US is too weak!
ItIsILeClerc last edited by
(…)I just think the US would have stomped up its production more, if it had needed to,Â if the war had gone worse for the Allies.(…)
That is exactly what the US did.
All Major Powers actually. The thing with production is that a Major Power has a basic production capacity. Some of it is reserved for war production, some of it must remain for production of civil goods (food, clothes, whatever).
During the course of WW2 the production of all Major Powers did not increase that much because of the conquest of new lands, but much more so because war production was geared up at the cost of civil production!
An exeption is of course the acquisition of a strategic material that lifts a certain production/utilisation inability. Oil for example. a MP can build carriers but why would it if it hasn’t got any oil to fuel it…
Why is there no factory in Ural for Russia?
During the German invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941â€“1942, the mountains became a key element in Nazi planning for the territories which they expected to conquer in the USSR. Faced with the threat of having a significant part of the Soviet territories occupied by the enemy, the government evacuated many of the industrial enterprises of European Russia and Ukraine to the eastern foothills of the Urals, considered a safe place out of reach of the German bombers and troops. Three giant tank factories were established at the Uralmash in Sverdlovsk (as Yekaterinburg used to be known), Uralvagonzavod in Nizhny Tagil, and Chelyabinsk Tractor Plant in Chelyabinsk.
Here is Russia’s bomber Cow… Looks pretty cool, actually.
Young Grasshopper last edited by
Yeah I need a bid for the allies against experienced players and my opponents need a big bid against me when I am the axis.
Like a non bid solution could be +10 usa and +1 russia bomber in archangel. Otherwise it seems like +12-15 allies is the way to go.
I’m not really a fan of bids and have never used them is any game I’ve played. I guess the reason is that it alters opening strategies, and I truly believe that opening strategies in a regular rules game should remain pure for players who plan a lot pre-game.
In europe alone. I full scramble round 1 with UK. You still have enough to sink Italy. Especially if you have a sub for your bid.
UK goes full middle east. A bunch of air comes to Russia. I am not too worried about sea lion since UK 1 is 9 inf or 6 inf 1 fighter.
Chances are you will cut into Germany’s air units scrambling from UK. So it is not too bad. Even if you are playing low luck you generally get your moneys worth. 3 fighters = 2 hits then 2 more hits (2x cruiser 2x bb, germany is sending 4 hits usually sometimes sub hits so it is 5, in which case your fighters go even). SZ 111 Germany can score 2-4 hits so you expect a 2nd roll with the fighter scrambling. You get a roll @ 1 then a roll @ 4 when germany gets good dice, Germany gets bad dice you get a 3rd roll. Okay dice you get 2 rolls @ 1 (on the bright side you are not rolling @3 which you can miss and be sad).
In dice games, you may as well try to luck out early game.
I have yet to play a Europe game with a bid. I see your logic in scrambling, and I used to see it that way too. The problem is that you really don’t have enough to take out the Italy fleet after a full scramble. Here is my Germany attacks against 110 and 111.
110: 2 subs, BB, 2 figs, 2 tacs, bomber
111: 2 subs, 2 figs, 2 tacs, bomber
Sea zone 110 attacker is averaging 3-5 hits in low luck. If you scramble you will average 4-5 first round. Lets say you each get 4 hits. attacker chooses 2 subs and 2 hits on the bb. Defender chooses 2 cruisers BB and french fig. Next round attacker gets 3 hits and that kills you while you kill 2 fighters. This is a net gain in terms of TUV vs. not scrambling (which would be 1-2 hits vs 5-8, but now you have a lot less that can hit Italy.
Sea zone 111 attacker is averaging 3-4 hits and defender with scramble is 2-3. Let’s say 3 hits for attack and 2 for defense. That means attacker looses 2 subs and defender looses cruiser, dd, and 1 hit on BB. Next round attacker kills you and you get 1-2 hits. Let’s say 1 hit. That means you killed an extra fighter that you wouldn’t have and had a better chance at killing both subs. Sounds like a TUV gain again, but what about Italy?
I might like scrambling 110 just to try and get lucky since you’d have to take that BB out on your turn anyways with your fighters, but you’d have to not scramble 111, so you can have that extra fighter for Italy’s fleet.
Sorry 110 should have both bombers in it. In that case you scramble 111 and leave 110 alone.
With Germany I like to preserve my aircraft especially in the early rounds. .
110: 2 subs, BB, 3 figs, 3 tacs
Defender should get 4 hits if they scramble 3 fighters and this will protect your planes from being destroyed since you can apply them to the subs and BB. If you take the ships out on the first wave then retreat the second to save the BB and your planes.
111: 2 subs, 1figs, 1tacs, 2bomber
Defender should get 2 hits thus again saving your planes.
Spendo02 last edited by
^ Thats my standard G1 move.
I generally retreat once I’ve sunk all the ships in those two SZ. I’m not interested in trading a Ftr for Ftr with the UK, but I’ll happily wipe them out when rolling to sink all the ships.
I don’t think it is just that the US doesn’t make enough money. The game mechanic in global took away the US shuck ability. Without this ability a transports value is nearly half. You now need twice as many transports and they don’t defend, so you need twice as much fleet. This wouldn’t be so bad if not for the fact that Germany has a production capacity of 23 with West Germ, Germ, and France. 22 Infantry costs Germany 66. 22 Infantry costs US 143 because of the 11 transports, and this isn’t even accounting for the fleet that goes with it.
This game feels so broken to me, and it saddens me to say that because I love Axis and Allies.
There is a reason why I strongly prefer to play the axis.
My last live game I was like, “I will give you a Russian bomber, 5 usa inf anywhere in mainland america, a sub in sz 98, and an infantry on new guinea. If I get to be the axis.” He was like “that sounds like a really good deal.”
It was a close game.
It is like America’s economic system, it will crash then money will be reallocated based on the social security system. That is the game plan. If you think about it, it makes perfect sense, sure the people who start out with the most monetary wealth in this new system will be the ones who paid into social security the most (makes sense to me). Everyone has other wealth, land, possessions etc so wealthy people will be fine.
I do not see why anyone would be afraid of the dollar collapse.
Just try that 5 inf USA, bomber russia, sub 98, inf new guinea. Like if you are good with the axis you should be fine with the allies getting all that stuff.