Posts made by Keredrex

@Col.Stauffenberg:

If Germany doesn’t take Egypt rd 1 it’s game over for the axis.  We’ve been playing weekly for ten years and when that happens the axis player conceeds and we start over.

I disagree… we have played a few games where germany in Round 1 left egypt alone and moved his southern fleet to gibraltar, built in the northern waters, and took out the UK fleet and Russian Sub in SZ2,  threatening britain and still moving land units to fight russia.  dont forget that the new spring 1942 game is different in enough ways from Revised and the original game, that the old strategies do not guarantee wins or losses.

@Imperious:

Yes make one for Global 1940.

dont have the game… ill need the info… any changes to the units and new units, All the countries/powers involved starting income (and if there is some change to there income thru game play… if im correct america starts lower then gets more IPC’s later)…  from what Ive overheard about the global game its “complex” so the sheet may be a bit difficult but ill try.  Off the back im thinking it would work on 11x17 paper that way its on 1 sheet or turn the 8x10 portrait (as opposed to landscape) and only have 3 or 4 rounds per side.

@coorran:

Very nice! In our games, we don’t really keep track of anything else than IPC income, but we play with OOB rules. Looking at your chart, I wonder how you can keep track of all of this if you’re not using said chart!

thank you… we started adding the purchases in the log cause of an argument on what was bought cause they put too many chips down. also an argument of  placing of a complex then trying to move it after 2 countries already went and arguing that it was accidentally knocked to another spot.  now we log everything… especially where complexes are placed.  the cool thing is we keep the sheets and can look back at old games  for bragging rights.

@Gen:

Keredrex  very nice chart. Wonder if somebody can make one for Global 40?

thanks… the only problem i see with making one for global is space on a standard 8x10 sheet of paper.  in order to add more countries i would probably have to remove the game notes section and purchase units lists, but maybe leave space for writing in the purchases.  …
ill give it a shot though… but i dont have the global game…
what would i need to add?

ever since the beginning back we had gotten a used copy of the original 1986 board… we had to use paper and pen to log in the IPC’s, purchases, tech., saved games, etc.  when we got the revised edition we played maybe 2 games with the paper ipc’s then started writing it down cause it seemed easier and caused fewer arguments.

as a graphic designer I created a chart for the current Spring 1942 game. It keeps track of IPC’s, Purchases, Advantages (if used), Tech. Development (If Used), Current Round, has a Unit stat chart, A game notes section (for those instances of amazing Di rolls, awesome strategies, jokes, pranks, etc.)

File is meant to be printed on the back (long edge binding)
Enjoy…
A&A_GameRec_x.pdf

@DREAMING:

Hi,

Very new to the game so just looking to learn. My question revolves around what a number of you have said but I’ll quote SAS:

“Standard attacks are 9 inf, 1 art, 1 tank to West Russia”

If you send 9 infantry into WR, are you leaving just one fighter in Karelia? I assume it will die on G1? Also, nothing is left in Archangel to counter on R2?

Thanks for your help.

after your attacks… during noncombat land your karelia Fighter in caucasus with the fighter from Russia…

@Nix:

I recommend attacks on Belorussia and Westrussia, Ukraine leves your armour exposed for counterattack…

Also usually roll with a 3 inf, 3 arm buy

i Disagree… attacking Ukraine takes a german fighter out of play.  and also takes a tank out… even if russia barely takes ukraine with 1 or 2 units … its worth it for position and killing that german fighter

I would say Russia… only cause you dont have to worry about buying boats, which takes away half the choices of “what to buy”. as russia you can focus your attention on defensive/offensive land & air combat.  however… your criteria doesnt fit one country and with time you can expand into the other nations and learn to play them.  but russia is a good starting point… as for the 1 Russian sub, park and follow whatever allied ships in the area to help them out.

If german doesn’t take egypt then you got another fighter in the area. so it depends on what you are doing with the carrier. 
If you use the carrier to take out the Japanese transport in 59.  then you could land both planes in india and move in the inf.
–-  india would have 2 inf. 2 fighter and The AA Gun. 
If you keep the boats together you could use the fighter from 35 to take out the transport.  Still use the Cruiser to bombard borneo.  and land both fighters on the carrier in Sea zone 48 of borneo.

It really depends on what germany does… but in your example sure its worth it to leave india with 2 inf. 1 fighter and the AA Gun. japan could only send 2 inf. with planes. ( assuming transport is taken out )

It can’t…. borneo is a separate space from the Sea zone surrounding it.  so from Sea Zone 35 the movement count would be… 36, 48, Borneo, 48.  so for the fighter to attack borneo the carrier has to end its movement in 48.

run a few mock battles… to get use to the di values for each unit and the special combat scenarios… like fighters needing to land with only 1 space, sub sneak attacks, amphibious assaults, strategic bombing etc. etc.  maybe even have a certain IPC amount to let them purchase units for the mock battles so they understand the monetary value. then run a full game… but make it a discussion game where everyone can speak on every countries turn but you pick a di roller for each country.  then play a serious game with a person per country

@GCar:

Anyone voting DD as not understood something in naval fights.
Anyone voting bombers as not understood the value of strategic bombing on his killing target (Russia or Germany usually).
For ground units, Art is the call (if no AA guns), but the winner should be in the ships area.
I will have to say Crusers, very close to Battleships, and maybe of subs depending which side you play the most often.

i disagree… Strategic bombing is Valuable considering the OOB rules,  it applies to damage only which reduces deployment capabilities.  however, depending on the game situation, it may be far more beneficial to add 4 Inf. to your forces on either attacking or defending.  especially when you risk your bombers to AA Fire.

Russia Barely has the Money for bombers, Germany is better off with 2 more tanks or 4 Inf., Britain usually needs that money for the navy or complex/units elsewhere, Japan usually needs more naval units or another complex, USA is the only when with the non threatened expendable wealth early on for bombers…   again this does depend on the current game situation, what round, how certain battles go, etc…

but to vote Bombers doesnt mean the player doesnt understand the value… it means he purchases these units less for whatever reason…
 the only other unit i purchase in the quantity i purchase bombers is Battleships, but they are more appealing for obvious reasons and every country (except Russia) has a need for a battleship at some point.

UK can build in every sea zone that surrounds it.

as far as i know…… the planes can not be part of 2 different combat results. technically, the landing would occur at the end of the conduct combat round or beginning of non-combat.  so whatever the results are from the combat round decides if landing can occur…

can someone post the rules on this… page # maybe

you forgot DESTROYERS.  i voted bombers, only cause i feel america is the only country that can afford that luxury item.  all other countries require units that are good for attacks and also Defense.  the bomber doesnt fit this criteria.  and subs are the new cannon fodder for naval battles.  but honestly i have purchased bombers with EVERY country at one point or another

Anyone ever thought/attempted a higher numerical Di for the game, like d10’s?  basically replace the d6 everywhere its used.  I think D10’s would be ideal cause you can allow Percentage rolling for whatever reason, Like technology rolls, etc.

interesting debate guys … think what is happening here is the double IC’s in asia R1 for the allies is a strategy that does not work with the strategy suggested for the axis in the posts above.  maybe it is only a strategy that can be used against an amateur player.  Ive only ever played with the people in my group and we have only played on the original, Revised and now spring 42.  must admit i would like to play a game with a few of you based on what I read in these forums.  interesting debate guys

@Hobbes:

Germany holding Karelia has a lot of advantages:

• Norway is secure (+3 IPC for G, less 3 for the UK/US)
• Russian income stays below 30, while G remains 40+
• Russia has to commit units to West Russia that won’t be used to defend the Sinkiang/India ICs from Japanese pressure. The same happens with the UK/US sending planes (either they go to WR or the ICs). That or Russia retreats from WR, dropping its income even more.

Britain can build and fight norway or use a navy to fight karelia.  (this is with the assumption that Germany didnt buy a navy R1 and losses the transport and destroyer in the north.)  Russia doesnt necesarliy have to defend the sinkiang complexes, this depends on japanese moves.  i had said the Double IC only work depending on japans strategy & Strength in Asian land units. we could write down a mock game and assume all its moves, strengths and weaknesses and still not completely call this a failed strategy.  over all id say this is still a possible strategy that could possibly be used for the win depending on the game.  the double allied complex in asia could lend itself to any win/loss using strategies like KGF, KJF, KRF, KBF (dont think there is a KAF if so please let me know) does not mean the game is over cause of the attempt.

@Hobbes:

It’s more easily the other way around: rolls don’t get you a victory if the strategy is not there. The best definition of luck i know is: when opportunity meets preparation. If your opponent is not prepared to take advantage of good rolls, or, if you are not prepared to deal with unexpected results then you’ll be at a severe disadvantage.

Germany take egypt round 1… .figure they have 2 tanks left.  britain takes it back with 3 inf. fighter bomber Cruiser bombardment.  and builds fleet in SZ 2.  america sends a transport and units to take algieria and builds a fleet and units.  if germany didnt add to the fleet in rd 1 they cant do both sides of africa … US has the money to sacrifice a transport for an early deployment into africa… and UK can join them when possible.  or wait 1 round and go huge.  still depends on the outcome of dice, etc. but it can be done

@GCar:

The problem is that your UK fleet usually dies in 1942 (while it didn’t in revised). Therefore, if UK builds an IC in India and then ground units there, they are losing too much time to get ground units against Germany. And with the US also spending IPC for an IC and ground units in Asia, Russia usually cannot hold long enough against a good axis player.

its possible to save some of the UK fleet.

@Hobbes:

G2 builds 6 arm and 4 inf. G3 moves everything to Karelia, less 2 IPC for Russia. G5-6 Caucasus falls, and meanwhile Russia has to pull back all its units on Sinkiang/India to defend itself, leaving them open to Japan. Game over.

the allies can stall this and buy america time to threaten the axis. and russia losing karelia isnt that big if they continue to trade Ukraine and hold west russia… and with that german buy germany isnt doing much for africa which means USA and/or UK can feed troops through northern afrrica which takes another 2 away from germany.    … but again this all depends on what moves the axis make if germany goes strong on land UK will be forced to go KGF along with america.  it also depends on rolls during certain battles.  strategy doesnt always guarantee victory if the rolls are not there.  it also depends on house rules used… sometimes i forget we play with certain house rules and not direct OOB rules.  for example we use 2 hit carriers.

@Bunnies:

I’m reading a few comments in this thread on how US sinks Japan’s fleet at Hawaii.

Sub/cruiser/2 fighter/bomber kills the US fleet and doesn’t risk Japan’s battleships or cruisers.

then japan may lose 3 of those units and poses no threat to US territory ( as long as they build enough to defend Alaska. )… US can put all there money to a KGF scenario and a complex in Sinkiang.

the allies have the advantage of seeing what the axis do to decide there move.  if in the 1st round russia gains W. Russia and Ukraine and defends well against germany, then russia can stack infantry above manchuria, and if UK defends well enough in egypt and take it back easily they can build there complex on India. (must sink the lonely transport by formosa).  if japan rolls poorly in hawaii, allowing the US to sink whats left there, the US can build the 2nd complex and choose to build a small fleet on either East (to start a flow of units to africa or norway) or West USA (to continue the naval threat on japan).  and has time to place units in Asia.

2 factories are possible with the right moves and good 1st round battle results…uk would have to sink the transport by formosa and not attack FIC