• '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    He lost those planes in Round 1 to the AA Gun in W. Russia

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    The opponent isn’t from these boards.

    He lost fighters to AA Guns again.  He’s not doing well against Russian AA Guns, and I retook both of them last round. =)

    Anyway, 14 Armor against 20ish Infantry is not going to be fun to watch.

    My debate, currently, is if I should strafe W. Russia or not.  5 Inf, 5 Arm if I can get out without taking it, could help.  The flags were wrong for Russia, they have 24 IPC, so at least I can make 8 more infantry.

    If he goes all out on G3 against Russia, and I get no hits, he has a 75% chance to clear it and have 2 bombers and a 3 fighters and an Armor left.

    if I strafe W. Russia I should lose 8 Infantry and he loses 5 infantry, 3 armor.

    That means I’ll ahve 9 Infantry, 3 Armor, 4 Fighters to defend against 11 Armor, 3 Fighters and 2 Bombers.

    And then he’ll have a 62% chance of clearing Russia, but not taking it. (Assuming all AA Guns for my attack and his attack miss, anyway.)

    Damned no matter which way I go.

    The other option is to somehow get both Caucasus and W. Russia with Russian forces and block those 9 armor for one more turn.

    If I go Inf/Arm to Caucasus and 8 Inf, 2 Arm, 2 Fig to W. Russia I might be able to do it.  I only have about a 40.40% chance of taking W. Russia though, and that’s if the AA Gun misses.


    Okay, think I have it figured out.

    OOL for Russia: Bomber, Infantry, Armor, Fighters.  That gives me a 62% chance to win against everything Germany can bring to bear.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    updates

    1 Inf left in Sink in case he attacks, that way it qualifies for 4 free infantry

    [attachment deleted by admin]


  • @Jennifer:

    updates

    1 Inf left in Sink in case he attacks, that way it qualifies for 4 free infantry

    The United States has “Colonial Garrison” National Advantage?  I thought that was UK only…

    Or are you talking non-aggression treaty?  If so, doesn’t that only apply to original yellow territories?

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    Non-Aggression.  If any Russian units are attacked, they get 4 Infantry in any red territory under the new LHTR.  If any Russian territory is invaded, you get to put them anywhere you want as well, they don’t necessarily have to defend that territory anymore.

    According to my reading of it.

    Anyway, USA has Chinese divisions, need to keep that freebie going as long as I can.

    My bad, it has to be adjacent to a Japanese controlled territory, not anywhere Russia controls.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    Well, Germany attacked and luckily got spanked.  Since my W. Europe forces were dead anyway, with England, I attacked S. Europe (after he retreated a transport and wounded battleship from two American transports.)

    Here’s Germany 3 and England 3.

    Anyway, barring anything really weird, I think the corner is turned and Russia will survive.

    (the extra Russian tank is from Salvage NA.)

    Anyway, end of next round, assuming an SBR by Japan that does 3 dmg, Russia should have 9 Infantry, 4 Armor, 2 Fighters and 3 American infantry and 2 british fighters to defend her from an infantry, 6 armor, 3 fighters and 2 bombers.

    [attachment deleted by admin]

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    More maps

    [attachment deleted by admin]

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    He triggered non-aggression with his Japanese SBR, in case you are wondering where the infantry came from.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    Germany’s still pretty tough, but most of her wind’s been knocked out of her.

    2 Unfettered SBR bombers a round is gunna hurt for a LONG time.

    [attachment deleted by admin]

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    more maps

    [attachment deleted by admin]

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    He triggered it with the SBR in Russia anyway.

    It’s a guy from the Army, Neil Schmitz.

    [attachment deleted by admin]

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    More maps.

    Note, Japan decided to destroy the battleship instead of a fighter.  To save it from certain destruction from the British fleet.

    America got hosed.  She had an 86% chance to win with both battleships surviving (most likely a fighter, destroyer and carrier as well.)

    I call this the Jennifer Effect.  I always seem to get the worst possible result when it comes down to the dice.  Considering changing to LL only games so I have a chance to win. :P

    [attachment deleted by admin]

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    Germany surrender after UK 6.

    England got uber lucky attacking Karelia.  Almost 100% accuracy with tanks and planes in round 2.  Though, I think Germany and Japan were still pretty strong, considering America only had 54 IPC in land/air units (all infantry) and 76 in naval (all transports except Aircraft Carrier and Destroyer on opposite ends of the globe.)

    I stuck to my guns though, even though it looked bad, I kept America on the path of KJF with English Support and focused on securing Moscow at all costs.

    He spent too much time going for the IC in Sinkiang I think.  Trading 3 Armor for 3 Russian Infantry a round isn’t a good trade, IMHO.


    What do you think, nuno, since you’ve been gracious enough to take this as a pet project. =)

    [attachment deleted by admin]

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    Well, there are other clubs, AAMC, DAAK, FoE, etc.  But my buddies and I play in mIRC since we’re thousands of miles apart.

    The 4 inf qualified for Moscow because Moscow was attacked by the Japanese.  But it also qualifies because the Bomber was landed on the border to Moscow.

    And yea, we had already caught the error in Moscow.  One too many clicks when placing units I’m afraid.

    Anyway, the Axis almost had it, but he decided to keep up with tanks and switched to Infantry too late.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    The first time in the game that the Japanese forces attack any red territory, you may place four of your infantry for free in that territory before resolving combat.  If Japan attacks more than one red territory in that turn, you may decide which such territory receives the infantry.  If you attack an orange territory before Japan attacks you, you lose this national advantage.

    They can go into any red territory that is attacked by Japan, not just Buryatia. (Which is the only red territory that borders an orange territory.)


  • I think Nuno was referring Larry Harris 2.0., in which is stated that infantry may go in a territory that is adjacent to a japanese controlled territory (not only an orange territory).

    But maybe in this game you are using an older verions of LHTR.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    Sorry, yes, we were using LHTR 1.3

    2.0 just came out, didn’t it?


  • Yes 2.0, is the latest version, and non-aggression pact has a different ruling.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    I have it, but havn’t printed it out.  JSP and I are running with 2.0.  Somethings are over powered, some are nerfed.

    (IE Japan can team Most Powerful Battleships with Nightfighting and thus kill any KJF strategy before any begins.)


  • @Jennifer:

    I have it, but havn’t printed it out.  JSP and I are running with 2.0.  Somethings are over powered, some are nerfed.

    (IE Japan can team Most Powerful Battleships with Nightfighting and thus kill any KJF strategy before any begins.)

    But in that case they are giving up any possibility to use land NA (namely Banzai attack) and then if other nations select land based NAs Japan may work harder while going on Moscow.
    This week end we played a 4 player game with LHTR 2.0 and 4 NAs for each side.

    I was Russia/US. I started R1 and choose Non aggression treaty.
    on J1 Japanese selected Nightfighting.
    On US1 I chose War Economy.
    Then I and the Brithish player agree in leaving to USA the fourth NA to chose.
    In J2 Japanese player selected Most Powerful Battleships.
    Then in US2 I selcted Mechanised infantry.

    I planned to contrast japanses on he Asian mainland. USA infantries landed in Algeria in US1, after two turns of struggling in North Africa, they arrived in Persia in US4 and are resdy to figth in India and Sinkiang in US5.

    The problem with the double NAs for the BB is that Japan have only two units that benefits from that NA. US mechanised infantr yaffected all the USA infantry, and moving of two with infantry is a great thing!

    So my IMHO is:

    • NAs should be considered a sa whole not singularly. Comnsidere as a whole they are less broken than they seems
    • Second choosing NAs well is part of the game strategy, and USA have a great advantage, becasue maye choose last two times.
    • Third NAs are really fun!

Suggested Topics

Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

27

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts