Posts made by Commando Brado

I know it’s a bummer. Hopefully a good turn out. Not sure what version they’ll play. My guess is A&A50.

I agree w/the offensive punch buy in later rounds, even Round 2. Just not in Round 1. By buying all inf in Round 1, it gives you 10 to 11 inf in Karelia, plus 4 Caucasus and 4 in Russia. Then, buy offensive weapons in later rounds to go w/all those inf you have. By buying offensive weapson in Round 1, it doesn’t seem to give Russia enough inf to absorb all the losses it’s going to take. Plus, w/a stack of like 10 inf in Caucasus in Round 1, it’s plenty of inf to attack and take any territory in the south that the Germans have losely defended.

Let’s say there is a German sub in SZ6, along w/a German cruiser. And I want to attack SZ6 w/a British battleship, bomber and 1 FTR. Can the German sub submerse before the British battleship gets a chance to fire on it if the German player so choses?

Anyone in S. California interested in meeting at Strategicon on May in LA?

I’ve seen a lot of post indicating building Russian offensive power is the key. I guess it depends on what scenario you’re talking about but I like building all Russian inf on Turn 1 and have been very successful with it. I agree that it depends on what Germany does turn 1 but still think this is a viable option. It kinda dictates to the German player which territories he attacks. Germany can’t attack both north and south effectively. So they have to chose. And the Russian players builds as much inf in the way of the German advance as possible and then bleeds the German player of inf, forcing him to attack Russian inf w/tanks. By that time the Allies should be taking territories, resources, bombing Germany, etc… and then the German player starts to die. Especially if the US has a KGF strategy. Then, the Russian player can start building offensive weapons. And, the extra inf in the early turns gives the Russian player extra inf for the defense of China and it’s backside.

I think it all depends on what the US does. If they go for KGF, then I don’t like the IC in France. If they don’t, then maybe. I haven’t seen a good place to put a German IC that makes sense. Why put a German IC in France or Poland, when Germany is only 1 hex away? Why waste the 15 IPC’s and wait a turn to build? In my opinion, Germany has to take out Russia as quick as possible for the Axis to have a chance to win. They have to squeeze Russia along with Japan.

Building a IC in Egypt for either Germany or the UK is useless. The UK IC will be taken by the Axis and the Axis IC in Egypt, Germany/Italy will spend all their efforts defending it.

The only IC’s I’ve seen work for either side are : a IC in Union of S. Africa for the British. Take a while to mobolize but in a longer game, it starts to pay dividends later in game. Although, you can make an argument that the extra IPC’s against Germany also pay dividends and much sooner.

And of course the Japanese IPC’s. I think most everyone would agree that at least 1 IC for Japan is in order, possibly two. But, it depends on what the US players does. If the US players comes after Japan and aborts KGF, then I think it makes sense for Japan to build 1 IC and build trans to help put units on Asia and defend it’s valuable islands.

Agreed but by the time Germany builds a IC in Poland(Turn 1), builds Inf(Turn 2) and moves them, you could have just built Inf in Germany and moved them to E. Poland, Baltic States or Ukraine. Then, the IC in Poland is useless and you just wasted 15 IPC’s.

I don’t think buying any IC for Germany makes sense, unless it’s in Egypt and you can hold it.

It depends on what the Germans do in Turn 1 and attack E. Poland, Ukraine and make a heavy play for Karelia via Baltic States. And don’t take Karelia in Turn 1, I like to move 2 Inf from Archangel into Karlia, 2 Inf from Russia into Karelia, along w/2 Inf builds in Karlia for 11 Inf in Karelia Turn 1. Then move 3 Inf from Russia into Belorussia, then 1 Art from Karlia to Archangel for counterattack and 1 Art from Russia to Archangel for counterattack. Makes it hard for the Germans to take Karlia Turn 2 w/out heavy losses. And you have a counterattack force for Turn 2, if the Germans attack Karelia from the Baltic States Turn 2. Plus, by then you might have English forces to land in Karelia(Turn 2) as well and take it back.

Thoughts?

Does no one like the 10 Inf for Russia Turn 1? I’ve done this a few times now and had great success! I like to build offensive capability on Turn 2. Thoughts?

Looking for a AA50, 41 or 42 scenario with or without NO’s, with or without Tech, no Interceptors and Dardanelles open. I’m willing to play either side.

Rohmm I’m up for that 41 scenario game if you’re still interested. Prefer to play the Axis but I’ll willing to play any side or roll for it.

I live in Orange county and can play on weekends. Willing to drive somewhere in San Diego to play or host a game at my house.

During the combat movement phase, the Japanese players loads 3 Inf and 1 Tank on 2 Transports. Moves two hexes, attempting a seaborne invasion on the Hawaiian Islands. As part of the seaborne invasion, let’s say Japan has other naval units attempting to destroy US naval units in sz 53 before the seaborne invasion starts. Japan aborts the seaborne invasion, during the naval combat. Meaning, Japan decides to retreat from the naval battle, before the seaborne invasion occurs. The Japanese player retreats one seazone, from which his at least one of his naval units traversed, during the combat move phase. This sea zone has an island territory in it(Caroline Is). Is the Japanese player also allowed to offload his units during the Non Com move phase onto the Caroline Is. I believe the answer is no because he just loaded those units during the Com move phase that turn. Am I correct?

Question :

Say Japan attacks Hawaii w/a amphipbious assault. And the US has naval units defending the territory. After the naval battle, the US has 2 figthers(which were on a AC) left only. But, Japan takes so many naval losses that they abort the naval battle but still have 2 transports w/3 Inf and 1 tank aboard.

My questions are, since Japan aborted the naval battle but there are still 2 US fighters left in the sea zone, does this prevent the Japanese player from continuing the amphibious assault? Or, since there are only 2 US fighters left in the sea zone and no US naval units, can the Japanese player continue with his naval assault.

2nd question, if the Japanese player is allowed to continue with the amphibious assault, are the US fighters allowed to land in Hawaii before the amphibious assault starts? Or, do they land somewhere in the non com phase? If in the non com phase, how many spaces can they go or where can the land?

Thanks!

I’m available for So Cal games. I live in Orange county and I’m willing to travel.

What is Dardanelles rule?

I live in Orange county. I’m interested to travel down to San Diego.

I’m looking for an opponent for the 41 scenario of AA50. If you’re interested, let me know? Thanks! First time playing online so it will be slow go at first but I have been playing A&A(all versions) via boardgame for over 20 years. So lot’s of experience and know the rules well. Thanks!