Even though I don’t like house rules in general, I like the OP house rule in conjunction with the HR that allows submerging after one round against DD. The first HR makes subs a little weaker (can’t be used as fodder against planes) while the second makes them stronger (by letting them survive more battles). All in all, I think it balances out. It also has the advantage of being elegant and easy to use.
Posts made by Zombie69
-
RE: Sub vs planes w/w out DD: HR to limit subs-fodder and to keep equityposted in House Rules
-
RE: Best House Rules ever!posted in House Rules
For any game with tech research in it, I like the tech being more likely to be discovered the more money you put into it. Instead of needing to roll a 6 on one die to discover the tech, you roll two dice and need to roll a 12, but for each previous roll, you get +1 to your current roll. So on the second roll you would succeed on an 11, on the third roll on a 10, etc. The average number of rolls needed to get the tech is about the same, but the variation is much lower. You’re much less likely to get it on your first attempt, but also much less likely to need 10+ attempts. To keep track of how many rolls you’ve made, place a die (or an airplane movement marker from Revised) on the tech chart where the control marker would go.
-
RE: Fortunes of Victory: Mr. Andersson's House Rules for Spring 1942 2nd Edposted in House Rules
I like the concept, but most of them are far too powerful for my taste, with the potential to completely alter the game with a single card. I might try them if I could seriously tone down about two thirds of the cards and play them with open hand to minimize surprises that can ruin the game.
I guess I like to have more strategy and less luck involved in my games.
-
RE: Spring 1942 Scenariosposted in House Rules
Seems to me like the introduction of China/ANZAC in 1942 would just give Japan free money once they take Australia, since they can’t buy an IC until turn 3 (making 7 IPC per turn) and with no other way to spend money, would just end up with 21 IPC in bank as a gift to Japan for taking Australia.
-
RE: 1942.2 total vic. w/ int: Zombie69 (Allies) vs Guerillero (Axis)posted in Play Boardgames
TripleA Turn Summary for game: World War II v5 1942 Second Edition, version: 1.9
Game History
Round: 6
Purchase Units - Russians
Russians buy 6 infantry; Remaining resources: 1 PUs;Combat Move - Russians
2 infantry moved from Russia to Caucasus
1 fighter moved from Russia to Caucasus
2 infantry moved from Russia to Kazakh S.S.R.
1 fighter moved from Russia to Kazakh S.S.R.
1 infantry moved from Russia to Vologda
1 artillery moved from Russia to VologdaCombat - Russians
Battle in Vologda
Russians attack with 1 artillery and 1 infantry
Japanese defend with 1 infantry
Russians win, taking Vologda from Japanese with 1 artillery and 1 infantry remaining. Battle score for attacker is 3
Casualties for Japanese: 1 infantry
Battle in Kazakh S.S.R.
Russians attack with 1 fighter and 2 infantry
Japanese defend with 1 infantry
Russians win, taking Kazakh S.S.R. from Japanese with 1 fighter and 2 infantry remaining. Battle score for attacker is 3
Casualties for Japanese: 1 infantry
Battle in Caucasus
Russians attack with 1 fighter and 2 infantry
Germans defend with 1 factory and 1 infantry
Russians win, taking Caucasus from Germans with 1 fighter and 1 infantry remaining. Battle score for attacker is 0
Casualties for Germans: 1 infantry
Casualties for Russians: 1 infantryNon Combat Move - Russians
1 fighter moved from Caucasus to Russia
1 fighter moved from Kazakh S.S.R. to Russia
1 submarine moved from 6 Sea Zone to 13 Sea ZonePlace Units - Russians
6 infantry placed in RussiaTurn Complete - Russians
Russians collect 16 PUs; end with 17 PUs total -
RE: 1942.2 total vic. w/ int: Zombie69 (Allies) vs Guerillero (Axis)posted in Play Boardgames
TripleA Turn Summary for game: World War II v5 1942 Second Edition, version: 1.9
Game History
Round: 5
Purchase Units - Americans
Americans buy 2 artilleries and 10 infantry; Remaining resources: 0 PUs;Combat Move - Americans
1 bomber moved from Eastern Canada to 5 Sea Zone
1 fighter moved from Russia to 5 Sea Zone
1 armour moved from French Equatorial Africa to Anglo-Egyptian Sudan
British take Anglo-Egyptian Sudan from Japanese
1 armour moved from Anglo-Egyptian Sudan to Belgian Congo
British take Belgian Congo from Japanese
4 fighters moved from 6 Sea Zone to 5 Sea Zone
1 submarine moved from 6 Sea Zone to 5 Sea Zone
1 battleship moved from 6 Sea Zone to 5 Sea Zone
3 carriers moved from 6 Sea Zone to 5 Sea Zone
1 cruiser moved from 6 Sea Zone to 5 Sea Zone
1 destroyer moved from 6 Sea Zone to 5 Sea ZoneCombat - Americans
Battle in 5 Sea Zone
Americans attack with 1 battleship, 1 bomber, 3 carriers, 1 cruiser, 1 destroyer, 5 fighters and 1 submarine
Germans defend with 1 battleship, 1 carrier, 1 cruiser, 1 submarine and 1 transport
Units damaged: 1 battleship owned by the Germans
Americans win with 1 battleship, 1 bomber, 3 carriers, 1 cruiser, 1 destroyer, 5 fighters and 1 submarine remaining. Battle score for attacker is 59
Casualties for Germans: 1 battleship, 1 carrier, 1 cruiser, 1 submarine and 1 transportNon Combat Move - Americans
3 fighters moved from 5 Sea Zone to Russia
1 bomber moved from 5 Sea Zone to Finland
1 carrier and 2 fighters moved from 6 Sea Zone to 3 Sea Zone
1 destroyer moved from 6 Sea Zone to 3 Sea Zone
1 aaGun, 1 artillery and 10 infantry moved from Eastern Canada to 10 Sea Zone
1 aaGun, 1 artillery, 10 infantry and 6 transports moved from 10 Sea Zone to 3 Sea Zone
1 aaGun, 1 artillery and 10 infantry moved from 3 Sea Zone to Finland
4 infantry moved from Eastern United States to 11 Sea Zone
4 infantry and 2 transports moved from 11 Sea Zone to 23 Sea Zone
4 infantry moved from 23 Sea Zone to French West Africa
4 infantry moved from Western United States to Western Canada
1 aaGun, 1 artillery and 5 infantry moved from French Equatorial Africa to Belgian CongoPlace Units - Americans
2 artilleries and 10 infantry placed in Eastern United StatesTurn Complete - Americans
Americans collect 38 PUs; end with 38 PUs total -
RE: Help Needed For Allied Strategy - Updated thoughts on Bid?posted in Axis & Allies 1942 2nd Edition
Wrong. The bomber on average gets only 5 shots in before getting destroyed (on the 6th pass, it gets shot down before it can release its bombs), so on average it will do 5 * 3.5 = 17.5 damage before going down.
-
RE: KJF or KGFposted in Axis & Allies 1942 2nd Edition
Well, I can’t really disagree with any of that, MarineIguana. Subs + fighters are better than just one or the other, and I’m glad to see that you agree with my UK purchases. I do believe these purchases make the Allies relevant in Asia/Pacific much faster, possibly starting to take big islands as early as round 3 or 4. It certainly was the case in the game where I put it into action.
-
RE: 1942.2 total vic. w/ int: Zombie69 (Allies) vs Guerillero (Axis)posted in Play Boardgames
TripleA Turn Summary for game: World War II v5 1942 Second Edition, version: 1.9
Game History
Round: 5
Purchase Units - British
British buy 2 armour, 1 infantry and 2 transports; Remaining resources: 0 PUs;Combat Move - British
1 armour moved from India to Burma
British take Burma from Japanese
1 armour moved from Burma to India
1 bomber moved from India to East Indies
2 fighters moved from 8 Sea Zone to Northwestern Europe
2 fighters moved from 6 Sea Zone to Northwestern Europe
1 transport moved from 8 Sea Zone to 6 Sea Zone
2 infantry moved from United Kingdom to 6 Sea Zone
2 infantry moved from 6 Sea Zone to Northwestern Europe
1 infantry moved from Norway to Finland
British take Finland from GermansCombat - British
Strategic bombing raid in East Indies
Bombing raid in East Indies rolls: 6 and causes: 6 damage to unit: factory
Bombing raid in East Indies causes 6 damage total.
Battle in Northwestern Europe
British attack with 4 fighters and 2 infantry
Germans defend with 1 infantry
British win, taking Northwestern Europe from Germans with 4 fighters and 1 infantry remaining. Battle score for attacker is 0
Casualties for Germans: 1 infantry
Casualties for British: 1 infantryNon Combat Move - British
1 bomber moved from East Indies to India
4 fighters moved from Northwestern Europe to 6 Sea Zone
2 destroyers moved from 8 Sea Zone to 10 Sea Zone
1 cruiser moved from 8 Sea Zone to 10 Sea Zone
1 carrier moved from 8 Sea Zone to 6 Sea Zone
2 infantry moved from United Kingdom to 8 Sea Zone
2 infantry and 1 transport moved from 8 Sea Zone to 6 Sea Zone
2 infantry moved from 6 Sea Zone to Norway
1 armour moved from Norway to Finland
1 aaGun moved from Norway to FinlandPlace Units - British
Turning on Edit Mode
EDIT: Removing units owned by British from Finland: 1 aaGun
EDIT: Adding units owned by British to Finland: 1 infantry
EDIT: Turning off Edit Mode
2 transports placed in 6 Sea Zone
2 armour and 1 infantry placed in IndiaTurn Complete - British
British collect 30 PUs; end with 30 PUs total -
RE: KJF or KGFposted in Axis & Allies 1942 2nd Edition
The hardest part about a KJF, IMO, is that Japan makes too much money. After turn 2 Japan should be making more than US. A smart Japan player should be building only 4 ground at most and the rest navy. This means that a 40 IPC Japan is spending an average of 30 IPC’s a turn on sea, while US is spending 38. That is going to take a long time to make enough to take and hold any one of the major Islands. By the time US gets to taking the Islands India should have fallen because UK needs to retreat to defend Moscow against Germany.
Did you read my post? If UK helps the cause by producing 2 fighters a turn to go on US carriers, that’s a total Pacific production of 58 for the Allies against 30 for Japan. So with good UK involvement, a KJF goes much quicker and the Islands get taken long before Russia falls. Indeed, if done well, Russia may not even fall at all. I’m not talking just theory either, I’ve done it in an actual game.
Now I’m not saying that KJF is better than KGF, because it’s not. But if you decide to go KJF, this is the way to do it and pretty much the only way that can get there fast enough.
-
RE: KJF or KGFposted in Axis & Allies 1942 2nd Edition
On defense, subs are slightly better in a mixed force mostly because of the hit advantage (60 IPC buys 6 fighters vs 10 subs).
That’s not a fair comparison because in order for your fighters to help on defense, you need carriers to place them on. So a better comparison would be 3 carriers and 6 fighters for 102 IPC vs. 17 subs for the same price. The subs give you 17 defense and 17 hits while the carrier gives you 30 defense and 9 hits. The subs win big time.
Your point about fighters being able to attack land is a good one, but typically there’s not much for your fighters to attack on land anyway, other than a few easy battles. It will help take India, but that’s it.
It seems reasonable for UK to retreat and deadzone India the round the fighters move to support US; however, trading India really reduces the land pressure on Japan.
It doesn’t have to. If India is retaken by US or Russia rather than by UK, then UK can still produce 3 land units on it on that very same turn. Setting up a counter with one of those nations is a good idea on the turn that UK retreats.
-
RE: KJF or KGFposted in Axis & Allies 1942 2nd Edition
I agree that KGF is easier, but I have to disagree about two points that have been made here about KJF by MarineIguana.
First, the best purchase for Japan to contest the US fleet is subs, not fighters. For the same cost, they’ll perform better than fighters on both defense and offense by giving you more units to take as hits. Their only drawback is their inability to counter attacking planes, so you’ll need a few carriers as well, but the bulk of your fleet as Japan should be made up of subs.
Secondly, yes it does take a big naval purchase for the Allies to contest the Pacific, but the US doesn’t have to contribute all of it. I’ve had a lot of success in one game going KJF using US carriers with UK fighters on them. UK bought 2 fighters each turn, plus 3 land units for India. The UK fighters went to West Russia, then India, then onto the carriers. Japan was hard pressed to compete against two nations on the water and ended up losing big islands quite early.
-
RE: GARGANTUA's K.I.S.S. TripleA Instructionsposted in TripleA Support
Great set of instructions for PBF! But how does one start a PBeM game? I couldn’t find the info for this anywhere.
-
RE: 1942.2 total vic. w/ int: Zombie69 (Allies) vs Guerillero (Axis)posted in Play Boardgames
TripleA Turn Summary for game: World War II v5 1942 Second Edition, version: 1.9
Game History
Round: 5
Purchase Units - Russians
Russians buy 7 infantry; Remaining resources: 2 PUs;Combat Move - Russians
1 infantry moved from Caucasus to Ukraine S.S.R.
2 infantry moved from Russia to Vologda
1 fighter moved from Russia to Vologda
1 fighter moved from Russia to Ukraine S.S.R.Combat - Russians
Battle in Vologda
Russians attack with 1 fighter and 2 infantry
Japanese defend with 1 infantry
Russians win, taking Vologda from Japanese with 1 fighter and 2 infantry remaining. Battle score for attacker is 3
Casualties for Japanese: 1 infantry
Battle in Ukraine S.S.R.
Russians attack with 1 fighter and 1 infantry
Germans defend with 1 infantry
Russians win with 1 fighter remaining. Battle score for attacker is 0
Casualties for Germans: 1 infantry
Casualties for Russians: 1 infantryNon Combat Move - Russians
1 fighter moved from Ukraine S.S.R. to Russia
1 fighter moved from Vologda to Russia
3 infantry moved from Caucasus to Russia
3 artilleries moved from Caucasus to Russia
1 infantry moved from Russia to Kazakh S.S.R.
1 infantry moved from Russia to NovosibirskPlace Units - Russians
Turning on Edit Mode
EDIT: Removing units owned by Russians from 8 Sea Zone: 1 submarine
EDIT: Adding units owned by Russians to 6 Sea Zone: 1 submarine
EDIT: Turning off Edit Mode
7 infantry placed in RussiaTurn Complete - Russians
Russians collect 17 PUs; end with 19 PUs total -
RE: 1942.2 total vic. w/ int: Zombie69 (Allies) vs Guerillero (Axis)posted in Play Boardgames
TripleA Turn Summary for game: World War II v5 1942 Second Edition, version: 1.9
Game History
Round: 4
Purchase Units - Americans
Americans buy 8 infantry and 2 transports; Remaining resources: 0 PUs;Combat Move - Americans
1 infantry moved from French West Africa to French Equatorial Africa
British take French Equatorial Africa from JapaneseCombat - Americans
Non Combat Move - Americans
2 infantry moved from 8 Sea Zone to Northwestern Europe
3 carriers, 1 cruiser and 4 fighters moved from 8 Sea Zone to 6 Sea Zone
1 transport moved from 13 Sea Zone to 10 Sea Zone
1 battleship, 1 carrier, 2 destroyers, 2 fighters and 1 submarine moved from 13 Sea Zone to 6 Sea Zone
4 transports moved from 23 Sea Zone to 10 Sea Zone
1 aaGun, 1 armour, 1 artillery and 4 infantry moved from French West Africa to French Equatorial Africa
1 transport moved from 11 Sea Zone to 10 Sea Zone
1 artillery and 9 infantry moved from Eastern United States to Eastern CanadaPlace Units - Americans
2 transports placed in 11 Sea Zone
4 infantry placed in Eastern United States
4 infantry placed in Western United StatesTurn Complete - Americans
Americans collect 38 PUs; end with 38 PUs total -
RE: Amphibious invasion of Berlin: A recurring issueposted in Axis & Allies 1942 2nd Edition
For one thing, to solve a minor historical innacuracy, you’re creating bigger ones, like Germany constructing its naval ships on the Atlantic and controlling that region instead of being masters of the Baltic. As far as gameplay is concerned, you’re also making the game less fun to play. All I can say is that I wouldn’t buy such a version of the game. Of course, you’re free to create your own house rules.
-
RE: Amphibious invasion of Berlin: A recurring issueposted in Axis & Allies 1942 2nd Edition
My favorite way to make Sea Lion work is to spend nothing in one turn, then if UK didn’t defend properly buy 10 transports, while if they did I’d buy land troops. That’s how you can produce 10 transports in one turn, and that necessitates the factory production to do it.
-
RE: UK India Fleetposted in Axis & Allies 1942 2nd Edition
That’s the standard move for KGF. For KJF, attack SZ 37 with the Indian fleet, the Australian fleet and the Egyptian fighter.
-
RE: Amphibious invasion of Berlin: A recurring issueposted in Axis & Allies 1942 2nd Edition
Well, if you’re putting 15 IPCs of production with industrial complexes on countries outside of Germany (Italy’s 3 plus Germany’s 12, reassigned), you’re screwing Germany in a different way because you’re giving the Allies lots of juicy territories to take and then start producing on right away, while Germany gets to produce fewer on its capital to defend itself.
-
RE: Amphibious invasion of Berlin: A recurring issueposted in Axis & Allies 1942 2nd Edition
I really don’t like the idea, if only because it would greatly decrease the number of boats that Germany can drop in the Baltic in a single round, thereby making Sea Lion almost impossible.