Posts made by eudemonist

@Cmdr:

I never see it anymore.  I saw it all the time in the box rules and setups, but never in alpha 2.

This is almost certianly due to the facts that:

1. Russia only has 18 infantry in range of Manchuria/Korea
2. Japan has 10 Infantry, Artillery, Mechanized, 3 Fighters and 2 Tactical bombers literally on Manchuria/Korea, 3 transports, 6 fighters, 3 Infantry, 2 Artillery, Armor, 2 strategic bombers, 2 battleships, 1 cruiser and 5 tactical bombers that can hit manchuria/korea on Japan 1

and

3. Russia isn’t going to give Japan 12 IPC just for the opportunity to allow Japanese tanks to blitz through all of the Soviet Far East.

Yeah, it’s been my experience that most of that Japanese stuff gets deployed elsewhere pretty quickly.  I certainly wouldn’t try an R1 attack, but by about round three, it usually thins out a bit.  Russia might not give up that 12 just to allow tanks to blitz through, but helping China out and maybe meeting up in the north can swing a game.  With a complex there, I think Japan would have to commit resources to defending it.

If they’re using two battleships, three transports, a cruiser, and a flock of planes, they aren’t using them somewhere else…say, the Dutch East Indies.

I like to sub-choke the Anzac.  Three subs can put a serious dent in a 10-IPC income.

@Cmdr:

I don’t really see Russia being able to take Korea, however, they sort of fixed that in Alpha 2.

Eh?  I’ve seen it multiple times.

Seems like that just makes a target for the Russians.  I would come after it, I know.

@questioneer:

Add 2inf to Siam
Add 2inf, 1tnk to Korea
Add 1inf to Jehol
Add 2inf, 1mec to Shanghai

Hmm…maybe.  Seems kinda heavy, but I don’t have a board in front of me.

How about:
Siam:  +1 Inf
Korea: +1 Inf, +1 Mec
Jehol:  +1 Inf
Shanghai: +1 Inf

Personally, I think waiting until round four to attack with Japan is a terrible mistake, and almost certainly will lead to the Japs getting beat down, as by that time India and Anzac are pulling in serious money.

If it is your opinion that Russia and England can overpower Germany and Italy without any help from the Americans (which I strongly disagree with), it seems like Europe must necessarily be imbalanced, does it not?

Damn, waddn’t tryin’ to start all that.  I don’t think mantle’s trollin’, leastaways not intentionally.  Just ribbin’ him about sounding like Idi in an earlier thread.

I agree that Jen’s estimates are…lower than what my experience has been.

@Pelanderfunk:

As the Axis, you only need to win one of the boards to win the game. You’re claiming that the Axis can’t win one a board without any US involvment at all. I think you need to revisit your Axis strategy.

I also agree with this.  As Axis, I’m pretty happy if the U.S. goes all one way.

@questioneer:

This is where I am at right now.  I know for sure the Alpha+2 is in favor of the Allies slightly.  Therefore I just want to see a tweeked NO to give Japan a little more cash.  Europe side is fine IMO.

Change Japan’s #4 NO by adding 5IPCs for owning Shanghai or Hong Kong.

I really think that is all that is needed.

Yeah, that would probably work as well.  I was just kinda shooting for simplicity with a few extra infantry.

@mantlefan:

Maybe it’s child’s play if you are litarally playing axis opponents who are children, but it is infathomable hopw much the axis players must suck inthe games you are describing.

Idi Amin-like typing detected…

Personally, I think A2 is pretty well balanced, but I have found Japan a little soft, mostly on the mainland v. China and Russia.  I don’t believe the Euroaxis needs any help, but two or three more Japanese starting on the mainland wouldn’t hurt, I don’t think.

I’ve had success pressuring ANZAC.  A few subs down that way can work wonders.

I’ve found floating a sub (or a couple!) on down off the west coast of Africa can work out pretty well.  Some nice convoy action down there to disrupt, and not many threats around.  Puts U.K. out of position if they come chase you down.

Mag-Con is convening again this weekend (4/2 & 4/3) in New Caney, TX, just northeast of Houston.  We’ll be playing G40 A+2 Saturday, if anybody in the area wants to come out.  Seats still open!

http://mag-con.com/

@jim010:

For defensive power for my money, and allows for fht swapping at sea.

That’s a pretty big deal right there.

@Idi:

Your right!

Pretty good while…I had a hard time with “beekin”.  Not hip to furry-speak.

EDIT:  Not that there’s anything wrong with that.  Fur it up, big dog.

@Idi:

Just admit that this strat can never work and we can all stop posting

Heh, awesome!  Deflection, avoidance of a direct question, doubling down on teh uninfromed beekin off, and false victimization, all rolled into one!

Dude, seriously–S.A. or FARK Politics.  You’ll be a god among men.

@ghr2:

Winning is not everything.  I won’t mind losing a game if I had fun doing it.

I do agree with these statements.  I greatly prefer close, competitive games, without a doubt.  The key, though, is close AND competitive.  Making a game close by being less competitive isn’t fun at all to me.  Used to have a girlfriend who whipped my arse at pool regularly…the LAST thing I wanted was for her to take it easy on me, because, when I did win, I wanted to know I’d done it against the best my opponent had.

I do understand, I think, to some extent, your points about taking a long-odds win shot early in the game.  I generally avoid 50/50 all-in bets myself, but for strategic reasons, not because I feel some sense of duty to the other players or something.

@Idi:

Dudemonist! have you even tried this strat in an actual game? Or is beekin off without knowing your speciality?

Nope, haven’t tried the strat.  Of course, the quote you posted made no statements as to the efficacy of said strategy, nor have, I believe, at any point in this thread made such statements.  You’ll notice many of my statements include such qualifiers as, “Seems like…”, “Probably…”, “I don’t think…”, “It may…”, “I see it as…”, etc.

Let me ask you the same question–have you attempted this strategy?  Given statements like:

@Idi:

An experienced USA player would have bulked up enough home defence to stop any invasion…

@Idi:

Way to screw the game kid>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

@Idi:

The only way the USA will ever be invaded is if Mantlefan is playing them.

@Idi:

this is not the best strategy…… However this would be the best strategy if you wanted to waste 3.5 hours of other players time.

@Idi:

His whole strategy rides on playing his son and his rookie friends after school

@Idi:

With this strat you are going to bankrupt the Axis for a gain of 12 IPCS.

@Idi:

The only down side to it is for it to work you’ll need 100% hits for the Axis and 100% misses for the the Allies.

That looks like an awful lot of “beekin off without knowing” to me.  You make far mmore assertions throughout this thread than I have.  Either you’re willfully ignoring that (which means you’re straight trollin’), or have an incredibly low level of self-awareness.

@ghr2:

Exactly my point earlier, this is not a practical strategy to be used.  It may be good once if you dont care about time, you are in a tournament, or you are showing it off to friends just for kicks.

Wait, so, if you don’t do it every time, it’s not a “practical strategy”?  Not sure I agree with that.

Also, I believe most people care more about winning the game than making sure it takes “at least X hours.”  Again, could be wrong.  Maybe more people play just to play than to win, but that seems silly to me.

@ghr2:

Why play it if people will commit every game to the exact same do or die attack and end the game so quick?

Erm, I don’t think anybody has suggested attempting this “every game”.  In fact, it seems to be the consensus that this would probably only work once (if at all).  It may be useful in future games to force particular responses (namely, staging a navy at Carolines and SZ6 would, apparently, lead certain individuals to upgrade the Horrywood factory early), but I don’t see it as a standard strat.

@ghr2:

Cause most of the playters did not get to do anything but sit there with a dumb look onm their faces.  Russia did not get to do jack, UK did not get to do anything…

True, Russia did not get to do much, but certainly the U.K., at war (in Europe at least) from the start of the game would have a chance to contribute.  Moving past that, however, I’m not of the opinion that one should “take it easy” on opponents to artifically stretch the game out.  Just not how I play.  I suppose you can call that “douchebaggery” if you like.

@ghr2:

Otheriwse why not conceed after 2 hours?  Or 1? or right after G1?

Umm, I haven’t ever played a game that was decided G1.

@ghr2:

If every game lasts for like 3-4 hours or less, this would be one of the shortest board games of all time.

Again, your “every game” thing is a straw man, but, that aside, 3-4 hours is “one of the shortest boad games of all time”?  Seriously?
Catan?  Monopoly?  Chess?  Roborally?  Puerto Rico?  Clue?  Stratego?  Mastermind?  Go?  Scrabble?