Posts made by knp7765

My Paypal account is just quivering with anticipation to go to FMG.  So ready to order my goodies.

Will you have pre-orders for the Italian units and the new combat dice for France and ANZAC at the same time?

Thanks Krieghund.  I was pretty sure that Japan was considered an island.  However, the aircraft carrier problem really stymied me.  After all, how often does that happen where you have a lone aircraft carrier with no planes roaring off to attack?  This is the first time I can remember in all the times I have played A&A in all it’s versions.  I almost always have either an escort or at least 1 fighter with my carriers.

@Sergente:

What about Tiger I and … StuG III ??? I know StuG III isn’t properly a medium tank, it is a tank destroyer and it seems more like the italian Semovente 75/18, already used for the italian sculpts…

I wouldn’t mind seeing the StuG III but FMG has already stated that they are making the Panzer III and since the StuG III used the Panzer III chassis, I think they would be too close together. 
Also, I think the reason they used the Carro Armato (tank) and Semovente (SPG) was because the Italians of WW2 didn’t have a wide range of armor choices, unlike the Germans who seemed to have tons of different tanks, tank destroyers, assault guns and self-propelled artillery to choose from.

I just checked out the changes to the AAP40 setup and I have to say they make more sense to me.
1> I’ve always wondered why NSW didn’t have a naval base.
2> 3 fighters on New Zealand just didn’t seem right to me.
3> The US always seemed a little too heavily equipped compared to how things really were in Spring 1940.
4> While I know that Japan did build a very strong war machine, it seemed dispropotionately plane heavy in the original setup.
5> I’ve always thought that China was too weak.  Sure they were struggling with Japan and rather backwards in equipment, but they had a lot of men.

As for the rest of the changes, I’m sure they make better sense too.  I look forward to trying these out in my next AAP40 game or Global 40 game since I guess they work for both.
Any word on if the special NO for Japan is a part of this new setup?  How about the garrison of Manchuria?  I haven’t seen how many units Japan is expected to keep there.

I have a question about aircraft carriers.  Since their attack value is 0 now, can they still attack and destroy transports by themselves?

I recently played a game where the Japanese took NSW.  They only had a transport in the adjacent sea zone and were planning on taking land units over to attack New Zealand.  ANZAC still had a carrier with no planes on it.  Since I wasn’t sure about carriers destroying transports, I ended up sending it to the New Zealand sea zone to prevent the Japanese invasion.

Also, this may have been covered but is Japan considered an island for purposes of scrambling aircraft from the air base?  I know it’s all within one sea zone, but it also has a major IC on it and you can’t build ICs on islands.  Does it having an IC negate scrambling capabilities?  Or is Japan just a special case that gets both an IC and the ability to scramble?

I think letting all the Axis go together gives them too much of an advantage.  It’s like all of the Axis get to do their damage then all the Allies are left trying to answer to it.  If they are spread out, sometimes an Alleid nation can give a nasty surprise to the Axis and make them change their gameplan.

I also love to see the Panzer III.  I still say it is the best choice and comparable to the Carro Armato M13/40 we are getting in the Italian set.  I would still like to see in the future sets other light/medium tanks that would be more comparable to the Panzer III and Carro Armato for the first armor choice.  Some examples:
USA = M5 Stuart
Britain = Crusader II
Russia = T-26
France = Renault R-35 or Somua S-35  (A heavy tank for France would have to be the Char B1-bis)
Japan = This is the only exception as WOTC already used the Type 95 Ha-Go light tank.  Therefore I would like to see FMG come out with the Type 97 Chi-Ha medium tank and perhaps the Type 1 Ho-Ni SPG/tank destroyer.

@Table:

They have them up now.

@reloader-1:

When do you think Fairplay will have them in stock?

COOL!  Thank you.  I just went in and placed my order for three sets.  Looking forward to getting them.

@reloader-1:

Knp,

I’ll post pictures later, but I’ve been using “city” pieces from the newest edition of Risk. They are made in the same factory and in the same colors as A&A pieces.

It’s $2.50 for a bag of 15 cities and all the “blue” armies from Risk.

Yeah, I have that edition of Risk.  It’s the one where all the army pieces are little arrows, right?  So you use those city pieces for minor ICs?  That’s cool.  What do you use the “blue” army pieces for?  You can order the city pieces by themselves, without the whole game?  I imagine Risk has a website for ordering stuff.  I will have to check that out.

I’ve been using the old white ICs from the MB version of A&A for minor and the newer grey ICs for major.  I’ve also got a lot of the old white AA guns which I haven’t figured out a use for them yet.  Maybe if someone gets the Radar technology, where AA guns hit on 2 instead of just 1, I could replace the grey guns for white guns for that country.

Hey Fishmoto37.  Is “The War Game” made by Pegasus Hobbies?  If so, I found 4 of them on eBay thanks to your tip on how to type it in.  All four with shipping are over $100.  Is this game out of print now?  Or just hard to find?  Well, I guess I will pass on this.  It was more of a curiosity anyway.  Thanks again for your help.

I still don’t get it.  Do they think that Japan is too strong?

@Table:

Picked up the Japanese from the shop yesterday,

I WANT THEM!  When are you going to have them ready to sell?

@Fishmoto37:

@knp7765:

That War Game Tiger looks really nice.  Is The War Game still available anywhere?  I tried looking it up on eBay but typing in “The War Game” gave me almost 7,000 results and a lot of stuff that wasn’t even remotely related.

Try typing in “The War Game:World War II”. But remember that all the sculpts in that game are different colored German units.

Thanks Fishmoto37.  Yeah, I know they are different and not really compatible with A&A units.  I guess that I’m just hooked on collecting little miniature combat pieces.  You ought to see my large collection of Xeno naval pieces in about 19 different colors.  I will never use them in any game but I just keep collecting them.

Yeah, the Finns even used the Swastika symbol on their military equipment, except it was light blue and in a square shape with the flat edges on top and bottom rather than diamond shape with the corners on top and bottom.

@Imperious:

I was wondering if anyone had any better ideas for the CV’s that must be cut open on the bottom of the hull.

use small metal circles and paint them and glue them on top?

A metal strip on the bottom?

Hey IL, that idea of a metal strip on the bottom sounds terrific.  Do you think the little magnets on the planes would be strong enough to be attracted to the metal strip through the plastic body of the ship?  I guess another idea would be a narrow metal strip on the flight deck.  We could pretend they were like British carriers with the armored flight decks.

@jeffdestroyer:

I got 40 magnets at Hobbytown for $6.

Are you talking about Hobbytown USA in Wichita, KS?  I get a lot of my model paints there.  I really like this idea.  Plus those little round magnets would still allow the planes to sit flat on the board just on sort of a small pedastal.

@Axis:

NO IPC’s???  Explain… Do they not have printed numbers?

Don’t feel bad Commander, I made the same mistake thinking that the number of infantry also meant the number of IPCs available.  At first, one of my main strategies as Japan was to march through Mongolia and pick up an “extra” 6 IPCs.  I have a chart for each country showing their percentage of gain and I had to change it all to remove the 6 Mongolian IPCs that didn’t exist in the first place.

@WILD:

Thanks for a fairly detailed report. It was cool to see some strats that worked, and some that didn’t. Just wondering if you used the new set up for Pacific in your global game (14 air unit reduction, inf changes in Asia, NB on NS Wales, and 1 tpt to India). Also giving the new guy Japan was just wrong, to much power, and to many decisions  :evil: The UK attacking Japan, now that’s a twist, but it seemed to work against the newbie. The German player didn’t do much of a naval build from what you said, I think Germany has to pump some $ here to keep UK honest in the early rounds. The trick is to keep your navy afloat, so you can use it in the Baltic to reinforce/counter attack Scandinavia/Russia. You also noted an SBR campaign on Germany, did you use to ftr/ interceptor rules, did you lose any planes because of it?

Hey Wild Bill, where are you getting these new setups for Pacific in the Global game – 14 air unit reduction, inf changes in Asia, NB on NS Wales, 1 transport to India?  The only setup changes in the rulebook are 6 infantry each on 3 different Soviet territories and 1 ANZAC infantry in Egypt.  I see nothing about a Naval Base in NSW or a Transport for India.  What is this “14 air unit reduction”?  Does that mean there are 14 planes taken out of the Pacific setup?  Please explain.

Hey ZehKaiser,
Sounds like you had a pretty good game.  It also sounds like the German player made some bad decisions.  I found the IC in Romania very interesting.  Then you have an access for new tanks right there on the Russian front.  I wouldn’t have put a Major IC though.  Costs too much.  Basically, he spent his whole income that first round on 1 piece.  I would have went with a Minor and gotten some other equipment.  Perhaps this helped lead to his ultimate downfall?
I put a Minor IC in Norway to back up the Finns and converted my German IC to a Major.  I then proceeded to build up three army groups on the East in preparation for Barbarossa.  When the North army group took the Baltic States, they didn’t need to concern themselves with Leningrad and could leave that to the Finns and concentrate on the attempted Soviet build-up in Belarus.  It worked like a charm and the Russians were soon destroyed.
I can’t blame him for buying extra bombers after getting the heavy bomber tech, although he might have went a little overboard.  Whenever I research and get Heavy Bombers, I usually end up gettin more bombers than I usually would.
By the way, speaking of the Heavy Bomber tech.  I don’t like this “roll two dice and pick the best result”.  Heavy bombers are just that…HEAVY.  You spend that money for reasearching that, which is expensive, then you should be able to get two hits per bomber, not just rolling two dice and picking the best one.  It’s not like you pay for research and boom, you get heavy bombers.  First you buy the dice and hope to get a six.  If no six comes up, you lose your money.  THEN, you roll and hope to get ANOTHER six.  There are five other items you could end up getting and if you are really wanting heavy bombers and get one of the others, then you are screwed.  That’s why I don’t like the new limitation to Heavy Bombers.
Also, I miss the reasearch tokens from the Anniversary game.  At least that way if your reasearch fails, you can try again next round and your money wasn’t totally wasted.