Thank you. That was the conclusion we reached, and the airbase ended up, rather uselessly, on the West Indies.
Posts made by TheMarshall
-
RE: Airbase purchase/build question
-
Airbase purchase/build question
We had an interesting situation come up in a game today. UK’s capital was under German control, and the US had re-captured Gibraltar from Italy, thereby claiming control of it. During the US Purchase Units phase, the US bought an airbase, intending to place it on Gibraltar. During the same US turn, the US liberated the UK. There was then some debate about what happens to the yet-unbuilt airbase.
From what we deduced, the rules demand the following:
- Gibraltar immediately (during the US’s Combat Phase) returns to UK control.
- The airbase may therefore not be placed on Gibraltar, as the US no longer controls it by the Mobilize New Units phase.
- The US then MUST place the airbase on another territory they control during that Mobilize New Units phase. Because they have the ability to build the airbase (even if not where they originally intended to do so), the rules do not allow for receiving an IPC refund or deferring the building of the airbase.
Can I get an official ruling on whether the above conclusions are the correct interpretation of the rules?
-
RE: Best strategy for the Axis in Europe only theater?
@Soviet-Steamroller I’ve always found the Stalingrad strategy to be a difficult one, as it’s just too far from Germany’s industrial base. Couple that with the fact that the Soviets can reach both Ukraine and Stalingrad in one turn with mechs and tanks, and it seems like Germany just runs out of steam. They’re not able to effectively crush the Soviets before the US is knocking on their door. If Italy assists, that gives it a much better chance of success, but my Italian strategy is usually focused on Africa and the Middle East.
By contrast, Leningrad is much closer to Germany’s power base, and with transports in the Baltic, it’s generally a simple matter to capture and hold it, using it as an industrial base for the assault on Moscow. Because it takes the Soviets two turns minimum to reach it, it is nearly impossible for them to mount a counter-attack and take it back. Furthermore, the air base allows Germany to keep their air force in play to defend the homeland, while still menacing the majority of Soviet territory.
I also like to wait until G2 to declare war against the Soviets, just to keep Britain guessing. I can see why you’d go with a G1 attack on the Soviets, though, since as you say, it definitely puts them back on their heels. For my tastes, I just find it allows Britain much more freedom and clarity. Without any pressure against Britain’s capital, they can usually build enough navy/air force to make your life miserable.
Again, just my two cents.
-
RE: 1940 reference cards
@Young:
Glad you like them. Use them in good health!
Very nice work, some of the best looking cards I’ve seen.
High praise indeed, coming from you. Thank you very much.
-
RE: Best strategy for the Axis in Europe only theater?
My general German strategy is a G1 purchase of 4 transports. This forces UK to spend resources shoring up its homeland. I might be able to capture Britain G2 if I catch the British player with their pants down, but more commonly I wind up using the transports to attack Novgorod on G3.
I take France and Normandy G1, along with crippling the British navy in the Atlantic. I like to attack the Canadian fleet with a couple subs, since that prevents Britain from bringing those Canadian units as reinforcements, and the subs do some convoy disruption as well. I also usually attack the two fleets in SZ 110 and 111.
I then follow up with an attack on the Soviets on G2. My goal is to capture Leningrad on G3, which is usually pretty doable. From there, it’s a forceful push to Moscow.
My Italian strategy is somewhat dependent on what UK does on their first turn, by my overall goal is to capture Egypt and push into the Middle East to gain the bonus IPCs from controlling that region. If the UK doesn’t devote a lot of resources defending Africa, I like to build an IC in Egypt to solidify control of Africa and the Middle East without requiring a navy.
I also try to maintain control of Gibraltar, but this can be difficult once the US gets in the war, since they can dump troops directly from the US into Gibraltar. If the US decides to focus its efforts on the Mediterranean, I usually find it turns into a game of delaying the US until Germany can capture Moscow. If the US turns its efforts to Germany, Italy can usually take over Africa and build itself a significant industrial base.
That’s my 2 cents, anyway. I’ve won several games with the Axis using the strategy. The biggest thing that can go wrong with it is if the British player has a hot dice hand on G1 and wipes out a lot of your air force. It’s possible to come back from that, but it makes things decidedly more challenging, since you don’t have the extra firepower against the Soviets, and it is more difficult to suppress the British and keep them from building a navy.
-
RE: Please let my son and I talk again. Debate over Sea Zone 106
I must ask… What situation has developed in your game where the answer to this question significantly impacts the outcome?
-
RE: 1940 reference cards
Really nice work! Would you be so kind to share to design files?
I added the source files to the folders above. They are the ODG files, which can be opened with OpenOffice or LibreOffice.
-
RE: 1940 reference cards
The Mediafire links are in the message above, but here they are again.
I think I didn’t express myself clearly. I was hoping you could share your original design file with seperate layers so I will be able to create translations into Dutch and create some other reference cards in the same style.
Ah, yes. I understand now.
I created them using OpenOffice Draw. Let me see about posting the source files.
-
RE: 1940 reference cards
The Mediafire links are in the message above, but here they are again.
NO Cards: http://www.mediafire.com/?sgz3gr48qxs6l
Setup/Politics Charts: http://www.mediafire.com/folder/6xmoz7a93pgff/A%26A40_Reference_Cards -
RE: 1940 reference cards
The finished product showed up in the mail today. Boardgamesmaker did a fantastic job. These turned out really well. The cards are thin, but have a durable plastic feel to them. The reference charts are 5"x7", so shouldn’t take up a lot of table space.
I also had them print me some additional Italy and Germany control makers, as well as some task force markers and cards. The whole setup ran me about $50, including shipping. Probably not the cheapest option, but I’m quite happy with the product. If you’re looking for something similar, the links to my source files, and the respective links to the products at boardgamesmaker.com are in the thread above.
-
RE: 1940 reference cards
Well done! It looks like you reused some original artwork as the background of these ref. cards. Did you extract this from one of the manuals?
Yep, I used the PDF of the manual, copied the cover into my photo editing software, and clipped a portion of it to use as a background for my cards.
-
RE: 1940 reference cards
Thanks… I miss the good old days where references like this came in the box.
I’ll post some photos once I get the final printed products.
-
RE: 1940 reference cards
National Objective cards can be found here: http://www.mediafire.com/?sgz3gr48qxs6l
Most of these are designed to be printed two-sided, so that you can flip the card over to indicate that you have accomplished the objective.
I will print these on 2.25x3.5 cards: https://www.boardgamesmaker.com/print/bridge-size-blank-card-4332.html
-
RE: 1940 reference cards
I’ve added some general reference cards to the link above. These will be 2-sided, using the same printing link above.
-
RE: Axis & Allies Community Map Files
Has anyone run into issues with getting items with these maps on them printed? Isn’t the work copyrighted? Or have they given folks permissions to print them?
I think you’d only run into trouble if you tried to sell them after printing them.
-
1940 reference cards
Hello all,
I’ve been working on creating some custom reference cards for the 1940 games. My goal was to create a single set of references that could be used for Pacific, Europe, or Global. I also wanted the cards to fit the motif of the game, so they wouldn’t stand out as obviously being an add-in. I designed these to fit on cards measuring 5"x7" or less, so that the cards would fit into the storage boxes that I use for my pieces.
So far I’ve created setup card and politics cards, which I’m intending to be two sides of the same card. I’m working on finishing up some general reference charts and national objective cards.
Here are the results of my labor so far. http://www.mediafire.com/folder/6xmoz7a93pgff/A%26A40_Reference_Cards
As you’ll see, these references should work for all three versions of the game, although it might require you to ignore information that doesn’t pertain to a particular version. Where required, I’ve explicitly annotated where information is different between versions.
My plan is to get these printed onto 5x7 cards at boardgamesmaker.com. If you’re interested, here’s the link to their custom cards: https://www.boardgamesmaker.com/print/fi-8977.html
Thoughts and suggestions are welcome. The remaining cards will follow soon.
-
RE: Technology scheme
@ancient:
May I suggest an amendment to your rules. Any roll under a 3 is treated as a 3. This way someone is not totally screwed by continually rolling 1s and 2s. This may have the affect that you will need to raise the tech values a little though.
So the possibilities would be 0, 3, 4, or 5 points, with a 50% chance of 3 points? That takes a significant portion of the randomness out of it. Even with that system, someone could be continually screwed by repeated 6s being rolled.
The purpose of my system was to acheive a greater balance between risk and reward. I think your alteration swings too much away from risk. That’s the nature of the game. Sometimes your heavy bombers roll a bunch of 5s and 6s. The dice bite you some times.
-
RE: Technology scheme
The results of my first play-testing of my rules yielded the following observations:
- It seems to encourage technology development far more than the standard rules. Japan, USSR and US all developed technology throughout the game. There were some pretty lucky rolls though (lots of 5s, no 6s), so this might be a little higher than you could normally expect.
- The original numbers for breakthroughs might be a little low, although again the lucky rolling makes it a little hard to tell. I’m leaning towards 12-15-20 as the numbers required for respective breakthroughs, but I’ll probably try one more game with the original numbers I came up with.
- The system can create situations where you’ve already sunk a considerable amount of money into technology that you feel compelled to finish the job. The flip side of this is that if you’re very close to a breakthrough, you needn’t spend a great deal more money in order for it to pay off for you. For example, in my game the US was at a point where they had 9 points in a given category. Given that circumstance, it seemed silly not to spend money on the one die that likely (5/6 chance) would push you over the threshold.
- Overall I think it strikes the right balance between risk and reward. I’ll probably push for some variation of this rule in all my future Global games.
-
RE: Pacific 1940 2nd Edition
What about the industrial production chart across the top? How will it work when you put it together with Europe for the Global game?
-
RE: Pacific 1940 2nd Edition
SZ6 is fixed, as in it no longer borders Korea?