Posts made by SEP

Thanks for the explanations everyone, I understand it now.  A good way to help novice players out a bit.  I’ve probably played a hundred or more games of the classic version and that would have been helpful at the beginning.  Unfortunately the two that taught us were more interested in winning than properly teaching the game.  Once I purchased the game myself things changed dramatically.

My teaching method for newbies is to basically get them up to my speed as quickly as possible.  This means that the first game or two I will point out things, even if it is detrimental to my own side, so that they learn for the future.  That way they have a fair chance and enjoy the game and want to play again.  After a game or two they’re normally doing well on their own and I can enjoy a good challenging game.

Did the same thing when I was teaching my son Starfleet Battles.  Now he more than gives me a tough fight and in fact wins quite a bit.  His Kzinti has beaten my Lyran five time in the last seven games!  So this bid idea will be of use if I need it for newbies in the future.  Good idea.  Thanks again.

YG, very nice job.  I downloaded them this morning and had Staples print them out for me.  I have my own cutting board so now I’m all set.  Thank you sir.
:-)

Gotcha, thank you.  :-)

Thank you both.  I’ve only had the opportunity to play 1942.2 a couple of times now.  Do a lot of folks consider it slanted towards the Axis?  I played Allies both times and felt pretty solid with them each time.

I could see making various adjustments to start everyone off on an equal footing (for the most part).  For example, you could adjust the value of some territories, particularly capitals so that everyone starts off with equal IPC’s.  And you could do the same with changing neutral territories into territories owned by a specific nation at the start.  For example, France could own Spain and Portugal as well as Switzerland if necessary (or give it to Italy if necessary).  Italy could get Yugo, Bulgaria, Greece and Crete.  You’ve also got the Middle East and Mongolia for China ANZAC as needed.  And then there is also South America which would be interesting if whoever owns it is against the U.S.

Only thing you’d have to do is either nix China altogether or buy units for them to use.  Might be easier to nix them and that way you have an even eight powers.

You could allow the players to make their own alliances (and also whether or not to be true to those alliances i.e. they can do some back stabbing if the opportunity presents itself) or you could draw for your partners.

If you have multiple players, who operates the neutrals?

They say the only stupid question is the one that goes unasked, I hope that’s true  :-)

In many different threads I see the term ‘bid’ being used i.e. the allies were awarded a bid and so forth.  Maybe I missed that in the rules, or perhaps that is something outside the rules?  What is a bid exactly?  Thanks folks.  :-)

http://starfleetgames.com/

Starfleet Battles started in 1979.  To say it’s an in-depth game would be an understatement.  It isn’t difficult to play but the rule book is 224 pages long…and that’s the basic game.  It is based on TOS (the original series) of star trek and has vastly expanded upon it.  The advanced game (Advanced Missions) adds quite a bit more to the game and then there are a plethora of modules that add empires, ships, weapons systems etc to the game.

I’d suggest starting with the basic set which contains, IIRC, the Federation, Klingons, Romulans, Tholians, Orions and the Kzinti.  Basic will have a small number of ships for each to try out such as heavy cruisers, light cruisers and frigates.  If you like it then the next step is Advanced and modules C1-C3 which add Lyran, Gorn, Hydran, ISC and WYN.  But there are many more empires including Carnivon, Paravian, Peladine, Borak, Nicozian and that’s just the Alpha Octant.  There is also the Omega Octant which has multiple empires.  Each has a different type of ship and different weapons systems.

There is a LOT of tactics in this game and a lot of subtle nuances.  It is NOT fast paced for the most part, although that’s not to suggest it drags along.  What I’m saying is that the more experienced you get the more things you’ll find you can do with your ship.  There’s been 36 years of tactics developed by the players such as the Kaufman retrograde, Mizia effect, saber dancing, knife fighting, hack-n-slash, plasma ballet, Gorn anchor and one I developed called the Carnivon b!tch slap.

There are national tournaments (I reached the finals in a couple of them).  Biggest drawbacks are that the owning company is small by comparison to companies like WOTC and such.  If you walk into a game/hobby shop they’re very likely to know what Axis and Allies is but look at you like you have a third eye if you ask for SFB.  And the games heyday has come and gone since the early 2000’s.  Back in it’s heyday it was one of, if not the biggest draw at places like Origins.  And they still do Council of Five Nations every year.

If you get into it and have any questions let me know.  I have almost all the material they’ve put out over the years which means I have all the empires and ships from Stellar Domination Ships down to fighters and everything inbetween.   A&A and SFB are my two favorite strategy/tactics games. 
:-)

@Young:

The introduction of the Mech Infantry at 4 IPCs allows for the increase to tanks and the separation of value between land units. If tanks were 5 IPCs… nobody would buy mech infantry or even artillery for that matter.

You don’t feel the combined arms benefit of artillery or the blitz capability of mech infantry would be enough that people would still purchase it?

I’m just curious as the value of several other units have gone down but their benefits remained the same or were even slightly enhanced (such as a 2 hit battleship and aircraft carrier).  Not suggesting 6 IPC is wrong, just curious if anyone just went with 5 IPC out of habit.

In 1942.1 they were kept at 5 IPCs while their attack/defense values were bumped up to 3/3. There was a lot of howling over that as a lot of players thought that made tanks way overpowered. Strange that 1 IPC can make such a difference.

Starts to add up when you buy in bulk  :-D

No one plays SFB?  Either FTF or SFBOL?

Having played classic since 1986 I’m use to tanks costing 5 IPC.  Now that I’m playing 1942.2 and soon 1940 Global I see that tanks are now 6 IPC.  And I understand that the attack/defense values are now the same whereas in classic they defend like infantry.

Does anyone still use 5 IPC in the non-classic editions for simplicity?  Maybe I’m just use to 5 IPC (though I’m digging the lower costs for the other units).  :wink:

I’m looking forward to it.  This will be the most complex version of A&A I’ve played.  Reading through the 1940 rules as well as looking at YG’s channel is helping with the subtle nuances of this version.  Personally I like the complexities of a game such as this.  I also play Star Fleet Battles which is about as complex a game as you can get (rule book is as thick as a small phone book).

So yep, looking forward to it.  And I like the size of the board!  :-)

Well I heeded everyone’s advice.  Last week I received all the mech infantry and tac bombers I needed from HBG for the five powers in the 1942.2 game I bought.  I was able to obtain both 1940 boards inexpensively (but with no units).  So I bit the bullet and went back to HBG and bought units for the four minor powers.  I took a look at the starting OOB for all four and then made an estimate as to what I realistically would need.  Which means I didn’t go crazy on battleships for everyone  :wink:

I did get France a battleship because I thought it was cool (even if it never gets used) and I bought France, Italy and ANZAC each an aircraft carrier because they were inexpensive.  But mostly what was needed with a tad extra.  About $45 all together so we’ll see if I chose wisely on the pieces I needed.  I figure in the advent that I need an extra troop or transport or whatever then the classic pieces will come to the rescue.  But by in large everyone will have the traditional colors.

I figure all-in-all I saved the price of one full game going this route.  We’ll see if that’s the case.  Anyway, looking forward to receiving the boards and pieces and getting a game going.  Figure next week all should arrive which gives me time to reread all the 1940 global rules and take another look at YG’s YT videos which have been a big help.

I agree that it isn’t, but sometimes a bit of realism needs to be suspended in order to create a game mechanic.  In Star Fleet Battles we call this envoking Handwaveium.  :-D  How else can you explain a Lyran Expanding Sphere Generator not having an effect on plasma torpedoes?  Which btw, they do in our HR FTF games on a 2:1 basis.  :wink:

I may have the opportunity to obtain both 1940 boards (boards only-no pieces).  But currently I have only the 1942.2 pieces plus the tactical bombers & mech infantry units for each of the five 1942.2 powers I purchased from HBG.  I may fork over the cash at some point for the minor powers for the 1940 global game.  Until then I’m curious if anyone has developed a functional OOB for the five major powers used in the 1942.2 game to be used on a 1940 global board?

That’s an interesting idea.  Indeed, the actual history justifies fighting for specific islands and this would help to reinforce that as well as promote action in the Pacific.  Something to ponder….

Putting together a 1940 Global board.  I don’t have French, Italian, Chinese or ANZAC pieces.  But I do have the units from two classic sets I’ve had for decades.  Trying to do this as frugally as possible.  Here’s what I’m thinking;

For Italy I’ll use the classic grey German pieces (since the new German pieces are black).  For France I’ll use the classic Russian brown (they differ in shape/tint from the new Russian pieces).  For ANZAC

@Baron:

@SEP:

So I’m leaning on the as-is air bases that work with air transport and the naval bases that repair ships.  Scramble is still up for discussion.

One HR I used from Knp or Oztea, I don’t remember, is to allow 1 Fg scramble per Victory City.
(So, Germany could protect any ship in Baltic Sea with 2 Fgs if they can place 1 in Germany and 1 in Karelia.)

I played this with some variations and I can say that allowing 2 Fgs to scramble from UK changes the game dynamics too much IMO.

So, an Air Base put in the set-up at no cost which allows 1 Fighter to scramble isn’t unbalancing.
More than 1 can create some balance issues.

However, one of my next step (to play-test) is to allow 1 Fg scramble from Victory City and also to buy an Air Base at 10 IPCs (cost adjustment due to 1942.2 lower economy) which provides also 1 Fighter scramble.

So, if UK player buy an Air Base, he can defend the UK’s surrounding SZs with 2 Fighters, instead of only 1 from VC.

---

On balance issue:
Don’t forget that anything which allows to scramble 2 Fighters creates a similar effect as bringing 1 Full Carrier in a SZ, without any vulnerability to submarine. You get the best high defensive unit without the additional cost to bring a Carrier with enough escorting unit.
And, even if you destroyed both in a turn, you can built 2 new Fighters every turn as SZ air cover, without additional cost.

In 1942.2, the balance between UK and Germany about protecting any invading fleet (from any side) is pretty close in the first few rounds.

Hope this can help.

I like that quite a bit.  Sounds like a 1942.2 Global is coming along nicely.  Figure my HGB units should be arriving today or tomorrow so I’m kinda itching to put everything that’s been discussed to the litmus test.  We’ll probably start with the air/naval bases ‘as-is’ to get our feet wet, but if you do your 10IPC purchase option I’d like to hear how it went.
:-)

@Black_Elk:

Despite my reservations, a nerfed base might be fun, if you can find rules you like that work for the map scale. One possible approach, if you want to pursue a full redesign of the game, would be to include them, but not as units for purchase.

This sounds like it may be a viable option to begin with.  We’ve been discussing the addition of adding an air transport in another thread.  One proposal offered involved them being used around the air bases.  From KNP7765:

Attack 0, Defense 0, Move 6, Cost 8
Subject to AA fire
Can move 1 paratrooper in combat move to enemy territory and land in any friendly territory. MUST load at an air base.
Can move 2 infantry in non-combat move to any friendly territory with an air base. MUST load at an air base.
Can move 1 infantry in non-combat move from any friendly territory to any other friendly territory. Does NOT need an air base.
If transport planes are in a territory that is attacked and all friendly combat units are destroyed and there are enemy combat units(s) remaining, transport planes are automatically destroyed. (same as sea transports)

This would give a purpose for an air base if the extra move component was removed.

As far as naval, the ability to repair BB and CV is fairly substantial in-and-of-itself.  I’ve read the scramble rules.  It can be tried to see how it does on the 1942.2 board.  It can always be nixed if needed.  The extra movement can be nixed as well from the get-go perhaps to maintain balance.

In this way the bases do have a purpose.  Perhaps not enough of a purpose to go out and buy one, but if as you suggest you go with the starting bases and allow no future purchases then they are fine.  In other words they are useful enough to have because you start with some, but not useful enough to purchase more.  So in the 1942.2 Global game you learn to use what you start with.

If we want to discuss including the extra movement point…

On the 1940 Global map a strategic bomber leaving London (M7) can get all the way to Evenkiyskiy.  On the 1942.2 map, the same M7 SB, using the same route can get to the far side of Russia.  That is substantial and concerns, imo, are justified.

As far as naval bases, U.S. can get from Hawaii to Iwo Jima using M3 on the 1940 global map.  1942.2 puts you off the coast of Tokyo.  So as with the air base, the extra move on the 1942.2 board probably just isn’t the best idea.

So I’m leaning on the as-is air bases that work with air transport and the naval bases that repair ships.  Scramble is still up for discussion.

As far as the TB and MI, perhaps just as easy to allow each player to replace 1 ftr with a TB and one inf with a mech at the start and then they can purchase them as per normal rules.  That way no one has anything ‘extra’ from the OOB and the capabilities of just two units at the start are slightly enhanced.

Not to worry, I tried on a different PC and it worked just fine.  Really is an excellent map, well done.  :-)

I went to Staples and they gave me a price of like $60 for the 64x34 laminated.  I’m leaning towards this unless I find it less expensive somewhere else.  Thank you for the effort that was put into it.