Posts made by Feddy the Frog

Hey,
I ordered Global War 1939 from HBG and I am completely happy with the board. The territories are big enough and am a huge fan of the additional territories to Russia and North Africa. The only gripe I have is that Japan is colored yellow instead of the more recognizable orange. Also the UK keeps changing colors but thats neither here nor there. Just to be fair I am using the D6 system that “Jeremy” from Field Marshal Games has created and the setup which he put a lot of work into.
The setup is great! I love it… Thank you so much “Jeremy!”

Having said all that: Is Japan too Strong?
They make 40 IPCs a turn and can pretty much boss China around. The 20ipc Non-Aggression pact with Russia makes it so an invasion is unlikely from that area, and all the British and ANZAC forces can do is but pester the Japanese. Once the US gets in the war (only around turn 5-7) Japan (in our games) seems to make around 70 ipcs. They take all of China (+12) at least 2 of the DEI’s (+8) Hong Kong and French Indo-China (+6) and anything else they can grab. To my estimation that’s around 65 and 70. I can’t give you exact buys, but by then the Japanese can land around 10-12 guys in Asia, and can build a fleet to match the US. Any ideas on how to stop this, or (most likely) are we playing the game wrong?
Any help would be help-ful  :-)
Thanks, Freddy

Ohhhh, Didn’t know that…… Might be why I always had supply tokens waiting around.
Thanks!  :lol:

Hey Tigerman,
I don’t think the scope of the game has to be any bigger than D-Day. I just want something that has a more tactical aspect, but still A&A. I felt BOTB got a little too “Not A&A.” I don’t want to learn a whole new game! Thanks, I would totally buy a Historical Board Gaming Theatre game!
Freddy

Thx IM,
Knew it was there someplace…… Hope in the second edition they cut Africa and blow up France and Germany. It really ticks me off…  :-(
Freddy

Hey All,
This has been harped on since it came out, but I have to ask again. Is there anyway that the western front territories can be made larger? It is really ridiculous. I am pretty young, but still have a hard time seeing what territory is what. Forget trying to know their values! The roundles they give you can’t be used, since they take up too much space. I HOPE this will be amended in the 2nd Edition. (we all know there will be another edition  :-)) In the meantime, is there a way to make the game at least better in the short run? If so, any help will be appreciated!
Freddy

Hey,
During some games, they just are too expensive. Especially in smaller games, in G40, they are probably ok, but with 1942, 1941, and others, they aren’t bought. Maybe once a game, but that’s it! Especially when are one hit carriers.

Hey all,
Not to offend anyone, but I am vehemently against this type of game. The historical reliability of the game would become too compromised. The US and UK would be limited in their strategic points of attack, for instance: The US in our games aims for territories in which ICs can be placed, and the UK uses transports and bombardment to attack the axis. The UK sends as many men as possible to Russia for defense, and the US aids Britian out by producing tanks and land forces with their ICs.
Tis kind of corporation is (for me) what makes A&A cool, that all these powers have to work together to defeat the axis. The axis have an advantage as they can (for the most part) attack as one group. All the allies attacking at once would prove devastating for the axis as well as a-historical.
Sorry uncrustable, but I just don’t think that this variation adds to either the balence or playability of the game. Again, I’m not trying to offend anyone, just inputting my opinion.
Thanks,

Hey ItIsI,
I totally agree with you, BB were getting obsolete by the end of WW2, so making them around 22-23 would make more sense. Also, reducing the amount of money for a carrier to 15 might make them a slightly better buy. Especially in the smaller games, carriers (in our group) are almost never bought. Perhaps raising BB cost by one or two, and lowering the CV cost by one or two might make for more balanced naval buys. Just my 2 cents.
Thanks,

Hey ch0senfktard,
Thanks for your advice. The only problem is that I really don’t like delaying Operation Barbarossa to try Sealion. Also, are two transports enough to really threaten Britain. I do think that something has to be done, but is a 1st round Barbarossa more of deterrent. Any advice is appreciated.

AHA! Well, that makes sense; it always seemed like there wasn’t a lot I could do about the Trans-Jordan IC! Thanks a lot guys. Well, the next he plays that I will pull out the rule book on him. (knowing the rules is such fun!)

Thanks for all your help,

What counter is the best if UK decides to pour all resources into an minor IC in Egypt? He (my opponent) takes out most of my Italian boats with: Malta fighter, UK med ships, and everything he has got. Then he flies his planes to Gibraltar, setting up a 2nd round stack of at least four fighters. He then dumps an IC in Egypt, and reinforces it. It really isn’t a deal breaker, but after a few turns of steady Inf building, he then makes another IC in Trans-Jordan, really putting the squeeze on Italy!

My math probably isn’t perfect but I think he can have 6 inf, 2 art, 1 mech, and a fighter by turn one, and 9 inf, 2art, 1 mech and 5 fighters by turn two. That isn’t easy to take down without substantial German help which (as I play it) it really can’t afford to give. Any advice would be much appreciated!
Thanks,

Hi all,
I currently own G40, 1942 (1st ed) 1941 and a lot of other AA games. My question is: It is worth shelling out 60+ 1942 2nd, or should I just get another copy of the 1st so that I can play blind? I love playing blind, and is more like real war, but I don’t want to pass up a another great game (after missing out on anniversary). What do y’all think of this one in particular.
Thanks,  :-)

I don’t think even two or three rounds of buying will do you any good either. UK and US are making too much money for you to drop a sealion attack. Its really too bad as its cool to finally take Britain off the map.

That would be like axis and Allies heaven… Especially is you had like a game of people playing the game, and then like four different “generals” playing the actuall battles…  You would need like a billion dollars to buy all the minis needed to actually play that though. Sweet idea.
Thanks,

I really like the minatures, but since no new ones are being released, and the scale has gotten everything wonky, are the land minis ever played? Just wondering… I personally think the minis were are great idea, that was too far from the original, scaring potential customers away… Really liked the idea though.
Thanks,

It’s possible that with the long nature of these games (1914, Pacific 1940 etc) that is is harder to fully play test them. Let’s not forget that there are literally hundreds of units on the board, so adjusting each ones cost, movement, attack, defense and such takes a lot of time……

However, this game is so allied heavy, you do start to wonder if WOTC just moved the date of release up an extra year!  :? Just saying, it’s probably harder than it looks…

See ya,

Thanks Oztea, let us know how that works!

Which one are you hoping for?! I really want a Kursk, but really I want ALL OF THEM!  :-D

Hey all,
The only problem with BOTB is that the system and units aren’t like anything we’ve had before, so learning a new game that is rather unbalanced to begin with isn’t a gret proposition. I really like the tactical games though, and would absolutely love a Kursk, or Stalingrad or Midway game!!

Someone has probably said this, but the idea that If china takes over all of their territories, and are make a boatload of money, there is an invisible force-field that stops them from ever attacking Korea, any Japanese held Russian territories, or most British territories is ludicrous… Like really?! Come on, I know there as a civil war but that doesnt mean that invisible force-fields just stop them… Whatever, rant over…

Thanks,