Posts made by 1Bean432

@knp7765:

Another little fact. In the first edition, not only could you only scramble from air bases on islands, but it was also unlimited to the units you could scramble. So theoretically, you could have 100 fighters and 100 tactical bombers on an island with an airbase and if an enemy attacks that sea zone, you could scramble all 200 planes. Crazy huh?

In the second edition, any airbase bordering a sea zone could scramble but it was limited to 3 aircraft per air base. I think that rule was actually changed in one of the Alpha upgrades, but I’m not sure which one.

I can imagine it. They would have aircraft carriers on land launching additional planes.

Some planes would take off with other planes still on top, those planes would have to take off while in the air to save time.

@knp7765:

A scenario where Germany already has London? Well, they would already have France too, right? But still be strong on the eastern front? This sounds like an “Axis nearly sure to win” scenario.

Nah, kinda as if the game had already progressed about 3 turns in after a successful sea-lion

Germany gets London, Scotland, France, Normandy
Also would have quite the transport fleet
A carrier
A Tank or 2 on London
MUCH less units on the Eastern front

Italy would have Southern France, Yugoslavia, and Greece

Russia would have A LOT of units gathered up in East Poland

That sorta thing.

Its funny. It was so easy in the 1st edition to sea lion, you just build some transports and attacked ASAP. But now its really difficult.

The biggest problem about balancing Sea-lion, was that you had to make Britain weak enough for a sea-lion.
But a weak Britain made it hard to help Russia during Barbarossa.

Then Britain was made strong. So that Germany will almost always go Barbarossa, while Britain tries to help Russia.

I think people should create custom start up scenarios where sea lion has already successes, but still give Germany a chance with Russia.

If the U.K can support another IC, then go ahead! Just make sure that IC doesn’t fall into Japanese hands.

Holding off Japan and Italy from Russia would (for me) be the main goal. Once Berlin falls, so many IPCs can be redirected towards Japan.

And really, the U.S should easily be able to hold Hawaii and Sydney until you can kill Germany.

This is pretty awesome. Although i think your game will show how a sea-lion play for the Axis is kinda weak. You should also record your turn 3 positions, so you can start fresh games with France and London already captured.

As for strategies.

Russia could try for some very interesting tactics, like moving through the Mid-East, pick up the extra INF at Persia, and move onto India. This would free up strain on the U.S, and it would allow them to throw a bit more money around.

Or Russia could just go hard on Germany. Russia (from what you describe) should have around 50ish IPCs. Which should be enough to kill off Germany, as long as U.S.A pitches in.

Russia should get Norway. Troops from a U.S.A IC would take 6 turns to reach Berlin, and multinational forces don’t work to well anyway.

As for U.K, well, all they can and should do is build as much as they can in South Africa to stop Italy from becoming a monster.

China just needs to live. Otherwise, Japan might get board and will probably try to drill into Russia’s behind, or through Siberia.

ANZACs should probably try annoying Japan by fortifying any of the DEI. Other than that, make sure to keep an eye-out if Japan decides to switch route and take Sydney instead.

U.S.A should go towards Germany a little. But mostly towards Japan.

As for the Axis.

Germany will probably try to survive long enough for Japan to win, and for Italy to do something. But they will die because their 30ish IPCs will not sustain them against Russia, and landings in Normandy/Belgium.

I’m not entirely sure how fast Italy’s going in Africa, but whatever speed, they need to be slowed down. U.K should just build troops in South Africa. That should keep them busy.

Japan is the real enemy. U.S.A should just keep ferrying troops into Hawaii. Then into Sydney, you never know.

All the Allies really need to do is choose to go hard Germany, or hard Japan.

@crusaderiv:

_Well then we already have a problem. No fog of war means you cant really steal operation/battle plans.
There’s no real diplomacy, and there’s no such thing as influence in A&A.

So what did you have planned._

I have a plan but I’m asking the question if someone create a good espionnage rules.

Then tell us your plan then!

I thought i’d dig up an old post about whites so called ‘experience’.

@Whitshadw:

Oh I agree with you… We have a group of 10 people who rotate some can make it as others cant so we normaly have soild 5 people play all experianced with countless games user our belts were 30+ … To you all an idea of age and experience

30+ games? really now… I’d like to encourage you to use triple A and show us your so called ‘experience’ because you sure as hell haven’t shown us any evidence of it.

We don’t play low luck really just count up cost vs cost and see if it’s worth the attack 9/10 times planes do get scrambled or England

Clearly your play group hasn’t been on the A&A fanatic forums. Those forums comes up with long, detailed lists on why NOT to scramble. 90% of games, I’ve ever seen, England doesn’t scramble.

is put in a position to atlest use there planes to attack some where also. I just see it highly unlikely that they would sacrifice all active planes in France the entire fbit of England would be lost in aircraft and to make matters worse they couldn’t attack the Italin Navy cause the counter would crush them.

I suppose it’s a huge risk vs reward

There is no risk. No such thing as ‘risk’, the battle of France is in the bag in allied favor.  if your going to talk about strategies, then any strategy you make based on ‘luck’ or ‘risk’ is clearly not a very good one.

or something that Italins can Capitlize on a weaker Britsh player but if suppose the idea seems sound on why to do it

also what tactical bomber? From where I only count 5 British fighters and 1 strategic bomber

@Uncrustable:

SZ 109 (UK scrambles fighter from Scotland) Subs have less than a 50% chance of sinking the transport.

SZ 110 (UK scrambles 3 fighters from UK) You have a 45% chance of winning with an average 1-2 defending fighters surviving. Meaning UK can stack Britain against Italy round 1. And you just lost 6 planes.
Retreat after 1 round your not going to kill a single fighter most games while losing 3 of your own. This also means UK can stack France, meaning you can’t take Normandy, south France, Tunisia or FIC until round 3 (after Italy takes France round 2)
Meaning Germany loses 3 fighters and loses out on 28 IPCs round 1, and another 9 round 2.
That’s 37 IPC plus 30 IPCs in planes on average. 67 IPCs lol.
So UK loses 5 planes to hold France one round, it’s already ahead by 16 IPCs and the axis are severely delayed from anything in Russia or Africa and there is no sealion threat .

Again the more I look at this the more flaws become apparent.

Do yourself a favor and atleast post a game report, turn by turn. Otherwise I do not believe this has any merit.

Without those planes then U.S.A can all that much easier waltz into Italy.

Whites strategy just keeps falling apart dosnt it?

@knp7765:

@1Bean432:

I would imagine so.

Still, kinda strange how people say its always the Allies catching up. Even when its the allies with more units.
-Territory’s
-IPCs (almost 3-fold)
-Nations etc

It might make more sense if you look at it this way. For totals I have included fighting units, facilities and all for each country.
Total Units: Axis = 227, Allies = 289
Total IPC value: Axis = 1499, Allies = 2072
So it would appear that the Allies would outmatch the Axis. However, look at the territories controlled by each side.
Total Territories: Axis = 35, Allies = 175
This comes down to an average of units per territory: Axis = 6.49, Allies = 1.65
Or an average of IPC value of units per territory: Axis = 42.83, Allies = 11.84
You could even cut it down to territories with an IPC value, but it just gets worse for the Allies.
Total Territories with an IPC value: Axis = 26, Allies = 96
Average Units per territory: Axis = 8.73, Allies = 3.01
Average IPC value of units: Axis = 57.65, Allies = 21.58

So you see, while the Allies do actually start out with more units and more IPC value of units, they have much more territory to protect and are way spread out. The Axis on the other hand has all of their units concentrated in smaller areas for much more of a punch on attacks. So I guess the idea of the Allies having to “catch up” to the Axis would be their ability to concentrate their forces and get more of a punch against the Axis before they manage to capture too much.

Awesome.

Do you know the average number of units on occupied territory’s during start up?

A.K.A, territory’s that don’t have any units on them from the start should’t be counted in the average number of units per territory.

@Gargantua:

Yugoslavia.

Sometimes it feels like you always fail there, and the allies snipe you for 3 or 4 guys.

Oooh. Mind elaborating?

@rjpeters70:

Why in the world would Yugo and Greece be part of a Balkan Axis (unless they were conquered, that is)?  They fought on the side of the Allies.

They would still be Pro-allied neutral powers, but they would be considered original territory’s of the Balkan Axis.

e.g Germany could attack Yugoslavia, and fight the Infantry their. But it would go to Balkan Axis.

@rjpeters70:

Jesus, I don’t get the stacks with over 90 units in them.  Who has time to build all that?  Just bum rush and be in Moscow by G5.  No way Russia has the time to build all that infantry in Moscow by G5.

Sorry, i was just over-exaggerating.

But it is kinda how it goes.

You haven’t explained why the counter-tactics don’t work. All you’ve done is say.

‘Everything you say does not work. I get Egypt turn 2.’

Please explain why these counter-strategies don’t work, because you’ve explained diddly-squat.

@CWO:

@1Bean432:

Vichy France:
-Get France, Southern France, Normandy, and the three north African territory’s.
-Vichy would be the convoy raiding effort of Germany in WWII

The Balkans puppets:
-Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, Greece, Albania (Greater southern Germany/Austria?)

Scandinavian war effort:
-Norway, Finland, (Sweden?)
This power would represent the Finnish war effort. As well as Norways complete lack of ability to counter allied offences.

Europe in WWII wasn’t a five-way Axis power.  It was a mixture of German-occupied Allied countries, major Axis partners, minor Axis partners, Russian-occupied states/territories, and neutral nations (some pro-Allied, some pro-Axis, some more or less truly neutral), with one collaborationist state and one co-belligerent thrown in for good measure.

On the game map, the “France” territory and Normandy don’t actually form part of Vichy France; those were areas under German occupation.  Southern France and most of the French colonial empire were governed by the Vichy regime.  Vichy was a collaborationist state, but technically it wasn’t a belligerent after the French surrender of 1940.  Vichy came close to going to war against Britain after the Mers-el-Kebir and Oran raids, but it didn’t actually do so.  Vichy scuttled the French fleet in 1943 to keep it out of German hands when Germany occupied Southern France; the French fleet never fought on the Axis side.

Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria and Slovakia were definitely on the Axis side (they were involved in the invasion of the USSR and/or of Yugoslavia and Greece), but Yugoslavia and Greece were not Axis puppets: they were countries invaded and occupied by the Axis, hence Allied nations. Yugoslavia was even (as I recall) invaded by Germany because a popular uprising deposed its pro-Axis king.  Greece fought off (for a while anyway, until Germany got involved) an attempted Italian invasion, and drove the Italians into Albania (which had been annexed by Italy a few years previously).

The map’s “Greater Southern Germany” roughly corresponds to the territories which Germany annexed before the war: Austria and most of Czechoslovakia (a few crumbs having been given to the newly-created puppet state of Slovakia).  I don’t think “Greater Southern Germany” is a term that was used in real life; the former Austria, for example, was renamed Ostmark.

Finland was a co-belligerent in WWII: it participated in the German invasion of the USSR, but as a separate power rather than an Axis one.  Norway was an Allied country under German occupation, not an Axis country which lacked the ability to counter Allied offensives.  (Free Norwegian forces actually operated out of Great Britain, being engaged in such anti-German operations as the Gunnerside raid.)  Sweden wasn’t at war during WWII; it was a nominal neutral, though it allowed Germany to transport iron ore shipments from Norway throught its territory.  Sweden’s neutrality was useful to both the Alllies and the Axis: it was a hotbed of espionnage, and the country to which Norwegian resistance groups and Free Norwegian foces would escape after conducting operations in Norway.

WHOA, i dint mean it for historical accuracy. I meant it for representing the total European Axis war effort in WWII. I just thought it would be kinda cool to have 3 powers go hard Russia. It gives me the fuzzies whenever something like that happens.

AS for Vichy and Balkan axis getting Yugoslavia and stuff.

You could make all the Frances territory’s be considered original Vichy France territories. While yogu, Bulgaria, and Greece are all considered original territory’s to Balkan Axis. That way, even if Germany and Italy where to cut up France, it would all go to the Vichy France player.

The idea to roll for French colonies seems nice, but what about the units their? It would be like rolling for free INF in Africa than anything else. For simplicity’s sake, Just give Vichy all of France and North African France, including the INF there.

Vichy France would not only represent France, but also the German effort to wage convoy war against Britain.

To balance out the fact that Germany is MUCH weaker (almost 25 IPCs weaker) we should do this:

Immediately when France is taken, all remaining french territory’s in mainland Europe, as well as French ships, are all considered neutral. This would represent the political stuff Germany started with France about Vichy etc. At the end of Frances turn, Vichy France comes into being and all French warships become Vichy. South France is the capital.

This way, Britain would have a reason to attack the ships, as well as a rule to legalize it.

For the Balkan allies, Romania is the capital. The Balkan allies also get a Fighter in Romania.

For Scandinavia, they can have 1 extra artillery in Norway.

The battle for Moscow for me.

When Germany has 50 Tanks, 50 mech, 50 Art. Vs Russia’s 200 Infantry.

@Whitshadw:

@Uncrustable:

You also realize that in order for Italy to actually get 19 IPCs round 2 all if the axis must hold off from taking any France tts until France falls!
This includes Normandy and south France (5IPCs)
Meaning now 5 less IPCS less Germany on top of the 23 for not taking France G1

IMO this strategy is so flawed it’s silly, and I’m beginning to wonder if we’re not just arguing with a couple noobs. (No offense but this has to he pointed out)

I’m sorry this guy is lost or dosnt understand how this game works basicaly my last post in this matter.
I’ve stated again I’ve played in tournaments and countless levels of expertise from novice to finalist and there’s no one clear way to win you use any advantage to win and sometimes play and use tactics that are unconvential

Yes Italy may loose up to 20ipcs worth of men to gain 19 from sacking France and 4 for the value of the teratory. But Endland would loose up to 50+ by stacking most of there fighters last I checked 20<50 for value correct?

England is the ultimate bitch nation in this game. I don’t care if they lose their capital, as long as they can stall Germany/Italy for any number of turns, then they’ve already done their job.

Also while yes America just sits at Gebralter that dosnt stop transports ferrying troops over and having part of the German Airforce covering France/Italy to counter any attack

How would an air force counter attack a navy West of Gibraltar? Its to far away. And if your Air force is in France, then Russia must be VERY happy right now.

All of France can fall in one Turn

'IT. CANT. FALL. TURN 1. unless Germany takes it. Or you get lucky, but luck is no substitute for a good strategy.

so I have no idea what this kid is talking about. And this is all round 1 threw 2 movements round 5 is to late to just have America

America can be West of Gibraltar turn 3. And who cares when they arrive? Italy will see it coming and realize ‘oh shit, i need to turtle’. And turtleling will NOT get Italy into Africa.

sit at Gebralter and think it’s doing anything.

It does.

The idea behind this is too flood Africa

Cant. America. Unless you want to lose Italy.

and push into Iraq ASAP.

Blows my mind how people are so short sited

Oh wow.

with just seeing things one way and just reply with America rushs

They do, its to good of an opportunity to pass up.

in lol
Anyways I’m done try it
… It’ll work and mouths will drop other wise no point arguing with inexperianced players

Uncrustable’s right. No point, arguing with people who clearly don’t know what their talking about.

Once again, If Italy is going to get France, then you must choose one of the following as the Axis:

-Lose Africa
-Lose Italy
-Go on the defensive in Europe (allies win)
-Let Russia live

Every since A&A 1914 came out, everyone complained about how:

-Historically inaccurate it was (Italy is at war before Austria-Hungary attacks Serbia, ON THE ALLIED SIDE?)
-Lack of railway movement
-How bad Unrestricted Sub warfare was
-How unbalanced it was
-The problem with India
-No colonial fights
-The Cps seemed like a pushover after their initial forces are gone, unlike the epic struggle Germany would put up in other A&As
-Clearly not play tested a lot
-Rules felt icky (Mostly due to being changed from what we all know and love. in particular Russian revo, Air combat, Infantry for every army)

So i was just Curious about what you guys had to ‘fix’ (or add) these.

Um, i may sound stupid but.

Mind telling me what the X @ X is. (which ones IPCs or whatever)

And a question. Which version is that chart from? (alpha +3, +2 etc)

We should think about splitting Europe into a 5-way Axis power.

Every Axis power in Europe would represent a part of the total war effort the Axis had in Europe.

I was thinking:

Vichy France:
-Get France, Southern France, Normandy, and the three north African territory’s.

-12 IPCs - 2 subs a turn.

-Vichy would be the convoy raiding effort of Germany in WWII

The Balkans puppets:
-Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, Greece, Albania (Greater southern Germany/Austria?)

-12 IPCs, a Romanian minor, And a Greek Naval base.

-Their NO would be about reuniting Romania, +3 IPCs for controlling Romania & Bessarabia.

-These guys would represent the individuality of the German puppets in WWII, and their support role.

-They would also represent the constant build up on the Russian boarder.

Scandinavian war effort:
-Norway, Finland, (Sweden?)

-5 (8?) IPCs. Norway gets a minor.

-NOs for liberating Finland. +5 IPCs when Karelia and Vyborg are under Axis control.

This power would represent the Finnish war effort. As well as Norways complete lack of ability to counter allied offences.

@Whitshadw:

Lol US takes
What and when round 3 lol

Depends on when Japan declares.

U.S.A could be west of Gibraltar on turn 3, 4, or 5.

U.S.A does not take anything. They instead sit their and force Italy to turtle. Which is why people say that Italy cant take Africa.

I’d also like to say a root question:
Italy loses 20ish IPCs on average trying to take France. So the extra $$$ is only replacing what shouldn’t of been lost in the first place.