Posts made by kyrial

Btw, just as a side note on the bombers (which everyone seems to be bashing price-wise), IMO they’re an option for the allies because frankly they’re the only ones who can seem to afford the price vs. effect with them. Also, bombers were a different kind of buy back in the day when the rules were a little more… how shall we say, skewed to favour such craft? I still think that they hold some value for the allies as far as SBR’s and giving added support to invasions. Let’s be honest: you’re never going to buy bombers like you buy fighters, if only because although the firepower is slightly better the defense is regrettably lacking.

Now, if one were to up the bombers to an attack of 5, say, that might influence things differently as they could become more of a threat offensively.

Just a quick pip: the game needs to be kept at a somewhat reasonable level of complexity, and by that I mean (and it’s been said before) we can’t have a game so detailed that you actually have to be a ranking officer on a general staff in order to play. It’s fine if you want for your own games, but overall I am against continuing to add new units to the game.

If you’re going to re-adjust pricing, my vote is to price Soviet infantry @ 2 IPC.

Wow, what a thread!

I must say, I take NCS’s position on this one for several reasons, the most pertinant of them being that

a) While the Axis certainly CAN win without a bid, when you have players of equal skill and who are equally skilled at playing both Axis AND Allies (not just one or the other side), a bid can certainly make the difference in the early round(s) and many times it’s what happens the first 2 rounds that can help decide the game.

b) figuring out statistics is something that can only be done over thousands and thousands of games. I mean, you can flip a coin 100 times and get 90 heads. Does that mean the odds of getting tails are skewed? No, because if you were to flip that coin 10,000 times or 100,000 times the odds are it would be very close to 50/50 and 1,000,000 times or more and likely the difference would be so negligible as to allow us to say it was 50/50. While we cannot play 1,000,000 AAR games, I don’t think it’s too much of a stretch to suggest that a bid helps even out the game.

You know, just as many of the issues of AA Classic were worked out in AAR, I think probably in the next iteration (or version) that many of the issues we’ve seen here will be worked out as well. Maybe an extra unit here or another territory there… whatever it takes to balance the game.

Actually I have made the same observation in the past. While I do not have any conclusive evidence, it’s probably as was suggested that they were still in development. If anyone has any information please do post it. Also, if anyone has a Jpeg of the back of that box, post it somewhere. I think my box has long since deceased :)

I have to agree to an extent with Sankt Hallvard… it is a plan that relies on the Russians being extremely cautious and the USA going with a KJF strat. If the UK bulks up and the USA does the traditional sending troops to help UK, I frankly don’t see how you can pull it off short of a miracle.

I do understand that you want to break away from the traditional game because, quite frankly, it does get boring. I mean, basically as the Axis it’s the same thing over and over and as the Allies the only issue is whether to go KGF or KJF and even the latter of the two is considered risky.

Perhaps a key here could be the following: don’t go all out on the USA… let the feel they can spend some on a fleet in the Pacific, thus taking away some IPCs that could be spent in Europe. Meanwhile, leave India be… possibly even move some troops north-wards in order to entice the UK player to build an IC in India. Over all, though, make line an enraged hornet at Russia via the northern route or middle route because you NEED to get the pressure there on his back door before he decides to go heavy into Europe. This may (and again, I stress may) give you the time you need as Germany to pull off the heavy against UK. Try and add a fighter every turn if you can because you will need the AF for the navy and also for the invasion.

I guess it’s a little bit of misdirection, but you need the Allies to feel as if Germany is just going to turtle and then WHAM hit them with it. Let us know how it turned out.

Oh, and if all else fails… loaded dice :)

Please if someone (Jennifer, in this case specifically) is going to try this in a game make sure to let us know somehow so I can track the game in the other forum. I do try to follow that forum as much as possible but sometimes a few days go by and I won’t check it and I don’t want to miss out seeing this live in action!

I admit I would be very interested in seeing this strategy pulled off.

Also, remember, if I hadn’t had terrible rolls for Germany I would have beaten off the combined UK/ Russia attack. And when Germany finally fell, it’s ONLY because he hit it three times in a row UK, USA (the ONLY time he hit with US forces) and USSR. I am fully confident that had we played another game, I would have been able to hold him off and recouperated as Germany and he WOULD have lost the game since Japan was just getting warmed up.

NCS hit it right with his “Top 10 reasons to attack Egypt on G1”, and I will add in that there’s not much one can consider overkill. Trust me from experience (sadly) everytime I think “hmmm… I can take Egypt with <insert minimal=”" forces=“”>instead of bringing <insert appropriate=“” forces=“”>I end up losing and it’s all downhill from there with Germany.

It’s kinda sad that, for Germany at least, such a critical battle comes so early in the game. Granted, you can recover from it but it seriously screws up your game.</insert></insert>

He attacked my fleet. I suppose he figured with the subs he could take out several of my main ships as he was rebuilding on the west coast but the subs didn’t hit at the level he wished.

This is a post regarding the subject matter and a bit of a rant about my latest game…

In my last game this past weekend, I played Axis and friend played Allies. The game started out as fun with Russia taking both West Russia and Ukraine with no losses. Yes, Russia lost nothing and Germany totally wiped. Undeterred, I played Germany as she should be played: went after British Navy and did a little hit and run on the Eastern Front trying to weaken the forces. Took Karelia but African invasion was a complete and total disaster. By R2 he was so seriously threatening Balkens I had to focus all forces on Europe, and UK was landing in Western Europe every turn (being smacked back but taking a toll nontheless).

Through all of this, he decided to go heavy US navy. I had a decent pearl on J1 and started pumping troops across the border and made one fatal error… I decided to go after British posessions the Southern route and into Africa in order to take the pressure off Germany instead of going straight at Russia, but did this beacuse I thought Germany could hold out against UK/ USSR only with no American help. Meanwhile, he combined the India fleet in the South Indian Ocean and threatened to raid in right before the US attack with their fleet (approx 1BB, 2AC, 4SS, 4FTR, 1DD).

The point of the post is that I easily countered it without breaking much of a sweat on the mainland (only pulled 1 fighter away for fleet defence) and crushed him in a battle just off Japan. Because of the Japanese pressure on Russia, he had to start keeping the INF home and so made one last desperation throw at Germany proper before he ran out of INF to support the attack. He won with 1 tank left because my fighters hit 2x in 9 attempts. Had I won that battle, Germany would have rearmed next turn and taken back at least 2 territores which were essentially bereft of Soviet Forces. And Japan would have whopped up on the USA.

Point of post: I’m sore because I just seem to be unlucky with dice and going all out US Navy against Japan you had better play me with my bad dice rolls  :x

William Shirer feels that there is no way Germany could have won the war. He argues that on a simply economic and industrial scale the Germans could never have competed in the long run with the Russians and the Western Allies. Yes, they could have marched into Moscow in 1941 but Napoleon DID in 1812. The Russians would most likely just have turned the Eastern Front into a giant guerilla war and sapped away at German strength. Probably a better idea would have been getting the oil in the Caucuses because in the long run the Germans ran into serious fuel shortages.

I do agree with Imperious about Hitler; he was not a great commander but he knew war and understood all the basics he needed to know, and if you’re going to fault him for some of his poor choices (i.e. consigning the 6th Army and Paulus to their death in Stalingrad by not letting them retreat and relying on Goering’s rediculous claims that he could supply them by air) you have to give him credit for calling Manstein out of retirement and using his plan to beat France (Schliffen’s plan would have failed) and the way his refusal to allow the German army to retreat in the Winter of 1941-1942 staved off what would have been a complete catastrophe which could have brought the war to an end much more quickly.

At the end of the day, Hitler just ended up with too many enemies and he didn’t understand them. He didn’t understand why England didn’t want to split the world with him… after backstabbing so many other countries. He didn’t understand why the English wouldn’t surrender… even though they knew his navy was badly shaken by the losses in Norway (which, btw, was a brilliant move by Hitler in denying it to England). He didn’t understand why the Russians didn’t rise up against the Soviet government when he invaded… even though Goering was making plans for the mass importation of grains that would have probably starved 20-25 million Russians to death by 1944 and the SS was butchering Russian peasants at the slightest provocation. And finally he didn’t understand why the Western Allies didn’t help him against the Soviet Union to the end, even as they were crossing the Rhine.

BTW is it just me or does everyone think bombers are overpriced?

Well, I haven’t done a cost/ dmg analysis on them (I’m sure someone has or could) but I usually don’t buy bombers unless I’m winning and want to provide for that little extra push that having an attack of 4 can do in a battle. I mean, as the Allies most attacks you can use a BB for the support on an amphib and it gives you the no return fire (against Germany, Russia is a non-issue because they aren’t buying any bombers). Probably the most sense would be using bombers as Japan to lend extra support while attacking Russia.

So the point of that paragraph I suppose is that I don’t know that I would buy bombers even if they reduced the price, unless they reduced them to the point of fighters or something…

I would have to agree with NCS here… I know it was a while ago,. but way back someone posted a thread about the viability of UK going on an all-out SBR of Germany (i.e. building nothing but bombers and just launching non-stop bombing raids every turn) with the end goal of keeping Germany with enough losses that they would not be able to mount any kind of attack on Russia and eventually the US would be able to come in there and whack-a-mole the Germany forces in WEu.

I know it sounds like a sound strategy (after all, it has its precedence in history) but the reality was shown to be otherwise.

There’s nothing wrong with an SBR here or there, for example if you can knock out just enough to prevent the opponent from buying 7 INF instead of 6 or 3 ARM instead of 2; this is fine. But especially as Germany there are a LOT better things you can do with your money early in the game than SBR.

No sense loading the Aussie tranny (Priscilla?)

Classic  :evil:

all that needs to be done is the US an GB to build air force in the pacific to take out the jap navy. and BAM

Two points of interest:

1. Where (how) is the UK building an air force in the Pacific?

2. While the US is building AF in the Pacific, what is the Japanese navy doing?

The only place I see the UK building an air force is out of India… building an IC in India is basically inviting the Japanese to take it by J3 at the latest and have a free IC on the mainland (plus without India troops you most likely don’t have Africa) and with the US building a navy they cannot committ the kinds of troops really needed to take Africa back for the Brits.

I’m not saying Island hop can’t be done, but at the same time, with Japan going off on the mainland, how are you holding them back? If i see the US going navy in the PAC, I send the whole Jap fleet to waste it. The British can’t get much of an AF going with India gone and most of Africa as well… maybe you’ve got a different strat going on with builds? Also, how isn’t Germany in Moscow without support to Russia from the allies?

Just a few questions…  :-D

Octo:

I’ve taken a quite look over at your game again (not having re-read all the pages, so bear with me if I make a mistake in my appraisal), but if I’m not mistaken US did not go with a KGF strategy, correct? I believe they went with a bit of a split as far as forces go, which still should make my initial comments correct. IF the US had gone full blast against Germany from the get-go, I really don’t think the situation in Europe would be the way it is today. For example, when the UK took WEu, the traditional thing to do is back it up with gobs of US troops/ fighters before Germany’s next turn. That requires a serious Atlantic fleet and lots of money spent in transports to get the troops over there.

You’re playing well as Axis all things considered. It is a knock down drag out, as Switch said, and I’ll be interested to see how the rest of it plays out.

I’ve found the best defense in slowing Japan down is simply fighting a slow, retreating battle towards Moscow/ Novosibirsk and then taking them on as Russia. Quite naturally, this means that by J4 or J5 you need to have MASSIVE allied help in taking on Germany.

Taking up this point, let’s look at the following: as has been said several times on this board, throwing an IC down in India is like giving Japan a free IC on the mainland. The Asian Wall strat… well, it’s been debated but really the Allies can only put 5 units down per turn while the Japanese can overwhelm both of those ICs in turn by pumping troops from the mainland with adequate transports. The best thing to do, as Russia, is to fighting the delaying battle and let Japan take what it will take inevitably but at the same time not losing the bulk of the forces you start out with in the east.

Put simply, if the Allies by turn 5 or so are still relying on Russia to take on the majority of the German forces and are not in positions to cause Germany to shift focus west, Russia is in SERIOUS trouble. If, however, the US has retaken Africa/ is pumping troops towards Europe and taken out the German navy and the UK is pumping troops into Russia via the northern route, Russia SHOULD be able to shift some forces east and, with some offensive units that hopefully have been bought over time, will be able to strafe any Japanese columns heading there. Japan can take a lot of territory quickly but it cannot bring around the necessary offensive forces to really overwhelm Russia for a several turns because they need to march them west from either the coast (debarked from Japan to Manchuria/ Kwang/ FIC) or from any land based ICs.

I’m not a huge fan of the IC in South Africa… I’d rather re-take Africa (if I even lost it in the first place, such as Germany pumps troops in after retaking Egypt with Indian forces, and if Germany is willing to pump troops into Africa well that’s less for Russia) with American forces.

Yeah, I forgot to mention in my post as well that taking out the Pearl fleet is, IMO, essential towards forcing the USA to shift the naval emphisis east (to Germany). Otherwise the US CAN put together a decent Pacific fleet quite rapidly, especially if (and perhaps only if) they decide to split their attention and go with either a KJF or something on those lines.

NCS, took a look-see at your game in progress… very nice job of keeping Japan bottled up. It was an interesting move to go with 2 ICs on J1 for Octo… I think I play pretty aggressively and I only go with 1 IC on J1 usually… I find it better to get the trannies early and start pumping troops into Asia. My take on the game so far is that it would have helped if in the early few rounds Japan was able to start pumping some land units into Asia in order to suplement the attack, even with the US bulking the Navy… with Japan you can still usually counter a US navy build at least in the early going as you start with so much more.

It will be interesting to see how this one turns out, though I have an idea based upon the current situations…

If russia can fully turn they can stop japan, but they need a secure backside and that is the UK/US responsibility.

And that’s the key. The difference between Russia and Japan is that while Japan certainly can outproduce the Russians offensive-unit wise, once the Russians pull back in the east they have the advantage of much closer IC production to the battlefield. Sure, Japan can plop an IC down in Manchuria/ FIC but then they have to drive those tanks all the way to Moscow. As far as INF goes, which you will need a bit of unless you want naked tanks running around  :-o they will take a while to get to Moscow and in the numbers needed to prevent constant Russian strafes. Russia can keep pumping INF into Novo and a few tanks held back in order to give some fire-power wheras after the initial quick IPC wins, Japan will need to march troops long distance in order to bring any force to bear. Also, if Russia has played her cards right in the west (assuming a heavy German navy build) she should be taking territories worth the IPCs lost to Japan if not gaining a bit.

I will maintain, though it’s only my opinion, that there is no way a good player will not be able to counter a German fleet with a combined US/ UK fleet over time. Unless Germany is willing to spend their entire income time after time, they will after a few rounds have lost an Atlantic fleet. I’ve found that unless Germany keeps constant pressure on Russia by whacking at them every turn the Russian stack (if not split, which ideally it is not) will be able to grind Germany out.

I don’t have the time now to post one, but maybe someone could post a potential buy order for the first few turns as Allies provided Germany is going heavy navy buys? I’ve come around to agree that a CV buy on G1 is not a bad move at all (different way of playing the game) and having a German navy escape to the Atlantic provides an interesting scenerio for potential allied troops coming from the USA to anywhere, but again if the US/ UK both take turns whacking the German fleet I don’t see how it lasts baring atrocious dice rolls.