Posts made by Driel310

What the bloody hell is that US bomber doing in China.  :-D

And Germany still having a fleet in the Baltic…, surprising…  :?

You guys aren’t trying to fool us now are you?  :lol:

I think Timeover is here only for one thing: The big Allies must always win campaign, since the Axis are the evil demon side.

If you don’t look on this as a game, but want to replay history only, yes the Axis must always lose. Quite clearly the Germans and Japanese non-military actions during 1933-1945 were the worse of the worst. So they must lose and so they did.

However we are talking about a game here, not history! If I want to take history lessons I go back to school. Games should be balanced with both sides have an equal chance to win and strategy being the key factor who wins the game. So I hope this forum has more posts about strategy instead of the damn history lessons and Allied propaganda. :wink:

@marechallannes:

@Driel310:

To add to that, putting in an extra DD in SZ15 makes a shitload of difference since Germany is now unable to attack Egypt on G1, making life hard on Italy as you described.

Of course you have all the liberty of the world to guess the correct setup as we don’t know the whole true one, but this change is so big impact on game balance is very substantial.  :wink:

p.s. trust me, if Japan wants, India will fall on J2. Only the Russians can prevent that, but I doubt they can spare the troops.

Did you play it with this DD in SZ 15?  When did you take egypt?

I am not shure to sacrify the german bomber for a landing operation in turn 1…

No we did not. We used the R9 version of the map Bluestroke made. We believe that is the only setup that has some basis, the pictures from GenCon. Any changes to that setup (although we got confirmed there are some) are pure speculation.

And unless you are unlucky, Germany should not push the Egypt attack until the bomber dies too.

To add to that, putting in an extra DD in SZ15 makes a shitload of difference since Germany is now unable to attack Egypt on G1, making life hard on Italy as you described.

Of course you have all the liberty of the world to guess the correct setup as we don’t know the whole true one, but this change is so big impact on game balance is very substantial.  :wink:

p.s. trust me, if Japan wants, India will fall on J2. Only the Russians can prevent that, but I doubt they can spare the troops.

That’s why we build the IC in France. With all the infantry buys it’s a lot easier to make a Fortress Europe with Germany if the Allies go KGF, and with 16 production capacity you also have the luxury of not repairing all the SBR damage, only the damage required to place your build.  :wink:

Let’s hope so, saves the axis player buying infantry all day long.  :-D

@marechallannes:

@Driel310:

My dear Marechallens, do you have any idea how much IPC UK has on the first turn?

A whopping 43! Add to that that 1 DD, and 1 CA will always survive G1 and you have your fleet build (even in SZ2 if needed) on UK1.

Germany needs the infantry bad, really really bad like silent observer described or the Soviets will be knocking on your doorstep on R3/R4.

I know the UK IPC starting income very well. But as the british player you have to care about africa, india and australia too.

What is your german production an G2? 12 infantry?

The german has to kick the russian fast and that does not work only with infanry.

PS: Hey, I dont want to say you are noobs or something like that. But 10 inf in G1 seems very special.

Ehhh, because you are unable to place 12 infantry.  :-D

G2 buy is usually 9 inf, 1 rtl + 1 IC in France.  :wink:

My dear Marechallens, do you have any idea how much IPC UK has on the first turn?

A whopping 43! Add to that that 1 DD, and 1 CA will always survive G1 and you have your fleet build (even in SZ2 if needed) on UK1.

Germany needs the infantry bad, really really bad like silent observer described or the Soviets will be knocking on your doorstep on R3/R4.

@Lynxes:

A DD in the east med would mean egypt is a no go on G1. Also a big change in favour of the allies.

Not quite. You could still attack with a bomber and your transport with some chance of success, but very risky.

Without the bomber taking part in the Egypt attack odds go down so rapidly, any sensible man wouldn’t attack. Since UK is inbetween Germany and Italy the African campaign for the Axis is near to a lost cause.

Of course I know my history and that the ships of the UK were a real problem to Rommel, but still, in history the axis also lost. And we don’t want that every game now do we?  :wink:

Although it does seem the axis have a lot of winning power I hope the differences aren’t that big. And a fighter in moscow is considered very big IMHO.es.

A DD in the east med would mean egypt is a no go on G1. Also a big change in favour of the allies.

We’ll have to wait I guess, but still we enjoyed the games we played a lot.  :-)

@cousin_joe:

@Perry:

Hah, sorry JB! It was Cousin_joe that talked about countering UKR  :-)

So, Cousin_joe , what do you have to say for yourself  :-)

4INF Ukr, 1INF Euk, 1ARM Mos (as per BGG setup - which we now know is wrong, so actually may be even more)

If you don’t hit back in Ukr, you expose Caucasus to being attacked by whatever’s left in Ukr + potentially 7ARM (Blitzing through a German owned Ukr) + potentially 4FTR + 1BMBR + whatever can be brought in by sea (1INF + 1ARM)

For me, that’s a must

I am sure you mean 4 inf from Caucasus.  :wink:

However, the blitz to Caucasus is always present, because Italy can take Ukraine as well by sea allowing German armor to blitz through.

Another point, what if Germany attacked Ukraine on G1 with 3 inf, 3 arm? You will have a hard time taking it back with 5 inf, 1 arm……

Although I can’t tell yet how things would work out in AA50, but in AAR Japan could be on 50 income and the axis still lost big time, cuz the KGF was in full effect.

When the allies go KGF in AAR or A&A original Japan will grow Godzilla as a consequence. It becomes the well known race of Berlin vs Moscow. And more than occasionally Berlin falls at the same turn as Moscow does.

However as I said, not sure if in AA50 the same is possible, but from our games so far it’s not something that’s totally impossible.

Yes, we are using the map version of Bluestroke. Not the R12 version, but the R9, but since the changes are merely cosmetic that is not really an issue.

So it seems like we are still missing a few pieces? Can we conclude then that the setup of Bluestroke is right, but just need additions? Or are there units that need to be removed completely or moved to a different zone?

Since we all have to wait 4 weeks more on the game maybe as a compensation we can get a little bit more info on the setup.  :-D

@Imperious:

So are you buying more naval, more air or more tech compared to Revised?

I am hoping the naval costs allowed some axis ships.

ON axis land did Japan buy factories and where?

In our games, Germany didn’t bought any. Japan bought some ships besides trannies when the USA went full blown Pacific, but still only DD’s and CA’s, no capital ships.

As Black already wrote, air is a more attractive buy. They are cheaper and more effective on sea and land. USA had 5 bombers already before they became heavies.

Japan bought an IC on J3 (that’s default) to be placed on Manchuria. In the first game with Japan Godzilla at 70, they also built one on India (the two 3 IPC countries).
By the way, Germany also build an IC on France on both games, the best spot there is and also a default buy at G2.  :wink:

When the Japanese fleet was wiped, US got heavies as I wrote. US then went for the SBR on Germany + started to shuck to Europe. However it was too late, Germany + Italy moved in for the kill on Moscow.

Also I have to mention that Germany shot down 3 out of 3 heavies on a SBR run (sorry for that John  :-P). Still I don’t believe that would have prevented the fall of Moscow.  :wink:

Apart from the two bombers in the USA there is not much that is really strange… I know that functioneta disagrees about China, but to be honest a J1 where you attack every territory of China is not the best J1 I think you can play.
In the end (let’s say 5 turns) China is usually buried alive yes, but that’s part of the game, it was the same in the old A&A…

Personally I believe the current setup is a nice one, it seems reasonably good balanced. It’s very normal that the axis win the early games, cuz their strategies are the easiest to discover. Germany/Italy walk to Moscow (I mean Sea Lion is a real dead horse in this game) and Japan tries to expand to as much IPC as she can grab, after which she puts pressure on Moscow as well. Fighting in the Pacific means only 5 IPC for Japan, why put in so much effort since you can’t take Western USA anyway.

The USA can’t take Tokio either, so why bother going there, Berlin is easier.

In the game we played where USA went 100% in the Pacific we saw a showdown of Japan teasing the US to attack at a 60% battle. Of course USA rolled HB just that turn so the Japanese were wiped, but normally (8% chance getting HB with 20 IPC invested) this wouldn’t happen.

We (=axis) expected to end up with an empty pacific which would have been very good for the axis since the Japanese were already running on the mainland and had two new trannies at Japan harbor. The Usa however would need to rebuild and this would take another two turns. Two turns the allies didn’t have since Germany and Italy were already at Stalingrad and building up near Moscow.

So IMHO if you want to play Pacific war, you need an Indian IC as well. Still I don’t see how Germany and Italy are stopped against Russia with this strategy……, seems like we have a KGF after all… :wink:

Ah, now I understand. I think you are talking the 1942 scenario which is still all fuzzy for us normal grunts.  :lol:

Japan can reach 65-70 by taking the whole pacific, and Asian mainland (up to yakut/Chingai/Persia) line. This means she has 15 IPC from the NO’s, so a basic income of 50 is enough. Also Japan usually ends up with Madagascar and South Africa.  :wink:

Perry, with an Indian IC in place, UK will only be at 50% (or even less) strength vs Germany and Italy.

I have serious doubts whether that will be enough looking at the games we played. Africa needs attention as well and Russia is a sitting duck vs a marching German army + Italy landing in her belly countries.

And you won’t win the game this way since Japan can defend her countries with her fleet + land forces while Germany slowly tightens the screws on Russia……

IMHO it’s almost KGF for sure to make an Allied win possible the way we stand now.

@Black_Elk:

I’m not sure yet whether Egypt or Karelia is more critical for G1. In my games the Allies have totally locked down Africa, even when Egypt is cleared/taken in the first round, so I’m not sure whether its worth sending in the bomber and the extra tank, only to get backed out again or trapped in Trans-Jordan almost immediately thereafter. The odds aren’t very spectacular either, so its almost just as likely that the fighter will survive regardless of what G does. Karelia on the other hand risks the AA gun fire on the Luftwaffe, but if you take it out then you also get the NO bonus (and most likely on the next round as well.)

I’m not sure though, G seems really strapped for cash. I’m amazed for example that they don’t even get a battleship in sz 5. There’s just no good reason to make a naval purchase that I can see, since Germany needs every penny to coordinate the defense of Europe in round 3.

I don’t think the game is balanced without the NOs.
KGF is just way too easy to pull off otherwise.

The Egypt G1 attack like we performed it has a 80% chance of clearing. Germany don’t really need to take it, Italy can do that, it’s all about that one fighter of the UK.

I am not sure how the Karelia odds are but attacking with 4 ground units (2 from Finland, 2 from Germany) against 6 ground units (5 inf, 1 rtl) and an AA gun gives me a bad feeling in the underbelly as well. Cause if you fail I think your whole eastern front collapses…

Losing Egypt hurts like hell too but as we proved it’s not a game decider on G1.  :wink:

To answer Todd7912: Yes, I (Japan) tried to attack Northern America as well. However I had 6 trannies, one sailing around the globe and I needed 3 to keep the flow to the mainland going. So my offensive was limited and therefore failed completely, also because the USA player did really well by buying armor and infantry and keeping the shuck going by building them on the west coast. All I did was delaying him one turn.
Although many people here state otherwise, I don’t believe Japan can take over Western USA with 70 IPC+ on hand vs 45 of the USA. You would need about 5 turns to get a big enough force and you need to invest every IPC into this offensive. Meaning on the mainland you are pushed back by the Russians + British landing forces in Archangel–> to Moscow—> to the Japanese forces.