Axis & Allies .org Forums
    • Home
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Register
    • Login
    1. Home
    2. calvinhobbesliker
    3. Posts
    • Profile
    • Following 0
    • Followers 2
    • Topics 93
    • Posts 4,637
    • Best 9
    • Controversial 0
    • Groups 0

    Posts made by calvinhobbesliker

    • RE: Is there currently an average bid(or even a bid) in G40 2nd edition

      @taamvan:

      100% KJF is NOT a loser.  Japan in G40 can be torn apart via a number of different strategies.  These strategies do not work on Germany.  If Japan can reach or exceed USA wartime income, then even these KJFs will falter (this is more likely in G42 than G40)

      KGF does not mean 100% Atlantic.  It means trying to kill Germany.  Since this doesn’t work, it should be called AGO= Annoy Germany Often.

      Is the Europe strategy in KJF to turtle in London and Egypt and delay in the Middle East as long as possible after Moscow falls on G6 or G7?

      posted in Axis & Allies Global 1940
      calvinhobbeslikerC
      calvinhobbesliker
    • RE: What Extra Sculpts, Roundels, etc for custom G40 table and game

      @Bob77:

      What!!! Dont do it!!!
      No offence to HGB, but those roundels are way too expensive.
      You can buy global for twice that price and get the sculpts as well.
      You only need chinese and union jack roundels to track income.
      You could get spare roundels for major powers from 41.
      You could probably find a few french italian and or anzac roundels on ebay for a better price.

      Umm, my 2 cents

      People aren’t buying those roundels because they need more, but because they want better quality ones.

      posted in Customizations
      calvinhobbeslikerC
      calvinhobbesliker
    • RE: Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2)

      Is rocket range 4 instead of 3 in G40? I think (East) Germany is 4 spaces away from London and Scotland.

      posted in Axis & Allies Global 1940
      calvinhobbeslikerC
      calvinhobbesliker
    • RE: What's New at Historical Board Gaming?

      Hello GHG,

      If the Americans scramble their 2 fighters in Hawaii against the Japanese invasion fleet, then a sea battle is created, and the previously ignored American subs can enter the battle if they choose (they can also submerge and stop participating at any point in the battle since the Japanese do not have any destroyers in the battle).

      The sea battle involves an attacking Japanese carrier, 2 cruisers, and 3 transports against the defending 2 American fighters and 2 subs (if they choose to participate, which they probably will given that this battle determines the outcome of the entire game). The American submarines get a first strike attack as long as they’re in the battle, since the Japanese have no destroyers. These could damage or kill the Japanese carrier or cruisers without them being able to fire back (except if the Japanese carrier is only damaged).  The result of the battle may greatly affect the Japanese turn:

      The Japanese will win the battle if they can kill the 2 American fighters and either sink the American submarines or have them submerge, which is unlikely since this is a critical battle. If the Japanese lose their 2 cruisers while killing the 2 American fighters, then the Japanese can’t win the battle, since they would only have a carrier with 0 attack and non-combat transports, all of which will eventually be sunk by the defending American submarines if the Japanese do not retreat. Thus, Japan must in fact kill both fighters and both submarines. Note that the Japanese cannot kill both American fighters and then choose to ignore any remaining American subs. They must sink both subs and both fighters. Even if they do this, the cruisers can no longer bombard Hawaii, so it will be up to the 6 ground units and the Japanese planes to kill the American land units on Hawaii. With 6 land units and 7 planes against 8 infantry, this is still very likely. Thus, if Japan manages to win the sea battle, they will likely capture Hawaii and thus win the game. However, if in the sea battle the Japanese carrier is damaged or sunk, then the 2 Japanese planes attacking Hawaii with only 1 move left will be forced to die if they survive the battle. After the battle, the surviving Japanese planes with 2 movement could land on the carriers off Midway, and the one with 3 movement could land on Midway itself.

      However, a FUBAR will occur if the Japanese lose the sea battle. This will occur if they lose both cruisers and if any American units are left in the sea zone. At this point, retreating from the sea zone is the best option, since each round the battle is continued with a carrier and transports unable to attack is another round they could be killed by the American units. If such a retreat occurs, the surviving Japanese ships (the carrier if still alive and any transports) would have to retreat one space away to a sea zone at least one of the original attackers originated in (even if the attacking ship in question was sunk). This nullifies the ground unit landing on Hawaii, but the 7 planes will be forced to attack Hawaii for at least 1 round, leading to the probable loss of a couple of planes. After the first round of such a battle, the Japanese would be well advised to retreat, since they can’t capture Hawaii with just planes and trading planes for infantry is a bad idea. In this case, since the Japanese carrier was forced to retreat (if it wasn’t sunk), the Japanese planes in Hawaii with 1 move left no longer have anywhere to land (if they survived the 1 round of the battle of Hawaii), so they will be forced to ditch in the ocean. The Japanese planes with 2 moves can again land on the 2 carriers off Midway, and the Japanese planes with 3 moves can land on Midway itself.

      The retreating transports will still have their troops on board, and cannot land them onto a friendly island. Thus, they are vulnerable to being sunk by a surviving American fighter or submarine unless they are protected by other Japanese ships. If the Japanese sufficiently protect these transports, they may be able to try invading Hawaii again next turn, this time no doubt bringing enough forces to win both the sea and the land battle, if possible. However, the US will do all in its power to prevent this from happening again, now that they are alerted.

      Thanks,

      calvinhobbesliker

      posted in Marketplace
      calvinhobbeslikerC
      calvinhobbesliker
    • RE: Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2)

      If the US enters the war on the collect income phase on its 3rd turn, then since the mobilize units phase was before that, does that mean that the US can only build 3 units on each factory?

      posted in Axis & Allies Global 1940
      calvinhobbeslikerC
      calvinhobbesliker
    • German Trucks from Bulge

      Is there somewhere I can get the German trucks from Bulge? HBG is out of stock.

      posted in Marketplace
      calvinhobbeslikerC
      calvinhobbesliker
    • Piece Count Weirdness

      It seems that the US only gets 20 infantry pieces, but the setup and reinforcement charts have a total of 22 American infantry. In addition, all the countries seem to have lots of extra artillery pieces that will never come into play. Am I missing something in the rules, or are these artillery pieces just extra? I understand the extra German infantry and tanks and extra American tanks since stacks with chips may split up, but the American and German artillery and the British tanks and artillery are all separate in the setup/reinforcement charts and so would not need extras.

      posted in Axis & Allies: Battle of the Bulge
      calvinhobbeslikerC
      calvinhobbesliker
    • RE: Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2)

      Can British ships move through the Panama Canal when the US is not at war? Can Russian (surface) ships move through the Strait of Gibraltar, the Panama Canal, or the Suez Canal when neither Russia nor the US is at war?

      posted in Axis & Allies Global 1940
      calvinhobbeslikerC
      calvinhobbesliker
    • Taranto without CV?

      Has anyone tried doing a Taranto Raid without using the CV? This probably requires a bid, perhaps a sub and a fighter at least. You do a normal Taranto, except you leave the British carrier in SZ98, hoping to lose the 1-2 fighters you bring from London as casualties. If this works out, you can withdraw the carrier into the Indian Ocean and combine it with the Indian and South African ships to have a decent fleet that can play in the Med, instead of the carrier being killed by the Axis.

      posted in Axis & Allies Global 1940
      calvinhobbeslikerC
      calvinhobbesliker
    • RE: Advise for concept definition and name "Interception Threshold Gap"

      In G40, attacking bombers and defending fighters roll for 1’s.

      Say you have x bombers and y defending fighters. The attacker will lose y/6 bombers on average, for an IPC loss of 2y. The defender will lose x/6 fighters, an IPC loss of (5/3)x.

      The remaining x-y/6 bombers will be fired on by the AAA’s. These will kill (x-y/6)/6 of them, a further 2x-y/3 of IPC loss for the attacker.

      (In both of the above cases, I’m assuming neither side outnumbers the other by a factor of 6 or more, else all planes on the weaker side will die).

      The remaining (5/6)(x-y/6) bombers will do damage to facilities. Each will do 3.5 IPC’s of damage on average.

      Therefore, the attacker lost 2y+2x-y/3=(5/3)y+2x IPC’s. Meanwhile, the defender lost (5/3)x+(7/2)*(5/6)(x-y/6)=(55/12)x-(35/72)y IPC’s.

      For these to be equal, we need (55/12-2)x=(5/3+35/72)y, which becomes (31/12)x=(155/72)y. This simplifies to y=(6*31/155)x, which becomes y=(6/5)*x. Therefore, 5 bombers against 6 fighters, or 50 bombers against 60 fighters will cause the same IPC loss on both sides (assuming facility damage isn’t maxed out).

      posted in Axis & Allies Global 1940
      calvinhobbeslikerC
      calvinhobbesliker
    • RE: Portable Piece Storage Tips?

      @GeneralHandGrenade:

      One thing to consider when buying plastic piece containers is the lid. If you see my videos you can see that the lids don’t open all the way and are “up in the air.” This allows you to have a smaller footprint on the table with your containers because the lids aren’t all the way open taking up twice as much space as they would if you have to lay the lids down on the table. Also, they are handy because you can put your cards, charts, paper money, etc. on the lid where you can see them. I had to hunt around to find lids that were like this because most of them open all of the way.

      Which exact brand of tackle box do you use? And how do you transport them all?

      posted in Customizations
      calvinhobbeslikerC
      calvinhobbesliker
    • RE: Portable Piece Storage Tips?

      @Bob77:

      I was reluctant to get the planos because of space issue. I wanted something that fit in the box. I went ahead and bought them any way. Very happy i did. I got the ones with good latches and if the dividers are put in correctly (not upside down) the pieces stay in their compartments just fine.
      They should all fit in a regular back pack. Duffle bag, gym bag or “husky” soft sided tool bag($20).

      How many tackle boxes did you need for all G40 pieces? Did you put multiple nations in one box?

      posted in Customizations
      calvinhobbeslikerC
      calvinhobbesliker
    • Portable Piece Storage Tips?

      I was thinking of buying a bunch of Plano tackle boxes to store my G40 and eventually my HBG pieces. However, that would probably require 8 or 9 trays in total, and that seems hard to travel with (if I want to bring my G40 game to gaming meetups). I really like the FMG Ammo Box, but unfortunately it’s out of stock. Has anyone found a good, portable way to store the tackle boxes?

      posted in Customizations
      calvinhobbeslikerC
      calvinhobbesliker
    • Great Deal on eBay

      https://www.ebay.com/itm/Axis-and-Allies-Anniversary-Edition-Board-Game/172971664675?epid=2215423899&hash=item2845ea2523:g:zFoAAOSwFb5aBHDu

      ToysRUs is selling Anniversary for $48.74 on ebay, with free shipping!

      posted in Axis & Allies Anniversary Edition
      calvinhobbeslikerC
      calvinhobbesliker
    • RE: Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2)

      @simon33:

      @calvinhobbesliker:

      If I attack a fighter and carrier with a sub and cruiser, and if the defending fighter and carrier both roll hits, am I forced to lose both my units, or can I assign the carrier hit to my cruiser and then say that the fighter can’t hit my sub?

      You’re forced to lose both units.

      Yeah, that’s what I figured.

      posted in Axis & Allies Global 1940
      calvinhobbeslikerC
      calvinhobbesliker
    • RE: Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2)

      If I attack a fighter and carrier with a sub and cruiser, and if the defending fighter and carrier both roll hits, am I forced to lose both my units, or can I assign the carrier hit to my cruiser and then say that the fighter can’t hit my sub?

      posted in Axis & Allies Global 1940
      calvinhobbeslikerC
      calvinhobbesliker
    • RE: USA Strategy. Green Seas/Skies

      @aagamerz13:

      The main critical point in WW2 that many miss is that, at a certain time around mid 1942, USSR only had about 1000 armored vehicles and a few thousand planes left with which to fight Germany.  This fact alone is not significant.  But couple it with the fact that, at that very same point, USSR had received about 5000 armored vehicles and many thousands of planes from UK and USA, and a clear picture emerges.  So, at this point and probably weeks to months earlier, USSR would have been out of WW2 because they would not have any heavy weapons to fight with.  All the territory they gained or held with lend lease weapons would have gone to Germany with low losses.  If US/UK had not done lend lease or had done it at a lower level, USSR was out.

      Do you have a source for this? In any case, the Russians produced about 24000 tanks in 1942, or an average of 2000 per month. They were not in danger of running out of tanks.

      posted in Axis & Allies Global 1940
      calvinhobbeslikerC
      calvinhobbesliker
    • RE: Looking for Cardboard Axis Minors + Minor Allies Custom Roundels from HBG

      @Wolf555:

      Does anybody know where to get the Cardboard Axis Minors + Minor Allies Custom Roundels from HBG, preferably in Europe ?
      I was told by HBG they won’t be restocked  :-(

      Which ones are out of stock? I’ve looked at a few and they seem to be in stock.

      posted in Marketplace
      calvinhobbeslikerC
      calvinhobbesliker
    • RE: USA Strategy. Green Seas/Skies

      @Ichabod:

      I would like to add that Pittsburgh and the surrounding areas of that city along the rivers produced more tons of steel for the war effort than Germany, Italy, and Japan combined! I did not know this until having lived in Pittsburg recently for 3 years. On a side note, the steel industry was close to out of business because of environmental regulations in Pittsburgh (pollution was horrible there at one point)…ect., but with new cleaner technologies, the steel industry has been making a huge come back.

      One might have to bump up the US’ income from 100 IPCs to like 300 IPCs per turn to get a “historical” representation in the board game. Perhaps the Axis get 5 turns before the US joins the game to really simulate December 1941. But good luck once the Sleeping Giant joins.

      That’s just one location.

      Look up the figures on the amount of Carriers w/ Battle Groups the US had by 1945.

      Yeah, it’s ludicrous that both Japan and Germany can easily make more money than the US after about 5 turns in this game.

      posted in Axis & Allies Global 1940
      calvinhobbeslikerC
      calvinhobbesliker
    • RE: USA Strategy. Green Seas/Skies

      @taamvan:

      A truly historical set up and play would mean

      no tanks for japan
      no strat bombers for the axis
      no carriers to Germany
      1/2 the number of tacs and fighters for axis
      Axis and UK carriers carry 1 plane

      and

      100+ $ for USA
      -40 for Japan

      I think Japanese and American carrier both carried large numbers of planes.

      Also:

      1 less CV for Japan
      Luftwaffe can’t attack on water
      Uboats can’t attack North America for a few turns
      At least 1 more British carrier
      Lots more British destroyers in the Atlantic
      US should have an Atlantic battleship
      Larger Russian air force
      Japan not allowed to march across Siberia

      posted in Axis & Allies Global 1940
      calvinhobbeslikerC
      calvinhobbesliker
    • 1 / 1