Fleetwood Dan is correct. It’s land units only in the box rules, and both land and air units in LHTR.
Air Force
-
I was thinking about this and it occured to me that there really isnt any reason to keep up an Air Force. Ground troops take land, Navys protect and destroy transports and thus supply lines, but planes dont seem to do much of anything that realy changes the outcome of the game. They are really good at sinking subs but beyond that…well they just seem like a luxury buy.
Your thoughts?
-
Planes are crucial to increase the reach, flexibility, attck power and defense power of your forces on land and at sea. They are absolutely crucial for every nation’s success, with the possible exception of Russia. Bombers could be legitimately considered a luxury, but fighters are a necessity. An expensive one, sure, but a necessity nonetheless.
~Josh
-
Actually aircraft are CRITICAL to Russia, perhaps more critical than to any other nation.
Those FIGs provide incredible anchors for INF stacks, allow for improved territory trading with Germany, and most importantly massed FIGs make Moscow nearly impossible to crack with even a 1-2 punch from the Axis (ususally 1-2-3 or even 1-2-3-4 is required)
-
You keep thinking that.
I will keep buying an airforce.
-
Also, in nearly every case…
The games I lose are games where I lose my AF, or a large portion of it, early in the game. -
Russia needs planes because it gives them punch on territory trading without incredible risk. Without planes you need to bring Artillery or Armor along and risk them to counter attack. Germany can afford this, Russia cannot. Then agian, Germany starts with 300% the air force of Russia too. Go figure?
-
I misspoke myself… Russia definitely needs planes as well. I should have said:
Purchasing planes is absolutely crucial for every nation’s success, with the possible exception of Russia. Russia can hardly afford to buy new ones until things are going very well for it, and she must use her existing planes to great effect as explained above, and depend on the airforces of her allies to assist in defense.
~Josh
-
–
-
I was thinking about this and it occured to me that there really isnt any reason to keep up an Air Force. Ground troops take land, Navys protect and destroy transports and thus supply lines, but planes dont seem to do much of anything that realy changes the outcome of the game. They are really good at sinking subs but beyond that…well they just seem like a luxury buy.
Your thoughts?
Fighters let you take land without committing forces.
Fighters have great range, allowing them to pose a viable threat to a wide range of territories.
Fighters are very cost-efficient when compared against naval units, and have the added flexibility of being able to target ground units.
Fighters are gr8.
-
Read my German strategy, it does work (if Japan does he´s job)
-
@Nix:
Read my German strategy, it does work (if Japan does he´s job)
There’s much to be said for an intensive ground unit Fortress Europe for Germany.
KGF is quite prevelant, mainly because it is fairly easy to implement and it works well.
Given this fact, which leads to Japan being given the job of winning the war for the axis, then a turtle shell germany can work.
The key is what does Germany trade it’s airforce for…? It has to be worth it.
-
@ncscswitch:
Actually aircraft are CRITICAL to Russia, perhaps more critical than to any other nation.
Those FIGs provide incredible anchors for INF stacks, allow for improved territory trading with Germany, and most importantly massed FIGs make Moscow nearly impossible to crack with even a 1-2 punch from the Axis (ususally 1-2-3 or even 1-2-3-4 is required)
What he said and
@Baghdaddy:You keep thinking that.
I will keep buying an airforce.
What he said…
I think it is a deleted scene in We Were Soldiers Once and Young (The Mel Gibson Nam film) Mel’s character is looking at piles of enemy corpses just killed by an airstrike and says, “That is a beautiful thing.” Sam Shepard’s character says, “Air support sir?”
If you think that aircraft aren’t important look at the current armed services and tell me which one doesn’t use something that flys. Here’s to the pilots.
-
KGF is prevelent because just about anyone with average dice results can win it, assuming no bid.
KJF is easier, but it takes intelligence and cunning to pull it off and a bad round of dice in the first few rounds can severely kill you.
Anyway, Germany and Japan are probably the two nations that do not need fighters. There are policies that state that 1 fighter a round for each nation for 6 rounds is a good policy, but I’ve implemented it twice and seen no real improvement, in one case I saw a lack of improvement, rather a detriment. The other I still won, but I did it in Round 15 instead of Round 10.
Russia needs a 3rd plane, IMHO, and should buy it prior to Round 3.
England needs a plane every other round if at all possible.
America should be getting a plane a round until she has 6 fighters. The mobility alone is worth it, and let’s face it, if you can afford 6 Infantry, 4 Artillery and 1 Fighter a round, filling 5 transports easily, why not?
-
KGF is prevelent because just about anyone with average dice results can win it, assuming no bid.
KJF is easier, but it takes intelligence and cunning to pull it off and a bad round of dice in the first few rounds can severely kill you.
Hm. I wonder what Jennifer plays. Could it be . . . KJF?!! I sadly admit that I am one of the “prevalent”. Instead of being very intelligent and cunning (like American Civil War general Robert E. Lee), I will be very plebian (like American Civil War general Ulysses Grant).
Anyway, Germany and Japan are probably the two nations that do not need fighters.
wat?!heresy!
There are policies that state that 1 fighter a round for each nation for 6 rounds is a good policy, but I’ve implemented it twice and seen no real improvement, in one case I saw a lack of improvement, rather a detriment. The other I still won, but I did it in Round 15 instead of Round 10.
There should be no “1 fighter a round” policy. Things that say “Ignore your opponent and charge foolhardily ahead with one fixed strategy, regardless of what your opponent does” are things that should be left alone in a corner to die an unmourned death. UNLESS you are playing against me, in which I heartily recommend those things.
Russia needs a 3rd plane, IMHO, and should buy it prior to Round 3.
agh! the heresy!
England needs a plane every other round if at all possible.
MORE heresy!
America should be getting a plane a round until she has 6 fighters. The mobility alone is worth it, and let’s face it, if you can afford 6 Infantry, 4 Artillery and 1 Fighter a round, filling 5 transports easily, why not?
Burn the heretic! Burn!
Of course, you realize that I am saying this is heresy from a KGF point of view . . . KJF requires a lot of Allied fighters.
But saying that Russia needs fighters, that the Axis don’t need fighters . . . that is quite bold.
(cough CRAZY cough)
Of course, the crazy ones are always much smexier.
-
I should clarify, Germany and Japan do not need to BUY fighters, as they start with 6 already. I’m not saying they should feel free to leave them where enemy infantry can destroy them. :P
And yes, there are times I use KJF. No one is ever ready for it and almost no one can defend against it because they are neither ready for it nor experienced in dealing iwth it. Some have said it is very easy to defend against, and I’m sure when the game was new it was, since no one knew how to implement it either. But times have changed and it has become a very viable and logical strategy. In fact, I would actually recommend this as a route for first time players of Axis and Allies because of the simplicity of hitting Japan first and then hitting Germany. It is much more dynamic to hit Germany.
For instance: KJF: You take islands with England and America and then take the mainland with England. Russia stalls Germany.
KGF: You invade W. Europe OR you land in N. Europe to support Russia OR you walk through Africa OR you combine two of those avenues.
1 method vs 4 methods. Which is an easier concept for a beginner to understand?
Likewise, just for the shear desire to have a different game, KJF is fun! I mean, who wouldn’t have fun actually buying a battleship for once! Who wouldn’t have fun watching a combined value of 600 IPCs sink to the bottom of the board in a single engagement!
-
Is it possible to find all that excitement on YouTube? Maybe someone can tape their game and show that happening!
“Oh my look, the Yamato and all her escorts just sunk to the bottom of the paper floor. Hurray!”
-
I believe the History Channel did that, you know, Taffy 7 vs the Japanese Center Force?
heheh.
Seriously, next time I promise to tape it. I might even play at GenCon and see if I can foster it. Though, you’d have to ask JSP how much he enjoyed it when my Japanese fleet obliterated his combined allied fleet. Though he won the game, I most decidedly won the engagement!
-
@ncscswitch:
Actually aircraft are CRITICAL to Russia, perhaps more critical than to any other nation.
Those FIGs provide incredible anchors for INF stacks, allow for improved territory trading with Germany, and most importantly massed FIGs make Moscow nearly impossible to crack with even a 1-2 punch from the Axis (ususally 1-2-3 or even 1-2-3-4 is required)
What he said and
@Baghdaddy:You keep thinking that.
I will keep buying an airforce.
What he said…
I think it is a deleted scene in We Were Soldiers Once and Young (The Mel Gibson Nam film) Mel’s character is looking at piles of enemy corpses just killed by an airstrike and says, “That is a beautiful thing.” Sam Shepard’s character says, “Air support sir?”
If you think that aircraft aren’t important look at the current armed services and tell me which one doesn’t use something that flys. Here’s to the pilots.
In real wars yes. In fact Disney did a feature during WWII, Called Victory through Air Power. In the game it doesn’t seem so important.
At least I didn’t think so before. In light of what has been said in this thread I must change my mind. Thats the whole reason I posted the thread in the first place.
-
If you want the REAL poop on WWII airpower, may I recomend Airwar by Edward Jablonski. It was not only required reading at USAFA, but was ISSUED to me on my first day (right after my copy of Contrails, the Cadet knowledge text…)
-
@ncscswitch:
If you want the REAL poop …
I have two young boys, I don’t need anymore real poop, sham-poop is good enough. (aka shampoo, get it?)
Suggested Topics
