The option column was blank.
I also give you 1 cookie if you achieve to moove GAR which cant :
- moove
- SR.
I also give you 1 cookie if you achieve to moove GAR which cant :
- moove
- SR.
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
No save for you fancy. AI Nat china has been able to annex mongolia, instead of you
however i still think that this redeployment is totally gamey, and that those units have to be deleted (no matter how) for fair play purpose.
however i still think that this redeployment is totally gamey, and that those units have to be deleted (no matter how) for fair play purpose.
No save for you fancy. AI Nat china has been able to annex mongolia, instead of you
however i still think that this redeployment is totally gamey, and that those units have to be deleted (no matter how) for fair play purpose.
I was gonna annex Mongolia. *Points to Western Mongolian VP*
It was legitimate. Those divs could SR even a few weeks later than I actually did it and thus be saved. SR was at least as legitimate as Italian SR and disbanding in Africa.
Those divisions were going to be encircled in less than a week and with no way to escape (unless you wanted to lose more TP). This is obvious that you are exploiting a hole in the rules. one more time. Prove us than you can do something else than doing that everytime.
For the SR in africa, Hax couldv'e done it much more than he did. He hasn't done it.......only because i and fancy pressured him to not do it...because it was not fair-play..
For the SR in africa, Hax couldv'e done it much more than he did. He hasn't done it.......only because i and fancy pressured him to not do it...because it was not fair-play.
.
I never sr'ed troops in Africa, just disbanding them that was in the west part(Libya).
I could have sr'ed those troops who got encircled in Cairo but I didn't do it.
If the province got amfib attacked then it and the rest of the provinces becomes front provinces.
Idk how you allies can be so bad players, isn't it clear that you have already won if you don't make any stupid mistakes. See just Barbarossa, we haven't advanced 3 provinces from the old border. And with a growing SU and USA we can't hold much long.
I could have sr'ed those troops who got encircled in Cairo but I didn't do it.
If the province got amfib attacked then it and the rest of the provinces becomes front provinces.
Idk how you allies can be so bad players, isn't it clear that you have already won if you don't make any stupid mistakes. See just Barbarossa, we haven't advanced 3 provinces from the old border. And with a growing SU and USA we can't hold much long.
"redeployment of units in provinces bordering the enemy is forbidden"
A front province should be the ones that can be attacked by hostile troops. Therefore you would logically not be allowed to dispand or SR troops in coastal provinces if you are at war.
A front province should be the ones that can be attacked by hostile troops. Therefore you would logically not be allowed to dispand or SR troops in coastal provinces if you are at war.
Redeploying (or disbanding) units in coastal provinces is allowed if the province does not neighbour an enemy province.
There is nothing about "ennemy province" here. The ennemy was in the sea of rangoon and in the sea of chittagong.
It means enemy territory, not enemy units. You cannot have "borders" with divisions - only with provinces.
There is no word about territory or provinces here. The "ennemy" was clearly threating all your lines...given i had attacked/bombed rangoon only some days ago, and i had troops entering chittagong.
The fact is that this rule is made on purpose to avoid people escaping from encirclement, and that's the spirit of the rule. and you clearly broke the spirit of the rule.
The fact is that this rule is made on purpose to avoid people escaping from encirclement, and that's the spirit of the rule. and you clearly broke the spirit of the rule.
Your judgement is biaised Lodovico. Mine repose on WHY this rule has been created, and not on how this should be applicated.
Why this rule has been created is not biaised. How is biaised.
And the troops had no way to espace unless from SR, and you did SR on purpose to avoid encirclement, not to do any strategic moove like SR should be used to.
One or two examples :
- military access is forbidden : clearly to avoid people rebasing on other countries to be able to attack an other freely. Allowed and oftenly used in RL, but gamey in HoI2.
Like italy rebasing 20 ships+20 divisions+20airforce in japan in 39 to be able to naval strike/take land/sunk convoys freely.
- Allies and Comintern cannot propose trades to AI to buy any oil or rare materials until the Danzig or war event : clearly to avoid every ressources-whoring and early shortage of ressources.
- Rules like SR are made to avoid escaping from encirclement/prisonners which would have happened in real life. SR is made to do strategic mooves (like from france to poland, from poland to japan), not escaping mooves.
Why this rule has been created is not biaised. How is biaised.
And the troops had no way to espace unless from SR, and you did SR on purpose to avoid encirclement, not to do any strategic moove like SR should be used to.
One or two examples :
- military access is forbidden : clearly to avoid people rebasing on other countries to be able to attack an other freely. Allowed and oftenly used in RL, but gamey in HoI2.
Like italy rebasing 20 ships+20 divisions+20airforce in japan in 39 to be able to naval strike/take land/sunk convoys freely.
- Allies and Comintern cannot propose trades to AI to buy any oil or rare materials until the Danzig or war event : clearly to avoid every ressources-whoring and early shortage of ressources.
- Rules like SR are made to avoid escaping from encirclement/prisonners which would have happened in real life. SR is made to do strategic mooves (like from france to poland, from poland to japan), not escaping mooves.
your both biased. Appoint an unbiased person, have him decide the outcome.
Or let this pass, with a addation to the game rules.
Or let this pass, with a addation to the game rules.
Yes US military access to UK is gamey and not historical.
US didn't want to join ww2 but when Pearl Harbour attack came then they joined.
After Pearl Harbour it should be able to do military access.
Also before we get more disscusions we should remove that allies can rebase in SU.
US didn't want to join ww2 but when Pearl Harbour attack came then they joined.
After Pearl Harbour it should be able to do military access.
Also before we get more disscusions we should remove that allies can rebase in SU.
As i said the other night it is impossible to police an SR rule when you involve amphibious units. Troops on a ship do not constitute boots on the ground and no matter how close or far away the encirclement is. To say that a troop could not get onto a train because there are units floating out on the ocean just isnt' viable and would leave ALOT to be open to interpretaion as to what units can and can't SR when a big invasion is commencing.
However, i do think that pepsi's situation might have some merit. Kalewa? the Province the "train" would have to travel through was adjacent to an enemy provinces..... even though the units that moved where not. So whilst the rule is pretty clear that SR is only mandated by adjacent provinces that are occupied and not in retreat, any rule would become fairly complicated and thus defunct when dealing with Salient situations.
Perhaps the SR rule should be reworded to read : SR is only permitted when ALL provinces required to retreat through are not adjacent to enemy forces, retreating enemy forces do not count as adjacent.
This would probably solve the situation we had the other night.... Though im not sure what was occupied around Kalewa when the Allied forces SR'd, though im pretty sure a province east of Kalewa was occupied thus making it adjacent.
As for the amphibious thing, youd have a hard time convincing me of SR limitations due to amphibious activity.ie.........
-Allies Own Africa.
-Axis make a landing at Tobruk
-Allies SR everything west of Tobruk backtowards Alexandria
As you can see from this very simple situation, the Axis plan would be to move to cut the units off West of Tobruk. However to say that because some infantry are on ships in the med sea that units cannot SR from there beaches or wherever is simply absurd. A Province cannot be "adjacent or occupied" if the agressor isnt even on the beach yet.
This same situation could be applied to an Invasion of Italy or even France with some outlandish consequences.
-Axis own France/Lowlands
-Allies launch D-Day at Holland with landings in Ghent, Rotterdam and Amsterdam
-Axis not allowed to SR from Normandy or French Atlantic coast, ...... because there are troops in the sea zone..
As you can see writing a rule for amphibious would not only be rediculous but impossible.
However i think the reworded rule as i mentioned above would cover the situation that has caused this grief. UK wouldn't have been able to SR out becuase Kalewa (a province he had to travel through, seeing as cuttack? was being attacked) was adjacent to Enemy forces.
However, i do think that pepsi's situation might have some merit. Kalewa? the Province the "train" would have to travel through was adjacent to an enemy provinces..... even though the units that moved where not. So whilst the rule is pretty clear that SR is only mandated by adjacent provinces that are occupied and not in retreat, any rule would become fairly complicated and thus defunct when dealing with Salient situations.
Perhaps the SR rule should be reworded to read : SR is only permitted when ALL provinces required to retreat through are not adjacent to enemy forces, retreating enemy forces do not count as adjacent.
This would probably solve the situation we had the other night.... Though im not sure what was occupied around Kalewa when the Allied forces SR'd, though im pretty sure a province east of Kalewa was occupied thus making it adjacent.
As for the amphibious thing, youd have a hard time convincing me of SR limitations due to amphibious activity.ie.........
-Allies Own Africa.
-Axis make a landing at Tobruk
-Allies SR everything west of Tobruk backtowards Alexandria
As you can see from this very simple situation, the Axis plan would be to move to cut the units off West of Tobruk. However to say that because some infantry are on ships in the med sea that units cannot SR from there beaches or wherever is simply absurd. A Province cannot be "adjacent or occupied" if the agressor isnt even on the beach yet.
This same situation could be applied to an Invasion of Italy or even France with some outlandish consequences.
-Axis own France/Lowlands
-Allies launch D-Day at Holland with landings in Ghent, Rotterdam and Amsterdam
-Axis not allowed to SR from Normandy or French Atlantic coast, ...... because there are troops in the sea zone..
As you can see writing a rule for amphibious would not only be rediculous but impossible.
However i think the reworded rule as i mentioned above would cover the situation that has caused this grief. UK wouldn't have been able to SR out becuase Kalewa (a province he had to travel through, seeing as cuttack? was being attacked) was adjacent to Enemy forces.
It is 99.9% likely that USA will never set foot on USSR soil, so i wouldn't go worrying to much in any event.
Also the Japanese Historically attacked the UK 4 hours after they started Pearl Harbour.... They didn't get free reign against USSR or UK for 6+months. By the time the USA can do anything in this game it will be june 1942. So effectively you get to do a 4v1 gangbang against USSR for 1 year +. So if you whanna whine about historical crap be my guest but check your own backyard first eh?
As for the mill acces to UK, it happens by event, we didnt ask for it. And to my knowledge no Troops or planes have been deployed to UK soil. Yes our navy has been active in watching what is going on, but with USA shackled by this rule set and impending PH effects at japanese DOW as i said it'll be mid 42 before the US can even lift a finger.
Im sure that Pepsi finds geos 15 old ships floating around india as a rather laughable hurdle at this point in time.
Last edited:
1) the "train" should have passed or by kalewa, or by chittagong, which were both under attack and going to be taken in a week.
2) A rule who cover all aspects of the SR will be very hard to do, this is obvious. That's why i think that more of it's ingame application, the spirit of the rule (not SRing units which are going to be fairly encircled) should be respected. But it requires total self-control and fair-play. I've made my part with the planes in hong-kong. Do yours Lodovico.
3) Game is not fun when you just obliterate the ennemy.
4) It seems i'm the most concerned about the US MA on UK.
Given the situation, i find it understandable. If Japanese had attacked SU and UK without attacking US, this is obvious that USA would massively prepare for war, even by sending preventive forces, like navy and airforce (which would be used to help uk).
5) "Im sure that Pepsi finds geos 15 old ships floating around india as a rather laughable hurdle at this point in time.".
7th Dec 1941 : Opening of the great hunt.
So bad that the war is not going to last long (the only question is who is going to be eaten first ?). It could have been a very funny game if rules didn't allowed allies to cripple european axis even before they entered the war.
2) A rule who cover all aspects of the SR will be very hard to do, this is obvious. That's why i think that more of it's ingame application, the spirit of the rule (not SRing units which are going to be fairly encircled) should be respected. But it requires total self-control and fair-play. I've made my part with the planes in hong-kong. Do yours Lodovico.
3) Game is not fun when you just obliterate the ennemy.
4) It seems i'm the most concerned about the US MA on UK.
Given the situation, i find it understandable. If Japanese had attacked SU and UK without attacking US, this is obvious that USA would massively prepare for war, even by sending preventive forces, like navy and airforce (which would be used to help uk).
5) "Im sure that Pepsi finds geos 15 old ships floating around india as a rather laughable hurdle at this point in time.".
7th Dec 1941 : Opening of the great hunt
.
So bad that the war is not going to last long (the only question is who is going to be eaten first ?). It could have been a very funny game if rules didn't allowed allies to cripple european axis even before they entered the war.