Here’s an interesting question that arose during a game today. One of Russia’s national advantages was the non-aggression treaty. Japan ran a strategic bombing attack on Moscow. Does this violation of the treaty mean Russia puts 4 troops on Moscow? That’s how we played it, though it seems to be in violation of the spirit of the rule.
Latest posts made by General Mayhem
-
RE: AARHE: Phase 3: Revised NA's
-
RE: Replace the Bidding System
My friends and I do no bidding. We draw countries out of a hat, and roll dice to see which NAs each power gets. The number of NAs is agreed upon beforehand. This has thrown a real eliment of chance into how each war will play out.
-
RE: German Aircraftcarrier?
My friends and I also like to sometimes throw some crazy strategies out there just to try it. With the addition of National Advantages, I can see where Germany could use an AC. Say you’re playing with more than one NA per power and Germany gets both U-boat interdiction and wolfpacks. Germany can really make use of a powerful sub fleet, and the allies are going to go after those subs. A loaded AC is going to make their attacks costly for a long portion early in the game.
One of my buddies did the 2-AC purchase on G1. He lost. But it was interesting.
-
RE: Memoir '44?
I have played it quite a few times, and agree with the positive comments above. Once you get the hang of it, a battle can be over in 30 minutes or less. Or they can drag out as long as an hour or so. It does seem that they have engineered certain battles to fairly well assure that one side will win, and on a few of the battles it seems a bit constricted, but overall it’s a great game.
-
RE: Japanese IC
US could bring two transports down, but I think I said somewhere above that all it takes is one. Just because Brazil can produce 3 units per turn doesn’t mean it has to. Once the factory is established the US can use discretion as to how much, if any, force to produce in Brazil.
-
RE: Thoughts on Japan
This is very interesting. I don’t think I’ve ever played a game where Japan didn’t even try to sink the Pearl fleet. I look forward to giving this strategy a try.
-
RE: Can Germany invade the UK first and win?
Even in a game where Germany doesn’t benefit from any bid, I see this as worth a try. I’ll pay 5 IPC for the chance to try. If I ever hit that number for long range aircraft, I am going to invade. It is a game, after all. The one thing that the German player must remember to do is never think it’s actually going to succeed. Germany must make a first turn purchase assuming the invasion is never attmepted.
-
RE: Japan in North America
If Japan makes a move on Alaska, the US has to respond. This can help the Germans immensely.
-
RE: Taking Africa…
Taking Africa on G1 is the easy part; keeping it is harder. Africa is a nice payday for the Germans, worth an investment. It’s worth getting the UK completely out of range of the Med so that you can build a second transport off italy on G1. As I see it, Germany is going to get its money one of two ways; they can take and keep Africa, or they can savage the Russians. (or they can try for Britain, good luck).
-
RE: Japanese IC
Still, I think trying to throw some different tactics into the mix makes for more interesting games!
Yes indeed. That’s one reason I love the NAs. They make every game radically different. I’ve posted this elsewhere, but my friends and I roll dice for as many NAs as we have agreed to. This adds an element of chance that we like better than each player selecting. If players get to select their NAs, the same ruts will develop.
In answer to the original topic of this thread, I have almost always build the first Japanese factory in Kwangtung, if for no other reason than that it is so easily fortified immediately. If the main thrust of the Japanese attack it towards Moscow, I have had some success building the second Japanese factory in Buryatra (or whatever that Russian territory adjoining Bury is.) If things have been going well for the Japanese, they should have 4 transports off Japan that can unload directly into Bury; They build 3 tanks for Kwangtung, 2 inf for Bury, and shuck over as many men as they can afford to build to Bury. This becomes an irresistable force surging towards Moscow. We once saw a Japanese factory built in Egypt. That was a wild game.
And more on the Brazilian factory; the main reason I don’t like the east coast>algeria rout into africa is that it exposes the US fleet to German air units. The brazil>west africa rout is doable with one transport, lands troops in Africa on US2, and the US boats are fairly immune from attack (barring some ballsy German naval maneuvers). And really, the US is wealthy enough to build a factory that will, if it serves it’s main purpose, be rendered obsolete. You send US bombers on SBRs over germany, knowing they might go poof, in the hope it will cost Germany money…for the same 15 ipc the US can deny germany all the IPCs in Africa, forever. The secret is to stop feeding that factory when you don’t need it anymore.
In all the games I’ve played where Germany did well, they took and held Africa for long spells. As the allies, I’ve lately been willing to let south asia go if I must, but you gotta keep Africa.