Posts made by Derek

Well im assuming it means what its says, unless the author is anything like my gf then there is probably many many hidden meanings and clues which must quickly be discovered or face untold consequences.

If you were smart enough to read in context (few humans seem capable) then you would understand just who i was calling lazy.

If they are one in the same then that is not my fault and i do not rescind.

BTW Minor i think these aids look really great, i only was pointing out the irony of you releasing them the same time 3.9 was released.

All opinions aside i merely present the facts…

$ per $ cruisers are terrible in comparison to destroyers or battleships

let me explain in further detail…

6 battleships = 120 IPCs
10 Cruisers = 120 IPCs
15 Destroyers = 120 IPCs

6 BBs vs 10 CGs = BB victory ~75% of time with a tie occurring ~3% of the time (Very one sided)
10 CGs vs 15 DDs =  Destroyer victory 88% of the time with a tie occurring ~1% off the time (Total rape)
6 BBs vs 15 DDs = Destroyer victory ~70% of the time with a tie occurring (One sided)

So if your looking to win naval battles on the open sea nothing beats a mass of destroyers.
And your DDs double as anti sub.
If you need something that can fight and bombard then the battleship is the clear option.
If all you care about is shore bombardment then cruisers would be the best option.

Even if the cost of Cruisers was reduced to 11 it still loses to battleships $ to $, and barely breaks even with destroyers.

I really like Col. Ty Webb idea. This is a historically accurate option that would give more reason to build cruisers.

@Col.:

I’ve always thought cruisers should be able to move an extra space.

At least historically, they were made for higher speeds and more fuel capacity.

This would work, they suck compared to DDs and BBs but can mover further, atleast it gives you reason to spend money on them.

Astonishingly if you reduced the cost of cruisers to 10, an equal monetary amount of destroyers, the destroyer still wins ~52% of them time with a ~2% tie avg.

10 IPC cruiser rape battleships though…

My final suggestion…

DDs - 9 IPC (from 8.)

CGs - 11 IPC (from 12)

BBs - 20 IPC (no change)

20.5 is actually a much more ideal number for BBs but who wants that ?

DDs get beat soundly by BBs (~82% in BB favor) and they lose a close contest to CGs (~51% in CG favor)
CGs are beat by BBs (~78% in BB favor)

So cruisers and destroyers are roughly equal. The difference being cruisers can bombard and destroyers handle submarine duty.
Battleships become the big bully but raising the cost of BBs to 21 doesn’t work either.

All calculations run via Axis and Allies combat simulator (10000 sims) using 1940 rules.

$ for $ cruisers lose hard to both battleships and destroyers.

It makes very little sense in almost any situation to build cruisers.

The only advantage i can see is that if you only want shore bombardment power then cruisers will get you more bang for your buck.

I really would like to see the cost of cruisers reduced to 11 IPCs.

Even with a 1 IPC reduction they still lose to BBs. And they still lose very hard to DDs. But atleast they’d be a little bit more viable an option.

Maybe i’m horribly misinformed…

Thoughts ?

basically if UK does not 100% do everything in its power to protect london on UK1 and UK2, Germany can still take London on G3.

I just did one test and with UK in full defend london mode, on G3 sealion was succesfull, however only 1 tank 2 tacs and 2 strats survived the assault. Hardly a decisive victory. Germany will be weak to both a USSR push and a USA push.

So my thoughts are the changes work.

I honestly beleive Sealion on G3 is still  plausible.

Your looking at ~24 INF (depending on how succesfull SBR was on G2)
1 mech
~6fighters (depeding on whether or not he scrambles to defend seazones or incoming SBRs)
1 tac bomber
5 AA guns

vs

13 INF
5 arty
8 tanks (you could position differently on G2 and send more tanks and less arty but it really shouldnt change anything)
~4 tacs (depending on how many you lost to SBRs)
~3 fighters (depending how many were lost in attacking SZ 111 and if any are lost during SBRs)
~2 bombers (depending if you lost any to SBR

Plug those into a battlecalc…Saying that he never scrambled his fighters, you lost 2 fighters in attacking SZ 111 and one tac during SBR.

72% win for Germany on 10000 sims.

Now obviously battlecalc doesnt count for using AA guns as fodder. (id say its closer to 67% win for Germany which is a risk/ with great reward)

but really it depends on whether or not he scrambles fighters to defend seazones and or SBRs
and how succesfull SBR was on london IC.

Ideally he should never scramble to save his fighters for defense of sealion.

If you are using R&D and UK gets Radar then forget it lol

@General:

These changes shouldnt be buried on page 86 of some random thread :-/ They should be incluided in the summary if they have been deemed official.

They are official. As of yesterday or the day before i think. Give them a chance lol.

And instead of being lazy maybe go check it out.

But il help your lazy butt out ;)

Krieghund wrote:
Here are the current changes:

Move the French cruiser in 112 to 110.
Move the UK cruiser in 112 to 111.
Move the German cruiser and transport in 113 to 114.
Add 1 UK mechanized infantry and 1 French infantry to United Kingdom.
Add 1 UK infantry and 1 AA gun to Scotland.
Change 1 French tank and 1 French artillery in France to equivalent UK units.

Change the Soviet “Spread of Communism” NO to “3 IPCs for each original German, Italian, or pro-Axis neutral territory that the Soviet Union controls.”

Krieghund wrote:
I have reviewed the above changes with Larry, and they are now official as written. We’ve also added 1 AA gun to India, bringing the total there to 3.

Hopefully you know who Krieghund and Larry are

http://www.harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=7989&start=680

page 86

Its not Europe specific

I would argue 2 strats and a sub. Really bomb the hell outta london starting rd 2. and hope for bad aa dice.

Alpha +3.9 is official as of yesterday lol.

All changes (theres not many) are Germany/UK/France settup changes. Only other change is tweak of one of USSRs NO.

Look for these over on the Larry harris website forum under “sealion in alpha+3” around page 80 or so by Kreighund

Their are actually three kinds of people in the world… @#$%s, !&()s and aholes…

You know where im going with this if you’ve ever been fortunate enough to watch “Team America: World Police”

:lol:

Sorry it will not let me post links :P

Go to Harris Game Design .com

In the forum under A&A Global 1940, its posted in the thread “Sea lion in alpha +3” page 86…. scroll down

Krieghund lead the charge for this i believe

enjoy

Germany will be so filthy rich they will have no problem with USSR and as big as USA is it would be nothing short of a miracle for them to take on Japan and Germany virtualy alone and win….

However…

See alpha +3.9 (released yesterday :D) USSR NO is fixed, and the allies received a buff in regards to stopping sealion and crush calcutta.

Now the problem is… HOW DO THE AXIS WIN ?

So in summation:

Alpha +3: Axis Round 3 crush London + Crush Calcutta (not difficult to accomplish) = Axis win

However: IF either of these attempts fails, or for some reason not attempted, then its gloom and doom for the Axis.

Seems pretty absurd.

One thing i have found is that Italy will be completely crushed in both Africa and the med (And sometimes by their 3rd turn). So what does Italy do? Push on USSR? Defend Europe? (How boring lol) Italy’s NO’s are pointless to even think about as they will NEVER GET THEM.

UK needs to be one power, and Italy’s turn needs to be BEFORE UK’s.

And death to moronic USSR NOs.

• Get your submarines out of CRD range (you want the max capture possible.)

Im sorry what does CRD mean ?

Possible to add a 6th option ?

hear me out…

AA guns can never attack.

On defense AA participates in every round of combat (as any normal unit currently does). Rolling one dice per AA gun hitting on 1 (2 if radar is researched) however (and obviously) AA guns can only hit aircraft and defender will choose the casualty’s. Attacking aircraft hit by AA guns are moved to the casualty zone just as if they were hit by any other unit. OR Attacking aircraft hit by AA guns are immediately removed from battle and do not return fire. OR Attacking aircraft hit by AA guns are immediately removed from battle ON THE FIRST ROUND ONLY. Subsequent rounds attacking aircraft hit by AA will be moved to casualty zone and return fire.

I really have never understood A&A anti aircraft rules… in a real battle the aa guns are not going to just stop shooting after a couple minutes lol that makes no sense. Like the AA gun operator gets bored because the crappy gun can never score a hit anyhow and he falls asleep… :P

if not i vote for option #4