We need an allied playbook.

@Marshmallow:

It would be even more effective if the US could spend its money to build bases on Allied territory, regardless of whether or not the US owned the territory.

For that matter, the US should also be able to produce units at the factories in France (as a whole) on its turn even after France (the territory) has been liberated. Historically, the US provided everything for the French army after the liberation of Paris – the French could not supply their own army at all after Paris was liberated.

Marsh

@trulpen

right on. It’s a good way to test things. Yea the AI doesn’t play global real well. It does pretty good on some other games. You can give it extra dough. That makes it harder but still would do weird stuff

@Whackamatt:

The US must be at War.  Either post US3 collect income phase, or the Axis have declared war against them. The UK cannot land on the US carrier until the US is at war. Once they are at war, then BOTH units defend.

So it sounds like you moved a UK fighter onto a US carrier illegally.

He didn’t say he landed it, he ask “what happens if…”

Thanks for the welcome Variance!

You are guessing correctly ^.^:
If the UK (in our group) sees that Germany is going ‘full bore’ (I guess that means throwing everything at Moscow to defeat it G6 or G7), then it starts channeling its fighters from wherever it must build them (Britain, Canada, South Africa and India) into Russia and finally into Moscow. All this happens Either via the northern route or via Persia/Africa (building a key AB here and/or there).
  UK is OK to sacrifice its ships in the med. to keep every plane alive, annihilate the Italian Navy first and to prevent any new axis ships to appear there.
Subsequently the aircraft help to destroy the Italian presence in Africa (from set-up plus maybe 1 turn of reinforcements) and then the aircraft flies into the Middle east, ready to go into Russia whilst trying not to disrupt Russia’s NO of having Archangelsk-route. But the UK fighters in russia are more important than the Russian NO if the threat is high enough.

This is why our UK is always strong while at the same time being able to be in Russia with their FTRs on time, giving Germany (statistically) no chance on Moscow, not even if it goes full bore. If it doesnt go in full bore than all those UK FTR can go elsewhere as a very flexible force. For example, fly into the areas in Europe that the US captures, stay in the med, fly to India to recapture Calcutta or prevent it from being taken… you name it).

So perhaps we don’t play Germany as optimally as possible ;-).
The best I have ever come up with myself is hitting Moscow with around 230 attack factors G6 (buying 4 STR G5, 4 TAC/STR G4, ARM+MECH G3&G2, ART+INF G1) while Russia alone I believe cannot have more than around 195 defense factors, their AAA still excluded. Combined with the UK FTR however, this can easily be too much over the 230 German attack factors. This combined with sufficiently enough more allied units, a full bore axis attack on Moscow is in our group a statistical fail.

Anyway, a quick calculation shows me that an all STR German build can reach to approx. 200 Attack factors and has way less defense factors so my guess is it will fail to deliver the message to Moscow.

I am looking for Axis strategies to counter the allied dominance (in my eyes) but Perhaps I should then move on to another thread or start one myself  8-).

I will definately look into the tripleA program if I have the time, thanks!

they asked this in the faq to find out the answer. I know the rulebook needs an update.

how is that good for germany to see bombers take out his naval? you get like 1 or 2 drops in before usa slams it… that sets you back from the VC win… with the naval and air lost there and the cost of the airbase is enough mech to just have shoved down there anyway.

Not to mention bombers take 1 round to get in position then it hits… it is the fastest way for USA to have an impact. bombers hitting stuff is fast and furious in an otherwise slow process.

there is no infrastructure required for bombers either. you just buy one beer and GO, epic winning, it is bi winning. who needs to drop men to trade ipcs with germany/italy? when you can just blast their stuff in the ocean?

Romania minor is ok for ground units. the naval and airbase is not going to pay for itself.

how many rounds can you get swinging at russia with just carrier 2 transports? and say you pull your air back before the bombers hit? I’ll give you round 1 place romania round 2 drop the 3 naval pieces (30 ipc and + airbase cost which is not really lost and has somewhat a tactical advantage from there… but it can be bombed later).  Anyway caucasus is worth 7 so you would need a good 4 rounds of drops to pay for itself in theory.

trying to defend it is a dumb idea, you’ll typically lose even more out of it and it stalls you from taking russia and reduces threat levels from axis on sz 97.

not to mention bombers are up there in optimal buys for USA anyway. they do lots of things and can switch fronts pretty fast. plus if you shove 7 bombers at 2 tanks, you break even in terms of IPC (1 bomber for 2 tank).

Giving usa a reason to give russia the ability to call in an airstrike on whatever he could not get to… iz not like a good outcome for axis.

It is like call of duty man, spetnaz will air strike the flag and cap it. Allies get gangsta like that when you throw naval down in the black sea.

Trust me, someone did this to me and bombers own. In all fairness I like having some bombers around… mmm munch that naval.

usually bombers are a part of my opener because usually people like to sea lion feint… if they do go through with sea lion I can at least rest assure that japan won’t declare war or 4 bombers fly into uk. Before 3.9 bombers just increased the casualties of germany in taking uk, now it just too much fodder for germany so it actually delays japan if germany wants to go through with it.

if I see a romania IC early on and no naval buy in the baltic… I’ll only have a couple bombers. if naval is bought in the baltic I’ll still get 3 bombers and a couple dds and a carrier.  It’s the typical reaction from usa. bombers can hit naval up top and land in belarus. 3 bombers layin around is never bad either it can hit an italian fleet that moves out. or industrial bomb an airbase before uk attacks italy fleet so no scramble. or bombers can just strafe italian guys between algeria and egypt… so all russia has to do is blitz a tank through tobruk and that other spot for +7 russia.

bombers are good units to have for usa. I don’t see how they are bad.

Russia’s NO has changed so that bombers are more optimal to have so you can just blast all that stuff and clear it out for russia if there is nothing better for them to do.

I did a quick skim and I don’t think anyone mentioned it so I’m gonna chime in. If you ever are in a game and want to figure out odds in a battle you don’t need a fancy odds calculating website or iphone app.

All you have to do is figure out the low luck odds in your head or with an old  fashioned pocket calculator. Just add up the total attack value on one side and divide that number by 6. That’s the number of hits you’ll have in round 1 and then just anticipate what the opponent will remove as casualties (likely lower def/atk values first) and then repeat.

For example, you attack Russia as Germany with 6 infantry, and 3 armor vs their 8 infantry. Your infantry attack at a 1, and the tanks at a 3. That means your attack value is 6 for the infantry (61) and 9 for the tanks (33) for a total of 15. You divide that number by 6 and you have the number of hits you’ll do on average in the first round. 15/6 is 2.5 hits. So you should kill 2 or maybe 3 units. To play it safe I always round down. So lets assume you kill 2.

Then you’ll figure his odds of hitting you in round 1 the same way. He has 8 inf defending at 2 each for a total of 16 defense. He will get 2.67 hits. Again, I always round in my opponents favor so we can assume he hit you 3 times.

So that’s round 1. You can then repeat that process to figure out round 2 and so on until you win or lose. So in round 2 you will have 3 inf and 3 tanks vs 6 inf. Your attack value (AV) will be 12, his will be 12. The odds are dead even in R2. If you divide both by 6 you get 2 hits each.

Round 3 will be your AV of 11 vs his AV of 8, now you’re winning! The more rounds you fight the more the odds are in  your favor since you have higher attack values on your tanks.

Hope that’s helpful, I just hate it when I’m in a game and people want to figure odds and the next thing you know 5 grown men pull out their smart phones and try to race to see who’s $6 odds calculator app will figure out the answer first when you can do it in your head faster… :roll:

First things first, watch the economics,  as long as you are making MORE money, you are in charge,  and can trade piece for piece all day.

Second thing, remember you only need to NOT LOSE Hawaii and NSW.  Get stacks of ground units into those territories - mixed with planes + an AA and hold.

Third,  as often as possible build Transports and Men.  Take islands, forcing Japan to take them back, even if it costs you the tran to steal the territory in the first place.  Again, try to watch the economics here.

What this all does - is dilute’s Japan’s ability to focus it’s economics on one specific target.  If Japan can’t focus and take it’s objectives, it can’t win.  If you slowly start to swing the economic balance in your favour - 1 island at a time, eventually Japan will run out of gas - and because they lose - you win.

It’s all a widdling factor.  Widdle widdle widdle till you win