GW, I want to point out and I am not sure if this is actually written in V4 but I know it's in V3 and all of us are veteran V3 players so the rule might be already be muscle memory. But the situation where Ethiopia has to change player hands from France to UK because France was conquered may very well be irrelevant because of the rule saying that France and Italy have the clause for playing minors on their side as an optional rule due to those nations being the most "boring" to play. While in the strictest of settings, even someone like me who wants to play by the book with a few house rules, I do not see the need to change hands in this rare situation. I notice that a lot of players will have UK and France be played by the same player while with my group, we make it clear that France must be played by US.
I really like that house rule because France and Italy really are more boring to play! With that said, it's one thing to allow the person with the most time on their hands to plot and plan (great idea), but another thing to change which country Abyssinia will align to should certain alignment conditions be reached! 8 )
So true! It might be a very poor decision for both of them! At the start of the game, USSR makes 4 and France 6, so if they both send a mountain infantry, that's 80% of their starting income!!! Plus, strategically it might actually make sense for USSR to want Italy to be doing well. If Italy is active in the game, then it is likely Germany is sending resources down to the Mediterranean, either via Lend-lease to Italy, or by sending the DAK. Either way, an active Italy means less potential German troops headed towards USSR. So the only way USSR should be Lend-leasing to Abyssinia is if the Axis make them some sort of sweetheart deal.
@@GW36_Enthusiast THanks for the input - I am entirely new to the game, as I got recently Tabletop Simulator on Steam and found this module for a very advanced Axis and Alies, so I am documenting myself.
Just to clarify, if Italy doesn't possess all 3 zones at the end of the game they don't score the victory point, correct? Example, Italy defeats Abyssinia, then goes to war with Commonwealth and GB captures 1 of the zones and holds it at the end of the game.
You are 100% correct, Ozark! There are very few strategic objectives which are "permanent." The USA/USSR technological objectives are and the ones where a minor power evolves are too (France, KMT, CCP). But most other strategic objectives can be taken away. Fortunately for Italy, the turn order favors them a bit in this regard. They can fly a bomber to strategic bomb a rail and make the Commonwealth lose African Colonialism. And they can make an effort to secure all three territories at the last moment. But v4 isn't like v3 where you can win in Spain and now you've got two guaranteed VP's. You have to hold most of the strategic objectives you achieve. So something like Festung Europa is nearly impossible!
![[Live] : ONE 169 วันนี้!! "อนาโตลี vs อูมาร์"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/IK3YZVWuFJg/mqdefault.jpg)
So cool!
Good to know! Thanks.
Another great video. I wasnt even tracking the Great Britain options even existed.
You missed a scenario where Abyssinia is not yet defeated, but france is resurrected XD
I am hoping you will construct a flow chart for this Byzantine situation, my friend!
GW, I want to point out and I am not sure if this is actually written in V4 but I know it's in V3 and all of us are veteran V3 players so the rule might be already be muscle memory. But the situation where Ethiopia has to change player hands from France to UK because France was conquered may very well be irrelevant because of the rule saying that France and Italy have the clause for playing minors on their side as an optional rule due to those nations being the most "boring" to play. While in the strictest of settings, even someone like me who wants to play by the book with a few house rules, I do not see the need to change hands in this rare situation. I notice that a lot of players will have UK and France be played by the same player while with my group, we make it clear that France must be played by US.
I really like that house rule because France and Italy really are more boring to play! With that said, it's one thing to allow the person with the most time on their hands to plot and plan (great idea), but another thing to change which country Abyssinia will align to should certain alignment conditions be reached! 8 )
Interesting video but it seems to me silly that Russia and France can just do massive lend lease to Abyssinia.
So true! It might be a very poor decision for both of them! At the start of the game, USSR makes 4 and France 6, so if they both send a mountain infantry, that's 80% of their starting income!!! Plus, strategically it might actually make sense for USSR to want Italy to be doing well. If Italy is active in the game, then it is likely Germany is sending resources down to the Mediterranean, either via Lend-lease to Italy, or by sending the DAK. Either way, an active Italy means less potential German troops headed towards USSR. So the only way USSR should be Lend-leasing to Abyssinia is if the Axis make them some sort of sweetheart deal.
@@GW36_Enthusiast THanks for the input - I am entirely new to the game, as I got recently Tabletop Simulator on Steam and found this module for a very advanced Axis and Alies, so I am documenting myself.
@@CohenCohen I hope you love this game half as much as I do, my friend!😊
Just to clarify, if Italy doesn't possess all 3 zones at the end of the game they don't score the victory point, correct? Example, Italy defeats Abyssinia, then goes to war with Commonwealth and GB captures 1 of the zones and holds it at the end of the game.
You are 100% correct, Ozark! There are very few strategic objectives which are "permanent." The USA/USSR technological objectives are and the ones where a minor power evolves are too (France, KMT, CCP). But most other strategic objectives can be taken away. Fortunately for Italy, the turn order favors them a bit in this regard. They can fly a bomber to strategic bomb a rail and make the Commonwealth lose African Colonialism. And they can make an effort to secure all three territories at the last moment. But v4 isn't like v3 where you can win in Spain and now you've got two guaranteed VP's. You have to hold most of the strategic objectives you achieve. So something like Festung Europa is nearly impossible!