Posts made by EnoughSaid

Interesting idea.

Allow me to analyze how it would play out in most games. Which also requires the answer to a question:
Are German and Japanese Not At War NOs also in play?
So does Germany get +10 for peace with Russia?

For the first example:
If not, Germany gets +5 first turn for peace with USA. From what I gather, Japan usually wars J1, and if so it’s better for the Allies for USA to declare war on Germany immediately if only to make Germany not get this +5 IPCs. upon so I see little reason for USA to let Germany continue to get 5 IPCs.
If Japan waits for war, a frequent occurrence, maybe more so with this incentive, then you’re looking at up to 3 collect income phases for Germany before USA wars.
Germany total: between 5 and 20 extra IPCs

@crusaderiv:

_So you have a transport by itself and Germany sends a bomber at it: you get one roll and if you hit a 1 you survive but without the ridiculous addition of your transport killing a bomber" _

Or simply…a bomber cannot attack a transport…

AL

Why not? Bombers attacked transports all the time. In fact, the entire reason we went for Guadalcanal was to prevent Japanese bombers from hitting our shipping lanes.

Nothing but praise here. These are simple and concrete actions that any Russian player can perform. Well said.

Hey Vandroff, welcome.

I don’t think there are many players in Savannah here, but I’m rooting for you.
I don’t want to leave you completely hanging though. Have you tried meetup?

http://www.meetup.com/cities/us/ga/savannah/games/

There’s 2 groups there, maybe you can find someone interested there?

If that doesn’t work, you could try playing online via AAA.
I’ve never tried it myself, I prefer playing face-to-face, but some people swear by it as the best way to play.

Like I said, I’m rooting for you. I know the troubles of finding a game - I have to drive 90min one way and schedule the weekend a month in advance with my friends.
Even if you can’t find a game or player, this site has a pretty good crowd to strategize with and deliberate plans and what-not. That’s fun too.

@Field:

Now with an Industrial zone of 10 the USA would put 5 fighters and 5 tanks in each buy thus obliterating Germany.

Whenever you capture a Major Industrial Complex, it turns into a Minor Complex. Additionally, only the original power can restore it back to a Major Industrial Complex.

Just so you know, that shouldn’t have been possible - unless you were playing with house rules that say otherwise.

I agree with your overall premise.
On your specific points:

@Young:

1. Germany receives 3 free production units from France making it incredibly difficult for the Allies to begin a sustain a meaningful strategic bombing campaign.

I have little problem with this. I know we might want strategic bombing to be more effective, particularly for historical reasons, but having 3 production units in France serves to highlight that France was (perceived to be) a major power, as well as in my opinion they effectively yet simply support Vichy France concepts, and also serve as a nice springboard for D-Day momentum.

@Young:

2. Germany receives 2 free production units from Russia allowing their advance on Moscow to springboard unrealistically across a vastly large front.

It’s not on board with the famous scorched-earth policy, but I think it’s appropriate for the size of the map to have these capturable facilities. Gameplay > historical accuracy (when they must be at odds). What isn’t OK though is how Leningrad can produce a pathetic max of 3 and therefore falls too easily.

@Young:

3. Japan can build at least 3 and sometimes 4 production units to decimate China and eventually India.

….and I think they fairly well could have/did in real life, too. Particularly Korea. I say this be OK.

@Young:

4. While Japan enjoys many spawning points to choose from, the IC restrictions placed on the US make it impossible to supply a significant attack on the Japanese naval blockade, let alone Asia.

Agreed. An IC on islands, especially Philippines, should be allowed. I know the reason they aren’t is because it can make islands a !@#$ to take, but the rule just fixes one problem to make another.

@Young:

5. The major IC in India works against the Allies when Japan delivers max damage and the UK can not build a single unit.

Yes. With UK Pac’s small economy, this was an oversight of development that has an outsized impact.

@Young:

6. If and when ANZAC makes any significant income, they are limited to building only 3 units unless they purchase a 2nd IC in Queensland.

This. This so much. It’s almost inexcusable (except I can think of one or two excuses, but they’re definitely not good enough to be reasons).

@Young:

7. The production units the UK starts with in Canada and South Africa usually take a back seat to the need for one in Cairo, or Persia.

Yes, Middle-East is Priority #1 for a new UK production center. I’m not sure what that has to do with Canada and South Africa, though.
Canada is there to give you a safe place to build ships if the Germans take control of the seas around London.
South Africa is there to let you reinforce the Mediterranean if you never had the means or will to make a minor complex in Egypt.

If I don’t remember, message me come April. I might be moving theresabout direction.
Welcome!

@Whackamatt:

Korean War version

That should translate into a good game.

In fact, Imperious Leader made one. You can download the map for free and buy roundels at HBG.
http://www.historicalboardgaming.com/Korean-Conflict-Map-Rules-Free-Download_p_628.html

@Baron:

Your post is very challenging.
Some old ideas and new ones together.
I like the carpet bombing roll @2.
No retaliation seems a bit overpowered.

2@2 first strike is more powerful than 1@4.
For medium bomber: Maybe 3@1 first strike is comparable to 1@4
For heavy bomber: 2@2 first strike is comparable to 1@5.

Heavy move is too much, just keep it at 7+1 with Airbase.

I also notice this feature:
As OOB, except subs cant sink other subs, and destroyers negate subs on a 1-to-1 basis.
This is another way to have less Subs as sea-fodder.

This is hard on planes but it is a simplify scale A1 D0, A2 D3:
1. One round only of Air-to-air dogfight
Escort figthers att at 2, intercepting fighters def at 3.
All types of attacking Bombers roll 1 in the dogfight. Def Bombers roll 0

The missing part is about Naval combat with planes.
1 Carrier will put on board 2 TcBs for A6 D8 (like the OOB Fg unit)
2 Fgs is very weak A4 D6.

Carrier operations and naval combat already incente for defensive and they lose offensive power.
Now the offensive capacity of 2 Fgs (A4 D6) or 2 TcBs (A6 D8) or 1 Fg+ 1 TcB (A5 D7) is weaker than OOB 1 Fg + 1 TcB (A7 D7).

A single round dogfight phase is it enough to outweight the above?
1 Fg A2 + 1 TcB A1 against 1 Fg D3 + 1 TcB D0 or against 2 Fgs D3+D3 This show how Fg is good on defense.

Because of this, I think TcB should get D1 in air phase also (still 3 times lower than Fg D3).

I feel like I just learned a new language in 10 minutes.

@TheMethuselah:

@EnoughSaid:

Hmm…. I don’t like this question exactly. I always build an IC in French Indo China turn 2, and sometimes it’s the only IC I build for the whole game. But if I was directly forced to only be able to build 1, I’d definitely prefer Malaya real estate.

Thing is, this would also influence opponents, and I’m sure I’d have a much harder time taking it. Knowing I can only build one, I’d actually probably end up building it in Hong Kong for the early tempo of a factory and an upgrade to Major IC down the road. The free port being a factor, as well as it being in perfect proximity for Japanese air (Malaya isn’t, and FIC is one-way only), and even the kamikaze sea zone as nice bonus, too.

(abstaining from Poll)

Keep in mind that Hong Kong is ineligible for a Japanese Major IC because it is not an originally-controlled territory.

Thanks for reminding me! I always just build a new Minor IC when production is too low, so I forgot!

:-o

Hmm…. I don’t like this question exactly. I always build an IC in French Indo China turn 2, and sometimes it’s the only IC I build for the whole game. But if I was directly forced to only be able to build 1, I’d definitely prefer Malaya real estate.

Thing is, this would also influence opponents, and I’m sure I’d have a much harder time taking it. Knowing I can only build one, I’d actually probably end up building it in Hong Kong for the early tempo of a factory and an upgrade to Major IC down the road. The free port being a factor, as well as it being in perfect proximity for Japanese air (Malaya isn’t, and FIC is one-way only), and even the kamikaze sea zone as nice bonus, too.

(abstaining from Poll)

Yes. When Russia left the territory it came under the sole control of the CP. Under the conditions you state the Russian Revolution would happen.

Also, the CP power would place his control marker on the territory immediately, but not gain income until his next Collect Income Phase.

I noticed how you spoke of the Revolution “saving” Moscow. I know what you mean. The Revolution can be both good and bad for the CP. I recommend whether to play with or without the Revolution being a decision the German player alone makes before the game starts.

Um… one of us might be missing something. I might not be getting what you’re getting at… but you know France is supposed to fall, in the first round no less, right?

I’d like to be there. You gotta give us a date, though!

Has anyone played both Fortress America and HBG’s Amerika?

If so, which do you like more, and which would you recommend?

That’s a big bay area, mate.
Can you be more specific, please?

At least San Francisco, Oakland, or San Jose?

….San Mateo? Morgan Hill? Cupertino? Hayward? Marin? Pittsburg?
Thanks.

Edit: I know it’s already past the 12th anyway.

@Narvik:

try this link

Thank you very much, Narvik! I will take a look at it soon.

I also agree with you entirely that this needs to be as simplified as possible.
I disagree with you on the execution of resolving 2 simultaneously attacking armies.
Black Elk proposed an individual skirmish he dubbed “border clash” where both forces fight with attacking values. The winner then carries on with its planned proper attack. I think this would be simpler than taking an extra step to bid for priority of attack. Which units would be fighting are even already written down!
Additionally, being forced to pay for attacking not only adds complexity in my opinion, but also potential frustration for a losing opponent. Picture a broke Chinese player that can’t counterattack ever because he is always outbid by the bigger Japan (or substitute China with Russia, Italy, UK, and/or ANZAC). It might debate-ably be more historically accurate, but it sure doesn’t sound as fun to me.
To compound on that, in a game where moving troops is more taxing than normal, the refreshing increase in combat opportunities and unknown possibilities should be a welcome excitement.

Me1945,
The thing about the use of absolutes, such as “always” and “everybody”, in most Western languages, particularly English, is that more often than not they are not used for their strict meaning, but rather for emphasis, particularly in persuasive speech. This is also known as a form of exaggeration. Speech does not need to be “perfectly correct” to still convey valid points in an effective manner.
Source: Linguist

But I gather your real point is that you have experience contrary to his, and you have seen players bid in Russia. That’s cool. Thank you for contributing!
Is there any chance you could regal us with a story on how that experience you’ve witnessed or performed was an effective decision? At the moment, I’m leaning towards Black Elk’s logic of getting the most bang-for-buck by utilizing the resource (bid) as soon as possible. It, too, seems to be such the stronger play to me that I have difficulty imagining another course of action being as effective. As such on this, it’s quite possible that when Black Elk used absolutes, he really meant them in those absolute terms as per his own experiences.

Hello.

It’s been almost a year since any information on this has been posted. I can’t find the existence of a Legion Gaming publisher. I just read all pages in this thread and am still a little confused. Forgive me if I’m asking questions already answered elsewhere.
Is this game canceled, or just on hold?
Has it been assimilated by IL’s Clash of Empires?
Should this thread still be stickied?

Thank you.