Posts made by maverick_76

Hey guys, here is an end to all of this: eliminate capitols, only have victory cities! As long as a country has an industrial complex then they are still in the fight. So for Russia for instance, if Moscow is taken, if they have a factory in Siberia they can still fight. You don’t lose any money, but you lose the IPC value, which Moscow would be a lot of value (probably at least 5-10 IPC’s). I think what you guys are forgetting is that you can’t just place an IC wherever, according to LH the territory you place it in must have a minimum IPC value and the IC can only produce 3 units max, or 10 depending on what type of IC you bought. So you as a country are defeated when you lose all your IC’s. You can still move troops and all that but you cannot build, effectively eliminating you.

Well it looks that the only country you’ll be able to beat on is China, but they have lots of men and land to take that will give you little money. I see what is happening now! If you want to do the time honored “sandwich Russia” move you are going to need more income than what China can give you so you are forced to attack the islands and the Philippines and South Asia and Pearl! BRILLIANT! That triggers the entry of the US so immediately you are posed with a two front war for Japan as is Germany. It is starting to make really good sense now……ahhhhh my brain feels better about the pre-order now…

@Brain:

I was playing with a piece like that in 1986.

LOL, I was born in 1986!

I would if I had a spare $60+ lying around, I don’t so I just got one. It is only $10 for shipping, and it takes 5-7 days, I’m cool with waiting a little while, as long as I get my copy.

I think the best way to deal with convoys is to have a zone like in AAP and AAE. It is a convoy route for a selected country. If it becomes occupied by an enemy then that country loses income for every turn thereafter until that evemy ship leaves the zone or it is destroyed. If the enemy ship leaves then the route opens again, it should not stay closed if the enemy then leaves! You should not have to have a friendly warship there to keep it open, only to defend it. To sum up what I said: if the zone has nothing there then the convoy is open and adding to the income of the country, if it is closed by and enemy ship then it won’t add to the income of the country any more.

So from my understanding if a convoy route is captured why are we losing money already collected? How does that make sense, the ships delivering IPCs already got to us, thus the collect income phase at the end of the turn. For every turn after then the income should be docked, but why immediately?

My only experience with China is AAP which does not have Russia involved so what I found is 99% of the time people avoided China. I’m not sure how this game is set up but my guess is that most games will consist of people circumventing China and transporting troops straight to South Asia. Unless China is a vital part of victory for Japan I don’t see it being a huge part of the partial game. Now the global game, that is a whole other animal….

I pre-ordered my copy last night from there because it seems most people have a good history with the site and the price was good too.

I think 1-1-2-16 sounds good. Carriers did have defenses against planes but not really against other ships, that is why I think the original 3 defense was whack. I think the best solution should be 0-1-2-15, either that or what I mentioned above.

I think it should at least be barred from attacking, maybe allow it to move non-combat. I would say that merely for gameplay purposes, so people don’t spam entrenchments left and right. You can’t have cake and eat it too. This would make defense better but would that not just perpetuate dead zones for either side if an invader then decides to entrench? We would have WWI and that would not be actually accurate because bombers and artillery improved drastically, not to mention tanks. It made it suicide to just hole up and wait, (example: Japanese on any island invasion by marines). I can understand it for when you really need to use it as a last resort, thus limiting your options if you do entrench, remember you are in essence de-mobilizing your force to gain a defense advantage, does it make sense to be able to mount an offensive right after? It takes a little time to regroup, and I think the least for movement penalty should be no combat movement, but you can non-combat move.

I think a per unit basis, just like pairing your artillery with infantry on the attack, you should just be able to entrench units but have the penalty of not being able to move immediately.

I still think for gameplay’s sake to make it a one turn build. And just have it as a bonus for defending infantry and artillery, like +1 defense for up to two units per blockhouse. Heck even call the unit entrenchment, and possibly to make it even more risky is if a unit becomes entrenched it cannot move any more. Or it takes a move for the unit to “un-entrench” first, then be able to move and attack. To make it easy, just add in a colored chip to put under units that are entrenched, make the cost like 5 IPC’s for two units and if they move they would have to rebuy the entrenchment bonus again if they wanted to entrench. It makes it to where we won’t see entrenchment spammers who think that an entrenched army can just jump up and move the next day like it is nothing. Just look at WWI, armies moved at a crawl because it is so hard to advance and retreat once you have dug in, it destroys morale and destroys the environment too. Dirt and rain don’t mix too well for trucks and men.

The best is if it’s your infantry vs. a tank or plane. They roll a hit on you and you stick it to them with your casualty roll, MMMMMMM!!! TAKE THAT BIOTCH!!! TERRITORY IS STILL MINE!

Personally I don’t know how much time that could save, maybe like a half hour overall. I think I would just roll myself, I don’t trust those online rollers anyway. I like to feel like my mojo got me the critical hit to win the battle, you know what I mean?

Something I struggled with as well because I usually make a move then battle then move into another battle, so on……but yeah you cannot move through freshly conquered territory, you must stop at that territory for that turn.

Without house rules or any perks to the Axis then classic AA is 90% chance of victory for the Allies. Unless the Allied player is green or has not read Don’s essays on AA then the game is even but once the Allied player knows how to operate then it is usually a short game with the Allies as the victor.

Hey didn’t Larry say that blockhouses are not going to be in the game?

Yeah that has to be the case.

Hmmm, interesting. I never thought about joining them that way.

I have one of the original AA games, though it is “well played.” I also have one of the AAP and AAE games along with D-Day and BOtB. (I’m thinking about selling my D-Day and BOtB games though because I only play the ones with money involved.) It is a shame that I was not able to get AAR and AA50, those I was really looking forward to and just kept putting off the purchase until it was too late, ch well….

I agree, but the reason I like Axis and allies is that it is not like Risk in that you have to be an economist and strategist to win. I don’t think politics should be in the game, just simple national objectives with some sort of bonus would be nice for the game to play more like a the real thing did. You don’t have to follow the rules but it is to your advantage to, for the same reasons it was in real life.