G40 League House Rule project

[gamerman01]

@Boldfresh:

alexgreat should be tier 1 gamer.  he’s on the Ancients with Me1945.

I thought about it, but it only affects MostHoly by 1 point

If you think he’s tier one based on your play with him, I’ll change him.

[gamerman01]

@Eggman:

@Gamerman01:

He’s not nearly as good as you think he is.� Shall I stop buying tech now, just for you?� I’ve wasted 20 IPC’s so far, so that would be quite a handicap.

My opinion isn’t relevant, his record speaks for itself.  Your comment about the expense reveals why you can’t really evaluate the results on a game where tech was allowed to skew the outcome.  If you spend little on tech and get it, you should expect to win since tech has no counter except luck.  If you spend a lot on tech and get nothing, you would probably expect to lose since in hindsight it would seem obvious that the money would have been better spent on units.

If you continue to spend money on tech in your second game v. love and fail to get a major one (some are clearly far less useful than others - I’m looking at you, War Bonds!) and still manage to win, then I’ll be impressed (not that this matters) and will eat a virtual hat or what have you.

Egg, Allweneedislove left Berlin wide open and undefended and I had to point it out for him to change his noncoms so that UK wouldn’t just walk in on about the 4th round.
He lost that game badly and tech had absolutely nothing to do with it.

Now that he’s completely reversed his earlier, adamant, stance (and long-winded thread) that tanks are a waste of money and bought them en masse with Germany on round 1 and round 2, he will probably take Moscow early, but it remains to be seen whether he can win the game.  And I threw away 5 IPC’s on R1 on tech to boot.

Find someone else to worship.

[gamerman01]

@Eggman:

My opinion isn’t relevant, his record speaks for itself.

So does yours.  It says we really shouldn’t pay much attention to anything you have to say regarding strategy.

Sorry - truth hurts

[gamerman01]

Updated

Changed Allies vs. Axis tally at far right

I now have a total by tier, of Allied vs. Axis results, with the grand total at the bottom.

Over all, the Allies are 57-53

.518 win pct

Please welcome our newest ranked player, Snake eyes, weighing in right now at #15
There are now 27 players who are ranked (have completed 3 games)

At some point, maybe half way through the season, I may up the minimum count of games for rankings, maybe from 3 to 5 or something, because of the over all relative volume of games.  Not that it matters

AA Gamer’s League Rankings.xls

[gamerman01]

Updated

AA Gamer’s League Rankings.xls

[gamerman01]

Updated

AA Gamer’s League Rankings.xls

[gamerman01]

Updated

AA Gamer’s League Rankings.xls

[gamerman01]

Gentlemen,

(Jennifer aka Snow White, aka Wendy (and the lost boys) hasn’t started playing in league this year yet)

We have a tie score!

Axis - 57
Allies - 57

Updated

AA Gamer’s League Rankings.xls

[gamerman01]

Allies surge ahead on Karl’s victory

Karl, you need to pick up the pace, man, Jeff has still finished more games than you

Games played leaders -
Jeff - 23
Karl - 20
Egg - 16
JWW - 14
Kabloom - 13
Boldfresh - 11
Ziggurat - 11
Wheatbeer - 11
Odonis - 10
Variance - 9
Fortress - 9

Updated

AA Gamer’s League Rankings.xls

[Karl7]

I’m working on it!  :lol:

I got a couple coming down the pike.

I have to say, the allies are kicking butt.  Allied play has really picked up.  Despite being one of the big believers in the Axis advantage, I am beginning think there might be a alight allied advantage!  What?  :-o :-o

[gamerman01]

Wow, that is big news.

You saw the light earlier than I anticipated  :-)  But we must still be in the minority because everyone’s bidding bonuses to the Allies….

Germans could sure use another sub to start with!  :-)

[Karl7]

What can be said?

The Allies are getting really good at getting in and disrupting the Axis expansion.  I have yet to see a game in the last 2 months where Japan expanded and managed to hold the DEI for more than a couple rounds.

Further, I haven’t seen or been able myself to get Moscow in any game for months.  (I lost moscow to Most Holy but that was because I made a really dumb move and could have held it otherwise….  I blame BOLD for distracting with his vengeance game :-P)

Yeah, Germany, alas, I am starting to worry may be under powered.  Maybe another fighter, say in Romania, and another easy NO?  Like say France?  Those couple turns in between R1 and when Germany can get Leningrad when Germany only makes like 50 really hurt the Axis cause.

[Karl7]

The other thing I am seeing is that even slightly bad luck for the Axis in the first couple rounds can be devastating.

Losing a couple planes in the G1 fleet battles is a potential game ender as can be the whole Taranto battle/R1 med battles if the UK gets lucky and can shoot down the Italian air force in defense.

Also, failing to take Yunnan J1 is a game ender in my opinion for the Axis.  This actually happened to me in my game with Zhukov.  I attack with everything I could, got like 1 hit and China responding with 3 hits or something.  Long story short, if China holds Yunnan, UK fortifies and Japan basically will never get moving in Asia.

[gamerman01]

Intelligent comments and observations and lessons learned - thank you for sharing.

I agree.  The Allies are numerous and the ones with more options.  They know what the Axis must do to win and have numerous ways of disrupting or stopping it.  As people learn that the Allies need to “rotate and pray” (Cow’s words), the Axis will have less success.  It is often a good idea, for example, to throw ANZ planes out there in the line of fire like on money islands and sometimes they take out 2 or more Japanese infantry.  Those Japanese infantry are worth much, much more than 3 IPC’s because of their timing, opportunity, threats projected, and position.

Perhaps the Allied bids will diminish over time and maybe approach zero.  If 2 players recognize an Allied advantage, their bid may even go to the Axis.

I haven’t tried it enough times, but I find Japan very difficult to play against a good Allied player.  Too many enemies, too much space to cover.  It’s very difficult even to take out 1 of the Allied powers, and Japan has 5 enemies, often.

I think India and Australia are overpowered.  Japan shouldn’t have such a hard time taking and holding money islands, as you observed.  ANZ and India shouldn’t start with 3 planes, IMO.  Maybe 2.

[gamerman01]

@Gamerman01:

It’s very difficult even to take out 1 of the Allied powers, and Japan has 5 enemies, often.

I had India and New South Wales in mind, not Russia or China.

[Karl7]

I haven’t tried it enough times, but I find Japan very difficult to play against a good Allied player.  Too many enemies, too much space to cover.  It’s very difficult even to take out 1 of the Allied powers, and Japan has 5 enemies, often.

Here I think the issue is that the US can go 70+% against Japan because the UK and the USSR can hold out against Germany long enough before the US would really have to help them.

If Germany were able to seriously threaten the USSR and UK, the US would have to put more in the Atlantic allowing  Japan to get moving.

As is, your right, Anzac/India go devil may care and throw their stuff in the line of fire to whittle down Japan and the US rolls in and does clean up.  You don’t really have to worry about losing India and Sydney.  Not good to lose them, but to do so Japan would basically be allowing the US to overrun the entire Pacific.

[gamerman01]

Agreed….

Best A&A game yet, but lots of room for improvement…
I guess if you’re playing with a buddy all the time you can house rule it to your heart’s content, but playing all these games online we’re stuck with the default rules and setup so that we’re all playing the same game…  :|

[Eqqman]

@Gamerman01:

I think India and Australia are overpowered.  Japan shouldn’t have such a hard time taking and holding money islands, as you observed.  ANZ and India shouldn’t start with 3 planes, IMO.  Maybe 2.

I have a hard time reading some of these kinds of comments and thinking we are still playing the same game.

It would be interesting (albeit very time-consuming) to go through every league game and try to put a finger on exactly when a particular side won or lost, although I suspect there would be plenty of disagreement.  Speaking from my own collection of games, there are a few commonalities:

• If Japan allows its fleet to be sunk too early without inflicting equal or greater Allied naval losses, this usually results in a loss.

  • If Japan allows its air force to take heavy losses too early, this might result in a loss, it can depend on what happens with the navy.  You need to keep the air force together so that it can strike any emerging Allied fleets in tandem with the air force.

  The German player only has one real direction in which to vector their forces: Russia.  Japan has several, which has already been pointed out.  An unwise Japanese player is going to expand out in every possible direction, which leads to an initial high income but spreads its forces out, allowing them to be attacked and defeated piecemeal, especially if the Allied player is willing to fight battles they know they will lose in earlier turns to create a winning battle for one of the countries that plays afterward.  This basically works akin to blowing up a balloon too fast, the Allies can pop it, if they have been careful to preserve enough of their starting forces.

  The wiser Japanese players move a little more slowly and keep their fleets together.  With the Air Base in Kiangsi (I hope that’s the right K province) and the vast majority of the Japanese fleet parked off Malaya or the Philippines, no Allied fleet is going to make a move on the DEI or SZ6 unless they can be sure of surviving the Japanese counter-attack.  This is going to take round after round of spending, and if Japan continues to make modest increases to the navy, the Allies won’t be able to keep up for a long time.  The game should pretty much be over in Europe by then.  Japan can abandon China completely and focus on holding the DEI and still provide an Axis victory, since the Chinese are stuck there (it is harder, however).  Holding the DEI is worth +19 to Japan and -9 to India, they need to prioritize holding it in a manner that doesn’t fritter away their naval advantage.

  At the start of the game India and ANZAC are total pushovers, those precious air units are the only thing keeping them from being routed.  Just seizing Malaya and holding it is a loss of -10 to Allied income.  If Japan can’t handle holding every one of the DEI islands, they can focus on Borneo.  With Borneo, Malaya, and Hong Kong in Japanese hands (very easy to do) India is down -15 of its income.  Park a few ships (preferably subs, once you sink the starting UK and French DDs, which you probably did already if they were used as blockers) off Calcutta and they will have no appreciable income, meaning you won’t even really have to fight them.

  ANZAC is in slightly better shape since it has 2 NOs and is far enough away that it is inefficient for Japan to try and send ships down there to convoy away its money.  It is hampered by having no access to a major IC and its starting minor IC is only in range of Java once you start making TTs (than can also be a pro, since it takes Japan longer to get to it).  ANZAC is the only player in the Pacific that can seriously harass Japan long-term since it would take Japan the longest to utterly crush it.  Still, it isn’t hard for Japan to minimize their threat by forcing them to fight for their Outer Island Defense NO or even doing spoiler attacks, dropping an odd Infantry or two into West/North Australia to distract.  ANZAC has to make constant choices between buying ground units to beat off a sudden invasion or building up navy to be ready to hit once Japan overextends.  If Japan makes the mistake of leaving too little presence in the DEI, then ANZAC is going to start cranking out ships.  They need to be forced to invest in ground and TTs as long as possible.

  I don’t think losing Yunnan J1 is a game over for Japan.  In order for the Allies to really capitalize on it, the UK would have to DoW on UK1/2, which I still think is a terrible idea (although I’m open minded, I might be convinced otherwise).  If Japan has been keeping their forces together the Allies will find very few targets in an early DoW, and to me the sacrifice of +20 income for the US for 1 - 2 turns isn’t worth it.  Given that 10+ planes are going to be sitting in China, I don’t think the Allies can move enough in there that they won’t just be wiped out J2.  Japan can then just say thank you for having the chance to kill these units sooner rather than later.

  Another footnote to Japan, I’m very surprised that I don’t see the J3/4 India crush in more league games.  I don’t see how the UK-Europe economy can handle keeping Italy down and doing anything to rescue India.

  Now, having just said all this Japan is awesome stuff, I don’t actually think the Axis should be expected to win in the Pacific board.  With optimal play by all around I would expect the Axis to win on the Europe board every time.  Since Japan is potentially much more powerful than Germany (it will hit 70+ income faster than Germany does, even when both sides do well), the USA is almost required to spend everything in the Pacific in order to stave off defeat.  Thus, Japan will probably end up suffering more since the Allies have to choice but to hammer them.  Another comment said this but I wholeheartedly agree: all of Japan’s Pacific foes are so weak that they will crumble much faster than the Allies will in Europe.  Japan’s real mistake comes from trying to crush all these foes at the same time too quickly.

  Moving on to Europe-

  • If Germany spends too much on naval, this can result in a loss.
  • If Germany doesn’t help Italy, this can result in a loss.

  The Axis powers in Europe are basically on a shot clock.  If they miss their big chance and allow the game to continue, then the Allies have an opportunity to win.  But just like in basketball, if they keep calm and just focus on what is important, they shouldn’t miss the shot.  The main mistakes I’m seeing on the German side is sending too few ground units after Russia.  A lot of German players are dribbling out subs or other naval units to be annoying to the Allies, but there is no need for it.  Any time the Allies pose a serious problem at sea, just make a single large buy of navy.  If you hold Normandy you can pop a DD right into the Channel to block a fleet that might be trying to go Gibraltar - Germany or Gibraltar - Norway.

  The German air force should absolutely be used to help Italy as much as possible (unless you went G1).  If you’re just taking a massed stack of units over to Moscow, the Russians are going to just retreat every time anyway, so there is little for the Luftwaffe to do over there.  Wipe out all the Allied ships in the Med, leave somebody behind in Italy to scramble if needed, and possibly land others to defend the Italian stack in North Africa if needed.  There is plenty of time to redeploy them to Russia later for the final attack, or to send some to Germany if you need to guard against an Allied landing, etc.

  At best, it takes the Allies 4 turns from the time they start to prepare an invasion force (from scratch) to the time they finally hit the beach.  If the USA can’t do full spending in the Atlantic because it’s worried about Japan, it will be even longer.  I think this is the most dangerous part of the G1 attack, since it leaves so many Allied warships on the table, the Allies can shave a turn off their invasion schedule.  But again, if Japan is doing the right things, you should still have time.

  I haven’t seen anything in my own games that would lead me to offer conclusions on how much of the Mediterranean territories should be split between Germany and Italy, I’ve seen both extremes.  But if Italy takes all of it, then Germany is very limited in how they can aid the Italians directly, and all of that income is subject to Convoy damage anyway if the Allies are allowed to get the upper hand at sea.  My leaning is that Germany should probably get as much of this income as possible since they want everything to send after Russia.

  Europe is a lot harder to evaluate since I think Germany can make a lot less obvious blunders than Japan can.  But if it seems like Germany isn’t prioritizing ground units, the Axis are undervaluing an early seizure of Cairo, or Germany isn’t helping Italy get their NOs, then the Axis (may) be heading to a loss.  The Axis can lose, but it’s their game to lose.

[boldfresh]

@Eggman:

@Gamerman01:

I think India and Australia are overpowered.  Japan shouldn’t have such a hard time taking and holding money islands, as you observed.  ANZ and India shouldn’t start with 3 planes, IMO.  Maybe 2.

I have a hard time reading some of these kinds of comments and thinking we are still playing the same game.

It would be interesting (albeit very time-consuming) to go through every league game and try to put a finger on exactly when a particular side won or lost, although I suspect there would be plenty of disagreement.  Speaking from my own collection of games, there are a few commonalities:

• If Japan allows its fleet to be sunk too early without inflicting equal or greater Allied naval losses, this usually results in a loss.

  • If Japan allows its air force to take heavy losses too early, this might result in a loss, it can depend on what happens with the navy.  You need to keep the air force together so that it can strike any emerging Allied fleets in tandem with the air force.

  The German player only has one real direction in which to vector their forces: Russia.  Japan has several, which has already been pointed out.  An unwise Japanese player is going to expand out in every possible direction, which leads to an initial high income but spreads its forces out, allowing them to be attacked and defeated piecemeal, especially if the Allied player is willing to fight battles they know they will lose in earlier turns to create a winning battle for one of the countries that plays afterward.  This basically works akin to blowing up a balloon too fast, the Allies can pop it, if they have been careful to preserve enough of their starting forces.

  The wiser Japanese players move a little more slowly and keep their fleets together.  With the Air Base in Kiangsi (I hope that’s the right K province) and the vast majority of the Japanese fleet parked off Malaya or the Philippines, no Allied fleet is going to make a move on the DEI or SZ6 unless they can be sure of surviving the Japanese counter-attack.  This is going to take round after round of spending, and if Japan continues to make modest increases to the navy, the Allies won’t be able to keep up for a long time.  The game should pretty much be over in Europe by then.  Japan can abandon China completely and focus on holding the DEI and still provide an Axis victory, since the Chinese are stuck there (it is harder, however).  Holding the DEI is worth +19 to Japan and -9 to India, they need to prioritize holding it in a manner that doesn’t fritter away their naval advantage.

  At the start of the game India and ANZAC are total pushovers, those precious air units are the only thing keeping them from being routed.  Just seizing Malaya and holding it is a loss of -10 to Allied income.  If Japan can’t handle holding every one of the DEI islands, they can focus on Borneo.  With Borneo, Malaya, and Hong Kong in Japanese hands (very easy to do) India is down -15 of its income.  Park a few ships (preferably subs, once you sink the starting UK and French DDs, which you probably did already if they were used as blockers) off Calcutta and they will have no appreciable income, meaning you won’t even really have to fight them.

  ANZAC is in slightly better shape since it has 2 NOs and is far enough away that it is inefficient for Japan to try and send ships down there to convoy away its money.  It is hampered by having no access to a major IC and its starting minor IC is only in range of Java once you start making TTs (than can also be a pro, since it takes Japan longer to get to it).  ANZAC is the only player in the Pacific that can seriously harass Japan long-term since it would take Japan the longest to utterly crush it.  Still, it isn’t hard for Japan to minimize their threat by forcing them to fight for their Outer Island Defense NO or even doing spoiler attacks, dropping an odd Infantry or two into West/North Australia to distract.  ANZAC has to make constant choices between buying ground units to beat off a sudden invasion or building up navy to be ready to hit once Japan overextends.  If Japan makes the mistake of leaving too little presence in the DEI, then ANZAC is going to start cranking out ships.  They need to be forced to invest in ground and TTs as long as possible.

  I don’t think losing Yunnan J1 is a game over for Japan.  In order for the Allies to really capitalize on it, the UK would have to DoW on UK1/2, which I still think is a terrible idea (although I’m open minded, I might be convinced otherwise).  If Japan has been keeping their forces together the Allies will find very few targets in an early DoW, and to me the sacrifice of +20 income for the US for 1 - 2 turns isn’t worth it.  Given that 10+ planes are going to be sitting in China, I don’t think the Allies can move enough in there that they won’t just be wiped out J2.  Japan can then just say thank you for having the chance to kill these units sooner rather than later.

  Another footnote to Japan, I’m very surprised that I don’t see the J3/4 India crush in more league games.  I don’t see how the UK-Europe economy can handle keeping Italy down and doing anything to rescue India.

  Now, having just said all this Japan is awesome stuff, I don’t actually think the Axis should be expected to win in the Pacific board.  With optimal play by all around I would expect the Axis to win on the Europe board every time.  Since Japan is potentially much more powerful than Germany (it will hit 70+ income faster than Germany does, even when both sides do well), the USA is almost required to spend everything in the Pacific in order to stave off defeat.  Thus, Japan will probably end up suffering more since the Allies have to choice but to hammer them.  Another comment said this but I wholeheartedly agree: all of Japan’s Pacific foes are so weak that they will crumble much faster than the Allies will in Europe.  Japan’s real mistake comes from trying to crush all these foes at the same time too quickly.

  Moving on to Europe-

  • If Germany spends too much on naval, this can result in a loss.
  • If Germany doesn’t help Italy, this can result in a loss.

  The Axis powers in Europe are basically on a shot clock.  If they miss their big chance and allow the game to continue, then the Allies have an opportunity to win.  But just like in basketball, if they keep calm and just focus on what is important, they shouldn’t miss the shot.  The main mistakes I’m seeing on the German side is sending too few ground units after Russia.  A lot of German players are dribbling out subs or other naval units to be annoying to the Allies, but there is no need for it.  Any time the Allies pose a serious problem at sea, just make a single large buy of navy.  If you hold Normandy you can pop a DD right into the Channel to block a fleet that might be trying to go Gibraltar - Germany or Gibraltar - Norway.

  The German air force should absolutely be used to help Italy as much as possible (unless you went G1).  If you’re just taking a massed stack of units over to Moscow, the Russians are going to just retreat every time anyway, so there is little for the Luftwaffe to do over there.  Wipe out all the Allied ships in the Med, leave somebody behind in Italy to scramble if needed, and possibly land others to defend the Italian stack in North Africa if needed.  There is plenty of time to redeploy them to Russia later for the final attack, or to send some to Germany if you need to guard against an Allied landing, etc.

  At best, it takes the Allies 4 turns from the time they start to prepare an invasion force (from scratch) to the time they finally hit the beach.  If the USA can’t do full spending in the Atlantic because it’s worried about Japan, it will be even longer.  I think this is the most dangerous part of the G1 attack, since it leaves so many Allied warships on the table, the Allies can shave a turn off their invasion schedule.  But again, if Japan is doing the right things, you should still have time.

  I haven’t seen anything in my own games that would lead me to offer conclusions on how much of the Mediterranean territories should be split between Germany and Italy, I’ve seen both extremes.  But if Italy takes all of it, then Germany is very limited in how they can aid the Italians directly, and all of that income is subject to Convoy damage anyway if the Allies are allowed to get the upper hand at sea.  My leaning is that Germany should probably get as much of this income as possible since they want everything to send after Russia.

  Europe is a lot harder to evaluate since I think Germany can make a lot less obvious blunders than Japan can.  But if it seems like Germany isn’t prioritizing ground units, the Axis are undervaluing an early seizure of Cairo, or Germany isn’t helping Italy get their NOs, then the Axis (may) be heading to a loss.  The Axis can lose, but it’s their game to lose.

  this just in -

  Eggman has begun to write a treatise rivaling that of the venerable “cow”.  it’s gonna be a page turner!

[gamerman01]

Bold, why in the heck did you use the “quote” feature on that?

It is really fun to write about Axis and Allies strategy - it really is.

I read about 6-8 different sentences of the treatise as I skimmed over it, and pretty much everything I read was, I’m sorry, completely ridiculous.

With all due respect, Eggman, could you spare us your wisdom until you at least have a winning record?