Posts made by cts17

Wow. Quite the round! I’m pretty impressed with my defensive rolls. Time to see if it holds up :)

Give me a little while. I have to get back into this A&A thing….

Sorry. I will lose the destroyer.

4 even to 1 odd…. looks like the dice really want you to be the Axis ;

flip a coin, eh? Let the more common type decide ;) best of 5

Odd: cts17(axis) vs. Mistergreen(allies)
Even: cts17(allies) vs. Mistergreen(axis)

Rolls: 5@6; Total Hits: 55@6: (2, 2, 6, 2, 5)

I have returned from beyond the void to play again :)

I don’t want to play on Global yet though ;)

Anyone care for a '41 game against me?

@Gargantua:

1. consoles
2. are
3. for
4. little
5. kids

1. You
2. have
3. no
4. life
5. Stop trolling

Seriously though. Consoles have their own place. Sure, it’s not as controllable as a PC, but it also isn’t as interactive with your hands and is generally on a larger screen :)

1. Legend of Zelda
2. Morrowind
3. Halo 3
4. CoD 4: WaW
5. Rainbow Six

I occasionally read about how the Soviet soldiers on the whole were less effective than the Japanese, who were less effective then the British, who were less effective then the Americans who were less effective than the Germans.

How is this conclusion brought about? After answering, could you please use your formula to provide a list of WWII combat effective troops per nationality?

@Frontovik:

@special:

An alternative choice (in case you wish to quickly beef up ANZAC) is for India to take Dutch new Guinea (+10 IPC in NO’s for ANZAC) and then let ANZAC take Java (+4IPC), giving them 24 IPC’s after their first turn.

(haven’t actually done it myself yet)

NO is only worth 5, and only starts when at war?

I think when he said after their first turn he meant the 2nd turn and following. I agree with you though, it is more proper to say 'after their second turn" as income is collected at the end of, or ‘after,’ their turn.

How did you hold the DEI from the Indians and the Australians?

I would give the new player complete control of the entire Commonwealth.

This gives him 3 pools of money to play with, one completely on land, one completely at sea and one that is the most influential with some choices.
It also gives him complete overview of the entire board, as everyone’s moves directly impact his gameplay.

If you have a competent player doing the United States’ moves, he can help ‘dictate’ the new-comers actions by his own moves, as India/ANZAC largely move based on American aggression.

There aren’t so many units for him to toy with, but he still feels top shelf because his units are all over the board. There’s no complex naval maneuvering like that between the USA & Japan, there’s no massive calculation of large armies like in Russia, there’s no tight economic playing and strategic allocation like that involved with Germany. There’s no need for rapid expansion across the entire board like Japan.

It is hands down the best nation for a newcomer to play.

A navy with 2 or 3 battleships will always fair better than a navy without.
Something that people often fail to consider is the 2 hits accredited to these ships.
The same applies to the carriers. Carriers should not have 2 hits, only battleships should.

@Cmdr:

We called that Kill America First and Larry outlawed it, cts17.

I was not advocating a KAF. Besides, that’s not really feasible anymore, given your quote. I was talking about a True Neutral Crush, hence the topic :)
Really, how many opponents have expected a true neutral crush before? Especially one that transitions into a late invasion of Russia from 4 directions… Norway/Sweden, the Eastern Front, Turkey and the Middle East. Up to 12 Russian territories can be immediately exposed for the preliminary invasion by Germany & Italy, and Japan can up that to 17…

I have often wondered what an IGNORE Russia strategy would look like. Russia is not strong. She does not have the capabilities to become strong. Those that speak of the Russian Bear only speak of it when Germany collapses against her iron walls of infantry somewhere between Moscow and Poland. Why step foot into Russia in the first place? Certainly, border nations are worth disputing, but a solid push into foreign territory? An armored wall of planes and mobile equipment is more than enough of a deterrent for a Russian advance.

What if Germany (and thus Italy & Japan) ignored Russia and went a True Neutral Crush? Japan would not be crippled pushing resources against Russia, besides the neutering of the Russian infantry stacks should the opportunity present itself. Free to expand south, free to grow, free to show the world, including America, her prowess.

Everyone’s Axis Europe victories have been credited to a Russian Fall that could only occur with Japanese intervention. I say, who needs Russia? A Japan that forces America’s hand into the Pacific, especially since common strategies today have a strong American presence in the Pacific, could allow Germany the oomph to focus its energies on other forces, like the neutering of Britain.

Should Africa fall, the Isles are subject to convoy raiding and strategic bombing. Great Britain could be knocked out of the game without a Sealion.

Everyone speaks of Axis strats as revolving around a Barbarossa opening or a Sealion opening. How would you react if you saw neither?

Without a Sealion build, Great Britain can threaten France as early as turn 3… not very strongly, but by turn 5, the British can be landing in strength on the French and Scandinavian coasts.

For each nation, which division do you think was the strongest, and which nation had the strongest one overall?

This based on combat experience, equipment, training & leadership.

There is no way an Allied Player is going to let you do that….

It can’t be used as a crutch. You need to be aware of the board. My group will never point out mistakes as they’re being made, especially if it’s a juicy mistake like a lone strategic bomber that can be nailed, or can openers that can be hit.

We generally make our opponents think about their moves, especially in these cases, when we ask them if they’re sure if that’s a good move. We also think aloud about the consequences, and if he’s thinking that nothing can hit his unit when there is, we will ‘straighten’ out their thoughts.

But if they’re not thinking about it, it is a logistical game that encompasses the entire world, so our “intelligence reports” are only given when they’re being brought up by the opponent.

There you go, jim010. I don’t care about success odds as that is impossible to guess. The only “odds” you can guess are how many units are killed after the first round of combat. You need to round from there. Your 7 units remaining makes sense to me, though.

That means you’ve lose 4 planes, and have only 1 unit defending Great Britain, which can be retaken immediately thereafter. Plus, the United States is in the war, and if she’s cooperating, can reinforce nearly immediately. A turn 2 sealion isn’t feasible. Possible, but not feasible.

On to turn 2. I don’t care what Germany builds. Most will build more transports and units. Few will be building more sea units.

Great Britain:

Buy
1 CV (16)
2 DD (8)
save (0)

CM:
none

NCM:
SZ92 fleet to SZ110
1 CA SZ91 to SZ119
… I’d loose that battle…

Hmmm… that SZ106 battle really does change things. If the sub wins, I can’t do this build… my odds aren’t good enough. If it looses, then I can build another carrier with more planes on it.

attacker
Rolls: 5@3 5@4; Total Hits: 55@3: (2, 6, 5, 4, 4)5@4: (2, 2, 1, 2, 6)
defender
Rolls: 5@4; Total Hits: 35@4: (6, 2, 3, 5, 3)

attacker:
Rolls: 1@1 4@2 6@3 6@4; Total Hits: 91@1: (2)4@2: (5, 4, 4, 1)6@3: (3, 2, 6, 6, 6, 5)6@4: (1, 3, 2, 1, 2, 2)
defender
Rolls: 9@2 5@4; Total Hits: 89@2: (4, 4, 1, 1, 6, 5, 2, 6, 1)5@4: (2, 4, 3, 5, 3)