Posts made by bugoo

But there is no counter to the I/G can opener I smash moscow so you have to keep most of your units on it while I laugh at you tactic.  Not in aa50 '41 that is.

Right, and that makes russia stack moscow and not go offensive for fear of 12 tanks stealing there capital.

As far as turn order Russia must absolutely go after both Germany and Italy, to remove the stupid can opener tactic in AA50 41 that keeps Russia from doing anything but defending her factories.

I think it would be better if all countries on both sides went at the same time.  This would allow combined assaults and remove stupid crap like can openers.

I don’t disagree with ya.  I really don’t understand why carriers are so defensive in nature in this game, or that the only truly offensive sea unit is a nitch unit (the sub).  Carriers should be a 1/1 unit, and we need a heavy cruiser unit, or for the BB to change for a ship that is stronger offensively than it is defensively.

How about this for blockhouse units:

Grant defending inf and art +1 on all defensive rolls.  No movement, 10 IPC cost, destroyed when invaded, can be placed in any territory next to or containing an industrial complex.

To try and eliminate trading with the blockhouse unit is impossible without other serious problems in a game where you collect income at the end of your turn.  It is impossible.  The easiest way to eliminate the trading of France is to make it not be next to germany, which is already happening.  Sadly it will still contain a factory next to the beaches, which will result in it being traded, alot.

In the Pacific esp there was heavy stacking, not so much in the atlantic as the UK navy had alot of ground to cover, and no true enemy navy to worry about.  They  protected there convoys and strategic locations like the straits.

No matter what you do there will be stacking because of locations where you can build are limited, there may be some stack dancing as you try to outmanuever the enemy stack, but there will always be stacks.  Look at the G/R border in AA50, it is wide open but you still have to stack to win.

3 mech inf are better than 2 tanks as well, the true problem.

Vs navy i’ll just buy regular bombers, range is the most important factor when defending against enemy drops.

Navy vs Navy the destroyer is still a better buy offensively and defensively, so I wont care.

Bombers at 14 means no one buys them, ever.

Cruisers at 12 mean almost the same thing.

And armor at 6 is less cost efficient than mech inf at 4, for attack and defense.

And why would I pay 1 more IPC for a tac bomber that only fights as good as a fighter when with a tank when I could instead buy a fighter.

Time for more math!  Woot.

Let us take a combined arms force, we will say 3 inf, 3 armor, and 3 tec bombers.  Using TripleA battlecalc and assuming the tec bombers are regular bombers which is better for them because they don’t loose the +1 due to the armor dying, but that is beside the point.

3 inf, 3 arm, 3 tec bombers vs 11 inf win 52% of the time
4 inf, 3 arm, 3 fighters (same cost) vs 11 inf win 54% of the time

Dollar for dollar they are about the same on the attack in a mixed group, yet fighters have no restrictions like needing armor, AND they defend better.

End result is for useless unit list:
Cruiser
Armor @ 6
Tactical Fighters @ 11

One of these days Sub i’ll take you down again  :evil:

Just wish TripleA would finish the change, and my weekend connection would improve.

Problem with that is by the end of I2 there should be around 5 Italy inf on france, going up by 3-6 a turn every turn, not even counting the german inf or the large number of fighters that germany and Japan can put there, and lastly that does nothing directly to take pressure off of Russia.  And with bombers in france you need 2 navies to cover them.  But to each there own.

This way the core of your forces would remain inf with some art, while you would use your armor and M inf to rapidly support where needed.  Atleast for G/R front.

One thing I though of with tanks that would work.  Make them 3/2 for 5, BUT have them get +1 to defense from inf.  It makes logical sense as armor had a terrible time defending without inf support, and would balance out the cost for Larry.

As far as making strat bombers desireable, first off there cost should be 10, there is absolutely no reason for them to cost more than a fighter when they have worse stats! (3-3 vs 3-4).  Yes I know they are a 4 on the attack with some other units, but that still gives them the same points as a fighter.  Also, how would people feel if regular bombers were no longer allowed to attack sea units.  This makes some sense historically, and I feel would help make the ocean a little more interesting.

I almost always stack Kar and here is why.

1. 2 UK figs that I land there are UK units killing Germans as early as G2.
2. AA guns can really wreak G’s air and cause CDF during an attack on Kar by G.
3. It is where I start my UK shuck on UK2, even if G takes it in force, UK will usually wipe out any survivors
4. It kills German units.

If you let G reach critical mass in IPCs OR unit count you are doomed.  But if you kill German units your friends (US/UK) have a much easier time cracking that nut open.  I have had many games where on R1 I stack Kar, on G2 it is taken leaving a few German tanks left, Russia begins to push back in the south and begins stacking up Persia/Chingai and the UK lands in Kar killing the remaining armor.  This means G will usually only have token inf/art on Russias doorstep with 9 inf/1art in Poland and whatever they built in Berlin.  A very good looking board for the allies.

Let me give you an example, if Germany were to bring 10 inf, 1 art, and 6 arm up against 11 inf, 1 art, 1 arm, 2 figs, they would have roughly 5 units left on average.  That is the most ground G can have in range for G2.  For each plane that comes along you can assume 1 more ground unit left, but that gets messy because of AA gun.  If the UK builds boats in SZ 2 (the best) the US can land up to 2 fighters on UK’s carrier.  The UK should have 2-4 transports loaded up ready to drop into Kar on UK2 killing all german survivors.  This is a worst case assumption, G should not have that many units in range.

Russia absolutely needs to be offensive but must be careful because of Italian can opener threat.  This leaves you few options.  You can either build planes and set up trades and deadzones, you can mass up units to push G’s back in Belo or Ukraine, or you get germans to die by attacking you.  I perfer the last 2 options and that is why my favorite R1 purchase is 2 inf, 6 arts.  I stack Kar.  If G ignores Kar I move all those units into Belo and purchase tanks R2, being sure to move as many inf as needed into Ukraine to block the can opener and move my AA guns in Kar and Cauc to cover Belo and Ukraine (let them SBR me there I don’t care).  This gives you a force of around 18 inf, 8 art, and 6-7 armor that can hit East Poland on R3.  Along with G loosing Finland/Norway to the US/UK, an US fleet in SZ 12, and the SBR campain begining in force, this makes for a bad German turn 3.  Sure they can attack you, or continue stacking, but then soon you and the UK will rally in Baltic or East Poland and begin driving the fascist back.  Its almost like revised except the US goes after Italy/Africa instead and stays down there till they can take Italy or France.

In a KGF it is all about keeping G’s income low.  The UK/US should take finland/norway turn 2 regardless, and that extra 7 IPCs for Germany is huge.  No matter what G will be making 10 units a turn, an extra 7 IPCs turns two inf they would have built, into 2 armors, or 1 inf into a fighter, or almost another bomber to keep US/UK fleets at bay.  Germany will not crumble to the UK/US before Russia crumbles to Japan if you let Germany make 50ish IPCs and Italy 20ish.  You must keep there incomes in check.  And on turn 2 the UK should begin there shuck into Karelia so that the Russians don’t have to send any more units up there.  Now granted if G puts a ton of units in range of Karelia, then you are forced to abandon it typically, but when they only have like 6 ground units in range it is foolish to just give it to them.  Also, by abandoning Karelia you allow Germany to put a large stack there to continue trading Finland with the allies, making R’s 10 IPC NO harder to get, and it makes it more difficult for the UK shuck to take off.

We are not complaining about the mech inf, we are complaining about 6 IPC tanks being made obsolete by them.

Uh wodan, bombard works that way in AA50, units killed get to fire back.

And yes, you will see huge defensive stacks now, both on land in the form of inf/mech inf, and in the sea with 2 hit carriers.

I personally still feel the game is balanced in a dice game, also, holding to revised strats will make you loose.  In a strong KGF Russia has to come out swinging to help lower German income to a reasonable level.  Also, protecting the US against Japan is easier than it looks if played properly.  One other important thing is the relationship of Germany and Italy in this game. The can opener threat can really stall Russia.  Also, the fact that Italy can easily stack around 10 units into france by turns 3 or 4 if allowed to gain a large income counteracts Germany only building 10 units a turn, as nearly all of those units get to swing at Russia.  Also of note is the extreme importance of holding Persia.  I have found that abandoning India and moving to Persia UK1, followed by Russian inf reinforcing turn 2 along with other allied units moving that direction threw Africa is the best way to hold Japan in the south.  You cannot loose Persia.  I also feel it is important in a KGF setup that the allies have two fleets, one to hold in northern europe, and one in the south.  This forces G/I to protect more territory than they can.

It also seems KGF is the only viable strat, and any pacific strat is limited in scope to holding onto a few NOs and distracting Japan a bit.  There is no real way to bottle Japan up early before her income soars while containing G/I as well.  I wish it were not so, but it is.  Japan just plain has too many transports and carriers for the US to even try to face them alone, and no one can afford to help.

@bongaroo:

@bugoo:

Ok i’m looking at game 8 and see a few mistakes.

R1
Do NOT abandon Karelia!  G had 4 inf, 1 art, 3 arm and a bunch of planes in range.  Russia could have had a stack of 11 inf, 1 art, 1 arm plus 2 uk figs there.  You gave germany free money without them even having to work for it.  If you had to do an attack you should have struck Baltic States.

So I loose the fleet you suggest to not spend as much $ on?  If those fighters are in KAR they sure as heck aren’t keeping a fleet above the waters, right?

If Germany wants it they can take KAR on G2and If I stack all my defense there I just end up with nothing to trade territories with.

As I said G only had a handful of units in striking range of Karelia.  If you give G that much free money you will loose the game.  You could have stacked 11 inf, 1 arm, 1 art, plus an optional 2 UK figs, more than enough to hold it.  On R1 you must stack the crap outta Karelia or else Germany just makes too much money.

As far as navy best UK1 buy in my book is 1 AC, 3 trans, 1 Destroyer, land the 2 US figs on the carrier.  If G has a large quantity of air in range, scratch 2 of the transports for another AC or destroyer.  I really like the 3 transports though.  In the game I was looking at G only had 2 fighters and 1 bomber in range of SZ 2, the ideal location to drop your fleet.  Because of such a large transport buy, you force the germans to defend france heavily.  On UK2 you can begin a large shuck of units into Karelia, or, if you need more boats stop in SZ 6, trade NWE and do a large drop on Norway and build more boats.

Thirded.

2 hit carriers will really change the Atlantic as well as there is almost always another place to land your fighters and you can worry about repairing the carrier once the enemies planes are all shot down at your leisure.  This will truly put the carrier as the ultimate shuck defender.

Also, I was really hoping strat bombers would help break the defensive deadlock of the sea by being a powerful navel attack unit.  Just what makes a torpedo bomber defend at a 3?  I understand regular figs high defensive value as they defend against enemy planes very well, but what gives?