Posts made by Axel Allie

As far as I and my girlfriend know, I’m male  8-)

@triforce:

When I play the cpu on triplea, i usually play a 12 city game, just cause its fun, and it dosen’t take as long.  Besides a Japan that makes more that 100 ipc a turn is just a ton of fun.  2 battleships a turn baby.  Just because I can!Â

that’s true…

the cpu doesn’t have the problem of looking at your massive buys, while he is in agony about the very few and little moves he can do next.
I love it, too :-P

I would have said I always play with the OM…

but, that’s not true!
we play A&AR without techs…
and actually, if you come to think of it… that’s a house rule as well! (to play WITHOUT them)…

so, triforce? do you play with or without techs?

2 IC’s in J1 is not a good move, I think…

1 of the 2 IC’s will be temting to attack for some allies.
if J loses one of them? this means another turn to take it back and on the following turn the possibility to build there again…
that’s 2 rounds of inactivity…

@Flush:

you should be able to size up the board and realize you have lost. once your chance has passed you are painfully “rolling out.”

yep, that’s what I’m thinking, too.
the trouble is: some people like to see this “rolling out”

@B.:

[What if DDs were able to shore bombard on a 2?
[/quote]

you mean like in a tech, a national advantage or is it a house rule?

We never play with techs, national advantages or house rules, so this is a question that is irrelevant for me.
but I think DD would be of more interest then :-)

There are so many ways you can upgrade the one or the other:
I can state it the other way around:
what if a BB can defend on a 5?

:-P

wow,

no one even prefers low or no luck!
15 votes so far, ZERO for low luck and ZERO for no luck

A couple of friends recently played A&A.

One of them was a newbie and the other one has played revised 3 times.
The first played Allies, the latter played Axis.
Since Allies have a great advantage in A&A without a bid for the Axis, but with the fact that the player for the Allies was a newbie…
they played without a bid!

Guess who won?
the Allies!
well, I have to say, the person who did play A&AR before can use some good strategies (you can not say he is a pro in the game yet)

but still!!! If even a newbie can win as Allies in A&A - even without a bid?
:-o
then the game MUST be pretty unbalanced.
and yes: both got very good dice sometimes, but very bad dice as well!

If you have a bid of 6 and you don’t want to place that extra inf (meaning 3 IPC’s left)…

can you give all 6 IPC’s to the germen/japanese bank, too?
meaning - not spending anything of it before purchases being made?
or do you have to pre-place half the amount?

@Flush:

we have always played until someone concedes defeat. there is no point putting a player through the agony of “rolling it out”

Some people love it when they have MASSIVE armies against each other…
If one is ready to collapse? they start building inf over and over again.
So, in this case it would be possible to look at 40 infantry to take over UK…  :roll: :|
I only know of such games, but never played one like that before.
We always stop when it’s getting pretty obvious :-P

So, we never play VC’s any more! We just play untill someone resigns.

@triforce:

I’ll I’m saying is that I don’t have any trouble winning when I play the Axis.  In 2nd I did.  Thats my point.  I think bids are silly, and I think that Low No Luck is for whiners.

No, I think it is for people who like chess more than they like A&A® and hope to get something in between!

thx ncscswitch!

so, nothing new, then :-P

@JamesG:

I voted Real Dice, though I don’t despise low/no luck as some others on the board do.  I think they are all valid ways to play, I just prefer the variable results generated by real dice.  But I don’t share the view that the low/no luck players are playing a lesser version of the game.  Just different.

you could mark 2 votes as yours…
the 2 most preferable ways of play, in this case…

can some of you analyze this poll?

interesting, JamesG…

I’m always interested in some facts and figures…

I’m in for games with real dice!

I didn’t try “low luck” or “no luck”, but I don’t think I’ll ever try those systems…

@ncscswitch:

Even if you are CERTAIN to lose at least 1 FIG in battle does not matter.

When are you CERTAIN?
in a game with real dice, there is a REALLY, REALLY big chance you’ll lose it, but you are never CERTAIN :-P  :evil:

Like ncscswitch stated: no and low luck were a strat testing method originally…

what I’m suggesting: if you want to know what a bid should be for the Axis or the Allies?
then you should playtest - also known as strat testing - with no luck :-P

and since this would be a game of CA&AR (stands for Chess Axis & Allies Revised  8-)) you could play it on you own…
and at the end of some games: you’ll know what bid should be placed, if any…

have fun!
(you’ll need it :evil:)

@Sankt:

@triforce:

I guess my question is why no or low luck. What crybaby came up with that?

LOL. Can I quote you on that?  :lol:

you just did…

before I ever heard the exact rules of A&AR, I thought that a part of the combat sequence was like this:

1. the attacker attacks with his attacking dice
2. the defender defends with his defending dice
3. the defender attacks with his defending dice
4. the attacker defends with his attacking dice
5. casualties are taken from the board
   (…step 1 till 5 again…)

maybe a little feedback is needed?
say 4 fighters attack 3 infantry and 2 fighters?

1. the attacker rolls 4 dice. he rolls (as an example: 1,2,3,4) so 3 hits
2. the defender rolls his defense: infantry 2,5,6 and fighter 4,5 so he has defended 2 of his units good, but will lose one unit (the third hit he could not prevent by defending rolls)
3. the defender makes a counterattack with his defending dice (he is in his own territory, so he has an advantage…): he rolls 2,3,4 for inf and 4,6 for figs. so, 1 hit for the inf and 1 hit for the figs.
4. the attacker rolls for this counterattack and rolls a 3,4,5,6 so only one die (the ‘3’) is good for the attacker to prevent the damage sustained. another unit has to die…

you can see this is a whole other way of playing, and would make the game look more like “warhammer”
I just thought the game would be played this way, but since I know the rules, I know it’s not  :lol:
I’m not suggesting you should play this way…
you can always say every casualty has a “save” of a “1 on 6” or a “2 on 6” to prevent being lost and still stay in battle…
I know this rule would prolong battle, but sometimes people want this…
:-P