@barnee Thanks for making me feel techno-savvy! It is been some years since that last happened.
Zoom is free video conferencing s/w. So one player in the game sets up triple a and shares his screen with the rest. Control of the screen is given to whoever’s turn it is. We can also see and hear each other via the video / audio link.
@barnee That’s them. I have read all of them and love the way the Uhtred develops from a young hot head into a wily old warrior.
The BBC / Netflix series is difficult for lovers of the books to swallow at first. There are lots of changes to the story to get to Uhtred the warrior much more quickly than the books do. But then the series settles into a much more recognisable story and gets better and better. I particularly like the depiction of Alfred the Great. Unfortunately there are no plans to make more series.
@Wittmann said in 1914 NML TEAM GAME:
Battle in Sea Zone 112 Pacific Ocean
Britain attack with 1 cruiser
Germany defend with 1 battlecruiser and 1 transport
Britain roll dice for 1 cruiser in Sea Zone 112 Pacific Ocean, round 2 : 1/1 hits, 0.50 expected hits
Germany roll dice for 1 battlecruiser and 1 transport in Sea Zone 112 Pacific Ocean, round 2 : 0/1 hits, 0.67 expected hits
1 battlecruiser owned by the Germany lost in Sea Zone 112 Pacific Ocean
1 transport owned by the Germany lost in Sea Zone 112 Pacific Ocean
Britain win with 1 cruiser remaining. Battle score for attacker is 23
Casualties for Germany: 1 battlecruiser and 1 transport
You lucky blighter!!!
Our first post Covid BoB will be on the 10th October. :hand_with_index_and_middle_fingers_crossed: As usual our venue is in Derbyshire, UK.
Thus far we have 11 players, with space for another 2 at the venue. Those places will be allocated to those that come forward first. Since we have 4 listed players that have not yet responded it is possible that someone may be disappointed.
Typically we would run three games - one each of 1942, Anniversary and 1914 - for the day.
If anyone else wishes to join us then please either reply to this thread or drop me a PM.
Or come and join us at a Battle of Britain?! More difficult for you travel-wise, but more fun too!
A mechanised strike force able to sit back from the front and threaten more than one enemy territory can benefit R’s defence. The challenges are to be able to afford it and also not to need to commit it to forward defence where is might get pinned down. Nevertheless I would typically add one or two mechanised units each turn for as long as I feel able.
I don’t think anyone has mentioned this game before? So I thought I would! I have only played it once but I enjoyed it a lot and immediately bought it for myself.
The easiest way to describe it might be as a mix of A&A and Catan, with Greek mythology thrown in. Each island kingdom’s soldiers and fleets battle for military and naval supremacy, build universities, temples, forts, naval bases and metropolises, and compete for the favour of the gods and control of mythological creatures, such as the kraken and cyclops.
If you enjoy both A&A and Catan I would have thought this game would be a must.
The soldier and fleet sculpts are entertaining in themselves, particularly the Amazons - for some reason.:relaxed:
@Wittmann Has the Kaiser has rediscovered his martial spirit? Or stopped crying into his beer at least?
For various understandable reasons some attendees cancelled and we ended up with 6 players. So we played 2 games:
1. 1914
Played with 2 house rules: max 4 builds in India; land units move 2 if every territory is friendly. Powers were allocated at random:
CPs - Ste
Entente - Andrew (h0lym0nk) as GB, Italy & USA; Adam (Private-Panic) as F & R.
Which may have been a bit unfair as Ste had not played 1914 before!
R was able to consolidate it’s units and overpower a number of G & A-H attacks, eventually advancing into Galicia. G’s advances into France were successfully beaten back by F with GB’s help. And A-H were pushed out of Italy as it’s forces were diverted to the R front and to help G against F.
However, T had some success against GB, resisting GB attacks on Mesopotamia and advancing into Egypt. Also G went on the rampage in Africa, killing off most of the GB & F units sent to knock them out. G’s dreams of an African empire were short-lived, with the USA eventually arriving and creating their own instead.
G & GB navies cowered in their North Sea ports, neither able to find the courage to attack.
With R in Galicia, Italy advancing from the West and the arrival of the USA in Albania, Vienna was increasingly under siege. GB also eventually managed to push T out of Mesopotamia (with R help) and Egypt (supported by some Italian Infantry landings). Virtually all G’s forces were in the West facing F & GB incursions, but giving R space to expand.
The CP surrender was graciously accepted by the Entente!:blush:
2. Anniversary
Allies - Rob (Dran Black)
Axis - Dave played G; Simon as J; jointly played Italy
I was not in this game, but here is what I think I know!
J took India, but lost a naval battle with the USA in the Pacific. Furious J naval builds recovered some level of maritime parity, but at the cost of limited ground units being dispatched to Asia.
G struggled against R in the early stages, but by the end of the game had attained unit superiority on the eastern front. This was partly because some R units had headed south to recapture India.
The Allies managed to sink the Italian fleet, but at some cost. Consequently they only managed to take F once and promptly lost it to an Italian counter attack. In doing so they put their remaining Atlantic fleet in jeopardy.
G made significant incursions in Africa, but looked certain to lose them again, due to a GB factory in S Africa sending units north.
At the end neither side had sufficient advantage to claim victory. But it was agreed that the Axis were in a stronger position, with quite a lot more income, the possibility of making headway against R and the impending sinking of the Allied Atlantic fleet.
I invite my fellow players to post their own views on these games. Especially to correct my mistakes or fill in any gaps.
@Caesar-Seriona said in Mechanized Russia:
Any experienced player will agree that if USSR can buy anything else other than infantry, either Germany is not doing it’s job or USSR has Korea for some strange reason.
I think this is a self-fulfilling prophecy. If R only buys infantry its options are so limited as to mean that the only thing it can do is turtle a stack of infantry. Some mechanised units and some artillery in the mix can give Germany pause, as its advances must be sufficiently strong to withstand the teeth that Russia has, hopefully thereby allowing extra turn(s) before they arrive at the gates of Moscow. But Caesar-Seriona is correct in that non-infantry purchases are limited until such time as the allies are draining Germany’s eastern front of reinforcements. Limited but not non-existent I would say. For example 30 ipcs might buy 1 mech inf, 2 art and 6 infantry.
More controversially perhaps, I am also keen on ensuring Russia has the fighters to minimise losses during the trading of territory. An early fighter purchase may save quite a few ground unit losses. Of course it can also intercept a SBR.
@weddingsinger said in Mechanized Russia:
My first concern is that Germany can trade buffer territories much better than Russia since they’ve got lots of planes. So putting 6 shiny new tanks at risk for a counter attack after a successful attack is not my cup of tea.
And weddingsinger is right too. Russia will not want to advance expensive units into territories where they will be obliterated. I am a keen fan of strafing, albeit that this strategy holds its own risks.
@Witt and I have been playing this game and enjoying it a lot. Gets a good score on BGG: www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/206480/imperial-struggle
Two players battle as Britain vs France for domination of the globe in the 18th century - diplomatically, economically and militarily. Great game!
@Gargantua Are you letting the side down Garg?! That is usually my job!
Again 6 hardy souls braved the pandemic! We decided to play a game of 1914 so we could all participate in the same game.
1. 1914
Used 2 house rules: max 4 builds in India; land units move 2 if every territory is friendly. Powers were allocated at random:
CPs - Mike (Aftertaste) as AH & T; Adam (Private-Panic) as G
Entente - Andrew (h0lym0nk) as Italy & USA; Mark (Credulous) as F; Jon (jon1988) as R; Dave as GB.
R was able to consolidate virtually all it’s units into Poland and so put the fear of God into AH & G, who countered with almost equal stacks in Silesia (G) and Galicia (AH and some G). The Entente decided to pursue a G first strategy and R advanced it’s stack into E Prussia. The CPs rubbed their hands with glee! While this might create a possibility of the Entente capturing Berlin it certainly gave the CPs an easy route to Moscow. G put everything it could into E Prussia to fight a battle in which it might have had a slight advantage, so as to prevent the R stack retreating. In order to do this G accepted the need to fall back on the Western Front.
The battle in E Prussia resulted in quite a few more losses for R than G. The dwindling R stack was stuck there without reinforcements while G could add units easily if it wished.
Meanwhile F pressed forward against G’s western borders, reaching the Ruhr. Perhaps F had a slight advantage in that territory and it also had a sizeable stack in Munich to follow up. Unfortunately F lost badly in the Ruhr, effectively ensuring that G would recapture with sufficient force to stall the F attack.
G took out the GB North Sea fleet for the loss of only 2 subs.
Turkey kicked GB out of Mesopotamia and captured Egypt.
All of this in just 2 turns.
The Entente abjectly surrendered!
2. 1941
With some hours of the day left to play we decided to follow with a game of 1941. Dave had to leave so we now had 5 players. Only house rule was an additional GB destroyer off Canada to balance the game. Sides allocated at random.
Allies - Mike (Aftertaste) as GB; Andrew (h0lym0nk) as R; Mark (Credulous) as US
Axis - Adam (Private-Panic) as G; Jon (jon1988) as J.
The Axis decided on a strategy of jointly pressing hard on Moscow, probably linking up in the Caucasus. And this is what they did!
However, a GB & US fleet was established off the coast of Western Europe by the end of turn 1. Normally this takes longer so G was not happy! By the end of turn 2 the Allies had 7 units in Western Europe, including a US and a R fighter, with a combined defensive power of 19. G decided to attack this with the 8 units it had available, with an attacking power of 21. I have just used triple a to discover an attacking success probability of 70%. Risky. But absolute disaster!
Clearly it still hurts!
In the meantime J captured China, the Spice Islands and the Phillipines.
Aware that G would be unable to afford units for the Caucasus given Allied Pressure on Berlin the Axis decided that their chances on Moscow were not going to improve. G’s sacrificial attack was another dice disaster, doing far less damage to R than J needed if its follow-up was to have any chance of success.
After J duly undertook its kamikaze assault, the Axis tearfully surrendered.
@comet I am from the UK and cannot read your post but I do know three forum members from Germany - Aequitas et Veritas, Elrood & JDOW. You could always try contacting them using the chat facility.
@salocinx An IC has its own AA guns. These defend against an SBR but not against an attack on the territory.
If an AA gun unit is present it does the opposite. It defends against an attack on the territory involving air units, but not against an SBR.
@CorporalClegg Hey Corp. Unless you have something better to do with the bombers then they are worth it. Each bomber on average throws 3.5. So average ipc benefit per bomber is 3.5 x 5/6 = 2.92 damage less bomber lost cost of 1/6 x 12 = 2. Which is a 0.92 ipc gain per bomber on average. But when the AAA keep throwing 1s it does not feel like it!!!
@Wittmann That’s not where the Maginot Line was witt. Get it right!!!
We had 9 players and ran three games. It was good to feel that the event was getting back to normal after Covid. :grin:
It’s hard to play in a game yourself and also follow what is happening in the others, so I can only hope that this battle report is accurate. If not, perhaps we shall see some corrections from maligned players!
1914
CPs - Andrew
Entente - Ste & Rob
The CPs followed a Moscow first strategy, with G and AH combining to push R back. T also advanced on India. The Entente surrendered when Moscow and India both fell.
Anniversary
Two games were played on the day as the first was over so quickly.
Game 1
Axis - Mark (J) & Lee (G and I)
Allies - Darren
This game was declared an Axis victory when Moscow fell.
Game 2
Axis - Lee
Allies - Darren (R and USA) & Mark (GB)
In the last round of play J launched a powerful attack on India, but lost 5 of 8 planes to AA fire. Disaster! Although India was taken J was no longer able to compete against the USA in the Pacific. But the clincher for the allies was GB’s capture of Berlin.
1942.2
Axis - Adam
Allies - Dave (GB) & Colin (R and USA)
Following an absolutely awful run of luck in the first turn J was in a mess and G already facing a North Atlantic Allied fleet. G did manage to grab and hold Leningrad but began to struggle to reinforce the eastern front as it fought off ever more powerful allied landings in the west. Meanwhile J lost the money islands and felt sorry for itself.
However, G then managed to pull off an opportunistic raid into Moscow and pinched R’s treasury, which at least shut up the Axis player’s complaints for a while!
Then J unexpectedly found itself with even odds on the Combined GB/USA Pacific fleet and decided to risk it. Superior J tactics and fighting spirit delivered a glorious J victory.
G also gained an even odds attack on Moscow and, inspired by J’s example, launched an all-out assault. Again the Axis won with significant forces surviving.
The Allies surrendered. The Axis decided that the dice were not so bad after all!
@CrazyIvan Hi. Our forum colleague Panther is very helpful on such matters. I see that he has posted a link for help on such matters, though, and suggest you use that. Here is his forum post with the link:
https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/32516/triplea-has-an-own-dedicated-forum
@Faramir Having earlier in this thread doubted the value of tanks I would not go as far as Faramir. They do have a value, which is to reduce casualties when in attack. If they accompany an infantry / artillery stack for two attacks they have recovered their cost.
Plus that reduced casualties can be vital to sustaining forward movement while reinforcements lag behind, as already noted above.
