I like the Allies collectivly, but if I had to pick one, it would be the US. More challenging. And I’m crazy
Posts made by Rommel34
RE: Revised Edition
Oh. I see what you’re talking about. It doesn’t say you can’t use chips for those peices. It just says that you can’t place new plastic peices if your out. Sort of like a Leader-of-the-Army type of thing. However I think the general consensus on that is to ignore that rule, as it was taken out for the Fourth Edition and the two expantions. I know I don’t play with it.
RE: Revised Edition
Great game. I like it alot.
I’m also annoyed with the lack of contaners and chips. I guess they figured out how to cut costs . I used ziplock bags too.
The chips are what got me though. You barely have enough for the opening setup! I feel bad for anyone without another A&A (I have 2, the older A&A and Europe, so I didn’t have a problem) to mooch chips.
Other then thoes two pet peevs, I love the new game.
RE: Has anyone played with the 3/3 tanks from the new AH edition
Ok, well I played the new A&A, where the tanks are 3/3. I liked it alot, countries favor a mixed inf/tank approach with is much more realistic/fun. I didn’t try inf at 1/1.
As for the Marines, all the other countries get a special too, so it evens out again.
I heard someone mention the idea sometime of allowing tanks to take their second move after combat if they had one left. That might be interesting because in essence it would allow tanks to strafe like fighters can do. Maybe it would suck, I don’t know.
You just, somewhat, described Panzerblitz. A German special (like the American Marine)
RE: Favorite nation to play
Vann Himself wrote:
I chose Japan because they are usually more flexible and as long as you hold asia, island hopping isn’t really a threat to your economy.
I have to disagree with that. Island hopping can devistate Japan. I’ve said this a couple of times and I’ll reiterate my points.
First, it puts a navy on Japan’s door step, and gives allied players another foothold for Asia. Not the biggest advantage but it helps a little.
Second, it is very easy for the UK to put an IC on Australia (even easier if WE is taken and the US is moving in on Germany, so your on the defencive in Europe) and grab at least two islands form the start. Since it’s difficult to reinforce islands effectivly, you usally only have to take out one inf. A ftr and 2 inf can usally handle this threat.
Third, it draws attention away from Asia. If Japan doesn’t reinforce their navy in the south pacific (esspecialy against an IC in Australia), they will wind up with a broken or, worse, no navy, which opens the door for invation. So, Japan is forced to spend money on a navy, taking money from the mainland, which is a plus as it slows the drive to Moscow. That could mean death for Germany right there.
Finally, if you take all the islands, you steal 8 IPCs from Japan every turn. That is VERY difficult to retake on mainland Asia, as the territories average around 2-3 each. So you need to take something like 3-4 territories just to make up for the loss. Plus it provides a nice boost for the Allied nation(s) that occupy the islands.
So, thats my two cents.
Oh, and I like Germany the best
RE: Industrial Complexes or Transports for Japan?
It’s all about timing. You build transports until the time is right to build an IC. Knowing when that time is is the key to winning with Japan.
So it’s realy not a question of witch is right or more important. Their both needed.
I agree 100%.
RE: Japan Strategy poll
I like to take midway. That way I can bomb the US :). That usally freaks them out and pulls stuff from Germany. one thing though, you have to wait untill the US has ALREADY moved it fleet to the Atlantic, if they did. That’s why I don’t adivse the US doing so.