Posts made by Novosibirsk

Exacta-mundo NC!

Instead of all bombing done by one power, divert the cost across multiple powers (quite historic if you ask me). Even a sassy player like myself would consider a russian bomber if the cash flow is there.

If you get real crazy with NA’s…… lend lease can make this pipe dream(crack pipe off course) a reality. And forget about superfortresses - they wreck Germany every time.

But if and when the zitties start hitting (non-NA games), it is a large loss to the allies. Law of averages will eventually shoot down bombers as you throw enough of them at Gerry. The outcome from this is determined by how well you spent your disposable income after Bomber purchases. In all actuality, it would have to be a KGF tactic. Bring the entire US fleet around to the Atlantic, along with the latecoming British aussie fleet, and as they slowly feed into the game, you may be able to offset the german naval onslaught. I get the impression that if the allies do not feed all existing forces into Europe, Germany can offset some of the IPC loss with gains in Africa / Mid East / Russia combo and also the possibilty of an early and undeterred naval consolidation.

In conclusion,

good luck!

NewPaintbrush

^^ can we get the condensed version of that post ^^

Sheesh  :-D :-) :|  :-( :-P :evil:

Allies -

fighter on AC in pearl
extra tranny for UK - where ever

Axis -

I like Lybia idea - stock it
Tranny for Med fleet
3 art for Norway - they’ll come out firing 6 - twos plus whatever planes you throw for support
4 Inf for Ukraine - a strong counter attack on west russian stack

What is preventing this program from developing the technology to simply allow two players to simultaneously play from their homes?

I would figure the hard part is already done with the layout, programming and graphics.

The fact of the matter is that having a computer program as opposed to live play really cuts down on the time it takes to finish a game.
ie no set up, fumbling of pieces, searching for chips, etc.

PS ––> Thanks to everybody for their input on this subject

PPS --> Can’t the designers of the program make the computer any smarter?

88 -

Completely understandable to sidestep the multitude of emails, but……

Doesn’t the game require both competitors to be present(live) for decisions like:

1- Which casualties to dismiss first
2- Which countries casualties are dismissed first in multi-nationally occupied territories
3- anyhting else that i would be overlooking

also,
I don’t think i understand the principals of how two people play this game.
-How do both players see the same gameboard?
-What information is emailed, and in what form?

Excuse the barrage of questions, i’m just having a hard time putting it all together.

88 – thanks, that is exactly something i am looking for.

Is this what people use to play each other here?

Can I play anyone who downloads it, or do both computers have to be networked?

Can you alter rules, adjust AI difficulties, include bids and/or NA’s?

Thanks again

Is that it everyone?

PBEM and Forum???

Which is better?

Which is quicker?

Which do you like and why?

Can anyone

1- explain in detail….

2- list and link me to…

[or]

3- direct me to a thread containing….

All Possible Options for playing A&A (any) whether it be live, PBEM, computer programs, games, tournaments, ETC.

Any inclusive info on preferences, supplies, durations of gameplay, reccomendations, clubs, costs, ETC. would be appreciated

i am interested in raising my gameplay from 0 games a month to about 2-3 games a month.  :wink: :wink:

:-D TY  :-D

I believe you were very close with theÂ

Magic Gnomes

 comment.

seriously….  :mrgreen:

Curious if AAR was ever turned into a video game like the original version AA had with ???Hasbro???

Or any various versions besides email.

Systems that allow play with a computer.

If they moved their fleet off the coast of libia then moving there with your US forces is basiclay commiting suicide with them. If they put their fighters at a good spot and their sub survived ( pretty likely ) they can do that and still combine most of their fleet at G2.

Â

Humor me for a moment and let me ask, how many fighters does Gerry need to take out 4 TRN, 1 DD and 1 BB (the allied fleet)?  All of those planes would also have to be in Lybia and/or WE if they are to attack the Lybian SZ (sorry no gameboard). Any German forces in Lybia would be crushed from the back to back amphibious invasions, right? Regarding the necessary 5-7 plane Luftwaffe in WE, some of them would have to have flown straight over and missed critcal battles in Russia. In order for the German fleet to combine on G2, then the German BB and TRN can not attack the Allied fleet and still move after.

I think the Allies welcome this attack from Germany on their fleet. Worst case scenario…… the allies lose their fleet but have a pod of landlocked troops in Africa and ready for a back-door reclaim of Africa.

Furthermore, the attack has most likey claimed some, most or (most likely) all of the luftwaffe.

If the Germans just simply attack (fleet and all) and not go for the combination of their fleet, then they stand a better chance of winning the battle in strength, however it brings the german fleet into unwelcome waters that subject it to attack from allied planes. Thats only if it can get there, when it could most likely be docked off the coast of AES where many Gerry players take it G1.

I stand behind playing India out, and not bailing. I also believe an Allied assault on Africa via the Atlantic is enough to hastle the Axis Powers long enough.

Very surprised most of you did not comment on this.

Cut off germany and Africa has the best chances of survival.

Did the UK not return to Africa via the European theater?

Did the US not land in Africa US 1 via the Atlantic Ocean?

I don’t understand how Africa became such a clean sweep. Perhaps your allied fleet in the Atlantic was not focusing on the Battle for the Med Sea. If you want to be a thorn in Germany’s side, you cut them off from Africa, logistically speaking. And this Allied push from the Atlantic allows the Forces in the Mid East/India to hassle the Japs long enough for the Allies to catch up, and take control through attrition.

I see you wrote “tried” this tactic, i just don’t understand how you let the Axis powers steam roll Africa together. If they are going to focus their fleets and troops there, then you must do the same, right?

either way, the territory gets 4 more INF instantly. If a russian territory is attacked before a japanese territory is attacked (by russian troops) then that russian territory gets 4 INF. very simple. Either Avid is not “johnny on the spot” describing things, or I can’t make sense of what he is describing. Either way, my head hurts.  :-(

Heres how it unfolds……

" okay, I got 4 ones - 2 twos - a three - and 4 fours. And you got 6 dueces."  Â

“WHOA whoa whoa … first I got two zitties at your bombers.”

“oh yeah……SH%^$#…miss em…miss em!!!”

I believe the game is over when Japan loses its fleet. It is cut off from the mainland, and soon after it is surrounded.  It cannot rebuild ships and loses its islands and income. Its remaining land units are mopped up. I am an advocate for building as many ships as possible for the chewer. It strengthens the depth of the fleet, and allows the fleet to split into smaller task forces when “Opportunity presents itself” as a previous poster mentioned.

You could argue the fact of having 2 IC’s on Asia’s mainland, which should produce enough units to steamroll the allies (accompanied by your initial fleets’ amphibious landings which soon lose their convenience logistically). Adding to this dilemma for the Allies is the fact they need a couple turns to develop and get into the war. So the two IC’s would have to come early.

Flawing this 2 IC Japanese assult are two critical things:

1- These IC’s become targets. By J3 you have them, and by US 3 they should be knocking on the door.

2- All of Japan’s income is spent on units for the mainland. That means extreme minimal purchases for the Japanese Navy, and a weak fleet is a dead fleet for the Japanese. They need to add to the fleet to keep pace with two opposing powers who continue to jockey for the Navy title. So when that big fleet engagement finally happens (and it can sometimes take a while), if Japan does not prevail, then it loses the war.

I do like the Manchuria IC. It seems very safe, and if the homeland is ever threatened, flop the navy right in there to protect both IC’s.

risky but new and refreshing.

Gotta pass the time somehow

That question kinda hurt my head to read.

:mrgreen:

Good Things

The worst invention in my opinion ever invented would be Video games. Talk about a waste of time and money for kids. About 99.5% of all video games may bring joy, but do nothing for the people plying them. They spend hundreds of hours playing them only to end up with NOTHING in the end. Nothing!

Not to mention it is the universal agreement between these companies to continue upgrading as fast as they can to get new systems to the market. It’s like they can’t wait to make these machines obsolete and squeeze another 300-400 bucks outta some family.

Oh, ……and I think Nuclear Weapons is a dumb invention also. I see many people already said this one. Good for all of you.  :-D