ouch. bad dice can be extremely frustrating, hats off to hobbes for not getting down about it. i can see from this description that you guys are playing on a whole other level compared to me, i’m pretty sure i couldn’t’ve won against either of you with loaded dice! in fact i’m terrified to play against a human at all on triplea, but i’ll get there i’me sure.
i feel like i had a point when i started this reply, but i’ve lost it somewhere between then and now… sorry about the ramble!
they’re trying to be nice, silver bullet, but your explanation was open to interpretation and could have been read in a way that gives the wrong meaning of the rules. krieghund’s post was needed to make things explicit, and is not misunderstandable the way yours is. of course it makes sense to you, because you know exactly what you mean. someone else is another story. there’s no reason to make a big deal out of someone clarifying your response, they’re just trying to avoid giving a new player the wrong idea.
ok that makes perfect sense. thank you for taking the time to explain it to me! i will definitely try the R1 sub buy next game and see how it works for me. it’s a little scary spending the money down there, that’s a big chunk of my defense budget
germany has over 80% odds to win in anglo egypt round one anyway though, and in all my games that BB doesn’t make it past round 2 even without russian sub. so it still seems like whats gonna happen with the R1 sub is germany takes egypt anyway and then loses the BB to russia instead of UK or US. i still need help understanding why russia needs to take that upon herself to deal with the BB instead of focusing on survival/beating back german ground forces
@Bunnies:
Re: using 2 tanks vs 3 tanks at Ukraine / Ukraine attack
Yeah but then they just wipe out three of your tanks no problem and with two tanks on WR, it also helps Russia win faster in WR and helps protect against the counter. Besides, it’s a risk for Germany since there’s so many missions for those german fighters. Either way is good. I think that division comes down to personal preference.
Take a R1 sub buy. You want to land your Russian fighters at Caucasus to threaten the German battleship unless it sails west and takes Gibraltar with transport (to prevent UK air from whacking the battleship and transport) or spends IPCs on a defensive navy and stays at Southern Europe.
Failure to take Ukraine means an additional 2 German tanks that can hit Caucasus. If Caucasus is hit, Russian fighters will be lost, and the threat to the German battleship eliminated. Russia can safety and abandon Caucasus, but then the Germans whack Anglo Egypt and grab Caucasus with 1 inf (or whatever minimal forces), making the R1 sub buy fairly useless.Assuming UK recaptures Caucasus on UK1, Russia can land fighters on Caucasus on R2, to threaten the German fleet for R3, but on J2, a Japanese BB and AC can join the German Mediterranean fleet, and/or Germany can take countermeasures. True, Japan might not be in a position to reinforce, but if that were the case, US2 would be able to threaten the un-reinforced German battleship with 2 fighters 1 bomber anyways. (UK1 aircraft carrier/2 destroyer buy; US1 flies 2 fighters to UK carrier, US bomber to Archangel, R2 reinforces US bomber with 3 infantry, UK2 moves carrier to Algeria, US2 moves fleet to Algeria; US fighters on UK carrier in range of Mediterranean, joined by US bomber). This hits the entire Mediterranean.
(Hobbes mentioned in another thread the UK2 attack - UK bomber into position, UK fighter to French West Africa, UK1 India carrier southwest plus fighter for 2-3 fighter plus bomber, but contingent on Japan and German moves.)
So the strong point of the R1 sub buy (threatening German battleship before G2) is undermined if Ukraine is not taken, esp. considering the possibility of J2 reinforcements.
As far as risk - of course it’s all risky; an early German attack on a 6-7 unit Caucasus is risky, dropping the G1 Anglo Egypt attack is risky, if the German attack on Caucasus succeeds, the UK counter is risky, if the UK counter is not taken, the weakening of Japan’s J1 attacks is risky, if Russia attempts to recapture Caucasus, that will also be risky, and if Russia does not attempt to recapture, that will be riskiest of all!
There are dangerous behind every dice pip. :-o
“Remember what Bilbo used to say: It’s a dangerous business, Frodo, going out your door. You step onto the road, and if you don’t keep your feet, there’s no knowing where you might be swept off to."
i’m a beginner, and i don’t know if i understand the R1 sub buy. is the idea to chase the German BB out of the med by threatening it with 2 fighters and a sub R2? If so, i feel like in all the games i’ve played Russia has quite enough on its plate and too few fighters already without trying to deal with German navy… isn’t it better to just let UK/US worry about that, since they’re more equipped to do it? (and indeed, if i understood the point of a Russian Mediterranean sub, to force the BB out, they’ll end up being the ones to kill it anyway, right?)
just though about it a bit more, by placing R1 sub, it forces G to sac the BB if it wants to attack Anglo-Egypt, since russia can immediately strike with the sub + 2 fighters… is that the reason to take a R1 sub buy?
hope you can explain this to me.
Just sticking to the 42 board -
America - whiskey
Germany - Beer
Russia - vodka
Japan - sake
UK- Gin
i say UK should be sherry and america should be more specifically bourbon, to be more distinctly native =)
i’ll use it next game for sure, thanks for that!
wait, so the number of pieces DOES limit how many ICs can be on the board?
well we’re all just getting into the game, so these won’t give you any strategically feasible ideas. i don’t know if i remember quite right, BUT as japan i had one in manchuria and one in shanghai, UK had one in india, and US was wanting to build one somewhere but didn’[t have a model. now that i am counting i think either i am forgetting one or we’ve lost a model. either way, it was pretty much a shambles, the IC in manchuria ended up being a total waste of money, i don’t think i ended up ever dropping a unit in there. and i took the IC in india from britain.
that was the game where we learned that dropping IC’s all over the place doesn’t work well.
which map is just the normal AA42 version? i see tons of maps but can’t find the ‘real’ game in there.
@Bunnies:
Which would you rather have? The Nemesis Weapon of Mixed Destruction? Or . . . The Nemesis Weapon of Mixed Destruction With Puppy package?
in my experience, the puppy IS the Nemesis Weapon of Mixed Destruction.
wouldn’t it be great if some gracious soul reworked that as a java applet and hosted it on this site? then we could just come here and voila, easy keeping track of everything!
i actually ran out of ICs last game, using AA42, so there’s a thought.
well, i tried looking for the answer before i made this post, unsuccesfully. but i have browsed some more and run across the answer. oops! i ask that my ignorance be suffered with patience :|
I also have a question about subs. hi btw, i’m a rookie A&A player, nice forums!
anyhow, my question concerns fighters and subs. specifically, if a sub were to attack a carrier and hit, what becomes of the planes? i understand that fighters on the carrier are allowed to defend, but they can’t hit subs. so are they considered cargo in this case, or are they defending, but unable to hit? if they are defending, do they die because of having nowhere to land (the sub can’t hit them) or may they land on an adjacent friendly zone?
i saw in the rulebook pg 27
a fighter based on a defending carrier must land on the same carrier if possible. If that carrier is destroyed in combat, it must try to land elsewhere. It must land on a different friendly carrier in the same sea zone, move 1 space to a friendly territory, island, or aircraft carrier or be destroyed
is this my answer? it’s a little unclear to me. thanks for anyone who can give a ruling!