Posts made by DethSkwad

Folks are just pointing out similarities.

Right but how much of that is WISHFUL THINKING?  It seems as if it would be more of a let down to you all if I weren’t him than if I was.  More over “similiarities” is an often vague encompassing safety word which allows you to generalize traits shared with most other people as well.  Both he and I could be right handed but that in of itself is not a good basis for making such a guess because so too are 98% of all other people.

The “great” agent smith is no more than a coward. Of course this would not apply to you deth!!

But if he’s a coward and I’m him why do you want to play me so bad?  I’m not that good and this guy must really have been something to have all of you all in such a tizzy.  But having no frame of reference with him I am rather bored of discussing him really.  Aren’t you?

Yes but that’s guilt by similarity and I’m rather tired of it.  I feel as if I am being accused of being a witch in Salem…if I float I am guilty and if I sink I’m dead.  Gee great choice.  But is there a way to prove I am not these people?  Oh by the way I really am Maddogg and NCSSwitch is that a problem here?

I don’t have time to play you right now maybe in a month or so but not now.  I don’t even know what an AS is did you mean to call him an A** but leave off the last ‘s’ to avoid being profane?  Soon U Die is another person here that makes comments isn’t he?  You seem to think that because our views are similar this means we are the same person?  By that token how do we know you are not me, and I am using the “maddog” persona as a ruse to buffalo everyone here.  I mean it’s genius play yourself in a game by creating a phony persona which is so outrageous that no one suspects a thing then when you play one lays down and you ‘proove’ how great you are.  Come on that’s a little bit elaborate don’t you think.  Would you please stop insinuating that I am a bunch of other people here, especially because I don’t know who most of them are.

Trust me folks,that 500 lb gorilla is no more than a 5 lb spider monkey.

More nonsense from you.  Christ!

the moral of the story: don’t  use an african bid unless you attack egypt via southern europe first turn to acompany the bid. even then i’m still going to call you mad

I would gladly take a bid of 27 and win as the Axis by placing 5infantry in Ukraine and 4 infantry in Libya.  Yes Russia can attack in Europe and the Libyans will need help in Egypt but the key here is that he cannot do it all.  If Russia attacks Ukraine it makes it easier to deal with the British navy for Germany.  If they don’t attack Ukraine then Germany can afford more troops into Africa.  If Russia attacks FinNor then the Germans might just attack Karelia, and if Russia attacks EEurope that move is irrelevent.  Ignoring Ukraine is the best because the net gain for Russia is usually very small, only 2arm and a ftr, but for Germany that gets this plus 3 units bid into Ukraine this is a huge upswing.

were still playing it. i got a 27ipc bid and put 4inf(3X4+=12) in manchuria and put 3tanks in libya.

And this is WHY you are losing.  Putting that much infantry in Asia does no good, and you overdid the armor in Africa so you got little benefit out of your bid.  Like I said with 27 I’m going for 9inf and putting 5 of it in Ukraine, and 4 in Libya, or I would bid for 8infantry and put 5of it in Ukraine and 3of it in EEurope.

who the heck gives up india for egypt? it  worked though.

Sounds like a good move.  India is only 3ipcs, East Africa/Syria is 7.  India is too close to Japan to be defended, Egypt is an easy hold for the Allies once taken from Germany.

the moral of the story: don’t  use an african bid unless you attack egypt via southern europe first turn to acompany the bid. even then i’m still going to call you mad

Or bid at least 4 infantry in Africa.

I would think so because if they didn’t have that battleship the Allies could just use one of their bombers to sink that sub.

Yes but that swings both ways first the Germans can use air to kill the suicide unit forcing the Allies to spend 1 unit every turn to prevent this.  If the Germans only build 1 sub and have the bb trn this is enough fodder to make the threat credible.  The seond option is to use one of their units as a suicide unit off Spain and then move the bb sub to the WMed for the same purpose.  I’m not saying that I would do it but it can be a major nuissance.

Building a few subs can be a strong move but the idea is to pick apart the Allied navies one at a time and protect Africa probably for the 84 ipcs.  To do this you ideally want to get the Japanese airforce to Europe as fast as possible and use them to hit the Americans should the Brits to to Algeria and then hit the Brits with the Germans.  There should then be nominal forces in Africa and the Allies will have to rebuild their entire fleet if timed just right the sub will either back the Allies into a bad move, or allow Germany to hold Africa one turn longer.

Well I don’t really mind that because it is risky to go ships on ships and because it means you must send both of them i.e. you don’t end up with fodder in the North sea which is a huge plus. If I can get the Russians to start taking those kind of risks on Russia one when they don’t have to then I think my bid has done its work.

You missed the option attack and take or strafe EEU.

Yes but while this is probably better than the risk of nailing Ukraine it is not better because as Russia you are still giving up 3inf and 2arm for just 3inf arm ftr in EEuro.  The only real gain here is that you can attack the baltic sea but you are very likely to see the Germans push their guys from Ukr to Cauc as well as play a strong opening in Egypt.  Essentially, you are giving up all the ground you normally would to a power europe and power africa opening.

Russia strafes ukr with 8 inf,3 arm,2 figs which is a slightly superior force than what ukr has (7 inf,2 arm,1 fig) and gets more superior after the first round of fire because the germans are losing (2’s) and the russians (1’s). Ukr winds up with 1 or 2 arm & a fig. Russia retreats back to karelia with a couple inf,3 arm,2 figs.

This is a VERY optimistic apraisal because you assume NOTHING goes wrong.  Even if it does you leave 2 German armor(which is what they want anyway) and you retreat with 2inf plus armor.  so you are trading 6 infantry for 7 big deal!  Plus if you go for the ships on ships in the baltic and the ukraine you are very likely to get stung in at least one place.  If its in the baltic i lose no ships and you retreat with a transport .  While its unlikely I would attack Karelia it is very likely that I would use that transport, either to move troops out of Finland or to move troops from Weuro to eeuro.  At the same time I can take down the Uk fleet without losing any aircraft so even if you take the EEuro option instead I really haven’t been hurt much.  And then there is the 500 pound gorilla in the room of my 4inf bid in Libya which enables me to attack syria as well as egypt while knocking out the entire Uk navy turn 1.  No matter what you do against Germany in EEuro, Ukr etc it won’t matter so long as that force has that kind of options.  The way to prevent the Egypt/syria gambit is to make not attacks on Germany but for the naval ones and force them to have to stretch a little on G1.  However that means you are giving the Germans a huge advantage in terms of guys in Europe against Russia which will hurt in several turns.

Im stıll goıng to say though that a bıd of 7 to 8 unıts ın Ukraıne or Europe ıs not the best because so much more can be done wıth 4 ın Ukraıne and 4 ın Lıbya or 5 ın ukraıne and 3 ın Lıbya.  Wıth eıther of these the Russıans cannot really afford to attack Ukraıne or at least take ıt meanıng Germany should be able to use all fıghters and have enough fırepower to achıeve all objectıves on turn 1.  Also because Ukraıne ıs so buılt up the Russıans wıll have to brıng everythıng ıngnorıng the baltıc fleet whıch ıs another advantage to Germany.  Even wıth a strafe Russıa should lose.  Further should Russıa brıng everythıng ınto the Ukraıne they are lıkely to have to pull off leavıng a tank or two and ıf they go after the baltıc as well as the Ukraıne they wıll lıkely lose more troops than they kıll.  And thıs doesnt even begın to account for the extremely hıgh lıkelyhood of very bad dıce ıe Germany gettıng 5-6 defense hıts on round 1.  Yes there ıs a lıkelyhood of that hıttıng the Germans but ıt ıs less than that facıng Russıa.  Also unlıke a euro only bıd you dont have all your eggs ın one basket 4ınfantry ın Lıbya ıs very capable of gettıng the job done as are 3ınfantry.  In the end the only real choıce for the Russıans ıs to make no attacks on R1 but for the baltıc and maybe a strafe on fınland to soften ıt up for turn 2.

I like the idea of limiting the bid to 4 units in europe. That would limit an enormous initiative advantage.

See I don’t like these kinds of rules because I think they presuppose that units in Europe are stronger therefore you must limit this effect.  If you start with such an assumption you are saying an all europe bid is superior(which it is) and therefore why would you want to bid elsewhere.  In that case if we assume this to be true even with a 4 limit rule I would still bid for 8infantry but split them with 4 in Ukraine and 4 in Libya which might be better anyway.  The Russians cannot attack and take Ukraine because it leaves their armor exposed to counter attack.  They cannot attack and retreat because they would only gain an advantage of perhaps 1-2 units plus there is the risk of bad dice which with 9 @ 2 + 1 @ 4 is very high.  11 units attacking 10 units is pretty much a crap shoot as far as the dice are concerned and such a battle would most certainly make or break Russia, but for the fact that even with great luck the Germans are still quite strong in Africa.

wow that’s neat!

Rolling 4 6-sided dice:
5, 5, 1, 5

You shouldn’t be able to.  If you start with 7inf, move 2, and bid 2, minus 3 for first round casaulties you are left with around 8inf, the bulk of which should be in China thus precluding a push on Yakut for the second turn.  If Russia uses its second turn to build some troops into Asia then on the forth turn they could reinforce Yakut strong enough to hold out for one more turn.  The cost of going to Hawaii isn’t just 2infantry on that turn but also the two infantry on the next turn that you won’t have either because you go to Austrailia.

Except those 2inf are a big deal in that they enable you to push back Russia from Yakut which means Japan can focus on the Sinkiang front.  This is a huge help, and without it you will have to build into Manchuria for several turns just to get rid of Russia.

It doesn’t matter either way if he’s got them and you don’t you’re going to lose.  Therefore the purchase of AA guns is irrelevent.  Obviously if you’ve developed Heavies and have some extra cash then AA’s can be bought, but remember that someone with Heavies is likely going to target your factories so that you cannot develop this tech yourself.  Once he can eliminate that threat the game is over.  In other words you need to develop tech while you still can.

Right but look at it like this if you built an AA gun you are bombing yourself for 5ipcs, and a 50/50 at a bomber is actually only costing your opponent 7.5 ipcs.  So just at that level you are only gaining 2-3 ipcs, and when you consider that the remaining bombers should hit you for about 20-22ipcs you’re actually not coming out ahead.  If an opponent has HBs they can afford massive losses of them so long as they are getting to your production.  If Britain has 24ipcs they can build 1.5 bombers a turn, and can lose this much every turn so long as they are taking out Japanese production.  If Britain is trading 24ipcs of theirs a turn for 42+ of Japan who is coming out ahead?  This is why this guy should be building to tech.  I would agree with other that there is some advantage to picking up as many ipcs now as you can, but DO NOT over extend yourself, and he should be building a bomber a turn to prepare.  If Russia is out there is a chance he could win, but it will require him to get Heavy bombers at some point, probably sooner rather than later.  Guys aren’t going to make as much of a difference.

NO!!!    Playing Japan in Asia is not about playing defense but about playing offense and creating pressure on Russia.  If you wait too long to do this then the Allies will have mobilized enabling Russia to send its army east creating all sorts of havoc for the Japanese.  But above all else it enables Russia with its shorter supply lines to bottle up the Japanese in the same way the Allies can do to Germany in the West.  If you are counting on Japan to win the game for you because you accept this will happen to Germany then you must be able to guarantee that Japan can win the game for you by getting Novo.  If you delay yourself in Asia for meaningless ipcs in Hawaii, Austrailia and New Zealand then this won’t be possible.  Further, as you point out Japan’s problem is usually having too much money so why give them more dollars they can’t use?

Yeah but I would never buy an AA gun no matter how tempting it might be.  Even 1 tech roll can concievably change the game.  I think to roll Heavies with 1 roll is around a 4% chance whereas to get enough bombers with 1 AA gun to swing the game is much lower in odds.  You’d need to hit a lot for it to start to change things.

As the Russians I love to see Japan send troops after Hawaii on the first turn because it leaves them critically weakened in Asia on successive rounds of play.  If Japan cannot achieve an early push in Asia so that Russia has to fall back to Moscow thereby surrendering Yakut and Sink then the Russians can stall the Japanese almost indefinately by moving from Kaz to Novo and forcing the Japanese to defend two fronts which are both far from their capital.  If the Japanese don’t play it perfectly, India may end up liberated, and or Yakut is held by Russia late into the game by which point Berlin should be about to fall and Japan will be too far away to do anything about it.  Plus an assertive Russian push in Asia compels Japan to stay at home and defend these Ipcs rather than go playing around in Africa.  If they do anyway Russia could end up camped in Mongolia which is really bad news for Japan as it makes Yakut, Manch, China, and Sink possible dead zones and will probably force Japan to fall back to defend either Manch or Yakut again leaving Sink, China and or India open for the taking.  Once the Russians are fully mobilized on the Eastern front Japan cannot afford to give up India because it can be very difficult to get back and may require giving up something like Yakut to do it.

I disagree with the last two AA guns are a total waste of money and at best only delay the inevitable.  If he has Heavy bombers he probably has already got several bombers with which to take advantage of that and thus only really has to risk 3-4 a turn to reduce Berlin to rubble, so for that reason there isn’t really much to risk by going over AA guns.  Especially because he can probably build enough a turn to replace whatever he loses and still build up to more in the long run.  If he’s got Heavy bombers don’t waste your money on AA guns build a bomber or two and start rolling yourself as this is your only hope.  Look at it like this 3 AA guns are equivalent to 1 bomber, and or 3 tech rolls which could alter the balance of the game.  AA guns never will and are nothing but a stalling measure, and for that to work you have to be stalling for something.