Topics created by Cow

@bryanbr:

@Hobbes:

I sent the Russian fighter to Egypt and did an SZ37 attack with the UK. Germany got a carrier for the Med. Japan killed the Russian stack on Buryatia and did a botched attack on Hawaii. US went Pacific.

It sounds like the Japanese player was just incompetent.

Under no scenario do I see Japan attacking Hawaii if the US is putting the right amount into the Pacific.  If in KGF, the US needs to support the pacific with enough to prevent the loss of Hawaii.

He decided to attack SZ52 on J1 with 1 FTR, 1 BMR, 1 cruiser and 1 submarine. That’s 73% odds with LL, enough to make the US lose the carrier but my sub got lucky and hit with a 1.

I’d swing the SS with the BB to hit the UK BB…that way you can sack that runaway transport G2.  The only thing I can say that could give you a chance is just go KGF…drop 1 inf a turn for UK in India, but save the rest. have the US build two DD…save enough money for a UK3 drop, but I really don’t think the Allies have much of a chance in this anyways.

I thought this was a hilarious game. Was close up until, I stacked west canada like an idiot. lol.

Though if I had taken berlin at 58% the usa mistake wouldn’t be so bad, since uk could save america. I feel like I spent the whole game getting screwed, which is why it was hilarious for me lol.

GIVE ME MY 2 DOLLARS.

my_two_dollars.jpg
palin-you-betcha.jpg

@seththenewb:

Good game

good game to you too,
you fought very well

I don’t see a reason to expose your fleet early as Japan.  That said, even playing games with the Americans, albeit fun; is counterproductive.

You don’t gain much as you can still bait the US into buy full Pacific early in the game against a well-versed player, so that school of thought is out.

Carolines don’t come into play until much later in the game (read securing Calcutta) and VC win is Hawaii or Sydney.  However, I’m banking that Hawaii is “easier” to take once removing the fleet than Sydney.  This is primarily due to the Minor IC being able to put out multiple units round after round until you arrive with an Amphib that requires the Carolines.

Its much easier to go after Hawaii as it is a single move from Tokyo anyways (barring any blocks).  Having to fight for the Carolines and then Sydney seems less… efficient?

I don’t know global, but reading this discussion reminds me of when we played an Expansion rules set from Gamers Paradise for AAR that had two hit capital ships (costs weren’t modified back then).  The capital ships could take a damage hit, but they would need to be repaired, and if it were an a/c taking the hit, she would lose her ability to carry planes.  Damaged BB’s could not attack either.  You had to sit (for one turn) in a SZ adjacent to an undamaged IC to get repaired (IC’s could be protected from SBRs with eascorts, so an undamaged IC was a bit easier to achieve)

One last rule for the capital ships in taking damage:  When a capital ship(a/c, BB) were to be taken as damage, it had to be the carrier first.  In other words, carriers were the primary target for the attacker.

Feel free to pick and choose any of these rules to try and balance the pacific as you seem fit.

I haven’t really paid much attention to convoy damage and how it works in triplea, when I convoy 97 as allies usually I have enough stuff to convoy all the spots regardless.

I like the old convoy system, rolling convoy in a live game adds more time and takes away from the pace.

In either system you should be doing 8 convoy (I won’t have korea, because russia is coming in), so yeah, I wouldn’t worry about it so much.

I was thinking of playing games in which russia had to take Non African original axis territories for his national objective (ie no +14 off africa).

However this money is very useful for russia to survive mid-late game. How should russia be compensated?

I put 2 russian destroyers and 2 cruisers in the black sea with a transport. Russia battleship in the baltic sea in sz 115 where the cruiser is.  I also gave russia a bomber.

You may be thinking it is a bit much, but they can’t actually go anywhere and get blasted easily by germany anyway. However it should equate to the late game money russia would have gotten off of africa.

What do you guys think?

@wheatbeer:

Page 20 in the Europe rulebook says its possible:
“An attacking land unit can assault a coastal territory from an ally’s transport, but only on the attacking land unit owner’s turn.”

Clear enough! Thank you!

@wheatbeer:

The transport unit description doesn’t seem to contradict this.

I still am a bit confused because of the Transport unit description
“Amphibious Assaults: A transport can take part in an amphibious assault step of the Conduct Combat phase. That is the only time a transport can offload into a hostile territory.”

So in fact a transport can offload into a hostile territory under two circumstances:
1. own troops in an amphibious assault on it’s own combat move
2. allied troops (cargo) as part of the combat move of the allied nation
  (but here the Transport cannot be part of the amphibious assault because allied nations never attack together)

But no more arguing, I am convinced now.
Thank you again.
:-)

I moved in with 2 carrier 2 dd bship cruiser 4 fighter.

i used the bship from pacific and cruiser. union africa dd.

after that was easy to get the rest. dd carrier fig. dd carrier fig. dd carrier fig.  
~
also you can sink italy no problem… your air reaches everywhere. :D

also if usa has a small atlantic fleet, may as well chuck it into 97 after merging the two. usually I have something for atlantic… I don’t buy transports with usa anymore in the atlantic. It is all about convoy disruption combined with +15-+19 NO money for russia. getting air into russia… bombers are nice. with bombers you can bomb all the ics, hit germany mech/tanks, pretty much just cheese and be lame is what I do.

I mean this is not aa50 where the most optimal strategy is to double stack uk and usa on france or northwestern europe. it don’t really work out for allies most of the time ESPECIALLY IN LOW LUCK GAMES. There is no way you can get a foothold in time.

Shut em down in 97 is much more realistic followed up with usa air into russia. +15-19 NO for russia from africa. pacific eventually you park in japan to convoy disrupt or trade naval/take islands back in dutch.

~
check it out if you have enough naval to drop in normandy, those could instead be in 97 doing -10 a round no transports necessary.

how is that good for germany to see bombers take out his naval? you get like 1 or 2 drops in before usa slams it… that sets you back from the VC win… with the naval and air lost there and the cost of the airbase is enough mech to just have shoved down there anyway.

Not to mention bombers take 1 round to get in position then it hits… it is the fastest way for USA to have an impact. bombers hitting stuff is fast and furious in an otherwise slow process.

there is no infrastructure required for bombers either. you just buy one beer and GO, epic winning, it is bi winning. who needs to drop men to trade ipcs with germany/italy? when you can just blast their stuff in the ocean?

Romania minor is ok for ground units. the naval and airbase is not going to pay for itself.

how many rounds can you get swinging at russia with just carrier 2 transports? and say you pull your air back before the bombers hit? I’ll give you round 1 place romania round 2 drop the 3 naval pieces (30 ipc and + airbase cost which is not really lost and has somewhat a tactical advantage from there… but it can be bombed later).  Anyway caucasus is worth 7 so you would need a good 4 rounds of drops to pay for itself in theory.

trying to defend it is a dumb idea, you’ll typically lose even more out of it and it stalls you from taking russia and reduces threat levels from axis on sz 97.

not to mention bombers are up there in optimal buys for USA anyway. they do lots of things and can switch fronts pretty fast. plus if you shove 7 bombers at 2 tanks, you break even in terms of IPC (1 bomber for 2 tank).

Giving usa a reason to give russia the ability to call in an airstrike on whatever he could not get to… iz not like a good outcome for axis.

It is like call of duty man, spetnaz will air strike the flag and cap it. Allies get gangsta like that when you throw naval down in the black sea.

Trust me, someone did this to me and bombers own. In all fairness I like having some bombers around… mmm munch that naval.

usually bombers are a part of my opener because usually people like to sea lion feint… if they do go through with sea lion I can at least rest assure that japan won’t declare war or 4 bombers fly into uk. Before 3.9 bombers just increased the casualties of germany in taking uk, now it just too much fodder for germany so it actually delays japan if germany wants to go through with it.

if I see a romania IC early on and no naval buy in the baltic… I’ll only have a couple bombers. if naval is bought in the baltic I’ll still get 3 bombers and a couple dds and a carrier.  It’s the typical reaction from usa. bombers can hit naval up top and land in belarus. 3 bombers layin around is never bad either it can hit an italian fleet that moves out. or industrial bomb an airbase before uk attacks italy fleet so no scramble. or bombers can just strafe italian guys between algeria and egypt… so all russia has to do is blitz a tank through tobruk and that other spot for +7 russia.

bombers are good units to have for usa. I don’t see how they are bad.

Russia’s NO has changed so that bombers are more optimal to have so you can just blast all that stuff and clear it out for russia if there is nothing better for them to do.

sweet, that is how i thought it worked. hehe egypt minor is gosu!

btw, question; do you prefer the axis because you think they are better with perfect strat, or because you think it is easier to not lose the game to mistakes?

in most axis games I have played, the allies have been the harder side to play, but they have also been the stronger side. for me it seems like the playtesters have not been skilled enough to play very good, so they have concluded with that the allies need more help. then when the game is released, the game will be fairly even when people play it the first time, but later the allies will will, because learning how to play them gives much more strength than learning now to play the axis.

If I played the same every single game, I would be bored out of my mind. Axis have more options than allies and are the ones in the most control of how the game develops.

To answer your question. I prefer axis because of 1) fun 2) if you get diced throughout the game, you can always just go for the win. 3) axis have to perform or they lose especially if usa is going full pacific (puts germany/italy on the clock for africa and russia).

Did I mention that the allies are boring? Axis do this -> allies got to do this. Axis indirectly control the outcome of what you do and the impact or effect you have on the axis doesn’t come to mid/late game.

Everyone’s axis 1-3 purchases and moves are always the same. HMMM I WONDER WHY. I mix my stuff up depending on my mood and who I play against, but most people have a set way of doing things.

I have a set way of doing this as the allies depending on what the axis purchases / strategies are.

Example sea lion feint -> 1-3 inf rest artillery/mech/tank russia buy. usa 3 bomber 2 dd or 3 bomber 1 carrier. UK 9 inf 1 art.

I always hit 97 and the sz below it as uk, i hate getting diced in one of those spots, because it sets me back a whole round, but the outcome is very good when you win… even if he did not scramble outcome is still good, because you do get to convoy italy… if italy sinks it, he has less stuff than germany so you get to fire more than 1 round typically and that means the french fleet can move.

germany can’t move his naval to take gib or morroco or take uk if japan wants to war round 2. If he does this and puts japan off another round, japan is screwed in pacific, that’s so much income for uk pac and anzac and japan income is put off from being big another round.

so it is an ultimatum the axis face. best move is to just shuffle in the baltic and go barb, let japan explode. Sometimes japan waits to war and I lose UK. That’s fine. I bought offensively with russia and usa. I am ready to push romania push yugo push northern italy and push into rome with my russians. usa can always land air units to help hold. it is beautiful and it is awesome.

The only time I enjoy allies is when germany takes UK over, because the run for italy with russia is too funny, plus I bought plenty of time in pacific by making japan wait till round 3 to declare war… so I don’t have to buy anything for pacific till round 4.
~
in all fairness the guy could not scramble 97 if he wanted 80% at UK. he also had to buy more naval to defend against 2 fighter and 3 bomber from usa the turn he took uk over (so he had to drop 3 destroyers down off normandy)… I think he also bought infantry for germany and air to hit usa if he moved up. he took uk with only tank 2 bombers and a tactical left.

I pulled the pacific fighters into the atlantic side of the map. so I held yugo because of the UK air plus usa bombers. USA moved by gib the turn uk got taken with 4 fully loaded carriers and that starting cruiser the round london fell and it got sunk so germany had to get carriers off normandy to land his air (this was where his london income went to and infantry/art for germany/west germany.

So I had a fun push for yogo at 55% chance to defend. He attacked because it was the only way to save italy. the first round of attack did not go well other than I lost my bombers for usa so in terms of total unit value he was up, but he couldn’t continue or risk germany being taken… So yeah I took italy when he got to liberate it, europe was a mess. Was a pretty cool game, the most fun I had as allies.

most of the time russians just hold romania for some time. usa liberates uk eventually. blah blah you know how those games go.
~
I do like to play allies when I see that no one online knows what the hell they are doing as allies… I’ll take it.

@Alsch91:

Fighters in Rome can scramble into SZ 95 even if only Sicily - or any other territory - is being invaded.
Scrambling can force combat in any neighboring sea zone where combat is possible.
As another example, fighters in gibraltar can scramble against an invasion on Morocco.  Same deal.

Also, yes, a single enemy submarine would stop a transport-only amphibious assault as well.

oops just looked it up mine was an alpha 2 thing

For clarity -

A Blitz is defined as a combat movement where a tank or mech/tank pairing enters an unoccupied enemy territory, captures it, and moves to a second territory as a single combat move.

Any other movement of two spaces, whether during combat or noncombat, is NOT a Blitz and should not be called a Blitz.  It’s either a combat move or a noncombat move, but not a Blitz.

This is important because Mech Inf can always move two spaces as a combat or noncombat move, provided it’s not a Blitz. Calling such moves “Blitzes” implies that Mech can only move two spaces with a tank under every circumstance, and that is NOT the case.

@Larrie:

@Cow:

Siam and French indo china… may the chinese attack it? I do not see a national symbol there or an exception to the rule there. So I kind of just assumed china can’t hit it.

If you check the Pacific rulebook it states that the only two tt’s that China can attack, outside of China of course, are Burma and Kwangtung.

What Larry said, and to be very clear, that has never changed in the Alpha revisions.

Revised the bid is 7 with dice 10 with low luck going to the axis. In 1942 I’d say the game is balanced as is.

The Russian NO deals with originally pro-Axis territories, so true neutrals that switch do not count.

Japan sitting off of Hawaii is fine; there is a sea zone between SZ 26 and SZ 10.