Let's talk Jeeps!

thanks for the update you guys are the best. Can I ask what set is after UK?

I played my first game of Amerika last night. It was pretty easy to learn once I was finally able to remember which sculpts were the self propelled anti-aircraft units and and which ones were the self propelled artillery units. It took awhile to play because I was carefully going through every step and double checking to make sure I didn’t develop any bad habits as far as the rules go. I can see being able to play a game in under 2 hours including setup if you had 2 or 3 players who already knew how to play. That would be perfect for the lake in the summer when you go into the cabin to wait out a rainstorm. A&A on the other hand would be more of a whole day this is never going to clear up type of game.

It’s a good game and very well made. I picked up the Strategic Markers expansion set with the game but didn’t use any of the extra rules that come with the pieces so I could learn the game first and decide which rules and extra pieces would be appropriate to make it a better game. I did find the map a little small so I am going to get a bigger one for use at home on the big table. I like lots of elbow room and space to line up my tanks without using chips. In the game the Japanese got bogged down in the northwest with the allies holding the line at Hanford Nuclear Research Facility. They had better luck in the south moving inland and taking out Los Alamos NRF. The Germans made it as far as Detroit in the north and Nashville in the south but couldn’t capture Oak Ridge NRF. On the fifth turn the allies were lucky enough to roll big and go first, which meant that they had 2 turns in a row and were able to take back Los Alamos and 3 cities and accumulating enough points to win the game. If the axis would’ve went first on the fifth turn it would have been a different outcome and they might have won on the fifth or sixth turn. It all came down to that one roll…

@Imperious:

I prefer this:

Infantry 6
Artillery 3
Mechanized Infantry 3
Tanks 3

Fighter 3
Tactical Bomber 2
Bomber 1

Transport 2
Submarine 2
Destroyer 2
Cruiser 1
Battleship 1
Carrier 1

Trucks 2

TOTAL = 32 pieces set

I really like your numbers IL. This would provide a much better ratio of more common units (infantry, tanks, fighters) to less common units (capital ships, bombers). Even more so than FMG’s current set. For example: With FMG’s sets, you only get 12 tanks per 6 Carriers. With your proposed numbers, you could buy 4 sets, get 12 tanks but only 4 Carriers.

I second IL’s thoughts - Italy is a no-brainer, and the next nation should definately be Germany. The interest in German pieces is immense, and should carry some weaker nations (I think Russia will be the weakest - unless you come up with that piece I mentioned :wink:)

@crusaderiv:

Well heavy artillery for me means katyusha rockets,nebelwefer and 155mm long tom.
heavy artillery attack and defend on 3. May choose is target in the first round fo combat.

that just seems like another way to do regulare artillery.

And I agree I would rather have a rocket artillery unit than siege guns, but i think rocket artillery would have a more offenisve nature, not just generaly good.

We have introduced Oil rule la couple of years ago.
In our 1939 game rules, Axis players doesn’t have oil so they have to fight to get some because they’re going to face a penalty after the 7th round.

If you conquer a neutral oil territory you receive form the bank, twice of the value of the territory.
Ex: Saudi Arabia = 2 IPC so you’ll receive 4 IPC.
When you invade an ennemy oil territory, the player must give you twice of the value of the territory. Ex: Egypt = 2 so UK player must pay 4 IPC.

@Imperious:

Pay 6 IPC gain one MP… heck id rather buy a sub for that or 2 infantry or half a bomber… or?

1 extra movement point would definitely alter the game somewhat, because one would be able to affect one’s opponent’s fleet maneuvers, say if he wanted to position subs and/or destroyers.

I think that the simple expedient of putting the ports into the game from the beginning with the +1 movement rule would be nice.  So every power would start with at least 1 port, and some would start with several.  But building a new port during wartime would have been quite difficult for most of the nations,  (I’m talking about the fully functioning ship-building, ship-repairing, aa-defended, kind of port.) so why even have a special piece for ports?  Why not just add the +1 movement point ability to any IC which can build naval units?  This would make building ICs a little more attractive for the 15 IPCs which you must spend.

@Variable:

I’ll go ahead and add my version of the Paratrooper Rule:

Cost 4, Att 1, Def 1. Delivery method: Your choice, whatever you like best. LH rule is good (bomber drops one into first hostile zone), or many of the others here are great as well.

Here’s the kicker: Special ability- Match either 1-1 or 1-2 (haven’t play tested enough yet to decide) with DEFENDER’S UNITS, reducing the defender unit by 1 Def.

Example: 1 tank and 1 paratrooper attack 1 infantry and 1 tank. Attackers = 1@3 (tank) and 1@1 (para). Defenders = 1@2 (inf) and 1@2 (tank) instead of 1@3 (tank). If you decide to match 1-2, then defender would be 1@1 (inf) and 1@2 (tank)

Thoughts?

After going back over this a few times, I’ve decided on 1-2 matching. First, the delivery method is a bit complex and expensive. 2, with bases having their own air defense now there is more tactical AA fire on the board. 3, at a 1/1/1/4 unit, they need 2 “points” more to be worth it. So match 'em 1-2 if you use my rules.