Posts made by Axel Allie

Like someone else stated:

when a newbie plays, he has an advantage to play axis.
more experienced players will have a better time playing allies.

why? because the coordination it takes as allies to make it work!

@JamesG:

Axel Allie,

I took the poll to mean which side does the out of the box game favor, in terms of having a better chance to win.  To that I say Allies.  But if the question is which side is more fun to play, for me I’d say Axis.

hmm,

I have to admit:
when I reread the question…
I want to replace my vote for Allies… I think they are favored more than Axis!

hehehe,

thx for the ‘invitation’, tcnance…

I haven’t got internet at home…
but since I check this forum during working hours…
I cannot install a game on my computer at work…
thát would be over the top :-P

I hope I can manage to play a game online somewhere in July, though…
Maybe I’ll have the opportunity then…
I’ll keep you informed when I know more  :lol:

wow,

djensen!!!
what a great layout for such a magnificent dice-roller!!!

I love it!!!

I’ll try it, too:

Rolling 10 20-sided dice:
11, 17, 9, 8, 12, 5, 1, 17, 5, 5

hmm,

maybe India and Karelia will fall at the end of turn 2 at the end of that game,

but isn’t there a possibility that USA or UK can take an important VC from Japan in force?

I think indeed, like squash already mentioned:
a KJF is in place when you play a 8VC!!!

To take one of those initial Japanese VC’s is probably an easy target to keep the Axis under 8 VC’s…
but for how long? that’s the question…

one thing is sure:
if you play a 8 VC game: Axis and Allies both have got other objectives then in a 9 VC game for example!!!

ncscswitch,

interested in a game of “97% of the times you gain your money back”?
Let me know when you are (if ever?)…
:-P
:evil:
:wink:

and Yanny?

still in a lazy mood?

let us know when you’re not :-P

@Sankt:

@Axel:

what IS possible? when you conquer a new territory with some land units, you can reinforce the new territory with units that have not been in combat that round! so, if you have a spare plane that didn’t engage in any combat? THEN you can land it there to secure the territory if you want - since this move is a total non combat move!

Not even that is possible. From our “bible” LHTR 1.3:

"Completing Air Units’ Move
An air unit may end its move (“land”) in a territory that was friendly at the start of your turn. Air units cannot land in a hostile territory or in a territory you just captured. "

Well, I didn’t know that one!!!
I just assumed you could reinforce with every unit that did not engage in combat, so including planes.
but, I too, learn every day :-)
I will only play with reinforcing land units, from now on.

thx.

The planes don’t have to return to UK exactly…
they only have to return to a friendly territory.
so, if they could reach a Russian territory, that’s a good solution as well.
or you can fly them to gibraltar for example (strategically this is a bad move most of the time)

so:
your planes can move 4 spaces:
you can move it:
1 space in combat move, engage combat and move it maximum 3 spaces to fly to safety in non combat move
2 spaces in combat move, engage combat and move it maximum 2 spaces to fly to safety in non combat move
3 spaces in combat move, engage combat and move it maximum 1 space to fly to safety in non combat move
4 spaces in combat move, engage combat and move it maximum 0 spaces to fly to safety in non combat move
the latter is ONLY possible when you attack a sea zone where a carrier will be present at the end of non combat move phase!
so, you can not do the latter for conquering a land territory!

what IS possible? when you conquer a new territory with some land units, you can reinforce the new territory with units that have not been in combat that round! so, if you have a spare plane that didn’t engage in any combat? THEN you can land it there to secure the territory if you want - since this move is a total non combat move!

@DarthMaximus:

Thanks for the responses.

My point about navies is they only serve 1 purpose, to get troops to where they need to go.  This is the same as it has been in 2nd or 3rd.

Don’t get me wrong I think it is cool to have destroyers and some more naval units, however, I just think you need to be very careful about trying to play around with them too much to the point where you lose focus of the main objective, get to Berlin or get to Moscow.

My idea, too!
and as I mentioned in another thread:
I think lowering the cost of ALL ships and AF would be a nice way to go for having a bit more naval action…
OK, I know it supresses historical accuracy, but it’s still a game!

and one of my future games will be like:
fighter = 7 IPC’s
bomber = 9 IPC’s
sub = 4 IPC’s
destroyer = 6 IPC’s
carrier = 8 IPC’s
battleship = 12 IPC’s

this would be madness as hell :-)
(i know :-P)
but think of what great naval battles you would have, then!!!

naval units would be bought as if never before!
I wonder how the game would turn out :-P

Either that, or increase the money Axis and Allies recieve.
after all: look at one of the main changes of A&A to A&A Revised…
Every country has more IPC’s, 'cause there are more territories and more IPC’s to gain!
and I think this is one of the best changes made in the game!!!

hello Tom,

your game is VERY FAR from lost :-)
the situation you’re talking about can happen in A&A Revised, and even fearly quick!

so, keep up the good hopes!
and maybe do one of the things above…

you’ll do just fine!

hmm,

didn’t see that one coming…
I like playing Axis, and only Axis…
when I submitted my vote, I frowned…
many of you guys do like Allies!!!

Good to hear that :-)
so, I know I will have adversaries in the future  :-P

@ncscswitch:

Ah yes, but lower the cost of those units would remove an historical accuracy from the game… the decline of surface ships in favor of the Carrier…

who cares about historal accuracy in this case?
it’s still a game, right?
and you have to have LOT’s of fantasy to see the realism as it is now!
If the game should be historical accurate?
then armor could not defend when you make a landing in Western Europe for example :-P
and most of all: axis would never win the battle or even the war…
:roll:

what I mean: I still prefer a NICE and FUN game, rather then being subject to a historical accurate -but not compelling- replay of history where ships cost a lot more etc…

placing an Indian IC is a very good move… AS JAPAN  8-)
but as UK, nah, better keep your money out of there!

some say it’s better to put an IC in South-Africa…
if G doesn’t buy an extra trannie (or his med fleet gets shot even) - you can defend and regain Africa with much ease…

leaving USA for giving the biggest punch to G ever, since they do not need to ship for Africa.

Well, make it 97% then :-P

I think there is a difference :-)
if you don’t care about that 3%?
why don’t we play a little game then?

say, you’ll GIVE me 10,000 bucks…
you have a 97% chance of getting it back.
3% of loosing it all and never see it again :-)
would you do it to prove your point?

Nah, I don’t think you would :-P
anyway, I wouldn’t play this game unless I was 100% sure of getting my money back :-P
(but then again, why would you ever play the latter game  :roll:)

oh, BTW: It’s just to prove my point :-)

In one of my games, I had staged UK in Karelia with about 15 units…

at one point of the game, I also had 5 trannies in SZ 4…
I pulled 10 units out of Karelia and put them into an amphibious assault in Western Europe!
Germany didn’t see that one coming, I can tell you!!!
USA could easily reinforce W-E massively as well, so G ended up looking at about 20 units in W-E.
I can tell you: the next round G was taken and my adversary resigned :-P

I think the only thing Japan can do IF he wants to build 2 IC’s: go defensive for one or 2 turns.

defend those newly build IC’s or you’ll lose them :-P

(still think it’s a better idea to buy one IC and a transport)

IF DD would have a shore bombardment, who would buy BB’s then?

the main problem is: both ships are way to expensive!
oh, and the other ships as well!
and so are the AF!

I would like to see some mass naval battles in a game,
but this is only possible when AF and ships are less expensive…

as for the BB? I occasionally buy one for the only naval battle we have sometimes: Japan versus USA…

“a guaranteed win”?

hmmmm,

I don’t like the sound of that.
You are STILL playing with real dice!

so, I suggest you keep in mind that there is a little chance that you fail ncscswitch :-P
Although I think that in 90% of the cases, Axis can win at the end of turn 2…
but 90% is still not the same as guaranteed…

just being a pain in the a**
:evil: