Posts made by jeffdestroyer

Controlling the seas could include denying its use to your foes. not just building ships.

ie German bombers and fighters…maybe a few subs in the North Atlantic.

EBAY has three at this time    :mrgreen:

I like the new sub rules.  It will force a lot of players to pay attention to the naval game and be prepared for balance and alternatives.  A lot of players are just tank commanders in AA Revised.

Here are the most important items that I think will affect subs.
1.  A player may not have enough IPCs to have enough DD’s in all of the correct places to counter subs.
2.  2nd and 3rd rounds of a naval battle will be more critical if subs are involved and you lose your DD’s.
3.  subs might be moved during non combat after a DD threat has been neutralized and the sub is in a better postion for the following turn while not subject to attack in the meantime.
4.  DD’s are subject to air attack  thus they might not be forward deployed without other assets, while subs will be.
5.  need a DD to hit a sub with air power
6. Subs are cheap.

Oh well, TR only cost 7ipc now.  Buy another.

@Cmdr:

There are two things I learned in Revised that I suspect are true in Anniversary as well.

1)  She who controls the oceans, wins the game.  Period.  End of story.  I don’t care if you have a billion infantry and I have 1 infantry, if I own the oceans, I win.  Therefore, navy IS important. (my favorite trick in enhanced is to drop 2 or 3 submarines in the water every round with one of my nations until I dominate the oceans.)

Why is this true?  Without a navy you cannot use any of your infantry offensively and, as we all know, turtle-ing as your only strategy is doomed to failure.  Eventually the one controlling the oceans will control the mainland and out produce you.

2)  She who has the biggest air force, tends to win the game.  No idea why this is true.  I suspect it is related to your ability to mass more firepower on your attacks without risking them to counter attack.  It also is not ALWAYS true.  Sure, if England does nothing but buy fighters for the entire game, they might have the biggest air force, but they also have no ability to land troops.

Now, if you assume both 1 and 2 above are true.  Then it makes sense to use air power to establish command of the oceans early, followed by a slow build of of warships to maintain that power, then to use your air power on frivolous things like SBR damage.

I agree !!!

@Imperious:

yes when you embark units on your allys transport you have to wait a turn before you disembark

You can also bridge your units on your transports or drop off in NCM units on different territories you control.

If you are using a single TR in NCM, it must offload into a single friendly territory.  AA50 pg 31.
This includes bridging  :wink:

If the Axis own Egypt and TRJ, Italy can move its fleet to sz 15 to be safe for a rd.  if the UK builds extra bombers in a single turn.

2 CA for Italy.  Larry gave you an extra one.

I have a few USA INF that lean to far and they will not stand up.
1 Russian is decapitated.
1 Ger bomber has 1 wing shorter than the other.
a lot of pcs are showing white where the mold was connected.

It is not all pcs, just a few.

@P-Unit:

Ack!! $200 is too high. I’ll try to print it out on multiple 8.5" x 11" pages and tape it together!  :p

A couple of years ago I edited an Imperious Revised Map using Window Picture and Fax Viewer to make my prototype map.
I printed each page and placed it on a roll of paper.
I taped over the edges and I use a sheet of plexiglass to keep the paper down.  $30 for the plexiglass was the most expensive part.

@HolKann:

Didn’t update the link :oops:. I did now (and doublechecked ;) ): Shanghai, 1942 setup, connection to Nwe from SZ7,… are correct.

thanks for the correction

@Cowboybob:

@jeffdestroyer:

If Germany is trading Poland as a dead zone, they are in trouble whether are not an IC is located there.
It is about logistics and getting INF to the front.

What do you mean by “Dead zone”?

I mean that each nation keeps trading a territory on its turn, thus not holding it.

NO

What has not been discussed is how an allied nation can help the other in NO’s. 
If the the USA player takes a Jap. Island, it will help the UK on the next turn.  I also like how the NOs involve several territories.  It does not have to be the same combination.

IF the PACIFIC is abandoned, the the USA will have one NO in a short period of time and the UK may have zero.

correct.  One BB or CA can attack for every land unit that is making an amphib. landing.

ie  2 INF, 1 Art could be supported by 3  BB’s or CA’s in the same sz for the 1st round of combat.

If Germany is trading Poland as a dead zone, they are in trouble whether are not an IC is located there.
It is about logistics and getting INF to the front.

Visit the painting and modeling section of the forum. 
I learned a lot from some of the people who watch that thread.    :-D

@TG:

I used average numbers. That means not counting full hits, but decimal numbers. Maybe I was wrong, but I believe I did get a little higher probability for the subs to win.

Just ask yourself this question: Would you use four infantry to attack three infantry?

Right now, I just don’t see much point in buying ships as the German player. If they did economic damage then maybe it would be a different story, but we’ve been down that road before right…

If Germany builds a sub and it doesn’t survive the first round, does it make a sound?  It doesn’t matter what you do to subs to make them better (heck, you can make them attack for 4), Germany does not need them.  The Atlantic is too small and a IC in France is too risky.

However, I do see a rule like this spicing up Italy/UK, and to a greater extent, Japan/USA.  Under this rule, US wolf packs would have a field day sinking Japanese transports in the South Pacific.

USA subs did just that to Japan in WW2 while Ger. faded with the Allied convoy system

round down  5 terr. = only 2 INF

I agree about the dead zones.  If Ger and Jap.  SBR Russia, it can cripple them near the end, because they can not produce enough pcs to trade dead zones.

If the USSR has 19 IPC, they might lose 9.  Usually after two-3 rounds of SBR, they can not take all of the dead zones back without getting behind the Inf count against the Germans.  especially if the Jap. player creates more dead zones in Asia.  …then the USSR is collecting 15 and still has SBR after that.
This usually requries Japan to buy a bomber or two along the way.  If they have been ignored along the way, they can afford the bomber and it can get into combat quickly.  As everyone knows it may take several turns for the Jap. player to be in position to threaten Russia directly, but she sure can bleed her dry with dead zones and SBR in the mean time.

When SBR stops the USSR from taking territories near the end of a game, it is worth a lot more than SBR at the begining of the game when calculating the cost of bomber loses.    :evil: