Posts made by Corbeau Blanc

If you don’t attack China, you’ll eventually will end up to have to defend Manchuria, Kiangsu and Kwantug. By turn 3, China will have 10 inf and 1 fighter if left alone to hit on theses 6 ipc ( on top of the 5-6 ipcs you don’t take from China.)

But that’s not the real danger, China infantry can be beefed up by allies planes and they could be used to screen an allies attack force. It gets even worse if a russian AA gun makes it way down there as well.

The point is, you will eventually have troops bogged down anyways by or because of China even if it’s left alone or risk losing your foothold in mainland Asia.

Twigley, I did not adress round 2 but that’s why i recommend a buy of an AC + fighter, 1 inf/1art for German round 1 as my prefered option.

This ensures Baltic fleet survives.

Try it this way on round 2, reinforce Karelia with transport and buy 2 fighters, 9 inf and 1 transport. You should have 54 ipcs. I’d say 4-5 fighters (Italy helps), 6 tanks, and 2inf/2art can hold Karelia without serious losses.

IF you aren’t prepare to reinforce Karelia, On G2, it’s still imperative to block UK drop in Karelia. A cheap trick for German to keep UK fleet at bay round 2 is simply moving the BC in sea zone 3. ( UK will still be able to land in friendly Archangel but they can’t directly attack Karelia that round )

Don’t forget Japan( round 3) and Italy, they can send troops / fighters to help.

There was a discussion on this on another old thread I can’t find but what I liked of a brazilian IC was if it was used in conjunction with an early sinking of Italian fleet.

UK would buy 3 bomber turn 1, sink Italians UK2

Sea zone 23 can hardly be hit from france based bombers unless they want to land in Africa ( sea zone 22 litterally cannot be hit from France ) so it was a cheap way to keep reinforcement going to Africa.

For me it was great since I could spend most of my income afterward into the pacific and still send enough gear to support Africa without having to maintain an US Atlantic fleet or hold sea zone 12.

Bids and dices are something out of the context of this strat.

This strat does what it says, take and hold Karelia. Nothing more, nothing less.
It does not pretend to be the best opening move
It does not pretend to be 100% sure with dices
It does not factor in bids which is completely random.
It is flexible, nothing prevent you from diverting ressources from other theaters to achieve what you consider more favorable ‘‘dices’’ odds in Karelia if you must have it 100%. I figure 80% odds for that fight is good enough for myself.

Veqryn, of course if there is a bid and Karelia is reinforced, I would hope a player is intelligent enough to not use this.

I would also hope a player will conduct the UK BB/TR fight before the Karelia fight, so he knows if he is better to only do a strafe or go the whole way in Karelia.

Now with all due respect, please, I am still willing to debate within the low luck context, NOs and no tech. But certainly don’t want to continue debating low luck vs dices or bids/ no bids. No offense meant.

You’ve used triple A battle calc… and multiplied odds. I don’t need to learn ‘‘statistics’’ to understand that a bomber + 2 inf will 100% trade a territory defended by 1 inf. The only question is if I lose 1 inf or not…

Like I wrote in other thread, 1 sub, 1 bomber and 1 jet are at 94% odds versus UK BB/TR… When in practice it’s a 100% win with 1-3 units left.

Good strats base themselves on low luck.

One thing that needs to be adressed, I do strats based on low luck. Everyone does that. I am well aware of the dices vs low luck debate, and I will even tell you I prefer dices. Reality is, most players plays low luck.

Now, one must be cautious when throwing %odds like you did. With low luck, an attack with 1 sub, 1 bomber and 1 fighter on the UK BB/TR is at 94% chances of success when in practice it is litterally 100% odds to win with anywhere between 1 to 3 units left.

Also, If I was to stretch this debate, I could overlook everything else in the strat outside of holding Karelia. With low luck in mind :

• 3 subs at the destroyer in sea zone 2,  100% sure. move BC to block z3
• 4 tanks, 4 inf, 1art at Baltic States    100% sure
• 4 jets, 1 bomber, 3inf/1 art to karelia  100% sure to end with at least 2 units ( 95%  up to 5 units ).

Now that’s 100% chances… Not saying I would do it, but to demonstrates % can lie and if you don’t want to take any initial risk in your moves, it’s doable.

Imho, when you do an axis turn with dices, you will have to risk that at least one opening move go wrong anyways. With dices, 100% does not exist and many games can end first round with a couple of snake eyes (1). With low luck, as I demonstrated, the odds you depicted are a good % higher if not litterally 100% sure.

I’m describing here my optimum assault G1 on Karelia and having the best chances to holding it, not saying it’s 100% sure or the best strat to use if you are a conservative player.

Now, your 44% stat chances is way off.

You list Baltic States, Eastern Poland, Ukraine as the crucial fights. ( when they are not so and when I already specifically mentioned you can forego Ukraine )

The key fights as far as holding Karelia is concerned is the attack on Karelia and sinking the UK BB/TR that are in range to drop. I even offer a second option where you can avoid the fight altogether. Other theaters of war are just that, the fact I adress them does not change anything to holding Karelia itself ( which is the main goal here )

I also find the way you calculate odds by multiplying each separate battle % a bit dubious.
I prefer to say the key battles are at 79.82% for Karelia and 84% to sink UK BB. Which are good odds imho.  :wink:

Nah, all theses 3 points are at around 80% odds.

I disagree.

Axis can win when taking Karelia G1.

There is 3 intrumental things that must happen,

• Germany 1 must hold Karelia trough the whole turn
• G1 Egypt must fall
• UK 1 must not be able to land troops there

It is doable, I’ll post a strat about it, feel free to comment

“Leningrad assault”

LOW LUCK STRAT

German goals:

1. G1 must take and hold Karelia trough the whole turn:
   Have 2 ground units surviving Karelia assault, reinforce it with 2 tanks of Poland in non-combat, ending with 1 inf, 1 art, 2 tank. Sacrifice fighters if you must. This ensure Russia can’t retake it round 1.

2. G1 Egypt must fall or Sea zone 12 must be cleared:
   This is to ensure the Italian fleet will not be sunk ( as well as other obvious economic reasons )

3. UK 1 must not be able to land troops in occupied Karelia:
   This is done by either sinking UK BB or using G BC to block sea zone 3, foregoing the extra shore bombardment.

The moves:

Assault on Leningrad

• Take Karelia ( 3 infantry, 1 artillery, 3 fighters , cruiser/transport ( 93% to hold it with 2.8 unit not counting AA))
• Reinforce Karelia: Non combat, 2 tanks from Poland to Karelia. This non-combat move is the twist here.

Eastern front assault:

• Take and Hold Baltic States ( 2 inf, 3 tanks )
• Take and Hold East Poland ( 1tank, 2 inf, 1 art )
• Take Ukraine ( 3inf, 1 art)
    Optionally, can forego Ukraine and 5 ipc NO. This ensure Stronger ratio in forces around Karelia as you can adjust forces in BS and EP.

Atlantic sea/Egypt:

• A) Sink UK battleship + transport ( 2 sub, 1 fighter ) to hold on Norway/Finland and prevent landing of UK1 forces in Karelia. Send Bomber and everything that can reach Egypt to take it G1. This is the preferred move.
  OR
• B) Sink UK BC and destroyer (2 subs, 1 fighter ). Bomber should be sent against sea zone 6 DD with the Baltic sub to open the way for Baltic BC. However, this means in all cases that German Baltic cruiser will need to move in non combat to block sea zone 3 and won’t be able to help in Karelia assault. It also need to survive vs the Russian sub. It’s risky business

Holding the north.
Either maintain Baltic fleet or Build an IC in Finland. This is Highly based on which option you went with A or B for the Atlantic scenario.
Prefered buys:
A - 1 AC, 1 fighter, 1 inf and 1 art   ( My preferred option )
A - All in: 2 IC ( Finland / Norway)
B - IC ( France ) 1AA, 2inf, 1 art ( 1 aa, 1 fighter, 5 inf should be defending France )
B - Tank dash: 5 tanks, 3 inf

Strat overview:
Plus: - Karelia is hold on G1, Germany achieves 2 NOs
      - Depending of buys, Russia has to fall back as far as Moscow, deadzoning Archangel
      - Russia can’t devote forces to reinforce India, which makes J2 easy
Minus: - The Luftwaffe pays a heavy toll ( 2 to 3 fighters loss )
         - Small chances for the assault to go wrong, but relatively none with low luck.
         - Italian fleet is threatened by 1 bc, 1 des and 1 bomber attack.

===========================================================

DICES STRAT

Disclaimer: Not really a whole turn strat, added for close minded players that don’t see the whole turn so it’s preferable to leave other battles out as they can’t make the difference. So It only covers the 3 important battles and forego everything else in an attempt to get closer 100% odds. Good players will know how to divert their forces on other theaters/objectives and accept some risks

Eastern front assault:

• Take and Hold Baltic States ( 4 inf, 1 art, 4 tanks ) = 100% odds

Atlantic sea:

• A) Sink UK battleship + transport ( 2 sub, 1 fighter ) to hold on Norway/Finland and prevent landing of UK1 forces in Karelia. = 85% odds

Assault on Leningrad

• Take Karelia ( 3 infantry, 1 artillery, 3 fighters , 1 bomber, cruiser/transport = ( 93% to hold it with 2.8 units left)
• Reinforce Karelia: Non combat, 2 tanks from Poland to Karelia. This non-combat move is the twist here as it gives you 4 units to defend Karelia versus Russia.

Unrealistic calculation for success of all 3 battles would be around 80%.

Myself have a way easier time winning with the allies.

Just stall the axis in the first few rounds and recover with superior economics.

In my mind, the easiest way to set up win circonstances in the 2 first rounds by achieving 3 main goals  :

• Sink Italian fleet asap.
• Prevent J2 taking of India
• Hold the eastern front with Russia

Once theses are achieved, it’s a walk in the park.

Nice move but even if Triple A allows to do it, I am not sure if you really can send your fighters so far out without the carriers being in range to recover.

The thing is that in theory, carriers can’t recover your fighters unless you pass trough the BB.

It works out since you can recover in non-combat but I am not sure if its legal since at fighter launch, you can’t recover them due to ennemy ships in the way.

Either it is legal, or it’s a triple A error to allow the move.

The gruman F4F wildcat had an overall kill-to-loss ratio of near 7 to 1 versus Japaneses fighters troughout the war  ( And I’m not reffering to the hellcat F6F which was completely rendering japaneses fighters planes obsolete ).

I’d say it was a very dangerous bi-plane…

That thing was maybe slow but it was so much armored and sturdy that less than 200 were lost in battle.

For training, I am not sure either. The flying Tigers were actually based on the USS Ranger in the Atlantic before flying to China after PH, using mostly P-40 sporting the famous shark mouths paint job. They had a kill Ratio of near 10 for 1 so yea, it’s a bit sad China don’t get to use them in A&A50 since they did inflicted a very heavy toll on the Japanese.

There was one game where I did pretty much everything against the cook book with Germany.

I was trying a “Leningrad assault” strat I came with which involve building 2 German IC in Finland and Norway round 1.

German goals were:

• Take Karelia ( 3 infantry, 1 artillery, 3 fighters , cruiser/transport( 70% to hold it with 1 unit ))
• Take and Hold Baltic States ( 4 inf, 1 art, 2 tanks )
• Take and Hold East Poland ( 3 inf, 1 art, 4 tanks )
• Hold on Finland ( accomplished round 1 by sinking transport in range )
• Hold on Norway ( accomplished round 1 by sinking transport in range )
• Hold the Russian Front line ( accomplished by leaving 1 infantry in Romania and foregoing Ukraine 5ipc NO )
• Sink UK battleship ( 2 sub, 1 fighter )
• Attempt sinking sea zone 6 destroyer  ( 1 sub )
• Take Egypt ( use bomber, transport )

Altought sea zone 2 is a key battle and not 100% sure, the double IC bought can be placed elsewhere if all goes wrong ( very unlikely ). My biggest concern was the Karelia fight itself but it’s fairly safe in low luck scenario. Russia was hard pressed to retake Karelia. In fact, in that peculiar game, Russia was not able to swap it again on round 2.

Germany Turn 2 saw mass german infantry building, 2 tanks and a destroyer in Norway.

The key point was the round 2 where Norway IC was able to resist landing and destroyer in sea zone 3 enabled germany to block access for a UK drop in Finland or Karelia, which resulted in Germany being able to hold it a full turn while UK elected to drop/swap in France. Meaning round 3, at it’s peek IPC income, Germany had access to a 7 unit production in the northern belt.

It’s not a full proof strat, far from it, but it gave me a quick win over Russia on that occasion and lots of option I normally don’t have as Germany. A variant would be to only buy the Norway IC and an AC in baltic sea to keep the transport/cruiser.

I know subs cannot block sea units but what about a lone transport?
Does a transport can stop enemy movement?

Also, I’ve been told a factory IC also prevented blitz like an aa gun… that’s true?

I like to swap with infantry/artillery myself when playing germany, so my deadzone end up between 2 to 3 units while I keep tanks in reserve. Also enables me to keep my airforce against UK/US on the western front.

When Russia tries to go for fighters and infantry swapping, I have a tendancy to buy one or two AA guns to move to forward lines and directly within the deadzone. Since I swap with ground units, I don’t really care if the AA gun ends swapping hands each turn.

The presence of an AA gun really put the hurts on players depending on fighters/infantry swap. The hurt is more important psychologically since even if the odds are a low 1, I don’t know why,  they tend to avoid sending their jets/bomber in the fray. However, when the gun does hit, the ensuing battle results in high casualties.

As Germany, overall, 2 to 3 units in deadzone backed up with AA gun. Even when traded, thoses guns works more in favor of Germany than for Allies since my playstyle is to use my planes to pressure UK/USA naval fleets as opposed to swapping on eastern front.

I will need some time to go in details, I can give you a general idea:

• Japan sink pearl harbor, grabs all the land it can, ending with 8 units + aviation within India range. Kinda easy to do optimal moves with them.

Germany has more variants:
Vs UK:

• Germany sink the whole UK fleet, commiting every planes.
• Germany sink most of UK fleet, Bomber commit to take Egypt.
• Germany mostly ignore UK fleet, take Karelia round 1.

VS Russia: Eastern front viable variants either put focus on Karelia or Caucasus.

Overall, thoses moves always end up about the same and the also what axis buys as far as units goes.

The Pincer Attack or United Eastern Front as previous poster calls it, is not a strategy which cannot be countered but it will really need an axis player who defend his waters.

The strategy aim to take out both Baltic fleet and Italian Fleet by Round 2 and by round 3 to occupy both seas.

UK take out baltic fleet as usual. Build 2 AC, one of which will receive 2 USA fighters, and mass a big enough fleet to move in Baltic to drop. Usually doable by round 3.

US moves it’s 2 fighters on UK carrier and 2 bombers in England (Gibraltar if it can be protected Round 2 from Italians ) then take out Moroco. US build is made to add extra firepower, at least another 1-2 bombers and ships/transports. On turn 2, the UK AC with american fighters moves into sea zone 12, US fighters are now in range of Italian fleet on US 2…

I realise some might contest this move, but as far as triple A is concerned and earlier versions, allied fighters moves with the Carrier as cargo. All in all, you could always go with a 3 UK bomber build and send more US ships to help out UK mass a big enough fleet. Result will be the same, Italian fleet goes bye bye round 2…

Results are pretty much:

• Africa is denied to axis
• Nor/Fin are taken out
• Both seas are controlled so Allies choose how to commit their forces in the 4 coast territories I mentioned. ( Poland/Baltic States/Romania/Ukraine )
• Italy, Germany, France and Balkans must be also defended against drops
• Allies main worry is to make sure Axis air force cannot dislodge thoses 2 fleets, which is not that hard. Seazone 12 is probably the most vulnerable for USA but only if German airforce is based in France.

So, yes Axis can defend, but what makes this particulary succesful is that most German players disreguard the idea of a German Navy and defending their fleets.
Also, I have yet to see a succesful naval strat from Axis but I suspect it would involve a France IC and japanese fighters support for any would be AC. That or submarines cleverly used.

axis_roll,

NO : yes
Tech : no

The first turn of the axis are pretty much scripted to a point. With the allies, it’s easy to plan ahead based upon that fact.

Allies won thoses games by denying Italy NOs and focussing upon weakening Poland/Baltic States to the north (UK) and Romania/Ukraine to the south(USA). This enables for a really agressive Russia which achieve all her NOs.

Think about it, Karelia and Caucasus are the main targets for axis in a standard game before Moscow. By cutting german lines trough thoses 4 territory mentioned above, it prevents reinforcements and even eventually prevent any advance. It enables Russia to keep her NO’s while Germany loses her own NO. More importantly, Allies by doing this are concentrating most of their forces in the same region.

Once the axis offensive is stalled, Allies economy allows them to come on top. Eventually something has to give up, France, Italy or the whole eastern front. By the time Japan arrives, IF it ever arrives, Russia is making 50 ipcs.

I call that policy: The Pincer Attack.  :-P

I saw no need for bid so far in all my games.

In fact, I had a way easier time to win with the allies than with the axis.

The one time I lost as allies was my own fault for continuing playing in early hours of morning while tired.

If you limit each nation to one tech maximum, it’s playable.

Else you get horror stories like: Long range Heavy Bombers with paratroopers…

Even the paratrooper tech is not done correctly in my opinion, I doubt very much bombers would be loaded with bombs and attack while dropping paratroopers…

Either you fit troops, fit more fuel OR you fit more ordnance onboard… but ALL of this inclusively!?

Techs should not stack, I think this is irrealist.