Posts made by Jennifer

Perhaps a wiser solution would be 1 AC, 2 submarine if you are going for a Pacific battle.

Your AC with 2 fighters (E. US and W. US) should be more then adequate for a couple rounds to defend some subs.

Given all other variables are equal, what nation do you feel is the strongest? (ie, same skill level of player, same unit values, normal game setup, normal turn rotation, etc.)

Assume 2 or 3 rounds of game play.

I meant that each fighter has a 50% chance of a hit. You really only need one, IMO. (sorry, I just plain dont see that transport as a threat. it’s only 1 tank or 2 infantry!) Besides, the UK can take it out later.

And yea, I conceed that you might still loose the sub in spain. So perhaps dumping that tranny on Canada would be better.

I’m still not going all out with Russia as mentioned in post 1. Although, I was thinking about it, and it is a good way to reduce the number of units on the board, dramatically. Perhaps a way to open Finland or E. Euro up for an invasion sooner by the allies? (BTW, unless I can get jap fighters, I don’t like to attack with my eastern russian forces. If I can get jap fighters, I’ll sacrifice 7 infantry and a tank just to get 1 or 2 enemy fighters!)

I actually prefer to take the risk. For one, your odds of killing the Spanish sub increase dramatically with the addition of a tranny for cannon fodder, and if neither die, at least you get a shot at any attacking German fighters.

Also, you have a 50% chance of hitting with both attacking fighters in the Baltic while the Germans only have an 18% chance of hitting anything on round one. Even if there is a round two, that chance is only raised by 12% to 30%.

But unlike most, my goal isn’t to get the non-threatening transport, I want the submarine. I want to hinder their chance of killing any British units I can. Although, I’d prefer to take the cannon fodder (transport) as well, if possible.

If I see the US going for Germany first, as Japan, I’ll work on getting a fleet together to take out the US. You can even do that while you pretend to attack Asia. (After all, what you really need is some land and 8-12 transports. Once you have that, it’s a matter of turns before you can dump 24 infantry into Alaska. More then enough to relieve the Germans before the US can mount a defense.)

However, perhaps 1 AC and 2 transports would be a wiser use of your money?

I prefer 2 Fighters in the Baltic, sub and tranny at France. May as well take out 60% of the German naval vessels with USSR while you build infantry.

Odds are you’ll loose either a plane or a transport. Neither will loose the game, but the fighter is definately the worse one to loose. On the plus side, you may have saved the life of at least one British BB saving the Brits 18 IPCs.

I only buy the AC if I know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the US will put fighters on it. (and by know, I mean if he doesn’t I can personally walk over there and kick his rosey little red tushy!)

Even then, sometimes I work with the US to forgo round one naval purchases with the UK. 60 IPCs makes a much nicer fleet, especially in Iron Wolf where you can use Destroyers, but even so…1 BB + 4 Trannies + whatever fleet the US can bring in (72 IPCs worth, give or take 2 IPCs) and you can bombard.

I dunno, I mean I prefer the US to make the carrier, they have more disposable income and they’ll need the carrier for the Pacific after Europe is gone.

Don’t get me started on the “odds calcs” ugh…I hate players that use them…it adds so much time to the game and takes 80% of the strategy out of it, IMHO.

I kinda like the idea, though a different flavor might be an armor instead of two inf. Though, I don’t think that’ll do much good in the long run since that German infantry isn’t likely to do much more then grab French West Africa and only long enough to give the Germans an extra IP for the round. (Assuming UK can take Libya and US can retake FWA in T1)

I’ve actually grabbed the Armor with Germany and used it in Europe and given up Africa. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesnt, either way, an extra surviving tank isn’t going to hurt, especially when you have to counter 16 defensive points with your attack.

Finally, my odds calculator is in my mind: All defensive points added vs all attack points added. Common denominator is 6, obviously. If I don’t have at least 2:1 odds, I don’t attack, I prefer 3:1 odds, though I’ve been known to go 3 inf vs 1 inf defender. It’s 3:2, but it almost always wins. (Yea, there’s an exception to every, and I mean EVERY, rule.)

See, I was thinking the UK BB with 5 trannies is better then 2 trannies, a BB and an AC

I’d say Fin/Nor has almost no bearing at all on the game. But I still prefer USA to have it, it costs 8 ipcs more for the US to join the war then for the Russians and only the US is posed to take out Japan if they don’t just surrender after the fall of Germany.

Another thought:

What are the odds of the UK purchasing an AC if you do not destroy both of her BBs?

It’s really the AC with two fighters that prevent Luftwaffe attacks on transports. A BB discourages it, but an AC with 2 fighters almost requires 3 fighters and 3 bombers to attack and you may not get the carrier or the fighters before your planes are destroyed. A BB is much easier to overwhelm.

2 months late, but so what?

If, and I’m not espousing this on every game-just a way to stir it up a bit, you instead go for USSR in Karelia with everything you have you could cripple the Russian’s ability to join in the battle.

I view it more as a toss up between crippling the British or the Russians. You can cause more IPC damage to the British, but you could take more land with the Russians. (btw, even if you use your Luftwaffe in Russia, you better still take out at least the BB in the med, tranny in Canada and try to get a shot off with your sub from the Baltic.)

I think the worry here is that you’ll fail your attacks in the land battles, not taking the land and not destroying enough enemy forces to prevent Germany from killing your 8 infantry (+2 fighters?) in Karelia leaving you no offensive forces on the west and forcing you to dump into Moscow.

I veiw Russia as a country that must hold it’s borders forcing Germany to build up for at least 2 rounds so that the US can get into the mix. Anything that jeapordizes this, is giving the axis powers more advantage then they should have. (I kind of prefer leaving the axis with 18% chance of winning a normal, 2nd ed. rules game.)

I do like taking E. Euro with Russia (even if I have to put my tanks there) and letting UK or USA take Finland/Norway. (hey, it’s free money, right?)

I’d rather just jump E.Europe with everything I can (less tanks) and use the Tranny/Sub in baltic.

Once you have E.Euro you cut off Germany and Italy from attacking Karelia and if you have 8 inf, 2 arm, 2 fgt there, the last remnants of the Eastern Front won’t be taking Karelia, at least not on T1.

Also, I like to leave Finland/Norway for the US. After Germany falls it’s going to be left up to the US to take Japan, since they have the most convenient IC for the job. (I also like to leave Algeria and Libya for the US as well, it makes up for the 4 lost in Asia.)

Then again, I tend to give as much to my allies as I can as Russia so they can help out easier. After all, the sooner the USA is dumping 12-20 infantry in Finland and the UK is dumping 6-10, the sooner you can turn your red army on mainland Asia.

I think it’s more then that, Pol. I think once two nations fall there is no financial way the 3rd can win. Then again, if you have two enemy capitals, plus your two you already have 34-38 IPCs out of your needed 84 IPCs for a financial victory and I’d wager just about anything that you also have enough territory to have surpassed the M84 requirement.

I know. They chose to end the game after two ally capitals were captured becuase at that point you just don’t have the finances to maintain an adequate supply of manpower to win. (Unless you can liberate a capital within a round.)

And yes, it is frustrating when the UK and USSR fall, especially as the game is geared towards allowing the “good guys” (a.k.a. allies) win.

The problem I see with OP Sea Lion is that the UK just isn’t anywhere near as big a threat as Russia is to Germany. Yes, the Germans can overcome the threat easily, but they still need a few turns to do so. Until then (and assuming you didn’t roll only 6’s when attacking the Brit fleet) you can pretty much ignore the UK until you can reduce the defending units of Moscow enough that Japan can take it before USSR can rebuild. (Yea, that means that Japan gets the money, but so what? Build only infnatry in Euro-Asia and Africa and wait until the Japs can take the US.)

I think that’s why victory is declared when the allies loose two capitals. Although, I think that if you loose UK and USSR but USA holds Berlin or Tokyo then you should be allowed to keep playing. (or any ally holds an axis capital and an ally holds their own capital.)

Also an extra transport in the Baltic is an 18% higher chance of destroying a Russian fighter if they attack. Any extra fighter they don’t have for defense is all that higher a chance you can take them easier.

And I’ll check out that map tool as well. I’m not 100% pleased with Hasbro’s game. (dice are unrealistic, IMHO, and it isn’t customizable enough.)

There once was a game called Dogs of War or something…I still have the soundtrack…anyone remember it from the mid-1990’s? If so, anyone know if it’s still downloadable?

I’d love a PBEM game, however, there isn’t a place in my house I could leave a board set up for more then 30 minutes. (assuming I start setting up the board when my son starts his nap…)

Too bad there isn’t a remote hosting site that can leave a board set up on their servers and allow someone with a mouse to manipulate it as needed…