If newbies are playing their first game…

@The:

I’d say hit the Solomans with maybe as much air as you can send (if it reaches), but if it can’t reach safely, hit that area with everything you got. Those are the closets transports. The WUS ones are 2 turns away. Hit Solomans, but buy more air for a) defence and b) hitting power because when you go south, he’ll move north/northeast into your path to block you, really putting a cramp in your plans to come back to the defence of Japan.

And if you could post a map or something of what you face, that would be great. But kill transports. Battleships can’t transport men anyway!  :lol: :-D

GL

Thanks, that’s what I was thinking. My focus is Russia while they’re super weak. I can hit his loaded carrier, and trans with 2 BB’s, an AC and four planes. That should do it, and I can take two hits and won’t mind losing a couple planes.

I anticapted his blocking move too and was considering buying planes. I think I’ll buy 1 plane and all land forces.

I usually start shipping troops and a small fleet to africa to threaten the underbelly of Europe, building up enough forces over several turns to eventually launch a strike or reinforce WEU.  At the same time I am slowly building a navy in the Pacific to make sure Japan doesnt go unchecked, and maybe if japan has their navy out of the way I will build a transport and take borneo, just to be an annoyance.

i’m a pro-axis player myself. i’ve always been interested in WWII, and especially in germany. so i always enjoy it more

mind you, i’ve played germany so often that my mates always try to make me play a different nation. mainly an allied one!  :lol:

@Cmdr:

Appears to be working, though, the unit I am running on ATM is perma-connected to the net so it might be drawing off the net…doubt it.  :)

Thanks, Dan

Nope, there’s no way that’s drawing off the net. That would take a whole lot of programming that I simply haven’t done.

@newpaintbrush:

@DarthMaximus:

@newpaintbrush:

@DarthMaximus:

I think a well rounded strat will allow you to do both relatively seemlessly while if you venture too much into a “reactive” strat it may not allow you to take adv of mistakes as quickly.

Don’t you mean “OVERreactive” strat?

If you make unsound purchases based on what you think your opponent’s going to do, that is overreacting.

If your opponent sees your mistake, and acts in the best possible manner to exploit your weakness, that is reacting.

Yes.

But also:
Did that persons previous moves put you in a position to make a mistake, or did you just flat out miss something and make a mistake on your own?
Maybe I’m nitpicking. :-)

You can think proactively (2-3 turns down the road) and force your opponent into difficult decisions or mistakes.

I’m of the school that assumes that their opponents will be worthy, hence that mistakes will not be made; hence that losses will be from bad luck or the aggregate result of suboptimal plays, rather than from a blatantly wrong move.

To clarify, you can NEVER “maneuver” your opponent into making a mistake.  Either your opponent blunders, and makes a mistake on his/her own, or you force your opponent to make a difficult decision.

–

In other words, say I know you like alcohol, and that you don’t really care too much about money.  So I bring free drinks to our poker game, you get drunk, and I win lots of money.  Did you make a MISTAKE, or a CHOICE?  I think you made a CHOICE.

Now, if you were holding a straight, in five card draw no wilds, and you folded, you probably made a MISTAKE.  But that was your choice.

If you were drunk when you folded, I would say that you made a CHOICE to enter into a situation in which you would more readily make MISTAKES.  But still, folding on that straight would be YOUR MISTAKE.  Nobody forced you into folding.

I think we’re agreeing with each other.

(your mistake or not) Your betting pattern, poker face, demear at the table all provide the other player with information into the decision about their hand.
You come out betting strong, with a stone cold dead face, I read that as hell I can’t beat him I fold.  I made the choice, but you willfully provided informaton that helped me make a decision.  All be it a wrong decision but at the time I assed all available info and came to a conclusion, which in this case was wrong and a mistake.

The whole theory behind deadzoning is manuevering to get your opponent to (help them if you will) make a mistake (or bad choice).  Yes your opponent makes the choice to move in his whole army, but you set up the board.

I also play assuming your opponent is “worthy” and makes no mistakes, but that doesn’t mean I won’t set “traps” to test them.  B/c as we both know, no one is flawless and I’ve seen plenty of good players overlook the smallest things from time to time (including myself).

I think we are agreeing with each other here.
I think these statement are equivalent:

ME:

Did that persons previous moves put you in a position to make a mistake, or did you just flat out miss something and make a mistake on your own?

YOU:

Either your opponent blunders, and makes a mistake on his/her own, or you force your opponent to make a difficult decision.

Perharps I shouldn’t have used the word “mistake” in the first sentence, but they basically say the same thing.  Force a person into a “lesser of two evils” decision.

Pre-LHTR Lend Lease is insane.  Non-LHTR Super-fortresses is also pretty crazy.

Colonial Garrison makes KJF much stronger.  Radar messes with things a lot.  Mobile Industry makes the Caucasus no longer a vital country, and increases the strength of a KJF.  Mechanized infantry lets you do a lot of stuff, as does fast carriers, as does island bases . . . really, MOST of the Allied NAs are quite good.

Germany’s Blitzkrieg is decent because it frees up fighters.  Japan’s Banzai is okay.  (Banzai’s not great against a KJF, and even for a KGF, you need tanks and fighters for that last push into Moscow).  Most of the Axis NAs suck.  It is usually a matter of HOW MUCH they suck.

How to abuse pre-LHTR Lend Lease - UK fighters, US fighters.  You haven’t seen “stupid” until you see Russia producing 8-9 infantry a turn with 14 fighters for backup.  No, seriously.  Russia just beats the hell out of everything.  LHTR changed this, thank goodness.

How to abuse Superfortresses - build bombers to strat bomb, go for tech dice on US3 or US4.  With heavy bombers, you shut down Germany.  LHTR limits total damage per turn, I believe, instead of total damage per bomber, so stops this from doing more than 16 IPC damage.

How to abuse Blitzkrieg - well, you take this fat load of tanks, and use 1-2 infantry to trade territories with Russia early.  Since you can use your tanks to trade territories without committing, now you can use your fighters for other things.  Like . . . getting EVEN MORE territory, or fighting off that Allied Atlantic fleet.

How to abuse Banzai - use a lotta infantry, surprise.

I meant to add that… the fun ends for the German navy pretty quickly…

The Carrier is a nice addition. After years of resistance I’ve dropped my pride and in my current game added one. Although I lost my Baltic fleet on U.S.4, it allowed me to control the north against determined Allied play through G4. I could have devoted more IPCs and held it longer, but I cut my losses and pulled my Ftrs. More meat and potatoes were needed.

So I’ve finally seen the  light- the G1 Carrier/ 8 Inf build is solid…damn you all…

I’d advise that you give Karelia up in R1. If you build 3 Inf, 3 Arm and are a bit lucky with your rolls (attacking at least WRU, maybe UKR), it’s even possible to drive German forces out of Karelia in R2 (although not likely).