Axis & Allies .org Forums
    • Home
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Register
    • Login
    1. Home
    2. Argothair
    3. Best
    A
    • Profile
    • Following 1
    • Followers 4
    • Topics 88
    • Posts 3,158
    • Best 215
    • Controversial 0
    • Groups 9

    Best posts made by Argothair

    • RE: [AA50/Anniversary] Modular Map Overlays - Splitting Australia, the Balkans, and Sea Zones; adding Cairo, Malaya, Singapore, Rio, Cape Town, Recruitment Centers and tons more!

      @Titus The whole premise of this project is that it’s possible and useful to add a few more carefully chosen territories to create a middle ground between AA50 and Global.

      Global is very careless and generous with its placement of territories – there are dozens of territories in Siberia, western China, west Africa, the southeast Pacific, south America, etc. that essentially see zero combat and are worth either 0 or 1 IPCs each. 99.9% of games would play exactly the same if they deleted Samoa or Uruguay or Tsagaan Olom. Heck, there are even plenty of impassible territories – sometimes they split the impassible territories into two, just for fun. It would make absolutely no difference to gameplay in literally 100% of games if they merged, e.g., Sierra Leone and Liberia, because nobody is ever allowed to enter either of them.

      There are literally 100 more territories in Global than in AA50. Vodot and I think it’s possible to add something like 15 extra territories to AA50 and get good results.

      That said, not every request to add territories to AA50 will make sense. I personally don’t see any need for the Maldives or the Azores in a game at this scale, but Vodot is too much of a softie to tell Imperious-Leader no, so instead Vodot will just do hours of free graphic design labor and give Imperious-Leader what he wants, regardless of whether Vodot agrees with the request.

      posted in Customizations
      A
      Argothair
    • RE: UK as one economy

      SiredBlood has rules for a combined UK economy that work pretty well; basically there is a 20 IPC/turn spending cap in India, and otherwise you just combine the entire UK + Canada + India + South Africa into one economy, with ANZAC remaining separate. If you don’t like the 20 IPC/turn rule, you could replace the major IC in India with a pair of minor ICs, one in India and one in West India.

      ANZAC is interesting as a separate power because ( a ) they have a core cluster of facilities & 2-IPC territories of Queensland, New South Wales, and New Zealand that are far enough away from Japan to be defensible, ( b ) they have economic interests like Java and New Guinea that are close enough to Japan to make for immediate conflict, ( c ) they can realistically get up to 20+ IPCs in many games, which gives them options beyond just sitting and turtling, and ( d ) they are a convenient ‘junior partner’ for the US Pacific Navy, which allows them to punch above their weight.

      None of these are true for Canada except for ( a ). It’s easy to defend Ontario and Quebec, but Canada doesn’t have any economic interests that put them into immediate conflict with any Axis powers, they have no realistic path to get to 20+ IPCs, and the British Atlantic navy isn’t strong enough in this version of the game to need or want a junior partner. It might be possible to radically adjust the starting setup so that the English-speaking countries have a larger total Atlantic navy that is split up less favorably among UK & Canada so as to preserve roughly the same level of power, or to have a larger Canadian navy that serves as a sort of Allied bid, but you can’t just split Canada off as its own power without tilting the power balance further in favor of the Axis. Even if you do fix the balance issue, it’s not obvious that Canada is a strategically interesting power on this map. I am very pro-Canada and have great respect for Canada’s historical wartime contributions, and I think thematically it would be a lot of fun to play a Canadian power, but I don’t think it’s a realistic goal mechanically for this map and setup.

      posted in Axis & Allies Global 1940
      A
      Argothair
    • RE: Glider or Cargo Plane graphic that's suitable for a TripleA unit?

      Brilliant, thanks!

      posted in TripleA Support
      A
      Argothair
    • RE: Mechanized Russia

      @taamvan Agree with you re: infantry.

      This is very nitpicky, but disagree on blocking east Poland – there is only one Italian tank in Romania, so if you block Bessarabia then either it blitzes through East Poland to attack Bessarabia (in which case you can just go through West Ukraine to get to East Poland) or it blitzes through East Poland to occupy West Ukraine (in which case you can go through Bessrabia to get to East Poland).

      posted in Axis & Allies Global 1940
      A
      Argothair
    • Five of the Japanese Openings

      INTRODUCTION

      This post, loosely inspired by BlackElk’s posts on All the Russian Openings and All the German Openings, will take a look at Japanese opening strategy from a beginner-to-intermediate point of view. I’m going to assume you know the rules and basic tactical concepts like trading and deadzoning, but this post should still be fun to read even if you’re not an experienced player.

      Because the Japanese go fourth in the turn order, and because the Allies often get a ‘bid’ of additional units to place on the board that can disrupt the starting position, there are so many possible board positions by the time Japan gets to take its first turn that I can’t possibly cover all the Japanese openings. So, here I’ll cover five of my favorites – some popular, and some less popular – and explain how they work, when to use them, and what kind of middlegames they can set you up for.

      TANK DEATH MARCH TO MOSCOW (“TDMTM”)

      What is it?

      In TDMTM, Japan builds a constant river of tanks, usually from mainland Chinese factories, and sends them straight to Moscow, hoping to overwhelm the Russian defenses and sack the Russian capital.

      What should you build?

      You’ll probably want at least two Chinese factories – one in Manchuria and one in Kiangsu or Kwangtung, so that you can build five tanks a turn right into Asia. With the cash left over, I recommend building fighters, which can help you take territories while you’re left alone, and then quickly fly back to defend your factories if America comes to get you.

      How should you attack?

      You need to find the fastest path to Moscow, which usually runs through China (four spaces). Siberia, which has five spaces, can sometimes be a faster route if China is defended and Russia is foolish enough to stack their eastern infantry in Buryatia (or the Far East) so that you can wipe out the whole Russian stack on turn 1 or turn 2. If Siberia is totally undefended, you can blitz across it with tanks in only three turns. In general, be willing to lose tanks in order to get your tank forces one space closer to Moscow, as long as the Russians can’t push you back out without taking painful losses. Gather most of your infantry and separate it from your tanks, sending the infantry toward Burma to bottle up the British forces there, and then retreat your infantry to the east as needed to avoid losing a major battle. It’s OK to give up some territory in the south as long as you still hold your factories and the victory city in Shanghai.

      Why does it work?

      No matter what Russia builds, it can’t afford to build enough units to fend off a combined onslaught by both the Germans and the Japanese. Basically, it’s OK if the troops you lose cost you more than the troops Russia loses, because you can afford to replace all 5 tanks every turn, but at best, Russia can only afford to replace 3 infantry per turn in Asia. Meanwhile, if the Japanese use mostly tanks, then in order to arrive on time to save the Russians, the western Allies have to fly in planes, which cost more and are less efficient than the Japanese tanks.

      When should you use this opening?

      This opening works best when Russia doesn’t roll well on its first-turn attacks in eastern Europe, stacks its eastern infantry in Buryatia, or builds expensive units like a plane or two tanks on its first turn. It works well when Germany ferries units from Africa up to Europe (instead of vice versa), and when Germany builds all land units, especially tanks, and sends them directly against Russia. This opening works very nicely when Britain over-invests in India (e.g., 1 infantry and 2 fighters) instead of building an early fleet to crush Germany, because you don’t need to attack India at all to win with this opening. If there’s a bid, you want the bid to include Egyptian infantry and/or an Indian Ocean sub, and you want the bid to not include any Russian infantry.

      What kind of middlegame can you expect?

      If your opponents are competent, America and Britain will usually manage a successful landing in France or Italy before you can actually take the Russian capital. At some point, you will probably have to divert some German production to infantry and artillery to defend western Europe. You may wind up crippling Russia and knocking it down to 10 to 12 IPCs per turn a few turns before you can actually take the capital. Be prepared to fly a stack of Japanese fighters west to defend Berlin (or vice versa if the Allies are attacking Tokyo), and start to look for more moderate, slightly less aggressive trades. You have to be willing to go for the knockout blow if you really have an opportunity to take the Russian capital, and you also have to be willing to be patient if the best you can do is trade Kazakh and the Caucasus. If you throw away too many tanks for too many turns in a row, you can give Russia a chance to stabilize. You need to win by turn 8 or 9, but you don’t need to win on turn 6 or 7 – it will take several turns for Allied transports to make their second round-trip from Washington to Paris, and until they make that second round-trip, the added cost of the transports and their defensive escorts means that Germany can produce more land units than America and Britain put together.

      LET’S ORDER INDIAN TAKEOUT

      What is it?

      In the Indian Takeout opening, you focus all of Japan’s energy on conquering and holding India at the earliest possible moment. This wipes out the only Allied factory that’s anywhere on the southern or eastern halves of the board, and it gives you a strong base of operations for attacking juicy targets like Egypt, Caucasus, and Kazakh.

      What should you build?

      You’ll need either three transports and a factory in French Indochina Vietnam, or five transports. Your transports will be loaded with a balanced mix of infantry, artillery, and tanks – you can adjust the exact mix to make good use of all of your income each turn. It’s OK to have 1 more transport than you can afford to fill, because you can usefully load one transport with Manchurian troops and bring them down to Indochina to help with the Indian battle.

      How should you attack?

      Your biggest bottleneck in this opening is transport capacity, because you need transports to unload troops onto the Asian mainland for attacks, and you also need transports to get your troops – including troops from Manchuria – closer to India. Try to solve this bottleneck by making each transport move do double duty. For example, on round 1, if you move troops from Tokyo to Yunnan, they’re now only two moves from India, and they can also kill some American infantry as they’re landing. Also, killing any British boats left in the Indian Ocean is a top priority – you need to be able to send your transports exactly where they want to go without having to worry about escorting them against British sub attacks.

      Why does it work?

      India only has 3 build slots, and the Allies don’t have any other factories anywhere nearby to help reinforce it, nor are there any good candidate territories for the Allies to use to build a second colonial factory. The Allies can fly fighters to India, but it’s slow, expensive, and challenging to do that. Even if the Allies manage to get planes to India in time, it will set them back on other fronts. Also, you can set up a ‘dual threat’ on India – one threat via land, with tanks in Indochina blitzing through Burma to reach India, and one threat via sea, with transports off the coast of Kiangsu, the Philippines, or the East Indies ready to deliver troops to India by sea. The idea is that if India attacks Burma to stop the blitz, they could use up enough troops that India would be vulnerable by sea, but if India doesn’t attack Burma, then they get blitzed and they still get hammered by your transports.

      When should you use it?

      If the Germans take Egypt or even Trans-Jordan on turn 1, or if the British divert units away from India toward Egypt, then this opening has an excellent chance of succeeding. This opening can also be useful if the Russians do above-average in eastern Europe on turn 1, since the opening works fine even when Russia is strong. If Britain doesn’t place a full 3 units in India on turn 1, this opening should be near the top of your list. This opening is not recommended during a strong American attack on Japan, since India is too far away from Japan for your fleet to operate effectively in both theaters, and you won’t have any spare cash available to build defensive warships. If there’s a bid, this opening works well when the bid goes to Russia or to the American Atlantic fleet.

      What kind of middlegame can you expect?

      If you successfully take India, it sets you up for Japan to have both an enormous economy and a convenient factory site with which to exploit it. Without Allied reinforcements from India, China and Siberia will typically fall pretty quickly, and you can at least trade Egypt, Kazakh, and usually the Caucasus, for an income of at least $50/turn. With that kind of money, you can build, e.g., 3 infantry in India, 3 tanks in Manchuria, and 2 bombers in Tokyo every turn. If you were able to kill big stacks of British units while they futilely tried to defend India, then the game is yours. If Britain gave up on India early and built a fleet to invade France/Italy, Germany is probably in trouble, and Moscow is probably still safe for a few turns, so get ready to relieve Germany as soon as you can – if the Allies are in the Mediterranean, then you can ‘liberate’ the Suez and send your fleet to help Italy, and if the Allies are in the Baltic, then you can try to meet up with German forces for a one-two punch by the Germans and then the Japanese in the Caucasus, allowing you to hold the Stalingrad factory and crank out 4 tanks / turn to relieve the German position.

      POLAR EXPRESS

      What is it?

      In the Polar Express, you set up to quickly ferry troops into Alaska, building a factory there and penetrating as far into the American interior as circumstances allow. This opening won’t let you actually conquer the United States unless your opponents royally screw up, but it can distract the heck out of the USA during crucial turns when they really need to be ferrying troops to Paris.

      What should you build?

      As many transports that are fully loaded with pairs of infantry as you can afford, plus a couple of destroyers for blocking the US Pacific fleet (if any). Also, one factory in Alaska. If the USA builds warships in the Pacific, you may need to at least partially match their build, or build fighters to sink their ships and then land the fighters in Alaska. Otherwise, go easy on the planes.

      How should you attack?

      The best time to move troops ot Alaska is usually turn 3 – you need to wait the Allies are far enough out of position that they won’t be able to launch an immediate counter-attack. With perfect execution, you can invade Alaska on turn 3 while bringing your fighters back to Tokyo, follow up on turn 4 by building an Alaskan factory, sending a second load of transports to Alaska, and flying your fighters over to Alaska, and then deliver a third load of transports to Alaska on turn 5 while building tanks at your new Alaskan factory. You’re going to lose some transports this way, but every turn you pose a serious threat in Alaska is another turn that the US can’t focus on Europe. Be aware of who can blitz into which territories – if the US has tanks in San Francisco, you may need to put a token force into Western Canada so the tanks can’t reach Alaska, and if you have tanks in Alaska, you may want to put a token force into Western Canada to threaten to invade San Francisco. Meanwhile, you can slowly expand into central Asia, especially China, making smart, opportunistic attacks that cost the enemy more troops than they cost you. You’re not in a hurry; you’re just there to get extra income and reduce US income. If you have more loaded transports than you need to hold Alaska, send them to Hawaii, Panama, and Brazil to further reduce US income.

      When should you use this opening?

      This opening only makes sense if (a) the US starts to send its Pacific fleet through the Panama Canal into the Atlantic, and (b) Britain spends most of its turn 1 income on planes or India. If America builds ships in the Pacific, or if Britain plops down a carrier in the Atlantic on turn 1, then don’t use this opening – you won’t get anywhere useful by distracting the US if Britain is in position to take Paris on its own or if the US is planning on attacking you anyway.

      Why does it work?

      Japan can make some reasonable progress in mainland Asia even with virtually no spending there, freeing up basically the entire Japanese economy to go harass the United States. Meanwhile, the United States’ first few turns of building usually go to transports and defensive warships, which don’t have any effect on Germany until after they unload in Europe. If you can distract the US intensely enough at the right time, then you can give Germany the time it needs to crush Russia without sacrificing much position in Asia. By building mostly infantry and fighters, you can force the US to attack you, which usually requires a higher income – but after Japan conquers China and Alaska, they’re earning at least as much cash as the US (36 IPCs / turn).

      What kind of middlegame can you expect?

      Japan will have a somewhat smaller economy than most games – even as late as turn 6, Japan might only be collecting 40 ipcs, and you won’t have much in the way of stored-up armies, either. However, Germany should be huge – either about to capture Moscow, or marching tanks all over the map from Archangel to the Congo, or both. You’ll need to find the right moment to abandon your Alaskan adventure and go beat up on India or help finish off Moscow.

      SKIPPERS OF THE SOUTH PACIFIC

      What is it?

      If you get bogged down on land but your navy is in solid control of the South Pacific, you can take advantage of the extra mobility of your marines to vacuum up territories across a wide area, making the Allies’ land-based garrisons irrelevant.

      What should you build?

      Transports. At least 6 transports, together with a couple of bombers, several infantry, and a few artillery. You won’t need more than your one starting tank (for South Africa). If you can afford it, a factory in the East Indies can be useful for this opening – because it’s 3 spaces away from Japan, and more or less in the direction of your targets, an East Indies factory can resupply your transports a full turn earlier than normal.

      How should you attack?

      Priority one is to clear the South Pacific of Allied boats. No destroyers, no subs, definitely no carriers – send out your planes, send out your subs, and kill them all. Priority two is to drop enough infantry into mainland east Asia to hold the line and create at least a little bit of presure on India – if Britain feels totally safe in India, they’ll start building subs or bombers there, which can wreck your plans. Basically, you want Britain to feel that they can hold India if they build 3 infantry there, but that they’ll lose India if they build 3 subs. Think of suppressive fire – you’re not trying to kill India; you just want to make sure India stays down, under cover, where they can’t shoot at you. Priority three is to launch your transports and start hoovering up Allied cash – take Australia, Madagascar, New Zealand, South Africa, Brazil, Hawaii, British West Africa, and anything else you can get away with, roughly in that order. If your landing site is undefended, you can spread out for a turn or two to adjacent territories (e.g., Rhodesia, or the Congo). If the Allies somehow manage to ship in reinforcements, don’t bother to stay and fight – just pick up your dudes and move on to the next undefended target. Note that the priorities are listed in order of importance, not in order of time – you’ll need to start moving transports out on turn 1, but if you don’t have enough cash to accomplish all three priorities, then transport-construction is the place to skimp.

      When should you use this opening?

      This opening works well when the Allies over-commit to defending Siberia, China, and/or India. If you see Russia move two infantry and two tanks to the east, or if you see Britain build tanks in India and fly planes to Gibraltar, it’s time to think about letting the Allies keep central Asia and eating up the Allied economy on other parts of the map.

      Why does it work?

      The southern hemisphere is just woefully undefended on the starting map setup – you’ve got one British infantry in South Africa trying to defend 6 different territories with no navy and no air support, Brazil is literally empty, and the only Allied factory that can resupply any of those places is in India. Keep India busy, and the rest of the southern hemisphere falls. Granted, the southern territories aren’t super-valuable – you’ll be picking off a lot of $1 and $2 provinces. Together, though, they add up, and Germany is likely to get off to an excellent start while the Allied garrison is wasting its time in Central Asia defending against a Japanese attack that you don’t need to launch and won’t ever have to launch.

      What kind of middlegame can you expect?

      A long one. This opening will create an economic advantage for both Germany and Japan – you could be collecting 95+ IPCs per turn by turn 6 – but none of the Allied capitals will be in any special danger, and this opening doesn’t create any real opportunities to crush large Allied armies. The Allied forces in central Asia will be out of position in the opening, but they won’t be killed or stranded, so they can fall back to Moscow and render excellent service later in the game.

      (continued below)

      posted in Axis & Allies 1942 2nd Edition
      A
      Argothair
    • RE: Bombardments - no Incentive to invest in BBs and CAs?

      Well it’s not the one-shot rule that anyone is complaining about; I think everybody here agrees that BBs and CAs should only get one round of bombardments per battle. The question is whether an infantry that gets hits by that bombardment should be allowed to return fire.

      And as far as CA & DD in pairs, again, that ignores the way that BBs can soak a free hit.

      Let’s say you buy 6 CA & 6 DD to attack me, and I buy 5 BB, 1 DD, 2 SS to defend. You can expect to inflict an average of 5 hits, and I expect to inflict an average of 4 hits. As you say, a slim attack advantage for your fleet – but only on the first round of battle. After the first round, 4 of your DDs are dead, but all of my ships are still in the fight.

      Now you have 6 CA + 2 DD = 22 pips of offense, against my 5 damaged BB + 1 DD + 2 SS = 24 pips of defense. Suppose you roll slightly above-average and score your 4 hits, and I roll average and score my 4 hits. Now you have 4 CA left, against my 4 damaged BB. Clearly at this point my fleet outclasses yours, and you should expect to lose the battle if average luck continues.

      Pairing CAs with DDs might be the way to get max value out of CAs, but that certainly doesn’t mean you should routinely purchase them – the maximum value you can get out of a CA is still noticeably less than the maximum value you can get out of other ships.

      posted in Axis & Allies Global 1940
      A
      Argothair
    • RE: Russian Supplies Idea

      @TheDesertFox I agree with you, and I’ve been designing my mods accordingly. My Balanced Mod for the Anniversary (ww2v3) map has three explicit Russian lend-lease objectives for Archangel, Persia, Vladivostok, and their respective sea zones, and they don’t incorporate any xenophobia that cancels the objectives if the Western Allies have boots or planes on Russian soil.

      I’m expecting my latest map, WW2v3 Deluxe, to come out this weekend. It’s inspired by some of vodot’s hard copy map changes, and it includes direct ‘gifts’ of specific Russian units (artillery, tanks, and AA guns) based on control of the lend-lease routes.

      More broadly, do keep in mind that the Soviet Union can’t be reliably powerful enough to beat Germany all on their own if you want a competitive game. If the Soviets are a match for the Germans, then the UK is certainly a match for Italy and the US is a match for Japan, so the Axis will lose essentially every time. The Germans have to be able to kill the Russians in most 1v1 matchups (maybe not easily, and not all the time, but at least most of the time); otherwise the game stops being balanced.

      posted in Axis & Allies Global 1940
      A
      Argothair
    • RE: Axis & Allies balance problems …

      @SS-GEN Can you say a little more about your logic, SS Gen? You’re touching on some interesting ideas, but I don’t think I understand why anyone would need to remove some of the starting transports.

      posted in Axis & Allies Discussion & Older Games
      A
      Argothair
    • RE: Five of the Japanese Openings

      NINJA TURTLE DEFENSE

      What is it?

      Sometimes Japan just needs to dig in and defend itself, without worrying about grand strategic objectives on other parts of the map. This opening will show you how.

      What should you build?

      2-3 transports, 6-8 fighters, 2-3 destroyers, and lots of infantry. Hold off on building carriers until you really need them – they’re not useful for attacking mainland Asia, and they’re vulnerable to large wolf packs of submarines if the US sees you building them far enough in advance to build the wolf pack. You can plop down an (extra) pair of carriers in sea zone 62 immediately before the US attacks and land fighters from Tokyo directly on the newly-built carriers, blocking off most of the decent US attack routes. Avoid building any factories, because factories create a second choke point that you have to defend (other than Tokyo) from an American invasion.

      How should you attack?

      As with the Polar Express opening, you want to make smart, opportunistic trades in East Asia. Gaining income from extra territories is nice, but only if it’s going to pay off quickly enough to help you hold Tokyo – there’s no sense in losing 10 IPCs’ worth of units to gain a 1 IPC-territory when the big battle for Tokyo will be on turn 6 or 7. Also, you’re not trying to conquer any territory in particular, but you do want to wipe out Allied forces in the region at minimal cost to yourself. If you can keep the British cooped up in India and force the Americans to rely exclusively on what they can bring in by transport, then you’ll have an easier time defending.

      When should you use this opening?

      Don’t be too easily intimidated – if America plonks down one extra carrier in the Pacific, that by itself doesn’t mean that they’re going to be able to shut you down or even that they’re necessarily going to try to kill you – it could be a bluff, or a mistake, or some odd tactic that’s not immediately apparent. If America attacks Japan on its own, without any support from Britain or Russia, you should be able to sink the American fleet at a profit, even without any special defensive tactics. On the other hand, if you see that Britain is shifting Egyptian troops over to India, and Russia is shifting troops from Moscow / Caucasus into China, and America is moving ships out of the Atlantic and into the Pacific, then you have a problem, and you need to stop thinking about how to conquer Asia and start thinking about how to stay alive as long as possible. If the Allies have a bid, consider using this opening when you see a British sub in the Indian Ocean, a bid of more than one infantry in China, infantry in Hawaii, and/or an extra ship or extra fighter off the coast of Hawaii.

      Why does it work?

      If all three Allies (or Britain and America with token help from Russia) are focused on attacking Japan, then all you have to do is survive and avoid gifting the Allies a mainland factory, and Germany should be able to beat up Russia and run away with the game.

      What kind of middlegame can you expect?

      Japan is going to be small and under siege, with probably only a couple of territories under control beyond Tokyo itself, and a large stack of infantry and fighters defending Tokyo. Germany should be enormous, occupying both Africa and Siberia and starting to put pressure on India. Your goal as Japan is to continue to stay alive as long as possible, re-taking some of your territories or sinking some Allied transports when you see a good opportunity to do so without losing your capital.

      CONCLUSION

      So, that’s five Japanese openings! Did I forget your favorite opening? Can you think of a way to execute one of these five openings more effectively, or a reason why one of these openings is doomed to failure? Let me know in the comments!

      posted in Axis & Allies 1942 2nd Edition
      A
      Argothair
    • RE: Argo's Middleweight Map for 1939 & 1942

      @Black_Elk said in Argo's Middleweight Map for 1939 & 1942:

      So my eye darts around from Sweden to Arabia to South America etc, because that is where the highest value contrasts are occuring.

      Ohh! OK, now I see what you were getting at. Yeah, you’re right, land vs. sea is an important place for contrast, and Axis vs. Allied is an important place for contrast, and relative to that neutral vs. impassible vs. owned is not a very important place for contrast, so it doesn’t make sense to use white for neutral or black for impassible or a greyish blue for the sea. Better would be grey for neutral, beige for impassible, and a very light, crisp cyan for the sea. Easy enough to fix!

      posted in Other Axis & Allies Variants
      A
      Argothair
    • RE: What to do with the bid?

      I’ve never understood why people get so excited about attacking Tobruk. It’s worth 0 IPCs, you’re not destroying any enemy planes, the units in Tobruk aren’t immediately threatening to attack anything except Alexandria (which is also worth 0 IPCs), and in general if you can kill the Italian ships (and you can) then the Italian units in north Africa will be stuck there doing nothing important for the entire game. You can go the entire game without ever actually needing to kill those units. I don’t understand why people would want to kill them on turn 1, let alone why people would want to place a bid with the idea of killing them.

      I suspect people just like recreating the Second Battle of El Alamein, or they feel itchy about having enemy units near what they see as “their” turf. I really can’t see any strategic purpose.

      posted in Axis & Allies Global 1940
      A
      Argothair
    • RE: Grand Plans, 3rd Edition?

      Any word on whether the publishers plan to crack down on TripleA after they get their paid platform up? Or on whether they plan to offer a map editor, scenario editor, or automated tournament ladder for AAOnline?

      posted in Axis & Allies 1942 Online
      A
      Argothair
    • RE: Five of the Japanese Openings

      Thanks, Innohub! That makes a lot of sense. I’m imagining something like this:

      J1: Build East Indies Factory and 1 transport, save $8, move starting transports to Yunnan with troops from Tokyo. Start marching troops from Kwantung, Indochina, and Malaya toward India via Yunnan and Burma. Attack Anhwei mostly with troops from Manchuria, leaving 2 inf in Kiangsu.
      J2: Build 2 inf + 2 art in East Indies and 2 bombers in Tokyo, move Burma transports to Kiangsu & Philippines to pick up troops and drop them off in Burma, move new Tokyo transport to Burma with remaining Tokyo troops. March units from Indochina and Yunnan into Burma.
      J3: Use all 3 transports to ferry 4 inf, 2 art from East Indies to India together with support from BBs while also attacking India from Burma and with help from new bombers in Tokyo.

      Total army is approx. 14 inf, 6 art, 1 tnk, 4 ftr, 2 bmbr, 2 BBs.

      If the British build 2 inf, 1 ftr in India on rounds 1, 2, and 3, and they move in every available troop from Egypt through Burma to defend India (minus a loss of 1 infantry to a G1 attack on Trans-Jordan), that still only leaves them with 12 inf, 1 art, 1 tnk, 4 ftr, 1 AA gun to defend India on round 3.

      Odds on that battle are 98.9% in favor of the Japanese! Even adding in two Russian tanks and one American fighter as emergency reinforcements, odds are still 84% for the Japanese. I like those odds. I look forward to giving it a try the next time a British player gives me the opportunity! Taking India on round 3 would be a great way to accelerate the Japanese expansion – and since it leaves you with 3 transports, some planes, and a decent position in China, you really don’t have to sacrifice that much to get there. Thanks for showing me a new way to look at the East Indies factory. :-)

      posted in Axis & Allies 1942 2nd Edition
      A
      Argothair
    • RE: Argo's Middleweight Map for 1939 & 1942

      Early draft of unit chart. Note that artillery does not boost infantry, flak is not limited to non-combat move, transports are not defenseless, subs do not submerge, etc, fighters do not escort or intercept bombers – unless explicitly mentioned on the chart, special unit rules will not apply. This should help simplify the rules and allow newer players to enjoy the game even though there are more tiles and more unit types compared to Revised.

      076c397a-696a-487a-882b-144e54d3196d-image.png

      posted in Other Axis & Allies Variants
      A
      Argothair
    • RE: UK Strategy -"Middle Earth"

      @Pinch1 Meh. It takes 10 seconds for you to tell me to give it a try; it takes 10 hours for me to test your ideas in one game of Global, and even then, if I get crushed, you could call it a fluke. I’ve never met you and I have no reason to trust your judgment. If you really want other people to give it a try, why not respond in detail to my concerns? If you don’t care very much, then that’s fine; we can agree to disagree – it’s just a game.

      posted in Axis & Allies Global 1940
      A
      Argothair
    • RE: Grand Plans, 3rd Edition?

      @Black_Elk said in Grand Plans, 3rd Edition?:

      I mean I guess we got the defenseless transport and the new bombing mechanics, more expensive tanks, and a cruiser unit that nobody buys, but they also ditched the tech and national advantages from Revised

      You’re really selling it, Black_Elk! Tell us what else you like about 1942.2! :-)

      posted in Axis & Allies 1942 Online
      A
      Argothair
    • RE: Larry Harris Semi-Official Tournament Game Patch

      It’s not that surprising that the 1942.3 setup would be roughly balanced…it’s adding 14 points of units to the Allies, and subtracting 6 points from the Axis, for a total of a 20 point swing, which is comparable to the bids being offered in competitive 1942.2 play.

      What I dislike about the new setup is that beyond securing a rough balance between the factions,  the new setup does very little to address what I see as 1942.2’s major weaknesses:
      () the irrelevance of the periphery, e.g. Norway, Anzac, Brazil, South Africa, Urals
      (
      ) the direct pipeline from Tokyo through China to Moscow
      () an un-thematic, un-imaginative repeat of Pearl Harbor that leaves the US without any good reasons to fight near Midway, the Solomons, New Guinea, or any of the other 1942-era Pacific flashpoints.
      (
      ) the near-total absence of counterplay for the UK, US, and China in the first three rounds. The Allies need at least that much time to stockpile infantry and rebuild their fleets, which can be slow and boring work. Adding extra infantry to India doesn’t exactly scream “fear my clever counter-attack.” I get that the Axis start the game on offense in 1942, but it shouldn’t be a 100%-0% split. The Allies should have some options somewhere on the board in at least some openings for a plausible early counterattack, and I just don’t see it.

      Also, for what it’s worth, I have now been waiting for over ten days for Larry Harris to approve my comment on his website.

      posted in Axis & Allies 1942 2nd Edition
      A
      Argothair
    • RE: Argo's Middleweight Map for 1939 & 1942

      So I’m running into some difficulty, and I’m open to advice. At this point the map file is a .png file, as required for the TripleA map editor utilities; it’s not a vector file. That means that I can’t easily expand the size of the map (in pixels) while keeping the borders one-pixel wide, as required by the utilities.

      Unfortunately, many of the smaller territories are not wide enough to accommodate even one or two unit types – the units are 35 pixels wide, so even though the map as a whole is several thousand pixels wide, smaller territories like Greece, Malta, Denmark, Kiev, etc. are just not capable of displaying a mixed army without spilling over way into other territories in a horrible mess. It’s not just one or two territories, and if I merged all of the smaller territories then this map would no longer faithfully represent my vision.

      How have other map designers tackled this problem? Anyone have any creative ideas? I could start from scratch with a new vector file, but I would lose dozens of hours of work, even if I used this map as sort of a sketch to guide me.

      posted in Other Axis & Allies Variants
      A
      Argothair
    • RE: UK Strategy -"Middle Earth"

      @randyshervandyke That is profoundly weird and possibly the most effective/exciting new strategy to hit the meta-game since Dark Skies, and I am really looking forward to your video. Happy Holidays and good luck with the overtime!

      posted in Axis & Allies Global 1940
      A
      Argothair
    • RE: Grand Plans, 3rd Edition?

      @Black_Elk said in Grand Plans, 3rd Edition?:

      But then the trick is broad adoption, which seems like it only ever comes with some sort of official nod.

      I’m not sure that’s totally accurate! I think we as a community of players underestimate ourselves. I know that the friends I game with are usually willing to try mods that I’ve designed, and I’m willing to try theirs. Corpo42 has hosted a Bay Area Anniversary tournament with some modest rule changes for the last two years that’s drawn broad attendance, and SiredBlood in Orange County made his own Global 40-esque map and ruleset and tech tree for a tournament that also got good attendance. Balanced Mod 3.0 currently sees about as much play as OOB Global 40, and several years ago I believe New World Order (another unofficial map) was one of the most commonly played games on TripleA. So when people make good games, I think other people are usually pretty willing to play them.

      One place where I do see the community lacking is in organization and consensus-building. The people who are interested in house rules (myself included!) spend a lot more time creating their personal favorite versions and arguing about them on the forums than they do systematically playtesting and reviewing other people’s mods. You don’t really see “committees” set up to design games very often, much less committees set up to vote on or approve new games as “semi-official.”

      In my opinion, that’s what it would take to shift games even further away from OOB toward games that are more responsive to player feedback: if we’re not going to be dependent on the Word of God from Avalon Hill or Larry Harris or whatever, then we need to rely on the Word of the Majority from some sort of board or committee or general membership that has high enough status/prestige within the community that they can say “this game is official” and the game becomes accepted as a result. People might follow the board’s leadership if the board is full of very high quality players and designers, or if the board pumps a lot of energy into organizing leagues and tournaments, or if the board includes skilled programmers and artists who can make very pretty games, or if people see that the board is using a thorough, fair, transparent review process to evaluate new game designs, or some combination of the above.

      Right now, though, we don’t even have the beginnings of that kind of Board – the people running their various regional tournaments aren’t even trying to coordinate their rules, and the people running the axisandallies.org League are totally agnostic about house rules (you can play a league game with whatever house rules people do or don’t agree to), and the people maintaining the tripleA software are running a neutral platform that can accommodate any and all game designs…so nobody’s really even trying to develop a “moral counterweight” to Larry Harris’s moral authority as one of the original designers.

      I think we could wait until the stars grow cold for someone like Larry Harris or an Avalon Hill executive to officially bless a variant Axis & Allies game – if they were interested in acting on constructive criticism, they could have fixed their mainline map on any of their last three tries. They’ve got no special need to listen to feedback from die-hard fans like the people who post on this forum, because they’re making good money from ongoing sales to casual players, and they’re generally well-respected in the community. If we want a new and improved mainline map to catch on more broadly than with just a local group of friends, we will have to do the hard work of building a consensus around that map by ourselves, without help from the corporate owners of the intellectual property.

      posted in Axis & Allies 1942 Online
      A
      Argothair
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
    • 6
    • 10
    • 11
    • 4 / 11