Problem is that if you don’t buy US navy then Tojo can relax and pump everything into Moscow without spending a single ipc to increase it’s navy. If the US match and try to surpass Tojo’s navy then they must spend ipc’s to counter what the US is doing. If the US completely destroys the Japanese navy they can threaten both the asian mainland or Japan itself forcing the Japanese player to spend ipc’s defending Japan and China. These are units that wont be threatening Russia.
Posts made by falconrider
-
RE: Preferred option to stall Japanese expansion.
-
RE: Preferred option to stall Japanese expansion.
@Cmdr:
yea, that is a mistake one not soon forgets!
Not sure how effectively you can SBR Japan from Stanovoj. Not saying it is effective or ineffective, saying I’m not sure how effective it is! (some people like axis_roll will assume because I said “not sure how effective…” I mean completely ineffective and go off the deep end trying to prove me wrong, hence the clarification!)
I’d say it is a pretty heavy investment from what you are describing.
21-24 IPC in Russian Infantry
- 20 IPC in British Fighters
- 20 IPC in American Fighters
- 24 IPC in American Bombers
- 12 IPC in British Bombers (?)
That’s 88 IPC (if you dont bring the British Bomber) of units tied up to do 3.5 IPC damage per bomber on average. (10-11 Dmg a round expected.)
Just to put some perspective on it. Again, I am NOT saying this is a GOOD or a BAD idea, I am only attempting to investigate further.
Hi Jen,
Basicly this tactic uses as was stated the majority of of starting units. You stack up all the USSR inf and fly usually 2 US ftr is enough + as many US bombers as you need into Stanovj. If the Japanese want to remove this threat they need to send more units in this direction than they usually want to. When you feel like there’s enough threat you simply move back 1 space with the inf and fly the ftr’s back to the Pacific for carrier duty and the Bombers can either fly home, to the UK to hit Germany or what i like to do (if theres a Manchurian IC) is move to Russia and bomb it from there. What i sometimes do with the US ftr’s is use them in what i call my Russian stack push where i stack up in either Eastern Ukr or Belorus with all i got and then flying 2 UK + 2 US ftr’s into the stack along with an AA gun. Certainly gives Jerry something to think about when i do it again into East Poland and he’s dangerously thin of inf on the front.
-
RE: Preferred option to stall Japanese expansion.
Something i was trying for a while is to fly US bombers and fighters to Stanovj and Strat Bomb Japan from there. It’s a big investment for the Japanese to throw 7 or 8 USSR inf + 2 US ftrs out of there. You can if you can afford it move 1 or 2 USSR arm there and/or fly the UK ftr’s there too.
-
RE: How long does a game of AA50 take?
Make sure you don’t sacrifice your game for the sake of playing fast especially on the Eastern Front as those desicions are critical to winning.
-
RE: Australian Fleet
I take an inf + art and link it up with the US carrier. It sits with the US Pacific fleet and when it gets a chance threatens to take back Borneo, East Indies or Phillipines.
-
RE: Question about using a friendly transport
Thanks for that, yes is a pain in the rear.
-
Question about using a friendly transport
I’ve been playing that if a friendly transport is adjacent to both the territory you start in and where you get off that you can do it all in the 1 turn. Eg. I have the German transport in the mediterranean and i can move the Italian troops in the same turn from Italy onto the transport and into Libya using it as a bridge. A friend seems to think you must wait until your next Italian turn to move them from the transport into Libya. I know if the transport has to move then you must wait until the next turn. Am i correct that you can use a friendly transport as a bridge?
-
RE: AA42 has been revealed….. now what?
Buy it for the pieces and that’s it. AA50 all the way!
-
RE: The new sculpts
I’ll buy them just to have more pieces. I’m constantly running short of tanks for the Japanese and British and it would be good to have a variety of different looking models too.
-
My take on the new map.
After playing AA50, the 1942 map looks far too basic in Europe, no nwe, no Baltic States, combining of the Balkans & Ukraines, etc means that the tactics will be much more simplified. With the extra provinces, outmaneuvering is a key part of AA50 on the eastern front. With the simplification of Europe this doesn’t seem the case, it looks to be more a who has more tanks wins game. A good thing for a novice player i suppose and it will reduce the stalemates on the eastern front making for a quicker game.
The 7 Chinese provinces are gone, along with the micromanagement of playing and attacking China. The 12 regions on the Asian mainland have been combined into just 5 . This may be a good thing and should make life a little easier for the Japanese (as if they needed easier lives) and allow them to focus more on the Pacific.
I’ll definatly buy the game (if only for the pieces to add to AA50) and give it a go.
-
RE: Low Luck and Normal Dice Roll hybrid
I can understand your friends annoyance at bad dice. I feel the same when after spending hours of play a major battle is so skewed by good/bad luck that the dice decide the game rather than the player. I’d considered reroll tokens as well but have also come up with these 2 ideas as LL hybrids. Neither of these methods interfere with SBR which i like too.
1. Since most of the time it’s the major battles that are more game changing, any battle involving 10 or more units per side is determined by LL, all other battles are rolled. Once the LL battle is less than 10 units per side rolling dice decides the remainder of the battle.
2. Which i like better is that each player gets 3 LL tokens to use per game. When dice are rolled if either player feel unjustly done by the dice they can call LL to be used on that set of dice rolls. So if your opponent has rolled way too well or you have rolled really badly you get to call LL. The remainder of the battle is then rolled out as normal.
-
RE: What do you think of this mixed LL and dice idea?
I totally agree dice are good however i’m saying just use LL for big battles but when the big battle is reduced less than 10 units per side switch to dice to finish it.
-
RE: What do you think of this mixed LL and dice idea?
Essentially this method keeps the interesting “risk management” part of the game in tact but removes the problem in a large battle when one player rolls really well and the other rolls rubbish. If that happens in smaller or medium battles all is not lost but if you have 20+ units a side and someone scores 5 hits and the other 15 then it’s usually game over.
-
What do you think of this mixed LL and dice idea?
My friend and I play the dice rolling method but both feel very frustrated at spending all that time playing only to have an important large scale battle go horribly wrong due to bad dice. Very large battles that get skewed like this can ruin a good game if one side gets too dominant. It also has the effect of making the loser not feel like playing anymore.
We’ve come up with an idea that when a battle has 10 or more units on both sides that LL is used. Once someone has less than 10 units then the dice rolling method is used. This has the effect of both keeping the dice involved in the game and reducing those horrible moments when a large one sided battle ruins a great game.
-
RE: How to achieve balance
My friend and i have tried many rule variences and have come to the conclusion that with NO’s and/or fighter escort the axis are too strong and tech simply is too much of an unknown and can unbalance both ways. We’ve found the most fun and balanced game is no NO’s, no tech, no fighter escorts and closing of the Dardanelles.
-
RE: Operation Paintskrieg
Whilst on the topic of painting, i play Warhammer Fantasy and love to play but hate the painting so paid an overseas company to paint my stuff. They did a good job and were priced well. Maybe i should get them to paint my AA minatures too. If your wondering who they are you can find them at www.paintedfigs.com
-
RE: Operation Paintskrieg
I’m very impressed, well done! Are you planning to paint the IC & AA units as well?
-
RE: Where do you usually send Japan's 5 starting transports on J1?
I agree with this too.
-
RE: Where do you usually send Japan's 5 starting transports on J1?
I agree on this too, you must threaten India to stop the UK player from even thinking about putting an IC there.
-
How long should a game go for?
I’m fairly new to A&A having only played about 6 games. Last weekend i played a game that went for almost 20 hours over 2 days. What an epic battle it was with the tide turning on multiple occasions only to tip too far due to a costly error by the axis general.
The UK just purchased an IC at India and Persia and had increased factory production. I was sending over the RAF (3 bombers and 2 fighters) to support the battle in the east. They had landed in Russia on their journey there and i thought they were safe. To my horror the Italians took Eastern Ukraine which allowed the German tanks a path to Invade Russia. Russia wasn’t that defended only the planes and 5 infantry. My whole army was sitting in Belorussia and his in East Poland. Both sides afraid to press an attack. He took Moscow and killed the RAF (maybe my error was a master stroke) which were heading for India. The amount of tanks he used left his force in East Poland weakened and i attacked next turn wiping them out.
The problem is that when attacking only one country can do it and when defending all countries are involved. In the case above both UK and Italian forces where present in smaller numbers meaning that attacking was going to prove difficult causing the stalemate. Only due to his error did it make it worthwhile. Even then by the time I got near Gernamy he’d rebuilt and during this whole time Japan’s force was huge meaning i couldn’t afford to make a mistake with Russia so pressed home slowly and surely instead of rushing in.
I’m finding that even when the game appears to be in one sides favor that by careful outmanouvering and harrassment that you can turn the game the other way. I was playing the allies and found that it’s better to sit back and snip territory and harrass and build up rather than go headlong into a conflict, even if the conflict is in your favour. There was a few occasions where i could have attacked hard but chose not to as a bad battle due to dice would have left me vulverable to counter attack. It was only once the US had built a large enough navy to take on Japan that i felt comfortable attacking hard. I am a rather careful player and will spar until i get a decisive opening rather than try to land a risky KO punch.