Sry, not playing techs :-D
Posts made by HolKann
-
RE: Second Thoughts
@TG:
- Contrary to public opinion Cruisers DO NOT suck. In the hands of a invasive power like UK, the shore shot is worth the price of admission alone.
[…]
- Bombers are as good as advertised. There is no “hype” – bombers ARE at the top of Axis and Allies food chain. And because there are so many more territories in A&A:50, a bomber’s range is even more valuable.
- On the flip side, I often found my fighters running out of gas early
Hmm, let’s imagine UK in the first rounds: main conern is defending fleet from German luftwaffe, but still being offensive:
Options:
*2 cru + 1 bmr (cost= 36 IPC’s):
-shore bombardment
-bmr can SBR
-bmr has great range*1 AC + 2 ftr (cost = 34 IPC’s):
-2ftr’s are as good offensive as 1 bmr + 2 SBR’s
-better naval defense
-better defensive options with ftrs (in Russia ;) )
-AC adds a little bit more range to ftrs
-8% cheaper=> I’d still opt for the AC + ftrs, but I do agree that when defense is not an issue any longer, that bmrs (+ cru) are slightly better. It’s a close match anyhow, but bmrs are not that strong I think (low defense :( )
PS: your other thoughts are totally correct. Especially the Russian sub one (though I like to harass Japanese trns with it :evil: ).
-
RE: Modules for ABattlemap
Two great ideas + a little better unit pics = I’ll look into it when I have the time -> january exams are comin’ up.
BTW, the Chi IC is indeed the best one, had already made some kind of burned down building for it, but it was quite ugly, so tnx for posting yours…
Edit: simply added your unit pics to the file for now 8)
@Jeffdestroyer: try bigpieces, those have got some different units pics, or feel free to draw some yourself, it’s not that hard and it never hurts having some extra nice figurines :)
-
RE: Modules for ABattlemap
Hey, it looks like they used some of my images as the basis for the new toolpieces.bmp. Cool!! You can almost tell the pieces apart!
Yes, I did :D I mentioned this the first time I posted the modules somewhere, but forgot it in this thread. And it’s true, DD, Cru, BB are very hard to make distinguishable with the toolpieces, tried my best… And since we’re giving credit: the general shape and colors of the map are the work of Atilla at Flames Of Europe (who is also the creator of the whole ABattlemap program).
@The:
Is there anything by way of a new “map” for Triple A for AA50? I haven’t bought the actual game yet, and thought taking a look the virtual way might be nice. Also, where can I find the rules book? Do I have to go through the errata first? :-P
Try pm’ing Imperious Leader, or just browse around a bit in this forum, Imperious Leader has got different maps uploaded at mediafire which are a decent representation of the actual map, and he distributes links to them every now and then.
-
RE: AA50-1943
@Imperious:
Im sorry but this is too much like 1942. The axis are too strong. I am working on this and will post by tuesday.
Seen the gigantic USA fleet? The emptyness of Siberia? The toughness of the Chinese?
=> This will be totally different from 1941/2 because USA + Chi will play a meaningful role in the Pacific. Also, remember that the order of play is:
Russia, Germany, USA, Japan, UK, Ita => the Japanese fleet and the German army will get some heavy blows before they start out, I’d rather give the allies the advantage.Nonetheless, this map isn’t good/balanced/historical, but it’s just pointing out some of the possibilities (like doing a stalingrad/kursk and some island hopping on the first turn).
Your map looks OK, I like the 4 inf in China part :) And also the US fleet in Pacific and the US having conquered Libya (that’s really different from previous maps, like it double!) But what’s the Order Of Play? And why is Burma still Brittain controlled? (looked it up in Wikipedia, and Japan and UK were battling it out along the Indian border).
I do hope there are some nice opening battles in your map, but need an OOP for that… -
RE: AA50-1943
Owkey, tinkered around a little, made up a historically totally inaccurate map, but with some nice moves in the opening round :)
characteristics:
-USSR recapture of Kursk and Stalingrad in R1
-Germany can get Egypt at G1, but then UK can reclaim it, but Ita is also in the field
-German U-boats are going to do a lot of damage in G1
-US gets Ngu back in turn 1
-US+UK ready to go SBR the hell out of Germany
-IC in France to represent atlantic wall + give a little boost to Germany
-Siberia is empty: those forces went to recapturing StalingradIt’s merely a scratch, so please correct/improve historical accuracy/balance/fun/playability.
-
RE: AA50-1943
I like the idea! Though I don’t like extra rules, just make it the way they made 1942 and 1941: different set-up, and different order of play. I like 1943 because this time, it’s not the Axis who will hit the first turn, but the Allies will also get to deal a few blows. Ofcourse, the map should be balanced, which will need some extra units in the back ranks of the Axis to recover from the hits…
How about:
1. Russia (recaptures Stalingrad + kills 5+ arm near Kursk)
2. Germany (intercepts American + British DD’s and trns with 3+ subs in the Atlantic, recovers from Kursk and Stalingrad, Rommels in Africa)
3. USA! (starts Island hopping: for the first time in A&A history, USA gets to do something early in the game :D )
4. Jpn recovers from the Island hopping + embarasses China
5. UK (Pattons in Africa, goes SBR with 2 bmrs on Germany)
6. Ita (joins the battle in Africa, fortifies France)Hmm, I might devise a little ABattlemap set-up for this :)
-
RE: China wall strategy:
Aah, nice plan, but what if the Germans go all-out Egy on G1? 2 inf 2 arm 1 rtl 1 bmr vs 1 ftr 2 inf 1 rtl 1 arm, both Egy and Trj will be Axis at the end of round 1… Which means a lot of less units to defend India :(
-
RE: AA50 bidding
Well, er, how do you do that? How do you fix the set-up everywhere in the same way to the point that it’s balanced?
Bidding is universal (used in all competitive A&A), and allows for a perfectly balanced match. If you’re gonna start changing the set-up, you’ll loose these 2 advantages (is 2 inf in Lib balanced? Or 1 inf 1 rtl?, maybe siteA is differing from siteB, resulting in a less universal game). -
RE: Killing Fleets with Bombers
how about 1 AC on italy2? Throw some German ftrs on it if needed. That’s 7 hits already, which would need at least 7 bmrs = UK4 if they bought 2 bmrs a turn. = 12*6= 72 IPC’s invested vs 14 for the Italians. I don’t think this is such a good strat. Better to build some fleet as brit (an AC and some DD), and kill the Italian navy this way. Remember that bmrs can’t land on carriers, nor do they defend on a 4 like fighters. As for Germany not building any fleet: bmrs are of no use against an U-boat-armada…
-
RE: Is there a way to keep Karelia for the Russian on G2(1941)?
go all-out to finland, move as much army as possible to
KareliaArchangelsk, buy 3 arm 5 inf, place 1 inf in Len, 3 arm in Mos, and get ready for a 15-unit-strong counter at R2 :) Ow, and make sure the German trn is killed by UK…Finland with 4 inf? Then the UK BB+ trn survived (otherwise Nwy wouldn’t be a safe landing place for the bmr/ftr). => still go all-out to Finland, followed up by UK if not taken with Rus.
-
RE: Naval Units: what is worth buying?
The only bad sea-unit is … the cruiser! The rest is fairly balanced, let’s take the DD as the standard sea unit:
sub = cheap naval hit, worthless if no enemy ships are around, bad defense, superb at keeping the opponent’s navy from spreading out, immune to air fleets => totally worth the cost if enemy ships are a problem. I would advise them to any nation except USSR.
DD = cheap naval hit, neutralises enemy subs, can hit air, 2/2 is decent => The bulk of an all-round fleet should be this guy combined with subs
AC = expensive naval hit, 1/2 is very low, but allows ftrs to engage in sea combat, is multifunctional: even after the enemy ships are gone, it still has the bonus of extra mobility for you’re fighters. => If you need to get fighters across a big distance (pacific!), or fast defense (with help of ftrs)
BB = moderate naval hit: after 1 battle, the BB has repayed itself in terms of cost/hit (it still has 2 hits, even after taking 1), and you get an extra shore bombardment on top => 1 BB is always handy when waging a sea war, because of the free hit…
Cru = expensive naval hit, can shore bombard, 3/3 is good, but 3 DD’s are better than 2 Cru’s because of the extra hit. => only good if a lot of shore bombardments are needed, otherwise, buy a battleship or DD’s. Note that for each shore bombard, 1 land unit is required, so shore bombardment doesn’t repay itself the way it did in revised… So how many times will one actually use the shore bombardment? => I don’t like the Cru… make it cost 10 :):oops: Just saw Romulus posted the same arguments in essay-form… Aw well, this is a summary then :|
-
RE: Modules for ABattlemap
Posted a final version of the map, without naming errors and some optimized territory shapes (nothing major, just made some connections between seazones or land territories a bit more clear), + fixed the placement of some NO IPC-values on the map.
Also, +1 to the first forummer who knows the names of the six people pictured on the map… 8-)
-
RE: All that extra German money :?
I’d go for a sub fleet any day :) It’s like a crocodile lurking under the water: if the allies come to close, it opens its jaws, and with the help of some ftrs, the UK fleet is dead :evil: If the allies move to the med, the subs simply move to the English Channal, removing the ability for the British to build new fleet.
-
RE: Modules for ABattlemap
Didn’t update the link :oops:. I did now (and doublechecked ;) ): Shanghai, 1942 setup, connection to Nwe from SZ7,… are correct.
-
RE: Subs still marginalized…by DD this time...
I think subs are underestimated…
I like them a lot more than the Cruiser for instance. The extra cost of 6 IPC’s doesn’t make up for the shore bombardment and extra punch.
Now, let’s take a look at their advantages:
-subs are CHEAP! 6 IPC’s for a naval hit is dirt cheap!
-subs are invulnerable to lone enemy aircraft => this allows them to swim around Europe/Pacific avoiding those German/Japanese ftrs.
-subs can’t attack airplanes, and apart from DD’s, other sea units are more expensive than airplanes. As a result, if a fleet has got only 1 DD, it won’t stand a sub attack, because the expensive carriers, cruisers, and battleships will be the first to get hit. This is often underestimated!
-subs have a greater mobility than other fleet units because they can’t be attacked without an enemy DD.disadvantages:
-1 defense is little, even for 6 IPC’s. Don’t count on subs to stand tall against an organized attack.
-subs can’t hit air, but air with DD can hit subs
-subs don’t like a lot of DD’s (a single DD is seldom a problem)To summarize: I like subs a lot the way they are implemented now. And I think Germany building a sole sub fleet is a viable strategy. If you just don’t let the British navy too close, the subs+air will keep the baltic.
-
RE: Modules for ABattlemap
sz 7 does not connect to NWE on the Battlemap file.
Fixed :)
@Mr:
Any chance of posting these using the site based uploader…
No, they get screwed up all of the time because the forum doesn’t allow “.rar”-files to be attached. PM me with your e-mail address, and I’ll send them to you…
-
RE: German "factory crush" strategy with little help from Mini-Me ( Italy)
@Imperious:
Caucasus has 6 infantry defending. Its the new weak point. Ill take it with the tanks and stuff in East Poland and Ukraine, plus also take back Karelia but light and for good measure open either Belorussian and/or East Ukraine, so I can then go to Moscow one of 2 ways, and latter have a link to attack Moscow from Caucasus, which forces your Karelia stack to move to Moscow and you have no way to take Caucasus back as Japan lands 3-4 planes from FIC, with Italy scraps top hold up in Caucasus. Your plan is just trading one factory for the other by trying to defend all three. UK cant retake Caucasus and now soon India can even be taken by Germany.
No, it has 10 defending (4 from start who didn’t move, 2 from Kazakhstan, 4 build there) If needed, add the British ftr from Egy, and place 1 ftr less in Swe. Next turn 7 Brits+4 inf are coming to Cau (if needed). The 5 extra arm from Ger won’t hurt it :)
The plan to add Mos as a third by claiming Euk and Bel is interesting, but I think that with 10 extra inf on R2, Mos is safe, even if Bel and Euk aren’t reconquered. In the worst case, abandon Kar alltogether at R2, conquer Nwy with Swe armies, and prepare the British to strike back (buy 7 land units + 3 trns, + 4 units from UK2 landing in Swe.
If your stack moves to Moscow, the Germans builds can now take Karelia.
I think of it like a mother bear trying to protect 2 cubs a mile away…it cant cover both of them at the same time…one must die by the wolf. If it tried to protect them by staying in the middle the wolf can take both. UK ( played by little orphan annie is too weak to fight a wolf until much latter.
UK is income-wise stronger than Germany! But it is true the tank-pivot in Epl is very annoying to say the least. But once you conquer Kar, Cau is safe (the arms are out of their pivot-position), and the British are coming from Swe! The wolf can only take one cub, the other cub is safe with it’s mother then. And UK/father bear will be very angry with the wolf :D Remember that UK can bring on 8 units each turn to Kar, whilst it’s a long way for Ger to go to Kar.
However, I do think this is the best option for Ger, and with good play, both players will get an enjoyable game out of this strat. It will make the game more dynamic then the territory-trading we saw in Revised, whilst still giving both parties a chance to win.
Yes Germany builds a carrier and cruiser if they want a longer game, but the attacks should be the same except for the Baltic fleet stays in 41 ( less clear in 42)
I prefer the cruiser so i got a SB each turn for 4 extra IPC and better defense.
Germany needs the cruiser for both offensive and defensive. For Germany you can get away with a CV build on turn 1, followed by a CA build on the turn where UK builds or moves fleets in range of Baltic, or buys too many air units… so consider it the German fleet installment plan.
So 1 AC G1? That’s 3 arm less in Epl! Russians, rejoice! + most probably the ftr and DD kill eachother, which is another ftr gone… Add to that that 2 ftr have to go to Morocco, 1 ftr + bmr to Nwy (they haven’t got enough moves left to get to Bal). => the Baltic is underdefended: 2 ftr 1 bmr vs 1 AC 1 Cru 1 trn 1 sub (if lucky 1 ftr)…
You will need another DD or Cru (which is almost 90% of G1 purchases, so Mos will be safer). But then UK simply goes for a massive UK1 navy build-up, whit 2 AC, 2 subs, and total war upon the baltic fleet :evil:I don’t think Ger can go navy, except for a sub armada (which leaves no room for coastal BB’s or transports). Anyhow, if it does, then Russia will have much less to worry about…
-
RE: How to re-balance the -41 Scenario (team effort!)
How about inventing some nice Allied counter strategies to the KRF (kill Russia first) ? They haven’t been all tried yet, have they? So no, I’m not convinced the Axis got a '41 auto win…
@Flying:
Japan is overpowering we need to lessen their NOs
-Gain 5 ipcs if you have not engaged in combat with Russian forces as attaker or defender at any time during the game. This will simulate the nonaggression treaty with Russia, if either side breaks the treaty then both lose the ipcs. Yes Russia will have the same NO.What’s the point of giving them to both? Now it’s only better for Japan to attack Russia! Who needs those 5 IPC’s most - Japan or Russia? No, only give Russia a bonus if Japanese units are on its territories, thàt’s the way to make Japan think twice. (edit the Russian 10 IPC one to 5 IPC’s then)
Edit:
As for the bidding: 1 IPC to the Axis 8)