Posts made by AgentOrange

…but I appreciate all the input regardless. And on that note, I can’t just watch all this go on, and not even vote. So I went for fighters. Aside from the fact that they’re the perfect combination of defense and mobility, their good defense is made outstanding by a tech called jet power. I’ve always loved jet power, even since the original version, for this very reason. And who can complain about having 2 or 3 full carriers in a decent sized fleet, with jet power? Every round, that would equal 4 to 6 rolls at 5 or less, making your assailants drop like flies, while BBs take hits for you. Jet power also makes a navy awesome too. 8)

How do you think I feel? I just started this topic, hoping it would bring people to put up good points about the pros/cons of various units. I did get that. But what I also got is a huge friggin’ debate about the economic value of infantry vs. that of everything else. I’m just glad that the issue of strategic value came into the picture SOMEWHERE… :oops: :roll:

Good call, Duke. Let it be known that the “Other” option shall include an answer of “Don’t build one. Trannies are the way to go.”

…And not to pry, but to whoever voted “Other” please specify via a comment where you’re talking about. I’m curious…

I favor French Indochina as well. You guys’ posts help to reinforce the notion that Japan is crucial in saving the Nazis from utter ruin. (in most games I could think of)

By “value” I meant to factor in more than just the unit’s combat values and such. Like in the case of bombers, they can bomb ICs for cash. With battleships, they can take two hits. Destroyers can prevent sub sneak attacks. Tanks can blitz. And remember also to apply any possible techs that can boost your units. So I ask you; with all these factors, which unit do you find to have the most value monetarily as well as strategically?

Which unit do you think holds the most overall value? (including price, abilities, atk/def, etc.)

:D :-? :( :x :evil:

Do you think it might be wise to build a new German IC other than the ones they start with? I’ve never done it, but I’ve always wondered if it might help. Tell me what you think.

In a game I’m currently playing, Japan owns four (count 'em, four) ICs.
One that they start with, one in French Indochina, one in East Indies, and one in Australia. Where do you think is the most influential place for the Japs to put their second IC? (Comments are encouraged.)

:D :-? :cry: :x :evil:

Why not use your techs and NA’s in conjunction? These are the ones I could come up with. If anyone else has any other suggestions, then lemme hear 'em! :P

Oh, and Justus: You forgot to mention that at one point, you were trying to take Berlin, but your forces were diminished by the fact that Britain still owned an AA gun in Western Europe. Ended up taking it anyway, but such was the luck o’ the dice… 8)

This is also true: You can start out playing Traditional, but when someone goes out, switch up the teams then. WWII wasn’t that long ago (OK, maybe it was) but bear with me. Maybe Russia was one of the allies during the war, but that was only because they shared a common enemy with the Brits. When that enemy (Germany) fell, what happened next? Germany was split in half, the Wall went up, and suddenly relations with the ol’ Russkies weren’t all that good. True, the Cold War wasn’t a conventional war by any means, but even so, Germany wasn’t re-united until almost 45 years later. It just goes to show that, historically, whenever a war is “resolved”, the survivors will inevitably duke it out amongst themselves… :roll:

I like both pretty equally. With regards to what you said about RTS skill being about memorizing hotkeys and such, I don’t bother attaining enough skill in this department just to be better at the game. (Maybe this is why I still haven’t beaten Starcraft or Warcraft 3?) But I still love RTS because of the fast-paced decision making! On the other hand, Turn-based is awesome because it allows alot of time for decision making. So as long as it’s one of the two extremes, I’m good to go. :D

:D :-? :( :x :evil:

I think alternate is the way to go. Traditional may be more accurate (duh) but alternate forces you to make new strategies, so…

Good point Jennifer. I guess I’m looking at it from my point of view, and not that of a newb.

I voted Heavy Tanks, obviously not because of the inferior part, but because it seems ridiculously powerful. C’mon, a unit that costs 5 IPC’s but defends on a 4? Wait… that just might make Germany’s job a little easier. :D All joking aside though, I do have a question. How would you roll for Heavy Tanks if it’s the seventh tech? Or are you talking about replacing one of the old ones with this new one? I saw that most people voted nay to the rocket tech, but I enjoy it! It may not be the first one I go for, but once a nation is a little more secure than what it starts with, who can argue with the ability to make an opponent lose IPC’s from up to three spaces away, which can’t be prevented?

I’m with 88mm here. The US just gets to sit back on its laurels, being both the most far-removed from the action, and making the most money to start with. As some people pointed out, strategy is ALWAYS a concern, but there’s not as much pressure on strategy with America as with other nations, like Germany. (No-one voted for Germany. Does that surprise anyone?) And also, the US gets to wait until the last turn, after everyone else has set THEIR gears in motion, to decide what they’re gonna do. Who can argue with that? :roll:

If you’re talking about skill involved to play AND survive? Germany definitely. They may have an outstanding army to begin with, but I just think they have a horrible starting position. Maybe it’s partially because they start out owning West Russia, the tumor of EurAsia. (The Battle of the Bulge comes to mind…)

Honestly, I’m all about looking out for Number 1. I try to make sure my nation is set, and then once I’m sure that it’s as secure as it can be, then I’ll contribute to my team’s cause with everything I’ve got. (We rarely go for the traditional set-up. And once somebody gets wiped out, we then change up the teams to make it more even.)

To add to ydavid’s comment, czech out the explanation that it gives, as far as “you could move a fighter from Hawaii to the East Indies in one turn, as long as you control both island groups.” Without Island Bases, your fighters couldn’t go anywhere near that far.

Basically it only helps the US in the Pacific.