Posts made by jsp4563

If you’re going to conduct an SBR campaign against Germany, it’s best to have both the US and UK involved because it doubles the maximum damage that can be inflicted from $16 to $32.

Even a high bid doesn’t guarantee an axis win.  In my AAR game with Jen & Frimmel they had the axis with a bid of 17

bid placement:
1 IPC to the Japan Bank
3 INF to UKR
1 INF and 1 ART to Libya

Although it took awhile the Allies were victorious.

By all means leave my US Pearl fleet intact, I’ll soon be knocking on Japan’s door.  :evil:

I’ve played games with bids as low as 4 and as high as 17.  A bid of 6-9 seems to be average.

According to Larry Harris, Greenland is NOT and Island.

“In the spirt of the game… Greenland is NOT an island.”
-Larry Harris

It’s clear that the fact that greenland & sz2 butt up against the edge of the map board is what creates the abiguity in this case.  Does that abuttment constitute attachement to something that would disqualify greenland as you argue or does the map simply end at the edge with greenland attached to nothing placing it entirely “inside” sz2 as I would argue.  India’s attachement to other territories would clearly disqualify it as lying “entirely inside” SZ35, and the Eastern US occupies 2 seazones (Sz10-E. US Seazone/GSZ-Great Lakes Seazone)

By your very own logic, Greenland is an island.  Just as sz2 ends at the maps edge so does greenland.  Whether that’s true in real life is irrelevant.Â

However other compelling evedince can be found in the fact that every other Island on the map has it’s seazone named after it

West Indies Seazone (sz19); Hawaiian Seazone (sz52);  Midway Seazone (sz56); Wake Is. Seazone (sz51); Solomont Is. Seazone (sz45); New Zealand Seazone (sz41); New Guinea Seazone (sz47); East Indies Seazone (sz37); Borneo Seazone (sz48); Philippines Is. Seazone (sz49); Caroline Is. Seazone (sz50); Okinawa Seazone (sz58)

SZ2 is labeled the “Greenland Seazone” which supports my assertion that Greenland is in fact an Island.

I have submitted the question to the designers site, let’s see what they have to say.

@cyan:

@ncscswitch:

Russia:
3 INF, 1 ARM ,1 FIG

why whould anyone need a fig for russia? that one makes no sense

I’ve used this buy successfully many times.  I will usually add a 4th fighter in R2 or R3.  The fighters give Russia a lot of flexiblity.  From the caucasus they can reach all of eastern europe most of Central Asia and India.  Also they are very useful when your trading territory with Germany.

I don’t think any decent allied player would allow germany to unite their fleet in sz7.  It’s easy to spot, and easily countered.

I’ve seen plenty of instances where a lone picket has defeated the attacking ground units forcing the fighters to retreat.  Leaving the territory empty guarantees your opponent will capture it with the commitment of a single infantry.

@OutsideLime:

A horseshoe is not a closed shape. Therefore, the sea zone does not enclose Greenland.

Now that, my friend, is sound reasoning. I’m convinced. Greenland is not an island then, in Axis and Allies.

~Josh

I disagree, I believe Greenland does qualify as an Island.  Here’s the rules definition of an Island:

Islands:
An island is a territory located entirely inside one sea zone. A sea zone can contain at most one group of islands, which is considered one territory. It is not possible to split up land-based units so that they’re on different islands in the same group.

Greenland is located entirely inside sz2, there is no part of greenland that is located outside that seazone.  No where does it state that the seazone must completely surround or enclose the Island, so the fact that Greenland and sz2 butt up against the edge of the map is irrelevant.

The reason I will put at least 1inf in a territory I know I can’t hold is to force my opponent to commit forces to take it.  If they are sending 2inf, 2fgt to take the territory, those fighters won’t be attacking somewhere else.

Anybody know what ever happened to Tcnance.  I had a game going with him and he just disappeared.

The Original Battlestar Galactica only ran 1 season and was cancelled because they couldn’t meet production deadlines, mainly due to all the special effects.  “Galactica 1980” was the spin-off where they found Earth.  Most of the original cast was not in the spin-off, for which I’m sure they are grateful.  It was beyond Lame and was cancelled after something like 9 or 10 episodes.

Trying to take UK before Russia falls will cost you the game.  Germany can’t spend all that money on transports without allowing Russia to become a threat, and the US/UK will see the German naval build up and easily counter it.

@Jennifer:

Yea, for a 2 IPC IC that’s an annoying one.

Battleships are expensive.  If he wants to throw them away, I have no problem with that. :)

I’m very proud of my little egyptian IC, combined with the E. Indies IC they have been able to neutralize Jens Battleships and keep her out of Africa.

@Jennifer:

On the flip side, JSP, that IC is ostraiced from the world.  So the arguement against does have some merit.

Not that it really matters.  America’s been pretty worthless in our game ever since you got destroyed in SZ 37.  England’s been dang powerful though.Â

Oh contraire mon fraire (ooops…that’s french, I will have to punish myself  :-P )…it was the US that kicked Germany out of the Caucasus, it was the US that destroyed the German stack in Eastern, and it is the US that has 24tnks plus supporting infantry sitting on Germany’s border in Eastern.

In my game against Frimmel & Jennifer I tried a new strategy I like to call AJF (Annoy Japan First).  For the 1st 6 rounds the US spent half their income building a Pacific Fleet and the other half setting up a transport train from E. Canada>Norway.  On US9 the pacific fleet captured E. Indies and built an IC on US10 protected by UK/US ground forces (4tnk, 6inf, bmb) and a combined US/UK fleet of 5fgt, 3CV, 3BB, 4DD, 7SS, 5TP vs. Japans fleet of 6fgt, 3CV, 3BB, 3DD, 7SS, 3TP (plus 3fgt in FIC).  Japan attacked the combined fleet on J11 destroying the fleet with 4fgt, 2CV, 3BB, 1DD remaining.  Even though Japan got great dice (17hits in rd1 with 6/7 subs hitting) she still hasn’t retaken the Island.  We are on round 20 that’s 11 rounds the US has collected 4IPC & depriving Japan of that income.  The IC had an unexpected bonus, Japan has to keep her fleet close by because of the possibility that the US might drop 4 ships into that seazone at any time.

My personal preference is to wait until J2 before building an IC.  I like to know the outcome of the China battle and what the US is going to do before I commit 15 IPC to an IC.  A disaster in China can put a newly built IC in Jeapordy, and if the US is going to contest the pacific, I’d rather use the IC money for ships/planes.  Plus additional transports on J1 let’s you quickly move those forces scattered on the Pacific Islands to Asia.

@froodster:

Japan’s navy could help in the Mediterranean though, so that sub could still be of use.

It will be many turns before japan could or should be in the Med, that sub would have been far more useful as a transport.