Posts made by Panzer Leader

On one hand I like Japan because you get to play with all that navy and airforce and noboby is a real threat for awhile. :-D
On the other I like being the underdog as well like bbrett3 was saying. So Italy an Germany are the two that have it the toughest. And that is the hardest game to win and the most satisfying. :|
Russia is a bit of an underdog as well, but I have played Russia on several occassions and I always seem to hold the enemy at bay for long enough until you can finally start to buy all tanks and crush Germany.
So I would still have to stick with Japan as long as you have a really good German player. 8-)

As USA playing using NOs, I tend to build all naval in the Pacific on round 1 except one transport in the Atlantic. Then 60/40 (Pacific/Atlantic) naval on round 2. But I always make sure Atlantic transports are full and ready to go across on each round. Therefore you have to buy a couple of land troops to fill transports as required. Get a back and forth going with the transports in the Atlantic going to Africa so as to fill at least one every turn. Once Pacific fleet as got some capital ships I tend to buy alot of cheap subs and a few destroyers to fill it up. Also need at least two transports in the Pacific to insure you can take back islands as needed. From round 4 on it depends upon what Japan does if you go more Pacific or go all out Europe. 8-)

I agree I don’t like retreating either. In the subs case it should only be allowed to submerge when its defending. The attacker has the retreat option only, so that is what it should be for all pieces. That way you are only moving on your turn.
Your are correct about the mechanized infantry being a tech advance. I have played too many versions and sometimes get confused on which rule goes with which version.

That is still WAY more costly, less agressive (particularly on your Russian neighbor who does not need ships to threaten you), and less flexible than air units.

You are correct that it is alot more costly. The idea is to get your fleet to a point where you only need to add to it a little and you can stay ahead of the Allies, but you cannot let up on Russia and still have to be as aggressive you can with whats left and what you start with. You still spend the rest of the IPCs on ground troops for the first couple of turns to send Russia’s way and try to secure Germany’s NOs as well. Then buy planes to fill the carriers, one with Italy and a couple with Germany. If Italy/Germany can secure the Med and move south into Africa for money and east into Persia so you can then hit Russia in Cacauscus from Persia, from Ukraine and from the Black Sea simultainously and hold it. Plan it after Russia goes and use one then the other to re-inforce.

I am not saying it is fool proof but it has worked for me. It does maybe take a little longer but you don’t loose your Italian fleet and you start to take off with the money earning way more then the Allies. Japan of course has to do its part to go after Russia (and India and China) as well.

If you can stay ahead and start bringing Russia down to size, you can then move that fleet into the Atlantic beside France and plan for UK/America invasion. Usually you win with victory cities by that point. 8-)

I have played the all out ground forces against Russia game where you let Italy stand on its own and that can work as well, but like you said you have to buy lots of planes to take out UK fleets, which can be costly as well trading planes for ships. If Italy falls before Russia does that can be a big blow to Germany. :-(

It is definitely an interesting idea which would have to be tried before final assessment can be made.
One thing I thought of though is that in AA50 version I believe an infantry can catch a ride with a tank and move two or Blitz with it. Therefore that infantry would be eligible for Blitz and maybe breakthrough as well.

Also defending subs get to retreat which to me is moving when it is not your turn. Subs can retreat whenever it is their attack and they can chose to retreat instead. Any piece could almost do that, especially planes. So you could chose not to roll your defense roll and retreat instead. Thoughts?
8-)

That little Hilter is great. It proves your point IL. :lol: :-D

@Perry:

I’m curious. Do you build boats with Italy?
What would the purpose of Italian ships be, and have you ever acheived anything valuable with the Ita fleet (other than having it wiped out mid-game by US).

I believe that an Italian fleet is very important and chances are the Axis will loose if they loose the Med and Italy’s fleet. A trick I have used on G1 (in 41 and 42 game) is to buy an IC on France right away. On Italy’s turn save all your money and move the whole fleet to south of France. Then on Germany’s turn buy several ships (dd, trans, & sub) to add to the fleet, so on UK’s turn there are too many ships for them to attack. Then on I2 buy a carrier and trans and try to take Egypt and/or Trans-Jordan. On G2 buy more ships and ground forces to move to Africa. Make sure all your transports (I & G) are always full going across every turn, even if just “bridging” to re-inforce. Work on getting all Italy’s NO’s ASAP and keep moving guys across and enlarging your fleet. If Germany can spare the money they could add their own carrier to the fleet and it starts to get real large. Do not buy a German fleet in the Baltic, add it to the Italian fleet, it lasts longer and makes it a lot harder for the allies. 8-)

I guess by the responses I have read it is unanimous, Italy is better as a seperate entity mainly due to the added possibilities that it creates and the overall strategy changes it allows from both sides.
The other thing I really do like is that with 6 countries it is axis then allies turns rotated so as to not have two allied turns back to back. It is harder to double team that way.
Thank you every one for your thoughts. 8-)

I agree that China ignoring the IC as far as counting units goes is probably the best way to handle this. China has enough restrictions already.

And also that the Phillipines is the best spot for US to capture build an IC and lunch from there.
8-)

@LuckyDay:

@Subotai:

It’s about the total game balance, not if Germany is stronger with or w/o Italy.

@Panzer:

I was just wondering what others thought of Italy being in the AA50 game. Do you think it helps Germany as a seperate entity or do you think they should be kept together as the new revised edition coming out is supposed to have. 8-)

gee, and i thought the question was about if 'it helps Germany as a seperate entity or do you think they should be kept together"  the reference to AA42 was for reference to Germany controlling all Euro Axis forces.

I like Italy integrated as a 6th player.  Some arguments now about China being a 7th, that’s where Italy used to be.  It’s not the powerhouse of Germany, but it isn’t supposed to be, all the countries are different.

I’ve played games where Italy was added as a unique country in AAR and AAE and have enjoyed both.  It can be a touchy thing when a German player doesn’t want to commit troops to help protect Italy or if Italy falls, it’s an easy thing to cite as the reason we lost, and all.  Italy can be a key to winning or losing whether it’s combined or not, sure, and so can other fronts, like in Russia, but for getting a 6th player into the game instead of just watching, Italy’s especially great.

We have tried a 6 player 42 game where we drew out of the hat to see who ended up with which country, I ended up with Russia which is limited until you turn things around, but the Italian player was actually not too effective. Personally I would have done things differently, but ultimately it was Italy’s weakness that opened up Germany to fall. It was really cool however having 6 players around the table though and I would like to try Italy only to see how I would do.
China would be do boring to actually play as a player the way it is now. I have a Xeno games World at War version where China has its own pieces and does a little more then this version, but still limited. That game starts in 39 and has France seperate as well. Also I do like the way the neutral countries are handled in that version, as each country has its own force and can be convinced to join up to your cause. 8-)

I agree with dondoolee.
Because this is on a global scale and it is too difficult to simulate all possible terrain obstacles, and they want to keep the game play streamlined, you really cannot introduce terrain costs or attack / defense changes as this will slow down play and created a whole bunch of variables that may change game play significantly.

The artillery issue is another thing all together. The game does not differentiate between long range “indirect” or short range “direct” artillery.
My thought would be to add one free shot to the defender if he has an artillery in that square, to represent the long range aspect. This would be like the anti-aircraft shot at the beginning of a battle. You would have one dice for every artillery but they would only hit ground units and only on a dice roll of one, and they would only get the free roll at the first round of battle.

I really like all the new added rules and changes. Italy to me does seem like it can be a game decider if played to its full potential. The only thing I do not really care for in the AA50 is the China rules. To me they are somewhat of a waste of time and are basically useless. And they really interfere with US being able to capture any country on the Asia continent. US does not have alot to capture and keep besides Japan itself and its islands. 8-)

That actually is correct based upon the interpalation of the Chinese rules.

I believe that since US / Allies can no longer capture Manchuria and use it properly, because it goes to China and they are basically useless, China should be allowed to "ignore that piece or destroy it. Of course this would have to be agreed upon by all players.

In the original game, US captures Manchuria and builds an IC there and then can build-up fleet/men to capture Japan, launching from Manchuria. In this version they have to come from accross the ocean as there is no country they can actually capture and build an IC on, therefore it falls on UK and Russia to deal with Japan the island, if you want to actually capture it. That actually means Japan is very difficult to capture, and usally the game ends with Victory Cities taken and Japan is usaully still alive and well. It is a bug to me as well.
:-P

Bjergmose has all the correct answers. If a carrier is sunk in that way, the planes can land on any friendly island, land or other carrier in the same sea zone. If not they are lost. 8-)

I was just wondering what others thought of Italy being in the AA50 game. Do you think it helps Germany as a seperate entity or do you think they should be kept together as the new revised edition coming out is supposed to have. 8-)

@Emperor:

Question:
US has a fleet w\TP in SZ62 and ground forces in Manchuria.  Japan buys a DD and places it in SZ62.  Can US destroy the TP and then pick up forces from Manchuria with the TP in sz62 and move them during Non combat move?  I say no.  They either leave the combat zone (move over) or they fight with the rest of the fleet (move over).

Yes you are correct. The thing to remember is transports can only load in friendly sea zones and if they were part of a sea battle or were forced to retreat in the combat movement phase, then their turn is done, they cannot come back and load once the battle is over. 8-)

@chunksoul:

i have a question about the suez canal

in previous versions you had to hold both sides of your canal at the start of your turn.

in this version can i capture both side of the canal then non combat through the canal ?

In the rule book for AA50, page 4 under canals it states that you cannot use a cannal on the turn you captured it. Also it does state that you must control both sides in oreder to contorl the Suez.
Hope this helps. 8-)

I truly believe that KUKF is only half correct.
I have played many games of A&A and the Xeno World at World series as well, and the true constant is that UK is too difficult to take early, because as soon as you make your intensions clear, next UK turn all they need to do is buy all men and you will not have enough to take it. Taking it on G1 is too tight. And after that UK can anticipate all your moves.
The reason I say it is half correct is that in my view you have to crush UK as much as possible as early as possible, except Britain, Canada and Australia. Take out as many of their naval pieces as you can and then the idea is for the Axis to take all of UK’s money and NO’s away so Germany is dominating in the money. An IC on France first turn is a great idea so G2 you buy at least 1 transport iand 1 sub in the Med to add to Italy’s fleet and help Italy take Africa, Middle East and then assist Japan to take away India if they are having trouble. Also it is import to note that Russia can then be attacked from the middle east with Italy or Germany. If the Axis can take control of the Med, and manage to capture Egypt early and hold it, so as to go deeper into Africa, along with taking Trans-Jordan and Gilbraltor, Italy now gets all of its NO’s and makes around 25 IPC’s per turn. Germany and Italy combine thier naval forces south of France and they each can then add one or two naval piece to their fleet each round. Once the fleet is large enough it can be moved on the same turn into the Atlantic beside France so as to reach Britain and/or America. If the Axis control the Atlantic and can add pieces every round to stay ahead of the Allies, they will win.
Germany should keep UK at bay and concentrate on acheiving its NO’s and then trying to get the upper hand on Russia, while planning its buys accordingly.
Japan needs to take out UK in India and south seas, push deep into China, and mount a significant force to go into Soviet far east and move forward towards Russia.
The Axis should try to avoid losing terittories they capture, as this slowing down plays into the Allis hand and prolongs the Axis advance and can stop it all together. 8-)

@frimmel:

@Panzer:

Thanks frimmel, I will see if I can locate them to check out. 8-)

Those books really establish the whole Extended Universe of Star Wars and pretty much any of the novels set after Ep. VI with Luke and company is established with those books. I know my local library has them and they are usually still available in the ‘Star Wars’ section of Walden’s and so on.

Frankly I think that whole section of those stores really owes its existence to the Zahn Books.

Careful with the Amazon link, the blurbs have spoilerish info.

I actually have a whole lot of Star Wars Novels which I bought on e-bay in a bundle and I have read around half of them so far, mostly the early ones before EP1, and have read only a couple of the newer ones as of yet. I checked and I have some of the Zahn books already, but have not yet read them. I will get to it and check them out. Thanks again.

Thanks frimmel, I will see if I can locate them to check out. 8-)