Axis & Allies .org Forums
    • Home
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Register
    • Login
    1. Home
    2. The Fire Knight
    3. Posts
    0%
    • Profile
    • Following 0
    • Followers 0
    • Topics 14
    • Posts 279
    • Best 0
    • Controversial 0
    • Groups 0

    Posts made by The Fire Knight

    • RE: Japanese Strategies

      @Hobbes:

      @The:

      Yes, I like building 3 transports as well as Japan R1. But I believe that the best way to kill the allies is a J1 attack on the 4 chinese territories, Shan State, French Indo-china, Kwangtung, Phillipines, and Celebes. I take all of these on round 1 and then take all of the DEI R@.

      How much fleet do you send to protect the transport going to Celebes? Otherwise the Japanese transport will be sunk by the UK preventing Japan from taking all of the DEI on J2.

      Well I’m a perfectionist so I spent a lot of time thinking about a Jap strategy and I think mine is going to be soon unbeatable (in my humble opinion  :-D ) after a bit more revising. There are a lot of logistics involved, but i sent my Caroline islands transport, battleship, and carrier to celebes, and then have a tac and a fighter land on them at the end of the turn. this easily protects them against the small British fleet (the only 2 units that can reach me if I remember correctly).

      posted in Axis & Allies Pacific 1940
      The Fire KnightT
      The Fire Knight
    • RE: Do you want canada as a power

      @Brain:

      @SilverAngelSurfer:

      Or why not Poland?   :-P  Take the scenario back a year more and Germany has even more to do before the other powers enter the war…  :wink:

      We talked about that in an earlier post. It would be nice to have a '39 version so we could have some Polish cavalry units.

      In my opinion, A and A is developing more and more over the years, and I think it should keep developing until perfection. i.e. a global game about the size of this one, with completely correct rulebooks and maps and pieces and everything, maybe slightly more advanced rules (a bomb, Canada (if not already included) and possibly more powers b/c the more the merrier I say along with special colonial rules ie Egypt and South Africa and India) and 4 different playable and tested scenarios at 39, 40, 41, and 42 (kind of like aa50 only the ultimate game). This might take like 30 years or so but that’s my dream world or a and a.  :-D

      posted in Axis & Allies Europe 1940
      The Fire KnightT
      The Fire Knight
    • RE: Why are there Canadian roundels? A new rule perhaps?

      @Brain:

      Maybe the Canadian roundels are for future plans to make an advanced 1940 Global game.

      What!?! Wotc planning ahead?!?  :-o

      posted in Axis & Allies Europe 1940
      The Fire KnightT
      The Fire Knight
    • RE: Do you want canada as a power

      @allboxcars:

      @WITZANEY:

      Which ones?  Definitely not a Major Power like the United Kingdom, USA, USSR, Japan, Germany, France or Italy.

      Shto?
      France and Italy were Major Powers?
      For which side?

      #535

      I believe it was French for the axis and Italy for the allies.

      posted in Axis & Allies Europe 1940
      The Fire KnightT
      The Fire Knight
    • RE: Guam & Naval Base on Wake?

      @kaufschtick:

      A friend of mine and myself have been putting this new game through its paces ever since it came out, we’ve played just under 100 hours now, and here’s our latest thoughts on how the Allies should go.

      I don’t know if maybe we’re slow learners, and everyone else has already gotten on to this, but in our last game session, we discovered Guam as the key to the Allies, along with a naval base on Wake Island (US 1).

      We’ve played through zillions of the J2 & J3 opening attacks, but I will say this up front, that we haven’t yet tried any of the J1 attacks. So maybe this isn’t a good counter to a J1 attack?

      First off, we started many games with the Japanese buying 3 transports J1, then we moved to the Japanese buying 2 transports and a minor IC on J1. We found ways for the Allies to block Japanese transports in SZ6 on J2 to some extent by moving the British BB up to Guam and the American DD from the PI up to, I think it’s SZ19, to screen off the PI from transports originating in Japan.

      Then we got on to Japanese putting the minor complex down on J1, and the Allies just couldn’t afford to lose the ships early on like that in blocking moves. The Japanese could always opt to go for a J3 attack and sail through the blocks on J2 anyways, leaving those units sitting in the breeze on J3.

      Last game session, we tried something I haven’t read yet on any of the forums, although I haven’t really been going through them in the first place. So like I said earlier, it may be what I’m posting here is already widely known by all.

      But last game session, we started out with an American naval base going into Wake Island on US1, along with both the US infantry units and the fighter going from the PI to Guam on US1. The entire US fleet, and all of its at start air units go to Wake Island.

      The idea is kinda to make Guam like the Japanese use Truk. You get lots of air units on an island with an airbase and it’s pretty tough to root them out. The airbase acts like a force multiplier, so an attacker may have to commit twice the forces to root out a base like that.

      Anyway, the whole goal is for the US to get, or to be going after Guam. If they can do that, then they threaten not only Japan, but the whole Asian coastline from Korea all the way down to Vietnam.

      If on US1, they have their at start fleet at Wake, a naval base, and the 2 fighters and two dive bombers on Wake plus the 3 bombers, then they have the most options as to what to do on US2. They are in position to possibly counter attack Guam if the Japanese took it (two transports with three infantry and one armor: 1CV w/ 1ftr & 1Tac, 1BB, 1CA, 1SS along with 3 bombers if you want to risk a landing on New Guinea available to clear the SZ), they can move to Australia and SZ54, and they have two routes to attack  Japan if there is an opening there. The fighters from Wake can reach Guam if still held by the US on US2, and the ANZAC fighters can fly up from Queensland on ANZAC 2 as well. This is especially important if the US had to counter attack Guam and were able to retake it on US2. The 4 ANZAC ftrs can fly up from Queensland to bolster the defence after the assault.

      The prospect of having a large force of Allied fighters and dive bombers on Guam by turn two is enough to make Japan react to it, one way or the other.

      I don’t know if taking Guam on J1 is part of the whole J1 attack thing or not, but if Japan leaves Guam in US hands by the start of US 2, then they are in serious trouble. In that case, if the US can send in the two transports to Guam from Wake on their own, they do, along with every air unit they have, even carrier air. Like I said, the 4 ANZAC ftrs come up too at the end of the Allied turn, and now Japan is looking at Guam with at least 4 land units, 3 US ftrs & 3 tac air, along with 4 ANZAC ftrs. If the US fleet moves to Guam as well, then the Japanese are going to have to mount one super serious naval effort to get at Guam.

      From Wake, the US can keep putting in more air to Guam, and ships can reach Guam as well with the naval base being on Wake.

      Is taking Wake part of the J1 attack deal?

      It’s my opinion, and i think most peoples (although many differ b/c of the many options of the game) that a J1 attack is the best. I don’t know about that whole Guam thing. I’ll look into it, but I usually don’t build air or naval bases, and just use existing ones, which makes the Phillipines and caroline islands very important as the U.S. player. Also, for threatening the mainland, I usually just mass at Hawaii, which can threaten Korea (which Japan should never loose or they are screwed) and the Caroline. If you move to the Caroline from there, then you threaten Korea and Japan again, the Philippines, the mainland and you’ve got a ton of options w/o having to waste ipcs on bases. Japan usually can’t defend home sea zone and the caroline, so it serves the same purpose as Guam with the added bonus of an anti-aircraft gun and not having to spend anything.

      posted in Axis & Allies Pacific 1940
      The Fire KnightT
      The Fire Knight
    • RE: Release Date

      @Brain:

      I don’t care if it doesn’t come out until December if that’s what it is going to take to make it right.

      Although half of the game (the pacific part) would still be wrong. So unless Europe fixes these Rulebook, map, and pieces problems, then I would still feel incomplete as to the game.

      posted in Axis & Allies Europe 1940
      The Fire KnightT
      The Fire Knight
    • Greece and Yugoslavia… National Objective?

      Does anyone else think that it will be likely for pro-allied Greece and pro-allied Yugoslavia to be a national objective for the Allies? Not only would it give Germany historical incentive to attack these places, but it would also give the allies a historical incentive to recapture them, with the allies in a mindset of "maintaining a foothold in Europe. In fact, it would be cool if it were an objective to both like U.K. and Russia, but only one could get it (U.K. if the U.S. or U.K. controls them and Russia if Russia controls them). This would simulate pre-Cold War conditions, with control of the Balkan peninsula being important to both sides. Thoughts?

      posted in Axis & Allies Europe 1940
      The Fire KnightT
      The Fire Knight
    • RE: Japanese Strategies

      @Hobbes:

      @Veqryn:

      i do not really see a J1 attack as being that useful.  you start out with only 2 transports, and if you do a j1 attack you need to commit forces to too many areas while being out of position.  you immediately give USA an extra 50 income, when most of your attacks will be happening J2 anyway. 
      anyways, what do you guys think of the things i actually listed in the original post?

      With a J1 attack the Allies have to deal with Japan with whatever is left from the initial attack. If you do a little math the 40 extra IPCs that the US win are almost the same as the money you prevent the UK from earning (13 instead of 31 on UK1, 13 instead of 23 on UK2) and the US (55 instead of 62, if you attack also the Phillipines, which I did on my game), for a total of 35. But you’ve got rid of the UK BB, all the US units on the Phillipines, the DEI is left completely undefended unless the Allies land planes there and the US will be too weak to even move its fleet to Hawaii.

      I’d definitely add an early J attack (either J1 or J2) to your list because the longer the wait the better the allies will be prepared to slow down Japan. I’ve tried the conquer of ANZAC but I lost that game to the allies.

      Yea. I did that same math. This game is all about math if you think about it. The more math you incorporate in your strategy, the better that strategy is. I think the only time a J1 attack might not be the best thing to do is if you are trying some strategy with tricking the allies (ex. going for the WEstern U.S. or whatever else you’ve got up your sleeve). Otherwise J1 is the best I think.

      posted in Axis & Allies Pacific 1940
      The Fire KnightT
      The Fire Knight
    • RE: Why are there Canadian roundels? A new rule perhaps?

      @oztea:

      Banter back and forth in my gaming group is that the Canadian roundels may sybolize a UK special power. The power would be that, if London falls, Canada “becomes” a power. Canada is controled by the UK player and can only collect Canadian IPCs.

      This possibility stems from the fact that sea lion might succeed with a sly German player leading the Kreigsmarine. Considering there will likeley be 3 turns to play with untill the US and Russia become active, a jab at London would change the game irrevicably. Therefore, I susspect, and hope that if this happens the UK continues to fight, colleting some IPCs in an attempt to liberate the home islands

      Thoughts?
      Or am i just crazy kreig….

      I definitely think that Canada and Anzac should fight on. Although maybe not so much Egypt, India, or South Africa.

      posted in Axis & Allies Europe 1940
      The Fire KnightT
      The Fire Knight
    • RE: Japanese Strategies

      @Gravy:

      A J1 attack only works when you leave the Philipines for J2 while purchasing 3 transports J1.  I’ve been telling you guys this now for weeks, try it as Japan and you will see how deadly it really is.  Then purchase a minor IC in Asia ans just build 3 tanks per turn.  It is a powerful Japanese strat that is really hard to stop.

      We came close a few times as the allies but it is hard to stop because Japan can build alot of ships every turn and use the Philipines as its central core for all its attacks.

      Yes, I like building 3 transports as well as Japan R1. But I believe that the best way to kill the allies is a J1 attack on the 4 chinese territories, Shan State, French Indo-china, Kwangtung, Phillipines, and Celebes. I take all of these on round 1 and then take all of the DEI R@. This skyrockets Japanese income to 41 on turn 2 and like over 60 turn 3. I then steadily make my way through China and into India with a Malayan factory (useful for both an Indian and an ANZAC invasion). Thoughts?

      posted in Axis & Allies Pacific 1940
      The Fire KnightT
      The Fire Knight
    • RE: Japanese Strategies

      @Gravy:

      The one thread has already discussed this issue with the conclusion that Japan shouldn’t be allowed to build an IC in Asia.  IC’s can only be built in Japan or Ausralia.  Hard to stop Japan when they only need to build 3 tanks for asia a turn and then buy carriers and battleships…by turn 3 Japan is at 65 and the Philipines is a fortress with unbelievable range that will rip the allies apart when they get close.

      If Japan doesn’t take dumb chances and slowly bleeds India, its over.

      And i saw that thread too, and the only reason you guys came to “a conclusion” that Japan shouldn’t be able to build an IC in Asia is b/c many of us saw the thread and though it was such a stupid idea that they didn’t bother responding.

      posted in Axis & Allies Pacific 1940
      The Fire KnightT
      The Fire Knight
    • RE: Japanese Strategies

      @Gravy:

      You Folks didn’t read the most important thread on this board…if Japan attacks J1, but waits to take the Phillipines J2 with 3 transports from the J1 build and then buys a minor IC for Asia, THE GAME IS OVER.  Allies can make it very close if they get some good rolls but will not win,

      Can;t believe the play testers let this get by on a 100 dollar deluxe game…our play group is trying to come up with a few house rules to change the balance of the game…didn’t take long!!!

      India dies a slow death, the US just doesn’t have enough to out produce Japan.

      I bet the play testers know a bit more about the strategy of this game and of a and a in general than you do. Just saying. Although it is possible that the game is slanted, why don’t you look for ways to overcome this difficulty first instead of coming up with house rules right off the bat just b/c your group can’t seem to make the game work.

      posted in Axis & Allies Pacific 1940
      The Fire KnightT
      The Fire Knight
    • RE: Do you want canada as a power

      @Tralis:

      @The:

      I think Canada as a whole separate power is a bit much. Canada is actually stronger as part of the UK than as an independent power. An independent Canada can’t attack with the UK.

      Unless you made a rule that stated that commonwealth provinces could attack with the U.K.

      So the net effect of this would be that they would have a different color?
      Actually, they also wouldn’t share technology either unless there was a rule for that. Split income would basically be the same thing except simpler.

      yea. It would basically mean different pieces (which is always cool), split incomes (which is more realistic), and also  different capturing ownership (like in combined attacks and also just if Canada or Anzac takes something on it’s own.) So really it’s simple, more cool, and more realistic.

      posted in Axis & Allies Europe 1940
      The Fire KnightT
      The Fire Knight
    • RE: Fighter Interceptors

      (other than a house rule allowing to disregard the law of physics that states than an object cannot be at 2 different locations at the same time ;) ).

      That should be like a research or something. Or possibly a national advantage.  :-D

      posted in Axis & Allies Pacific 1940
      The Fire KnightT
      The Fire Knight
    • RE: Do you want canada as a power

      I think Canada as a whole separate power is a bit much. Canada is actually stronger as part of the UK than as an independent power. An independent Canada can’t attack with the UK.

      Unless you made a rule that stated that commonwealth provinces could attack with the U.K.

      posted in Axis & Allies Europe 1940
      The Fire KnightT
      The Fire Knight
    • RE: Global 40 Tech Speculations

      @Brain:

      @The:

      @Brain:

      I guess I just wasn’t thinking along the lines of tech. Sorry about that. I was thinking along the lines of just a standard rule.

      That would be kind of cool, and worth looking into for future a and a games. The attacker sometimes did choose it’s targets, so maybe a rule that if you rolled a hit, you rolled the dice again and if you get a one then you get to choose your hit.

      I am not sure if I like this idea because I believe you would have to decide whether you were going after a specific target before you attack and not after.

      Well yea. But you would have to roll a lot more dice that way, and it would be harder to keep track of, and only slightly more realistic. But it’s the same basic idea.

      posted in Axis & Allies Europe 1940
      The Fire KnightT
      The Fire Knight
    • RE: Vichy France

      @oztea:

      The central france stack “might” be big enough that germany has to attack it Round 2. And a G1 and It1 attack on Brittany and Vichy respectively is the propper move.

      The only 100% ahistorical thing that is going to happen is, the french atlantic fleet is going to be big, and survive.

      I think that They did have a big atlantic fleet. Bigger than Germany’s anyhow. And I read somewhere that Germany should be able to take Central France on round one if they devote enough, but that if they tried to shirk from all out, France might have a chance of surviving one round. I would think this would be Germany devastating if they survive to build any units.

      posted in Axis & Allies Europe 1940
      The Fire KnightT
      The Fire Knight
    • RE: Making Airbases Required for Flight/Landing

      I disagree kind of. An airbase I think is much different than a landing strip. For aircraft to take off and land, it really only requires a simple dirt runway, which probable wouldn’t even be worth an ipc. An airbase however i would think would be a sophisticated system of concrete runways which could refuel, repair, and other sorts of things. It would be like an airport, which would be worth the 15. I think this is the “real-world” reason why this was not in the game. there are runways everywhere, but not airbases/airports. This is in addition to the reason that it would just be a huge pain and would complicate the simplicity of the game.

      posted in House Rules
      The Fire KnightT
      The Fire Knight
    • RE: Rethink of usa capture

      @Omega:

      I just think these kind of games are really lame. Just like the old capture UK first turn with Germany. It defeats the purpose of playing the game. If the gamble fails, welll I suppose Japan just lose? If the gamble wins, then the game is over?

      Good for you. I’m glad your not the one making the game, b/c this is the best a and a game yet. There are so many flaws in your reasoning, but let me just point out some main and obvious ones. If Japan is able to capture the U.S… if, then the allies actually still have a good chance at winning. Next, no one is going to go all out on a 45% chance of success. The only way any player would go for the U.S. is if they thought that they could get away with the best buys for Japan, while somehow fooling the U.S. player. An surprise attack. So that’s kind of what this game is all about, and it’s the best game b/c you have a choice, with a chance of victory with every choice, whether it’s a go at U.K., china, ANZAC, Hawaii, or the Western U.S. No one said that you had to do the gamble, and it’s not a gamble for the game. It’s a gamble for the West U.S., which is very different. If you would surrender, then maybe your just no good and didn’t play the game right as the other allies. Don’t blame the game first before considering whether or not you yourself are in the wrong.

      posted in Axis & Allies Pacific 1940
      The Fire KnightT
      The Fire Knight
    • RE: Global 40 Tech Speculations

      @Brain:

      I guess I just wasn’t thinking along the lines of tech. Sorry about that. I was thinking along the lines of just a standard rule.

      That would be kind of cool, and worth looking into for future a and a games. The attacker sometimes did choose it’s targets, so maybe a rule that if you rolled a hit, you rolled the dice again and if you get a one then you get to choose your hit.

      posted in Axis & Allies Europe 1940
      The Fire KnightT
      The Fire Knight
    • 1 / 1