Alpha+.1

Link up A&A Pacific 1940 and Europe 1940, and you've got Axis & Allies Global 1940.
Captain Crunch
Posts: 136
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 3:04 pm
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Alpha+.1

Post by Captain Crunch » Fri Dec 31, 2010 7:22 pm

Krieghund wrote:
cond1024 wrote:There has been some arguments about having the US DOW on collect income phase of turn 4 and that the US shouldn't be able to attack before Russia. Why not allow Russia to attack on round 3.
I thought the proposal was that the US would declare war in the Combat Move phase (like everyone else) of turn 4. This would change nothing except to give the US one less turn of wartime income. Perhaps I misunderstood?
That was how I understood the proposal as well. And I also think it would be a good idea.
Regards,
Captain Crunch

Take time from your busy day to play Axis & Allies and to eat a bowl of cereal.

Natasin
Posts: 79
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 3:48 pm

Re: Alpha+.1

Post by Natasin » Fri Dec 31, 2010 8:22 pm

Krieghund wrote:
cond1024 wrote:There has been some arguments about having the US DOW on collect income phase of turn 4 and that the US shouldn't be able to attack before Russia. Why not allow Russia to attack on round 3.
I thought the proposal was that the US would declare war in the Combat Move phase (like everyone else) of turn 4. This would change nothing except to give the US one less turn of wartime income. Perhaps I misunderstood?
No thats exactly the suggestion. Also japan could theoritically not have to deal with us for one extra turn (really half a turn)

User avatar
Krieghund
Posts: 2672
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 9:18 am
Location: Virginia, USA

Re: Alpha+.1

Post by Krieghund » Fri Dec 31, 2010 11:18 pm

From Mantlefan (who is currently unable to post):
mantlefan wrote:Some people have said that the UK and Italy can both rebuild their navies after a G1 and UK1 attack, respectively, because Italy can use their NO's to get the necessary money. But without their navy, how achievable are those?

Tobruk is hardly invincible, especially if UK sends only 1 plane along with land forces. With the bomber from England, UK can knock out transports easier than before

Some were saying that since UK loses its navy round one, "it's only fair" that Italy lose its navy. If we can even show that that is "fair," why does it even matter? Isn't the issue game balance and enjoyability, not some notion of what is "fair" between only two of the eight powers in the game?

If UK does need the bomber, I think it should go in Iceland or somewhere in Canada. Or, maybe even give them another Ftr instead in scotland to help preserve the Scapa Flow navy more. But, doing more to make the Italians worthless by putting a bomber in the UK or Scotland doesn't make the game any more fun from where I am standing.
Thanks Mantlefan... I hear you had a difficult time getting here. I hope that can be fixed. I totally agree with your "It's not fair" comments.

Yeah that bomber just ain't fair.
LH-a
A&A Developer and Playtester

"War is much more fun when you're winning!" - General Martok

calvinhobbesliker
Posts: 554
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2010 11:53 pm

Re: Alpha+.1

Post by calvinhobbesliker » Fri Dec 31, 2010 11:28 pm

Some people? I'm the only one who has said that; you can go ahead and directly name me; I don't mind.

To address your point, keep in mind that the UK can only kill half of the Italian navy. Moreover, if it attacks Tobruk with 1 plane, that's one less plane to attack the Italian navy, which can be reinforced by 2 German planes that attack Z112 or France. Clearing the Med of axis ships is easy with Germany's airforce and Italy's extra plane. Taking Egypt is also easy, since the UK lost most of its ground forces in Tobruk, leaving Egypt vulnerable to attack by sea.


Finally, also keep in mind that the UK can't rebuild its navy for a couple of turns because it must build inf in London in case Germany builds 9 transports, while Italy is safe and free to build its navy.

9 transports ! 63 IPC...! Naaa give me 6 fighters please - thank you
LH-a

MarkVIIIMarc
Posts: 54
Joined: Sun Sep 26, 2010 4:12 pm

Re: Alpha+.1

Post by MarkVIIIMarc » Sat Jan 01, 2011 12:11 am

Think its G5 now in our latest game. One with 12/29 rules. My Germany and Italy got hit pretty hard by bad dice in the water. Since I wasnt planning Sealion it hasnt done anything YET to Germany. Italy has gotten into the 20s for income but isnt a real military force.

Japan has neutered India by taking their income. Got a big stack of inf in Calcutta we might ignore for awhile in favor of capturing more money islands to fight off the US who is spending 2/3 of their income in the Pacific.

Germany attacked Russia G3, got four territories. Japan jumped some Indians and Aussies who were to adventurious J3. I'd rather give America 20ipc than give India and Australia 5 each.

My favorite land battles are still in China with the multi national forces there.

Perhaps to spice up the Eastern Front:

Italy could get a few more land units. Historically secondary Axis units were present in decent numbers in Russia. They just did not fare well.

More ipc per Russian territory taken by Germany round one. Am wondering if five ipc each would annoy Russia.

A bigger bonus for Germany taking Lenningrad or a subtraction for Russia if they loose it which they never did. Russia defending Lenningrad is tough. Their forces there can be left trapped behind unable to defend Moscow by a skillful Germany.

No US complex in Persia is nice.

UK or German naval units can be placed near Brazil with so.e sense of historical accuracy.

As usual my German strategy is to leave Russian inf units defending Lenningrad while bleeding off my fast tanks and mech scoot for Stallingrad and lossibly Cairo or Calcutta. By the time a stack of 25 inf from Lenningrad get to Poland I can have 20 new inf, some tanks and my air force to eliminate them. This way those German units are useful and not just marching to the front.

User avatar
Dave
Posts: 307
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2004 10:51 pm
Location: Lackland AFB, San Antonio, Texas

Re: Alpha+.1

Post by Dave » Sat Jan 01, 2011 2:43 am

Hey everyone,

I'm back from vacation and apparently Santa wasn't the only one busy while I was gone! I have some questions regarding this new rule:
13. No neutral power may end its turn with land units on transports. Movement between Hawaii and the Philippines is the one exception. When moving between Hawaii and the Philippines or vise a versa loaded transports may end their movements in sea zones 22 or 23.
1.) Does the theater specific rule for Russia still apply? Meaning, if Russia is at war with Japan, can it have loaded transports on the European map?

2.) Japan starts at war with China. Does this allow it to end its turn with loaded transports despite being neutral to the US, UK, and Anzac at the start of the game?

3.) This does not affect the UK or Anzac in the Pacific because they are both start at war with the Euro-Axis, right?

kcdzim
Posts: 103
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 3:07 pm

Re: Alpha+.1

Post by kcdzim » Sat Jan 01, 2011 3:45 am

Dave wrote:Hey everyone,

I'm back from vacation and apparently Santa wasn't the only one busy while I was gone! I have some questions regarding this new rule:
13. No neutral power may end its turn with land units on transports. Movement between Hawaii and the Philippines is the one exception. When moving between Hawaii and the Philippines or vise a versa loaded transports may end their movements in sea zones 22 or 23.
1.) Does the theater specific rule for Russia still apply? Meaning, if Russia is at war with Japan, can it have loaded transports on the European map?

2.) Japan starts at war with China. Does this allow it to end its turn with loaded transports despite being neutral to the US, UK, and Anzac at the start of the game?

3.) This does not affect the UK or Anzac in the Pacific because they are both start at war with the Euro-Axis, right?
1) yes, it should apply, based on how it's written, but it shouldn't particularly matter as Russia probably won't build transports. But if they do, yes, they can't stay onboard.
2) Japan is not neutral at start of game as it's at war with china, as you said. So yes, it can end with units on board.
3) Correct. The UK and Anzac are not split diplomatically between the theaters, only economically (for UK).

It's written in such a way that it includes Russia (but probably will never matter for Russia in anything but a gimmick play). But it mainly addresses the US Navy camping out, waiting to take over territories. However, I'd still prefer it written so that there weren't safe zones in 22/23 as if the US really wants to reinforce, they should have to build a naval base on wake or if they want to retreat, build a base on guam. Allowing 22 and 23 to be safe zones means the US can leave a massive fleet there at the end of US3.

I'd also prefer it to read that neutrals cannot have units loaded at end of noncombat phase as well, so that on US3 they don't park that massive fleet at the Carolines, go to war on collect income phase, and wait for anzac/britain to take control of Carolines on UK/Anzac 4. but oh well.

Natasin
Posts: 79
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 3:48 pm

Re: Alpha+.1

Post by Natasin » Sat Jan 01, 2011 3:56 am

Dave wrote:Hey everyone,

I'm back from vacation and apparently Santa wasn't the only one busy while I was gone! I have some questions regarding this new rule:
13. No neutral power may end its turn with land units on transports. Movement between Hawaii and the Philippines is the one exception. When moving between Hawaii and the Philippines or vise a versa loaded transports may end their movements in sea zones 22 or 23.
1.) Does the theater specific rule for Russia still apply? Meaning, if Russia is at war with Japan, can it have loaded transports on the European map?

2.) Japan starts at war with China. Does this allow it to end its turn with loaded transports despite being neutral to the US, UK, and Anzac at the start of the game?

3.) This does not affect the UK or Anzac in the Pacific because they are both start at war with the Euro-Axis, right?
Krieg, if I'm wrong correct me

1. If Russia is at war with Japan then Russia is still neutral on the Europe board and also the opposite way.

2. Japan is at war so it isn't neutral. Being at war avoids the neutral thing.

3. Different board different war settings. UK Pacific has to be at war to be able to avoid the neutral combat rules. UK Pacific is technically at war with no one as far as the game is concerned.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 25 guests