Posts made by Black

@superbattleshipyamato

Hard to see how it could be much worse.
; )

We just finished our first game of Pacific. Another train wreck (though for…many…different reasons). Global is up next!

@superbattleshipyamato

Nothing rude about it. I was hoping MY fighters and battleships (all rolling 4s on defense) would manage to take a few of his Spitfires down, or that he’d save SOME for defense of his own island).

No such luck. And very POOR luck with my dice rolling (neither of my bats managed a hit before being sent to a watery grave).

I still wonder if the stratagem would have been effective with a little tweaking. Calc simulations show that ANY air support would have greatly increased the likelihood of the Italian navy surviving…likewise if I’d decreased Paris’s forces MORE before retreating.

The magic number seems to be TWO…so long as Paris is left with no more than two pieces (a fighter and tank, presumably), Italy should have the upper hand (using ANY air support), even if the UK brings three fighters for reinforcement.

In retrospect there was a lot I’d do differently, including (probably) leaving my fleet on the other side of Denmark…an enticement for the RAF (without UK naval support), and ja looming threat on the horizon.

Definitely the most disastrous opening I’ve ever experienced in ANY version of A&A. I’ll try not to make the same mistake in the future!

So…earlier today, I proposed a strategy for helping get the Italians the “head start” they need to fight on equal footing with their German partners. Then I put that strategy into effect.

It worked perfectly…right up until it didn’t.

All Germany’s moves went down, more or less, exactly as planned. Rather than retreat to Holland from France I retreated to West Germany (as I had planes in Holland and had left an infantry or two as well). My opponent had no idea that my retreat was planned, and crowed mightily thinking he’d won a huge blow against the Germans by keeping Paris alive…he had no idea of my planned Italian invasion.

The disaster started on UK’s first turn: he absolutely took the bait of trying to sink my German fleet (as I had intended) taking the bulk of his navy minus destroyers (which were sent to deal with my convoy blasting subs). However, he also took the entirety of the RAF (including the fighter from Scotland) leaving nothing behind. I scrambled my three ME109s out of West Germany but the dice went dead cold and I ended up losing everything, while he retained both his battleships (wounded) and ALL his fighters.

Which he then landed in France.

This completely crushed the Italian move. In order to have any chance against the fighters in Paris, I had to take all of Italy’s aircraft…and ended up losing every single unit. Meanwhile throwing the entirety of Italy’s navy at UK’s Mediterranean fleet resulted in the sinking of all Italian ships (including both transports trying to land in Trans-Jordan and Syria), with never a sniff of the shoreline. Just an absolute shellacking.

It did not help that the dice refused to thaw at all during Italy’s turn, leaving the Allies with plenty of units.

Once again Germany was forced to come to Italy’s rescue. After sinking UK’s two wounded battleships, Germany again “softened” France…this time to the point of capitulation…and used the fighters/tacs stashed in Southern Italy to sink the remainder of UK’s Mediterranean fleet.

But it was too late. An extra wasted turn of wasting precious resources on the western front kept Germany from pushing hard enough in the east. The G2 Barbosa started well, but without air support to bomb Soviet ICs, the Red Army was able to mount sufficient counter-attack to wage their delay/attrition war…and Italy’s lack of IPCs, the loss of their navy/air force, and their inability to close the Suez all meant no help in the Middle East either, the Soviets eventually taking it all.

I conceded after G7, having failed to take back Denmark (lost to the UK in their 6th turn). The Germans could have fought on a turn or two more, but the squeeze was already on from west, south, and east…losing the Baltic (and with a heavy fleet of American transports sitting in the Channel), the inevitable defeat was clearly visible. I was at the gates of Moscow and out of troops…and the USSR was pulling down nearly as many IPCs as Germany. They’d already taken Greece back from Italy.

sigh

Friggin’ Italians.

On the bright side, we did manage to finish the game in a single day, and my son was definitely happy to get his first win in E40…just a day shy of his birthday, too.

[can’t wait till he unwraps Pacific 1940]

; )

@superbattleshipyamato

Yeah. It didn’t work so well.

I’ve been considering this for a couple/three days now: how to make the Italians a viable force in the war.

Because while I can win with the Axis, it takes a lot longer than playing with the Allies (nearly three times as long), and it seems the main reason is that Germany has to carry the Italians (and play nearly perfectly) to do so. In E40, the Allies have THREE Great Powers (plus the French) by turn 4. The Axis has one…and Italy.

SO…how to turn Italy into a Great Power?

The Italian’s problems are two-fold: they are placed in a disadvantageous position from the beginning of the game, and they have too few IPCs. Both problems work to strangle Italy’s potential: Germany’s 1st move allows them to get the maximum potential out of their forces on their own terms, and their ability to expand east via land travel allows them a good road to precious IPCs. Italy in contrast is likely to lose at least 15 IPCs before picking up the dice, and their space for expansion is restricted by their buddies the Germans (to the North) and the Mediterranean (to the South). I’m guessing that’s why I see so many strategy threads demanding that Italy take Southern France…a TERRIBLE strategy, as Germany needs that southern port far more than Italy. But how to get Italy any IPCs to make up their lost material?

In the games I’ve won, I’ve found the main/best way for Italy to gain IPCs is through their NO bonuses. But unless the Allies are complete idiots, it can take a long time to achieve ANY of Italy’s NOs, and even then Italy will probably need substantial help from Germany, pulling German resources and attention away from the other fronts, drawing out the war and perhaps even losing it.

What’s needed is to put Italy on equal footing as quickly as possible to enable self-sufficiency.

Here’s what I propose:

• Forgo the G1 DOW. Buy a battleship and fighter.
• Use 2 stukas and 2 fighters from West Germany to sink the French ships in SZ 93; land in Southern Italy.
• Use remaining stuka and strat bombers on London; dividing among UK naval base and IC.
• Use 2 subs to destroy cruiser off coast of Gibraltar; use 3 subs to destroy the UK transport and destroyer in SZ 109.
• Take Southern France with 2 tanks and 2 mech from Western/Southern Germany (via Northern Italy).
• Using remaining land forces from Holland and Western Germany, attack France only with the objective of reducing its fighting strength. Do NOT capture Paris…only soften it so that ITALY can capture it on I1. Retreat to Holland.
• Move entire German fleet to SZ 112. Use transport to reinforce Norway; take Finland. Make sure there are three fighters in West Germany to scramble (remember you are building one!); move infantry to Poland. Add new battleship to SZ 112.

While it may be unorthodox to leave Paris to the Italians, this opening nets Germany 45 IPCs and sets the table for their southern ally to be a real threat. Italy is left free to pursue the following achievable objectives in I1:

1. Take Paris (from Northern Italy).
2. Close the Suez Canal.
3. Sweep the Mediterranean of enemy ships.

With her 10 IPCs, Italy should build a tank and artillery. The rest of I1 should be as follows:

• Leaving slow-movers as a buffer in Tobruk, invade Tunisia from Libya.
• Take Kenya.
• Take Paris from Northern Italy. Use aircraft if deemed necessary, but Paris MUST fall (you should still retain all Italian aircraft due to the ability to scramble German fighters against Taranto attacks).
• Take whatever remains of Italian fleet to SZ 98 and crush UK navy. If UK has split her navy (sometimes see a destroyer or cruiser sent to SZ 96 to aid aircraft in destroying Italian ships), you may need to send aircraft for this purpose, but remember that Paris must fall in I1. Better to leave one surface warship (and forgo NO bonus) than leave France standing in F1.
• Amphibious assault Trans-Jordan from SZ 98 or both Trans-Jordan and Syria, if UK fails to protect TJ.
• Activate Bulgaria (for an I2 assault on Greece).

Doing all this should net Italy a minimum of 35 IPCs, 40 if the Mediterranean is cleared of surface warships and possibly as much as 42 for Syria and Anglo-Sudan (if left unprotected). This gives Italy a much larger resource base to work with, allowing it to be a more equal partner with Germany going forward.

By the end of I2, Italy should have a minimum of 21 IPCs from territory plus 5 for command of the Mediterranean. By the end of I3, both Gibraltar and Morocco should have been taken by Italy and/or Germany (with ships from Southern France) and Alexandria should be falling, too, bolstered by new bombers from Italian airfields. With the war in USSR going full swing…and thus preventing Allied help from the Caucasus…the Italians can start plumbing the Middle Eastern oil fields, really drumming up an IPC advantage between the two Axis powers, while reinforcing Egypt against the inevitable (if hopeless) counter-attack from South Africa.

I figure it’s game over for the world by turn 7 or 8.
; )

@tincanofthesea

Interesting. We were reading old strategy threads on this forum, and while I favor a G1 attack on USSR myself, it’s proved a disastrous strategy for my boy. The Night Witches pretty much won the eastern front for the Soviets in our last go around.

To be clear folks, it’s not that the Axis cannot win…it’s just that the win is so much more difficult to achieve.

My last Axis victory was played to the bitter end…eight VCs and the Allies not within range of taking ANY back before the next G turn. Since we’ve started keeping records, I can tell you victory was achieved on turn 21.

By comparison, my last two Allied victories occurred on turns 7 and 9. In both cases, the Axis conceded but the writing was on the wall (most of their units finished, huge swaths of territory left wide open and empty, and the UK, USSR, and USA advancing en masse on multiple fronts). In one case, the only countries left to the Axis were Germany and Italy proper.

I think it’s possible to win playing either side (strategy, dice luck, and reaction/adaptation all playing roles)…but the Europe only game seems to skew in favor of the Allies.

Both my son and I are VERY interested to see how Pacific plays (with Global to follow shortly thereafter, I’m sure).
; )

@superbattleshipyamato

Appreciate the info.

@superbattleshipyamato

As I wrote, we’ve owned (and played) other editions of A&A that utilize the entire globe on a single board. Europe 1940 is our first experience with a limited theater of operation.

As such, I suppose I’m just used to having Imperial Japan as a strong power for the Axis side…and its absence is sorely missed. The addition of France and Italy are wonderful…love ‘em…but while the UK, USA, and USSR are much the same as in the “smaller” game, the lack of Japan to coordinate with Germany really makes the Axis a challenge to play in Europe 1940.
)
In my opinion. But we’ve only had the thing for a couple weeks. Just wanted to get the opinion of the folks who’ve been playing longer.
; )

@seancb

Welp, Pacific should be arriving in about 5 days, so we’ll see how that changes things.
; )

My son received Europe 1940 (2E) for Christmas…been playing it non-stop ever since (just finishing up our fourth game).

We’ve really enjoyed the hell out of it…previously we’d only played 1941 (the shorter game) and A&A Zombies. The additional units and complexity have really raised the bar/standard for us. Just can’t say enough good stuff about it.

Okay…my question:

It appears that the Axis is a bit underpowered compared to the Allies in this game. I’m (nominally) the better player between my son and I, but he’s no slouch…he has beat me before in earlier A&A games, and our learning curve has been about the same (I had never played A&A before we started together).

The two times I’ve played the Allies in Europe 1940, I have absolutely CRUSHED him…and quickly. The Americans’ ability to bring wave after wave of attackers (assuming UK and USSR can both hold on) is overwhelming.

On the other hand, while I won my first game with the Axis, it took THREE DAYS OF PLAY to secure victory, with Italy basically having to land ships in the Caribbean and march into Central US to force concession (Moscow never did fall).

As I wrote above, we are on our 4th game and, again, I am playing the Axis and (again) it’s taken three days (!!) of play to take eight victory cities. And that’s AFTER taking Paris on G1, Moscow on G6, and maintaining a stranglehold on Europe and Asia.

The problem is Italy and their complete inability to do more than send sailors to the bottom of the ocean. Both games I’ve won (well, I’m about to win the one we’re playing) it has taken Germany doing everything itself. Italy can’t take…or hold…Africa or the Mediterranean against a well-played UK/USA combo. South Africa and India become perpetual thorns in the side of the Germans, while Gibraltar and Morocco get taken and retaken by US forces. Italy ends up starved for IPCs without bonuses, ending up a punching bag to remnant French ships before the USA arrives to really slap 'em around.

This game…well, I figured it was in the bag after I took ALL of Asia and Europe by…mmm, turn 7 or 8? Rather than concede, my worthy opponent decided to fight on. That was two days ago.

[update: he just retook Egypt via a convoy from South Africa; with cruiser and air support…the war continues]

It feels like the game is balanced in the favor of the Allied forces in the Europe edition. Without Japan to draw and occupy the USA’s attention, the Germans end up fighting a war on three fronts, with the fall of the Soviet Union hardly guaranteeing victory…so long as the UK maintains its presence in West India and Africa.

[even later update: it took another two hours, but Cairo…and the Allies…finally fell. Had to take it three times before it held]

I understand folks may simply concede games after London or Moscow falls to the Axis. Played out, it’s not that easy (in my first game as the Axis, I took London TWICE and it was still liberated by the end of the game). World domination with only the Italians for support just seems…extremely difficult.

Or maybe I’m just doing this wrong? Is there a faster way to victory for the Axis?

It is a little unclear in the rulebook, but it appears that land units launched from transports (to make an amphibious assault) are committed to attacking unto death; i.e. there is no “back to the boats!” retreat possible. Are we reading this correctly?

In our current game, there was an aborted Sea Lion attempt when air support failed to knock out enough resistance during the landing of the invasion force. Germany, quite reasonably, preferred to not lose all their units in a disastrous assault, and was unhappy when we ix-nayed their retreat.

Just want to know for future reference (same question would apply to a D-Day scenario). Thank you!
8-)

Private Panic wrote:

But even when no such time constraint exists I doubt we have ever played a game through to the bitter end!

I suppose we are just really, really stubborn.

The invasion went down and (as predicted) the UK was taken, despite some stout resistance. And while the Allies accept they’re probably dead in the water, they’re still not ready to concede the match.
8-)

Ugh. Thank you. Can’t believe we missed that sentence!

Can a single transport unload troops into two territories simultaneously, thus making two amphibious assaults in the same turn? I can’t find an explicit rule regarding this situation, but it feels “iffy” to me. In our current game, the Allies deployed troops from a single transport in sea zone 14 into Gibraltar and North Africa, capturing both territories in the same turn.

[[i]it wasn’t a game changing move, so we didn’t worry much about it at the time]

Thank you for your help!

After what has been (for us) a fairly long, conservatively played game, Germany seems on the brink of finishing Britain, having just launched an amphibious assault of 8 infantry and 2 armor backed up by 3 bombers (the Axis has more armor but it is tied up in Egypt preventing an American landing in North Africa from breaching the Middle East).

This is Hitler’s second attempt at “Operation Sea Lion;” the first such assault failed miserably, being undermanned in both land and air. Britain still has a good number of pieces, but not enough that it should make a difference (the A&A calculator shows a 98% chance of success). Even if by some miracle the UK survives the invasion, it’s clear England’s days are numbered, as their island is their sole remaining territory at this point (Australia having recently fallen to Japan), and the Americans have lost almost the entirety of their navy in a series of disastrous engagements.

My question is this: in situations like this, is it usual for people to “play out the string?” Is it usual for one side to concede when all hope seems lost? Or are folks more inclined to fight till the bitter end?

Things look pretty darn hopeless for the Allies at this point: the Americans are down to holding North America (Quebec was lost to invasion, but no Axis forces remain in Canada and it would be easy to reclaim). Russia has been removed from the board. And Japan is pulling down 17 IPCs per turn now, and already has three battleships roaming the Pacific. It’s really just a matter of time.

Here’s the thing: just a few turns earlier, things didn’t look nearly so bleak: Japan was the country that was reeling (with almost all its Navy destroyed), and Russia had built up huge forces in all its starting territories (with the exception of the Caucasus), approaching double digits in tanks and infantry. Germany still had a navy, but it was a small one, and (as mentioned) had already launched one disastrous attempt at Sea Lion, costing them their final transport. At that point, it looked like the numbered days were those of the Axis!

[[i]the reversal of fortunes was due to a couple incredibly successful submarine strikes from the IJN, and the nickel-and-diming of Ally territories for IPCs. Japan brought a couple tanks across Asia to bolster the Caucasus, allowing Germany to finally bring crushing forces against the Soviets; it’s been all downhill for the Allies since then]

At what point do folks usually “throw in the towel,” if ever? I find it hard to believe the Allies can come back at this point, being so far behind, but I’m curious to know how people usually end their games. Do people mostly fight to the death?

@ Private Panic:

Thank you for the info…and for leaving some things for discovery. I appreciate that!

You wrote:

G’s opening deployment on the eastern front, however, affords R some short term opportunities and patience may be required to consolidate an unstoppable drive on Moscow.

Pretty cryptic (unless I’m extremely obtuse); this is one puzzle we’re trying to unravel. We’ll work on it!

You also wrote:

J can help significantly with the attack on R. J ground unit builds are only 2 moves from the Caucasus.

My only comment is that two turns feel like an eternity in a game where things can turn so quickly. Of course, at this point we’re only thinking one move ahead…thinking two or three moves ahead? Not quite there yet!
:wink:

Thanks again. German air support in North Africa will certainly help slow down the Allied invasion! Looking forward to trying it.

No Operation Sea Lion this time…and Britain ended up cleaning house as a result.

Germany decided not to go after the UK, focusing instead on the “easy” targets on the Eastern Front, including an invasion of the Middle East via amphibious assault from North Africa (bypassing UK forces in Egypt) to close the Suez. This ended up illustrating how important Gibraltar is as the destruction of Britain’s aircraft carrier by German U-boat attack (as always happens) did not end in the destruction of its fighter, which was able to land safely.

With fighter support in the Mediterranean (and a safe airport for the UK bomber), it is remarkably easy to take Northern Africa with a Canadian landing party. The Kriegsmarine falls (again) to the British navy (hail, Britania!) and it’s all but over from there.

India denies Japanese expansion into the south Pacific, causing Japan to make the hasty decision to land forces in Alaska. Despite IJN support, Japan loses half of its warships in the US counterattack (as well as Alaska). The Battle of Midway will be fought in the following turn and cost Japan most of its remaining warships.

At the end of Turn 2 we have the IJN reduced to a single carrier and fighter, Norway has been successfully taken by USA (with a bomber landed in Iceland), and France has been liberated by British tanks out of North Africa, where two UK bombers are being fueled and ready for Turn 3. The Middle East has been reclaimed, and while Russia has lost both Archangel and Karelia, they’ve taken Manchura (with Soviet tank and air support) to make up the difference). Japan is in Szechwan (one infantry unit), but the USA maintains an infantry presence in Asia (two units, bolstering the Caucasus).

Axis powers offer unconditional surrender before the beginning of Turn 3.

I don’t grok why folks feel the Allies are underpowered in this particular edition. Even if Japan had retained its naval forces, it’s difficult for me to see how Germany could have recovered and pushed back with enemies on all sides and no help on the way from the Japanese (assuming the USA plays conservative in the Pacific theater and keeps the IJN occupied). Committing to Operation Sea Lion early (rather than worry about Russia) still seems like the best option for Germany, even at the cost of the Kriegsmarine which…it would appear…faces inevitable defeat. This occurs even in games the Axis won; however, in those games Germany was able to rebuild its navy in the later stages of the game.

Please tell me what we’re missing here.
8-)

Great stuff, folks…thank you!

Private Panic wrote:

GB should never succumb early to Sea Lion! If the GB player is awake that is…

…In this game the allies have to respond to whatever initiatives the axis are taking in the early turns, given the axis advantage in units on the board.

It may just be that we are new to the game, because there’s a certain amount of “psychological warfare” going on precisely because of the Allies responding to the Axis attacks. An amphibious assault on Gibraltar followed by a successful sneak attack on Britain’s aircraft carrier in the Mediterranean, coupled with attacks on the Russian territories (Karelia and/or Caucasus) can cause all sorts of consternation, distracting the UK from the potential Sealion assault. Especially considering the Allies’ focus on keeping Pacific territories safe from Japanese conquest!

Charles de Gaulle wrote:

Another thing to consider is the German lack of defense navally.  Any German transport built is very vulnerable to British air assault.  Assuming Germany holds its battleship back, the UK will most likely have some other advantage.  If Germany goes for this option, the UK can react accordingly and ask US for help.  Meanwhile,  this risky move on Germany’s part is sure to give Russia massive advantages in the east.

If Germany buys the transport, either sink it or be sure to build or divert the necessary forces.  It does not matter if you have to give up North Africa or a build in India.  Just hold off the German attack and Russia will be able to do serious damage with so many Germans in the west.

You don’t have to tell me about Germany’s lack of naval power! Despite a successful landing in England, the Axis lost its entire Kriegsmarine, leaving Germany stranded in England (though with a hefty bonus to IPCs). Part of this was due to extremely poor rolling (battleship to an unsupported destroyer?!) but its not uncommon for us to see nothing but British and American warships in the Atlantic by the third or fourth turn.

What we have NOT found, though, is this giving Russia a significant advantage on the eastern front. Attempting to take German territory is a tough struggle for Soviets, inevitably leaving them thin and vulnerable to (potentially devastating) counterattack. The USSR seems to be much more effective at cutting the legs off of Japan (in mainland Asia) while building defense to stave off the Germans. Adding four or five of Japan’s IPCs can more than make up for the difference of territory losses on the eastern front…provided the Soviets can hold onto both Moscow and the Caucasus.

Is it a standard tactic to ignore (or de-prioritize) the Japanese threat in order to focus on Germany? We’ve found that, left unopposed, the Japanese can quickly achieve a dominating position in the Pacific, maintaining their mainland territories and bringing the war to the Americas through Alaska.

Topmat wrote:

Hey, I have played numerous games and the allies lose every time. I am asking what the allies can do without changing rules or implementing a bid. I haven’t been able to figure out how to win. (I guess i need to sharpen up my strategy skills.)

I’m new to the game, too, but I managed to win both my games when I played Allies, so I know it’s possible.

I know that the classic AA game plays much slower, and has different tactics; I’m not familiar with it, so I’ve developed different methods of coordinating the Allied forces.

The USA is a powerhouse with its ability to pump out a battleship per turn; while Japan has a pretty dominant navy to start the game, this can turn very quickly…however, battleships deployed in the Atlantic can really seal the deal for you early (in conjunction with the strong British naval presence). If you can wipe out the Kriegsmarine (or drive them off) in the first couple turns, and can maintain at least one or two British warships to guard the Strait of Gibraltar, you can use your eastern transport to take North Africa, just like Patton did, and set up a little caravan route into Italy. I like to park a U.S. bomber or two in Morocco and fly sorties into Europe to cover landing parties and wreak general havoc. Assuming you can hold the Caucasus, the UK can do the same using the transport off the coast of Quebec or one from the Indian ocean…hey, when you control the Suez Canal, make use of it!

The Pacific theater is a little different because, while the USA provides the intimidation factor (all those warships), it’s the UK and USSR you need to really cut the legs off of Japan. As soon as you can spare the armor, send a couple Soviet tanks east to start taking out Japan’s assets; losing Coastal China and Manchuria cost Japan half its initial resources. Then, in the south seas, you need to keep Japan from taking easy marks like Borneo and the East Indies, and that’s all about those factories in Australia and India making troops to ferry to potential IPC spots. The goal is to starve the Japanese navy so that they A) cannot replace ships lost in battle with US warships, and B) have no resources for mounting an invasion campaign into North America. It’s okay to let Japan take the occasional island…or even invade Alaska!..so long as you blow up their transport and then bomb them into scrap. Soon enough they’ll be huddled on their island while Russia uses newfound income to create troops and tanks on the eastern front, eventually rolling into Western Russia as a red tide.

Normandy is really just an afterthought.
8-)