Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
15 Posts

Axis Empires: Totaler Krieg!» Forums » Rules

Subject: Delaying western guarantees rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Paul Lags
Australia
Parramatta
NSW
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
37 scenario, playing western guarantees in autumn 39(instead of spring). This seems to really make Poland a lot harder for little negative consequence. I guess I shouldn't play 37 scenario if I want balance.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stephan Valkyser
Germany
Wesseling
NRW
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Why do you think so?

Straight off the top of my head I'd say that delaying Guarantees enables the German player to take out Poland without having to worry about dragging the Western Allies into the War. Thus, the Axis would be free to employ an East-first strategy and attack Russia.

Historically, the Western Guarantees in Spring forced upon Hitler the need to play the Nazi-Soviet Pact, because he could not risk a two-front war at that time.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Haggett
United States
Riverside
Rhode Island
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Why does that make Poland alot harder? They might resist your demands, I suppose, but the Ceded Lands marker goes into the force pool and you can deal with them later.

Fpr balance, I'd play with the '39 start--the '37 start can have alot of pitfalls for the Axis (and occasionally the Allies).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul Lags
Australia
Parramatta
NSW
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
No guarantees = no war on first cede attempt. By playing in autumn however, it means that a second failed attempt will result in war but in mud (as there is only one clear turn on autumn). Seems like a no brainer for western allies unless there is a downside I am not seeing that a more experienced player could take advantage of.

To be clear whilst I am sure there are things the German player can do what I am questioning is whether this is a no brainer for the allies because it has only (or mostly) positive effects for them, or is there consequences for making this decision. I am a fan of consequences
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Haggett
United States
Riverside
Rhode Island
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
This did happen to me in a recent game. It isn't disastrous, but it does tend to stretch the Polish campaign out and can make the Western Allies frisky. If you find yourself about a turn behind in 1940, you might try playing an alternate offensive to Case Yellow in the summer and Case Yellow in the Autumn, to help ensure Vichy forming. I failed to do that, and it has been a long game blush . Missing Case Yellow firing meant digging out the French and I could ill-afford those steps in the long campaign.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul Lags
Australia
Parramatta
NSW
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
any consequences for the Allies you can see Mike? i.e. Why wouldn't the allies do this every game?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Haggett
United States
Riverside
Rhode Island
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
The only real consequence would be if Germany caused Poland to cede the corridor on the first roll. That would likely put off limited war until Spring. The upside for Germany is alot more steps, since they can play their 1940 mobilization card. The Allies don't, I think, gain nearly as much.

And, of course, if Germany chose another path, then it might or might not matter. Pact of Steel, followed by treatying Poland and Italy, and then going either West or East gives the Germans some flexibility, and adding Italy can make the French have to guard a very long border.

This is probably the key to the '37 campaign--if you play to an obvious plan, your opponent can find it easier to throw a wrench into your plans. Which is what happened in my game--I followed essentially the historical path, while my opponent innovated.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul Lags
Australia
Parramatta
NSW
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Ok i think i agree with you, 37 scenario is not for those who want a historical or even semi-historical ww2 start. Which is kind of disappointing as i was looking for a tweeked ww2 start, not a totally different one. The extra roll at ceding is dwarfed by the 5+ extra steps losses that Germany will take in Poland or wherever they attack IMO. It seems like a Autumn start to the war is pretty unlikely in such a scenario. Better to just start the war with Case Yellow I think.

Regarding card selection, don't you put down your pending card before the Allied player reveals their Spring Card. So you will not know if Guarantees has been played when you make the choice between pact of steel or Molotov pact cards (assuming you want the extra steps that come with Summer).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Haggett
United States
Riverside
Rhode Island
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
That is true--and Allies will know for their Autumn pick which you have chosen. But Pact of Steel, at the expense of some steps, keeps a sense of options open.

If you do play N-S Pact, you could make a different play as Germany in Autumn--demand one of your other areas. Or your '39 mobilization, with a look to completing mobilization in Spring and doing a Case Yellow for Summer 40.



 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jakub Kircun
United States
Woods Hole
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
Why wouldn't the allies do this every game?
This is an interesting dilemma, and one I'm not sure how you could solve; you could introduce another "exception" into the rules I guess. Also following a purely historical card-selection path in the 1937 scenario does put you at a disadvantage, as Mike pointed-out. I would think that as the German player I would always try to delay the start of hostilities as long as possible.

In any-case, good catch!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul Lags
Australia
Parramatta
NSW
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Swapped side and we played again(my opponent insisted), same deal (guarantee in autumn), axis get ceded marker instead of war. This again throws off the timetable for the Germans. My opponent played a demand card in spring which kicked off the war but by not being able to play case yellow until autumn 50 got heldup in front of Paris.


I think it basically comes down to 2 choices if guarantees are not played in early 39:

1) align to Russians and go after them
2) accept that Poland will remain neutral in 39 and spend winter mobilising and the playing case yellow in summer.

Either way the genie is out of the bottle on this gambit, there maybe a way to replicate the axis successes of 39-40 in 40-41 instead but given this is when the axis should be playing its dipo cards it seems like a no-brainer for the allies.


 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Haggett
United States
Riverside
Rhode Island
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
That was a bad move on your opponent's part, not a game feature. Playing 6a Additional Mobilization begins Limited War in the Options Card Phase of Spring, allowing Case Yellow to be played as the pending card for Summer. As you note, a demand at that point is sub-optimal--not having a blitz card of some sort makes summer in France tougher. If you have to wait Spring '40 for LW, Additional Mobilization is really the card to use.

Is there some reason as the Axis you couldn't play Demand: Corridor in Spring 39? Although I guess your point is the pursuit of beginning LW with the Polish demand. I think you're back to starting the game at the '39 start if you want to reliably play this out historically.

What were your oppponent's plans if the Spring '40 Demand had been successful? At that point I suppose you have to go for the long limited war scenario, mobilization in Summer, perhaps Norway in Autumn. Treaty in Winter, try and pick up Italy. Start hitting France in Spring 41 with Marita, followed by Case Yellow. Barbarossa put off until '42.


2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul Lags
Australia
Parramatta
NSW
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Not sure, but apart from the guarantees thing, Spain was republican (brutal)and the allies/ soviets had influence in hungry and rumania (the axis had none). Very convinced that the 37 scenario is too hard for the axis and with the guarantees gambit makes a 39 start to the war impossible (at least under favourable axis conditions). Going to play 39 scenario instead.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alberto Natta
Italy
Unspecified
Unspecified
flag msg tools
mbmb
In my personal experience the Axis is very weak already.
For how it has many options, meanwhile the Axis goes through the various demands which can even cost them steps, the Allies do the lion in the politics and diplomatics and place influence left and right (or at worst nowhere around).

The Axis has the SCW cards which are a burden or a filler when the SCW is no more and the Allies have the interest in NOT keeping SCW running because if they flip back and forth the Axis plays more cards and can remove influences. Pratically the Allies would go SCW mode only if the Axis fucks up with rolls with theirs.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Uwe A. Redjac
China
Beijing
Beijing
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
kubaman wrote:
I would think that as the German player I would always try to delay the start of hostilities as long as possible.
In which case the Allies would play Guarantees as early as prudently possible to mess with you, right?

Just saying playing "Guarantees as late as possible" is maybe not as clear cut as claimed.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls