Posts made by Tralis

As of AA50 it is cheaper and better to buy 3 subs rather than 1 BB. The BB is only worth the purchase if it gets repaired at least once. AAP40 makes this a lot less likely.

I think it was a bit unneeded even in Pacific. Artillery attack on a 2, and inf with artillery attack on a 2. In classic there was no art, so marines were a very common house rule since otherwise amphibOps were very, very difficult. In AAP, though, artillery exists, and that means for 7 you can have two 2s.  Thus, it is useless to put two marines on a transport, strictly worse than one art one inf. So, marines only are useful when attacking with artillery. The one IPC to get a 3 rather than a 2 is nice and usually worth it, but it really has very little effect on the game. It also means having to worry about an additional color for infantry, which is which. It is extra overhead for something that barely affects the game.

P40 wouldn’t be any different with marines, really. I can’t see it changing the outcome at all.

@Commando:

Yes because luckily I have the actual boardgame map. But on the electronic map there is no Rising suns. So I guess, as the other poster put it, it’s everything that starts off in orange with the exception of Siam.

Siam is in reference to real life, as in, not Axis and Allies. In game Siam is a Japanese space in every way. Anything that has the rising sun emblem printed on the board is originally Japanese.

Anything marked with a Rising Sun rather than the Nationalist Chinese symbol, at least in game terms.

In real life terms, its pretty similar. Almost everything that is marked with the Rising Sun was a Japanese possession, except the “Siam” space which represents the Siamese alliance with the Japanese.

AA50 brought the Battleship down to 20, a comfortable place that in that game I think is right. But AAP40 makes the BB strictly weaker but not any cheaper. The BB now has to go back to naval bases to repair rather than repairing on the spot, which can be a powerful shackle in a game where the one or two turns to go back to repair can make all the difference. The BB gets no new strength, other than convoy disruption, which is much better done by cheaper ships. As a result, I rarely see even the Americans buy them, much less other powers. Do you guys think BBs are underpowered or overcosted now? What’s a better price point for them?

Me:

Oh well, I guess I was wrong [about Canada being a split-income entity]. Cool house rule?

Larry:

Canada cannot be separated from the UK economy.

@allweneedislove:

@finnman:

So what your suggesting is a split income. :? :? :? :?

i think britain being forced to spend canadian ipcs in canadian industrial complexs would have added fun logistical problems and spread the battle of the atlantic(more fun)

i am not making a suggestion because the game is finished. this is just my opinion on how the game could have been improved.

it is funny how i am expressing opinions on a game that is not released.

I agree. However, Larry seemed pretty adamant that it shouldn’t be a house rule…

India = 3 (3)
Malaya = 3 (6)
Hong Kong = 3 (9)
Borneo = 4 (13)
Burma = 1 (14)
Shan State = 1 (15)
West Canada = 1 (16)
Yukon = 0 (16)

16 is correct.

Yeah, they needed quality control for Pacific, big time.

What would be the point? Plus, Harris gave Japan so many planes for a reason.

@Croesus:

Aha! But would Croatia, Bulgaria, Slovakia, Hungary, and Romania, together form an “Axis Support” power. Geographically it makes sense. You could also have Thailand and finland, and make a super “Axis support team”
They could hold 11 IPC w/o finland or 14 with (just guessing)
Either way, They could put up a fight (with heavy german support)

I actually rather like this idea!

I don’t think the Shinano class is a good carrier for Japan. Sure it was big, but it also was designed as an aux carrier. It was never meant for fleet action. Plus the BB has to be a Yamato, so we’d already have the Yamato hull for the BB. I think the Akagi would be a much better choice for the CV than the Shinano. The Akagi is a very beautiful carrier.

Planes today avoid the Himalayas if at all possible. Even the slightest fog can be deadly.

The Sahara, well that’s another matter.

Its a flat 6 ipc bonus for China. It does not increase. China gets the bonus if the road is open as of the collect income phase for China, as any objective. It does not have to stay open the whole round.

@captainjack:

I downloaded the latest unstable version, but I didn’t see Europe on there…?  I have an Apple computer, but I wouldn’t think that would matter.  Any suggestions?
Thanks.

Pacific is in the alpha stages. It is a available but not terribly playable.
Europe is not out, not in real life nor in TripleA. It will not be available in TripleA until it is available in real life, as they need to have it in real life to clone it for the computer. It will probably release August.

Any news on when Italy’s going to be available?

Let’s say the attackers have 1 cruiser and 1 transport carry 2 infantry
The defender has 1 transport in the sea zone and 1 infantry defending the island
The attacker moves in to take the island.

The transport dies automatically, and the cruiser can’t bombard, right?
In tripleA it seems I can ignore the transport and still bombard. Is this true?
Or is it such that I kill the transport and can bombard?

How is it ahistorical, really? Its a situation that never came up, so we can’t really say that its going against history. I think if the British Isles fell then Anzac and Canada definitely would have fought on. Anzac would actually need an additional rule to make this not true since it is a seperate power. Assuming Canada has a split income, it makes good sense for it to be able to fight on without the British Isles.

@The:

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.

Different pieces is cool, but we probably aren’t going to see that. Use the mint-green UK pieces from revised if Canada as a different color really matters to you.

My argument, though, is that a split-income, shared-pieces rule set like the original AA:P with India/Australia makes Canada stronger than having them as a whole separate power. It still forces UK to have forces cross the Atlantic (sweet), still gives Canada a bit of independence (also sweet), but allows for shared attacks and shared tech without many special rules (also good).  Its actually in the end simpler to have split-income, shared-pieces. Having them as a separate power with shared movement would require a bunch of rule exceptions that would be hard to remember.

@Brain:

Naval battles are always stymied by the super stack strategy.

The new capital ship repair rules help with that a little.