Posts made by Ozone27

'K, how about this for a tentative opener featuring the above rules plus 2-Hit BBs…(a harsh scathing critique is what I’m looking for–I need an idea of the impact of this rule)…

USSR moves its fleet to North Sea. Moves 3 INF CAUCASES->KARELIA;4 INF, 2 ARM, 1 FTR RUS->KARELIA; places 8 INF Karelia.

Germany: Purchases 6 INF, 1ARM, 1 SS

CM:Africa:1 INF ALG->F.W. AFRICA;1 ARM LIB->F.E.AFRICA->EGYPT;1 INF LIB->EGYPT; 2 INF S. EUROPE->EGYPT

Mediterranean: 1 BB S. EUROPE->SYRIA SZ;1 TR p/u 2 INF S. EUROPE->SYRIA SZ land on EGYPT

N. Atlantic: 1 BMR GERM->HUDSON BAY; 2 SUB (BALT/FRANCE)->NORTH SZ; 5 FTR (various)->NORTH SZ

Eastern Europe: 2 INF 1 ARM UKRAINE->CAUCASES(throwaway force)

N-CM: All surviving planes land W. EUROPE; 1 TR p/u 1 ARM F/NORWAY->ALGIERIA; 1 INF E. EUROPE->UKRAINE; 2 ARM W.EUROPE->E.EUROPE; 1 ARM UKRAINE->E.EUROPE; 1 ARM 4 INF GERMANY->E. EUROPE

Place: 4 INF 1 ARM GERMANY; 2 INF S. EUROPE; 1 SS S. EUROPE SZ

So basically at the end of the turn we hope we’ve got 6 INF, 5 ARM IN E. EUROPE; 2 INF UKRAINE; 1 INF 1 ARM CAUCASES; 1 ARM ALGIERIA;1 INF F. W. AFRICA; 2 INF 1 ARM EGYPT; 1 BB (1/2 strength), 1 TR SYRIA SZ; 1 SS S. EUROPE SZ; 2 INF 4 FTR 1 BMR w. EUROPE; 4 INF 2 ARM GERMANY; 2 INF 1 ARM S. EUROPE; 3 INF F/NORWAY

CI: 39 IPCs, now has 40

This move seems mediocre to me at best. I liked SUDs “c**k-blocker” idea in the Med, and I saved most of my Air Force, but I am gonna let USA move around w/ her TR (the only alternative would be to use the SS in W. EUROPE to hit it and I might lose an extra FTR or waste the TR in the BALTIC); I left a UK BB (a most odious option to me); and can just barely kill the Soviets after they attack E. EUROPE T2. But I do have 40 IPCs. What should I do different? Seems like 2-Hit BBs are bad for Germany right now–except for the attack in Egypt…

Ozone27

Er…I don’t understand what SUD is talking about, but I’m sure its grand :D ! (M84…?)

What I don’t get about the “bomber strategy” is how do you take territory w/ so few INF purchases? I guess you rely on USSR to roll in and crush Gerry…?

If so, why doesn’t Gerry/Japan use the same strategy vs. USSR? Maybe they don’t see it coming…

Ozone27

Exactly my point! mikaylah: give us all a detailed report of the worldwide situation T1 (w/ RR or not) and there are people on this site who can help you.

BTW SUD–looks like mikaylah is playing both Germany & Japan. He/she might need some pointers re: Japanese strategies for T1/throughout the game. I am making no headway…

Ozone27

:cry: but I Ozone don’t WANNA lose 2 FTRs!!! :cry:

Ozone27

mikaylah, I am trying to help you–calm down!

Yes w/ no RR, you are at a disadvantage: but the disadvantage is not as great as you think: all RR essentially does is buy you 1 turn without Soviet attack: they will attack next turn, most definitely.

If the Allies are ignoring Japan, then Japan’s #1 priority is to take advantage by making a super-PITA of herself. The Japanese Navy is not useless it is a potential major threat if you can get it to the battle area.

Attacking North America is intended as nothing but a distraction–if your enemy will see right through it, then don’t bother! But many USA players (admittedly not experts) will freak out when Japanese troops land on their territory. This helps because it takes a little of the pressure off Germany.

If you have just 1 IC and 3 TR in Asia, you can put 6 INF 3 ARM on the mainland every turn. Believe me, that will put a LOT of pressure on USSR.

Sounds like you are losing a lot of men T1 in Asia–this may be whats causing USSR to be able to protect itself using only 1 INF in each territory. If so, try not attacking so many different places T1 in favor of cancentrating your forces and reducing major resistance–this may enable you to go on the offensive against USSR earlier, with more men.

Post a detailed report of what your enemy is doing worldwide on T1-2. You will get a horde of great strategists picking the moves apart within a few hours I guarantee (A & A players like nothing better than foiling other players’ clever strategies :D )–you will no doubt get some good pointers as to some countermoves.

Ozone27

@bangalore:

America had those two guys in that cartoon, you know what I’m talking about… I forget the name. (Where they’re always in a foxhole and it’s raining and they’re muddy.) :)

“The Sad Sack”…?

Ozone27

USA gets “Betty Grable”. Morale soars and all INF in the territory get to attack at 2, defend at 2. The next round, they all retire to their bunks and are reduced to 1/1 for the remainder of the turn due to distraction…

Ozone27

“Hungry Hungry Hippos”…?

Ozone27

Cool. Here are the rules my crew are currently playing with. It’s a wierd hodgepodge. Basically we’ve got 2nd Edition w/ the following modifications:

1.)RR
2.)Submerging Subs
3.)No East/West Canada (meaning no movement between West Canada and Hudson Bay SZ–if that’s not already standard 2nd Edition; I can’t remember).

Naval Occupation is allowed–that is, no launching ships while the SZ is occupied by enemy units.

One of our players is considering a house rule of 2-hit BBs, so I wanted to get an idea of how it impacts the game before I came down on one side or the other. I’ve heard it helps the Axis, but looking at Germany T1, I couldn’t really see how–except for the Anglo-Egypt Sudan amphibious invasion.

What would you do given the above rules + RR?

Ozone27

The short answer? You guys should flip a coin every time you play to see who gets to play what side: after your brother plays as Axis a few times, he should be willing to tweak the rules somewhat. Playing w/ only 2 players decreases the amount of time it takes to need rules adjustments, but it will happen.

The long answer? Well, you need to switch strategies. Basically you are using an “offensive-type” strategy for Germany where you try to win straight off with a massive strike. That just won’t work using the rules you are using at your skill level. Try instead a more “long-term” approach: make inroads in Africa while building lots of INF and just concentrating on defending your territory while Japan eats away at USSR. You will find the Japanese fleet comes in extremely handy! Try making a naval move against Mexico or Alaska–it might draw the USAs attention away from Germany for a few turns. Try sailing your fleet thru the Suez or around South America to threaten the Allies in the Atlantic. Like WWII, A & A is a very Naval-oriented struggle; learn to use your navy more effectively than his–you will find that the Japanese navy is far from “useless”. And always push against Russia.

As far as rules changes–there are dozens of “standard” rules variations that are out there–chances are there is at least 1 you both can agree on. We started playing w/ “submerging subs” first and it worked out great–a plus is that it applies to both sides, but what it mainly does is give Germany an extra sub T1–that SUB can come in pretty handy…

Oh, and sink the UK fleet T1. I can’t stress this enough–there really is no better use of your planes.

Ozone27

The only problem is that this rule already has a parallel in play–just not with the straightjacket of mandatory purchasing. If you attack with all ARM & no supporting INF, your ARM will quickly weaken due to the enemy’s counterattacks, wheras w/ INF support, your ARM will stay in the attack longer. Plus, the relative cost of each unit also is a factor. With say, 30 IPCs to spend on INF/ARM to go into battle the next turn, there is a certain ratio that will get you the most “bang” for your buck. I often see players spending lots of money on “all ARM” when a more-or-less even split between ARM and INF (or especially a preponderance of INF) would serve them better numerically–ARM are just more glamorous.

I only REALLY started getting into A & A when I started playing Germany. If you play a few games as Germany, you will quickly realize that “all ARM” every turn is NOT the answer. You must become very conscientious of money as Germany–the choice often is “do I buy 2 INF or 1 ARM”? How many INF do I need? What can I get to the next battle? These kinds of questions lead one to purchase INF to support their ARM without the need for a rule.

As far as the CV purchase requiring a BB purchase, that is totally out of the question. A player would have to spend 42 IPCs in A SINGLE TURN to get one CV. You’d find massive fleets of TRs and SUBs with no capital ships whatsoever. Not to mention that logically it just doesn’t work–assuming that A & A (Basic) BBs represent all types of surface-warfare ships (that is, BBs, CAs, CLs, DDs, etc), a CV still doesn’t REQUIRE them in order to effectively operate. Its aircraft can perform many “scout, detection & interception”-type tasks without the (albeit important) protection of a whole task force.

Ozone27

How do you sink the UK fleet T1 as Germany w/ 2-hit BBs?

Ozone27

If micayla & friends are playing w/ the above mentioned rules, they may not have played that many games, and so therefore, Germany might have a chance. I would suggest massing your INF in Eastern Europe (to a lesser extent, Ukraine as well) and keep buying whatever USSR buys–just more of it! When USSR attacks Eastern Europe, try to crush them in the counterattack! Don’t forget to destroy the Allied fleet in the North Sea and Mediterranean T1–then be sure to land all planes in Western Europe ASAP! Africa will be important–keep putting a few troops there until the Allies destroy your fleet. On T1 a TR is a pretty sound purchase if you can protect it, but you should quickly switch to INF/ARM for the rest of the game. Don’t let the Allies in Western Europe, but use only the minimum # of INF for the purpose–don’t forget UK & USA often act in tandem here.
Your Japanese ally should attack the Soviets as quickly as possible–when most of the Russian East is taken you will be surprised at how rapid your progress will be!

My friends and I are very conservative with the rules and for a long time we played with just straight 2nd-edition, like you. Then we added “Submerging Subs” and that little rules adjustment seriously improved our games–and made all of us more willing to adopt other rules changes when the time came. If you find your games are getting less enjoyable due to the Allies winning all the time, try adding just one “tweak” or 2–it will help, and players may be more willing to adopt a small change than a big one. “Submerging Subs” really helped us…

Ozone27

Excellent posts.

I’d just like to point out on the issue of “cruelty vs. inefficiency” in the conduct of peace & war that, as TG points out, the Civil War and its resulting cruel peace (and cruel prosecution) are not forgotten TO THIS DAY in the South. After WWII, the USA and her Allies, largely for cold political reasons, but also for the purpose of preventing from happening again the nightmare the world had just been through, helped rebuild the nations of their former enemies. Today they are economically 2 of the most powerful economies on Earth, both are good friends of the USA; powerful allies of the US; and one (Japan) has the world’s only Constitution renouncing War as an instrument of foreign policy. Now, I dunno about you, but considering WWII, WWI, the Franco-Prussian War, the American Civil War and countless other wars throughout history, I’d say the side of “limited cruelty” and “compassion for the vanquished” has been the better long-term choice, as well as the best preventer of future war. A great General tries not only to defeat the enemy and end the war as quickly as possible, but to prevent future war with that enemy.

As far as the use of the Bomb goes, that is an extremely difficult moral issue to tackle. I hate what happened, but I also can’t imagine being in the shoes of the Washington decision-makers at that time with a possible choice between the possible unnecessary destruction of an entire generation of young American men (which an invasion of the Home Islands might have caused), and the eternal damnation of responsibility for the unleashing of mankind’s most terrible weapon. If only there HAD been a clear-cut alternative, but at the time there just wasn’t. Speaking of course as an American; to a degree, I think USA’s mercy for her former enemies after the war partially exhonerated us of some of the ignominy for the horror of the nuclear decision–but we still did it, we are the only power that has ever done it, and we sacrificed others in order to save ourselves. I personally think it WAS justified in the circumstances, but I can totally understand the POV that disagrees. Whose “fault” it was almost doesn’t matter–at that point so much ugliness had occured it is difficult for us (younger people) to comprehend the mindset of the times.

However I know one thing which no one can deny: the Japanese & Germans in WWII also had the experience of conquering vast foreign enemies. And their record was, shall we say, somewhat less compassionate than the Western Allies…

Ozone27

@fixitman:

i believe the actually chance to win a G1 attack on britain works out to ~10%. ive seen it done in a tournament, when i was japan! my team mate was this wierd (but fun) guy, who had played all of 3 games, and hated our opponents. my team mate didnt want to spend any time around these guys, so he bet the whole game on that one move, and had the second hottest dice ive ever seen (first hottest was watching russian aa cut down 6 outa 6 shooting down the german airforce, thats right, 6 1’s!!!). after handily defeating the british navy (who completely missed), our hero hit 100% on his first roll as attacker. was the most amazing G1 ive ever seen. the opponents gave us the win, as they didnt want to waist the time to probably lose anyway. almost felt bad for our opponents, but they were usually jerks anyway.

:lol: Great stories! :lol:

“If at first you don’t succeed, the hell with it!”

:lol: I have a friend that practically LIVES by this rule in A & A! :lol:

Ozone27

@TG:

Maybe you should try combining Diplomacy with A&A for the ultimate gaming experience?

I was thinking about that while I was posting on the other thread about you & Emu’s “WWI” version of A & A. Really some sort of “Diplomacy”-type rules are, I think, the only way to get the true flavor of the times–like if Italy enters the game after a move or 2, someone should throw some dice to decide which side they join :o (just a thought)!

Diplomacy “conference” rules + A & A WWI (with your 8 players)=perhaps the ultimate game…?:D

Ozone27

@TG:

Maybe. Each country has a “special ability” unique to that country only. For example the Russians have the “Bolshevik Revolution” and Austria-Hungary has the “Two Country Rule.” I think Germany’s special ability has already been used, so you might have to talk to Emu about this. Also, we have no units to represent them, which might be another difficulty.

I’m thinking of Storm Troopers as being a technology that Germany can research that improves normal INF–like “super Infantry”. So possibly, no new units necessary…

What is “Bolshevik Revolution” gonna do–Russia is automatically out of the game :lol: ? What is the “2 country rule”?

Ozone27

@TG:

I remember they made the Campaign for North Africa, which I can only describe as the equivalent of whacking your head with a hammer. 80 pages of rules, hundreds of units and a map that will require three by ten feet of your surface space for the remainder of your natural life. Once you’re ready to “play,” begin by filling out a log sheet for every unit - you read that right: every damn unit (hundreds in most cases). Then, take note of each unit’s ratings: barrage, vulnerability, anti-armor, offensive close assault, anti aircraft. Record which pilots are flying which planes. Check plane fuel. Plan air missions. Establish supply dumps, convoys, and stores. Assign troops to trucks. Begin construction projects. Transport cargo. Repair stores. Deploy fleets. Initiate training. Check evaporation of water supplies. Pass out water, making sure the Italians get extra, since they need it to make spaghetti (I’m not making this up). Don’t give up yet – you’re almost ready to move a unit! :wink:

… :lol: that is soooo funny. ‘Er…who wants to play “Hungry Hungry Hippos” instead?’ :lol:

JediCharles: I know exactly what you are talking about. We are both very lucky to have friends who would (mostly) rather have a good time than just win all the time. Although our games often do get extremely competitive, there is always a lot of trash-talk and good-natured banter: no one ever takes it that seriously. A couple of us would definitely rather make a stunning “surprise move”, than win the war the same old way.

Probably the best way to ensure variety in your gaming experience is to switch games every once in a while. Like TG Moses sounds like he really enjoys Civil War (and other games as well)–I am a HUGE fan of “Diplomacy”; although its so cutthroat some of my friends balk at it. However we had one game of A & A last all of 3 hrs (our last game without RR!), and so we busted out the “Diplomacy” game and still had a good time.

“Hungry Hungry Hippos” is also a good alternative to A & A :D…

On another note, one of our players had a MAJOR problem w/ not planning his (A & A) turn at all and screwing around till his turn was up–then making up for the time by studying the board for up to 20 MINUTES before buying! We instituted a 10-minute turn and kept time. 10 minutes was too short, so we bumped it up to 15–which was too long. So we settled on 12 minutes and it works out pretty good. Of course, conferencing doesn’t count (though it must be in between turns) and we are pretty loose about the stricture, but it works OK to move folks along & get them to plan their purchases & (especially) stay focused on the game.

Ozone27

@chiefman21:

when playing Germany, Attack UK navy by the first turn and invade UK with tanks and troops (if you still have your transport!)

This is an awesome first move! Unfortunately it has little better than a snowball’s chance in hell of succeeding.

Regardless of what you bought, T1 you can get a maximum of 2 INF, 2 FTR, 1 BMR actually onto UK for the attack. That leaves (up to) 2 subs, 3 FTRs for the sea battle–just about enough if the USSR has reinforced UK in North Sea SZ.

The 2 INF, 2 FTR 1 BMR will face 2 INF, 2 FTR, 1 BMR, 1 ARM and that P.I.T.A. AA gun. If you get super lucky, and UK super unlucky, you just might win–but I’ve heard the chances of this happening are something like 1 in 20. What do you do the other 19 times?

An alternative to this plan is to make the attempt T2 when your BB and most of your airforce (which are presumably in Western Europe) might enter the fray. In this scenario you’d sieze Gibraltar T1, endure any counterattack, then (hopefully) attack the North Sea SZ w/ 1 BB, 1 SUB, maybe 1 BMR (or whatever you can get there) while 2 INF and EVERY FTR IN RANGE hit the beach in UK. The UK sometimes might not see the danger–but again, usually the danger is seen and easily thwarted by either sinking the Germany fleet (if possible) or just building a better fleet in the North Sea.

It’s a great dream, but often is not possible for Germany until after USSR has been defeated. If anyone can get me odds on the above attacks it’d be very helpful–also if anyone HAS taken UK early in an actual game, I’d like to know how as well…

Ozone27

@TM:

Any deliberate attack on the civilian population is immoral. I know in war, civilians are accidentally caught in the crossfire and many are indirectly killed, but to purposely use civilians as targets is a serious crime. I understand destroying weapons factories, railroad networks, and supply to deprive the enemy of resources but not when it would jeopardize the lives of innocent children exempt from any wrong doing. I think it is very cowardly of grown men engaging humanitarian violence and using war as a cover up :(

…exactly. The Civil War was coming to a close as it was and while the “March to the Sea” may have hastened the “end” somewhat, the ends certainly did not justify the means. I agree that W.T. Sherman was a great general and probably not on a par with Forest in the “evil” department; still he used his army to rampage across virtually undefended civilian territory with the intent to “bring the war home” to the South by wantonly pillaging their country. This did a lot to prevent the reconciliation between North and South that continues in some forms to this day. Many Southerners still recall the name of Sherman with bitterness. This can hardly be called “ending the war sooner” at least in peoples’ minds.

Ozone27