Posts made by WILD BILL

Yea this game (as Larry said) could go a couple of different ways early on. You do know there are convoy zones in the game right. We don’t have any details yet, but some type of economic blockade is possible.

One thing I noticed about the AA40P map. Japan is one tt in one sz (an island). This means its land based fighters will be able to def the sea and get +1 on take off. Australia would not be considered an island nor would UK for that matter (multiple tt & sz) and won’t get these bonuses. I wonder if they left Japan this way just to get this advantage. I kinda expected to see Japan split or at least 2 sz. Interesting.

Yea Krieg, and while your at it get me a seat at a AA40 testing table (I’m in Rochester Mich). lol  :wink:

Blockhouse rolls 3 dice one time only at 4 or less pre-empt. The catch is the the attacking player rolls 1 dice at 3 or less before to see if he just goes around it w/o getting hit.  :-D LOL :-D

Yea that happens only if Germany screws up and doesn’t take out the British fleet in sz 12 & 15.

Yea lend lease would be good. US is pretty close via transport. The lend lease could also be done with NO’s (like Russia in AA50). The Anzac would most likely need US/UK to reach its goals, just like China will need help keeping the Burma road open.

Thanks again Krieg for keeping us in the loop.

At this point we don’t know Larry said he’s not 100% sure how the global game will handle the Anzac (still testing?). Looks like he is leaning towards the UK controlling both. I would sure like separate units (they are given different colors anyway), which would allow for separate  economies, even in a single UK turn. We’ll just have to wait until word comes down.

Thanks Krieg, that was quick and helps allot.

If those island based fighters go into the sea battle , will they be able to retreat back to the island before the sz is cleared to def against the ensuing amp assault or are they at sea till the death.

Also will ports offer any def bonus to your shore line or fleet. I read a port/airbase only gives AA to the land not to the sea. Will a port come with some kind of land based guns that fire only at ships attacking or invading.

Finally will straights have a role in this game. I saw where Larry started a tread for canals/straights on his sight just collecting thoughts. I Was wondering if anything came of it. Will tt like Gilb w/port & air base be impassible (until taken) or able to do air patrols (like islands).  Or is that still up in the air.

IL your right, this tread (map pictures) And other treads are going a lot of different directions. Can you create different post Maybe air strips/ ports; Blockhouses/coastal def and move stuff around with out losing the content? Or should we just continue on. I really don’t know how the admin stuff works.

In another post Larry also said that an island w/air base could also launch air units and not count the surrounding sz (only on departure just like a port) giving it +1 in movement. These island bases are going to be a really nice addition to the game. I wonder how many islands will have both AB/PT (air base/port) at set-up. Malta,Hawaii etc.
I also wonder if these rules will also be extended to any coastal AB for the +1 movement and ability to patrol adjacent sz? If not will it be extended to straights like Gilb,Turkey and NW Europe/Norway.

I was just reading some of Larry’s comments and ran across this air strips  defending sea zones thing.
Larry:
Any CAP rules (I hope not)???. Sort of… An island can launch aircraft (fighters and Tac bombers to its surrounding sea zone and attack or defend in a battle if the island has an airbase.

This is big. I don’t Know why someone didn’t bring it to light earlier. Your ships will get (land based) air support if their attacked. Sounds like you don’t even need a port to protect your fleet just an air base. I wonder if a port would even give more protection(like naval guns). Will the (land based) air units launched to the sea be like an interceptor (get reduced values), or get their full def values?
Buy the way what are CAP rules?

The UK by rule may have to spend $ in the pacific through the Anzac. The US really doesn’t have a minor ally that it will control like the UK. The only thing I can think of is to connect its NO’s to that theater. Like if there is an island NO for the pacific (similar to AA50) then that $ is earmarked for the pacific theater. Also with the new convoy zones (not knowing any details) I think the US may have to dedicate some resources to both theaters to keep its money flowing, and interrupt its enemies convoys.

PS:If #3 is adopted it would be cool if the Anzac could skip its turn w/UK and joint strike with the US later in that round giving the game more of a cooperative feel.
I can see not allowing the US & UK to attack together (to powerful) but allowing the Anzac to attack with the UK or US would give the game something its been missing joint attacks with allies. You could even go on to extend it to China/allies. You could offset it by allowing limited strikes with Germ/Italy. Boy this could lead to a lot of new house rules.

Sounds like in AA40P 2 separate nations :In the global game they take their turn together.

Q  1. Being as Canada is a Commonwealth of UK, and ANZAC is a separate power, how will that play out in the “full” game, both economically and with territories?
Larry:
In the Global game both the ANZAC and Canadian forces will probably be controlled by the UK player.
Q    2. Will ANZAC control all of the UKs territories in the AAP map, with UK controlling the ones on the Europe map?
Larry:
No, again the UK player will control all commonwealth territories in the global game. I’m not 100% sure about this however… In the AAP there will be a dedicated UK player - based out of India and the ANZAC player out of Australia/New Zealand.

SgtBlitz, I agree that Japan should not have pissed on our pacific paradise :-o. BIG MISTAKE. I don’t think those other countries you mentioned would have met them with open arms however :|. Of coarse without its younger (better looking) big brother around the UK very well would have caved in the region leaving it to the orange monster. Your right about Persia and Caucaus a little coordinated effort between the 3 axis powers could have set them up very well. If only Hitler would have waited till 2010 when Larry Harris lifted the no invading neutral Turkey rule so he could hit Russia from the south (cutting off her fuel) and the east. Just think if Germany/Italy gained control of the French fleet and had the fuel/man power to use it. Can you say REALLY BIG SEA LION!!
:evil: :-D :evil: :-D

Emperor, I don’t think you read all my remarks.
@WILD:

I also hope that by keeping them separate will force the UK to spend the ipc’s generated by the Anzac in Australia, or at least get a large Commonwealth NO that is earmarked for the Commonwealth IC’s. The key is forcing the UK to spend $ in both oceans, but giving it enough money to do so.

If by rule the $ earned by Anzac had to be spent there. It would behoove the UK to and the US to to keep them in the game. There could also be a NO for commonwealth linked to it. Money talks.
Also it sounds like there will be an IC in some of the commonwealth tt. What stops the UK from investing in those areas is they have to first buy the IC only to see Japan target it. Now that that decision will be made for them I think the UK will invest $ down under (maybe forced to by rule).
I am wondering when/how Anzac will take its turn in the global game.
1)Two separate nations (like Germ & Italy)
2)Separate but together (like US & China)
3)All together, Anzac & Uk separate units but attack/def as one power.
Although the US had command of the pacific the Anzac was still part of the UK commonwealth. However if the Anzac were given option#3 it would be cool if they could give up there part with the UK and attack w/US later in that round. Kind like a joint strike.
I think the allies will try to get the most out of their minor powers Anzac, China and even the French.
I also agree the oob should dictate balance in each theater, not a house rule.

In the global game I think the Uk should end up controlling both. Units and $ should be separate and earmarked. The question is:
1)Will there turns be at different times (like Germ & Italy)
2)Will it be at same time but separate (like US & China);
3)Will it be all together as one nation allowing for joint attacks.
I guess much testing would be needed, but if 1 or 2 are adopted #3 would be an awesome house rule.

In regards to balancing the Pacific vs Atlantic in the new global game the Anzac could be the key. Balance would be achieved if the Anzac & UK are still separate units (they have different colors) but are both controlled by the UK and allowed to take their turn as one nation. In  games that the Orange Godzila is allowed to run ramped the UK has no presence in the pacific. No IC in India or Australia. In AA40 Global I hope there is at least a minor IC in these countries at set-up, and  maybe even one in Africa. This would help keep the UK fighting for her commonwealth tt as she wouldn’t want to just hand over those IC’s to Japan. I also hope that by keeping them separate will force the UK to spend the ipc’s generated by the Anzac in Australia, or at least get a large Commonwealth NO that is earmarked for the Commonwealth IC’s. The key is forcing the UK to spend $ in both oceans, but giving it enough money to do so. Also by allowing the UK to use both units at once would be cool!

PS. I started a new tread in AA40P to discuss balance of the two oceans in the global game.

In regards to balancing the Pacific vs Atlantic in the new global game the Anzac could be the key. Balance would be achieved if the Anzac & UK are still separate units (they have different colors) but are both controlled by the UK and allowed to take their turn as one nation. In  games that the Orange Godzila is allowed to run ramped the UK has no presence in the pacific. No IC in India or Australia. In AA40 Global I hope there is at least a minor IC in these countries at set-up, and  maybe even one in Africa. This would help keep the UK fighting for her commonwealth tt as she wouldn’t want to just hand over those IC’s to Japan. I also hope that by keeping them separate will force the UK to spend the ipc’s generated by the Anzac in Australia, or at least get a large Commonwealth NO that is earmarked for the Commonwealth IC’s. The key is forcing the UK to spend $ in both oceans, but giving it enough money to do so. Also by allowing the UK to use both units at once would be cool!

I think if Larry implements some kind of blockhouse or coastal def (He could change his mind) it would have to be something simple. A blockhouse 0-4-0-6 or pairing units already in the game would be simple enough. As for what boarders it protects, you have to look at a block house as many structures so it should protect all boarders I think maybe raise the cost slightly. We still don’t know the full extent of what a port or air strip brings to the table. There could be some type of def bonus tied to these new concepts which would reduce the need for the things we a now discussing.