kilorynothere L (+12) vs Mainah X BM

[kilroynothere]

@mainah First, I need to check out the new variant. You like it?

Second, I haven’t really done too much of having allied air on US carriers as it reduces a few options, but it does open up others. I really didn’t have much of a choice in this game. Really do enjoy this variant as this game is not terribly similar to any other I’ve played. Very challenging.

I think a single player as the allies makes for a very strong allied side in general. Having separate players reduces the carrier swap types of options. Especially face to face. It seems for the allies to win, they must work fairly seamlessly. IMO.

[mainah]

@kilroynothere said in kilorynothere L (+12) vs Mainah X BM:

@mainah First, I need to check out the new variant. You like it?

Second, I haven’t really done too much of having allied air on US carriers as it reduces a few options, but it does open up others. I really didn’t have much of a choice in this game. Really do enjoy this variant as this game is not terribly similar to any other I’ve played. Very challenging.

I think a single player as the allies makes for a very strong allied side in general. Having separate players reduces the carrier swap types of options. Especially face to face. It seems for the allies to win, they must work fairly seamlessly. IMO.

All very true observations.

Path 2 Victory. I do like it. Major changes are islands are between sea zones in stead of being surrounding by one, carriers can scramble to adjacent battles, some cost changes, some attack/defense and bonus changes, very different NO’s and a major change in territories in china and Russia. There has not been a fast win gambit developed as yet because of the territory changes - it’s a longer game by design.

[kilroynothere]

@mainah End of Round 5! Still not sure which side is on top at the moment… much fun.

Game History

Round: 5

    Purchase Units - ANZAC
        ANZAC buy 2 transports; Remaining resources: 7 PUs; 

    Combat Move - ANZAC
        1 fighter moved from Queensland to 42 Sea Zone

    Combat - ANZAC
        Battle in 42 Sea Zone
            ANZAC attack with 1 fighter
            Japanese defend with 1 transport
                1 transport owned by the Japanese lost in 42 Sea Zone
            ANZAC win with 1 fighter remaining. Battle score for attacker is 7
            Casualties for Japanese: 1 transport

    Non Combat Move - ANZAC
        1 fighter moved from 42 Sea Zone to 54 Sea Zone
        1 cruiser moved from 63 Sea Zone to 54 Sea Zone
        1 destroyer moved from 39 Sea Zone to 77 Sea Zone

    Place Units - ANZAC
        2 transports placed in 54 Sea Zone

    Turn Complete - ANZAC
        ANZAC collect 10 PUs; end with 17 PUs
        Objective ANZAC 3 Pacific Supply Lines: ANZAC met a national objective for an additional 3 PUs; end with 20 PUs

    Combat Move - French

    Non Combat Move - French
        1 destroyer moved from 39 Sea Zone to 55 Sea Zone

    Turn Complete - French

Combat Hit Differential Summary :

triplea_40161_5fre.tsvg

[mainah]

@kilroynothere said in kilorynothere L (+12) vs Mainah X BM:

@mainah End of Round 5! Still not sure which side is on top at the moment… much fun.

You are by a large margin.

[kilroynothere]

@mainah really? I guess I don’t play enough to have a strong feeling about that. Still feeling like every piece and every move is super critical. Might be the GIB gambit… that really messes with the Allies mojo.

[mainah]

@kilroynothere
The eastern front is secure. Minus a major screw up on your part, Russia will start holding German territories in 3 turns. Germany has to spend too much to defend the west. Once Russia holds Poland/Romania, and Russia/uk/USA hold Norway, it’ll be over for Europe.

Japan will corner China shortly, and has a decent shot to grab India, if i play it right, and have favourable dice, but wont be able to secure the last victory city prior to Germany’s fall. Or before Russia with some support from uk will be able to contain and slowly wear down Germany while the us is free to spend 90% on japan.

A great tool in TripleA is that “player tap” on the right column. Gives you a break down on each countries income and total unit value, as well as by axis total and allied total. You are up by 80 ipc’s per turn, and currently have 500 more TUV than me. That economic advantage combined with a positional advantage in Europe is nigh impossible for me to overcome.

We can most certainly play out another 2-3 rounds so you can see the effects - but you hold a full house against my pair of 8’s. The sinking of my Italian fleet sealed the deal - I had hope before then. Now reinforcement of gib is impossible. Morroco is secure, so a harbor there just allows you to leave the gib forces to rot while you take norway. Your Indian navy forces me to send some navy to help take India and protect the money islands, preventing me from threatening hawaii, which allows you to continuously build up the us/Anzac forces in the se pac area.

In short - it’s 1944. You can just slow grind me to nothing.

I lost the initiative and the positional advantage when the German fleet was sunk, as that was my main drive turn 1-3. I had put it all on position while not improving my economy, so when position was lost, I had no way of making it up.

[kilroynothere]

@mainah
It is hard to argue your points. I feel about the same on all of it. I may give a bit more emphasis on losing India, but that would force you to lose islands and make Anzac/US that much stronger. Specifically ANZAC which is a nightmare for Japan when that happens. Economically perhaps a wash, but positionally could be a major problem for Japan as the allies will be in their back waters rummaging around and causing trouble.

As for your thoughts on my strategy in the Europe… yeah, that’s exactly my plan. Never have done it quite like this, but I can make a new GIB in MOR and work Germany/Italy that way. And yes, the sinking of the remaining Italian fleet does not allow you enough time to build back something of significance to thwart the allies movement advantages. Italy is fine defensively for some time with a strong GIB, but those forces are stranded as you noted.

So, I know I dislike just “playing through to the end” once I’ve lost hope. I can do that on my own time just to see it through. If you want to call the game, I’m comfortable with that or continuing. Up to you. If you’d like to play another game, I would very much enjoy that. Like your strategic thinking. Makes me really have to work for it.

I took a gander at the new variant and it looks like fun. With all the new territories, objectives, a Russian MnrIC in the east!!! it definitely is a longer game, but also seems like more strategy options. I’m happy to play that if you would like to.

[mainah]

@kilroynothere
Would love to play another game! Either BM4, original, or P2V.
BM while different than Alpha 3 (or the board game as it is today) is close enough that it runs the same basic premise. P2V is a major departure and I am on only my 3rd game, and i don’t know it well enough to be able to know who is up or down at any given moment (except when it does become glaringly obvious). The only thing I can say for certain is you can’t spam mechs for the eastern front - too costly, and they really need to be paired with a tank to be truly effective. Which makes the infantry the back bone, and the careful planning of movement all the more crucial. Especially so with the pripet marshes truly dividing the north and south fronts.

Which ever board, I leave to you.

And a salute to you for the win on this one!

[mainah]

I don’t like playing through for no reason other than to make it official. But I do like playing it through if it helps me or my opponent practice something or help visualize the long term effects of a particular strategy.

We can also start a new game and just slow this one down if you think it will improve your game.

[kilroynothere]

@mainah
Appreciate the cheers to a win. I personally enjoy playing so much, a win or a loss is about the same. Just pure enjoyment thinking about other things than what I do for a living! I typically can only play one game at a time… just not enough free time to devote to it, unfortunately. Once my second leaves for university, hoping to have a bit more time to play.

I’m inclined to start a new game with the P2V variant. Just seems like something new to chew on. The BM4 certainly was different, but not terribly so. As you said, still had the basic tactics with a few wrinkles. This new one seems entirely different!

If you want to take Axis again, go for it, or we can switch up. I enjoy both sides, so not a big deal to me.

Also, have you got the forum working for you? Still wasn’t for me. Not sure I have the latest AAA uploaded though.

[mainah]

@kilroynothere
I feel the same way about wins v losses!
I play in the league for the consistency of play, especially with a wide variety of opponents and styles; the competitiveness for ELO score is meaningless to me.

Forum works for me. The same TripleA version as we just used - maybe your set up has an error in it? Regardless, you can always save to your own computer and then upload the save file

I do have 1 request - I do ask you to play axis. I have only played the allies in any version once in my last 30+ games, and never in P2V. I am itching for a change of pace. I am happy to set it up. Mostly free for the rest of the day. I have been posting via my phone, while processing chickens. Kids are occupied with some friends as of now, and I am just putzing doing a purge in the basement.

[kilroynothere]

@mainah
Love the term “Putzing”. My mom used to use that. An east coast thing? Happy to play Axis. If you don’t mind setting it up, that would be great. Unfortunately I am working today. Designing a HQ for a client. Super exciting project, but a tad bit behind. Trying to get my crazy thoughts on paper today.

Looking forward to another challenge!