Posts made by WILD BILL

I’m not sure there will convoy boxes in the mid or south Atlantic (maybe there should be). I would think they would be say off the coast of Brazil or Morocco. Honestly I’m not sure if Germany would even get the opportunity to stray that far in this game so it might not be a benefit to them. Japan might find itself in the South Atlantic though if the allies try some version of KGF. It would be great however to see some kinda fighting going on down there, convoy’s would be one way to attract it.

Although it will probably be a 1 turn shuck across for the US to get to Africa, I hope axis air power and subs will force some detours. I’m also glad to see (through Larry’s above mention post) that US to UK will be 2 turns at least by air or sea…

@Razor:

Keep in mind Tanks cost 6 IPC now. Razor hardly doubt Japan will try Tank Push Mechanic in this edition.

That’s a good point Raztag, WB thinks that a Jap push through India would be better. Kill 2 birds 1 stone that way. Now you have an IC closer to pump out cheaper units to really stick the Caucaus. That will tie up Russia enough for Germany to sack Moscow. You will have to make good def against USA though or they will kick your a$$.

There was a lot of back stabbing going on in WWII. Hitler did it to Stalin, Franco backed out on Hitler, England walk out on France(although forced). I don’t see how you could hold any merit for any of the treaties or agreements of the time. They weren’t worth the paper they were written on. If Japan hadn’t bitten off more then they could chew with the US they could have attacked Russia’s back door at any time. I’m still not sure why they nailed Pearl. I guess they thought they could scare us into signing some type of agreement allowing them to do as they pleased in the Pacific as long as they left us alone. The Tripartite Pact also guaranteed that Germany and Italy would join in against the US (another deterrent aimed at keeping the US from declaring war).  Boy that backfired, now Roosevelt had the ammo he needed.

When this game starts the US is not at war. Hitler felt he would be parading through Moscow by late fall of 1941, just as he did in Paris in the spring of 1940. If Hitler could have got Japan to attack Russia’s back door around the time of Barbarossa (a double back stabbing on Stalin) Hitler might have got his parade. There were open talks of Japan ending its nonaggression pact with Russia, because of the Tripartite Pact it had prior with Germany. Japan instead decided to go after the Euro colonies in the Pacific and invite the US into the war.

This game starts before all this. You as ruler of Japan can do what ever you want especially the first couple rounds. In the global game if you want to attack Siberia then as Tiger Woods would say “just do it!”

I would think that in the global game a Japanese attack on Russia would not bring the US into the war, just as attacking China won’t.

@Flashman:

The crucial question is this: can allied ships hop across the Atlantic in one turn?

Everything that happens in this theatre depends on this mechanic, for example it determines absolutely where Germany stations it’s U-Boats, or indeed if it’s worth building them at all.

I always thought the US 1 turn hop across to England or Africa was kinda lame, although when you consider a turn is 4-6 months it is realistic some would argue. There will be more sea zones for sure, but the NB will give you that +1 bonus so 1 extra sz between them won’t make much difference.

**Larry did say however that a ftr could not leave the US and land in England, that it would have to use Iceland as a layover (or land on an A/C I guess). So if you figure a US ftr leaving an AB in E.US gets 5 moves, and can’t get to England, then there has to be at least 5 sz between them. So as a ship leaving from a port on E.US (3 moves) you would be one sz short of getting to the coast of England. So it should take 2 turns to get planes or boats from US to UK. This is a rather large change in the mechanics.

@Kilukru:

My guess is : Spain will be at 3 moves from the US and the first german occupied zone at 4, this way, if the allies invade neutral spain they will have a 1 turn landing platform from the US.

I agree that E.US w/AB & NB shouldl be 4 sz (3 moves by ship) from both Africa & Spain. You will be able to hop across in 1 turn by ship, and once you take the tt your planes will be able to hop across in one turn also. (This part is only speculation).

I guess you could build both the IC and AB rd #2 ($28), your income should be on the rise.

IC-$12, NB-$15, AB-$15, new base of operations priceless.

Ok maybe I’m a little slap happy only 2 days left.

@Krieghund:

@Omega:

Quick question : can allied fighters participate in the defense of a bombed IC?

Yes.

Krieg another quick sorta related question can friendly ftrs/tac bmr scramble from an island AB to def the surrounding sea zone. Sorry if you already answered this at some point.

Yea I think that having a base of operations off the coast of FIC will prove to be very strategic for Japan. Especially because it can move in without declaring war round 1. Its a nice staging point to hit China, India or Australia, and it will take a while for the US to get there to help.

rd #1 build NB on Hainin, invade FIC
rd #2 build minor IC on FIC (could also build AB on Hainin or wait til later )
rd #3 build according to your needs (reaction from enemy etc) very flexible.

Yea that’s a good observation Vareel, about putting AB & NB on Hainam. You would get the benefit of the FIC IC (need to build one) to drop in ships, and the air support of the island (Hainam) off the coast for your navy. Its just 3 spaces to assault India, I also noticed it is 3 spaces from Western Australia (possible invasion) keep them guessing. It will give you a two prong attack on China/India by land (via Manchuria also). It could also serve as a base to protect your money islands. Being only 3 spaces from Japan allows you to combine your navies or give you another base later in the game if Japan itself is under siege. Lots of options. The only drawback is the cost would be rather high, but you could hold off on building the air base until later rounds when you might need it for defensive reasons.

On another note the Caroline islands (comes with AB & NB) might be hard pressed to keep in later rounds as it will have a big bulls-eye on it.

Quote
It’s  why the success rate of empires is, as of yet, Zero. Because vast territory is very difficult to supply and easily susceptible to attack.

As far as Empires, the common thread is they always come to an end. The last being the British. Most of the Commonwealth has gained independence (although still very loyal). WWII marked the batten being past to its offspring. The US is kinda at an economic and political crises right now. I hope we have learned from the past as we seem to be spread a little thin in world affairs, as things at home are also under a great deal of pressure.

I think it will cut down on SBR only missions for sure. Its like when the defender gets radar (AA @ 2) SBR slows down or comes to a halt. As the attacker you don’t want them firing @ 2, because if they hit then the SBR campaign was a bust. You may have lost more then the defender. Now you could have a greater risk then reward. As the attacker you will need to be more selective about the facility you are attacking. Find the weakest link and attack it. As the defender you can’t possibly put ftrs on all your tt containing a facility, so it could defiantly change some strats.

Its going to be a big change for Germany/Russia. Do you hold your ftrs on your IC or bring them up to the front lines for attack/def purpose. You may find your self basically assigning ftrs to certain tt. It will be more help to a power that is playing more defensive with the battle coming to him, because his ftrs based at his IC/capital will be able to protect him from SBR and be in range to attack the enemy. Could say the same for the island nations, because there is normally ftrs based there.

I wonder if ftrs should have had yet another reduction in cost. If your in a game with a lot of SBR going on. and carriers not able to land planes if damaged, there could surly be a lot ftrs going down. Each power is getting more income now though, so maybe its all good.

I agree with Raz, this game is designed to have more detail and a higher level of thought and planning. With that said the best part is that through house rules you can change that base level up or down according to how your group wants to play. I would suggest you play several games as intended though before you pass judgment. I remember in AA50 I hated the new transport rules at first. Even tried to force feed some house rules early on. Now having to protect your transports makes more sense to me, and I wouldn’t go back. I like the fact that each game has evolved a little more.

I have heard people say they use major and minor IC’s in house rules. They just use 2 IC’s (maybe glue together) for major, and 1 IC for minor. We all have extra pieces to do it.

Razortag, Wild Bill thinks he might like new SBR too!  He not sure, because attacker could end up losing more then the target in the end. Time will tell, WB can’t wait to test it out.

We use our own chart to track stuff. It has all powers on 1 sheet by round with the starting IPC’s. I’m sure many of us use something similar. We track IPC’s earned from tt, NO’s, $ saved from last turn, and war bonds if you have them (reminder). It also tracks how many researches (dice) and the techs you have. It makes life much easier. That way there is no questions about did I get paid for this or that, or the markers on the production board shifted. You can also track progress gained or lost. It also helps if you have to finish your game on another day.
Even with the chart, most of us still like the IPC’s to buy units though. I guess its because that’s what we’re used to.

@JohnBarbarossa:

One other thing. There was some talk (by Larry?) that the USA had a motive to keep a large fleet based at Hawaii (so Pearl would be re-lived again). Our US player thought differently and kept the fleet safely at the west coast to build it up first. But when we finised our test game we saw that there was a route from Japan to Hawaii of only 3 spaces (with a naval base). This means that Hawaii is constant at risk and this is probably the reason why you have to base a fleet there (or at least make it a deadzone for Japan).

Regarding Hawaii, is it possible for Japan to get its victory conditions very early. I heard it needs 6 vc. Can they get the other 5 then hit Hawaii for the 6th, forcing the US to build up there?

I think you should change your name from Funcioneta to Funchina.

Hope you don’t take this the wrong way, because most of what you post I agree with.

As far as carriers go I agree with ksm. The way it played out in AA50 is once your carrier was hit it sunk, your planes had to find an alternate place to land. Its the same now except you have a chance to limp the carrier back and keep it. 
The 2 hit units are going to be bitter/sweat. This along with other changes/additions will make the naval battles much better and more realistic. Its adding a degree of logistics AA has been missing.

Well at least the French will be able to leave France lol.

Well at least it leaves the door open for now. :-D

Krieg I have a question regarding airbases/scramble. From what i understand an island is a 1 territory surrounded by 1 sea zone. Japan is an island and Australia is not. I’m ok with that. I see Australia as very large and is considered a continent anyway.
What I was wondering about is the Euro side (I know I’m jumping the gun.) By this rule UK would not be able to scramble.(2 tt multiple sz). Size wise Japan and England are comparable.  Most consider them both to be island nations. Is there going to be an exception, as the UK was very good at defending its coast with the RAF. Especially when you consider its radar was much more advanced then Japans lack there of.

On a side note are there going to be any wep dev involving bases. It would be really cool if say radar now allowed you to scramble from any airbase to def land/sea that is adjacent. I know that would be very powerful, but would be self limiting due # of bases.

Krieg, I know you already went through this, could you clarify one more time about subs/kami’s only attacking a lone carrier w/planes on it. My confusion originates from djensens post on rules.

@Krieghund:

Carrier-based planes are always considered to be defending in the air when the carrier is attacked.  It doesn’t matter what the attacking force consists of.  If your lone carrier is attacked by subs and hit, whether damaged or sunk, your planes will have one space of movement to land.  If they can’t, they’re lost.  The moral of the story is, don’t leave your fleets without destroyer escorts when there are enemy subs around.

quote from djensen from his posting on the rules re carriers:
“If aircraft are stuck on an damaged aircraft carrier (either because of a kamikaze attack or sub hit), they cannot take off from the aircraft carrier until the carrier is repaired. In this case, if the carrier is lost the aircraft are lost too.”
So is djensen wrong in his rule posting, or is it a misprint in the rules. As I see it both kami’s and subs would be sneak attacks.
It can’t be referring to friendly’s as cargo on an attacking a/c because any hit would trap them not just kami’s/subs.

PS: Your moral of the story is two fold.

1. DD escort allows your planes to fight enemy subs.
2. DD’s can take hits so your a/c can still land planes.
   DD’s just got a more important role, they will be even more like the inf or the sea.