@SS-GEN

Pics and winner list
http://www.headlesshorseman2.com/gen-con.html

@seancb said in The cheezy retreat from Yugoslavia to Romania on G2:

if you all think this is a good thing go ahead. we dont allow cheeze in our games. the maximum movement they have is 2. I certainly wish a new “official” rule addendum would fix this. we just dont allow crap like that
as such i choose not to play with folks that think this kind of stuff is OK

It is a valid tactic since Classic. There won’t be any official rule addendum coming. And I dont agree with your assertion that people playing by the actual rules are somehow cheating or playing unfairly.

@taamvan said in Gen Con 2019 (Aug. 1-4):

Zombie First Day are sold out I bought in Friday 1400H. 4 day Badges are likely to sell out as the total attendee cap has been reached as a practical matter ~62000

Yeah, they sold out 2 years ago too. I got the “near sellout” email from gencon.

I hope to see many of you at Gencon.

@taamvan

Perhaps at Gencon then. Hope there is one.

Triple A has had time to work out bugs/kinks, as well as having all game versions.

To me, the # of games available + the AI are most important.

@surfer

London is toast is this scenario. The allies are toast too, because after the Germans do drop transports the Japanese will take the mic you built for them. The USA will have to try to save London which is great for the Japanese.

I’m not saying a middle earth strategy cant work but this is far too aggressive. And you are not utilizing the infrastructure you already have in SA which you can transport up to the middle east.

I’m not a fan of sea lion but I would happily do so if I saw you making those purchases.

@thedesertfox said in UK Strategy -"Middle Earth":

@squirecam

Pretty much. I dont think it gets simpler than that. Either Axis power has the ability to make the US pay consequentially for choosing one side of the board over the other.

I stated earlier that having assumed Japan takes Calcutta as well as the other cities of course, all that’s left is taking Honolulu or Sydney to which the Americans by GHG’s standard will have been building mostly everything in the Atlantic. yes I know he says to also shuck units back and forward into Hawaii but that’s what the Pearl Harbor attack is for.

You don’t even need to attack. Just build for a J2 attack and stack everything in Carolines that can reach. USA cant stack Hawaii because they will get destroyed. If USA doesnt build in the Pacific they get destroyed J2 or J3.

Just eliminate this whole floating bridge stuff right from the get go.

@jonahawesome said in Global war 1940:

I just started playing Axis and allies 1940 with 6 peoples . Where do I start implementing the more complicated rules of the game and house rules after we got the basics down like phases/ fighting units

I would avoid making any house rules until your group is familiar with the base game and how it plays.

@andrewaagamer said in Axis are underpowered.:

@squirecam

I would agree if the US is not fighting in the Atlantic with anything more than a token force AND there is only a $20 range bid that the Med is up for grabs.

My question is, for OOB, why in the world would anyone accept a $20 range bid? Do these tournaments you play at GenCon have different victory conditions than normal? Are they timed games? I have heard of that but having never played at one my personal experience is nil.

So actually the current tournament uses the 1942 setup, so that all countries start at war. Due to the limited time frame games must end at 10 hrs or so.

But before that setup people played with a bid in the 20s. You do not have time to take 30 minutes to run simulations on the best moves. You cannot use online battle calculators. You need to know what to do beforehand and play more with your gut then an odds calculation. As the games are at risk of mistakes, you really dont need a 60 bid. Moreover, bids are not limited to one unit per territory.

With the 42 setup, the axis win if they have 125 ipc at the end of the game. No bonus income counts. If they dont, they need 6 VC in the pacific. Europe VC win isnt happening. Otherwise the allies win.

@marshmallowofwar said in Axis are underpowered.:

@squirecam said in Axis are underpowered.:

You can pressure the middle east as well if you build a german fleet to aid Italy. You dont have to play out Moscow or bust every game.

In the scenario you’re describing you’re either splitting your forces, which means Russia is on definitive seek and destroy (and possibly even pushing you back), or you’re concentrating in the north, which means there is no pressure on the Middle East until several turns after you build this second fleet.

Assuming you build your fleet in Southern France, you need several turns to build a fleet that can survive if the UK is doing alright and essentially in control of the Med. Your Med fleet depends on the Italians to survive unless you’re spending a lot of money (more not spent on ground troops). If there is any UK or US air presence, your fleet will be blown out of the water as soon as you start building it without an Italian navy or air cover (which you have to build and anchor fighters there – more forces NOT helping you in Russia).

Of course, you might be trying to move your Baltic fleet to the Med. That is several turns of concerted movement through a hostile Atlantic and you are depending on Italian control of Strait of Gibraltar.

And once again, those ships do not occupy territories – they don’t help your economy directly. They are not “boots on the ground”.

I 100% agree with you that you don’t have to “Moscow or bust” every game, but you DO need to shut down the Russian army in a way that makes it totally defensive. That takes a LOT of ground troops and planes.

@snpic said in Axis are underpowered.:

@marshmallowofwar thank you for your advice, I will try it on tripleA and tell you what I think.
But I think that there’s a problem because if you take all of Russia you still need another victory city.

That’s true, but it’s rarely an issue. Your practical choice for VC is now Cairo or London. If things have been going well-ish for the Axis in the Med at this point but Egypt still holds out, there’s an excellent chance that the UK player has short-changed the spending on UK defenses. NOW you can build your fleet and air force while you bolster your Western defenses and consolidate Russian territories that you haven’t been able to conquer yet. A late Sea Lion is a beautiful thing (for the Axis).

On the other hand, if Egypt can be destroyed by the forces you currently have at hand (and can produce and deliver in a timely manner), you can go for Egypt.

Marsh

I’m not necessarily concentrating anywhere. I’m going where there is opportunity. The first build is ac + fleet, either 2 transports or des + sub. Then I see what the allies do. Do they attack Taranto. What does the US do in the Pacific (as my fleet is not attacking J1 but stationed in Carolines.) Do they go all Atlantic or pacific or split. What and where does Uk build.

This provides a multitude of options. But I have southern France taken by Germany to allow for med support. I have transports for shipping to Leningrad. In short I have infrastructure purchased G1 and G2 that allow me to put pressure potentially everywhere before US is brought in J3.

The Russian territories are worth 1 or 2 to the axis except for Leningrad. The med is worth +15 to +20 for the axis if you can get four bonuses. And you can do both at the same time. Yes, you aren’t in Stalingrad G6. But you don’t need to be.

@SuperbattleshipYamato said in USA Crush-Turtle or Die:

@squirecam

Changed British bid a bit. If you have any objections, let me know and I’ll redo the turn.

2024-6-3-world-war-ii-global-1940-2nd-edition.tsvg

Also, do you intend for us to just play side by side, or do you want me to also do the Axis turns following your instructions? Thank you!

Well I wont play a whole game but I can playtest for a few rounds. This would be my response as Italy.
2024-6-3-world-war-ii-global-1940-2nd-edition.tsvg

@8d88 said in Global 1942 Scenario by Larry Harris:

@siparo does anyone know know what the standard bid is towards the Axis in this game?? Looking to test it out with a group for the first time and my initial impression is that it is heavily weighted towards the allies, although keeping Japan in check is going to be quite challenging.

6-7 in Axis favor.

@SuperbattleshipYamato

I’d like you to try things my way for comparison. If the russians stack Amur, you attack them. So dont stack.

Take the fleet with 3 full carriers to Caroline Islands. Take and drop 1 transport load into Kwangsi (from Japan). Take SFE (Okinawa transport). Take the 4 china territories with as much airforce help as you can. Leave 5 planes in Japan (3 on island, 2 on carriers). Rest of planes (5) go to Kiangsi with 2 bombers 2 fighters and 1 tac to Kwangsi. Since Amur isnt stacked you can bring the Manchurian troops over and Korea ones to Manchuria, and drop troops into Korea (Formosa transport). Make sure the mech is in Anhwe for a potential Yunnan J2.

If UK kills the lone transport, you attack them alone and dont declare on the US. If China tries to load Yunnan, you can hit it.

This should help mitigate your China situation while leaving it ambiguous as to what Japan is actually doing. (See below for how I envisioned it before Allies go).

2024-6-3-World-War-II-Global-1940-2nd-Edition.tsvg

@SuperbattleshipYamato said in USA Crush-Turtle or Die:

@squirecam

2024-5-31-World-War-II-Pacific-1940-2nd-Edition Human.tsvg

Played another game. Both sides made mistakes, though I think the Allies made more egregious ones. That being said, I will admit your strategy was marginally beneficial to Japan. However, I’m not sure when and where in the game could Japan have refocussed their sights on Australia and the South Pacific to adapt to America’s growing capabilities. They were in a position where moving their forces would’ve taken far too long for little benefit.

Bottom line is, though, in 3 games played, all 3 have the Axis set to lose.

I think the US must be left alone as long as possible before the war starts and both sides are in position, if possible, to execute the strategy.

@SuperbattleshipYamato said in [USA Crush-Turtle or Die]

Sorry about that.

No problem. I just wanted an accurate test.

As to pacific only, US is limited to 17 dollars and there are no russians holding manchuria back. So that changes alot.

@SuperbattleshipYamato said in USA Crush-Turtle or Die:

@squirecam

Test Game France Turn Complete.tsvg

Redid it. I would like to continue playing it out.

So at this point I would break off the US attack in the atlantic and just do a sea lion. I’d kill the 3 dd with fleet and 3 air and in london You only have 3 infantry, 4 aa and a bomber. None of the other british units can get back. I can have 25 units for a G3 attack. The odds of a london attack succeeding according to the calc are at 100%.

I’d move a few tanks back to make sure I had 20 units and buy 2 inf and 9 transports. But this game wont be testing a US triple attack anymore, which was the purpose.

If we are to play this out, the game should be restarted from the beginning. But before you do, I’d like to know the purpose of why you bought 3 DD and moved the units away from London.

Also, when you test, you have to play it straight. As an example, I did say not to scramble into Taranto. But you only brought units that would have a 1% chance of winning if a scramble had occurred. You cant do that. That is favoring the allies. You have to bring sufficient forces to prevent a reasonable scramble. Otherwise you arent testing it properly.

@SuperbattleshipYamato said in USA Crush-Turtle or Die:

@squirecam

I apologize if my gameplay wasn’t top notch, I’ve only ever played Balanced Mod once in my life (against myself on TripleA).

Test Game France Turn Complete.tsvg

Let me know if you’re dissatisfied with how I played the Italian turn.

So the issue here is that we are “trying” to get the USA. Having Italy move the other direction is counter productive to that end. Italy should be taking Gibraltar in that case, not Greece. In which case, they would buy another transport, and not a fighter. If we are to continue testing, I think we need to redo Italy. I just assumed you would head West to follow the strategy, so sorry if I was unclear.

But as it stands, I see that my changes have put the axis in a better spot for J2. USA collected 20 dollars less. Japan has 7 more and can buy a carrier/4 transports rather than 3. Japan is in a better economic position for attacking the USA than in the original J1 attack.

Do you agree? If so, that was all I was trying to establish. That not going on J1 does not prohibit the strategy. Its actually better NOT to attack as USA is far weaker than it would otherwise be.

If we are continuing, move Italy west in Africa. Take Gibraltar. Take Tunisia. Move the troops in Northern Italy East and the troops in Southern Italy north. Albania troops also east. Germany will take Greece. Buy 1 transport, save the rest.

Also, just FYI, you should have retreated the German BB from 111. Doing so would have healed it and Germany would have it for later use. If you play this strategy, you should retreat. Let the British BB flee damaged. Its no biggie as this is just a test and the purpose was to show Japan was in a stronger position without attacking.

@SuperbattleshipYamato said in USA Crush-Turtle or Die:

@squirecam

Obviously I’ll send a turn by the other Allies later, but I thought it would be helpful to show you the result so far (it would also give you the chance to correct any movements since some parts, such as orders for the Japanese forces on the mainland, particularly the Kwantung and Korea Armies, weren’t written and I wasn’t sure what to do):

Test Game Japan Turn Complete.tsvg

Also at the end of all of it there are 9 planes in Japan, not 8 (there’s 6 in the Hawaii sea zone and 2 in sea zone 6).

So I would have moved the Korea units up into manchuria and unloaded into Korea with the transports.

@SuperbattleshipYamato

I’ll review.

@SuperbattleshipYamato said in USA Crush-Turtle or Die:

@squirecam

Then what you’re proposing is a different strategy with completely different parameters and goals than the original one posted at the beginning. While that’s perfectly fine, you’ll have to admit that this is the case and that what you propose may not necessarily work in the parameters and goals in the original post.

That being said, I’m happy to test it out. I’ll tell you my moves in a moment.

So I never claimed that my strategy was designed to take USA. I specifically said it wasnt. What I said was you can still execute the original strategy if you dont attack J1. Staging in Hawaii does allow you to do that. USA cant block and cannot stack there or it is destroyed.

You are not in any worse position than if you attacked J1. Moreover since USA is limited to 3 units, you wont have a large force of screening subs and destroyers.

You can simply do what Germany and Italy did in your game if you like. But if you want to follow the original script, then I suggest that you buy 2 carriers on J2, and then attack hawaii. You will see you are really in no worse of a position, and in a better position in alot of ways.