I really havn’t delved much into the AARHE and I’ve only played AARe once. AARe makes Germany way too powerful. Mainly because its almost impossible to find submarines in the game which means Germany can float 4 submarines around England and cut their production by almost 100%.
I think the Uboat interdiction rules need to be amended. Either make it easier to find submarines by giving America and England Sonar Planes/Bouys like they had so that planes can detect submarines without destroyers and then kill them or do away with the interdiction.
Also, Hawaii should not be a VC. Make it Anchorage, AL. Hawaii is too difficult for America to defend in a traditional game. On the flip side, Ukraine needs to be a VC.
I really havn’t delved much into the AARHE and I’ve only played AARe once. AARe makes Germany way too powerful. Mainly because its almost impossible to find submarines in the game which means Germany can float 4 submarines around England and cut their production by almost 100%.
I think the Uboat interdiction rules need to be amended. Either make it easier to find submarines by giving America and England Sonar Planes/Bouys like they had so that planes can detect submarines without destroyers and then kill them or do away with the interdiction.
Also, Hawaii should not be a VC. Make it Anchorage, AL. Hawaii is too difficult for America to defend in a traditional game. On the flip side, Ukraine needs to be a VC.
Thanks for your feedback, since this thread was about National Advantages, I was more asking your opinion of the NA’s themselves and not too much of the overall Enhanced rules set. We can discuss that elsewhere……
Well, back on topic about UK first turns, I agree that KJF is not so great for UK. When I think of KJF I think of US KJF. Do the math: US pits 42 IPCs against 30 for J. UK + R = 54 to 40 for G. UK must help R. When people talk about UK KJF, that often translates to “build IC in India”. Everyone knows this subsequently drains 9 or more IPCs per turn away from the Western front. But that’s the challenge, can UK split its efforts and be effective? That’s why UK is probably my favorite nation to play – in sports you would call them the “X factor”, the difference maker.
KJF Plan 1: (UK/USSR take on Germany, US takes on Japan)
USSR: “Stall those Germans! Trade territory!”
UK: “My air force is bigger than Jesus!”
US: “My air force IS Jesus.”
KJF Plan 2: (UK IC in India, US IC in India)
USSR: “Ooo, Imma smack you so hard with these Burytia infantry!”
UK: “And Imma protect those Burytia infantry with my fighter!”
US: “I can’t see the water. I have too many ships.”
UK: “My air force is bigger than Jesus!”
If John Lennon and the Beatles had been around, he would have said they were bigger than RAF AND Jesus. Wait, was he a baby in WWII? Maybe he WAS there.
US: “I can’t see the water. I have too many ships.”
No, you need to re-roll your attack on my US fleet, there are TWO red chips under the Battleship, not 1…
:mrgreen:
@ncscswitch:
US: “I can’t see the water. I have too many ships.”
No, you need to re-roll your attack on my US fleet, there are TWO red chips under the Battleship, not 1…
:mrgreen:
Until I read the Caspian Sub policy papers, I would not have really gotten that joke!
Sorry, I guess it was a bit targetted at those of us who use an actual game board since i don;t think you have to use chips to designate “stacks” with the mapping programs.
@ncscswitch:
Sorry, I guess it was a bit targetted at those of us who use an actual game board since i don;t think you have to use chips to designate “stacks” with the mapping programs.
No, I get that, because I do use the actual board game. What I meant was, I think your joke plays on that US strategy of building lots of battleships, which I read about at Caspian Sub. There’s tons of interesting stuff there.
I really havn’t delved much into the AARHE and I’ve only played AARe once. AARe makes Germany way too powerful. Mainly because its almost impossible to find submarines in the game which means Germany can float 4 submarines around England and cut their production by almost 100%.
I think the Uboat interdiction rules need to be amended. Either make it easier to find submarines by giving America and England Sonar Planes/Bouys like they had so that planes can detect submarines without destroyers and then kill them or do away with the interdiction.
Also, Hawaii should not be a VC. Make it Anchorage, AL. Hawaii is too difficult for America to defend in a traditional game. On the flip side, Ukraine needs to be a VC.
Thanks for your feedback, since this thread was about National Advantages, I was more asking your opinion of the NA’s themselves and not too much of the overall Enhanced rules set. We can discuss that elsewhere……
Actually, you’re BOTH threadjackers. The OP was about the UK’s first turn.
Ah, threadjacking. A proud tradition. Someday, I hope to be named the Bandit King of the Threadjackers.
Is it threadjacking to RETURN a thread to its home?! That’s like sending a teenager to his room.
So, UK first turns. My “newbie” son bot 8inf 1arm, placing 6inf 1arm on UK and 2inf on the IC in India he placed with Colonial Garrison I so foolishly allowed him. Then he moved 1BB 1trn to SZ6 (???) thinking he would bottle up my fleet in SZ5, forgetting I have that fleet plus 5ftr in WEur. So that was a big mistake on his part. No, I won’t be going Land Bridge, but now I can move 8 ground units to either Karel or EEur on G2 in addition to the 8inf 7arm I already have in EEur, plus he is left with 1trn in SZ2 (brought over from SZ1 or wherever it started the game) with which to move any UK units. It will be some time before UK is any threat on the Western front. India will certainly cause Japan problems, plus I couldn’t even take Egypt G1, so it’s not all good for the Axis.
I thought the established wisdom was that KJF is doubtful at best in AAR… at any rate, building an IC in India is just doing Japan a favour - they can focus their energy there and capture it easily.
For myself, with UK early on I think it’s best to just build TRNs and ground units, and land in Karelia or Norway from the North. Just avoid that Baltic fleet (assuming it is not a threat to London) and get units on the mainland to join with Russian forces ASAP. On the rest of the map, just do the best with what you’ve got, and have the US take care of other business.
I have found a second battleship fun for England. Though, by the time you can afford it, round 1 is LONG past. hehe.
And for the record, if Russia’s stupid enough to put 6 infantry in Buryatia, England should forgo any KJF plans, obliterate what she can of the Japanese navy, land her fighter at Pearl to obliterate more and focus on Germany. Those Russians are dead, no two ways about it.
In our league game, Switch was obliging enough to leave the UK Med BB alone, so I have two BBs without spending a dime - not quite sure what to do with it, but I think it may involve blowing up German units.
:mrgreen:
that is a death sentance to germany, to leave that BB alone, dezrtfish did the same to me…
@froodster:
I thought the established wisdom was that KJF is doubtful at best in AAR… at any rate, building an IC in India is just doing Japan a favour - they can focus their energy there and capture it easily.
For myself, with UK early on I think it’s best to just build TRNs and ground units, and land in Karelia or Norway from the North. Just avoid that Baltic fleet (assuming it is not a threat to London) and get units on the mainland to join with Russian forces ASAP. On the rest of the map, just do the best with what you’ve got, and have the US take care of other business.
For tournament games, KJF is pretty good. Because they play with victory territories and a shorter clock. KGF takes a while to get off the ground, so if the game’s called early, the Axis can win.
Building an IC in India is doing Japan a favor, but not if it’s a Colonial Garrison IC and a KJF. If it’s KJF, the US should have a fleet that’s messing with Japan, leaving India more breathing room. Colonial Garrison lets UK put 3 more units there at the end of UK1, before Japan has a chance to go. That means a whole slew of additional counterthreat options are available to India - as well as the added option of just sitting tight and building up each turn.
Leaving the second BB alone is bad for two reasons:
Leaving the second BB alone is bad for two reasons:
- You gave England a capital warship that can bombard you at will. That means two bombardments for the price of 1 infantry. (6 IPC for 3? That’s a good trade!)
- England is not out 16 IPC for a carrier to defender herself.
Don’t forget that the Allies don’t have to worry about keeping 1-2 Figs on the carrier giving them even more versatility
