Posts made by allies_fly

@TG:

Title:  Operation Sealion Turned (1941)
Date: December 21st, 2008
Special Rules:  Tech ONLY
Victor:  Allies by concession
Game Length:  Five hours
Bias:  About Even.  Five players – 3 Allies (Me, Amber, Flint) and 2 Axis (Jacob, Sony)
Description:
Endgame:  On UK1, Amber made a forced landing at Normandy.  On G2, instead of retaking Normandy, the Germans (who had unlocked paratroopers G1) launched a bold invasion of London.  High risk; high reward.  Well, the invasion failed (the odds were 45/55 to begin with) and Germany lost her entire air force.  The game ended with that (except for a Japanese invasion of the West Coast, which should have been successful but wasn’t), and the the rest of the rounds were spent going through the motions.          Observations: 
This game ended on a downer.  Either way you had a lose-lose situation.  If the Germans had succeeded in taking London (on the second round), there’s no way the Allies could have recovered.  The Germans, by not being able to take London, sealed their fate.  The game was doomed to end prematurely.  Bottom line: Axis and Allies aren’t for cocksure, “me-first” players.

THIS is the reason instant tech sucks.
Too much dice involved.  Getting the tech, then trying to apply the just gotten tech.

@Cmdr:

If I were limited to one change, it would be to give Russia 1 fighter.  I mean common, they start the game with only ONE offensive piece on the board??  WTF is that?

So I take it you do not think artillery is an offensive piece?
The sub can be considered offensive too

@WOPR:

Lynxes, that’s a well thought out strategy and I think it could work. However, Russia’s western front may be too weakened by the loss of the infantry and 2 fighter build (on R1) to withstand an aggressive Germany and Italy. It would certainly be a precarious balancing act defending both Moscow and India.

Perhaps some tanks instead of the ftrs.
4 tanks = 2 hits, just like the planes (or even more!)

If the Indian plan falls thru, the tanks can be used to take land against an agressive Germany/Italy.

I think if you do this as russia, throw the stack of 7 inf into Buryatia too.  Keep Japan occupied

This discussion has gone from the Med to the Pacific!  :)

Anyone ever contemplate a Russian bomber R1?

Keeps Japan honest with having to protect a transport (only) grab in east indies
or projects power into Manchuria in conjunction with a 7 inf stack in buryatia.

Doesn’t an Australia (or even Indian) IC depend alot on what Japan has done.

If Japan goes all in to  Russia, they may not be in position to threaten a UK IC for a round or two.

Australia is a VC country, and there’s lots of cash around it, so that might be a worthwhile investment.

Played first game in 1986.

I can not believe I have played this game for over 20 years.
Many rules versions later, I still love it.

Recently got AA50 delivered to the house.  Family will wrap and give it to me for Christmas.

Am going to play Dec 26th  :)

@tekkyy:

if this is what you are talking about
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/file/info/25840
then yes it was made from a version of IL’s (Imperious Leader) AARHE map

did you find what you want at jeffdestroyer’s link?

by the way, you can customize some pdfs yourself with Illustrator/Acrobat
other IL or myself can probably make a change or two for you

are you taking it somewhere to print or printing it in A4/letter tiles?
we can give you .png tiles if you are printing it in tiles

Please excuse my ignorance, what do you mean by tiles?
Do you mean in pieces like 8.5" by 11" sheet of paper?

If so, I would like to do that.  I don’t have illustrator to resize to 30" by 50"
Who do I politely ask to do that?  Or does such a file already exist?

Special K,

How complete is the FAQ?  :?

Will the FAQ need an FAQ?  :-P

Thanks!

@TG:

As much as I love bombers and can vouch for them, I’m also a cold-hearted statistician.

On the attack a heavy bomber has a 44% chance of sinking a battleship, the battleship has a 66% chance of splashing a bomber.

Not to start a silly discussion,  :| ok, maybe  :-P

But what is the criteria for a ‘superior’ unit?

Hit factor is one you touched on.  What about other aspects like:

• Range

• Cost

• Flexible/Multi-faceted

On all these aspects, the bomber wins out, ESPECIALLY in the mutli-faceted aspect:

• Can support naval and ground operations

• Can do SBRs

• Possibly being upgraded to be a troop transport (paratrooper tech in AA50).

maybe your qualification of ‘in a vacuum….’ meant you were ignoring these other factors, but I believe the vacuum should be turned off in this discussion. :lol:

@TG:

The rating system we have already is flawed.

In a vacuum, Battleships are superior units to the Heavy Bomber.

“MR BOMBER” is admitting ships are more powerful than BOMBERS?  :? :?

:-o

@cond1024:

I don’t know why it warped so bad, the only thing I can think is that I set it up on my kitchen table, which is next to a huge window
and the sun beat down on it all day long.

…Of course… GLOBAL WARMING is the cause!

@Krieghund:

Enemy subs can be attacked or ignored at will by the acting player.  The only effects that a destroyer has are to suppress subs special abilities and to allow air units to hit them.

‘sub’ stall is not a term we’ll be using in this game.

The only way to force combat or make a fleet stay is to drop a surface vessel.  Most likely a DD.

thanks!

I understand that transports are totally transparent: they can always be ignored, even by other transports.

Are subs the same way?
I understand you can ignore a sub if you don’t want to do combat with it.

Conversely, can a sub FORCE a navy to have to do battle if they want to stay in the same sea zone?
Would a destroyers presence make any difference?

@pagan:

.
United Kingdom Lend-Lease :  I’m surprised not more people use it , since you can play completely vanilla and be defensively strong. It’s one of those NAs that needs to be used against you before you can see how many applications it has
.

The problem is a good Axis player will demand more than mere vanilla moves from the allies for the allies to survive into mid/late game.

Wow, that’s pretty cool.

Kinda like a real war room.

@Bluestroke:

Again I state, this a good model of the problem the Allies faced in 1941, do yo agree?  The Axis were in the field with units, advancing with operational tempo.  This is a great modeling of that advantage.  The situation in 1941 was not balanced.  Why would you model a game for the Allies, that was balanced, at its start up-this would be wrong.

….unless you are Timerover51

@AxisOfEvil:

Does this new SBR strat break the game again? Germany would be pretty crippled, if the allies had a goal of keeping 20 markers on berlin, and 12 on SE.

There have been some concerns voiced over this, but Krieghund ensures us that in the context of the entire game, SBRs are not a concern.

The jury is still out for me.

@AxisOfEvil:

Or wait, where is germany second IC, do they have one?

It is my understanding that Germany only starts with one IC

@Krieghund:

There are damage markers.

A stack of 20 in one territory?
Do they stack nicely?
Or do you use the same chips that are used to represent additional units (like inf, tanks, etc)

So transports are there…
but not REALLY there.

A&A has it’s own altered reality.
A nice newly added feature  :lol:

How does the game keep track of these damage points?
I don’t have the new game to see that mechanism.