I would do. Of course, taking Canton and Hainan is worth the effort, but the real goal is Japan. And it's summer 1944 already. Time is running against the Allies.
With the Japanese fleet almost non existant, it's time for the big jump to invade Japan.

And if there isn't sea lift available to the Japanese, the big army they have overseas cannot return to defend the home country...

[composer99]

Ronnie's playing extended game length, so there's not such a rush to invade Japan. But with the IJN gone as an effective fighting force, the IJA mostly in China, and the Japanese economy starving for resources, the time is certainly right for an invasion.

[Centuur]

ORIGINAL: composer99

Ronnie's playing extended game length, so there's not such a rush to invade Japan. But with the IJN gone as an effective fighting force, the IJA mostly in China, and the Japanese economy starving for resources, the time is certainly right for an invasion.

I always think that that's cheating. Sure, it's nice that this option is in the game, but it's not part of the boardgame for a reason. The Allies will almost always crush the Axis in 1946 (except in those very rare cases where the USSR gets conquered).

[rkr1958]

ORIGINAL: Centuur

ORIGINAL: composer99

Ronnie's playing extended game length, so there's not such a rush to invade Japan. But with the IJN gone as an effective fighting force, the IJA mostly in China, and the Japanese economy starving for resources, the time is certainly right for an invasion.

I always think that that's cheating. Sure, it's nice that this option is in the game, but it's not part of the boardgame for a reason. The Allies will almost always crush the Axis in 1946 (except in those very rare cases where the USSR gets conquered).

I agree with this in the case where (M)WiF is being played as a game. I even understand that in some games it's just not enough that your side, or even faction wins (e.g., allies, Western Allies) but that the country you're playing wins. Though I've never played in these types of games, I understand that you want to help your allies just enough so that your side wins but not so much that another power on your side gets more victory locations than you do (i.e., beats you). The only thing I've ever played that has come close to this dynamic is Risk, where you make alliances to defeat other players but you always have to be mindful of your allies turning on you.

Now to my case (i.e., this AAR). I'm trying to play this "game" as a simulation of the war at the fidelity of MWiF and it's game mechanics. So I think in this case, or in my case, that extended game length adds to the realism of the simulation. Now when I say simulation, I'm not trying to recreate a playback of WW-2 (I have books and video on the subject for that). I'm trying to "simulate" another "replication" of the war; i.e., how the war might have went. Though again, I realize that this simulation is only at the fidelity of MWiF and it's mechanics.

By the way, that's why I might make decisions that I believe a power I'm simulating would have made which might not be, from a game perspective, the most sound decision. However, I do cop to my share of bad decisions that I've made, and will make in the future, that are flat out mistakes on my part. In either case, I really appreciate when you and others point this out and provide criticism on what I should have done. Who knows, I might play MWiF, or WiF, as a game one day where it matters only if doing something is sound from a game perspective and doesn't matter whether or not a given country would have done it.

P.S. I must admit that I'm having a blast "running" this simulation (i.e., "playing" this game).

[rkr1958]

Turn 30. July/August 1944. Axis #4.

Actions.

[rkr1958]

Turn 30. July/August 1944. Axis #4.

Euro-Axis. The Eastern Front. End of Impulse. No combat.

[rkr1958]

Turn 30. July/August 1944. Axis #4.

Euro-Axis. The Western Front (1/3). Celebrations at OKH and OKW!

[rkr1958]

Turn 30. July/August 1944. Axis #4.

Euro-Axis. The Western Front (2/3). Butt chewing and staff reassignments to front line units at OKH and OKW!

[rkr1958]

Turn 30. July/August 1944. Axis #4.

Euro-Axis. The Western Front (3/3). Northern Italy. End of Impulse.

[rkr1958]

Turn 30. July/August 1944. Axis #4.

IJN. Post Naval Moves. Japanese Home Islands. Very strong land forces in Japan. Far stronger than the Western Allies can take on now and in the foreseeable future.

[rkr1958]

Turn 30. July/August 1944. Axis #4.

South China Sea.