German strategy for the world game

[calvinhobbesliker]

Yes, they can, but then Russia will easily destroy them with its massive army.
As long as the UK controls Gibraltar, Axis surface ships can’t go into or out of the Med that way(or any other way since the UK controls the Suez Canal)

[brettstarr4]

@calvinhobbesliker:

Yes, they can, but then Russia will easily destroy them with its massive army.
As long as the UK controls Gibraltar, Axis surface ships can’t go into or out of the Med that way(or any other way since the UK controls the Suez Canal)

Don’t forge the possibility of a Russian ship or two in the Black Sea.  If Russia has a factory in the caucuses and they are still enjoying neutrality, it might be an interesting strategy to try to add to the Russian navy (probably stupid).

However, a smarter move might be to position the Russian ships between Axis forces and the British ships to tempt the Axis into breaking neutrality.

[UN Spacy]

I’m curious, why can’t Axis naval units move through the sea zone bordering Gibraltar?

[calvinhobbesliker]

Brett
Unfortunately, Russian ships can’t exit the Black sea because Turkey is neutral and thus the Dardennelles are close. Besides, since the Germans and Soviets are neutral, the Italian or German ships can go through the Russian ones.

UN Spacey
It’s a rule. Control of Gibraltar closes the strait

[brettstarr4]

@calvinhobbesliker:

Brett
Unfortunately, Russian ships can’t exit the Black sea because Turkey is neutral and thus the Dardennelles are close. Besides, since the Germans and Soviets are neutral, the Italian or German ships can go through the Russian ones.

UN Spacey
It’s a rule. Control of Gibraltar closes the strait

OK, I’m still a little confused on some of the rules.  I only own AA Revised so I haven’t dealt with neutral countries yet.  I plan on buying AAE and AAP at the same time but don’t care to play AAP by itself.
   So how does a neutral US work, Japan can pass through their ships in the Pacific too?  I thouhgt you wouldn’t be able to pass through a neutral countries’ forces??  So you can pass through their SZ, but not their territories? Also, are you sure you can’t pass through the Dardenlles if Turkey is neutral?  Why couldn’t everyone just pass through there.

[calvinhobbesliker]

@brettstarr4:

@calvinhobbesliker:

Brett
Unfortunately, Russian ships can’t exit the Black sea because Turkey is neutral and thus the Dardennelles are close. Besides, since the Germans and Soviets are neutral, the Italian or German ships can go through the Russian ones.

UN Spacey
It’s a rule. Control of Gibraltar closes the strait

OK, I’m still a little confused on some of the rules.  I only on AA Revised so I haven’t dealt with neutral countries yet.  I plan on buying AAE and AAP at the same time but don’t care to play AAP by itself.
    So how does a neutral US work, Japan can pass through their ships in the Pacific too?  I thouhgt you wouldn’t be able to pass through a neutral countries’ forces??  So you can pass through their SZ, but not their territories? Also, are you sure you can’t pass through the Dardenlles if Turkey is neutral?  Why couldn’t everyone just pass through there.

Yeah, you can pass through a neutral’s ships. Turkey historically closed the straits to both sides

[brettstarr4]

What is the order of turns in AAG?

[calvinhobbesliker]

Per LH 1//11/10

Quote
And the turn sequence for the Global game (combined AAP40 and AAE40) is:
1. Germany
2. Soviet Union
3. Japan
4. United Kingdom
5. ANZAC
6. Italy
7. United States
8. China
and 9. France.

[Dylan the Canadian]

@calvinhobbesliker:

@brettstarr4:

@calvinhobbesliker:

Brett
Unfortunately, Russian ships can’t exit the Black sea because Turkey is neutral and thus the Dardennelles are close. Besides, since the Germans and Soviets are neutral, the Italian or German ships can go through the Russian ones.

UN Spacey
It’s a rule. Control of Gibraltar closes the strait

So what happens if you invade Turkey, doesn’t that bring all of the neutrals to war or something?

OK, I’m still a little confused on some of the rules.  I only on AA Revised so I haven’t dealt with neutral countries yet.  I plan on buying AAE and AAP at the same time but don’t care to play AAP by itself.
    So how does a neutral US work, Japan can pass through their ships in the Pacific too?  I thouhgt you wouldn’t be able to pass through a neutral countries’ forces??  So you can pass through their SZ, but not their territories? Also, are you sure you can’t pass through the Dardenlles if Turkey is neutral?  Why couldn’t everyone just pass through there.

Yeah, you can pass through a neutral’s ships. Turkey historically closed the straits to both sides

[SilverAngelSurfer]

@Dylan:

@calvinhobbesliker:

@brettstarr4:

@calvinhobbesliker:

Brett
Unfortunately, Russian ships can’t exit the Black sea because Turkey is neutral and thus the Dardennelles are close. Besides, since the Germans and Soviets are neutral, the Italian or German ships can go through the Russian ones.

UN Spacey
It’s a rule. Control of Gibraltar closes the strait

OK, I’m still a little confused on some of the rules.  I only on AA Revised so I haven’t dealt with neutral countries yet.  I plan on buying AAE and AAP at the same time but don’t care to play AAP by itself.
    So how does a neutral US work, Japan can pass through their ships in the Pacific too?  I thouhgt you wouldn’t be able to pass through a neutral countries’ forces??  So you can pass through their SZ, but not their territories? Also, are you sure you can’t pass through the Dardenlles if Turkey is neutral?  Why couldn’t everyone just pass through there.

Yeah, you can pass through a neutral’s ships. Turkey historically closed the straits to both sides

So what happens if you invade Turkey, doesn’t that bring all of the neutrals to war or something?

That isn’t clear yet; a while ago Larry mentioned there might be repercussions like all other true neutrals turning pro-your-opponent if you invaded them, but that was still during development.  We haven’t been told how that will work yet and probably won’t find out until the game comes out.

[brettstarr4]

All other true-neutrals shouldn’t switch to pro-other side.  I like the idea, but it should be grouped together by contintent or something, that would be better.  Like, if you Germany invaded Spain, all European neutrals become pro-allied (assuming Spain were a true-neutral, when it might be pro-axis).  This would be more historically accurate, since, I doubt Iraq or Mongolia would suddenly become pro-ally because Spain got invaded.

[calvinhobbesliker]

@brettstarr4:

All other true-neutrals shouldn’t switch to pro-other side.  I like the idea, but it should be grouped together by contintent or something, that would be better.  Like, if you Germany invaded Spain, all European neutrals become pro-allied (assuming Spain were a true-neutral, when it might be pro-axis).  This would be more historically accurate, since, I doubt Iraq or Mongolia would suddenly become pro-ally because Spain got invaded.

Spain is a true neutral

[UN Spacy]

I apologize if this is too off-topic to ask, but if, say, Allied forces occupy a pro-Allied neutral territory, would the territory resist, or would its forces actually join up with them (and likewise for pro-Axis neutrals)? Say, for example, Soviet or British forces invade Iran, and Iran has three infantry silhouettes. Would three Soviet/British infantry appear once they occupy it?

[calvinhobbesliker]

I think yuo invade them during noncombat and their units become yours.

[brettstarr4]

I don’t like that tanks are 6 IPC’s in this edition of hte game.  I liked them better at 5, because they were a reasonable buy.  Tanks were still the less efficient buy according to precise mathematical calculations, but reasonable.  Now are we going back to the earlier editions of AA where everyone just builds infanry every turn and the person who gets sick of building infantry and goes with tanks eventually loses??

[calvinhobbesliker]

@brettstarr4:

I don’t like that tanks are 6 IPC’s in this edition of hte game.  I liked them better at 5, because they were a reasonable buy.  Tanks were still the less efficient buy according to precise mathematical calculations, but reasonable.  Now are we going back to the earlier editions of AA where everyone just builds infanry every turn and the person who gets sick of building infantry and goes with tanks eventually loses??

Tanks can move 2 spaces and increase tac’s attack to 4, which is why it’s 6. Also, this may be to prevent Germany from buildng just tanks, like in the original europe

[brettstarr4]

Yea, moving 2 spaces could be a bigger advantage on the bigger board, because it will take infantry a long time to get to the front and to maneuvre based on your opponents moves.  But still, I don’t think moving 2 spaces justifies twice the price of infantry.  The tactical bomber die point might be enough to put it over the edge, but idk, that depends on how many tactical bombers Germany can attack with.  If thats only 3 or 4, then maybe Germany only needs a few tanks at the front… Idk… I see your points, that tanks will be more valuable for new reasons in this edition, thus justifying the extra IPC.  I just hope that is how it works out in reality, becuase everyone building infantry every turn will get very boring, very quickly.  (plus i haven’t played the original AAE so I miss the reference).

[Dylan the Canadian]

@brettstarr4:

I don’t like that tanks are 6 IPC’s in this edition of hte game.  I liked them better at 5, because they were a reasonable buy.  Tanks were still the less efficient buy according to precise mathematical calculations, but reasonable.  Now are we going back to the earlier editions of AA where everyone just builds infanry every turn and the person who gets sick of building infantry and goes with tanks eventually loses??

One might argue tanks should be 7. Because tanks can move farther are 3 and 3 in combat, but yet Mech Infantry are 4 just because they can move a bit faster, so yeah.

[special forces]

@Dylan:

@brettstarr4:

I don’t like that tanks are 6 IPC’s in this edition of hte game.  I liked them better at 5, because they were a reasonable buy.  Tanks were still the less efficient buy according to precise mathematical calculations, but reasonable.  Now are we going back to the earlier editions of AA where everyone just builds infanry every turn and the person who gets sick of building infantry and goes with tanks eventually loses??

One might argue tanks should be 7. Because tanks can move farther are 3 and 3 in combat, but yet Mech Infantry are 4 just because they can move a bit faster, so yeah.

But then again mechs can’t blitz.

Personally, I think tanks at 6 ipc is a good thing for the game.

[SilverAngelSurfer]

@special:

@Dylan:

@brettstarr4:

I don’t like that tanks are 6 IPC’s in this edition of hte game.  I liked them better at 5, because they were a reasonable buy.  Tanks were still the less efficient buy according to precise mathematical calculations, but reasonable.  Now are we going back to the earlier editions of AA where everyone just builds infanry every turn and the person who gets sick of building infantry and goes with tanks eventually loses??

One might argue tanks should be 7. Because tanks can move farther are 3 and 3 in combat, but yet Mech Infantry are 4 just because they can move a bit faster, so yeah.

But then again mechs can’t blitz.

Personally, I think tanks at 6 ipc is a good thing for the game.

However, again, for each tank blitzing 1 mec can come along; so tanks are the ultimate support unit as lots of units benefit from having them around.  Infantry will still be the cheapest and therefore the most effective way to get the most units on the board, with artillery now having greater value as cheap infantry support, but tanks will now be the ultimate support unit, and still the most versatile.  They probably should have cost 6 IPCs awhile ago, but with all their abilities: 2 movement, blitz, upgrading tacs attack stat and mecs blitz, and the need for more mobility with the larger board, the 6 IPC cost is definitely warranted.