Solution to the LL vs ADS Debate

To be honest, I always determine my build units after determining all my attacks.  Actually screwed me up in a F2F game because I couldnt move the pieces into the territory being attacked without giving up my right to buy units.

But in PBF it’s easier.  No one is looking over your shoulder, so you can write out all your attacks, move the pieces on the board, look at the situation, determine what your NCMs are going to be (most likely - or even permanently if none of your attacks need dice) then see what the board looks like and figure out what you will build from that.

:roll:
  So Jennifer, it is probibly more of a matter of trust in the server than a problem with your machine? I know just how you feel. It is hard sometimes to go outside our comfort zone. And something different is not always better. I for one have few complaints with Triple A, the ladder or how the program works, although today I did have it freeze on me during a roll, (had to restart my computer to get out of it). Nothing is perfect, right?

Back to topic; I prefer LL for the mere fact that the regular dice are more often than not, unkind to me, causing much frustration. I know that I play a better game than my track record shows, and since I’ve begun playing LL it has been a lot less frustrating for me. I win more often, and even the games I’ve lost have not been one sided crushing defeats in 6 rounds. I will play AAR for fun, or to give a newbe a better chance to beat me, but not a serious game against a master Obewon Jedi AA player. I prefer to match wits, not the luck of the die rolls, for that, we can play Craps  :wink:

I’ve seen fast carriers help in 2 specific situations:

1)  Japan forgets that the Pearl Harbor Carrier and fighters can get to SZ 61 resulting in the loss of all of Japan’s unprotected transports.
2)  America builds one last carrier and two fighters for that assault on SZ 60 (SZ 55 to SZ 60 is 3 spaces.) Or even just buys two fast carriers so the 4 fighters in W. Canada can reach SZ 60.

But how often does that happen?

How much better off would naval warfare in the Pacific be if America had 3 fighters on the flight deck of a carrier, or could recover a bomber on an empty carrier?

I’m teaching my cousin how to play I was the Axis b/c he was born in England and moved to Canada so he was die hard about having the UK any way I gave him a bid last time b/c he got wasted the time before I gave him 15 IPC’s to use for any allied country. I wasn’t worried b/c I thought he would buy a US Pacific Navy. Instead he bought 5 INF and put them in Moscow. Needless to say that slowed down the Axis advance early on.

I like your idea about mixing it up. Keeps them on there toes. he he

-LT04

@Cmdr:

Appears to be working, though, the unit I am running on ATM is perma-connected to the net so it might be drawing off the net…doubt it.  :)

Thanks, Dan

Nope, there’s no way that’s drawing off the net. That would take a whole lot of programming that I simply haven’t done.

@Craig:

c) Naval units can be placed with other naval units or in territories adjacent to a power’s land

This would create some interesting bids… in games where the bid was high enough
(but with the auction bid system, I doubt there are many bids of + or - 8 or more to allow naval units)

Bah, I’ve seen 1 inf destroy 9 inf and a tank.  (Guy kept saying “he’ll eventually die!”)

Octo, we always play a sneak shot kills a battle ship (scapa flow)