capital ships for the UK will mean, subs. The cannon fodder/infantry of the sea.
I am aware that the revised rules say tanks defend a 3. Our group has choosen to to disregard this, who would buy infantry if armour defends at 3?
I am aware that the revised rules say tanks defend a 3. Our group has choosen to to disregard this, who would buy infantry if armour defends at 3?
INF is 3 IPC, ARM are 5.
Spend 30 IPC’s you get 10 INF, but only 6 ARM
10 INF have a total defense value of 20, and requires 10 hits to kill
6 ARM have a total defense value of 18, and requires only 6 hits to kill.
And that is at 3x3 for ARM.
Take my advice…
Look over some of the info on the site and try a few play by e-mail or play by forum games.
I made the same types of mistakes when I first joined. Some folks helped me find out those errors. And a few helped me learn.
A few months later, I am in the Tournament finals here, and ranked 27th in the world at DAAK for Revised.
As for SUB’s being cannon fodder… TRUE, for NAVAL battles.
But if you want to protect TRN’s from Germany, you need ships that can fire at aircraft. Otherwise the Luftwaffe will sink allied fleet after allied fleet, while sending ARM and INF at Russia so hard and fast that Moscow will fall by about Turn 4 or 5.
ncscswitch, we have never bothered with the revised tank rule. we have been playing for 15 years and found tanks defend at 3 to be unjusitified. tanks mobility exceeds any small increase in defensive odds for defense.
can u provide links for online games?
Flush, at first I agreed with you that armor defending at a 3 was nonsence. I thought this was crazy especially since Germany starts with 10 of them. I also thought the defense of a 3 dimished the ability of a fighter.
After some play testing, I discovered why armor must defend at a 3. I will let you figure out why.
It is necessary.
I’m with ncscswitch,
I think the Baltic needs reinforcements…
one AC will do just fine.
I can understand why Octo has success with no Baltic buy, but for me it just doesn’t feel right :-P
I never, EVER bought German navy. All land (mixed with air) always felt right to me. Kill my navy and see if I care. My Infantry will overwhelm you…
But Octo, I have joined with the Evil Empire (not the NYY :-D) of those who purchase a G1 carrier. sob …I never thought this day would come…
The northern economy lasts longer with the Baltic fleet around. Good Allied play will kill your fleet around turn 4, but precious time was bought for 16 IPCs.
The trick is to not spend any more money on navy whatsoever. The carrier is a delaying tactic only. And I fly my Fighters to safety when destruction is imminent, rather than losing them in an attempt to take out a couple more ships.
That is one step 88, now how about the next one…
Consolidate navy in SZ7 on G2. Then, in G3, attack the Allied fleets using Western and AC based FIGs as well as 3 subs, a DST, a BB, an AC, and 2 TRN’s…
Not to mention 2 TRN’s in SZ7 scares the hell out of UK :-P
octoc, your opinion on tanks defending@3?
my opinion (however stinky it may be) is that Armor does need to defend at a 3 (for revised).
The changes to the pieces that have been made in Revised removes “MUST build Infantry or lose” dynamic that existed in Classic.
Tanks now attack AND defend on 3’s, making them worth spending 5 IPC’s on. Now even Russia will buy some tanks instead of endless buys of ONLY Infantry like in Classic.
Fighters have had their price reduced, makign them a far more common purchase, again Russia will even sometimes buy FIGs in Revised where that NEVER happened in Classic.
Two hit battleships, cheaper Carriers, increased transport capacity, the addition of Destroyers, have all made navy a more common buy (instead of just TRNs and SUBs)
And even good old Infantry has gotten a boost, by pairing it with Artillery, to get some fair offesnive punch.
Tanks defending at 2 would make Tanks not worth buying; INF and ART pairs would ALWAYS be a better buy if ARM only defended on a 2.
Anyone else then me trying out “new” tactics?
Currently trying a Luftwaffe tactic against Sankt.
Aimed at keeping germany allive with massive air superiority… (round 2 lufwaffe consists of 4 Bmb, 6 Figs)
Four bombers?
Do you have the land and/or naval forces to back up your offesnive air force?
At least I assume it is offensive, since you paid 50% more for bombers vs FIGs, and they only defend on a 1…
Personally, I am a FIG person when ity comes to AF rather than BOMs… 4 times the defensive value, 75% of the offensive value, and only 67% of the cost.
Unless of course you need long range, like to attack unguarded TRNs that are well out to sea…
I need the range to threathen the trns at sea, that means US and UK needs to put some IPC into building defensive ships to defend them.
Fair enough…
Might even work out well for you.
Just be careful, on your land forces spending THAT much on AF…
yes that is a drawback of the tactic…
and freshly conquered territory?
not much to consolidate and defend it with probably?
(since AF can not stay in that place)
well im backing germany home to trade Ukraine, Belorusia, Karelia untill Japan say´s hello…… So i only need some inf for that…
hmmm,
I think all those nice and shiny AF can come in very handy for battling the Russians at the Eastern gates as well.
Axis actually joining forces for once in a game?
on the other hand…
G isn’t in the wealthiest position to strike first (with AF, so sacrificing AF…) and let J take the territory…
well, maybe to give some extra defense for J on a territory already captured…
who knows…
If those German BOMs and FIGs can keep the Allied trannies on the bottom of the Atlantic, then the German forces only have to deal with Russia… And with Japan moving in hard from the east…
that´s the plan, and to force UK, US to prottect the trn. (and if i get desperate i can sacrifice AF to sink all trn…
