September 04, 2015, 04:24:16 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: Want a t-shirt? Check out our awesome Axis & Allies .org T-Shirt Store! Search me
  Articles  
  Home Help Login Register AACalc  
Loading
  Show Posts
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 »
706  Axis & Allies / Axis & Allies Spring 1942 Edition / Re: Subs starting out in a SZ containing a hostile DD on: February 24, 2012, 09:50:36 am
Hobbes, I agree 100%.  If the enemy builds a cruiser or carrier, or places one of those units on top of your subs then it should have no affect on the subs.

Krieg, thanks again for the clarification.  Now what about the situation where the surface ship fleet does not contain a destroyer and the hostile fleet contains only subs?  What about a mixed fleet in the presence of a surface fleet containing no DDs, would the mixed fleets submarine portion be forced to react as the other surface combatants would?

Gee, just when you think you know all the angles.... LOL
707  Other Forums / World War II History / Re: pre-war Japanese options on: February 24, 2012, 09:33:49 am
Kurt, you do have a long term view I will grant you that.  You are thinking of 1000s of generations down the line evolving in isolation, allopatric speciation is the term that should be used.  I am rather well versed in the science of genetics and the pseudo-science of eugenics.  Hey, if you want to isolate yourself and only interbreed with a small selection of humanity for 1000 of generations in order to create a new species, knock yourself out.  Sorry for suggesting that was in any way shape or form like inbreeding on a personal level.  That philosophy does sound inbreed however.


Creating a super race might be noble notion, hmmmm, where have I heard that before.   Segue into the fact the Japanese thought they were a superior race and therefore other races could and should be treated like animals.  Had the Japanese Imperial Forces (and Nazis) treated others as humans with rational human motives then they should have been able to carve out a sphere of influence that could be in existence today.
708  Axis & Allies / Axis & Allies Spring 1942 Edition / Re: Subs starting out in a SZ containing a hostile DD on: February 24, 2012, 08:09:26 am
I am still not 100% comfortable with my interpretation though.  95% but not 100%

On page 12 of the rule book "Sea Units Starting In Hostile Sea Zones" it goes on to state: "For example, an enemy may have built new sea units in a sea zone where you have surface ships".

I don't like that fact they mention surface ships.  In my scenario, I placed a DD on the stack of Subs during my non-combat move.  Other than that, the wording implies something must occur during combat movement phase, stay and fight, leave and fight, leave and return to fight, or leave and don't fight.  Once they move in this phase, they are done moving not surprisingly.  But to move where I don't want them to go requires moving through a second DD which forces them to stop and fight.



709  Axis & Allies / Axis & Allies Spring 1942 Edition / Re: Subs starting out in a SZ containing a hostile DD on: February 24, 2012, 07:57:59 am
Hey Hobbes, you are correct, I didn't word that properly.   A bit of background on the scenario.  The stack of enemy subs is starting off their move with an enemy destroyer present in their SZ,  so they must move away from their SZ and hostile DD during the combat phase.  They need to move 2 SZ to get to where I don't want them to go, but move through one specific SZ (also containing a hostile DD) to get to that SZ.   It would seem there would be no way for any of the subs in that stack to get to the SZ I want to deny them access to if I am willing to use 2 DDs to prevent this from occurring, a traditional blocking DD and a second DD to sit on top of the sub stack to force them to move during combat movement phase.
710  Axis & Allies / Axis & Allies Spring 1942 Edition / Re: Subs starting out in a SZ containing a hostile DD on: February 24, 2012, 05:44:58 am
I am guilty of over thinking.   I am not guilty of broadcasting the exact scenario and location I am thinking of.  The sea zones mentioned in this fictitious scenario are irrelevant.   Yes, agreed, in that situation, a DD in SZ51 is all you would need to prevent combat from occurring in Sz60 via surface ships located in Sz45.  And as long as I had surface warships in Sz60 no subs could enter Sz60 during non-combat.  If I wanted NO subs to reach an unoccupied Sz60 then I would require another DD in Sz45.  This would only make sense if surface warships in Sz60 could be taken out during combat via air units thus allowing a non-combat move of a stack of subs into Sz60.  But again, this is not where my situation is occurring, thanks for the input, I appreciate it.
711  Axis & Allies / Other Axis & Allies Variants / Re: Games I made on: February 24, 2012, 05:34:34 am
Ummm, if you want to make your pictures available, then other people would have to download the file no?  If you are talking about making your picture show up in a text box that you type in and people then read....it ain't gonna happen.

If you want others to see a picture file, then you attach it so others can download it.  Or we could concentrate really really hard and wish it to happen by pure force of will if that works for you.....
712  Axis & Allies / Axis & Allies Global 1940 / Re: Strategic Bombing Raids on: February 24, 2012, 05:31:40 am
The difference with SBRs is that you are attacking future production versus pieces already on the board ready to do something.

You shouldn't be doing SBRs because your bombers only face a 1 each when attacking  an IC with an AA versus attacking land pieces unsupported by ground troops.  You do an SBR when there is really nothing for your bombers to do and they are not taken out of position by doing the SBR, and potential losses won't dramatically affect your next move.  If you really really need both bombers for next rounds attack on a navy that is threatening you, then maybe you don't risk losing a bomber in an SBR due to the fact it will prevent the planned next round attack on the said navy.
713  Play by Forum / Play Boardgames / Re: Varn H (allies) vs. *your-name-here* (axis): Spring 1942 on: February 24, 2012, 05:25:17 am
I meant to put 2 Japanese tanks in Persia.
714  Play by Forum / Play Boardgames / Re: Varn H (allies) vs. *your-name-here* (axis): Spring 1942 on: February 23, 2012, 09:39:19 pm
Combat Results:
Max 6 damage to Phi IC



Non-Combat Moves:
Sz34: SS(Sz32), 6 SS(Sz34), 3 SS(Sz14)
Cng: Inf(Rho)
Egy: 2 Ftr(SAf)
Jpn: 3 Ftr(FIC)
FIC: 2 Ftr(Egy), 2 Bombers(Phi)
Per: 2 Bombers(Egy)
Chi: 2 Inf, 2 Tanks(FIC)
Lib: Inf(Alg)
Sz43: SS(Sz53)



Mobilisation:
Jpn: 1 Bomber+2 Ftrs
FIC: 3 Inf   


Collect 41 IPC, 0 saved, 41 IPC On Hand
715  Play by Forum / Play Boardgames / Re: Varn H (allies) vs. *your-name-here* (axis): Spring 1942 on: February 23, 2012, 09:25:41 pm
Japan 15
-------
Builds:
--------------
On Hand    41

1 Bomber   12
3 Inf          9
2 Fighter   20
--------------
Saved       0
--------------



Combat:
Phi: 2 Bombers(Jpn) SBR
Dice
Rolls: 2@6; Total Hits: 2
2@6: (6, 2)

716  Other Forums / World War II History / Re: pre-war Japanese options on: February 23, 2012, 08:04:12 pm
Kurt, you don't seem to understand how genetic information is passed.  By your analogy, if diversity decreases by inter-racial breeding, then inbreeding would increase diversity?  Has that worked for your family?
717  Play by Forum / Play Boardgames / Re: Varn H (allies) vs. *your-name-here* (axis): Spring 1942 on: February 23, 2012, 07:19:51 pm
It is interesting.   It seems hard for the axis to make much more progress.  I was playing cautious at first to ensure the ground game would ensure me a greater income and setup for a war of attrition had you gone that way.  I was afraid you would build another IC in the Pacific and do hit and runs along the Asian coast to leverage your 6 battleships.

Ger 15
-------
Builds:
--------------
On Hand     57

4 Bombers   48
1 DD         8
--------------
Saved        1




Combat:
WAf: Tank(FEq) Vs Undefended



Combat Results:
WAf: Undefended



Non-Combat Moves:
Alg: 4 Ftrs+4 Bombers+Tank(Egy), Ftr(SEu), 2 Ftr(WEu)
FEq: Tanks(WAf)
TrJ: Tank(FEq), 3 Tanks(Egy), AA(Per)
Lib: 2 Inf(SEu) Via TT(Sz14)
WRu: 9 Inf(Kar)
Ukr: 13 Inf(Blk), 3 Inf(EEu), AA(Bel)
Yak: 2 Inf(Nov)
Nov: 2 Inf(Rus), Inf(Kaz), 4 Tanks(Yak)
Sin: 3 Inf(Kaz)
Per: 4 Inf(Cau)
Cau: Tank(Kar)
WEu: 4 Inf(Ger)
SEu: 6 Inf(Ger)



Builds:
Sz14: 1 DD
SEu: 4 Bombers


Collect 59 IPC, 1 saved, 60 IPC On Hand
718  Axis & Allies / Axis & Allies Spring 1942 Edition / Re: Subs starting out in a SZ containing a hostile DD on: February 23, 2012, 02:54:08 pm
Yeah I thought that would be too easy.  I see it explained on page 12, I was looking under subs and destroyers.

I can see a subtle effect.  Placing a DD on the stack of subs and also a blocking sub in the Sz next to the stack means the subs can't move past the second blocking DD, they can either retreat, or advance 1 SZ and attack the other blocking DD but could not advance further in non-combat as they all did something during the combat movement phase.  A huge stack of US subs in Sz45 could be prevented from reaching Sz60 during non combat with a hostile DD in Sz45 and a second in Sz51. 
719  Axis & Allies / Axis & Allies Spring 1942 Edition / Subs starting out in a SZ containing a hostile DD on: February 23, 2012, 01:42:03 pm
Say I non-combat move a destroyer into a sea zone containing a stack of hostile subs, but only subs. 

Would the entire stack of subs be forced to attack my destroyer and be pinned there? 

If not all had to attack then could some of the subs not attacking move out of the sea zone to enter into combat in other sea zones or remain not doing any combat and then non-combat moving out of the SZ?
720  Other Forums / World War II History / Re: pre-war Japanese options on: February 23, 2012, 01:27:24 pm
Quote
My view of race is that the world is better off maintaining the existence of the different races, than it would be by mixing all races together into one globalized race.

Why is that?   I am all for keeping cultures unique.  I don't want to move to India nor China, nor would I want 3% of their population to enter Canada all at once and duplicate their culture here and overwhelming ours.  But I could care less what the average physical features of a Canadian is 100 years from now, as long as they are totally cool and awesome like we are now.

If anything, increasing genetic diversity is good for the species and individual.  Maintaining cultural islands is also desirable.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 »
2015 Support Drive

Read about this support drive.
Support Level
Forum Username
Note: payee will appear as Livid Labs, LLC.
Buy Axis & Allies
  • Axis & Allies 1942 [Amazon]
  • A&A Pacific 1940 [Amazon]
  • A&A Europe 1940 [FMG]
  • [eBay]
  • [eBay]
  • A&A D-Day [Amazon]
  • A&A Battle of the Bulge [Amazon]
  • [eBay]
  • [eBay]
  • WWII Themed Combat Dice [FMG]



Axis and Allies.org Official Gold Sponsor: Field Marshal Games

Axis & Allies.org Official Silver Sponsor: Historical Board Gaming
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP © 2015 Livid Labs, LLC. All rights reserved.
Axis & Allies is registered trademark of Wizards of the Coast, a division of Hasbro, Inc.
Note: the copyright below is for the forum software only.
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!