Topics created by Emperor_Taiki

Is there any hint of an official AAKursk?

you could roll a resource dice, cost 1 i.p.c. for each 6 that you roll, increase the i.p.c. by 1

Back in 1993 we had a rule for Nuclear Weapons.

First you had to discover it, but could not do so until after round 10 (classic, remember.)
Second, it had to be loaded on a heavy bomber
Third, it removed 50% of the units on a territory if the bomber lived through any AA Guns.

Purpose:  Back then there was a problem of 400 infantry on Japan and it was just a pain to take it.  This way we could eliminate all 400 of them with 2 nuclear weapons and assault the next round iwth infantry.

For ports, if they also give some defensive bonus i think 8 is good, and it also takes two turns to build, but that is only the first level and you can only tranport 1 ship there, for additional levles they cost 3 each and the maximum you can build in a teritory is the IPC value +4. Also ports have to border a specific sea zone even if the territory they are in borders multiple sea zones

for airfields, we dont have to dicuss them now but i understand they were much cheaper and more abundant than ports, but i was thinking that you pay one IPC to build an airfield in a territory and the number of airfeilds in a territory determines how many aircraft can be based there. And, if you capture an intact airfeild you can land planes there in combat or non combat.

@Cmdr:

There are a few reasons I advocate the Karelian Attack on Germany 1……

Honestly, with only 4 AA Gun shots, there’s a 33% chance you won’t lost ANY fighters give or take. (I just used LL to estimate the chance.)  Even if you do lose one, and I wouldn’t expect to lose more than one, with a 50+ income for Round 2, I think you can afford the replacement fighter!

Have to smile at this one. I tried this on G1, and the KAR AA gun took out three, I say again, three of my fighters at the opening.  Who would have thunk?  :?

Needless to say, the loss of 3 ftrs and my amphibious force does not bode well for Germany’s prospects.  Maybe next time….

yah, with three diffrent idealogies competing for contol, that would be cool, but i was going for a game that was a little less black and white

leaders of arab countires are more often allied with western powers than with Islam, Russia and China are not on the best terms either, and in this game i am going to make it possible for Russia and China to have full scale war with each other. Also its not like the US, UK, and France are able to agree on eyerthing either. I think it is best if they are seperate powers.

sure their will still be too sides, NATO, headed by the US, and the Warsaw Pact, headed by the Soveits. but the alliances are not set.
In fact at the start of the game all countries should still be at peace. each power can either buy NATO or WARSAW Pact vicotry points with 10 IPCs, of course doing that lowers the effectiveness of their armies the next turn, and so should only do this when they are not expecting attack

THe US and USSR are the only countries that start out active, If  US/UK/France are attack all of those countries can become active, of course I am going to have diplomacy rolling that can weaken or change the NATO alliance

China, and India are different. You can gain control of them diplomaticly or you can attack them to makes them active. if you attack one, the other becomes contoled by your alliance

The diplomacy thing will be clearer later, I also might make diffrent national objectives for each contry so that when you have more than two players, diplomacy can be represented by people instead of dice rolls.

OK the US player should have 1 CV in the atlantic to be fair…but you see a carrier = 4-6 such units, and they really have 3.5 carriers representing ( remember the jeep carrier is a very small carrier)

For Japan: 13 carriers which makes 3 pieces (if using the 4-6 per guideline.) I remind you that a number of these carriers are escort class or seaplane carriers.

Shōkaku-class (2)
Soryu-class (2)
Ryujo
Akagi
Kaga
Taiyo
Chiyoda
Hōshō
Unyo ( which was available spring 42)
Zuiho
Shoho

Let’s do the numbers:

Bismarck class battleship armor: belt 145-320 mm, deck 110-120 mm
Deutschland class pocket battleship armor: belt 80 mm, deck 40 mm
Admiral Hipper class heavy cruiser armor: belt 70-80 mm, deck 20-50 mm

From this, it sure looks to me like the pocket battleship’s armor is a lot closer to the cruiser’s than the battleship’s.

LMFAO!!

…and although their displacement was that of a heavy cruiser, they were armed with guns larger than the heavy cruisers of other nations.

Yea lets do the numbers, except not compare a super dreadnought in the same navy with its own pocket battleship. Instead we compare the pocket battleship to normal warships that could be opposing it ( from England)

HMS Exeter ( Heavy cruiser)

Main belt

* 3 in
   * 2½-1 in enclosing bulkheads

Lower deck

* 1¼ in over machinery
   * 1½ in over stearing gear

county class cruiser
Main belt:

* 4.5 in with 1 in closing bulkheads (Berwick, Cumberland, Suffolk, Kent & Cornwall only, from 1935-)

Lower deck:

* 1.25 in over machinery
   * 1.5 in over steering gear

Admiral Graf Spee:
belt:  about 3.937 inches–- compared to 3 inches for uk
deck:  1.5 inches-3.5 inches— compared to equal to double uk cruisers

King George V class BB…basically the top of the line Battleship for UK
Main belt: 14.7 in
lower belt: 5.4 in
deck: up to 5.38 in

Kongo Class battleship ( just for example)
deck: 2.3–1.5 in
belt: 8–3 in

OK based on this the German ships should be one hit, but at 4-4 and not 3-3

you cant assign any unit to lay mines. I choose destroyer because it closest to mine layer. Perhaps a transport should be used instead.

Look you just tell me what you want and ill make a custom map (from my AA50) just for you to print off.

thats fair enough. But just don’t ask for all kinds of changes. I can make a few new territories and some changes, but i wont be making or drawing major modifications.

Even then you may have two first place winners.  For example the Allies may have won as a team but Germany won as a player.

LT

I missed these NIE threads way back in the day.

With the total re-write of CTG NIE last winter, we’ve been playing it often.  Maybe 10 times this year.

Most up to date info about CTG NIE is at http ://dartagnan.us/NIE/.  Also it is supported, rules wise, by me.  That website has my email address.

@Micoom:

have a look at this link;http://www.geocities.com/dutcheastindies/japan_paratroop.html
maybe it helps for some info

Ugh – dense reading.  :-P  You guys are hard-core.

I was also thinking maybe transports could carrymoney to other nations.

@Warplayer12:

Maybe a islamitic union instead of the mid east coalition. BTW, there is on World War 3 game on BoardGameGeek

necro!

Very cool, Lone Jack is just up the road from me. Maybe 30 minutes or so?

Dont forget to check out the Battle of Lexington, MO if you havent done so already.

For 8 more points, instead of a Tiger I, you can use a King Tiger.  It doesnt dwarf the Tiger I, but it looks scary on the battlefield and the stats are scary too, so id use it for psychological warfare.  You know……make them crap their pants.  :lol: