Best posts made by The Pripet Martian

Howdy! (translated from Texan: Hello!)

I was born, raised and still live in the Dallas area. I received Axis & Allies (what is now referred to as “A&A Classic”) as a Christmas present in 1984 and was instantly hooked. The varied forms of the game have remained with me throughout the years: Europe '99, Pacific '01, D-Day, Guadalcanal and Battle of the Bulge were all purchased for my son and provided us many hours of entertainment and bonding.

After several years away from the game, largely due to life’s various obstacles, I purchased Europe and Pacific 1940 in 2017. It was my wife’s fault - she said she loved playing Risk as a child and responded in the affirmative when I asked her, “How would you like to play a game similar to Risk, but infinitely better?”

Since the Global 1940 game came into my life, I haven’t played anything else. In my opinion, it’s far and away the best iteration of Axis & Allies.

11 JUN 1944: My uncle, Bud Piper, a combat engineer in the U.S. Army, began his second day in France. Like yesterday and tomorrow, he would spend it on his hands and knees, removing mines from Omaha Beach. By the end of the month, 1/3 of his unit would be killed or wounded by mines, booby traps, snipers or German artillery.

@ABWorsham4 The more I read, the more I learn that American neutrality pre-Pearl Harbor was extremely nuanced, to say the least. Very interesting stuff.

You can also see this table in a couple of General Hand Grenade’s videos. Here’s the latest:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_EhZXv11Hs

I can’t speak to any game other than G40, but I’m not convinced a Zero Round of purchases would have any effect on balance, since Axis and Allies alike can spend their full compliment of IPC. That said, I really like this HR, but with a twist:

All powers make their purchases and determine new unit placement in secret, then reveal them simultaneously.

If you take it a step further and eliminate standard new unit placement restrictions, you can open the door to potentially game-changing scenarios, such as a German aircraft carrier in the Med to protect the Regia Marina from Taranto, an American “Fortress Philippines,” etc. This could be a lot of fun, and has the potential to ruin the standard G1 and J1 openings while forcing the development of new strategies on the fly.

Missed it by a few days, but: 75 years ago last week, my uncle, Bud Piper (a U.S. Army combat engineer), visited Paris…which wasn’t liberated until 24 AUG 44. His story, which I have no reason to doubt, is remarkable.

At the time, American engineer units were “free agents,” for lack of a better term - they would be temporarily attached to this brigade to build a bridge for them, then reassigned to that battalion to clear a path through a minefield for them, and so on. In between assignments, they had down time. My uncle compared it to firefighters at their station house, waiting for a call.

During one of these periods of down time, Bud said, word reached his unit that Paris had been liberated. They were only about 30 miles from the City of Light, so my uncle and a handful of his buddies hopped in a truck and headed down the road.

As Bud explained, “unlike WWI, the front line was riddled with gaps, and some of them were pretty large. We didn’t see any live Germans along the way.” Upon reaching Paris, they drove straight to the Eiffel Tower, parked the truck, got out and started taking pictures, like any other tourists. They got a few strange looks from the locals, Bud said, but they were used to strange looks from the French. While snapping photos, they saw a squad of Germans - still armed - marching a few hundred yards away. “We assumed they were marching off to surrender,” stated Bud.

One of Bud’s squad mates wanted to get his wife some “real Parisian lingerie,” so they set out to find a shop. “We didn’t speak French and couldn’t find anyone who would admit to speaking English, but we managed to find a lingerie shop nearby,” said Bud. “While we were inside, we saw another squad of Germans march right down the street, past the store. At that point, we figured the story about Paris being liberated was just a bullsh*t rumor and high-tailed it out of there. A week later, Paris was liberated for real.”

Hard to believe? Yes. Crazy enough to be true? Yes. My uncle has never been prone to embellishment, exaggeration, etc., so I have no choice but to accept it as true.

In a recent live G40 game, I (as the US) attacked the Japanese fleet in SZ 6 with the following:
2 FTR, 2 TAC, 10 STR

Rolled this in the first round:
FTR = 1 hit
TAC = 0 hits
STR = 0 hits

Pro Tip: After you soak the dice in lighter fluid, scrub your hands thoroughly with soap before striking the match. :skull_and_crossbones: :skull_and_crossbones: :skull_and_crossbones:

@CrazyIvan An individual transport can only offload into a single territory per turn. If you brought two transports, however, one can offload into Norway while the other offloads into Western Germany. If TripleA won’t allow that, it’s a glitch.

@Imperious-Leader said in HR skip movement phases in first round:

If you engage such a round and the purchases were secret, Germany could do a G2 Sealion

That’s certainly a possibility, as long as France still falls in the first round…which might not be automatic, especially if the Brits choose to reinforce Paris.

I see so many possibilities. This really could be a lot of fun. I think I’ll have to try it.

@ABWorsham4 I’m not familiar with False Flags, but I’ve read Mrs. Ferguson’s Tea Set, Japan and the Second World War: The Global Consequences Following Germany’s Sinking of the SS Automedon in 1940 by Eiji Seki. It’s an excellent account of the exploits of the German commerce raider Atlantis, and I found it fascinating as a Japanese perspective of WWII.

@Black_Elk I think a Zero Round purchase in G40 offers a myriad of options for most powers. Here are just a few thoughts that come to mind:

• USSR stacks Amur (a 12 INF buy? 6 Armor? A combo?) and sweeps through Manchuria and Korea unless the Japanese fortify both.

• USA stacks the Philippines, effectively blocking Japan’s path to the Money Islands.

• Japan buys transports. If USA doesn’t fortify the Philippines, they go south. If the Money Islands are blocked, A major move to Alaska and British Columbia isn’t out of the question.

• As I stated previously, a German aircraft carrier in SZ 97 could prevent Taranto. Saving the Italian fleet changes the dynamic in the Med fairly dramatically.

• Another German option: 5 more U-boats in the Atlantic could really ruin England’s day.

That’s really just the tip of the iceberg. I’m sure there are many other great ideas out there.

I’m not exactly sure what you mean by “trading territories.” Assuming, however, you’re talking about capturing a 1 IPC territory for the sole purpose of collecting that IPC while knowing your opponent will recapture that territory on his turn, I’d say that’s almost never a worthwhile trade.

From a purely economic standpoint, you’re sacrificing a 3 IPC infantry unit (at a minimum) to gain 1 IPC. Say your opponent has 1 INF in that territory, which you kill. You’ve just cost him 3 IPCs. On his turn, he counterattacks, killing your INF (thus costing you 3 IPC) and regaining that 1 IPC territory. In effect, both sides have lost 2 IPC, with no change in the status quo. With that in mind, you should ask yourself if there’s a better use for your infantry unit.

There are times when the territory in question has a strategic value much greater than the IPC value, and such a “trade” is in your best interests. In those cases, it’s simply a matter of calculating the number of hits you expect your opponent to get in the battle and sending in one more infantry unit than the enemy can be expected to kill. For example, 3 defending INF can be expected to get one hit per combat round. If you send in enough planes to ensure you’ll kill all 3 enemy INF, you only need to send 2 INF in to secure the territory.

Now hear this! Now hear this! I’m looking for experienced G40 players in the Dallas area for a live playtest of The Pripet Martian’s Global Enhanced Rules System.

GERS (because who doesn’t love a good acronym?) is designed to address the two chief complaints of G40 fans: Game (im)balance and a desire for more IPCs. These issues are handled with only minor changes to the G40.2 OOB rules, plus several exciting, intriguing and strategy-altering rule additions. Highlights include:

• Injecting more IPCs into the game through an action-driven War Bonds system.

• R&D is now targeted and top secret. Decide which tech you want and put your best people to work on it. Use espionage to steal enemy research and beat them to the punch!

• New units: Coastal Fortifications, Paratroops (rule change from OOB), Engineers, Marines, Gurkhas and Commerce Raiders.

I’ll be out of town 5-9 FEB, so I’d like to shoot for a mid- to late-February playtest. Weekends are preferable, but I can also do it during the week, if that works best for everyone. I’d like to finalize a group as soon as possible, so everyone has time to familiarize themselves with GERS before playing. Reply to this message if interested.

–PM

In G40, America is both protected and hindered by the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. Fortunately for the Allies, the US has the economic resources to bridge the gap. Figuring out how best to utilize those IPCs to swiftly get Uncle Sam into the fight can be challenging, so I decided to post my thoughts on the subject. I hope newer players will benefit from this, and who knows? Maybe some more experienced players will be inspired.

The Combined Arms Approach

The “Bright Skies” strategy calls for the US to contribute bombers to the war effort, arguing that it takes the Americans too long to get ground forces into battle.

Though two turns are required to cross the oceans from the US to Europe or Japan/Korea, I’d argue that the US is uniquely positioned among the Allies to contribute large numbers of both aircraft and land units to both the European and Pacific theatres. Also, combined arms attacks are much more economically efficient than air-only attacks. The question is, what is the most efficient way to get significant numbers of American ground troops into the fight?

Crossing Oceans: A Three-Step Process

Moving American land units to Europe and Japan is a three-step process. I call it “SSB,” or “Security, Soldiers and Boats.”

1. Since transports are the most vulnerable units in the game, naval and air security along your intended route is critical. Buy those planes and warships first, so you can get them into position while you’re building ground units and a transport fleet.

2. Buy soldiers (ground units) next. Transport capabilities dictate that, for maximum efficiency, half of your units will be infantry. What of the other half, though - should you buy all artillery, all armor, or a mix?
   Interestingly, on a very basic level, it doesn’t matter: your attack strength will be the same, no matter what. Where you see a difference is in defense strength. What this means is that, if you’re planning an amphibious assault and a strong enemy counterattack is expected (as in Normandy), you should buy all armor. When attacking an island (like Japan), where a counterattack is highly unlikely, buy all artillery.

3. Transports - Boats - should be purchased last. Because they’re vulnerable to any attack, you don’t want to put them in the water until you’re ready to move troops overseas.

Security aside, once the US is at war, they have the economic capacity to get 10 infantry and 10 artillery units to Japan or Normandy in just 4 turns, as shown in the examples below.

EASTERN US TO NORMANDY:
Turn 1) Buy 10 infantry and place in Eastern US. Buy 10 artillery and place in Central US.
Turn 2) Buy 10 transports and place in SZ 101.
Turn 3) Load transports and move to SZ 91 (Gibraltar).
Turn 4) Move to SZ 110 for amphibious assault into Normandy.

WESTERN US TO JAPAN:
Turn 1) Buy 10 infantry and place in Western US, 10 artillery and place in Central US.
Turn 2) Move all artillery to Western US. Purchase 10 transports and place in SZ 10.
Turn 3) Load transports and move to Hawaii (SZ 26).
Turn 4) Move to SZ 6 for amphibious assault into Japan or Korea.

How Many Transports Do I Need?

In order to set up a conveyor belt-type system to funnel troops into Europe, you need to figure out how many transports are required. To ensure a steady flow of land units, you must have an identical number of transports for each leg of the voyage. Let’s say you decide to go with a 5-transport shuttle from the Eastern US to Normandy: 20 transports are required, so that at the beginning and end of each turn, you’ll have 5 transports each in SZ 101 and 110 and 10 transports in SZ 91. The shuttle works like this:

1. Buy 10 infantry, 10 artillery and place in Eastern/Central US.
2. Buy 10 transports and place in SZ 101.
3. Repeat Turn 1 buy.
4. Repeat Turn 2 buy. Load 10 transports and move to SZ 91.
5. Move transports from SZ 91 to SZ 110 for amphibious assault into Normandy. Load transports in SZ 101 and move to SZ 91, unloading in Gibraltar/Morocco.
6. Buy 5 infantry, 5 armor and place in Eastern US. Move 10 empty transports from SZ 110 back to SZ 91. Move 5 empty transports from SZ 91 to SZ 101. Load 5 transports in SZ 91, move to SZ 110 and unload in Normandy.
7. Buy 5 infantry, 5 armor and place in Eastern US. Load and move 5 transports from SZ 101 to SZ 91, unloading in Gibraltar/Morocco. Load and move 5 transports from SZ 91 to SZ 110, unloading in Normandy. Move 5 empty transports from SZ 110 to SZ 91. Move 5 empty transports from SZ 91 to SZ 101.
8. Repeat Turn 7.

In the immortal words of Forrest Gump, “…and that’s all I have to say about that.” Any thoughts, comments, criticism or suggestions?

Whether intentional or not, I find it very interesting that the OOB G40 rules reflect with some accuracy the waning value of battleships and cruisers in World War II. The rise of aircraft carriers may not have rendered BB and CA obsolete, but they certainly made them vulnerable in ways they hadn’t been in previous wars.

As for the one-shot bombardment rule…I’m fine with it as is. Considering that the biggest ship-mounted guns of the era had a max range of under 30 miles, it’s not realistic to allow naval bombardment to continue throughout a battle across a territory which might be hundreds of miles wide (many European territories, for example). I’ve always considered the one-shot support attack a bonus, rather than a primary function of BB and CA.

Parting thought: Buying, moving and fighting CA & DD in pairs gives you a slim attack and defense advantage over a BB, for the same price. Doing so is the best way to get max value out of CA. This is a hill I will die on. :grin:

The issue with targeting ANZAC is, for me, an economic one. For Japan to acquire ANZAC’s 10 IPC/turn, they have to capture a total of seven territories. On the other hand, just four territories - Sumatra, Java, Borneo and Celebes - will net 20 IPC/turn for Japan. My alternative to your scenario is this:

J1 Move one transport and one sub from Japan to the Carolines.
J2 Declare war, then use transport + 1 INF from Carolines to take New Guinea. Also take Malaya as soon as possible (these actions deny ANZAC National Objectives, costing them 10 IPC/turn). Use naval forces in Carolines to take out ANZAC fleet.

On subsequent turns, park subs in sea zones 54, 62 and 63. This can reduce ANZAC income to as little as 3 IPC/turn, virtually taking them out of the fight without investing a significant chunk of the Japanese navy, as well as ground forces.

Technology should absolutely be a key element of G40. To make it so, however, you have to come up with a system allowing for targeted R&D, rather than the random, hit-or-miss OOB system. Without targeted R&D, you’re just wasting IPC.

@djensen While I’m still adjusting to the new forums, I think this was a good move. As far as monetizing the site…while I don’t know much about such things, making TripleA a pay-to-play service seems to me to be a good place to start. For example, TripleA access could be included for Bronze, Silver and Gold Patrons, while non-patrons pay $2/month or $20/year. Obviously, becoming a Bronze Patron would be the smart play in that scenario; either way, the objective is met.

Beyond that, I think a slightly more aggressive approach to the support drive is warranted. I’m sure you don’t want to spam everyone who visits the site (and everyone hates spam), but increasing the prominence of the message that this site runs primarily on donations wouldn’t hurt. Perhaps a weekly newsletter, similar to the Digest sent out on 18 NOV and featuring links to the top-five discussion topics of the past seven days, could include a prominent message about the support drive.

I find A&A.org an invaluable site and worthy of my financial support, which is why I became a Silver Patron several months ago. I encourage others to do the same, as there’s no better place for we A&A addicts to congregate with our own kind.

One more Allied gambit comes to mind. No idea who had the original idea, but I’m calling it…

The Berlin Bank Job

Moves: US takes Denmark. UK transits Danish Straits to capture Germany.

Plan: The Allies take advantage of a German player who leaves Denmark and Germany lightly (or un-) defended. In a one-two punch, the US captures Denmark, opening the door for the UK to sail into the Baltic and amphibious assault into Germany, capturing Berlin and stealing Germany’s money. Executed at the right time, this move can almost single-handedly save Moscow by preventing Germany from purchasing new units for at least one turn. Also, the UK gets a huge one-time income boost.

Problems: In order to keep the German player from becoming alarmed and reinforcing Denmark and Germany, the Allies can’t have a huge troop buildup in advance of the operation. This means that minimal force must be used, which means that those units committed to Denmark and Germany are essentially on a suicide mission. This includes any British naval units which enter the Baltic, as they’ll be trapped there until Denmark is again liberated or they’re killed by the Luftwaffe, whichever comes first.

@SS-GEN I can’t remember where I read it, but it’s my understanding that one infantry unit = 25,000 men.