Topics created by fanofbond

I play the latest version alpha 3.  Here is a link to the setup and rules: http://www.harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=6149

Uhmmm….I don’t even know what to say…I think I broke my calc…nevermind :?

@Doomreaperx: Im so pissed off, i orderd mine from amazon while they said there was only 2 copies left. and I just got an e-mail saying it wont be here till the 15th of september!  :x that stinks

Like I said,just a thought

@fanofbond: The US is amphibious assaulting Korea and can the planes in japan scramble to kill the transports in the seazone.  The are no jap ships in the sea zone. The scrambling fighters will defend the seazone, not the territory.

You are correct.  My appologies.

See http://n2.nabble.com/Download-Maps-Links-Hosting-Games-General-Information-tp4074312ef1671093.html read/skim the whole thing…. It’s either incorrect Triplea version…check to make sure you have the latest (1.25 i think). that you haven’t dled the proper maps…make sure you’ve done this. if it’s that you can’t host that’s the problem, you probably haven’t enabled port forwarding to host games. They explain how to do all this in the link above.

That’s what I used my carriers for when I made this attack. I was attacking the jap carrier group and I knew that I was basically going to lose every unit. So as I lost two airlplane I would then damage and take the carrier as a casualty. That away if I did have something survive it could land or I still had a carrier at least. That was the battle where my friend said that offensive carriers couldn’t take two hits.

@allboxcars: @Brain: @allboxcars: @Brain: I agree. Far flung territories should have a controlled path to the homeland before thay can contribute IPC’s to their “homeland” otherwise they should have to spend the money themselves if they have a factory or save the money until it can be transported along a clear path. Hmmm. So would that be your evil twin brother saying that rules shouldn’t keep IPCs in Canada as it totally unbalances the game and dooms the Allies? :lol: Canada would still be owned by UK. And this proposed rule would cause the same net effect. #521 Not exactly

@i: well if you want to replay the war then axis always lose allies always win. That is why the game can never be too consumed with being exactly like history. Changes have to be made to give each player a fair chance at winning and the freedom to make different dicisions than what the historical leaders did.

@Gharen: I think if your ship ends up in an enemy convoy zone and survives to their collect income phase it automatically deducts from their total, so that being said I believe you can attack to an enemy sea zone assuming you kill something or noncombat to one.  The convoy raiding takes place on the opponents collect income phase so its entirely different from your combat. right!

@moompix: Destroyers stop a submarine’s movement. Submarines do not stop a destroyer’s movement. well said. #482

@fanofbond: Can a jap transport move through an allied controlled seazone? While i’m on the subject of questions can us planes land in either Anzac or uk  territories before the dow. If Japan is at war with any of the allies in the sea zone, and there’s a ship that you can’t ignore, then the answer is no. If Japan is not at war with any of the allies in the sea zone, but will be by the end of Japan’s turn, and there’s a ship that you can’t ignore, then the answer is no. Japan can move past allies it is not at war with, to attack allies it is at war with, provided none of Japan’s moves will result in war with the moved through power. The answer to your second question is no. US planes can only land in US territories or on US Carriers, when it is not at war.

@Gargantua: But cmon, Germany building an ACC! That shouldn’t bother you! True, if that’s all he built and the Allies have enough to easily destroy it. But aircraft carriers ROCK, for ALL powers.  Now that they only cost 14, and who knows - in their game it’s possible it only cost 11! Aircraft carriers are the most efficient way to get quick defense against air, in the sea.  I buy an aircraft carrier with Germany in almost every game, and yes, I usually win. Now building one in SZ5 when it’s occupied, depending on the situation, may be a very bad idea, as you said. 

@supremacy: My friend was Axis and myself the Allies.  I had just taken Germany with Uk and USA while he was trying to invade russia.  oh  I should mention he was playing the game and watching TV at the same time.  he started building up japan with transports armed with tanks  infantry and artillery,  6 loaded transports sitting in on the coast line of japan.  so i put a battleship in 55.  on his next turn he moved all 6 loaded transports to zone 57 with out any navel escorts.  of course on my turn i moved the battleship into zone 57 with his transports  baaaam  all gone  he looked up at me and said  ( where the heck did that come from ?  how the heck can Axis win when the allies have cloaking and stealth abbilites ?  LOL  )  I think he will NOT be watching TV while playing next time,    what do you think  ?  ?  ?  LOL Lol

Germany because, espacally if they hit Russia hard, Russia is stuffed aginst a full blown Germany. But 1 bombing round aginst Italy can really catch them off balance and make it hard for them.

@oztea: The following straights are added to the game board, unlike canals, a player needs only to control one territory to control naval access to the adjacent sea zones. Submarines and air units may move normally. Gibraltar – No units may cross the border dividing sea zones 12 and 13 without control of Gibraltar Denmark – No units may enter or exit sea zone 5 without control of Northwest Europe Dardanelles – No sea units, not even subs, may enter or exit sea zone 16 without control of Turkey I play with this in all my games, alot more fair 1. I find the Coastal Guns rules (Surface Ships ONLY – subs can pass freely. You NEED DDs to restrict the passage of subs.) from AARHE much more useful for Gibraltar and the Channel passage issues. To pass Gibraltar, Sz 1 to Sz 2 or vice versa, all Axis Surface Ships ONLY are subject to fire from the Fortress Guns at Gibraltar - Hit on a 1 or 2. To Pass through the narrowest point in the Channel, between Dover and Pas de Calais, all surface ships - either side - are subject to gun emplacements of the other side (that also spent the war firing on each other - yes, they were quite long ranged) - Hit on a 1. [Note: With Historical Setup you can even re-enact the ‘Channel Dash’ of the BB’s Scharhorst/Gneisenau [http://www.german-navy.de/kriegsmarine/ships/battleships/index.html ] and their accompanying Destroyer escorts. Set up 1 BB and 1 DD in Sz 7 {1941 Scenario} to re-enact the Dash. For {1942 Scenario} both set up in the Baltic and the BB has a Damage Marker underneath. To reflect the surprise of the British, the guns only get to fire at the BB’s, not the DDs.  2. Agreed, although Norway must also be controlled to enter Baltic. Although, while I always play it that way, Allied subs are free to pass through the Kattegat if they survive a Mine Roll [1-3 Sink, 4-6 Pass].  8-) See also [http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=15710.msg517854#msg517854 ] This works really well when you add the following NO that was curiously omitted from AA50 - and honestly, anyone who believes the NO objectives are biased towards the Axis should look at Italy’s NO.  [The UK & USA just suck up the IPCs with their generous NOs.] Germany: •  Gain 5 IPCs if Axis control Baltic [Sz5] - with no Allied naval units present, plus control the following adjacent territories: NW Europe, Germany, Poland, Baltic States, Finland, and Norway. Allied subs, even Russian, can be real thorns in the Axis side - although at least the German Navy does not just roll over and die so easy anymore, especially with AA Cruisers / Old BBs (incl. captured BB’s/Cruisers fitted out for AA role).  You could also go further, if anyone plays with the Soviet Baltic Fleet accurately represented as the Eastern Baltic entrance (S of Finland) was also heavily mined by Germany/Finland during the 1st week of the attack from June 41. [But thats a topic for a future thread. wink 3. Agreed. To do otherwise is just inaccurate as even the Main UK fleet in WW1 lost BBs just entering the Southern end of the Dardanelles.  The turks have the length of the Dardanelles heavily fortified with Forts and Mines.  Certain Suicide for any attempt to pass.  :roll: PS: Don’t forget to check out the following Improved China Mod: http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=15626.0 ]

You could split the axis up the same way. Put Germany and Italy on one side while Japan is on the other. Both sides need 10 VC to win but can only attack each other when the allies are down to 4 VC. This would make the end gamee very tence and maybe even exciting.

infantry attack on 2      defend on 2 for #3 it is the same as in AAR

@Bob_A_Mickelson: GC is ten times better and can be completed in 2 hours I like D-day better. the system is more similar to the classic AA system. GC has this battlebox I dont like, I dont like the way units move, I dont like artillery sinkink ships etc etc

LuckyDay has hit the high points. D-day is the weakest version but it is also the fastest once you get the turn sequence down should get most games in under 2-1/2 hours and if you want to have beers while playing the most forgiving to less than complete focus. GCNL is a bit longer but it can FEEL faster with alternating movement of each units (1st player moves TRNS, next player moves TRNS, then BBs and so on) and keeps you involved cause you don’t really have your turn/opponents turn. GCNL has much more in the naval and logistics departments and a random casualty system. Poke around the boards there are many threads on this version vs. that version.

I don’t have BOTB,  but I did buy AAG for my son and we enjoy it. I would be surprised if most folks in this forum did not say AAG is better.  I definately think it is worth the cost.  It is a much different game from AAR, AAP or AA50.  As a matter of fact, we joke about AAG that to learn how to play it, you have to forget how to play the other AA games.  Happy rolling.  BTW, if you are interested in enhancing your AA experience, check out the Field Marshall Games company where you may buy custom AA dice.  You may find more info in the “Variants” forum here at A&A Org.

I find best way to protect Kar is to have 3-4 trannies in SZ 2 at the end of UK1, then if needed drop the entire thing onto Kar. I’d rather deny G 7 IPC and Russia 5 than let Kar get traded.  Its too much of a pita for Russia to trade it and keep Persia held and Cauc.  I really like it when I get to kill a stack of G armor in the process   Its also very tough for G to hit SZ 4 with planes so your DD+AC from turn 1 should be enough defense for your boats as figs must be in Baltic States or within range of your trannies to hit your boats.

@Subotai: It’s an interesting concept. Other alliances would be tempting to play in revised, if not AA50 was released. We did that in classic, I don’t remember if Germany + Russia worked for a good game, but Germany + US was pretty even, almost like the original teams. US and Japan in AA50 is much too weak. Also, NOs can’t be used when changing alliances, b/c the NOs are specifically built around the original alliances, while any territory with an ipc value can be captured, NOs are different. I’ve already been thinking about other setups in AA50, I haven’t tried any other than the original teams yet, but Germany and Italy + Russia would probably work fine. I don’t think any other teams can work, except if Italy is an enemy of Germany, Germany will then capture Italy rnd1, this will slow down Germany, but Germany will then be stronger from rnd2 than if Italy is on the same team as Germany. Maybe Germany and US could work in AA50, also original teams could work with the exception of Italy is teamed up with allies. A team change that is interesting to try out is: Germany owns all of Italy and Italian units, not only to play different setups, but also to determine if it is an advantage for axis to “split” Germany, I think axis are stronger if Germany got the possessions of Italy including the Italian units. I also think if we just removed all of Italy and Germany had to capture Italy and eventually build in the Mediterranean, Germany would be stronger than in the original AA50. I have been tempted to experiment to see if Italy is advantageous as its own seperate entity.  I am inclined to agree with you that an “uber Germany” is probably preferable for the Axis.  The only reason why I have any doubt though, is the nasty nasty potential for a double hit on Russia (and sometimes even a triple hit).  It really does seem that if Italy has a decent presence in the Russian theater, Russia can only defend against two fronts after about t2 and can no longer leave a 1 man inf defense.  That alone can tip the favour to the Axis.

Sounds like an awesome slugfest. Like two fighters in the late rounds, wheeling about in the the ring backpedaling away from each other, trying to hang on, trying to land the decisive one punch to end the contest and trying not to lose the match!