That sucks. but really it’s the field commanders (i.e. the dice) fault and not yours. Not every battle is meant to be won even if the odds are in your favor.
I personaly dislike low luck except for solo play trying out strategies, but if you hate wild swings in luck it might be your thing
Yikes! that’s 16 or so turns to get to the end of 1945. I don’t have that kind of endurance. 10 turns is considered a long game with my group.
I hear you with the whole RROD thing. Mine died recently but I’m thankfull microsoft is repairing them for free. I’m relieved this didn’t happen in April though. That would have pissed me off.
I saw it yesterday at American Eagle and almost picked it up for $40. Though I wanted to look it up Board Game Geek first. Unfortunatly there isn’t a entry for this game at BGG which I think is a shame.
As some might know, Battlestations Midway is one of my most favorite Xbox 360 games ever. Well, this April the sequel comes out and I would love to see some people from this board in the game playing with me. Here’s a trailer for the game.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUR229x-Apo
Or you can have the board framed. That way you can display it on the wall for all to see, plus it will be under glass so it wont warp or stain. This is my plan once I get some time.
You’re right, I don’t think Russia and Germany can Fall to any sort of allied attack. Thats why the allied victory conditions are for it to only stop Axis from cliaiming Africa Asia before USA creates a Atom Bomb (by turn X) and forces a treaty/surrender.
As it was, the only ground Axis had gained by turn 4 was Persia, Trans Jordan and 1 territory in China It had lost Libiya. If you had asked my opponet who was Axis, he would say my bid was already high.
Yup, it’s pretty standard for the Japan player to send transports into Africa along with neutering China. It’s too bad the Germans have generaly started to fall apart at this point (In the games I’ve played). Occasionaly Alaska goes too but I’ve yet too see a winning attack on America mainland.
So wait. Are you assuming I’m ignoring Japan or just not using them effectivly.
Question. Is it possible for Germany to still be a threat to Russia (or anyone) after turn four?
Well we all take turns being Axis. It’s basicly the same three people I’ve played these games out, so it’s hard to say if our Axis game needs work.I’ve read the posts on Germany moves but in the end the games all end the same. Germany gets right up next to Russia but because the Allies are nipping on Germanys butt, it’s unable to keep a front going and ultimatly fails at Russias doorstep. And if Germany actually gets Russia Allies are able to take Germany same round.
Would love to expand my play sessions with more people to see new styles of play strategy.
Maybe you’re Allied players need some practice? :P
I think the bid came out to 16. Uk fighter and two inf on egypt.
We were thinking a 8 turn limit. Roughly ending the war when the USA makes the atom bomb. But we really actually want to find out how long it takes Axis to win and create a turn limit based around that.
No changes in placement except for the bid.
Airsoft for me as well. Nothing against paintball though. I’ve got 2 TM mp5’s. Haven’t played in awhile as it’s hard to find groups.
I can’t get enough of this game. Regardless of how many other videogames I get, this one keeps finding it’s way into the disc tray. And I bought this game when it was released. Anyone else play?
For those who don’t know Battlestation Midway is a WWII RTS dealing with warships and airplanes with the ability to control any unit manualy. It’s pure gold to warship lovers.
Couldn’t get a full game in because of time constraints but we did get in 3 rounds.
In short
Germany: focused on Navy and threatening UK. At the start of round four made a suicide charge into UK.
Japan: focused on getting a foothold on asia and eliminated the eastern Russia forces.
Russia: focused on India but was held back by a multi national foce positioned there with a UK IC. It also tried going through China but was hurt by the fact china could get a better grip in the teritory.
UK: built a India IC and ships to compete with germany.
Italy: Did what it does best and just died. Actually the multinatial Jap/USA/UK force did that.
USA: built transports in the pacific an IC in Philipines and some transports in the atlantic. Also helped UK with fighters.
China: Gets to keep its fighter and is in a better defensive position.
Granted this was only three turns but the Axis player was demoralized by the fact that he wasn’t gaining ground fast.
We talked about having China go to Axis hellp balance things out. Plus it might make sense in the context of the scenario.
I’ll update this when I get a full game in.
Really?.. Really?.. For reals you guys are finding a Axis advantage?
I’ve probably got 10 or so '41 games in, and all but two have been a Allied victory. This is with NO’s and tech and all players were experienced. It’s actually getting to the point where we might have to bid for Axis to get any of the players to agree to play German side.
We’ve had one '42 game and it was a allied blowout.
I’ve played probably six or so full games. 42 once the rest were 41 W/NO and tech. Every time with three players. Idealy we would have a fourth. Anyone near Seattle?
Played the MB version back in the day (don’t remember the year) as a kid. Stopped as I felt it was too biased towards the allies. Back then There was no internet so I didn’t know about a bid. Started up with revised, maybe two years ago and have been playing strong since. Now with AA50.
And terribly unlucky that the Bizmarks AA couldn’t hit one of the Bi planes. I was just making a point that outdated WW1 equipment could still have a chance against the newest war machines. This kind of event of underdog winning wasn’t unheard of during WWII. Which is why I guess we use dice to determine the battles and not low luck rules.
In regards to it needing a transport to move it on the sea: I see it as a way so it’s not just a free movement across the sea as you have to invest in transports to move it accross. Otherwise you might as well just hand it over the IPC’s to UK, perhaps with a delay. Which would just make a gamebreaking strategy of USA giving all it’s money to UK making a unhistorical gamebreaking strat. Giving it a defensive value would in my opinion just make a strat of investing in cargo as cheap hit takers for the navy. Plus, theres a simple elegence to the two unit staking currently on the trans (1 inf 1 cargo).
In regards to it being defenseless: Almost all USA strat’s involve at least sending some “defenseless” transports to UK (E Canada shuck). In almost all the games I play Germany never has the ability to threaten them much as the risk rewards are high (Bombers are the only unit with the range, and only from Norway no less). Granted if you wanted to send a crap ton of cargo to UK, I could see a smart German player bombing those trans.
In regards to it taking to long: It takes just as long to send ground forces into the UK as it would to send the cargo. The cargo wouldn’t be a instant gratification unit, it would be part of a long term strategy to help bolster a quickly deteriating UK.
The other place I see cargo actualy being done is with Germany giving cargo to Italy. Germany doesn’t have to buy transports but there is a two turn delay and Germany can’t afford to give too much.
Additionaly, It could possibly be done with Japan giving to Italy (4 turns on the sea), or USA to Russia in the example I gave at the start of the thread. You could even spend the entire game trying to get a cargo to the Russian front with Germany.