Posts made by soldaatvanoranje

Wait, what?  :? Do I understand correctly (not sure if I interpret “provoke” right)

So with Japan I can attack the French, without causing war with the UK, ANZAC and/or USA?

@gamerman01:

@Cmdr:

Exactly which island were you going to put a complex on in Europe?

West Indies = 1 IPC, invalid
Malta = 0 IPC, invalid
Cyprus = 0 IPC, invalid
Sicily = 0 IPC, invalid
Iceland = 0 IPC, invalid
Ireland = 0 IPC, invalid
Madagascar = 1 IPC, invalid

Did I miss any?

:-)  Good post.

Greenland?

Crete?  :roll:

No, for Japan only those with the rising sun: Korea

For the Major/Minor issue: I ordered at Hasbro the replacement set for the Cities of Risk. Totally works as Major IC!

Order at:
http://www.hasbro.com/customer-service/orderform.cfm?sku=45086

see picture:

Kamikazes are good for the game imho. Especially the fact that you may target particular ships.

Everybody tends to forget about them, including the US player. This way I was able to sink two loaded US carriers once!

yeah, I guess you’re right.

Didn’t work for very well for me last game though, long discussion, and I lost (the discussion, not the game).  :roll: Arguments above were convincing enough.

cheers

Actually they went for the civilian population mainly. They made the same strategic mistake as the Germans in the early war. The effectivenes of carpet bombing civilians was greatly overrated by both sides. (until the A-bomb obviously)

:evil: :evil: :evil:
Or maybe the western allies knew this but kept focusing on the bombing campaign to put up an effort that seemed devastating while the dictatorships wore each other down on the eastern front.
:evil: :evil: :evil:

The Brittish did this extensively on Dresden, in pre-war days Germany’s medieval gem, were almost no industry was present. They called it sex-appeal bombing. The idea was to show the Germans that their propaganda of supremacy and invincebility (“the motherland will be untouched”) was false, in the hope to break their spirit…

Before the new rules they were standard part of my allied strategy -> day and night bombing Germany’s IC’s  :evil:

With the interceptors in play, it seems futile to me to invest in such a disadvantageous position, with marginal(possible) gains…

Also, with the new board, by the time USA is in place to conduct strategic bombing, it can only bomb those IC’s which are most of the time no longer producing units, as my adversaries (and myself as axis) always build IC’s near the front.

It’s a shame though. I always loved it when Germany was crying that “It ist nich fair” when they have to surrender their production to the constant flow of B-24’s and Lancasters. Which was a major part of the US and UK war effort until D-Day btw.

@Hobbes:

@soldaatvanoranje:

I’ve got a question on allied-aircraft-carrier interaction.

Let’s say I have two German fighters landed on a Italian carrier vessel. In Italy’s turn the carrier moves two spaces, let’s say from SZ98 to SZ94.

Do the German fighters have their full range from SZ94 or are they limited to their last station in Germany’s turn being SZ98?

It would seem strange to me that a german plane could travel two spaces more in the same year, just because it is landed on a ITA carrier… :?

Thanks!

They have the full range. In this particular case G lands its fighters and Italy moves the carrier on the same round. When G moves the fighters from the carrier on SZ94 it is already a different round (or a ‘year’ if you prefer).

Thanks for the clarification. We’ve agreed on this rule the same, though I’m not really satisfied with the outcome.

Imho it still seems odd that Germany can extend their fighters’ range for landing by two in the same round, just because they’ve landed on a foreign carier. This wouldn’t be possible when Germany lands their planes after combat on their own carriers, they wouldn’t be allowed to move these carriers in the non-combat phase…

This way a German fighter can launch from greece, fight in egypt and can be available in SZ94 the next turn. This just seems wrong to me and a defect in the rules…

I always assumed the events in a round held the fiction that all the fighting and movement in the round happened simultaniously, displaying one year of events of war. The turn-based play would just the way to make the game work…

@special:

I don’t know if it isbetter or worse, but it has become more interesting.

Agreed!

It makes sense that such an unit is not sunk that easily and I love the complexities associated with capsizing your Carrier!

More tactical choices make a more interesting game!

:-o Wow  :-o

last Friday we managed to add another 12 hours to our conquest for world domination.

This must, by far, be the best game I’ve ever played!!

Nevertheless we still didn’t manage to beat the Axis of Evil and have landed in a defining stage of our continuous  struggle:
Japan is on it’s knees, ready for Harikiri;
USSR has been dead for a while;
Calcutta is holding back the Hun marching from the Russian IC’s;
London is awaiting the siege of Cairo;
The US and Anzac are preparing to assist Japan in it’s Harikiri;
The Nazi’s are contemplating domination over three continents.

Please see the new map over here:

http://www.mediafire.com/?12kelwmn6kaf3fk

And please give me your comments!! They are always much appreciated!!  :lol:

X
SvO

Never seen before…I learn new rules every day, still feel like a N00B after 9 years of A&A

Thanks SF!!

For Germany, I like to build Industrial Complexes along the Russian border (in order to keep the distribution of infantry steady) and keep building them when you progress into Russia.

Also having two fronts (Leningrad and Stalingrad), makes Russia split up their defensive capabilities, where it would rather focus.

Russia’s advantage is it’s sheer size and defensive investments, you can take those away with the above imho…

I’ve got a question on allied-aircraft-carrier interaction.

Let’s say I have two German fighters landed on a Italian carrier vessel. In Italy’s turn the carrier moves two spaces, let’s say from SZ98 to SZ94.

Do the German fighters have their full range from SZ94 or are they limited to their last station in Germany’s turn being SZ98?

It would seem strange to me that a german plane could travel two spaces more in the same year, just because it is landed on a ITA carrier… :?

Thanks!

@Gargantua:

LOL I love how people go on and whine about how cruisers aren’t the most effective buy.

What about some countries, like RUSSIA, who never get to buy navy in any serious fashion?

Or the Chinese, who are limited to men / arty, and lastly the French, who NEVER get to even do a buy!?

There is a time and place for everything.  Infact, when’s the last time someone bought a battleship?  I’m guessing almost never.Germany/Italy certainly can’t, UK I doubt it…  Japan maybe… USA most likely.  Everyone else can forget it.

And why would I EVER build a destroyer? if my opponent is never building subs?  It can’t be used to bombard - and it’s less effective on defense… in come the cruiser.

Who are you playing with? In my games Germany, Italy, UK and Japan often build Battleships…As subs are highly effective and always on the board, you’re Carriers have to be protected with Destroyers…

Nevertheless point taken on

It can’t be used to bombard - and it’s less effective on defense… in come the cruiser

You can bombard with one ship per unit you are landing. 1 inf would thus allow one ship to do a bombard

This is news for me, where do I find this rule? :?

But to answer your question: yes it is possible, you could even capture norway with US and build a major over there. A bit of a deficiency from the out-of-the-box rules. Hence the Alpha2+ rules, they fix this problem as above.

See also larry harris’ webpage for all alpha 2+ rules.

I think it’s a shame that plastic figurines are that limited in a $100 game…  :x

Luckily I’ve got some spares from my old sets…though I still fall short on some tokens or unit (italian tokens, mechanised infantry)

@Gargantua:

I was in a group game, where we were winning, and my “allied” UK partner, got wiped from the game, after the germans rolled a last ditch fluke shot on Paratroopers, and took the London Capital.

It was all downhill from there, as no one was in range of taking it back immediately (Blocked)  and he was able to build off of U.K.

But would you say that this actually enhanced the gaming experience?

This is exactly the reason I don’t like the R&D rules, it is a bit too much based on luck and once earned changes the entire (delicate) balance of the game.

I hear this from the previous posts, though I would be very interested in how and why R&D deserves a place in the game based on long-term strategies…

(I can remember from the original setup it made strategic sence to invest in developments, but the game back then was less complicated and less delicately balanced)

My bad  :roll:, I mistook Iceland to be an US territory. Nevermind my remarks, but thanks anyway Krieg!