Posts made by Ansbach

Most of the games I play, the UK vacates India to hit Egypt and knock Germany out of Africa or to reinforce Syria for attack on the German navy on UK2. Sometimes they vacate to South Africa. Of course ocassionally they will build a factory in India, or rarely hit Kwang - but other than that India is ripe for the taking.

I can’t remember ever seeing a UK player just leave his stuff in India without reinforcing it and building a factory. If he did, I would definitely hit both India and China, leaving the Far East for later.

Personally, I would recommend buying the original Axis and Allies first and then later on you can move to the variants… just my two cents. The main difference is the obvious one - the original covers the entire war and the other two cover specific theatres.

However, all three are fun - the smartest move would be to find out which ones your friends have and buy the one they don’t!

Also, you will find that these Forums are one of the most mature on the web - 95% flame free!

[ This Message was edited by: Ansbach on 2002-06-11 12:28 ]

FYI:

There is a player matching service on The MicroSoft Network Gaming Zone - http://www.zone.com.

No, it’s not what I’m thinking then. There is a specific problem you have to address if you are using a firewall/router. Sorry I’m not more help!

I did some research on the net and found out that the movie was released on VHS in 1986 under the name “State of Division”, so you may be able to find a video of it under that name instead of “Death Race”.

Here’s a brief summary without spoiling anything:

Two American P-40s go on a mission in Africa to bomb a minefield, and one of them gets shot down and has to make a crash landing. The second pilot lands to rescue his buddy, but a German tank and soldiers show up and a stray bullet takes out something or another so that the plane can no longer take off, but can still taxi along the ground. The remainder of the movie is about the Afrika Korps chasing the two pilots and the plane across the desert, and it has a great ending that I’m not going to tell you about… :grin:

It’s really good for a TV movie - on http://www.imdb.com it has a rating of 8.3 out of 10.

[ This Message was edited by: Ansbach on 2002-06-10 07:33 ]

sorry 'bout that :lol:

[ This Message was edited by: Ansbach on 2002-06-09 22:52 ]

Either of you guys using DSL router/hubs such as a Linksys?

Here is my personal favorite Pearl Harbor attack:

2 Battleships, 1 Sub, 1 Fighter, and 1 Bomber to Hawaii (if you are playing with 2 hit battleships you don’t need the bomber). The fighter and the bomber are the last casualties you remove, but in an ‘average’ battle you will wipe him out in Round 1 and only lose the sub.

The reason I like this is one is because on the non-combat phase you can move the AC to the Japan SZ and land the fighter there, ready to go into action on turn 2 and protecting the transports immediately.

I’d also like to recommend a different Pearl Harbor attack on J1. The Japanese airforce are the most important units they have on the board - they are their only offensive units that can be used effectively for quite some time. They are extremely valuable, and losing them in the Pearl Harbor battle would really hurt. Look at it this way - you start with 6 aircraft, if you get slightly unlucky and Japan loses 2 in your Pearl Harbor attack, then you have just lost one-third of Japan’s offensive capability! And if you replace them, then you have just been slowed down by a turn, maybe twwo!

If you bring in even 1 Battleship on the Pearl Harbor attack, you will have a much better chance of a first round wipeout (which will minimize your losses), and if they get two hits you can take the Battleship as a loss instead of the fighter.

Being a newer player you might think taking a battleship as a loss instead of a fighter is crazy, but don’t let the cost of units fool you - the strategic situation on the board makes many specific “cheaper” units more valuable than other, higher cost pieces. In the long run, that Japanese fighter will be a much more productive and active unit in the war then the battleship. The infantry in Lybia are another perfect example - 2 extra German infantry in Lybia are more valuable to the Axis then two extra battleships for Japan!

I’d read many many comments that Allies always win. While I agree that the Allies have a strong advantage (eg USA, UK, & Rus IC are 1 turn away from Germany whereas Jap IC are lightyear away), I believe that advantage only translate to an Allies victory 60-65% of the time. I presume always win mean 99.9% of the time???

BladeX:

Using the rules you are playing with, the Allies can win about 90% of their games - but it is using one specific Allied strategy (with minor variants). If your opponents haven’t learned or don’t use that specific strategy, then the Axis probably have about a 40%-50% chance of winning instead of about a 10% chance, and many Axis strategies (such as going for an early IPC victory) are more viable, which is why your strategy is working well for you for now…

[ This Message was edited by: Ansbach on 2002-06-09 22:34 ]

Exactly, and I’d also like to add that eliminating the UK sub (and keeping your German fleet alive) is much easier when you play with 2-hit Battleships.

Using the rules you are playing with, a turn 5 economic victory is NOT POSSIBLE AGAINST A GOOD ALLIED OPPONENT. Not to beat a dead horse, but for the Axis to have a fair chance of winning this game at all against a quality opponent you have to bid or give them something extra, and it usually comes in the form of extra infantry in Lybia to help secure Africa, as Field Marshall stated above.

For the Axis to win an economic victory, Germany basically has to have EVERY country in Africa, and Japan has to have EVERY country in Asia except the three next to Russia, and they are still 5 IPCs short!

In a regular game without bidding or extra troops, if Germany spends the extra effort needed to take Africa there will be no pressure on Russia, who can then send more troops to Asia, delaying Japan and preventing economic victory. Not to mention the fact that the US and the UK can dump large amounts of troops into Algeria any time they want to starting on turn 3, and will only miss one turn of the action in Europe in doing so.

Without bidding, the only way a turn 5 economic victory by the Axis is possible is through poor play by the Allies!

[ This Message was edited by: Ansbach on 2002-06-09 08:44 ]

That’s an excellent movie! It’s called “Death Race” and it was a made for TV movie from the 70’s so it is very hard to find. It was an American P-40 I think, being chased by a German Tank Commander played by Loyd Bridges(don’t worry, he used to make serious movies!)

Yeah, The Art of War is a no-brainer and if you like the generic scope of Sun Tzu’s work then you will like Hart as well. His best book is called “Strategy” and is probably second only to The Art of War in my opinion. In it he examines top generals and battles from Alexander to WW2 and then extracts the common core principles that made them great, which he calls the “indirect approach”. The thing I like about Hart applied to A&A is that his theories are from the same era so they fit exceptionally well, as if you were studying Sun Tzu for tactics in an Ancient Japanese warefare game. Hart’s theories on mobility were the foundation of the success of German Tank Generals like Rommel and Guderian, who credit Hart as the source of their tactics.

Xi: using HTML…

< font size=n > This is the text I want bigger or smaller. < /font >

the < and the > should be next to the font statement, not a space away. I had to put them a space away so that they would show up for you to see… n can be a number between -2 and 6 I think?

TEST: -2

TEST: +6

[ This Message was edited by: Ansbach on 2002-06-07 08:48 ]

Yeah, I really wanted to use “I want to eat your children” but it just doesn’t quite fit A&A…

I play Germany in a similar fashion, although I am more conservative and defensive than Yanny. My sole objective with Germany is to survive until Russia falls, so I buy nothing but infantry and fighters. I try to buy 3 fighters in the first five turns with Germany, using the rest on Infantry. If you don’t lose a fighter on turn one (I always take the bomber as a loss first), you will have 8 fighters - I usually have 2 in WE, 1-2 in Germany, 3-4 in EE, and 1 in Africa.

It’s true that 1 fighter isn’t as good as 4 infantry defensively, but the flexibility of moving them from EE to WE or Africa and back as needed is huge, and you put additional pressure on the Allied fleet while still defending, which slows them down a little.

Instead of suiciding the fleet early, I time it with Japan’s push towards Russia - hit the Allied fleet the turn before Japan moves into Novo, which is usually J5 - more often I don’t hit the fleet at all.

**“Everybody’s got a plan - until they get hit.”

• “Iron” Mike Tyson**

[ This Message was edited by: Ansbach on 2002-06-06 15:17 ]

The Eight Maxims of Military Strategy - BH Liddell Hart
–-------------------------------------------------------------_Not all of these Maxims can be fully applied to Axis and Allies, but for the most part they fit very nicely.

For those of you who are unfamiliar with Hart, he was a British military strategist from the early-to-mid 20th century and is regarded as the father of modern military strategy._
–-------------------------------------------------------------
1.) Adjust your end to your means.

Clear sight and cool calculation should prevail. Do not bite off more than you can chew. Keep a clear sense of what is possible. Face facts while preserving faith. Confidence will be of no avail if the troops are run down.

2.) Keep your object always in mind, while adapting your plan to circumstances.

Recognize that alternatives exist but make sure they all bear on the object. Weigh the feasibility of attaining an objective against its contribution to the attainment of the end in mind.

3.) Choose the line (or course) of least expectation.

Put yourself in your opposition’s shoes and try to see what course of action he will see as least probable and thus not try to forestall.

4.) Exploit the line of least resistance – so long as it can lead you to any objective that would contribute to your underlying object.

Seize on opportunity – but not any opportunity. Tactically, this refers to following up on success; strategically, it refers to the management and deployment of your reserves.

5.) Take a line of operation which offers alternative objectives.

Choose a single course of action that could have several objectives; do not let your actions reveal your objectives. This puts your opponent on the horns of a dilemma. It introduces uncertainty regarding that which is to be guarded against.

6.) Ensure that both plans and dispositions are flexible – adaptable to circumstances.

Include contingencies or next steps – for success as well as failure. Organize and deploy your resources in ways that facilitate adaptation to either.

7.) Do not throw your weight into a stroke whilst your opponent is on guard – whilst he is well placed to parry or evade it.

Unless your opponent is much inferior, do not attack until he has been disorganized and demoralized. Psychological warfare precedes physical warfare. Similarly, physical warfare can be psychological in nature.

8.) Do not renew an attack along the same line (or in the same form) after it has once failed.

If at first you don’t succeed, give up. Your reinforcements will likely be matched by the enemy. Moreover, successfully repulsing you the first time will morally strengthen him for the second.

**“Everybody’s got a plan - until they get hit.”

• “Iron” Mike Tyson**

[ This Message was edited by: Ansbach on 2002-06-06 13:52 ]

The UK had a lone commando with air support that cost me the game on Turn 2 just last night!

OK, at the beginning of Germany-2 I had 2I and 1A in Egypt, and a T next to SE. He had hit my battleship on UK1 and landed the Indian Fighter and his Bomber in Syria-Iraq, with 1 lone infantry. He didn’t bring 2I from India to protect them, so I am thinking “sweet - scratch two UK airplanes!”

I didn’t want to take a chance with Africa so I hit Syria with everything - 4I, 1A, and a Fighter from EE. To make a long story short he killed everything but my fighter without losing a thing! Then on his turn he killed my transport and fighter with the troops that shouldn’t have been alive, again without losing a thing.

At the end of UK2 I had no navy and Africa was empty except for that lone UK Commando in Egypt!

Needless to say, I had to buy all infantry with Germany the rest of the game and lost about 6 turns later… after the game I got on the odds calculator - I had a 97% chance of winning that battle, and should have had 2I/1A/1F remaining!

“A clever military leader will succeed in many cases in choosing defensive positions of such an offensive nature from the strategic point of view that the enemy is compelled to attack us in them.” - Moltke

[ This Message was edited by: Ansbach on 2002-06-04 09:51 ]

I almost never take it, but threatening Southern Europe is the best way to get Eastern Europe to fall, especially if Germany is still in Africa. Once both the US and UK fleet are established, I will usually land 8-10 US infantry in Algeria and keep the UK in the North Sea, forcing Germany to try and defend all four countries. This is a bluff unless they don’t defend Southern Europe - I leave the men to mop up Africa and eventually push towards Japan.

If you time the Africa landing right Germany can’t defend all four countries, and either WE or EE will fall for good. Usually they will just be forced to pull out of Eastern Europe.

Yeah, and we’re tied again at 51… at least we were until I told you we were tied… :wink:

I forgot to mention one of the most important factors! By having your transports operate from the North Sea, every turn you are threatening…

Western Europe
Germany
Eastern Europe
Algeria

… with a one-two punch from the UK and US, or a one-two-three punch to Eastern Europe with Russia!

“A clever military leader will succeed in many cases in choosing defensive positions of such an offensive nature from the strategic point of view that the enemy is compelled to attack us in them.” - Moltke

[ This Message was edited by: Ansbach on 2002-05-30 15:22 ]