Posts made by d142

@tekkyy:

maybe I didn’t make sense (regarding move 2 spaces per turn, 10 spaces per round)

i can see how that would work, it would make for a speedier transport and more option’s to take evasive action should the cargo get detatched from an escort convoy.

this is how i would implement the new unit into a game.

each cargo ship unit would cost 12 i.p.c, each cargo ship would have a defense of 2 and an attack of 1, and could hold a cargo of 20 i.p.c.
cargo transported by land would have the same stat’s, except if it would be captured (by destroying the unit in battle), where by the capturing power would not gain control of the unit’s attack and defense capabilitie’s, and they would have to provide their own armed escort to get the cargo to an i.p.c. or capital, or run the risk of having the cargo re-taken without a battle.

yeah, i think it’s a good idea, what would the capacity of the transport be, do the crate’s represent construction material’s, i think i would  purchase the crate’s for 1 i.p.c. and have a cap on the number transported by ship, no restriction’s by land movement, except maybe a friendly tank escort, decided between the two national power’s, there could even be a small, interest clause, you know when the national power lending from another wins territorial gain’s they could pay back some of the i.p.c. loan, i would set the capacity to be transported by transport ship to 20 i.p.c., which would leave it needing a heavy escort, i cant imagine myself taking that much of a risk during a game without the benefactor, moving ship’s to join the escort or without the prospect of some payback.

i dont know for sure, the only mario game i played was mario kart, was it wario

1. axis and allies

2. risk (all variant’s)

3. constantine (ps2)

4. commando’s 2, men of honour (ps2)

5. street’s of rage (sega md)

i think that a unit with more than one premium weapon should have an extra set of stat’s on the card, the same as some of the multi-turret tank’s, an ability similar to the “shrapnel” ability could be devised for the panzerfaust against infantry, i think rolling 3 dice would vastly increase the chance of disruption, while not going to overkill

i dont know, i would have a guess that around 15-20 thousand ships were sunk, at the end of ww2 i think there were less than ten servicable ships left of the kriegsmarine.

i have been reading some records taken at the time of the battle of britain accounted day by day,
during the first days the luftwaffe suffered very high losses compared to the RAF, the ratio being as high as 6:1 at times.
i dont know the exact overall ratio of the battle, i suspect it could be as high as 3:1.

i think it varied considerably throughout the campaign, at times the ratio would have been higher than 2:1, maybe even 5:1, i doubt it would ever have been much higher than that. at other times the ratio would have been in favour of the luftwaffe. i can not say for sure, although i think the ratio was calculated week by week.

yeah, it looks good, about 90% new units, mg for the french, heavy artillery for the soviet’s and lots of new hardware for germany and the allies, new units to bolster the smaller armies and the arrival of finland to the game.

i was playing a game of axis and allies recently and wondered about the abilities of the panzerfaust unit against infantry units, as they have an attack of four in this situation, and rarely have a success against infantry, what about making their anti infantry abilties the same as the mauser kar 98, and increasing their cost to 10, as it stands when there are no vehicles within range, and are facing an attack they are sitting ducks, considering the new stacking rules would it be plausible to increase the zis-5 3 ton capacity to 3 with an increase in the cost to 6.

yeah, the BF-110 was that bad they needed a fighter escort on on their escort missions.

http://www.military-aircraft.org.uk/ww2-fighter-planes/

some great information and pictures of wwII aircraft here.

@Imperious:

The Germans had wasted Guderians talents for 2 weeks when they were like 50 miles away, then sent the best mobile force south. Stalin’s posture during the period was to hold the cities and Kiev was the major city for Ukraine, so the capture of Moscow would have also led to the loss of the same Soviet armies at Kiev after Guderian  would hook south.

if army group south had advanced on moscow and not won a quick and descisive victory in the ukraine, and in the process
defeating up to 1/5th of the soviet army which was operational at that time. they would have reached moscow sooner and with greater numbers which would have increased the chance of taking moscow, however this would have left the axis forces trapped between the moscow defensive line and facing an attack of up to 500,000 soviet troops from the ukraine that would have been well armed and capable of seriously undermining an axis offensive on moscow. furthermore considering the onset of winter and the slow progress that the armed forces of nazi germany was making toward the ultimate goal of operation barbarossa, and the fierce resistance they faced, army group south would have suffered the same same fate as army group centre, and been forced back from moscow, and would never have reached kiev unless by reorganising and retreating from the moscow offensive and making their way to the ukraine to face most likely by that time exactly what they faced at moscow, they would have been demoralised and understrenght and probably incapable of a serious attack on a more prepared, heavily fortified and defended territory.

the political leadership of russia may have been toppled, russia was never conquered during wwI .
my understanding is that hitler thought that he had to take the ukraine in order to gain supplies of food and materials nescessary for the continuation of the war further to the east.
i dont think the armies that were sent by hitler to attack kiev would have been enough to capture moscow.
the nazi leadership had vast resources and armor, which could not be sustained to their end without conquering every nation that was in their path, and taking control of every resource that nation had, to use for the nazi pursuit of total world domination and the destruction of any person or people who stood against them.
leningrad was very important in terms of the war, for the people of leningrad to hold out against the siege and continue to supply their front lines with supplies, while surviving on very little food and stopping the enemy from taking their city, supply centres and resources was severely damaging to the enemys advance and intention to occupy their nation.

@Adlertag:

Germany lost the war the day they attacked Russia.

i think this is true, i dont think germany could ever have conquered russia, given the superior numbers of hardware and supplies of oil and raw materials that russia could call upon, i think russia was hitler’s first priority, and could not afford to wait any longer to let russia build up it’s armor. in response to the question, i think only the capture of moscow, and the destruction of the red army could have taken russia, if russia had fallen under nazi occupation i think the war would have continued for many more years.

yeah, around 2:1 is more accurate, i was looking at some stats for the battle of britain losses, luftwaffe 1750 losses, RAF 900 losses, not counting the blitz.

i voted for the spitfire. it is the one i remember the most from watching wwII movies, the spitfires were always out numbered and out gunned, and when the RAF got the warning of the messerschmit’s imminent arrival to britain they would be in the air shooting down the nazi aircraft 10-1. i dont know if that is exactly true though :-)

i dont know enough wwII ships to pick a favourite, although i think this one would have been really cool, if it was ever manufactured, have any of you heard of the proposal by someone from the american side to build aircraft carriers out of
ice that dosent melt, i know it sounds bizzare, they said it would have been virtually indestructable because it would have been as strong, if not stronger than concrete, and have the capacity to carry far more aircraft because of this,
i think the ice is called perma-ice or concrete ice, i dont know if it was manufactured or what, i only caught a glimpse of the programme while watching television.

anyone up for a game of revised with tech and 12 national advantages, using aBattlemap, frood or in forum dice.

yeah, thank’s, the grossdeutcshland campaign look’s very good.
i think with some modification’s to the map’s i have and some substitute unit’s it is possible.

if you look at the T34-76, S.U.122, and the S.U.85, the chassis’s are all very similar.