Posts made by Funcioneta

Saludos. Te he respondido en el otro subforo, donde también tienes un tema pidiendo gente para jugar. Podemos jugar a cuatro como en el otro post, o un uno contra uno a parte, o incluso ambas  :lol:

OK, coon, Gewehr, Torment and me, Funcioneta. A game? I suggest revised, FAQ, 9 victory cities, no bid (throw dice for choosing side). I could play with bid, of course. AbattleMap?

Yo soy de Córdoba, pero vivo en Sevilla. Llevo año y medio jugando, pero en tablero, nunca por e-mail. Podríamos echar una partida por la red …  :mrgreen:

@coon:

looking for somebody to play
i am rather handicaped
i would like to play the revised game
i am not sure how triple a is working so what i need is an opponent
with a bit off patience
hope hering from someone

coon

Hi, we could start a game.I Use ABattleMap. For dices, i use the dice roller installed in the forum. P.example:

Rolling 4d6:
(1, 1, 2, 2)

It would be my first game by e-mail anyway …

Rolling 5d6:
(2, 4, 4, 5, 6)

Trying …

Well, German player buyed an aircraft carrier in Baltic Sea, and make some carnage with allied fleet in Atlantic, so german fighters were busy killing allied ships. Luckily, western allies managed buy another fleet at time.

In fact, I only sent 8 siberian units plus 2 new built to China, all the other buys went against the german. Last turn before axis surrendering, my income was 34 with USSR.

I think saving Sinkiang IC is a good way of stopping japanese advance in Asia. Sure, that 10 units would stop the germans a bit, but they may arrive too late, and letting japaneses alone in Asia are bad news for USSR … losing siberian production means less units against germans anyway …

Aaah… the old good Hearts of Iron’s unholy alliance…  :mrgreen: well, maybe give Chinese territories to USSR and not to USA to balance: think them as controled by Mao insteand poor old Chiank Kai Shiek …

Oh, also delete USA Pacific fleet and maybe half of Japanese fleet or Unholy Alliance will be toasted in the seas …

I tried a new strategy in my last game. Face to face, 5 players, revised with faq’s. I was USSR.

In all my past games, siberian units (6 inf) joint in Buryatia or Yakutia. That mean Japan chewed them in Buryatia by shore bomb + massive amphibious assault or doing nothing in Yakutia because japaneses many times send massive forces anyway by 6-7 turn.

This time, I sent siberian and Novosibirsk units to China, plus 2 inf from Russia’s IC. Added to Indian and Sinkiang ICs they managed hold China and even conquer Manchuria and Kwantung! We got a bit (only a bit) of luck and even a soviet inf managed survive a showdown with massive japanese units (10 sov+3 chinese vs about 15 japanese units)!

Japan couldn’t recover his Kwantung IC, so it was out of Asian mainland, reduced to 21 IPCs. Plus, japanese player sent his fleet to a suicide attack against superior USA/Australian joint fleet who can’t hit Japan anyway and got only 13 IPC’s. It was about turn 7. German player was too far away from Moscow (I had 7 tanks  :mrgreen:) and surrended.

Strangely, japanese player said he still have a chance  :lol:

Well, obviously, japanese player played very bad his fleet. But I think siberian soviet units are better aiding China survive than doing nothing in Yakutia. Thoughts?

Still, i don’t understand why destroyers are overpriced  :?

What do you buy then when you need some cheap ship to protect transports?

Subs are cheaper but don’t protect from aircraft… or from other subs  :lol:

Battleships and carriers cost more than destroyers. BB double, and carriers need some fighters and have crappy attack value.

I buy more than one destroyer in my games. Usually one from UK atlantic fleet and two for USA, one for Atlantic and the other for Pacific. Germany and USSR sure don’t need, but even with Japan i buy some DD sometimes…

No one build destroyers? Why? It prevents subs first strike, protects transports from lone fighters and only cost 12 IPCs … My most used UK1 is IC, destroyer and 1 inf. Can anyone explain me why no one build destroyers?

Rockets it’s ok, but i’d try only two dices. You must buy at least same inf as USSR.

Heavy Bombers is powerful, but relies only in dice rolls. No tactic challenges and you can also lose anyway if Germany plays well. Anyway, with USA i’d try 6 dices first turn for gain it quickly.

Ste is right. UK and USA should build a fleet. Note that then you can’t go for heavy bombers with 6 dices, only 2.

Techs are risky. Not for long planning use, but for surprising your enemy.

Ok, thanks.  :-) That is that i thought. Then, what is better? Should I land alied troops in Karelia and attack Poland from there with US and UK or maybe continue the attacks against WE? We’ll play on thursday …

Germany has around 25 units in WE/Germany/SEurope plus luftwaffe. None in Africa, I think, only one japanese in SAfrica.

All owned by Japan, IC (japanese buyed) in Sinkiang. Japan is very near from Moscow, but only owns about 15 units (most of them tanks and only 5 japaneses units can reach Moscow). I have 6 inf and 3 fighters in Moscow and about 12 units in Caucasus, and one inf in Kazak preventing Sinkiang-Caucasus blitz plus one in Ucrania. The good news is that there are no German troops near Russia. Nearest are in Germany, so Russia is only facing Japan by the next two turns.

Anyone?

URSS: 3 fighters in Russia
Germany: 4 fighters, 1bomber, all in Germany
UK: 2 fighters (in Karelia)
Japan: 4 fighters, 1 bomber (all fig trying hopelessly conquer Western USA, bomber in FIC)
USA: 3 fighters (defending West USA with about 8 inf)

We are playing revised, vanilla rules, no bid, no nat. advantages, total victory. I’m allies and my two friends are axis.

I used KGF, only sending a token force for picking some island in the Pacific. No Sudafrica, no India and no China IC built by me (Japan buyed FIC, Sinkiang and India)

Japan has some tanks in China/India now, and Africa is still contested by both sides. I have around 10 divs (mixed) in Caucasus and 6 inf/3 fig in Russia (URSS has also Norway)

German attack forces have been eliminated (with a few japanese tanks) in Caucasus last Russian turn. Karelia is well defended by british and the chain of american/british transports is working (about 6 USA inf/8 UK inf each turn). German defence forces are stuck in Germany/WE. Only mediterranean German fleet is still alive and allied fleets are in good shape.

Japanese fleet defeated (with some loses) token USA fleet and invaded Australia, but now is busy trying hopelessly invade western USA (with 3 japanese inf). Japanese trasport chain is not working, only the IC, buying tanks.

URSS IPC about 25-28 each turn
German IPC about 33-35 each turn
British IPC about 27-29 each turn
Japanese IPC about 50 each turn
USA IPC about 37 each turn

Allies 90-95 each turn
Axis 83-85 each turn

I think i’ll win the game if there are no mistakes or bad luck by me (i think Germany is about to collapse), but my friends think they’ll win for sure, even with bad luck for them. Who do you think will win?

Cool. Grey means South and blue means North, yeah? What means red and green?

In a Diplomacy style game, Brazil could fit and sure it would be easier from Lula getting aid from Chavez, Evo Morales or Castro. Those three never would aid the US.

European Union would get a boost in a Diplomacy game. Her population would never support a long war, diplomacy fits more on EU. The russians wold have troubles in convincing ancient soviet republics join their cause. Baltic states, Ucrania and even maybe Poland not join.

Let the Mongols neutral. I see no reason they can join China or Russia. In our times, it seems as an asian Switzerland.

The muslims could fit as an alliance. At least Saudi Arabia has enough power or money to get some allies. Easier than Chavez and Castro aiding the US  :lol:

And nukes should be restricted or they ruled the whole game. If it is diplomacy, a lone nuke is the end of diplomacy… and sure the end of mankind  :cry:

@Imperious:

Well then forget Brazil… American player in such a war would have all the help of the latin nations like it did in ww2. This American Coalition would consist of Canada ( sake Quebic)  and most of S america with a few desenting neutrals ( cuba)

I can’t imagine why south americans would help the USA. There is a strong anti-northamerican sense in latin america because of USA actions in the past (Chile p.e.). Not only Castro. Think in Venezuela or Bolivia. Sure Evo Morales or Chavez would not aid the US. Lula in Brasil would not aid them i think and Chile also not. Mexicans would want emigration advantages and the others would be neutrals having their own troubles (drugs in Colombia). At the best, they would do very unstable allies for the US. Canada maybe could join but they seem to pacifist to join in a global conquest. In fact, US better allies would be Israel, Japan and UK.

Anyway, I’d suggest as playable countries:

USA
European Union
Russia
Islamic Alliance
China

German advantage giving art a defense of 3 is powerful indeed. Gives you a boost of 1/3 to your defense. Think german art boosted as an inf with 3 in defense, 2 in attack and a bonus to a buddy inf. Only at 4 IPC’s. This is very good and makes the german art better than tanks!.

Sure superfortress and lend-abuse are crazy (and chinese divisions or col garrison), but remember, these are optional rules. Superfortresses can be mended using the A&A Europe rules for strat bombing (escorting planes). Lend- lease can be used as in Europe, only in Russian IC and only in placing new units phase.