Best posts made by shadowhawk

@Taffy3
If you know this will be the case just have a laptop with triple A present and update countries at the end of their turn.
If you play with a group some people will be Idle most of the time anyway and it saves doing things later.

With stacks of 20+ units cellphone shots can be tricky to recreate from.

TripleA also has the advantage of being able to continue the round from remote locations in case your next sitting is prevented by other IRL things.

As an added bonus it adds disaster recovery in case accidents happen. Dice bounce out on table, cat/kid sneaks in.

@SuperbattleshipYamato said in Triple A North Africa?:

@AndrewAAGamer

Agreed, I’m worried otherwise Hasbro might sue TripleA for infringing on copyright and being an unlicensed competitor (let’s be honest, TripleA is basically competing with the physical game for time the players spend on Axis and Allies, it’ll probably be competing monetarily if it was more well known). Buying the game will (hopefully maybe) show them that TripleA isn’t a competitor, but a complement. We should reward Larry and the playtesters for developing such a fantastic game if possible.

Hard to sue a platform as TripleA does not come with the games and is used for various other games as well. But since hasbro does not want to make a decent online version of any Axis&Allies game ( the 1 on steam is crap compared to tripleA ) they cant really complain.

TripleA is great for those with little block of time or that lives far from others that play the game, not everybody can leave the board standing there for 3weeks and if you can only play 2 evenings a week for 3 hours the game might take a while

@The-Captain said in In how many hours can you complete a G40 game:

To all Axis & Allies Global 1940 players:

1. How long time does it take to complete an OOB Global 1940 board game - face-to-face - with either 2, 3, 4, or 5 players ?

2. How long time does it take to complete a modified OOB Global 1940 board game - face-to-face - with either 2, 3, 4, or 5 players ?

Captain

Depends on the skill and experience of the players, with 2 or 4 players with each playing their own countries so no 2 generals for each country it will take 12-16 hours i recon. After that you might not have won the game but it becomes so obvious that 1 side might as well resign.

Tournamen rules game can be done in about 8-10 hours, with 2 players a bit faster with 4 as you can play parallel.

Assuming that you can do quick combat rolls ( so 4 colors ) and have more then the 12 dice that come with the game. Having your dice pool to reflect the units and just removing them once your doing fighting saves a lot of time in the long run.

@Arthur-Bomber-Harris said in In how many hours can you complete a G40 game:

@The-Captain if people are experienced, but not masters, they can complete two games in a marathon game day (15h or so). The game takes about the same time for 2-5 players.

Highly experienced people with careful battle calculations will take more time per round and play 3x more rounds before the outcome is decided, but it is rare to find high quality opponents.

True that experienced players will think things over more, but especially round1 they start with a plan. New players might start by looking at germany and going so what will i do. Experienced players already know in advance they play germany and already desided their buy and moves before the game starts. Same with japan.

Also verry experienced players might see the writing on the wall well before beginners see it. So they might actually play fewer rounds. They know what is reasonable possible and what the other side can do.

A few things that i normally do to speed the game up.
4 color dice. So each combat round can be rolled in 1 go.
IPC update phace, during combat move place upside down roundels in the land combat areas. If you win leave them there, this phase you flip them over and update the income tracker.
Reorganize phase, inactive player will make neat stacks of the units on the board. So during combat/non-combat you dont swap units for chips you do that when your not doing anything.

@The-Captain said in Winning the game: most common victory scenario:

What are the most common victory scenarios:

1. OOB G40 with no modifications, biddings or changes to the basic Set Up or game mechanisms
2. OOB G40 with any kind of modifications, biddings and/or changes to the basic Set Up or game mechanisms

Is Victory most commonly achieved by:
a) A convincing Miltitary Victory (capturing Major Capitals and/or Victory Cities)
b) Economic Victory (one side has achieved such a high score of IPC that this eventually will bring Victory)
c) Surrender (either side surrenders due a hopeless Military or Economic Sitruation)

In any version i played so far, so either OOB, Tournament or other versions its almost always surrender. At a certain point you just see that either a major combat goes heavy against you and you cant recover back in time or you just messed up and are 2 far out of position.

@The-Captain
Are you using D6 for the G40HRE or other dice?

@barnee
Yea i mean germany clears TJ with other units leaving the tank behind.
And then in NCB the tank moves through TJ and into iraq.

Ofcourse the only units that move in CB and NCB are air units.

@G40NEWB said in Tank blitzing through newly conquered territory:

Is Germany able to blitz tanks through a territory it just conquered that turn? For example, using a few tanks to attack blocker infantry in Eastern Poland then attacking Western Ukraine through that newly captured territory? Please give me an example from the rule book that makes this move illegal or legal, can’t seem to find anything that specifically deals with this situation.

All combat moves are done before any combat is resolved.
All combat moves, so after you start rolling dice no more combat moves are allowed.
This situation is pretty clear, your tank cannot blitz because there is a blocking infantry in the way.

After the infantry is removed only non combat moves are available and you cannot capture new countries in non combat.

You could blitz into a friendly neutral country, as thats considered a non combat move. So if germany stands in egypt with a tank it could first clear a blocker in trans-jordan and then blizz into iraq.

@SuperbattleshipYamato said in Submerging before battle?:

@Azimuth

You’re mostly correct. I can’t speak to your last scenario.

There are a ton of little “loopholes” in the rules that allow for really clever maneuvers for very specific situations, like Great Southern Germany-Yugoslavia-Romania in one turn.

I trust that the designers considered many possibilities and that they intended for such a scenario to be possible.

I doubt that many of the rules where actually designed in a way to create these kinda loopholes. They are more build this way to make the game easier to play and more structured for beginners. The loopholes are just side effects that the designers either didnt think of or didnt think people would abuse as they are kinda illogical.

You retreat abuse, well how would you do it otherwise? how can you keep track of what unit came from where? its a lot of extra problems. Its much easier just saying everything retreats to the same country.
Older versions even had the rule that no land units could retreat from amfib combat ( even ones comming from land ) just to simplify things.

This is just another 1 of these things where your not allowed to mix non-combat and combat moves to make the game easier. Otherwise you would need to keep track of the things that already moved.

Logically it makes no sence that units cannot just move during the combat move step. It actualy makes the game a lot easier and faster to play if you are mixing both phases. But you have to keep track of your moves better.

@FranceNeedsMorePower

You can use them to retake money islands and being a general nuisance to japan.

Java is just 3 moves away from your factory, if you take it that gives you 14 ipcs to spend which is 1 transport + 1 inf + 1art. Which also is your production limit and its also a pretty decent attacking force.
US can clear blockers if needed and Anzac can just move in and take the island.

Japan doesnt always have transports nearby or land forces to take it back so its a hassle for them.

@dazedwit said in Is killing Sea Zone 110 an absolute must?:

@shadowhawk

wow look at you

I said I’m testing out a new strategy. Didn’t say you needed to do it.

Just pointing out where your “strategy” might go wrong.
And quite interested how you get 1/9 chance happening regularly.

Imo its best to keep anzac home, they got a factory and so they can capture and contest money islands which keeps japan busy.

This leaves the US free to build combat units to attack the japanese fleet and clear a path for the anzac transports to be annoying.

You can place 3 units with anzac and have them attack the round after. Neither Japan or USA can do that. And UK-Pac is better served buying land only and assisting china and staying alive

@SuperbattleshipYamato said in Is there a world champion for this game?:

@shadowhawk

That’s why Iike low luck. More predictable. Perhaps that would be the way to go for a hypothetical world championship.

True but then that does not test a players skill to addapt to changing situations.
If all combat is pre-determined you never have unplanned situations.

@SuperbattleshipYamato said in Why is surrender not an option in the original game?:

@surfer

I don’t make that assumption. My view is that since surrender wasn’t explicitly mentioned in the rules it’s not allowed.

Every game out there basically allows 1 of the players to give up. Its a game if you think you lost you can give up.
What would you do force a player to continue playing?
Its not in the rules because its so obvious it doesnt need to be in the rules.

@SuperbattleshipYamato said in Why is surrender not an option in the original game?:

@shadowhawk

I don’t force.

But when playing by myself or if I’m the one losing I always play to the end.

Why? If your axis and its clear you will lose why continue for another 12 hours. Especially if allies are winning things will go slowly downhill for the axis but it takes many rounds before tokyo, berlin and rome are captured. You could stack tokyo with about 50-60 inf and a load of fighters so then good luck invading as the allies. 1 kamikaze a turn means 6 turns without shore bombardment as well.

Not having it also means that the first player that lands there can also land a lot of planes. Having 2 french units and say 8 infantry and 6fighters is a lot worst then having just 8 inf on that zone to deal with. Sure the US cannot build 3 tanks but the ability to land a huge airforce there does mitigate that issue the first round.

And if they keep the zone for long enough that they could produce there there is verry little that stops them from attack you.

Bombing the harbour does nothing at all. You would normally land from SZ110 which has a UK harbour anyway so bombing it only exposes your airforce to AA fire without any benefit.

Thinking about the post and the board pictures.
Its kinda unfair we now helping only 1 side of the board. As it looks like both players are new to the game our help will give 1 side a clear advantage over the other side.

@Arthur-Bomber-Harris

This gambit is actually quite good if you look at it.
With low luck you would trade air for air with japan having the more expensive units lost.
If a dice game its also japan that will lose the more expensive units and slowing them down.

The UK fleet is funny to have but it cant go anywhere so it will be destroyed G2, so well sure you got a fleet and you can move it for 1 turn.
You already won the med anyway so this move will slow down japan and with them slowed down US can go a lot heavier into the european side of the board.

Going for the true and tested strategies all the time makes the game more of a predetermined chess match.

@Arthur-Bomber-Harris
Low-Luck is good for trying strategies as you dont have luck to factor in but for real games its rather boring. You can just calculate the optimal attack force and you can calculate if you can move forward or not.
With luck there are some variations that might throw a wrench in your plans.

Though luck should be limited imo so that there are no extremes happening.

What would happen if you combine OOB the 1 fighter for russia with a more agressive mech-arm + air move into china from russia and a UK1 attack/DOW on japan.
If you can grow china at the start it can become a real pain and both anzac and UK got good income to challenge japan on the waters. Leaving the US free to build up a force to attack germany as soon as its free.

@questioneer said in Online bid question:

@Stucifer that seems about what I remember. I looked at several games and it seems like in G40 a lot of people add an infantry in Yunnan, 1 inf in Egypt, 1 sub in the Med off Egypt and 1 sub outside Gibraltar. If that is the case in almost all bids, they should just be added to the standard setup IMHO…

1 inf >Yunnan
1 inf > Egypt
1 SS > 98
1 SS > 91

Rather not, these are bids that are designed to break the game in some areas to make the game even more 1 dimensional.
Those 2 subs make sure you can destroy the italian fleet and forces in afrika without the axis having any chance of stopping you. They remove choice and options from the game.
You dont need those 2 subs you can still destroy the italian fleet but with the 2 subs you dont have to chose to forgo other options.

IMO bids should go to countries that generally do not have the initiative in round 1 so the bids are not abused.