Topics created by Bardoly

@Bardoly:

My main point though, is that giving techs for free is definitely a house rule, while allowing one’s opponent to pay 5 IPCs and you assume that the tech die that he rolls is automatically a “6” and then his Chart 1/2 die is automatically forseen, is more of a gentleman’s agreement rather than a house rule, and as such, could possibly be allowed in League play.

Whether it’s a light beer or a wheat beer or a pilsner beer, it’s still a BEER.

In other words, I am pretty sure any gentlemens agreement is still a house rule, and would technically be against any league play rules.  Sorry  :cry:

no bids.  42 is balanced.

@templeton:

@Cmdr:

All this tech does is allow you to keep your artillery safely behind the lines - you know, where artillery is in REAL LIFE?

Counter battery fire is what tends to get artillery… anway at the scale of Axis and Allies this would make it more effective than MRLS!

We’ve used this rule in AARe and AA50e (enhanced) and it does not seem overly powerful.

As for realism, think of it as your guns have twice the range of their guns.  So you can hit them and they cannot hit you.

@Funcioneta:

Yep, I see. I think you should be allowed deploy the bid in any territory you had, empty or not. Also in any friendly coastal territory

That would open up other bid options…why limit them?
I, however, don’t get to make the league rules

At home, we have no such limitations.

I will usually only build extra naval units with Germany if there is some sort of core to build them around. Be that a surviving cruiser or battleship. If I still have one of these in turn two or three I might build some subs or even a destroyer. Also the casualty rate on the Eastern Front cant be too high, because then I will buy extra land units instead.

So basically, it depends on how well the Allies play and how well my navy holds up. Its a opportunistic investment at best and I never considered it a feasible strategy for Germany really.

let them land where-ever, but you could base their attack/move values on where they take off from.  if from a carrier, they act like a naval fighter, if from land, then a normal air force fighter….

well id say a PB should be a 4-3-3-17 and can bombard takes 2 hits to sink. i justife the attack because germanys PB had armour of a HC but had guns of a BB

@U-505:

Second, the logical progression after attacking Phil is to go to Australia(J2) and then to India(J3) and then to Africa(J4). It’s hard for me to wrap my head around what happens if you don’t attack Phil on J1, but you still go for India and Phil on J2. Australia is still in UK hands at the end of J2 so in order to take it you’re either going backwards from India or if you push on to Africa from India then you’re looking at buying a lot more TP’s than just the 1 or 2 I usually buy with Japan because most of your initial TP’s will be too far away to come back and start landing units from Japan. And that seems costly considering you earned 7 IPC’s less than you would if you had taken Phil on J1.

If I don’t attack Philipines J1, I buy 2 tpts.  Those Tpts can take on Philipines J2, leaving all the other tpts freedom to do whatever they want.  By stationing in sz37, taking Burma, Japan will have 4 transports, loaded carrier, BB, CA in range of Australia J2 (Unless UK blocks).  Ground unit wise, at least 3 inf + whatever is left in Burma to australia J2.  The threat to hit India with the same units and 3 ftrs in FIC makes the UK units run for the hills, so you pretty much walk into India J2 AND take australia without being blocked from Australia by one silly UK DD (if you go to Philipines).

By being in SZ37, you threaten so many spots, the allies really can’t afford to try and hold anything very strongly and their best/safest course of action is to withdraw safely, most likely to persia.  Even there, JApan can hit with east indies and burma units + 2 ftrs or maybe another 2 ftrs if italy/germany take TRJ.

It’s not a pretty scenario for the allies.  Of course, the allies can get lucky and hurt Japan by doing well in Burma (3 inf, art vs UK inf), but the same can be said of the US inf hurting that same force J1.

@Cmdr:

You need better opponents.

Yes, thats what I’m trying to get here, first you had to postpone, and then U-505 is not sure if he can play live games…   :|

I would still like to play against some of the better players on this forum to see their allied strats.

Well said!

I agree with your rational, but I do feel that Paratroopers belong in the game.  I don’t know the solution though.  Perhaps they could only be used in attacks where at least 1 other unit is also attacking the same territory by land or by sea.  (I would make an exception for islands and perhaps undefended territories.)

I like the original idea.  However, I’d also raise the price of the Industrial Complex to 18 IPC. Maybe even as much as 20 IPC.  You’ll recoup that over the next few rounds from increased income from the territory, and you are, in effect, increasing the power of that Industrial Complex by a factorial.  Instead of 2 tanks, you can put out 3 tanks.  Instead of 3 infantry, you can put out 3 infantry and a fighter.  Etc.

And yes, this will most likely help Japan way more then any other nation.  Though, the S. African IC will be a lot more powerful now, if you go that route. mwuhahahaha