@ncscswitch:
Pearl Harbor lead to the defeat of Japan.
It worked that way in 1942, it works that way in the game.
Pearl Harbor was very successful actually. It’s the battle of midway that really hurt. Don’t go to midway as japan. :)
History isn’t very well replicated in this game in any event. Taking out the fleet in hawaii really isn’t all that bad a move, imo, but if the allies went hard into asia I am usually pressed to ignore them.
There are fools and greater fools.
You should look for some of the threads that actually garner discussion. The threads that are immediately disputed indicate strategic errors by the original poster.
Strategic errors, or game rule errors, Such as…
You will probably wipe both forces out, but if you have a fighter left, land it in Karelia to better defend it against the Russians.
You cannot land airplanes in newly taken over territory.
The cost of that ftr for the Man battle will likely be the loss of Kar. Losing Kar is severely penalizing to the allied cause.
It really depends on the circumstances. If attacking manchuria is an option, this must not be RR. I also assume there is no bid because of the thread starter’s experience, and because some type of bid would probably be placed into man. Therefore, assuming russia can attack, I do not think at ALL that the ftr for the man battle will be the loss of KAR. As I seem to be repeatedly arguing, a german attack on karelia is really not all that frightening. Even if russia in the west only takes out the baltic navy, the attack against karelia is G: 9inf + 7 arm + 5ftr + 1 bmb vs. R: 19inf + 3tnk + 1 ftr + aagun. That gives germany a 47% chance of taking. As russia, that’s a chance I am willing to take.
I think at the least most recent 20 threads should be mandatory reading before being able to post here…
And if you would win every time as Axis, the how come I play as Allies and always win?
Because nc is a much better player than you? :)
You may not be aware but western canada connects to the eastern canada seas. The US hardly needs to even blink an eye by a round 4 assault as the gravy train is well under way. By round 3 US should have its transport crew set up, with some extra inf in western US. Each round thereafter they build in western US. This allows the western US defend against mexico, and since the troops go western U.S.->Western Can->Finland, alaska is defended against as well by troops that just happen to be walking by. Brutally effective really.
Seems fine to me. There is some question over attacking egypt, as india can hit you on the counter. It weakens india of course, but it effectively removes germany from africa. Most people will tell you that germany cannot realistically hold africa in a no-bid game anyhow, at least without the axis diverting forces from other well needed arenas. I’ll try and avoid taking us off track with mentioning japan.
What does your opponent go for eastern europe with? I believe that taking eastern europe as the allies is imprudent, at best. If you take it with armor, even worse. Russia gives up their only offense besides fighters on the first round (besides the east armor). The trade ends up not being in their favor. They spend 33 + 35 = 24 IPCs, and germany spends 33 + 15 + 1*10 = 24. Russia will probably kill another inf on the counter, but I’d rather bleed russia than germany any day. Russia really needs that armor, germany has plenty of armor and fighters to spare. Assuming they use one ftr in the baltic, that leaves them a 90% chance of taking eastern. Now, that’s a great percentage and all, but even if they take they are taking with 3 or 2 armor, probably. Munch munch. Their attack against finland is now weak. You could always pull out of finland into sweden. Yes it costs you 3 ipcs, but you will probably get to take back finland for 2. If it is lightly defended you could probably even do this twice, gaining yourself TIME, more IPCs than neutral violation, and a better unit tradeoff than if they sat there on defense. If russia wants to attack you they have to march in there before they can use their fighters. You have also made finland/norway a very brief deadzone.
Anyhow, your moves are pretty much what I’d do. I sometimes use my transport to move infantry south like you do, but send my bb against the UK for a suicide mission. I can then use the sub in the UK seas, as I would much rather lose the sub than a fighter. You could then use the bomber elsewhere or help take out the bb still if you wished. Sure you might lose your battleship, but were you really going to ressurect the kriegsmarine?
Look forward to hearing them. You are obviously thinking about the game a lot. Keep in mind that no one has really come up with the a satisfactory counter to the KGF strategy under 2nd edition or 2nd edition RR. That is why bidding was introduced. Are you familiar with it? It sounds like you probably regularly cream your gaming group, so it wouldn’t be necessary there. If you consistently are crushing them as the allies though you may wish to spot them a few inf in africa.
@ncscswitch:
You make a few errors in your responses. Caucuses CAN’T be retaken in round 2 before German gets to act: Russia has no forces left to do so: everything west of Yakut (in your scenario) is dead (except the R2 build, 8 INF to cover Karelia and Russia). That means Russia has to split their defense, leaving Karelia potentially vulnerable (not extremely, but again it comes down to my north atlantic sub sinking that Canadian transport and limitting UK to landing only 2 land units, of which one will survive and I might even get one or both of those fighters with AA or my land forces in Karelia that survive the BB. Also, have you considered that Germany leaves only 1 land unit in Karelia, inviting UK in and saving much of their air-power for an all-out strike on Russia from the Caucuses that you can NOT re-take before G2?
Well it would have been a mistake if I said that caucus was retaken before germany gets to act. I believe it explicitly states it as UK 2’s move that they attack the caucus with 1 bmb, 2 ftrs, and 2 inf. I certainly make mistakes frequently but that was not one of them.
Given my no luck scenario, you leave 1 unit in karelia? So germany has 1 ftr, 1 bmb, and 2 inf f/ caucus attacking russia. That would be a very, very sad all-out attack. Even if I decided as stated before to only place 2 infantry in moscow, that only gives you a 20% chance of taking. Considering you would want to lose 1 infantry, then fighter/bmb if you wanted to take, your odds decrease drastically. G: 2 * 1 + 1 * 3 + 1 * 4 vs. 2 * 2 + 2 * 4 + 2 (from aagun) -> G: 1 * 1 + 1 * 4 + 3(carry) vs. 1 * 2 + 2 * 4 + 2 -> G: Kaput vs. R: 2 * 4. Everything else that could have reached russia was used against karelia. If you didn’t use everything you could possibly bear, your odds become much worse in the karelia assault. As I stated before, after you have shot your wad you have no legitimate G2 with your moves.
You are right though, it CAN be done.
@ncscswitch:
And yes Germany would be weak afterwards, but building strongly for 2 rounds against a weakend Russia (with enough INF in key places so that UK would have to risk those precious fighters if they attempt an amphib).
I really don’t think russia is that weakened. They are still making some nice IPCs. Furthermore, as you have stated elsewhere, you are not reaching parity with economy/units. You cannot hold the IPCs you have taken, and you have blown your main starting units. By the third round the allies still hold significant territory BUT the axis units in the west have accomplished very little IPCwise. Yes japan will start gobbling some up, but that is typical. Russia could only really start slowing them down when they get near moscow anyhow.
@ncscswitch:
And as far as holding Japan at Yakut with 7 INF and a tank…
On J1, I can probably crack that with available J forces in an RR game.
Yes, you CAN, but I think you are relying on too many CAN’s. (i love this reference) I CAN win at tic-tac-toe, but I would never bet on it. Trying to win twice in a row is even more difficult against a skilled opponent. By attacking yakut you significantly weaken your advance in south asia, allowing those troops to be used as speedbumps later. Not to mention it all for a gamble. Lets do my silly thing called math. The odds are you will take it with the bomber if you throw away the inf. That’s what I’d do. Still, I’ll do the math both ways, first with if you just kill the troops, 2nd if you want to take it. If my count is right, the yakut battle is (at most) J: 3 * 1 + 3 * 3 + 1 * 4 vs. R: 8 * 2 -> J: 1 * 1 + 3 * 3 + 1 * 4 + 4 (carry) vs. R: 6 * 2 + 4 -> G: 2 * 3 + 1 * 4 vs. R: 3 * 2 + 4 -> G: 1 * 3 + 1 * 4 + 4 vs. R: 2 * 2 + 4 -> G: 1 * 4 + 5 vs. R: 1 * 2 + 2 -> G: 1 * 4 vs. R: Kaput. That is an awfully close battle. If you want to take the land, then you shift the chances of you winning below 50%.
J: 3 * 1 + 3 * 3 + 1 * 4 vs. R: 8 * 2 -> J: 1 * 1 + 3 * 3 + 1 * 4 + 4 vs. R: 6 * 2 + 4 -> J: 1 * 1 + 1 * 3 + 1 * 4 vs. R: 3 * 2 + 4 -> J: 1*1 + 1 * 4 + 2 vs. 2 * 2 + 4 -> J: 1 * 1 + 1 vs. R: 1 * 2 + 2 -> -> J: Kaput R: 1 * 2.
Yes you can crack it, but as russia I’m willing to take those odds. 50% to take out 3 fighters and a bomber? Can I get a hell yeah?
@ncscswitch:
Do you REALLY think that Russia, starting from 8 INF in Round 2 and reduced IPC’s can stand up to Germany knocking on the door and Japan a tank-blitz away backed up by a hell of a lot of air-power?
The great thing about halloween is that you can always just not answer the door. Considering you sacced half your airforce on J1, can only tankblitz with 1 armor on J2, sacced your german airforce, your german armor, yes I do think they can stand up to it. The cool thing is that if you go all out on yakut, you cannot take china.
Why does talking/playing about this game never get old?
Okay, so lets say you follow your advice…
@ncscswitch:
Actually at that point I would try a slight shift… crack the “free” nuts south of Karelia, taking IPC’s equivalent to 1 INF from Russia, and posting land forces on Russia’s border, as many as I can get there: all of my tanks, infantry including Med transport and a support shot to kill that lone Caucus INF). If I read your post right on number of forces in Karelia, there will be nothing in Russia proper (unless moved in from the Japan front). If I still hold Eastern, then the INF flows forward giving Russia and equally ugly nut to try to crack.
You move everything you can get into the caucus. Assuming my strafe that I mentioned, that’s…oh MY! 2 inf and an armor. You fly in your fodder, I mean japanese airforce and it lands. I am not sure what you plan to do with ukraine, so I won’t make assumptions. If you left it light, I’d consider attacking there too.
So lets see about this caucus attack. 221 pointed out that you could just shift the stack, which would be perfectly nice. If ukraine was left lightly defended(?) then could the caucus/ukraine be attacked without a reputable counter in karelia? Caucus battle (using nowluck) - G: 3 * 2 + 2 * 4 + 1 * 1 vs. R: 5 * 1 + 5 * 3 -> G: 1 * 2 + 2 * 4 vs. R: 3 * 1 + 5 * 3 -> G: Kaput vs. R: 1 * 1 + 5 * 3
That leaves 11 inf to do your bidding in karelia. Of course if there was a strong contigent in ukraine like a 2 fighters, 3 inf, 3 arm, the caucus would have something to worry about on the counterside and might just shift. Of course, that also makes ukraine a tasty target though a much harder one to chew off. Lets say that ukraine is left lightly defended (though i am guessing nc wouldn’t do that). That leaves 11 inf + 8 inf build in karelia = 19inf + 4 ftrs. Assuming the G1 you mentioned, germany could next round bring 10 inf + 4 ftrs + 1 bmb + 6 arm. That’s a less than 20% chance at taking karelia. Not to mention you just weakened the japanese front substantially.
(this dialogue is fun) I don’t think your numbers are representative of chance. With your offense vs. defense, germany will only win about 50%?
Lets do a little NOLUCK to show what the most probably outcome of your battle is. I’ll take out 1 plane with the AA gun.
R: 50 = 8 hits carry 2
K: 48 = 8 hitsR: 13 2’s, 2 4’s = 34 = 6 hits + carry4 + carry2 = 7 hits
G: 3 1’s, 11 3’s, 1 4 = 40 = 6 hits carry 4R: 7 2’s 2 4’s = 22 = 3 hits carry 4
G: 7 3’s, 1 4 = 25 = 4 hits + carry1 + carry 4 = 4 hits + carry 5R: 3 2’s, 2 4’s = 14 = 2 hits + carry 4 + carry 2 = 3 hits
G: 4 3’s, 1 4 = 16 = 2 hits + carry 4 + carry 5 = 3 hits + carry 3R: 2 4’s = 8 = 1 hit + carry 2
G: 1 3’s, 1 4 = 7 + carry 4 = 1 hit + carry 5R: 1 4 = 4 + carry 2 = 1 hit
G: 1 4 = 4 + carry 5 = 1 hitR: Dead
G: Dead
Whoever wrote that stuff in that post was really dumb. Germany actually wins more like 60% of the time. Allow me to correct that idiots numbers, man he can’t even count.
R: 50 = 8 hits carry 2
K: 48 = 8 hits
R: 13 2’s, 2 4’s = 34 = 5 hits + carry4 + carry2 = 6 hits
G: 3 1’s, 11 3’s, 1 4 = 40 = 6 hits carry 4
R: 7 2’s 2 4’s = 22 = 3 hits carry 4
G: 8 3’s, 1 4 = 28 = 4 hits + carry4 + carry 4 = 5 hits + carry 2
R: 2 2’s, 2 4’s = 12 = 2 hits carry 4 = 2 hits + carry 4
G: 5 3’s, 1 4 = 19 = 3 hits + carry 1 + carry 2 = 3 hits + carry 3
R: 1 4’s = 4 = 4 + carry 2 = 1 hit
G: 3 3’s, 1 4 = 7 + carry 4 = 1 hit + carry 5
R: Dead
G: 2 3’s + 1bmb
There, now that I have corrected myself. Much of what I said above still stands. I’ll carry noluck about as I talk about, and do the baltic battle. If the transport is left in the baltic to prevent offshore shelling then that can be an excercise to the user, and just means I’d use the bomber in karelia more than likely. In the UK Seas, lets do this quickly now…
R: Non-Sub 1 4’s 1 1’s = 5 (transport lost because g sub’s add to 6 this round)
Sub = 1 2’s = 2 + 2 (from 1st round)
G: Sub = 1 2 = 4 (from 1st round) + 2 = 1 hit
So the UK attacks karelia with UP to 1 bb, 1 arm, 2 inf, 3 fighters, 1 bmb. Lets just say I take 2 fighters, 2 inf, an arm and the bb. That’s it for the defense, and in with the UK.
Yes, I realize I am going with a no luck scenario, and that does not represent reality. What I am trying to show is that if germany blows its load and the UK can take back karelia, it was a really silly move. Given that it is VERY likely they will, why do this as germany? Yes the dice can go well for you, yes you can take karelia with overwhelming force. On the other side, yes russia can kick your butt back to oblivion. Why the hell even bother to setup the board if you are going to attack karelia with RR? No strategy could be implemented by Russia to prevent this, there is nothing they can do. So you as germany take a crapshoot, maybe get lucky and hold karelia so russia can’t build on it. Otherwise karelia as I have demonstrated will have a strong defense. If your crapshoot works out, then you believe the allies have no chance. So why bother? Why throw the whole game to a single battle that requires no strategic setup?
If the mods want to move this latest part of the thread, go for it.
EDIT These numbers below are incorrect. I’m going to leave this post here though to show how much of a dolt I am. Most of the ideas still stand. Corrections are in next post. /EDIT
Switch,
(this dialogue is fun) I don’t think your numbers are representative of chance. With your offense vs. defense, germany will only win about 50%?
Lets do a little NOLUCK to show what the most probably outcome of your battle is. I’ll take out 1 plane with the AA gun.
R: 50 = 8 hits carry 2
K: 48 = 8 hits
R: 13 2’s, 2 4’s = 34 = 6 hits + carry4 + carry2 = 7 hits
G: 3 1’s, 11 3’s, 1 4 = 40 = 6 hits carry 4
R: 7 2’s 2 4’s = 22 = 3 hits carry 4
G: 7 3’s, 1 4 = 25 = 4 hits + carry1 + carry 4 = 4 hits + carry 5
R: 3 2’s, 2 4’s = 14 = 2 hits + carry 4 + carry 2 = 3 hits
G: 4 3’s, 1 4 = 16 = 2 hits + carry 4 + carry 5 = 3 hits + carry 3
R: 2 4’s = 8 = 1 hit + carry 2
G: 1 3’s, 1 4 = 7 + carry 4 = 1 hit + carry 5
R: 1 4 = 4 + carry 2 = 1 hit
G: 1 4 = 4 + carry 5 = 1 hit
R: Dead
G: Dead
So you are left with nothing in no luck. Let ssay you were left with a unit, you could always take out your bomber earlier of course, but then you are left with one tank, and no air. What would you do? I assume put the tank there, and no build in karelia is nice. (please double check my math, I did once and found an error, but am going off the assumption it’s right).
Of course, in RR russia would move over to UK seas, which means your subs have a whopping 11% chance at a win. 54% chance you only kill 1 or no transports, and even if I have to take the transport casualty, I have my transport off of canada. Much less chance if you don’t take your trans.
This round, I roll into karelia with a BB shot, 2 inf, 2 fighters. I probably take with 2 inf, land my fighters in moscow. I send my bomber, battleship, and sub to your BB and transport. They are gone. The UK doesn’t even BOTHER building an AC because you have nothing to take it with. Depending on transports it has left, it can build a few. Lets say it only has 1 left, so it builds 2. Then 4 inf. The US builds as per darth’s suggestion 3 trans/2 inf. The US lands 2 inf in finland, 2 fighters, bomber in UK.
Next round: Russia builds 6 inf in karelia, 2 in moscow. You have two inf in eastern, 1 armor in berlin. You cannot possibly attack, so where do your forces go? I assume you move inf into eastern, maybe do a little dance in ukraine/caucus. You still have no air, bonus for UK. UK moves 4 inf + 1 arm into karelia. It attacks your caucus inf with 1 bmb + 2 ftrs + 2 inf. Maybe ukraine has two inf also? So I don’t bother attacking. If it only had 1 I might split forces. US builds another 2 trans, places some in eastern, the rest in western. Shuffles its troops into finland, shifts finland troops to karelia.
You quote “Come G3, Russia will ONLY have 13 INF, plus whatever UK and USA support has been moved in to defend against a German assault that could be as much as 18 INF, 5 tanks, and a bomber.” Where did your 18inf come from? In G2 you only had 2 left in eastern, then lets say you moved your 9 in. That’s 11 that can attack in G3. Meanwhile, russia has 6 + R3 build of 6 (caucus was retaken in UK2) + 2 from moscow = 14. On top of that, you have in UK2 moved 4 inf + 1 arm into karelia, and the US has moved in another 2 inf. Oh yeah, and the fighters.
In short, G3’s more likely outcome is ~11inf + 5 armor vs. 14 inf + 4 inf + 1 arm + 4 ftrs.
I think you need to re-evaluate this all out assault on karelia, or maybe I am missing something.
Ack, this thread took up way too much time and can’t respond to others now. Damn this whole thinking thing. Oh, btw, if I stack Yakut with 7 inf and the armor you only have a 51% chance of taking it, and that is saccing 3 fighters to do so. 3 1’s 3 3’s 1 4 vs. 8 2’s. That means you don’t take the land either, which means another 2 IPCs for russia, yippee.
The main problem I see is that there is no easy transfer of forces. The US/UK can transfer their infantry and be in position next round to pick up the exact same amount. Japan has a lot of seas to go through. I think you would probably want to combine it with some factory builds, as your transport force will be occupied and you would want to keep the pressure up.
@ncscswitch:
Strategy is fluid. Anyone bound to a set pattern at the start of a game deserves to lose.
See, you are assuming that because I have told you what my initial strategy is that I cannot shift. Your sentiment is also mistaken. I assure you I can never lose a game of tic-tac-toe games sticking to one particular strategy.
Anyhow, I want to get your strategy right because I don’t want to make assumptions. I think you have come to good strategic assumptions on your own, but I think you need to play online. Lets say I play a “typical” R1 and things go about average, maybe even slightly well. I kill your baltic fleet, throw a transport into UK seas, land my fighters on karelia, leave one inf in caucus. I strafe ukraine with 7 inf and 3 arm. Ukraine has one fighter left, you kill 3 inf. Retreat to Karelia. I also attack manchuria but that’s another discussion methinks.
Karelia now has 8 inf + 3 arm + 2 fighters + 8inf build. You have previously said that you go all out against russia, I wonder if this means that if eastern europe is not taken if this is what you do?
While I apologize for getting potentially off track here, I must point that nccswitch is playing by some sort of mystic rules where infantry cost 4 IPCs. 24 IPC ( 8INF )
The concept of slashing/burning africa is very amusing to me, you honestly take all of africa with germany? I think you are assuming that you are the only one who can change strategies, and that the allies will keep dumping all of their troops into “germany” or karelia. Oh, and I ignore japan all the time as the allies, it tends to piss off the japanese player. Once they get a little closer I’ll start paying attention. I think this probably relates to axis strategy more, so i’m going to go over to that thread.
I think that Japan generally sweeps southeast/northeast asia pretty rapidly. The problem is that it slows Japan down by 1, and probably 2 moves. The key is that the initial attack is weaker than it normally is, so it can be counterattacked closer to russia when it arrives. Either that or japan waits. Those one/two moves are typically enough to allow the allies to win. Time is to the allies advantage, not the axis. An old quote I see thrown around a&a a lot is from napoleon - “Strategy is the art of making use of time and space. I am less concerned about the latter than the former. Space we can recover, lost time never.”
anyways this move dosent work on a russia restricted game…
Is there anything, anywhere in these posts that leads you to believe we are talking about a RR game? Since we OBVIOUSLY are not, why bother bringing it up?
Why waste the two fighters on the first round? If germany is hellbent on killing the navy, they will be able to accomplish it the second round against a carrier and 2 fighters. So why bother as the UK/US? There is a reason why darth is buying 3 trans/4inf and not 2 ftrs.
If the UK abstains from buying the first round, the second round they can buy an aircraft carrier and whatever else it is their heart desires, lets say a transport and some other crap. The us moves their 3 transports into the UK seas, drops off some troops in finland/norway, and hangs out with the UK navy. The US builds a few more transports and infantry that round.
So G3 comes around, and what does germany do about the navy? Not much that I can see. 5 ftrs and 1 bmb against the navy in the UK seas nets you about a 10% chance at a win. The most likely outcome is that I have my fighters and an aircraft carrier lying around. Next round US moves in and drops more troops into finland/norway, and the UK builds some transports too. Now there is even more of a navy than last time, and you have not much at all to attack it with.
So, you COULD buy 2 fighters if the UK did the “standard” build, in fact you should. Most of us are aware though that the standard build rarely works out very well, and thus plan more in tune with what I mentioned above. If you don’t sac your airforce against the navy, the allies are dumping in troops pretty quickly. If you do, then the allies are still dumping them in quickly, you just have no airforce.
I thought in the other post you said that russia taking manchuria was a really bad move? I guess maybe you aren’t advocating this move in particular, just mentioning.
It any event I really like the move, but I rarely do it because it has worked out immensely NOT in my favor quite a few times. I have lost all attacking forces with no losses on the other side too many times.
But yes, it is a good move to slow down the Japanese assault, as the US can potentially counterattack manchuria delaying japan one more round, and giving more breathing room and more IPCs. Okay, it’s really the extra round that is important. One more round means another ~14 troops into karelia, more than germany can build most certainly. Note that I specified another round to bring troops into karelia, instead of taking down germany :) . I certainly won’t do the move if germany has taken AES, because I like to counterattack germany from india and end that threat/cashcow immediately.
I would argue that you could use it even when you aren’t doing a KJF strategy.
Nc,
Do you honestly believe that the general assumption of everyone who has played axis and allies for years that the game is unbalanced towards the allies is wrong? Or do you believe that your strategy is unique? It is not a bad strategy, but you are making what I believe to be poor assumptions of what good and bad play is. For example, manchuria is NOT a bad move. I may agree that it’s not the best move, but you are kidding yourself if you believe it hasn’t been used frequently by very good players, to great affect.
Your detailing of what the allies does is also generally incorrect for an allied team that wants to win. You assume that russia will attack eastern europe, whereas the more likely first move is a strafe against ukraine. The caucus is a simple retaking the next round with whatever you put into it, by using air power. Your attack relies on the UK and US attacking germany proactively, whereas I very rarely do that. Lets say I do shuck shuck (because i’m unoriginal) on you. As the allies by round 3 I will have finland norway stacked with a couple of tanks and about 12 infantry. My fighters from the UK and the US would also have been sitting in karelia for quite awhile.
Ugh, actually I am pretty tired of arguing this, so I’m sure I will let you go on believing what you will. I would just say that I have very different ideas of what “GOOD” play is. In my mind, good allies would be helping karelia, not playing around with western and eastern europe. In my mind, a good russia will not just let you storm across their continent. In my mind, even when you take moscow if as you say the allies hold western and eastern the game is certainly not over if berlin is taken that round.
I would suggest you test your strategy on http://www.tripleawarclub.org/, as actions always speak louder than words.