Posts made by JimmyHat

Well, we certainly didn’t set up the army and invade! No sir we’re too good for that.  Much easier to install a puppet regime after we assassinate the current leader, but A&A doesn’t include this function, the US is left with DOWs on neutrals.

If you vote less than 50 or more than 80 please state your percentage and reasoning why.

I have amended my post to include the addition of allied naval units in baltic sea.  Looking back over it I remember an issue that came up with 1C.

It says if an axis power attacks a neutral block while either US or RUS is neutral, that they then can declare war on the Axis.  This might cause an issue.  If Italy attacks Spain prior to war with US, can Russia then declare war on Japan?  And if so, what would happen to Mongolia/instant conscripts/12ipcs?  Is the intention that US/Rus declare war on the offending axis nation, or all axis?  If only the specific nation how are we going to do that in terms of the rules?

Another issue is the wording of the loss of the US 10ipc NO.  I don’t think we should mention anything about league of nations sanctions because that never happened in history when US made aggressive moves.

For rolling to see what tech you get, I also liked zalomalos idea, although if you get to re-roll when you roll the same number, then everyone is going to end up with ‘7’.  What if 7 is ‘reroll’ and then the others can be techs.  If you roll the same tech again then you’re screwed.

As for the ipc level needed to receive dice, I tend to feel Jenn’s list where 15 is 1, 65 is 2, 115 is 3 and so on.  That way if you’re in the bucket for ipcs you can’t tech.

I don’t like limits, whether its limiting someones ability to save ipcs or limit minor powers to less or less powerful techs.

@Cmdr:

@special:

Haven’t really foillowed this topic, but if you use 2 x D6, and exclude double 1’s, then you have 10 different numbers you can throw (3 to 12)

(with some numbers that will happen more often then others)

Fails to follow KISS.  Right?

Here’s my KISS test:  I ask my 9 year old son if he understands.  If he cannot understand it, a lot of people on the internet won’t either (there are some really stupid people.  As Carlin said: “Think of house stupid the average person is, then realize half of them are stupider than that!”)

Haha.  Well your kid gets a healthy dose of you most of the time!  I’m not sure we can trust his opinion either!:)

Seriously though, I didn’t say replace tech with NA’s or make both mandatory.  But I do see the similarity with them.  Perhaps youre right and bringing in the nation specific techs is too much like NA’s and we should have both, not just 1.

I’m just saying if he comes back on afterwards and says ‘i vote for whatever’ we let it count.

i dunnno if mantlefan voted so we should allow him to vote when he returns.

@Cmdr:

Switzerland and Sweeden could be their own Neutral Block, perhaps.  So they stay in the game.  Honestly, I don’t think anyone is attacking Switzerland for any reason, it serves little to no tactical or strategic utility - at least none I can see.

Trust me I’ve thought of this.  SF pointed out that adding Switzerland to the Iberian block would help assuage Germany if US attacks Spain.  I suppose putting Sweden in this camp might work, however do you suppose US would hit Spain if Sweden turned German as well?  Also lets look at the end game.  If Germany is contained by Russia, then the US could hit Spain, turn Sweden and then on the following turn Russia attacks Sweden. (or vice versa, capture of Sweden followed by landing in Spain before Axis had a chance to coalesce these forces.

To reiterate Switz is already in the Iberian camp.

Further Sweden is far more concerned politically with Germ/Rus/Uk than Spain.

Wait a minute, what if each country had its own tech chart?  That way Russia wouldn’t get super subs but something they could use.

We could have 6 techs for 6 powers, that 36 different options!  Lots for people to get creative in.  Just an idea that might also allow us to balance weaker countries to stronger ones.  ANZAC could get a really cool tech while US has 6 mediocre ones.

@special:

Something about the whole Sweden solution still feels very wrong to me.

Isn’t it better to make Sweden an absolute neutral? (not invadable) and change the NO to (for example) an Allies-free Baltic Sea? (abit like the italian Med NO), or possibly that + Axis ownership of Norway.
well its important to get it right.  Can you nail down an area that makes you feel odd?  
By the way, Sweden didn’t have that much of an army, i think…
perhaps not as big as Spains but it was large enough, plus the terrain is horrible.  Hard to represent their and other neutral’s force pools correctly, game balance is better than historical accuracy.

Edit: or just add it to the Iberian block? I don’t see a problem when that would be the case (at least not right away)

As for making Sweden a strict neutral, do you mean just forbid countries from attacking it?  I don’t like that, the game is Global after all.  I thought my proposal would essentially end up with a neutral Sweden.  Allies in Norway and USSR in Finland or Germany preeminent.  It is a bit complex I  will admit however the end result is what’s important.

true, I also have seen a game like that.  Germany had their fleet run to the Med and they left the BB alone.  This ship wouldn’t just sit by, he’d convoy raid!

I’ve thought alot about which territory to link to the NO.  Norway I don’t like.  It already has a convoy zone, and isn’t where the resources are from.  It is the port where the iron is shipped out in the winter months, but that is because there is a rail line that facilitates this, however the ore could have also been transported directly to Stockholm.

Sweden was another option, it being where the ore is coming from originally.  This proves rather hard for the allies to disrupt, and here I agree with Jenn that NO’s should be able to be disrupted.

Denmark seems the most logical because the islands provide a choke point for shipping, control of this area will negate any ore shipments along the entire North Sea and Skaggerat.  If you hold Denmark then shipping from Norway cannot even reach Germany.

I like this addition of no allied ships in the baltic plus German control of Denmark.  This allows Rus to place a ship if possible to disrupt it.  I would say  all ships, included subs must be clear of the baltic.

http://donsessays.freeservers.com/

Here you will find the strategies for pros in the original Axis and Allies version.  Lots of information here for newbies and older players alike.

@Vance:

I would also like to see the Emergency Conscripts idea in poll 5 to resolve the Mongolia/nonagg pact issue, but wait and see how that vote goes (Emergency Conscripts is currently leading).

I didn’t vote for this because I don’t really understand it.  It seems to be similar to the 12ipc rule from A2 in that either side can receive troops.  This is different because in my version only Russia can receive Mongolia.  Not sure Japan needs the troops, I feel the Axis win by pressing Russia, and that will mean either attacking through Siberia or through the back of China, but either way Japan will be the aggressor.  That being said, I realize my strategy might not be best for everyone and having multiple options is FANTASTIC.  If my Mongolia idea isn’t used, a solution will have to be made for Mongolia in the neutral blocks.

I also will add that having Mongolia as a deciding factor between Russia/Japan aggression is historical, uses the ‘on game board’ information, and is very similar to A3’s Mongolia rule just less cluttered.

?  Sweden is never under Nazi rule.  They are neutral and providing Hitler with Iron Ore.  If Germany DOW’s sweden, they will have to defeat sweden’s decently large army and small fleet.  Plus considering the chance that Sweden may join Germany if it remains neutral, I think most Axis players are going to leave it be.

Historically Sweden remained Neutral throughout the war, but the SS recruited there and they freely traded with Germany.

EDIT***I also like how sweden is separated from the strict neutrals.  Its position in Scandinavia means it is already in the periphery, and like Mongolia the fact that it is surrounded by belligerents means it does not have the freedom to DOW other countries like SAmerica for example.  Taking it out of the ‘strict neutral’ camp and any blocks does mean it is vulnerable.  Beefing up its military is one solution, but this proposal also adds another solution which gives a ‘bonus’ to the surrounding powerhouses.  Germany wants to keep Sweden neutral in the hopes of gaining the Swedish military if the war starts to go against them.  Russia wants Scandinavia because it ‘potentially’ receives additional NO money from it.  UK/US are also vested in Scandinavia, if they can capture Norway before the Reds, Sweden will remain Neutral.

YG, we use a 12 sided dice to track what round it is.  After 12 rounds we add a 6 sided.  After that the game should be over!:)

I was thinking more about the poorly drawn Western Hemisphere.

@Vance:

I think the best of both worlds would be 1C plus Jimmyhat’s force pools.

I would also like to see the Emergency Conscripts idea in poll 5 to resolve the Mongolia/nonagg pact issue, but wait and see how that vote goes (Emergency Conscripts is currently leading).

Thats where I was going.  A few issues arose however.

The Swedish Iron ore NO:  I was unhappy with the results of linking it directly to Sweden.  The allies /have/ to invade sweden to negate the NO then.  This IS historical, but made it too hard to disrupt.  Then I had the idea of moving the No to Denmark.  This is where most of the ore passed through, without control of Denmark a nation could blockade northern Germany and shut off the iron ore.  That’s why I moved it to Denmark.

Russian Caucasus NO:  This might be a good fix, I think however we shouldn’t require a Rus inf in Caucusus to destroy the oil wells.  Germ would probably try and take Turkey with a bit of surprise or trickery, and troops are really not needed for this mission, the citizens living in the area should do just fine.

YG’s Swedish proposal
I like the idea of Sweden being on its own separate from other blocks, but if Russia uses valuable resources to take Finland and Germany, why reward Germanys failure by automatically giving them Sweden and $3 extra dollars?

My suggestion is, who ever controls both Norway and Finland, controls Sweden and receives the $3 income. That would give Germany a small boost to begin the game after they take Finland. However, It’s up for the taking if the allies want to invest units to take Norway and Finland.

The 6 infantry should only be activated if Sweden is attacked out right by a side that does not control both Norway and Finland already.

***Sweden is in a bit of a confusing position.  The reason I added that they switch to Germany is to give the allies incentive to invade Norway before the Ruskies get to it.  If the western allies can reach Norway, then Sweden can breath easy, if Stalin takes Norway and Finaland, then Sweden declares war on Russia in a final bid to escape communism.

Going by you’re suggestion, most likely Soviets will take all of Scandinavia and then Sweden would fall to their camp.  It really is historically accurate to have most countries in Europe fearful of Stalinism, rightly I might add.

I vote similar to Special forces.  I don’t like the 5 ipc limit or the min/max of purchased dice.  10 ipcs sounds about right.

We cannot have ‘free dice’ techs that are weaker than ‘pay dice’.  ANZAC/Italy and other minors cannot afford dice, so they could never get the ‘cool’ techs.

Jenn this is 5+ player game!

Whats hard about this is that we are making a rule that has the intent of breaking the game.  Isn’t that what tech does?  Hence why it needs so much additional information, like countries that cannot tech, cannot tech while not at war, etc.  Perhaps putting a limit on saved money is the way to go, this rule is a muddy puddle already so why try and clear the water?