The Great Santini

Hello, I'm looking for opponents for AOD 1939 scenario in version 1.02. You can contact me at jdailey@stx.rr.com. Thanks for replys. Dave

Hello, I'm looking for opponents for PBEM games of AOD 1939 scenario in version 1.02. I can be reached at jdailey@stx.rr.com. Thank you.

Hi. I'm looking for an opponent for PBEM game of SCGC. You can contact me at jdailey@stx.rr.com. Thanks.

Hello. I'm searching for opponents in the 1939 scenario version 1.04. PBEM single or mirrored game. Contact me at jdailey@stx.rr.com. Thank you.

I am looking for opponents for GC 1939 scenario v. 1.04 in PBEM. Either single or mirrored game. Contact me at jdailey@stx.rr.com. Thanks, Dave.

I am looking for opponents for the World at War 1939 scenario vwersion 1.03 in PBEM format. Contact me at jdailey@stx.rr.com. Thanks. Dave

I am looking for PBEM opponents for the 1939 World at War version 1.02 scenario. Single or mirrored games. You can reach me at jdailey@stx.rr.com. Thanks. Dave

Hello. I am seeking PBEM opponents for the 1939 scenario in version 1.02. I will play single or mirrored games. Contact Dave at jdailey@stx.rr.com. Thanks.

Hello, Colin. I will give you a good game. Dave Dailey

I am interested in conclusions people who play Operation Z have about the scenario. 1) Do they feel it is a balanced scenario? 2) If not, which side has a more difficult time winning the scenario?. 3) What are the challenges the weaker side has in winning the scenario?. 4) From what I observed the newest patch seems to have strengthened the Japanese side. Was this a good idea? If so, why and if not why not? Thank you.

I'm looking for opponents for Pacific Theater Operation Z or other interseting scenarios, either single game or mirror game. Also Fall Weiss from World at War. Contact me at jdailey@stx.rr.com. Thanks.

Since the U.S. is Japans' biggest problem doesn't she buy more time by invading as many Pacific islands as possible,even if she can't garrison them? Or is the cost in amphibious transport points worth it? With her big fleet advantage at the beginning of the war she can provide cover for the vulnerable transports. And the U.S. will still have to invade even an undefended island to use it as a staging area later.

It isn't a question of "cutting down strategic possibilities" because there is only one path to victory, namely grab every minor country you can, with no consequences. Terif invented the "Terif cookie cutter". This so wrecked SC1 that it was necessary to add MPPs to the allied majors to rebalance the game. Right now the U.S. always enters no latter than summer 1942 no matter what the Axis does, so why not grab every minor for plunder you can. And with only five chits for diplomacy each side usually tries to cancel out the other when they see a move being made to influence a country. And once the U.S. enters diplomacy is out the window, assuming there are any unconquered minors left. And when we see things like England attacking Ireland or Saudia Arabia or Germany attacking Switzerland with NO consequences it isn't a game with "strategic possibilities" it's a Harry Turtledove novel.

Why are the diplomatic consequences for invading defenseless countries so trivial and ultimately nonexistent once the U.S. enters? It is outrageously ahistorical. The game deteriorates into nothing more than a massive land grab for MPPs. The minor countries become nothing more than piggybanks. If Germany wants to invade Switzerland, fine, but let the consequences be something like an increase in U.S. industrial capacity. And why just five chits for diplomacy? Is there a shortage of money for striped pants statesman?

Artillery and anti-aircraft units are ranged pieces, so I can deliver fire on units without them avoiding it. But how do you do it with anti-tank pieces. Enemy tanks won't fight them and they are vulnerable to other units. I can't deliver a shot to a tank that I am not next to and enemy tanks won't get next to them. What am I missing?