Alpha 3 Intelligence Report - Straight from the front lines!

@Stalingradski:

Ok Jimmy! I’m looking through.

G1 - think about switching a Mech Infantry with a regular in Normandy. Since you should win with 1 Infantry, it could be a Mech instead and save you a mobile unit. If you know the ones in France will die - why not let regular Infantry take a beating instead?
***I think you’re right, this is a better idea and a reason to not put only inf in Normandy

I don’t think any aircraft need to be used in Yugoslavia - they can both make it to naval battles and/or France. I use the Fighter from Hungary in SZ112, and the Tac from Poland in France. I openly defy the AA in France - it’s only a 1 in 6 chance, and it teams with Armor to give you an extra 4 for three rounds… which means you should keep an extra Armor and possibly an Artillery, by my math. That offer is too good for me to pass up, even with the threat of the Tac getting shot down. And with the land units you’re bringing, the Yugo battle is a two-rounder and should result in two lost German Infantry regardless.
***the aircraft in Yugo were really superfluous, they just wound up there because there were few other options for them to fly to.  The one in Poland originally went to 112, I think you’re right and sending it there is wiser than Yugo in order to further safeguard the fleet.  I’m not sold on a 1 in 6 chance of hitting a plane over Paris, I certainly wouldn’t count on that aircraft making it.  I’d rather keep the aircraft from hitting Paris in order to guarantee their usage in G2 and G3.

SZ112 just added the Fighter from Hungary, which gives you 12 pips or two hits, meaning a better chance to keep your Sub.

SZs 110 and 106 look good. It would be a bad idea for Britain to scramble.
That’s why I would consider hitting 91 with 2 subs and just air on 110.  This would be in the hope that UK scrambles.  If they do, the first 2 casualties will be BB hit and CA, after that it’s aircraft and someone might be unwise enough to save the BB over a ftr.

Noncom - I would have used the Armor in Poland in Yugo - it can get back next round in time for Sealion.
This was my original intention, the armor went to WGerm because I knew no armor would survive on the French coast and leaving it in Wgerm means it can be shipped out G2.  However you’re probably right, and Germany can still load up 3 inf 3 art for G2 naval threats.

UK1 - I’d take out the Italian Destroyer/Transport combo with a Brit Destroyer/Fighter/Tac Bomber. Then you have the flexibility to park your fleet elsewhere.
that dd is needed to block for the British fleet off Gibraltar however.

Even though I commented earlier on a different UK purchase, 9 Infantry is smart.

Noncoms look reasonable to me.

ITA1 - yes, I would also kill off the British as you did, but if I were the British I wouldn’t have given you the targets. And are you saving S France for G2? I’d let Italy have it, personally, and collect on it the first turn, and get closer to your NO.
Are you saying to forgo the blocker in sz94?  Can the UK fleet survive without it?  If so then I agree and UK should have moved that dd with the fleet.  I forgot SFrance, it wasn’t crucial to my plans so I skipped it on my board.

OK! It was cool to go through your moves and think about them. I also know it’s good to get some feedback.
Thx for the feedback, I;ll go back through and edit my moves so they are smoother, I’ll make sure to update the stats too, but it’ll prolly take a day.

reverse ur countries. were talking about germ attacking a rus blocker stack.(or italy)

@DutchmanD:

Oh, this is no more ahistoric than Italy being able to take Syria, Iraq, Jordan, Egypt and the rest of the Mediteranean when they could even beat the Greek army with their entire military. Not to mention one of the most significant ahistorical flaws of G40, which is that the French troops in Aremain loyal to the Allies for some reason, not Axis Vichy…  and, if they are not at war, why are they killing Brits mercilessly on Italy 1? Don’t get me started on the whole “orginally owned” territory nonesense either, the Germans can buld a major IC in Norway and the UK can build one in Malaya, but the Japanses cannot build one in Shanghai; the Japanese were the first to build factories in Shanghai around 1900 after the First Sino-Japanese War, and by 1937, when they fully officially occupied the city, it had more manufacturing power than the rest of Southeast Asia combined!  Dice Gods forbid the Japs actually being able to make a major IC in an actual manufacturing center that they originally created        :wink:

Ahistoric… hmpf!  Nothing like an instant 10 tnps build by the Germans and the dissappearance of essentially the entire Royal Navy in the Spring of 1940 to make you give up on all the historical aspects of the game we love…
 
All good points, but directed more at game mechanics than historical accuracy.  I agree that the production cycle is not accurate to real life, it should take 3-4 turns for a BB to be built, but the game is not made for that scale.  All units you can build are placed almost immediately.  Both the US and UK fleets are severely nerfed, most likely in order to give the axis a chance that they didn’t have in RL.

As for the other issues, I understand why Vichy is not in the game, you have to draw the line somewhere and Larry choose to add France but have them be inert, while China is also hamstrung.  Otherwise you get a community of people clamoring on the BBS from Bulgaria wanting special Bulgarian rules or some other nonsense.

I have played a game where Japan could build a major in China and it did seem overpowered.  It was maxed on production and China was quickly swallowed up.  It took massive US naval builds and tenuous fighting from India to stall the Japs.  Japan was also able to not build many trns in that game and still concentrate on the Pacific islands.

Thanks for going over the Abandon London moves again James.  One would assume they became even more potent in A3, have you had the opportunity to try it yet?  It’s playing the allies like the Axis, creating the initiative and then keeping it long enough to sack Italy…hopefully.

The warship and transport need only end their movement in the same sea zone.  They don’t have to move together.

With the relative ease of taking London and Calcutta (in opposition to Sydney and Muskva) it seems better to go after England

But beyond that, if you take London, you negate all of England’s income, even if you cannot take the territories!  Worse yet, Calcutta can take stuff and can liberate stuff on the Atlantic map, but can never collect for it, so you’ve effectively, permanently ended England.

Just my current thoughts, I reserve the right to change my mind with little to no notice and for whatever reason I so choose. (Woman’s perogative.)

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=21959.0

tell nutbar to play by alpha 2

Fighters that are damaged roughly lose around half their abilities @: attack: 2, defense: 2, Movement: 2, they also gain 5 damage points. The reason to this change, was so that players would feel more enthused to strategic bomb knowing they wouldn’t lose a fighter, instead, they could continue using the fighter just at a damaged level. The downgrade in its abilities would be a temporary result until the fighter is repaired at half the price (5 IPCs) of a new fighter.

Fighters that missed or didn’t get hit, are free to return to base like in the OoB rules.

One other thing i forgot to mention, bombers that are not accompanied with escorts are considered ‘locked on’ therefore are subject to interceptor fire @ 1d6 of damage per defending interceptor.

These rules make bombers and interceptors very powerful units. It encourages players to strategic bomb with 2d6 of damage, however there is also the risk of interceptor ‘lock on’ that would minimize the bombers full 2d6 damage potential.