Oak

Can it be?!? A good idea from Kuniworth? Yes, indeed! I believe that Kuniworth has a good idea worth exploring here. I'm not sure that this move qualifies as a 'gambit' but it is a move that would certainly slow down the Axis assault on Denmark and could result in the German fleet losing rather than gaining. You could really make life interesting for the Axis by putting the French air fleet in Copenhagen and the Polish air fleet next to Copenhagen, giving the Allies 2 air fleets in Denmark. The French one could outlive the fall of Poland. Another option I've seen is to operate the Polish air fleet to France and use it to intercept attacks on Brussels. However, that is only really useful if it appears that Germany did not move enough units west to ensure the taking of Brussels.

Can it be?!? A good idea from Kuniworth? Yes, indeed! I believe that Kuniworth has a good idea worth exploring here. I'm not sure that this move qualifies as a 'gambit' but it is a move that would certainly slow down the Axis assault on Denmark and could result in the German fleet losing rather than gaining. Another option I've seen is to operate the Polish air fleet to France and use it to intercept attacks on Brussels. However, that is only really useful if it appears that Germany did not move enough units west to ensure the taking of Brussels.

It would seem that Kuniworth (a.k.a. 'Puniworth) is making a mountain out of of mole-hill ... a tempest in a tea cup. I think that the rules should include a rule about not putting a lot of useless and annoying comments on the Forum.

AND, what in the world is the "Axis slaughter bulgaria Gambit"?

Lots of interest and talked about ad nauseum. It will be up to Hubert to decide what will and will not be in SC2. Until it appears, we will just need to watch and wait.

Pardon my ignorance, but ... - How do you take Spain in 2-turns? - What is the "Bogus German Landing in UK"? - How does the Rambo-Rome-Invasion work? - What is the "Surround Moscow crap"? Enquiring minds would like to know. Oak

- Risk taking and inventing new ideas is all part of the game. We should encourage rather than discourage it. Go for it, Rambo. - How often have people won/lost with this strategy? Exactly how risky is this risky strategy?

Tech increases in the short term really are a matter of luck. Replaying a move over and over again to get a tech increase is a lot of work. My suggestion is that you ask your opponent why the file doesn't show reloads ... asking if he has changed the file name, etc. And, if you really feel your opponent is cheating then find another opponent.

Here are my thoughts: The Dutch Gambit gives the Allies a big advantage, but Axis can stop the Dutch Gambit by taking LC in turn 2. It seems like more and more players (including Zappsweden) feel that the game is won or lost in the first few moves. It seems to me that it should be fairly easy for Axis to develop a strong counter to the turn 1 Dutch Gambit just as a strong counter to the turn 2 Dutch Gambit has already been developed. Once that is widely used, no one will do it any more. The Dutch Gambit with a DoW in turn 2 is a bit risky for the Allies but can be quite successful. However, the turn 1 Dutch Gambit is extremely risky since it is all but impossible for LC to be taken by the Allies that first move. So, rather than making a house rule simply stop people from a DoW on LC in the first move as Allies by making an effect counter move that ensures that the Allies will lose big. Oak

Bill, You can include this in the next version of the Strategy Guide. By the way, my deepest thanks and appreciation for your hard work in putting that Guide together. Oak

I think that the current set-up works well and is historical. The Italians can be stopped from getting out of the Med and bombarding the Gibralter port if the UK defends it. A UK BB sitting in Gibralter port will give much more than it takes if attacked by the Italians. Gibralter was a pain for the Axis because of the fleets based there. AND, even if Gibralter is left undefended by the navy ... the UK gains MPP each turn and forces the Italians to bombard the port if they want to get into or out of the Med. Oak

Bill, Even if the Allies cannot take Spain, I'm sure there will be plenty of players that will jump at the chance to deny Germany the advantage of Hungary, Bulgaria & Romania by declaring war on Spain. The key disadvantage for the Allies is that they will probably lose Gibralter. Oak

I think you will need to design the game for human vs human play.

Take out carriers, air fleets and bombers altogether. One important missing component is artillery. Rockets could be used for that.

Oak may be faster, but Terif is better (actually, by far the best) and the true master of SC.

Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria won't join the Axis if you declare war on Spain before they join. Declaring war on Vichy France makes no difference as to whether the Axis minors join.

Good ideas ... but let's keep things simple. Right now, the focus is on getting a bunch of people together playing SC via PBEM, and making it easier for them to find opponents. Many on the list (notice that I refer to it as a List, and not a League or Ladder) are fairly new to the game and looking for opponents that can help them enjoy this great and exciting game. As that list is developed and a good group of players is developed, we can then start organizing tournaments, ladders, etc. In setting up those tournaments and/or ladders we can explore the issue of how sides are assigned and the issue of advantage/disadvantage for one side or another. One option is the bidding system used by the Z-Ladder. Another option is the 2-game approach being discussed above. At the end of the game victory points are assigned and that seems to be the best criteria for assigning points to a win. If it is a draw, then there a variety of ways to measure results.

Forgot to add that the whole purpose of this is to have fun. My thinking in setting this up is that everyone plays a bunch of games alternating between Axis and Allies. After everyone has had a chance to play everyone else, they will have an understanding of who they would like to play and the levels that everyone is at. The result should be that it is easier for people to find opponents for fun, enjoyable PBEM games.

Although the sides are assigned, that doesn't mean that the Allies cannot be given a MPP advantage. If we reach the point where everyone is at the level of Terif, Zapp or Rambo then we can set an agreed amount of additional MPP for the Allies. However, I think it will be a long time before that happens. It appears that we have quite a lot of beginners on the PBEM List, we a fair number of intermediate players as well.

Flatus, Sure! No problem. Flexibility is what the PBEM List is all about. Please send an email to me at: reid@pacific.net.sg with your user name. I will put you on the list. You may need to wait a little for your first game assignments, though. Oak

First, the rules and set-up for the PBEM List/League stand. Second, Kuniworth's view is that the Allies are at a considerable disadvantage in SC and can only win if given extra MPP to make up for that disadvantage. When I first started playing SC, that was my view as well. But, I've come to realize that this is not the case and that the game is quite balanced. If anything, the Allies probably have a slight advantage.

KDG Hadn't really thought about that. For now, keep them separate. Oak

But ... how can the UK (with only a couple of corps in Egypt/Syria take out the army in Tobruk?

I'm still very new to the game, but here is my observation about the UK Med fleet: - the UK Med fleet is out gunned by the Axis who have better supply, better position and can more readily bring air fleets (with HQ support) to bear against the UK navy in the Med. - my view is that the Med carrier should definitely be moved to the Atlantic. If you need air in the Med, operate it in from England or Malta. - you can take one of 3 approaches with the battleships and cruiser: 1) use them together with the French fleet to hit the Italian navy hard before France goes out. If you are lucky (and the Axis is careless), then you can take out 2-3 Italian ships and even things out a little. 2) abandon the Med and move everything out, relying on air to defend Egypt. 3) leave a token force in Egypt (1-2 ships) knowing that they will probably be wiped out by the Italian navy but in the hope that they can slow the Axis down. Oak

I've been busy today. Here is the text of a 4th email sent out to everyone on the PBEM list: "In the Z-Ladder games, whether someone plays Axis or Allies is decided through a bidding system which gives extra MPPs to the Allies. I have taken the approach of assigning sides to players, arranging it so that everyone will play an equal number of games as Axis and as Allies. As a result, there is no need for bids. I suggest that players can take one of three approaches, and how you want to handle it is entirely up to you (as long as both sides agree). 1) Play without any MPP being given to the Allies. Since everyone will be playing an equal number of games as Axis and as Allies, even if the Axis does have an advantage (and I don't think they do) things will even out in the end. 2) Agree to give Allied powers extra MPP when the enter, using either the 1-1-1 or the 1-4 formula. 3) Agree to use a set-up that you feel provides the most even arrangement. I would suggest that players will probably want to avoid the second option. The reason being that players will find themselves giving their Allied opponent an edge (in the form of extra MPP) in one game and not getting that same edge in another. Also, if the sides are decided then why give anything extra to your opponent. Again, how you want to work it is entirely up to you. My own experience is that 'fun' games tend not to include giving extra MPP to the Allies while 'competitive' games do. These PBEM games are meant to be 'fun' games. Reid (a.k.a. Oak)"