They usually are!
I’d scrap the gme and start a new one. :wink:
It’s still salvagable (a real long shot). :lol:
The Allies are not too bright either, with a total only ONE transport. :roll:
I’m really interested to know how the game turns out. Please keep us posted Guest. :wink:
Hey everyone,
Well, here’s how the game turned out. The allies won, eventually. My German partner failed miserably and I wish he hadn’t been my partner otherwise I would’ve won the game because I started off dominating with Japan. In any case…
USSR and the UK basically Strategically Bomb Raided whatever was left over of Germany until Germany had no money left during any turn and therefore could not produce enough men to keep up with Russia or Germany. Eventually the UK took Germany and Germany tried to push into Russia with 20 or so infantry as a last resort trying to buy Japan some time. It didn’t work that well though, even though the UK capital and Russia as a whole were MASSIVELY thinned out.
In the meantime, I couldn’t withstand US’s naval attack so I pulled back and instead rushed to focus on the mainland of Asia and in Africa as well. I pulled back all my navy and used my two transports to transport men (with a battleship for amphibious assaults and a carrier with two planes for added support) into Africa which I took over severely fast leaving UK pretty much stuck up in Germany. That also left US spending a LOT of money on naval units thinking I would fight with him on sea, which bought me some time as well. I pushed forward into the mainland while taking Africa and almost converged with the German army just before it failed to take Russia but Russia managed to stamp the flame out with manpower that it recieved from the large amount of money it was making. After Russia started to fight back at Japan and Germany was gone, the US and Russia began to annihilate me from the Asian coast taking over all the factories and building more to try and rush into my HEAVILY packed Japan capital. In the meantime, UK tried to take back Africa, which I decided I didn’t want to fight for anymore so I led UK into Africa under the pretense that I would defend it but as that happened, I also faked a few possible amphibious assaults on open lands that were not guarded but I really was making a b-line for the UK capital since it was open and UK was stupid enough to send all its force into Africa. In the end, we called it a game before I could take the UK capital and the US had taken most of my islands and had left me with very little money and very little options. So I lost.
However, I believe I did very well and I used a main technique that bought me a lot of time and that was to lure the allies into buying units they thought they would need in order to fight me, not realizing that I had a totally different plan so they were spending money on stuff that didn’t really concern them. But like I said, I did dominate the game in the beginning. The US had no Naval units at one point, Russia couldn’t keep up with my production in Asia and had to build two fronts in case Germany and myself charged through, and the UK had really no place to go but to Strategically bomb Germany for the longest time. But Germany failed to fight offensively and therefore I had no support. But still, I’m proud of what I was able to accomplish without a capable partner for this game.
What do you guys think?
Typical, Germany fails just as Japan is rolling…. I still say the #1 Job of Germany is to stay alive, build mostly infantry yet have some tanks to pose a credible offense. You’ve picked up quick on the concept of ‘mis-direction’, causing your foe to build in areas that end up being useless. Even if you only tie up enemy units (hopefully without tying up alot of your stuff that could be used elsewhere) Enjoy these early games!
BB
Well you did the best you can. You might want to teach Germany a thing or two if you want to keep him/her as your partner (a big if). Almost taking Russia and UK? :o You should be REALLY proud of that.
Thanks for the support everyone. I think I’ll have to sit Germany down and give him a strat to follow to the very letter or otherwise play the Axis by myself. And I guess you’re right, almost taking Russia and the UK despite my massive disadvantage is indeed something to be really proud of. It was worth the try and the game was good overall. I’ll keep you guys posted the next time we play another good game worth posting about.
If he’s gonna be your partner again, see if he’s willing to try a plan. 8)
Or you could trade him like the Allies did Italy.
On our side for WWI … on your side for WWII. :roll:
These “scenarios” from you and others provide a nice change from the same old initial setup. Well until next time you’re in a jam then. :wink:
Next time we’re thinking about incorporating Nuclear weapons on the technology arsenal. It’s 2 dice and BOTH have to be 6 in order to get the technology. Then, in order to nuke any joe blow territory you have to start off by paying 10$. The next nuke (any player) goes up to 30, then 60, and continues in increments of 30 dollars. If you want to nuke a capital then you have to pay an extra 10 bucks on top of the regular price. Once a nuke is placed all the army on that land are gone and anyone passing through that land has to HALVE their army, however, until a person takes over the country, the country remains in its current owners hand. Prices are subject to change as well. But it’s quite a different outlook on the board when you have to concern yourselves with nukes. Then again, my friends and I don’t usually play a normal game of A&A as you’ve seen in this scenario.
Spiro Floropoulos
Not bad. It certainly is more reasonable than the old A-bomb tech. But I don’t see it having any impact on the game. BTW, I wonder how much did the US spend on developing and building the A-bomb relative to the total war effort.
Certainly not 30% of their GNP! :wink:
For an A&A variationI you can pick up an expansion set in most specialty gaming stores. I’ve mentioned this a couple of times in the last two days.
From what I know the total cost of WW 2 for the US of A (in 1996 dollars) was about 3.3 Trillion. The Manahatten project cost about 20 Billion. Makes ya wonder why they didn’t just play a cheap stalemate until they got it, guess nobody knew for sure if it would work….
You’ve mentioned alot of things a couple of times Xi…
Guest, nothing against what you laid out but… In general, simple is good. If you need lots of ‘constraints’ on a new rule it’s probably too much of a change or needs refining. Not saying that this is one of those cases but… I’m a fan of K.I.S.S. Keep It Simple Smilee :-)
BB
Yeah. Most people I get to talk to about A&A don’t want to try it, don’t want to take time to set it up, and/or expect to have a turn every 5 minutes(with 5 people :P imposssible.)
Let’s do some math.
Assuming the numbers provided by B_BB are correct, then for every $1 the US spent on A-bomb it spent 3300/20=$165 in total.
In A&A terms:
Assume on average the US makes 33 IPCs per turn. Then it takes 5 turns to make 533=165 IPCs.
Out of that it spends 1 IPC for weapon development. Since it takes 5 IPC to roll, it takes 55=25 turns to get 1 roll.
I’ve shown before it takes on average 21 rolls to get a particular tech you want, in this case A-bomb. Then on average it takes 2125=525 turns to get A-bomb.
Assuming 1 turn is 3 months in real time, then it takes on average 5253/12=131.25 years in real time for the US to get A-bomb. :o
Historically the US got the A-bomb in 6(?) years.
Therefore I’ve proven that it was much easier to get the A-bomb historically than in A&A. 8)
For the next lecture I’ll make a case for putting Antartica on the A&A map.
A simple way to look at it was the US spent 3/5 of 1% of the entire war budget on the Manhatten project. Based on 21 tech rolls to get the a-bomb you’d need to spend 105 IPC. For this to represent the same % of war effort has the historical example you’d have to have earned 17,325 IPCs…. What the US could do with 1155 bombers… THEN get the A-bomb… I guess ya could say it’s a bit more costly in A&A :-)
BB
Yes, the US got incredibly lucky with the tech roll. :lol:
Xi, what does the expansion have in it?
BigBlocky, I hear ya about the large constraints on rules. Playing Risk with nuclear weapons is FAR easier to accomplish than using nukes in A&A. We’ll try it anyways and see how it goes. We may decide it’s too much of a hassle.
Been a long time …
Lemme think …
:-?
May be more than one type of expansion set out there.
The one I recall had cards to draw …
(resistance movement, weather problems, cowardly opponent, unit breakdowns…)
OW! Sorry my brain crashed!
The package I remember had some example cards on the outside.
Make a coupla calls. see what you can find.
Whoa! That sounds sweet. Thanks.
You are very welcome!
