From: barich@bach.udel.edu (Dewey H Barich)
Subject: Re: A&A: Allies buy how many dice?
Organization: University of Delaware
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 05:24:22 GMT

In article <x3apf_p@lynx.unm.edu> emullins@triton.unm.edu (Eric Mullins) writes:
>barich@bach.udel.edu (Dewey H Barich) writes:
>  "Jonathan T. Moore" <jmci+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>>Yes I've seen it, but I don't like it.  [etc. discussion of who gets
>>                                         naval advantage deleted]

>You mean you're going to waste your planes to destroy a navy which,
>though big, is insignificant?  Were I the Japaneese player, I would
>merly loose a couple of battleships [after sub] and laugh.

Insignificant?  Then you'd play Japan without it?  If you think that the
Japanese navy is insignificant, you need to work on your naval strategy.


>Also note that planes do not "crash" into the water should their
>carrier be destroyed.  They get two movement to land with.

WRONG !!!!!  These are defending fighters on a carrier.  If the carrier
is lost, they must either land on an ally's carrier in that zone or land
on a friendly land territory adjacent to that sea zone.  This would be a
movement of 1, if you would call it such a thing at all.

>All this assumes the russian wasn't idiotic enough to attack Manchuria,

Attacking Manchuria is not idiotic.  The Soviets have the advantage.
They will, on average, win the territory with one of the five available
infantry and the armor.  I use this all the time.  I consider it
essential.  Please don't call strategies or any ideas idiotic, as that
is your opinion.  Others have their opinions, but by and large none are
idiotic.  OK?

>and the brits weren't stupid enough to attack kwangtung.  In that case,

While I don't often use this strategy, I find it quite useful.  Again,
this is all opinion, and it depends on the plans of the players.
Attacking Kwangtung (which I do only after a successful assault on
Manchuria by the USSR) removes all Japanese land units from Asia, except
the Indo-China Burma units.  For me, the idea behind this is to limit
the Japanese player's options for a while at the start of the game.  It
becomes a high priority for him/her to recapture those territories, not
start expanding.  Also, the USSR gets to destroy one of the Japanese
fighters, a big help overall.

>pearl harbor should be attacked somewhat differently so as to retain
>the battleships, transports, & planes to destroy all opposition in asia.
>
>All this business with bombing is pretty ridiculous too.  There is a much

I'm sorry, but I really wish that you had read the posts leading up to
this one.  In at least the first of my posts, and perhaps some of the
others, I clearly stated that I WAS NOT IN FAVOR OF THE BOMBING
STRATEGY.  You are the only person who has missed that, perhaps you
started reading the thread a little late.

>more efficient way to trash the Axis: a direct and immediate assult on
>germany.  To do this, those planes which you wasted trying to kill an

Again, if you had read the whole thread, you would know that this is the
strategy I favor.  And, I did not waste those fighters, I would gladly
lose them to finish off the Japanese navy.  

Although, I must admit that I made a counting mistake (sorry, I forget 
the name of the guy that corrected me -- thanx).  So, actually, the 
end result (on average) would be that the 2 Japanese battleships
would survive.  If this were going to be the case, then I would not 
use the fighters (necessarily) to do this.  But, I think that the 
original assumption of all the attacking units (especially the bomber) 
is a little more than should be spent by the Japanese.  Even so, this is
a huge draw of effort off the Asian, which, under the circumstances
(that Germany is getting bombed and has a short lifespan) is a huge
boost to the Allies.  It would keep the Japanese at least another turn
away from Russia, when they already could barely get there in time...

>already "dead" navy with can perform a much better task--like landing
>on the newly built brittish carrier on the first turn and eternally holding
>the sea so that troops may be brought onto the mainland immediately.

Actually, the carrier is unnecessary, if you do things right.

>Another thing to do with planes is land them in Karaelia.  Okay, fighters,

Actually, if you so things right, you can keep Karelia from ever getting
seriously attacked, in which case you don't need the fighters there...

>not bombers.  Anyway, with russia totally defended, the german can't break

This is the general strategy, but it can be beaten by the Germans.

No offense, I'm actually curious, have you been playing long?

Dewey


From: lang@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (John J. Lang)
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 18:17:42 GMT
Subject: Re: Auction Prices for Wargames at Gencon
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA