Topics created by kfgolfer

@Krieghund:

@kfgolfer:

ok, thanks.  One other quick question as this came up in my last game.  If Japan takes Los Angeles to capture 10 cities for a major victory, does the game end there, or does the US get a chance to fight back and maybe take back the city??

Victory isn’t checked for until the end of each round, which occurs at the end of the US turn.  So, in your example, the US would have a chance to take LA back (or any other Victory City).

However, if America lands a single infantry in S. Europe to get the 10th VC then that is it.  The Axis never get a chance to liberate that VC, even if Germany has 10,000 tanks and 40,000 infantry in Germany and that’s the ONLY American on the board (save the transport that deposited him there.)

One of my MAJOR problems with the VC conditions for victory.

BTW, I prefer to play with the house rule that you need 9 Victory Cities and you need to HOLD THEM for a full game turn (from the collect income phase of your turn until the purchase units phase of your next turn) without losing them.

If at any point you lose a victory city, even if your ally gets it back for you, it no longer counts as one of the 9 you can count.  (However if you hold the 9 until your ally’s next turn, it would count.)

I feel that slight adjustment to the rules really covers the exploit of landing one guy here or there to steal a victory in a game.  It forces you to be able to hold your victory cities which really is the point of them.  IMHO.

@kfgolfer:

i just dont see how Russia could “bleed Germany dry”??  russia has very little money and German has a lot!!  Germany keeps buying tanks and simply runs over russia Inf at will too quickly… Russia can only defend itself for a short time and where does the allied help come from?  a D-day invasion?  UK air raids?  I know I am a rookie at this game, but it always seems russia can’t hang on long enough to Allied help… never happens when My opponent loves buying Tanks for Germany and steemrolls over russia almost every time…

Jen has it right.

The western allies should be dropping as many units as quickly as possible into western europe (or elsewhere in europe) to make Germany fight THERE as well as with Russia.  Germany can not keep throwing units against all three allies for very long, expecially if all they buy is tanks… hence the bleeding dry of the vermach.

Well, I ended up winning the game.  Very interesting and by far the most fun game I’ve played.  It would have seemed that Russia was going to fall but America was going to take the monster opponent Japan who was getting loads of territories.  However, I took Borneo East Indies and all his Islands so that he only averaged 40 income.  America had 4 BBs, 2 DD, 3 AC, 16 Ftr w/ LRA, 8 Trn w/ 2 Arm and the rest Inf, 2 subs, and a small UK fleet floating with them for more firepower on defense…  I eliminated his 5 BBs, 4 DD, AC with 2 Ftr, 3 Trn with 6 Inf.  I then took Tokyo and from there it was all downhill…  UK managed to get it’s places back and be a threat again and Russia always had an average of 28 income the whole game.  My opponent put up a good fight but then again I was against two friends and the one who is still a newb at the game made some poor decisions and thus when he had to leave my other friend had to take his spot.  Many times we were both thinking it was pretty even.

KJF - always a fun game

axis_roll
I understand that…(and it was funny)  I was just taking the opportunity to bust on myself… :-D  I could have phrased the question a little more intelligently…

i don’t think anyone here is rude at all.  Actually, everyone takes the time to answer all of our “newbie” questions without any complaints… It’s a great forum…

You can only place ANY units purchased at an IC controlled by the nations who’s turn it is.

Great.  thank you !!

Yes.  Air attacks (other than SBRs) work in the same way as any other attack.  The attack continues until one side or the other (or both) is destroyed, or the attacker retreats (or the defender submerges if it’s a sub).

1.  Yes.  However, after 1 round of combat, the SUB can choose to submerge if it is still alive, ending the attack by the FIG (or BOM).

2.  NO.  The Battleship is offshore.  It can only engage in land combat for a single shot and only in the very special case of an amphibious landing.  In the example you cite, with Germany counter-attacking Western, the Allied BB is in SZ7, and means NOTHING to the Allied defenders in Western.  Battleships are naval units, and are ignored for land combat except in the case where the Battleship is in the same sea zone as the attacker’s transport(s) that are offloading to combat.

Also, DSTs (Destroyers) can only engage in land combat if you have the technology that permits them to fire a support shot like a Battleship.  Otherwise DSTs mean NOTHING in land combat.

We switch between the 12 point bid, and the axis again 4 NA’s and the Axis seem to win 50-60% of our games, and the last few months no one can beat them. Axis has one 13 of 17 games since this past september.  We have 20 man group that plays about twice a month.

Did you download the latest patch?  4.2?

Check out my post further down the list…on the very same forum you just posted on!

The short version is that any unit that did not combat move can non-combat move to the limit of its movement rate in a single turn.

:|
There is no such thing as a “dumb” Newbie question.
Only the question of; “a dumb Newbie” is plausible.
And if a Newbie is asking for advice on this site, then he may not be dumb,
Gullible maybe, but certainly not dumb.  :-P

This observation is coming from a guy who calls himself; Crazy Ivan!

Please ignore the crazy man, he has had 4 hours of sleep in the past 30 hours  :-o

:-D……Gaming, gaming, gaming… :-P

The TripleA is a cool game, but it’s a shame that the AI is sooo lame. It really is to easy.
However, it’s great that they included a lot of versions, and a few new ones(at least to me). The Great War scenario looks nice :-D

Personally, I think that both options have their advantages.
Sure, playing one on one has something ‘chessy’(and I mean the game :lol:) about it. It’s like you’re trying to get inside the mind of your opponent, deducting his strategy as he/she makes moves and try to make his plans part of your masterplan. It’s fun, it takes a lot of mental work but it’s worth it.
Then again, playing 2 vs 2(I’ve never played with 5 people, and for this I apologize  :wink:) has a lot of good features too. Two minds see and think of more than just one. Putting your ideas together will often result in a better plan than either of you thought of, and defeating 2 of your friends(who are your intellectual equals, at least concerning A&A :roll:) gives an enormous satisfaction. Beating two people who think together to defeat you is something special, at least to me.

To sum up. There will always be people who prefer one or the other, but I believe that each has its charm, and therefor such discussions are a bit pointless. And to end with a golden oldie: “Live and let live”(Unless your opponents are playing on the Allied side, in which case, kill the bastards :evil:)