Adv art could allow you to fire your two preempt (no return fire)

that seems reasonable, artilery gets a 2 or less preemptive fire on attack and defence, in my opnion advanced artliery represents powerful weapons like the German 88mm and the Soviet Katyuhas so this represents their long range firepower well. Tac Bombers have even longer range than any kind of artillery(obviously cause their aircraft) aswell as the weapons to easily elimnate point targets so if one side has a tac bomber they then negate "advanced" artillery's preempitve strike like a destroyer negates a sub's preemptive strike. This also keeps advanced artillery from obsoleting infantry.

You bring up a good point with  the AB and NB techs, but what would that represent historically, the 12 tech should be the 12 technolgies that were most influencial in determining how the war was fougth. I dont really like imporving AB since they are already very powerful and if they increased range anymore they would be doing it beyong what was histrocialy possible. NB imporvement makes a little more sence, perhaps their could be a tech called "Fueling Ships" and ships can move 4 instead of 3 spaces when they start next to a NB.

Whats wrong with paratroopers I have been actually thinking of making specific sculpts for them myself by using spare pieces.

Instead, in terms of someone taking a territory with a paratrooper I think Arnhem is a better demonstration of the limitations of an airborne assault.

Right, and two attacking infantry probably wont be able to take a territory unless they are assited by ground forces, thats why this rule is realistic and awesome!

Here is exactly what larry said on the new paratrooper rules as it is misquoted above.

LH 9-18

I can tell you this... There will be Paratroopers. They will be one of 12 techs (which are all pretty close to the Anniversary game's techs.)

I call out Paratroopers because they have been radically changed from that tech in Anniversary. Infantry (up to 2) can be flown, to join an attack, if that location is within a 3 territory/sea zone range. They don't need bombers or any other aircraft representation. They must however be on a territory with an airbase.

mabe there will be atomic bomber were you get one atom too use. if you want another you pay 10 ipc
atoms can ether kill 5units in one teritory or destroy one ic

Heavy Bombers are the PC name for Atomic weapons.

Atomic bombs were in Larry's original NOVA games A&A.

Also I beleive that England used Irish naval bases, perahps Ireland will be pro-allies and the UK will be able to use a naval base that starts their.

Larry has said the tech will be similiar to AA50, although he is going to have to change techs like mech inf and jet fighters in order to not oboslute the mech inf and tac bombers.

Jet fighters should be a defensive tech anyways and during stategic bombings jet fighters should intercept on a 3 or 4 instead of on a 2.

Also AA50 also has some pretty useless and non-sencical techs like warbonds and advanced artillery that need to be changed or rid of.

I too hope for a Heavy or Advanced tank tech(tanks defend on 4 perhaps), aswell as somkind of advanced anti-submarine warfare/sonar tech( i dont know what the rules would be for this). I also want somekind of tech that represents overall imporvment in antitank weapons, maybe this could replace advanced artillery.

Also I love this new change too paratroopers and hope all the techs have changes this good.

Norway should have an Air Base, it had a lot of the Germans bombers and fighters.

Well the game start in 1940, and at that time Norway only had a very small airfield with like 4 single planes. It was the germans that build all the airfields. So Norway should start with no Airbase, and let Germany buy an Airbase if they need one.

Norway should start with a Naval Base, because it had many large ports and shipyards, and one of the worlds largest merchant fleets, and this was one of the reasons that admirals Raeder and Dønitz wanted to control Norway, to get a free passage into the Atlantic.

I agree,

Also I would move the airbase from Italy to Sicily, as that inland was the used by the Italians as a giant aircraft carrier throughought the war.

And I doubt Romania and Egypt will start with anything in them, Germany and the UK should have to build up their respectively.

anyone mention the german film Stalingrad?  its very good. 

I did

Stalingrad for Europe,
 and I second IL's choice Tora Tora Tora, its how all war movies should be made.

My suggestion for FMG's Soviet Fighter

the I-16 Polikarpov


It may look a little odd, but it was quite effective and the backbone of the soviet airforce until 1942 with over 8,000 of them built.

One thing I find very interesting is the problem of how to play a good UK in this game.  The big problem is this game revolves primarily around income.  And the UK needs boats to get and protect its income.  The big money for the UK is in DEI and Malaya.  On top of that there is a convoy zone both next to Malaya and India.  If the UK does not have boats to protect these she will be down to 2-4 IPCs within a handful of turns.  But, she is also the only one who can challenge Japan on mainland Asia, and she has no chance at all to win in a naval race with Japan.

So I ask you, for the UK, boots on the ground or boats in the sea?  And why?  To me the easy answer is boots on the ground to slow down japan, but it appears the real answer is boats in the sea so you have some stinking income!

It depends on where the Japanese airforce is. If you think his airforce is going to show up in the east indies then their is no point to building a fleet; but if you think you can protect your fleet, then your right, boots in the sea is the better answer.

If you dont try to take and hold the east indies when the japanese airforce is not around and you continue to build an army, while you may save IPCs from not buying a navy, you will lose because when the Japanese airforce does show up it will destory your small army in one turn and not even have to bother with fighting a fleet.

Wow. That was pretty cool. But I'm thinking that 'gameboard' is pretty far out of reach.

Yah the windows surface costs like $10,000 right now, but I have heard that windows 7 can do the same multi-touch sort of thing( I dont know what kind of computer you need, i have seen it on laptops though), I am not sure what apple has in terms of competition.

The Idea is that you can let thme have 2 turns if 37 but they are not in reach of VCs, you are just aiming to take Hong Kong, Hawaii, and NSW in J4 and Phillipnas in J5. You have a huge navy at carolines, and mabey a carrier and crusier to protect your Phillipnas Navy.

Thanks IL for moving it.

I see what your saying, but if the UK has Malaya and their navy is parked in 37 they are within range of 3 VCs. Plus the UK will likly be producing close too 40 IPCs a turn which is pretty close to what Japan produces with outtaking the east indies. I would also recommend to take guam on J4 and not waiting any later since you dont want the UK to use that for an airbase.

The main challenge is how defend your VCs on turn five from both a UK and US navy while also having invaded australia a turn before.

It is defenently a strategy that should be tried though.

Warning: Video may explode your brain!

http://vodpod.com/watch/2401754-video-demo-ruse-using-windows-7-multitouch-features

The idea of a half track towing an artillery gun halfway across Europe to get to the front line is hilarious.

I'll say it again and again: land units all moved to the front by train.

Since I sense that LH is coming round to the need for rail movement, Mech inf will have to be revised to survive; since the 2 space movement becomes redundant then the blitz ability will have to become more important.  However I'm not keen on artillery moving into combat at all, never mind blitzing!

The games scale is not small enough for artillery to bombard adjacent territories if that is what your getting at, but I do agree, although it is a long AA tradition, tanks making strategic movement faster than infantry it is quite unhistorical and instead mech and tanks should have somekind of second attack ability.

I have not tried this. and although it sounds plausible, good luck trying to fight off the UK.

I will try to try it in my next game as Japan, it is an interesting strategy, it certianly sounds challenging to pull off correctly.

The Future is... Now!

http://vodpod.com/watch/2401754-video-demo-ruse-using-windows-7-multitouch-features