Viking pilot Posted April 15, 2012 Report Share Posted April 15, 2012 That explains why no airforces are seen on the other side. They could use some air support there, by the way. What do you mean, "no airforces are seen on the other side" ? And "They should send more?" Who's side are you on? Maybe you two should be fighting it out. I would pay to see that (no, seriously....) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dageraad Posted April 16, 2012 Report Share Posted April 16, 2012 Maybe you two should be fighting it out. I would pay to see that (no, seriously....) Sorry to disappoint you, but there are plenty of targets on the Russian front: Ju-88's. Me 163's, Me109's, Fw 190's, He 177's Whitley's , Manchesters, Spitfires, Typhoons, Hampdens, B-18's, A-24's, A-20's, P-39 and probably a lot of P-51 and P-47's. And most of all: Skymasters. And while we're fighting the Poles, Bals, Finns, Icelanders and Norwegians I am having the impression that over half of the opposing army in Russia is Finnish. And it is still growing. I surely wish those Finns were Finished. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Falco Posted April 16, 2012 Report Share Posted April 16, 2012 That explains why no airforces are seen on the other side. They could use some air support there, by the way. What do you mean, "no airforces are seen on the other side" ? And "They should send more?" Who's side are you on? Polish and BS airforces? You haven't seen that much of them. Mostly the fins where throwing away their airforces against you guys. And you've had total air superiority for quite some time now. And what I said was they could've used more, and they still can use, a lot more to prevent the slaughter of their armies. That's not the same as they should send more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking pilot Posted April 16, 2012 Report Share Posted April 16, 2012 We are finally withering under the assault of eight (nine) players (Greece, Hungary, Austria, Italy, Yugoslavia, Poland, Baltic States, Norway, and sometimes Iceland).....we will continue to inflict damage....but not likely to hold our ground for too much longer. 2v8 (or 9) is a little too steep....even on defense. The Russians (real ones, not Victory Russians) used to say that quantity has a quality all its own. When you are relatively inexperienced players that particular quality is highly cherished.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dageraad Posted April 16, 2012 Report Share Posted April 16, 2012 So we have a group of highly experienced Russian tech army groups defeating wave after wave of Finnish cannon fodder. Mannerheim must be turning in his grave. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harbinger of Death Posted April 17, 2012 Report Share Posted April 17, 2012 We are finally withering under the assault of eight (nine) players (Greece, Hungary, Austria, Italy, Yugoslavia, Poland, Baltic States, Norway, and sometimes Iceland).....we will continue to inflict damage....but not likely to hold our ground for too much longer. 2v8 (or 9) is a little too steep....even on defense. The Russians (real ones, not Victory Russians) used to say that quantity has a quality all its own. When you are relatively inexperienced players that particular quality is highly cherished.... 8 (or more) against 2 is a little ridiculous....even for "relatively" inexperienced players. Three games beyond the mid-point no longer qualifies you and your colleagues as an "inexperienced player". That being said...you are fortunate to have 8....a few less and things would be much different indeed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dageraad Posted April 17, 2012 Report Share Posted April 17, 2012 8 (or more) against 2 is a little ridiculous....even for "relatively" inexperienced players. Three games beyond the mid-point no longer qualifies you and your colleagues as an "inexperienced player". That being said...you are fortunate to have 8....a few less and things would be much different indeed. Iraq and Persia took notice when fresh Baltic and Icelandic armies and air fleets arrived in Russia. At the time we were having a nice two on two war with Poland and Finland. It took a while to stabilize the front against Baltic States and push Poland out of the Ukraine, but we are on the offensive again. And doing damage. So if the Scandinavians withdraw units from the Eastern front they will take an extra hit. As the game only lasts for another nine turns even a complete evacuation of Central Russia woudn't decide the war, but for you it is no 2 against 8.5. It is 4 against 9, or 10 against 20 if you count in occupied countries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earthling Posted April 17, 2012 Report Share Posted April 17, 2012 Neither of your two groups is receiving the full bore of most of our alliance(s). We are spread out across two fronts and fighting against BOTH of your groups. So, from our point of view it's even odds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harbinger of Death Posted April 17, 2012 Report Share Posted April 17, 2012 True...although the same cannot be said for the other team of five we are fighting...we are their only targets. That is why I said it was more like 2v8 rather than 2v10. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earthling Posted April 18, 2012 Report Share Posted April 18, 2012 True...although the same cannot be said for the other team of five we are fighting...we are their only targets. That is why I said it was more like 2v8 rather than 2v10. When you go to war, you have to accept the consequences, no matter which way it turns out. This is a war game, therefore, you will have to fight the entirety of an alliance when you take actions that warrant responses. You chose to be at war with all of the nations involved, one way or another. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dageraad Posted April 18, 2012 Report Share Posted April 18, 2012 For me, Canada, the USA and the Scandinavians all have valid points to make. Consider the odds in the east: Northern Alliance: About 250 army divisions . About 7 active bomber divs. An estimate of 7-8 fighter divs. 2 active HT groups. Advantages: Baltic States and Poland have vastly shorter supply lines. Middle Eastern Alliance: About 200 divisions 14 bomber divs, 12 figher divs. 3 active HT groups. Advantages: unit for unit a better army. (higher proportion of Line, Veteran and Elite divs, more Armored and Mech, Russian vs British, Generals) . Numerical advantage in the air. Uncomitted TA: Turkey. These odds explain why for the moment the Middle Eastern Alliance is slowly pushing the Northern Allance out of Russia. The numbers do not tell all of the story: the war between Poland and Iraq has been a slugging match, were Poland ran out of armies before Iraq did, but the fights elsewhere were very dynamic. Finland alone has lost over 110 divisions against us. Each air unit send against the USA or Canada will be missed on the Eastern front, so I can understand why Viking Pilot and Earthling are complaining about their two front war. As they are slowly but steadily losing that war in the air. Now about the war in Western Europe: The Scandinavians do not have the numbers to defeat Canada and the USA on their own, fo reasons explained above. The Balkan alliance and Hungary are advancing on a narrow front. Afaik they do not have air superiority, but the production advantage is huge, so they should advance. The only reason I can imagine why they don't is lack of coordination and cooperation. This proves that the Scandinavian and Balkan alliances (together with Hungary) do not constitute a single team of 20 nations strong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking pilot Posted April 18, 2012 Report Share Posted April 18, 2012 For me, Canada, the USA and the Scandinavians all have valid points to make. Consider the odds in the east: Northern Alliance: About 250 army divisions . About 7 active bomber divs. An estimate of 7-8 fighter divs. 2 active HT groups. Advantages: Baltic States and Poland have vastly shorter supply lines. Middle Eastern Alliance: About 200 divisions 14 bomber divs, 12 figher divs. 3 active HT groups. Advantages: unit for unit a better army. (higher proportion of Line, Veteran and Elite divs, more Armored and Mech, Russian vs British, Generals) . Numerical advantage in the air. Uncomitted TA: Turkey. These odds explain why for the moment the Middle Eastern Alliance is slowly pushing the Northern Allance out of Russia. The numbers do not tell all of the story: the war between Poland and Iraq has been a slugging match, were Poland ran out of armies before Iraq did, but the fights elsewhere were very dynamic. Finland alone has lost over 110 divisions against us. Each air unit send against the USA or Canada will be missed on the Eastern front, so I can understand why Viking Pilot and Earthling are complaining about their two front war. As they are slowly but steadily losing that war in the air. Now about the war in Western Europe: The Scandinavians do not have the numbers to defeat Canada and the USA on their own, fo reasons explained above. The Balkan alliance and Hungary are advancing on a narrow front. Afaik they do not have air superiority, but the production advantage is huge, so they should advance. The only reason I can imagine why they don't is lack of coordination and cooperation. This proves that the Scandinavian and Balkan alliances (together with Hungary) do not constitute a single team of 20 nations strong. For me, Canada, the USA and the Scandinavians all have valid points to make. Consider the odds in the east: Northern Alliance: About 250 army divisions . About 7 active bomber divs. An estimate of 7-8 fighter divs. 2 active HT groups. Advantages: Baltic States and Poland have vastly shorter supply lines. Middle Eastern Alliance: About 200 divisions 14 bomber divs, 12 figher divs. 3 active HT groups. Advantages: unit for unit a better army. (higher proportion of Line, Veteran and Elite divs, more Armored and Mech, Russian vs British, Generals) . Numerical advantage in the air. Uncomitted TA: Turkey. These odds explain why for the moment the Middle Eastern Alliance is slowly pushing the Northern Allance out of Russia. The numbers do not tell all of the story: the war between Poland and Iraq has been a slugging match, were Poland ran out of armies before Iraq did, but the fights elsewhere were very dynamic. Finland alone has lost over 110 divisions against us. Each air unit send against the USA or Canada will be missed on the Eastern front, so I can understand why Viking Pilot and Earthling are complaining about their two front war. As they are slowly but steadily losing that war in the air. Now about the war in Western Europe: The Scandinavians do not have the numbers to defeat Canada and the USA on their own, fo reasons explained above. The Balkan alliance and Hungary are advancing on a narrow front. Afaik they do not have air superiority, but the production advantage is huge, so they should advance. The only reason I can imagine why they don't is lack of coordination and cooperation. This proves that the Scandinavian and Balkan alliances (together with Hungary) do not constitute a single team of 20 nations strong. I'm not complaining about the course of the war. Some decisions worked out fine, some not so good and some things are beyond control. Its a game and totally deterministic results under our full control wouldn't be very fun (at least that's how I see it). I think your basic analysis is pretty well stated and for whatever combination of reasons things are likely to continue to degrade a bit in the east (from out point of view) and be a little more lively in the west, with a shot at either taking Ireland or racking up kills (for both sides...) or maybe both. A good game all in all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurassier Posted April 18, 2012 Report Share Posted April 18, 2012 Long live Nizwa!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earthling Posted April 18, 2012 Report Share Posted April 18, 2012 Long live Nizwa!!!! Go Away Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elpasopete Posted April 19, 2012 Report Share Posted April 19, 2012 For me, Canada, the USA and the Scandinavians all have valid points to make. Consider the odds in the east: Northern Alliance: About 250 army divisions . About 7 active bomber divs. An estimate of 7-8 fighter divs. 2 active HT groups. Advantages: Baltic States and Poland have vastly shorter supply lines. Middle Eastern Alliance: About 200 divisions 14 bomber divs, 12 figher divs. 3 active HT groups. Advantages: unit for unit a better army. (higher proportion of Line, Veteran and Elite divs, more Armored and Mech, Russian vs British, Generals) . Numerical advantage in the air. Uncomitted TA: Turkey. These odds explain why for the moment the Middle Eastern Alliance is slowly pushing the Northern Allance out of Russia. The numbers do not tell all of the story: the war between Poland and Iraq has been a slugging match, were Poland ran out of armies before Iraq did, but the fights elsewhere were very dynamic. Finland alone has lost over 110 divisions against us. Each air unit send against the USA or Canada will be missed on the Eastern front, so I can understand why Viking Pilot and Earthling are complaining about their two front war. As they are slowly but steadily losing that war in the air. Now about the war in Western Europe: The Scandinavians do not have the numbers to defeat Canada and the USA on their own, fo reasons explained above. The Balkan alliance and Hungary are advancing on a narrow front. Afaik they do not have air superiority, but the production advantage is huge, so they should advance. The only reason I can imagine why they don't is lack of coordination and cooperation. This proves that the Scandinavian and Balkan alliances (together with Hungary) do not constitute a single team of 20 nations strong. Viking and Eartling will complain no matter what, er never complain! 110 divisions- glad I'm not counting. It seems that I have seen the 55th three or five times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.