Posts made by BigBlocky

France knows exactly how they want saddam disarmed. Over the next 10 years, with sanctions in place so everybody can blame the bad old americans for the sanctions. Since Saddam will be in power for 10 more years and be utterly gratefull for the French he will grant France even more lucrative contracts while continuing to support chaos against the US and Israelis. Since they aren’t paying a dime they have no problem with 1/4 of million Yanks and Brits sweating their nutts off while their family gets lonely and the French get fatter with lucrative blood money contracts with the devil himself……

BB

Too the last Guest post, the revolutionary war? Wasn’t that 1776-1783 or something? The War of 1812 was when the US wanted to conqour what is now Canada and ruthlessly invaded our land. Since we were highly motivated as many of the people here had fled US persecution as refugees(These were known as United Empire Loyalists) after the rebels won the right to govern the 13 colonies we all did rather well pound for pound. In fact, we torched your capital to the ground!!!

I’m not sure what others call it but if my plan is to invade a foreign country and the result is I get repelled, my capital burned to the ground and losses so great I sue for peace I’d not consider that a draw. But Americans do a great job of acting no wonder you think you have 2 draws…… :-) Ah loves ah mer e cans!

BB

I totally agree with treating Japan and Germany as a single entity. I’m not a fan of building an IC right away, for me it’s 2 transports and 3 inf. My reasoning is that you build and IC for tanks only so assume 15 IPC/round to supply it. With 3 transports and the IC you should be building 6 inf for the transports and 3 tanks for 33 IPC. Japan won’t have this coin until about R3. I build only enough inf for the 4 transports, taking the free inf off local islands. Once I save 8 IPC then it’s the 5th transport, 10 inf/round at 30 IPC. Again, I only spend 30 IPC and once I have about 10 IPC saved I think about the first IC, maybe an extended voyage with a transport or two causes me to build it then or I wait until I have 15 IPC. Having an IC early sometimes hampers you as you must defend it. As always it depends on what the allies do, if it works for you then it’s right for you :-)

The lure technique has it’s advantages for sure. A wise russian player might keep a tank to drive in and out, if not I’d always put an infantry on Manchuria but no more. Again, knowing what you can hit me with I won’t just put all my units in one spot for you to smoke them. I know a slow withdraw with the russians is better.

One stumbling block with building transports and doing Pearl Harbour is if the Brit or Ruskie puts a plane within striking range of the Japan home waters. If the brit player always does IC in India you most likely don’t face this.

Our group always does the Brit grand fleet, saving until they can build fleet big enough to defend against the luftwaffe. The US sets up a supply line via Canada and both allies pump 8-10 transports/round worth of land equipment into Norway. The brit India fighter moves to the territory west of the soviet far east (I must be getting old!). This little move is such a prick shot……

If the US navy does 2 hits you might have to take off the bomber if no transport was brought in. With only 1 ftr I think the US should hit the jap fleet assuming it does not have to put it’s ftrs on a newly built brit carrier on T1. If you take only 1 hit or less then as the Jap, I’d hit any newly built US navy in the pacific. I can do this because I don’t retreat from Manchuria. I’ll take out the US fighter in China, not bother with India (unless open or 1 inf). With overwhelming firepower on China the battle is over quick, you don’t need to commit too many Inf, 3 if you are brave, 4 if you are conservative. I mass my air in Manchuria, 3 fighters with at least 4 inf is usually enough for defence. With this I can fly 2 ftrs to the US west coast, the 2 ftrs from the carrier land at Wake island with the bomber. That’s 4 3s and 3 4s, toss in the carrier’s 1 for good measure and you’re likely to do 4 hits on the first round. Even if the US player built 4 subs (the best navy for the money for T1) he’s only gonna do 2 hits on average back and have a lone BB and sub left against 2 ftrs, 2 BBs and the CV.

Dang I gotta get this CD playing over the net…

BB

BB

Do whatever works until it doesn’t work anymore….

BB

MIB, like I said, if you left 1 infantry in Karelia, why would the Germans put all their tanks in there knowing they would be lost, is he drunk? The other guy should always determine what can hit him.

The Germans, assuming they are not drunk, would take Caucus for sure and most likely Karelia. They would do it with 2-3 units each. They would move up all their armour and infantry to both Ukraine and EE because you can’t attack them since Karelia and Caucus is occupied. Germany then out-builds Russia for at least 3 turns before SBR’s reduce their 35-40+ income.

Britain will lose Africa quick as you can’t defend India and counter the German build up via the untouched med fleet. The English income would rapidly fall to the 20 IPC level. You have to build 3 units/turn in India and use all your fighter airforce to defend it. You’d be lucky to build 1 bomber/round.

Your IPC table doesn’t make any sense. The Germans get their full 32 IPC build on R1 as the bombing takes place AFTER the german turn. At the end of the German turn it’s income after taking 3-4 IPC in Aftrica on R1 as well as Karelia AND Caucus is in the 40’s right away. As your bombers scale up so does the German income as it takes more of Africa. It will be 3-4 turns before you get Germany below 30. By then the Germans have soundly out-built the russians that are now feeling the affects of an ever increasting Jap pressure. Russia falls before you get Germany below 10 IPC builds IMHO.

BB

I hear ya CC on the Canadian population density thing. Most from europe just don’t have any concept of driving your car at 130Kmph for an hour just to get to work. Of course if you live in a large metro city you can live without a car. For the same cost of living in an apartment in downtown big city Canada you often get a car and house in a rural area. The price is the commute to work. Unless you work from home :-)

It’s a 5 hour drive west to get to Quebec and about a 20 hour drive east to get to the next province Manitoba. Trains in Ontario are great as long as you live along the QEW corridor along lake Ontario or along the Montreal-Toronto-Windsor corridor. You can’t use what doesn’t exist.

The problem with Kyoto is that if everybody could use as much energy as the US/Canada does per citizen we’d all be in trouble. Then again, the south gets fried and Canada benefits…… Burn baby burn!

BB

I pret near always move the AA from SE to EE, but it’s also true we always play russia restricted. It would be natural to move it into Karelia in R2. The question is could Germany hold Karelia on R2. As Germany I’d take Karelia and let them SBR me. The bombers can only do an SBR or conventional attack. If Karelia is SBR’d then those mediteranean transports will be busy stocking Africa making Rommel a happy desert fox.

BB

I’m not so sure the US should have to accept a Veto by 1 member. If the US knew for sure that Iraq had to be pre-emptively hit and yet knew for sure that say France would veto an attack for purly cynical reasons she they just bend over and allow a perceived threat to become real?

I’m not saying this is the current situation, but what if? Let’s just assume this situation did exist? The US is going to war against Iraq. They are so sure that Iraq has WPM that their troops will all wear protection. Most likely, statistically, some will die due to heat exhaustion due to the added protection. Is this just a publicity stunt?

I say that after the dust settles, if the US administration was wrong that they should step down and face a war crimes trial. If they are that sure they should state this.

Does anybody think that those who want to support Saddam like the French would state that if they are wrong they will retire immediately and for ever from politics? I doubt it.

There are far far worse things than fighting a just war.

BB

It is an interesting idea, if the Germans do take Karelia even with a tank in-out then it is open to an average of 7 IPC bombing, which really nets 4 since Germany gets the 3 IPC for the territory. You are net ahead and saving the russian tanks is great rather than losing in a slug fest in EE or Ukraine. A couple of pluses for sure.

However, since russia can’t build on Karelia nor land allied fighters once it was re-taken it would take longer to be able to retake it and hold it in latter rounds (unless the allies take it after the German turn, but with no navy that is a tad hard….). Also, if Germany moves up to Ukraine they can exchange caucus for 3 more IPCs. Russia’s income would be down immediately and Germany’s up but going down as the bombers take their toll. I few minuses then as well.

I think by the time the bombers took enough of a toll on Germany, Japan would be rocking and there would be little chance for the allies to help defend the India factory. IMHO at least :-)

It’s nice to see new ideas however, keep 'em coming!

BB

On second thought, I see how the geometric series works, Meijing’s number agrees with what I stated in this thread on March 15th when describing my stochastic simulation. 15 IPCs gets you 17.5 on SBR.

I’m not sure what Meijing means with this:
But it will take 11 turns for reaching 15.
((5/6)^12 - 5/6)/(5/6 - 1) * 3.5 = 15.1

F_alk, you state the obvious, and I didn’t miss the premise you have to start with 6 bombers, I stated it…… I think you’re missing the point. I merely showed a different way to agree with what I said earlier and what Meijing eloquently proved with the geometric series. It’s merely that 15 gives 17.5 in SRB’s on average. I also stated that didn’t take into consideration what the bombers could have done instead. Your point is true as well, the cost of having bombers instead of say transports and land units is not factored into the so-called payoff ratio.

I never use SBR as a strategy outright, I do however find the opportunity to SBR with bombers that aren’t better used elsewhere.

BB

A big reason many companies move out of Calif is the power situation, chip makers in particular don’t like it when their power gets cut in rolling blackouts. The tax load in Calif is heavier then most places as well. Capitalism is all about finding the most efficient means of getting the job done. All you have to do is ensure there are good rules/laws everywhere. If a comany relocates to a third world country so they can dump crap in the environment then an import tax should be levied to level the playing field. It ain’t perfect and it’s most likely the worst system save all the others….

Chicago seems a smarter place for Boeing anyways. Isn’t it the Major US Hub, busiest airport or something like that?

BB

I usually don’t do Pearl (since I haven’t played outside my box that might be a mistake but…… :-) Japan will have 5 ftrs and a bomber and be landing 8 inf/round into asia. With 2 BBs air and naval mobility there is little chance for the allies to do much in asia but back to the russian border and play territory exchange. The problem for the allies is that russian has only 2 ftrs, japan has 6 air units which gives a huge attrition advantage to the Japs when exchanging land.

I wish I could get my AA CD to play over my internal network never mind the internet… sigh

BB

A geometric series is not the proper tool for this. I think you’d need to use a stochastic model, it’s been years since I got my B.Sc in Computer science so I don’t have any links to back it up.

Why make things complicated when simplicity will do.

Premise #1:
I think we can all agree if you had 6 bombers on a raid, statistically speaking, you should lose 1 bomber.

Premise #2:
Each surviving bomber will do 3.5 IPC

Premise #3:
5*3.5=17.5

Conclusion
If you spent 15 IPC per turn for a bomber, started with 6 bombers, you on average will do 17.5IPC per round.

This is called a sound argument. If all the premises are true then the conclusion must also be true. Prove 1 of my premesis wrong and my conclusion is not logically true.

However it is statistics. Did you hear about the three statisticians who went on a hunting trip? They see a deer, the first statistician shoots and misses 5 feet to the left, the second statistician shoots and misses 5 feet to the right. The third statistician yells out “BULLSEYE!!!”……

The 15:17.5 payout ratio does not take into effect what those bombers could have done if they were used in a land or naval battle instead. They do not take into acount the cost of losing your only bomber. Losing your only bomber means your reach is less and your enemy has less to defend against. 1 bomber plays havoc with plans requiring a 1-2 transports to move through it’s area of reach.

I totally agree with Ozone, SBR are not a strategic, merely a usefull tactic in some situations when the opportunity or need presents itself. Using SBR has a strategy locks you into 1 mode of attack.

BB

I’ve posted a few of my AAP strategies so I won’t repeat them in detail. I’m convinced that Japan cannot lose when going for 22 VPs.

To win you must have a plan. With the Japs the plan is 22VPs. Based on that China is of VERY LOW importance initially. In rounds 4-6 you might need to grab a territory or 2 worth an IPC but don’t waste your firepower in the first few rounds. I’m not say don’t attack, only attack with stuff you don’t need for other battles. Also based on this Japan really doesn’t need any more land units. Again, I’m not saying NO land units but I’d say 80% of your builds should be navy and or air with most being subs.

The japs ought not to engage in navy battles where it’s a close trade in units. The japs need to conserve navy, ensure most air and navy can hit the allies as they move towards Japan. I often never fight the ‘big’ battle. The allies look at the odds and only when they can move into range do they. At this point a slow retreat while raking in the IPCs occurs.

Who cares if you lose most of asia and most of your navy while getting to 22VPs because as soon as you do, finee. You do the happy-in-your-face dance to the loser.

I’m not quite sure how to stop them as the allies. Japan will win on Turn 6 if you don’t do something to stop the IPC victory. The allies might never do their turn 6 and most likely won’t do turn 7. So don’t build transports and marines on turn 5 as they’ll never get used and they might not be used when built on turn 4 either.

The only way I can see it is with lots and lots of subs, present too many targets for their subs and destroyers. Try to get the jap to seperate his fleet and whittle it down when you can. Don’t worry about capturing islands where you can capture the sea zone. With a 72 US income why bother taking a few meaningless islands to get a few IPCs. It’s all about denying the Japs their VPs.

I don’t think the US should bother building more than a few arillery to mate up with the existing marines/infantry. Job #1 is being able to get the few dudes you have into Jap territory. Tanks on transports don’t do much against fighters and bombers and jap navy….

BB

ssolie is correct, your planes under no condition, can they move more than 4 territories on your turn. If they were on an allied carrier then on the allies turn the carrier moves, on your turn you can move the plane 4.

When a carrier is sunk the planes can move one space. So if a carrier was in an adjacent territory or an island with an airbase yes the planes could land there. The planes could not fly to the adjacent territory then land on an island without an airbase.

BB

Harry, didn’t the US lose the war of 1812 and the vietnam war?

BB

On average a bomber does 3.5 IPC so it should pay off in 4-5 rounds not 11, factor in the 1/6 loss issue and its about 5-6 rounds.

An issue that nobody mentions with SBR is the effect of ‘over bombing’. Obiously the goal is to bring the enemy close to zero IPC. In order to ‘average’ this sometimes the enemy gets over-bombed, doing 35 IPCs and the enemy having less. I’m not sure how often that occurs as I rarely use SBRs as as tactict. I often find that using bombers in my many battles pays off more by getting battles over quicker and thus losing less peices. This often has the effect of making the surviving force just that much stronger and often means too strong to counter-attack in a cost effective mannor.

BB

If russia can counterattack karelia so well (and it could) why do you expect the germans to just park their tanks in Karelia waiting for them to be attacked?

Russia builds 6 Inf, 2 tanks and saves 2 IPC on turn #1? By my calculations that’s 30 IPC, what game are you playing?

With the brits building a factory in India they really can’t build lots of bombers as well so it’s going to be only the US player doing strategic raids and it takes time to get 6+ bombers going and that’s what you well need to affect germany making 35+IPCs. With no real allied navy in the Atlantic the germans will be able to mass forces against russia without fear of protecting against allied landings.

Try playing it with the correct russian income levels and see how it works.

BB

The more dice your roll the more the odds work out to an even distribution. There is no magic or supernatural force, in time the odds work out. If you count on ‘dice’ to win then you never lose by somebody else’s superiour strategy, you merely always lose because of dice. Good players rarely win or lose based on the dice rolls.

BB

You take islands just like in the original games, the japanese have transports and destroyers that are in range to do so. You don’t get IPCs or VPs for ‘capturing’ a convoy. Convoys are a bit confusing. If you own both the land/island AND the convoy sea zone you get IPCs and/or VPs. If you moved any naval unit except a transport through (blitz) or into a sea zone that contains a convoy you either 1) put a flag on the convoy symbol if it doesn’t belong to you or an ally or 2) ensure there is no enemy flag on the symbol if it belongs to you originally.

So, it’s possible to capture an island using only transports and land units and not get anything for it because you have not ‘captured’ the sea zone convoy route. Seems odd that some islands you can caputure and get an IPC without requiring a combat ship to also capture the sea zone and yet other islands and mainland territories you must. The rules state you can’t capture sea zones but it’s not exactly correct is it….

BB