Posts made by MistaBiggs

That’s what I thought … The peeps that I play with – play like that (good House Rule … I think anyways).

Yeah … I have the large map … I like it!

It’s the same map as the smaller one that comes with the W@W game, but only bigger. It’s nice to have the extra room on the board … you just got to have a big table or play it on the floor. Also, you will need to laminate it to keep it protected … which, I haven’t done yet – so, I don’t know how much it cost yet.

Here is a link that shows what the map looks like:

http://www.angelfire.com/games/silex/maps/wawlarge.html

RR = Russian Restricted (i.e. Russia cannot attack on turn 1)

Look here to find out what shuck-shuck is:

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1921

Each “tree” is $4.95 and contains the following:

8 men, 2 bombers, 3 fighters, 3 tanks, 3 transports, 1 aircraft carrier, 2 battleships, 6 destroyers, 3 submarines, 2 anti aircraft guns, 1 sub pen and 1 factory.

They are available in the following colors:

blue, tan, burgundy, olive green, green, lime green, gray, yellow/gold and red.

Also, the gray is actually a silver color (like the pieces that come with W@W). I find these to be perfect for Italy. Goes good with Germany’s units.

If you buy an aircraft carrier and a fighter in the same turn … at the end of your turn – are you able to place the fighter on the carrier?

The group I – plays with play this way (only if bought together); however, I was wondering if this is correct or not?

Thanks!

HA!!

Ditto…

I agree with Grigoriy Ivanovitch, that’s how we play too.

Can someone please answer this question?

… although I really don’t know – but, I agree with StrongBad198 … It seems like the (withdrawed) sub would be in the SZ before the “newly placed” units – therefore, the sub would be defending.

Does anyone know the answer to this???

Try KaZaA Lite…

Just wanted to get this back to the top … as I’m in the process of making some “House Rules” to add Italy to the game. ANY input would be appreciated.

Thanks!

@haxorboy:

Just building planes and try to use what little resource I have at the beginning to maintain Africa. After UK5 and I have a nice airforce sitting on the ground, usually in the big K helping guard it so that Russia can build up the back side, and the US can shuck troops over to help the front side. Anytime Ger. throws ships in the water the mighty RAF take to the skies and punishes the silly sailors for even thinking about going anywhere. I believe this is a far better use of the limited UK cash flow then trying to throw money away at an eventual lost cause in India…

I agree with haxorboy. I think the India IC is a lost cause. UK should definitely build fighters for defending Russia and clearing the seas. This will allow USA to shuck-shuck. Well put!

Kobu is right …

It does read wrong. Fighters attack at 3, while battleships always attack at 4 (even in amphibious landings). Perhaps M-4 Sherman meant that they defend at the same strength as battleships?

@M-4_Sherman:

asthetically, fighters are good on carriers, and can be used effectively against Japan, especially in amphibious landings:

1. fighters attack at same strength as battleships
2. once the carrier is produced their a lot cheaper
3. Battleships only fire once in amphibious assaults

that and their great for taking out subs trying to get thier “first shot attack” in before they get a chance

Kobu – read the bold portion…

Well put Guest.

Plans do depend on prior moves…

There are few things that are CERTAIN in A&A, thus … it is hard to talk strategy, b/c there are so many variables/situations (and NO ONE can predict the dice).

Thanks for the post!

In 2nd edition rules – a surviving fighter in this scenario can only land if an island (completely surrounded by water) exists in that SZ.

In 3rd edition rules – when an aircraft carrier is sunk. The surviving aircraft on it can attempt to locate and land on a friendly island, territory, or aircraft carrier. These aircraft have one movement point to do so.

I would like to hear (read) this explanation too.

It MAY be possible IF:

Germany completely whips out U.K.'s navy (except the transport in the India Sea Zone) – this would require the use of the entire German navy and air force. This would stop U.K. from being able to build the carrier or the transport … and in turn – U.S.A. could only bring over the 1 fighter and the bomber (both would have to land in U.K.).

Correct…

I agree U.S.A. should establish the shuck-shuck A.S.A.P.

However, if Germany controls the Atlantic – this is not possible right away.

I wouldn’t put an I.C. in S. Africa either, but if it was done – I don’t see how it would be easily taken by Germany or Japan. It would take either one of them a couple of turns to reach it (at least) and by then it would be to heavily guarded.

I agree … it is possible (very hard though) and it would take the cooperation of all 3 of the Allies to hold India – but, this would leave Russia at Germany’s mercy. I would love to be the Axis in this situation.