Posts made by vodot

@CWO:

I think that this Zeppelin Carrier should be given a substantial amount of armour plating, and that its defensive rating should be increased accordingly.  In fact, if it’s given enough armour, it will become completely invulnerable to the enemy’s fighter defenses because it won’t be able to take off and thus will never reach enemy territory.  By sitting on the ground at home in this manner, it would, however, be vulnerable to enemy SBRs, so to deal with this threat it should be given a significant built-in AAA capability.

wait- so much armor plating that it could remain submerged under water for long periods without surfacing?? Unterseezepplin!

A0
D2
M1
C20
3-hit

Carry 2 planes when not Sumberged
AAA Roll when not submerged
Surprise Strike when submerged (Strength 0)
Boosts enemy subs to A4D4 on a 1:1 basis

@P@nther:

@vodot:

@P@nther:

@axis_roll:

Can I non-combat a sub into a SZ that contains a Destroyer and immediately submerge?

You can non-combat move into that SZ but you cannot submerge. Submerging is done during Conduct Combat Phase. Also a Destroyer cancels the Submersible ability of subs.
Combat would result in case the move happened during Combat Move Phase.

So when would the ensuing combat occur? Does it necessarily happen during the next Conduct Combat phase, or does it only occur if the active power has combat to conduct in that zone?

Can I sketch some scenarios?

1. G sub moves into SZ with UK DD.
on next (UK) turn, can they move DD out of that zone, avoiding combat? If so, is that a combat move or a non-combat move?

2. G sub moves into SZ with US DD.
on next (UK) turn, if they have no units in (and move no units into) that SZ, does combat still occur between the G sub and US DD? Can the UK move through that space and ignore the sub, even though it is not ‘submerged?’

Combat is initiated by the power moving during Combat Move Phase. It is resolved during the Conduct Combat Phase immediately after the Combat Move Phase.

Scenario 1: Here the “Sea Units Starting in Hostile Sea Zones” rules apply (rulebook page 14). The UK destroyer moves from a hostile sea zone to escape combat as its combat move (also on page 13), then.

Scenario 2: In case Germany moves the sub into the SZ during Combat Move Phase, combat occurs during Germany’s Conduct Combat Phase.
In case Germany moves the sub there during Noncombat Move Phase no combat occurs, as this is not a Combat Move and the Conduct Combat Phase is over for that German turn. UK can move through that space simply ignoring the German sub - (the German sub can’t be submerged, as submerging takes place only during Conduct Combat Phase). When it comes to US’ turn, US can choose to engage the sub or not.

Ok, so units of two opposing powers can be present in the same SZ without combat, as long as it is not the Conduct Combat phase during one of those powers’ turn? Appreciate the help and your patience.

@P@nther:

@axis_roll:

Can I non-combat a sub into a SZ that contains a Destroyer and immediately submerge?

You can non-combat move into that SZ but you cannot submerge. Submerging is done during Conduct Combat Phase. Also a Destroyer cancels the Submersible ability of subs.
Combat would result in case the move happened during Combat Move Phase.

So when would the ensuing combat occur? Does it necessarily happen during the next Conduct Combat phase, or does it only occur if the active power has combat to conduct in that zone?

Can I sketch some scenarios?

1. G sub moves into SZ with UK DD.
on next (UK) turn, can they move DD out of that zone, avoiding combat? If so, is that a combat move or a non-combat move?

2. G sub moves into SZ with US DD.
on next (UK) turn, if they have no units in (and move no units into) that SZ, does combat still occur between the G sub and US DD? Can the UK move through that space and ignore the sub, even though it is not ‘submerged?’

@Nowhere:

@Midnight_Reaper:

@Nowhere:

If it’s “Hungry Hungry Hippos: 1941 edition”; Now with Japanese Tiger-Is and British and American IS-2s.

You say that like it’s a bad thing! :-D I prefer to think of them as Heavy Tanks for all the major powers. Just because the Japanese never built Tigers doesn’t mean that they could have never done so. After all, Japan never conquered India in real life either, but that doesn’t stop Japanese players from doing so on a regular basis.

It is a bad thing. The Japanese didn’t build Tiger tanks, the Germans did… the Americans and British didn’t build IS-2s, the Russians did. Using the wrong equipment for the wrong country is a bad thing… just watch the Iron Eagle movies and tell me how cool Russian F4 Phantom Migs are and tell me its a great movie… bad things are made by people being lazy and loose with history… like Iron Eagle and 1941.

Japanese tanks were terrible from start to finish. When all your tanks make the M4 Sherman look like an overpowered, unstoppable juggernaut, your nation has serious tank-design problems.

Look, I don’t have a problem with alternate history… I don’t have a problem with saying “maybe if the Japanese tried a little harder here, and committed some more forces there, and the British foolishly let their guard down, a different history in Burma or India might occur”… that’s one thing… but to give the Japanese tank industry Tiger tanks? To say America and England just threw up their hands and said “you know what, we’ll just mass produce Russian tanks instead”!!! No thanks.

If I want heavy tanks for the US, England and Japan, i’ll just go to HBG and buy a few of the actual tanks produced by those nations. 1941 has some nice unique sculpts… and I use them for the appropriate nation… American & British IS-2s, Japanese Tiger-Is? I tossed every one of them in my trash can… it was fun hoops practice.

I think we can all agree that it’s within each of our own rights to determine for ourselves where to draw our own ‘accuracy vs. practicality’ line in the sand; for reasons financial, aesthetic, OCD, or otherwise. I’m sure that’s a thing that has been discussed ad nauseum on this forum, of all places.

On the issue of Japanese heavy tanks, for example, I think it’s a little silly to allow the Japanese to “try harder” in one arena (say, committing land and naval resources to the conquest of Alaska) while preventing them from “trying harder” in another arena (say, committing scientific and economic resources to improving their tank manufacturing). Is this a deterministic simulation, or a game?

Sculpt accuracy is also a slippery (and expensive!) slope- and it is ultimately just as arbitrary. Someone could purge their entire setup of all non-native units, but I guarantee they’re still playing with green IS-2s somewhere- in that we all make trade offs between perfect accuracy and practicality, and use our imagination or ignorance to cover the gaps. It’s just a matter of what an individual is or isn’t willing to personally accept to meet their minimum conditions for ‘Secondary Belief.’

If you get the urge to throw any more units in the trash, Nowhere, I have a mailing address for you! :)

@Midnight_Reaper:

@barney:

Concerned for everyone else as well. Major Black Eye for the Brand. Would’ve been better if they never released it.

Hush you. I waited a long time for them to gin up a new version. It’s imperfect, what else is new? I’m just glad I could get one for myself for less than the price of a used car.

As for board warp-age, a little bit of plexiglass over the top, and Bob’s your uncle.

-Midnight-Reaper

I agree.  Even with these defects I’m really pleased to get a copy. It doesn’t hurt that I got mine for a phenomenal price, either!

@warTorn:

I want it to be that cheap in Canada is what I want

How much is it in Canada?  I have a ‘special’ (exterior box damage, like I’m buying it for the box :roll:) coming in from Amazon this very minute that I would be willing to ship to you at cost, if it’s more economical than you ordering direct…

Nate

Hi All!

Name: Nate
Area: Portland, OR/Vancouver, WA
Games: A&A (any; I own AAR, 41, 42.2, and AA50).

@axis_roll:

@Argothair:

Well, you could let the Allies choose where to put it. Australia, Brazil, South Africa, or even Archangel could be reasonable choices, although I agree that most players would want it in India.

Well, sure, it could be anywhere, but if you want it to be the most useful, India would be the best

What about requiring that the TT contain either a victory city or be worth at least 2 IPC, but then auto-boosting whatever TT gets the bid IC to 3 IPC (if less)? Does boosting Australia to 3 help make AUS a viable location for the bid factory, or does it simply ensure that Japan gains another point of income? What about Egypt or SA for a hard counter in Africa, or Hawaii for the US? If it is just the ‘2 IPC-ness’ of these outlying territories, I think we could fix that. If they’re simply in a strategically less relevant position (relative to India), not much to be done.

Trying to combine an Argothairian idea (make the periphery more interesting) with a Black Elkian idea (balance the game with one elegant change) with axis’ chicagoism to at least the extent that we could see a viable PTO or KJF.

Adding an IC might not make the periphery interesting… and those ‘pre-conditions’ might be less than elegant… and maybe all it does is expand Japan’s PTO (which hardly wants doing). Who knows?

@taamvan:

G40 - infinite (or seems like it)
G42 - at least 2 sessions or until beer is depleted and board flipped during #ragequit

:rolling_on_the_floor_laughing: I have never played G40 (played P40.1 once), but that’s definitely how it appears, given what just P40 was like.

I was hoping you’d post these!

What about waiving the bid and giving the allies a free IC+AAA to place somewhere?

Thanks YG, this is terrific!

Interesting that someone decided that Russia is likely to out-navy Italy (+2 TR and +2 CA)- just in case Stalin decided to float the mighty Caspian Armada? Bummer for those of us for whom the italy units were always a big selling point :)

Yeah, my copy has four issues:
1. Dented setup boxes (all of them!)
2. Deformed infantry rifles (1-5 each side)
3. Molding defects (short shots, delaminations, burn marks)
4. Sprue/cutting defects (large/sharp white burs)

I haven’t done an OCD count or anything, but I’d estimate that most of the ships (esp. Carriers) suffer from #4, and at least a handful of the other units for each side appear to suffer from #3. Contacted Wizards and got the high volume response; hopefully we’ll see some replacement pieces and boxes flowing out eventualy.  It’s a bummer for WotC and the A&A brand, but this really does look like 100% MFG/China error given that the molds look identical to 42.2 and those pieces came out nearly perfectly.

On the plus side, my map does not have the warp/gap that some others are describing; and all of the counters/etc. look great.

UPDATE: got a new message from WotC asking for pictures before they will escalate to the parts replacement team. More than happy to oblige. No additional update yet.

@warTorn:

@vodot:

Guys, use 7zip!

Seriously, freaking WinRAR!? For what- archiving the album of .mp3s you downloaded from napster over the course of an entire evening with your state-of-the-art, 38880 baud, dial-up modem?

I kid, but seriously: www.7zip.org.

EDIT: If you’re on a mac, use this instead (it’s a 7zip port) www.kekaosx.com/

YOU ARE A SAVIOR!!!

:-)

wow, and here I was coming here to post that Amazon was selling it for $53.  Aaaaaand order canceled

Guys, use 7zip!

Seriously, freaking WinRAR!? For what- archiving the album of .mp3s you downloaded from napster over the course of an entire evening with your state-of-the-art, 38880 baud, dial-up modem?

I kid, but seriously: www.7zip.org.

EDIT: If you’re on a mac, use this instead (it’s a 7zip port) www.kekaosx.com/

sweet! D10.  Do you know if anyone has done a complete “Space Empires” -style conversion with D10s for attack + defense (armor) ratings + individual unit-by-unit targeting? I would LOVE to figure out something like that.

@Argothair:

…thegamecrafter.com, which will sell you 30 infantry, 20 artillery, 10 tanks, and 10 fighters for a total of $6.

Which ones were these, the on-the-sprue “Military” units? Those look like a steal! What are your impressions RE: quality & scale?

awesome.  I’ve got your setup printed out to try once I finish my current solo vanilla 42.2 game. I have some homemade Italians, and am debating whether to paint up some Chinese + French units, or just use the substitutions I mentioned earlier.

:lol: