Posts made by Lozza007

Rolls: 3@3 4@4; Total Hits: 43@3: (2, 1, 4)4@4: (4, 5, 2, 6)

grrr

Rolls: 3@1; Total Hits: 03@1: (5, 2, 2)

damn missed :

:dice 2d6@2:

testing @ function
:dice 2d6@2

You know while I tend to agree with Van Trump that losing all the UK & ANZAC Ftrs is an unrecoverable setback, the Java stack is worth some playtesting.

Perhaps a UK minor factory on Java on UK1 would spice things up a bit?  It would definitely be a magnet for Japan but if Japan failed to capture it, it could prove nasty by turning Java into a fortress.  Of course it would mean no Indian defence, and would it be fatal to ANZAC if Japan captured the factory???  It’s certainly less useful than a factory in Kwangsi or Malaya….

<edit>Duh!  Can’t build the UK factory cos it’s Dutch owned!  Still, Japan could always avoid all this by taking Java on J1 with its Carolines transport.

Lozza007</edit>

I think this is a good idea Kauf - not a winning one, but one of the best I’ve seen as it lets the Allies be aggressive at a time when the Japanese have their fleet spread all over the place.

Increasingly I view India as a lost cause anyway so any additional damage or frustrating moves you can deal out to Japan is a big plus  :evil:

Lozza007

If I recall, the units in FIC were Vichy controlled.  They caved in to Japanese pressure for airbases in FIC along with German pressure to comply.  Adding 2 Infantry is therefore probably a bad call  :-o

Lozza007

Dylan,

Don’t use “@”  is all I can see you’re doing wrong…

Lozza007

test…
Rolling 1d6:
(4)

Hi there,

Sorry to be a bit ret*rded but I can’t find this dice rolling tool.  Can someone helpful provide the link so I can download it or whatever?  :?

Thanks!

Lozza007

Quick question,

This may get moved to a FAQ section….can you land planes on a newly purchased Carrier as soon as it’s built (existing planes and/or newly built planes)?

Cheers,

Lozza007

Hi chaps,

I’m interested in playing some Axis & Allies Pacific 1940 by email/by forum.  I don’t own a hardcopy of the board so I guess I’ll need a map tool and dice rolling system….

Can someone please provide links to the required tools?  I’m particularly interested in using tools that most other people use for compatibility, ease of use etc.

Much obliged  8-),

Lozza007

Kauf,

I’m pleased you debunked the Korea IC strat.  It’s a great objective, but I was always puzzled how the US was supposed to hold it.  Like you say, the US can’t get units there until turn C, giving the Japanese ample opportunity to regather its Transports and counterattack.

Even Strat bombing isn’t as effective for the US anymore as it doesn’t “remove” Victory Points (there are none), and defending Ftrs will rip Bombers to shreds with no escorts, which the US can’t bring unless they park a carrier in sz6.

I like the sz19 idea but at the end of the day the Allies need to be in a position to fan out and capture all of the money islands (DEI, Philippines, Java etc) with Subs, and then block an additional sea zone outward with Destroyers.  Tricky to say the least!

Lozza007

Yeah, Marauder highlights an unfortunate problem with the Axis & Allies series - the Allies generally don’t get to celebrate because the Axis tend to quit after a major loss  :-(

I think AAP avoided this the best by having a VP system.  It’s a shame the developers didn’t consider applying a similar system to the 2 new games.  Another old game called Hitler’s War managed it best IMO, by saying that whoever held Berlin on turn XX won the game.

Cheers,

Lozza007

First off, their game sounds really neat and I’d love to watch! :-D  Sounds like Russia is a real challenge, and that Japan has been poorly played.

Now the possible downsides to the Europe version:

• the UK seems weak in Africa and at sea - just as I feared. After 8 turns they have not stabilised Africa or got more fleet together than 1 carrier and a cruiser???!!!

• the Italians seem a little…er…uber strong?  I really can’t see how a country that should be earning about 6 IPCs per turn can hold off the UK and US in the Med.

Eargerly awaiting more playtesting updates from Larry though  8-)

Lozza007

Kaufschtick’s idea of combining an Allied carrier fleet near Australia on about turn 3 or 4 seems to be the best looking play I’ve seen so far.  At first it’s only defensive but over time it will develop attacking power.  It reminds me of a similar move in original AAP where the UK bought a carrier in Australia, and then move to northern Australia with 4 carriers to threaten any/all of the Japanese money islands.

After only 3 games of AAP40 I can say that Japan is overpowered and that India falling from turn 4 is a given.  The key thing then is placing the ANZACs and US in a good position from that same time, and this play seems to achieve that.  Once the US has had a couple of turns to churn out 1 Bmb, 1 Trn, 2 Sub, 3 DD it will begin to have enough fodder units and heavy hitting power to either advance towards Japan or recapture the DEI etc.

Whether reducing UK/India to a helpless target every time is fun for the UK player is another question entirely!  :?

Lozza007

Yeah, the person who said it just weakens the UK and makes SeaLion more likely is 100% correct  :-o

Dispersing the UK income just means it has less resilience to Axis attacks, i.e. it falls into the “I can’t buy anything useful this turn so I’ll just save money” category.  This gives the Axis continuous initiative.  Similarly, at 10IPCs or less for Canada etc, they can’t huy anything useful either.  1 DD in the Atlantic per turn will just get killed off by lucky German Subs and Bombers.

Even worse, this splits the attacks of the Allies.  Previously you may have had 3-4 Allied DDs in the Atlantic operating as a nasty ASW force.  Now you will have 1-2 each, making each attack weaker.

I can’t believe the designers didn’t think of this, and if they did, what was their superior justification? :?

Cheers,

Lozza007

You know, at the end of the day, Airbases in AAE40 are not really useful.  They only exist at all to make the Pacific islands in AAP & AAP40 worth something….

Naval bases are good all round, as I always wondered why it took years to travel anywhere by sea in Axis and Allies!  :-o

Lozza007

Hey chaps,

I think some of the numbers of units mentioned here is too high.  Regardless of the historical numbers on each side, the numbers of units in the Med (and in the game in general) will be in relation to:

• the number of units in AAP40

• their relative success in the war

Therefore, even if the Italians had many submarines (mostly coastal vessels I suspect), because they failed utterly to use them effectively in real life AND we must keep proportions stable with the Japanese and the US Pacific fleets, I believe we will see fewer units.  My guess is:

• France: 1 CA, 1 Transport

• UK Gibraltar: 1 CV + air, 1 BB, 1 DD

• UK Malta: 1 Sub

• UK Egypt: 1 BB, 1 CA

• Italy: 1 BB, 1 CA, 1 DD, 1 Sub, 1 Transport

• Germany: -

Cheers,

Lozza007

Hey again,

I wouldn’t have said the UK’s ASW technology was poor in 1940.  They had sonar/asdic as well as basic radar.  The key thing is that there simply wasn’t enough escort ships to guard all the convoy routes, and air power wasn’t available in the mid-Atlantic.  The RN pretty much refused to let many of its destroyers be used as convoy escorts as they feared depleting the Home Fleet.

Again, I feel the best way to represent this in AAE40 is to compel the RN to remain in UK waters through threat of invasion etc, and then encourage the Germans to whittle away UK income through convoy attacks.  This will force the UK to invest in destroyers and other replacement units, rather than stacking up large and threatening France/Germany with invasion as early as 1940-41.

The UK can still have a powerful fleet but it will be a bit of a paper tiger if it’s only got 10-20 IPCs to spend every turn due to convoy losses.

Cheers,

Lozza007