I’ll try this out… sounds like fun
Posts made by mrsoccerchessman
-
RE: Don't you hate it when…
-
RE: Special Sub Scenario
actually, subs always fire in opening steps of a sea combat with or without presence of a destroyer.
An attacking destroyer makes it so that the subs roll (if it hits) makes the casualty when all other casualties are done.
Example of Battle: 1 destroyer and 2 subs attack a sub and two transports. Both sides fires the subs first, all of them hit (hypothetically) so the defender loses both tansports that don’t get return fire, attacker chooses the destroyer (hypothetically) but the destroyer still gets to fire.
A bit complicated but that is my understanding
-
Don't you hate it when…
…you send two fighters to attack a single transport and the transport dies but so do your two fighters.
…you are short of building something by one IPC.Please comment with your own experience
-
Developments
Do you try for developments? If so, which ones? Please give your reason for “yes” or “no”.
I usually try for developments at times. I usually try for LRA for USA because it’s much easier to take Japan’s sea vessels from a far away distance. I usually don’t try for any other development. But developments are the last thing I think about when I’m contemplating what to spend my money on.
-
RE: New ideas…
Ok, new idea (trying to get back on topic’s title)
Why can’t battleships do more than one turn of bombardments? Originally, my two friends and I have played that as long as the land troops in an amphibious assault survived and a second round of battle continues, the all BBs bombard again.
Has anyone played with this “houserule”?
-
RE: New ideas…
I thought wikipedia was the one where you can edit it yourself. I know of uncyclopedia.org - that site is freaking hilarious
-
RE: New ideas…
@Bunnies:
Thanks for the history… though that’s from wikipedia :-)
If it’s on internet, it must be true!
I BELIEVE!
Then you will believe everything thus making yourself contradict yourself. For example, if somewhere online it said “Llamas are the best” 10 times out of 9 times there will be somewhere saying “Llamas are the worst”. So, I can never trust you now :-)
But who cares, wikipedia is wikipedia… it must be true ;-)
-
Strategic Bombing?
Is it worth trying the strategic bombing if the bomber(s) are not doing anything this turn?
-
RE: New ideas…
Thanks for the history… though that’s from wikipedia :-)
-
RE: Allies question
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
-
RE: New ideas…
So, would that be considered an acceptable National Advantage for Germany, Artillery having the option of being an AA Gun if it did not do combat this turn? And the battleships with AA guns? In my games, my friends and I are always eager to buy BBs.
Another new idea would be… Paratroopers- Bombers can drop up to 2 Inf over a place. Inf must be loaded on like a transport. Other exceptions to this rule can be added seeing as it would be an awesome tactic. comments?
-
RE: Allies question
Well the board looks like both axis and allies have a chance of winning… I was just wandering if this is unusual. It is G6. I’ve gotten some good rolls and some bad ones. I was lucky enough to have Germany have no navy till last turn when he built a BB, Trn, DD. However, I will definitely have R7 and R8. UK is slowing losing IPC, like I said Africa is lost 50% to Germany 50% to Japan. Japan has China, India, Bury, SFE, 50% of Africa with a nice Navy in 61 with 5 Ftrs in Africa and I will lose Brazil to Japan next turn. America has Wake, C. Is., S. Is, Borneo, East Indies, mild hold on Lybia but nice Navy in Pacific (now split up half on Boreno half on C. Is. UK also has AC, Trn, DD, 2 Inf with US Navy. America then has LRA with a total of 11 planes. If US were to attack Japan Navy with everything (including Ftrs) then US would win but vice versa for Japan.
I also will have 2 BB,AC,DD,3 Trns (6 Inf) in sz55 after US6
That’s in a nutshell. -
RE: Allies question
I just made R6 and I know I will be able to make a R7 and probably R8. Shouldn’t Russian not last this long? I also have had Russia collect at 31 IPC at once and usually averages 27. UK has been sending troops over though UK is only collecting 17 IPC next turn but should be able to get more in a few turns… comments?
-
RE: New ideas…
National advantage for Germany… my friend was saying that German artillery in WWII were also used as AA gun. Would it be legit to be able to transform your artillery into an AA gun - rules would make it so that it could only be one or the other on Germany’s noncombat move unless it was used in combat. Comments?
-
New ideas…
My friend and I have been playing this game at least a dozen times and have had new ideas for the game. I know that this game is pretty much historically accurate but my friend loves history and pointed out a few things.
Greenland, was it really controlled by America? My friend says that it could possibly controlled by Germany. And same question with Madagascar.
Now for new ideas, we thought it would be awesome if Battleships had an AA gun. We had some other cool ideas but I can’t remember them off the top of my head now. Any input would be great.
-
RE: Fun Game… (KJF)
Yes, I do mean long range aircraft but Advanced Flight sounds better and easier to say… you should use it sometime when you play a game (use the name that is)
-
RE: Fun Game… (KJF)
I forgot to mention that I got Advanced flight this turn and he left a BB, AC w/ ftr, and submarine on East Indies and I can send 9 planes to kill that, then send my sea units (in Wake Island) to take Borneo and maybe have my still surviving british sea units (that started in india) take East Indies. It’s America’s turn :-)
-
Fun Game… (KJF)
Two friends of mine have started a game with me yesterday (still haven’t finished) and I was gleefully happy to take the Allies. I have found this game much more entertaining than most others due to the fact that I am using a KJF strategy or at least a KJB (Keep Japan Busy). I have a nice sized US navy in the Pacific with 2 ftrs on AC and 5 ftrs on Hawaii and 4 ftrs on West US. I also got Advanced flight. Anyways, in a KJB America threatens to take Japan by having the navy within grasp of taking Japan. Japan has a bigger navy but is scared of my ftrs. Thus he protects Japan with sea units in 61. That’s where US can start picking off the islands like Borneo and east indies. Meanwhile Russia seems to be barely surviving if it weren’t for the UK and his 4 trns carrying system. I’ve been building 8 guys every turn and sending them over to aid Russia, Germany can’t keep up with 8 inf from UK and 6 - 8 Russian inf every turn. My game isn’t really going anywhere fast but it is sure a lot of fun. I’ve gotten lucky in some areas but also had a few bad losses too :( . And of course you would have to see the board to see my full advantage. Of course I could get unlucky trying to sink some of Japans sea units.
-
RE: UK Fighters?
Thx a bundles, this makes things better. I guess there was a screw up with my chart