Posts made by Jermofoot

Doh, forgot tell to tell you that you owe me $10, Wargaming_nut.
Then again, I guess I didn’t accept that offer…

Before you see the Magnificent Seven, see Seven Samurai.
For that matter, see Kurosawa’s originals before you see the remakes (not saying the westerns are bad, just different - and weird how the Japanese have a cowboy fetish but we copied their movies into westerns).

Other than that, I’d recommend the Tin Drum (WW2 related material), A Very Long Engagement (WW1 movie that’s just enough guy and gal flick - but it’s FRENCH!!! OMG!!), Zatoichi, Women’s Penitentiary 1 - 287.

Obviously joking about that last one.

As it should be.
But I don’t even own the first.
Thank you, TechGod, for bestowing internet cafés upon us!

Sorry, being silly, but I just had to be the 50k post.
Unless that counter isn’t right.
Eh…doesn’t matter.
Just allow me this one moment…

…thanks.

The other thing I forgot to mention about Manchuria is that it would only be good for land units - which seems to be what everyone is focused on anyway.  Since it occupies the sea zone with Japan, it would be useless to drop anything other than land units.  But all of you probably caught that anyway…

I guess it would all depend on the Allied movements.  I think this would be a good auxiliary strategy to execute when things were favorable (as in a Russia player who didn’t pay attention to Japan).  I’m going to try it, as I see the US wouldn’t be as much of a threat as I originally thought.
Then again, if you had one of those “bad rolls” days, it could turn into disaster, but you can never do anything about that!
Suckering the US player depends on how you read the US strategy.  The thing with people is that they can be unpredictable.  He might fall for it, or he might try and help Russia through Europe and Africa, still.
The only thing to do is try it a few times.  At the very least, I do believe the Axis need to expand as much as possible, as soon as possible; this does that for Japan, but the overextension is what I’m worried about.

Ideally, it would be placed in Burma, but I usually land it in Kwangtung.  Each area has it’s pros and cons.

Burma - highest mobility and range, but more susceptible to attack.
Manchuria - low mobility, relatively safe from attack, but direct shot to Russia
Kwangtung - best defense, average mobility on land, high mobility in the sea, susceptible to the Kwangbang attack

In my experience, I took China J1 and placed an IC on Kwang on J2 (I think).  This was after whittling India.  It’s a nice pocket to be in, but if things went better on J1, I’d go for Burma.  In the last game I played, this IC was VERY important because the Allies placed ICs in Sinkiang, India, and Australia (US1, UK 2 or 3, and UK 5, I think).  Nevertheless, I went on to own 6 ICs that game….

I try to place an IC on J2, J1 might be a bit risky and costly.  It could be a trade off, though.  Place on J1 to defer transport costs to tank and inf, or Place on J2 and have a sound fleet.  Not sure which way to go, but the earlier placed, the better.

I traditionally do Pearl, which wouldn’t allow for all this.  I’ll try it sometime with regular players - it could be an effective strategy.

My concerns are that the increased presence of the US will cause Japan to immediately turn around and defend itself, overextending the units in Asia that made good gains.  However, the increased pressure on Russia could open things up for Germany.  If coordinated, you could have Russia down in a few turns.  Also, the open expanse of Russia could allow Japanese tanks to blitz onto Moscow, assuming you gave them priority in the attacks.

I’m interested in the results.

As you know Nc, I’m a fan of the Japanese, and I still contend that they are the key to the game, not Russia.  Maybe I should redefine that to be the key to the game is the interplay of Russia and Japan - but I still think that Japan holds the power from the start since they are positioned as an aggressor.  If I were playing Russia, I know Japan’s potential, as well as its weaknesses. 
To take your strategy, which I like in my first impression, there are two things I’d look at:

1.  Let’s assume that UK and US help in holding Karelia, and blunt the German advance in general (as you stated).  If this is the case, I’d also assume some of the pressure intended for Japan is being redirected by UK and US.  Perhaps not, but I will go with this.  I would think it appropriate to redistribute pressure elsewhere to make up for it - so I like the idea of sending tanks to SE Asia by Russia.  In fact, I usually buy a tank or two from the start to do so.  This all falls under one of my perceptions of the game.  There’s a revolving pressure that occurs between the Axis and Allies.  Consider the positioning of the forces (A = Allied, X = Axis):

A A X A X

You have nations sandwiched between enemies, and as you go around to everybody’s turns, you see that coordinated attacks generally produce the best results.  If Germany attacked only UK, then Russia would be free to waltz into Europe, and vice-versa.  So I think as pressure is removed from Japan, it needs to be added elsewhere.

2.  The tanks work better at assaulting than defending, so send them on to attack.  If you’re not planning to attack Germany immediately, atleast move them back to Russia.  This allows for counter attacks on Karelia, or moving on to SE Asia.

Those are my basic concepts for your strategy, so I agree with it so far.  It may only be 2-3 tanks, but in the Pacific theater, that can make a big difference.

Other reasons why I’d go for it:  There are limited Allied units in SE Asia, so any extra defence is welcomed.  If you can reduce/stagnate Japan’s income, then by all means do so (with a meager 25 IPCs to start, removing any mainland Asian territories is a big strike against them).  Holding Russia’s backdoor is essential in their survival, so buying time and relieving pressure can help deal with Germany.  Forcing Japan to reacquire beachheads will relieve pressure from the US (transfer of units from Pacific to Asian coast).  Holding or increasing Russia’s IPCs will help in the long run, and help to produce more units for either front.

@Wargaming_nut:

Jermo; deny she’s right! Seems to me it’s purely the ahem “party of reagan” that’s committing all the violence… this doesn’t indict every Republican and Right-wing in the country, obviously, but it does put the whole thing in perspective a bit (ten bucks says the usual suspects doesn’t have Kevin Spacey in it).

Nope, it’s the whole quote, baby.  Just kidding. 
Well, I’ve read her a few times in my local paper, and she’s overboard.  Most of the stuff she says comes out of her hot @$$.  I have to hand it to her though, she is creative, which I hadn’t noticed before, because I’ve not heard that BS from any other source.  It’s at least original.  Don’t get me wrong, I don’t care for many things celebrities do, so it’s not like I’m automatically taking their side.  In fact, I’m not taking their side.

@Zooey72:

The picture sucks. Trust me, seeing her is loving her. She is the bomb, and I don’t even get into asian women.

Actually, the picture is better than in my paper.  The only bomb I see is her article, and I do get into asian women. (ok, now I’m being silly)

I’d still check out the Atari “Axis & Allies,” unless you have NO interest in RTS (as stated, like Command & Conquer).  It trades strategy for faced pace action, and can be fun with friends on a LAN.  I got a chance to play for a while, and it can be entertaining, for a short time…
Others to try would be Sudden Strike, another RTS but not as goofy, and my all time favorite RTS involving WW2 material: Close Combat.  A damn good game…
I downloaded a copy of Iron Blitz from a website I can’t remember - I’ll try and track it down.  It was a relatively small download, runs fairly well (gets slower and slower as you go on, even when turning down some of the settings), and is FREE!!!

I’m 24, and originally played in middle school ('92-'94, God that seems so long ago…).  Didn’t really play much but had the game shortly after that.  Recently found some friends that enjoy playing Friday nights on occasion, but gets harder and harder to get together.

Patton+, I’m also in Kentucky - Lexington to be exact.  Where ya located, and would you ever care to play (if possible)?

I’ll give you hot (maybe a stretch), but I must claim that her brain is mighty ugly to me, inevitably revealing her to be just another drone. 
It’s not about politics, it’s that she perpetuates the same mindless, inflammatory drivel that I’m used to avoiding.  What in the article indicated she was smart (my honest question - not an instigation)?  My only guess is that she’s quite astute at making an audience; anything that juicy is bound to have readers.

I was in Paris this past April (yup, the city is exactly as it should be in the spring), and I saw homeless people.  That’s all I have to contribute…

…not.

@Imperious:

Those people who lie in the streets made a choice, in spite of your misguided views.They simply stopped being part of their society and the result is homelessness. They stopped the struggle for life which is the prime motivation for all human experience.

Actually, the majority of homeless don’t make a concious effort to be homeless.  Who would?  And - suprise! - the majority of homeless are neglected veterans, atleast in the US.  Other factors are: the economy, mental illness, drug abuse (a cause and effect of homelessness), family conflict, and many more.

Now they toil the streets and have nothing. We can show pity for what has become of some people, but in the final analysis they are to blame for their condition. That is not to say we should make fun of them or not do something for them… but in many second rate nations such as France they do have social services and can goto some homeless shelter or Church group…but alas failing that they made a choice to stay in the cold streets.

Another suprise - many homeless have jobs.  I guess we wouldn’t know, deciding against treating them like human beings and instead ignore them.  And again, it’s not necessarily a decision.

Now i know you’ll point out as usual how this is stupid (or Falk will) and highlight my entire statement,

Maybe they won’t, but I will! See?

but yes their are exceptions in some lessor nations that have little or no infrastructure to support these people… but I’m sure its not the case in a great nation such as France. Nietzsche had a remark along the lines of “if you never feed or provide for them they will eventually go away” I never give to them because its what invariably keeps them in the streets in the first place…

I don’t know who you refer to as lesser nations, but even the US doesn’t have wraps on the homeless problem (by the way, the UN identifies it now as houselessness, but whatever…).  We don’t provide enough resources to support our current programs.  Meanwhile, as Bush calls more soldiers into active duty AND strips them of benefits, he’s perpetuating the problem.

One thing I noticed in Paris -which is probably no different in NYC, or Chicago, or London, or… - is that the homeless aren’t just crazy old men.  There are homeless children.  There are homeless families.  There are homeless women.  And none of them are monsters.  Where I live, many of them are celebrities. I’ve met crazier people who have homes, and are half the fun to hang out with.  My girlfriend used to host her back porch to many of them, putting old couches and mattresses back there for them, and brang out food occasionally.  No problems.  I was shocked to find that one of them was discovered on the internet (jail website posting bookings) by someone in Jimmy Kimmel’s crew, and he was a highlight for a week - “James Brown” for those of you who watch his show.
The point is that it’s a problem of society, not necessarily of the individual.  Just like the mentally ill, the disabled, etc., these people need a little help, and everyone who is capable should do so.  If not actively, atleast support the processes already in place to help them.

Even though most rapes involve a man violating a woman, it can happen the other way around (I know, it was mentioned and isn’t likely, but it’s happened).  Don’t forget that rape can occur between two or more people, even of the same sex.  Furthermore, rape is a subjective crime.  That makes it difficult to prove, which, if proceeded through regular judicial channels, provides inherent protection of the accused.  I’m sure there’s plently of prosecuting and defense strategy that we are all unfamiliar with when it comes to these cases - probably something involving the assessment of trauma in the accuser, since a true rape would cause trauma.

Another thing is that someone can accuse you of rape without ever having sexual, or for that matter, physical, contact.  Of course, this should wash out and flounder in the court room, but the stigma of being identified as a possible rapist isn’t wiped out from an appropriate ruling.  In this case, zipping it does jack squat.  I understand that SUD speaks generally (in terms of sex) when he says to zip it, which is fine advice.  However, rape isn’t just about sex, so no amount of zipping can save you from false accusations.  You may be saved legally through sound judicial practices, but damage comes in many flavors.  I think something that may help is to make penalties for false accusations more strict - give people a reason NOT to falsely accuse.  Maybe make it as tough as being convicted of rape, maybe not.

I’d have to add that the analogy with money out in a bad neighborhood does not compare to rape.  It just doesn’t.  Rape is an entirely different crime from robbery, murder, etc.  It’s a whole other ballgame.

SUD - you’re well versed.  What’s your background on this?  And I am not instigating anything - feel free to ignore my next question - have you had some experience with this?  Based on your posts, I perceive something underlying your tight argument.  Maybe I’m just crazy, or putting too much into a meaningless observation.  Either way, I’m curious.

Lately have just had the TV in the background.  It’d be cool to put something in to listen, but as much as I like BoB and other war movies, I think it would just make the game go longer.  Which, now that I think about it, isn’t that bad…think it would work in bed?

It looks good on 360, but even better on a stacked PC (if you can afford it).  I was impressed by how well the tanks operated in the PC version, so I know what you mean.
Let me know how the US levels are, will ya?

Where’s Rodney King and his titular line when you need them?

For an FPS WW2 game, Call of Duty is definitely the king of games.
But for a strategy WW2 game (computer, not board), I’d have to give the honor to Close Combat.  That was a great series…

A fantastic game - leaps and bounds beyond MOH.  I’m looking forward to the second release.