Posts made by Croggyl

I have tinker some little carton boxes with sliding lid for all my A&A variants, matching the size of the game box, including little boxes for nation markers, dices, IC and so on. The boxes have little boxes inside with different size for each type of unit. I have also do this for other games I own, for instance “Merchants of Venus”. It’s a little bit work for a (long) afternoon, but they are looking much better then plastic boxes, I think.

@EEB:

This is my Sea Lion strategy, it works 75% of the time(the only times it failed was because I shouldn’t have launched Sea Lion):
1st build
Baltic Carrier, 1-2 fighters and whatever else you want, NO transports.
1st move: whatever you like, move all your air to EE, move everything out of Norway and WE, do NOT move German Meditteranean Navy to Gibraltar!
[…]
This plan is much more flexible than a purchase of 5 trannies, If you clearly can’t launch Sea Lion, then the CV still defends the Baltic pretty well.

Yea, sounds more flexible than first-turn-attack!

But you may be very short on INF after spend 26 or 36 IPC at fleet in the first round.
And it will work only once, if ever. In that case you have described I would go to ALG with both UK and US and would buy one more TRA for UK and minimum five ground units to fill my trannies at next round.
Frood says something like you capture UK, but lost 4 FIG. Perhaps more if both UK and US bomber are at UK too. And US and UK both have troops to get UK back immediately. UK will lose one rounds of building units, and you can’t attack a second time, I think.

I don’t think you can win the war with these. You win a move against UK in europe, you lose a move against russia because of missing INF. That 30 bucks from UK can’t buy your four FIG back (but you will have long range air).

But it seems to be a funny variant. Perhaps I’ll try it out just to see the face of my oppenent. May be worth it. ;)

@Cmdr:

I’d actually prefer a game where only territories worth 8 or more that start with Industrial complexes get Industrial Complexes and there is unlimited building at them. (Yes, that’s Russia, England, Germany, Japan, W. USA and E. USA.  I know America gets two, but America is also huge and has two major fronts.)

No IC at Italy restricted the axis to much, I think.
And without additional IC you will lose many interesting game variants.

@LT04:

I have seen Germany start to play out the Geman Turtle buying mostly INF for the first 2 rounds stowing a little income away from those rounds then buying an overwhelming number of transports (5+).

In this method the Luft Waffe was put in W Europe again like you would in the German Turtle method.  They assisted in the land invasion.

If I was going to go that route I would consider massing the med. fleet with the Baltic fleet first.  If you are buying mostly INF it would be a wile before any one could get a foot hold any way.

LT

How would you protect these 5+ transports after build? I think against a competent allies player the german start fleet is no longer above water at turn three, foremost you move the baltic fleet out and try to merge with the med one.
The only chance to survive with the baltic fleet until turn three is a CV at first turn, I think. Then it may be possible to merge fleets at sz 7 and move back to baltic at turn three to protect those trannys, but then a combined uk/us fleet may stay at sz 6. You perhaps can sink these fleet, yes, but you can’t sink these fleet and land at uk at the same turn. That allied fleet will be rebuilt, and you can’t sink it twice.
The german fleet at baltic may live some time longer, yes, but with the med fleet moved toward england you should not get a feet on ground in africa. And that carrier at first turn and the heavy transport build will bring you to some INF shortage at the eastern front.

In my opinion operation sealion can be done against an inattentive uk player only, and must be done quickly. After turn four the us pacific fleet can stand in the north sea, from this moment on at the latest a landing at uk is no longer possible.

@Rhineland:

Has anyone every tried an all air craft build for japan turn one? If so how did it turn out?

I’m interested in trying this myself next game see what happens.

I think, without a transport build you will lose foothold on asia quickly. If the UK sink that lonely tranny in SZ 59 (which seems to be a common move) you will only land 4 land units in the first two turns. If the UK build an IC in india you may be in deep trouble …
You need an infantry shield to claim land. Fighters/bombers are nothing without fodder.

@Cmdr:

Thinkin, 2 fighters/artillery could work if you land the 2 originals in Caucasus.  Give you a decent shot at sinking the Med fleet anyway. (4 fighters vs battleship/transport)

Dunno if it would be wise, but at least it is not a standard move!

It’s not a standard move, but funny. For the germans.
I have done these years ago, and retreat two fighters after one round of combat without any hit by myself. :(

Notes to myself:

• russian pilots are not able to sink any german ship
• better build an embankment dam at Gibraltar and dry up the Mediterranean Sea

@shermantank:

I agree. What the US should do instead is build an IC in Alaska (assuming that the Chinese territories are virtually not a viable option for the US to build an IC), and produce naval units to threaten Japan, which would divert resources from a JTDTM (Japanese tank drive to Moscow). Any thoughts?

I have try these once. It was a disaster. But … I will try it again.  :-)

What I learned so far:

• the axis player now know that US is going pacific

• Alaska may be vulnerable to a japanese amphibious attack

• the IC should (must?) build at the first turn

• Japan can attack sz 63 with all air force if holds SFE which means a lot of pressure to the US fleet as you can’t (temporarily) retreat your fleet to sz 64 or 55 until you have enough land forces to hold ALA against four fully loaded japanese transporters with BB support and minimum four FIG

• it seems tricky to start an island hopping from there; a BB strategy seems more reasonable, but it may takes more time that the russian player may have

And I think the allies can be in trouble if Germany decide to go to africa and into the atlantic: The Uk may run short of IPC quickly and may not have the ability to push the germans back, but for that I’m not sure.

But perhaps we should discuss that in another thread, it sound a little bit off topic …

@timerover51:

Short of keeping some sort of paper record, how would you differentiate between the two AA guns for Rocket use?

Put a country marker under that AA gun?

@frimmel:

I guess the converse is true as well. If you aren’t going to catch up by airfields you almost have to spend all your reinforcement to get ships on the board in an attempt to destroy enemy capitol vessels.

Unfortunately you haven’t enough time to drive a naval strategy, I think. If your opponent (mainly the japanese player as it’s easy to install a supply chain to New Georgia) invest heavy into supply token and build airfields very fast, the game will not last long enough to bring naval units into game. I mean, you need to buy naval units, bring them to front and need an enemy who is willing to take some naval battles. I think, if you buy many ships, you are short on ground units which means that the other player could decided to fallback the capital ships to base card as they are no longer needed to intercept incoming trannys and support land units with naval barrage.

That’s a little disadvantage with AAG: The game is fast. Ok, it’s a advantage too, because your games (when playing face to face) can end on one evening. But you haven’t enough time to bring a strategy to work, you have to use your units tactical.

I tend to agree that a once you have supply at a built airfield you are in a strong position especially with some artillery to back up your AA. Don’t forget that artillery can shoot at boats as well.

Yeah, if an airfield is covered with one or two AA and one or two artillery and some inf it’s nearly impossible to successful get control over that island, because it’s you can’t kill all enemy units fast enough.

Nearly all games that I have play end around turn five or six, the longest takes nine turns, but that was much luck by the american player: succeeded in kill an aircraft carrier with one shot of a sub, damaged an airfield in the following round that coult not repaired by japanese instantly and kill a BB in the next round.
Alas, the american lost that game too because of the lose of many air units while bombarding that airfield and lost nearly all remaining aircraft and all fleet except capital ships while attacking the enemy fleet to sink that BB. Was not able to get complete control of an enemy island and lost because the japanese has one airfield more.
But it was a very funny game! :)

@Maarek:

land units wouldn’t attack the airfield anyways, you’d attack the opposing land units, and take the field once they’re all vanquished.

Not necessarily.
As japanese player at the first turn I would gladly attack that airfield on Guadalcanal and possibly destroy it …

@Krieghund:

I’ve posted a variant for Hidden Submarine Movement over at BGG.  Have a look, and let me know what you think.

Sounds good. I like it. :)
Now you can use your sub and sneak up enemy forces behind the “front line”. And only the possibility that a lonely destroyer could be escort by some subs can bring some confusion to the other player.

And if I had the chance to secretly deploy a newly build sub … perhaps with a secret stack of supply tokens? The other player knows that I have supply tokens in that stack and knows how much I have put inside, but don’t know whether I use these token for deploying or not …

@Cmdr:

A)  You could go to the battleship dominance strategy building an Industrial Complex, Aircraft Carrier, 2 infantry and an armor on Round 1 (the complex to go to Alaska) and then 1 or 2 battleships a round thereafter until such time you can overwhelm and destroy the Japanese fleet.

How do you defend that complex from japanese round 2 attack with all available transporters (maybe four) and perhaps fighters from CV before pearl harbour, perhaps a BB too?
There can be two inf (one us, one british), one tank (british), one bomber and three fighters at Alaska. But two of that fighters will be needed to secure the us fleet before WUS, I think. And if you use the transport to bring two additional inf to Alaska that tranny will be dead.
Do you sacrifice that tranny and risk one fighter to hold the newly build IC, or do you accept the loss of Alaska and counter it with five inf from WCA (fifth from Midway), tank and air?

@captainjack:

I agree with you that there are definately some foolish moves, however, I’m not sure that a German C/V is necessarily one of them (as long as it fits it with the overall Axis strategy).

But combined with an IC in WEU on GER1 it seems a little bit foolish … :)

@axis_roll:

That is something about novel plans in A&A.  Unless you’ve got some more seasoned opponents, these can surprise and sometimes overwhelm them.

Against experienced players, you wont have such a cake walk in the atlantic and would probably have russians knocking on the gates of moscow to foul these naval expansions plans of Dönitz.

That’s what I regret sometimes.
When you play an experienced player you can try out new things which are perhaps a bit foolish (like purchasing a IC for france and a CV at GER1, followed by atlantic navy), but you will not win that game because that player will demonstrate your weak points very fast. ;)

@Bunnies:

(And why am I always beating my favorite dead horse “look at the board, look at the board, look at the board”?)

Because it’s so unrelevant? Or maybe your horse is to slow? ;)

So, you say, you specified that a country was deadzoned and was being traded.  Ask yourself if that’s enough to formulate a grand strategy.  Of course it’s not.

Not? ;)
Don’t get me wrong, I know that my game will only some dilettantish moving of plastic figures as long I have no planning above the next three moves. Know yourself, know your enemy … all that stuff from all that books.
But I also must take a look on the little decisions I have to make, like that example above. If I make such little things wrong, no strategy can help me. And I think, an strategy must pay attention to the overall board situation (as you said; not a dead horse in my eyes), my own weakenings in gameplay and the player that sits on the other side of the table. To judge that situation right and create the adequate strategy is a thing that I have to do by myself, and all the postings on this board can only help a little. But for that little tactical decisions and tiny precious moves which the game have in store these boards are an eye opener for me. And that’s why I’m looking for such little, delimited solutions for a special problem and hope, I’ ll remember that solution in my next game.

Conclusion:  Germany has superior trading ability.  Germany may leave defense forces of 2 infantry or more per territory, particularly in Belorussia and Ukraine early (since UK/US probably can’t drop units into those territories early, unlike Karelia and Archangel).  However, Russia should avoid leaving infantry in territories if it can help it.

I’ll try to remember that.

Note leaving infantry behind is sometimes good re: Tim’s post.

Known, but noted again. :)

And: thank you for your post.

@Bunnies:

(grunts) 'im good post.  Wat he said, Croggyl re: 3+ IPC territory.

It doesn’t matter if the territory is 1 IPC or 3 IPC.  If you have a fat load of troops that’s gonna walk in, a single infantry is not going to even make the attacker blink.  If anything, the attacker is glad that the defender’s splitting forces.

Yep, reasonable, if a fat load of troops walk in and can’t be counterattacked.
I should have read the original post better. :(

What I had in mind was the situation when a country was deadzoned and traded between two factions, for instance UKR from EEU and CAU, and the german attack failed, and the russians survive with one russian INF.
Should I move back that INF to CAU and leave UKR empty or should that INF hold position?
Until now I prefer to let that INF hold the line (2+ IPC) and move out otherwise, but perhaps I have to overthink this approach …

@ncscswitch:

map

Thanks! :)

@ncscswitch:

In my final qualifying match for the DAAK World Cup Tournament, I just did a Nazi landing in Brazil of 1 INF, 1 ARM on G4…

Germany is collecting $50.  Japan has $38.  The US has been buying SUBs out the wazoo off California.  And Germany has a fleet that outclasses the Allies in the Atlantic.

BTW:  That Main Nazi Fleet is in SZ12 (3 TRN, 1 SUB, 1 DST, 2 AC, 4 FIG, 1 BB), and EUS has only an IC and AA at present…  UK4 is the next pending move.  UK fleet in SZ2 is blocked from a direct assault on the Germany fleet by 1 German Sub in SZ8.

Sounds very interesting!
It is possible to take a look to the game progress somewhere? As well after the game is finished?

@Bunnies:

Let’s say you’re Russia, and you have a fat load of German infantry and tanks coming up on you.  Next round they are gonna march into territory X, and you can’t stop them.

Do you:

A.  Leave an infantry there (1/3 chance of inflicting a 3 IPC casualty on the enemy causing some logistics problems as the Germans try to get more units to the front)?

B.  Totally pull out?

I say B.  If Germany blitzes, great, they didn’t move in their fat stack, and you blitz right back.  Huzzah.  If Germany moves in their fat stack, you just saved yourself an infantry.  If Germany moves in a few dudes, then you can attack or stay put.

100% yes to B if it is a one or two IPC country. But what if it is a three or more country like UKR? Shouldn’t I better leave one INF inside to prevent a single INF walk in?

@captainjack:

Sorry, I should have explained better… he used his transport(s), 2 Figs (from AC he bought on UK1), and BB for Amph. assault on W.Europe.  We traded WEu for most of the game - I would usually only stack a couple infantry there.  But this kept him from attacking my navy.  I was able to slowly pick off his US and UK navys because I would attack one round only and retreat ( I had 3 subs, a BB, 2 trns, AC, Figs, and 2 DD).  I’m not saying what he did, or what I did was correct - I’m just saying that it worked in this game.

Sounds like a funny game. :)

And I doesn’t want to critize you (sorry if it seems so, english is not my first language), I only want to see the counter options a little bit clearer.

And after your explanation I’m amazed a bit about that attack on WEU and run into a german counterattack with both fleet parts and german airforce and retreat of the unified fleet … ;)