Posts made by BigBlocky

You pin head…… The guy has a problem playing his axis and allies CD game which runs on windows. Try reading the thread…

BB

Bashir, I’m not sure I’d build 2 transports on Japan’s second round, unless some of the existing transports are NOT getting 1 load/round into Asia (going for Australia or Africa right away).

My strong point is logistics, I always think of “Transport loads”, some people see 5 Inf, 2 tanks and an AA, I see 5.5 loads and a need to build an infantry or waste 1/2 a transport for 1 round.

The 2 transport, 3 Inf is a great build on R1. If I can, my transport moves are pick up ONE INF from the Phillippines, move the transport to Borneo and pick up that infantry, this is the only time in the game that move is a 'transport freebee" you’re not wasting a transport/turn going for a long voyage to fetch it. Both INF go to FIC. The INF left on Phil, Okinawa and wake islands are also freebies. A transport from Japan fetches 1 and pulls 1 from Japan to Manchuria.

In this way, Japan starts out with 8 Inf, a Tank and an AA (6 loads) that can efficiently be brought to Asia. The idea is to maximize the number of units your transport fleet can get to asia. Your first 2 transports take 2 loads to Asia, you build 1.5 loads and 2 transports. Turn 2 Japan has 5.5 loads and 4 transports, you need 2.5 loads to fill up the transports. Build 1 transport and now you need to build 3.5 loads, 7 Infantry. That’s 29 IPC, so if you can get China and the Soviet FE then you have the said 29.

Now with 5 transports you bring in 30 IPC of Infantry. Soon you’ll be earning more than 30 IPC, perhaps build an extra tank on Japan to give you options in your transport loading but generally try to save 15 IPC, build and IC and free up 2 transports right away to go roaming with the capital ships generating threat points.

BB

I’m not so sure that after 5 rounds the Jap fleet would be all that much stronger then the allied fleet. They have the advantage of seeing it coming for a long time, then using transports to block the final attack by a round perhaps.

I hear ya on using the Jap fleet right away, by not doing pearl the BBs and 3 ftrs really don’t do a thing unless you attack the Soviet FE with a BB.

I see your point also about tying up allied resources. I really try to concentrate on that in my game. Big battles rarely occur, it’s more posturing and pressure points.

An empty CV, and 2 BBs off Japan doesn’t scare the allies much does it? It should. Next round it’s off FIC with 4 transports loadable (always drop loaded units off when you can) with 6 air units in position to invaded Africa. (Japan always must have 4-5 transports between FIC and Japan until R5ish when IC’s come into play). Do the allies just ignore this? They’ll be looking at what can get into Africa and looking at the territories from Persia to Italian E. Africa thinking “Anything along those 4 territories is toast”.

What did Japan sacrafice, nothing. Those infantry at FIC are 2 rounds away from Novosibirsk just like they would be in Manchuria. Next round you could move back to Japan and pick up/unload into Manchuria OR go HUGE into Africa or go MEDIUM into Africa, the latter two requiring the building of a an IC to replace the 2-4 transports being tied up in Africa.

That threat should play out every other round or have a 1/2 threat by an even split of the navy capital ships.

Same threat but you get more transport defense. The real goal of the Jap navy is to get guys into Asia, any more is bonus.

BB

I like that baltic transport to Algeria with troops from Norway during non-combat, never thought of that. :-)

I hate not using the German BB, a 4 on the first round is most useful. I think if I could do the Baltic transport move, get 2 infantry extra in Libya I’d still attack the Brt sub. Yes it does suck to miss with the BB and have it sunk, but it’s only a 1/9 chance that occurs and if it does, the transport retreats and the units end up in Libya. Even if you then lose both remaining transports it’s not the end of the world, you nurse Africa for what it’s worth and hang tough till the Japs come.

BB

Don’t use windows XP…… Hell I just upgraded to windows98! Then again I am old and crustier my the minute.

Is there anything that triggers the flicker? If you can see modem activity lights when the flicker occurs or CDRom/hard drive access etc that narrows the problem down. If you use ICQ or Kazaa, heck, whenever you try to diagnose problems simplify the system. STOP and close all programs not needed, ICQ, anti-virus, every single thing you can eliminate. If the problem still persists then drop your video card down to 640x480/256 colours. If the problem STILL persists (and it’s not a pirate version of the software) and the win install is good and fresh (as you indicated) then… if it ain’t software it’s gotta be hardware and that is extremely rare (and since you say it’s only when using AA not likely at all). A plodding, anal retentive elimination of variables is the best way I know to isolate problems, might not be the fastest however…

If you can get the game to run without flicker on a ‘bare bones’ windows XP configuration then add back the programs you normally run all the time (ICQ, antivirus etc.).

BB

C_F, you’re right, there’s not much to do with the Pacific fleet. I’m not sure I’d so a suicide run into India with what’s left of the US fleet.

As for the Japs going for Brazil…… That’s an aweful lot of equipment being tied up for 4 rounds just to get 3-4 IPCs starting on the 5th round. Even if you don’t build extra subs that’s 112 IPC’s of equipment doing not much for 5 rounds in order to get 3 IPC thereafter. What if the US put bombers in Alaska, you’d need factories in asia as you couldn’t transport of Japan. As the Americans I’d let you stay in Brazil all game long, it’s only 3 IPC after all. Hey, maybe after 4-5 rounds I’d do brazil but those units can earn more keep elsewhere IMHO :-)

I think we all agree the US focus is Germany at the start. Also that if you can get the allied atlantic navy going before the pacific fleet shows up you do so.

If the Japs do pearl and the us fighters must protect the brit carrier I’d use the Pacific transport to block the japs south of mexico and put the BB west of Panama. The japanes can ftr attack the BB but it could be costly if it has to go 2 rounds. The jap must split the attack, the transport effectively takes out two BBs.

Even Japan ignores the US pacific fleet I pull it back but only to W. Panama. Next round the newly built transports go to the UK, perhaps slip the pacific fleet to E. Panama if you really really need to go to africa on T3 and need to split the fleet. But it’s no sense having 2 carriers and a US BB in the UK waters for 8 rounds for the 1 or 2 times you need to split the fleet.

If it’s off W. Panama basking in the sun for a few rounds so what. Well, it forms the nucleus of a dangerous fleet that in 3 rounds could slap the Jap really hard if he isn’t carefull. If the US has saved a few IPC’s and has 40, BAM 5 subs, BB, CV and Sub move up (yeah maybe move the transport to the atlantic to get up to 5 transports but no more are needed there). US should have 3-4 ftrs, BAM they move in. Perhaps 1-2 bombers BAM, they fly over. Next round move up or 4 more subs then move up building 2 bombers on the round you move up. Knock the Jap navy off Japan and it’s all over but the crying. A good way to shake up a stalemate in Europe.

BB

Nobody should take rush limbaugh seriously (nobody should listen to him better yet). There are a few sayings that come to mind when his name pops up. Through enough mud and some will stick to the wall. Even a broken clock has the right time twice per day…

F_alk, I’m afraid you’re totally wrong about the US agricultural subsidies. There is nothing secret or hidden about it. The US just in the last year passed the largest agricultural subsidy bill ever. We’re talking 180 Billion over 10 years. 18 Billion a year is a heck of a GDP for a third world country. Nothing secret about it! The secret stuff is when they provide loans to the thirld world countries to buy the wheat from the US that is below fair market price so the third world countries farms fail and they have to import what they used to grow. How nice we provide them with loans too… Mind you the EU is the most guilty. They spend more than 100 Billion/year.
http://www.kisanwatch.org/eng/analysis/may2002/an_US_FARM_BILL_2002_1.htm
BB

It’s funny you mention that pesky sub. I was just talking AA to one of the local boyz and it centred around extra units in Libya to avoid the pesky sub. I really hate doing critical battles like that one with only a few units each. The odds never get to ‘smooth out’, the game ought not to be a crap shoot! :-)

4 outta 5 times all Germany ever puts into Africa in our scenario is 2-4 inf and maybe a tank, even if the transport is alive somehow on R4 Germany can’t afford to spare the resources. Lately we do 2 Inf, then a tank and maybe a second. Rather have 2 Inf then a tank on EE.

BB

F_alk, to a certain extent there is a ball around the Toronto area. Probably about 7 million people in ball 400 KM in diameter (pret near 25% of Canada) . The problem is the 4 most concentrated populations spots are 500, 1000 and 2000 KM apart roughly. In the balls there is some mass transit but no fast rail links between big metro areas. They are talking about promoting it but…. Since fuel is cheap relatively (Ironic the Canada is the number 1 exporter of oil to the US but it’s more expensive here…) and the government support for mass transit is weak there isn’t a critical mass. Though there is the odd exception. If I worked in downtown Toronto I can drive half-way or 3/4 even, then park and grab the ‘Via Rail’ link into big town.

BB

Hard to say. 2 junior but equal players might always end up with an allied victory. 2 medium but equal players might end up with an axis win most of the time. 2 experts and equal end up with allied victories.

3rd edition helps allies more then axis IMHO.
RR and German rockets alone might be enough, if not give germany jet power (ftrs defend on a 5). Somebody at our group coined the term piranha for a German jet fighter. Couple of those in a stack of infantry adds some back bone! No rolling 4 times each always missing, they always take a bite!

BB

I’ve read a few things here and there off and on over the years but nothing really new in the last few years. Some intersting stuff is at:
http://www.spring1942.com/WarCollege/Goa/default.asp

DM I’ve never come across bidding with RR however, the numbers you mention with RR are right on for what I’ve read and the RR numbers make sense.

Our group is somewhat stoic, we put flags in a baseball cap and pick. It used to suck having Wally as an Axis partner but he has bought into germany buying mostly infantry :-) I think bidding is the cure to the 7 year itch around here….

The bids mentioned from your link “Bidding systems” seems a tiny bit higher based on other things I’ve read. Not like I would know. I’ve never played with bidding… yet!

Submersable subs I think showed up in the AA CD game, it’s not an official rule nor even an official ‘house rule’ like russia restricted or giving germany jet power or japan super subs.

AA pacific uses submersable sub rules but also has a rule where fighters can’t attack subs at all unless a destroyer is present (not even a BB allows fighters to attack a sub). Sucks to gave a lone carrier with an enemy sub present, could lose the carrier, 2 ftrs and not even sink the sub…. But nobody would let that happen… :-)

Destroyer (DD) pieces… got me, use russian battleships?, not like they will ever get used! You could purchase AA Pacific but the there are only 3 colours the brits and usa have the same colour but Japan is red! Germany is out of luck. Ask the AA Europe folks to see what colours are used there, maybe purchase a set of pieces for both games, then you’re styling! And yes, BBs in AA Pacific are 2 hit. Japan rocks in AAP, they start with 4 carriers, 3 battleships, 6 destroyers, 11 transports, 5 subs, 2 bombers and get this, 15 fighters. Did I mention Japan goes first and Britian and USA have all their units defend on a 1 for the entire first turn, yep, battleships and fighters defend on a 1 all turn long…

BB

I picked hunker down but I’d like to qualify that. Eventually Karelia ends up being a multinational anchor. It’s great on defense but not much good on offense. Germany and Karelia end up a stalemate. At some point forces can be diverted from Karelia to fight the Japanese but at what proportion?

A few factors, logistics coming to mind (say it ain’t so!). Obviously russia has the shortest supply line so it should be the engaged in attrition with the Japs, but only to the extent it can afford it, not much granted but…. I take a majority of russians as they most likely will have the largest single land force. I’ll also have a few Brit and Yank units, 1-2 tanks, 1-3 Inf or so, the allies being rich with air power most likely by round 6 have a powerfull punch but lack the staying power for a slug fest. The idea is to get the russians to be the point of the spear. The US can grab a small territory, the russians move in with force, the brits move what they can plus air power for defense. Lets say you do this towards a Japanese Factory. The Japs most likely can perry this threat with existing units and air power plus their build… But now you are dictating to the enemy. So the Japs move in to a strong defensive postion, however with 3 allies moving for every Jap move this is a losing game for Japan. It’s a philosophy more than a tactical plan but it seems to work for me :-)

BB

The german rocket is an interesting idea, never thought about that. Germany does 3.5/round actually and it could be against England or Russia (perhaps only England or….?). If you have a bid of 18, does 6 rounds at 3.5 (21 total) have as much value as 18 right off. I’d take the 18 upfront. The ‘interest’ you get off say 6 Inf on round one more than offsets a few extra IPCs in latter rounds.

Now over a 10-12 round game now it might balance out. The axis has to hit hard and fast, I’ take the 6 inf but it’s close enough to flip a coin I think.

Submersible subs is a tough call. Even with that it’s not like the Germans can build subs. Now if they were imune to air attack unless you had a battleship (a bit expensive, in AAP they use a destroyer (3/3 costs 12, 1 hit and does shore bombardment with a 2 attack)). But again, if it requires too many rules you might be treading on fundemantals.

I think 2 hits BBs favours the allies actually. My thinking is often the Japs have the Pacific to themselves so 1 hit or 2 hit doesn’t matter much. You might take less naval losses, great, now you have a sub as well…

The germans on the other hand have to smash the allied navy immediately to buy them 1-2 rounds. If 1 BB survives then the brits really don’t need to build a carrier. The germans would be down to 3 maybe 4 planes. The allies would have a lone BB and 4-5 transports at end of R1. 6-7 hits is alot to ask from 4 planes.

The original game of AA allowed Jap Kamikazes. Basically 1 ftr/round could be designated Kamikaze. Once designated on offense the plane can’t land even if it survives (no need to teach them to land right!). However, it attacks on a 4 not a 3. It can fly out 4 spaces to attack with no restrictions on where to land. If you plan to lose a ftr anyway, Kamikaze is the way to go for 1 plane. Makes hitting Pearl a bit easier as well. 3 ftrs, bomber and sub. If you take 1 hit, the kami goes, sub stays, carrier moves to wake and the US fleet is blocked by the Jap Sub.

BB

That opening allied move is almost a direct copy of what I do. I tend to only build 3 US transports and the rest land. To avoid a hiccup for the US, you must build 2 loads for each transport you build and a load for each transport you alread own.

I’ll point out the obvious flaw in that otherwise brilliant move. :-) It takes the US fleet 3 turns to get to Algeria. Remember to draw the line through the panama canal. The US pacific fleet is in the middle of the atlantic at the end of the US second turn. Also, if the brits do build the carrier, then the Japs should hit Pearl as the US fighters can’t attack the Jap fleet or else they sacrafice the Brit carrier. The brits WON’T like that at all! :-)

If the US build 3 transports (unless the german bomber can hit, then I am scared and build 4 transports assuming my initial 1 is with the UK fleet) then they build 4 infantry. This gives them exactly 5.5 transport loads. If the intial US transport takes 2 infantry to England that leaves 4.5 loads. You really need 6 loads, 3 to go with the transports and 3 to be in E/W Canada. In fact, the best logistical situation calls for building only 2 transports and lots of equipment then build 1 transport per round until 5 are available. Of course the German bomber may dictate otherwise!

So you don’t put guys in Africa until the 3rd round, plan on that. Keep a guy in S. Africa and make a lone tank try to take it, don’t make it easy and let Germany hit you in Kenya with the tank AND infantry. On round 2 the Brits really can’t drop lots of guys of in Africa anyways, even with 2 transports it’s most likely not enough. When the US comes in on R2 to the UK they take Norway from the Germans. (I play russia restricted, the russians are huge in Karelia but it’s dicey). On german R3 Norway is gone so a tank and 3 inf are not threatening Karelia. Then on R3 you go big into Africa, the fact you can also go big into europe causes the Germans to be yanked back from threatening Karelia like a lapdog on a short leash……

BB

DM, I agree with most of what you say. I’m a huge fan of infantry with the odd tank to leverage air mobility threats. It makes sense if you build all infantry to have your bids in infantry as well.

If you bid say 18 for the axis, do you have to announce the german/japan split and types of units by convention?

As for additional german navy, I was only thinking a sub for 1 reason. To avoid losing a plane on the opening German move when taking out the allied navy. I’d rather build a sub to avoid a plane loss then build a plane to replace the loss if ya know what I mean +4 IPC.

The extra plane might delay the onslaught of the allied navy for 1 round….might. Does this extra round parlayed through the turns pay off more than having 4 infantry is the 64 dollar question. It’s a losing game for Germany to plan on using a fleet past the third round. Even if you had it you couldn’t deliver troops anywhere without unduly weaking mainland germany. Trading Africa for Germany ain’t a good trade :-)

I suppose things tend to converge to a balance over time. Perhaps it’s just the few variations of bidding are the best. I’d still love to play Japan if she has 2 extra INF on each asian territory…

BB

I’ve noticed with bidding that the extra units seems limited to infantry or tanks. The locations limited to Libya, Manchuria, EE and Ukraine. Is there any reason for this or is it just convention so players have a relatively even point of reference as it where.

If germany could get an extra sub and transport or the Japs with an extra sub and transport would be a wild variation.

BB

I can’t remember how many times I had to erase a question I was asking and answered myself… :-)

Our local group hasn’t played AA much in the last few years. Allies always win even with RR, germans with jet power and Japs with super subs.

The idea of bidding is re-kindling interest I must say.

BB

Oz, I did that to Panama. Even though we all know the rule it’s a good reminder.

There is also that slight thingee about the two sea zones on the very S. West of S. America being connected to the seazone about the caroline islands blow up box on the S. East most sea zone. It’s a blue blue moon when that gets used but……

BB

Meijing, you make some excellent points. From the sounds of it you have a view of the world different from somebody who grew up in the USA, forgive me if I assume wrong. As a Canadian I and my fellow compatriots see it half way I suspect.

The friend telling a friend about a difference of view is a good one. I’m not sure who spit on who, the US or France :-)

I don’t think war in Iraq is the only way to democracy in Mid East, but it’s the simple way to reduce variables in an uncertain world. Correct or wrong, when the war is over, there will be a net drop in the number of variables. Had this been done 2 years ago we’d be better able to face N. Korea.

N. Korea never stopped it’s weapons program, it merely shifted it from plutonium based to uranium based. The americans long suspected, finally confronted them and were proved correct.

I really wish intelligence was as good as some people think it is. If you suspect somebody might have a weapons research program you could be wrong in either way, they could have a passing interest or have several bombs.

The UN was in Iraq during the mid 90’s during a 4 year program inspecting and never knowing a bio-weapons program was in full swing.

When N. Korea fired a rocket over Japan it suprised everybody. Nobody thought there missle program was that advanced. In fact it was intended to launch a test satelite and failed. 2/3 of the rocket worked and it went past Japan, hmmmmmmmm how far can it go I wonder?

Perhaps it was counter-productive to list Iran and N. Korea, the whole axis of evil thing actually. I think it was a mistake to openly proclaim this.

Afganistan…. Here is a spin. Afganistan was about blood revenge. Afganistan is much different then Iraq. I suspect the US think they can make Iraq into a democracy in 10 years perhaps but not Afganistan in 40.

I think much more should be done in Afganistan, Canada will be leading the operation shortly, I hope we do as much as we can with our limited resources. I also think Canada should do more and so do all my friends, yet our government isn’t spending what it should.

They might not like this ‘crusade’, let’s up they tolerate it and let’s hope the west does a good job of rebuilding. Iraqis deserve a good life just as we all do.

I think N. America does a brutal job on fuel effeciency. The auto makers had/have too much power in this continent. It’s in their interest NOT to have public transit. We now reap the rewards… We use more fuel per person than any other nation on the planet. Don’t tell me you need more AC in florida then Iceland needs heating…

Since the US fuel is typically 1/2 to 1/3 the cost of fuel in Euroland it’s not a suprise that the balance settled where it did here. One strike against rail transport is often the rail companies have to pay for the land and land taxes required for the rails. They also pay fuel taxes that build roads for the competition (cars/trucks) who don’t pay taxes on the land under the roads. In effect, the rail companies are paying subsidies to the competition.

NOBODY has done a study to see what happens if you raise taxes on fuel. Oh people complain about lost money. What, do they burn the tax money? Do they ship it to third world countries? The tax money doesn’t just go up in smoke. You spend it in the US instead of letting OPEC spend it. A bit of pain but then the US trade deficit goes down, you know, the 10 billion dollars or so the US ships abroad every month…

BB