Topics created by 4thmac

@4thmac:

THe situation:

Germany captures Congo from the Brits early in the game.  Then Berlin falls, with Congo still under the German flag.  Can Japan move a land unit into Congo to take control of that territory and claim it for income?

The Congo technically isn’t “liberated” when Japan moves in.  But Germany can’t do jack squat with it, so does it become idle until one of the Allies comes along?  That would seem crazy since the Allies would presumably benefit from leaving one of their territories under foreign control, because Japan could beat them back and earn income where the Germans could not.

LHTR 1.3 rulebook seems unclear on this issue.  Help!

No.

Germany retains control of the Congo.

Japan can only take the Congo if the Allies recapture the Congo, then Japan recaptures from them.

Yep, totally legal.

@Jennifer:

In that case they are +4 IPC for Caucasus that turn.  However, they are not in an tactical advantage and Russia has suffered no loss for loosing it.

Net:  Russia Tactical Advantage with larger then normal stack in W. Russ.  IPC Gain +2 (WR)
Net:  Germany at no advantage, IPC gain of 4 in Cauc, IPC loss of 2 WR, net 2 IPC gain, tactical disadvantage due to larger then normal stack in WRuss.

The way I see it, Germany gains +4 IPC from the territory, and +1 IPC from the 1/3 chance of killing a unit with minimum value 3 IPC (one infantry), so net +5 IPC for investment of +3 IPC.  Germany also benefits from tying down the UK bomber for that turn, which is not trivial; a UK bomber can do a lot of damage to valuable naval units.

The Allies gain a tactical advantage from killing a forward placed German infantry, as well as the fact that the UK, not Russia, depleted Germany’s forces, which in turn allows Russia’s forces to mass and therefore be more efficient.

Russia gains nothing by holding West Russia because I believe Russia should hold West Russia until Germany has heavily massed at Ukraine.  That is, Russia should probably be holding West Russia anyways.

Oh, okay, that makes a bit more sense.  I guess I haven’t looked at the new rules in a while, so that’s why I thought the way I did.

A new version would be great, maybe with prettier pictures and a bigger map.

However, the current version isn’t too hard to use.  You get used too it.  Right now the toughest units to differentiate are:

Transport/Submarine
Battleship/Destroyer

You can do it, but sometimes I get em mixed up whatn I just glance at them.

@Jennifer:

I agree.  If I plan to hide like a school girl cowering from an overly menacing mcdonald’s double cheeseburger with my fleet . . .

Traumatic personal experience?

Oh well, if you ended up looking like that in a bikini, I’m not complainin.

No the Tranny doesn´t participate in the land-battle and can´t be taken as casualty.

It does participate in the naval battle before the amphibious assault (if there is one) and could be taken as casualty there, but all units it has loaded would be destroyed.

I’ve used them a few times to bomb Germany into the stone age.  Especially on a KJF strategy.

England pumping out 1 or 2 bombers a round up to 3, America keeping 2 or 3 bombers in England and then blowing the heck outta both Germany facilities will severely limit his production.  Heck, 6 bombers vs Germany herself is still 20 damage, that’s 6.66 infantry they are not buying to prosecute the war.  And remember, those rounds you don’t loose a bomber, you don’t build one, you build fighters or transports or land units instead.

Meanwhile, America is more then capable of taking out Japan.  If Japan switches to building navy they do not have the man power to make significant gains against Russia/America/British stonewalling and thus America can easily out produce them, especially when America starts grabbing islands.

@Nix:

Goggle for TripleA, it has a very weak AI, but better then Hasbros…  (doesn´t say much of course…)

TripleA’s AI is almost static for the first 3 rounds.  Go with insane German purchases for the first two rounds and you’ll own Moscow because it doesn’t know to stack Moscow with infantry.

@Jennifer:

We’re talking Sea Lion in Round 2 now?

England has 1 Bomber, 5 Fighters, 2 Infantry, 2 Armor, 1 Artillery and 1 Fighter, 1 Bomber, 2 Infantry, 1 Armor and 1 Artillery from America vs what, 6 infantry, 6 tanks, 6 fighters, and a bomber you said? (I know you did, I copy pasted it.) . . .

So the question is, do you want to loose your entire Airforce and not take the land, or do you want to allow England to hit you with 5 fighters and a bomber next round?

Er, who are you talking to?  I wrote that G2 SeaLion WON’T work.  “No, a G1 buy of 5 transports does not guarantee taking of London.”  Even later, I mentioned “That’s an offensive punch of 46 against an AA gun and a defensive punch of 54.”, I hope you don’t think I would think those were good odds!

The only SeaLion I advocate is a 1-2 tech dice for Long Range Aircraft with OOB (and possibly FAQs), to allow Germany the 16-30% chance to attack on G1 with 1 infantry, 1 tank, 6 fighters, and bomber, against London’s existing forces, as well as leaving Germany the IPCs to buy transports to secure London on G2 or G3; and even then I only advocate it if Russia did not fly its fighters in, and if OOB/FAQ rules are being used (because, of course, LHTR delays tech from going into effect, so you couldn’t get all those fighters to hit London).

The response I’m looking for is how to counter that threat other than flying Russian fighters to London, and ncsswitch has responded with a proposal of a Russian fighter attack on the Baltic, and a Russian attack on the Ukraine, combined with a sub move to block the German attack.  I think that is too risky because it commits three Russian tanks and Russia must win the Ukraine battle to kill that German fighter, and because both Russian fighters will probably die attacking the Baltic, in which case Germany could opt not to go G1 Sea Lion at all, but build mass ground units (POSSIBLY eight tanks, although I normally think of that as insanely reckless for Germany), and try to smash Russia instead.  But that’s not to say that I think ncsswitch’s proposal is bad, because preventing a G1 Sea Lion with 2 tech dice is pretty difficult anyways; if Russian fighters just fly to London (which was what I proposed), Germany is quite strong with the Belorussian and Ukraine forces intact.  Maybe if USSR did a hit and run on Ukraine, and hit West Russia . . .

“As for the detriment to Russia in that scenario… (Russia attacks the Baltic fleet with 2 fighters)
With the Baltic Fleet toast, UK starts landing in Karelia/EE/Germany via the baltic in UK2 with 6 divisions plus air and BB shot.  That immediate reingforcement of Russia is a heck of a boos,t and mor ethan counters the lost FIGs.”

First, if Russia was attacking the Baltic fleet - and all combat moves are made “simultaneously”, so I would also see the commitment in the Ukraine, and see that Russia was going to try to prevent G1 Sealion - I would probably kill the transport before the destroyer, because I just wouldn’t need the transport; I’d be planning a quick attack against Moscow at that point.  Second, in such a case, I do not see it as clear that Russia will kill the Baltic fleet, even if both Russian fighters die.  Third, even if the Baltic fleet was cleared, and UK built AC, transport, and 2 infantry, that fleet could not threaten E. Europe or Germany that early - there are just too many ground units being built in Germany and being pushed through E. Europe.  (If UK didn’t build an AC on UK1, and tried moving units into Karelia or E. Europe on UK2, Germany just uses W. Europe fighters and the bomber at Libya to clear, which is why I assume UK WILL build an AC, and not two transports, three infantry, and a tank.)  Fourth, if UK does stay in the Baltic, the US push on Africa and the Mediterranean will be postponed, and every turn that Africa is delayed is costly to the Allies.  Fifth - do you normally attack the Baltic fleet with Russian fighters on Russ1; if you do, how does that go?

–

I actually think the UK unification is the second best scenario for Germany, because it allows 6 transports, 2 subs, destroyer, 4-5 fighters, and bomber to attack a combined fleet of 2 transports, sub, aircraft carrier, 2 fighters, and battleship.  In such a case, I wouldn’t try invading London at all.  Let me clear, though, and state that I am firmly against 5 G1 transports; you can’t count on UK to unite that fleet, and even if it does, USSR’s push is just too strong.

@ncscswitch:

Off topic folks.

Technically, you could call these illegal/legal moves.

Beer helps this visualization.

:mrgreen:

OK, only 2 version have the entire world on the map:  “Classic”, which is usually second edition, but also includes the rather rare 1st edition, and the Hasbor CD-Rom game (also called 3rd edition) and “Revised”

If you game includes the units Artillery and Destroyers, you have Revised.
If your game says “Milton Bradley” on the box, you have Classic
If the starting income is:  R 24;  G  32;  UK 30;  J 25; USA 36 you ahve Classic
If startign income is R 24; G40; UK 30; J30; USA 42 you have Revised