Topics created by Perry

the discussion has been 42, but has gone into strategy.

When AA50 first came out, 41 was new and unbroken ground.  Now that some time has passed, I think 42 is still the Axis and Allies setup to play, only with bigger board!  The addition of Italy for a 3 vs 3 game makes it balanced.  Short games still favor Axis and long games still favor Allies.  It’s how it should be.

Can’t wait for G40!!!

Keep in mind that SUM can be used for naval and acft builds…. no transports needed.

:-)

I joined just to post on the new faction specific dice for Italy and China by Field Marshal Games  :-D

If Italy can take Africa for IPCs and keep its fleet intact for 4-5 turns Italy can start doing good.  One game Germany launched an unsucssesful invasion of UK.  Then Italy came out of nowhere and took the UK with one tank left and the US fleet was 3 sz away.  Game ending move.  Italy has potential.

ok, so no change from revised then. thx.

A44bigdog and Jennifer are correct.  Destroying a defenseless transport is a combat action.  It requires a dedicated battle to accomplish it, so all combat movement must be completed before doing so.

Q. On page 29 it says that your aircraft may hit enemy submarines if you have a destroyer in the sea zone, but it doesn’t say anywhere in the rules that aircraft can’t hit submarines without a destroyer present. Do you always need a destroyer in a battle in order for your air units to hit enemy subs?
A. Yes. Air units can only hit subs if there is a friendly destroyer on the battle board, otherwise hits made by air units must be applied to units other than submarines. If you’re the attacker, destroyers in the same sea zone belonging to your ally don’t count, since they’re not involved in the battle.

THX Kriegshund, you are right!

I apologize to all readers of my previous posts for having answered without this important information.

In this case the subs would sink the transport without interference of the fighters.

@templeton:

… but there were nearly 100 players. (http://www.jimwallman.org.uk/tlw/index.htm) That way you simulate the reality of missinterpreted orders, bad briefings…

This looked like an amazing simulation. I can’t imagine having conflicting political and military objectives along with poor communication. What wonderful chaos that must have created. Were any of the German Generals shot for not following orders?

@templeton:

I like to try and do this for Axis and Allies, and hope to get 12 people playing in the new year. This way you can have Japanese Army and Japanese Navy and make them argue over strategy. Ditto the US are split into ETO and PTO - that way you don’t get such a strong KGF, as the other player wants to follow KJF.

Keep us posted on this one. It has some real interesting potential – I’d like to try and get this working with our local gaming group. We can usually muster 10 people or so once a month and get 2 boards going at once so combining it to one group wouldn’t be too far of a stretch.

What kind of white “control” team do you need to pull this off, and how to you keep the dialectic tension at a high level within the teams?

@Cmdr:

An all out attack on Japan’s worked more often. (Russia holds the front against Germany and stacks up to help with China/holding Japan back while England puts down ICs in Africa/Asia Minor and America blitzes in.)

Maybe this is why Japan is so strong?

Another thought would be about which is going to be easier to replace for you country.  Subs are great fodder and replacing them is easier on the pocketbook than FIG’s or CV’s, and especially if you are Japan.  US can afford to usually replace that kind of loss, but most other countries can’t.

For 72 IPC’s, I’d go with a mix like ones mentioned earlier, with DD’s, CV’s (+FIG) & SS’s.  If split over a couple rounds, maybe SS/DD first in case of early strike

LHTR fixes some issues with box rules.  You can find the rules, and a discussion about them, on Larry’s site.

quite simply, transports have to be defended, and the allies can put have in range alot of threatening airpower before japan’s second turn…  and every ship that’s left defending them reduces your ability to cheaply destroy the various allied fleets that might be making a mess in the pacific on turn one.

Other than that, the additional transports allow for 6 units a turn, similarly to the IC’s.  The additional transports give you the ability to grab guys more quickly from the islands, as well as the ability to push on india and africa faster and harder.  But each of these require some tradeoffs (ideally, mass troops in manchuria, but if india looms you may have to deal with that, slowing the flow of 6 units/per turn.

transports assuming a factory build later also ends up reducing the flow of fast moving armor, if that’s necessary.

Don’t get me wrong, i’m a big fan of transports, but they have their drawbacks too.

I got to say that the introduction of the National Objectives concept, was a stroke of genius imho.
Now, the game, through the NO Bonus Incentives, push the players towards their historical aims.

Anyhow, as with any setup, I think that even with the NO setup, AA50 might go stale over time.
Also, not ALL historical strategies are being encouraged by the OOB NOs. What about the German Sub strat, for example? It is not shown in any NOs at least.

Therefore, I thought of the Variable NO concept. It runs like this :

We create a list of, say, 5-10 NO’s per Nation (not possible to create even THAT many for a nation like China, for example). Before the game starts, every nation rolls randomly to see what NO’s they get.

1 NO: China
2 NO’s each: Italy and Soviet Union
3 NO’s each: Germany, Japan, UK and US

I like the thought of China having their own NO/NOs, but of course, they could be incorporated into the US one.

What’s your thought? Or maybe you got some NO’s of your own?

@axis_roll:

Don’t get me wrong, I like to KJF, it’s more fun, since it IS harder to execute.  I like a challenge.  Probably why I like to play the Axis… they’re the underdog.

So KJF is an underdog type of allied strategy.   :wink:

KJF is harder of master, not of execute. When you master KJF, it’s more powerful than a mastered KGF. First, because very few people know how counter KJF and many start to do strange things. Second, because it’s easier for axis reach economic parity in KGF than in KGF. Third, for league games, I found it’s easier reach 9 VCs with KJF (Manila, Shangai, Paris). Fourth, a KGF strat let Japan try invade american mainland (a strat I still don’t master, but seems very nasty in a initial KGF game)

@Driel310:

Start with playing with both. If you never play with tech you won’t know what it does to the game and I don’t believe you have a right to give an opinion on tech.

However when you played a few games and don’t like it, then throw tech away. NO’s are must IMHO since the axis won’t stand a chance without them.  :wink:

Totally agreed. You can mod HB if it’s too powerful anyway

The bonuses countering each other stuff only works if germans cannot retake Kar, but if the target is not letting germans build at kar, I agree.

The forum does not allow for uploading of xlsx-files (Excel 2007).
However it does allow for the uploading of xls-files.

You should either ban the uploading of all type of Excel files, or move into 2007  :-)

Perry,

Wow that was very interesting.

Thanks,
LT

www.mediafire.com is the one IL’s always linking
http://www.imageshack.us/ and http://photobucket.com/ are a couple others.