Posts made by Weekend Gamer

Probably the pug-ugliest gals you’ve ever seen!  I’m thinking Ms. Balbricker from Porky’s!!!

IL, thanks – I just looked at the pics again and saw all those mini-CSS Virginias!  :-D  I’m a little tapped out now just having bought 2 games this week alone.  But I’ll keep this one in mind.  I’m definitely looking for something besides “Battle Cry” from the Civil War era.  It’s a nice game, but I prefer strategy to tactical games.

@Jennifer:

The trick is to get 2 to 3 transports on USA 1 then at least 1 transport a round after taht, preferably 2 in some rounds.  And no, don’t stop when you can fill them all, you want the extra fodder to use against a Japanese fleet invasion of the Med.

Good point, Jen.  One mistake I have made is not building enough transport fodder to kill excess Axis fleet.  The Axis have more fleet in Revised than in Classic and you have to adjust your American strategy accordingly.  Otherwise, you can rule the Atlantic, but be rebuffed from entering the Med.  That really sucks if you are the Allies.

@Jennifer:

I realized the same about DS9 when it went on reruns on SPIKE.  They basically copied B5 episode for episode but a season or two later.  They did eventually get more seasons in the end, but only because Stranzinsky had scripted teh series to end with Sheridan being President.  He wanted to quit after that, but Turner Television bought the rights and talked him into another season AND a spin-off, both of which flopped because Stranzisky was basically flying by the seat of his pants and not from a major script with scheduled major events like he did for Seasons 1-4.

I had heard or read somewhere that Straczynski (I checked the spelling on the Warner Bros. site) had the story plotted out for seven seasons and that season 4 (the last season I saw) was supposed to be the mid-point.  That is apparently wrong, because only 5 seasons got made and I’m sure he could have gotten two more made if he chose to.  Anyway, there is some good stuff on the Warner Bros. website, for what it’s worth. http://www2.warnerbros.com/babylon5/home.html.  Also, found this fan site.  http://www.midwinter.com/lurk/lurker.html  Enjoy!

So Froodster, what is the latest?  Any more interviews?  An offer maybe?

BTW, I’ve been keeping quiet about it, but I, too, am a lawyer.  :-)  I practice in Florida, so it’s a little different (we call it “clerking”, not “articling”).  I agree with SS, almost everyone fears going into court before they’ve actually done it.  Before long, though, you begin realizing you are often the smartest person in the room and usually the most knowledgeable about what you are talking about (if you prepare properly, of course).  Learning to “think on your feet” is daunting, but think of it like learning to ride a bike – you learn to do it, because you get sick and tired of falling and busting your @ss!  Before you know it, you’re having fun.  Knowing how to put a jerk in his place is a very satisfying feeling.  :-D

I still remember my first deposition.  I was sitting in a chiropractor’s office (of all places) taking his deposition and was shaking like a leaf!  I get a laugh thinking about it now.  Fear not!  You too can learn to advocate.  Because, unless you are a law-review caliber writer, chances are you will have to make your career in the trenches with the rest of us and not in the ivory tower!  :wink:

@balungaloaf:

favorite episodes anyone?

and did you like the show more with the first captain or the second captain?  and more in depth, did you like the show more at the beggining of its showings or more toward the end of its run.Â

i like the build up to the shadow vs. vorlon wars.   and i have to disagree jen, the vorlons were way more hardcore than the shadows.

I absolutely loved this show the first three seasons.  I would literally race home from work to make sure I made it home in time.  I even had a buddy tape episodes when I was out of town so I wouldn’t miss anything.  Then, they had that ridiculous episode where the Vorlons and Shadows just “went away” and the show lost it for me right there.  Three years of build up only to have The Biggest Anti-Climax in Sci-Fi History!  (Although it was kind of cool to see the Vorlons “go postal” there for a while).  I loved all the characters, but Londo was my personal favorite.  G’Kar was equally well-acted, but I just liked Londo better.  His sadistic pleasure at others’ misery was appealing in an anti-hero kind of way.

So anyone hear what Stryzinski is up to these days?

IL, one thing that has impressed me from reading various historical novels about the Civl War was how these armies were moving all over the place using rail lines.  Did you incorporate rail movement into this game?  I’m just curious.  It seems to me that would be a key strategic component to any Civil War strategy game.  I would also love to see the CSS Virginia and CSS Arkansas incorporated as special pieces somehow (make them like self-healing BBs, say).  I know it probably breaks some gaming convention, but those were such special ships historically speaking and it would give the South some unique units to screw with the Yanks with.

SS, please tell us a little more about this variant.  Why SHOULD we want to play it?  ADVERTISE for Christ’s sake!!!  Make us WANT to play!  :wink:

Wow! :-o Now THAT’S cool!  Nice work Mr. Jennsen!!!  :-) :mrgreen:

General, if I’m not mistaken, this poll was generated by your amusement/amazement that I had 3 or more games going on at once, including my game with you.  Did my game against you suffer because I had other games going on?  It’s possible, because I did lose to you.   :wink:  But seriously, I think I made my critical mistake in that game fairly early on, so by the time my other games fired up, I was already fighting an uphill battle.  (I would add that if I had a just a little better dice, I might still have won, but I digress . . . .)

I’m still fairly new to Revised and to playing by forum, but I agree with SS that playing multiple games at a time improves my play.  Through repetition, you learn to recognize certain patterns in a game which I think are key to developing your play to a consistently high level.  Frankly, I could not manage it with a physical board.  It’s fun to set up the physical board, but a mess to clean up.  Why bother?  That said, I will grant you that several of the better players on this site (Switch and Mojo come to mind) are board players, so I will give them their due.  But for me, I get bored storing at one game map at a time.  There are only so many possibilities in a single game.  Once I’ve figured out my next move (maybe two), that’s as far as I go.  As someone smart once said, no battleplan survives first contact with the enemy.  So why bother to plan 5 turns ahead when your opponent will probably do something to completely torpodo your well-laid plans?  Do I have a long-term strategy?  Sure.  Do I sweat the details many moves in advance?  Nah.  Life’s too short.

Oh, and to answer your poll, I’d say 3 at a time is good, 4 is a little hairy but manageable if I’m not sick and if work doesn’t get in the way.  :-P

@Mr:

I saw some of the expansions of A&A have cards.  Do they offset the luck factor of the dice?

I’ve played a many of card-driven military board games and the luck factor is just a high as dice only games.

Ahem, if you are drawings cards, how is that any less random (barring cheating) than rolling dice?

I agree with critmonster – the bizarre results make the game more interesting.  Think of it this way – if every game played out the exact same way, then how interesting is that?  Chess is a bad comparison in some ways because, except for the fact White moves first, the players are perfectly evenly matched.  Not so in A&A.  The game is carefully balanced, but the Allies and Axis clearly don’t have all the same pieces or all the same advantages.  Their positions, pieces, economies and opportunities are all different.

A great example is a recent game I played where, as Japan, I DID NOT GET A SINGLE HIT IN PEARL HARBOR!  Lost 5 pieces (yes, probably should have pulled back) and then proceeded to lose my transport fleet on the U.S.'s turn.  Talk about your big holes, but it was great fun figuring out how to dig out of that situation.  I probably won’t face that again for another 50 games, but you bet I’ll always remember THAT battle!

So my point is, the bizarrely random results are the stuff of which great war stories are made!  That’s why we all spend our time on a forum dedicated to a dice game instead of being hunched over our chess boards.  :wink:

Okay, we’ve covered Russia pretty thoroughly, thanks to Newpaintbrush, Jenn., Switch and others.  Now let’s talk about Germany.  This time, to preempt the argument about “what about the capital”, we’ll include Germany, at #1 obviously.  South Europe must be #2 because, if S.Europe falls for good, Germany is surely toast in 1-2 turns.  Beyond that, I’ll let the list do the talking:

1.  Germany – 'nuff said
2.  S.Europe – gateway to Berlin
3.  E.Europe – launching pad for Operation Barbarossa
4.  Ukraine – best path to Moscow
5.  Caucuses – best destination on the way to Moscow (I hear the beach is nice.  8-))
6.  W.Euro. – economy booster
7.  W.Russia – it’s hard to reach, but controlling this territory means you have Russia by the short hairs!
8.  Karelia – holding this territory stems the flow of Allied reinforcements, if only temporarily
9.  Balkans – income, proximity to capital
10. Belorussia – income

Honorable mention: 
England – if Sea Lion opportunity arises (which is rare), it cannot be ignored.
Egypt – good early boost to income, and holding it closes the Suez to any British fleet in the Indian Ocean.

IMO, 1 through 5 are hard to argue.  I can see some debate on 6-10, especially the relative merits of W.Europe, W.Russia and Karelia.  If you are playing a minor victory game, then Karelia may be more important.

Thoughts?  Provocative arguments?  Anyone want to make a case for Norway?

NPB:  Those are some interesting and insightful points, especially about Kazakh.  I think you are looking at it, though, from the Axis perspective more than from RUSSIA’s persepctive.  Not to say your points are not valid because they are indeed.

In fact, I think that post qualifies as an essay.  You should submit to Mr. Jensen who is looking for strategic essays as I recall.  I think a lot of players could benefit.  :-)

Make that WEST through India – getting sleepy here

Jenn, your math is off:

Starting in Japan, Novo. is three steps away:  1) Buryatia, 2) Yakut, 3) Novo.
Starting in Manch., Novo is  "      "      "  :  1)    "        2)    "  , 3)    "      or 1) China, 2) Sinkiang, 3) Novo. – same distance!
Starting in Kwang – I’ll give you this one  :wink:
Starting in FIC – from here, Sinkiang is the shortest route.  But if you’re staring here, you’re as likely to head east through India as to head northwest through Sinkiang.  Why?  Let’s list the reasons:  1) India 3 IPCs, 2) Persia (which IS a bottleneck - notice it’s #7 on my list), 3) 3 moves from Kazakh OR Caucuses!, and 4) Africa is in that direction.

Expensive to go the Southern route?  Compared to what?  You gotta build transports or ICs to get stuff to Asia.  You start with 10 free infantry in the Islands which only move with transports.  That’s 30 IPCs!!!  (Coincidentally the same value as 2 ICs).

The bottom line is, once Japan has stuff in Yakut (and why wouldn’t it?), you’re position in Sinkiang is untenable.  I personally think Sinkiang was MORE defensible in Classic because you could build the Indian IC and move British troops up to sweep the Japs out of Sinkiang or bolster its defenses.  In Revised, only Russia can reinforce Sinkiang when it could possibly make a difference (barring a Sinkiang IC, that is).  And those Russian troops are in short supply and in danger of being flanked.

Anyone else think that Sinkiang is critical to Russia?

Jenn, there is another forum for political discussion.  The title to this one is “Other Games” and, no, I don’t think that includes politics . . .  :roll:

Assuming the territory in question is friendly when you drop off your troops during Noncombat.  If it is enemy territory, then the answer is no – you must do that move during the combat move phase.  (And await the results of the seazone battle to see if your amphibious assault ever hits the beach).

@cyan:

@Weekend:

Russia is definitely more fun in the Revised game.  There’s more territories to fight over and you have to do more than just buy infantry to survive.  I definitely like to purchase some armor so I can mow down stray Axis pieces when Germany or Japan come at my lines too aggressively.  Armor creates more dead zones than artillery IMO because of its ability to blitz.  I also like to pop out a third fighter by the 5th or 6th turn (circumstances permitting) to maximize my flexibility.  I like to conserve that armor when it’s late in the 3rd quarter and the Allies are taking friggin’ forever to arrive on the scene.

Yes, Russia I enjoy because, after all, which country is closer to the center of the action?  NOBODY!

right you are but i think Japan is slightly better beacuse no ones going to stop you most of the time.

Japan is the Peyton Manning of A&AR – it puts up big numbers every time.  However, if the Allies do their job right, they do a Bill Belichik and run out the clock on the Japs.  It’s all about the numbers . . .

@Jennifer:

I’d put Sinkiang way above Novosibirsk.  From here you defend Novosibirsk, Kazakh and Russia.  SFE/Yak/Evenki are all worthless, the three together barely equate Ukraine.  Bury is a lost cause.  If you have it on Russia 3 you are EXTREMELY lucky or you are playing National Advantages.

Jenn, you’ve played way more games of Revised than I have, but based on years of experience playing Classic and the layout of the map, I would have to disagree.  Sinkiang can be flanked!  Therefore, it cannot be more valuable than Novosibirsk, which Japan CANNOT avoid if it’s going to Moscow.

@newpaintbrush:

1. West Russia.
2. Caucasus.
3. Novosibirsk
4. Russia

if you know what you’re doing.

–

West Russia is the key position.

–

I definitely agree that West Russia is a critical territory and I respect the argument for placing it #1.  If you hold W.Russia with sufficient force, then Caucuses should be safe on the Western front, anyway.

@newpaintbrush:

Novosibirsk controls the east. Early game, Yakut and Ssinkiang are key, with Persia being important if Japan focuses on India early. Both Yakut and Ssinkiang will need to be retreated from in the face of a strong Japanese threat, though, so Novosibirsk is the fallback point. Once Novosibirsk falls, Japan can move its tanks from Yakut to Ssinkiang or Kazakh, and vice versa, which makes Japan extremely hard to contain. Eventually Russia may be forced to retreat from Novosibirsk, but when it has to, it’s watchout time for Russia.

I have to agree – Novosibirsk does deserve higher billing.  It should be higher than Ukraine and Belorussia.  It’s just that, economically, it doesn’t do much for Russia.  You spend 6-9 IPCs or more to take back a 2 IPC territory.  Granted, it is important.  But that’s an expensive trade for Russia that’s not sustainable long term.  But I’ll re-rank as follows:

1.  West Russia
2.  Caucuses
3.  Kazakh (if this falls for good, then it’s REALLY watch out time for Russia)
4.  Novo.
5.  Etc.

And, yes, Russia is obviously a cool territory and, yes Switch, it ultimately is #1.  But as I qualified my post, this is about the territories OTHER THAN THE CAPITAL that are important to Russia (to hold, that is).

(You know, it’s funny, NPB.  It never occurred to me to send Russian fighters to London to stop the Sea Lion.  I would hope the bloody Limeys are paying better attention than that to need RUSSIAN air power to save their ruddy behinds!  Not to mention, there should be American air power somewhere near.  But you’re right, the tactical possibilities with Russia are endless, which is why I am enjoying playing it so much!)

@Micoom:

have a look at this link;http://www.geocities.com/dutcheastindies/japan_paratroop.html
maybe it helps for some info

Ugh – dense reading.  :-P  You guys are hard-core.