Posts made by JamesG

If the BB force is only landing one Inf, then it’s probably not worthwhile to buy the sub, as your analysis shows.  But if the BB force is escorting a full landing, then the sub may be worthwhile to block those shots.

When playing the US, I keep an eye on Japan’s pacific trannies even though I’m focused on KGF.  If Japan looks like they may try something cute on the west coast of North America, I simply build some/all of my tanks in Western US.  The US often has discretionary cash to buy an extra Inf or two as well on the west, while still buying enough to fill it’s trannies on the east.

If Japan lands, the tanks plus “extra” inf crush them on the counter, and if they don’t the tanks move to Eastern Canada via Western Canada with no delay to the shuck to Europe at all.

@88:

3x3 to Algeria.

Not sure why you’d need a 3x3 (or 2x2) to Algeria.  If the troops bound for Algeria are staged in Eastern Canada, trannies can shuttle between adjacent zones SZ12 (off Algeria) to SZ9 (off Canada), picking up and dropping troops in the same turn.  Unless you want additional trannies down there to threaten Southern Europe or something.

@Axel:

@Malus:

It is legal to place existing fighters on a newly build AC if the fighters are located in the IC area

Isn’t it legal, too, to place existing fighters on a new AC when they are located in an adjacent territory to the sea zone the AC is built?
I thought it was, but I can’t remember actually…

No, the Fighters MUST be in the same territory as the IC that built the AC.  So for instance, German Fighters in Western Europe can NOT be placed on a newly built carrier coming out the the German capital.  The fighters need to be IN Germany in order to be placed on the AC.

Note - The comments in this thread apply to the Revised rules, not LHTR.  LHTR changed some things about how fighters are placed on new ACs (and not for the better IMHO).

@Malus:

Why would the germans continue into moscow if their capital is falling? It seems like a really stupid move, if you are about to take moscow it would mean that you have a lot of offensive based just a few turns away, I wouldn’t hessitate in moving around and head back for the defense.
I can understand this, if its the japanese thats taking control over moscow, but then the game is far from lost, a Japanese player having control of moscow means that Empire of the Sun is a really nasty Empire and it won’t take many turns for them to liberate the german capitol.

Yes, when both Germany and Russia fall it is usually Japan who takes Russia.  But it is far from a given that Japan will be able to liberate Germany.  Yeah, Japan is nasty, but with the US/UK holding Germany itself plus East, West, and Southern Europe they are still probably out-earning Japan.

@ncscswitch:

Yes Octo… JamesG got it right… it IS Missing Persons.  Their other hit was “Walking in LA”

Horay for me!

As for sending the AC against the TRN also… that depends on what you do with your Aussie fleet… AND if you think the game will go long enough for you to get the AC back to UK via the Cape of Good Hope…

Yeah, I didn’t want to totally sacrifice the entire fleet by moving it to Kwangtung.  So I attacked the Trannie there with the fighter, intending to land in Bury which I had stacked as Russia.  The rest of the fleet went straight down and linked with the Aussie trannie.  The Aussie sub went against the Solomons sub.Â

I know I can’t hold Bury for long but Japan can’t sack Bury, do Pearl, and kill the UK fleet down in SZ30 all on turn one.  I wanted to give him a lot of choices and capatalize on what he didn’t do.  Losing the Fighter vs the Trannie, without even killing it, did hurt.  My opponent did Pearl and killed the UK fleet, but it meant his East Indies fleet was out of position on J2 to do much.  If that battle had been off Kwangtung, the Jap fleet would’ve been in a better position J2.

Still not sure what the “optimal” move is with those UK boats.  There may not be one…

I used to be Inf all the way, but I’ve realized that Russia really needs to buy some offensive pieces in order push back some early in the game.  But its still all ground units, I don’t mess around with an extra fighter or two.

Though I go pretty much full bore KGF with the allies.  If I was going to play around more in the pacific I might tend to be more defensive with Russia and go back to all Inf.

@liquidvet:

We have just been playing that the first major capital that falls and stays fallen loses.  Once Russia or Germany has been taken over you can pretty much call it a day.  You would have to be a pretty bad player to let one of the factions rebound from a nasty country loss like that.Â

Depends on if the other side is losing a capital at nearly the same time.  Very often, Germany and Russia fall around the same time.  So even if one falls “first”, if the other goes within a round or two, it can still be a dogfight.

@ncscswitch:

Just remember, against MOST experienced players, Japan will NOT have the Kwang tranny on J1.

Unless your UK attacker (either Fighter or DD) misses and the trannie hits on round one… like happened to me in my most recent game.   :-(

destination unkwown…
(Bonus points if you know the musical group from the 80’s that sang a song by that title…

Missing Persons ?

@liquidvet:

Now if Moscow fell while Uk troops were positioned in 2 territories, they would immediately begin making money for it since they are already bringing order to a hostile territory with no rule.

I do not think this is correct.  If UK has troops in a Russian territory and the Russian capital falls, the UK does not earn money for that territory.  Nobody does, until either an axis power takes over the territory or the Russian capital is liberated.  In order for the UK to earn money for an original Russian territory, they must liberate it from axis control.

I grant you it does not “make sense” from a real world perspective, but a fair number of rules don’t make sense in that way.  They are probably the way they are for game balance reasons, etc.

@liquidvet:

I was assuming that each country makes money for the lands within the region that they have occupied, but then this kind of screws the british and americans since they can only liberate, not take control of Russian lands.  Make sense?

Note that if the Russian capital is in axis hands, then if the US or UK liberates a “Russian” land, they gain control of it and can earn money for it.  If the Russian capital is ever liberated, at that point the lands revert back to Russian control.

Some examples.  Say the Russian capital is captured, with Archangel in Russian hands and Caucus in German hands.

Archangel will generate no money for anyone as long as the Russian capital is conquered, unless an axis power takes it over.  But if the US or UK liberate the Caucus from German control, the liberator earns the IPCs for the territory AND can use the IC there to produce units.  If the Russian capital is later liberated, the Caucus (and its IC) will revert back to Russia and the US/UK will no longer earn IPCs or be able to build there.

Actually, we don’t need to extrapolate.  From the rules themselves, specifically page 18 (top of right hand column).

If the original controller’s capital is in enemy hands when you liberate
the territory, you collect income for the newly captured territory and
can use any industrial complex there until the original controller’s
capital is liberated.

@Axel:

never heared of ‘playing low luck’.

There are probably other threads and websites on the topic, but I’m too lazy to look for them right now.  :-)

In brief, low luck eliminates the wild swings of luck that regular dice can entail.

Basically, in each battle you total the attack and defense factors on both sides, divide by six, and each side gets that many hits.  If there is any remainder, a die is rolled to see if that generates an extra hit or not.  So each round of combat can have at most one die roll per side.

Here is an example.
2 Tanks, 1 Art, and 2 Inf attacking 3 Inf and 1 Fighter

In the first round, the attackers total is 3+3+2+2+1=11
So they get one hit automatically, and a second hit if they roll a 5 or less.

The Defenders total is 2+2+2+4=10.
So they get one hit automatically, and a second hit if they roll a 4 or less.

and so on.

Luck is still a factor in low luck, which is why it’s not called no luck.  But it’s a much smaller factor.

Some people like low luck, some don’t.  I’m not sure which I prefer myself.  Also note that strategy is different between the the versions.  The differences a subtle, but they are there, and it is possible to be a good low luck player but a bad regular dice player, and vice versa.

Edited to add a couple of "or less"es…

@Axel:

while in gameplay, it changes nothing really, I think it’s easier to NOT give the subs their opening fire step when an enemy destroyer is present and only role those dice when you are actually attacking with the rest of your ships…

I agree, in normal gameplay, its often just as easy to skip the opening fire step when an enemy destroyer is present.

But if playing low luck, it makes a difference. For instance, take an attacking Sub and BB vs a destroyer.  If you skip opening fire and allow the sub and BB to combine their attack, the Dest will automatically be destroyed, since 4 for the BB plus 2 for the sub equals 6, which is one hit in low luck.

But by making them split their attack, the Dest may survive round one.  The sub could roll a 3 to 6 in opening fire (missing) and the BB rolls a 5 or 6 in normal fire (also missing).

@Axel:

a destroyer makes every special ability of a sub VANISH! so, they can not have opening fire any more!
so,
@Perry:

Q4: YES your subs hits during the Opening fire step, but so does your enemy’s subs…! Only, any non-Sub units of yours that are hit by your enemies attack, DOES get to fight back during regular combat, due to the presence of your DD…
The thing is that the presence of a DD does not move the attack of the enemy subs to the Regular Combat step - the DD allows the units hit by subs to fight back before they are killed!

this quote is not a good way of rephrasing the good thinking of keen2215!

Umm, no.  A Destroyer does NOT cancel out every special ability of the sub, and Perry’s quote was exactly correct.

Take a look at the rules (available here: http://www.wizards.com/avalonhill/rules/axis2004.pdf ) specifically pages 15-16.  You’ll see that Destroyers do NOT stop subs from doing **Step 2: Conduct Opening Fire.**  What Destroyers DO do is make subs skip Step 3: Remove Opening Fire Casualties

So subs, attacking and defending, always roll to hit in Step 2, but thier casualities are only removed in Step 3 if there are no enemy Destroyers present.  If there ARE enemy Destroyes, then sub casualties are removed in Step 6: Remove Casualties
Just like Perry said.

PS- And yes, I know enemy Destoyers also cancel out a Subs ability to Submerge or to Treat Hostile Sea Zones as Friendly.