Posts made by Nukchebi0

I just used TripleA and set up each of the situations. It follows the rules perfectly, with the exception of flying fighters above a sea zone to land on a new carrier.

No.
No, not on the same turn.
Yes.

In order.

Assumably this would be with low luck?

Assumably yes.

You do know why this is true?

I really need to take more time reading my posts and ensuring they communicate what I want them to communicate.

That being said, I’m sure the sight of millions of hatchets being hurled at them would have caused the Nazi defenders to run in fear, thereby making the invasion of Omaha Beach a much more pleasant affair than it was in real life.

We would have lost a lot less people invading Normandy if they had Tomahawks in 1944.

I remember more of that game now, and it was entirely unconventional. The US and Japan were fighting solely in the Pacific (India and China taken, but none of the Far Eastern territories in Russia), and thus just building big navies with lots of battleships. Consequently, it was Britain and Russia vs. Germany, which made the lack of British reinforcements death for Russia, even without Japanese pressure.

Against a traditional KGF with US involvement in Europe, I see how this strategy will fail.

(So yes, it was due to a poor Allied strategy).

Has anyone ever tried completely eliminating the British navy and ensuring it can’t harass you? Heavy naval purchases the first two turns, obviously.

My friend did this successfully, and Britain was never a problem until round 6. Africa was firmly in German control, and the Axis won.

Transports can’t hold fighters, unlike a carrier. The 16 IPCs nets you a +11 defensive punch with a carrier, and only +2 defensive punch with the transports. If the goal is to protect the Baltic for as long as possible, then you want to maximize your defensive power.

Whatever the idea is.
:|

@Bunnies:

@Nukchebi0:

Yes, only one, but not on the first turn.

Buy 7 inf, save 3. Attack the standard.

You’ll have 32 the next turn, for 6 inf, an art, and the fighter.

Resume the next turn with standard purchasing.

(Spock voice)

Illogical.  You can buy an eighth infantry that first turn, and move it into position on the second turn.  There is nothing to gain by saving 3 IPC.

(Kirk voice)

Or is there?  Dun dun dun.

(McCoy voice)

Dammit, Jim, since when do you say “dun dun dun”?

(Kirk voice)

Since I got this new crack pipe lolz!

Lol, I was tired when I typed that.

Yes, only one, but not on the first turn.

Buy 7 inf, save 3. Attack the standard.

You’ll have 32 the next turn, for 6 inf, an art, and the fighter.

Resume the next turn with standard purchasing.

They would be a little too good of a purchase at the current price with those conditions.

Not really, since the new version would provide for the changing of such values.

Carriers should be revised to 0/1/12. They are basically transports for airplanes, after all.

No naval unit except the carrier should defend better than it attacks.

@Imperious:

They don’t deserve two hits, as the Hood amply demonstrates.

That ship got a lucky hit in the wrong place, besides the hood was one of a kind.

A true Heavy Cruiser can take more punishment, its supposed to fight anything up to battleships and if it faded with one salvo, it would have no use relative to its cost/value.

The hood was a battle cruiser and this means a fast moving hybrid battleship class guns but with light armor plating to get the high speeds.

Then should there be perhaps two cruiser classes, a battlecruiser at 3/3/12, one hit, bombard, and heavy cruiser at 3/3/18, two hits, bombard?

Hillary did well today, sadly.

Destroyers are honestly way overpriced in comparison to how they were used. They should basically be an anti-sub that attacks and defends on the same as a sub costing the same.

Navy should be like this:

Transport: 0/1/8
Sub: 2/2/8
Destroyer: 2/2/8
Cruiser: 3/3/12, but can bombard. They don’t deserve two hits, as the Hood amply demonstrates.
Aircraft Carrier: 1/2/12, they are cheapened to compensate for the defensive decrease.
Battleship: 4/4/20, two hits, bombard. They are simply too expensive to ever buy. At 20, they are still expensive, but investing in a couple for shore bombardment or hit soaking isn’t such a bad idea anymore. Additionally, this balances them out with the new cruiser, which would become more effective in a bombard but less effective in naval conflicts.

That is, 20 cruisers would kill more land units on average than twelve battleships, but these battleships would kill off the entire cruiser force 83% of the time.

This would accompany a fighter alteration to 3/3/8.

Overall these changes would place less emphasis on defending with a navy, because defending wasn’t necessarily any easier than attacking in naval conflicts.

@Cmdr:

They post rules yet?

My version of the Cruiser is basically a BB with Att 3 Def 3 Bombard cost 12 and Destroyer changed to 2/2 cost 10 stops sub sneak shots (no bombard.)

What’s Avalon Hill’s version?

If you could buy four (in effect) units with a statistically guaranteed hit each round vs. 2 (in effect) with a 67% chance of hitting each round, why would you ever buy anything but a cruiser?