Posts made by deadbunny

Quaker,

The reason I said what i said is that I have yet to play a game where Japan does not strike Russia in the first round. It costs the Axis nothing because the current Russian NO is countered by the loss of the territories in (-3 in round one and -1 in round 2 so the Russian not at war NO goes to 1 ipc). Plus the Japanese if waiting till round 3 to attack UK/ANZAC/US have an overwhelming force to both crush China with and the Russian far east with a modest setup to attack the DEI. Maybe if I played different people the result would be different but I always see Japan striking  Russia early, and I would do it myself. Any NO would have to be a penalty to Japan to prevent it, such as giving Russia offensive pieces in the far east or some such.

Quaker,

NO’s that favor one side over the other will just give an advantage to one side that was not intended when the game designers worked the mechanics out. What is 3 ipc’s to japan when they can just get that the first turn more than likely by taking the three furthest territories? If Russia attacks they will loose anything gained anyway since they have no offensive pieces to back up a thrust, or their income negated through naval blockading. By turn two japan can be making 4 ipcs by taking an additional territory and if Russia is lax in thinking will loose all the infantry to a major air attack. So it only benefits Japan in this case and seems lopsided.

I was asking for help with ANZAC strats and now the thread is gone? It had two pages but its not even listed under my latest posts by author. Any idea?

EDIT: I know some people used racial epitaphs in the discussion, is this why? If so I understand why, I mentioned it was inappropriate.

Well I certian didnt intend to disturb anyone with it  grin

I still find a sense of disturbance to this!

One way you could counter this is never count victory cites as a winning mechanic. My gaming group always has played to total domination (generally ends in concession by the USA if axis wins or concession by japan if the allies win, try taking out up to 80-90 troops in a sea invasion!) and it would fit this scenario better than the victory city setup.

Stefano, please get a challenging Japan player. Japan is in this also and if the USA did what you state then the game could be or will be in peril.

This is the weirdest and most disturbing thread about global yet. Regardless of balance issues what would the purpose of allowing Russia to join the axis be? Would this be axis vs allies at that point?

I have to give my thumbs up for your work. Nice personal website also!

I will with hold from stating that the game is imbalanced with so few games being played as of yet. However it seems to me the game gives the chances to play smart and overcome the allied advantage of income. Also it seems that there are too many knee jerk responses to balance in these games and given that a player may seem at an advantage bad/ill advised moves tend to lose the game.

EDIT: it also seems that people are looking for optimal moves at the optimal time and with the optimal outcome. Unless you play with low luck (the easy way out of thinking and taking gambles in war) then you will always find fault in setups and oob rules.

Once again I doubt if you missed the American units at the west coast that starting TUV means anything. If it cant be protected in force its useless unless its out of range.

Hey doc I may have a group that can meld with yours, we play mainly AA we just got the new global setup so let me know.

Small group (2) that has been playing A&A for the last 15 years is looking for new challengers and hoping we can get a regular schedule going for the new AA P & E global game. Anyone interested we are thinking once or twice per month for games on Saturdays starting early (around 8am). We play regularly so any additions would be welcome.

Allies start with major units unprotected. TUV means nothing in the face of that. Just the brit navy as an example (2BB, 2CA, 2-3 DD, 1-2 TRN) So for conservative play 87 IPC value, non conservative 102 IPC. That is for a loss of 5 max subs and a fighter or two at 45-55 IPCs. Starting unit Values mean nothing to an experienced player. I’m not sure starting unit values really mean much.

I second domicron. lets gets some games under the belt before calling in the red flag. generally peeps tend to call the red flag in support of their favorite side anyway. lets keep it neutral for once.

Nice touch, and interesting house rule. But in reality this only gives an advantage to the axis.

I was afraid of that. But hey its a new ballgame here so who am I to complain? I keep hearing about some kind of toranto raid what are people talking about? I have searched the forums but I come up with nothing relative. I realize it may be rehashing an old point but we (my gaming group) are curious.

So a friend and I have been playing ever since the 2nd edition. Once NO’s were introduced we ignored them and just played the game regularly (we never use bids since we often invite others with little experience). Is there even a way to play global without NO’s? Seems to me that the USA player will be at a extreme disadvantage without its declaration of war income. I realize that we could use a house rule for this but is there any options in the rule set to go no NO’s? I ordered both games but have yet to receive them and our first game will be this weekend. Any input would be appreciated.

And I guess I need not say a word, just read the above post. Little do I post but it seems like I’m obliged.

Don’t get me wrong CMDR Jenn. I meant no offense but you can get a little ambitious in your replies, just that good play can be thwarted by the inconvenience of tech, or just plain old bad luck. You cover alot of possibilities with optimal play being the focus. I applaud most of these posts and digest them as good strats to use against others but some seem like your looking for good dice rolls.

I’m not in favor of nerfing anything; I’m just saying that a tech can change the winning side to the losing side. This can happen for both the axis and the allies, basing your overall strategy on combating the possibility of the other getting it is ridiculous. Your assumption that we should base our tactics off of the possibility of an enemy getting a tech is worthless. In the basis of this thread it was about saving the Italian fleet not winning all battles, just the first few rounds.