Matrix Games Forums

Norhern China

I know that the premature attack on France has its proponents. Yet, I find it both ahistorical and quite a gamble.
It is also very cheesy, because it also relies on the rules that any French successful counter-attack (or advance) in Germany is going to pay off much more than what could get lost in said counterattack (due to the increase in production multiplier.)

I rarely see any benefit for it: when playing correctly with Germany (barring bad luck) you should see the fall of France in summer 40, which is enough time to send the army back east if that's the strategy; the question is: what do you intend to do with the few turns you can potentially gain ? Usually, in 40, Germany is not strong enough because it misses critical HQs to enter far into Russia and at the same time secure France (where, lacking supply, the British can easily land).

Note that I once had the hard surrise of a DoW by Russia in Jan/Feb 40, because the allies caught the initiative and the garrison ratio was not met by Germany (units were still in Polish ZOCs, negating their garrison value): that makes for a very, very nasty situation for the Germans...

Well, that's just me...

I don't like the abandonment of Chengchow and Tungkwan. Most of the successful Japanese attacks on China I have seen in AARs have involved heavy attacks on the Communists; giving Chengchow away makes this much easier for the Japanese. This is particular true since the Communists have made the mistake of not picking the 8th Route Army. [:)] (A mistake I make two thirds of time, of course.)

ORIGINAL: Courtenay

I don't like the abandonment of Chengchow and Tungkwan. Most of the successful Japanese attacks on China I have seen in AARs have involved heavy attacks on the Communists; giving Chengchow away makes this much easier for the Japanese. This is particular true since the Communists have made the mistake of not picking the 8th Route Army. [:)] (A mistake I make two thirds of time, of course.)

True. I did not see this. Of course, the Japanese must pay for every hex they capture, with the exception of clear hexes not accross rivers... The reason for this is that attrition kills the Japanese: too many land units to replace means that Japan cannot build its navy and/or air force to the required level.

In the same way, I'd put a unit in the Mufu mountains.
No pain, no gain...

yvesp: Recently some of us went through a lengthy discussion about "Fall Gelb", and even had a couple of test set ups and run throughs, so I wont start the debate all over again. FYI: I happen to be a big proponent of Fall Gelb.

To answer your questions and comments: As to its historicity (if that's a word)...the Germans actually did consider it...hence the name "Fall Gelb". The fact that it didn't happen should not restrict it from happening in WiF. Wargames, especially strategic ones are not reinactments. Everything is a gamble in WiF, which is why its so fun to replay it over and over. The gamble of France lasting into 1941 is far worse to me. Yes, France CAN be taken down by the end of J/A with a competent German player, and assuming you have no die roll disasters, and use both O-chits. Mayhemizer performed a pretty good Fall Gelb last game if you want to take a look at that AAR.

I don't think its cheesy at all that Germany gets the multiplier for a French advance...if you want to look at history as you mentioned above, did not France actually move into Saarland?...and then stopped, and then was itself counter attacked at great loss compared to German losses?

The benefit: 1. Time. This is the most valuable commodity in WiF. What to do with that time?...that depends on your over all strategy, but the most important thing it does is give you more options (which is the best type of plan). You don't need to assume something in USSR...there is Gibraltar (perhaps invasion of Spain if Gibraltar can not be taken by invasion), Malta, Africa, the Balkans, etc... 2. Economics. Save 1 O-chit for sure, perhaps both. 15-30 BP's are hard to come by in 1940. Plus, the sooner you take out France, the more income you have. Not just from French factories/resources, but also perhaps with factories/resources you gained from what you did with that extra time. Also, possibly fewer losses since you are facing a weaker France/CW early on. 3. Disaster. Avoid the dreaded possibility that France might survive into 1941...which I have seen happen at least twice in my face to face games...once to me, which is why I turned whole heartedly to Fall Gelb since that game.

ORIGINAL: Courtenay

I don't like the abandonment of Chengchow and Tungkwan. Most of the successful Japanese attacks on China I have seen in AARs have involved heavy attacks on the Communists; giving Chengchow away makes this much easier for the Japanese. This is particular true since the Communists have made the mistake of not picking the 8th Route Army. [:)] (A mistake I make two thirds of time, of course.)

Hi Courteney,

Can't say I'm exactly chuffed about it either, especially Chengchow. The trouble is, in my relative inexperience, I can't readily see what I would trade off to mount the defence. A viable defence would take quite a few units. The Japanese, setting up second, can then simply ignore it and advance elsewhere. A token defence, unless the Japanese are unlucky with their die roll, simply presents them their first kills in addition to the city.

Advice for future games appreciated.

Not going into a long discussion, but I would just mention that!
1) under the current rules, that attack should have upped German production by a .25 production factor. This would make the real september/october period to have been more productive than the november/december period. I'm not aware that this indeed happened: hence the German player can leave quite weak places in his initial defense against France and know he won't suffer any consequences. That is what I find cheesy, not the idea of attacking west.
2) the fact that such a plan did exist in real life (but was rejected) is obviously not enough to make it acceptable in the game. After all there was a very serious plan to unite France and the Commonwealth (but it failed); indeed I'd like to see that option open, to once test that alternate history path. Alas, this path is closed...

I was not sure when I started to set German units if I go for "Fall Gelb" or not. I decided to give another try, without attacking all European countries while France is still standing...

In China I have same plan as last time (it will remain secret for some time). But this time I will be focused on my target, not shoot from the hip (and change plans immediately when I see an opportunity) like I usually do.

Poland protects capital and Germany is ready to attack.

S/O 39 Axis 1

Germany declares war on Poland.

Germany and Japan land, Italy combined.

He112 fly to North Sea box 2.

Italy takes transporter loaded with Mech to East Med. Later Mech will land to Tripoli.

Japanese G3M2 bombs factories in Chungking with no result (roll 1).

Germany launches two ground strikes and Japan one.

Polish units are not hit in Lodz.

Oh well...

I'm confident future roll will be better as they can't be worse.

German land units overrun Polish ships, both are escaped. Where do they want to rebase?

Is Liverpool OK? I will replay it if that is not good.

Japan occupies empty cities of Chengchow, Nanyang and Tunkwan and US does not react (rolls 7,7,6).

Italy moves one unit in French border and Mech lands in Tripoli.

Germany launches two ground attacks in Poland. Germany uses ground support vs CAV.

Here are final odds. Poland can choose combat tables. Is it going to be Assault in both combats?

ORIGINAL: Mayhemizer

Is Liverpool OK? I will replay it if that is not good.

Good choice, thanks.

Assault table is good.

Polish cavalry is gone

I don't have to ground strike ever again if my land combat roll are like these.

Germany rebases a fighter to cover factories in southern Germany.


CW and France declares war on Germany. On a 6 one chit is removed.

Germany calls reserves. All possible troops are set to western front.