Posts made by PGsquig

I don’t know if memes are allowed but I’ve done this by accident a few times and it is devastating. Had to make this meme to mitigate my sorrow.

@AndrewAAGamer This behind the curtain stuff is really interesting to read, thanks for typing out your thoughts. My friends and I who play together appreciate how much care was put into this game, and I completely agree that it is the most balanced A&A game.

One other interesting thing about North Africa is that since units have different abilities like targeted attack (as well as the supply cost of each round of rolling and the ability of defenders to retreat), there is no battle calculator available (yet). While I use a calculator frequently on every other version, I’ve enjoyed not knowing my exact % win on large battles as it adds another layer of tension to the game. It adds some unpredictability for both sides to deal with, which I find to be very fun.

@jim010 Game looks great! I am curious about a few things. How long does a typical game take to complete? What is the impact of terrain and weather? Can weather ruin your Mulberry harbor like what happened in history? Is supply moved by trucks like in North Africa? (I’ve never played Bulge). Are any units necessary to play that aren’t in g1940? I notice what looks like two types of German tanks - perhaps they’re light and heavy tanks?
Thanks!

@kyledavis97 Europe and Pacific 1940 are great. I haven’t played 1914 in like 10 years but it’s fun haha. We normally play 1942 because we can usually finish in a day, but we should definitely try 1940 sometime. Do you have discord?

@kyledavis97 Hey Kyle, I live in Seattle and I love playing in person games. Myself and three others get together every few weeks for a game in Sammamish. What versions of A&A do you prefer? And is the eastside too far to travel? We would definitely be down to add another to our group

@bratcher You must right click the transport, then right click the units you want to load, then right click the sea zone you want the transports to move to, then right click the territory you want to unload units into. Hope it works for you.

Just put in for Gold. Thanks Dave!!

@thethedew I don’t own the game, but I think the main point of it is that it is not WW2 based. This way the game has appeal to people who aren’t that interested in WW2.

Let us know what you think after you’ve played a couple of games.

@dazedwit
Your faction must control Turkey at the start of your turn to allow passage through the Turkish Straits.

It would make no sense whatsoever for Turkey be attacked (but not conquered) by Italy, and decide to reward that behavior by opening the straits to Germany.

@cmmiles I think it’s fantastic! Stack limits and supply really creates a whole new way of thinking. You can’t simply stack 25 infantry, instead you must be creative and figure out the best unit combinations for any given situation.
I also think the fight for control over the Med/ convoy raid system is really cool. It’s all on a knife’s edge for the first few rounds in my experience- very well balanced.

@simon33 said in Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2):

@PGsquig said in Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2):

@simon33 Just to clarify, you mean yes it is legal to do a combat move that is dependent upon landing fighters on a newly purchased carrier? I thought I remembered reading something in the rules that specifically prohibits this but I can’t find it now.

Yes.

Pac rules, p13 “A fighter or tactical bomber can move its full 4 spaces to attack in a sea zone instead of saving movement, but only if a carrier
could be there for it to land on by the conclusion of the Mobilize New Units phase.”

@gamerman01 said in Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2):

Is page 14 in Europe 2nd edition

Thanks for the quick replies guys!!

@simon33 Just to clarify, you mean yes it is legal to do a combat move that is dependent upon landing fighters on a newly purchased carrier? I thought I remembered reading something in the rules that specifically prohibits this but I can’t find it now.

Hi all,

Here’s my rules question:
Is it legal to declare an attack with fighters that depends on a newly placed carrier for its landing zone?
For example, say Italy has two fighters on Rome, and there’s a UK destroyer in SZ 98. If Italy buys a carrier at the start of their turn, can the fighters do combat in 98 and land on the newly purchased carrier in SZ 97?
Thanks

@Glamorboy A big load of subs can definitely be useful, and if you aren’t trying to protect transports at all, it is a good option. True, one carrier and 2 fighters loses to 5 subs. Typically though, your navy will be much more expensive than $34 and the fighters are also relevant on land. Also, subs are not good at defense while fighters defense kings.

When I play against friends who are new, I just give them a bid. If they win, their bid goes down and if they lose, their bid goes up. I never spend money on both coasts as US because I feel like I can never get anything going at all and it seems like all the money is wasted. Also, I think it is more helpful to use viable, typical strategies against new players so that they know what to expect. I have learned a lot more about the game through losing than I ever have by winning.

@Glamorboy Cruisers and Battleships aren’t worth the cost. Certainly you should use the ones you start with, but I have literally never bought a cruiser or a battleship.

For a defensive fleet, focus on carriers with fighters and destroyers. For a more attacky fleet, use subs as well. You are correct that fighters and bombers are fantastic, especially for Japan. The range of bombers is unbeatable.

When you are playing US and going after Japan, be careful to not buy too many transports too early. Your first priority should be building up a navy that Japan absolutely cannot mess with. Once you have a large enough navy to crush the Japanese navy and withstand any attack from fighters/bombers that might be within range, you can control the Pacific- you’ll have a free hand to ferry men on transports anywhere you wish.

@cmmiles Yes, units can move after unloading from convoy in phase 1

@dazedwit When Calcutta falls, there is often no naval battle whatsoever. You would be better off spending the money on more infantry which will help your land defense rather than investing in infrastructure which will likely not be used. Any Anzac fighters can be used to defend the land territory of Calcutta and will have much more utility than if they were used in a sea battle.

Even if there were a naval battle before an amphibious assault on Calcutta, only if the UK Pacific’s navy is large enough to nearly win a battle against the Japanese navy would a second airbase be useful. If your UK Pacific navy is strong enough to stand toe-to-toe with the Japanese navy, either something disastrous has happened to the Japanese navy (in which case the Allies probably have the game in the bag) or you have nearly no UK Pacific land units (in which case the Japanese army will walk their way to Calcutta and ignore your boats).

@dazedwit
One time I was playing my roommate, who was playing the Axis. At the end of his turn, he had two giant German stacks next to Moscow. If I did nothing but buy and place units with Russia, he would have a 90% win on Moscow on his next turn.
I strafed one of his stacks with a huge stack of infantry and got super lucky dice. Then with UK I did a nearly suicidal run into his barely protected German air force.
On his next turn, he had only a 25% chance on Moscow. The game went on for a long time after that, but his troops never recovered, and his morale was crushed entirely.