Topics created by Woodstock

But it does cost you the 10 IPC NO, so until your planning to go to war with the US consider the IPC value of FIC to be -8

Yes, this is the case in Alpha +2.

@Woodstock:

@BadSpeller:

@Woodstock:

What Inmajor said. I expect to buy a game that’s finished.

Maybe look at it this way, we were able to get the game 2 years before it was released.  Many addtional playtesters are tuning the game before it’s final release.

So I am getting a whole new updated copy once they’re done playtesting?  :roll:

Nope, but you can BUY Larry’s NEW AND IMPROVED AXIS AND ALLIES 1941 edition ™, for only 3 easy payments of $39.99!  AND get to do the ridiculous “revised setups” B.S. all over again cause he spent all his time “fixing” the current edition!

Thanks.

Japs lost  :x

Yes, the Dutch did control most of the island, however, since the British are allowed to take the other Dutch islands through amphibious landings, it would only make sense that the British automatically occupy the rest of Borneo using the forces they already had stationed in the northern part of the island.

Well…worry not. I will be buying 'em all  :-P

Since they happen on two different turns, they can do both.

@ksmckay:

On page 20 under restricitions on placement it says “You cannot have more than one industrial complex per territory”

D’oh. Must have missed that one then…Sorry. I will try not to read the rulebook drunk anymore  :roll:

Historically the USA should be allowed to land aircraft in USSR territory, but they are then interned (removed). This is highly unlikely, but they may just want to bomb Japanese ships in an adjacent sea zone, or perhaps a Manchurian factory, and then plan to land in Russia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_Tu-4

Kick ass. Thanks Krieghund.

Now only to do some math…I just spotted 3 bombers and 2 fighters within range aswell for the americans…Ouch

Hey. I am always looking for people who feel like a PBEM game through TripleA

(AA:50 is doing pretty well in TripeA now: http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=44492&package_id=119711&release_id=665387)

I play a turn every other day or so, so if you feel like a game, drop me a mail at wouter.dewever(a)home(dot)nl

Yup, I def agree that Japan ICs should be located in FIC/Burma/India. Honestly, I don’t see the point of putting a factory in Manch.

I like to make a hard push towards India on J1, taking out Burma and both 4 IPC British islands so that I’ve got plenty of ground units to take and hold India on J2, as long Germany was successful at clearing Egypt and the Soviets didn’t send troops to Persia R1 (which I’m starting to think might be a good idea).

This allows an IC on Burma J2, and an IC on India J3, which means Caucasus starts to hear the Jap tank treads as early as J4. I find this really helps relieve some pressure on Germany.

If Germany did not manage to clear Egypt, or the Brits have Soviet assistance in India/Mid East, then I’ll go the Burma/FIC route for the factories instead.

Yeah, same here. Currently my germans have 3 V2-launch pads…and only 1 works  :-P

I think the transport that early is over kill.  The carrier, sure.  Carrier and Destroyer sure.  But you probably dont need the transport yet.  Germany 2 maybe.

Likewise the fighter.  If you go ground forces with the cash you are putting into Transport and Fighter, you’re talking 17 IPC or 4 Infantry, and an Armor…with which you can certainly use to fill holes that will appear in your front with Russia (or to liberate France if you let the Allies trade it for a round or two.)

I guess, 32 IPC in the water, might be better with Carrier, Cruiser, Submarine instead.  At least that is significant defensive punch (and you WILL have that submarine if England attacks round 1 (probably the SZ 5 starting one too) since England has nothing with which to attack SZ 5 that can hit submarines. )  And you’ll have significant offensive punch with 2 cruisers, 2 submarines, carrier, destroyer in whatever fighters you put on the carrier (thus allowing at least 4 fighters to hit SZ 2 on G2, probably a bomber as well.)

Got ya Krieghund, thanks.

@Frontovik:

I TRY allot of KJF’s, but then i again, i TRY.
What i always notice is: no IC in India, and perhaps none in Sinkiang
if you build one, it’ll die, makin KJF much harder than easier
i always see japan with KJF reach 40, i guess this is normal (They go india full power, china, SFE). but then you need to come up with US and pacific fleet and try to stop them
all troops on EUS should go to africa aswell
problem is, germany gets + 50, but perhapd with some SBR from US and UK, and UK landing north…

what’s everybodys opinion?

I just on a very nifty game with the Axis (no bids btw).
And what you describes is what exactly happened.

On J1, I didn’t do Pearl Harbor, luring the Allied player into the pacific. Offcourse, the USA needs to invest a whole lot more in the Pacific if he wants to reign those seas opposed to Japan.
So, while Japan was going 50-50 on land and sea units, taking territories here and there, Germany was having a field day now that the USA was putting 100% of it’s IPC’s into the Pacific.

By turn 6, the initial USA fleet was vapourized, having taken only 1 Japanese island (and Japanese income at +40), Germany was at +50, Britain pretty much locked into London, and Russia stacking INF in their only territory, Moscow.
At that point USA was unable to stop me from invading Brazil with Germany in the next turn, the 2nd USA fleet would be at leats deminished to 50%, and UK was about to lose their last transporters against a strong German BB, stacked AC, some subs and a destroyer.
Japanese transports would have been ready to head for Alaska aswell, but the Allied resigned.

Agreed, there were some lucky rolls, but I think all in all….the USA needs to invest way too much in the Pacific to make much of a difference there, whilst leaving Germany with 1 opponent less.

@Croggyl:

@timerover51:

Short of keeping some sort of paper record, how would you differentiate between the two AA guns for Rocket use?

Put a country marker under that AA gun?

We have a winner!  This should be done any time that an ally’s AA gun moves into one of your territories, as he/she still owns it.  The only way that ownership of an AA gun can change is through the capture of a territory.

Correct.

It’s nice to have, don’t get me wrong, but I’m not investing valuable IPC in maintaining it.  (I’ll use it as fodder if I attack the allied navies though, if the allies are silly enough to let it live that long.)

@Woodstock:

@Gamer:

@Woodstock:

Thanks. Changes the German meditarrean situation quite a bit …

Not really.  The Allies have been given more fighters and fleet to compensate.  Notice the sub off Egypt is now a Destroyer?  Notice the Indian Ocean fleet?  And so on . . .

Yeah, I noticed the enlarged UK fleet, but I meant that the 2 hit kill applies to both offense and defense for the Battleship makes a difference.
The UK wasn’t attacking my Med fleet, as he thought “Well, he is weaker in attack then defense, so let him attack me.”…and I was holding off my attack on his Battleship for the same reason…

Well, it’s sort of obvious to us that have been playing Revised a while.  But when you think about it, why would the extra hit only apply to defense?  The extra hit is to reflect the fact the Battleship represents a MUCH larger set of surface ships than a destroyer, and that is true whether the fleet is attacking or defending.  And as for NOT attacking it, why on earth would Germany use the Med. fleet to attack, unless the likely result is annihilation of Allied fleet?  If you wait for the Germans to attack another fleet with the Med. fleet, you should be waiting quite a while in most cases.