I sent a personal e-mail. Did you get it? I would be interested in getting together. Global 40 is fine.
Posts made by mike55
-
RE: Hamilton, Ontario Players
-
Hamilton, Ontario Players
I have recently located to Hamilton from Northern Alberta. I don’t have space to host, while I do own all A&A versions from Original 2nd Edition to Global, 1st Edition. I have played formal board war games for over 40 years, although life and location have limited my opportunities. I have no difficulty playing with any age or experience level; most of the last group I played with in Grande Prairie, Alberta were younger than my adult children, and they regularly gave me a lesson. As a retired teacher I would be willing to teach the game to new players; I taught the game at my school. I’m looking for fun and relaxation and am available at any time: normal awake hours - although lately, my naps seem to occur any time in the day! :-).
Mike55 -
RE: PT Boats
The UK had 82 DD (Destroyers) (http://www.naval-history.net/WW2CampaignsStartEurope.htm) in and around the UK in 1939.
False….
Royal Navy had 184 destroyer (Including torpedo boat) in august 1939.May I ask what your source is? Note that the 82 DD was in “Home Waters” only and does not include units in the Atlantic or ships not classified as DD such as Destroyer Escorts, Corvettes, Mine Sweepers and Torpedo Boats. According to the Marshall Cavendish Illustrated Encyclopedia of World War II, (1972) p. 121, the Royal Navy had a total of 243 Destroyers and 52 Escorts in 1939. The naval-history.net site lists the DD numbers as about 140 world wide for the Royal Navy not including Commonwealth ships. The notes under the charts on the web site indicate that these numbers do not include escorts. The encyclopedia includes ships “built and launched” which would include most units brought on line in 39 and 40. The encyclopedia also lists 11 carriers (CV) for Britain, 2 for France and 1 for Germany. The German carrier was never finished and never brought into operations. I suspect that the difference in total numbers relates to operational (web site) versus all vessels launched. Vessels are launched without necessary equipment installed to make the ship operational. Hopefully this clears up any misunderstandings.
-
RE: PT Boats
The scale of most A&A games would preclude the use of small units like the PT boat. A single Destroyer in A&A represents flotillas of Destroyers and Escorts. The UK had 82 DD (Destroyers) (http://www.naval-history.net/WW2CampaignsStartEurope.htm) in and around the UK in 1939. The 1941 set-up in AA50 calls for 2 DD and 1 BB in Europe and Atlantic to represent over 130 actual units including 4 carriers and 21 CA (give or take a few for builds and losses). I could see the PT boat being used in localized battles such as Guadalcanal, but not on the strategic level that most AA games represent.
-
RE: AA Europe '40 Box Art
I don’t get the “hoopla” over the box art. What does the box art really got to do with what is in the box or how good the game is. I say wrap the box in brown paper, save a lot of money and reduce the cost or put in more units. As it is, I generally trash the box and put all my units into fishing tackle boxes. My game boards go into a large Rubber Maid tub with a lid that seals. I have books of war art; I don’t need or care for something on a game box. Maybe I’m just an old curmudgeon or my patience has been worn thin by my junior high students (one week left!), but “I don’t get the “hoopla” over the box art”.
-
RE: How is France going to survive even 1 round?!?
I think you have nailed the Axis strategy, Wild Bill. So how does UK and France counter this strategy? Obviously Germany gets the first shot and all France may have is some navy and units in Africa. Does the French player try to hold Africa as long as possible or retreat its land forces via transports to British tt and mass its fleets with British fleets in a circle the wagons approach? Or does the French fleet do a kamikaze to damage the Italian fleet as much as possible? Of course all this will depend on initial unit set-up. Any thoughts?
-
RE: Power Groupings - Global Game
Hey BD, I just read this thread ( I don’t follow all of them; I actually have a life, unlike some who seem to be on this forum all of the time.) and I’m responding to an old point you made. Who says the city of AxisandAllies has to be in the US? I think it should be in Canada. Just think of the advantages: we have universal health care, so if people got into an argument and a fist fight broke out, the injuries would be repaired regardless of your rank or stature. However, health care doesn’t cover dental work, which means we would have to make a Canadian house rule on no punching in the mouth. Kicking or gouging anywhere else would be fine, well, except eye damage, which may or may not be covered depending on the type of corrective procedures. Furthermore, putting AxisandAllies City in Canada would be a clear recognition of the important role we play in the global gaming community. AxisandAllies, Canada has a certain ring to it!
@Brain:
@Krupp:
I know what you’re saying maverick :-P
We need to get some new friends or maybe we can all move to the same city. Hell, let’s start our own city called Axisandallies, USA
-
RE: Technology
Mike, Is that you in the MSU uniform?
No, unfortunately not. I wish I had played pro-football. It’s Chris Szarka, Canadian born fullback in the uniform of the Saskatchewan Roughriders of the Canadian Football League. The Roughriders will be celebrating their 100th anniversary in this 2010 year. Training camp starts soon, as league play begins in June and the 98th Grey Cup Game, the CFL Championship, occurs in November. It is professional football. I had considered using Szarka’s nick name, the Cannuck Truck, as my handle or whatever one’s identity on the forum is called, but decided to go with my first name and year I was born. I love the Canadian version of the football game and I referee amateur ball in my area in Northern Alberta. I was raised in the province of Saskatchewan and became a devoted fan of the Riders. I’m afraid I don’t follow American football, college or professional, so I don’t know what MSU is. [Dare I mention that I am more devoted to my Riders than I am to A&A, and I’m an A&A fanatic having played it since the first MB version.]
-
RE: Technology
I generally ignore Tech development. I prefer NAs. As has been said by others, I find Techs to be a gamble and overweighted in their influence of the game. I totally agree with the KurtGodel7 and his scenario. In my European hex game I make techs into NAs that are timed. For example, I have Light, Medium, Veteran and Heavy Tanks. I use the original AA tanks as lights, and I mark or paint the individual sculpts for the other three types. Veteran tanks are mediums such as the T-34 and the Panther. Lights are the Grant, Pz ii. Mediums are the Sherman and Pz iii & iv. Heavies are the Churchill, Tigers and Soviet KV-1 & IS-2. For dice rolls, I use D-12s: Attack and Defense: Lt 5-3; Md 6-4; Vt 7-5; Hy 8-8. Heavies are 2 hit, but move at one. Light have a movement of 3. In my view tanks were designed to attack; defence goes to the infantry. How does this fit into my NA/Techs? All countries in 1939 have Light tanks. Only UK, Germany and USSR have a limited build of medium tanks. France and USSR also have a limited build of Heavies. In 1941 USSR gets to build Veterans (T-34). In 1942 the US gets Mediums and the Germans get Veterans. The US and UK never get Veterans, while the Germans get Heavies in 43 and the US in 1945 ( the US heavies get to move at 2 - the T26 Pershing).
-
RE: Realistic battles
I think what you are meaning is realistic battle results. And you’re correct, in that an entire division of infantry or a wing of aircraft don’t just disappear. Just off the top of my head without playtesting, I think a couple ways of approaching this are: 1) Paint a different colour on the base of some infantry units, and these become cadres (the surviving members of a unit depleted below combat effectiveness). They have an attack of 0 and a defense of 1. Replace a cadre for every unit hit, but place the cadre in an adjacent friendly tt. During the next build phase, replace the cadre with a full unit at cost minus 1 or combine 2 cadres to form one full unit. or 2) Allow units to retreat one tt when hit with the maximum number. With any result that is less, the unit is destroyed as usual. An example: A tank rolls a 3 and an infantry takes the hit. Retreat the infantry. At the same time an artillery hits on 1 (less than the maximum two) and the next infantry is destroyed. However, if there was only one defending infantry in the first place and he gets hit twice and he’s dead…dead…d-e-a-d! Both ideas may need some tweaking but would represent a possible solution without encumbering the play too much, I think. However, at this point these ideas are just untested theories.
-
RE: Why are there Canadian roundels? A new rule perhaps?
I’m Canadian and I turned 12 when Canada celebrated our centennial (Canada is now 143 years old); Lester Pearson was our Prime Minister, Lyndon Johnson was in the White House and man hadn’t landed on the moon yet. I just needed to establish that, and as a teacher in my other life, I’m happy to see young people get involved in a wonderful game. On topic, I’m quite happy with the recognition, I think I was one of the first to suggest it would be just a recognition thing.
As far as people getting confused with the Canadian roundel and not treating it as British for income totals, just put a British roundel over top. It’s not a huge issue. I do the reverse. I’ve made my own Canadian roundels ( roughly by hand of course being an old guy) and I place those on top of the British roundels where there are any in Canada. I use a different coloured unit or mark British units as Canadians. Other than that they are British units. When I play solataire I give Canadian and, by the way, Australian and South African infantry an attack of 2, based on the fact that the Commonwealth forces from these countries were volunteers and had higher morale. (Advanced Squad Leader gives CW troops higher morale as well.) I also give this 2 attack to German SS and American and Japanese marines.
In following this thread I do have a concern about recognizing one country by putting down another as has happened. Canadians can be proud of what our soldiers and civilians did, but so can the citizens of Australia, India and wherever else. Given that, putting too many different roundels on the board could get confusing.
As for Canada, or Finland or the Balkan states being a separate power, I think it would be a mistake and complicate the game far too much. In fact, I would rather see only three power groups: Soviet Union, Axis and Allies. I think all the Allies should play at the same time except the Soviet Union and all the Axis play at the same time. The US and British forces should move and attack as one, as they really did in Europe, based on the scale of this game. The same with Germany and Italy. The only separation would be national income levels for the major countries (Japan, USSR, Italy, USA, UK) and placement of units in their own country. This placement would include placement of minor forces in Canada, Finland, the Balkans and all other minor countries aligned with a major country. However, this would be a fundamental change in the game and is not likely to happen.
As for recognition to Canada, I suggest to my fellow Canadians, appreciate it. I registered with this forum after reading it for some time, because of the “Canadian” topics and that it seemed to generate a lot of interest. I’ll stay because of my interest in the game. Besides BD makes me laugh. What does that say about me?
-
RE: Flight Across Sahara
Actually, there was an operation flying supplies “Over the Hump” as the route over the Himalayas was called. However, a steep price was paid as per the following quote:
Flying over the Hump proved to be an extremely hazardous undertaking for Allied flight crews. The air route wound its way into the high mountains and deep gorges between north Burma and west China, where violent turbulence, 125 to 200-mph winds,[10][41] icing, and instrument weather conditions were a regular occurrence. ```…At times, monthly aircraft losses totalled 50% of all aircraft then in service along the route. A byproduct of the numerous air crashes was a local boom in native wares made from aluminium crash debris.[2] The full article can be found at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hump For game purposes,IMHO, the Hump constitutes a no-fly zone. At the very least, a die roll for each aircraft crossing with a minimum one-third (2 or less on 1d6) of crashing. That would be enough for me to keep my aircraft from attempting to fly across. The Sahara was another problem and I believe the British flew replacement aircraft around the Sahara (to the south) to reach Egypt. However, I do not have a reference for that as of yet.
-
RE: Railway
I’ve been away from this thread for awhile with report cards, parent-teacher interviews and other forms of making a living that get in the way of a good game. Thanks to crusaderiv for correcting me on the railways in North Africa. I’ll correct that in my game. As for pictures, I’ll try and get some of the map as the game isn’t set up right now. The map is old school- hand drawn so it won’t be as sharp as the computer generated ones. Thanks for the interest.
-
RE: Railway
I wrote my game version just as a counter point, not necessarily one that would work in AAE40. I like Supermetizo’s idea, which was posted while I was writing my post. In my game, North Africa did not have rail movement except in Egypt which was two hexes, anyway.
-
RE: Railway
I developed a Europe game using railroad. The map consisted of 3 inch wide hexagons. Railway movement was unlimited in a chain of contiguous hexes; these hexes had to be friendly controlled at the beginning of the current turn. Railway movement was permitted in Non-combat movement only. I did not use Railroad markers; I had experimented with them and rejected them as too cluttering. I instead used railway damage markers (yes, made of cardboard); units could use rail movement to enter, but not exit a hex with a rail damage marker. Railways could be damaged in three ways: 1) there was an automatic damage of one point for every turn of land combat in a hex, 2) strategic bombing could cause 0-3 damage points, 3) an infantry unit that does not move or combat may cause one point of damage (engineers destroying bridges) per turn. In case of infantry damage, there was a maximum of one point per turn. Repairs were done by paying a repair cost in the Purchase Units phase. I had plans for a fourth means of causing rail damage by partisans, but I haven’t established that rule and I haven’t worked on the game in a number of months. My adult son and I have play tested it a few times. The rail system worked quite well. Oh, maximum damage was set at 3. The rail system was effective because I based the game on a time scale of 1 turn=3 months. I renamed combat movement to tactical movement and non-combat movement to strategic movement. Tactical movement for all unit types was based on the traditional system, although I gave destroyers and cruisers 3 movement points. Strategic movement of all unit types was unlimited, but could be interdicted. However, I will restrict my comments here to railway movement. The key to the whole structure was hexagons, making 1 movement point the same in Africa as it is in Europe or the Atlantic. I only occasionally strayed from geographic scale for game purposes.
-
RE: Europe Requests
My requests:
1. Railways
2. Lend LeaseFor these first two, you can see my posts under the appropriate headings.
3. Britain continues post Sealion.
4. Vichy France & Free French rules.
5. An initiative roll when one side in a battle are submarines only, so that subs can submerge or even move one zone to avoid a battle if they win initiative. This would force the anti-submarine (ASW) forces to spread out and cover more sea zones and not concentrate on one spot. Knowing exactly where the sub is sets up quick kills and a short sub campaign, which is extremely unrealistic. (I do like the new convoy rules of AAP40, but we need convoys in mid-ocean for the Atlantic.)As for an Advanced A&A, I thought that is what house rules are for. It would have to be more formal than simply sending in house rules to the forum (which has its place, of course). House rule contributions would have to be placed in the appropriate section of the Advanced Rules by a moderator/controller/editor. One of his/her responsibilities would be to cross-reference where one house rule negates or conflicts with an original rule or another house rule. Yeah, it could get pretty messy and time consuming. Oh right, like wargaming isn’t already time consuming? Anyway, my sarcasm, aside, I would appreciate response to my ideas.
-
RE: Soundtrack for playing Pacific
I have a couple CDs of World War II pop music and military marches and occasionally I’ll put a John Wayne war movie on while playing, although that is more often when I’m playing solitaire.
-
RE: Scrambling - Too strong?
I think scrambling should be expanded, not restricted. If someone wants to pile on the aircraft, let them. It means I can attack elsewhere. As for expanding, I think any coastal land zone should be able to scramble into the adjacent sea zone. That would eliminate the issue of island or not.
-
RE: Railway
Rail movement could also be hampered by strategic bombing, similar to air and naval base damage.
-
RE: Why are there Canadian roundels? A new rule perhaps?
I see we have clearly figured out that quoting device and are making good use of it there mike. I’ve never seen a stack like that before!
Welcome to the boards.
P.S. You a 'Riders fan?
Yup! Raised in Saskatchewan. Played football in junior high and high school and now I referee football in Grande Prairie, Alberta. I keep trying to wear my Rider hat on the field, but the other refs won’t let me. Bunch of Eskimo fans. I thought of using the name “Canuck Truck” but decided to go with his picture instead. My other choices were the roundel which you’re already using or the Red Ensign. It’s fun doing the “quote thingy”. Thanks for the welcome.