Posts made by Sankt Hallvard

@Mork:

EX: i have 10inf in western US. can i use their combat move into the central US, then in non-combat move them again into Eastern US,

or

can they only make a combat move if they are combating?

also can transports load/unload during non-combat move phase?

thank you.

1. No
2. Yes
3. Yes

Check out: http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=6992.0

No.  :-)

You answered your own question, they need to control the canal at the beginning of their turn. To overcome such obstacles it’s often a good idea to have your ally(Japan) take t-j on their turn so that Germany can sail through. I often find myself keeping some british troops stationed with the US troops in/around Egypt just to be able to close the channel to avoid such sea battles.

It’s perfectly ok, in any case the sub will either be dead or submerged so the AC is free to NCM into sz8 to pick up the aircraft.

@mr.:

The shortest distance is 5 from sz35 to sz52. Is the carrier allowed to sail for example to sail to sz49(SUI), and then the fighter takes of, and lands on the american carrier in sz52, without engaging in combat???

A fighter has a move of 4 spaces, no carrier can change that. However, the shortest distance to sz52 is 4 spaces so feel free to land your uk fig on the us carrier. (37-47-45-52)

@cyan:

@Sankt:

Never retreat! Never surrender!

the way you have me libetaing china for you mr. us i would think your motto was never enage never attack.  :lol:

• Mr. russia

LOL, I know I wanted you to attack china but that was before Japan had moved. I would never have you go banzai with a pack of infantry for the sake of taking out 2 jap inf. And with the counter bound to come it’s not going to look so good for the allies.  :cry:

Never retreat! Never surrender!

@xenon:

I don´t think so. A blitz into an unoccupied enemy territory doesn´t count as a combat move.

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=ah/faqs/axisrevised#movement:

“I attack and capture an enemy land territory in combat. Now, during non-combat movement, can my tanks that weren’t involved in combat move through the newly-captured territory and enter a second friendly territory on the far side?
Yes, this is legal.”

If you blitz to an unoccupied enemy territory it is indeed a combat move. A “blitz” to a FRIENDLY territory is a non-combat move, though I got a verbal beating a while back for calling that a “blitz”.  :-)

I’m sure there can be scenarios where it would be advantageous to roll one round and then decide on whether to press attacks or retreat. But to me this creates more problems than it “solves”. Using the in-house dicey would be even harder than it already is if you have to make one post for each round of combat for each battle in succession… Let’s face it guys, we’re not playing poker with a million dollars as the prize.

Personally I follow a gentlemen’s code when playing, I would never exploit rules or tamper with posting order/dice to get a better result for myself. And even though I usually dislike and mistrust people in general I wouldn’t think otherwise of my fellow gamers online. If the situation arises I’ll certainly roll each combat according to the rules. Or if my opponent insists on it from the start.

@OutsideLime:

PS -  And I think your opponent will certainly attack Midway.  He definitely wants to kill that Bomber now.  Maybe it wasn’t a good idea to leave it in reach of anything.

I could just as easily have landed it in safety in w.us but decided to push my luck by using midway. sz60 is no longer safe for his trn(he has only 2 left now, the other with the fleet in sz37). He will either have to attack me at midway or move out of reach of my bomber. If he attacks I still have a 60% chance to survive with the bomber. Certainly worth the gamble for him by throwing 2 inf at me, but if he fails it will also result in him losing another trn.

I feel that taking out 3 Jap trns in round 3 is a game-breaker. It is a huge setback for the axis, it will take a lot of smart moves and some help from the dice to get back into the action. This was caused by me being “lucky” in the sense that 3 trns should more often than not come out victorious from such a battle. Personally I wouldn’t trust 3 trns to do the job so it could be argued(IMO) that my opponent made a misjudgement.

But the second part of my operation is just as risky. Risking a 15 ipc unit(which I probably will replace at one point or another if lost) to get a unit worth 8. Here my reasoning is that by sending that trn in(at 40% success) he is risking his trn and it is NOT sending units towards russia. A failure also means he will not be able to evacuate his canadian landing party. His purchase must also take into account that my bomber can survive so buying 3 new trns without protection may prove costly if I can repeat my dice rolls. Actually I think he is more of a daredevil than me if he does not buy a capital ship with the new trns. (Unless he skips trns altogether for one round)

These examples to show just how intricate some decisions can be and what great part the dice can play in smaller but crucial battles, especially early round sea battles.

Let me drop a bone to you guys… this just happened in a 5-player game I’m playing here on the forums.

It’s US3 and Japan has just dropped off units to w.can leaving 3 trns in sz63. My bomber is stationed in novo and I decide to be a daredevil and give it a go. All 3 trns sunk and bomber lives. Landing on midway with 1 inf for protection. Japan also has 1 trn in sz60 and 2 inf on Japan, no air in range. Now…

Was I “skilled” or “lucky”? To have my bomber survive has only a 22% chance. What about the landing spot? He can bring 2 inf vs my 1 inf, 1 bomber and I’m probably going to lose the inf before the bomber. Am I skilled or taking too huge a risk? Consider that that trn by attacking midway gains no IPCs, abstains from sending forces to the mainland for one round and if the inf fails to capture or kill the bomber it is a sitting duck for a new bombing mission. (No capital ships in range) Even by staying in sz60 a new capital ship will have to be built to protect it as no other ships are in range.

As I have no desire to have my head bit off again I’ll abstain from comments but I’ve submit my vote…

@DarthMaximus:

I think it only takes about 2-4 games to go from noob all the way to average player (assuming you have some sort of A&A experience, ie you played Classic).

I think it takes another 8-10 games to approach the good level.  On both sides you get more comfortable with the KGF and you’ve probably seen some games that are KJF too.

The difficult one is going from a good player to a great player, and that one doesn’t get a number.  Maybe you get there maybe you don’t.

This is exactly what I’ve been saying all along, we just draw different conclusions. Someone falling into the “great player” category will win 90% of his games against the “noob” based on skill. In that respect it’s fair to say it’s 90% skill and 10% luck. I introduced the difficult term “equally skilled opponents”. That means between two “great players” luck will be the deciding factor by as much as 90%.

I also think that the leap from “noob” to “average” is a lot bigger than the step from “good” to “great”. Therefore a game between a good player and a great player will also be mainly decided by luck.

I don’t know what kind of players will enter your league, but I guess you will have players from all categories thus making a win percentage of 90% possible. But after just one season those “noobs” will be average players at minimum and unless you introduce new players next season no one will be able to get a 90% win percentage. Maybe 70% since some people never learn.  :-P

I’d also like to state for the record that I was exaggerating when I made my “10 skill, 90% luck” statement. Although I was aiming to kick some of you guys off your high horses I didn’t mean to get you that upset.

@squirecam:

But dont say I make assumptions about you, when you make many assumptions about who I have played and how good they are.

Are you disagreeing with me that attacking UKR with 2 bid units is risky?? If your not, then what I said was true. USSR has strategies to win without getting that air G1.

If you think its not risky, (and the attack is 50/50) then what is??

Don’t make it seem like I’m the one attacking you on a personal level. Your posts did all what I just said, although in a more or less “subtle” manner. I guess that’s ok on a forum, but it’s not good tone. If you said that to anyone face to face you’d be considered rude.

I totally agree attacking Ukraine is risky, even without a bid. Standalone there is a 90% chance to take the territory so that’s acceptable, the reason it is risky is the value of the units used(and probably lost) and what you lose in the w.russia attack which is considerably weaker without the extra art/arm. I’ve often done the w.russia/belo instead because it feels a lot safer. But if I could get average dice every time I would choose to hit ukraine instead since the payoff of a successful attack is so much higher.

@DarthMaximus:

Squire and Sankt, lets make sure we keep this a friendly debate.   :-)

Yay, my first moderation. And me out of all people, I’m all sunshine.  :cry:

If you are condescending me, belittling me or making assumptions about me or bestowing views upon me that I don’t have you WILL hit my trigger-values. Which is why I put pleasantries aside and stated the obvious, he’s an arrogant *****. Leaving the ball dead now, eternal sunshine, happy thoughts…  :-)

@squirecam:

So? If you cant take out that fighter, you cant win??  You are suddenly in a huge hole going to be beaten??  Please.

There are several strategies which dont require a UKR attack R1. And attacking it in the face of a bid risks failure.

And since the Origins player in question has won a few games, and been in the masters at GCI, he’s probably “pretty good”. You have no idea whether he is good or not.

Continue to believe its 90% luck. I dont care. But for the new players who come here looking for advice, know that this game is skill based, and you should spend time learning it and learning strategy rather than quitting on G1 after minor setbacks.

You’re an arrogant. And I’m not even gonna add “IMHO” to that.

You are no doubt a better and more experienced player than me, though. But unlike your pro at origins I’d smack you good with 3 inf, 1 art, 3 arm in ukraine at R1. Especially when your counter fails miserably as you said, that means you’ve lost at least 7 units on the counter. And your Egypt strike went sour… There is no coming back from that, you are either too arrogant or too optimistic to believe that.

DM Edit.

@froodster:

You can be “relatively equal” can’t you? Or does every single game prove that the winner is the best and the loser is an idiot? Would you say that about the game between Switch and JSP?

Much like 1984 he sees himself as more equal than others.

A game between switch and jsp would, unless one or both decide to “go experimental”, be decided by 90% luck and 10% skill.

A game between you and me would be decided by 90% luck and 10% skill.

A game between me and Mr SifadyasCam here would be decided by 10% luck and 90% skill. That mass of “skill” bringing me victory, of course.  :wink:

@Mork:

oh wow, lots of stuff… well first of all thanks for the debate, it seems as though you guys really feeel as it being a useful seazone, but then again the longest game ive played was only 5hours long, so we havent gotten to the piont were that might become useful. (you dont get troops in brazil originally do you?)

Hey mate, I was only raving on in a humorous way. No one is seriously arguing it’s an important seazone. Brazil stays empty in 99% of all games and there isn’t much naval cruising going on down there. It might as well have been a mutual zone between sz24 and sz26 in terms of tactics/strategy. We’re just having some fun at the expense of your “silly post”.  :-)

@squirecam:

I could care less whether you “buy” it. It happens. From personal experience, an Origins opponent took Ukraine with USSR, AFTER I added 2 inf as a bid, with NO GERMAN HITS. The German counter into Ukraine was REPULSED. Egypt was empty and Germany had no fleet due to the forced UKR counter attack.

I won that game. Not because the dice magically turned, but because I was better. Sorry that you quit instead of taking the opportunity to treat it as a challenge, “how well can I do given these conditions”.

Regarding your opponent at Origins, he was clearly in a different league. Even I would have smacked your bum with those results from G1.

Disagree. Attacking UKR, (especially with a bid, but even without) is a risky move. You do so, you run the risk of losing or the dice going badly. However, had you moved all your troops into west russia, you have an overwhelming chance to kill the Germans in ONE ROUND, and REDUCE the hits coming back at you.

I say that the WR only strategy is better. Therefore, why people who use it probably win more than you do.

Similarly, attacking the BB wth 3 Fighters + sub is MUCH different than attacking with the BB+trans+sub+fighters and taking Gibraltar. Again, a better strategy.

Huh? I’d think the german player would move his troops while you scramble in w.russia. R1 is your only shot at taking out that German fig. Whoever said I don’t win a lot? Stop making assumptions about my play from my views on luck. I have yet to play someone doing just the WR attack, though. Maybe it’s superior, but I doubt it. Belo would be a better solution and Ukraine even more so.

If you think attacking the bb with the med fleet is a better move regardless I’m doubting your strategic assessments. Every move in this game has consequences. Bringing the fleet will result in a stronger attack, but with that a lot weaker at Egypt. (or do you forego it?)

I use both approaches, btw. I can’t tell whether one is superior to the other, there are way too many variables in each game to get a true feeling. You also haven’t mentioned the mental aspect of the game with one word. Just like in poker bluffing is a major part as well. I may be unwilling to sacrifice my German airforce to sink your UK navy but I can trick you into believing I will regardless. (Or you can call my bluff and I will come out losing) You can be as fluid, flexible and adaptable as no one else, ultimately dice will decide most games. That does not mean that a number of players playing 1000 games between them one may have a win percentage of 80% and another 50%. However, I seriously doubt anyone would have such a high win percentage as 80%. During all those games his opponents would adjust their play along the way and even if they could not copy the master 100% luck would mostly even the results out.

90% luck, 10% skill.