Into the Breach

[rkr1958]

By the way, what do you think about my "new" AAR format/template? My objective is to make a more polished (professional) looking AAR in powerpoint, export the slides to jpeg's and post them in the AAR. I must admit that I a bit disappointed with the smaller (jpeg) graphic size. On the up side it gives me a chance to review and correct my grammar. On the downside it take a got bit of time and uses a lot of disk space. For example, the 14 "slides" I've posted so far are around 4 MB. The powerpoint file from which those jpeg's were made is over 27 MB. That's nearly a 7 to 1 expansion.

So while (I hope) the new format looks more polished and contains fewer typo's, I'll likely go back to the "old way" of screen caps with (most) comments in the post (typo's and all). [:(]

[brian brian]

I don’t think I have rolled much on the strategic bombing table, didn’t notice that. I would still bomb the Chinese though, particularly with the new “Cadre” rule. Depending on if you pick the pay-as-you-go oil use rule, (paying one-tenth per unit on some impulses), without that then some air missions are free of oil use. It also no longer costs oil to re-org an HQ, so it is cheaper to fly planes twice when the land units aren’t using the re-org points.

You will notice the changes to the air counter mix in J/F 40 builds phase...

...but also at set-up. The Germans have a 2/3 chance at drawing an interesting new NAV.

[rkr1958]

ORIGINAL: brian brian.

...but also at set-up. The Germans have a 2/3 chance at drawing an interesting new NAV.

Which the did. They drew one that had the range to reach the 4-box. With the RN threat of mining the Norwegian Coast and the possibility that the allies could gain access to the Baltic, this "new" NAV is now on patrol in the 4-box of the Baltic.

By the way, another change I noticed is that German u-boats, at least those at-start, have longer ranges. The two flotillas that German drew have a range of 5 and 6. Couple that with the new sub rules and I have a feeling that the Battle of the Atlantic is going to be more trying for the allies in CE than it was in FE.

P.S. Battle of the Atlantic. Also, it costs only 1 OP to move and attack with ALL subs when another action (e.g., land) is taken. So Germany can take her lands and pay 1 OP to move out and attack with her subs. By the way, in a naval or combine, moving and/or attacking with all your subs no matter how many different ports they may start in now only counts as 1 naval move.

[Courtenay]

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

By the way, what do you think about my "new" AAR format/template? My objective is to make a more polished (professional) looking AAR in powerpoint, export the slides to jpeg's and post them in the AAR. I must admit that I a bit disappointed with the smaller (jpeg) graphic size. On the up side it gives me a chance to review and correct my grammar. On the downside it take a got bit of time and uses a lot of disk space. For example, the 14 "slides" I've posted so far are around 4 MB. The powerpoint file from which those jpeg's were made is over 27 MB. That's nearly a 7 to 1 expansion.

So while (I hope) the new format looks more polished and contains fewer typo's, I'll likely go back to the "old way" of screen caps with (most) comments in the post (typo's and all). [:(]

The key thing is the time. I think you should use whatever is easiest for you. If the new format takes significantly more time, stay with the old one.

[rkr1958]

Turn 1. Sep/Oct 1939. Axis #3.

Weather. Weather roll is a 1 which means fine across the map.

Germany. Action. Germany decides to take a land and pay for oil as they go (i.e., 0.1 per oil unit moved/attack, first one free, versus their fixed cost of 1 oil for a land). Also, Germany pays 1 offensive point to move and attack with both their u-boat flotillas currently based in Kiel while the weather if fine and while most of the RN ASW assets are still in port. In addition to the 1 OP, this will cost Germany 0.2 oil in addition to what they will spend during their land. By the way, the fixed cost for a land/naval combine for Germany is 1.7. However, they will move 6 oil burning land units and 2 u-boat flotillas, which will cost them (8-1) x 0.1 = 0.7 versus the fixed cost of 1 for the land and 0.2 for moving the two u-boats (or is it 1.7 for a land/naval combine?). A savings of 1/2 and oil.

Since Germany won't have any SCS in either the North Sea or Norwegian Sea that if the Brits decide to mine the Norwegian Coast next allied impulse they'll get the +1 modifier.

[rkr1958]

Turn 1. Sep/Oct 1939. Axis #3.

Germany. Poland (1/2).

[rkr1958]

Turn 1. Sep/Oct 1939. Axis #3.

Germany. Poland (2/2).

Editor's Note. I'm transitioning AAR formats, posts after this one will primarily be screen caps with text in the body of the post. It's just too time consuming using powerpoint.

[rkr1958]

Turn 1. Sep/Oct 1939. Axis #3.

Battle of the Atlantic. The battle of the Atlantic kicks off with a whimper.

Note. The Faeroes Gap. The reaction by the British of their NAV2 (i.e., Swordfish) to the 0-box of the Faeroes Gap cost them no oil since this occurred during their opponent's impulse. You only have to pay oil during your own impulse. Also, if the German u-boat flotilla had found, it would have cost them only 1 SP to avoid a naval air combat instead of 4 as in FE. Because the Swordfish reacted it's modified range of 2 would be used for determining the number of SP's required to avoid.

[rkr1958]

Turn 1. Sep/Oct 1939. Axis #3.

Japan. China. Japan takes a land and decides to pay for oil as they go. They move 2 oil burning units (0.1 oil), fly no air combat missions or make any land combat attacks.

[rkr1958]

Module Memory.

The WiF CE Vassal Module works smoothly and has a lot of nice features. But, it does require sufficient memory. With the module up running along with google chrome my system is at over 80% of it's 8 GB memory in use.

[rkr1958]

Turn 1. Sep/Oct 1939. Allied #4.

CW. Take a naval and mine the Norwegian Coast. Neither Norway or the US react to this very well. Norway starts up a trade agreement with Germany to send her resource to them. Also, the only chit remaining in the Germany/Italy entry pool is returned back to the deck.

Regardless of the reaction by Norway or the US, the Norwegian Coast is now mined. The question for Germany now is does it make sense to make a difficult invasion and conquest of Norway to ensure that the 3 Swedish resources get through in winter (i.e., snow or blizzard in the arctic) or accept the status-quo which with the Norwegian resource now coming to Germany (year around) compensates some for the loss of the three Swedish resources during winter.

So, doing some "real time" calculations. The Weather Chart contains 72 entries per zone (i.e., 6 turns/year x 1-12 die rolls). For the arctic, 49 of those 72 entries are something else other than blizzard or snow. Assuming an equal chance of 1-12 weather roll for the last impulse of a turn this means that over a given year that the 3 Norwegian Resources will get through to Germany 68.06% of the time, or on average, 2.04 resources per turn. The Norwegian resource gets through 100% of the time and (see where I'm going) when added to the expected number of Swedish resources per turn that gets through gives 3.04. In effect, all that the British accomplished in mining the Norwegian Coast was to hack of the Americans (i.e., lost an entry chit) and tilt Norway a bit in favor of the Germans.

[composer99]

Churchill's gonna have some 'splainin' to do in the House.

[rkr1958]

ORIGINAL: composer99

Churchill's gonna have some 'splainin' to do in the House.

Yes he does. They'll probably make his prime minister for this! [:D]

[rkr1958]

Turn 1. Sep/Oct 1939. Axis #5.

Weather/Action.

[rkr1958]

Turn 1. Sep/Oct 1939. Axis #5.

Germany. Rail. Rail needs to be through about differently in CE versus FE. In FE, it cost no oil to "rebase" oil burning land units from Poland to the West by moving them (as long as you didn't flip them). It did cost oil if you railed them. In CE the opposite is turn. It cost oil to move oil burning land units but not to rail them. Though rail still cause units to flip.

FYI. Air rebase costs no oil.

[rkr1958]

Turn 1. Sep/Oct 1939. Axis #5.

Germany. Land Combat. Poland. Another interesting dynamic difference between CE and FE. I choose to advance two oil burning units, which weren't in position to be railed, into Warsaw where they could be railed West (for no oil) in a future impulse. Otherwise, I'd would have had to pay 0.2 oil to move them to a railhead and then rail them in an impulse after that.

[brian brian]

The Poles should have taken out the tank-destroyer division - 5 BP - with overwhelming odds as it would defend at one strength. But can’t do that on a CW Naval impulse.

Also the Luftwaffe can easily contest the North Sea on the first turn without detracting much from the blitzkrieg in Poland. With multiple strong Home Fleet squadrons it would be less wise for the Kriegsmarine to sortie but if they do so under air cover they have an excellent chance to survive and take away the -1 modifier.

That roll on the mining table gives the Germans another option - a Sea Lion ‘raid’ aiming to only take London. They have Offensive Points, the Luftwaffe, a PARA, and an AMPH. And Italy to stir up trouble elsewhere...particularly with the French fleet in the Atlantic...

[rkr1958]

ORIGINAL: brian brian

The Poles should have taken out the tank-destroyer division - 5 BP - with overwhelming odds as it would defend at one strength. But can’t do that on a CW Naval impulse.

More significantly, all their surviving land units, 2 in Lodz and 2 in Warsaw were disorganized. The Poles had nothing to attack with.

[composer99]

The orangey bar along the left side of the counter is the indicator that it's disorganised, I presume.

[rkr1958]

ORIGINAL: composer99

The orangey bar along the left side of the counter is the indicator that it's disorganised, I presume.

Yes.