Posts made by LinkandMarioman

In my view, a round 1 attack on Italy is vital, because it crushes an entire 1/3 of the Italian army right away, rendering it impossible for the Italians to group together more units than 14 inf and 4 art in Tuscany. That means no counterattack on the first Italian turn, enabling reinforcement to arrive on AH2.
The key to success on the Italians front it speed, whereas the battle of the East is a lengthier on. Iâ€m very tempted to make the entire Viennese army march towards the Italians (could be in Rome on AH4), while spending almost all earned IPCs on the Russians.
One more thing, two planes – one for each front - is an essential first turn buy for AH. The Italians will be helpless against it, as they donâ€t have money enough to spare – you are thus guaranteed AS. Â

Sorry, but what does KISS mean?!

I really laughed at:
‘‘He takes a look at the map and announces to the group that he will be in Vienna by next spring. Everyone kind of looks at the map and wonders what the hell heâ€s talking about. Sometimes, when playing Axis & Allies, smack talk is as important as 10 divisions of infantry. If you donâ€t have one, you always have the other.’’
That’s totally me, when I’m playing! Scare 'em with your flamboyant words!

@Flashman:

WWII was a struggle between two different brands of evil, at least on the eastern front. Some would say the capitalist west was not much better.

Hear, hear! There’s great naivety in calling one side evil and the other (the victor) good. All nations at war try to make the war seem legit by calling the opponents evil.

@Flashman:

All Russian units outside of original Russian territories or Russian-controlled territories are immediately removed from the board.

Say Russia had been successful in the south against Turkey, but been forced to negotiate by Germany and Austria.

Russian units are still in control of Mesopotamia, Syrian desert and Ankara.

Does the above clause mean that Turkey has in effect permanently lost 3 of its home provinces, and there’s nothing it can do to get them back?

What if the Russians had taken control of Constantinople - this would in effect prevent the CPs from liberating the Turksih capital.

I could even see a scenario where Russia takes Constantinople, then deliberately capitulates (by for example evacuating contested tts) in order to trap the Turks into the permanent loss of their capital and all that goes with it, no chance of a comeback.

Say there are also British units in Syria (the tt having been given a Russian control marker when occupied). Evidently the Turks cannot attack these, but the British units can move out to attack the Turks in Smyrna. Life just isn’t fair sometimes.

The Brits could use the tt to build up a massive force on the border of Turkey, without the CPs being able to do anything to attack it. Presumably this also applies if the Russians have long since left the tt, leaving the UK to defend it.

Doesn’t this mean the exact opposite - that all tts conquered by Russia are returned to their original owners?

@Flashman:

@Gargantua:

Shogun is a considerable seller without the U.S. in it.

Isn’t Richard Chamberlain American? It wouldn’t have got made without an American playing then hero.

He is, but plays an Englishman…

I preordered back when first possible - mid January, I think. I wonder if it releases the same day in Denmark as in the US/UK.
Only got one copy, but I might order yet another one, haha.

It’s important to note, though, that GB can’t create units in Africa, which means that one of the fronts dies down, when the British army there is defeated - I think it will be somewhat easily done, if the Ottomans put their back into it.

Pretend, then, that the British pour all their money into Indian units - then, yes, they are indeed able to crush the Ottomans because they earn +14 IPCs per turn, but then France/Italy is definetly toast. If they spend around half their IPC-values there (seems fair, right?) then the fight is even - 16 IPCs against 15 IPCs.
There is hope for the Ottomans - furthermore, I think that Bulgaria is worth 3 IPCs (would be fair considering Romania), so they earn roughly the same amount of IPCs as the US after the first turn.

Keep them previews comin’!  :lol:

I have a question about the use of subs in the new game. Larry has confirmed – in one of his posts – that subs are able to submerge in battle and so on, but are they also able to surprise first-strike? On another note, can subs block a SZ, so that new ships canâ€t be built?

US purchases:
Turn 1: 3 transports (then it has four and eight units to move). Saves two IPCs.
Turn 2: 1 trans+2 art+1 plane.
On the movement phase of the third turn, the boats embark, landing in Picardy/Piedmont (or wherever) on the fourth turn with 5 inf, 4 art and one plane. After that, they can land one loaded transport each turn or so. Not exactly a show of force, eh?
:roll:

The problem with ganging up on Russia is that it takes 6 or 7 turns to move your men from the East to the West. Is it possible to hold a full-income France, Italy and US back that long? Perhaps…

What we know (about IPCs) from Larryâ€s posts:

1. Germany: 35
2. Britain: 30
3. Austria: 26
4. Russia: 25
5. France: 24
   If you look at the production chart (picture attached) you can see that the production chart corresponds with the values above, meaning that it portrays the set-up values. By looking closely, you can see the following:
   US: 20 OE: 16 Italy: 14
   Thusly, the starting income for each nation is:
6. Germany: 35
7. Britain: 30
8. Austria: 26
9. Russia: 25
10. France: 24
11. US: 20
12. OE: 16
13. Italy: 14
    Which makes the power-balance as follows:
14. Allies: 113
15. CPs: 77
    Italy is a bug waiting to be squished!!!

Possible scenario:
CP strat:Go all-out on the Western Front, trying to capture Paris and Rome with Germany and Austria respectively. Ottoman Empire tries to stay alive and be as big a chore for the Allies as possible.

Allies strat: Stall the German offensive in France with France, the US and a little help from Britain, too. Russia goes on the offensive against Austria, holding the line against Germany. Britain goes almost completely all-out on the OE, while Italy tries to stay alive.

If these are the strategies applied by both sides, a possible game might look something like this:
Germany manages to take/contest Burgundy right at the gates of Paris, but is then stopped by the Allied forces – a longer series of contested-tt battle ensue (trench warfare for ya, guys). Austria slowly manages to creep its way towards the Italian heartlands, finally taking Rome. By then, Russia would have had at least four or five turns without any counter-offensives from the CPs and will probably be close to Vienna – the Austrians move their units back to defend/counter the Russians. The OE is quickly knocked out of the game, their capital probably falling right about the same time as Rome.
With Africa and the Middle East under complete Allied control and the Russians advancing with help from the British from Constantinople and beyond, the Eastern Front, too, will be locked in dead water. At this point, Austria and Germany will probably acknowledge that with no gains on either front and an economy still smaller than that of the Allies, the game is already up and they quit before Vienna/Berlin is taken.

This is how I imagine one of my games would be as of now.
I donâ€t know about you guys, but when I play, either side always gives up before the given number of VC are captured, simply out of economic reasons. It does save a lot of time…

The British seem quite powerful. If  most IPCs are spent in India, the Ottoman Empire will be unable to cope with the threat, especially if the Russians move as well. With an activation of Arabia and an invasion Persia plus Trans-Jordan, the British manage to create a single three-territory front too strong to be repulsed for many initial rounds. Furthermore, once the few German units in Africa have been destroyed, all remaining on that continent will head towards the English-Ottoman frontline, regardless of nationality. It seems, then, that the OE is Italy of the CPs.

The way I see it, the French donâ€t really need a lot more help than what they get from the Americans unless both the French and the Russians are bad. We all know that time is what wins the game for the Allies, so if the (initially) powerful advances of the CPs can be stalled, the game is practically up.

Yeah, about the Production Bonus - I hope it’s not real, cause it seems so unfair! I’ve always hated that bonus.  :x
But, oh, nevermind.
Also, it has been confirmed (I think, haha) that there are no NOs, and isn’t the US bonus usually an NO?

As Austria, I would use my entire army in Budapest to take out Serbia in round 1. Then there no problem when Italy activates Albania. Romania should be left alone initially, so Austria only has two and not three fronts from the second turn foward.

We’re looking at the production chart located in the dessert.

By what you said, the starting income for the Allies is 114 IPCs while 77 for the Axis, the difference being 37. It seems quite normal that the Allies at the start earn about 1,5 times as much as the Axis, but in this game I think itâ€s harder to conquer territories in a hurry, so the advantage for the Allies might be greater than usual.
Iâ€m glad that the US only earns 20 IPCs per turn, though, making it possible for them to land – after the initial invasion of course – merely one transport full of units per turn. Thatâ€s actually quite a weak performance right there! 

Furthermore, if Germany invades Switzerland on their first turn, the Italian tt of Piedmont (only guessing on the name there) will be threatened. Italy can choose to attack the Austrians, which would be quite suicidal, or hold their ground, in which case they will be overrun on the next turn. The best strat for Italy, then, seems to withdraw their initial forces and join them with the ones from Rome on the first Italian turn, thereby giving up their two northern tts. Overall, the situation seems rather bad for the Italians, given that they only earn enough IPCs to buy four or five infantry per turn, before they lose ground. What do you all think?

I just saw a picture of the new map (see the post ‘‘Preview 0’’), and it looks cool and all, but I’m having a hard time determining the different IPC-values around the map. How much does the one US tt gain, for example (very important)? Help from somebody with better eyesight than I is much appreciated. See ya! Â

Furthermore, Burgundy bordering Switzerland opens many possibilities for the CPs. An Austrian attack reinforced by the Germans? I think so….

Please, oh please, can’t you tell us the starting income for each nations?! Most importantly the US and the Ottoman Empire.

The way I see it, Germany is most definitely – initially at least – not screwed. With a full-force invasion of Belgium from Ruhr and Alsace on the first turn (14 inf, 6 art), and the movement of all units from Hamburg and Munich to Alsace, Germany will have both French front-territories heavily fortified. On the next turn, these two armies can either join in one colossal battle for Loraine (with the fighter from Berlin) they will – with dice fair – indeed win. The forces initially in Kiel are first moved to Ruhr, and then to reinforce Belgium. This, then, mean that Germany might very possibly have taken and held both Belgium, Lorraine AND crushed the French army after the first two turns, without the British being able to intervene in any fatal way. By the way, merely holding the Eastern Front (after taking Poland of course) allows Germany to send all its units in Berlin – yes, ALL of them – to the Western theatre, enabling a over-powerful attack on Burgundy on the fourth turn. This is how I see it, anyways.
Also, by playing defensively with its navy, Germany can secure all original German tts from attack by sea. This is done by putting all German ships (and subs!) in the naval tt next to Kiel. Perhaps, buying an additional battleship might prove to be wise as well.