Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I benefitted from the pro-Axis coup in Iraq (can't remember the date/year) and fended off enough attempts by the Indian Brits to take Baghdad that they camped out nearby and sat still for at least a year. Persia sided with the Russians. I built an Iraqi corps and used it to take back Basra (but not Kuwait, which apparently left the port of Basra still in Allied hands). I went further a-field and isolated another Indian unit near the coast who inexplicably headed for the hills from the relative safety of the town it was in. Sometime in early 1944, another event turned the tables completely on the Axis, toppling the government, and eliminating all at once both the unit in Baghdad and the marauding Iraqi unit headed for the western border of India. I am guessing this was a scripted event. Can anyone confirm? I was definitely lulled into a state of confidence, trusting that I was going to be able to use Iraq as a base to push north against Persia and then the Caucasus. If losing Iraq is indeed scripted, then if I'd moved in a German unit into Baghdad, would have that German been eliminated by the "pro-Allied" event? Thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi 10harold66,

The only event that I could see this happening with is the following one:

"Allied Invasion Leads Sheik Rashid Ali To Resign - Iraqi Government Collapses"

This even causes Iraq to surrender to the Allies but should only trigger if there are 2 Allied units adjacent/within Baghdad.

Does this sound like the one?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hubert, that does sound like the event, although there was an Allied unit in Karbala (3rd Indian Special Forces, two squares away) and another (XIII Indian Corps, adjacent) that attacked Baghdad for several turns before it retreated to Hamadan in Persia (four squares away) once the Russians took over Persia (by event, forming the Iranian Corps in Tehran). So, for at least a few months, two Allied units were within two squares of Baghdad until one of them chickened-out and retreated. So, in 1944, the Iranian Corps suddenly found its mettle and moved southwest with the XIII Indian and sure enough, when they moved within two squares of Baghdad, that triggered the collapse of the Iraqi government. Not sure why it didn't happen earlier. Then I think "hmmm... why would the XIII Indian just sit there in Hamadan for over a year when all it had to do was move within two squares of Baghdad to cause a government collapse?" But thanks for the reply! I really like the event, by the way -- keeps me on my toes -- but to my other point... if I'd been wise enough to stage a German or Italian unit in Baghdad, would have that prevented the collapse?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, wait, Hubert...

I just read your response again. You said two units had to be adjacent to Baghdad to trigger the event. The 3rd Indian SF in Karbala stayed in Karbala -- never attacked; never moved adjacent to Baghdad. The XIII Indian attacked, then retreated to Hamadan. That's only one adjacent unit, which didn't trigger the collapse. The Iranian Corps and the XIII Indian moved next to Baghdad in 1944, triggering the collapse. So, I wonder why the Allied AI wasn't savvy enough to realize years ago that it just needed to move the 3rd Indian SF one square so it could be adjacent to Baghdad. The downstream effect for me as the Axis was that I left Syria undefended, while using the upgraded Syrian Corps and a handful of Italians to attack Egypt from across the Suez. Once Iraq fell all of a sudden (without warning!!! wahhh! wahhhhhh!), I was too far away to save Damascus. But, like I said, I really like the script -- knowing what I know now, I'll definitely have to look sharp. Great game, by the way.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...