Jim010 (Allies) vs Cmdr. Jen (Axis) 15 VC game, NOs, No Tech

[Alsch91]

London collects

27 - 1 = 26 IPCs

Calcutta collects

24 IPCs

01_Jim010_Jennifer_02fUK.AAM

[Jennifer]

I give up, I can’t fight 3 people at once.  Too many eyes on the board.

Jim, if you want to play 1 on 1 let me know.

[Jennifer]

or for that matter, any of you want to play a game 1 on 1 let me know.  But with 6 eyes, there’s not a chance a mistake can get past them, but plenty of eyes to catch the slightest mistake on my part, like not landing a couple fighters in W. Germany to defend the fleet.

Sorry, but I really should have quit the instant we got new players, I had a mind too, I don’t really know why I did not.

Here’s the outline:

1)  Germany takes France, SZ 111, SZ 106, SZ 109, Yugoslavia and W. France - All good odds or if there are scrambles, good odds of killing fighters in England so that’s even better.
2)  Germany sets up Sea Lion - nothing can be done about it, except if there is a little snafu on NCMs
3)  Germany takes England

1)  Japan takes Kwangsi
2)  Japan puts bases on Kwangsi
3)  Japan takes Burma, Sham State and/or Malaya depending - uses carrier based aircraft to sink anything possible, or uses a huge aircraft stack to clear the Burmese out.
4)  Japan takes India

G’luck.

[jim010]

As of right now, I’m too busy to play a game by myself.  Interesting game, though.  Sealion seems to still be alive and well.

I think that playing a combined VC will work with Alpha 3, though.  Future games, I think, I will play with this.

[jim010]

Sorry, but I really should have quit the instant we got new players, I had a mind too, I don’t really know why I did not.

You made the challenge, not us.

[Jennifer]

I understand that you’re too busy, but this was obviously a case of one person seeing something that I was too busy to notice and the other person did not and that’s really not how I like to play games.  By all rights, I should have a partner pointing out things like “Land the damn Fighter/Tactical Bomber in W. Germany before you get attacked!” and then this would never have happend, England would be my puppet and there was not a dang thing that could have been done about it.

I had half a mind to LET you take Japan without stacking it and just give it to America.  Dump a few industrials were China could destroy them and ignore America for the rest of the game.

[Jennifer]

@jim010:

Sorry, but I really should have quit the instant we got new players, I had a mind too, I don’t really know why I did not.

You made the challenge, not us.

I made a 1 on 1 challenge, after the game started you brought in extra help.

[jim010]

Whatever.  I’m just here to play.  All my games right now are group games so I don’t have to make a move everyday as I’m too busy.

If you want blood, that’s fine, but for the next while I am doing group games.

[ghr2]

@Cmdr:

@jim010:

Sorry, but I really should have quit the instant we got new players, I had a mind too, I don’t really know why I did not.

You made the challenge, not us.

I made a 1 on 1 challenge, after the game started you brought in extra help.

to be fair, you accepted the 3v1 when you could of easily said no.

[jim010]

Did you guys want to start another group game?

[Alsch91]

I prefer 1v1s actually.  Hard to coordinate otherwise.  Thanks for the offer.

[jim010]

@Alsch91:

I prefer 1v1s actually.  Hard to coordinate otherwise.  Thanks for the offer.

That is true.

[jim010]

What about you vs ghr2 and myself?

[Alsch91]

I’d be interested in that, but I actually care for Alpha 2 quite a bit more than Alpha 3.  The games of A3 I’ve had haven’t shown me that the changes were much of an improvement.  In my opinion it’s actually less balanced.

Although if you’d like to continue to test out Alpha 3, I’d be okay with being Allies.

[jim010]

Alright, I’ll start up a thread tomorrow.

Jenn’s version of Sealion was interesting, but I think the one we developed for Alpha 2 much is much better as it leaves less UK ships alive.

[Jennifer]

@Alsch91:

I prefer 1v1s actually.  Hard to coordinate otherwise.  Thanks for the offer.

Exactly.

And yes, I could have said no, and as I said, I should have - or at least demanded for the game to pause until such time as I could get a partner or two for myself.  But I really am not a group gamer type person.  I only participated once in a 2v2 tournament and I wanted to kill a really good friend by the end of the second round of play for not doing what I wanted him to do.

Still, you have to admit, we started as a 1v1 game that turned into a gang against Jennifer game which is not what was originally stated.  And this is mostly for posterity’s sake so Jim here doesn’t try going around saying he’s the greatest player that ever lived (I am not saying you would Jim, but I know a few players who would change the parameters of a game and then declare that they were far superior because the other person couldn’t keep up with all the changes.)

Generally speaking the strategy has never failed to produce results.  Both London and Calcutta fall every time it’s employed.  Notice, I did not say the Axis win every time!

The real issue comes in when others know what you are going to do before you do it.  Take the Americans up in SZ 16.  No way in hell they would be there in a normal game.  In this case, the player knew I couldn’t sail back and achieve the objective at the same time.  In other words, he knew exactly what I was going to do and the only way to adapt the plan was to scrap the plan and create a new one - which violated any kind of test of the plan itself!

Russia played as it normally does, and for that I give Jim010 a lot of credit.  He knew what I was going to do and could have dropped a bunch of Mechanised Infantry like Corrigan and Noll did to capitolize on my being stuck with one plan and one plan only.

I think England did not play as normal - knowing what was in store for it.  (Who would put a destroyer out there south of Sumatra?  In all the games I have seen and played, I have NEVER seen one there no matter what Japan does.)  England almost always hits SZ 97 as well on round 1, before they know what is happening on Round 2, so cuddling up to Gibraltar is not exactly down a normal game’s lines.

I guess what I am saying is you cannot test a strategy if your opponents know you are testing a strategy.  As much as they might try to say they are not letting the knowledge of what is going to happen effect their turn, it is impossible not to let it effect you pro or con.  I do think that given a normal game, 1 on 1 or 2 on 2 or 3 on 3, that the Kill England First strategy will work 90% of the time (based on the worst battle being 90% odds, all the rest are higher.)

In a normal game, if I saw America move to SZ 16 and England to Gibraltar, I would scrap all my plans of British Conquest and shift immediately over to destroy Russia first with massive fleet builds to slow the Americans down.  Shift over to turtle on the other side of Gibraltar as long as I can hold out so that America cannot get a foothold early. (This is the only way to deal with an England that is completely turtled as you cannot win and be in a strong position afterwards, you can win and you will win, but you’re out of position with a weaker stack because your enemy knew what you were going to do and you did it anyway.)

Now, I’m willing to have a FAIR fight.  1 on 1 or 2 on 2 if someone is interested.   But this 3 on 1 when I have half a dozen other games going is not going to work.

[Jennifer]

@jim010:

Alright, I’ll start up a thread tomorrow.

Jenn’s version of Sealion was interesting, but I think the one we developed for Alpha 2 much is much better as it leaves less UK ships alive.

It does leave less British ships alive, but it’s harder to pull off since you can get more British units to England.  In other words if England turtles, you don’t have 90% odds like you do in Alpha 3, I think you are down to what, 55% odds?

---

@Alsch91:

I’d be interested in that, but I actually care for Alpha 2 quite a bit more than Alpha 3.  The games of A3 I’ve had haven’t shown me that the changes were much of an improvement.  In my opinion it’s actually less balanced.

Although if you’d like to continue to test out Alpha 3, I’d be okay with being Allies.

I think Alpha 2 is as unbalanced in favor of the allies as Alpha 3 is unbalanced in favor of the Axis.

6 IPC bid for England puts the game on an even keel, as England now has the defensive power to stop an early Sea Lion.  Sea Lion can still happen, but not on Round 3, it’ll have to be Round 4 and that gives Russia more time to play.

[ghr2]

well, to be honest, i might of doen the sz16 even if i did not know ur plan purely because you were in such an awkward position with ur navy put of reach to return home and japan being open, also, 13 trannys does keep the uk worried about sealion, its almost a given to expect one with all the mass naval builds.

[Alsch91]

@Cmdr:

I think England did not play as normal - knowing what was in store for it.  (Who would put a destroyer out there south of Sumatra?  In all the games I have seen and played, I have NEVER seen one there no matter what Japan does.)  England almost always hits SZ 97 as well on round 1, before they know what is happening on Round 2, so cuddling up to Gibraltar is not exactly down a normal game’s lines.

I agree with most of what you said, but I disagree here.
When I play as England, and Sealion is threatened on round 1 - which is standard - I do what gives me the most options.  That means I run to Gibraltar.  As long as Germany plays and builds normally, i.e. naval builds, I will never hit 97.  I will never just hand London to Germany.

And the Destroyer in the Indian Ocean was fairly normal as well.  It couldn’t do much in in the Atlantic/Med.  It would have more use to me as a blocker in the Southwest Pacific than in another theater.  I also wasn’t sure what Ghr2 was going to do with the French destroyer - I usually use it as a Pacific blocker as well.
At no point did I do anything with British units that I would not have done normally.  They were fairly standard openings.

[Jennifer]

Generally round 2 is accompanied by a naval base in Kwangsi - I did not do that this game for other reasons (just as I failed to leave a few planes on the carriers like I usually do as well, which would have helped with that weird destroyer placement.)  I had never seen the destroyer put there, it is (to be honest) the weirdest move possible and I can only see it being marginally effective if you planned to sail back to the cost of malaya and put something else on the coast of Burma.

Germany almost always goes naval build, so what you’re saying is you almost never attack the Italian fleet.  Okay.  I can buy that.  One reason I like the 2 transport build instead of the destroyer/submarine build is that 3 transports for Germany really is not a whole lot and it looks like it forces England into a panic to race home.  (Note, in any typical game, even this would not help you!)  Killing the French fleet with Italy would have been better than what I did, though.

Eh, look at the crush england thread we can discuss it more there.