2nd NO for Russia

@Gamerman01:

Getting the money when taking a capital is as old as A&A itself, so what, about 35 years?

Never a good reason if it’s the only reason.

Very nice idea with the telegrams and stuff.

While reading the german ones, I’ve seen some grammar/wording errors in the german NO cards. Don’t know if someone mind them, but some corrections:

Geheimdienstbericht von der vom Chef Leiter der Sicherheitspolizei und des SD
(even though the german intelligence was called “Abwehr” I think)

Schnellbrief Telegramm

An der den Obersten Befehlshaber der deutschen Truppen

Betrifft: Betreff:

This looks like a lot of work  :lol:

I think there are 8 for each nation. (except china)

@Commando:

@ghr2:

@Commando:

@ghr2:

Brando, why would you leave 1 inf in each territory?  The only ones that matter are rostov and Baltic States.  You will lose 6 ipcs in units for not much gain in epl/bess.

I leave 1 Inf in each territory, so the Axis/enemy can’t just walk in. Inf have a 33% chance of a hit. Prevents a country from just taking a territory w/1 Inf. Usually the attacking country has to attack w/2 ground units, just in case your Inf gets a hit. Also prevents the enemy from sending just one ground unit on a long walk across your territories(i.e. when Japan starts marching across the Soviet Far East). I don’t always do this. Like in China, I consolidate the Chinese Inf whenever possible. But in Russia, I always try to leave at least 1 Inf in each territory. One thing to point out, I don’t leave 1 Inf in each territory, unless the enemy has a chance to take that territory.

Because they only have a 33% chance to hit, I would not want to risk giving away nearly free infantry kills to Germany unless they are defending something valuable.  Each infantry you put in his way is 1 less body defending something critical for a 33% chance to kill 1 thing.

It’s not just a 33% chance of killing something. It’s making the enemy commit more than 1 Inf/1 ground unit to take the territory How would this hurt a country like germany that will have mechs constantly reinforcing and the positioning does not screw him?. Maybe you didn’t read my entire post. Again, I don’t always leave 1 Inf behind in each territory(i.e. China and other territories) Japan can just send 1 inf and air, it really won’t hurt him if he wants to.. However, leaving 1 Inf behind on such things as islands, even 1 IPC islands. Your enemy would most likely have to commit at least 2 ground units to take the islandIt depends on the value of the island and the likelihood he/she would go for it.. Therefore, forcing your opponent to commit more resources to take territories and have less units to use elsewhere. I understand what you mean, but this is also a game of economics and efficiency.  If your opponent does not need to go for it, or is not even affected by it, the one infantry won’t be an issue.Like I said in my explanation, Soviet Far East is a good example. There are 13 IPC’s from Soviet Far East to Vologda/Samara. If your strategy is to leave these unguarded for Japan to just take w/1 Inf, then go for it. In my opinion, over the 26 years I’ve played A&A, it’s the wrong stategySince russia can easily stop japan from taking it unless Japan commits more to the front, it really is not an issue.  Also, with mongolia, it won’t be unguarded.

@AndrewAAGamer:

Our gaming group has come to the conclusion that some bid is needed to balance the game for the Allies.  In reading through the posts it seems to me that the general consensus is that the Allies need a bid of about 9-12.

My questions are:

Is a bid of 9-12 the current and reasonable amount?  As we will not want to bid for a particular side, we will set a certain bid point for each game and then let people choose which side they want to be as some Players enjoy playing particular Powers.  So what is a fair bid?

My group usually goes 10-15, some where in the ball park of 8 to 14 is what everyone does.

Is this bid added as starting income to be spent on Turn 1?

What Siparo said.

Is this bid added as units and money such as the Revised FIDA bid?

Never played revised, and what is FIDA?  Another government agency?

Is this bid added as units on the board with remainders as starting money?

Siparo doesn’t do it, but my group allows it.

For any units placed on the board are there any restrictions?  For example:
     a) Must have a unit already in the territory / sea zone?
     b) May not place more than X number of units?

My group has 3 rules:
1.  Must be one unit per territory/seazone.
2.  Can only be placed in a territory/seazone where you already have units occupying it.
3.  Can only be a unit that power has access to (china can be inf and art only).

I would appreciate your kind thoughts and comments.  Thank you…

or you could use Phillapenes might work if us will let you

Turn 3 Alpha+2, Turn 2 OOB

@13thguardsriflediv:

@The:

This rule is heavily one sided towards the allies.

Japan doesn’t want to attack Russia because of the 12 ipc given away which will help Germany and if Japan doesn’y attack Russia it means more units can be spent on the German front. I believe that for this to favour the axis Japan has to commit huge forces to the war against Russia leaving it open to attacks from the US and Uk i prefered the old rule

Finally a change by Larry tilted towards the allies. All I saw so far were extra planes for Germany, more land units for Japan, more fleet for Italy etc…

A good rule, because Germany shouldn’t be able to waltz into Moscow without serious effort with help from Italy). Some seem to want a game where Germany can boogie into London on turn 2 and then jive into Moscow on turn 5.

Germany should meet some resistance but I think the Ipc bonus should be smaller maybe 6 so it is 2 inf or 1 arm rather than 4 inf or 2 arm. Italy was also not needed for attacking Russia in the real war and Germany were eventually driven back. However Italy would need to give a few troops. It shouldn’t be major support but a few troops here and there. Italy was used for support along the med.