Posts made by BigBlocky

When I first joined I got an error when submitting the form, so I tried again and it said my username already existed…. Guess the error was non-fatal and it still posted. I logged in and the rest is history.

BB

A simple way to look at it was the US spent 3/5 of 1% of the entire war budget on the Manhatten project. Based on 21 tech rolls to get the a-bomb you’d need to spend 105 IPC. For this to represent the same % of war effort has the historical example you’d have to have earned 17,325 IPCs…. What the US could do with 1155 bombers… THEN get the A-bomb… I guess ya could say it’s a bit more costly in A&A :-)

BB

The allies start with a combined income of 90 the Axis with 57, a 33 IPC spread in favour of the allies. Anything that increases this spread in favour of the allies hurts that axis. Since the Axis is fairly equipment rich and income poor wouldn’t it make more sense to go the other direction?

24*.75=18
32*.75=24
30*.75=22
25*.75=19
36*.75=27

Now the allies only have a 24 IPC spread. Both sides build up slower so this benefits the axis.

BB

Yes. Yes indeed. Indeed it is true that it takes a long long time to do the Jap first turn….

BB

D’oh…. Not logged in again…

BB

Xi, let me get this straight. You build xports and not factories right, I do the same. Yet now you say if you don’t use your Jap capital ships to chase down the US Fleet of W. USA it’s a mistake? You can’t have your cake and eat it too…… In my world the allies move SO FAST against Germany that the BB is not needed by the time it can get there. Besides, if the US fleet doesn’t want to engage your Jap fleet it won’t… In that case your 80 IPC fleet is out of the action for 3 turns… Can’t wait to play you…

I try to optimise my equipment usage. Have 80 IPC of equipment chasing 32IPC for 3 rounds doesn’t make sense especially in light of the fact the allies don’t even need that equipment. Again, every move is a trade off. Man, I’m gonna by the Cd tommorow and give you the chance to shut me down soon, or realize I might just know a thing or two…

BB

From what I know the total cost of WW 2 for the US of A (in 1996 dollars) was about 3.3 Trillion. The Manahatten project cost about 20 Billion. Makes ya wonder why they didn’t just play a cheap stalemate until they got it, guess nobody knew for sure if it would work….

You’ve mentioned alot of things a couple of times Xi…

Guest, nothing against what you laid out but… In general, simple is good. If you need lots of ‘constraints’ on a new rule it’s probably too much of a change or needs refining. Not saying that this is one of those cases but… I’m a fan of K.I.S.S. Keep It Simple Smilee :-)

BB

Kenya to Egypt to Libya to sea zone to S. Europe to E. Europe to Karelia is six to me. I guess I said Caucus by mistake rather than Karelia when proving you wrong that if you really really really wanted to S. Bomb Germany you could. If you want to count that as some kind of victory then by all means do so. I let my game playing do that kind of talking :-) There is no reason for your tone of language. Like I said, this ain’t a pissing contest….

BB

When subs withdraw from combat, where can they go?

If the subs were attacking, they can withdraw to any adjacent sea zone that naval units came from when launching this attack.
If the subs are defending, the rules state they can withdraw to any friendly or unoccupied adjacent sea zone. Ultimately, both of these amount to the same thing; any sea zone that does not contain enemy naval vessels or aircraft at the time the subs withdraw. That last bit is very important because it means defending subs can withdraw into sea zones that the attacking forces came from, thus cutting off the attacker’s avenue of retreat. As long as there are no enemy units currently in a sea zone, it’s a legal withdrawal path for defending subs. (Units on an island don’t matter; they’re in a land territory, not in the sea zone.)

BB

What’s with all the eye rolling? Can’t we all just get along man? I’ve actually just gotten into AAP, seems there is little comment on that game. I’ve come to the conclusion the Japs have an easy victory with only 22 VPs, I’ve heard most bids are around the 28 mark. Anybody verify that or….?

BB

I’m not at all a fan of having the Jap navy roving around the Pacific. 2 Priorities, IPCs and attrition against russia. When you exchange territories with russia you have the advantage of 6 air versus 2. You can exchange back and forth to the Jap advantage vis-a-vis IPC values of units ultimately lost. To do this you need fodder. The jap transports must stay close to home and get 2/round onto the continent. A long voyage might move 2 infantry into ‘attack postion’ over 3 rounds. Staying between Burma and Japan brings 6 over 3 rounds. Of course if you have extra transports for some reason ( fill in the blank ) then by all means :-)

BB

Big fish in the little pond is the term I use. Yep, that’s always the concern. I’d hate to enter a turnament and be blindsided with something all weekend…. To be honest I rarely have much of a plan after the first 2 turns. I think my strength is logistics, yeah yeah a suprise eh? :-) And I have a keen eye on what can get where or hit what. It seems to be the first person to make a major error (Not seeing those extra 2 ftrs and bomber) that shifts an 8 on 8 to an 11 on 8 battle on rather unfavourable terms for the defender. I usually get in a rythm where I can dictate favourable battle exchanges vis-a-vis IPC values and slowly smother the other side.

I’m tempted to just go and purchase it again… :-)

I’ve done lots of web searching, haven’t seen anything new and seen tonnes of hairbrained ideas IE. Germany building a carrier and all armour…

As for bids… yep 'bout as green as you can get. So what kind of bids are we talking here? I’d love to play Germany with some extra goodies… :-) I’m assuming nothing like 4 extra tanks that can hit karelia right? Just extra IPCs?

BB

Play “You die” all you want. After consulting with my crew, we all agree that I have about 200+ games of A&A under my belt against about 30 different people over 20 years. I hate to brag but I am so good at it…… I’ve lost perhaps 5 games… Comment all you want on maybe I should play new people… Why do you think I am here? Bring it on boyz… :-)

Seriously, as much as I hate to lose, if I do… I hope it is do to my foe’s superior tactics rather than crappy dice. In that way I have learned. Then I can spring it on my local crew and claim it was inspiration on my part snickers Win if you can, lose if you must but always cheat! wg

BB

I have NEVER seen Japan have a force strong enough to take out Russia before turn 10. 80% of our games have an allied fleet on the start of the German’s second turn that can deliver a dozen units, this rises to 20 by Turn 3 (not sustained as the brit income falls as it loses most of Africa/India but units are available from Norway to attack the german coast). So it’s no doubt my Japan technique of the fleet rotation is alien to you Xi. What seems to happen is that allied forces VERY quickly flow into Karelia and a few tanks backed up by air power move against the Japs. They Japs really never get the luxury of sitting back and building up, it’s a war of attrition and you need units to move from Siam to India and west. You don’t need to rotate the entire fleet, just a few xports with adequate protection so my Jap capital ships don’t generally wander around alot.

After you lose Africa to Japan a few times you respect the Japs ability to quickly flow forces anywhere, this causes the allies to tie up their equipment as ‘safties’. Yes Japan can start to ‘pressure’ Russia, causing her to keep more and more units in russia. You can never look at 1 area of the map in isolation. The germans are paralized by T3 with the combined allied navy being able to hit 3 critical spots. We’ll have to play game online, hopefully you can kick my butt, maybe I’ll learn something new. But ya know what they say about old dogs…… :-)

BB

From Kenya you can S. Bomb S. Europe and land in Cacaus so it’s irrelevant if you can’t reach Germany, which incidently I had stated in my prior post. I try not to use my 1 and only bomber on an attack where I can lose it unless it grants good strategic advantage. I think you suggested not risking the German bomber on an attack where you could lose it, I say that is good advice for all owners of 1 and only 1 bomber. The threat that 1 bomber presents far outweighs the few IPCs you will take from Germany, why risk losing it so soon?

As for no safe return for the bomber, are you on glue? Let’s review the thread, what to do with xport off India. I said if Germany had 3 or so units in Egypt you might want to hit it with upto 3 infantry and the fighter in India and maybe the bomber from England. You win the battle, both air land in Kenya and nothing can hit them unless you lose the battle in egypt or if germany has air in egypt…… Look, if you never lose a battle in the game then most likely you are playing too conservatively… 1 bomber and 1 fighter is a hell of a force against a german navy of 1-2 xports and BB if all you want to do is kill the xports, and accelerate the allied retake of Egypt.

If it don’t fit don’t force it. Obviously if the situation is risky you might no choose it. Again, it’s a situational gambit.

It’s about exchanging ideas and constructively critiquing others tactics, devils advocate as it were. This ain’t a pissing contest…

BB

When a city is attacked by 7, it’s reduced to 6 units and the fight starts. So if 1 neighbour put 10 on your city then you need to put 5, not 4, unless you have metal working and they don’t as the smaller army starts to remove units first…… 5 units means you lose all 5, the attacker loses 4, 6 remaining units can’t break down a city. With agriculture every territory can suppor at least 2, double that to 4 then attack with all and repopulate with 2/territory from your adjacent territories, it’s easy to get 10-12 units on a city that way… If the surrounding lands support 3 units, then after pop growth you have 5/territory… 3 next to your city and I doubt you could get enough units in to prevent a city loss. 3 neighbours taking 1-2 cities/round… and you want a low population to move last but this also means it’s harder to rebuild cities…

40 units AFTER pop growth or 20 before, 6 of one and half a dozen of the other… Yup 2/city so with 6 cities ya need 12 to live and 20+/round as fodder to protect 4 of your 6 cities/round, but to get 20 new units you need 20 units in 10 territories 2/territory. If you have 5 in a territory you only had 2 units during pop growth.

I just checked my game, 2 countries can win with 1200 and the rest 1300-1400. Since you can only own 11 cards and the cards are limited I’ve often found that you must have 100-200 points in your hand. In the event of a tie, he who has most points wins…

I’ve just never found it a slam dunk to win when ahead even by 2. I play with alot of pricks, theyco-operate relentlessly to knock the #1 guy down :-)

BB

Off topic? Ain’t it about dough, bread, deneros, green backs, smackers, loot, loonies, bucks….?

BB

Personally, I think in general Americans are pretty smart. That being said, y’all sometimes forget to look around the world and see if somebody has a smart idea too… The entire problem stems from the fact that tax for companies and people are different, people get screwed… They pay a higher % of their income as tax. So poor people get ALL or most of their income in the people ie hight tax category. Now rich people buy a % of a company and get more of their income in the corporate ie low tax bracket and screw the poor working class folk. Heck, lots of companies don’t pay taxes at all dispite profits, saying it’s not fair to tax it twice is fine but not taxing it all ain’t the answer… Since rich Americans have no qualms about screwing poor folk this Bush plan works well… However, some countries in the world have a tax code that has the company state to the dividend recipient how much tax was paid on his/her behalf. You do your income tax has normal, add the 5,000 of dividends into your income box, add the 1,000 the company paid in income tax to get that 5,000 for you into your taxes paid box. Do your tax, if you are poor you might get that 1,000 back. It would be tax neutral for most middle class. And if your average income tax % is higher than the 20% corporate in this example you merely pay the difference between the two rates. Seems fair to all no?

BB

Yep, that’s the way to defend. But if a big neighbour puts 10 units on a city, you still need to put 5 in for defence to prevent the city from breaking down (or close, been awhile). You can have up to 55 units right? If each neighbour used 20 of 55 on 2 attacks (or more if the surround lands can support more, say 26 max) each, they could sustain that forever…… With the 20 case, you need 5 defensive units each times 4 attacks is 20 defenisive units, ya need 40 minimum to sustain that… close to the edge. Now toss in Iconaclism and herasy or … Civil war (only need 4 cities to get that). If you’re on the edge a natural disaster might cost you a round, if you go below 2 cities you halt the advance. You also need some valuble cards to advance in latter rounds. Sure, if somehow you got 2 places ahead on the advance chart and had 1100-1300 in cards and trade cards at that point you can coast… But ya need better opponents… :-)

BB

Waraxis…. Until recently Canada had just 3 major federal parties. Progresive Conservative (Republican), Liberal (Democrat) and the New Democratic Party (ummmmm, a cross between communists and environmentalist and wishful thinkers…). For the most part each of the 10 provinces has the same 3 parties. Recently however we have the Bloc Quebecouis, who in the US would be taken out and shot as traitors and perhaps given a trial afterwards. However the federal governnment supports them in their right to try and take Quebec out of Canada. Luckily, most of those who want to seperate are old blood French who don’t make alot of babies. The immigrants seem to think staying in Canada is better for them then letting some kinda scary seperatists run their affairs. Then there is the western based Reform party that just changed it’s name to the Canadian Alliance. They are a bit more right then the Conservative party, kinda like super republicans. But having 2 parties on the right means the vote gets split and the left vote goes to the liberals. We are doomed to be ruled by this party until the 2 parties on the right unite.

BB