Page 17 of 18
Re: Empires in Flames (4-player game)
Posted: Wed May 20, 2026 12:07 pm
by Majorball68

- USSR Builds.png (133.64 KiB) Viewed 140 times

- Lending.png (105.55 KiB) Viewed 140 times
Re: Empires in Flames (4-player game)
Posted: Wed May 20, 2026 12:17 pm
by Majorball68
Initiative MJ40
Axis 4 Allies 2(0/0)
Allied reroll(Axis +1)
Axis 4 Allies 2
Axis moving first unfortunately. Can't cop a break in China, Axis have won initiative every turn of the game so far.
Over to Axis.

- Weather Report.png (76.87 KiB) Viewed 137 times
Re: Empires in Flames (4-player game)
Posted: Sat May 23, 2026 6:15 am
by Majorball68
If it wasn't already obvious I did edit the French garrison away from the Italian border in order to deal with the Turin resource issue.
Re: Empires in Flames (4-player game)
Posted: Sat May 23, 2026 8:37 am
by Orm
May/Jun '40
Impulse #1 (Axis)
No declarations of war.
Land: Germany, Japan
Combined: Italy
Naval:
No Port Strikes. No Naval Air.
Naval Movement:
Italy:
SUB -> N Atl 2-box
SUB -> East Coast 0-box

- 0157.jpg (271.96 KiB) Viewed 90 times
Re: Empires in Flames (4-player game)
Posted: Sat May 23, 2026 8:38 am
by Orm
Majorball68 wrote: Sat May 23, 2026 6:15 am
If it wasn't already obvious I did edit the French garrison away from the Italian border in order to deal with the Turin resource issue.
Thank you.

Re: Empires in Flames (4-player game)
Posted: Sat May 23, 2026 8:41 am
by Orm
No contact in East Coast (10-2).
No contact in East Coast (5-4).
Re: Empires in Flames (4-player game)
Posted: Sat May 23, 2026 8:52 am
by Orm
May/Jun '40
Impulse #1 (Axis)
No strategic bombing.
Ground Strike:
Italy:
LND3 -> Reims
Germany:
LND2 + LND3 (2-strength) -> W Brussels
LND2 -> SW Brussels
LND2 -> NW Reims.
Axis has 4 FTR2 + FTR3 available.
Will France intercept?

- 0158.jpg (607.8 KiB) Viewed 86 times
Re: Empires in Flames (4-player game)
Posted: Sat May 23, 2026 10:45 am
by Majorball68
This should be self explanatory. Fire AA at the HS123.

- Allied Intercept.png (824.65 KiB) Viewed 71 times
Re: Empires in Flames (4-player game)
Posted: Sat May 23, 2026 11:24 am
by Orm
One German FTR2 to each of the hexes in Belgium.

- 0159.jpg (395.85 KiB) Viewed 67 times
Re: Empires in Flames (4-player game)
Posted: Sat May 23, 2026 11:32 am
by Orm
West of Brussels the French fighter take a heavy toll on the German bombers before they are destroyed. The french pilots hurry back toward their bases in hope of getting new airplanes to continue the air war with.

- 0160.jpg (296.33 KiB) Viewed 65 times
Re: Empires in Flames (4-player game)
Posted: Sat May 23, 2026 11:37 am
by Orm
SW of Brussels the bomber is cleared.

- 0161.jpg (304.6 KiB) Viewed 64 times
Re: Empires in Flames (4-player game)
Posted: Sat May 23, 2026 11:41 am
by Orm
The Italian bomber crews defend well, and the French planes are destroyed.

- 0162.jpg (286.07 KiB) Viewed 63 times
Re: Empires in Flames (4-player game)
Posted: Sat May 23, 2026 11:46 am
by Orm
The AA fire is effective (9,3,6,8,8,4).

- 0163.jpg (299.19 KiB) Viewed 61 times
Re: Empires in Flames (4-player game)
Posted: Sat May 23, 2026 11:57 am
by Orm
Re: Empires in Flames (4-player game)
Posted: Sun May 24, 2026 6:53 am
by Orm
May/Jun '40
Impulse #1 (Axis)
Rail movement:
Japan:
MIL -> Wuhan
Land Movement:
Italy:
MTN -> SW Turin
HQA -> Turin
Germany:
A lot of minor adjustments along the western front.
A couple of units move closer to the eastern border.
The Alpenkorps does some training in the Austrian Alps.
Japan:
TERR liberate Tungkwan (2). One US entry chit added.
MAR liberate Ichang (6). No US reaction.
In addition: Japan moves most units in China, and I find it hard to try to describe it. See pictures.

- 0167.jpg (974.81 KiB) Viewed 39 times

- 0168.jpg (1.15 MiB) Viewed 39 times
Re: Empires in Flames (4-player game)
Posted: Sun May 24, 2026 7:06 am
by Orm
Germany attacks west of Brussels. One LND2 fly support. One AA is included in the attack. One FTR2, and one FTR3, can intercept.
Any defensive ground support?

- 0169.jpg (637.49 KiB) Viewed 36 times
Re: Empires in Flames (4-player game)
Posted: Sun May 24, 2026 7:44 am
by Majorball68
No Support.
Re: Empires in Flames (4-player game)
Posted: Sun May 24, 2026 7:53 am
by Orm
May/Jun '40
Impulse #4 (Allied)
Final odds.

- 0170.jpg (278.35 KiB) Viewed 28 times
Re: Empires in Flames (4-player game)
Posted: Sun May 24, 2026 8:02 am
by Orm
The French are pushed backwards...

- 0171.jpg (318.97 KiB) Viewed 26 times
Re: Empires in Flames (4-player game)
Posted: Sun May 24, 2026 8:51 am
by Orm
Japan is disappointed. I am annoyed with the rule book.
Japan had planned since the beginning of the game to use a Japanese ATRto reorganize units in the Lanchow area. I checked the rules to see if there was any restrictions on using a flying boat to reorganize units on land, and there was not, so it was decided to build the ATR4 since it was more versatile than the regular ATR3. Now that the ATR4 arrived, and there was a fighter ready to escort, the air resupply was attempted. And it was forbidden because it was a flying boat. Really annoyed I was about to place a bug report. But decided to make a really thorough rule search first, and found the offending paragraph burried in the stacking rules. In the stacking rules! Bah!
Why flying boats should be forbidden to drop supplies in a hex it can not land in, but normal aircraft may do so in a hex it may not land in eludes me. But that is not the point. Had we known about this restriction Japan would have built the cheaper, faster arriving, ATR3 instead.
Cut from RAC:
11.18.1 Air supply
An air supply mission allows you to organize a unit in
any land hex by flying an ATR to that hex.
Option 35: Any aircraft with a white range circle can fly an air supply mission, even if it is not an ATR.
Cut from RAC:
2.3 Stacking
....
Flying boats can fly missions into, or rail move through, non-coastal hexes. Engineers (MiF option 7) do not effect stacking limits for flying boats. ATR flying boats (e.g. the BV-222) can only air transport units to or from,
or air supply units in, coastal hexes.
I supposed both disappointed and annoyed is a slight understatement.

- 0172.jpg (578.62 KiB) Viewed 19 times