Posts made by Omega

<colon>dice ndm <colon>Replace <colon>with an actual colon “:”
Replace n with the number of dice to roll.
Replace m with the number of sides per dice.

Rolling 5d6:
(1, 2, 3, 5, 5)  </colon></colon></colon>

<colon>dice ndm <colon>Replace <colon>with an actual colon “:”
Replace n with the number of dice to roll.
Replace m with the number of sides per dice.

Rolling 6d6:
(1, 1, 1, 4, 6, 6)  @1</colon></colon></colon>

test

: aaa: 1@1 2@2 3@3:

Without closing the Dardanelles, I think Russia is always threatened by Italy. So even if you spend alot of naval units, you can still do some amphibious assaults, which can deal prevent Russia from going all offensive.

You dont have to trade France everytime. All you have to do, is build a strong fleet of transports with troops, set them in position to invade either France or Italy. Have UK build a fleet that can invade both France and Germany. See how the Axis do now! Germany will have to dedicate most of his resources to defend himself. Eventually, his troops on the East won’t have any backup. This will leave an open road to Russia to take back some territories while concentrating most of his remaining forces in slowing Japan. Once Europe falls into the hand of the Allies, the game is pretty much over. And don’t say allies lose every game because this isn’t true. Look at the tournament results if you don’t believe in what I say. Axis might have an advantage, but winning is certainly not impossible

Robert

With my friends, we play with Dardanelles closed and I gotta say that this limit Italy alot and gives Russia the opportunity to counter attack without fearing the Italian troops. Yes, the Italians can still clear a path, but it’s much harder with their ground troops (Italy have little tanks, and little infantry)

With Dardanelles closed, the Allies certainly see their chance of winning increase.

That said, with or without the Dardanelles closed, I believe this game to be fair for both side. I’ll give a slight advantage to the Axis simply because of their strong start.

Right now, we just discovered 42. We feel it is more balanced than 41 (for some reason, and maybe it is really more balanced).
Personally, I’d say this : If you want to balance (if it isn’t) 41, just remove some Japanese transports (I don’t believe in the “add some Chinese units”). 42 shows how Japan is weaker in the first few turns because it lacks transports. Like force them to take 1-2 more turn in order to take the free 8 ipcs in East Indies/Borne or something, or prevent them from sending that many ground forces in their first turn. From there, you will see how it limits Japan’s capabilities.

Robert

Student studying in French literature and Philosophy… no idea where or what I’m going to do. Trying to write a book, keeping an eye on the possibility of studying law, considering a career in sciences

uh :O :?

Robert

Hey im alive! Yes im new, but I do play axis and allies with my friends with the actual boardgame. Playing this tournament online could be very interesting, im looking toward it!

Robert

Last game, Italy built a first turn transport. Used their first turn to transport troops into Transjordanie (was abandoned by UK)

Second turn, hit Egypt with 3 shore bombardment, and up to 8 unit + fighter (In our game, UK did not counter attack in transjordanie, and stayed in Egypt to keep their +5 ipc NO as long as they can).

Not sure about the odds, but I think Italy has a huge advantage from its bombardment and can easily take Egypt turn 2. German doesnt need to weaken Egypt. Just stay in Libya to make sure UK doesnt attack it

Robert

East indies and Borneo should be worth 1 ipc each. Then, put the 6 ipc somewhere that is truly worth that much, like Australia or Canada

Eh, I think I’ll give it a try!! I’ve never played online and only have a couple of real life experience :)

1.  DarthMaximus
2.  DutchmanD
3.  DY
4.  DesertJournalist
5.  Zygmund
6.  Telamon
7.  Bigbadgoo
8.  SgtBlitz
9.  Pin
10. Questioneer
11. TimTheEnchanter
12. Omega
13.
14.
15.
16.

Robert

You dont need to invade EVERY turn with UK and US.

IF you take your time with the UK, and have every turn 1-2 additional transports with full capacity, you are threatening Germany,

Lets say I have 4 Transports loaded. I decide to not drop them. I build 1 transport, 1 infantry 1 artillery = 14IPC

Next turn, I have 5 transports and 10 units that can be dropped ANYWHERE on Europe (That’s with Baltic Sea cleared)

What will a competent Germany do? Protect his capital, and maybe France (If he built an IC already) If he continues to send his 10 units production against Russia, he might as well lose Germany on UK’s Turn. (10 units UK with his little air force and shore bombardment CAN win against 10 newly produced Nazi units)

You do the same thing with the USA. They have to do it slowly. The most important is that you make sure that your fleet will survive to any Aircraft/navy units. Once that is done, then all is left is to produce units and proceed with invading Morocco. When Morocco is invaded, build more transports to make a chain :
USA –> Moroco
Moroco --> USA
Moroco --> France or Italy

Once both UK and USA can threaten Europe, the game is pretty much over. All you have to do is to slow down the Japanese on the East.

Of course, this doesn’t always work. Dices can dictate the game.
Say Germany launch a desperate attack on Russia and wins it with almost no loss. This can change the game to a point where UK and USA must act NOW.
This can be hardly achieved too if Germany builds alot of air (he can easily afford 1-2 plane per turn) or if he buys navy. Because a Germany with 40+ IPCS can easily divert some of his money to builds units to destroy the British naval forces. If British naval forces are destroyed in the mid-late game, I think Allies just lost the game.

Robert

to prevent Polar Express, you just need to have minimal navy forces in the Pacific. (Your fleet must still be equal or more powerful than the Japanese one)

You can let the Japanese land, that is not a problem. There will be 1 infantry in western canada that will slow their advance by 1 turn. By the time the polar troops arrive to USA, you will have enough troops to counter them
I said that you can let the Japanese land. But you must have sufficient navy power to destroy their entire fleet. (To cut off all reinforcements).

Usually, you just need 1-2 Destroyer, 1 aircraft carrier with 2 fighter and ALOT of submarines.
My typical USA 1 is to buy 1 CV (for the Atlantic) and 2 submarine (for the PAcific). The rest is up to me (Do i sacrifice a transports to take morocco?). If Japan succeeded in sinking the pacific DD and Transport, i usually add one DD to my Pacific fleet. Don’t rush. Make sure your transports can survive to the Nazi’s airforces. If Germany succeeds in sinking your fleet, that is a huge tempo gain for the Axis.

You let the japanese take Alaska. If he sent 0 naval ships to defend his transports, you wipe out his transports and slowly, you build ground forces to retake Alaska.
If he sent a huge naval forces to take Alaska, then its your chance to sink everything with your Submarines. If you do destroy the entire Japanese navy, then the Pacific is almost yours (Depending on the losses).
Remember that Submarine are best on the attack. Don’t let the Japanese attack you. You have to attack them first!

Polar Express isnt always a big threat. You can see it coming. The first few times, you will surprise your opponent (because no one really know that transports from Japan can hit USA). The Axis needs to use it properly to deal great damage. The USA must never get scared. Just make sure your naval forces are enough to destroy the Japanese forces. Ground troops can be taken care after.

With UK/USA, you have to play slowly, hitting where the enemy is weak. You have to build a navy to protect your transports. Spending 1-2 turn to prepare an invasion is good enough.

Remember, having 2-3 transports loaded that can hit both France and Germany will remove a lot of pressure on Russia. Once Allies start exchanging France with the Axis, I think the game is almost finished.

About India : You just have to slow down the Japanese. The same thing applies with Chinese. I do not understand people using the fact that China is week as an argument. China IS week. But China can slow down Japanese. Of course, China can be completly destroyed in a few turns.
The 7 infantry stack is there also to slow Japan. Right now, i’m still not sure if it’s best to leave them to die there, or to slowly retreat them (leaving 1 everywhere).

Allies do require more communications between everyone.
Axis players can pretty much do whatever they want and still win

The game is certainly not perfect. But I think it is very possible to win with both sides. Yes, I hate how there are so many first turns move that can give a huge advantage to the Axis, but this is how the game is designed.
Personally, I don’t understand why UK has only 1 Industrial Complex. Russia has 3. Why can’t UK have one in India? or Australia, Africa, Canada….

How about this house rule?
Every player gets a “re-roll ticket” If at any moment, they feel something extreme is happening, they can ask opponent to re-roll the dice
(IE, if my opponent attacks with 10@1 and rolls 10 ones. I should have the right to ask him to reroll :P)

"Solution
I think a more appropriate solution would be reducing the value of all those central african territories. I don’t think it improves the game that Africa is worth so much - it certainly doesn’t help game dynamics, and I’d welcome the views of people with good historical knowledge whether it is even accurate that it was so valuable income-wise during WWII.

For example, make all African territories worth zero except the three north african ones + Saf.  You’d then have to rebalance the UK’s income.  The value of Australia could be increased (perhaps splitting Australia into two territories with WA worth 1 and the east/south worth 3), which is both more realistic and has the added benefit of keeping the US interested in the pacific (and thus improving the dynamics of the game)."

Most African territories are worth 1, so this is already fine. It still take 3-4 turns for a tank to blitz through Africa. Plus, the 2 men in South Africa usually just block the tank from ever getting SAF.
Maybe it’s me being Canadian, but Canada should be worth more. During WWII, we were already 10 millions or so, with a relatively good economy and war economy :/ If UK can keep some stable amount of IPC, maybe things would change.

But I personally believe that it will take more time before knowing what is wrong (if something is) with the game. And I agree that placing units as bids may not be a good idea, because it changes the board situation.

Robert

Darthmaximus just said that Allied are leading in the tournament. Maybe wait for all the results before arguing about this?

Robert

Give Uk a starting IC in India! (Would that balance things or turn it one sided?)

But I have to agree that Europe is pretty much ok. Germany can and will deeply go into Russia. But the deeper he goes in, the weaker his armies. Eventually, there wont be any infantry left to take some hits and he will die because troops take too long to arrive to the front… just like they did in Stalingrad :)

Canada and Australia helped alot during WWII. I’m surprised that Canada doesn’t even have an IC (not that it would be of any use :S)
Not sure about India, I don’t know India’s history. If UK starts with an IC in India, then Japan can’t go crazy.
And yes, India IC can’t stand against a competent Japanese player. But the longer he takes to take it, the better it is for the Allies!

Me and my friends are going to play a no NOs game next time to see how things are. One thing is sure, if there are no NOs, Germany won’t have to spread himself. Neither will have Japan. But at the same time, they lose a lot of IPC from bonuses. I think it will be interesting

Right now, we know that the key of success for the Allies are a strong UK navy. If UK can keep a strong navy during the game, then he can threaten France and the reste of Europe.

To slow down Japan : Remove NOs
That removes them the 10-15 IPC they gain from stupid undefended islands/territories
It’s already incredible they can take the two 4 IPC islands from UK that are undefended. Why should they earn 5 more?

"ADS is also a program as LL, if you play a software version of A&A. "
I don’t play software version of AA. I play it with 5 other real person in real life. Not saying program is worse or whatever. Just saying that I enjoy physical game more than online games.
Programs take into account probability, I guess. Like, you have 1/6 to roll a 1 with a dice, for example. But in real life, it isn’t a perfect 1/6. Depending on how one rolls the dice, it can be less, or it can be higher.
I play enough cards to know that physical shuffling is not the same as software shuffling. Physical shuffling is never perfect. Software shuffling can never perfectly imitate physical shuffling.

We have played several games now. Axis did won more games than the Allies. But the fact the Allies have won some games suggest us that there might be not any imbalancement yet. We think that we haven’t sufficiently developed strategies.
That said, we are pretty sure it is more balanced than revised (without the bid/tweaks, we were never aware of those changes). I mean, we haven’t won a game with Axis in revised, not that I remember of. In AA50, although Axis won more than Allies (4 to 2), the fact that we were able to win with both sides suggest that the game is more balanced than revised

Robert

"However, if LL is played that’s not AA anyway.

AA is a dice game with strategy and lots of players."

I agree with this.
Playing a 6 players game is not the same as doing a 1v1. 6 players have different views of how to get things done. Because of that, funny things happen. Lack of cooperation, insults, good jokes, etc. I for one hate to have someone dictate my moves.

Real dices is different from any program. It adds some “fun/surprise” to the game. Some people hates this, but I think it prevent games from becoming too linear. History is full of lucky/unlucky events

Robert