Totally agree : at just 17 min through the video I sent Gw enthusiast a private message on the discord and told him that he does a great job interviewing Morten.
Love listening to these videos as I read/ study the V4 rules. Here is my latest question as I ponder my German strategy: Festung Europa. Some of these coastal land zones border multiple sea zones, initiating my thoughts of putting multiple fortifications on a land zone. That thought led to my question: Do these ‘free’ Fortifications have to be placed on a Coastal border? Could one be put on Belgian border with France? Or West Germany’s border with France? I see no constraints other than reference to ‘Atlantic Wall’. Thanks for any thoughts you might have on this. Look forward to the next video in the series.
Great question! You are not constrained on what border you chose to place the fortification, as long as it is placed in one of the seven land zones! An attack from Alsace-Lorraine to West Germany already faces Mountainous terrain, so you would really be making it painful with a fortification!
So I’ve not seen this played out yet in a YT war. Italy’s Impero Italiano SO/bonus. Unlike Africa Oriente Italiana, Festung Europa or Pacific Buffer Zone, I dont see clear guidance on where the units are placed. I saw reference to Place Units box. Does that mean that the Seaplane/Transport count against the Italian factory production so Italy could only build 3 units that turn (assuming major factory at 5). (Seems more like a punishment than a bonus.) Or, if they do not count against factory production, do they even need to start in a territory with a factory? Would line of supply or home country or starting territories work? Curious as we’ve already establish normal build rules do not apply to these bonuses - so looking for thoughts, ideas, guidance on this one.
This is NOT a punishment! It is amazing! The reason this strategic objective is different is it is immortal! You can get the units over and over so you want to be aggressive and use the Seaplane aggressively. Yes, it will take up 1 of your slots, but it's a free unit! If you want to build 5 units a particular turn, then don't be so aggressive with it. You raise a very good point that we need clarification on where the two units may first appear.
@@GW36_Enthusiast Thanks, as always. Playing the Axis in our game, we should complete the S.O. on our next turn, but I realised I had no idea where the units start. I’ll share the perspective that reducing our planned build by 2 units does not feel super. Unlike the other S.O., Italy had to be in the war to get this one. Every unit, every turn, is critical. The add’l clarity is appreciated. Might I suggest upon initial achievement the units not count against any build limits - the reward! But if lost in combat, then they are placed on the build queue to be placed in a future turn under same rules as new units. (For initial placement I’d also suggest they should start in one of the islands or Greek territories that Italy had to take to earn the bonus- again consistent with the Atlantic wall or Abyssinia.)
1:08:the manchuko and kurile islands SO is able to be captured while maintaining neutrality with the Allies. I think I will still strive to maintain neutrality with the Allie’s in V4 as the USSR
So as we look at the end of our V4 game, Festung Europa seems to be the most fragile of Germany’s Victory Points/Strategic Objectives. Since they are in the war, we are looking to have Italian units reinforce the wall, as well as be a QRF in Paris to counter any UK move before the US can reinforce. With that as the stated defensive strategy - here is our question. Are we correct in understanding that Germany does not need to be in possession of all 7 land zones to earn the point, just as long as they have a land unit in each? We are debating the value of an Italian counter-attack against a Commonwealth invasion. If Italy regains the territory (taking possession), as long as Germany sends in a land unit with the Italians on their next turn- do the Axis still earn the Victory point? -Followup, same scenario for bonus, can Germany place a bonus Coastal Artillery in the Italian possessed territory as long as Germany has a land unit in all 7 required coastal land zones. -We noted the wording of this objective compared to other Powers. (Specifically the term ‘possess’ in the Soviet, Italian, Japanese & American objectives). As always- appreciate your thoughts and insights.
You are both perceptive and correct. The Germans do not have to possess the seven coastal land zones in order to achieve Festung Europa. They must have a German land unit present in each. But note also how the Allies could then strip Germany of Festung Europa if they carpet bombed the land zone and eliminated every German land unit! Your second question is yes, Germany can build the Festung Europa bonus in land zones possessed by Italy or Japan (what a strange game that would be where Japan possesses one of the 7 land zones!). Festung Europa is one of the strategic objectives that is great for it's bonus, but very difficult to keep to the end of the game (like Kidō Butai).
@@GW36_Enthusiast as always my friend- thank you for the quick and helpful reply. Ironically, while I started by saying it is the most fragile of Germany’s Strategic Objectives- it is also very likely to be the only one Germany earns in our game. So Italy’s ability to help secure it is important. Good luck in FRWL.
This question is from someone playing Japan to someone playing USA in our respective UA-cam wars. Can the US scramble (air or naval) units in defense of Hawaii IF Japan is using their Surprise Attack before the US reaches 35 ipp? I dont know if scrambling counts as moving naval units but I think as long as Japan has a screening force the Japanese Surprise penalty would still apply…?
Interesting question! So Japan declares war on USA to utilize their "Surprise Attack" special ability. What instantly happens is USA jumps to full production. The USA is no longer restricted and is absolutely allowed to scramble. The really amazing thing about v4 is that scrambling has been moved from the end of the combat movement phase (v3) to the combat phase! Per 10.1, the Japanese player gets to determine the order of attacks! So the Japanese player can decide to conduct strategic bombing of the major port in Hawai'i, and if the port is damaged, then that would prevent American naval units from scrambling. If the Japanese player is conducting a port attack, he could also choose to conduct that attack before conducting an amphibious assault. Does this make sense? It's a very important concept which is subtle, but has huge tactical implications!
@@GW36_Enthusiast as always your answer makes perfect sense. I also conclude then that if the US does scramble naval units, they would be subject to the same surprise attack penalties. I believe the rules allow naval combat prior to an amphibious assault to both be considered part of the surprise attack. Thanks again.
So question about Kido Butai & Improved Construction, the rules are clear on the fact a player may stack both on a purchase, so a battleship would go from 6IPP per stage to only 4 per stage. But how does that work if Japan wants to quick build a battleship? Improved Construction allows 6/6/6 to become 12/6. Does KB make it 11/5? Or even 10/5? Thanks in advance, and Happy Holidays.
Happy Holidays, Captain G! If you use Improved Construction to quick build, you can't subtract 1 per stage for Improved Construction (because you are using IC to quick build instead), but you can subtract 1 per stage with Kidō Butai or Big Blue Fleet. So with both IC and KB a slow built battleship would be 4/4/4 whereas a quick built battleship would be 11/5. Thus, it would cost you 4 IPP more to get it completed 1 turn earlier.
@@GW36_Enthusiast perfect timing we are getting ready to record our Japan turn and werent sure what to do about our purchase. Much appreciated as always. Thanks.
@@GW36_Enthusiast Again, Happy Holidays. I’ll admit before we recorded our turn for Japan, I asked this question in two threads - yours here, as well as one of Silk’s Japan turns. I didnt recall him rushing production, but he might have. Sadly the two replies didnt match- everything about IC did, thats an established concept by now. But I got a reasonable explanation for why it would be 11/5, as well as one for why it would be 10/5. I am thinking rule clarity for this one may be needed - and to your point KB & BBF.
@@CaptainG9318 Ninety-nine times out of a hundred, Silk will be right! He's a tremendous resource and our community is lucky to have him! If he is saying 10/5, it gives me pause. I'll try and track down his answer to see his reasoning.
And you want Advanced Artillery for the Kitakyushu's, and Improved Factories for those T-34's! But you also want Improved Construction to protect your Major Factories from German strategic bombing. So many to choose!
@@GW36_Enthusiast in the games I have played AND the games I have watched I haven’t seen very much strategic bombing of Russian factories. As Russia I am more worried about the German army. I won’t place a high priority on researching Improved construction as the Soviets.
@@TheGlobalWarVeteran I hear you, but you are stuck in v3 thinking, my friend! In v3, Strategic Bombing was not very worthwhile, but in v4 an important change has been made. Now, you start repairing at the start of the turn, but facilities aren't repaired until the end of the turn. This means that if your Major Facility is damaged, you won't get to roll for tech with it on the turn you repair it. Improved Construction will change the economics so that Strategic Bombing Major Factories will no longer be cost effective for Medium/Strategic Bombers. But if you do not have Improved Construction, then Strategic Bombers hitting Major Factories is more than twice as cost effective. Of course, I haven't played v4, but mathematically, the change from 2.333:1 to 0.667:1 will have a dramatic impact.
@@GW36_Enthusiast I already knew these facts, it will obviously be worse to be strat bombed if you don’t Have improved construction but again: I still feel like I’d rather be more prepared against the Germany army in general rather than a large strat bombing force. As you have stated there are a lot of technologies to research and as USSR you can’t even start research at the beginning of the game and so You have to be picky on what you research. Improved construction is a tech I am choosing I won’t prioritize researching as the ussr
@Morten even understanding the reward for Maintaining the Atlantic wall I will still prefer to guard a less expansive border by keeping Denmark neutral, protecting Paris and W Germany. This is a much more easily maintained defense and will require fewer resources than maintaining an Atlantic wall that is 7 territories wide. How many times during play testing did people go after this SO early because they thought it would Be a good strategy VS they did it to try something “new” or didn’t try it at all?
High quality video! Excellent exploration of the topics while doing an incredible job staying on topic and maintaining focus. Well done!
Totally agree : at just 17 min through the video I sent Gw enthusiast a private message on the discord and told him that he does a great job interviewing Morten.
Love listening to these videos as I read/ study the V4 rules. Here is my latest question as I ponder my German strategy: Festung Europa. Some of these coastal land zones border multiple sea zones, initiating my thoughts of putting multiple fortifications on a land zone. That thought led to my question: Do these ‘free’ Fortifications have to be placed on a Coastal border? Could one be put on Belgian border with France? Or West Germany’s border with France? I see no constraints other than reference to ‘Atlantic Wall’. Thanks for any thoughts you might have on this. Look forward to the next video in the series.
Great question! You are not constrained on what border you chose to place the fortification, as long as it is placed in one of the seven land zones! An attack from Alsace-Lorraine to West Germany already faces Mountainous terrain, so you would really be making it painful with a fortification!
@@GW36_Enthusiast As always much appreciated!
So I’ve not seen this played out yet in a YT war. Italy’s Impero Italiano SO/bonus. Unlike Africa Oriente Italiana, Festung Europa or Pacific Buffer Zone, I dont see clear guidance on where the units are placed. I saw reference to Place Units box. Does that mean that the Seaplane/Transport count against the Italian factory production so Italy could only build 3 units that turn (assuming major factory at 5). (Seems more like a punishment than a bonus.) Or, if they do not count against factory production, do they even need to start in a territory with a factory? Would line of supply or home country or starting territories work? Curious as we’ve already establish normal build rules do not apply to these bonuses - so looking for thoughts, ideas, guidance on this one.
This is NOT a punishment! It is amazing! The reason this strategic objective is different is it is immortal! You can get the units over and over so you want to be aggressive and use the Seaplane aggressively. Yes, it will take up 1 of your slots, but it's a free unit! If you want to build 5 units a particular turn, then don't be so aggressive with it. You raise a very good point that we need clarification on where the two units may first appear.
@@GW36_Enthusiast Thanks, as always. Playing the Axis in our game, we should complete the S.O. on our next turn, but I realised I had no idea where the units start. I’ll share the perspective that reducing our planned build by 2 units does not feel super. Unlike the other S.O., Italy had to be in the war to get this one. Every unit, every turn, is critical. The add’l clarity is appreciated. Might I suggest upon initial achievement the units not count against any build limits - the reward! But if lost in combat, then they are placed on the build queue to be placed in a future turn under same rules as new units. (For initial placement I’d also suggest they should start in one of the islands or Greek territories that Italy had to take to earn the bonus- again consistent with the Atlantic wall or Abyssinia.)
1:08:the manchuko and kurile islands SO is able to be captured while maintaining neutrality with the Allies. I think I will still strive to maintain neutrality with the Allie’s in V4 as the USSR
Well done again! Really like the series with you two and Board gaming Bro.
Another great conversation. Please keep this going
So as we look at the end of our V4 game, Festung Europa seems to be the most fragile of Germany’s Victory Points/Strategic Objectives.
Since they are in the war, we are looking to have Italian units reinforce the wall, as well as be a QRF in Paris to counter any UK move before the US can reinforce.
With that as the stated defensive strategy - here is our question. Are we correct in understanding that Germany does not need to be in possession of all 7 land zones to earn the point, just as long as they have a land unit in each?
We are debating the value of an Italian counter-attack against a Commonwealth invasion. If Italy regains the territory (taking possession), as long as Germany sends in a land unit with the Italians on their next turn- do the Axis still earn the Victory point?
-Followup, same scenario for bonus, can Germany place a bonus Coastal Artillery in the Italian possessed territory as long as Germany has a land unit in all 7 required coastal land zones.
-We noted the wording of this objective compared to other Powers. (Specifically the term ‘possess’ in the Soviet, Italian, Japanese & American objectives).
As always- appreciate your thoughts and insights.
You are both perceptive and correct. The Germans do not have to possess the seven coastal land zones in order to achieve Festung Europa. They must have a German land unit present in each. But note also how the Allies could then strip Germany of Festung Europa if they carpet bombed the land zone and eliminated every German land unit! Your second question is yes, Germany can build the Festung Europa bonus in land zones possessed by Italy or Japan (what a strange game that would be where Japan possesses one of the 7 land zones!). Festung Europa is one of the strategic objectives that is great for it's bonus, but very difficult to keep to the end of the game (like Kidō Butai).
@@GW36_Enthusiast as always my friend- thank you for the quick and helpful reply.
Ironically, while I started by saying it is the most fragile of Germany’s Strategic Objectives- it is also very likely to be the only one Germany earns in our game. So Italy’s ability to help secure it is important.
Good luck in FRWL.
@@CaptainG9318 Thanks and I'll need as much luck as I can get versus these pros!
This question is from someone playing Japan to someone playing USA in our respective UA-cam wars. Can the US scramble (air or naval) units in defense of Hawaii IF Japan is using their Surprise Attack before the US reaches 35 ipp? I dont know if scrambling counts as moving naval units but I think as long as Japan has a screening force the Japanese Surprise penalty would still apply…?
Interesting question! So Japan declares war on USA to utilize their "Surprise Attack" special ability. What instantly happens is USA jumps to full production. The USA is no longer restricted and is absolutely allowed to scramble. The really amazing thing about v4 is that scrambling has been moved from the end of the combat movement phase (v3) to the combat phase! Per 10.1, the Japanese player gets to determine the order of attacks! So the Japanese player can decide to conduct strategic bombing of the major port in Hawai'i, and if the port is damaged, then that would prevent American naval units from scrambling. If the Japanese player is conducting a port attack, he could also choose to conduct that attack before conducting an amphibious assault. Does this make sense? It's a very important concept which is subtle, but has huge tactical implications!
@@GW36_Enthusiast as always your answer makes perfect sense. I also conclude then that if the US does scramble naval units, they would be subject to the same surprise attack penalties. I believe the rules allow naval combat prior to an amphibious assault to both be considered part of the surprise attack. Thanks again.
So question about Kido Butai & Improved Construction, the rules are clear on the fact a player may stack both on a purchase, so a battleship would go from 6IPP per stage to only 4 per stage. But how does that work if Japan wants to quick build a battleship? Improved Construction allows 6/6/6 to become 12/6. Does KB make it 11/5? Or even 10/5? Thanks in advance, and Happy Holidays.
Happy Holidays, Captain G! If you use Improved Construction to quick build, you can't subtract 1 per stage for Improved Construction (because you are using IC to quick build instead), but you can subtract 1 per stage with Kidō Butai or Big Blue Fleet. So with both IC and KB a slow built battleship would be 4/4/4 whereas a quick built battleship would be 11/5. Thus, it would cost you 4 IPP more to get it completed 1 turn earlier.
@@GW36_Enthusiast perfect timing we are getting ready to record our Japan turn and werent sure what to do about our purchase. Much appreciated as always. Thanks.
@@GW36_Enthusiast Again, Happy Holidays. I’ll admit before we recorded our turn for Japan, I asked this question in two threads - yours here, as well as one of Silk’s Japan turns. I didnt recall him rushing production, but he might have. Sadly the two replies didnt match- everything about IC did, thats an established concept by now. But I got a reasonable explanation for why it would be 11/5, as well as one for why it would be 10/5. I am thinking rule clarity for this one may be needed - and to your point KB & BBF.
@@CaptainG9318 Ninety-nine times out of a hundred, Silk will be right! He's a tremendous resource and our community is lucky to have him! If he is saying 10/5, it gives me pause. I'll try and track down his answer to see his reasoning.
@@GW36_Enthusiast Thunderball 18.4 Japan video.
Good talk! Thanks guys!
Personally impoved logistics seems very iportant to russia.
And you want Advanced Artillery for the Kitakyushu's, and Improved Factories for those T-34's! But you also want Improved Construction to protect your Major Factories from German strategic bombing. So many to choose!
@@GW36_Enthusiast in the games I have played AND the games I have watched I haven’t seen very much strategic bombing of Russian factories. As Russia I am more worried about the German army. I won’t place a high priority on researching Improved construction as the Soviets.
@@TheGlobalWarVeteran I hear you, but you are stuck in v3 thinking, my friend! In v3, Strategic Bombing was not very worthwhile, but in v4 an important change has been made. Now, you start repairing at the start of the turn, but facilities aren't repaired until the end of the turn. This means that if your Major Facility is damaged, you won't get to roll for tech with it on the turn you repair it. Improved Construction will change the economics so that Strategic Bombing Major Factories will no longer be cost effective for Medium/Strategic Bombers. But if you do not have Improved Construction, then Strategic Bombers hitting Major Factories is more than twice as cost effective. Of course, I haven't played v4, but mathematically, the change from 2.333:1 to 0.667:1 will have a dramatic impact.
@@GW36_Enthusiast I already knew these facts, it will obviously be worse to be strat bombed if you don’t
Have improved construction but again: I still feel like I’d rather be more prepared against the Germany army in general rather than a large strat bombing force. As you have stated there are a lot of technologies to research and as USSR you can’t even start research at the beginning of the game and so
You have to be picky on what you research. Improved construction is a tech I am choosing I won’t prioritize researching as the ussr
@Morten even understanding the reward for Maintaining the Atlantic wall I will still prefer to guard a less expansive border by keeping Denmark neutral, protecting Paris and W Germany. This is a much more easily maintained defense and will require fewer resources than maintaining an Atlantic wall that is 7 territories wide. How many times during play testing did people go after this SO early because they thought it would Be a good strategy VS they did it to try something “new” or didn’t try it at all?