Posts made by Bardoly

Has anyone looked at Japan’s first buy being 3 Research tokens and 1 transport?

My friends and I play with a minor house rule for tech as follows:  Instead of rolling 1 die to see which random tech you receive (after having rolled a “6” of course), roll as many dice as you had research tokens, and then choose which tech you want from the numbers shown on the dice.  Using this method helps ensure that you don’t get a fairly useless tech (such as America or Japan getting Radar).

Using this rule, there is a pretty decent chance of Japan getting Long Range Aircraft on the first turn, and that would drastically modify Japan’s first turn.  Japan could then completely destroy the entire US Pacific fleet, knock out UK’s Indian fleet, and take all 3 of its National Objectives while still leaving no easily picked off transports or ships.  This would also leave you in the position to either hit Alaska, Australia, and/or India on the second turn.  You should also receive about 46-47 IPC at the end of your turn.

I realize that Japan may not get Long Range with this buy, but even if he doesn’t, Japan can still do a pretty traditional turn.

I agree, Iceland was a valuable territory in WWII due to its location.  Iceland wanted to be neutral, but UK took control of it to prevent Germany from taking it.  I believe that it should be worth at least 1 IPC, and I would even be willing to give Germany a bonus (perhaps +3 IPCs or a bonus to German ships in Atlantic sea zones such as +1 to Sub attack or defense or something like that) for controlling it.

Thanks for the timely response.

1 situation with 2 different questions

Situation:  On Germany’s first turn, he decides to build an Aircraft Carrier and land 2 Fighters on it causing him to have 1 Sub, 1 Cruiser, 1 Transport, 1 Aircraft Carrier, and 2 Fighters.  He also killed the UK Battleship/Transport and the nearby Destroyer, so the only units which can attack his fleet are the UK Bomber and the 2 UK Fighters.

First question:  Can Russia build 1 Battleship and 1 Sub at Karelia and place them in the Baltic Sea, and then on Englands turn, when the UK Bomber and 2 Fighters attack, may the 2 Russian ships join in the Battle?

Second question:  Russia builds 2 Aircraft Carriers at Karelia and place them in the Baltic Sea, and then suppose UK rolls tech and gets Long Range Aircraft.  UK then lands his 3 Fighters (2 from England and 1 from Egypt) on the Russian Aircraft Carriers, and then on America’s turn, suppose that he also rolled tech and got Long Range Aircraft, and then he lands the Eastern US Fighter on the Russian Aircraft Carrier.  On Germany’s turn, he may choose to attack or reatreat.  If he attacks, what do the UK and US Fighters do?  Do they defend, or are they just cargo with no defense.  I realize that this is a contrived and unlikely situation, but something vaguely like this may happen because of Germany and Karelia sharing a sea zone.

Thanks for any help with these questions.

Ok, thanks for the info.

Thank you for your answer.

You are right.  The German player made some bad moves and got some bad rolls, and dice fell the Allies way a little more than the Axis.

What do y’all think about this house rule for technologies.

My friends and I really like playing with techs, but we hate the thought of just spending money but getting absolutely nothing for it or getting a tech which is almost useless (i.e. America rolling Radar), so we modified the new AA50 tech system, and this is what we came up with.

Use the normal AA50 rules for tech to see if you receive a tech by rolling a “6”.
After you roll a “6” and choose the Land chart or the Air/Naval chart, you roll 1 die for each of your research tokens, and then you may choose the tech you would like to receive from the numbers that your dice show.  For example, if you paid for 3 Research Tokens, and then you finally roll a “6”, and you choose the Air/Naval chart, then you roll 3 dice, and you roll a “4”, a “5”, and a “6”, then you may choose what you would like from the following:  Shipyards, Super Subs, or Jet Fighters.  If you happened to roll 3 “5’s”, then God must have wanted you to get Super Subs.

We like this system, but what do y’all think?

@Imperious:

we are currently playing….

Playing AA50 already?

Yes, I currently live in China, but we have a group of Americans who like to play Axis & Allies, and we already have an older version of Axis and Allies for the pieces.  Here in China, we can print a nice full-sixe or larger gameboard out for about $5-6, so we did that for the AAHE, and we liked it, but we like the new map for AA50 better.  We already played 1 game, and the Alies won handily (The Axis conceeded after 7 rounds.), but that was because Germany lost all of his Air Force by the second turn, UK built and held an Indian IC which was never taken, and Russia got Mechanized Infantry.

We ARE planning to buy AA50 the next time one of us returns to America.

A question about transports in combat.

Here is the situation.

Turn 1 England moves an unescorted Transport to Sea Zone 12 in the Atlantic next to Gibraltar and offloads troops in Gibraltar.  On Italy’s turn, can he move his entire fleet from Italy to Sea Zone 12 and get 2 Shore Bombard shots (a “4” from his Battleship and a “3” from his Cruiser) and attack Gibraltar with 2 land troops (a man and a tank) and have the UK transport distroyed?

Please answer this, because this is an actual situation in a game we are currently playing.

@Atlantikwall:

@Bardoly:

because Germany may hold Gibraltar until the end of the game.

Sorry, this is complete nonsense. Gibraltar borders sz12 (AZO) in the new map and therefore it is easyly accessible for both UK and USA. You would loose it very quick!

I diagree with you.  I DO agree that it would not be too difficult for the Allies to take it back, but I think that it would be one of those things where there would always be something better to do than take back a 0 IPC territory.

Exactly what are the differences in Subs from Revised to AA50?

Did I read somewhere that they would only get their preemptive shots in the first round of combat?

IL,
I do agree with you that if the Jet Fighter tech were to only raise the Fighter’s defence by 1, then it is much too weak.  That’s why I think it would be more appropriate if the Jet Fighter tech in addition to the +1 to defence, giving them -1 to AA fire seems to “balance” the tech so that if I get this tech, then I won’t feel so disappointed.  I would also be okay with raising the attack by +1 instead of defence but still with the -1 to AA fire.  Players would probably be more happy about gaing +1 to attack than to defence.  I just feel that giving them +1 to both attack and defence is a little too strong.

I had another thought.  Considering the speed of the Jet Fighters, why not keep their attack and defence the same, but give them 2 shots on defence, similar to heavy bombers 2 shots on offence.  I personally would rather roll 2 “4’s” on defence than 1 “5”, and even though it would be strong, I don’t think it would make it too powerful.  What do you think?

Some of you say that the Jet Fighters should get immunity to AA fire.  I somewhat agree with you, but I think that instead of immunity, the Jet Fighters should get a -1 to all AA rolls against them which gives them immunity to non-Radar AA rolls, but if an opponent has Radar, then instead of him hitting on a “2”, the Jet Fighters would lower it by 1 to a “1”.  I don’t think blanket immunity is a good thing, but considering how often Jet Fighters will be attacking Radar, it will almost be immunity.

As far as raising Attack to a “4” or Defence to a “5”, I feel that either would be okay, but having both would be too strong.  I feel that raising defence is probably more appropriate, but raising Attack is more fun, in that if I were rolling tech, and I got Jet Fighters, then I would probably always be more happy about a raise in Attack rather than a raise in defence.

What about Germany taking Gibraltar on the first turn?  Then if Italy can take Egypt OR Transjordan, then he should get 21 or 22 IPC at the end of his first turn because of getting both of his 5 IPC bonuses.  Of course taking Egypt is much better, not only because of the IPC difference, but also because of taking away England’s bonus, but it may not be feasible on Italy’s first turn.  I realize that the UK bomber can take out the German tansport, but the tradeoff may be worth it, because Germany may hold Gibraltar until the end of the game.

@Krieghund:

Last one:

@Lynxes:

Soviet Union

• (Control of all at least four out of: Finland, Baltic States, East Poland, Poland, Czechoslovakia/Hungary, Roumania/Bulgaria and/ or Balkans) = 10 IPCs (we know the Soviets have a 10 IPC bonus, but the details are not known)

10 IPCs if Allied powers control at least three of the following: Norway, Finland, Poland, Bulgaria/Romania, Czechoslovakia/Hungary and/or Balkans.

All of the National Objectives are now complete.

Thank you Krieghund!

Timerover51,
I agree, Cruisers should not have the SAME abilities as AA guns.  That’s why I limited the AA shot to 1 per Cruiser, with a maximun number of shots equal to the number of attacking air units, with the attacker chhoosing the casualties.

Sorry for being off-topic, but when I first posted in this thread, I was trying to find out what others feel about the Radar tech.  I feel that it is too weak as is.

What do y’all think?  Radar is too weak?  Too powerful?  Just right?

It would have been interesting to have given it to Italy, but have no troops on it in the opening setup.

@Admiral:

AA guns are already overpowered to begin with… The radar tech makes them absurdly effective.

Putting my gripes about AA guns aside, I think all nations can benefit from this tech. Russia, Germany, Italy, and the UK for obvious reasons. As for Japan, building a few beefed up AA guns and shipping them the key islands, can really put a wrench in the Allies plans. Think of the headaches the US would have if they were unable to take islands because all of their planes have been shot down (or they are afraid of their planes being shot down). Also, radar guns on a few islands would make a pacific paratrooper campaign REALLY risky- if not impossible. They would have to put more money into land units, meaning that their navy would be less powerful, meaning Japan could put up a better fight in the Pacific… you get the idea.

The benefit of AA guns for the USA is less clear however. The first thing that comes to mind for me is shipping a few AA guns to Europe. For example, replacing the AA gun in England with an American Radar AA gun which would really help the UK player. Also, the Americans could install a radar gun in France and/ or Northwest Europe, making it much more difficult for the Germans to take those territories back.

As for adding AA capabilities to ships… Man, I would lose it if a single cruiser shot down a bunch of planes in addition to its normal defense roll!!! I think this idea wouldn’t work. It effectively gives these units two or three defense rolls. It’s WAAAY too much… And to put this into a historical perspective, battleships, while powerful, were extremely vulnerable when faced by attacks by airplanes. Just think of the Yamato!! The mightiest warship of the second world war… sunk by an American fighter squadron which lost only a dozen men in the attack!

Okay fine, only give Cruisers AA ability.  Battleships are good enough as is.  But I don’t think you understood what I was saying.  I feel that the Radar tech is too weak, with little use for several countries, and I feel that Naval AA is something missing from Axis and Allies, so, you can kill 2 birds with 1 stone by allowing the Radar tech to upgrade a nation’s Cruisers.  In defensive situations (although I wouldn’t be opposed to allowing it in offensive situations as well),
each individual Cruiser would get 1 (and only 1) preemptive roll of the dice at a “1” not a “2” fired at the attacking Air units.  The attacker could still choose the casualties of course.  (If there were 2 Fighters and 2 Bombers attacking 2 Cruisers, then each Cruiser would roll 1 dice at a “1” (a total of 2 dice), and then if 1 of the 2 dice “hit”, then the attacker would probably choose a Fighter as a casualty leaving 1 Fighter and 2 Bombers to fight in Round 1 against the 2 Cruisers.  Round 1 would then proceed as normal, and in the following rounds, the Cruisers would NOT fire any AA shots.  If you had a situation where the defender had more Cruisers in total than the number of attacking Air units, then the total number of AA shots would be limited to the same number of attacking Air units.  (Example:  A fleet containing a total of 4 Air units attacks another fleet containing a total of 6 Cruisers.  The defender whould only roll 4 dice at “1’s”, NOT 6 dice at “1’s”.  I feel that this would help to make the Radar tech more valuable for the nations for which the current Radar tech doesn’t really help.  (Radar as is helps Germany and Russia some, but doesn’t help Japan and the US.  UK and Italy are kind of in the middle.  Radar upgrading Cruisers would help Japan and US the most, UK and Italy second, and Germany and Russia very little, so I think that this would be a balanced approach to the Radar tech.

Yes, but then there isn’t enough money in the game.  Perhaps if the IPC level of all territories was increased by 1, then there would be enough money in the game to collect money at the beginning of your turn rather than at the end of your turn.  That solution would also partially solve the problem of having too few locations with which one can build an IC because now every territory would be a minimum of a 2.

My friends and I printed out Blustroke’s Players’ Aid Map, and have played AA50 according to it, and the tech which seems absolutely too weak is Radar.  Both Japan and the US want techs from the Air/Naval Chart, but Radar is basically useless for them.  Even for the other players, Radar just doesn’t seem to be nearly as useful as ANY of the other Land or Air/Naval techs.

I believe that the Radar tech should give advantages to your navy as well.  Possibly by adding +1 to the attack/defense of each of your surface warships in the first round of battle only (even if you are neither attacking Air units nor defending against Air units).  This would fairly represent the advance warning the Radar would give you. (Radar worked also against ships, not only against Air units right?).  Or, another fix would be to ether give Cruisers AA ability (possibly only give each Cruiser 1 or 2 AA shots each, but with the maximum number of AA shots fired to be no more than the total number of attacking Air units) or to give Battleships and Cruisers each 1 AA shot (limited to no more than the total number of attacking plane).  The AA shots should be in addition to the Cruiser or Battleship’s nurmal roll of the dice for the battle.  Probably the AA shots should be preemptive, but it would still be okay with me if they were not (allowing the Cruiser or Battleship to roll both a “1” to only hit Air units and also roll a “3/4” to hit whatever).

What do y’all think?  Radar is too weak?  Radar is too powerful?  Radar is just right?