Posts made by SgtBlitz

Stalin would go and alter your previous post in an armor change discussion thread behind your back, making you look like a total moron, then laugh about you to his other friends about how cool he is and what he can get away with on his website.  Then the thread would devolve into a shouting match between Churchill and Hitler with Stalin laughing on in the background the entire time.

OH WAIT where were we?  Defending Russia?  Yes…  Just build ART R1, then ARM after that with INF sprinkled in.  Try to keep your tank stack alive, retreat from battles before you leave a stack of THREES (now that we know tanks can still defend with 3s) out there vulnerable to a counterattack.  Don’t be afraid to push the offensive, especially if Germany pursues a large fleet/Med. adventures/Sealion.  You’ve got the advantage in unit counts as long as the dice don’t swing terribly far; try not to leave medium INF stacks exposed if you can help it, they’re terribly vulnerable to getting diced in battles without armor/FIGs to back them up.  Capture the initative and make the Germans respond to YOU, don’t be the pushover player who just builds INF the entire game and waits for the end in Moscow.

Nevermind, the proposed change didn’t stand the light of day for more than 27 hours…  I knew that it stunk to high heaven.

IL, can I start another thread with another, more clearly delinated poll, with better options?  People will read this and wonder WHAT the hell is going on.

Dammit, IL, you are diluting the significance of this armor change with that ridiculous poll.  This thread is just going to get derailed, and probably already has with all the bickering.

Fellow Axis and Allies aficionados:

A call goes out to all WWII history buffs, armchair generals, and in-general board game freaks:  Larry has decided that current Armor units are Somewhat Overpowered with a 3 Defense Value, even when the cost was revised upwards to 6 IPCs for the AA1940 game.  He has decreed that Armor Units will Now Roll with a 2 on Defense Without an Accompanying Infantry Unit.  THIS MUST NOT STAND.  This insults everyone here, and our intelligence, our dignity, nay, our very LIVELIHOODS, as WWII board game enthusiasts, is at stake.

Who here does NOT enjoy playing the new Alpha +.2 with the newly reinvigorated Axis powers?  Who does NOT enjoy the thrill of attempting and winning Sealion attacks against all odds, or rolling armies of new Panzer divisions into Russia a year ahead of schedule?  Well, the pride and joy of the German Wehrmacht, emerging from the legendary genius of General Heinz Guderian, the revolutionary new military equipment that changed the face of modern warfare forever, yes, OUR BELOVED PANZER DIVISIONS, are at stake.  We are talking about introducing changes that will forevermore change the face of the WWII boardgame, for YEARS to come, wherein armor will NOT be built by Germany, since it will be “considered a sub-optimal buy”, in the wake of waves of infantry supported by artillery, with massive stacks of planes behind the front lines.  SAY IT WILL NOT BE SO!  WE SHALL NOT GIVE UP OUR 3/3/2 6 IPC ARMOR UNITS WITHOUT A FIGHT!

SAY NO TO THESE PROPOSED CHANGES BY LARRY HARRIS.  He is essentially turning his back on the glory of the armored unit in its heyday, wherein the world saw more combat involving these behemoths than in any war thereafter, wherein anti-tank guns and planes were specially developed for defeating them in combat!  WE SHALL FIGHT THESE CHANGES, AND WE SHALL WIN.  WHO IS WITH ME?

Yup, IL, I have to say mantlefan has a point here.  You’re trying to make him look ridiculous, with the 4/3 tank.  On a topic in which YOU BOTH AGREE ON SOMETHING, it looks suspicious.

Whatever, here is what I was trying to say earlier before the thread got closed…

Hey guys, just thought you ought to know about the proposed tank changes for the NEXT major game balancing version of GlobalAA40.

http://www.harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=4592&start=80

Wow, in ADDITION to the new unfair tank changes rule, I also get to see the slimy, unwashed, despicable underworld of forum politics!  Don’t hide the truth, IL, put that poll back up!  Many people are going to be unhappy at this change, especially 6 months into the game’s relase!

I’m posting my responses on Larry’s website.  I did not pay over $120 for both AAE40 and AAP40 to see such drastic changes enacted like this, when it is obvious the game creator has no idea how to balance his game, now been released for over a year (AAP40 released Dec 2009).  I will play this game for free online and am swearing off the hooch, i.e., never buying a single boxed set again.  HE JUST MIGHT CHANGE THE RULES AGAIN.

While we’re at it, let’s decrease the infantry’s cost to 2 IPCs, cause 3 IPCs per infantry is just TOO much for only 2 defense.  We’ll need the extra stacks of infantry produced by this new rule change so our forward stacks have a chance in hell of surviving enemy counterattacks only fighting with 2s from now on.  Not to mention, we’ll also need this new rule in that the offensive unit stacks will never get touched, as they’ll be ONLY FIGs/TACs behind the enemy lines of which their numbers will only get larger and larger as the game grinds on.  So, basically, if you’re on the offensive, just pray for a lot of 1s and 2s when your infantry stacks defend to have a prayer of decimating the enemy forces…  Plus, the attacker will always have the option to retreat his aircraft away, so fat chance of taking any planes down anytime soon!  GREAT CHANGE LARRY!

Hmm… what else will go wrong with Axis and Allies by removing the tanks due to nerfing?  How about NO BLITZING anymore?  If you build no new tanks, then no more racing across enemy territories or threatening enemy capitals, turns before the infantry shows up!  We lose a whole mechanic of the game!  WOOO WOOO!!!  ALSO, since most people will just build stacks of planes now, and YOUR MECH CANNOT BLITZ WITHOUT ARMOR, we’ll just end up building stacks and stacks of one move infantry instead!  (Will probably still be useful for getting to the front lines in Russia… maybe.  I’m betting we’ll only see infantry, artillery, and FIG builds, especially for Germany from now on.  There’s now no point in building anything else.)

Watch the game slowly grind to a crawl as we see giant lumps of infantry slowly congeal together with even BIGGER stacks of aircraft stationed behind them, supporting each new human wave offensive!  Hey, IL, you’ll get your wish for that WWI game you’re always talking about in your signature!  It’ll be like WWI, except with airplanes!  THANKS LARRY FOR ADDING EVEN MORE HISTORICAL ACCURACY THAN EVER TO YOUR OPUS MAGNUS, AAG40!!!

LOL, this is the latest rule change incarnation to come out of Larry’s bullplop 1940 game???

What garbage reasons are they giving for the armor’s defense value to be reduced to 2???  “Tanks are only better offensively used in combat?”  What tank DIDN’T take part in local counteroffensives during the war, for chr*st’s sake?  Are stacks of tanks moved into recently conquered territories during NCM just too OP right now?  You even increased the cost of tanks to 6 in the first place to compensate, too!  What was so wrong about them being 3/3/2 5 IPCs in AA50?  “We’ve only just now realized that having a land unit with a defense value of 3 is just too powerful…”  Right…

OH MY GOD, this is ANOTHER balancing issue, right?  You’re taking away Germany’s main ability to defend its piles of infantry in Russia by adding this stupid change, and making it easier for Russia to counterattack, right!?!  WHAT A SCAM.  What a half-assed fix!  I look forward to the historical accuracy of this game when I take Moscow with 23 FIG 15 TAC and 35 MECH, all sacrificed in the name of “game balance”.

Okay, so I’ve played at least 10 if not more Global AA40 games so far, and I finally had my first defeat in France on G1.

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=22443.0

True, I was trying out a new strategy and was going into it with less than optimal numbers of land units, but the dice calculator said I had a 99% chance of victory!  Often do you guys lose the 1% battles?  Right now its 1 out of 10 games for me, so I’m beating the 1% battle odds by a large x10 margin here.  HOORAY FOR BAD LUCK.

Ok, how about we’ll roll a die for sides?  All options open.  Send PM.

Prefer medium level to vet.  I’d like to try out something as the Axis.  Send PM.

Actually, let me put another spin on this strategy.

Build 6 MECH and 2 INF on G1, instead of the major IC in Romania.  Why do we really need to build the major IC when ARM and MECH from Germany can reach the front lines in E Poland in a single turn?  They’re only one territory behind the rest of the units, and in any case, the soonest Germany can get the 10 produced tanks on G2 to Novgorod/Ukraine is by turn 4 at the earliest.  Also, you’re not losing any initial momentum in Russia on G2 in getting units to the front lines with the MECH purchase.  If its really needed, the major IC can be built later anyway.

G1 BARBAROSSA STYLE!

BUY 6 MECH, 2 INF

Attack France with 8 INF, 3 ART, 2 MECH, 2 FIG, 2 TAC, 1 SBmr? (maybe the SBmr)
2 SS attack SZ 106
2 SS attack SZ 91
1 SS + 1 FIG + CA or TAC attack SZ 112
3 INF 1 FIG 1 TAC attack Baltic States
2 INF 1 FIG 1 TAC attack E Poland
2 INF 1 TAC (maybe 1 SBmr) attack Bessarabia

This plan should have you at least killing off at least some of the minor naval units of the UK plus taking out 7 INF off the Soviet border that won’t be able to retreat back.  There’s plenty of planes around to stack W. Germany and N. and S. Italy with extra FIGs for scrambling as defense.  The 6 MECH plus 2 leftover MECH from W. Germany can be used as fodder to push the line forward to E Poland on G2, while you’re building the 10 ARM with the extreme G2 build with France’s IPCs.  The 8 initial armor at the beginning of the game can be used to stack with the 8 MECH for a very good starting force in E Poland by G2.

The German attack on Russia G1 also produces a lot of side benefit of starting the war much earlier, so the Russians don’t have the 3-4 turns they normally get to prepare for it.  You’re killing 7 INF on the first turn, plus they’re missing around 3 additional turns of infantry/unit builds, so that’s potentially 20-30 INF you’re now not needing to chew through to get to Moscow.

Always wanted to try this.  It seemed like Larry wanted something like this anyway, with the way he kept beefing up the UK all over the place, making Sealion impractical at best.  Might as well go for Russia first, since they’re still at OOB strength.  At least until Larry notices that the SU is now “unbalanced” vs. G1 war decs and then screws everything up in Russia to prevent “unbalanced” G1 attacks for Alpha/Beta/Gamma/Delta +.824123354289.  Right.

Only problem seems to be getting the best bang for your buck with your airforce on G1.  Meh, take 1/2 your airforce and kill the BB in SZ 111, forget about SZ 110, and with the other 1/2 of the airforce attack the SU border territories along with starter inf.  You would need to build a DD to kill the sub in the Baltic on G2.  After the Romanian major IC, then just Mechs and Arm to victory.  I guess you’d probably have to help out Italy for sure in the Med since the pressure is off the UK.

Hell, maybe even forgo the UK navy entirely, and send that first 1/2 of your airforce to France instead of using the standard 5 armor invasion stack, and use those tanks to make an uber stack of 18 ARM in Romania/E Poland by G2/3.  The INF and ART in Berlin also get to move much quicker to the front, and you ought to be able to take Novgorod with ease by G3 (14-20 INF and ART accompanied by 8 ARM plus most of air force should easily be able to kill Nov’s stack (maybe you’re fighting 20 INF if Russia decides to defend Nov, with some planes, which is asking for it)).  Stalin basically loses 7 border INF he would have retreated on Russia 1 with this move, so those are also less reinforcements for the Rooskies later on.  Also ought to be easy to take Archangel, and prevent Russia’s NO even if your fleet is bottled up in the Baltic.

Then just swing your forces down to the South, and finish her off.  With 3 ICs in production range of the capital, its just a matter of time before Moscow falls.  Only problem with this strat would be that you have even LESS time to KO Russia than most games, as the UK is playing at full strength if not full strength +25% since you didn’t touch their starting naval units, and have no counters in position for Gibraltar attacks/Italy invasions.

It’d be interesting to see the Allies response with this strat, if both Japan and Germany squished Russia between them from the first move on.  The Allies have a hell of a time actually landing troops into Russia to prevent the capital from falling in the first place, so even if the UK navy survives, it may still prove to be a non-factor in getting enough forces to Moscow for the Allies to hold it, especially against 20+ German tanks.

You’re forgetting the main point of the UK is to hold the line against the Fascists until the cavalry shows up to save their bacon, i.e., the US and/or the Soviet Union, depending on whose butt needs saving at that moment on Round 3.  Surrendering London without any type of fight AT ALL, especially without the “Exiled Capital” rule, is just asking for an Axis victory.  How are you expected to take back the UK if you can’t build anything?  It doesn’t matter how many IPCs you save by preserving the initial starting fleet, if the Germans can just build a bunch of subs and use their still-intact starting airforce to blow the returning fleet to hell and gone by Round 4-5.  In one turn I see 9-19 SSs in production range of Gibraltar, with German posession of England, Normandy, and S. France (not to mention NB movement from SZ 112).  (They could also completely ignore you, stack the hell out of Italy, and invade Russia with everything else they’ve got.)

The main point of the Sealion option is to remove a specific, nearby threat to Germany, with a huge amount of risk involved for the attacker, to the point of leaving the surviving invasion forces very susceptible to Allied counterattacks.  If you remove the risk involved in taking London, especially to the point where it could be considered traded back and forth or even abandoned for several turns, you’ve essentially turned a VC into a gimme for Germany by Round 2.  All that for the possibility to taking Italy without 1/3 to 1/2 of new Allies IPC builds (no new UK units) on Round 4 or 5???  Come on.

Maybe you’re trying to use this strategy as a draw, as a lure to pull Germany away from its main target, Russia?  There’s better ways to accomplish that than completely abandoning England.

This sounds like a terrible idea.  You’re banking on the premise that surrendering London for SURE on UK1 is going to be worth Italy falling on UK4 or UK5 (IF all the cards are played right).  The Allies already have it difficult enough as is in Alpha +.2 without losing 30-35 IPCs for 5 game rounds by surrendering the UK.  150 IPCs lost is a hell of a swing to come back from (maybe 125 if you count in the US’s war dec on Round 2, which usually occurs at the end of Round 3 (if you’re counting correctly)).

Your strategy MIGHT work, barely, on the European map, but I really doubt it will work in Global, mostly because of Japan acting as a counter to the US.  You’re counting on full US builds in the Atlantic to come to the UK’s rescue/take over Italy, and the US isn’t really going to have enough IPCs left over to dissuade the Japs from attacking in the Pacific.  Once one theater is taken over, its one hell of a slog to start taking it back.  Too easy for the Japs to take over the Pacific by J6 or J7.

Building defensively in the UK at least forces most the German IPCs from France and Europe into building TRNs for the landing, those units aren’t cheap and they’re difficult to protect with a decent surface fleet, which requires even more IPCs.  Maybe rather than considering it GAME OVER when the UK falls, have the US and SU build appropriately to counter the Nazis, either by building navy or superior land forces (Eastern Front).  Even if Germany wins London by a sizeable majority, if those troops are trapped in England or end up stuck on the wrong side of the Europe map, it can still spell an Allied win.

I think surrending on UK 1 is even worse than before because now the Germans aren’t required to actually buy the 9 transports now to invade; London is taken on the cheap and the captured IPCs can go to even more naval surface and air units to prevent an Allied navy counterattack.

@The:

@MEGAEINSTEIN:

my posts are too inteligent to most players understand them due to the fact that i am a lot more inteligent than the common mortals.

@MEGAEINSTEIN:

By the way CAN SOMEONE EXPLAIN TO ME WHY THE USA LAND OF FREEDOM WAS ALLIEd with THE COMUNIST SU during wwii?

1. Learn how to use caps lock
2. If you are so intelligent why do you need to know why US and the SU were allied?

I like how he misspells “intelligent” too.

Count me in.  It’s always good to show a new player the ropes.