Topics created by akreider2

Please stay on topic or don’t post in this thread.  Thanks.

@Zhukov44:

It’s only happened to me once or twice.  It’s a feat of speed to make a post and come back to the thread and roll a battle all in the space of 15 secs.

Eh, I can see how you can come close if you’re doing round 2 or 3 of a large battle, because then all you need to do is @ a couple times. If you’re a faster typer you can breeze through it.

But still, not generally a problem for me.

@axis_roll:

OK, can we take this premise is a slightly different direction?

what makes a great A&A player?
[Not sure if these are in order of importance of not, we can argue that after we create a list]
Also assuming a 1-on-1 game.  Team dynamics are a whole other discussion.

1).   Experience

Knows the game and the ‘better’ strategies and more important territories as well some of the nuances of the game (like sub / DD interaction / vulnerabilities as well as how to coordinate moves with your allies countries)

2).  Vision / Ability to see 2-3 rounds down the road in a game.

If you can not see what your opponent is trying to do to you or have a strategy for your side (at least a general one), it’s hard to win.  Knowing HOW to win is not hard (your objectives), you can gleen that from the rules, knowing HOW to achieve those are much more vital

3).  Understanding / mitigating the risks

Take good odds battles, unless you are falling behind, you might starting increasing your risks in order to increase your chances of winning.

4).  Determining who is winning / losing (very tightly related to 3)

If you think you are winning when you are in fact losing, your moves may be counter productive.  An example helps to explain my point.  If I think I am winning, I may have no sense of urgency to force my opponent to counter my move(s), or properly increase my risk exposure.

5).  Being able to realize AND take advantage of an opportunity

Many times in games, a battle may go awry for/against you (dice will do that!).  Sometimes it can be so bad that no level of contingency plan you have created can save you EXCEPT for your opponents failure to realize and exploit this weakness.  Good players recognize these situations.

6).  Realizing any unit is disposable to meet your objective(s)

Often times, a player is hung up on the COST of some units that are risked/lost.  “Oh, I took france but it cost me 3 bombers to do it!”
Well that just might be the best move for the situation, ESPECIALLY if you can afford it or needed that battle to get back into the game (see #3 about mitigating the risks)

Please feel free to add to my quick list.  I am sure there are many more.

Very solid list.

I’ve changed my strategy!I hit egypt first round with germany.take out sz12 with 2 fighters and sub.sz2with fighter ,bomber suband now leave canadian trans alone.don’t want to spread out too much.lower all the risk a little and save a fighter hopefully.
I had a game yesterday where italy landed in london unopposed.how did this happen?when you bring in the jap navy into the mediterainan ?(2 carriers battlship 4 fighters)and combine this with the itallian fleet you can now almost destroy the allied convoy system and or make there purchases of navel units skyrocket.I’m planning next game to nip that in the bud.have the usa hold the jap fleet back in the pacific and destroy the itallian fleet round one or 2 befroe the japs get therewith british or american bombers and or navel units.I now play germany very defenceively,buying time for the the japs to come in.Seems like the allies should always win ,they should be able to counter anything with there vast resourses.It just a matter of catching the off guard.Do not do a german tank blits.Russians can just build infantry to soak them up and then you losse france to americans coming over from canada.
SIDEPOINT      ATTENTION hardcore  players.Something is bugging me……should not french madagascar be in german control because it was in december 1941 the british had to invade so it wasn’t in german control anylonger…what about french west africa too and also Italian east africa I think they all should be under axis control…what are your thoughts?

Now having played these two games for several more rounds there do appear to be some disadvantages.

Sacrificing german planes to take CAU, or Italian troops on a first-round assault to help the Germans take it, combined with placing fewer troops in Africa - can make it so that the Axis has less of a fighting force, and might also be making less money than otherwise possible.

Italy is likely to lose its NO(s) in Africa faster.  Germany gets the CAU NO, but if it is possible to get this by trading KAR, then that might be a lot easier.

Germany loses a lot of flexibility by being tied into sending armor to CAU (either to reinforce it, or to take MOS). Also fighters can get tied up too, making atlantic Allied convoys easier and facilitating the US going for Japan.

Plusses: if you can get Italy to fight your Russian territory border skirmishes and to build infantry to defend ITA, FRA, and GER against the Allies amphibious assaults - then Germany can build up much faster than Russia and ultimately take Moscow with a stack of armor (possibly reinforced by a buy of all bombers, the turn before the assault - as they can fly from GER to MOS is one turn).

Having Italy use its infantry for cannon fodder is much better than having Italy attack MOS to soften up the defenses before the German attack, as Italy will typically lose all its units on the first round of fighting (thus it costs 10 IPC to kill a single defending Russian infantry - by buying 2 arm, or 10.5 with inf/art).  Italy can also intentionally escalate in border countries (stack an empty country with 2 inf, instead of 1) to bleed off more Russian units.

I just tried the build 2 factories UK in south africa and india.What a failure that was .It leaves russia wide open for a can opener italy so Germany wins right off the bat.Back to square one all you can do as the allies is KGF with tranny’s.I’m really kinda pissed off now.I think the the china’s representaion in this game is horrible.China had 3.8 million troops and if you think that the 5 divions represented is close your really wrong.Since your letting germany in this game just walk in to moscow the game shuld be balanced with a true representation of china and the 2 million in india.china should have like 12 troops right off the bat .now way would japan just walk on through china like a big joke.And then they should get a infantry for every territory.damn

I saw someone mention earlier about sub hits coming off first.

I believe a DD changes when a Sub fires. With one, a sub fires when everything else does.
So I think a defending sub would fire in surprise strike, but the attacker sub would fire with other units if the defenders have a DD.

Also in the opening fire phase, sub hits could be taken on defending subs that also fire, thus preventing a unit from not getting to fire if you have enough subs to cover the hits.

I mostly fixed the problem. And if your email was new enough, then it is still in the mail queue and you’ll receive it. As a result, hopefully, I won’t get added to any spam filters.

Germany cannot hold Caucasus early in the game.

If it tries, all Russia has to do is take Ukraine with West Russia forces, cutting off any reinforcements, and take Caucasus with combined West Russia and Russia forces.

On the other hand, Germany has a very easy time smashing Karelia early.  If Russia reinforces in Karelia, I think the Axis have an excellent chance of winning, as Germany smashes the Karelia stack with the Baltic transport, Norway, Eastern Europe infantry plus assorted tanks.  West Russia will not have enough to counterattack (since so many units were in Karelia in the first place), and the Germans have seriously damaged Russia’s ability to trade territories from W. Russia - the Germans can even secure Ukraine with that weak of a Russia.

Leave Archangel and Karelia open with Russia; do not defend.  That’s my recommendation.

One TripleA TSVG comprises all the history so far up to a position. The format is compressed or coded somehow, unparseable as text anyway. One may understand the format from the Open source.

Loading the TSVG into TripleA, it can reconstitute the position at any moment between actions - including at end of R1 of any turn. TripleA also does some good summaries inside, including IPC incomes and total unit values by countries and Axis/Allies.

Woha, how’d I miss this?  Good one, akreider2.

Akreider1 would be so proud!  (snif)

Bumped.
Please, Wittmann or Panther, move this thread into Player help.
Thanks.

One popular technique is to put something in the message that looks like non-spam.  I think run-on sentences are supposedly good or something.

Like

“Roberta pulled out her broom and mop, thinking that it was time for a cleaning; it had been many days since the leaves had been swept from the doorstep, and there was quite an accumulation of material that had been gathering over the past six or seven days.”

(I was originally going to post something far more . . . exciting.  But . . . exciting stuff often triggers spam filters).

And the other side of the coin is…

Threaten strafe and TAKE instead.  It just worked in my current game.  Jen was afraid of a German Strafe from Caucuses (I am guessing) making her Moscow force too weak to hold against the Japan.  So she evac’d instead killing the German force and surrendering Moscow.

Strafe Threats CAN be very fun :-D

To me I’m looking for gamebreaking changes in LL that would convince me that it doesn’t have any validity for analyzing overall strategies in ADS. I don’t really get stuck on very small details in very small battles in which we’re talking about efficiency in fractions of IPCs - which either side can take advantage of. I’m looking at the forest, not the trees.

I think it’s something to have to live with, but it’s still better to look at overall strategies than having every other game in ADS screwed over by some important battle going horribly wrong.

No on all counts.

Here are the reasons:

#1:  Rockets originate from AA guns.  AA guns can ONLY move in non-combat.
#2:  Non-Combat Movement rules specify that any land unit moved/engaged in combat may NOT move in non-combat.
#3:  The “Rocket” could only be moved toward Russia in non-combat, which is AFTER the phase in which Rockets fire, so you cannot move then fire.
#4:  Any units on a Transport are considered Cargo.  They cannot attack or defend while on a transport, and they die if the transport dies.