Page 15 of 291

RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR

Posted: Wed Apr 20, 2016 5:18 pm
by AllenK
As it turns out, the Harrow could have stayed at home. Searches Axis 6, Allies 8. No combat.

Stukas ground strike Brussels to some effect.

Image

RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR

Posted: Wed Apr 20, 2016 5:37 pm
by AllenK
Germany rails Inf from Denmark to Poznan.

Italy moves Terr to Tunis and Inf Div to Algiers.

China after Japanese moves.

Image

RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR

Posted: Wed Apr 20, 2016 6:01 pm
by Mayhemizer_slith
Only Germany declares land combats, in Liege and Brussels.

All attacking units are doubled using O-chit.

I presume Allies choose Assault in Brussels?

Image

RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR

Posted: Wed Apr 20, 2016 6:14 pm
by Orm
I presume Allies choose Assault in Brussels?
Yes.

RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR

Posted: Wed Apr 20, 2016 6:18 pm
by Mayhemizer_slith
I was little worried about 1 or 2...

Image

RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR

Posted: Wed Apr 20, 2016 6:29 pm
by Mayhemizer_slith
Germany rebases Ju52 to Breslau and Bf109 from Amsterdam to Brussels.

Ju52 reorganizes INF (disorganized and OOS) in Poland. Rundstedt reorganizes 2 Stukas.

Western Europe after Axis impulse 5.

Image

RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR

Posted: Fri Apr 22, 2016 4:26 am
by Orm
I am sorry for the delay. I am stuck at doing production planning and I got to frustrated to continue. [:(]

RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR

Posted: Fri Apr 22, 2016 11:00 am
by quiritus
very bad choice of belgian set up: the two inf in every other place prevent the Germany capture of Bruxelles. with the UK in Rotterdam and without para this is the only way Germany can break the Dyle line in rain this impulse.

RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR

Posted: Fri Apr 22, 2016 11:23 am
by Jagdtiger14
Very good post/response quiritus! Actually, the best location for those two INF would have been the hex just west of Brussels.

To give proper credit, Centuur mentioned it first.

RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR

Posted: Fri Apr 22, 2016 2:53 pm
by warspite1
ORIGINAL: Orm

I am sorry for the delay. I am stuck at doing production planning and I got to frustrated to continue. [:(]
warspite1

Hang in there! [;)]

RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR

Posted: Fri Apr 22, 2016 2:58 pm
by Orm
ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Orm

I am sorry for the delay. I am stuck at doing production planning and I got to frustrated to continue. [:(]
warspite1

Hang in there! [;)]
Thank you.

I need that since I am working on it.

And I needed to begin several times because one of the windows gets stuck behind the map. And can't move the map then so I have to force windows to close MWIF to move on.

*sigh*

At the moment I am working on a solution but that means routing every one of the CW resources. Maybe France as well.

*sigh*

RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR

Posted: Fri Apr 22, 2016 3:00 pm
by Orm
ORIGINAL: quiritus

very bad choice of belgian set up: the two inf in every other place prevent the Germany capture of Bruxelles. with the UK in Rotterdam and without para this is the only way Germany can break the Dyle line in rain this impulse.
Thank you for showing interest. Although I can not agree with you.

RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR

Posted: Fri Apr 22, 2016 3:00 pm
by AllenK
Mention in despatches for persistence in the face of the enemy.

Edit: In relation to Production Planning.

RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR

Posted: Fri Apr 22, 2016 3:02 pm
by Orm
ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14

Very good post/response quiritus! Actually, the best location for those two INF would have been the hex just west of Brussels.

To give proper credit, Centuur mentioned it first.
I hold Centuur in highest esteem. But I fail to see why he should be given credit for this since I see no post of his mentioning it in this thread.

RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR

Posted: Fri Apr 22, 2016 3:33 pm
by Orm
ORIGINAL: AllenK

Mention in despatches for persistence in the face of the enemy.
Sorry, I am not persistent enough. I change the convoy route and the computer, at once, change it back. I am to frustrated to continue.

And I also had a MadExcept during this time. I am taking a break.

No idea why the resource routing system is considered a working one. [:(]

RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR

Posted: Fri Apr 22, 2016 4:47 pm
by Centuur
ORIGINAL: Orm

ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14

Very good post/response quiritus! Actually, the best location for those two INF would have been the hex just west of Brussels.

To give proper credit, Centuur mentioned it first.
I hold Centuur in highest esteem. But I fail to see why he should be given credit for this since I see no post of his mentioning it in this thread.

That's because I mentioned it in the Axis topic, not in this one. I've joined the "bad" guys. I fully expected that the Belgians would not set up in either Antwerp or Brussels, thus preventing the Germans from crossing the Dyle river line during the surprise impulse in Belgium. The lack of cooperation between the Allies and the neutral Belgians however, proved otherwise, giving the Axis the opportunity to crush the valiant but powerless Belgian defenders in one blow...

RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR

Posted: Fri Apr 22, 2016 5:16 pm
by Mayhemizer_slith
ORIGINAL: Centuur

ORIGINAL: Orm

ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14

Very good post/response quiritus! Actually, the best location for those two INF would have been the hex just west of Brussels.

To give proper credit, Centuur mentioned it first.
I hold Centuur in highest esteem. But I fail to see why he should be given credit for this since I see no post of his mentioning it in this thread.

That's because I mentioned it in the Axis topic, not in this one. I've joined the "bad" guys. I fully expected that the Belgians would not set up in either Antwerp or Brussels, thus preventing the Germans from crossing the Dyle river line during the surprise impulse in Belgium. The lack of cooperation between the Allies and the neutral Belgians however, proved otherwise, giving the Axis the opportunity to crush the valiant but powerless Belgian defenders in one blow...

If Germany would have rolled 1 or 2, (spent O-chit and failed to take Brussels) this would have been a trap of the year.

RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR

Posted: Fri Apr 22, 2016 6:47 pm
by Orm
Sep/Oct 1939
Impulse: 7(Allied)

CW, USA, USSR - Combined
France, China - Land

CW moves a heavily escorted convoy point from Aden to the Western Mediterranean. CW also moves 5 Dutch convoy points from South America to Cape St. Vincent.

USA move 3 convoy points to the Philippines.

No searches.


Image

RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR

Posted: Sat Apr 23, 2016 3:41 pm
by Orm
ORIGINAL: AllenK

ORIGINAL: Mayhemizer

Polish setup it not what I expected, sneaky...

Image

See, this is what happens when you play without "No ZOC on Surprise". It's so totally unrealistic. Steve should have dropped everything and made this compulsory optional rule his number one priority to code. The game is completely unplayable without it.
I rather say that the "No ZOC on Surprise" is completely unneeded. Germany can setup strong in the West already and do not need any more advantage. Historical opening with heavy German setup against Poland is becoming a rare thing. At least according to some posters. And who has ever seen a phoney war in MWIF?

The ZOC cutting the supply for the German units in this setup might be a little weird. But if Germany placed a historical amount of units against the Poles then it wouldn't matter how the Poles placed their units.

RE: 4 player E-mail: AAR

Posted: Sat Apr 23, 2016 4:02 pm
by warspite1
ORIGINAL: Orm

ORIGINAL: AllenK

ORIGINAL: Mayhemizer

Polish setup it not what I expected, sneaky...

See, this is what happens when you play without "No ZOC on Surprise". It's so totally unrealistic. Steve should have dropped everything and made this compulsory optional rule his number one priority to code. The game is completely unplayable without it.
I rather say that the "No ZOC on Surprise" is completely unneeded. Germany can setup strong in the West already and do not need any more advantage. Historical opening with heavy German setup against Poland is becoming a rare thing. At least according to some posters. And who has ever seen a phoney war in MWIF?

The ZOC cutting the supply for the German units in this setup might be a little weird. But if Germany placed a historical amount of units against the Poles then it wouldn't matter how the Poles placed their units.
warspite1

I agree - choice is what WIF is all about. There should be no certain options - and if a West first strategy were ever a no-brainer then that would be a sad day for WIF. As soon as things become "standard" then you get into 3rd Reich territory....

As for the question in bold. When I play the Germans and make a total horlicks of the situation we often see a Phoney War! [;)]