Best posts made by squirecam

@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.

@cornwallis said in Axis are underpowered.:

@squirecam why no J1? How should Allies react to a J1, go KGF?

This is just my opinion, but a J1 eliminates most options for Germany. Whether or not it’s a good idea, a J1 ends any reasonable chance of a sea lion working as US gets involved early. For the same reasons a J1 ends any reasonable chance of holding onto the med as Italy because the US can move right in. So you are basically reduced to trying to get moscow before the US crushes you.

Germany isn’t ready for the US on turn 1. They have to pivot troops to Russia but the US can be landing in Africa or Gibraltar t1 which is really bad. So they have to help Italy which weakens the moscow push.

A J1 might work out fine for Japan. But I certainly dont like it as Germany. I absolutely hate the idea if I’m Italy.

@arthur-bomber-harris said in Axis are underpowered.:

@cornwallis cow provides an in-depth benefit of J1 over J2 in his pinned playbook. He also outlines the perfect execution for both. On average, attacking on J1 is advantageous to the Axis. However, the battle in Yunnan is slightly dicey and very bad rolling can leave China out of control with minimal Japanese land forces to counter it on the second turn.

If matched against an opponent of equal or superior skill, J1 DoW is clearly the best option. If facing a significantly inferior opponent and you want to minimize variance, J2 becomes a better strategy. Those advocating J3 DoW make me question why they are playing a strategy game and posting strategy tips on this forum.

Yeah, the fact that I’ve played every version of A&A winning tournaments at Gencon, Origins, the WBC etcetera probably means I’m very poor at strategy games and shouldn’t post any tips whatsoever.

Sorry.

You should only listen to those masters of the game who advocate a J1 apparently.

@superbattleshipyamato123 said in Axis And Allies D-day strategy:

@slip-capone

Why? I think they make the game interesting.

More randomness which means more luck vs skill involved.

I like D-Day and when we have played we just use the 2 card sets.

What if a capital controlled by zombies counted as a vc for your opponent, such that you were required to retake it and not use the plane tactic?

AA50 with 42 start and without NO’s is the most balanced version. Bids are usually a single unit.

This was a good read.

I’d say the best players minimize the dice luck as much as possible, and can overcome the dice when it does happen. No matter what game version is being played.

I dont think that the worse player should make riskier attacks though. I think the worse player should focus on minimizing mistakes.

If you somehow cant get better…then go ahead and make the risky gamble.

@taamvan said in Game 203 Report: What happens when you do everything right?:

@squirecam I wont convince you, but I disagree. The game works great and AAA has glaring flaws I can’t overcome. Mostly I just want to play with my buddies, y’all.

Im still unclear on the flaws of AAA vs this abomination…

What if zombie hits were limited to the # of attacking units then. You can bring in 1 fighter. But the zombies couldn’t get more than 1 defensive hit. If you brought 3 fighters, they get 3. It could prevent the 1 fighter strategy at least. As stated above it seems like the only way out.

@axis_roll

Agreed.