Game statistics at Axisandallies.org

@ncscswitch:

To get THAT much Japan hardware in range of the US for J2 would mandate that Japan was effectively going KUSA, with commensurate loss of income in Asia.

Not really.

7 Infantry, 2 Fighters attack China with the two fighters coming from Manchuria and FIC.  These fighters can land in Japan.
3 Fighters, Battleship, Carrier, Destroyer, Submarine, Bomber attack SZ 52
Fighter, Infantry, Armor attack Hawaii

2 Fighters from the SZ 52 battle can land in SZ 45 on the carrier and battleship from SZ 37

now, without building a darn thing you already have:

2 Battleships
2 Carriers
6 Fighters
1 Transport
1 Destroyer
1 Submarine* (If it was not lost)

vs

1 Battleship
1 Transport
1 Destroyer
3 Fighters (Assumes the fighter was lost in Hawaii)
2 Aircraft Carriers

I did not give up anything in Asia, but I did station everything in range of America.  The transport in SZ 52 can easily pick up units in Solomons to attack Australia with two bombardments if I don’t need them.

Or, don’t attack Hawaii and add 1 fighter to the defensive forces, but don’t risk losing your infantry and armor in the process.

Odds:

Attacker: 2 Battleships, 2 Carriers, Transport, Submarine, Destroyer, 6 Fighters (2 Fighters in SZ 52 can attack and land back on Wake), Bomber (assumed stationed at Wake where it can again land)

Defender: Battleship, 2 Carriers, Transport, Destroyer, 4 Fighters

(note, this does not take into account any builds for Japan that may or may not be in range of SZ 55.)

I have the Japanese winning over 99% of the time with losses of transport, submarine, 2 fighters.  I believe that is a rather good trading position for Japan.

@Adlertag:

stop being so cheap and just buy Revised ed

lol.

The plexiglass idea works very well.

I used to have a large sheet of plexiglass that I had attached hex grid to the underside of for use when playing AD&D.  A sheet for a “sliding glass door” replacement panel is a standard size that you can get at a home improvement store and measures about 33" by 75".  I think I had paid about $25 for the last one I bought (circa 1997)

With the plexiglass, you are going to want to also get some small felt “feet” (the little self adhesive felt disks) while you are at Lowe’s and put those on the corners, and a few along the edges.  That will help preent sliding, and will protect your table top.

Wow!
Were bombers flying around the world?
I’d love to play a game like that.

You need to add up the total Unit IPC value for each side (land and naval, not including ICs). If it’s a tie at the end of the Russian turn (or if the Axis is ahead), then the Axis is very likely to win the game.  You can do this automatically if you are using a program like aBattleMap.

I developed a statistical model for predicting game outcomes which is pretty accurate (100% accuracy on my small sample of games, starting on round 5):
http://www.campusactivism.org/blog/node/189

I can;t take credit for all of those.

I think my main suggestion was a small bid for the Allies, and then it is a 5 turn max game (Axis wins in 5, or they lose)

Or just add an INF to India.  That should be enough to make 8 VC a bit harder for the Axis…

@ncscswitch:

You must have missed a few of the games in the Games threads…

**NAVAL BATTLES DO NOT AND WILL NEVER WIN A GAME WHERE VICTORY IS DETERMINED BY CONTROL OF LAND TERRITORIES!**  …

Go ahead, play test it a few times.  You will quickly see what I mean.

Well, I agree and do understand your point. But it is sad that control of sea is not worth anything when history shows a different story. What if one included a rule for convoy raids! Try my rule for convoy raid in 2-3 games and then tell me if you think the game becomes more interesting. I just want you to try this rule to see what I mean. Navy will be more important, but with the twist of Axis favor!!! Then you will be more open for the discussion of cheaper navy!

Convoy Raids

The U.K, U.S. and Japanese players are susceptible to supply line interdiction. This rule imply that enemy submarines may conduct an economic attack against the supply lines (sea zones) adjacent to any of these nations industrial complex to “sink” IPCs. On the U.K, U.S. and Japanese players collect income phase, the player must subtract 2 IPCs to the bank for each enemy submarine within 1 sea zone of an industrial complex contolled by respective nation. For each enemy submarine within 2 sea zones of an industrial complex, the player must subtract 1 IPC. Any submarine that became submerged during the subjected players turn’s conduct combat phase, does not cause any economic loss. Multiple submarines may affect a single industrial complex, but the maximum combined loss can be no more than the territory’s (containting the industrial complex) income value. An individual submarine may only affect one industrial complex during each turn, but can affect multiple industrial complexes each round (i.e. one industrial complex per player).

Swell!

How things can go totally nuts :-)

the morale of the story?
NEVER GIVE UP TOO EASILY  8-)